Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

U.S. Supreme Court denies Texas lawsuit “for lack of standing”

U.S. Supreme Court denies Texas lawsuit “for lack of standing”

“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a ruling in Texas’ lawsuit challenging election procedures in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The lawsuit divided the nation, with roughly half the states supporting and opposing the lawsuit, respectively.

The Court just denied Texas’ request to file a Bill of Complaint. Justices Alito and Thomas would have granted it, but denied any additional relief.

Here’s the Order:


The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.

“Standing” is required to sue because the federal courts can only hear actual cases and controversies, not hypothetical cases. To make a case and controversy, the person filing the lawsuit must have suffered an actual harm, not a merely hypothetical harm (the doctrine of standing can be complicated, but that’s a simple explantation). As to the “standing” problem, here is what Pennsylvania argued in its opposition:

 Texas has not suffered harm simply because it dislikes the result of the election, and nothing in the text, history, or structure of the Constitution supports Texas’s view that it can dictate the manner in which four other states run their elections….

Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution limits the jurisdiction of the federal courts to resolving “cases” and  controversies.” U.S. CONST. art. III, § 2; Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811, 818 (1997). That same jurisdictional limitation applies to actions sought to be commenced in the Court’s original jurisdiction. Maryland v. Louisiana, 451 U.S. 725, 735-36 (1981). To establish standing, the demanding party must establish a “triad of injury in fact, causation, and redressability.” Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 103 (1998). More specifically, that the plaintiff has suffered injury to a legally protected interest, which injury is “fairly traceable to the challenged action and redressable by a favorable ruling.” AIRC,
576 U.S. at 800; see also Maryland, 451 U.S. at 736. This Court has “always insisted on strict compliance with this jurisdictional standing requirement.” Raines, 521 U.S. at 819. For invocation of the Court’s original jurisdiction, this burden is even greater: “[t]he threatened invasion of rights must be of serious magnitude and it must be established by clear and convincing evidence.” People of the State of N.Y. v. New Jersey, 256 U.S. 296, 309 (1921). Texas fails to carry this heavy burden.

First, Texas cannot establish it suffered an injury in fact. An injury in fact requires a plaintiff to show the “invasion of a legally protected interest”; that the injury is both “concrete and particularized”; and that the injury is “actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.” Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540, 1548 (2016). According to Texas, the alleged violations of Pennsylvania’s Election Code undermined the authority granted to the Pennsylvania General Assembly under the Electors Clause.8 Motion at 3, 10-11, 13-15. But as the text of the Electors Clause itself makes clear, the injury caused by the alleged usurpation of the General Assembly’s constitutional authority belongs to that institution. AIRC, 576 U.S. at 800 (legislature claimed that it was stripped of its responsibility for redistricting vested in it by the Elections Clause). The State of Texas is not the Pennsylvania General Assembly….

Second, Texas’s claimed injury is not fairly traceable to a violation of the Electors Clause. As discussed above, each of Texas’s allegations of violations of Pennsylvania law has been rejected by state and federal courts.

Third, Texas fares no better in relying on parens patriae for standing. It is settled law that “a State has standing to sue only when its sovereign or quasi-sovereign interests are implicated and it is not merely litigating as a volunteer the personal claims of its citizens.” Pennsylvania, 426 U.S. at 665. The state, thus, must “articulate an interest apart from the interests of particular private parties.” … Texas has no sovereign or quasi-sovereign interest at stake. It is a nominal party, at best.

Here was Texas’ counter-argument on standing:

Voting rights are fundamental, Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886), and the Senate is a body in which Defendant States’ actions threaten Texas’s voting rights. U.S. CONST. art. V, cl. 3 (States’ “equal suffrage in the Senate”). With that standing in
its own right, Texas can assert parens patriae standing for its citizens.2

Although Pennsylvania characterizes this action as a “seditious abuse of the judicial process,” Penn. Br. 2, and ‘uniquely unserious,” id. at 11, Texas seeks to enforce the right that preserves all others in a democratic republic: suffrage. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 561-62 (1964). Whatever Pennsylvania’s definition of sedition, moving this Court to cure grave threats to Texas’s right of suffrage in the Senate and its citizens’ rights of suffrage in presidential elections upholds the Constitution, which is the very opposite of sedition.

The potential loss of suffrage rights meets the serious-magnitude test that Pennsylvania poses, Penn. Br. 13, and the purely legal nature of Defendant States’ violations meets its clear-and-convincing test. Id. Michigan suggests that remand to legislatures to reconsider the result of the election would not redress Texas’s injury, Mich. Br. 34-35, but that is not the law. FEC v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11, 25 (1998). Michigan also argues that the remedy would disenfranchise millions of voters, id., but Michigan officials disenfranchised those Michigan voters. Specifically, Michigan admits it cannot segregate the illegal ballots from the legal ones, id. 9, which admits the impossibility of a lawful recount on remand to the Michigan executive. Lutwak v. United States, 344 U.S. 604, 617-18 (1953) (“admissions … are admissible … [as] statements of a party”). Remand to the legislature is the only viable option. Whether the legislature sets a new election or provides some other mechanism to allocate Michigan’s electoral votes is up to the legislature.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Goodbye America as we knew it.

    Dathurtz in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 6:45 pm

    We had a Republic, if we could keep it.

    Our votes mean nothing. Apparently, they never did – except one, when we surprised the swamp with Trump.

    This literally is the end of our nation. That slut Harris will be the coup d’grace.

      We are now an oligarchy, and any person in the world is as powerful as any American they are willing to bribe.

      We’ve lost our country. Time to plan secession while we still have our physical safety.

      Paul In Sweden in reply to | December 12, 2020 at 7:16 am

      It is time to “Peaceful Protest”, the government is dead. There is no law in America. Do as you will.

        “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue”. Berry Goldwater at 1964 Republican Convention.

        Dear Social Club of The United States (aka SCOTUS)…..The above quote has been the successful foundation for a country formerly a Republic…. In the cold harsh light of judicial misconduct and fraud real shadows where cast on Constitution. Maybe all you can deal with are subtle penumbras.

    JHogan in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 7:25 pm

    America is up for grabs to whichever party/group/organization can rig enough elections in enough states.

    We are now officially a banana republic.

    Andy in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 7:26 pm

    I sincerely hope states start leaving the union. I’ll be moving to one that does.

    alaskabob in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 7:57 pm

    State Supreme Courts have been given super-legislative power. The concern about “legislating from the bench” is a reality. The “Rule of Law” is whoever rules makes the laws.

    Extended… SCOTUS can over-rule the Constitution as nothing is binding. This is exactly what the Left has wanted… this is the living constitution… changed not by votes but by ruling. The judiciary is now ascendant.

    Exiliado in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 8:02 pm

    So it seems war and/or secession is the only way forward.
    The election was stolen via criminal fraud, and we are left without options. Accepting a Biden presidency is suicide.
    The Republic is dead.
    Time to form a new one.

      It is.

      We now live in an oligarchy that is for sale to anyone, along with it’s absolute 2-tier justice system.

      The US now reminds me of Cuba under Batista. We saw what came next.

      Btw, we now know who shot JFK: the CIA. Any arguments?

    Olinser in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 8:07 pm

    Told everybody. When they refused to rule on the slam-dunk PA crap, that was it.

    The fix is in, and the RINOs don’t care that the Dems cheated, they think they’re better off with Trump gone.

    redc1c4 in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 9:36 pm

    so much for that mewling hack John Roberts and the precious reputation of his “supreme” court…

    it was overruled by the mob.

    well, the soap box didn’t w*rk.

    the ballot box is corrupt an worthless.

    and the jury box (courts) are corrupt and worthless as well.

    there’s only one box left, and it looks like we’re going to have to open it shortly.

    i am bound my my oath, even today.

      snopercod in reply to redc1c4. | December 12, 2020 at 7:01 am

      Well what are you going to do? Shoot your neighbors who voted for Biden? Do you think that will solve the problem?

        Isolden in reply to snopercod. | December 12, 2020 at 7:57 am

        The Democrats were willing to shoot people in cold blood in the streets, burn down buildings, ruin businesses and mobs threatened people in their homes. I’m willing to give them a taste of their own medicine.

        Imagine, if you will, the Viet Cong, Soviet Red Army, and the Taliban had jointly formed a political party in the US.

        Now, open your eyes……behold, you see before you the Democrat Party.

    Pelayo in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 9:52 pm

    Watch now as Democrats will double down on rigging elections at all levels and in particular at the pesky State Legislature level. In my heart I know that this will lead to succession efforts.

    So environmental groups can have standing but 74mm US Citizens from 19 states do not.

    I am so sick of our courts relying on these created out of thin air doctrines like laches or standing to not to hear cases.

      Milhouse in reply to Pelayo. | December 12, 2020 at 10:22 pm

      Standing and laches are not “created out of thin air doctrines”; they are fundamental parts of our system of law.

        randian in reply to Milhouse. | December 13, 2020 at 1:21 pm

        The problem is laches is being used to create a catch-22. You can’t sue before the election because you don’t have standing, and you can’t sue after because of laches.

    4fun in reply to walls. | December 11, 2020 at 9:54 pm

    Before you get too weepy eyed, remember Trump got 70 million+ votes. We are still a sizeable force to be reckoned with.

      Close The Fed in reply to 4fun. | December 11, 2020 at 10:22 pm

      Totes agree, 4fun. Totes agree.

      irv in reply to 4fun. | December 11, 2020 at 10:47 pm

      And that’s not even counting the 10 or 20 million )(we’ll never know how many) switched from President Trump to Alzheimer Biden.

      randian in reply to 4fun. | December 11, 2020 at 11:03 pm

      After this we won’t have 70 million votes, not that the number of votes matters now. If a bunch of conservatives voters sit out 2022 because they see the election as rigged that’s as good for the Democrats as printing votes.

