(Updates)Texas Sues Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin at Supreme Court over Election Ru

[Bigun]

If it comes to war, and that would be very ugly, we have the capacity to win.

It would, however, involve us doing to the enemies of the Republic things which will haunt us all our days.

I haven't said much of late, because there are many things which, too lightly said, could be interpreted as seditious by the people who have undermined and committed treason against our Constitutional Republic. These enemies, foreign and domestic, are not to be taken lightly, and any action against them would have to have a level of commitment far beyond mere typing on a keyboard. That action might be reviled by those who would agree politically with us, would certainly be met with eternal derision should it fail in its true purpose of restoring the Republic, and would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of whatever those in control said the law was at the time, if they even bothered to hold court.

The words which come to mind are ..."with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

...because, ultimately, that would be what is at stake.

So rather than make rash statements, rather than wax hypothetical, I think I'll sit back more quietly, wait for further developments, plan for contingencies (what all preppers do), and consider possible options given those events which may well transpire in the future. Any wailing and gnashing of teeth is premature, as would be any drastic action.

It might be productive, however, for people to make the same considerations, keeping their own counsel (of course), and decide their own plans for contingencies.  I strongly suspect any publicly posted urges to action will be part trolling, part fishing expeditions by the various agencies looking for an example to make, and partly the ravings of hot heads who have not planned as much as emoted. (Which is why some dishes are best served like ice cream: cold).

All legal options have not yet been exhausted, nor have peaceable means.

Well said @Smokin Joe I hope many will read and heed!

[libertybele]

@Cyber Liberty
@mystery-ak
@corbe
@libertybele
@Gefn

Wait a minute - many on here, plus the two of you (Cyber/mystery), say we are lost - the Republic is dead, etc., etc.  I am surprised to read these posts.  I don't mean we should get our guns and win back the country.  What I mean, is:

Biden is President for four years - only.

If the two Republican Senators in Georgia win, we have the Senate.  Senators can hold down/stop Biden's biggest plans.  If the Rep. Senators lose in Georgia, we don't have the senate but Biden has only four years.  We will live through these four years (well, you will, maybe I will).

All of you have four years to bring about what you have written on this thread.  Want a new party?  Make one.  What to remake this old Party?  Remake it.  Do not spend 4 years in grief - make a plan and do something.

What can you do?
Go online to your state party, as in, "Florida Republican Party"  - read what is there; read it all.  Look for your county party on that website.  You will find your county
Republican Party - go there and read it, every single bit.  While you read it, think about what you could do with/for that group.

You will make friends easily with your County Republican Party members.  You could find that your County Republican Party keeps their office open all year.  OK, more rules/laws:  In Texas, the state pays for the office to be open during election season.  If the county party office stays open all year, the county party has to pay for those other months.

When husband and I started a Republican County Party, we could only open an office during election season as we did not have money to keep it open all year.  We also started having monthly meetings at the local restaurant that had a large section to close off for group meetings.  We got bigger with more people and they wanted an office open all year so they could go hang out there and discuss politics or whatever else they wanted to discuss with one another.  When we had a monthly meeting, they dumped money into a box so we could keep the office open all year and the bills got paid.  Yes, Cyber, we had coffee and donuts/pastries. We ran that Party and improved that county.

You can do things in your county.  You can send messages to your state office holders and national office holders.  You can go to your state office holders websites, and your national Rep. and Senator websites.  You will be surprised what you find on those websites - you will know how to help them.  You will know how to get your message across if they are taking actions you do not like - let them know but without curse words, please.

Go to those places above on the net to start doing something other than feeling as though the country is lost - we are not lost - we just have a hiccup bit of down time to make new plans.     

 

With all respect to you @Victoria33 I think you are a bit disillusioned as to what just happened...the DEMS will have full control ....our electoral process was just compromised, the DEMS have said that they will change it and they will and they also stated that they will pack the Supreme Court and they will.  Once amnesty is granted as the DEMS have been pushing for it will be mathematically impossible for any Republican to be seated again anyways.

Yes, plans need to be made, but thinking that we can change things from the top down or at the ballot box, I absolutely disagree.

[HoustonSam]

Cruz/Trump are the only ones right now who together I believe can form a new party.  Whether or not they'd be willing is the question.  Both can leave the political arena and leave the headaches behind.  Trump is too old to continue to put up with this b.s. I'm afraid that they will now go after him personally and  Cruz can't lead this fight alone..

I think any Trump/Cruz alliance has simply been for convenience, not an alliance of any real common purpose.  Trump demonstrated this when he began his lies about Cruz immediately after the 2016 Iowa caucuses. 

