Thy Will Be Done

I needed a while to recover from the shock I had Saturday morning, reading about the refusal of the Supreme Court to receive Texas’ suit.

After a while, a mixture of realistic estimation of the situation and cold evaluation of the facts started to set in. I still did not feel like writing about it yesterday, but today I will give it a go.

The cold evaluation: strictly speaking, nothing has been decided yet. The suit has not been received simply because three of the five judges (the other four don’t even count) think that Texas has no standing to say that Texans are damaged if Pennsylvania et alios run their elections Jim Crow-, or Venezuela- style. This seems patently absurd to me, but I do not know what precedents there are and how they were handled. Strictly speaking, this is nothing to do with the matter at hand in the Supreme Court, where the Trump suits still are or will be, clearly alive and kicking (for now).

In practice, though, I make a very simple, sobering consideration. Justices Alito and Thomas wanted to examine the case. Therefore, it wasn’t (procedurally) outlandish. If the Justices had wanted to rid the Country of its inner Venezuela, what would have been more sensible that letting this case get in and restore justice in this way, at the same time setting an extremely important precedent: that every State answers to the other States, with which he shares its destiny, of its electoral conduct?

This would have been, for sure, easier, less controversial and way more elegant than the other way, the fraud and/or foreign interference one.

Now I ask myself and I ask you: if three of the five Justices did not have the attributes to go down the easier and less controversial way, how likely it is that they will go down the more controversial one?

Food for thoughts.

Let us pray every day for this to end the right way.

But let us never forget to pray that, as in all things, God’s will be done.

 

 

 

Posted on December 13, 2020, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism. Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.

  1. The three judges, all Trump appointees, recused themselves. They must have an opinion, they simply refused, as a “set” if you will, to express it. Why?
    Justice Alito said that while the SCotUS does have a responsibility to hear Texas’ suit and he would have agreed to take it, he also says he wouldn’t have granted relief, most likely on the grounds stated.
    I trust his judgement.
    I think the three who recused themselves believe the same. Had they agreed to take the case it would have taken/wasted time and ultimately failed.
    It also would have given the left reason to explode beyond the insanity they already regularly demonstrate as they decried the clear “bias” of the Trump appointees.
    Trump’s team is “retooling” the case, creating grounds that will enable an honest court (five out of nine wins) to provide the requested relief.
    That is my prayer.

    • I read a statement of Alito that says that he does not make any statement as to how he would have decided.
      The recusal excuse, if true, is also absurd. It’s not Trump who “hired” the three. It’s the Senate. This stinks of real refusal to take their own responsibilities.

      A good solution would have been to take on the case; and, if decided that Texas has no standing (also absurd if you ask me; and twenty-one AGs agree with me), make clear that this does not impact any other matter in the case.

      But yes, many cases are still in front of them, or will (hopefully) be.

    • Alito publicly said that while he believes the court should have taken the case he did not see a path to “relief” (meaning a favorable outcome for Trump) in the case as presented by Texas.
      The four horsepeople of the libpocalypse said that Texas doesn’t have standing, which of course it does. If Alito is correct, and he probably is, then the three little justices saved the court from wasting time on a non-starter. I still hope that the court will throw these elections back in the liars faces… we’ll see.
      Of course Trump didn’t hire these people. But reality hasn’t taken so much a “backseat” here in America as it has been thrown under a steamroller. If and when these three get to rule against the demokkkrats there will be a howling, tearing of hair and gnashing of teeth beyond anything seen to date. Had they ruled for taking the Texas case that hysteria would be going on right now, taking attention from where oit belongs, and to (pardon my pun) no avail.

    • Well, it remains to be seen whether he thought there was no relief because it was his opinion, or because it was the other Justices’ opinion…
      I have no confidence in the Court anymore.
      I hope the big showdown will be on the 6th, with Mike Pence refusing to accept the electors before and after the 2 hours negotiations phase.
      Bar states of emergency and the likes, I don’t see other possibilities of a decent outcome.

    • My guess is that Israel also had no idea what was about to hit them due to their moral bankruptcy back in the day.
      Should our Lord allow this theft to stand it is the end of the USA that I was born in.
      No conservative will ever take the presidency again, the apparently useless SCotUS will be “packed” (not that it needs to be for their perfidious purposes), and we can expect a continued and accelerated erosion of our Constitutional Rights.
      As policed defunding proceeds, and riots and violence increase, gun-owners will be blamed for the violence and we will either enlisted biker-gangs or UN “peacekeepers” enforcing a government gun-grab using the illegal BATF gun purchase records.

      You are referring to the senate vote on the electors. Each individual elector may be challenged, all 538 or so, and each challenge can trigger a two-hour debate, leading to an up or down vote. Each challenge has to be in written form and signed by one senaator and one representative. If, for whatever reason, this process doesn’t result in a conclusive decision the election is thrown to the congress. I do not think that the VP can do that on his own, nor can he approve or disapprove individual electors unless there is a tie vote. In the congress (if the challenge gets that far) the house picks the president and the senate the vice president. The vote in the house is based upon state delegations of which the significant majority are republican(t). Each state gets one vote so Wyoming and California would have equal say.
      This is my understanding.

    • Dr Thurley keeps saying that Pence can throw everything to the House (1 vote per state), whatever the outcome of the “debate”, or so I understand him.

  2. I have thought about it these past couple of days as well. I wondered if there could have been veiled threats toward the judges’ loved ones. I also thought there could be some fear of human regard and losing face, especially if you were in a minority of voting in favor. I think both of my thoughts could be summed up in your final comment. They don’t have the attributes to take the easier way; of course they aren’t likely to do the more difficult thing. Which likely leaves us with the worst case scenario. Texans are talking seriously, publicly, about secession.

  3. This is only the beginning of legal remedies that President Trump has at his disposal there are several other cases in the supreme Court .

    In addition, an elector from a state could throw the whole totally corrupt election process which has been a total fraud into Congress where president Trump will surely win because the voting is different than what constitutes Congress now.

    One should never give up hope.

    Keep praying, stay in a state of grace we are engaged in spiritual warfare therefore let thy prayer rise like a fountain!

    • I heard that Mike Pence could (and probably will at this point) refuse certification and throw everything to the Congress.
      I am awaiting to see whether this is confirmed from other sources.
      Frankly, I don’t have much hope in the Supreme Court at this point.

%d bloggers like this: