Mike Lindell Announces Dominion Lawsuit, Says Biden Will be Removed After Audit | Frank Speech the Home of Free Speech https://t.co/OCXct7gPxD
— Israpundit (@Israpundit) June 3, 2021
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
This is all nonsense in tomato juice, as they say in Israel. No matter how much fraud you prove, there are no grounds to change the result. Understand, the president was not elected on Nov 3 but on Dec 14. The election on Nov 3 was to choose the electors who would elect the president. Any challenge would be to *their* election, not to his.
At most, let’s say you prove that PA’s 20 electors were fraudulently elected, and let’s say you persuade a court to declare that they were not really electors and their votes should not be counted. That’s an extreme stretch already, since electors don’t have to be elected, they have to be chosen by whatever method the state legislature decides, and the state legislature decided it should be done by the method used. But let’s say the court agrees with you and declares them not to have been electors.
First of all, they already voted. Their votes were already counted in front of Congress and the vice president. A judge can’t interfere in any process of Congress, so stop right there.
But suppose we don’t stop. Suppose Congress agrees to reopen the process and remove those 20 votes. That takes 20 votes away from Biden, but it doesn’t give them to Trump. All it does is reduce the majority Biden needs from 268 to 258. So effectively it takes 10 votes off his margin. The same for every other state. Even if you manage to get its electors to be retroactively not counted, the only effect is to shave *half* that many votes off Biden’s margin, because you keep reducing the size of a majority. And of course Dems get in the game and start disqualifying Rep electors too.
But it won’t even get that far.
A lawyer friend of mine tells me the Quo Warranto Writ is not so out of the box as I suggested in my last posting, as it it strongly based in Common Law. So, sorry for the misstatement. I just wanted to share his legal critique of my layman understanding.
(2 of 2)
But, the more impeachable pathway lies open. While the quo warranto writ is considered or dismissed, Lindell has responded to the Dominion’s lawsuit a couple of weeks ago and then there is the lawsuit that he placed before a MN court yesterday. This lawsuit is where all the beef for legal challenges to the fraud lies. And it can not be ignored. If the evidence is impeachable this ship will come to port sooner or later after significant challenges and delays.
The impeccability of the evidence is key to any victory, though. For myself, I am not too worried on this point as Byrne and his team of cyber-sleuths were quite aware of what documentation would be needed if Trump failed to secure real results prior to Jan. 20, as he did fail to do. Byrne has been aware of the fraud since last September, so it was not a last minute response in which they perhaps did not consider all avenues, but we will see if Perkin Coi can reinvent the wheel regarding a proper approach to cyber evidence as they have been attempting with election law with some significant successes over the past year.
In any case, as I said yesterday, this lawsuit is the real pathway to resolution of the fraud. And this is key. Because with this in the works, the courts will see that they can not ultimately ignore the crime and will afford a better chance of the the quo warranto coming to its quicker route of victory. Still, my money is on the lawsuit as a more certain path to victory.
Should the quo warranto and yesterday’s lawsuit both fail, there is still the counter-suit by Lindell on behalf of himself and MyPillow as a second fall back. Should all three fail, there are the State Legislature challenges that could gain success, and these are where the proper challenge to the fraud should have been addressed in Jan. and may have a better chance of victory. But it should be recalled that any victory with the State Legislatures will have to run the terrible gauntlet of legal challenges by Perkin Coi and brings us right back to the courts.
Again, I am not a lawyer, but this is a fuller telling of the story I began yesterday as I understand it, with regards to the lawsuits, quo warranto, and state legislatures. If anyone has more info on quo warranto legal challenges to presidential contests, it would be quite interesting to hear.
/2
(1 of 2)
@ Ted Belman:
So, yes, Lindell does intend to wrap this up in a writ of quo warranto and it is true that a writ of quo warranto is the more desired expedient path which Lindell plans to launch at a later point in his quest for a grand slam victory. But the quo warranto is only 1 of 3 paths to victory, and I am uncertain if it is the best path to success or not. I mentioned yesterday that what I wrote was the short answer to the big question of how do we arrive at a favorable resolution.
So, yes it was incomplete for the sake of brevity as this legal mess is getting more and more complex. The basis for the quo warranto goes back to early English common law and was actually initially instituted as a tool by the king to garner more authority about his kingdom. The Interregnum cost the Crown much of it’s authority and the parallels between the Interregnum and the US today, should be considered more closely, but I will probably do that on a different day – it is quite a fascinating tale with some relevance.
But the quo warranto that Lindell is bringing is planned as a legal challenge of the authority of the gov’t to hold authority over the nation. Its use in awarding just consideration to other federal election violations is well established, but again, not with the presidency – at least to my knowledge. It is a brilliant and bold move and has the backing of significant constitutional scholars, at least per Lindell. As Lindell does nothing by half measures, I take this as being accurate, but not being a legal authority as I noted previously, I am uncertain of this path and so in my response to Bear and milhouse yesterday, i did not address it though I probably should have as it will be released shortly.