While all politicians must have some narcissism in them, Trump is 100% narcissism, while Cruz has a very high level of true Conservative, Constitutional principled thought.  When that thought benefits Trump, Trump is all for it; when that thought is detrimental to Trump, Trump reverts to bullying and name-calling and victimhood.

A lot of good things happened for the country as a result of Trump's election, and more good things would have happened had he been re-elected, but he's in it more for his own ego than for any other reason.  Cruz suppressed his ego during the Trump admin when he saw that supporting Trump's position would be good for the country.  The two of them can be in alignment when Trump's ego happens to coincide with what the country needs, but that's not a basis to build any new party.

Cruz isn't perfect.  I think his vote against the National Defense Authorization Act is wrong on both principled and pragmatic reasons, with a failed and intellectually inconsistent attempt at justification.  But even with his imperfections he's a principled thinker and willing graciously to take a back seat.  Neither is true of Trump.

Last night's SCOTUS decision is the end of the 2020 election.  It was a bad decision, the country is in for bad times, and the fundamental rule of law appears to be dead, but it is what it is.  And it's time now for Trump to exit the stage; we should thank him for the good that happened during his admin and wish him well, but any new party or any revision of the R party needs to be free from the distraction of Trump's narcissism.

[Cyber Liberty]

I think any Trump/Cruz alliance has simply been for convenience, not an alliance of any real common purpose.  Trump demonstrated this when he began his lies about Cruz immediately after the 2016 Iowa caucuses. 

While all politicians must have some narcissism in them, Trump is 100% narcissism, while Cruz has a very high level of true Conservative, Constitutional principled thought.  When that thought benefits Trump, Trump is all for it; when that thought is detrimental to Trump, Trump reverts to bullying and name-calling and victimhood.

A lot of good things happened for the country as a result of Trump's election, and more good things would have happened had he been re-elected, but he's in it more for his own ego than for any other reason.  Cruz suppressed his ego during the Trump admin when he saw that supporting Trump's position would be good for the country.  The two of them can be in alignment when Trump's ego happens to coincide with what the country needs, but that's not a basis to build any new party.

Cruz isn't perfect.  I think his vote against the National Defense Authorization Act is wrong on both principled and pragmatic reasons, with a failed and intellectually inconsistent attempt at justification.  But even with his imperfections he's a principled thinker and willing graciously to take a back seat.  Neither is true of Trump.

Last night's SCOTUS decision is the end of the 2020 election.  It was a bad decision, the country is in for bad times, and the fundamental rule of law appears to be dead, but it is what it is.  And it's time now for Trump to exit the stage; we should thank him for the good that happened during his admin and wish him well, but any new party or any revision of the R party needs to be free from the distraction of Trump's narcissism.

You know what happens when the soap box fails, and the ballot box also fails.  People have been stocking up on cartridge boxes.

[skeeter]

I think any Trump/Cruz alliance has simply been for convenience, not an alliance of any real common purpose.  Trump demonstrated this when he began his lies about Cruz immediately after the 2016 Iowa caucuses. 

While all politicians must have some narcissism in them, Trump is 100% narcissism, while Cruz has a very high level of true Conservative, Constitutional principled thought.  When that thought benefits Trump, Trump is all for it; when that thought is detrimental to Trump, Trump reverts to bullying and name-calling and victimhood.

A lot of good things happened for the country as a result of Trump's election, and more good things would have happened had he been re-elected, but he's in it more for his own ego than for any other reason.  Cruz suppressed his ego during the Trump admin when he saw that supporting Trump's position would be good for the country.  The two of them can be in alignment when Trump's ego happens to coincide with what the country needs, but that's not a basis to build any new party.

Cruz isn't perfect.  I think his vote against the National Defense Authorization Act is wrong on both principled and pragmatic reasons, with a failed and intellectually inconsistent attempt at justification.  But even with his imperfections he's a principled thinker and willing graciously to take a back seat.  Neither is true of Trump.

Last night's SCOTUS decision is the end of the 2020 election.  It was a bad decision, the country is in for bad times, and the fundamental rule of law appears to be dead, but it is what it is.  And it's time now for Trump to exit the stage; we should thank him for the good that happened during his admin and wish him well, but any new party or any revision of the R party needs to be free from the distraction of Trump's narcissism.

Like others here I respect your intellect @HoustonSam but where Trump is concerned can we please get past the pop psychology? Its been beaten to death and doesn't edify or otherwise have any positive effect at all, unless your goal is to be provocative.

Re Cruz I am in complete accord with what you wrote.

