What happens if DEMOCRATS fail to suppress the evidence of their election theft?

Legion

Oderint dum metuant
“Fraud vitiates everything” and “fruit of the poison tree.”

In 1878, in United States v. Throckmorton, the Supreme Court held that “There is no question of the general doctrine that fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments.”

In plain English, fraud invalidates an election. “Void ab initio“ which means that fraud from the beginning taints everything resulting from it.

The Supreme Court, in 1939, explained in Nardone v. United States that if a tree is poisonous, so too is its fruit.

This means that, if fraud is shown, the election is invalid. Biden is not president and every action his regime took is void as if it never happened.

Of course, that’s never occurred - yet - in a presidential election, but it’s happened in lower elections.

If void ab initio fails, there’s no blueprint to correct the 2020 election because Congress, the states, and the Supreme Court allowed an unconstitutional inauguration to occur in the first place.

Nonetheless, the theft of the highest office in the land simply cannot stand. As New York, California, and other DEMOCRAT-dominated states are seeing in their streets today, if you allow thieves to steal or thugs to harass and assault with impunity, you get more of each.

The same holds true with election fraud, and the subsequent usurpation of the apparatus of government and the coercive powers that come with it.

If this theft is allowed to stand, then no American can go forward with confidence in the nation’s elections and the system based on them.


https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/06/peacefully_and_proactively_dealing_with_election_fraud.html
 
Depends. If the Democrats (or any other party) were in a position like PRI in Mexico was, or Maduro is in Venezuela, then it makes no difference. Fraud gets ignored and the fact that the election was a sham becomes as irrelevant as the election itself.
 
“Fraud vitiates everything” and “fruit of the poison tree.”

In 1878, in United States v. Throckmorton, the Supreme Court held that “There is no question of the general doctrine that fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments.”

In plain English, fraud invalidates an election. “Void ab initio“ which means that fraud from the beginning taints everything resulting from it.

The Supreme Court, in 1939, explained in Nardone v. United States that if a tree is poisonous, so too is its fruit.

This means that, if fraud is shown, the election is invalid. Biden is not president and every action his regime took is void as if it never happened.

Of course, that’s never occurred - yet - in a presidential election, but it’s happened in lower elections.

If void ab initio fails, there’s no blueprint to correct the 2020 election because Congress, the states, and the Supreme Court allowed an unconstitutional inauguration to occur in the first place.

Nonetheless, the theft of the highest office in the land simply cannot stand. As New York, California, and other DEMOCRAT-dominated states are seeing in their streets today, if you allow thieves to steal or thugs to harass and assault with impunity, you get more of each.

The same holds true with election fraud, and the subsequent usurpation of the apparatus of government and the coercive powers that come with it.

If this theft is allowed to stand, then no American can go forward with confidence in the nation’s elections and the system based on them.


https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/06/peacefully_and_proactively_dealing_with_election_fraud.html

American Thinker

Overall, we rate the American Thinker, Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories/pseudoscience, use of poor sources, and several failed fact checks.

Reasoning: Conspiracy, Propaganda, Lack of Ownership Transparency, Failed Fact Checks
Bias Rating: EXTREME RIGHT
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-thinker/
 
They're trying. What if they don't succeed?

Then we're stuck where we are, and states that do pass stricter voting laws will have less potential for fraud while Democrat led states will pass stuff like HR1 and SR 1 and eventually get caught mass cheating. Then they'll reluctantly pass stricter voting laws too.
 
American Thinker

Overall, we rate the American Thinker, Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories/pseudoscience, use of poor sources, and several failed fact checks.

Reasoning: Conspiracy, Propaganda, Lack of Ownership Transparency, Failed Fact Checks
Bias Rating: EXTREME RIGHT
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-thinker/

Don't you just love how predictable the Left is? They can't make a credible counter argument so they resort to ad hominem, attacks on the sources, and other fallacies to try and divert attention from how stupid their position has been proven...
 
If they don't succeed in suppressing the evidence of their election theft?

Like I stated, they'll sheepishly apologize while not fixing a thing until pushed and then they'll make some half-assed changes to voting laws to try and say they fixed the problem...
 
Like I stated, they'll sheepishly apologize while not fixing a thing until pushed and then they'll make some half-assed changes to voting laws to try and say they fixed the problem...

You don't think the 2020 election results will be challenged if they don't succeed in suppressing the evidence of their election theft??
 
You don't think the 2020 election results will be challenged if they don't succeed in suppressing the evidence of their election theft??

At this point, no I don't. But if that happened, in the 2022 and 2024 it'd be better if the Democrats don't bother to run candidates...
 
At this point, no I don't. But if that happened, in the 2022 and 2024 it'd be better if the Democrats don't bother to run candidates...

If they succeed in suppressing the evidence of their election theft and make cheating legal with H.R. 1 it will be as you say, in all likelihood.

What if they fail to suppress the evidence of their election theft?
 
If they succeed in suppressing the evidence of their election theft and make cheating legal with H.R. 1 it will be as you say, in all likelihood.

What if they fail to suppress the evidence of their election theft?

The best kept lies end up in the public square at some point. So, unless there is one guy doing it like some election fraud Unibomber, it will be found out. How the Democrats handle the leak is what needs to be determined.
 
The best kept lies end up in the public square at some point. So, unless there is one guy doing it like some election fraud Unibomber, it will be found out. How the Democrats handle the leak is what needs to be determined.

If they can't contain the evidence, what then?
 
What evidence are you guys talking about? "Trump says so and he never lies" - is that it?

GOP contenders won a plurality of the presidential vote in 1988 and 2004 (and the two winners didn't vote for Trump in 2016). Then suddenly in 2020 there had to be massive, nationwide fraud to steal the election from Dear Leader. Got it!
 
They're trying. What if they don't succeed?

Like Dotard?

“The people of Georgia are angry, the people of the country are angry,” he said. “And there’s nothing wrong with saying, you know, that you’ve recalculated.”

At another point, Trump said: “So look. All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state.”

He later added: “So what are we going to do here, folks? I only need 11,000 votes. Fellas, I need 11,000 votes. Give me a break.”

I guess you go on a pity rally tour.
 
Back
Top