The quo warranto writ will be released in roughly 2 wks. I am not certain if this will survive the legal challenges, though it is exciting and very much out of the box. But as I have stated previously, out of the box thinking is usually rewarded with great awards or quick disaster. I am less optimistic than LIndell, but I think most people have been trained into accepting a sense of inevitability about the loss of a favorable outcome and Lindell and Byrne have done much to lead us away from such a conclusion as it may lead to an acquiescence to the authority of this coup.
/1
@ Ted Belman:
Thanks, Ted and Peloni for the clarifications. I also understand Linda Goudsmit.s pessimism.
Lindell says he uis going to use a Quo Warranto Writ before the Supreme Court.
He will be asking by what authority Biden holds office and he will present his evidence invalidating the election.
@ adamdalgliesh:
It is true, that they won’t rehear the cases dismissed in this past winter. But, there are new cases making their way forward to them and they can not moot their way past the three minute bell, as it were, because these new cases have the advantage of not having deadlines such as Jan. 20. So they can’t put it off and say “oops no time to consider due to deadlines”.
But the case with Lindell is very important. Because of the issue of standing. The standing issue is still a concern with regards to the other cases, but Lindell’s case is a counter suit and it is not going to be dismissed on standing grounds. A ruling is inevitable. And if you watch the video, they have really good support as long as the evidence is not legally questionable. I suspect that Patrick Byrne is going to be a fact witness in this or other cases due to his commitment to maintain an arm’s length relationship to the audits.
Byrne will be a pretty credible witness and his White Hat Hackers are pretty impeachable if what I have read about them holds to be accurate. So a ruling on the fraud in Lindell’s case will substantiate the basis for the other lawsuits. But to your point, Adam, SCOTUS will be making unprecedented rulings regarding the presidency, though there is a strong record of case law supporting reversals/new elections in other federal elections.
It really goes back to if you believe they passed on the election cases this past winter due to corruption issues. I personally do. If that is true, they will say, despite the fraud, there is no precedent for removing a sitting president and deal with the public ire – and it will be significant. If I am wrong, which I find unlikely, they will consider the case and come to a fair ruling. Time will tell, because the Lindell case is going to raise more heat than Sherman brought to GA – a lot more.
@ peloni1986: peloni1986, our courts do not care about the facts, at least not when involve Trump. The judges are all establishment “deep state” people, with perhaps a few partial exceptions. THey had their chance to overturn the election. But they refused even to hear the case, claiming that Trump did not have the “standing” to appeal the election results reported by the state governors to Congress. As if the supposed losing candidate had no right to a recount after what everyone admitted was a close election!That’s how arrogant and corrupt our Supreme Court justices are. Mike can produce proof beyond resonable doubt, but the justices still won’t rehear the case.
@ linda goudsmit: I agree, Linda.
I don’t doubt the staggering and compelling evidence of communist China and other enemies hacking and manipulating our presidential election. What I doubt is that any court, including the U.S. Supreme Court, will do anything about it!! The judiciary is so profoundly corrupt they refused to hear any election challenges, and allowed the enemies of the state to claim there was no evidence! It is simply Orwellian.
For anyone not interested in watching Lindell’s 20 min. video explaining why they will recieve a 9-0 ruling, Tierney news gave a quick synopsis that ignores much of the detail surrounding the packets that were captured on election night. The video is well worth a listen, though, as it explains it plainly why it can not really be refuted.
https://www.tierneyrealnewsnetwork.com/post/tierney-s-real-news-6-3-21?postId=9282f3c2-5688-4e35-9781-c2012557e8a3
Here is the explanation for “the irrefutable evidence” and pretty easy to follow.
https://home.frankspeech.com/tv/video/mike-lindell-presents-absolutely-9-0
I believe it is always best to have more than a perfect case, and now they do. This way only two groups can say no fraud – the willfully blind(i.e. everyone who is complicit) and the woefully ignorant(i.e. Democratic voters, maybe).
But the matter could have and should have been dealt with last winter. I hope they resolve it in an equitable manner, but we will see.
(2 of 2)
But everyone has for months been diligently discussing and planning how we will win in court given the courts obsession with mooting judgements over the past many months. But the fraud is clear. It was clear in November as it was in January as it is clear today. So more evidence will be utilized to exhibit and expose an overwhelming certainty of fraud. Case close, we win, as we should easily have been granted last winter. The problem lies in the resulting decision of remedy.
The process was terribly corrupt, and there is substantial and recent black letter case law in other federally elected office holders. In these cases the judgements provide for the overturning of elections fraudulently conducted, and either allow for a new election or authorizing the correct office holder to be placed into office(this second point, I don’t have the case info on, but I am told it exists – so maybe). But here is the terrible point upon which everything hinges. Who will adjudge the remedy here. SCOTUS. And who chose to allow certification of the fraud without evaluating it? SCOTUS.
