View Full Version : Texas Challenge
Looks like the Supreme Court rejected it
What are you taking about? No details, no link.
whitewalrus
12-11-2020, 18:28
Probably this:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scotus-denied-election-texas-election-suit
I didn't think it would get very far, so I am not surprised.
TEAMRICO
12-11-2020, 18:29
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-us-supreme-court-throws-texas-lawsuit-pennsylvania-georgia-michigan-wisconsin/
Two hundred and forty something years.....the experiment is over.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-us-supreme-court-throws-texas-lawsuit-pennsylvania-georgia-michigan-wisconsin/
Two hundred and forty something years.....the experiment is over.
About on par for the statistical trend.
Will the bread lines be gluten free?
Great-Kazoo
12-11-2020, 19:11
Of course they did. Was anyone surprised? based on what's been happening in D controlled cities (antifa, etc) The justice's possibly felt allowing the election to swing trumps way, would cause violence across the country.
OR (tinfoil hat) their families were threatened.
Aardvark
12-11-2020, 21:23
There are still other court cases and fights going on. The Texas suit wasn't the first or last. This aint over.
There are still other court cases and fights going on. The Texas suit wasn't the first or last. This aint over.
Thank you.
Those other court cases were in process before Texas came along, those other court cases didn't stop because the of the Texas ruling.
TEAMRICO
12-11-2020, 23:11
There are still other court cases and fights going on. The Texas suit wasn't the first or last. This aint over.
THIS. I am mentally exhausted but will continue on until the end.
Fraud cannot stand!!
tactical_2012
12-12-2020, 09:18
Of course they did. Was anyone surprised? based on what's been happening in D controlled cities (antifa, etc) The justice's possibly felt allowing the election to swing trumps way would cause violence across the country.
OR (tinfoil hat) their families were threatened.
I'm not surprised at all the Supreme Court will never hear a case related to this fraudulent election. They know it will cause serious violence unseen since the Civil War and don't want to be part of it
Singlestack
12-12-2020, 10:06
I'm not surprised at all the Supreme Court will never hear a case related to this fraudulent election. They know it will cause serious violence unseen since the Civil War and don't want to be part of it
This^. Expect a very high level of judicial cowardice related to the election. I also expect the Dems will take both senate seats in Georgia next month. One, because republican lawmakers are too weak to insist on changes to make the election more fair than 11/3, even if the "changes" are to make the election conform with Georgia law that the legislature passed. Two, when actual laws are being violated on Jan 5, the GA republican party and poll watchers will be too weak to insist on immediate changes and be willing to assert themselves physically - which of course will be required. Strong words will get nothing done.
We either have a constitutional system for federal elections or we don?t.
Apparently we don?t. Something other than the state legislatures can change the election rules. If this doesn?t matter, does any of the document matter?
If SCOTUS is concerned about violence, they apparently don?t understand the consequences of not following the rule of law and tearing down our foundational principles.
Once the shooting starts, it should make it easier to define which side people are on.
RblDiver
12-12-2020, 11:45
In my dreams, the next escalation would be that Texas and other red states would pass a law that no individual who is a member of the Democrat or Socialist party shall be eligible for election. I mean, if the other states can change their procedures illegally, why shouldn't these states be allowed to do it via the law?
Delfuego
12-12-2020, 11:59
Two hundred and forty something years.....the experiment is over.#lastdaysofrome
whitewalrus
12-12-2020, 12:38
In my dreams, the next escalation would be that Texas and other red states would pass a law that no individual who is a member of the Democrat or Socialist party shall be eligible for election. I mean, if the other states can change their procedures illegally, why shouldn't these states be allowed to do it via the law?
Didn't help the south when Lincoln was elected President. He wasn't on the ballots in most all the southern states.
Bailey Guns
12-12-2020, 20:33
Nobody wanted to see Trump win a second term over Biden more than me. But it ain't gonna happen. Fraud and other shenanigans took place with the election. No doubt about it. It's a disgrace. It's wrong. There were probably dozens of laws violated.
And it doesn't matter. In terms of who is going to be sitting in the oval office for the next 4 years it doesn't matter. Because half the country doesn't care. The media sides with that half. Half of leadership in gov't sides with that half.
