Lance Wallnau

What Happened At The Supreme Court

I'm broadcasting from Washington DC, where they held the Stop The Steal and Jericho Marches, and I want to talk to you about what happened at the Supreme Court.
We were all looking for a different response from the Supreme Court because this legal case was the President's best strategy. When the court decided not to hear the case, in effect, they were saying that they refuse to listen to the evidence. There will be a lot of Legalese in the coming days, but what they said was that Texas didn't have a legal basis for the suit.
The big disappointment is that none of the Justices Trump elevated to the court agreed to hear the case. Only Thomas and Alito wanted to hear the evidence. There is a path forward, and I'm going to share what's coming next.

23 thoughts on “What Happened At The Supreme Court”

  1. What is to be noticed is that Trump does not need help from Texas to make a strong point. With the actual compiled evidence is enough!
    The fraud is loud and clear.
    God in did will answer the preirs.

  2. Thank you, Lance! You are one of my favorite people to listen to.
    You are a strong Christian who hears from God and has an understanding of the political and governmental arenas.
    You tell the truth of what’s going on, and you always turn our focus to Who and What this is really all about!
    God Bless you!

  3. Do any of you read your posts before hitting the “Post Comment” button?
    Trump and his Republican allies have lost about 50 challenges to the presidential election in the past five weeks, as judges in at least eight states have repeatedly rejected a litany of unproven claims. Trump has not once come close to overturning the results of a single state’s election, let alone the results in at least three states that he would need to take a victory from Mr. Biden.
    And around the country, judges have started to express their frustration with his attempts to have the courts substitute their will for those of voters.
    The federal appeals court in Philadelphia rejected Trump’s challenge to the results in Pennsylvania in scathing terms. “Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy,” wrote Judge Stephanos Bibas, who was appointed to the court by Trump. “Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”
    “Voters, not lawyers, choose the president,” Judge Bibas wrote. “Ballots, not briefs, decide elections.”
    Justice Brian Hagedorn of the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued an even stronger statement in an opinion rejecting a Republican attempt to overturn that state’s elections results. “Judicial acquiescence to such entreaties built on so flimsy a foundation would do indelible damage to every future election,” he wrote. “This is a dangerous path we are being asked to tread.”
    It’s quite clear that Trump believed that once his allies represented a third of the Supreme Court, the justices would simply do his bidding. That obviously hasn’t worked the way he thought it would.
    Bravo to the three justices – rather, all the justices – for their integrity, and believing that their sworn oath means something.

Comments are closed.