The Key to it All

 "I caught them. I caught them all." --- Donald Trump, at nearly every rally during the last two months.*

The scenario involving the Supreme Court sending the election the House is just one possible scenario. Even if the Supreme Court has to somehow "decide the election," there are other ways this might happen. These are far too numerous and specific to the law for me to even speculate on. I enjoy reading the ones that others are putting forth.

But if it does goes to the House, then of course Trump holds the cards there. The House members vote as states. Each state gets one vote. California and New York get one vote each for their entire delegations, same as every other vote. Fifty votes total (sorry District of Columbia, you are not invited to this one). Whoever gets the majority out of fifty is elected President. 

Current count of state delegations is 26 Republicans, 23 Democrats, and one tie, which happens to be Pennsylvania, at 8 seats for each party.

When I read speculation that this might be part of Trump's ultimate plan---the Doomsday scenario when all else fails---then a big light bulb went off in my head.

I had been hearing for weeks that Pelosi was adamant that the election might go the House, and was pushing every button to flip the Republican held House seats in Alaska and Montana. Those states have a single Representative for the entire state. So that individual is effectively, by themselves, one of the fifty votes who get to decide the election.

I couldn't understand why Pelosi was apparently so absorbed in this scenario. The only way that could happen in a normal year was for an Electoral College tie (269-269, for example), which although possible, and still possible, would be so unlikely as to make worrying about it quite mysterious.

But now it makes complete sense, under the condition that Pelosi was deeply involved in the fraud and was anticipating the countermeasures Trump might take, if it didn't work. She had to be anticipating the scenario I have mentioned, where the Supreme Court declares the entire national election to be fraudulent.

It seems like a pretty straightforward idea to me, in my limited knowledge, that if the Supreme Court is convinced that the election was fraudulent in multiple states, that it would apply this scale of remedy based on the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. In other words, they wouldn't throw out five states with manifest fraud and let the election be decided by the voters in the other 45 states. They would just toss it to the House, which is what the Constitution invites them to do, as a way of settling the election.

All this seems farfetched if this were normal times. If this were normal times, then even if the Democrats cheated on this scale, in a blatant organized fashion, they might get away with it. The investigation must be solid by December 14, the "real" day of the Presidential Election, when the Electoral College meets. 

One would expect the Democrats could stall. It would a tall order for the Supreme Court to intervene in this manner, so drastically.

A tall order unless the proof of organized fraud across many states is so compelling that it is impossible to overlook it. If there is proof so strong that no reasonable person can say the election wasn't fraudulent, then how the Supreme Court not apply this scale of remedy? It would make a mockery of the Constitution, and of the law itself.

So is there this type of proof? The most damaging evidence, as Wictor points out, would be the evidence collected before the election, and on election night itself. Everything gathered after that, by the citizen army, and also by state investigators, is supporting evidence, but one can sense that it wouldn't be enough to prove anything in time to change the election.

Donald Trump's personal lawyer is a man who busted the mob in New York. He knows exactly how to set up racketeering sting operations. Donald Trump instituted a new federal agency that works with the military to stop interference in America elections. There was probably covert surveillance of key precinct tabulation rooms. If so, then the insistence on having Trump reps in the room for the count is for show, and for legal precedence in the law suits. 

The essence of the counterattack was that it was necessary to let them cheat and think they got away with it.  Trump had to sit on his hands while they stole it. 

If covert voting maching manipulation software such as the type people are mentioning onlie were used as part of the heist, then it is almost certain that it was observed in real time by people at agencies like CISA. No need to worry about that. They must get a kick out of Trump folk online trying to raise awareness of this. But that's part of the way the public will understand what happened, and they will accept the result of the electoral with Trump as the victor, whether that's via the Electoral College or the House via the Supreme Court.

It's all going to be part of the evidence presented to the Supreme Court, if it comes to that. I'll be interested in seeing how it comes out, but we may never know the most damning evidence, as it would reveal classified techniques of information gathering to our enemies. I don't really mind about that. 

At the moment, Trump is calm and serene, Tweeting normally as if he indeed got re-elected and he is moving forward. His inner circle and his family is calm and confident. Key Republican Senators, instead of abandoning him, are closing ranks around him, including Lindsay Graham, whom one would suspect would be among the first to start hedging his bets if he thought this was a losing cause. He knows something.

Likewise high powered legal minds are joining Team Trump even at this hour, putting their entire reputations and livelihoods on the line for this effort. The effort is not petering out. It is a gathering storm. Why would that be so?

Part of this effort involves filing law suits in the state courts to get the wheels in motion, to set up the process. Part of it involves investigated the fraud claims and evidence coming forward, such as Civil War veterans apparently voting in large numbers, and statistical analysis on the voting numbers.

But the key is what I mentioned---if they really have the mob-like goods on the Democrats, then this is going to be a cake walk for Trump. No wonder he is out golfing. He himself hardly needs to do anything at this point. They have busted the bad guys already, and they are just letting it play out.

If this is all correct, then probably there is no Golden Bridge for the Democrats to retreat over. It probably will destroy the party and many people will go to prison as well. One can only speculate about which ones. But I'm guessing I probably wouldn't want to be in Stacey Abrams' shoes at the moment.

*another thing Trump said a lot at his rallies, often right the phrase at the top, was "They spied on my campaign. Scandal of the century." He used that exact phrase in every rally, to my recollection. He never supplied details. It occurs to me that this partly to blunt in advance the charge that he spied on Biden/Harris, which the agency might well have been forced to do, on pure national security grounds. That was supposedly why Obama put Trump under surveillance.