        Isolden in reply to randian. | December 12, 2020 at 8:00 am

        They printed and changed them before and won elections. What makes you think they won’t in Georgia in January? 2022? 2024?

          randian in reply to Isolden. | December 12, 2020 at 8:09 am

          They absolutely are going to print votes in January to take the Senate and in 2022 to take the House and consolidate their hold in the Senate. If they have enough Rinos willing to play ball expect the impeachment and removal of the not-so-conservative majority on SCOTUS and their replacement by a 100% progressive panel of justices.

      zennyfan in reply to 4fun. | December 12, 2020 at 9:28 pm

      Not without the presidency, the House, and the judiciary. And probably the Senate.


SCOTUS rules Constitution is a Suicide Pact.

    Yea but hey, they found a right to an abortion right there in the fine print.

    Brilliant people, those black robed political hacks. They decided a civil war was a better approach than possibly stepping on the fine print of the constitution that they routinely ignore when it suits them.

      Concise in reply to Barry. | December 11, 2020 at 8:43 pm

      Wouldn’t be the first time we have the Supreme Court to thank for a Civil War. Not too sure what will happen but a succession attempt or attempts may be in the works in the future, years in the future but this may be the starting point. There can be no union if we cannot have fair elections.

So we’ll spend the next four years discovering just how fraudulent the election was. #NotMyPresident.

So, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett NO HELP.

Thanks for nothing.

    jhkrischel in reply to Close The Fed. | December 11, 2020 at 6:48 pm

    I would not be surprised if SCOTUS justices had their families threatened. We now live in a country where over 75 million voters don’t care about the law can get away with literally stealing an election, and the other 75 million voters have no more faith in the law to redress such injustice.

    The SCOTUS chose the path that had the least amount of immediate antifa riots, but did the maximum damage to the republic.

      So what? DO THE RIGHT THING! We send young people overseas risking their lives to defend…. what was it again? And SCOTUS doesn’t have the courage to do the right thing even under threat of violence?

      In the 1980s, the Colombian government was fight off the drug cartels and many of them were murdered. Their Supreme Court was captures and almost half of the 25 judges were murdered. And yet, people kept stepping in to replace them.

      We don’t deserve to be free.

        Nope. The only two Justices with spine were Thomas and Alito. The others didn’t want to lose future invitations to Swamp cocktail parties, or have to wake up at 3am to the sound of Antifa outside their homes. And this case is just a precursor to challenges to the Second Amendment. You can just imagine how those votes will go. I hate being a Debbie Downer, but at age 66, I may yet live long enough to see a second civil war.

          And having read all of the comments here, I can’t even see that happening. “We can’t try that because it will never work” seems to be the mindset of Republicans. No matter what idea is proposed, the response is always ALWAYS a barrage of “It won’t work and here’s why.”

          It’s too late but we sure could have used a spirit of “Now there’s an idea! Let’s see if we can figure out a way to make it work!” Never EVER happens. Minutiae is only for figuring out how to lose around here.

          What makes you think Alito and Thomas disagree with the other seven? Their only difference is that they think the court can’t refuse to hear a case brought under original jurisdiction, so they would hear it and grant no other relief. If it had been heard, the decision against TX would have been 9-0. Because standing, among other things.

        heyjoojoo in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 11, 2020 at 10:07 pm

        Agreed. Tired of people using that lame excuse. You do the right thing or leave the profession. If you’re running scared, get out of the profession.

      There were nothing like 75 million voters for Biden. Dead people and fraudulent or duplicate ballots don’t count.

      “I would not be surprised…”

      You’re just making excuses for tyrants or cowards.

    I hate to remind you, but I told you so, 7-2 for Biden

      MarkS in reply to MarkS. | December 11, 2020 at 7:06 pm

      Hey, I’m kinda cranky now, but screw you and your downvote! When Barrett was nominated, I posted that she was a snake in the grass and that Trump would rue the day he appointed her, and I got double digit down votes here at LI.

        Voyager in reply to MarkS. | December 11, 2020 at 7:16 pm

        People are going to die because of this and all you can do is snipe? Take your down vote and like it.

          MarkS in reply to Voyager. | December 11, 2020 at 7:18 pm

          OK, tell us, who is gonna die?

          Katy L. Stamper in reply to Voyager. | December 11, 2020 at 7:26 pm

          Mark, who is going to die?

          I’ll tell you who is going to die:

          People Biden is going to lock down “for their own good.” Businessmen, students, etc., are going to go broke. Some of them will kill themselves, as we’ve already seen.

          People will die when more cartel members come up here thanks to Biden’s obliteration of Trump’s souther border policies.

          I could easily go on.

          ConradCA in reply to Voyager. | December 11, 2020 at 7:29 pm

          This election proved that voting is almost pointless, we end up with progressive fascist tyrants in charge no matter what because they cheat their way into power. The only alternative is to exercise our 2nd amendment right to remove tyranny. Millions of people will die in this conflict

        MarkSmith in reply to MarkS. | December 11, 2020 at 7:57 pm

        MarkS, do me a favor and change your name to Karen, I don’t want anyone to confuse you as me.

        Isolden in reply to MarkS. | December 12, 2020 at 8:09 am

        Don’t worry about the downvotes, everyone feels bad about this election

      Are you lacking in self-esteem that you need to publicize this, especially in current environment? Bad move.

      Milhouse in reply to MarkS. | December 12, 2020 at 10:26 pm

      On the substance it’s 9-0 for Biden. Alito and Thomas differ only on the right way to do it. They would give Texas the courtesy of hearing its case before dismissing it.

ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the wild, wild west

may God help us all

Prepare for your families, store food, medical supplies, misc. Dark times ahead, be ready for shortages and god knows what. This is not a drill.

Secession efforts start today.
Remember the date.

Union-of-Taxpayers | December 11, 2020 at 6:51 pm

Alito and Thomas wrote separately that they believe the Court should not deny the Texas filing.

This seems to create a Constitutional crisis since states appear to have no remedy if other states manipulate elections.

What now stops New York, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey and other large deep blue states from ensuring they win every election going forward?

    Well of course, that’s what will happen now. 2016 was the USA’s last legitimate presidential election. We are no longer citizens of a republic, we are now subjects to be ruled by the “expert class” oligarchy.

    SCOTUS took the cowards way out.

    Seems obvious to me the only remedy is to leave the Union.

    And what conclusion does the rest of the world come to when the oldest and most successful democratic republic in the history of the world sucumbs to rigged and fraudulent elections?

    The message this sends to the rest of the world is that universal suffrage democratic republics do not work. They succumb to election fraud and rigged elections and the rule of the mob.

    The rest of the world will take note.

    And the Pax Americana enjoyed by the world since 1945 will likely come to an historically overdue and violent end in the next few decades.

      Katy L. Stamper in reply to JHogan. | December 11, 2020 at 8:15 pm

      We are simply too large and became too diverse after the 1965 immi act.

      Hungary is doing fine. Its people agree on culture and values. Ours no longer so– Actually, we mostly agree, but the 3% crazies have managed to fool the rest of their party.

      Hungary shows it works, but lack of diversity is key, and manageable size is key.

        Too much diversity is a curse.

        There, I said it.

          zennyfan in reply to JPL17. | December 12, 2020 at 9:35 pm

          Diversity works only when a ruthless dictator/system rules the country. I fear our country is about to find out what this is like, especially if the Democrats steal the Georgia Senate seats. And based on the tepid response from the GOP (“We can’t fight dirty; that’s not nice and we won’t be invited to all the right parties”), that’s going to happen.

    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to Union-of-Taxpayers. | December 11, 2020 at 8:11 pm

    What now stops New York, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey and other large deep blue states from ensuring they win every election going forward?

    Nothing. The democrat party and the democrat controlled states have now been given carte blanche to use any means necessary to remain in power. And there’s nothing anyone can do about it. Any legal court filings will simply be dismissed for “lack of standing” and nothing will come of them.

    The Republic is dead. I’m amazed it lasted as long as it did.

    I think California has already been doing that.

    So maybe we should try having the states who filed amicus briefs on the Texas filing should each refile separately the same case? Maybe that would put the fear of God in them to cure those buckling knees and shrinking gonads?

      “fear of God in them”

      That has to be a joke, right?

      How hard do you think those black robed corrupt cowards have to work to stamp you “denied”?

      No state has standing on how any other state chooses its electors. And the supreme court can’t be panicked or impressed by the number of states who file. Even if 49 states filed against one, if they lacked standing the court would reject them.

        alaskabob in reply to Milhouse. | December 13, 2020 at 12:45 pm

        Live solely by the law, die solely from the law. By that argument the voting rights act should not exist. On a spiritual level Milhouse, we are all dead in the law.

    Alito and Thomas agree with the other 7 on the substance, they just think they owe Texas a hearing before dismissing its case.

    And no, states have no remedy, because they suffer no injury. How other states select their electors isn’t their business.

    What stops those states from sweeping elections is the same thing that has always stopped them. They have only so many electors, and no matter what margins of victory they cook up for the Democrats it won’t change that.

      randian in reply to Milhouse. | December 13, 2020 at 1:31 pm

      They have only so many electors, and no matter what margins of victory they cook up for the Democrats it won’t change that.

      You continue to miss the point. Five states colluded to take the election. Treating them as individuals is a dishonest analysis.

    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Union-of-Taxpayers. | December 13, 2020 at 1:03 am

    “This seems to create a Constitutional crisis since states appear to have no remedy if other states manipulate elections.”

    The remedy is federalism. States can simply refuse to comply with unconstitutional edicts emanating from Washington. If the federal government then attempts to assert itself via use of force, what follows is what follows.

What other suits are out there? Anyone?

States are no longer bound by the constitution. It’s officially dead. Thank you SCOTUS for ignoring your oaths to protect and defend it.

So much for McConnell’s crowning achievement.

Looks like I am hours away from re-registering as an unaffiliated independent. I sure hope everyone here joins me. If we can get at least to 40% of ALL registered voters into the independent category, that leaves 60% to split between the two wings of the Uniparty. Neither will get enough to outnumber us.

Now if we get to 50% or more,….. See how that works? We gut the establishment claim to representing the people and suddenly, the veneer of ruling consensus vanishes. It’s a corrupt dictatorship that will collapse under its own weight.

Your move Donald!

