To all of you conservatives who claim (without evidence) that the Supreme Court can’t toss out a rigged election …

[BeAChooser]

https://spectator.org/election-recounts-fruit-poisonous-tree/

 

**************

 

Applying the ‘Fruit of the Poisonous Tree’ Doctrine to Election Fraud

 

by Dov Fischer

 

In American criminal law, there is a doctrine called the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree,” a term that obviously derives from the Biblical Adam and Eve account. Under that doctrine, government violations of citizens’ core constitutional rights are deemed so severe and egregious that, for example, if the police violate a Fourth Amendment right in conducting their investigation of a crime, the whole government case can be thrown out even if that illegal search led to finding perfectly admissible legal evidence that unequivocally proves the culprit’s guilt.

… snip lots of examples …

There are many more examples in civil and criminal law where, even though the thing ultimately seems to come out right, it is deemed null and void because proper legal procedures intended to protect valuable personal and constitutional rights have not been followed, whether deliberately or even unintentionally and innocently.

Under the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” doctrine alone, a case can be made that the failure by several battleground states to allow Republican poll watchers near the tables where votes were being tabulated should alone be grounds to declare those states’ presidential elections null and void, requiring do-over elections. Yes, that would cost a fortune of money. Yes, that would make everyone in the country crazy. But, after all, it also makes everyone crazy when a known and proven murderer is released onto the streets based on a legal technicality. Constitutional protections are deemed that sacrosanct.

The franchise — the right and privilege to vote in an American election — is a constitutional right of that dimension. If it can be shown that proper election rules were violated this November, that the counting of ballots was done in violation of legal technicalities — especially, if it can be shown that such violations were perpetrated deliberately and, even more so, over the protestations of one side — that alone should be grounds for requiring that new elections be held. Of course that theory may not mean that the election automatically should be awarded to the other side, the victimized side, but at the very least it should justify ordering new elections in states like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

 

****************

 

Just saying ... 

 

[benson13]

[XavierOnassis]

There will be no nullification of this election by any court. Trump lost, Biden won by a sizable majority.

Even as I type this, Fabians are plotting to put itching powder in your underwear.

[BeAChooser]

Come on you conservatives who say the Supremes can't declare an election null and void.   Respond.   Don't let these ^^^^^ two cretins speak for you.

[RayDonavin]

1 minute ago, BeAChooser said:

Come on you conservatives who say the Supremes can't declare an election null and void.   Respond.   Don't let these ^^^^^ two cretins speak for you.

I didn't say they could not I said I just didn't see it happening. Too bad our FBI is in the bag for the globalists.

[RayDonavin]

4 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

There will be no nullification of this election by any court. Trump lost, Biden won by a sizable majority.

Even as I type this, Fabians are plotting to put itching powder in your underwear.

Who says? The media does not call elections retard.

[Zaro]

6 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

 

Even as I type this, Fabians are plotting to put itching powder in your underwear.

Lol

[XavierOnassis]

Biden won, Trump lost and the fucking Supreme Court will not change that.

[BeAChooser]

14 minutes ago, RayDonavin said:

I didn't say they could not I said I just didn't see it happening.

 

Why?   Don't argue like the cretins on this thread.   Give me a reason the validity of which we can discuss.

 

14 minutes ago, RayDonavin said:

Too bad our FBI is in the bag for the globalists.

 

All the more reason to take this to the Supreme Court and let them decide.   You only make my case.

[Zaro]

10 minutes ago, FivebyFive said:

give em a haha

 

i would would rather see murder hornets in there.

 

Get down to beesness

Chooser always gets impressed by the shit he reads on some kook site. Fruit of poison tree applies to criminal law, the SC concerns itself with constitutional law

[XavierOnassis]

Chooser is an obsessed imbecile.

[Zaro]

55 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

Come on you conservatives who say the Supremes can't declare an election null and void.   

Due process clause

 

Next

[Zaro]

Just now, XavierOnassis said:

Chooser is an obsessed imbecile.

Chooser is still pissed that Nixon was forced to resign.

[XavierOnassis]

Just now, Zaro said:

Chooser is still pissed that Nixon was forced to resign.

I am sure that is true. Odds are he is still hoping that Bob Dole will be president again.

