Don’t Mess with Texas! Texas Sues Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin at the Supreme Court

Don't Mess with Texas!
Texas Sues Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan
and Wisconsin at the Supreme Court

Texas Is Immediately Joined by 17 Other States.

by Gene Kizer, Jr.

The Law Suit Is Below and Is FASCINATING. It Lays Out Massive Election Fraud. President Trump Is Petitioning to Join the Suit too. Encourage YOUR State to Join in!

The outrageous election fraud of 2020 can not stand.

It must be litigated and criminals go to jail and, where applicable, be tried for treason and executed. The latter suits me best. Each execution would be an event to celebrate.

The illegalities of the 2020 election are bad enough but the suppression of legitimate news by Google, Facebook, Twitter and the "mainstream media" (I can't mention them without first wanting to throw up, then becoming enraged) also can not be tolerated.

We now know that the New York Post story about Hunter Biden's laptop and his allegedly corrupt influence peddling with China, Ukraine, and others, which was deliberately suppressed by Google, Facebook, Twitter, the NY Times, the Washington Post, NPR, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN (what a joke), The Atlantic, and all the rest of it, would have swung over 10% of Biden voters away from him. That alone would have given President Trump the election.

That 10% of Biden voters have said they would not have voted for Biden if they had they known of the allegations against Hunter and Joe Biden including the interview with Tony Bobulinski, whom Tucker Carlson interviewed for almost an hour before the election.

Bobulinski was, for a while, Hunter Biden's business partner. Bobulinski gave times, dates, amounts of money, and provided devastating evidence against Hunter and Joe Biden.

Bobulinski is sincere, honorable and imminently believable. That's why our despicable corrupt media covered it up.

American citizens deserved to know this but tyrannical, immoral Google, Facebook, Twitter and the fraudulent mainstream media, denied over half of us.

This is unconscionable corruption.

There are anti-trust suits now against Google and Facebook, and I hope soon against Twitter too. All should be broken up.

They are all worse than the Communist governments around the world. They are worst than Russian oligarchs and South American dictators.

We can not allow them to trample our First Amendment rights. Who the hell elected them to anything! They are despised by over half the country.

They are all hard-left partisans who hate us Deplorables with our God, guns and patriotism.

If the Supreme Court throws out illegal votes in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, or grants other relief to the plaintiffs such as ruling that the legislatures in those states should approve the electors -- WHICH IS UNQUESTIONABLY CONSTITUTIONAL -- then Trump wins because each of those four states has a Republican legislature meaning each has a Republican majority in both the House and Senate.

Right now the electoral count, which is a total fraud, is Trump 232, verses Biden, 306, but Georgia has 16 electoral votes, Pennsylvania, 20, Michigan, 16, and Wisconsin, 10. Together they total 62 electoral votes.

If you add those 62 to Trump's total -- because he did win those states -- after you read Texas's law suit, there will be no doubt in your mind -- and you remove those 62 from Biden, Trump wins 294 to 244. That is the legitimate count in the 2020 election.

Many people in the know believe this election is part of a "color revolution" which is used by the CIA and others against governments around the world at times. The corrupt election is stolen by massive fraud including with voting machines like the oft-mentioned Dominion Voting Systems with its ties to the Clinton Global Initiative and high up Democrat leaders and activists.

Dominion Voting Systems' machines were either pre-programmed with thousands of Biden votes already loaded before election day, and/or programmed to switch Trump votes to Biden after Trump reached a certain number, thus guaranteeing that Trump could not win.

In a color revolution, an election is stolen by fraud then there are massive demonstrations, violence and anarchy in the streets.

Of course, that is poised to happen here should Trump win back this election that has obviously been stolen.

When it does, President Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act and put down the threat with 100 times the force and violence being used by the criminals in the street. They should be arrested en mass and thrown in jail and the whole thing thoroughly investigated because this is treason that threatens our country's very existence.

It is not funny or OK any longer. The rule of law and legitimate government of the United States must prevail.

Here is Texas's brilliant law suit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that is currently before the United States Supreme Court and has been joined by 17 other states who are protecting the votes of their citizens. Those votes have been nullified by the alleged corrupt, illegal Democrat Party machines in the biggest cities of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

I want to warn you. This is some damn good reading.

