Trump Announces He Will Declassify Evidence PROVING He WON the 2020 Election |‘Hidden At FBI’

69360 said:
Unlikely
Click to expand...

I am likewise skeptical. Not that he won, but that there's any proof he won.

He might have proof that election laws were broken, but there's already tons of proof of that and noone cares.

Proof of fraud would be interesting but that's notoriously hard to prove.

Most likely: big nothingburger.
 
Reckon it comes out before the Epstein files?

Dude is unhinged when it comes to revenge.
 
The state votes in the presidents election so it is up to the individual state on whether they vote for the person who actually won their state's contest.

If it does happen the coup is at the state level though, it just goes to the federal level for certification of the election.

Since the federal government is a simple narrow check against the states power to be tyrannical.

A state can be tyrannical to an extent as long as there is consent and there are no specific limitations imposed against it at the federal level.

This could cause significant political consequences though. We put term limits on as a result of FDR winning a 3rd term.

There was no rule against it because 2 terms was good enough for Washington. The people thought there didn't need to be a rule against it because it hadn't been done before.
 
nikcers said:
The state votes in the presidents election so it is up to the individual state on whether they vote for the person who actually won their state's contest.

If it does happen the coup is at the state level though, it just goes to the federal level for certification of the election.

Since the federal government is a simple narrow check against the states power to be tyrannical.

A state can be tyrannical to an extent as long as there is consent and there are no specific limitations imposed against it at the federal level.

This could cause significant political consequences though. We put term limits on as a result of FDR winning a 3rd term.

There was no rule against it because 2 terms was good enough for Washington. The people thought there didn't need to be a rule against it because it hadn't been done before.
Click to expand...
The Constitution mandates that the feds ensure to each state a republican form of government, election fraud in not a republican form of government.
The feds not only have the right, but also the duty to crack down on election fraud, especially for federal offices.
 
Swordsmyth said:
The Constitution mandates that the feds ensure to each state a republican form of government, election fraud in not a republican form of government.
The feds not only have the right, but also the duty to crack down on election fraud, especially for federal offices.
Click to expand...
It is their duty but the federal government doesn't enforce it because they don't want to damage their relationship and reputation with the states and there just isn't a real enforcement mechanism.

The system we have now is that it is self policed by the state but if the state doesn't police their own election contest there's no enforcement.

This is because up to this point there has not been an agreement between the states by all the states in our union to force states to vote for the presidential candidate who won their state's contest.

It goes against the spirit of states rights to force a state to vote a specific way even if that specific way is the way the people of that state voted in the contest.

So if a state's representative votes for the candidate that loses the election contest in their state and they can manufacture consent from the people of their state it makes it impossible to enforce any law because all of the states currently consent to letting states do that.

The Overton window just hasn't moved to where it could be done.
 
There's no actual declassification of anything.

Any real evidence is destroyed, redacted or suppressed, as we are witnessing.

The only way the American people will ever know the truth, as obvious as it may be, is to utilize citizen policing powers.
 
nikcers said:
It is their duty but the federal government doesn't enforce it because they don't want to damage their relationship and reputation with the states and there just isn't a real enforcement mechanism.

The system we have now is that it is self policed by the state but if the state doesn't police their own election contest there's no enforcement.

This is because up to this point there has not been an agreement between the states by all the states in our union to force states to vote for the presidential candidate who won their state's contest.

It goes against the spirit of states rights to force a state to vote a specific way even if that specific way is the way the people of that state voted in the contest.

So if a state's representative votes for the candidate that loses the election contest in their state and they can manufacture consent from the people of their state it makes it impossible to enforce any law because all of the states currently consent to letting states do that.

The Overton window just hasn't moved to where it could be done.
Click to expand...
The states may indeed to choose different methods of selecting their Presidential Electors, but they may not cheat the method they establish by law, everyone can agree on that.
The states may also not cheat on any other kind of elections required by their laws or federal laws.

The Overton window clearly encompasses the concept of no fraud.
 
Swordsmyth said:
The states may indeed to choose different methods of selecting their Presidential Electors, but they may not cheat the method they establish by law, everyone can agree on that.
The states may also not cheat on any other kind of elections required by their laws or federal laws.

The Overton window clearly encompasses the concept of no fraud.
Click to expand...
The state gets their authority from the consent of their state's people and that consent is what grants the state authority.

Forcing a state to vote a certain way revokes that state power. It would be perceived very unwell. People don't like getting told what to do, especially our people.

There are a lot of things the federal government has legal authority to do- they have supremacy but they don't because it wouldn't be popular and they don't want to be fired. This is the power of the people.
 
I'd prefer that he declassify evidence that proves aliens are real

That might actually be able to be proven
 
TheTexan said:
I'd prefer that he declassify evidence that proves aliens are real

That might actually be able to be proven
Click to expand...
Alien enemies are real and he has been deporting them. It's all over the news havent you seen it?
 
TheTexan said:
Is he deporting them in decent numbers now or is it still rookie numbers
Click to expand...

I think it's a lot. Especially because when people watch what's happening they might not want to wait around in case they get caught next.

Aliens in other countries like to come here to do crime because other countries are a lot tougher than we are. This gets rid of that incentive.

This was his big promise he made when he came down that escalator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jmdrake
Ashli Babbitt was armed and dangerous
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
261
69360
6
Occam's Banana
FBI raids home & office of John Bolton
Replies
17
Views
123
Valli6
V
Swordsmyth
Trump announces ‘great’ Vietnam trade deal
Replies
4
Views
33
nikcers
nikcers
PAF
How Trump’s DC Takeover Could Supercharge Surveillance
Replies
0
Views
10
PAF
PAF
PAF
Whitney Webb Explains What Trump is Hiding From the Epstein Files
Replies
2
Views
67
unknown
unknown
Back
Top