>>12689821 (LB)
>Regardless of whatever all the legal jargon says
That link was not to some legal jargon. It was to the text of the US Constitution. The Constitution DOES NOT say that the president is to be selected by the people via general election. Only the choice of Representatives is explicitly given to the people. Senators and presidents are selected by the state governments. Putting that matter to plebiscite is modern common practice, but not a constitutional requirement.
Corporation.
Latin 'corpus'
'body'
To in-corporate is to em-body.
Don't get confused by the usual, narrower connotation having to do with commercial entities.
>State Constitutions outline how their selections of the President are to be performed
Sure. Great. So cases will be filed in State courts. We've all seen how that turns out. And State courts cannot overturn the Federal election.
It's naive to think that our guy are going to win in court just because they're right.
Fast-forward to the end: What do you see?
>Normies realized the dems sucked so bad they had to cheat and won't vote for them for the next 100 years.
There wasn't and isn't a problem with voters not understanding this. We already voted them out… or at least voted that way.
Their ability and willingness to manufacture numbers so far from reality, as they did in the past election, while telling us that these numbers are reality, means that this cannot be fixed by a future election.
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5896355/
It has already been decided that civilian courts are too comped to be trusted with the future prosecution of the badguys, even after enough evidence is relieved to enable their arrest and indictment.
Trusting state courts with this, at a time like this, cannot possibly be the Plan.