i agree we're rooting for the same outcome and debate is not only good, it's necessary in an advanced society that is interested to continually improve and hopefully get things right.
correct me if i wrote something to the contrary but i don't ever recall linking this EO with some requirement that the Supreme Court take the case. i believe the court has no jurisdiction over this unless someone later challenged Radcliffe's or others use and interpretation of the data but presumably that wouldn't occur until after it was revealed to have been activated to opposing parties that legally have standing.
without going bit by bit I'd just suggest you consider what I'm saying and EXACTLY how the EO reads. in theses types of legal docs exact words and their plain meaning are very important.
the EO reads that he first 45 day clock starts upon CONCLUSION OF AN ELECTION. there's no chance the election concluded Nov 3. certain rigged states allowed votes to be counted for days after. it's not written that it's to be within 45 days of VOTING. either way it's likely only a matter of a few days depending on how a court may view it if the EO were to ever be challenged in a court
also, PDJT doesn't activate EO or really have any involvement by the true reading, or at least he's not written in as an active participant in its enaction and design. perhaps it's legally appropriate for him to be involved in the last 30 day portion of the EO. there's an intrinsic conflict of interest if the then-president who is seeking reelection gets to call the shots on such an EO. it's left to DNI Ratcliffe and others and PDJT needs/needed to have as much distance from those decisions as possible
beyond that given the way the EO is written, if it was even activated (i don't dont it could have been), the assessment and plan could have happened in very short order or like you're speculating it could be being dragged out to the last moment.
no matter the actual case, let's hope something soon fren !
I've heard of these emergency powers and the Stafford Act and they all seem reasonable to me, but I don't have access to written docs that detail them, so I am not going to have much of anything to add beyond your linked stories.
bottom line is I think Q has/had many paths to success and these may well be a couple of them
i agree we're rooting for the same outcome and debate is not only good, it's necessary in an advanced society that is interested to continually improve and hopefully get things right.
correct me if i wrote something to the contrary but i don't ever recall linking this EO with some requirement that the Supreme Court take the case. i believe the court has no jurisdiction over this unless someone later challenged Radcliffe's or others use and interpretation of the data but presumably that wouldn't occur until after it was revealed to have been activated to opposing parties that legally have standing.
without going bit by bit I'd just suggest you consider what I'm saying and EXACTLY how the EO reads. in theses types of legal docs exact words and their plain meaning are very important.
the EO reads that he first 45 day clock starts upon CONCLUSION OF AN ELECTION. there's no chance the election concluded Nov 3. certain rigged states allowed votes to be counted for days after. it's not written that it's to be within 45 days of VOTING. either way it's likely only a matter of a few days depending on how a court may view it if the EO were to ever be challenged in a court
also, PDJT doesn't activate EO or really have any involvement by the true reading, or at least he's not written in as an active participant in its enaction and design. perhaps it's legally appropriate for him to be involved in the last 30 day portion of the EO. there's an intrinsic conflict of interest if the then-president who is seeking reelection gets to call the shots on such an EO. it's left to DNI Ratcliffe and others and PDJT needs/needed to have as much distance from those decisions as possible
beyond that given the way the EO is written, if it was even activated (i don't dont it could have been), the assessment and plan could have happened in very short order or like you're speculating it could be being dragged out to the last moment.
no matter the actual case, let's hope something soon fren !
I'll try to do some digging to see if I might be useful. got a little evening buzz going now so maybe not best time, ha
I've heard of these emergency powers and the Stafford Act and they all seem reasonable to me, but I don't have access to written docs that detail them, so I am not going to have much of anything to add beyond your linked stories.
bottom line is I think Q has/had many paths to success and these may well be a couple of them
We Win (already won?), that's the gist !