It doesn't matter that the son of the corrupt president-elect should be in jail. No one that can do anything about it cares.
It's a sorry state of affairs we find ourselves in. No question. It's shameful and it's demoralizing to those of us who believe in the rule of law. And it doesn't matter to anyone except those of us that can't do a damned thing about it.
I've written, I've emailed and I've called my elected representatives. I get lip service from a staffer on the phone.
It doesn't matter.
Biden will be president in January and there's no way to stop that from happening. I hope and pray I'm wrong.
THIS. I am mentally exhausted but will continue on until the end.
Fraud cannot stand!!
What do you mean? What are you doing?
What are the chances that Biden actually won, just like how apparently Trump won last time around, despite half the country thinking Russia chose our election for us? From the outside, it looks like all the groundless complaining just switched sides.
ETA: I'm not saying this to be snarky, I'm interested in a legitimate answer. After the 2016 election, people were on television declaring that it was merely days before Trump would be in handcuffs. Meanwhile, other "liberals" were calling out the left saying that they were wasting their time over fabricated accusations.
Now, many of my friends tell me about what a strong case Trump has, and there are mountains of evidence, and blah blah blah. Yet nothing is happening in court. Trump is apparently the only person with the power to save America, and despite everyone being against him for the last four years, he's accomplished more than anyone in memory. Yet now, he can't even get anyone to pay attention to enormous election fraud while he's still in power? Doesn't add up.
There are still people crying about Al Gore s presidency stolen on 2000.
20 years after election.
Not only that, but I haven't been impressed with what they've brought to court. Rudy Giuliani and the epitome of Bimbo?
If you want to reset an election, you need a bit more than side shows at Barnum and Bailey. If you can only convince 25% of the country, that's not because the other 75% doesn't care, it's because your showing isn't very strong.
The other factor is this is TRUMP. If a different GOP president made these claims and had reasonable support, people would take it seriously.
But we have a president that has spent his campaign being a complete and utter buffoon on twitter. Insulting people, spreading his own conspiracies on occasion. Making baseless insinuations, we all know the drill, and we've all ignored it. But it's a bit like the story of "boy that cried wolf" especially since he was crying fraud before any alleged fraud every occurred.
It's hard for people to back an utter idiot and his actions greatly amplify horrible results if we did. If Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Ted Gowdy, any of those people - if they were president and alleged election fraud and had some decent evidence (and were not using Barnum and Bailey) I think you would find tremendous support for investigation and/or correction.
But Trump? Thing is, everyone already knew he would allege fraud in any event, in any circumstance, in any situation except where he won. And he didn't fail on those expectations. Because of that, I guess you could say the burden of evidence is much, much much higher for most of the country. And SCOTUS isn't any presidents bitch, even if he did appoint them. If they heard Texas, what's to stop a liberal court from hearing California and New York next time? SCOTUS Justices in general DO NOT interfere in elections. You've got to have substantial evidence, not just allegations, not just a few cases of individuals conducting fraud.
That's not to say it doesn't exist, or there isn't an issue, it's just the reality on the ground. It's kind of like the crackhead that just robbed 7/11 screaming about police brutality. Maybe it's real, maybe it's not, but bystanders really don't give a shit.
That's pretty much the way I see it, but we're filthy never Trumpers and I want to hear from someone else as well.
Many believes that if GOP does this to teach Democrats about "oh, i guess we were wrong about Russian meddlin" from this is dreaming. Democrats do not think this way.
As some members stated, after this election, republican being a president might be a harder path to achieve. (Unless there is a superstar who can lure moderate, unaffiliated to vote republican).
wctriumph
12-13-2020, 18:31
As law abiding citizens, when laws are passed that go against our interpretation of the constitution, because we believe in the constitution and the rule of law, do we follow those new laws?
You know, the laws that say get in line to turn in your “assault rifles” and ammunition for same? Will you register your firearms like a good law abiding citizen?
You don’t need to answer, use it or lose it ...
Judicial cowardice has been allowed, encouraged even, for the destruction of the republic.
As law abiding citizens, when laws are passed that go against our interpretation of the constitution, because we believe in the constitution and the rule of law, do we follow those new laws?