They didn’t even take it to the point of consideration of summary judgement. Summary Judgement is where the judge looks at the evidence and assumes all the plaintiff’s(Trump’s) claims are all true and provable. The judge then makes a decision as to whether a legitimate law was broken and rules the case as substantial enough to go to trial or it is thrown out on “summary judgement”. So this low bar was never even considered by SCOTUS. And now they are to be relied upon for the just interpretation of remedy that will be rendered when there exists no precedent for fraud at the presidential level.
The reason the evidence was never considered is not knowable. But it is also key to predicting the future remedy. If they kicked the can because they really felt the case law was not substantial enough to consider themselves empowered to interact in the process in Jan, maybe they will judge things appropriately, now that the can not be kicked further. But if their decision was further evidence of the capture of the US gov’t by corrupt practices and extra-national sources, nothing will cause them to place Trump back into office.
I am not a constitutional law scholar. I am also not a lawyer. And I am not a law advocate. I hate going to court for any reasons at all. All that being said, this is the process that the hopes of a fair outcome hinges upon, as I understand it.
(1 of 2)
@ Bear Klein:
@ milhouse:
So, the limitations to removal of a legitimately elected president is stated clearly and the two methods you listed are the complete list. It is unfortunately a reality that the China Class used illegitimate means to impose this illegitimate administration upon the US, and the use of these measures to remove Biden and Harris are both remote and irrelevant. Should such measures be adopted the world would be left with the China Surrogate Pelosi as president, and some within the conservative movement believe this is actually the end game they hope to achieve(but the Conservative movement has been overwhelmed with alot of foolish suspicions and hopes).
So the routine methodologies are not useful because it is not a routine presidential violation of high crimes and misdemeanors nor of the competency of a presidential figure. For, though much support could be offered on both of these avenues, neither will take us where we need to go. But they also don’t apply. The underlying relevant point discussed in the above paragraph is the word “illegitimate”. The bastardization of the election carried a legal taint that rendered every step following as unsubstantial in nature, as the legal statement “fraud vitiates everything” implies.
So, it is a powerful point of legal leveraging that will be used to ask the courts to render as moot what was fraudulently certified as the work product of fraud, and, hence, without support of law or the constitution. This places the entire conversation into the context of an extra-constitutional paradox as we are asking our constitutionally provisioned Courts to judge an illegitimately constitutional provisioned president as null and void due to the election fraud conducted by members of the US and foreign gov’ts and which was certified by a rogue, but constitutionally provisioned Congress. This is a lot to chew through, but it is the short answer to the big question of how can this work out favorably.
/1
@ peloni1986:
It doesn’t matter what evidence is discovered; there is no way to remove Biden from office except impeachment or declaring him temporarily incompetent. The first requires a majority of the House and 2/3 of the senate; the second requires 2/3 of both houses, plus the vice president and a majority of cabinet secretaries. And both methods put Harris in office. No evidence, no matter how shocking, can change that.
@ peloni1986:
I will provide a challenge for you if you want to take it. What are the constitutional methods for removing a POTUS? One as we know is impeachment.
The second is the 25th Amendment (The Twenty-fifth Amendment (Amendment XXV) to the United States Constitution says that if the President becomes unable to do his job, the Vice President becomes the President (Section 1) or Acting President (Sections 3 or 4).
There no others to my knowledge. This congress IS NOT GOING remove by Biden by Impeachment. Harris could in theory become POTUS in the future by the 25th amendment.
Let me know if they are any others or if you believe this democratically controlled congress is going to remove Biden? Sorry I wish Biden was NOT POTUS but he is and even if damaging evidence does come out, Biden will NOT be impeached by this congress.
@ Bear Klein:
You are quite correct in this. But it is New Evidence not publicly known at this point that is being released, not just the lawsuit. And whereas the posting is just a posting, and so many postings lead to fantastical illusions and equally terrible disappointments, burn has been noted to be accurate in his postings and claims, usually understating rather than overstating the expected info he refers to in advance.
And as you suggest right now it is just a posting, but his most recent comment is “There are bombs coming that like you’ve never heard before in your life!” So, we will see, over the coming hours has to the accuracy of his estimates.
But the bigger issue has been and remains the fact that the courts have full authority to judge with discretion as to what remedy will be granted even if Victory should be obtained. But one step at a time.
I am sorry if an article by a prominent constitutional lawyer was saying this it might a shred of credibility. Also a lawyer would couch his words. Posting what is music to your ears does not make it remotely credible.
Consitution has
I am sorry if an article by a prominent constitutional lawyer was saying this it might a shred of credibility. Also a lawyer would couch his words. Posting what is music to your ears does not make it remotely credible.
Patrick Byrne says there is a very LARGE reveal in the Lindell lawsuit being released today. He calls it the Mother of All Bombs(MOAB) and that victory is certain because of it.