Failing to Adjudicate Texas Lawsuit, Supreme Court Is Turning Constitution Into Two-Legged Stool

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...reaking-2020-12-14-6

The refusal of the United States Supreme Court to hear the suit of Texas and 17 other states against four states, (Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), that were alleged not to have conducted fair presidential elections, on the grounds of Texas’ lack of standing, is a grievous abdication.

The claim of Texas and the other states was that in failing to protect against fraudulent voting on a large scale that affected the results for each state, and cumulatively between the defendant states affected the outcome of the election of the president and vice president, this was a violation of Texas’s right to an adequate level of assurance that the constitutional process of selection of the president and vice president was truly followed.

The attorney general of Pennsylvania called the Texas lawsuit a “seditious” attempt to disenfranchise the people of his state, and the Trump-hating media gave it the usual total-immersion in reflexive mockery.

Official processes are not more important than the election of the president; no right is more fundamental than the assurance of the constitutional selection of the president. The Supreme Court’s decision can only be seen as another illustration of its determination under this notoriously controversy-averse Chief Justice (John Roberts), to avoid any judgment that might produce a partisan backlash.

This appeared to have been the case in determining that Obamacare was a tax, (which is nonsense). It is one thing to hear a case and produce a dubious motivation for a decision, but something else to decline to hear a case in a matter not of appellate but of original Supreme Court jurisdiction—a dispute between states—on the fatuous theory that the 18 complainant states have no right to a high comfort level that the people elevated to the national offices have in fact been constitutionally elected.

This is not conscientious legal decision-making, and it is a failure to fill the judiciary’s role as the ultimate judge of the legality of what happens in the country.
Criminalization of Policy Differences

If the Supreme Court and lower courts will not exercise their full responsibility, the judiciary ceases to be a coequal branch of the government, the Constitution cannot function, and the political direction of the country is determined in an increasingly lawless contest between political factions in the executive and legislative branches, with no determining regard to the legality of their conduct.

The role of the judiciary is then demoted to being fought over for the criminalization of policy differences—it then ceases to be just a matter of legislating, but of driving the opponent from office after a partisan conviction of “high crimes,” a term that can be redefined to suit the occasion.

I was one of those, (and we were not numerous), who urged the Chief Justice at the end of the farcical impeachment trial of President Trump in February, to inveigh against the inadvisability of frivolous and vexatious attempts to remove high officeholders.

I was also one of those who warned the extremely small readership I then had nearly 50 years ago during the Watergate controversy, of the dangers of criminalizing policy differences in American government.

But that process has become addictive and almost reflexive. No conclusive evidence has ever come to light that President Richard Nixon committed any crimes, though some members of his entourage undoubtedly did. And he did not discourage an ambience in the inner circles of the White House that tolerated a casual attitude towards taking liberties in the interests of national security.

The charges against President Clinton were never adequately grave to justify an impeachment trial.

There was no conclusive evidence that President Trump did what he was accused of doing in his impeachment case—abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and neither is an impeachable offense, (any president who wouldn’t obstruct this Congress is guilty of negligence.)

The first presidential impeachment trial, of Andrew Johnson in 1868, was also preposterous—the president fired a cabinet official, for cause.

It would have been entirely appropriate and very useful if at the end of the Trump impeachment process the Chief Justice in recording the verdict of the Senate had stated that frivolous and vexatious harassments of presidents and other high officials for partisan reasons are not in the country’s interest. Such comments when cases are thrown out are not uncommon in less important matters.
A Two-Legged Stool

Something ultimately will have to be done to end this meretricious and destructive process of trying to mobilize partisan legislators to convict political opponents of crimes. But unless the judiciary fulfills its constitutional status as a coequal branch of government, it is to this depth of squalid bloodless assassination that American government will be reduced.

It is now a country with a totalitarian, left-of-center press, and a judiciary that is politically biased by or intimidated by the left, where, because of the pusillanimity of the Supreme Court, it is now the law that elections may be rigged with no oversight except within the state where the rigging occurred.