    Close The Fed in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 11, 2020 at 6:53 pm

    Your tactic will not work as a practical matter.

    Right idea, incorrect implementation.

    Agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly.

      OUR first step in draining the swamp is to DRAIN THE UNIPARTY! How hard is it to recognize that by being a member of EITHER party is being part of the swamp? We keep pealing the onion but we never get to the onion part. We are always presented with having to hold our noses to vote for the lesser of two evils.

      We will never EVER fix this problem. We need to wreck BOTH parties and step one is to wreck the party that always circles its wagons around the Democrat wing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory every single time. Wreck the Republicans and the Democrats are finished too.

      I just don’t understand why this is such a hard concept for people to understand. YOUR MEMBERSHIP IN ANY PARTY RIGHT NOW IS A FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM. What is the point of being a Republican? Drain YOUR swamp first!

    Why does it matter how we register? Or even how we vote?

    There is only one possible way to have a republic, now.

      Katy L. Stamper in reply to Dathurtz. | December 11, 2020 at 7:01 pm

      I believe the correct approach is, other that whatever other approaches are available:

      In safe dem districts, run as a goper. A Trumplican.

      In safe gop districts, run as a dem. A Trumpocrat.

      People don’t vote in primaries. The general is where you have the best shot!

        henrybowman in reply to Katy L. Stamper. | December 11, 2020 at 9:33 pm

        I have to say that this strategy makes zero sense to me. If you’re intent on losing just to make a statement that no one will ever hear, the traditional way is to run as a Libertarian or a Green.

          Close The Fed in reply to henrybowman. | December 11, 2020 at 10:47 pm

          Zero is a pretty low number. I disagree.

          Most people I speak with don’t vote in primaries.

          Therefore, the establishment candidate usually wins.

          So, your best bet to beat an establishment candidate is at the general election.

          In some districts, the opposition party runs no one. If that was you, you could easily run to the right of the gop candidate.

        Start with “your vote doesn’t matter anymore” and work your way forward. If your vote doesn’t matter, why even register to vote?

        Your vote DOES matter because without the veneer of “the consent of the governed”, governments cannot claim to represent “their people”, even in brutal dictatorships. They have been stripped of their claim to legitimacy.

        If in the final attempt at a fair election the entire system revealed itself to be hopelessly corrupt, what better democratic statement can we make as a nation of citizens than to stampede out of the room en masse? Not a slow steady decline as people slowly grasp the true significance of what just happened but a STAMPEDE. It imprints on history the reason why it happened and that Trump is still the only one who can capture enough votes to save us from the “voting machines”.

        If there is any hope of having another valid election in our lifetimes, we need to drop out of the corrupt Dem vs Rep idiocy. Give it up! UNAFFILIATED INDEPENDENT! How hard is that? Trump found the many of us there in 2016 and will understand completely where we are again. So will everyone else know where the real votes are. JUST DO IT! And tell your Democrat friends to do the same. Believe me, there are plenty of sensible Democrats who are or will be upset at what just happened and the sooner they follow us, the faster things can get fixed.

          In Texas, people don’t register by party and can vote in either primary. We seem to be able to generally get it right, but maybe that’s because we don’t sneer at primaries – we get to choose between multiple candidates and generally we get what we wanted – a candidate who has the interests of his constituents at heart, because he/she is going to be primaried again in two/four years. The people here who bemuse me the most are the ones who insist that NOT participating is the most effective way to participate, or that primaries don’t matter (and then whine that the candidates don’t represent them. Of course they don’t – you didn’t help select them). Not participating only guarantees that those who DO vote will decide who represents THEM, and whoever ends up representing you isn’t representing YOU. It’s such a simple concept that I can’t quite understand how you are unable to grasp it.

      MarkS in reply to Dathurtz. | December 11, 2020 at 7:01 pm

      Which is?

    How does ‘independent’ fix fraud? You can’t vote your way out of this because the vote didn’t get you here. Fraud did.

      jimincalif in reply to forksdad. | December 11, 2020 at 7:10 pm

      Unfortunately correct. Any go-forward strategy cannot assume fair elections. They will be for show to let us think we still have representative government, but they will never again allow someone outside of the Uniparty win.

      How does voting as a brain-dead Republican holding your nose voting over and over again for a corrupt lesser of two evils fix the fraud? Drain YOUR swamp first! If unaffiliated independent votes didn’t count, Trump would never have won in 2016. Now imagine that we are 40+% of registered votes! Do the math! Geez!

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 11, 2020 at 8:18 pm

    Registering as unaffiliated will not have an effect. And just in passing, I have been for a long time. Electoral politics no longer have any meaning in this country. Voting and laws [and judicial process] are as dead as the Constitution now. Not by choice, we are reduced to “other means”. Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln. The granting of quarter in the Troubles to come may well be counterproductive.

    Subotai Bahadur

      Why are you GOP slave circling the wagon around the ones who always circle the wagons to protect the Democrats? Are “you people” even capable of thinking strategically? Declaring independence from the British Empire never worked until our Founding Fathers did it. What idiots they were!

        Suggesting Subotai is a “GOP slave” is the height of stupidity.

        You can register as a dog and it will work just as well. Registration has nothing to do with it. I’ve never registered as anything but an independent, so what?

    Abstain from beans.

    That’s pointless. Two parties is the only stable mathematical solution to a first past the post election system.

      henrybowman in reply to randian. | December 11, 2020 at 9:35 pm

      Yes, but it’s possible to starve and loot an existing one. If Trump started a separate party, how much loss would the GOPe suffer?

        Thank you! Finally, someone who isn’t brainwashed. Even if it didn’t work, what is the harm in trying? Really, what do we lose from trying? I am not hearing anyone coming up with good ideas.

        Think of the panic in “BOTH” parties were voters to stampede out of them. So what if we need a two-party system? Who says it has to be Dems vs Reps? It used to be Whigs vs Federalist! Things change!

        So the panic happens. The Dems have nothing but rigged elections and without the Reps circling the wagons to protect them, both parties collapse. Will the establishment roll out the tanks? Not likely. Trump without the GOP but dominating with the unaffiliated independents is unbeatable. They will have to stage another election and we have time to work out the details.

        Outnumbering “either” party is HUGE! Outnumbering them combined would make us the majority party against the Uniparty! Trump would be in the driver’s seat to either reshape the GOP into his image or start his own party.

        We are in just as dire an historical situation today as we were in the 1840s before Lincoln. No one back then was arguing that we need to work within the Whig Party (which was also an elitist country club) to transform it into what we need. We got out of it by replacing them with Republicans. They found Lincoln and we have Trump.

        Apparently those Americans were just smarter and braver than today’s Americans. I am even more tired of brain-dead Republican voters than I am of liberal Democrats. Republicans are genetically programmed to sit on their asses and do nothing about anything. It’s just a parlor game for cowards to play in figuring out who gets to say “I told you so!”

          Close The Fed in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 12, 2020 at 10:45 am


          The reason we have just two useful parties is because they have designed the system so that ONLY their two parties have easy access to being printed on the ballots!

          That’s why it’s better to take them over!

          Gosh, if you had ever gone out to get signatures to get on a ballot you would know this!

        Think Ross Perot. People flocked to his banner and ended up giving two terms to a rapist. After that, having served his intended purpose, he was gone. Trump as a third party candidate elects a Democrat. Why don’t you just cut out the middle man???? Frankly, I can’t figure out why you GOP haters aren’t thrilled with the likely result of this fiasco. After all, your entire purpose is to destroy the Republican Party by electing Democrats. Down-ballot blues got you down?

      lichau in reply to randian. | December 12, 2020 at 3:24 pm

      Actually, a single party is the stable solution. Two parties is quasi stable. Three is unstable.

    Grrr8 American in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 11, 2020 at 11:08 pm

    It’s not over yet — but we’re in the pray for a miracle stage.

    If this coup-by-election-fraud succeeds, future elections will basically be kabuki theater. The Dems are going to legalize the illegals, and so add tens of millions of voters. And as they showed with HR1 in 2019, they’re going to institutionalize the fraud from sea-to-shining-sea.

    So while I will likely switch from “R” to “I” soon, I have no illusions about if effectiveness. Relatedly, if Trump or someone else organizes a new policy party, I’d be all on board.

    But I fear that our counter-revolution is going to have to come by other means than the ballot box, since both elections and our judiciary have proven to be thoroughly corrupt.

    Meanwhile, now that the United States has been taken down, the Chinese and World Economic Forum are finalizing plans to impose the Great Reset (global corporatist Fascism) upon the world.

    It’s a stupid idea. How you are registered only affects which primaries you can vote in. It makes no difference to the parties how many people are registered as their supporters. What they care about is how people vote, not how they’re registered. So getting people to reregister does nothing.

“…and Texas suffered no harm because it dislikes the results in those elections…”

Hells bells, the whole COUNTRY suffered harm from their corrupt methods of conducting elections!!!


    randian in reply to SafeTea. | December 11, 2020 at 8:52 pm

    That was a gross mischaracterization of Texas’ argument. Texas didn’t complain it was harmed by the result, it claimed it was harmed by the process.

      CapeBuffalo in reply to randian. | December 11, 2020 at 11:06 pm

      Absolutely! It was the process that was subverted and caused consequent harm, not just to Texas but to every legal
      voter. The SC majority took the path that they thought would be the least damaging to the country for the near term without thought for the possible long term destruction of the country.
      A coward’s path.

So, secretaries of state may now willie nillie change how elections are conducted, and ZERO consequences.

Now soros will be bankrolling S.O.S. candidates in EVERY red state.

So who does have standing – one voter from PA?

If lighting in a bottle like Trump can’t win with 76 million voters we are done in by fraud without penalty, will be in smaller and smaller elections.

Guess cheating is now the standard, so long as you own the state.

Union-of-Taxpayers | December 11, 2020 at 6:58 pm

Taxpayers have to stand up. Support Union of Taxpayers at

    With Dominion machines and Democrats counting the votes behind closed doors, how, in the name of all that’s holy, does a new third party win more than 3% of the vote, regardless of how many people vote for them?

      randian in reply to Valerie. | December 11, 2020 at 11:35 pm

      Oh that’s easy. The Democrats will gladly hand them, say, 20% of the votes. With Democrats at 45%, the Republicans at 35%, and the third party at 20% permanent power for the Democrats is assured.

