Taking Back Our Stolen History
TX AG Uses “Article III” to Bypass Lower Courts and Go Directly to SCOTUS…Lawsuit Against PA, MI, WI Was Filed at 12am
TX AG Uses “Article III” to Bypass Lower Courts and Go Directly to SCOTUS…Lawsuit Against PA, MI, WI Was Filed at 12am

TX AG Uses “Article III” to Bypass Lower Courts and Go Directly to SCOTUS…Lawsuit Against PA, MI, WI Was Filed at 12am

Texas AG Ken Paxton filed a brilliant new lawsuit right before midnight. He’s taking a different approach than anyone else and his path leads straight to the SCOTUS. Paxton believes that he can use “Article III” to take his lawsuits against PA, WI, and MI straight to the SCOTUS, bypassing the lower courts (too many corrupt judges) totally.

The Texas lawsuit is President Trump’s strongest case against election fraud because evidence can be introduced to the Supreme Court as it has original jurisdiction in disputes between the states.

A legal analyst revealed that the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled in 1997 (Foster v Love) that all ballots received after midnight of Election Day are null and void.

But, according to constitutional lawyer Robert Barnes, the lawsuit isn’t even that dependent on evidence of fraud because it centers on the constitutionality of states changing their election laws without input from their legislatures.

This is why the suit is so strong; Texas and the other states that have joined the suit have the best legal standing to challenge violations by other states of the Electors Clause provision.

“There’s nobody really better equipped to do that than the states, because the states are the original parties to the Constitutional contract,” Barnes said. “…The whole point of the Constitution is that we [the states] are going to agree when we pick the president that all of our state sovereigns are going to agree to abide by the same set of rules.”

“What happened here is that some states decided that they weren’t going to abide by those rules because they wanted to help Biden win.”

Up to 20 states may join the suit, Barnes added.

“This is about whether our constitutional compact will be enforced our not, because everybody agreed that the state legislatures would set the rules and that any election would be done with due process & equal protection, but a bunch of states decided they weren’t going to do that,” Barnes stated. “The best chance President Trump has is this Texas suit that’s been well-crafted and well-drafted.”

“The big question is whether the Supreme Court and ultimately Congress has the courage to uphold the Constitution in the midst of this incredible crisis.”

Source: Infowars

Texas’ pending case with SCOTUS hinges on whether the court will uphold the US Constitution, Attorney General Ken Paxton told Fox News’ Sean Hannity:

Paxton explained the state’s complaint centers on how Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan exploited the Covid-19 crisis to bypass and ignore federal and state election laws and enact unlawful last-minute changes, thereby disenfranchising voters in the Lone Star State.

“If other states don’t follow the Constitution and if their state legislature isn’t responsible for overseeing their elections … it affects my state,” Paxton told Hannity. “Our job is to make sure the Constitution is followed and that every vote counts. And in this case, I’m not sure every vote was counted. Not in the right way.”

Texas’ lawsuit focuses on two violations of the US Constitution, including a violation of the Electors Clause of Article II of the Constitution, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“It is the responsibility of state legislatures, per the Constitution to set the rules for the election of electors,” Paxton argued. “And in this case, those were overridden, in the four states we’re talking about … by other officials.”

In light of the constitutional violations, Paxton says SCOTUS should therefore permit legislatures in Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan the ability to choose their electors.

“This was traditional in our country,” Paxton said. “It was not uncommon for a legislative body to elect their electors. We’re saying, ‘Hey, look. The results here, we can’t go back and let the genie back in the bottle. We don’t know how to match up signatures because they were separated. If we can’t do that, we want to go back to the legislature and let them make a decision since they were elected by the people of their state.’”

Hannity agreed.

“The country deserves it. You deserve it,” Hannity told the Texas AG. “We, the people, deserve it. I don’t know what the justices are going to do, but the American people deserve answers. We need to have confidence in both the integrity and the results of every state’s election, in the process, because we have millions of innocent Americans in states where the law, the Constitution were not followed. They are, then, disenfranchised in a corrupt process.”

