WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

1.4K

Finally, I can relax and put away the last worn-out piece of hopeium I have left. Maybe there will be Trump 2024, but my money is on he won't come back. So we are back to electing Rinos/Dems (same/same). The USA is a goner.

Bannon on MIKE LINDELL'S CYBER SYMPOSIUM - "we have to do a forensic audit in every state". Translation "Trump aint coming back anytime soon"!

Finally, I can relax and put away the last worn-out piece of hopeium I have left. Maybe there will be Trump 2024, but my money is on he won't come back. So we are back to electing Rinos/Dems (same/same). The USA is a goner. Bannon on MIKE LINDELL'S CYBER SYMPOSIUM - "we have to do a forensic audit in every state". Translation "Trump aint coming back anytime soon"!

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

No such thing as a flipped federal election. At least without the Houses of Congress voting on the issue. Article 1 sec. 5 of the US Constitution makes each House the Judge of its elections. So if fraud is found you would have to get the democrats in Congress to vote out the people elected by fraud. Unless you have some other Constitutional method to get it done. If so please share it i am curious how it would work.

I was responding to the original poster, not making a constitutional statement.

Will say this - Proven fraud should invalidate results.

If not, then every election could (and will) be stolen. And our Constitution, and the Rule of Law is a joke. We are living in a Clown World now.

invalidate def - deprive (an official document or procedure) of legal efficacy because of contravention of a regulation or law. "a technical flaw in her papers invalidated her nomination"

[–] 0 pt

Agreed. They should be invalidated due to fraud. What I found with Article 1 sec. 5 is that the so called 70 cases Trump lost should have been tossed out with the judges saying "No federal court has Constitutional authority to Judge any federal Election because of Article 1 sec. 5 giving the power each House for the elections of Senators and Representatives and the 12th Amendment makes both Houses of Congress the Judges of the 12th Amendment election of the President. Therefore it is Congress who Judges the election results, not any Article 3 Court."

instead they tossed the cases based on either the point being Moot since the results have been certified, no standing to seek redress or insufficient evidence. They used these excuses vs the real reason mentioned above which would have had people demanding Congress have public hearings on the elections. The judges saved Congress from being held accountable.

I'm not arguing I am trying to enlighten people as to why nothing will change the last election. It is Congress that would have to do it not any Judge anywhere. What are the odds that all 70 cases had the same result, so not one Judge has a question in their mind of the cleanliness of the election?

"Therefore it is Congress who Judges the election results, not any Article 3 Court." - that would be the ultimate court for this, except in this case you have the arsonists involved in the investigation of why the town's building are burning down.

The Constitution is being rendered worthless.

The Rule of Law, and not men, is being flipped.

We need strong people up front leading the