The results of the US elections: Trump's main "trump card" did not play

On December 12 at 02:57 Moscow time (in the United States at that time it was still the evening of December 11), the last bastion of Trump's defense line fell. The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) dismisses Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton's lawsuit to overturn presidential elections in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin for violations by Democratic officials of the listed states of election procedures that influenced the election results.

The lawsuit was supported by another 17 Republican states represented by their attorneys general and 126 of the 196 Republican congressmen in the US House of Representatives. The documents were sent to SCOTUS in the form of an amicus curiae brief - “the arguments of a friend of the court”. In the American legal system, these are external stakeholders and groups that are not parties to a case who can bring their opinion about a proceeding to court. In addition, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed a separate lawsuit with SCOTUS with the same demands, without joining his 17 colleagues' friendly brief.

In total, 19 states supported the Texas suit along with it. You can even list them: Missouri, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. As you can see, these are mainly southern states. The Democrats, of course, were stunned by such a consolidated onslaught, but immediately responded with their democratic salvo. Immediately 22 jurisdictions, headed by Democrats, filed "friendly" briefs with the US Supreme Court, taking the side of the defendants, which together with the defendants themselves amounted to 26 states. 26 northern states versus 19 southern states, with one abstaining (Ohio was never able to decide for "whites" or for "red", having submitted a "puzzling" brief, allegedly not supporting either side), not counting five undecided states (Alaska , Idaho, Kentucky, New Hampshire and Wyoming, who chose not to get involved in a fight and stand on the sidelines). The air clearly smelled of a new Civil War. The only difference is that in the war of 1861-1865, 11 states took the side of the South, which did not accept the election of Abraham Lincoln, and now there are 19 states that do not consider Joe Biden's victory to be fair. At the same time, the population of America in this issue also split approximately in half.

Trump knew exactly what he was doing when he came in with this trump ace named "Texas", which he had in store for the last. By the way, his surname is translated from English (trump, from English "trump card"). Prior to that, the lower courts had already successfully dismissed 49 claims out of 52 filed by Trump's lawyers. There was a complete impression that Trump did not specifically support his claims in lower courts with weighty evidence, trying, without getting involved in petty clashes, to immediately transfer the consideration to the US Supreme Court, which is for them the final appellate instance, where he had a majority (6 out of 9 judges Republicans). At the end, it became clear how wrong he was about them!

Lonely Star vs.

Epigraph: "Do not want the bad, the good will be worse!" (D. Trump)

The Texas lawsuit also arose for a reason. The Lone Star State has a privileged position in the North American United States. And not only in terms of area and population (it is the second largest after Alaska and the second most populous after California), but rather, in relation to other states. Texas, which, as you know, it is better not to get involved (Don't Mess with Texas), is not in vain with ideas of separatism, since it did not sign the collective agreement on the creation of the USA, but joined (and, one of the last) to the already created union states (states) on the rights of a confederation, i.e. has equal rights with the United States, in fact, as a union state. It is not for nothing that the Texas flag on the flagpole in front of the local Legislature hangs above the US flag (no other state in America can afford such impudence!).

And it was the Attorney General of this state, Ken Paxton, who filed a lawsuit with the US Supreme Court to annul the election results in four states, citing the violation by officials of these states of Article 2 of the US Constitution when they changed the election procedure, which led to massive voting irregularities. Paxton insisted in his lawsuit that only the Legislative Assemblies of these states had the right to change the electoral legislation of the respondent states, and not officials under the pretext of the coronavirus pandemic, no matter how high status these officials had (whether judges or any other officials, up to to state governors). As a result, the postal voting allowed by them passed with great violations, which affected the final result of the elections. At the same time, Paxton did not fall for the presentation of the violations themselves, but proposed to annul the election results already on the fact of a violation of the procedure, referring to the precedent of 1892 (after all, there is case law in the United States), when SCOTUS canceled the election results and gave the Michigan Legislature the right to certify the authority of their representatives to vote on the Electoral College on behalf of the state (known as the MacPherson vs Blacker case of 1892).

SCOTUS did not have the right to refuse to accept the claim of the Lone Star State, since in this case it is the court of first instance for the state of Texas, and not the highest court of cassation, which has the right to refuse the appeal, citing the fact that this claim is outside its jurisdiction. This is what Trump was counting on, rolling out a weapon of his main caliber against the Democrats.

