Further to Progress Update 22 on filing US 2020 election fraud with the Supreme Court of the United States there’s two items I must draw to your attention (emphases mine):

THE BRUNSON BROTHERS

In TGP’s printer friendly version of Will SCOTUS Take This On? by Alicia Powe I note in particular:

‘…State and federal judges have previously dismissed more than 50 previous lawsuits  waged by former President Donald J. Trump’s campaign challenging the election outcome, but the Brunson brothers are pushing on with their case. (They) are now appealing the case to the Supreme Court. On November 30, the nine Justices set a date to examine the complaint.

SCOTUS is slated to convene on January 6, 2023 to examine the complaint and vote on whether to move forward to a hearing, during which they would officially adjudicate whether the defendants should be removed from office.

The Brunsons contend the defendants not only failed to investigate whether the election was rigged amid charges of election fraud leveled by 100 members of Congress but voted against conducting an investigation…

[NB: Deuteronomy 19:15 requirement for minimum of two witnesses in legal issues.]

If you go to a police department after seeing a crime and report a crime, they are obligated to investigate that crime. If two of you show up, they are even more obligated. Two witnesses can convict in a court of treason… to have 100 members of Congress witnessing that there needs to be an investigation, and then the others go against it is pretty serious.

He filed a lawsuit with six causes of action including treason, breaking the oath of office, fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, civil conspiracy. For each cause of action, he’s asking for a monetary amount…’

TEXAS + 17 STATES vs 4 STATES 

In TGP’s guest post December 11, America’s Other Day of Infamy…  ‘Erasmus’ writes,

‘The State of Texas, along with 17 other states and 126 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, called out the four states that had violated the Constitution and challenged their election results as being unlawful. They filed their case with the U.S. Supreme Court. In other words, about 20% of the states and about 30% of the House of Representatives joined together with Texas and went to the Supreme Court to say that this was wrong, and that these four states broke federal law and changed the election.

…The kind of case that Texas was bringing, along with several other states and over a hundred congressmen, was a case in which the Supreme Court had original jurisdiction. In other words, the Constitution tells us that this is the kind of case that the Supreme Court was designed to hear, and also that there is no other court in the entire world that has the authority to hear and decide this kind of case.

The Supreme Court refused to hear and try this case. The most likely reason is that the nation was severely divided and in turmoil, and the Court was too timid, too reluctant to risk the fallout and do its rightful duty. The U.S. Constitution was clearly violated —any average middle schooler could see and understand that. The results of the national election were affected by these violations. 

…At the same time, hundreds of data scientists and mathematicians, including over 300 individuals who had formerly worked for one of our national security agencies, came out publicly, in unison, and stated that the results of the election were statistically and scientifically impossible apart from widespread fraud. Mathematics is the language of science. Where were those who are always saying, “follow the science”?’

AMERICA’s GRAVE CRISIS

In my coverage of the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta and its evolution from King Alfred The Great’s adoption of Bible principles into Anglo Saxon laws, I remarked upon its becoming foundational in the laws of the USA and its Constitution, both of which are now under serious threat from Deep-state extremist politicians – as in the days of the lawless Wild West!

…BUT GOD!