RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/09/6-things-to-know-about-texass-supreme-court-petition-over-2020s-messed-up-election/

Texas argues that the case ‘presents constitutional questions of immense national consequences,’ namely that the 2020 election suffered from serious constitutional irregularities.

On Monday, Texas filed a motion for leave to file a “Bill of Complaint” with the U.S. Supreme Court to challenge the constitutionality of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin’s administration of the 2020 presidential election. The combined filings, which also include a request for an expedited review and a preliminary injunction, spanned more than 150 pages. Here’s what you need to know about this latest election case.

1. This Is Not Bush v. Gore

Texas’s lawsuit is a procedural creature differing greatly from the Bush v. Gore case about the 2000 election. Unlike Bush v. Gore, which traveled to the Supreme Court on appeal, Texas’s lawsuit relies on the Supreme Court’s “original jurisdiction,” or power to hear a case initially.

The Constitution establishes several types of cases that fall within the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, but other than cases involving disputes between two states, Congress has created “concurrent jurisdiction” with lower federal courts. This means those other types of disputes may be heard by federal district courts.

Not so in the case of a state suing a state. The U.S. Supreme Court has “exclusive jurisdiction” over such cases, meaning that such disputes can only be resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Paradoxically, however, the Supreme Court does not have to hear a dispute between the states. Rather, controlling precedent holds that whether to hear such a dispute is within the Supreme Court’s discretion. That is why Texas filed a “Motion for Leave to File a Bill of Complaint—because it needs the court’s permission to file the complaint.

In its memorandum in support of its motion, Texas argues that the case “presents constitutional questions of immense national consequences,” namely that the 2020 election suffered from serious constitutional irregularities, including violations by the defendant states of the Electors Clause and the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. The brief also argues that a ruling would help “preserve the Constitution and help prevent irregularities in future elections.”

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/atlanta-questions-persist-over-early-dismissal-poll-workers-alleged

Critical questions still remain unresolved this week regarding the alleged early dismissal of poll workers in Atlanta’s State Farm Arena on Election Night, a dismissal which some parties claim was followed by continued ballot-counting even after most workers had been sent home for the night. 

The State Farm Arena saga has been one of the latest in a series of election-related controversies that have persisted for over a month since the final ballots were cast in the 2020 election. The president’s legal team brought the Atlanta Hawks stadium to the forefront of the ongoing election debate last week when they revealed security footage that, they argued, showed election malfeasance and potential ballot fraud caught on video.

Lawyers for the Trump campaign claimed the footage showed the majority of poll workers being dismissed early from their posts at the arena on Election Night, after which, the campaign argued, a secret team of ballot counters can be seen resuming the ballot count in a largely empty processing area. 

Media reports and some affidavits have appeared to confirm at least part of that contention, though public officials have given mixed responses that have left the ultimate facts of the issue as unclear as ever. 

‘A small team remained behind’

The Georgia Secretary of State’s office last week confirmed that it was investigating whether or not poll workers were explicitly told to go home early or if they simply misunderstood confusing directives from government officials.

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/republican-officials-fear-illegal-votes-cast-non-citizen-immigrants-threw

For more than a decade now, major research institutions like Harvard University and others have published surveys showing large numbers of non-citizen immigrants in America claim to have registered and voted in U.S. elections despite a legal prohibition. Now some Republicans are questioning whether such illegal voting could have impacted the outcome of the still-disputed November elections.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who this week filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court to invalidate the election results in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia, said illegal ballots cast by non-citizen immigrants could have played a role in Joe Biden’s wins in many states.

“Look, it could have, I mean, there’s a lot of factors that could have had an impact on which way the election went,” Paxton told Just the News on Tuesday. “I think the voter rolls ought to be checked. Secretaries of States of each state ought to check whether people—there ought to be some way to check a database and whether somebody is a citizen or not. I think that’s a pretty important question to know the answer to. Because, obviously, only citizens of this country have the right to vote.”