[HoustonSam]

You know what happens when the soap box fails, and the ballot box also fails.  People have been stocking up on cartridge boxes.

Yes but that's a different issue, already well-described by @Smokin Joe.  My point here is that Trump and Cruz would inevitably be leading different groups whether in policy debate or in conflict.  Those groups might be aiming at the same targets, but they would be different groups.

And if I ever do have to open a cartridge box, it will be to defend a cause, not to advocate the ego of a malignant narcissist.

[Cyber Liberty]

Yes but that's a different issue, already well-described by @Smokin Joe.  My point here is that Trump and Cruz would inevitably be leading different groups whether in policy debate or in conflict.  Those groups might be aiming at the same targets, but they would be different groups.

And if I ever do have to open a cartridge box, it will be to defend a cause, not to advocate the ego of a malignant narcissist.

I don't think it's likely people would pick up a gun to defend Trump's Presidency, which I was not talking about.  It would only be when they feel directly threatened.  Storm Troopers would be considered a "direct threat," and will be met with armed resistance willing to kill in self-defense.

(I am NOT a "Trump cultist," nobody here is that I know of.)

[HoustonSam]

Like others here I respect your intellect @HoustonSam but where Trump is concerned can we please get past the pop psychology? Its been beaten to death and doesn't edify or otherwise have any positive effect at all, unless your goal is to be provocative.

Re Cruz I am in complete accord with what you wrote.

Thanks for your kind assessment of my thoughts @skeeter.

Your criticism is fair; needless provocation doesn't accomplish anything.  I've made myself clear so it's probably best for me to move on from that line.

[Bigun]

Allen West is entirely correct!

[skeeter]

Thanks for your kind assessment of my thoughts @skeeter.

Your criticism is fair; needless provocation doesn't accomplish anything.  I've made myself clear so it's probably best for me to move on from that line.

 

[Bigun]

IMHO no third party or ANY party for that matter is going to fix a damned thing!

The Supremes just delivered the message that: 1. they are a political institution, not a judicial one, 2. they will pick cases based on the level of controversy rather than merit, and lastly, we plebes can just suck it up and get over it.

It also delivers, to me anyway, that our system is so deeply corrupted and broken that there is no fixing it. It is rotten from head to toe and at this point, its continued existence is for the purpose of serving and enriching those who direct it. And, those ain't us.

And, I never would have thought I would get to this point in my thinking, but here I am.

[catfish1957]

Allen West is entirely correct!

For the nay sayers, just think...  The precedent has been set.  Then add the fact Biden is adding 11M new illegal voters (sans. dim senate win).   If this proceeds unfought, it is over, liberals, socialist, will rule in perpetuity.

[HoustonSam]

I don't think it's likely people would pick up a gun to defend Trump's Presidency, which I was not talking about.  It would only be when they feel directly threatened.  Storm Troopers would be considered a "direct threat," and will be met with armed resistance willing to kill in self-defense.

(I am NOT a "Trump cultist," nobody here is that I know of.)

I know that you are not a "Trump cultist" @Cyber Liberty.  And taking to heart @skeeter's constructive input and your distinction between self-defense and political advocacy, I'll dismount my high horse.

[Cyber Liberty]

I know that you are not a "Trump cultist" @Cyber Liberty.  And taking to heart @skeeter's constructive input and your distinction between self-defense and political advocacy, I'll dismount my high horse.

You did not appear to be on any horse, high or otherwise.  Now that weed is legal in AZ, it would be hard to tell if a horse is high.   

If things go to the worst (a "hot" CW), it won't be to support an imperfect President, it will be to restore the Republic that is lost.  And victory is far from certain, with so many of our countrymen OK with the chains.  The slaves will resist us with all their might, along with the tyrannical National Government.

[skeeter]

IMHO no third party or ANY party for that matter is going to fix a damned thing!

The Supremes just delivered the message that: 1. they are a political institution, not a judicial one, 2. they will pick cases based on the level of controversy rather than merit, and lastly, we plebes can just suck it up and get over it.

It also delivers, to me anyway, that our system is so deeply corrupted and broken that there is no fixing it. It is rotten from head to toe and at this point, its continued existence is for the purpose of serving and enriching those who direct it. And, those ain't us.

And, I never would have thought I would get to this point in my thinking, but here I am.

There has always been an underlying amount of corruption in government but we could always count on the Constitutional framework and the general ethical consciousness of our representatives, which seem to have now been completely replaced by crass self interest.

But recently we've seen what have traditionally been considered American interests, and the American middle class, are up against.

