Mo Brooks Announces Plan to Challenge Electoral College Votes in Congress

With dysfunction in several battleground states concerning vote fraud and ballot tampering, one US Representative said he will challenge the Electoral College Vote in Congress

Legislatures in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Georgia have all called for inquiries into vote fraud and ballot tampering in contemplation of using a provision in the US Constitution to claw back their power to seat electors to the Electoral College. One US Representative plans to challenge the Electoral College vote – if the status quo stands – in Congress.

US Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), told reporters Wednesday that he will challenge the Electoral College vote on January 6, 2021, when Congress assembles to certify the election if, in fact, the vote count stands as is for Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden.

“In my judgment, if only lawful votes by eligible American citizens were cast, [President] Donald Trump won the Electoral College by a significant margin, and Congress’s certification should reflect that,” Brooks said.

“This election was stolen by the socialists engaging in extraordinary voter fraud and election theft measures,” he added.

The Legislative Branch – the US House of Representatives and the US Senate – have the authority to challenge the legitimacy of the electors seated by the many states. In order to do so, however, at least one member from both chambers needs to contest the results “in order to force deliberation on the matter.”

The quest for Brooks at this point would be to find an ally in the Senate. Then he would have to face a Democrat controlled House in deliberations led by hyper-partisan House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

The Trump campaign, as well as several of the President’s allies, have launched legal battles in several of the battleground states he was leading in before vote counting was stopped on Election Night. Hundreds, if not thousands, of witnesses have sworn out affidavits that vote tampering took place in the hours vote tabulations were suspended and then into the days extended out from Election Day to facilitate the abundance of mail-in and absentee ballots cause by the questionable COVID pandemic.

But Brooks says, “A lot of time is being wasted in court.” He argues, “[T]he Supreme Court does not have the lawful authority to determine whether to accept or reject a state’s Electoral College submissions.”

“Under the United States Constitution and US law, that is the job and duty of elected officials,” Brooks said. “And so it’s the United States Congress that is the final judge and jury of whether to accept or reject Electoral College submissions by states, and to elect who the president and vice president of the United States might be.”

While Brooks may indeed find an ally in the US Senate, the chances of finding enough members of Congress confident enough to risk their political futures to do what is right by the American people are slim by all accounts.

https://nationalfile.com/battle-mo-brooks-announces-plan-to-challenge-electoral-college-votes-in-congress/

Raheem Kassam

@RaheemKassam

CNN is now publishing articles threatening the Trump kids. ⁦@KateBennett_DC

⁩ is a sicko.

https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1334658057754841089

Supreme Court delivers blow to California Gov. Gavin Newsom's lockdown orders against churches

A loss for Newsom and a win for religion

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday sided against California Gov. Gavin Newsom's restrictions on indoor religious services during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Supreme Court tossed out a decision from a Central District of California court that upheld Newsom's constraints on houses of worship.

"The September 2 order of the United States District Court for the Central District of California is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit with instructions to remand to the District Court for further consideration in light of Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo," the Supreme Court stated, according to Fox News.

The justices, with no noted dissents, vacated the District Court ruling against the Pasadena-based Harvest Rock Church and Harvest International Ministry, which has several campuses and more than 160 churches across California. The Harvest Rock Church initially filed a lawsuit against the state in July when restrictions were implemented following a surge in coronavirus cases. The restrictions banned indoor singing and chanting activities.

The Supreme Court referenced its recent 5-4 ruling against restrictions on prayer services in New York. The Nov. 25 ruling that said New York could not enforce limits on attendance at churches and synagogues in coronavirus hot spots, which upset Gov. Andrew Cuomo. The Democratic governor of New York then accused the Supreme Court justices of politicizing COVID-19.

California currently has a color-coded tier program that imposes certain restrictions in each county based on the number of COVID-19 cases. If the county has what the state considers "widespread" coronavirus cases, then "many non-essential indoor business operations are closed." In lesser tiers of the system, "some indoor business operations are open with modifications."