But how wrong he was!

US Supreme Court (SCOTUS)

There is no Constitutional Court in the United States. The highest oversight judicial body in the United States is the Supreme Court (SC or SCOTUS). It exercises the powers of both the highest appeal, cassation and constitutional courts. His decisions are final, not subject to appeal, and they can be canceled only through amendments to the Constitution. This has happened only a few times in history, including on a fundamentally important issue - the abolition of slavery.

SCOTUS doesn't even have to explain its decisions. The judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President with the approval of the Senate for life and can terminate their powers ahead of schedule only as a result of voluntary resignation or impeachment for crimes committed. These are a kind of celestials, no one is a decree for them, only the Sun (or God, who believes in what) is above them.

And it was into the hands of these people that Donald Trump entrusted his fate. Holy naivete! And these people acted quite predictably. They did not even consider the claim of the Texas Attorney General, citing the fact that he could not convincingly prove that his state had the right to apply to them with such a demand. I quote verbatim:

The state of Texas has not shown a legally justified interest in how elections are held in other states. All other pending applications are rejected as unfounded.

As they say in such cases - ink, light, curtain!

I told you that the SCOTUS judges are not even obliged to explain anything, they rejected the claim and that's it! I will help you, I will translate from legal American into public Russian. The US Supreme Court refused to accept Texas's claim to review presidential election results in vacillating states because it found no “legally justified interest” on the part of Texas in other states' election procedures, where it claims their own laws are being violated. Unclear? Then it's even easier. Texas has no rights, according to the US Supreme Court, to challenge elections in other American states. Even if there were violations, and so on. And if, because of this, the rights of voters in the state of Texas are violated, as the Texas prosecutor pointed out in his statement of claim, then Texas still has no rights. At this point, SCOTUS puts a point of consideration. Thanks to all! Everybody's Free!

Any questions? Trump's main trump card has not played. What Trump will do, I don't know. I am not suggesting that he do what the president of a certain banana (more precisely, cannabis) republic did, which has been under US protectorate since 2014, which by its decision simply tried to disperse the Constitutional Court of his country, which made an incorrect decision from his point of view (although, even he failed!). But the fact that Trump will not give up after that is a fact. What he will do, I will consider in the following articles. And I can promise Biden who won at the cost of massive falsifications that a quiet life for him will end from January 20, 2021, and now he will experience everything that Trump experienced during his 4-year cadence. The Senate remains in the hands of the Republicans and they do not guarantee it a quiet life.

As a seed, I will quote the statement made by the Chairman of the Republican Party of Texas on December 12, Congressman from this state in the House of Representatives Allen West (Lieutenant Colonel of the Marine Corps, who participated in two wars - in Iraq and in the Persian Gulf, black, by the way):

Rejecting a Texas suit, which was supported by 17 states and 106 congressmen, the Supreme Court ruled that any state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own electoral laws, and this would have detrimental consequences for law-abiding states, while the guilty state would not be held liable. This decision sets a precedent that states can violate the US Constitution with impunity. It will have far-reaching consequences for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should unite and form a Union of States that will abide by the Constitution.

I have highlighted the most important for Biden in bold. It looks like the West is promising to go wild again.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dimy4 Offline Dimy4
    Dimy4 (Dmitriy) 16 December 2020 07: 48
    surname is translated from English

    The trump card didn't work. The second sharper had more trump cards in his sleeve.
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 16 December 2020 09: 08

    The Supreme Court ruled that any state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own electoral laws.

    - so directly and decided, officially and on paper ???

    But in fact, these are PR games of some congressman, for elections ...
    All are PR for future elections, as other authors predicted. With the current ones, everything is already clear ...

    And about the revolution of the blacks, everyone recently abruptly fell silent, as if by signal
  3. boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 16 December 2020 10: 46
    To be understood correctly, I will say once again that I consider Biden's presidency more beneficial for Russia.
    But I don't think Biden has a victory in his pocket.
    Unlike the author, I believe that Trump prepared his main trump card on 12.09.2018/XNUMX/XNUMX. This day dates back to his decree on foreign interference, including in elections. And Trump has already announced the arrests.
    That is, we may well see martial law, military tribunals and other nishtyaks, in comparison with which 1937 in the USSR will seem like a real triumph of democracy and humanism.
    You can, for example, look.

