Posted originally on The Conservative tree house on December 20, 2020 by Sundance

Congressman Devin Nunes appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss a variety of key issues and provide his hindsight on prior comments.   Nunes outlines the common sense of the election, why Biden was selected by the Obama clan and why Harris was installed as the Obama term-3 operative.  Everything around that outline is concise and accurate.

Additionally, Nunes points out the purposeful weaponization of COVID-19 shutdowns by Blue state/region democrat leadership; the inherent hypocrisy within approaches that make no sense; and how the end goal of their effort to destroy Main Street business is tied to a larger fundamental change objective, increased dependency AND the goal of federal bailouts for overindulgent spending. Again, concise and accurate.

On the Spygate story Nunes points to the recently released text messages from Lisa Page and Peter Strzok and states a criminal referral for the treatment of George Papadopoulos should be forthcoming.

Re-Posted from GrrrGraphics.com DEC 19, 2020 AT 10:06 AM

Chief Justice John Roberts prides himself on keeping his court non-political, but in doing so he has made it very political—and blue pilled. 

The highest court in the land decided not to hear what is perhaps the most important case of our times: Millions of Americans have been disenfranchised due to blatant voter fraud. The evidence is stark and overwhelming, but the case was tossed. They said Texas had no standing. Trump criticized the highest court in the land. If we can’t obtain justice in the face of blatant criminality, what are we supposed to do?

Supposedly there was yelling involved and Roberts’ expressed worry about rioting in the streets if the court took on the case. I’ve heard Roberts is either totally compromised (Epstein’s Island?) or that he simply has an advanced case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Roberts’ decision was based not on the Constitution, logic, reason, or legal precedent, but rather on ‘fear.’ That’s hard to swallow, but so is the blue pill he’s forcing down our country’s throat.

If SCOTUS did hear the case, it would go in Trump’s favor because the fraud is overwhelming. Instead, it essentially endorsed the Democrat Party and cheating in elections. Roberts and his court do the bidding of the New World Order. The Swamp has standing—not millions of voters.

Make no mistake, the cheating will become permanent once Biden captures the White House. His administration will be the Blue Pill by force. The Red Pill will be smeared as ’terrorism’ and outlawed.

—Ben Garrison

Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law Re-Posted Dec 19, 2020 by Martin Armstrong

The Supreme Court has come out and made a statement denying that Chief Justice Roberts screamed in a room because they met by phone. This shows that they have been monitoring the comments since they denied the Texas lawsuit when there was no justification for “discretion” to deny taking the case. This is like asking if someone beat their spouse on Sunday, and they say no I was at church. If later caught, they simply say: Oh, sorry, I thought that was Saturday. They did not deny refusing to take the case because of protests. There were other rumors that Chief Justice Roberts on a phone call to Justice Breyer also said they will not take any case from Trump on the election.

The Supreme Court has condemned the nation to violence for anyone who has read history knows that the very purpose of courts is to provide a civilized resolution. If courts will not be honest, then the only solution is violence which may rise to the level of revolution. It has now not just denied the civil rights of the 74 million people who voted for Trump, a record for any incumbent president, but they have condemned democracy for here on out there will be no trust in any future election. Our model warns that the United States has a short-fuse. The break-up of the nation has just been set in motion by the Supreme Court and we have perhaps at best 13 years left. There will only be hatred and bitterness and trying to claim Biden has a mandate to drastically change the country will lead to bloodshed. This will all be on the hands of the Supreme Court.

If there was no evidence of fraud then review the evidence, show the world, and rule. The refusal to hear the case will leave that question unanswered. Ruling against Trump would have at least calmed the turmoil. This way, there will be no rest.

This was jurisdiction squarely created by the Constitution. It is already well established that voter fraud violates the civil rights of everyone else. The rights of Texas as even a state are violated by any other state which engages in voter fraud. This now justifies the rising tensions for separatism.

Pennsylvania is often at the top of the list of voter fraud in the country. This is not a small number of ballots. Pennsylvania is violating EVERYONE’S civil rights and there should be a major class-action suit filed ASAP. We all now have a right to file a class-action lawsuit under 18 USC 241 for Pennsylvania and Michigan have violated the civil rights of everyone in the country.

