Rasmussen Reports Profile picture
Dec 25 3 tweets 1 min read Read on X
"Under our system of separated powers, the Judicial Branch cannot sit in judgment over a President’s official acts. That doctrine is not controversial. It was treated as self-evident and foundational from the dawn of the Republic ...
1/3
... and it flows directly from the exclusive vesting clause of Article II. In 1803, Chief Justice Marshall endorsed it, writing in Marbury v. Madison that a President’s official acts 'can never be examinable by the courts.'
2/3
President Trump’s public statements and tweets about alleged fraud and irregularity in the federal election fall within the outer perimeter of Presidential duty, to which communicating with the public on matters of federal concern is absolutely central."
3/3
Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Rasmussen Reports

Rasmussen Reports Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Rasmussen_Poll

Dec 25
Good Morning and Merry Christmas !

"... these are not isolated concerns only arising out of the innermost thoughts of some conspiracy theorist hiding behind the keyboard on a computer. These deficiencies are clearly identified in a recent Rasmussen poll which showed ...
1/5
... over one in five voters in the last presidential election were involved in irregularities which should be without a doubt labeled as voter fraud. The poll also showed that these issues were not isolated to either party, and therefore it is not completely clear ...
2/5
... from the polling information itself as to whether the irregularities would have been sufficient to have made a difference in the outcome. Notwithstanding, there are other results from the poll that are even more disconcerting.
3/5
Read 5 tweets
Dec 10
Lab 'Leak.'

How did they know?

Millions of dollars were required to pre-order machines for a process - the mass mailing of unsolicited election ballots to every registered voter - that was then ILLEGAL in America.

Somebody knew early about the 2020 election changes. Who?
Unsolicited Mass Mailed Ballots - How Did They Know?

Fauci & Co. funded Gain-of-Function 'research' in Wuhan China. COVID-19 broke out there in late 2019.

By January 2020 it was in the U.S. On Jan 31, 2020 Trump ordered a China travel ban (initially opposed by Fauci). Image
Throughout February 2020 cases of COVID-19 were reported nationwide with the 1st official deaths reported on Feb 29th in Washington State.

The very next day - March 1st 2020 - something highly under reported happened.

From the official AZ Senate Forensic presentation 👇
Read 5 tweets
Nov 22
"I would watch the ballots go by, and there were odd patterns. 7 of those ballots were for Biden, 1 for Trump, 7 for Biden, 1 for Trump, 7 for Biden, 1 for Trump. That clearly doesn't .. that's not statistically possible." (Fake ballots were found) - uncoverdc.com/2022/06/29/pre…
Image
"There were a lot of things we noticed that were not organic. The bubbles being filled in absolutely perfect. It was obviously not done by a human hand - as though they were printed. A human being did not do that." (To do this requires proprietary AZ ballot software access.)
"The volunteers stop and look at a ballot. The paper was very very thin. The paper was really thin because when they moved it (gestures as if waving a fan) it was really thin." (Only 1 official ballot paper type was approved, 10 types were discovered by voter-volunteers.) Image
Read 5 tweets
Oct 28
"I would watch the ballots go by, and there were odd patterns. 7 of those ballots were for Biden, 1 for Trump, 7 for Biden, 1 for Trump, 7 for Biden, 1 for Trump. That clearly doesn't .. that's not statistically possible." (Fake ballots were found) - uncoverdc.com/2022/06/29/pre…
Image
"There were a lot of things we noticed that were not organic. The bubbles being filled in absolutely perfect. It was obviously not done by a human hand - as though they were printed. A human being did not do that." (To do this requires proprietary AZ ballot software access.)
"The volunteers stop and look at a ballot. The paper was very very thin. The paper was really thin because when they moved it (gestures as if waving a fan) it was really thin." (Only 1 official ballot paper type was approved, 10 types were discovered by voter-volunteers.) Image
Read 5 tweets
Oct 20
"In my 20 years of experience handling ballots, I observed that the markings for the candidates on these ballots was remarkably uniform, perhaps even with a ballot marking device. My estimate in observing these ballots, approximately 98% constituted votes for Joseph Biden. 1/6
I only observed two of these ballots for President Donald J Trump." Georgia "I was given several stacks of absentee ballots to count. The absentee ballots looked as though they had just come from a fresh stack. I could not observe any creases in the ballots and did not seem ..
.. like they were ever folded and put into envelops or mailed out. The marked bubbles for each candidate was filled in black ink perfectly within the circle. They looked like they had been stamped. The majority of the mail in ballots that I reviewed contained suspicious black..
Read 6 tweets
Sep 7
"The citizens of Georgia have been victimized for well over two years by false claims that there is no evidence of election fraud. This inordinate delay is attributable to lower court rulings that falsely claimed we had no standing. The secretary of state and attorney ...
1/3
general should have helped us all this time instead of fighting against us. It is critical that Georgians quickly know how many counterfeit ballots were included in the 2020 Fulton election results so we can implement more fraud protection measures prior to the next election.”
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(