PB >>10233596
>https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/493101-who-takes-control-if-there-is-no-presidential-election-this-year
A good Dersch article facts but no answers……
election 2020: when and how: what we have going for us
Congressional action will be attempted, Presidential EOs effected and lawsuits filed to begin the process of a ultimate Supreme Court Decision on how election will unfold. Maintaining precedent is preferrred, so getting covid reduced from 'Pandemic' status due to low mortality and slower spread may be important, separating c16 from general coronavirus should be key as well as therapeutics, vaccine availibility to slow spread. The timeline to present the best numbers likely needs to be done as SC hears election arguments. That could be why Potus is allowing the coronavirus +s to be presented as if it was c19, common cold and flu are mixed in, but that lowers the rate of death as a %, so that can contribute to ending pandemic as fatality % is a factor. Ease of spread and new cases also are factored in. HCQ needs to be approved for a strong case to end pandemic and many want a vax. So those are thing potus is weighing and timing now.
What we do know is Supreme Court knows the Dems tried to rig 2016 via faithless electors.
from 7.7.20 Kagan unanimous Majority Opinion:
Justice Kagan explained the electors’ thinking.
“The three hoped they could encourage other electors — particularly those from states Donald Trump had carried — to follow their example,” she wrote. “The idea was to deprive him of a majority of electoral votes and throw the election into the House of Representatives.”
The effort failed. “Only seven electors across the nation cast faithless votes — the most in a century, but well short of the goal,” Justice Kagan wrote. “Candidate Trump became President Trump.”
NY Times article: http://archive.is/Ddkxp#selection-891.0-899.195
(keep in mind optics- SC Justice Roberts had option to write opinion, but gave it to Kagan for a reason)
The words for a SC Opinion seem clear in relaying Dems tried to muddy up election, break tradition and use a interpretation of legalese as LawFare to teal the election from Potus.
If this case was heard before russiagate was exposed the Opinion would likely have been written different, and perhaps the vote also. The affected Trump may have been viewed as a Villian and the Conspirators as Heroes.
Q mentioned this and assume the SC put 2 and 2 together also:
If Trump failed, if we failed, and HRC assumed control, we as Patriots were prepared to do the unthinkable (this was leaked internally and kept the delegate recount scam and BO from declaring fraud).
Patriots in 2016 before Potus was inagurated prevented the entire premise of Russia Hoax, It was so BHO could alert country that Potus and Russia rigged election that HRC won, that intel has evidence and all 17 agencies agree, then call on elector to deny Potus electoral votes as a remedy at which time Paul Ryan and a GOP House would give the election to HRC.
If we countered that scam at BHO peak of power, we should be in good shape today, supported further by the fact the SC understands the Dems threat to our election integrity.