Paxton said whether a citizen is a Biden supporter or a Trump supporter, “you care about credible elections going forward, because it’s not just one election we’re talking about. We’ve got other elections going on that are not national elections that are affected by this, but we also have future elections that are going to be affected by this. So, the process, and making sure that we get this right, really matters, whatever the determination is on who’s president is in some sense secondary to getting the process right for the future.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/12/the_texas_lawsuit_in_the_supreme_court_is_huge.html

On Tuesday, the State of Texas filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The suit alleged that, because these states conducted elections that violated their own laws, they tainted the integrity of the vote, something that damaged not only their own citizens but also the citizens in other states. Because this is an intelligent, powerful case, it’s no surprise that eight other states have already joined the litigation.

To date, we’ve seen a multiplicity of lawsuits filed although, significantly, none has come before the Supreme Court for substantive review. Courts in various states, however, have proven resistant to these suits.

As I noted here, partisan judges are issuing what I will politely call “garbage” decisions. Judges are refusing to consider the evidence, with only one Nevada court attempting to do so. Instead, they make variations of the argument that, if courts were to consider Trump’s claims, they would run the risk of “disenfranchising” Biden voters.

That is a singularly dishonest argument. Disenfranchisement occurs when people are deprived of the right to vote. No one was deprived here. What Trump is doing, with his request that every legal vote count, is asking that courts invalidate illegal votes. You cannot disenfranchise an illegal voter, whether that “voter” is dead, a computer algorithm, or a form filled out in a Chinese print shop.

Do you know what happens when you invalidate fraudulent votes and count only legal votes? You identify the winner and loser in an election, as has happened in America since 1792. Those who voted for the losing candidate were not disenfranchised; they just voted for the losing candidate.

The Texas lawsuit argues that the four defendant states changed their mail-in voting rules without going through the constitutional, legislative process. By doing so, they assured illegal mail-in votes, meaning all votes under the new “rules” were illegal from the get-go. These invalid votes override the will of those who legitimately cast votes, tainting the national election.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/who_will_be_the_fraud_deniers.html

“These are just anomalies.  They happen in every election.” 

Well folks, anomalies cease to be anomalies when they all go in one direction.  When every outlier favors Biden, we enter the realm of prima facie fraud.

Fraud. It’s an ugly word. It does not have a pretty synonym.  Too bad.

Election fraud at the industrial scale perpetrated in the 2020 election is a crime most Americans will remember all their lives.  Books and movies will come out.  Retired math PhDs exiled to the basement by their spouses will continue to find statistical patterns that simply do not happen in straight data sets.

Like all great crimes, the 2020 election fraud will have a diffusion curve with early believers and early deniers, later adopters and fewer deniers and finally, only the ideologically blind will deny.

Diffusion curves happen in nature, in technology, in disease spread, in the understanding of any popular idea.  In early stages only the really committed dig in.  Over time, a realization makes its way into popular culture and eventually most have generally seen the data.  We are departing the early adopter stage of 2020 election fraud understanding.

The all-in media is double timing to convince the later adopters there is nothing to see here. 

It isn’t working.  Too much stuff is coming out from too many places and there are just too many alternative web sites publishing fraud examples on such a scale it cannot be denied by any but the willful.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/12/09/291426-n291426

One of the good things about the 2020 election is that there was a ‘Red Wave’ in the House with 27 toss-up seats and even some “lean Democrat” seats all going to the Republicans.

Republicans cleaned Democrats’ clock in the House in a big way, gaining at least 12 seats with a couple of races still to be decided.

Indeed, that’s one of the reasons it’s so hard to accept the claim that President Donald Trump didn’t win when not only was there that wave but he had 95% approval, record primary votes, gained 11 million more votes in the general election than 2016 and greater minority vote shares than in 2016 as well.

So here’s a picture of all the Democrats who lost the seats they had in the House.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/12/08/expert-the-odds-of-biden-overcoming-trumps-lead-in-the-four-swing-states-is-less-than-one-in-a-quadrillion-n1198438

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany on Tuesday evening highlighted an incredible statistic that is included in State of Texas v. Pennsylvania, et. al.