Section 241 has been an important statutory tool in election crime prosecutions. It has long been held to apply only to schemes to corrupt elections for federal office. It has been applied to stuffing a ballot box with forged ballots, United States v. Saylor, 322 U.S. 385 (1944); United States v. Mosley, 238 U.S. 383 (1915) as well as preventing the official count of ballots in primary elections, United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299 (1941), which may come in handy in this election. This means private suites can be filed claiming that interfering with the ballots is a civil rights violation to all in the country.

Destroying voter registration applications is also applicable (United States v. Haynes, Nos. 91-5979, 91-6076, 1992 WL 296782, at *1 (6th Cir. Oct. 15, 1992)), as well as destroying ballots (United States v. Townsley, 843 F.2d 1070, 1073–75 (8th Cir. 1988)).

Anyone who exploits the infirmities of elderly or handicapped people by casting absentee ballots in their names is also a violation of civil rights, United States v. Morado, 454 F.2d 167, 171 (5th Cir. 1972), just as anyone who illegally register voters and cast absentee ballots in their names, United States v. Weston, 417 F.2d 181, 182–85 (4th Cir. 1969).

Anyone who threatens injury, threaten, or intimidate a voter in the exercise of his right to vote is also a serious actionable issue under this statute, Fields v. United States, 228 F.2d 544 (4th
Cir. 1955). This even extends to someone who impersonates qualified voters, Crolich v. United States, 196 F.2d 879, 879 (5th Cir. 1952).

Chief Justice Roberts should be Impeached, but the Deep State will support him.

Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides SCOTUS has original jurisdiction over suits between states. That original jurisdiction of SCOTUS is laid out by statute in 28 U.S.C. §1251. Section 1251(a) provides that with disputes between states, the jurisdiction of SCOTUS is not only “original,” it is exclusive. In other words, if the parties cannot settle the matter, no other court but SCOTUS has authority, under the Constitution, to take jurisdiction.

The Judiciary Actof 1925 made such jurisdiction discretionary, which requires a Motion for Leave to File a Bill Complaint when the complaint is between states. That legislatively created change is equivalent to locking the courthouse door to suits like Texas, et al v. Pennsylvania, et al. Giving “discretion to hear” to courts that have original and exclusive jurisdiction over a case or controversy between states destroys the fundamental right of access to the courts. The jurisdiction of SCOTUS was created directly by the Constitution. Therefore, such jurisdiction requires an amendment to the Constitution to alter same.

The Judiciary Act of 1925 passed by Congress cannot be substituted for an amendment to the Constitution when such is required, and a “no standing” ruling is,simply put a cop-out. Once leave to file a bill of complaint is denied there is no further remedy,so this maze of laws should be treated as an unintended consequence and a grave mistake of the American system of justice. Similar unintended consequences have occurred before, e.g., the famous “Moitie footnote” was rectified by the opinion of SCOTUS in Rivet v. Regions Bank,522 U.S. 470 (1998). This mistake ties the hands of other courts that could provide review of the denial of the fundamental right of access to the courts. The denial of the Motion to File a Bill of Complaint is, at its core, an action of a trial court with original and exclusive jurisdiction per Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution but, untenably, with discretion to hear per the Judiciary Act of 1925, 28 U.S.C. § 1251(a). This scheme seems to have been designed by Kafka because it bars more than the courthouse door of the court of the first instance. When all doors to all courts that could provide review are barred in an unstoppable breathtaking cascade of severe judicial unfairness, it is reasonable, perhaps necessary, to assume that a mistake like the one made in the Moitie case was unintended, and that no one could possibly desire that such legal quandary continue. The movers in the Motion to File Bill of Complaint should take a step toward rectification of such by filing a Notice of Appeal with the D.C. Circuit under FRAP 4 which would spotlight the quandary and move forward toward rectification to achieve the goals of appellate procedure consisting, inter alia, of correcting errors, developing the law, and achieving uniformity across courts.At first blush, the errors are:

(1) violation of due process and equal protection for locking the door of the courthouse of SCOTUS by discretion where a case between two states must be heard in the first instance as per a grant and obligation of jurisdiction imposed upon SCOTUS directly by the U.S. Constitution,

(2) it was error to find no standing, because____________,

(3) the Judiciary Act of 1925 is unconstitutional because it violates due process and equal protection by allowing SCOTUS discretion to hear a case when the case is within the court’s original and exclusive jurisdiction of Article III, Article 2 of the Constitution and 28 U.S.C. § 1251(a), and by failing to provide a method of appeal that provides a review of a denial of a Motion to File Bill of Complaint alleging a case and controversy between two states thereby allowing the denial of access to SCOTUS to metastasize to other courts causing a monopolization of all avenues of relief,

(4) the Judiciary Act of 1925 is unconstitutional because it converts a fundamental right to a discretionary right which Congress cannot do since such can only be done by the amendment of the Constitution, (5) any other error you can think of. EGM

Hunter’s propensity for excessive spending on “drugs, alcohol, prostitutes, strip clubs, and gifts for women with whom he has sexual relations”

RePosted from the Canada Free Press By Jeff Crouere —— Bio and Archives—December 20, 2020

Throughout the scandals of the last few years, former Vice President Joe Biden has repeatedly heaped praise on his troubled son Hunter. In several interviews, including one this week, he has referred to Hunter as the “smartest guy” he knows. To make such a statement, it is clear that Joe Biden needs a much larger circle of acquaintances.

Is Joe Biden even qualified to identify a smart person? In fact, how smart is Joe Biden? The record shows he is the antithesis of smart. From his many asinine comments to his long record of questionable associations to his multiple episodes of outright plagiarism, Joe Biden is certainly not smart.

Since Joe Biden is not Mensa material, how about his son Hunter? C’mon man, this is about as easy as it gets. Hunter has a sordid personal life and has created a mess of professional life.

In 2014, after testing positive for cocaine use, Hunter was discharged by the U.S. Navy from his position as a public affairs specialist. His naval career lasted less than one month.

In 2016, in Prescott, Arizona, Hunter returned a Hertz rental car from California “after hours.” Inside the car, he left a crack pipe and a bag “with a white powdery substance inside” for all to see “on the passenger seat.” For good measure, he left behind credit cards, a driver’s license, a cell phone, “a Delaware Attorney General badge,” and a “U.S. Secret Service business card.” Instead of leaving the keys in the drop box, Hunter put them in the gas tank compartment. Due to Hunter’s action, this was not a car return, but a crime scene. Not surprisingly, since his last name is Biden, no charges were filed against Hunter.

The following year, Hunter’s former wife Kathleen filed for divorce from him. She noted his propensity for excessive spending on “drugs, alcohol, prostitutes, strip clubs, and gifts for women with whom he has sexual relations.” In her filing, Kathleen accused Hunter of running up massive debt, issuing bounced checks and having judgment that was “frequently impaired with respect to their safety, their care, and their best interests.” Eventually, the couple reached an uncontested divorce settlement in April of 2017.

By that time, Hunter was in the midst of a two-year relationship with his deceased brother’s wife, Hallie. After that break-up, it was announced that Hunter had impregnated a former Arkansas stripper, Lunden Alexis Roberts, who had to sue him for child support. Ultimately, they reached an out-of-court settlement. In 2019, Hunter married South African native Melissa Cohen after a six-day relationship. In March of this year, she gave birth to Hunter’s fifth child.

Along with a turbulent personal life, Hunter has been involved in controversial business dealings for years. He was paid an exorbitant amount of money to sit on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian oil and gas company, even though he did not know the country, the industry, or the language. He admitted that he was given the position solely because of his father.

The company has been tied to a former Ukrainian President and an oligarch and was under investigation by a prosecutor until Joe Biden threatened the withholding of a $1 billion U.S. loan guarantee and was able to force his firing.

His business dealings with Ukraine, China and other countries have been outlined by his former associate Tony Bobulinksi. In his statement, Bobulinksi claims that Joe Biden was aware of these business arrangements, contradicting the denials by the former Vice President.

