Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Supreme Arbiters will get 'er done!

I wonder why the dems are so quiet about all this

Your fixing to see it. Info involving foreign countries interfering (remember, that's what they accused Trump of ), millions of mail in ballots without matching signatures, etc.

Trump warned it was going to happen, now we are hearing how it happened, and it's starting to shift to the proof it happened stage. He's letting people know what happened and letting them know he's going to stop it to protect the constitutional election laws of elections and that hes doing it for we the people. He's letting us know this before he drops the hammer on them.

I'm now thinking back that Barr is the stealth bomber and Durham is now appointed to report on and prosecute the Hills, Yovanovitch, Vinderman and Weissman pukes that lied and worked for his impeachment and others behind the Russian dossier.

I think this posted by mtnsnake pretty well explains it.

https://rumble.com/vbjysx-ep.-2343b...ion-before-.html?mref=2hzb1&mc=fcbfy

Wasnt the country divvied up among them and she got the Pa area and Thomas got the Ga area.

Barr’s stunt with Durham was done to block President Trump from declassifying everything , No Redactions.

https://theconservativetreehouse.co...-trumps-ability-to-declassify-documents/

The best way to do it is how Brutus killed Caesar. Get real close, snuggle up, and shiv him in the ribs”…

https://theconservativetreehouse.co...nt-trump-said-this-ill-only-say-it-once/


Besides, Barr cannot legal appoint Durham as A Special Council. Federal law states that a SC must come from outside the Government, so Barr is playing games with the Presidents authority.

Supposed to be some whistle-blowers testify under oath
today in Nevada. Should be interesting.

Hopefully they won’t see pictures of family in familiar places
Kenneth

They're oblivious to what's actually happening, since the MSM they watch isn't peeping a word of it. To them, the election was overwhelming for their man, and he'll be inaugurated in January, oh, and Trump is a crazy, isolated, loony bird. That's it. That's all they get from the echo chamber they keep themselves locked up in.

I totally agree...


No way she recuses.. Vote SHOULD be 9-0 in Trump's favor, but most likely will be 5-4 for Trump with that pos Roberts goin' with the libbies..

We can sit here and see mountains of 'evidence', but how much of it can be proven enough to stand up in court? I'm guessing that very little of it can. They've had 4 years to cover their tracks, to hide illegal stuff and leave only unproven stuff for the courts to see.

Interesting comment. Essentially, you are saying that eyewitnesses are not credible evidence.

She will not and should not recuse herself. She is no more conflicted than any other justice.

No, it should be 9-0 ruling in favor of the law.

Ding ding ding ding ding! We have a winner. We also get in our echo chamber that Barr as well as every other government agency led by Trump appointees says there is no evidence of fraud and not one single shred of evidence has been provided to the court that any fraud took place not to mention whenever a Trump lawyer comes up before a judge, they say they have no evidence of fraud and its not a fraud case. Of course then you have to see the coming of the Kraken and how the Sidney Powell lawsuit in court makes claims of fraud in counties that don't exist. Throw in Rudy and the oil slick coming off his head and having press conferences in garden centers and you gotta wonder if this is serious or you all are just pranking us.

What about Kavanaugh?

Didn’t he already vote to allow unconstitutional ballot counting in PA?

So I see this falling into three categories of proof, each, if proven, will have different public effects (all result in Trump as president, I am talking reaction in the public population:

- Prove things like PA where more mail in ballots where returned than requested. This stinks of fraud and outright cheating. The "extra", if they can be identified, can be tossed out as bogus. T

- States changes the rules illegally, but the voter thought they were doing the right thing. This is the case of legislature approving mail in voting, but that wasn't within their power to do so. This one is touchy, the population that voted, very well have thought it was valid and their vote was valid, it's then tossed out. Yes it's an illegal vote but I don't count this as real cheating. In this case, the public perception will be voter supression.

- Things like the Dominiion server making up, or changing votes. Slam dunk the public should not accept this one.

That said, we all know no matter how Trump ends up in the whitehouse, it won't be a quiet four years.

I hope there is hard evidence. And I hope the scotus make decisions on the evidence. Would be great to see a 9-0 decision, based on facts.

Exactly, and yes he did. And no one knows what ACB is going to do.

Would any of you legal eagles on here know if the "Voting Rights Act of 1965" have any legal standing in our situation? My point is, if you falsify a vote(s)...you have in fact violated the civil rights of a legal voter by canceling his vote with the false vote(s). It appears to a lay person that the 15th amendment was narrowly written to protect only Africans, it appears the 19th Amendment was narrowly written to protect only women. Although the VRA of 1965 was written for Africans, why couldn't it apply to white citizens as well?

They may make some narrow rulings, but they are not, wholesale, going to overturn an election with multiple states results in question.

And given that it will take winning in several states to win the election, the odds of rectifying the fraud in all those states to the level of reversing the (fictional) apparent outcomes is very small.

And yes, this may very well signal the end of the Republic as we have known it if the fraud is allowed to stand, as is most likely..................the bar is very high.

MM

The SC hears cases involving Constitutional Violations, not criminal complaints.

Any case involving voter fraud or irregularities must contain a Constitutional argument.

He cheated, they cheated are criminal offenses, not so much Constitutional. Although the argument can be made , but in very slim ground, which usually doesn’t get certiorari.

The PA SC and election officials violated State Constitution, so this has merit, cept Kavanaugh already voted that it didn’t, so this is most likely a done deal.

Other state election fraud law suits will have to contain some form of Constitutional violation, not criminal.

Changing election procedures, in violation of state constitution and us constitution is the only way they will hear it.
Without that, nothing from the corrupt 9.