        See how the RINO echo chamber works on these threads? Shoot down every idea without offering a better one. And then go back to the tried and true loser strategy of nose holding/LOTE. Brilliant.

        The reason why the GOP sucks is because Republican voters suck. Stupid beyond belief. Fatal flaw. No imagination and no guts. All talk.

          Phil, I get that you are angry and disappointed, we all are, but please don’t start attacking your fellow LI commenters. It won’t help and it certainly won’t change any minds (how many times have you changed your mind because someone called you stupid and gutless?). We don’t permit personal attacks on other commenters here as you know. Just a friendly reminder.

          @Fuzzy. I can think of a couple of commenters who were insulting and prolific name callers that you even declared your love for. Do I need to name them? My point is that it is the REPUBLICANS who once again snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and were once again circling the wagons around the Democrats at the moment of truth. How dumb do Republican commenters here have to be to still be circling the wagons protecting these traitors? We never get a clean shot at the Dems because we have to work our way through two circles of defense!

          Look, you have a strong viewpoint, but that doesn’t make you right (or wrong) . . . and it certainly doesn’t make anyone who disagrees with you stupid.

          You can make your point without being personally insulting, Phil. Please do so.

Trump can use the Insurrection Act or issue specific muster orders for the militias. Giving up to the CCP is not an option. If he does not, we’re on our own, and will have to rely on God to stand up leaders for our people.

    Milhouse in reply to ray. | December 12, 2020 at 11:36 pm

    He could have used the Insurrection Act against BLM/Antifa riots. He cannot use it to prevent Biden’s election. If he tried, the military would ignore his orders and would arrest him. And they’d be right to.

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | December 13, 2020 at 1:15 am

      The military has no right or power to arrest the president. They do have an obligation to support and defend the Constitution and ignore unlawful orders. But they cannot themselves act unlawfully, and they have no power to arrest a president or anyone not covered under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Aloha USA we has lost the republic. The constitution is null and void. omrades.

Well, it looks like they better send in droves of lawyers and observers to GA, or the whole thing is in the toilet.

If cheating and fraud is the new standard, then we will have to get in the gutter and do it too.

I am surprised that all these courts and the SCOTUS itself could overlook such massive fraud, e.g. the MI AG refused to let the results of the audit of 22 Dominion machined be released to the public. What does that say?

If the SCOTUS is too cowardly to save the nation, it is up to us.

    Dathurtz in reply to Dimsdale. | December 11, 2020 at 7:10 pm

    Pack your kit.

    Sanddog in reply to Dimsdale. | December 12, 2020 at 3:49 am

    The counties need to actually allow the observers to.. observe the process, and that doesn’t mean making them stand in a corner. I don’t give a damn if they have to put a camera on every single election worker. They need to start treating ballots like gold bars and have the highest level of security and chain of custody for every single ballot.

    Milhouse in reply to Dimsdale. | December 12, 2020 at 11:40 pm

    SCOTUS can only look at cases that are properly before it.

Why doesn’t President Trump file the Texas lawsuit under his own name as plaintiff. Certainly he would have standing wouldn’t he?

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to garybritt. | December 11, 2020 at 7:11 pm

    I believe he did join. Perhaps you’re right, file under his own candidacy, separately.

    The republican legislatures in the 4 subject states could select electors who will vote for Trump.
    Odds: less than 1 in a quadrillion.

    Milhouse in reply to garybritt. | December 12, 2020 at 11:42 pm

    He has standing, but no direct access to the Supreme Court. The whole point of the TX suit was to invoke original jurisdiction so as to bypass all the lower courts. But original jurisdiction only gets you into court; if you have no standing your case doesn’t get heard. Even Alito and Thomas don’t dispute that.

      Dimsdale in reply to Milhouse. | December 13, 2020 at 9:31 am

      It is sad that the courts, including SCOTUS, have gone from a forum to contest wrongs, perceived or not, to a series of “Catch-22’s” designed to obscure justice or bypass it altogether.

      The SCOTUS should have at least heard the Texas suit. I say this because how could so many legislators, lawyers and states be so wrong about standing.

      Dershowitz stated that it is his opinion that the SCOTUS, and the other courts, just did not want to touch this hot potato.

I question if this Hail Mary was an attempt to win a case vs just an attempt by the Texas AG to build his career?

This was just a stupid lawsuit.

    txvet2 in reply to Danny. | December 11, 2020 at 7:09 pm

    It was a Hail Mary because they’d run out of other options. It wasn’t stupid, it was desperation.

    MarkS in reply to Danny. | December 11, 2020 at 7:09 pm

    Do explain, please!

    Stupid lawsuit? Actually, it raised some fundamental Constitutional issues about states’ rights and the right of other states concerning a federal election in which they participate, not to mention Equal Protection.

    The dissenters got it right. The suit should have proceeded in any event to address the issues. Now, half the country is shut from the process because no other court could decide this. This was a lost opportunity, in so many ways. Stupid?

      This was a lawsuit everyone involved knew would lose this badly that most definitely outraged swing voters in all of the swing states named in that lawsuit who in one state (Georgia) have a senate election to vote in on the 5th.

      So yes it was an extremely stupid lawsuit.

      Maybe if the Texas GOP wasn’t too busy suing Georgia it could deal with education issues in Texas which are as large as the state.

        “most definitely outraged swing voters in all of the swing states named in that lawsuit”

        You have no clue what these voters think. Especially as these voters have no voice or standing in this to matter in any way.

        Without the lawsuit, these particular issues would not have been raised. Now they are out there. And the injustice in being denied even a forum. That is important, NOT stupid.

        Education issues in Texas can wait for another day.

          “Danny” is one of the hundreds of paid operatives out trying to influence you to give up. They’re all over today.

          1. Swing voters in the suburbs went for Biden which is why those states went to the democrats
          2. Pretending they didn’t and suing the state instead of courting them encourages them to go democrat again in January and beyond.

          Education issues in Texas also can’t wait because they are turning Texas blue. Republicans always did well with Latino voters in Texas and did so this time, and Californians moving to Texas are actually evenly split making them not a net gain for either side.

          Saying they could wait in order to craft myths is delusional, especially because those myths are harmful to the republican side.

        Milhouse in reply to Danny. | December 13, 2020 at 12:05 am

        It was a stupid lawsuit because the flaws were glaring and obvious. The two most obvious:

        1. Standing.

        2. No court has the authority to change the Dec-14 date for the electors to vote. The suit’s claims that this was merely the date for the electors to be selected, and that the court could change it, were both obviously false.

        Meanwhile, what exactly are these alleged education issues in Texas? Last I heard, when adjusted for demographics Texas’s outcomes are in line with or better than many other states.

      The dissenters would have granted no other relief than to do the plaintiff states the courtesy of accepting their case before dismissing it.

AF_Chief_Master_Sgt | December 11, 2020 at 7:07 pm

Our laws mean nothing. Therefore, our laws mean nothing.

Every man for themselves. If the Constitution means nothing, then anything that was created in the Constitution means nothing.

The Presidency means nothing. The Congress means nothing. The Supreme Court means nothing.

As expected. It was a nice country while it lasted.

SCOTUS=Craven Cowards

May “justice” be served upon those who enabled the fraud. They cannot hide, they are known, they must atone.

The republican side should turn their backs on it and deny the communist pukes an existence.

FWIW, I think the USSC operated as they should. It is not a matter for that forum.

Ask yourself, what would Hillary do? ROTF Do her one-better 🙂

No standing because not hurt…yet. When damage is sustained what is the relief? A little late. The extra-legal rulings by State Supreme courts altered the elections in those states which has direct effect on all States. The rule of law is ill-prepared for the level of criminality we have seen.

    Milhouse in reply to alaskabob. | December 13, 2020 at 12:08 am

    Nope. No standing because how PA picks its 20 electors is none of TX’s business, any more than it’s PA’s business how TX picks its 38 electors. TX is in the same position as any individual voter, who has no standing to challenge an election result because it doesn’t affect him more than the general public.

No standing. So, no Constitution, just opinion. And, one State, one vote, right? Once you deny humanity (e.g. selective-child, diversity)… it’s a progressive path.

More than 2/3rds of the election-related lawsuits were dismissed based on standing. If nobody has standing to challenge fraud and malfeasance then election integrity is a joke and no election will ever be fair again.

    That is what stymies me: nobody in the country has standing when an election is blatantly stolen?

    Forget about the integrity of the vote, or faith in our system. The Dems and their media flying monkeys have destroyed that.

    Venezuela North.

      And we have nowhere to run.

      Milhouse in reply to Dimsdale. | December 13, 2020 at 12:10 am

      Defeated candidates have standing. In cases about a legislature’s privileges being usurped, the legislature (not individual members thereof) has standing. But ordinary voters have never had standing to challenge election results, because the standing rule is that you have to suffer specific harm that is more than what the general public suffers.

        Dimsdale in reply to Milhouse. | December 13, 2020 at 9:26 am

        Purest, non-legal speculation on my part, but I wonder if there is a “Citizens United” spin we could put on all or part of the country?

#notmypresident #stolenelection #resist #neverBiden #DemFraud

Evidently the only remedy for a stolen national election is secession.

From Barr, to Wray, to Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, Trump just can’t seem to appoint the right people!

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to MarkS. | December 11, 2020 at 7:23 pm

    Maybe at that level, there are no “right people.”

    That’s why he should have chosen people outside of politics.

      Chris Christie wanted the AG job from the beginning. He was an excellent politician, Governor, competent Federal prosecutor and loyal friend of Trump’s of long standing. Had he been picked, we would not have had Sessions, Rosenstein, Wray and Barr, or most of Trump’s problems. In my opinion, Trump would have been re-elected.

