>>11907610

Justice Alito Has Asked Pennsylvania to Respond to Kelly Request for Emergency Injunction – by December 9

By Shipwreckedcrew | Dec 04, 2020 4:15 PM ET

It has now been posted on the Supreme Court’s docket for the case that Justice Alito has directed the attorneys for Pennsylvania to file a response to GOP Congressman Kelly’s Emergency Application for an Injunction to prevent the naming of Electors for Joe Biden by December 9. That date is meaningful.

The “Safe Harbor” provision for naming Electors is December 8. What that means is that Congress must accept as valid — without allowing any challenge — the Electors named by a State on or before December 8 if those Electors were chosen in the manner prescribed by state law. The Pennsylvania state officials are not, at this time, prevented by any court order from naming Electors for Joe Biden, and presumably, they will do so on or before December 8 as a result of the popular election which is the manner prescribed by the Pennsylvania legislature for naming Electors. That means those Electors must be accepted by Congress when the Electoral College reports the outcome of their vote.

Justice Alito’s order likely means there are not 5 votes to grant the emergency injunctive relief and prevent the naming of Pennsylvania’s electors — at least not with respect to the complaint filed by Congressman Kelly seeking to declare the entire “vote-by-mail” scheme enacted by the Pennsylvania legislature as a violation of Pennsylvania’s Constitution.

But the fact that he has ordered Pennsylvania to respond does suggest that there may be some sentiment in the Court to take up the case — likely in combination with other cases now before the Court regarding the Pennsylvania election process. It just won’t grant the injunctive relief that would be needed to give any kind of retrospective remedy that Cong. Kelly and the other plaintiffs are seeking. The easy justification for the Court is there is simply not enough time for the Court to take on such a monumental challenge given the stakes. AND, while the Court MIGHT agree that on the merits that the “vote-by-mail” scheme is invalid, there is no purpose in doing so at this point in time given the significant likelihood that it may only be Pennsylvania that ends up being flipped, and the outcome of the election remains the same. So, to do so on an accelerated timeframe, where briefing, research, and opinion drafting would have to occur at “warp speed”, is simply too much to ask.

>>11907824

It is impossible to know at this point, but the meaningful question that might be asked is why the Kelly complaint was filed on November 21 — eighteen days after the election. The honest truth might be that the nature of the legal claim was not recognized such that filing the complaint earlier was possible. That would be understandable. But if the interests involved in filing that complaint knew on Election Day that such a complaint was valid, they should have filed it on November 4.

There is no point now in waiting for SCOTUS to rescue Pennsylvania via the Kelly case, and as a likely consequence there is much diminished — probably nearly non-existent — expectation that SCOTUS will make an effort to involve itself in sorting out the ugly “political” process that is underway in other states either. It could have acted weeks ago on the other pending case from Pennsylvania involving the extended ballot receipt deadline and failed to do so. But the same practical consideration likely applies there as well — the Penn. Supreme Court’s decision was limited to the Nov. 2020 election only, and the total number of ballots received by the State after the statutory deadline of 8:00 pm on Nov. 3 was insufficient to change the outcome of the vote by themselves so there is no urgency to address the issue of the Penn. Supreme Court’s order. The Court can accomplish whatever it needs to accomplish in rebuking the Penn. Supreme Court — if it deems it necessary to do so — by acting after the election is over.

It is impossible to know at this point, but the meaningful question that might be asked is why the Kelly complaint was filed on November 21 — eighteen days after the election. The honest truth might be that the nature of the legal claim was not recognized such that filing the complaint earlier was possible. That would be understandable. But if the interests involved in filing that complaint knew on Election Day that such a complaint was valid, they should have filed it on November 4.

There is no point now in waiting for SCOTUS to rescue Pennsylvania via the Kelly case, and as a likely consequence there is much diminished — probably nearly non-existent — expectation that SCOTUS will make an effort to involve itself in sorting out the ugly “political” process that is underway in other states either. It could have acted weeks ago on the other pending case from Pennsylvania involving the extended ballot receipt deadline and failed to do so. But the same practical consideration likely applies there as well — the Penn. Supreme Court’s decision was limited to the Nov. 2020 election only, and the total number of ballots received by the State after the statutory deadline of 8:00 pm on Nov. 3 was insufficient to change the outcome of the vote by themselves so there is no urgency to address the issue of the Penn. Supreme Court’s order. The Court can accomplish whatever it needs to accomplish in rebuking the Penn. Supreme Court — if it deems it necessary to do so — by acting after the election is over.

It is impossible to know at this point, but the meaningful question that might be asked is why the Kelly complaint was filed on November 21 — eighteen days after the election. The honest truth might be that the nature of the legal claim was not recognized such that filing the complaint earlier was possible. That would be understandable. But if the interests involved in filing that complaint knew on Election Day that such a complaint was valid, they should have filed it on November 4.

There is no point now in waiting for SCOTUS to rescue Pennsylvania via the Kelly case, and as a likely consequence there is much diminished — probably nearly non-existent — expectation that SCOTUS will make an effort to involve itself in sorting out the ugly “political” process that is underway in other states either. It could have acted weeks ago on the other pending case from Pennsylvania involving the extended ballot receipt deadline and failed to do so. But the same practical consideration likely applies there as well — the Penn. Supreme Court’s decision was limited to the Nov. 2020 election only, and the total number of ballots received by the State after the statutory deadline of 8:00 pm on Nov. 3 was insufficient to change the outcome of the vote by themselves so there is no urgency to address the issue of the Penn. Supreme Court’s order. The Court can accomplish whatever it needs to accomplish in rebuking the Penn. Supreme Court — if it deems it necessary to do so — by acting after the election is over.

https://populist.press/lewandowski-bossie-added-to-pentagon-advisory-board-after-latest-purge/

Lewandowski, Bossie added to Pentagon advisory board after latest purge

Top Trump allies Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie are among nine new members of a Pentagon advisory board installed after the administration fired the previous members.

The purge at the Defense Business Board, which provides Pentagon leaders with outside advice on business management issues, was first reported Friday by Politico.

It is the latest shake-up at the Department of Defense (DOD) following President Trump’s loss to President-elect Joe Biden in November’s election.

>>11907940

maybe they let Wood win the sandman lawsuits….so it would appear he was on our side.

>>11907391

>It's stupid for people to go to jail for a damn plant!

aGREED

>>11907824

>if those Electors were chosen in the manner prescribed by state law.

IFis the big question, which, imho, could be answered later….and could overturn the results later.

need better sauce?

https://twitter.com/piperfinch6/status/1335017104081383424

hink about it

@piperfinch6

Replying to

@AxisAlive

and

@Qtah17

Harrison Deal, grandson of former Georgia Gov Nathan Deal,was killed in a “car crash” (more like an explosion) today. Harrison works on Loeffler campaign and dates Gov Kemp’s daughter. This keeps getting weirder by the second. Sounds like a mafia hit job.

6:24 PM · Dec 4, 2020