"The District of Columbia was joined in the filing by the States and territories of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Guam, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Washington. President Trump lost the popular vote in all of these states except for North Carolina. Blue States Respond to Ken Paxton Supreme Court Lawsuit"
"States' Common-Sense Measures Taken In Response To The Coronavirus Pandemic Did Not Introduce Widespread Fraud"
So...
Texans say no, we are not party to a fraudulent election. Fraud does not constitute law, it is a contradiction in terms, and here is the evidence.
Frauds say, as if someone might think otherwise, we are not currently perpetrating a fraud upon the people in our State, nor the people in Texas, so there is therefore no evidence, and no reason to even look for evidence.
Boy with hand in cookie jar syndrome.
Will Majority Rule in The Supreme Court of the United States take the fraud side or the no we can't accept fraud side?
Fraud is legal, lawful, right, moral, and in fact, fraud is not fraud, there is no evidence, don't even look for it.
Or
Fraud is fraud, here is the fraud, we don't accept it, clean up the fraud, or leave us fewer options facing frauds persisting with an active fraud.
0
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
4 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
Josf-Kelley
Level 8
Dec 10, 2020
0
Time 23:00 or so in the above information has relevance to a FREE MARKET process elucidated beforehand:
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy
by William Watkins
"Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.
"Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government, the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely."
The States of Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana,
Mississippi, South Carolina, and Utah (“Intervening
States” ), through their undersigned counsel,
respectfully file this motion for leave to intervene in
this action and join Plaintiffs’ Bill of Complaint, as
modified by proposed intervenor President Donald J.
Trump, in the event that this Court grants Plaintiff
leave to file the Bill of Complaint. In support of this
Motion, the Intervening States state as follows:
This Court permits States to intervene in original
actions when “the issues in the litigation are so
related to the possible interests of [the intervening
states] … in the subject matter of th[e] suit, that the
just, orderly, and effective determination of such
issues requires that they be adjudicated in a
proceeding in which all the interested parties are
before the Court.” United States v. Louisiana, 354
U.S. 515, 515–16 (1957) (granting Alabama, Florida,
Mississippi, and Texas leave to intervene); see also,
e.g., Delaware v. New York, 507 U.S. 490, 497 (1993)
(permitting Michigan, Maryland, Nebraska, and the
District of Columbia to intervene); Texas v. New
Jersey, 373 U.S. 948 (1963) (granting Florida’s motion
to intervene). The Court’s power to permit
intervention arises from both “the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure” and the “general equity powers” of
the Court. United States v. Louisiana, 354 U.S. at
515; see also Sup. Ct. R. 17.2 (providing that, in an
original action, “[t]he form of pleadings and motions
prescribed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is
followed” ).
2
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 permits
intervention as of right and by the Court’s leave. The
Intervening State Plaintiffs satisfy both standards
here, and the Court should grant the motion.
I. The Intervening States Satisfy t
Josf-Kelley
Level 8
Dec 10, 2020
0
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AND BRIEF FOR THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND THE STATES AND TERRITORIES OF
CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, GUAM, HAWAII,
ILLINOIS, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MINNESOTA,
NEVADA, NEW JERSEY, NEW MEXICO, NEW YORK, NORTH CAROLINA,
OREGON, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, VIRGINIA, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS,
AND WASHINGTON AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS
AND IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A
BILL OF COMPLAINT
Recent Visitors 2
Photos 19 More
Posted by Josf-KelleyWanted for Treason That is all for lack of intelligence and moral conscience.
Posted by Josf-KelleyBorrowed from another IDW post is the pictured meme.
Posted by Josf-KelleyReal Reality A few people have purchased the exclusive power to add zeros to their Bank account balance, and they accomplish this feat by borrowing their spending from anyone who can produce ...
Posted by HeresiarchWhy you should close Social Media accounts you no longer use. (I shut down my LinkedIn account immediately)
Posted by HeresiarchI taught my daughter to shoot at ten years old. Now she's passing on the lessons she learned.
Posted by HeresiarchIt's taken us years to rehabilitate the soil on our Better Than Organic farmlet.
Posted by Josf-KelleyThat is a complex process viewed simplistically in two directions that appear, in simple form, to be opposites.
Posted by Josf-KelleyThe level of brainwashing or mind control, or spirit control, or body control, or behavior control is demonstrably on a sub-conscious level and it runs very deep.
Posted by HeresiarchHow do you sacrifice children?
Posted by HeresiarchHow's that Police State workin' out for y'all?
Posted by Josf-KelleyFrom a source:
Posted by Josf-KelleyTrump says Pence can reject criminal votes.
Posted by Josf-KelleyFrom another IDW post: Roadmap to re-inauguration:
Posted by Josf-KelleyAt a Pennsylvania State Hearing, widespread voter and election fraud is reported by witness testimony.
Posted by Josf-KelleyThe following link is immediately censored from Facebook, as I press the enter button, a warning page loads.
Posted by Josf-KelleyI was banished (for speaking the truth to power) from Culture War (IDW topics) and occasionally I am presented with posts in my feed that lead to that exclusive group, so I can't enter, and a I can't ...