      However, from what I have read, Trump listened to Jared Kushner, who dumped on CC because he put Kushner’s father in prison when a Federal prosecutor. In my opinion, Trump did this to himself and the country by ignoring the lessons of history – JFK picking his brother as AG, or Obama picking Holder. You can’t get that one wrong.

    txvet2 in reply to MarkS. | December 11, 2020 at 7:29 pm

    Sessions, Wray, Barr. He can’t FIRE the right people, either.

    stablesort in reply to MarkS. | December 11, 2020 at 7:37 pm

    The choice belongs to the Senate, not the President.

Katy L. Stamper | December 11, 2020 at 7:22 pm

Reading above, it sounds as though SCOTUS would have held in favor of the Georgia/Penna./Michigan et al. legislatures.

It strikes me that this might be a meager attempt by the court to demonstrate to the left that they don’t need to pack it in order to get their way. Not that the possibility makes me feel any better about this final disappointment.

I think we should spare the lives of Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

    txvet2 in reply to BillyHW. | December 11, 2020 at 8:28 pm

    We need more than that. We need 24 hr a day guards for them. The Dems will want to swing the court back without having to pack it if they can, and we already know they won’t be put off by the thought of assassination.

Katy L. Stamper | December 11, 2020 at 7:29 pm

Doesn’t it give you a chill — to view Law-itis in action?

Katy L. Stamper | December 11, 2020 at 7:35 pm

Unsure if this is the solution, but it can’t hurt:

If you want work, apply to work with your local elections office and/or your state’s secretary of state office, elections division.

America was the last putative free place in the world; we will now join the peoples of Uighur, Hong Kong, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. who lament the loss of their homes.

Our Senate is corrupt, our House is corrupt, the DOJ is corrupt, the FBI is corrupt and our Judiciary is corrupt. They have all left us naked and exposed to the fate determined by our enemies even as they tell us they are supporting our right to vote.

While I disagree with this decision, I’ll respect it and acknowledge Joe Biden will be sworn in as the POTUS. I don’t believe it was a fair election and I don’t believe the media, big tech or the courts are unbiased and I think they’re all stacked against conservatives. I don’t know how but I know conservatives must continue to expand the tent and bring in more blue collar workers. I also know Republican State elected officials MUST fix there deficiencies and that Republicans in the House and Senate must fight to fix the deficiencies at the federal level. We’ll get through the Biden administration, I have no doubt about that.

    jhkrischel in reply to WillS68. | December 11, 2020 at 7:39 pm

    I think the only way to get through a #MediaIndustrialComplex administration is to take every opportunity to throw sand in the gears. Their ambition cannot be limited, but their capacity to implement it can be slowed to a crawl. Without a cooperative working class, they can’t function with any sort of alacrity.

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to WillS68. | December 11, 2020 at 7:42 pm

    If they give illegal aliens and foreigners with green cards etc., citizenship and the vote, WE’RE DONE.


      Fraud is unchallengable. We are already done.

        Katy L. Stamper in reply to Dathurtz. | December 11, 2020 at 7:56 pm

        I don’t think it is unchallengeable YET. Damn close.

          What basis do you have for your optimism?

          Katy L. Stamper in reply to Katy L. Stamper. | December 11, 2020 at 8:55 pm

          Perhaps I was unclear. I mean going forward, fraud will be challengeable.

          First, I note that Lin Wood’s individual suit (he’s from Georgia) has been docketed in SCOTUS.

          Next, I note, Georgia legislative committees have been meeting – NOT to correct the current wrong, because I’m sure they’re concerned for their own well-being from the violent left, but to change current law to clean things up.

          I don’t believe war itself will break out if Biden is coronated. I believe that the right will energetically engage in much more aggressive and assertive politics.

          Then, if that fails, I see secession. I hope soon enough to stop us from being overwhelmed by unassimilated foreigners.

      Wait a minute. I know a number of naturalized citizens who voted for Trump.

      SCOTUS just gave the Dems the unfettered right to cheat and steal elections…we are already done!

    BillyHW in reply to WillS68. | December 11, 2020 at 7:59 pm

    What does John McCain’s necrotic rectum taste like?

    Barry in reply to WillS68. | December 11, 2020 at 8:00 pm

    The f’ing R’s are just as corrupt as the D party, that’s why we’re in this fix. Don’t expect those corrupt B’strds to fix anything. They have left us with but one option, separate from the union, with blood if required.

    Consent of the Governed has been lost.

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to WillS68. | December 11, 2020 at 8:26 pm

    Do you really believe that there will ever be an honest election in the United States again? What do you base that on?

    Subotai Bahadur

Article V , combined with a slate of new and brave legislators is our last hope now.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to felixrigidus. | December 11, 2020 at 7:43 pm


    sunnyvaleken in reply to felixrigidus. | December 11, 2020 at 8:07 pm

    The opening paragraphs of the Declaration apply now as much as they did then. If we’re going to use the original to establish a new country, I propose some changes:
    1) the declaration applies to women as much as men (all men and women are created equal)
    2) that among these (RIGHTS) are Life, Liberty, Property and the pursuit of Happiness.

    We need to prevent corrupt local governments from taking property for minor deviations is owed property taxes – if you owe $.50 or $5 on your taxes (for example); there cannot be a legal case where any government takes your property. I don’t care if you owe them $0.50 for 20 years; they can’t take your property.

      Katy L. Stamper in reply to sunnyvaleken. | December 11, 2020 at 8:18 pm

      Men and women aren’t equal.

      Join the Marines, buy a clue.

        drednicolson in reply to Katy L. Stamper. | December 12, 2020 at 10:11 am

        Men and women are created with equal human worth, but are in no way created equitable. Pretending otherwise is one of the Bad Ideas that helped make this mess in the first place.

        sunnyvaleken in reply to Katy L. Stamper. | December 12, 2020 at 11:16 am

        The Declaration names the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not physical abilities. Men and women are created equal in the sense that they have the same rights that are to be protected by government.

        sunnyvaleken in reply to Katy L. Stamper. | December 12, 2020 at 11:19 am

        By the standard of physical abilities, all men are not created equal. Watch a football game, buy a clue.

      Maybe “all men and all women” . . . .

      Government has the monopoly on the use of force. Government can do whatever it wants. Lincoln established that in 1861-1864.

      The US is unique in permitting firearms to be held by its citizens. Look for a full on attack on that right. Commencing day one of Harris/Biden Administration.

        Sanddog in reply to lichau. | December 12, 2020 at 3:55 am

        Yeah, I wish them luck enforcing their desire to make semi-automatic firearms and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, NFA items. I’m sure as hell not going to comply and I’m not going to help anyone who wants to comply.

    felixrigidus in reply to felixrigidus. | December 12, 2020 at 5:04 am

    Sadly we cannot see who thinks the Declaration of Independence is to be down-voted. I actually want to know who hates it: is it a Brit who cannot stand that the colonies are not still colonies? Is it some Chi-Com troll, or simply a Democrat who hates America without following a Chinese master’s direction?

The Supremes have anointed and blessed the Democrat’s theft of the election. If a state attorney general doesn’t have standing to challenge the election, nobody has standing and elections stand no matter how much criminal activity created the result. This their chicken-schyt excuse; Paxton doesn’t have standing; what pure bullschiff.

Remember this: the Democrats stole the election. May they forever wear that crown of thorns on their heads and regret their small- minded suicide.

whatever the legalese, what a stunning betrayal of over 100m americans

Super disappointed tonight.

This election was lost when 80 million votes were dumped at the post office. There will never be fewer than 180 million votes at the post office for any national election from now on.

I think it is time for our VSGPotus to play the one card that has been hidden.

Looks like the case is going to be appealed…………

So, the Court did as expected, but not hoped. It took the short-term easy way out and simply refused to hear the case. So, now it begins.

It would have been the simplest thing in the world to simply schedule a hearing, at which the plaintiffs and the defendants could presents arguments and counter arguments and the justices could actually do their jobs and decide on the merits of the case. However, as I noted previously, the Court decided to take the safe, short-term political road and dream up a reason not to hear the case. However, they have totally ignore the long-term problems, which have yet to be addressed.

Now, that almost all of the lawful, judicial avenues to redress have been exhausted, the pro-Trump supporter are coming to the point where they have no legal recourse left. And, as this whole situation revolves around allegations of unlawful activity and lawful, legal redress is being denied, without hearing, how does a law abiding man achieve justice, or at least a serious hearing? How did our forefathers achieve this in 1775, in 1860? It will be interesting, and distressing, to see how this plays out.

The Friendly Grizzly | December 11, 2020 at 8:23 pm

Texans make a lot of noise about being a Republic, and how they are the only state with the right of secession.

Okay, Texans: fish or cut bait.

“The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”

If I read the decision correctly the denial is because Texas and the rest would only have standing if PA, etc actions paused a threat to Texas’ state sovereignty. That it matters not one wit if the actions of PA and the rest somehow injure the voters of Texas because Texas in this suit has no standing to act on their behalf.

How each state conducts its election is not a threat to the sovereignty of another state but strictly an internal matters. Except we now have been told by the courts that even when it can be shown the action of state officials violate the laws and constitution of the state and disenfranchise legitimate votes no claim of harm can be made because the state is free to conduct its elections however they chose without reliance on any established standards.

So each election is an independent act that may or may not be conducted in accordance to any previous one. Making sure the candidate of choice wins by any means necessary is an acceptable reason for changes to procedure. The independence of the state to act in any way it chooses re:elections, is no other state’s business.

So why can’t a state have voter ID? Why can’t a state decide how districts should be mapped out? Why can’t a state have stricter standards for voter registration than “Motor voter”?
Do I sense a double standard? How is fraud in a national election not a threat to state sovereignty? Is state sovereignty tied to the electoral college? If so, doesn’t the election fraud of one state or several states disenfranchise the electoral college votes of the states where fraud did not happen? Just wondering.

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to JRaeL. | December 11, 2020 at 8:38 pm

    Good points, all.

    lichau in reply to JRaeL. | December 11, 2020 at 8:52 pm

    The real reason was that the Supremes are cowards. In fairness, they didn’t really sign up for being under literal fear for their lives for the rest of their days. They and their families would need 24/7 security from here on out. Never be able to eat out, at least in DC.

