Trump v. Biden – a SCOTUS Study Guide

All primary data - provisional ballots, harvested ballots and relevant obituaries - must be scrutinized accurately and expeditiously. Op-ed.

Dr. R. Sklaroff & L K. Lechter ,

voter fraud
voter fraud
iStock

Instead of restating the obvious, provided here is a roadmap for how to conceptualize the spate of breaking revelations that will inevitably be placed before the Supreme Court of the United States as “President Trump v. Past Vice President Biden”; this essay is short on fraudulent complaints because it is long on potent interventions others haven’t pondered.

The perpetrators of this electoral heist must be identified, but the primary goal here—assuming a sufficient number of mostly urban ballots are justifiably tossed—is to depict pathways toward remedies that may yield Donald J. Trump’s reelection; the orchestrated collaboration of America’s enemies—domestic and overseas—cannot be allowed to undermine potent, unique and overdue Promises Kept.

Others are summarizing what happened, notably Caroline Glick; we have detailed why The Donald is affectionately viewed as the First Jewish President while conveying The Common Sense Case for Donald Trump despite suboptimal support from the GOP.

Thus, the threat of urban unrest c/o Antifa/BLM [already rampant and seemingly legitimized inter alia in New York State, New York City, Chicago, Portland, Seattle’s CHAZ] cannot impede the search for an election that ensures all legal ballots have been counted [noting that Fox News cut away from Rudy’s fact-laden noon news conference in Philly and suspended Judge Jeanine Pirro].

It was covered only by Newsmax, which is rapidly becoming the go-to site for Trump supporters (for example, having aired Michael Flynn explaining why America is now ‘at Risk’); pro-Trump voters also remain dismayed that Fox News called Arizona for Biden before polls had closed.

Trump’s legal challenge mirrors election-theft in Philadelphia in 1994 when “the district court … found that certain officials responsible for conducting an election … had conspired with one of the two candidates (Stinson, the Democrat) to cause numerous illegally obtained absentee ballots to be cast”; it was cured when the district court estimated that the other candidate (Marks, the Republican) would have won the election but for the fraud and declared Marks had won absent the need for another election.

In civil lawsuits, the standard of proof is lower than in criminal litigation, “beyond a reasonable doubt” and punishment is often restitution, flipping all faulty votes from the guilty party to the challenger; in fact, the absence of a state’s fraud-free electoral outcome could empower GOP-controlled legislatures to choose electors, even if their governors are Democrats (as is the case in Pennsylvania).

Probing how to generate a durable legal filing, a childhood friend lamented that AG Barr is AWOL and proposed a matrix paradigm because he hypothesized the Democrats had been ill-prepared “for the extraordinary strong showing that Trump achieved and thus had to resort to desperate measures to add Biden ballots to the count stream”; he sees evidence that the Democrats had been unable “to cover these naked ballots with either signatures or valid envelopes, and at a scale that leaves them vulnerable to exposure and may even allow for incontrovertible mathematical correction that at a first pass would not require attempts at statistical adjustment.”

The SCOTUS Justices are undoubtedly girding for this case to arrive via the federal appellate system despite inter alia violations of state law; they will rely upon precedent that upheld voters’ civil rights, as has already been telegraphed by their isolated rulings honoring such causes-of-action.

Although conservatives feel some decisions by Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh suggest they could be squishy, the addition of Justice Barrett yields a solid triad of Originalists (both via text and meaning) that would be anticipated to embolden both Trump’s nominees and even Chief Justice Roberts (who eschews 5-4 splits); Roberts wishes to minimize risk that his Court would be tarred by accusations of political favoritism.

This level of speculation will undoubtedly affect how Giuliani fashions his legal mega-filing, recognizing that accusations of fraud can both be state-specific and generic; under this rubric would be concerns with activist judges changing election law regarding filing deadlines and signature verification, plus inaccurate voter-rolls and ballot tampering, plus software “glitches“ and last-minute updates, plus selective rehabilitation of defective ballots and blockage of GOP oversight.

Thus, all primary data (particularly provisional ballots, harvested ballots and relevant obituaries) must be scrutinized; such grunt-work must be accomplished accurately and expeditiously.

An initiative promulgated by the CIA may even expose ballot-stuffing, because “some voting systems and some states implement watermarks (see page 10) to be printed on the ballot that are specific to an election or designate it as being printed by an approved printing authority providing a visual cue that the ballot is authentic”; of course, it’s unclear whether state officials would have been necessarily apprised of this potential entrapment when implemented.

The implications of a Biden victory have already been personally experienced by one author of this piece [RBS]; along with banned conservatives such as Steve Bannon - he has suddenly, inexplicably and without appellate mechanisms offered, he’s ensconced within Facebook “jail” until the Ides of December and has been deplatformed by Medium.

Indeed, despite Biden’s muttered plea for patience on Friday, he pounced on Saturday, setting the tone for Trump haters to expand Cancel Culture to the detriment of Israel (Democrats are compiling Enemies Lists) and to reveal bias (media are attacking the Administration); Jew-hating progressives (led in Congress by the “Squad”) are now feeling empowered to erase Zionists such as Pamela Geller via Big Tech (updated here and here and here).

In many respects, the Deep State that has yielded this Perfect Storm (including such bureaucrats as Fauci) will have a negligible impact on the upcoming court battle; no longer legal factors are pungent self-revelatory biases voiced by Big Tech and Drive-by-Media, plus China and Iran, plus elitists and globalists.

Their physical violence and verbal abuse cannot match the erudition of our leaders: Rush (“Medal of Freedom”) Limbaugh, Mark (“The Great One”) Levin, and Tucker (“#1 on Cable”) Carlson; for righteousness to triumph, we also have what secularists indubitably lack, faith in the Judeo-Christian Ethic and adherence to the Enlightenment Constitution.

It is vital to empower the originator and implementer of Trumpism, who prioritizes situational ethics rather than moral relativism, positive populism rather than captive ideology, candid-contrast rather than false-equivalence, strategic pragmatism rather than idealistic dystopia, and principled realism rather than elitist globalism.

Lynne K. Lechter is a business/corporate attorney and litigator. Robert B. Sklaroff is a hematologist/oncologist.






















top