The church claims they are protected under the First Amendment to practice their religion, adding that the Democratic governor's order is illegal because it restrains the size of religious gatherings, but other secular activities do not face the same restrictions.

"For the governor, COVID-19 restrictions are apparently optional and penalty free," lawyers for the church argued. "But for Churches or anyone worshipping in their own home with someone who does not live there, COVID-19 restrictions are mandatory and enforced via criminal penalties."

Liberty Counsel founder Mat Staver issued a statement, "The handwriting is now on the wall. The final days of Governor Gavin Newsom's 'color-coded edicts' banning worship are numbered and coming to an end. It is past time to end the unconstitutional restrictions on places of worship."

https://www.theblaze.com/news/supreme-court-church-california-newsom-lockdown

Nevada Judge Does NOT Rule on Obvious Voter Fraud Case — USPS Is Preventing Witnesses from Testifying!

There was a hearing in Carson City, Nevada on Thursday afternoon on the massive fraud in Nevada in the 2020 presidential elections.

Hundreds of Trump supporters were outside the courts building rallying for their president.

The Trump Campaign believes they have a strong case in Nevada.

Democrats used similar tactics they used in other battleground states to flood the system with fake ballots and steal the election from President Trump.

The Trump campaign asserts:

** 15k votes from vacant lots

** 19k votes from non voting Nevadans

** 42k double votes

** 1500 dead voters

In a recent development, the US Postal Service is PREVENTING witnesses from testifying on the massive voter fraud they witnessed as postal employees.

This is disgusting behavior and should be condemned by EVERY American.

The National Pulse reported:

One such development is that the United States Postal Service (USPS) is “preventing witnesses and whistleblowers from testifying,” concerning wide-scale orders for workers to deliver ballots to nearly 8,000 “undeliverable” addresses. The ballots were later “collected, turned in, and presumably counted.”

“There are multiple key witnesses who are whistleblowers with matching, independent stories supporting these issues, who USPS is trying to obstruct from testifying,” the Nevada GOP notes.

The Republican Party also has evidence that there was over 100,000 cases of illegal ballots in Nevada.

Courtney Holland was covering the hearing today on Twitter.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/developing-nevada-judge-not-rule-obvious-voter-fraud-case-usps-preventing-witnesses-testifying/

Bill Clinton 'Couldn't Stay Away' From Jeffrey Epstein, Visited 'Pedo Island' According To Former Chief Aide

Bill Clinton's former top aide and Chelsea Clinton nemesis Doug Band has told Vanity Fair that former President Bill Clinton did visit Jeffrey Epstein's infamous "pedo island" in January 2003, and that he was unable to push Epstein out of Clinton's orbit since they flew to Africa together in 2002 aboard the the pedophile's (Epstein's) private 727, dubbed the "Lolita Express."

Band said he had no idea about Epstein’s sex crimes back then but got enough bad vibes that he advised Clinton to end the relationship. But Clinton continued to socialize with Epstein and take his money. In 2006 Epstein donated $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton made more than two dozen trips on Epstein’s jet around this time, Epstein’s flight logs show. In January 2003, according to Band, Clinton visited Epstein’s private Caribbean island, Little St. James. Band said it was one of the few trips he declined to go on in his time with Clinton. -Vanity Fair

Band - who revealed the Clinton Foundation's 'for-profit' activity and accused Chelsea Clinton of tapping Foundation funds to pay for her wedding (known only because of WikiLeaks) - also says Chelsea Clinton had a relationship with Epstein and his alleged co-conspirator in an underage sex trafficking ring, Ghislaine Maxwell.

