What I would do to be part of the team that gets to argue before the supreme court on:
The overwhelming evidence of the existence of the ‘alternative legislator slate’/‘Vice President’ conspiracy.
That said conspiracy’s critical legal argument, as to the Vice President’s role in “open[ing] all the certificates”, showed clear malicious intent at circumvention of constitutional and federal law.
That - regardless of the veracity of point 2 - the conspiracy’s legal backing was officially dismissed in Texas district court on Jan 1st, and in the appeals court the next day.
That - despite point 3 - president Trump and his personal lawyers continued to individually take multiple actions up to and on Jan 6th to coordinate the conspiracy, including inciting a threat of violence over the capital building.
What I would do to be part of the team that gets to argue before the supreme court on:
The overwhelming evidence of the existence of the ‘alternative legislator slate’/‘Vice President’ conspiracy.
That said conspiracy’s critical legal argument, as to the Vice President’s role in “open[ing] all the certificates”, showed clear malicious intent at circumvention of constitutional and federal law.
That - regardless of the veracity of point 2 - the conspiracy’s legal backing was officially dismissed in Texas district court on Jan 1st, and in the appeals court the next day.
That - despite point 3 - president Trump and his personal lawyers continued to individually take multiple actions up to and on Jan 6th to coordinate the conspiracy, including inciting a threat of violence over the capital building.