SCOTUS 1878 FRAUD VITIATES EVERYTHING....BIDEN LOST.....

Pennslyvania is going to do them in! The fraud is so rampant there they will never be able to hide it all.

Whatever truly does wind up happening, will be far more intense and satisfying than what's in the OP of this thread.

Be ready. Have what you need. Get smart fast.

The shitteth is about to hit the fanneth.

:IMPLEMENTING:

From the lowest to the highest courts the question is:

If FRAUD, on a massive scale, is proven beyond ANY doubt then will those judges rule for the LAW and the obvious or will the bend to threats from the left and, more realistically to the fact that the left will go NUTS and burn half of urban America to the ground.

The ONLY thing that will stop it is if the true American patriots come out (with their 434 MILLION guns) and put a stop to it and THAT for a time will smell a LOT like a civil war.

You're missing the punchline in that meme! It is:

"JUST KIDDING! IT'S JUST THREE WHITE LIBERALS"

Vitiates: destroy or impair the legal validity of...

1878, oh what a year it was.. LOL

[link to www.law.cornell.edu (secure)]
98 U.S. 61

25 L.Ed. 93

UNITED STATES
v.
THROCKMORTON.

October Term, 1878

11
There is no question of the general doctrine that fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments. There is also no question that many rights originally founded in fraud become—by lapse of time, by the difficulty of proving the fraud, and by the protection which the law throws around rights once established by formal judicial proceedings in tribunals established by law, according to the methods of the law—no longer open to inquiry in the usual and ordinary methods. Of this class are judgments and decrees of a court deciding between parties before the court and subject to its jurisdiction, in a trial which has presented the claims of the parties, and where they have received the consideration of the court.

16
On the other hand, the doctrine is equally well settled that the court will not set aside a judgment because it was founded on a fraudulent instrument, or perjured evidence, or for any matter which was actually presented and considered in the judgment assailed. Mr. Wells, in his very useful work on Res Adjudicata, says, sect. 499: 'Fraud vitiates every thing, and a judgment equally with a contract; that is, a judgment obtained directly by fraud, and not merely a judgment founded on a fraudulent instrument; for, in general, the court will not go again into the merits of an action for the purpose of detecting and annulling the fraud.' . . . 'Likewise, there are few exceptions to the rule that equity will not go behind the judgment to interpose in the cause itself, but only when there was some hindrance besides the negligence of the defendant, in presenting the defence in the legal action. There is an old case in South Carolina to the effect that fraud in obtaining a bill of sale would justify equitable interference as to the judgment obtained thereon. But I judge it stands almost or quite alone, and has no weight as a precedent.' The case he refers to is Crauford v. Crauford, 4 Desau. (S. C.) 176. See also Bigelow on Fraud, 170-172.

22
But perhaps the best discussion of the whole subject is to be found in Greene v. Greene (2 Gray (Mass.), 361), where the opinion was delivered by Chief Justice Shaw. That was a bill filed by a woman against her husband for a divorce. The husband had five years before obtained a decree of divorce against her. In her bill she alleges that the former decree was obtained by fraud, collusion, and false testimony, and she prays that this may be inquired into, and the decree set aside. The court was of opinion that this allegation meant that the husband colluded or combined with other persons than complainant to obtain false testimony, or otherwise to aid him in fraudulently obtaining the decree. The Chief Justice says that the court thinks the point settled against the complainant by authority, not specifically in regard to divorce, but generally as to the conclusiveness of judgments and decrees between the same parties. He then examines the authorities, English and American, and adds: 'The maxim that fraud vitiates every proceeding must be taken, like other general maxims, to apply to cases where proof of fraud is admissible. But where the same matter has been actually tried, or so in issue that it might have been tried, it is not again admissible; the party is estopped to set up such fraud, because the judgment is the highest evidence, and cannot be contradicted.' It is otherwise, he says, with a stranger to the judgment. This is said in a case where the bill was brought for the purpose of impeaching the decree directly, and not where it was offered in evidence collaterally. We think these decisions establish the doctrine on which we decide the present case; namely, that the acts for which a court of equity will on account of fraud set aside or annul a judgment or decree, between the same parties, rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction, have relation to frauds, extrinsic or collateral, to the matter tried by the first court, and not to a fraud in the matter on which the decree was rendered.

Yeah, and IMO the bad part of it is you know when they lose it some nasty revenge will be coming to America.

These minions of the globalists have already threatened Trump supporters with lists for re-education, loss of jobs, and what was that truth and reconcillation commission BS, and public threats regarding killing us have been made too, so they'll be out for blood.

They aren't going to roll over, I predict they will get really nasty and Americans will suffer for refusing their brand of kool-aid.

no matter who gets it, it's FUbAR. Biden is prez, half the country doesn't believe it. Trump is prez, half the country doesn't believe it.

There should be a new vote, closely monitored (which I'm confident Trump would win).

Yeah I remember how badly he got railroaded, by the media too. It was shameful what they did to that man.

I expect some nasty stuff to go down too, I agree w/you, very well funded and they are putting their plans into place too.

The election is a total sham for sure,
However the 12th Amendment (House voting once for each state) will re-elect Trump. (No need for another election)

When they announce all this shit...you might be glad you're on lockdown at home. The streets won't be pretty.

:DOMINIONVOTINGSO:

Last Edited by Butch DeFeo on 11/20/2020 04:24 PM

Mysteriously both sides have come together to keep working on the Stimulus.

There has to be a ANGLE of looking good no matter what this all ends up being.

In ANY contest, fraud means disqualification

See, I have a theory about this.

If Biden and co. would just come out and say “yes there was fraud, therefore I’m not eligible to take the presidency,” I think it would go along way to quelling some of the craziness. I could be wrong but I’d like to think they’ll listen to them.

Why would they do that, you ask? Because it’s part of the deal to go to jail for the rest of his life rather than be executed for his crimes

You will never get to see the "MSM meltdown" over this, because you'll never hear a peep about it in the MSM.

It's truly sad that we've reached the point where an 1878 law is going to save us now?

These monsters don't even obey laws from our OWN century... lol

See, I have a theory about this ^^^

There's a better chance that an asteroid is going to destroy the earth before January 20th, than there is for Biden (and company) to admit there was election fraud.

just when I was getting interested in this, you had to mention cue. I have no hope now

If what Sidney Powell says is true, and I for one believe her, of the involvement of the DNC with the chicons, Venezuela or Cuba, here is a little reminder.

As I've said before, never tire of seeing this particular small part of BK's Senate confirm hearings.

Really sad that there are so many from top of pyramid to the bottom people who are traitors to their own country.

And I asked this question on another thread but didn't get response. Hoping some legal eagles will reply....are we still under Maritime/Admiralty law structure?

Nope. Our founders understood that if fraud and cheating was rife in an election, then the election gets tossed by the SCOTUS and the House votes in the President.

And being that China owns Biden, it was an attempt of Communist Takeover.

Please cite the language in this case where it talks about "election fraud"

Never mind, I'll save you time, you can't, it's not in that case.

If fraud "VITIATES EVERYTHING" does that mean it goes to the HOUSE for a vote or does Pelosi take over?????

I really hope Trump can use this!!

Exactly. Disinfo. I want Trump to win but this is a red herring. utter BS. The case says nothing about election fraud. In fact, much of the discussion is on vacating court judgments based upon fraud in the underlying case. Not one mention of election fraud.