With a bench that is incapacitated in the most politically important matters, Madison’s magnificent triumvirate of equal branches of government will degenerate into a two-legged stool, in which the president will be a virtual dictator when his party controls the Congress, and he will be constantly vulnerable to harassment and threat of almost capricious removal when his opponents control the Congress.

The judiciary would then be reduced essentially to arbitrate the immense mass of civil litigation that afflicts and throttles daily and commercial life in the United States, and to be a rubber stamp for the prosecutotocracy that enjoys a 98 percent conviction rate, over 95 percent of it without trial, in the continuous demonstration of the abuses of the plea-bargain rules which permit prosecutors to extort and suborn perjury at no legal risk to themselves or the untruthful witnesses, (who receive immunity from accusations of perjury).

Such a country, with a stunted judiciary, will shortly fall into a state of institutional decrepitude where its highest courts no longer have the moral authority to bring down judgments on the political leaders even if they had the will to do so. It would be a severely hamstrung parliamentary system where the executive can only serve at the pleasure of legislative majorities and minority governments are dismissed from office as criminals.

This may all seem a bit remote, but when the Supreme Court creates a vacuum by abdicating as it did last week, the vacuum created does not cozily await the return of justice; the vacuum will be filled by the power-accretive politicians in the legislative and executive branches and there will be no one to mediate or arbitrate between them.

The judiciary’s task is to assure that the Constitution is upheld. If it does not play that role, the Constitution will not be upheld. The United States could ultimately replicate Rome, where 22 of the 30 emperors elevated between Tiberius and Diocletian died violently. Presumably, there have been in these seventeen centuries of intervening decadence, enough refinement of political thought and practice, that hasty departures from the presidency will not be violent.

If the deterioration of the quality of the media, the courts, the elections, the candidates, and at least superficially, of the cultural standards of the people also, is not temporary, the consequences will ultimately destroy the American republic (confirming Benjamin Franklin’s famous premonition). The United States will be at the edge of a precipice, with all of Western Civilization precariously attached to it.

Georgia Officials Will Conduct Limited Signature Match Audit in Cobb County

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...-county_3618558.html

The Georgia Secretary of State’s Office announced that an audit of voter signatures on absentee ballot envelopes will be conducted in Cobb County.

“Starting immediately, we are pulling all of our resources together with GBI [Georgia Bureau of Investigation], to conduct a signature match audit in Cobb County. Vote privacy is top of mind and we will never release how someone voted. We are only reviewing the signatures on the envelope,” Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger said at a Monday briefing.

“We recently received a report that Cobb County may not have conducted a proper signature match in June, and we will look into that claim. We work we hope to release the findings of this audit two weeks from today.”

The audit will consist of reviewing a statistically significant subset of the signed absentee ballot envelopes and comparing those signatures to the ones on file in Georgia’s voter registration system, the Secretary of State’s Office announced on its website.

Raffensperger also announced a planned statewide signature match audit. His office will partner with an accredited university to conduct a third-party signature match statewide audit study.

Gabriel Sterling, the state’s voting implementation systems manager, said that Cobb County is the only county “with a specific allegation where the process may not have been followed.” As such, this is the only county where an investigation applies, which will include reviewing a sampling of signatures on ballot envelopes.
Georgia's Secretary Of State Holds News Conference On Election Ballot Count
Gabriel Sterling, voting systems manager for the Georgia secretary of state’s office, answers questions during a press conference in Atlanta, Georgia, on Nov. 6, 2020. (Jessica McGowan/Getty Images)

“Right now, we have a specific allegation in Cobb of the process not being followed properly, so under our investigatory powers, that is where we’re starting,” said Sterling. “That is not to say there couldn’t be other counties or a statewide situation at a later date for post-certification review.”

“And for all we know, [the process] was followed. That’s the hopeful outcome that we’re going to see, but we can’t say that until we actually do the investigation,” he said.

