Does Chief Justice John Roberts Want A Civil War?

georgerasley

In our article Unconventional Warfare – The Democrat Plan To Oust Trump, we explained the 
timeline, steps and phase lines Democrats and their Far Left allies would use in an extra-constitutional effort to drive President Trump from office.

While we didn’t get every detail right in our prediction, one of the key steps we identified was for the courts to step-in and arbitrarily overturn existing election laws to enable Democrats to count votes until they win, especially in battleground states controlled by Democrats, such as Pennsylvania:

We also implied the weak link in the judiciary that Democrats would exploit is Chief Justice John Roberts, and it now appears that, while not accurate in every detail, we were right about how Democrats would try to use Leftist judges to change election laws to erode ballot security and that Chief Justice Roberts is indeed the weak link.

In the crucial Supreme Court case of Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar, Roberts sided with the three activist Democrats on the Supreme Court to allow Pennsylvania’s Democrats to count ballots received up to three days after Election Day – even though Pennsylvania law allows only ballots received on or before Election Day to be counted.

The extension was created by the Democrat-controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court which essentially re-wrote Pennsylvania election law at the behest of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party.

It was that kind of arbitrary, capricious and corrupt non-legislative rewriting of election laws by administrative officials and judges that was the core complaint in the recent lawsuit Texas filed versus Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan. 

The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roberts, refused to even hear the arguments put forth by Texas; "Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections," the court wrote in an order refusing the case.

READ ON