Posted on 12/10/2016 7:37:53 PM PST by kevcol
The courts could legally “install” Hillary Clinton as president instead of Donald Trump, because of Russia’s alleged interference in the election, The Huffington Post asserted in a story Friday.
Seizing on a breaking report that the CIA has concluded Russia worked covertly to help Trump win the election, Alex Mojaher writes in HuffPo the findings could be enough for a federal court to “invalidate” Trump’s win. “Russian Interference Could Give Courts Legal Authority To Install Clinton,” the headline reads.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycallernewsfoundation.org ...
In Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, et al the USSC ruled that the state legislature has plenary power to appoint electors. They followed that landmark decision with a series of equally important rulings in Bush v. Gore. Even the liberals (for the most part) got it right.
The Florida Supreme Court had earlier claimed that an ambiguous provision in the Florida Constitution meant that either the recount must complete by the safe haven date, or that Florida could not appoint its electors.
The USSC slapped down the Florida Court hard. The USSC ruled unanimously that the the US Constitution gives plenary power to state legislatures, and that no Florida statute, no Florida court, no Federal Court, and not even the Florida Constitution could set that power aside.
The Florida Supreme Court continued to play games. In Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the Florida Supreme Court had again exceeded its authority in ordering a manual recount in only a few counties, which would result in an Equal Protection violation. Additionally, the Court ruled 5-4 that the recount must stop because it endangered the likelihood that the electors could be appointed by the save haven date mandated by Federal law.
In sum: it was the Florida Supreme Court that exceeded its authority, and the USSC ruled in several decisions that the appointment of electors was intended to be handled entirely by the political branches, and NOT by the courts.
The USSC role in Bush v. Gore was an outstanding victory for the rule of law, and government of, by, and for The People.
A sample, from Antonin Scalia's decision for the majority. May he rest in peace:
"The counting of votes that are of questionable legality does in my view threaten irreparable harm to petitioner Bush, and to the country, by casting a cloud upon what he claims to be the legitimacy of his election. Count first, and rule upon legality afterwards, is not a recipe for producing election results that have the public acceptance democratic stability requires."
Let them try.
Of what I was referring to.
Related:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3503467/posts?page=1#1
former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan knows both Assange & the leaker & says it wasn’t the Russians, it was an ‘inside job’.
I’m sorry they are mentally ill. I sincerely doubt Trump’s chances were ever that low. And this whole “Russia stole the election” is just stupid.
Congress counts electoral vote. 2nd amendment would dispatch any communist so-called federal judge who would try to challenge that
Congress counts electoral vote. 2nd amendment would dispatch any communist so-called federal judge who would try to challenge that
Election Officials in Philadelphia (of course) conspired with the candidate of a state senate race to falsify absentee ballots.
Justice Newcomer, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania wrote, in part:
"Indeed, the two Democrats on the three-member board of elections, an elected body, testified that they were aware of the voter fraud, had intentionally failed to enforce the election law and had later tried to conceal their activities by hurriedly certifying the Democratic candidate as the winner."
At issue were fraudulently cast absentee ballots, sufficient to cast the results of the election in doubt. In his ruling, Newcomer threw out the absentee ballots, and kept the votes that had been recorded on election day by voting machines. In that outcome, the Republican won.
So he did not "award" the election to the loser. He based an adjudication of the winner on the only reliable votes at hand.
The Third Circuit returned his decision with an order that he reconsider on the merits. He did so, and reaffirmed his earlier decision. The case went to the USSC, which upheld Newcomer's decision.
This kind of case is taken to the Federal courts all the time, and involves a claim by the plaintiff that he and his voters were discriminated against as a class which is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and a clear matter of Federal law. He also held that the actions of the elections board, who were co-conspirators, meant that he and the voters of his district were denied due process in the election proceedings, also a matter of Federal law.
So, there is nothing terribly radical here. A judge made a decision about the usability of fraudulent ballots, and ruled that fraudulent ballots couldn't be used. By disqualifying the illegal ballots, the remaining ballots decided the election.
What does this have to do with Huffpo's claim that this case establishes a precedent for overturning the current election?
Nothing.
You mean drawn and quartered.
There is NOT a precedent. Please read my post.
“Does a court have ANY authority to do this anywhere, anyhow?”
No.
And what are they saying, that Russia sought to influence the election, correct? Either through the release of the emails they “hacked” or by putting “fake news” on FB, etc., somehow? I mean that’s the story right? Nobody is suggesting the Russians actually rigged voting machines or vote counts, are they?
So, how could you ever PROVE that the Russians were successful? I mean, in the end Hillary got more raw votes. I’d give the Ruskis a lot of credit for many things, but I doubt they could have swung this election to Trump via those means, or to Hillary either. If they could, well I’d look into hiring them if I ran for president.
Only after a fair trial and conviction.
I won’t dispute that and I”m too lazy to google, but that’s hardly comparable. It was a local election, maybe there was good evidence of vote fraud, that could happen and in a small race (that is a race with very few people voting) it could control the outcome.
I won’t address whether I think awarding the seat to the loser was the right thing to do without finding out more about it. But this is not comparable to a nationwide vote. Pres & VP are the ONLY votes taken of the entire nation, everything else is voted for on the state level even if it’s a federal office. And there are many protections built in to the constitution, the electoral college, what to do in case of a tie, etc.
In fact, I think the most recent season of the HBO Comedy show “Veep” went through every single one.
About the only thing that could keep Trump of of the WH now would be a large number of “faithless electors” and I just don’t see that happening.
Everything they are saying about Trump they said about Romney and, aside from business success, the 2 guys have pretty much NOTHING in common. So, only the lefty choir believes their preaching any more. And re-electing Pelosi speaker is just pathetic.
The times they really are a changing, again. My kid is 30, those kids are coming into their own. And actually very few of them need coloring books and a “safe space”. But I would say to the dems, you’re doing great, don’t ever change!
“Please read my post.”
I did, both of them. And thanks for explaining what happened in that PA case!
Trump is going to be president, for good or ill, just like Obama was. I hope that God guides him, but at least Trump loves America and Americans. Which Obama does not, which Hillary does not. So that will be an improvement right there.
Thanks for your clarification. the story I read on it didn’t have all those details and it was indeed misleading. Thanks again for clearing that up.
Thanks for your clarification. the story I read on it didn’t have all those details and it was indeed misleading. Thanks again for clearing that up.
My pleasure.
Another liberal wet dream. The courts do not have this authority and it is absurd to believe that Russian hacking stuffed ballot boxes with Trump votes in every state he won.
Great post. Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.