If this happens, the person ousted is not considered to have ever been President. The wrongful election is void. That’s the difference between quo warranto and impeachment. The law removes a legally sworn in President by impeachment for conduct while in office.

But the law removes an illegally sworn in person by the statutory Writ of Quo Warranto, regardless of conduct. I promised further research...

@HappyHermit That is quite interesting!!! Sort of like the different between getting annulled and divorced!!

Does this imply that a President removed via the Writ of Quo Warranto, you wouldn’t have to undo their actions as all of their EO’s etc would automatically be null and void, as if they never existed?!?


I think he loves us and we love him - in a Presidential way!!! I don’t know how he was able to accomplish everything he did.. he’s a miracle worker!! If you count the legal votes, he was elected in a landslide and I’m sticking to that!!

I’m all ears, so please keep us posted!! I noticed the other article said they plan future articles and even a podcast on the subject:

@Mikkall @HappyHermit @charlotte1958

“The best course of action is to improve yourself and your knowledge. Be ready.”

^ Exactly this. Read into it whatever makes sense for you.

@HappyHermit We posted essentially the same article!! 😂 my worry about the DC Circuit would be getting an unbiased jury.. keep up the good work!!

@HappyHermit One more thing: Sidney Powell told us that she suspects fraud in elections going back more than 10 years .. I think she said 2006.. what is the statute of limitations on using a writ of quo warranto, IF you have the receipts? That is what I’m wondering!!


Even if it gets to that point where a judge rules for Trump, it will inevitably go to SCOTUS. I have a better chance of replacing Biden than Trump if it comes down to SCOTUS.

But no case will get to any court so you don’t have to worry about my first EO.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
QuodVerum Forum

Those who label words as violence do so with the sole purpose of justifying violence against words.