PENNSYLVANIA Files In Support of Texas in SCOTUS

[Notaradical60]

So apparently some people believe that votes cast and counted in violation of or contrary to state and federal laws is Acceptable. I heard with my own ears people say we need to win by any means necessary. One illegally cast or counted vote is not an acceptable scenario. If the States in question didn't follow their own election laws ( not edicts, executive orders or consent decrees ) then votes cast in opposition to the law should be excluded........ which basically means all of them. If the Citizens of these States have an issue they should vote for Leaders that follow the laws.

 

[FA_Q2]

rofl

There’s going to be mass alt-right suicide on Jan 20

This assumes that reality will pierce the bubble they live in.

Kind of reminds me when Hillary lost...

 

[FA_Q2]

So apparently some people believe that votes cast and counted in violation of or contrary to state and federal laws is Acceptable. I heard with my own ears people say we need to win by any means necessary. One illegally cast or counted vote is not an acceptable scenario. If the States in question didn't follow their own election laws ( not edicts, executive orders or consent decrees ) then votes cast in opposition to the law should be excluded........ which basically means all of them. If the Citizens of these States have an issue they should vote for Leaders that follow the laws.

OR...

Legal votes cast in a fully legal manner as outlined by local state laws are acceptable and those votes elected Biden to the presidency.

There is that you know...

 

[Notaradical60]

So apparently some people believe that votes cast and counted in violation of or contrary to state and federal laws is Acceptable. I heard with my own ears people say we need to win by any means necessary. One illegally cast or counted vote is not an acceptable scenario. If the States in question didn't follow their own election laws ( not edicts, executive orders or consent decrees ) then votes cast in opposition to the law should be excluded........ which basically means all of them. If the Citizens of these States have an issue they should vote for Leaders that follow the laws.

OR...

Legal votes cast in a fully legal manner as outlined by local state laws are acceptable and those votes elected Biden to the presidency.

There is that you know...

Have you read the Election laws of all 4 States they are very specific, none of them allow for votes cast in opposition to the strict standards set by the legislatures. So read then rant you'll be more believable.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Fight, fight, go screaming and kicking into that great night!
Never let the bastards see you weaken.

One must exhaust every peaceful solution so what is done in war is justified.

SCOTUS is that last peaceful solution, then the choice is either revolution or living in a leftist Venezuela nightmare regime.

 

[FA_Q2]

So apparently some people believe that votes cast and counted in violation of or contrary to state and federal laws is Acceptable. I heard with my own ears people say we need to win by any means necessary. One illegally cast or counted vote is not an acceptable scenario. If the States in question didn't follow their own election laws ( not edicts, executive orders or consent decrees ) then votes cast in opposition to the law should be excluded........ which basically means all of them. If the Citizens of these States have an issue they should vote for Leaders that follow the laws.

OR...

Legal votes cast in a fully legal manner as outlined by local state laws are acceptable and those votes elected Biden to the presidency.

There is that you know...

Have you read the Election laws of all 4 States they are very specific, none of them allow for votes cast in opposition to the strict standards set by the legislatures. So read then rant you'll be more believable.

That would be on you to prove that any particular vote is in violation of the standards set, how many of those votes there are and, most importantly, that said number is sufficient to overturn the results.

 

[Mac-7]

I'm convinced they will. President-elect Biden will be inaugurated on Jan.20.

For now he’s president not-yet-elected biden

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm convinced they will. President-elect Biden will be inaugurated on Jan.20.

For now he’s president not-yet-elected biden

Meh, i prefer 'President pretender' Xi Biden

 

[Mac-7]

Fight, fight, go screaming and kicking into that great night!
Never let the bastards see you weaken.

One must exhaust every peaceful solution so what is done in war is justified.

SCOTUS is that last peaceful solution, then the choice is either revolution or living in a leftist Venezuela nightmare regime.

The people can continue to resist peacefully through the sheriffs and republican state legislatures IF it does not go our way on the high court

 

[Zorro!]

Fight, fight, go screaming and kicking into that great night!
Never let the bastards see you weaken.

One must exhaust every peaceful solution so what is done in war is justified.

SCOTUS is that last peaceful solution, then the choice is either revolution or living in a leftist Venezuela nightmare regime.

Or the Congress cleaning up the Election systems of all 50 states to ensure fair, open and easily audited results. That seems a lot simpler than the two choices you laid out. I love how these guys get all outraged and indignant, take Ted Cruz, and I'm a Cruz fan, but he's all up and arms about our elections, and what is the position that he has held for SEVEN years? Law Maker. And who does the US Constitution empower to ensure free and fair elections? LAWMAKERS! In Seven Years has he even introduced a bill? Much less has a either House of Congress said "Sign this into law, or no more appropriations, until you do!" I don't know how long a the "New Card" lasts, but I don't think it's 7 years!

What do they fear? That Fake News Propagandists will say mean things about them? They say mean things about us now, and never worse than the last two years, yet, we swept the down ballot races, so grow a fricken spine folks. Introduce the bill and insist it get passed into law.