    None of those cool cocktail parties, either.

    No excuse, just the facts. Courage is rare in humans, essentially non existent in politicians, whether or not the wear black robes.

      henrybowman in reply to lichau. | December 11, 2020 at 9:44 pm

      Why did they THINK we were paying them the big bucks?

      txvet2 in reply to lichau. | December 12, 2020 at 1:42 am

      No, the reality is that they don’t want future historians to point at them as the ones who triggered a civil war. Either way they ruled was going to piss off a lot of people, and let’s face it, conservatives talk a lot about taking up arms but the left are usually the ones who do it. Witness Portland, Seattle, Chicago, NYC, et al.

    Barry in reply to JRaeL. | December 12, 2020 at 10:05 am

    Good points JRaeL.

    However, it matters not one bit. The black robed justices are always hypocrites, ruling at there whim. I’ll excuse Alito and Thomas for now. But ACB, she stabbed Trump and us in the back the very first chance she got.

    Had this been a suit brought by dem states, it would have been accepted 9 zip. Count on it.

    Milhouse in reply to JRaeL. | December 13, 2020 at 12:27 am

    States can have voter ID, and many do. Who told you otherwise?

    States can decide how districts are mapped out, so long as they don’t violate US law or the US constitution. Any violation of state law is a matter for the state courts.

    States have to allow people to register to vote when getting their license, and to accept the federal voter registration form, because US law requires it, and US law overrides all contrary state laws and constitutions.

    No, there is no double standard. The standard is the same for all states. Texas’s sovereignty is in no way affected by how PA chooses its electors. TX gets its 38 electors no matter what PA does, and that’s all the say it’s entitled to.

So if the legislature is required to determine the rules of elections, and if that power is usurped in violation of the Constitution…

It doesn’t matter.

Once more, Democrats set a bad precedent. It may well come back to haunt them, especially as they start to implement the big tech police state. Sometimes, it takes something terrible to wake up the complacent.

    I wish it were so. If it comes back at them they will simply change it.

    All they have to do is fix the GA election. Then, they control everything. They add two states, gaining four Senators forever. Then they pack the SCOTUS.

    They will be the permanent majority. I am an old engineer/mathematician. In our winner takes all, a two party system is quasi-stable. The real stable state is one party. We are there in all the deep blue states. Those that are light red or purple will follow.

      It will take more than 2 years to implement these things. The corrupt practices will be revealed over time. The public has been unaware, but now the sights are on Biden and the Democrats. This is the ebb. The rules of engagement have changed. The Democrats’ methods are now in the open. Increasingly the election will be seen as stolen. Soon, Trump won’t be there to blame and bad decisions will be even more apparent. Not to mention what will happen elsewhere, in response to Biden’s weakness. It’s too bad, but this bad result, and what follows may only be a prelude for the big enchilada in 2024.

        Why would the Democrats care whether the election looks stolen? The only people who matter, those who oversee elections and the courts who judge claims of election fraud, have signaled they will aid in that theft. The voters, as noted by Stalin, are irrelevant.

          This ain’t the Stalinist Soviet Union yet, so the analogy is not apt.

          Many Democrats do not care, that is true. But many people of all stripes are becoming more aware they are being manipulated and used. This will be seen as one more powerful example, the stolen election. The law of unintended consequences may surprise. Again, this may all be a setup for 2024.

So going forward the law abiding will be subservient to the lawless?

    stablesort in reply to bt1. | December 11, 2020 at 8:55 pm

    This is known as ‘survival of the fittest’. Our justice system will not stop nor prosecute antifa, looters or arsonists. Our judicial system will not stop fraudsters and our DOJ will hide criminal activity on the part of its favored politicians.

    The only justice an individual will have is the justice he seeks for himself. America has surrendered its civilization.

AG William Barr is holding four aces. He is going to set off a political firestorm.

    Mercyneal in reply to Gersh204. | December 11, 2020 at 9:22 pm

    How so?

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to Gersh204. | December 11, 2020 at 10:20 pm

    Tell pray, who do you think William Barr is loyal too? Keep in mind that he deliberately concealed the investigations and probably charges against Hunter Biden so as not to inconvenience Joe Biden’s candidacy.

    We have to stop giving quarter and know our enemies.

    Subotai Bahadur

    I gave Barr every reasonable excuse.
    There are none left. Barr is as corrupt ay James Comey and Loretta Lynch.

Texas needs proof of harm?
Do we have to wait for that?

    henrybowman in reply to snowshooze. | December 11, 2020 at 9:47 pm

    It’s like UK self-defense law: you’re never justified in shooting until the other guy shoots first. After that, it’s too late.

      stablesort in reply to henrybowman. | December 11, 2020 at 10:46 pm

      LBJ changed the Vietnam ROE to require the enemy shoot first back in 1966. Also about that time he required that we wrap the handles on our grenades with tape so the handle wouldn’t fly off like their suppose to when you pull the pin. When ambushed, we’d throw grenades and Charlie would unwrap the tape and throw them back.

So, we appeal to a higher Court, right?

Barrett proves to be a dud. What is it with Republicans and SCOTUS appointments?

    Well, all the Lawyers went to College for Indoctrination…
    There are slim pickings in that lot.

    Barry in reply to randian. | December 12, 2020 at 10:11 am

    “Barrett proves to be a dud.”

    That’s being charitable.

    dud = outright fraud, corrupt commie

    She had one job.

      “She (ACB) had one job.” It now appears to have been to “play” the role of a Conservative, while being an acceptable (to the Libs) replacement for RBG.

        randian in reply to jb4. | December 12, 2020 at 5:48 pm

        It seems like every “conservative” appointment to SCOTUS does this. Thomas is one of the few who didn’t. I don’t get it. They didn’t change their jurisprudence while in the lower courts because of nasty media writeups and lack of invitations to the hippest parties, so why do it when they hit SCOTUS?

I wish my intuition had been wrong and I was openly hopeful, but I know it was a less than 5% chance 5 Justices would vote to hear this case.

Simply put, trying to win through legal technicalities without presenting forensic evidence of fraud was never realistic – Judges are humans too.

Now it’s probably too late.

And what’s really painful about it is that so many people actively disdained the pursuit of forensic proof (which Trump can still get, even now) because the legal technicalities, affidavits and statistical evidence were supposedly “enough.”

Except this is not a circumstance where you stop at “enough.” This is the Presidency – you go over and above; Trump should have sent in the Marshals to sieze the ballots, records and machines in the red flag counties in the four states the moment the clock ticked over to 12/9/2020 in Michigan.

It’s leaving points on the board and expecting to win the championship. That’s not how it works. You go the extra mile.

The Democrats dialled up their urban cheating game to 13. In response, the GOP kept its legal game at an even 8.

And we still have folks still claiming it is “impossible” to prove voter fraud – apparently the one crime invulnerable to forensic science.

To be clear; what needed to happen was a ballot by ballot forensic examination. We could have had the ballots, records and machines siezed and subjected to ink analysis and an audit of the custody chain and poll registers.

It wouldn’t have been easy; but it would have been easier than getting a judge to throw out the entire votes of the people of 4 states.

What judge would do that?

    henrybowman in reply to Martin_Knight. | December 11, 2020 at 9:49 pm

    “trying to win through legal technicalities without presenting forensic evidence of fraud was never realistic”

    You don’t present evidence before the trial, you present evidence during the trial. If they won’t give you a trial, you’re SOL.

    Two big problems with this election.. fake ballots, and mysterious counting machines. Which had a greater impact? Those machines are spread out, all over, wherever there are polling locations that use the even more mysterious software. They are somehow connected to a central tabulation server(?),, so, in order to prove shenanigans, maybe it would be better to seize the central servers. I am not a techie, and am probably using all the wrong terms.. but I hope you get the gist of it.

“A Republic, Ma’am, if you can keep it.” attr. B. Franklin

I blame the 16th and 17th Amendments as the fatal flaw. We’ve had a good run.

Why can’t the legislators in each state sue to invalidate the certification? The constitution gives them the power to determine election law and the election didn’t follow the law that they established. It was an illegal election.

The legislature could declare the election results null and void. Then they could choose new electors to send to Washington.

    randian in reply to ConradCA. | December 11, 2020 at 9:30 pm

    Sue where, the same corrupt state courts that are rejecting Trump’s suits?

    Elzorro in reply to ConradCA. | December 12, 2020 at 3:30 am

    They can. That is why SCOTUS tossed the lame lawsuit. And they are all GOP.

    Milhouse in reply to ConradCA. | December 13, 2020 at 8:56 am

    In those states where that happened, where the rules the legislature made weren’t followed, the legislature could sue. But it would have to be the legislature itself suing, not just a group of legislators or even a single house; both houses would have to officially vote to sign on as plaintiffs.

    As for changing the selection method, that would depend on the state constitution. The US constitution says that anything — not just bills but “every order, resolution, or vote” — that requires the assent of both houses also requires the president’s assent, or a veto override. If a state’s constitution has a similar clause then Biden would have a strong case to make that without the governor’s assent the new rules were not an act of the legislature, and therefore don’t count.

    In any case, a set of electors, represented as having been selected according to the rules in place before Nov 3, was sent in before Dec 8, and under federal law that set is guaranteed to be counted.

Should all legal avenues fail and Biden take his throne (yeah that bit was deliberate)and his appointed courtiers park their derrieres upon plush appointments hacking out flumes of pettifoggery we can be sure that their mockery of God will advance unbridled. True the runaway steed will be a Jackass and not a Thoroughbred but trample is as trample does.

There is a great chastisement in store for the just and unjust alike. Having a nation that believes in and protect religious freedom and freedom of conscience is not the same thing as a nation that codifies the unholy into the fabric of its laws and regulations as Biden is sure to do. You can be sure silencing those who still believe that truth is objective and evident to our eyes and heart will be on their “must do” list. We will have an ally in this battle if we remember that sackcloth and ashes offer better protection against the Biden virus than any strip of cloth ever could. Pray without ceasing for our nation.

This election created—or perhaps revealed—so many broken people.

Well, now we await the Electoral College.