You know, the laws that say get in line to turn in your “assault rifles” and ammunition for same? Will you register your firearms like a good law abiding citizen?
You don’t need to answer, use it or lose it ...
Judicial cowardice has been allowed, encouraged even, for the destruction of the republic.
It seems that line was drawn in the sand with the bumpstock ban. Out of about 500k in existence it sounds like a few thousand were turned in.
Not really. All people had to do was nothing at all, which is the baseline for most of the country when it comes to being politically active. If a couple thousand were turned in, and there were 495k lawsuits in progress, then we could say a line had been drawn in the sand.
I don't think there is a precedence for successful turnover of anything (for free, no less) here. And I don't think it has much to do with any political protest. It's more to do with "it's already mine". E.g. when prohibition started I'm sure private owners of alcohol were rushing to dump all their private alcohol out. The only reason certain things were successfully removed is because they actually rounded up the purchases from the purchasers (atkins accelerator, right? Or was it...I forget)
Aloha_Shooter
12-14-2020, 16:58
The Democrats started preparing for this as soon as they (or some of them) accepted that they lost in 2016. The schemes to manufacture votes were already present in the 2018 election and they ramped it up when they saw he was pulling in black and Latino votes. No one -- not even Fox News -- has pointed out that Trump also got more votes than Obama did in 2008, the year Obama was being presented as some kind of post-racial "moderate" savior. The Democrats inoculated against the charges of fraud by starting the whisper campaigns about him alleging fraud and having to literally be pulled out of the White House without a shred of evidence. It's much the way Hillary inoculated herself immediately after 9/11 by loudly proclaiming no one could accuse her of being unpatriotic before anyone did so. Once inoculated in the public mind, she then proceeded to undermine Bush at every turn.
The same thing is happening here. The media and courts are actively ignoring documented evidence of widespread irregularities and outright fraud on a scale never seen before in a national election. Democratic officials changing rules and procedures to make it easier to vote fraudulently by mail despite not having any statutory or constitutional power to do so in their states? This is just to handle the pandemic. Oh yeah, it's common to store ballots out of sight underneath a table and only pull them out for processing AFTER all observers have been kicked out of the room. 100,000 votes processed overnight in one county after everyone had been told processing had been shut down? Oh yeah, that's normal. We expected that, no, no surprises about every single one of them being for a single candidate. Papering over the windows of the pivotal election center in Philadelphia? Oh yeah, that was to protect voter privacy. Nothing to see here, move along.
I have never liked "The Donald" personally and his team has been disjointed (and a number of them had turned on him before the election which says a lot about him personally) but the allegations of fraud are FAR from baseless. They've presented all sorts of testimonials and video evidence while the "explanations" for the irregularities have been presented without evidence. People -- and the courts -- have latched on to them as an excuse to ignore or even ridicule the complaints simply because they don't like him (and the MSM has spent the last 5 years making sure more people dislike him even more by distorting things he's said or tweeted). When that hasn't been enough, they've just made things up out of thin air.
Having said all that, I think the Dems and Never Trumpers did what they did under the assumption that people who voted for Trump will not want to go through an actual civil war over this election. I would agree -- there's clearly a large portion of the country that detests him to the point of being willing to accept the racist, violent, anti-Western, anti-capitalist movement that goes with Biden/Harris. Civil wars are nasty things.
What I want however is for the courts and system to be honest enough to admit that the irregularities and signs of fraud were so widespread and so blatant that a blind man could see them and that some people need to go to jail or at least lose their jobs over the shenanigans. Anyone involved in illegitimately preventing election judges or poll watchers from seeing fair processing of ballots in Philadelphia and Fulton County should be permanently barred from being involved in the election process. Anyone who directed late ballots be predated for processing should be fired.
I don't have any faith that Biden/Harris would take those measures or pursue an investigation but we need it.
Whole heartedly agree that people found to have tried to influence the election at the polls should be severely punished.