I have exactly zero confidence in our form of government now.

[Cyber Liberty]

IMHO no third party or ANY party for that matter is going to fix a damned thing!

The Supremes just delivered the message that: 1. they are a political institution, not a judicial one, 2. they will pick cases based on the level of controversy rather than merit, and lastly, we plebes can just suck it up and get over it.

It also delivers, to me anyway, that our system is so deeply corrupted and broken that there is no fixing it. It is rotten from head to toe and at this point, its continued existence is for the purpose of serving and enriching those who direct it. And, those ain't us.

And, I never would have thought I would get to this point in my thinking, but here I am.

And that is exactly why I do not support an Article V convention of the states:  If the courts are going to ignore the Constitution that was ratified in 1789, they will gladly ignore one written in the 21st Century.

This Republic that just vanished was only meant to work with a moral population, and that ship sailed before we were even born.

[Right_in_Virginia]

[Right_in_Virginia]

IMHO no third party or ANY party for that matter is going to fix a damned thing!

The Supremes just delivered the message that: 1. they are a political institution, not a judicial one, 2. they will pick cases based on the level of controversy rather than merit, and lastly, we plebes can just suck it up and get over it.

It also delivers, to me anyway, that our system is so deeply corrupted and broken that there is no fixing it. It is rotten from head to toe and at this point, its continued existence is for the purpose of serving and enriching those who direct it. And, those ain't us.

And, I never would have thought I would get to this point in my thinking, but here I am.

Mega dittos @Bigun

[libertybele]

And that is exactly why I do not support an Article V convention of the states:  If the courts are going to ignore the Constitution that was ratified in 1789, they will gladly ignore one written in the 21st Century.

This Republic that just vanished was only meant to work with a moral population, and that ship sailed before we were even born.

The chance for a successful Article V Convention of States is gone; that opportunity was missed when the majority of the legislators in each state was conservative.  That shipped has sailed.

[Cyber Liberty]

That's because even black Americans have White Privilege.

[libertybele]

And that is exactly why I do not support an Article V convention of the states:  If the courts are going to ignore the Constitution that was ratified in 1789, they will gladly ignore one written in the 21st Century.

This Republic that just vanished was only meant to work with a moral population, and that ship sailed before we were even born.

Our Republic vanished because "We the People" kept voting for the same RINO's expecting a different result. 

Lots of reasons ... hind sight....

We need to move forward somehow.

[Bigun]

The chance for a successful Article V Convention of States is gone; that opportunity was missed when the majority of the legislators in each state was conservative.  That shipped has sailed.

Whatever made you @libertybele think that anyone is going to pay any more attention to a revised Constitution than they pay to what we already have?  That is a complete mystery to me.

[libertybele]

IMHO no third party or ANY party for that matter is going to fix a damned thing!

The Supremes just delivered the message that: 1. they are a political institution, not a judicial one, 2. they will pick cases based on the level of controversy rather than merit, and lastly, we plebes can just suck it up and get over it.

It also delivers, to me anyway, that our system is so deeply corrupted and broken that there is no fixing it. It is rotten from head to toe and at this point, its continued existence is for the purpose of serving and enriching those who direct it. And, those ain't us.

And, I never would have thought I would get to this point in my thinking, but here I am.

Well, the way I see it, either we try to restore/recapture our Republic through a new party; not a party that is dependent on the current system -- but a party that overthrows the existing corrupt system and starts anew, experience a Revolution, or throw our hands up in the air and do nothing ... welcome to Venezuela.

[Cyber Liberty]

Whatever made you @libertybele think that anyone is going to pay any more attention to a revised Constitution than they pay to what we already have?  That is a complete mystery to me.

@Bigun

IIRC, you were a big supporter of an Article V convention.  Did that change?  Serious question, with no criticism implied.

[HoustonSam]

Whatever made you @libertybele think that anyone is going to pay any more attention to a revised Constitution than they pay to what we already have?  That is a complete mystery to me.

@Bigun I think that's a fair question, but it raises in my mind a far more troubling question : if a Constitution is going to be ignored, then clearly it cannot be the basis for establishing a government.  So what can be the basis for establishing a government?

I realize it's a very academic question, but if we actually conclude that the Constitution simply will not be enforced by government, then where do we go next in our thinking?  What do we advocate?

*Why* will government not enforce the Constitution?  What is the fundamental antecedent problem we have to solve to return government to its proper moorings?

I think some of the root causes are in education and culture; it will be a very long march to make changes there, a march that will be continuing long after I'm gone.  But maybe that's the march we have to start and hope that those who come later will complete it.