Trump should declare martial law. What’s the difference if he does? At least he’ll be a benevolent dictator rather than the horrific ChiComm garbage trailing behind biden and harris.

No swamp crime against us will go punished, no swamp injustice against us will be cured.

We are in hell. I remember reading about people living in Austria at the time the Nazis ascended to power in Germany. One day they woke up, and discovered they were under Nazi authority.

We just woke up to that. If an embezzling traitor and a cheap whore ascend to the highest offices in our land because of a fake election, we won’t have a land.

NOTHING biden or harris will ever do will be legitimate. NOTHING.

Plan the secession.

    Nice idea, but doesn’t declaring martial law require the backing of the military whose leaders hate Trump as much as Roberts?

    You idiot. He has no authority to “declare martial law”. So his “declaration” would be so much wind. The military would not obey — it would be their duty not to obey — and he would be under arrest. To spare his dignity it would be called a temporary breakdown under stress, and Pence and the cabinet would invoke the 25th to suspend him until he recovers or his term ends, whichever comes first.

Funny how Roberts bent over backward to take the Obamacare case and re-write it, but kicks this one right out…

Found on the net:

Not a legal scholar but just read this on Parler

SCOTUS rejected the TX case because TX filed their case as “motion for leave to file a bill of complaint”. However, SCOTUS signals to TX and other states that if they file their cases as “motion to file the bill of complaint”, then their cases will be heard.
So, now, we awaits for TX and/or other states to file their cases correctly to SCOTUS again.

Any in-roads there?

Some advice:

If you didn’t buy any ammo today, be there when the stores open tomorrow. By noon, there’ll be none on the shelves anywhere in the U.S. Any caliber is trade goods if they don’t have what you need.
Not that it’s been easy to find for last 6 months….

First, they came for the Fetal… Posterity-Americans. Then, they came for the People-Americans. Once you establish a Pro-Choice quasi-religion, it’s a progressive path.

Judges use the “lack of standing” thing as a dodge to avoid cases they don’t want to get burned on. From now on SCOTUS means “Supreme Cowards of the United States” and their opinions should be treated with zero respect.

No more toilet paper for America…

Relax. They didn’t refuse it on the merits, first and foremost.

There are a number of other cases that are outstanding. Like tomorrow in Wisconsin. This wasn’t the only path. This wasn’t even an expected path.

Don’t be discouraged. Don’t back down. Don’t give up. Never give up.

This country was built on a foundation of process. We have a process to hold free and fair national elections every two and four years, We have a judicial system based on a process. The legislative branch is built on a process.
The country has survived this long because the population bought into and felt a part of the process.
Today, a group of seven people decided that process doesn’t apply, They generated a document that none of seven will directly put their name one, hiding behind anonimity.
They stopped the process, depriving the population a hearing within their jurisdiction, the same jurisdiction outlined in our constitution.
The state level officials did not follow their own constitutional process, the correct recourse is to be sought through the Supreme Court.

    Milhouse in reply to buck61. | December 13, 2020 at 10:19 am

    You have it exactly backwards. The court upheld the process. You wanted them to bypass it because the cause is so urgent, and they correctly refused to do that. And it’s nine, not seven. Alito’s and Thomas’s only objection was a new theory of process, that only they believe in, according to which they had to grant the motion to file and then reject the case.

      sfharding in reply to Milhouse. | December 13, 2020 at 4:51 pm

      No, you have it exactly backwards. Alito and Thomas’s objection was hardly “a new theory of process, that only they believe in”. It was a theory of process as old as the constitution that the writers of the constitution believed in. In a nutshell, Texas sued 4 other states, and were joined in amicus by what, 17 other states?, on the grounds that Plaintiffs had held elections in compliance with the constitution, while defendants had not, thus basically defrauding the voters of Texas. Thomas and Alito merely agreed that the action arose to a legitimate dispute between the States over which the Supreme Court had original and sole jurisdiction and that the court was compelled to hear the case.

In our new country, people receiving any $$ from the government, including loans and salaries to elected officials, GET NO VOTE.

And a legislature can VETO any court decision by a 55% majority.

And judicial terms are for 6 years, and ELECTED.

And impeachment for bad decisions, usurping decisions.

And NO JURISDICTION WHATSOEVER over foreigners’ petitions or suits. Ship ’em out if they complain!

    Close The Fed in reply to Close The Fed. | December 11, 2020 at 11:17 pm

    And NO FOREIGNERS, or children of foreigners, can work at any social media company. NONE.

    Tech permeates our culture now and culture is too important to allow foreigners to touch.

In the beginning, only Land-Owners were eligible to vote.

    Only Federal income tax payers should be allowed to vote in national elections…..1 vote per $1000 paid

      Close The Fed in reply to MarkS. | December 12, 2020 at 10:00 am

      No, because then Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos would volunteer to vote by paying $$ to the U.S. Treasury.

      Better that they be disqualified because they have contracts and receive payments from the U.S.A.!

Even Amy piled on. Thanks, Amy.

Plain and simple, keep your kids out of the military going forward. I was proud my son wanted to follow in my foot steps, now I’m doing all I can to keep him from joining so he won’t be sent off to increase the mil industrial complex profits. If there is no one to send over seas, there’s no way to fight a war. Get rid of standing armies and let the militias form for defense of their states and other states. Like Gen Butler said, war is a racket. You need the bodies to fight wars so cut off that supply.

It is not up to SCOTUS or any other court to usurp the plenary power of a state legislature. Texas last sentance defeats their own argument.
The remedy is in the legislatures. They are failing to act and they are all GOP. Besides an original jurisdiction case takes years to litigate, we have six weeks. This appears to be a scheme to allow feckless GOP porkaticians a way to moan and groan and still get rid of Trump. They had to know it would fail.

    TX-rifraph in reply to Elzorro. | December 12, 2020 at 5:57 am

    “…get rid of Trump.”

    No. Get rid of the Constitutional Republic. If this non-election is fraud and if it is allowed to stand, what follows is a Marxist tyranny run by China.

    Trump is just one man. Getting rid of Trump does not restore freedom — it ends freedom. That is the mission. The USA targeted Admiral Yamamoto in WWII. Why take out the leader? This is war and the enemies are foreign and domestic. The courts appear to be corrupt and useless. Our children are watching to see what the legislators do and what the citizens do, are they not?

      Elzorro in reply to TX-rifraph. | December 12, 2020 at 9:27 am

      Most everything federal is now and has been corrupt. Bit by bit they have legalized their crimes over time and made almost anything a citizen does a crime of some sort. This is post constitutional america now. They legalized vote fraud and centralized the fraud in basketball arenas run by minority counters. Pretty slick. All the while the RINO state legislators looked the other way. They stuffed the ballot boxes and at the same time stuffed the wallets of RINO state officials. Worked like a charm…in broad daylight. It will be a long time gone.

    “…an original jurisdiction case takes years to litigate, we have six weeks.”

    No, SCOTUS had whatever time it needed to put a stop the fraud. They can expedite. There was no evidence to consider. The urgency of a case that cuts right to the very core of our existence as a free nation was plain for even idiots to see. They simply tossed their oaths into the sewer and took the cowards way out by refusing to hear the case.

    Next Tuesday, the CA Secretary of State will re-open online voter registrations and I will then no longer be registered as a Republican. I can’t wait to get the stink off of me. It’s not the Dems who did this to us but the feckless corrupt Reps.

    If Trump decides to fight on, I will be there to support him. But I have no hope for Republicans nor for their dickless proles who choose to argue minutiae in lieu of doing anything as simple as re-registering as unaffiliated independents.

      The RINO states could easily drag it out anyway. SCOTUS would become a trial Court not an apeeals court I think.

        So drain YOUR swamp! Those RINOs were all elected by idiot Republicans who rather than fight, hold their noses and vote for the “lesser of two evils”. Those are the guys who circle the wagons around the Democrats. See the problem?

        I suspect Limbaugh made himself ill defending the GOP this week. His entire conservative plan has been based on gradualism. It’s time for “catastrophism” to steal a conceptual theory from geologists.

        His gradualism has not failed profoundly unless success is defined as creating a huge audience and persuading at the last minute of each election to hold their noses and vote for the LOTE. Hey, it takes time but we have to “hold” our ground! Well, we just lost that war BIGLY! Time to try something else. But first we need to put a giant wrench in the Uniparty machine. Drain their voter rolls of members. Do it now!

You guys are clinically insane.??

I believe you. You have GOP in the name, that means you have the best interests of America at heart. Nobody would use the name of the party he hates to concern troll, after all.

The evidence of warfare is massive. You are obviously part of it.

With Georgia having exactly the same election with mail voting, no providence drops and foreign computer vote counting I doubt the Leftists will be stopped from a sweep by just 2 Senators seat races

The millions and tens of millions of patriotic Americans, and the counties and States in which they reside should not succeed from OUR country. We have honored and upheld our constitution. We have honored and been faithful to our nations founding principles.
Instead we should seek to suspend from the Union those States or counties within States who have, or seek to, repudiate our constitution and founding principles. They seek nothing less than the destruction of OUR nation.
Those States or counties so suspended may be re-admitted when, by whatever actions necessary, are returned to constitutional abidance.

““Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections.”

I keep thinking about what that means. I am not a lawyer so I don’t know how English translates into legal language but…

Shouldn’t “has not demonstrated” be changed to “will not be allowed to argue”? How hard is it to grasp that states violating the US Constitution and their own state constitutions is worthy of being heard by SCOTUS?

This is a defacto endorsement of lawlessness at the highest level. It could be remedied by Congress but… Uniparty.

The Uniparty problem could be addressed as a start by voters abandoning “both” parties decisively and re-registering as unaffiliated independents but… read the comments on this thread. Too many of us are brainwashed. It’s just a click away yet…

So many of us talk about ” more guns and ammo” or “don’t mess with Texas” or secession or other ill-thought-out emotional plans of action but how about doing something really easy first? Direct your efforts to something you can do right now that doesn’t require years of planning or people getting shot! If being a Republican is so important to you, you are a certified member of the Swamp and a fundamental part of the problem.