Chelsea had ties to Epstein and Maxwell, Band said; he showed me a photo of Bill and Chelsea posing with Epstein and Maxwell at the King of Morocco’s wedding. Chelsea remained friends with Maxwell for years after the press revealed Maxwell was a close associate of Epstein’s. For instance, Chelsea invited Maxwell to her 2010 wedding at the Brooke Astor estate in Rhinebeck, New York, after Epstein had pleaded guilty in Florida to procuring sex from a minor. -Vanity Fair

"Ghislaine had access to yachts and nice homes. Chelsea needed that," said Band.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bill-clinton-couldnt-stay-away-jeffrey-epstein-definitely-was-pedo-island-according

Nuclear deal won’t be renegotiated, US must respect UN Resolution endorsing accord, Zarif tells Rome forum

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif reasserts Iran’s position that its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers is not open to renegotiation and that the US has to observe the agreement and the UN resolution that endorses it.

The deal “will never be renegotiated, period,” Zarif said on Thursday, addressing the 6th edition of the Rome Mediterranean Dialogues 2020.

Officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the deal was made between the Islamic Republic and the P5+1 group of countries – the US, the UK, France, Russia, and China plus Germany – in Vienna in 2015. It put some restrictions on Iran’s nuclear energy program in exchange for sanction relief.

The United States, though, left the deal in 2018 under President Donald Trump, returned the sanctions, and threatened those who would not abide by the economic measures with “secondary sanctions.”

US’ ‘rogue’ conduct

In committing the breaches against the historic deal, the Trump administration acted as a “rogue regime,” Zarif regretted.

He advised that the US end its “grave breach” of the JCPOA and UN Security Council Resolution 2231 that has endorsed the nuclear deal, because Washington “has walked out of the nuclear agreement, but did not walk out of the United Nations.”

“It (the United States) has obligations, responsibilities as a UN member, as a Security Council member. And there’s a Security Council Resolution 2231, which the US must observe,” the senior diplomat noted.

https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/12/03/639926/Iran-nuclear-deal-United-States-Trump-Yemen-West-Middle-East-Persian-Gulf-Zarif-Rome-forum

>>11895199

seems this is part of his plea bargain, go throw BC under the Epstein bus

Facebook Changing 'Race-Blind' Hate Speech Algorithms to Allow More Anti-White Hate

Mark Zuckerberg is overhauling Facebook's "race-blind" so-called "hate speech" algorithms to explicitly allow more anti-White hatred, according to a report from the Washington Post.

From The Washington Post, "Facebook to start policing anti-Black hate speech more aggressively than anti-White comments, documents show":

The overhaul, which is known as the WoW Project and is in its early stages, involves re-engineering Facebook's automated moderation systems to get better at detecting and automatically deleting hateful language that is considered "the worst of the worst," according to internal documents describing the project obtained by The Washington Post. The "worst of the worst" includes slurs directed at Blacks, Muslims, people of more than one race, the LGBTQ community and Jews, according to the documents.

As one way to assess severity, Facebook assigned different types of attacks numerical scores weighted based on their perceived harm. For example, the company's systems would now place a higher priority on automatically removing statements such as "Gay people are disgusting" than "Men are pigs."

Facebook has long banned hate speech — defined as violent or dehumanizing speech — based on race, gender, sexuality and other protected characteristics. It owns Instagram and has the same hate speech policies there. But before the overhaul, the company's algorithms and policies did not make a distinction between groups that were more likely to be targets of hate speech versus those that have not been historically marginalized. Comments like "White people are stupid" were treated the same as anti-Semitic or racist slurs.

In the first phase of the project, which was announced internally to a small group in October, engineers said they had changed the company's systems to deprioritize policing contemptuous comments about "Whites," "men" and "Americans." Facebook still considers such attacks to be hate speech, and users can still report it to the company. However, the company's technology now treats them as "low-sensitivity" — or less likely to be harmful — so that they are no longer automatically deleted by the company's algorithms. That means roughly 10,000 fewer posts are now being deleted each day, according to the documents.

Though Zuckerberg is allowing more anti-White hatred on Facebook, just a few months ago he announced he was banning all content which depicts "Jewish people running the world or controlling major institutions such as media networks, the economy or the government" as well as all Holocaust denial.

https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61940