I read through this thread, and some of it I found rather disheartening on this site. As I?ve said before this is not about Trump, we are at a crisis point in our constitutional republic. I believe people should be extremely concerned about the first amendment violations happening right now. The suppression of opposition is insane. Whether it is social media censoring posts, hosting companies being threatened with circuit removal if they don?t bring down certain websites, scientists who are blackballed for opposing findings of politically protected ?research?, or the thugs who threaten and assault people who dare to speak out. The ?fact checking? thing is ridiculous especially when you look at those doing the ?fact checking.? Under the first amendment people have the right to speak their beliefs regardless if they are accurate or what anybody else thinks about them; and this right should be protected by the government not attacked. This is all gestapo tactics to force people in line. I don?t trust anything or anyone that suppresses opposition; this is and always has been a key indicator of tyranny. This past year (actually several years) we?ve seen an assault on historical artifacts, monuments, American culture, people of faith, people stepping forward in this election, and legal attacks on political opponents. We?ve seen people harassed along with kids being bullied and harassed in school who?s families support the president. The fact that all of this is happening right in front of us should be a massive red flag that there is something seriously wrong with our country.
This election is no different. The narrative pushed by the media (propaganda machine) that there is no evidence is ridiculous. There?s approximately a thousand eye witness to crimes who signed sworn affidavits. These violations of state and federal laws are well known and factual. One eye witness to a murder will certainly initiate an investigation, law enforcement collects evidence, and likely a conviction if the evidence corroborates the testimony. Yet, the Department of Justice won?t interview hundreds of people who came forward, law enforcement won?t collect the voting machines and ballots to do a full audit and forensic analysis. It is not the job nor the ability of the legal teams to collect physical evidence so people need to stop dismissing them for not having it; that is the job of law enforcement, and they are not doing it. The county in MI had an independent team come in and do a full forensic analysis on the voting machine ?glitch? too big to hide...the error rate is astonishing. Numerous precincts had return rates that exceeded !00%. PA sent out approximately 600,000 less ballots than they received. There is plenty of testimony and election law violations to start an investigation in each of these contested states. All the physical evidence (machines and ballots) should have been taken into custody immediately after the election was contested. Seriously, the Clinton campaign paid somebody to fabricate a document, which was used to obtain illegal FISA warrants that initiated millions of dollars investigating a hoax, but all these sworn witness are dismissed without even hearing them? How can anybody that isn?t an extreme partisan not see a problem with that double standard? Regardless of the illegal ballot count, Republican observers were not allowed to do their job in the contested precincts, which invalidates their results. This is 100% suppression. Do we live in the United States or communist China? If at this point you think you are protected by the constitution, you?re delusional. We will not just move forward like nothing happened. If this election and the suppression of opposition is allowed we will live a tightly controlled life. Our children and grand children will know what it means to live in tyranny.
As far as Trump. If he was a bad candidate, he wouldn?t have received more re-election votes than any other president not to mention that total was manipulated by the games being played and the media vilifying him with every word. However, this isn?t about Trump, and everybody should see that. If this election is allowed to stand, it is the end of the republic as we know it, and you will live in tyranny?fall in line or be attacked?that should be obvious to anybody by now.
For those thinking this is over The last stand is a 14th typo 12th amendment challenge if the Rs in Congress have the balls to do it. For me it isn?t just about Trump so I don?t like that it has come to this; I want the truth. I wanted a real investigation to PROVE what happened, and those who violated election laws held accountable. The suppression tactics need to be stopped; that is the core of what is happening here and people really need to contemplate what that means for our future.
Bailey Guns
12-15-2020, 13:27
^^ I don't know that I disagree with anything you wrote. But what are you going to do about it or what will you do about it? Or what can anyone else do about it? It's obvious that very few people in a position to really do anything aren't going to.
^^ I don't know that I disagree with anything you wrote. But what are you going to do about it or what will you do about it? Or what can anyone else do about it? It's obvious that very few people in a position to really do anything aren't going to.
Agreed. There is the added difficulty of time. Investigations take time, and the country isn't going to stop and wait. I assume that's a big part of the plan, if any part of it is true. Get into office any way possible, then use the power to dodge any consequences.