While most of the media ignored Hunter Biden and his questionable financial dealings, some courageous media outlets did share the truth with the American people. For example, the New York Post revealed the explosive material on a laptop that Hunter Biden left at a Delaware computer repair shop. 

In a move that the “smartest guy” would not make, Hunter did not retrieve the laptop. It included images of explicit sexual acts, illegal drug use and a host of messages connecting Hunter and Joe Biden to business deals with communist business interests in China. 

The owner of the computer repair shop realized the explosive contents of the laptop and shared it with President Donald Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani, who then gave it to the New York Post. 

The hard drive has been in the possession of the FBI since last December and Hunter has now admitted that he is under federal investigation for “tax affairs.”

Joe Biden often claims that he is “proud” of his son and lambastes any rare reporter who has the audacity to ask him about Hunter and his business dealings.

Eventually, the investigation surrounding his son may destroy the remaining political career of Joe Biden. If he ultimately becomes President, it may be a very brief tenure, courtesy of the scandals surrounding the “smartest guy” Joe Biden knows.

Posted originally on The Conservative Tree House on December 19, 2020 by Sundance

The New York Times is reporting today on a Friday night visit between President Trump and lawyer Sidney Powell.   According to the Times President Trump’s legal counsel Rudy Giuliani was present via phone conference and White House counsel Pat A. Cipollone represented the office of the President.

There are essentially a few competing approaches still being provided to President Trump for consideration as the White House awaits an important report from Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, on what the DNI has affirmed was “foreign interference in the 2020 election.”

Rudy Giuliani and several members of the formal legal team seem to prefer President Trump using executive order #13848 upon, and as an outcome of, formal findings represented by DNI John Ratcliffe.

Use of that specific XO would make sense as the direct purpose of the 2018 order was targeted toward foreign interference. However, there is no specific information known as to which executive agency would carry out any authority if the issues directly highlight domestic election infrastructure targeting.

The Times reports “[p]art of the White House meeting on Friday night was a discussion about an executive order to take control of voting machines to examine them, according to one of the people briefed.”  However legal advisors to the office of president are unsure if DHS would have authority to impound Dominion ballot machines.  The 2018 executive order would seem to indicate that any office directed by the White House would have authority. This avenue would obviously depend on the DNI final report.

Ms. Powell has two lawsuits in the docket of the high court; however, as each day passes it seems the ability to confront known election fraud evidence becomes more challenging. It is likely Powell is recommending a more forceful approach by the executive branch that will support the lawsuits underway by her outside group.

NEW YORK TIMES – President Trump on Friday discussed making Sidney Powell, who as a lawyer for his campaign team unleashed a series of conspiracy theories about a Venezuelan plot to rig voting machines in the United States, a special counsel investigating voter fraud, according to two people briefed on the discussion.

It was unclear if Mr. Trump will move ahead with such a plan.

Most of his advisers opposed the idea, two of the people briefed on the discussion said, including Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, who in recent days sought to have the Department of Homeland Security join the campaign’s efforts to overturn Mr. Trump’s loss in the election.

Mr. Giuliani joined the discussion by phone, while Ms. Powell was at the White House for a meeting that became raucous at times, according to one of the people briefed on what took place. Other administration officials drifted in and out of the meeting, two of the people briefed said, and the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, pushed back on the ideas being proposed.

Ms. Powell accused other Trump advisers of being quitters, according to the people briefed. (read more)

With public confidence in the integrity of the FBI and DOJ near zero; and with massive evidence of wide-scale institutional corruption and weaponized politics highlighted over the past four years; there is somewhere near 100 million Americans waiting to see what direction President Trump will take.

In the larger picture many American voters are now awake to the reality that U.S. politics has been an “illusion of choice” for the past several election cycles.  The Big Club is indeed a set of two private organizations, DNC and RNC, that select candidates and construct the party election strategies around them.

It was the December 2014 RNC playbook to nominate Jeb Bush in 2016 that finally showcased just how much strategic manipulation takes place inside The Club to give the illusion of voter influence.  CTH called this specific road-map the “Splitter Strategy”, and it would have ended successfully with a Hillary -vs- Jeb general election contest if Donald J Trump had not intervened in 2015 as the outsider.