This means the vote stuffing, early morning rigging and subsequent ballot “discovery” schemes by the Democrats are all unconstitutional and therefore null and void.

It also means that all the swing states which simultaneously paused their ballot counting on the evening of Nov. 3rd, deliberately allowing post-election ballot fraud to take place, shall have their own elections nullified, along with all their electoral votes.

Once presented with this information — which apparently just got activated with a surprise Texas lawsuit filed with SCOTUS before midnight last night — the U.S. Supreme Court must rule that those swing states must now use their state legislators to appoint electors rather than relying on the fraudulent, nullified, rigged elections that used Dominion Voting Systems.

As explained by Ren Jander from ThePostEmail.com, the U.S. Constitution describes an “Election Day” which is one particular calendar day, and federal elections are limited to one day precisely for the purpose of preventing the kind of fraud that often takes place when elections are paused and drawn out. Because the federal government appoints states to carry out elections to fill federal positions (such as President), the U.S. Constitution has jurisdiction over state elections when those elections involve federal officials and violate the U.S. Constitution. As explained by Jander:

The voters vote.  The officials count.  These combined actions form “the election,” and the election must be decided on the day.  States that failed to make a final selection of officeholder by midnight after Election Day have violated the statute, subjecting the nation at large to the very evils Congressionally mandated deadlines were drafted to prevent.

To remedy this situation, a person or State merely needs to ask the US Supreme Court to remedy the violation by nullifying the votes of states which attempted to commit election fraud by extending election “day” to election “weeks.” As Jander explains:

3 U.S.C. § 2 kicks the decision back to the State Legislatures after a failed election renders the previous results void.  Failed elections nullify all votes, not just some votes, not just late votes, not just illegal votes.  The election itself is void in late States

On Wednesday, President Trump vowed to intervene in Texas’ lawsuit, proclaiming, “This is the big one!”


Read Texas’ lawsuit below:

TX v State Motion 2020-12-0… by Breitbart News

20 states have joined Texas: AK, AL, AZ, AR, FL, IN, KS, LA, MO, MS, MT, NE, ND, OH, OK, SC, SD, TN, UT and WV.

Other states who did not join but have a Republican AG include: ID, KY (Dem Gov), NH, ND, WY

Ohio Republican Attorney General Dave Yost, filed a brief “in support of neither party,” arguing against the relief sought by Texas, but would later in the day join Texas. Five other Republican attorneys general—from Idaho, Kentucky, New Hampshire, North Dakota and Wyoming—did not file briefs in support of Texas or motions to join the case. The governor of Alaska said his attorney general did not have enough time to review the lawsuit before the deadline to join the case expired.1

The District of Columbia filed a legal brief on behalf of 22 blue states and territories on Dec. 10 opposing the Texas lawsuit. The group represents all but one state with Democratic attorneys general not counting the four defendants: Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

“The people have chosen. But Texas, supported by 17 other states, asks this Court to overturn that choice,” the brief (pdf), signed by District of Columbia Solicitor General Loren Alikhan, states. “Amici States urge this Court to reject Texas’s last-minute attempt to throw out the results of an election decided by the people and securely overseen and certified by its sister states.”

The Texas case would explode with everyone seemingly picking sides. 106 US House Republicans signed a brief backing Texas two days later. The Pennsylvania House would also join the lawsuit against their own state and three others. Then, blue states and a couple territories got involved and joined Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin.  They are fine with massive corruption as long as they gain power.1


Ralph Abraham (LA)

Rick W. Allen (GA)

James R. Baird (IN)

Jim Banks (IN)

Jack Bergman (MI)

Andy Biggs (AZ)

Gus Bilirakis (FL)

Dan Bishop (NC)

Mike Bost (IL)

Kevin Brady (TX)

Mo Brooks (AL)

Ken Buck (CO)

Ted Budd (NC)