He later added, “this is about investigating the allegation, a lot at the same time, enhancing people’s fundamental belief in the overall system.”

Raffensberger said in a statement, “Though the outcome of the race in Georgia will not change, conducting this audit follows in the footsteps of the audit-triggered hand recount we conducted in November to provide further confidence in the accuracy, security, and reliability of the vote in Georgia.”

Georgia has seen two recounts and its officials twice affirmed Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s victory. However the two recounts were without signature verifications, which were one of the main points of contention from the Trump campaign.

The totals in Georgia now stand at 2,474,507 for Biden and 2,461,837 votes for President Donald Trump. Libertarian Jo Jorgensen received 62,138 votes.

The Trump campaign has repeatedly called for a more complete audit of Georgia votes, saying that without signature matching, any recount would include fraudulent mail-in ballots. Trump recently urged Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp to permit signature verification of ballots, arguing that it would show he had won. Several Republican state senators have also called for an audit of signatures for absentee ballots in the state.

More than 1 million absentee ballots have been requested as early voting began Monday for the Georgia Senate runoff races, which will take place on Jan. 5. The outcome of the races will determine which party controls the Senate. Georgia Sens. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.) are facing Democrat challengers Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, respectively.

Trump earlier on Monday again urged Kemp to “call a Special Session and open up signature verification,” saying “otherwise, it could be a bad day for” both Loeffer and Perdue on Jan. 5.

Following Raffensberger’s announcement of the limited signature audit, Kemp said in a statement, “I am glad Secretary Raffensperger has finally taken this necessary step to begin restoring confidence in our state’s election processes.

“I have called for a signature audit repeatedly since the November 3rd election. As Georgians head back to the polls for the January 5th runoffs, it is absolutely vital for every vote cast to be legal and for only legal votes to be counted.”

Cobb County Election Director Janine Eveler said in a statement that her office will assist with the audit but is currently waiting for a court order before gathering the needed materials, reported The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

She said that while the complaint Raffensperger referenced came from the June primary, the audit will cover signature verification for the Nov. 3 election.

“I’m confident any audit would find our office followed procedures and only counted ballots that were processed correctly,” she said. “Even though our resources are already stretched thin by advance voting and preparations for the January 5 runoff, we will help this process move as expeditiously as possible.”

Has the President conceded, yet? Didn't think so.

Whatever President Trump is part of, I’ll follow him. I already have seen what these other folks are all about. Swampers & globalists. USA# 1

Let's be precise. Barr is resigning, right before Christmas, but has not resigned yet.

Saying he resigned gives the impression he packed up his shit and left today.

^^He's had a couple years. Do you expect him to do much in the next ~10 days?

$.02 worth,
Boss

^^ No, but for members who get their news from the forum, and read "Barr Resigned," it's misleading.

Editorial: At This Critical Time, President Trump Should Take Action

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...reaking-2020-12-14-7

The 2020 presidential election is unlike any before and requires unprecedented measures to protect it, our republic, and our future.

The degree and scale of voter fraud was unprecedented. In swing states, President Donald Trump had large leads on election night. Then, late at night counting was stopped, while election observers were ushered out. And then, huge, statistically impossible vote dumps occurred, giving Joe Biden the lead.

This pattern, which occurred only in the states where Biden had to reverse the results, and hadn’t occurred in previous elections, points to a coordinated effort to steal the election.

This effort likely involved manipulation of the vote by Dominion Voting Systems. According to a forensic audit of its machines and software in Michigan, ”the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results.”

In addition, various forms of ballot harvesting and election irregularities are attested to in a thousand affidavits.

There are reports—needing confirmation—of foreign influence helping to undermine our election.

President Trump has referred to our election system as being under “coordinated assault and siege.”

As a consequence, our form of government is at risk. If an election can be won through such dishonest means as were used in 2020, then one can expect the next election will be won in the same manner. The American people will lose their right to vote.