I read through this thread, and some of it I found rather disheartening on this site. As I?ve said before this is not about Trump, we are at a crisis point in our constitutional republic. I believe people should be extremely concerned about the first amendment violations happening right now. The suppression of opposition is insane. Whether it is social media censoring posts, hosting companies being threatened with circuit removal if they don?t bring down certain websites, scientists who are blackballed for opposing findings of politically protected ?research?, or the thugs who threaten and assault people who dare to speak out. The ?fact checking? thing is ridiculous especially when you look at those doing the ?fact checking.? Under the first amendment people have the right to speak their beliefs regardless if they are accurate or what anybody else thinks about them; and this right should be protected by the government not attacked. This is all gestapo tactics to force people in line. I don?t trust anything or anyone that suppresses opposition; this is and always has been a key indicator of tyranny. This past year (actually several years) we?ve seen an assault on historical artifacts, monuments, American culture, people of faith, people stepping forward in this election, and legal attacks on political opponents. We?ve seen people harassed along with kids being bullied and harassed in school who?s families support the president. The fact that all of this is happening right in front of us should be a massive red flag that there is something seriously wrong with our country.
Just responding in part (to the social media stuff).
Conservatives don't realize the rabbit hole they are going into with those kinds of arguments. It's not a simple discussion. First off, first amendment protections apply first and foremost to government - there's a tier system set up in precedence. It has never been applied to a private business. Now, you may be arguing WELL IT SHOULD APPLY TO PRIVATE WEBSITES.
This is a private website as well. It has removed people in the past that have caused problems. It is also, by definition, a social media platform. So if you require facebook to let anyone post everything that's not prima face illegal, it spirals down and requires this website to require anyone post anything. Gay porn? Is that arguably 1st amendment? Maybe not, but a bunch of LGBT would like to sue everyone they oppose. What about Biden/Harris propaganda? That definitely is protected free speech on this private website right? Can't ban those people. Oh, and if we remove the protections that facebook enjoys, and you can sue them for posts, you also remove the protections that sites like this enjoy, and you can sue them for posts. Guess which companies have the resources to survive those changes?
The knee-jerk reaction that conservatives want would result in the entire opposite of what they want. A complete and total monopoly of all social media by Facebook, Twitter, and Google, the only companies big enough to afford the changes in manpower and litigation. Bye bye, every-single-firearm forum on the internet (no exceptions).
It is a bad precedence to apply 1st amendment protections to private entities.
What's the right answer? I don't have a perfect solution. But I can say, the resolution often proposed by conservatives right now is the worst one.
^^ I don't know that I disagree with anything you wrote. But what are you going to do about it or what will you do about it? Or what can anyone else do about it? It's obvious that very few people in a position to really do anything aren't going to.
As far as the election, I will make my voice heard the best I can and support those with the courage and fortitude to do something about it. I can help with awareness; even though we are censored and attacked at every turn, we can use that to discuss and talk to those on the fence about the gravity of what is happening; people need to question this and not let it be swept under the rug. I was talking to my niece last month about the election and what happened. Interesting conversation; she was never political, and never followed any of it. She decided to start following Trump and others because she "wanted to see what all the fuss was about." The thing she couldn't believe was all the information and posts being deleted and the censorship of information. This is what alerted her to there being a real problem without me or anybody else talking in her ear. We need to take this seriously. With regard to what Irving said; absolutely that is the plan; deal with the consequences later if they can't completely suppress it.
As far as the bigger question. Every person is going to have to answer that for themselves as we step into a new future. I guess the question is this: What is your freedom worth to you? Answer that and decide what you want to do about it. I think we are in for a real fight that is if people are willing to fight. I'm not sure what that is going to turn into at this point. I see cyber warfare happening everyday in my job mostly regarding the control of information. I guess people will either lay down and surrender or not.
Agreed. There is the added difficulty of time. Investigations take time, and the country isn't going to stop and wait. I assume that's a big part of the plan, if any part of it is true. Get into office any way possible, then use the power to dodge any consequences.
I think US politicking comes with an informal agreement, much like "I won't tattle on you if you don't tattle on me" between siblings. Once someone is in any kind of high office, the rest of our government will conform to prevent their successful prosecution in almost every instance. The ones at the top of government knows it is all a shit salad, and if they degrade into a food fight they're going to get covered in shit too, nobody has a clean nose at the top. I don't expect to see anyone go after Trump in 2021 for the same reason. It sets a precedence and turnabout becomes fair play.
