https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/12/two_wrongs.html
Donald N. Finley is a retired U.S. Air Force Colonel.
Much has already been written about the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the Texas suit. The sharpest legal minds in the country can’t agree on whether Texas has ‘standing,’ which isn’t much of a surprise since disagreement seems to be what we now do best. I say it’s a very good thing because it shows where everyone stands, and rather than wondering who’s on your side and who’s opposed, disagreement shines light on everyone, so you know what you’re up against.
Perhaps we laypeople don’t understand the legal jargon about ‘standing,’ or why Texas and eighteen other states and the President of the United States aren’t allowed to show their collective injury inflicted by the four cheating states. Perhaps the Supreme Court Justices didn’t understand the interest Texas had in other states’ election conduct was not its own; it was all of our interests. Perhaps the legal precedents just didn’t fit right, and this case would have taken some courage, creativity, and consequences. Perhaps it was just too much hard work for an upcoming holiday season.
I’m not a lawyer, but I’m not blind, either. “Judicially cognizable interest”? That means about as much to me as talk about the internet would have meant to Thomas Jefferson. Why does a ‘first ever’ event have to be judicially cognizable?
Throughout our history, and perhaps all of world history, there has never before been as massive a fraud perpetrated on a free people as this. Despite what Fox News says, these are not unfounded accusations. In fact, that fraudulent acts changed the outcome of the election is indisputable. Oh, it’s disputed, but it’s still indisputable in any factual or logically cognizable way. If that seems cognitively dissonant, welcome to our world, where the MSM and the Democrat party say there’s no evidence of election fraud, and the Trump campaign’s allegations are baseless and unfounded.