The institutions of American government and politics have responded over the past five years to having someone from outside the Big Club apparatus win the presidency.  Both wings of the UniParty club were/are aligned to remove the risk represented by Trump.

It has been a one-man America-First battle against the administrative state for the past five years and we have watched each element within this larger struggle.

President Trump has a key decision now in front of him; however, he also has 100 million American patriots standing beside him.

The MAGA movement is waiting to see what comes next.  One thing is certain, the entire apparatus of our U.S. government will never be the same.

We pray for wisdom.

Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law Re-Posted Dec 18, 2020 by Martin Armstrong

A report has come out from a clerk in the Supreme Court describing what took place when the Texas case came up. Chief Justice Roberts said he did not give a “f–k” about precedent. He refused to accept the case claiming “we have riots” which in fact the entire Black Lives Matter movement has been protesting the very immunity police have been given not by Congress, but by the Supreme Court. It is the Court that has blood on its hands for creating immunity that was complained of in the Declaration of Independence.

Chief Justice Roberts swore an oath to defend the Constitution. He has abandoned that oath and is a disgrace to the nation. He has condemned the country to the rise in civil unrest that may even rise to the level of breaking the country apart. Civilization = rule of law. He has abandoned countless centuries of precedent which distinguishes tyranny from civilization.

More than 2000 years ago, Thrasymachus warned Socrates that there is no justice. It is always the will of those in power regardless if it is a democracy, aristocracy, or a tyrannical form of government. Justice Roberts is a disgrace to the entire Western Civilization. He should step down. He has violated his oath of office and is no longer qualified to sit in that court! He should go down as the second Justice to be impeached. The only Justice to be impeached was Associate Justice Samuel Chase in 1805. The House of Representatives passed Articles of Impeachment against him; however, he was acquitted by the Senate. He acted like a prosecutor rather than a judge. Nonetheless, the impeachment raised important constitutional questions over the nature of the judiciary. It was the termination of a series of efforts to expand judicial independence under the Constitution. The dispute also defined the limits of the impeachment power. What Chief Justice Roberts has violated was clearly the prohibition of the judiciary from engaging in partisan politics and confined judicial independence which Roberts has ignored.

Armstrong Economics Blog/Revolution RE-Posted Dec 18, 2020 by Martin Armstrong

Sidney Powell’s filings at the Supreme Court for Georgia and Michigan were given a response date of January 14th which means they then claim it is untimely and Biden will be sworn in on the 20th. Once again they are using procedures to avoid the issues raised and are now protecting the Deep State.

Meanwhile, Arizona and Wisconsin were immediately rejected by the clerk without explanation. This is really now treason against the United States. This is time that the Judiciary Act of 1925 MUST be presented as unconstitutional. Every Supreme Court Justice takes two oaths and they MUST defend the constitution. Claiming they have “discretion” means they no longer need to defend the constitution and they have left the country in the same position as for the civil war. Instead of ruling for or against which would at least raise the hope of claiming the storm, they have left the people to sort this out by nothing but violence which our computer has been projecting.

In an internet poll asking did Biden win, the responses are so skewed to “NO” it is indicative of what we will face. This is an international disgrace and the Supreme Court has shown it no longer can be trusted to defend the Constitution. If Trump is wrong, then just rule that way and end the rising hostility. Avoiding this issue that confirms we even have a real right to vote is a confirmation that the Supreme Court is no longer valid.

It was the Supreme Court that created immunity for police, politicians, and prosecutors along with judges out of thin air claiming they could not do their job if they could be sued. The Entire Black Lives Matter movement has been played for fools. The Democrats could have passed a law removing that immunity in 15 minutes. Instead, they have exploited the racial tension for political purposes and allowed the defunding of police to take place instead of correcting the wrong created by the Supreme Court.