 

[Zaro]

1 minute ago, XavierOnassis said:

I am sure that is true. Odds are he is still hoping that Bob Dole will be president again.

 

Chooser voted for Don Blankenship, the mass murderer from W Virginia

[BeAChooser]

8 minutes ago, kfools said:

They can.

 

That doesn't mean they will. 

 

Agreed.  But are we not even going to try?  

 

Are we going to just let corrupt leftist cretins ... like the four now posting on this thread ... decide our future instead?

 

I want to hear good reasons why we shouldn't even try.    

 

Golfboy?   You were pretty adamant about this.

 

I don't see anything in the current approach that really gives me hope Harris won't take over the Oval Office in January.

 

Why don't millions of us take to the streets NOW and demand a revote.   Because we won't get a chance later.

 

 

[BeAChooser]

By the way, kfools ... see the sort of TRASH you let back on the forum?    And what did that accomplish?  Except give the left another voice to spout their lies.   This even handed approach conservatives have chosen is going to lead to a communist dictatorship in this country.   We need to start fighting ... for real.   We need to stop engaging them on their battlefields ... in their courts ... and pick our own battlefields.  Like the Supreme Court.    What the purpose of rushing to put Barrett on the court if we aren't even going to try and use her?    Take the case there otherwise we're going to lose.   And loss will mean the end of the American experiment.  

[Zaro]

12 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

Agreed.  But are we not even going to try?  

 

Are we going to just let corrupt leftist cretins ... like the four now posting on this thread ... decide our future instead?

 

I want to hear good reasons why we shouldn't even try.    

 

Golfboy?   You were pretty adamant about this.

 

I don't see anything in the current approach that really gives me hope Harris won't take over the Oval Office in January.

 

Why don't millions of us take to the streets NOW and demand a revote.   Because we won't get a chance later.

 

 

Trump tried. His cases get tossed. They don't make it to the SC. Try to pay some attention

[BeAChooser]

18 minutes ago, kfools said:

It's out of our hands. Trump needs to fucking try.

 

You're just giving up after all that big talk you had?   What's wrong with 5 or 10 MILLION American conservatives taking to the streets NOW?    I think that gesture might inspire Trump to "fucking try" ... and that expression, by the may, makes me mad because it implies he isn't now ... that he hasn't been trying ... and I think that's a baldfaced lie.

 

Quote

Trump needs to try. The problems he has is how does he convince anybody to investigate it? Without media pressure to have it investigated it won't be.

 

You're still playing their game.   Trying to fight this on their battlefield.   We don't need more *investigations* by entities that were involved in the rigging and the coup.  We don't need recounts.   There's enough solid evidence right now that the election is totally messed up and unreliable to take it to the Supreme Court and demand a REVOTE.   We don't need to try and prove that Trump won ... we just need to prove that there were enough questionable activities affecting enough votes that he may have won and that right now there is no way to clean the mess up and find out the real will of the people.   We need to STOP TRYING TO PROVE TRUMP WON.   The Supreme Court is probably not going to rule on that.   They'll let the lower court ruling and the corrupt election officials decide in that case.      Just ask for a new election.   A REVOTE in a manner that will insure it's fair and impartial.    That is something we can successfully sell to the now more conservative court.    

 

Quote

Million maga March is happening right now in DC.

 

And what are they chanting.   A call for recounts.   A call for investigations.  It's a waste of time unless you have the right message.   REVOTE or REVOLT.   Remember that in 2000, it wasn't until conservative massed outside the location they were dishonestly counting ballots in Florida ... AND POUNDED ON THE DOORS OF THAT PLACE ... that the Supremes acted.    We need to make it clear that if there's no revote, things are going to get really hairy for the powers that be ... and that would include the Supremes ... BEFORE January 20th.   

 

 

[Zaro]

8 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

You're just giving up after all that big talk you had?   What's wrong with 5 or 10 MILLION American conservatives taking to the streets NOW?    I think that gesture might inspire Trump to "fucking try" ... and that expression, by the may, makes me mad because it implies he isn't now ... that he hasn't been trying ... and I think that's a baldfaced lie.