Texas Law Suit Against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin at SCOTUS, PAGE 1.
Texas Law Suit Against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin at SCOTUS, PAGE 2.
Texas Law Suit Against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin at SCOTUS, PAGE 3.
Texas Law Suit Against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin at SCOTUS, PAGE 4.
Texas Law Suit Against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin at SCOTUS, PAGE 5.
Texas Law Suit Against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin at SCOTUS, PAGE 6.
Texas Law Suit Against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin at SCOTUS, PAGE 7.

“[T]hat form of government which is best contrived to secure an impartial and exact execution of the law, is the best of republics.”
—John Adams


Our Country stands at an important crossroads. Either the Constitution matters and must be followed, even when some officials consider it inconvenient or out of date, or it is simply a piece of parchment on display at the National Archives. We ask the Court to choose the former.

Lawful elections are at the heart of our constitutional democracy. The public, and indeed the candidates themselves, have a compelling interest in ensuring that the selection of a President—any President—is legitimate. If that trust is lost, the American Experiment will founder. A dark cloud hangs over the 2020 Presidential election.

Here is what we know. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a justification, government officials in the defendant states of Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (collectively, “Defendant States”), usurped their legislatures’ authority and unconstitutionally revised their state’s election statutes. They accomplished these statutory revisions through executive fiat or friendly lawsuits, thereby weakening ballot integrity. Finally, these same government officials flooded the Defendant States with millions of ballots to be sent through the mails, or placed in drop boxes, with little or no chain of custodyi and, at the same time, weakened the strongest security measures protecting the integrity of the vote—signature verification and witness requirements.

Presently, evidence of material illegality in the 2020 general elections held in Defendant States grows daily. And, to be sure, the two presidential candidates who have garnered the most votes have an interest in assuming the duties of the Office of President without a taint of impropriety threatening the perceived legitimacy of their election. However, 3 U.S.C. § 7 requires that presidential electors be appointed on December 14, 2020. That deadline, however, should not cement a potentially illegitimate election result in the middle of this storm—a storm that is of the Defendant States’ own making by virtue of their own unconstitutional actions.

This Court is the only forum that can delay the deadline for the appointment of presidential electors under U.S.C. §§ 5, 7. To safeguard public legitimacy at this unprecedented moment and restore public trust in the presidential election, this Court should extend the December 14, 2020 deadline for Defendant States’ certification of presidential electors to allow these investigations to be completed. Should one of the two leading candidates receive an absolute majority of the presidential electors’ votes to be cast on December 14, this would finalize the selection of our President. The only date that is mandated under the Constitution, however, is January 20, 2021. U.S. CONST. amend. XX.

Against that background, the State of Texas (“Plaintiff State”) brings this action against Defendant States based on the following allegations:


1.         Plaintiff State challenges Defendant States’ administration of the 2020 election under the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

2.         This case presents a question of law: Did Defendant States violate the Electors Clause (or, in the alternative, the Fourteenth Amendment) by taking—or allowing—non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors?

3.         Those unconstitutional changes opened the door to election irregularities in various forms. Plaintiff State alleges that each of the Defendant States flagrantly violated constitutional rules governing the appointment of presidential electors. In doing so, seeds of deep distrust have been sown across the country. In the spirit of Marbury v. Madison, this Court’s attention is profoundly needed to declare what the law is and to restore public trust in this election.

4.         As Justice Gorsuch observed recently, “Government is not free to disregard the [Constitution] in times of crisis. … Yet recently, during the COVID pandemic, certain States seem to have ignored these long-settled principles.” Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, New York v. Cuomo, 592 U.S. ____ (2020) (Gorsuch, J., concurring). This case is no different.

5.         Each of Defendant States acted in a common pattern. State officials, sometimes through pending litigation (e.g., settling “friendly” suits) and sometimes unilaterally by executive fiat, announced new rules for the conduct of the 2020 election that were inconsistent with existing state statutes defining what constitutes a lawful vote.

6.         Defendant States also failed to segregate ballots in a manner that would permit accurate analysis to determine which ballots were cast in conformity with the legislatively set rules and which were not. This is especially true of the mail-in ballots in these States. By waiving, lowering, and otherwise failing to follow the state statutory requirements for signature validation and other processes for ballot security, the entire body of such ballots is now constitutionally suspect and may not be legitimately used to determine allocation of the Defendant States’ presidential electors.