“Expert analysis using a commonly accepted statistical test further raises serious questions as to the integrity of this election,” the lawsuit reads. “The probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote in the four Defendant States—Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—independently given President Trump’s early lead in those States as of 3 a.m. on November 4, 2020, is less than one in a quadrillion, or 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000.”

“The odds of Joe Biden winning all four of those states collectively is less than one in a quadrillion to the fourth power,” it continues.

The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court to block the “unlawful election results” in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

The analysis comes from Dr. Charles J. Cicchetti, Ph.D, a member of Pacific Economics Group, a senior advisor to Pacific Economics Group Research, and a professor of Economics at the University of Southern California. Though Justin Grimmer, a professor at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute, says his claim “is based on an embarrassing and basic error in statistical reasoning.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/states-back-texas-in-supreme-court-suit-alleging-unconstitutional-election-in-battleground-states_3610505.html

Several states have expressed their support for Texas’s bid to challenge the election results in four battleground states, which was filed on Tuesday in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Attorneys general for Arkansas, Alabama, Missouri, and Louisiana have issued statements in support of a motion put forward by Texas asking the nation’s top court for permission to sue Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin in an attempt to protect the integrity of the 2020 election.

Texas is alleging that the four key battleground states unconstitutionally changed election laws, treated voters unequally, and triggered significant voting irregularities by relaxing ballot-integrity measures. The state is asking the court to declare that the four battleground states conducted the 2020 election in violation of the Constitution.

The suit, filed on Dec. 7 and docketed the next day, is also seeking to prohibit the count of the Electoral College votes cast by the four states. For the defendant states that have already appointed electors, it asks the court to direct the state legislatures to appoint new electors in line with the Constitution.

Responding to Texas’s motion, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry urged the top court to take up the case, saying that “only the U.S. Supreme Court can ultimately decide cases of real controversy among the states under our Constitution.”

Landry said Americans share “deep concerns” regarding how the 2020 general election was conducted. The state had previously filed a friend-of-the-court brief (pdf) to the U.S. Supreme Court urging the justices to take up a separate case—cited as Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar—that challenges a state Supreme Court order allowing election officials to accept absentee ballots received up to three days after Nov. 3.

“Millions of Louisiana citizens, and tens of millions of our fellow citizens in the country, have deep concerns regarding the conduct of the 2020 federal elections,” Landry wrote. “Deeply rooted in these concerns is the fact that some states appear to have conducted their elections with a disregard to the U.S. Constitution.”

“Furthermore, many Louisianans have become more frustrated as some in media and the political class try to sidestep legitimate issues for the sake of expediency,” he added.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/12/08/ga-gov-kemp-awarded-107-million-contract-

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp awarded a $107 million contract to Dominion Voting Systems two weeks after he met with the Houston-based Consul General of the People’s Republic of China in Atlanta.

Kemp met with Li Qiangmin, Houston Consul General of the People’s Republic of China, on July 12, 2019.

The Secretary of State’s office announced on July 29, 2019 that Dominion’s election services were procured to implement a “verified paper ballot system” in the state prior to the March 2020 presidential primaries.

Dominion Voting Systems, which operates voting machines in 28 states, has been accused of switching Trump votes to Biden in the 2020 election.

According to reports, the voting software company has multiple links to China, including a $400 million filing in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) one month before the election that links Dominion, UBS Securities LLC, and China.

The filing reportedly shows that UBS arranged a private placement of $400 million with Staple Street Capital III, L.P. on October 8, 2020.

Staple Street Capital, a private equity firm located in New York, purchased Dominion Voting systems on July 17, 2018, for an undisclosed amount.

The securities firm that arranged the transaction, UBS Securities LLC, is a division of UBS Americas Inc, which ultimately falls under UBS Group AG, a company listed on the SIX Swiss stock exchange.

Three of four board members of UBS Securities LLC are Chinese according to Bloomberg, at least one of whom appears to reside in Hong Kong.