Civilization cannot exist without the rule of law. The Supreme Court could have easily ruled it was insufficient evidence to show there was a fraud and this the election thus stands. Avoiding the issue indicates that they did not want the evidence to surface and are thus also conspiring against the people to end our liberty which was granted by the Founding Fathers. Refusing to rule can no only be seen as not wanting to address the evidence because it is serious. For the left press and the Democrats to even claim there was no fraud is a blatant lie. EVERY election has fraud. Dead people have been voting all the time. The honest thing to say is that the fraud DID NOT rise to the level of changing the outcome. That would at least be an argument. Claiming this is no fraud is a cover-up.

History will mark this decision, like Dread Scott, that in the absence of the rule of law, there is no government remaining and we are not the “people” but just the Great Unwashed. They are ruling against democracy just as John Kerry said. Trump appealed to “populism” and Kerry expressed it best for how the elite thinks of us:

“It’s really dangerous to play to the lowest common denominator of American, of global political life.” (Source: Yahoo)

What’s next? The Supreme Court will rule against the Second Amendment claiming the Founding Fathers were drunk and never intended to allow the Great Unwashed to possess any guns to prevent a revolution? After these maneuvers, the Supreme Court has lost all its integrity. The courts in America have become part of the Deep State.

Posted originally on The Conservative tree house on December 18, 2020 by Sundance

The New York lawsuit against the Trump administration -over disqualification of unlawful aliens in the 2020 election- was dismissed today by the Supreme Court [full pdf here] under procedural grounds.

However, that said, there is a clear indication where the outcome is likely to end-up once the court takes up the case next year.

The high court noted no harm currently exists because the census report hasn’t been delivered to congress to begin the representative apportionment.

The ruling was 6-3 on process, with justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer signing a dissent on the case.  Justice Breyer wanted to fire a shot into the administration by outlining a liberal opinion/perspective of the issue:

…”The plain meaning of the governing statutes, decades of historical practice, and uniform interpretations from all three branches of Government demonstrate that aliens without lawful status cannot be excluded from the decennial census solely on account of that status,” Breyer wrote. “The Government’s effort to remove them from the apportionment base is unlawful, and I believe this Court should say so.”

Beyond the liberal argument this majority part should alarm everyone:

[…] “Everyone agrees by now that the Government cannot feasibly implement the memorandum by excluding the estimated 10.5 million aliens without lawful status,” the opinion later said. “Yet the only evidence speaking to the predicted change in apportionment unrealistically assumes that the President will exclude the entire undocumented population.” (read more)

In essence what the court is saying is they will not support unlawful aliens being excluded from the census and, as a consequence, congressional representation. It is just too early for them to decide because the harm has not been incurred.

This is an alarming position when cast against the recent SCOTUS decisions on 2020 election.  Texas has no standing to file suit based on harm from election fraud, the voices of Texas voters are moot to the court; and now the same court is saying any unlawful alien residing in the United States should be granted a voice in government.

Share

Posted originally on The Conservative tree House on December 18, 2020 by Sundance

The Democrats certainly appear to have a compromising situation with Chinese spies inside their political network that extends well beyond Representative Eric Swalwell and Senator Dianne Fienstein.   The California delegation of Democrats most certainly has the biggest exposure to having been infiltrated with Chinese operatives.  It is all sketchy.

Think carefully about this part….. As noted in this interview segment Nancy Pelosi is claiming she was briefed on the Chinese spy compromise around Swalwell with McCarthy.  However, simultaneously House Leader Kevin McCarthy states he found out through the media.  Keep in mind McCarthy has only been part of the ‘Gang of Eight’ since Jan 2019 (he as minority leader and Pelosi taking over from Paul Ryan as House Speaker).

A Pelosi briefing prior to 2019 was in her role as Minority leader with Ryan as speaker (Nunes/Schiff as Chair/Ranking on HPSCI). Therefore either Pelosi was briefed outside the Go8 structure, or she is lying about briefing with McCarthy.  While Pelosi is a notorious liar, the former explanation of a defensive briefing seems more likely.

That means U.S. intelligence officials during the Obama administration kept the Swalwell compromise secret and outside the Gang-of-Eight.  Accepting that reality is further evidence the U.S. intel apparatus -writ large- was operating through the prism of politics.