Lets talk about how Luttig's J6 testimony re Pence plays into the whole plan
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (112)
sorted by:
Nothing in the Constitution or any law proceeding therefrom compels the VP to knowingly participate in fraud. Especially fraud leading to the overthrow of the Presidency of the United States in a treasonous coup.
Fraud vitiates (cancels the validity of) everything it touches. That includes elections because they're part of everything.
Poor guy has the words 'basically' and 'literally' mixed up.
Absolutely no fat in your statement. Impeccable command of the English language sir. Thank you.
Cheers anon
Words is fun :)
Actually, the CONSTITUTION says no such thing. It neither says the VP presides in a ministerial function only, nor does it say that the VP has the [exclusive] power to contest or reject Electoral certificates, nor "send them back." The problem is that has always been that the Constitution is silent. It's not explicitly clear what power, if any, the VP has as a "judge" of the legitimacy of the purported Electoral certificates. Then again, it's also silent about Congress' authority and doesn't explicitly state what should happen if Electoral appointments or votes, or counting of said votes, are disputed.
The Electoral Count Act attempted to solve this massive problem, which caused a constitutional crisis in 1876 (although, twice prior Electoral vote certificates HAD BEEN REJECTED because the states in question were still in a quasi state of rebellion without legally restored governments). But the ECA isn't even constitutional. The Constitution doesn't explicitly give Congress any authority to make any statutory law to give itself unilateral power to judge on presidential Electoral dispute matters. According to the Constitution, ALL judicial decisions are left to the courts, and in this case SCOTUS has original jurisdiction. This has always been a matter for the courts, for SCOTUS.
You really think this move to provide security for SCOTUS is because of Roe v Wade?? Nope. That's just the first step to prepare for what's eventually coming... SCOTUS will hear the election dispute cases on the basis of merit. And at the very least, will declare the contested states to have 0 electoral votes counted for either Trump or Biden, which means contigent vote in the House. Should have been done over a year ago, but I digress. Better late than never. But by some small chance Patriots truly "have it all", meaning the real, true vote count, and undeniable proof that it was changed, then SCOTUS could absolutely declare Trump the lawful winner.
Judges judge. Not Congress. Not the VP. Judges.
I definitely see blockchain and crypto being connected with all of this, whether as the goal or as the solution.
Excuse me for stating the obvious from your posts but I'm reading it that Military is the one in control, since they affected the 2016 election - So, are you seeing this as Trump not 'officially' in office, for purposes of counting the 10 year limit for holding Presidential office? (meaning, not reinstating Trump in any way prior to Jan 20 2023 to get the best use?)
And where are you on Pence? Bumbled along blindly on Jan 6th (on advice of his own attys) b/c Constitution silent on his actual role/responsibility?
That could be in play, bascially give "Trump" 4 years + 2 (or 4, if nothing happens) + 4 (if reinstated prior to 2024, or reelected in 2024), with 2020-2022 (or 23, or 24) being "ghost" president really in control in the background while Bido the Bozo gets blamed for destroying the country. In any case, I do think that the military is truly behind all of this, or at least whoever good is left in the military