Earlier today Missouri Senator Josh Hawley announced his intent to challenge the January 6th congressional certification of the electors.  A group of approximately 30 House representatives, led by Mo Brooks,  will be challenging from the lower chamber.

This sets up a dynamic where formal electoral challenges from both chambers of congress will be taking place based on evidence of election fraud in several key states.  The objection will initiate a debate and roll-call vote to certify electors within both the House and Senate.  Vice-President Mike Pence will preside over the debate in the Senate.

A combination of The Guarantee Clause (constitution) and the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (law), establishes the framework for some to argue a fraudulent 2020 election result can successfully be challenged during congressional certification on January 6, 2021. Thus five state legislatures -under Republican control- have sent dual-sets of electors to congress: Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, Georgia and Pennsylvania. (more…)

Calling-in for an interview with Todd Herman, attorney Sidney Powell provides her summary of election fraud evidence as if she had a few minutes to make her pitch to the United States Supreme Court.  [LISTEN]

https://youtu.be/qJg_E_u-2hM

(more…)

The New York lawsuit against the Trump administration -over disqualification of unlawful aliens in the 2020 election- was dismissed today by the Supreme Court [full pdf here] under procedural grounds.

However, that said, there is a clear indication where the outcome is likely to end-up once the court takes up the case next year.

The high court noted no harm currently exists because the census report hasn’t been delivered to congress to begin the representative apportionment.

The ruling was 6-3 on process, with justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer signing a dissent on the case.  Justice Breyer wanted to fire a shot into the administration by outlining a liberal opinion/perspective of the issue:

…”The plain meaning of the governing statutes, decades of historical practice, and uniform interpretations from all three branches of Government demonstrate that aliens without lawful status cannot be excluded from the decennial census solely on account of that status,” Breyer wrote. “The Government’s effort to remove them from the apportionment base is unlawful, and I believe this Court should say so.”

(more…)

Lawyer Sidney Powell tweets out today that the Supreme Court has rejected two cases of election fraud against Wisconsin and Arizona; and has accepted two cases against Michigan and Georgia.  The high court has given GA/MI until January 14, 2021, to file their responses.

(more…)

During the Texas presidential electors legislative session there was a debate over an amendment to wording where the Texas House would rebuke the Supreme Court of the United States for “moral cowardice” in not allowing the Texas challenge to be heard.

During the amendment debate Texas Congressman Matt Patrick (CD-32) put into the ¹record a report from a claimed “Supreme Court staffer” about an internal debate taking place within the high court where justices were arguing the reasons for not allowing the Texas election challenge to take place.  As outlined by Patrick Chief Justice Roberts was worried about riots in the streets if the court heard the Texas arguments and evidence.

The exact statement comes at 01:32:31 of the debate video [prompted just hit play]

.

¹To be fair – It should be noted the claim comes with no specific citation for further review or analysis; and considering the heightened sense of concern over the election, more details should be requested before making assumptions about the described incident.

(more…)

BREAKING:  Well this is very interesting.  On the same day Christopher Krebs, who was the country’s top cybersecurity official during the presidential election (before being fired), testified before the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee about no election interference,… according to CBS News Catherine Herridge the Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, is now saying there WAS foreign interference in the 2020 election.  WATCH:

.

Something is obviously going on, because the ODNI is now saying the report on the 2020 election is going to be delayed. (LINK)

Appearing with Fox News Maria Bartiromo, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton outlines his state’s legal and constitutional position on election fraud that disenfranchises his citizens.   If Texas has no “standing” then how are we to remain The United States.

As Paxton rightly notes if electoral nullification is not in the constitutional purview of the Supreme Court then what is?  The electors clause is in the Constitution for a reason… and the Tree of Liberty is quite parched at this specific moment in history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDPfQFuzd98

It might, very small ‘might‘, be argued the constitutional “harm” has not yet evidenced as electors have not yet presented themselves. However, the SCOTUS ruling would likely have inferred that position.

Texas AG Paxton does not appear to be positioned to re-file after 12/14/20.

(more…)

In a disappointing majority decision announced shortly before 6:30pm Friday evening, a majority of Supreme Court justices refused to take up a Texas lawsuit challenging four states in the 2020 election.

The court, with two dissenting options by Justice Alito and Justice Thomas, stated that Texas lacked a legal right to sue and did not have a legal interest in how other states carried out their elections.

The court rejected the Texas’ lawsuit without considering the specific merits of the state’s case.

Texas had asked the court to delay the official vote of the Electoral College, scheduled for Monday, Dec. 14, or prevent the four states from casting votes in the Electoral College for Biden. Justice Alito filed a short statement regarding the court’s disposition of the case and was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.

The position of the Supreme Court raises an important question that now sits unresolved. If an individual citizen is determined not to have standing to challenge an election result; and if a group of citizens represented by their interest in a state, any state, is also denied standing to challenge an election result; then who can constitutionally challenge an election, any election, that is mired in controversy and demonstrable evidence of fraud?

From the Alliance:

(more…)

Late Monday night the state of Texas filed a lawsuit directly in the Supreme Court against four states: Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvan and Wisconsin. The intent is to block those states from casting their Electoral College votes for Joe Biden due to the unconstitutional nature of mail-in ballot use – against legislative approval and requirement.

Today 17 states filed an amicus brief [pdf link] in support of the Texas lawsuit.

The seventeen states include Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.

As noted in the supportive filing: “The States have a strong interest in preserving the proper roles of state legislatures in the administration of federal elections, and thus safeguarding the individual liberty of their citizens.”

[…] “States have a strong interest in ensuring that the votes of their own citizens are not diluted by the unconstitutional administration of elections in other States. When non-legislative actors in other States encroach on the authority of the “Legislature thereof” in that State to administer a Presidential election, they threaten the liberty, not just of their own citizens, but of every citizen of the United States who casts a lawful ballot in that election — including the citizens of amici States.

(more…)

Immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court directly asked the states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia to respond to the Texas constitutional lawsuit on unconstitutional ballot changes, Jordan Sekulow sat down with Newsmax to discuss:

(more…)