7.         The rampant lawlessness arising out of Defendant States’ unconstitutional acts is described in a number of currently pending lawsuits in Defendant States or in public view including:

•         Dozens of witnesses testifying under oath about: the physical blocking and kicking out of Republican poll challengers; thousands of the same ballots run multiple times through tabulators; mysterious late night dumps of thousands of ballots at tabulation centers; illegally backdating thousands of ballots; signature verification procedures ignored; more than 173,000 ballots in the Wayne County, MI center that cannot be tied to a registered voter;ii

•         Videos of: poll workers erupting in cheers as poll challengers are removed from vote counting centers; poll watchers being blocked from entering vote counting centers—despite even having a court order to enter; suitcases full of ballots being pulled out from underneath tables after poll watchers were told to leave.

•         Facts for which no independently verified reasonable explanation yet exists: On October 1, 2020, in Pennsylvania a laptop and several USB drives, used to program Pennsylvania’s Dominion voting machines, were mysteriously stolen from a warehouse in Philadelphia. The laptop and the USB drives were the only items taken, and potentially could be used to alter vote tallies; In Michigan, which also employed the same Dominion voting system, on November 4, 2020, Michigan election officials have admitted that a purported “glitch” caused 6,000 votes for President Trump to be wrongly switched to Democrat Candidate Biden. A flash drive containing tens of thousands of votes was left unattended in the Milwaukee tabulations center in the early morning hours of Nov. 4, 2020, without anyone aware it was not in a proper chain of custody.

8.         Nor was this Court immune from the blatant disregard for the rule of law. Pennsylvania itself played fast and loose with its promise to this Court. In a classic bait and switch, Pennsylvania used guidance from its Secretary of State to argue that this Court should not expedite review because the State would segregate potentially unlawful ballots. A court of law would reasonably rely on such a representation. Remarkably, before the ink was dry on the Court’s 4- 4 decision, Pennsylvania changed that guidance, breaking the State’s promise to this Court. Compare Republican Party of Pa. v. Boockvar, No. 20-542, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 5188, at *5-6 (Oct. 28, 2020) (“we have been informed by the Pennsylvania Attorney General that the Secretary of the Commonwealth issued guidance today directing county boards of elections to segregate [late-arriving] ballots”) (Alito, J., concurring) with Republican Party v. Boockvar, No. 20A84, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 5345, at *1 (Nov. 6, 2020) (“this Court was not informed that the guidance issued on October 28, which had an important bearing on the question whether to order special treatment of the ballots in question, had been modified”) (Alito, J., Circuit Justice).

9.         Expert analysis using a commonly accepted statistical test further raises serious questions as to the integrity of this election.

10.       The probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote in the four Defendant States—Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—independently given President Trump’s early lead in those States as of 3 a.m. on November 4, 2020, is less than one in a quadrillion, or 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000. For former Vice President Biden to win these four States collectively, the odds of that event happening decrease to less than one in a quadrillion to the fourth power (i.e., 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,0004). See Decl. of Charles J. Cicchetti, Ph.D. (“Cicchetti Decl.”) at ¶¶ 14-21, 30-31. See App. 4a-7a, 9a.

11.       The same less than one in a quadrillion statistical improbability of Mr. Biden winning the popular vote in the four Defendant States—Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin— independently exists when Mr. Biden’s performance in each of those Defendant States is compared to former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s performance in the 2016 general election and President Trump’s performance in the 2016 and 2020 general elections. Again, the statistical improbability of Mr. Biden winning the popular vote in these four States collectively is 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,0005. Id. 10-13, 17-21, 30-31.

12.       Put simply, there is substantial reason to doubt the voting results in the Defendant States. . . .

The above is a VERY SMALL portion of this lengthy lawsuit.
Download a PDF of the ENTIRE LAWSUIT by clicking here and send it to everybody you can! It is 1.3 mg. Save it to your computer and email it to your list and post it on your website.
Here is the PDF on the Texas Attorney General's website. Copy and paste this:
Encourage your state, if it isn't one of the 17 already standing with Texas, to
This should be an overwhelming effort by those who love America and the rule of law because there is no tomorrow for our country if we lose.



i See

ii All exhibits cited in this Complaint are in the Appendix to the Plaintiff State’s forthcoming motion to expedite (“App. 1a151a”). See Complaint (Doc. No. 1), Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Benson, 1:20-cv-1083 (W.D. Mich. Nov. 11, 2020) at ¶¶ 26-55 & Doc. Nos. 1-2, 1-4.

Posted in Uncategorized.

Please click "About Us" on the menu bar for a brief bio. Thank you!