Seems a much easier route than either revolution or devolving into a Venezuela Failed State Hell-hole.

Let's start with insisting the Republicans introduce a bill in the Senate, go from there.

 

[the other mike]

Pennsylvania, Texas and 22 other states so far.

Alabama

Arkansas

Arizona

Florida

Indiana

Iowa

Idaho

Kansas

Louisiana

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Utah

West Virginia

Wyoming

 

[JimBowie1958]

people can continue to resist peacefully through the sheriffs and republican state legislatures IF it does not go our way on the high court

Or the Congress cleaning up the Election systems of all 50 states to ensure fair, open and easily audited results. That seems a lot simpler than the two choices you laid out. I love how these guys get all outraged and indignant, take Ted Cruz, and I'm a Cruz fan, but he's all up and arms about our elections, and what is the position that he has held for SEVEN years? Law Maker. And who does the US Constitution empower to ensure free and fair elections? LAWMAKERS! In Seven Years has he even introduced a bill? Much less has a either House of Congress said "Sign this into law, or no more appropriations, until you do!" I don't know how long a the "New Card" lasts, but I don't think it's 7 years!

these legal avenues have been available for decades and the GOP has NEVER used them before, why do you think they will now?

If the SCOTUS fails us, I think it is time to water the Tree of Liberty.

 

[Care4all]

Pennsylvania accuses Texas of seeking 'to decimate the electorate' in fiery Supreme Court brief

In briefs submitted with the Supreme Court on Thursday, Georgia and Pennsylvania slammed the Texas effort to prevent those two states, along with Michigan and Wisconsin, from casting their electoral votes as a "meritless" effort to "decimate the electorate of the United States."

www.foxnews.com

...most legal experts agree that for many procedural reasons the Texas case is almost certain to fail, and that their merits argument is fatally flawed too.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"To begin with, the imagined 'rule' is universally ignored since states have in fact allowed their governors, judiciaries, or both to make rulings and determinations affecting the manner in which presidential elections are held and electors thus chosen," Walter Olson of the libertarian Cato Institute told Fox News. "Texas has done this too."

Harvard law professor and former Supreme Court clerk to late Justice Antonin Scalia Lawrence Lessig, meanwhile, said that the motivations for the Texas case are purely political.

"This is political posturing through litigation. Not one of those attorneys general believes they are entitled to win," he told Fox News. "As lawyers, that should stop them from signing onto such an action. But they are acting as politicians, not lawyers here — to the detriment of the rule of law."

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

This is docketed as Texas v Pennsylvania; do they have to change that now?

roflmao, this is hilarious!

Pennsylvania House Leaders File Brief to Support Texas in Supreme Court Lawsuit Against Pennsylvania

www.theepochtimes.com

​

Pennsylvania’s House speaker and majority leader on Thursday filed an amici curiae brief with the Supreme Court against the state of Pennsylvania and in favor of Texas’s lawsuit against the commonwealth and three other states.​

​

A brief (pdf) filed by Pennsylvania House Speaker Bryan Cutler and Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff, both Republicans, requests that the Supreme Court “carefully consider the procedural issues and questions raised by the Plaintiff concerning the administration of the 2020 General Election in Pennsylvania.”​

​

“The unimpeachability of our elections requires clear procedures of administration so that everyone gets a fair shake. Unfortunately, outside actors have so markedly twisted and gerrymandered the Commonwealth’s Election Code to the point that amici find it unrecognizable from the laws that they enacted,” they wrote, adding that the state of Texas “raised important questions about how this procedural malfeasance affected the 2020 General Election.”​

​

In the lawsuit, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton alleged that Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin introduced changes to election laws, deeming them unconstitutional. The suit also contends that by doing so, those states treated voters unequally and created significant voting irregularities by rescinding certain ballot-integrity measures.​

​

Filed on Monday night, the lawsuit is requesting the Supreme Court to declare the four states carried out their respective elections in violation of the U.S. Constitution.​

​

“The states violated statutes enacted by their duly elected legislatures, thereby violating the Constitution. By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but of Texas and every other state that held lawful elections,” Paxton said in a statement announcing the legal petition.​

He's been deboonked !
Hes been deboonked!

A true patriot standing up ....his own state lol


The fbi of course has targeted the Texas ag...

They don't even try to hide that they're a globo homo Inc tool

Oh yeah And watch Hunter get cleared

Trump should just cross the Rubicon and start slitting throats

If the Supreme Court gives America the finger
Its finished

Down with the union!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Supreme Court Flooded with Filings in Texas Challenge to Voting Procedures

The Supreme Court has been flooded with filings since Texas launched its case against Pennsylvania and three other states on Monday night.

www.breitbart.com

In addition to the original filing by the State of Texas, there are other filings, including:​

• A motion to intervene by President Donald Trump
  • An amici curiae (“friends of the court”) brief by Missouri, on behalf of itself and “Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia” in support of Texas’s case
  • An amici curiae brief filed by Carter Phillips and other “Never Trump” Republican opponents of the president, supporting Pennsylvania and the defendant states
  • An amici curiae brief filed by Roy Moore and other “constitutional attorneys” in support of the Texas case.
  • An amicus curiae brief filed by Arizona, urging the Court to act quickly
  • Responses to the Texas filing by each of the defendant states
  • An amici curiae brief filed by the District of Columbia and “States and territories of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Guam, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Washington” in support of Pennsylvania and the defendant states
  • A motion by Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Utah to intervene as plaintiffs
  • Two amicus curiae motions by members of the Pennsylvania house and senate, respectively, urging the Court to take the Texas case
  • An amicus curiae motion by the Christian Family Coalition in support of the Texas case
  • An amici curiae brief by the speaker and majority leader of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in support of the Texas case
  • A motion by “state legislators and voters” represented by the Justice Foundation and the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society, seeking to intervene and join the case as plaintiffs; their complaint was also filed
  • An amici curiae brief by 105 Republican members of the House of Representatives
  • An amici curiae brief by elected officials from four states in support of the Texas case
  • An amicus curiae brief by the City of Detroit in support of Pennsylvania and the defendants
  • An amicus curiae brief by the Justice and Freedom Fund in support of the Texas case

​

The sheer scale of filings in just three days — including from Democrats and groups on the left — for a case that the Supreme Court has not yet said it will hear may increase the chance that it will do so.​

​

 

[JimBowie1958]

UPDATE: 21 States Now Support Texas SCOTUS Lawsuit, 42% of America to Sue 8% of America

Almost half of the Union has signed on, or expressed a desire to sign on, to Texas's Supreme Court lawsuit challenging the election.

nationalfile.com

With today’s additions of Wyoming and Ohio, a total of 21 states – including Texas – are signed on or seek to be signed on to the Supreme Court lawsuit challenging the elections in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin.​

​

Since Texas filed the suit, over 20 states have joined or expressed an interest in joining. As it now stands, the following states are seeking a Supreme Court remedy to the November 3 election: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Ohio, West Virginia, and Florida.​

​

Late last night in Idaho, the Republican Party overruled the state’s Attorney General, also a Republican, to file an amicus brief seeking to participate in the lawsuit, as Media Right News reported.​

​

​

 

[Rogue AI]

So apparently some people believe that votes cast and counted in violation of or contrary to state and federal laws is Acceptable. I heard with my own ears people say we need to win by any means necessary. One illegally cast or counted vote is not an acceptable scenario. If the States in question didn't follow their own election laws ( not edicts, executive orders or consent decrees ) then votes cast in opposition to the law should be excluded........ which basically means all of them. If the Citizens of these States have an issue they should vote for Leaders that follow the laws.

OR...

Legal votes cast in a fully legal manner as outlined by local state laws are acceptable and those votes elected Biden to the presidency.

There is that you know...

Have you read the Election laws of all 4 States they are very specific, none of them allow for votes cast in opposition to the strict standards set by the legislatures. So read then rant you'll be more believable.

That would be on you to prove that any particular vote is in violation of the standards set, how many of those votes there are and, most importantly, that said number is sufficient to overturn the results.

The unlawful change in standards is enough. Such unlawful changes taint every affected ballot. Fruit of the poison tree...

 

[Lakhota]

Pennsylvania was never Biden country. I live in a historically Democrat leaning county but this time it was overwhelmingly Trump. In the end, Trump was winning by a mile and our representative, Susan Wild, was getting her ass kicked on Thursday night. Somehow, Friday morning, Biden and Wild were both claiming victory in Northampton county. Fuck that noise. Even the legislature can see that. Democrats have turned totally corrupt and totalitarian. They see nothing wrong with stealing an election as long as it suits their beliefs. Fuck them.

Duh, you mean when they started counting the mail-in ballots - that they weren't allowed to count earlier?

 

[22lcidw]

So apparently some people believe that votes cast and counted in violation of or contrary to state and federal laws is Acceptable. I heard with my own ears people say we need to win by any means necessary. One illegally cast or counted vote is not an acceptable scenario. If the States in question didn't follow their own election laws ( not edicts, executive orders or consent decrees ) then votes cast in opposition to the law should be excluded........ which basically means all of them. If the Citizens of these States have an issue they should vote for Leaders that follow the laws.

OR...

Legal votes cast in a fully legal manner as outlined by local state laws are acceptable and those votes elected Biden to the presidency.

There is that you know...

Have you read the Election laws of all 4 States they are very specific, none of them allow for votes cast in opposition to the strict standards set by the legislatures. So read then rant you'll be more believable.

That would be on you to prove that any particular vote is in violation of the standards set, how many of those votes there are and, most importantly, that said number is sufficient to overturn the results.

The integrity of elections has been tainted. This is something people have suspected or known for many years. People in the media and entertainers and sports players have become part of the problem as their political stripes overshadow the nation.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The democrat house of mahjongg tiles is crumbling away. Between the election fraud, the Biden family crime drama and the Chinese spy connection the inauguration is disappearing in the rear view mirror.