If there was a coordinated effort to steal the election, those actions amount to subversion.

In addition, if the United States in effect has one-party rule, then legal changes may fundamentally alter our system.

The Democrats have spoken of ending the Electoral College, assuring that the predominantly Democratic big cities will elect the president; and packing the Supreme Court, to ensure that Democratic-appointed judges have the majority.

But as serious as these threats to our republic are, they don’t get to the heart of what is at stake.

At its root, the current danger is not about whether Biden or Trump wins. It is not about the Democratic or Republican parties.

The United States is facing an evil force that wants to destroy our country and in fact destroy all good things in humanity.

This election is the climax of the battle between freedom and communism, between good and evil.

With the fall of communist regimes in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, people in the United States and around the world relaxed, thinking the communist threat had ended. But communism has never slept. Globalization strengthened it and weakened the United States.

Good and evil cannot compromise. They are like fire and ice. Giving in to evil only encourages it. A victory for communism in this election would result in a defeat for freedom everywhere. Humanity would be plunged into a long, dark night.

On Dec. 5 in Georgia, Trump said of those who want to steal the election, “These people want to go further than socialism, they want to go into a communistic form of government, and I have no doubt about it.”

How will the United States be defended? Local officials are often those most complicit in the corruption of the election. Judges, because of the doctrine of separation of powers, are often reluctant to tell states how to run their elections. The U.S. Congress has no role unless the Electoral College fails to deliver a winner.

Trump’s destiny is to fill the breach. He has taken an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution, and he has the presidential powers to do so.

Trump should use those powers as President to safeguard the future of our Republic and arrest those who have conspired to deprive people of their rights through election fraud. The Insurrection Act enables Trump to use the military to seize the key electoral evidence in contested states and deliver a transparent, accurate accounting of the vote.

Our system is in crisis. Trump would act to restore the rule of law.

Through opening the books, honesty can defeat fraud. The wishes of the majority of the people will be realized, and the victory sought by communism defeated.

I don’t think there are coincidences. Not sure why Barr chose to leave. He could have easily run out the clock. That he submitted his resignation the same day the Electoral College met?

It doesn’t have to be 4d chess. But it feels like a plan.

As much as I am disappointed at Barr for his apparent lack of prosecution of the commies, I will give him much credit for being honorable with his high praise for the President in his outgoing letter. He didn't act like a Bolton or a Mattis or so many others cockroaches on the way out.

quote:

He was flying blind in many ways not being a Washington insider not knowing who was who and having to rely on bad advice and recommendations. It's astounding he accomplished what he did.

lastmanstanding - I suspect one of the main reasons he gave it a shot was due to his being unaware of the Washington power structure. He thought he could mix it up but it was already too globally engrained/controlled by outside entities and traitors. It is astounding what he accomplished with such massive resistance and being a newcomer to politics. Probably the last non establishment president/globalist president ever. Its amazing we got this one.

He sure flipped the lights on and the cockroaches are very apparent. They don't give even a few fucks about putting on airs following laws or the Constitution anymore, and the media doesn't even feign objectivity. I hope he's got some surprises in store for the backstabbing evil traitors. Exposing them will do little to nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
I don’t think there are coincidences. Not sure why Barr chose to leave. He could have easily run out the clock. That he submitted his resignation the same day the Electoral College met?

It doesn’t have to be 4d chess. But it feels like a plan.

This crossed my mind too.

quote:

Barr got put thru the wringer a couple of times, and as has been pointed out, he doesn't need the job...but wasted opportunity to do something right...

Boss1- Possibly Barr was a place filler so nobody effective could be in that position. He played us like a violin, he always acted like he was hot on the trail. Maybe he played DT as well. In a way I can't blame him, we like to think many are as brave as our founders and DT, willing to risk it all. Comfortable life or have yours and your families lives destroyed? Maybe he had the choice and took the safe route like almost everybody would. Pretty hard to go toe to toe with the most powerful entities in the world.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
As much as I am disappointed at Barr for his apparent lack of prosecution of the commies, I will give him much credit for being honorable with his high praise for the President in his outgoing letter. He didn't act like a Bolton or a Mattis or so many others cockroaches on the way out.