    “Sanya in Florida” is just an observer, giving an overview of the situation from the inside. It is also useful to look at some of its previous issues.
    At the same time, Trump does not give up working with the courts and collecting evidence of election fraud and Biden's corruption with the participation of China, Ukraine and Russia. And there, too, not everything is so sad. For example, it was recorded that Biden received an interest-free and perpetual loan from Baturina. Yes, yes, exactly the one you thought of. Even with the declaration of a state of emergency, Trump needs to present something to the people.
    Here, for example, fresh: the Fox presenter says live that, according to her source, Trump won.

    Let me also remind you that a number of states are preparing (some have already prepared) the composition of alternative electors before the approval of the voting results in Congress.
    So the main thing is yet to come. If Trump has enough steel in Faberge, then the situation may begin to escalate rapidly in a few days.
    How it can end - only God knows. Trump can be stupidly killed. I already wrote that US presidents (and presidential candidates) who encroach on Finintern's prerogatives have a very high mortality rate.
    Before the election, Trump prudently cleaned the top of the security forces, but if he declares an emergency, then the Democrats can only start a civil war or kill Trump.
  4. boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 16 December 2020 12: 12
    In general, our coverage of the situation in the United States is extremely poor.
    If anyone is interested, you can see

    This is Steve Dudnik's channel, he works as a detective. He hosts Russian-speaking Jews and others. People are legally savvy.
    Here Rachel gives a breakdown for the near future on the elections. True, she has lived in the United States for more than forty years and often inserts English words into Russian. But you can make out. The abbreviation JFK referred to is John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
    Security officer Dmytro Zhurba (from 1.00.00) gives a picture of what is happening in New York.
    How people are fleeing generally from democratic states to republican ones.
    If anyone missed it, Elon Musk fled from California to Texas. This was also in our media.
    The mood of the people there, the comments of the locals are interesting.
    That is, in general, until 06.01.2021 inclusive, the formal course of the process is likely, then the Decree of September 12, 2018 may be applied. about external influence. And then - whatever you like.
    1. Cyril Offline Cyril
      Cyril (Kirill) 16 December 2020 19: 47
      If anyone missed it, Elon Musk fled from California to Texas. This was also in our media.

      Musk has 7 houses in different parts of the country, and none of them is "permanent" for him (in the actual, not the legal sense). He lives in each of them in accordance with current affairs.

      If you mean Musk as a businessman, then his companies (their branches and facilities) are located both in California and Texas. Where did you get the idea that Musk "fled" from California to Texas - is unclear.
      1. boriz Offline boriz
        boriz (boriz) 16 December 2020 21: 24
        Where did you get the idea that Musk "fled" from California to Texas - is unclear.

        Yes, sometimes I browse the Internet.

        For example, a person lived permanently in California (a thoroughly democratic state) and decided to move to Texas (this is, accordingly, a purely republican, conservative state).
        1. Cyril Offline Cyril
          Cyril (Kirill) 16 December 2020 21: 34
          This article says that:

          He said relocating made sense with Tesla's new factory being built in Texas.

          As I said, it moves from place to place in accordance with the current work plans :)

          It also says that:

          Mr. Musk's companies continue to maintain extensive operations in California

          Texas just provides certain tax breaks, that's all :)
          1. boriz Offline boriz
            boriz (boriz) 16 December 2020 22: 23
            Right. And California has decriminalized theft of less than $ 940. Now any scumbag can take anything in the store for $ 500 and run away. Nobody contacts them anymore. There's no point. Businesses are closed, so there is no one to pay taxes. What benefits can there be?
            In general, you yourself wrote about 7 houses. You can locate a business in Texas and live anywhere.
            And he went to Texas.
            In 2019. compared to 2018 US coal exports fell 27%. The reason - the states of California, Washington and Oregon stopped shipping coal. And this is the whole west coast. All coal mining companies from the western United States sent coal to China and other Asia. Logistics, however. Justification is the fight for the environment. In fact, all states that are coal exporters are republican. Forced them to look for options. The cost of delivery has increased from this. The Republicans have been nasty. And who will deduct taxes in these democratic states? There were railways and ports for the shipment of coal. People had jobs, budget - taxes.
            Therefore, Musk went to sane people. This is a trend in the USA now. The people are leaving the democratic states for Canada and the republican states.
            Musk is just a particular example. Yes, I went to a place where it is more convenient to live and work. Why did it happen?
            1. Cyril Offline Cyril
              Cyril (Kirill) 17 December 2020 00: 06
              And California has decriminalized theft of less than $ 940. Now any scumbag can take anything in the store for $ 500 and run away.