People who refuse to do something that basic and immediately doable are hopeless. Even if it ends up accomplishing nothing, you can always re-register back as a squish and then start making excuses as to why you can’t take the more extreme step of shooting people (who?) as you relocate to a seceding state in the hopes that works. Or maybe you just go Rambo and run around shooting people as a one-man army?

I am having a very hard time finding a reason for hope. Empty talk and inertia has been the bane of our cause from the very beginning. For most of us, this has just been a board game for strategizing what someone else should be doing about the problems. I’m not interested in how people feel. What are we going to do about it? How about starting with re-registering as an unaffiliated independent?

I know, trying is the first step to failure.

    Union-of-Taxpayers in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 12, 2020 at 8:31 am

    Taxpayers are the core of this country. Taxpayers must unite because the politicos know that divided, we are easy prey. Join Union of Taxpayers at Tell your friends. It starts with a few, becomes a group, soon turns into a movement.

    sfharding in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 12, 2020 at 8:43 am

    I can think of few actions as meaningless and futile as re-registering. And now even voting has been rendered meaningless. No one is advocating for civil war, or shooting anybody. But remember, our country was not founded by disgruntled loyalists who bravely sought to re-register. Nor did our founding citizens advocate for war or shooting people. They simple declared themselves to be free and faced up to the consequences. And it took years of planning.

      Okay. So doing nothing is better than doing something. Brilliant. Or am I assuming that you plan to start shooting people? Bombing buildings? Let’s hear it. You and your ilk are all talk. Maybe you ought to find a time machine and having the advanced knowledge of how the American Revolution worked out, return to the 18th century and sign up for the Continental Army. Wake up! Do something! Re-register!

        sfharding in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 12, 2020 at 9:22 am

        The issues that confront our nation now are not going to be remedied by re-registering or joining Parler. I’ve done both. They will not be remedied by joining a militia or bombing buildings or by an ad hoc collection of citizens. They will be addressed when the States, as sovereign entities, begin to challenge a corrupt federal system that on the one hand taxes them, while on the other hand declares they have no standing.

          Elzorro in reply to sfharding. | December 12, 2020 at 9:46 am

          I registered Libertarian from refuddlican just cause they have a few candidates. You may be right though. Voting is futile. I do not want the stench of a republican card in my wallet that will soon be empty.

    Close The Fed in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 12, 2020 at 10:17 am

    With all due respect, much can be done. I’m astonished that anyone would be unaware.

    1. Work to get perdue and loeffler in georgia elected on jan. 5th. Contact their campaigns and do phone banking. If you’re in Georgia, go door knocking. You can sign up with the gop to do this.

    This will stop mass legalization of 20 million plus illegal aliens, and BUY US TIME.

    2. You can give to their campaigns.

    3. You can put up a sign for them in your yard, if your’e in Georgia.

    4. You can find out how to be a poll watcher/poll worker on Jan. 5th.

    5. You can write to Georgia legislators and demand they start a special session, including the gov, lt. gov. etc. I’m on under this handle. Contact me, I’ll send you the entire list.

    6. You can investigate what YOUR elected officials are doing about this crisis. THEN ARRANGE TO RUN AGAINST THEM, either in the same party or a different party. Go to, and you can view their primary and general election vote numbers. From there, you’ll have an idea which party is best to run as.

    7. You can write letters to the editors of your local papers about your specific elected offficials’ actions in this situation. If they won’t see the light, make them feel the heat.

    This is a beginning. THINK, for Christ’s sake. Trump cannot do everything, and if you REALLY want to do something, there is MUCH to be done. But it takes TIME. It takes consistent COMMITMENT.

    Which is why just a few percent of our people make the decisions. They’re the ones willing to figure it out and be consistent about it.

    Also, don’t forget to NETWORK with like-minded people in your community!

Spoken like a true RINO.

caseoftheblues | December 12, 2020 at 8:31 am

Phil your argument has a hole….every court and every law enforcement agency, and soon every state and federal body has put their stamp of approval on all future elections being simple anointing of the power brokers approved pawn. Voting is now meaningless

    Union-of-Taxpayers in reply to caseoftheblues. | December 12, 2020 at 8:40 am

    Money = Power. If taxpayers would unite, the politicos would not be able to get away with all of this. Join the Union of Taxpayers. Start a Chapter. United taxpayers on a national basis. We will change the dynamic. It’s not red-state / blue-state, its taxpayer and anti-taxpayer. Race, gender etc are not in the equation (they want you to make it about race /gender so they can smear you as a racist). Join now. Tell your friends.

    Aidng and abeting. LOL maybe there will be a Sovereign Citizen movement of 75 million. Now that would be something to see. I always thought they were kooks….now I wonder.

Your “massive fraud that would change any state” meme is about as ridiculous as proclaiming that a bank robbery should not be prosecuted because the amount stolen did not cause said bank’s insolvency!

Union-of-Taxpayers | December 12, 2020 at 8:44 am

Follow on Parler @UnionofTaxpayers // on Twitter @UTaxpayer

Texas has the legal right to divide itself into up to 5 states. this was written into the Republic to Republic agreement when joining the
United States.

Did one of you chinese masters write this for you??

The Deplorables will become ‘The Ungovernable’ if Biden gets in. A fake president of a fake administration. Everything they do unconstitutional.

Hit ’em where it hurts, their wallets.

“Resolved: Our Coalition agrees to withhold the sending of all federal tax Monies collected from our Citizens, until such time as our common Complaint is afforded a fair and open Hearing.”

Whether our state officials have the stones to actually do it, is the hundred billion dollar question.

A decision of supreme judicial cowardice and comparable to Dred Scott vs Sandford.

I have enjoyed reading the myriad suggestions here. And, I have noticed some problems with those suggestions. Let me discuss a few.

The first is this notion that changing party affiliation to NPA [NO Party Affiliation] will have some effect on the political scene. In most states all it does is shut you out of the primaries. So, essentially, you get to vote for the candidates already picked by the parties. Who do you think picker Trump as the Republican candidate in 2016? It was not thee NPAs, it was party members.

The other big mistake here, is thinking that anything can be done to curb violent fallout from all of this. The left is out of control. BLM, AntiFa and other radical groups are still engaging in violent actions, even though their side supposedly won the election. It will not stop and will only get worse if the results of the election are overturned. Then you have the response, by these groups, to pro-Trump demonstrations. They are always violent. This means that the pro-Trump people will have to respond in self defense and it is on. Because of the actions of the Democrats at the state, county and city level, it is now too late to avoid violence. Even if the pro-Trump supporters do nothing, it is still going to be game on.

The liberal factions of the Establishment have started a Civil War. And, unless the majority of the populist leaning citizenry rolls over and accepts the New Order, it will continue to be prosecuted. The pro-Trump people do not have to rise up in armed rebellion against the government, it is going to be thrust upon them by the left.

Our Forefathers were highly intelligent men. They had just gone through a Civil War with England over the English government’s refusal to hear their complaints. So, they installed a judiciary to hear and rule on complaints and disputes, so that the people involved would not have to resort to violence to resolve them. What has happened in the case of this election is exactly what happened in 1775, the courts refused to do their duty and refused to hear these cases. No court has presented any logical, reasonable reasons why the election should stand in the face of increasingly overwhelming evidence of election fraud which reversed the results. All they have done is tell people with valid concerns to shut-up and go home. What recourse do these people, who comprise approximately 1/2 of the population of the nation now have? Will they shut-up and go home? Or will they take their complaints to the streets?

    Union-of-Taxpayers in reply to Mac45. | December 12, 2020 at 3:56 pm

    Taxpayer must wake up and unite. Together we have real power. We fund the government. Join the Union-of-Taxpayers. Let’s get organized.

    Follow on Parler @UnionofTaxpayers // on Twitter @UTaxpayer

IANAL so I can’t couch these ideas in legal terms and I know that’s cheating on my part, but follow along if you will and see where it takes us.

First and foremost, the U.S. constitution does not guarantee that any citizen has the right to vote for the office of the President. Each state legislature was specifically granted the power to determine how each state’s electors are chosen and it is these electors who will vote for the President.

In effect, each state may allow its individual citizens to vote for the office President, but is not required to so. Further, even if the state does allow its citizens to vote for the President, each state has the power to override that vote at anytime for any reason. In other words, the state’s citizens may be allowed to vote, but they have no right to do so.

This part is tricky and isn’t totally clear (It seems lawyers have adopted their own language to prevent non-lawyers from understanding the proceedings.) We speak of human rights, individual rights, god-given rights and so forth. These tend to blur together like salt and pepper on eggs, but most people think of them as basic rights and that despite our opinions to the contrary, may in fact be infringed without recourse.

The constitution explicitly recognizes certain rights in ten amendments to the constitution commonly known as the ‘Bill of Rights’. These rights are recognized as belonging to all citizens across the nation by the federal government when dealing with federal issues. In some cases, not all of these rights are recognized within each state; the right to keep and bear arms for instance means different things to different states. Occasionally, the federal courts will step in and force the states to honor portions of the ‘Bill of Rights’ and other times it doesn’t. It’s a rather capricious process, but it appears that lawyers swim comfortably in those waters.

In the legal action of Texas v Four States, Texas argues that its citizens are harmed when the Four States do not follow their own laws regarding the national election. The USSC counters that Texas does not have standing to bring an action against the Four States. As a child, I would rare back my head, open my mouth and whine: “Why?”. With no answer forthcoming, let’s look at the elements.

If no citizen has the right to vote for the President, could a citizen be harmed when allowed to vote and his vote is ignored? Citizens residing within one of the four states could appeal to that state’s courts to correct this injustice, but there really was no injustice, as no citizens have the right to vote. So could Texas citizens be harmed if the Four States citizens were not?

The USSC ruling seems to say it matters not a whit how the Four States governors and courts meddle with the election since the legislature has the plenary power to take charge of the election process and overrule everyone else within the state; governors, courts and citizens alike.

There was a major environmental court case Massachusetts v EPA that was filed the same way and survived

Through it all can blaim the 5 state legislatures for not fullfing their Constitution duty and picking electors

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend