Take The Red Pill People!

BREAKING: Pro-Trump Lawyers See Hope In Texas Lawsuit – MORE States May Join

December 9, 2020
A.J. Cooke

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton took the legal world by storm Tuesday with a 92-page, 8,961-world Supreme Court filing to challenge the results of the 2020 election. Lawyers across the political spectrum reacted over Twitter with joy and dismay over the surprising strength of its claims.

As National File previously reported, the crux of the lawsuit is that the swing states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin violated their duties under the US Constitution by illegally altering election procedures in violation of their own laws.

This not only includes allegedly unconstitutional acts by legislatures and executive fiat, but also “friendly lawsuits” where Secretaries of State would engage in settlement agreements with Democrat groups which illegally bound their states to a wish-list of left-wing election tweaks.

The theory goes that the Constitution is a compact whereby states agree to conduct their elections according to the rule of law and, if one state fails to do so, it harms the other states. As such, the Supreme Court is the only appropriate venue to litigate such disputes and the only possible remedy is a contingent election in the US House of Representatives, which President Trump is projected to win.

The case is officially docketed with the Supreme Court, which has original and final jurisdiction over the matter. That means that the litigants do not have to file for a writ of certiorari and that the Supreme Court is obligated to consider the case on its merits.

The defendants’ response is due Thursday, December 10th by 3pm ET.

READ MORE: Texas Sues Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin In SCOTUS Over Their Unsafe, Broken Elections

National File also reported that Lousiana is joining in the Texas lawsuit, but more are coming in by the hour. The Attorneys General of Alabama, Arkansas and Missouri have all tweeted out their intent to join the fray.

Top constitutional attorney Robert Barnes, who went viral in mid-November for publicizing a crowd-sourcing archive of 2020 election fraud evidence, released a 15-minute video highlighting the reasons why he thinks the Texas lawsuit is Team Trump’s best chance of overturning the disputed results of the 2020 election.

Calling it potentially “a complete gamechanger”, Barnes laid out his reasoning:

If the Supreme Court is going to get involved, the Texas case is far more likely the case to do so than any other case. The reason for that is because the Texas case presents an easy means for them to resolve the issue without getting into the kind of nest of issues that the other cases attract. It also allows them to do sort of a one-stop-shop case to resolve all of it.

Legal scholar Hans Mahncke also weighed in, saying that the Texas suit is “Easily the best case” and that “This is the real kraken”.

Top Republican election lawyer and, famously, President Trump’s top impeachment defense attorney called the suit a “critical case”.

Viva Frei, a popular “Montreal litigator-turned-Youtuber” who does a weekly podcast with Barnes, made an enthusiastic 21-minute “Vlawg” about the case. Speaking from an outsider perspective without American political preconceptions, Frei expressed amazement at Paxton’s audacity, legal reasoning and meticulous documentation of election law violations.

Let me tell you… this is a well-drafted lawsuit! It is an election lawsuit and the next time someone tells you that there were no voter irregularities anywhere in this election, tell them to READ THIS LAWSUIT!



Margot Cleveland, a law professor and regular columnist at the Federalist, opened up a discussion on her Twitter feed. She was impressed with the seriousness of the suit but initially expressed skepticism that the Supreme Court would run with it. However, after discussing it in-depth, the did agree with Mahncke that this was Team Trump’s best case moving forward and promised an in-depth article to be published Wednesday.

Even lawyers typically hostile to Trump-related suits admitted that there is a solid legal argument that the Supreme Court must consider the case and can’t simply ignore it.

But there were more dismayed reactions from the Left as well. Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe, widely considered the Left’s most talented Supreme Court litigator, decried the suit as a ridiculous invitation to a “cascade” of frivolous interstate litigation.

University of Texas Law Professor Steve Vladek followed up by ridiculing the possibility that the Supreme Court would even hear the case. He cited the one-line rejection of the Pennsylvania election suit as evidence that the court has no patience for similar claims.

Rank-and-file leftists across Twitter desperate for a comeback to conservative enthusiasm for the Texas suit started copy-pasting a quote from a CNN interview of a “Republican” dismissing the validity of the case.

The alleged Republican in question, Ben Ginsberg, is an MSNBC political analyst. He was a member of the Bush and Romney legal teams who later served as an Obama Administration appointee. In 2013, he submitted a brief to the Supreme Court arguing that the popular vote against legalizing gay marriage in California should be ignored. In September of 2020, he published an article in the Washington Post condemning President Trump and claiming that “there’s no proof of widespread fraud” in American elections in general.

To the horror of left-wing commentators, President Trump then capped off the discussions this morning by warning he would be “INTERVENING” in the case.