              I tried to find news about the decriminalization of such crimes - I found only an article on a Russian resource, where, of course, there were no references to a specific legislative act. Can you provide a reliable source on the decriminalization of such crimes, referring to a specific regulatory act?

              Nobody contacts them anymore. There's no point. Businesses are closing, so there is no one to pay taxes.

              Would you like to quote the line from the article you quoted again?) Okay

              Mr. Musk's companies continue to maintain extensive operations in California, and other tech firms are expanding their presence there.

              In general, you yourself wrote about 7 houses. You can locate a business in Texas and live anywhere.
              And he went to Texas.

              Musk explained the specific reason why he is comfortable living in Texas at the moment - the opening of Tesla's new plant. He did not write anything about the fact that life in California is unbearable.
          2. boriz Offline boriz
            boriz (boriz) 16 December 2020 23: 03
            Well, you need to quote not only what you like here:

            Mr. Musk's companies continue to be active in California, while other technology companies are expanding their presence there. Yet his decision to relocate underscores growing discontent, especially among wealthier technicians, about the cost of living in the state, the pre-pandemic real estate crisis and congested roads.

            Staying in Texas gives Mr. Musk a personal advantage: the state does not levy state income or capital gains taxes on individuals. This year, the automotive executive was eligible for compensation for billions of dollars in options through an incentive agreement, making him the second richest man in the world.

            Musk cares about both himself and the valuable specialists who have become uncomfortable living in California.
            1. Cyril Offline Cyril
              Cyril (Kirill) 17 December 2020 00: 12
              I am quoting a specific reason for the "dissatisfaction of specialists" from the quote you quoted:

              However, his decision to relocate underscores growing discontent, especially among wealthier tech professionals. the cost of living in the state, the real estate crisis before the pandemic and clogged roads.

              None of these reasons have to do with the state being "democratic." The high cost of living in the state is a natural phenomenon for the country's economic centers. In Moscow, for example, living is also more expensive than in some Tomsk.

              The real estate crisis - again, California is one of the most populous states, which will naturally make it more difficult to find, rent and buy a home than in less populated and larger Texas. It's the same with congested roads.

              All these problems can be observed, say, in Moscow or Tokyo - do you also explain them by the fact that Moscow and Tokyo are under the yoke of American democrats?)

              You draw the final conclusion on the basis of problems natural for any economic center, corrected by your purely speculative and biased guesses.
              1. boriz Offline boriz
                boriz (boriz) 17 December 2020 11: 52
                All these problems can be observed, say, in Moscow or Tokyo - do you also explain them by the fact that Moscow and Tokyo are under the yoke of American democrats?

                Tokyo is a separate story, but the fact that Moscow and California are rigidly occupied by Finintern is beyond doubt.
                Any leadership of any territory is obliged to take care of the convenience of people living there. Texas Republicans do it better.

                Even Moscow is quite successful in dealing with traffic jams. California should have no less money, but it can't even cope with fires. There are fires there, like we have snow in winter, but there was no normal fire fighting service and there is no. Prisoners are stupidly driven to put out fires. When they were not enough, Kamala Harris (then the chief attorney of California) suggested that parents of children who skipped school be fined and imprisoned for up to one year to solve the problem. It will get to the biggest stool in the USA! Little will not seem to them.

                I made a slight mistake with thefts in California, thefts up to $ 950 were decriminalized.

                This is Montjan giving an overview of the WSJ article. I recently stopped watching it, so I hardly remembered it. Somewhere else there were videos of thefts directly in the store, but, so far, I did not remember where. I can't leave links to everything I've seen somewhere.
  5. ODRAP Offline ODRAP
    ODRAP (Alexey) 16 December 2020 13: 17
    And what is characteristic - not a single hemp ... feel