Give him time, Q. He has put his beloved Dept of (In)Justice ahead of the President & the Country. Mark my words, if Trump so much as wags a finger at that entity and its associated 3 letter agencies, Barr won’t be able to keep his trap shut.

Trump is down to one option as I see it and he is going to need a outside assist to employ it. The insurrection act or his 2018 executive order on election interference. I don't know all the intricacies of either or which he would chose and why but I don't see any other real path to his holding office.

He will need a outside assist preferably coming from John Ratcliffe of some irrefutable proof that has not yet been seen. Something that has people doing the perp walk the same time Trump is announcing he is invoking the act. Proof of foreign interference should be included.
Even then it's going to cause great upheaval in this country and Trump knows it which is why I believe he won't do it unless provided with such proof.

Yes we have a good deal of accumulated supposed proof but none of it has really been given the chance to prove itself. The courts have slapped everything away without consideration. The code guy who can supposedly forensically test millions of ballots a day for authenticity has not been given a opportunity to prove it and if he were do you think that just perhaps there are other experts available that could refute and cast doubt on his claims just as enthusiastically as he purports them to be true?

No Trump needs something more than what we have seen to this point. To use my own term from a previous post a Kracken riding a thunderbolt of proof. Maybe it's out there but it needs to show itself soon.

To bounce off my previous post I ran across this at John Solomon's Just The News web site.

quote:

Amid recent reports of foreign breaches into U.S. government computer systems, questions have emerged whether hackers manipulated the results of the 2020 elections — and if so, whether that would trigger a White House executive order on responding to such an incursion.

The 2018 executive order from President Donald Trump addresses the specter similar to Monday's revelation that Russian hackers had penetrated the Department of Homeland Security.

"Although there has been no evidence of a foreign power altering the outcome or vote tabulation in any United States election, foreign powers have historically sought to exploit America’s free and open political system," Trump wrote in his 2018 order. "In recent years, the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference, as illustrated in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with this threat."

Complete article

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
But it feels like a plan.

Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I agree with this statement. Barr's resignation seemed smooth, with no apparent turmoil -- I can't help thinking there's more to it that we're not yet seeing. I wonder if we'll see him again in some capacity.

quote:

Originally posted by vthoky:

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
But it feels like a plan.

Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I agree with this statement. Barr's resignation seemed smooth, with no apparent turmoil -- I can't help thinking there's more to it that we're not yet seeing. I wonder if we'll see him again in some capacity.

I'm not going to say it's not a possibility but I can't arrive at a scenario or set of circumstances where Barr resigning could somehow be part of a plan.

The one possibility I could see would be that Trump is planning to invoke his executive order or the insurrection act and asked Barr if he would be supportive and provide the needed cooperation and Barr said no. Ok then I need you're resignation. No one knows and we most likely never will. Everything is unpredictable and everything is a possibility at this point.

quote:

As much as I am disappointed at Barr for his apparent lack of prosecution of the commies, I will give him much credit for being honorable with his high praise for the President in his outgoing letter. He didn't act like a Bolton or a Mattis or so many others cockroaches on the way out.

Just wait til Barr's tell-all book comes out.

quote:

Originally posted by vthoky:

quote:

Originally posted by sigalert:
But it feels like a plan.

Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I agree with this statement. Barr's resignation seemed smooth, with no apparent turmoil -- I can't help thinking there's more to it that we're not yet seeing. I wonder if we'll see him again in some capacity.

I don’t see anything other than face value. Beat up by Trump, the media, and both Dems and Reps, he just doesn’t need the grief anymore. He knows his job lifespan is only a month, so why not go out under his own terms? Enjoy the holidays without worrying about any of this. I’m sure he’s going to start working on his book.