Tim Burchett (TN)

Michael C. Burgess (TX)

Bradley Byrne (AL)

Ken Calvert (CA)

‘Buddy’ Carter (GA)

Ben Cline (VA)

Michael Cloud (TX)

Mike Conaway (TX)

Rick Crawford (AR)

Dan Crenshaw (TX)

Mario Diaz-Balart (FL)

Jeff Duncan (SC)

Neal P. Dunn (FL)

Tom Emmer (MN)

Ron Estes (KS)

A. Drew Ferguson (GA)

Chuck Fleischmann (TN)

Bill Flores (TX)

Jeff Fortenberry (NE)

Virginia Foxx (NC)

Russ Fulcher (ID)

Matt Gaetz (FL)

Greg Gianforte (MT)

Bob Gibbs (OH)

Louie Gohmert (TX

Lance Gooden (TX)

Sam Graves (MO)

Mark Green (TN)

Michael Guest (MS)

Andy Harris (MD)

Vicky Hartzler (MO)

Kevin Hern (OK)

Clay Higgins (LA)

Trey Hollingsworth (IN)

Richard Hudson (NC)

Bill Huizenga (MI)

Bill Johnson (OH)

Mike Johnson (LA)

Jim Jordan (OH)

John Joyce (PA)

Fred Keller (PA)

Mike Kelly (PA)

Trent Kelly (MS)

Steve King (IA)

David Kustoff (TN)

Darin LaHood (IL)

Doug LaMalfa (CA)

Doug Lamborn (CO)

Robert E. Latta (OH)

Debbie Lesko (AZ)

Blaine Leutkemeyer (MO)

Kenny Marchant (TX)

Roger Marshall (KS)

Tom McClintock (KA)

Cathy Rogers (WA)

Dan Meuser (PA)

Carol D. Miller (WV)

John Moolenaar (MI)

Alex X. Mooney (WV)

Markwayne Mullin (OK)

Gregory Murphy (NC)

Dan Newhouse (WA)

Ralph Norman (SC)

Gary Palmer (AL)

Scott Perry (PA)

Guy Reschenthaler (PA)

Tom Rice (SC)

John Rose (TN)

David Rouzer (NC)

John Rutherford (FL)

Steve Scalise (LA)*whip

Austin Scott (GA)

Mike Simpson (ID)

Adrian Smith (NE)

Jason Smith (MO)

Ross Spano (FL)

Elise Stefanik (NY)

Glenn Thompson (PA)

Tom Tiffany (WI)

William Timmons (SC)

Ann Wagner (MO)

Tim Walberg (MI)

Michael Waltz (FL)

Randy Weber (TX)

Daniel Webster (FL)

Brad Wenstrup (OH)

Bruce Westerman (AR)

Roger Williams (TX)

Joe Wilson (SC)

Rob Wittman (VA)

Ron Wright (TX)

Ted S. Yoho (FL)

Lee Zeldin (NY)

On the following day, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and 20 House Republicans joined the 106 GOP lawmakers in backing Texas’ Supreme Court lawsuit.

A group of Michigan state legislators have also signed on to the brief asking to intervene in the case. The proposed intervenors in the case are: Michigan state legislators Gary Eisen, John Reilly, Julie Alexander, Matt Maddock, Daire Rendon, Beth Griffin, Douglas Wozniak, Michele Hoitenga, Brad Paquette, Rodney Wakeman, Greg Markkanen, Jack O’Malley, Joe Bellino, Luke Meerman and Brianna Kahle; Pennsylvania state legislators Daryl D. Metcalfe, Mike Puskaric, Chris E. Dush and Thomas R. Sankey III; Wisconsin resident Ronald H. Heuer; Georgia resident John Wood; and Michigan residents Angelic Johnson, Dr. Linda Lee Tarver, and Kristina Karamo.2

SCOTUS would disappointingly dismiss the lawsuit on December 11th claiming it lacked standing.


See Also:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.