It would be nice to see prosecutions (Hunter, etc.) but yeah, just like the people believing Hillary would ever be prosecuted, it's like "haven't you lived in the US long enough to know it isn't going to happen?". The king's court never goes after the king.
Just responding in part (to the social media stuff).
Conservatives don't realize the rabbit hole they are going into with those kinds of arguments. It's not a simple discussion. First off, first amendment protections apply first and foremost to government - there's a tier system set up in precedence. It has never been applied to a private business. Now, you may be arguing WELL IT SHOULD APPLY TO PRIVATE WEBSITES.
This is a private website as well. It has removed people in the past that have caused problems. It is also, by definition, a social media platform. So if you require facebook to let anyone post everything that's not prima face illegal, it spirals down and requires this website to require anyone post anything. Gay porn? Is that arguably 1st amendment? Maybe not, but a bunch of LGBT would like to sue everyone they oppose. What about Biden/Harris propaganda? That definitely is protected free speech on this private website right? Can't ban those people. Oh, and if we remove the protections that facebook enjoys, and you can sue them for posts, you also remove the protections that sites like this enjoy, and you can sue them for posts. Guess which companies have the resources to survive those changes?
The knee-jerk reaction that conservatives want would result in the entire opposite of what they want. A complete and total monopoly of all social media by Facebook, Twitter, and Google, the only companies big enough to afford the changes in manpower and litigation. Bye bye, every-single-firearm forum on the internet (no exceptions).
It is a bad precedence to apply 1st amendment protections to private entities.
What's the right answer? I don't have a perfect solution. But I can say, the resolution often proposed by conservatives right now is the worst one.
It is important to know that several of the social media providers are definitely guilty of censoring political speech. No where in my post did I talk about forcing policy (conservative or otherwise) on social media companies; just the awareness of what is happening and the systematic suppression of opposition. It's not good enough to just push people off these platforms but they attack the platforms that people stand up to share information. Don't take my post completely out of context with policy issues facing social media. People's first amendment rights are violated when they can't speak or assemble virtually or physically, they are violated when they are forced to concede to situations that are in direct violation of their religious beliefs, they are violated when they are attacked for their beliefs. This is happening, and the control of information is a very real thing. As far as firearm sites like ours; just wait....it's coming.
I don't think there is a precedence for successful turnover of anything (for free, no less) here. And I don't think it has much to do with any political protest. It's more to do with "it's already mine". E.g. when prohibition started I'm sure private owners of alcohol were rushing to dump all their private alcohol out. The only reason certain things were successfully removed is because they actually rounded up the purchases from the purchasers (atkins accelerator, right? Or was it...I forget)
No...they said turn in the springs. They specified they would not be going door to door trying to collect anything but if you eventually got caught with a functioning Akins you would be in trouble.
Here is the other key to all that and the later bumpstocks...the ATF specified that any bumpstock (Akins included) was considered legal as long as it didn't have the spring. This was part of the agreement between the ATF and the makers of the Akins. As such...the later ban on bumpstocks goes against a legal agreement that the ATF made with the owners of bumpstocks. I have been waiting and watching for this to be brought up in a court case.
As for the status of later bumpstocks...the feds dropped prosecution of possession recently since a former ATF agent stated that it did not meet the legal definition of a MG.
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/are-bump-stocks-still-alive-feds-drop-charges-because-they-couldnt-prove-devices-are-machine-guns/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20201120_FridayDigest_305&utm_campaign=/digest/are-bump-stocks-still-alive-feds-drop-charges-because-they-couldnt-prove-devices-are-machine-guns/
Asking for permission, there is no end.
Aloha_Shooter
12-15-2020, 20:57
I agree that First Amendment doesn't and shouldn't apply to private entities but the corporations that are censoring, editing, and promulgating specific viewpoints should lose 230 protections. They are not simply a host when they push an agenda.
Agreed. There is the added difficulty of time. Investigations take time, and the country isn't going to stop and wait. I assume that's a big part of the plan, if any part of it is true. Get into office any way possible, then use the power to dodge any consequences.
This. Once you've stuffed a bunch of rigged ballots into the mix, there's no way to separate them. Everyone knows that there's no way in hell that the courts/politicians would throw the mess out and do the voting all over again.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.