SCOTUS avoids exposing the stolen presidential election!

Subscribe to Let’s Talk Right Now on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

It was announced that the Supreme Court will not hear the GOP’s Pennsylvania challenge. The accusation by the GOP was that the election laws were changed last minute illegally. According to the Constitution, it’s the role of the legislative branch to set election rules. If it’s altered by the Executive or Judicial Branch, this is, by definition, an illegal and unconstitutional alteration. However, the case that is alleging these illegal changes will not be taken up by SCOTUS. Could there be a sinister motivation to not allow the evidence to be presented in court?

The allegation with this court case was that election laws were changed illegally. This clearly happened, and is only being justified by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the election laws that were implemented were not created by the Pennsylvania legislature. This should be a shoe-in case.

However, because the result of this change that is being contested would not change the election, SCOTUS is opting to not hear the case, citing the results as being “moot.” While this is a great deflective PR stunt, this could not be further from the truth. As Clarence Thomas wrote in his dissent,

“That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future. These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”

I would argue that this is actually even bigger than Justice Thomas explained. The real ramifications of the Supreme Court ruling that Pennsylvania acted illegally by rewriting the rules for this election would be far and widespread. In fact, this one court case could open things up to challenge a couple dozen states who all acted similarly.

If this one court case ruled in favor of Trump, the specific case wouldn’t change the election. That’s a fact. However, we would see more challenges to election results citing this ruling, which would lead to the overturning of the 2020 Election. SCOTUS knows this, which is more than likely why they chose to not hear this case. They know that the natural reifications would be a chain reaction which would lead to the reinstatement of President Donald Trump.

After seeing Clarence Thomas’ dissent, this should be an encouragement to Conservatives everywhere. Remember, we have the truth on our side. Now is not the time to give up. We have to continue pressing on, exposing election fraud whenever and whenever we can. We know that it occurred. It’s incumbent upon us to make sure that it never happens again… or better yet, eventually undo the alleged 2020 Election results!