 

 

You're still playing their game.   Trying to fight this on their battlefield.   We don't need more *investigations* by entities that were involved in the rigging and the coup.  We don't need recounts.   There's enough solid evidence right now that the election is totally messed up and unreliable to take it to the Supreme Court and demand a REVOTE.   We don't need to try and prove that Trump won ... we just need to prove that there were enough questionable activities affecting enough votes that he may have won and that right now there is no way to clean the mess up and find out the real will of the people.   We need to STOP TRYING TO PROVE TRUMP WON.   The Supreme Court is probably not going to rule on that.   They'll let the lower court ruling and the corrupt election officials decide in that case.      Just ask for a new election.   A REVOTE in a manner that will insure it's fair and impartial.    That is something we can successfully sell to the now more conservative court.    

 

 

And what are they chanting.   A call for recounts.   A call for investigations.  It's a waste of time unless you have the right message.   REVOTE or REVOLT.   Remember that in 2000, it wasn't until conservative massed outside the location they were dishonestly counting ballots in Florida ... AND POUNDED ON THE DOORS OF THAT PLACE ... that the Supremes acted.    We need to make it clear that if there's no revote, things are going to get really hairy for the powers that be ... and that would include the Supremes ... BEFORE January 20th.   

 

 

You gotta revolt cause a revote isn't happening

[BeAChooser]

16 minutes ago, tunafish said:

It is time to harvest the fruit.

 

I don't have clue what you're saying.   I just know that if we don't watch out the tree of liberty may be watered with the blood of MANY and that won't be a pleasant thing for ANY of us.   I'm trying to avoid that outcome by just asking for a REVOTE that is fair to both sides and trustworthy ... using the US military to record and count the votes via in person voting with paper ballots by voters who were registered on Nov 3rd.   That is not an unreasonable or undoable request given the circumstances and the alternative.   If a revote shows that Biden did win ... that he got 78 million votes as now claimed, I'll call him my President.   I won't resist any legal things he does.   But if there's no vote and he gets in office, all bets are off.   

[Michaelf]

1 hour ago, BeAChooser said:

 

Why?   Don't argue like the cretins on this thread.   Give me a reason the validity of which we can discuss.

 

 

All the more reason to take this to the Supreme Court and let them decide.   You only make my case.

The court doesn't have the guts. When you get right down to it they're creatures living in the same swamp that the Clintons and the Bidens live in. Trump only got in because they underestimated him. They won't make that mistake again. An outsider will never get in again.

 

 

[BeAChooser]

Just now, Michaelf said:

The court doesn't have the guts.

 

So you're another who is just going to give up.   Not even give the court the opportunity to prove you wrong.   Roll over puppy and show your belly to your new masters.

 

Just now, Michaelf said:

An outsider will never get in again.

 

Absolutely right.   Unless we stop it now.   But it's not just an outsiders that will never get in again.   It's conservatives.   You need to understand that the people behind this fraud are Fabian Socialists (i.e., hardcore communists) who have now abandoned the stealth and are going for the gold by any means necessary.    You should go read what the Fabian Socialists said they had planned for us.   It's not going to just be business as usual.    It's not going utopia.   It's not going to be bread and circuses.   Reeducation camps are in our future.   And firing squads.   And psychiatric hospitals.   And propaganda 24/7.   And all the other things that communist states are famous for.    And they'll have the technology to monitor and watch every one of us.   1984 is just 40 years late.    How many fingers do you see, Michaelf?

[Zaro]

10 minutes ago, Michaelf said:

The court doesn't have the guts. When you get right down to it they're creatures living in the same swamp that the Clintons and the Bidens live in. Trump only got in because they underestimated him. They won't make that mistake again. An outsider will never get in again.

 

 

The courts follow due process. Chooser wants to change due process AFTER the fact.

 

It's due process that stops Trump cold

[SpyCar]

38 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

By the way, kfools ... see the sort of TRASH you let back on the forum?    And what did that accomplish?  Except give the left another voice to spout their lies.   This even handed approach conservatives have chosen is going to lead to a communist dictatorship in this country.   We need to start fighting ... for real.   We need to stop engaging them on their battlefields ... in their courts ... and start pick our own battlefields.  Like the Supreme Court.    Otherwise, we're going to lose.   And loss will mean the end of the American experiment.   What the purpose of rushing to put Barrett on the court if we aren't even going to try and use her?   I sure hope Trump is a lot smarter than you folks.

 

You are guilty of sedition.

 

And your stupid lies die in the light of reason.

 

You are a Loser.

 

Bill