Posted on 06/17/2022 5:47:11 PM PDT by T Ruth
Please cite any part of the Constitution that mentions, or even suggests, Congress "certifying" anything.
One area where he's accurate is his statement that no state sent more than one slate of electors.
He would be singing a very different tune if the roles were reversed and it was Biden contesting a Trump victory in 2020.
Where does the Constitution mention, or even suggest, that elections with popular participation have any role in the appointment of Electors?
States could stop this ridiculous "voting for President" business tomorrow without offending the Constitution.
Pence did entertain objections to two states, Arizona and Pennsylvania. In fact the Arizona challenge had been submitted and the House and Senate were in the process of going to their separate chambers to debate and vote on the challenge when the capitol breach happened. The Pennsylvania challenge was debated and voted on later after Congress reconvened. Those were the only two challenges submitted.
There were dual slates.
Well said!
The meat of the issue is of course in how objections are handled and disposed of.
I think this is covered in detail by statutory law, not by the Constitution, or by any specific provision thereof.
A Fox News article has this:
___________
After the debate, the House and Senate will both vote on whether to accept that state’s electors.
It’s a roll call vote that will document how each lawmaker stands on each state’s electors.
It takes both the House and Senate to reject a state’s electoral votes. If that happens, the electoral slate just disappears. It would be as though Arizona never voted.
This could take a very, very long time.
After the votes on that particular state, the House and Senate resume jointly again and begin the tally for the rest of the states.
If there is another joint objection, the House and Senate separate again for another two hours of debate and a vote on that contested state.
The time needed to separate, debate and vote on each state could be three to four hours.
The process repeats itself until all the states are counted.
The votes are not on Trump’s side
Since Democrats control the House and enough Republicans in both the House and Senate accept that Trump lost the election, these objections are a longshot effort.
At the end of the process, Biden and Kamala Harris are expected to be certified as the next president and vice president of the United States.
Their inauguration would be on Jan. 20.
__________
So “certification” is the term arguably loosely being used to indicate the official, formally determined result of the counting or tallying process spelled out in the Constitution.
The process of dealing with the objections seems to be where the grey area is, the absence of strict Constitutional guidance or instruction, and the uncertainty as to what will or should happen if the objection cannot quickly be dealt with and resolved. States with astonomically high stank factors in the process by which slates of POTUS and VPOTUS elector slates should be ready to have their face pushed back into their own vomit by means of the aforementioned process of dealing with onjections. The Federal Government need not put up with state-level criminality impunitiously corrupting the process by which national officeholders like POTUS and VPOTUS are selected.
You’ll agree, will you not?, that Capitol Police murders of citizens cast a bit if a pall on a process by which the apparent electoral slate selection criminality in the states in question may have been exposed and rooted out.
Thats right and the true electors were standing by to fill the slot of those rejected.
Why?
The Constitution requires that elections be set and regulated by State Legislatures. The traduced swing states had agencies, and elected Judicial hacks who substituted themselves for the state legislatures and traduced the security and vote verification of the electoral process, Their electors sent in by 5 states were bogus. Very simple logic. I mean De Souza’s film 2000 mules is not based on imagination.
The Show Trial was designed to ‘move the needle’ on the elections. It failed.
Here’s what we’ve learned - that democrats only allow their side to speak. More and more of us will be voting against them in the future.
p
Thanks for the post.
Yu are most welcome my FRiend.
Yu are most welcome my FRiend.
Did the Founding Fathers intend for the system to be a conveyer belt of corruption?
Yes, it is speculation as to what may have happened...But...we do know what is happening now. Republicans are being hunted legally, politically, and ( sadly) physically, and the economy and world peace is a mess.
I’ll tell you this: The founders of this country would have been appalled at the idea that every moron who can breathe on a mirror would have the right to vote.
I believe there were individual objections made to the electoral votes for a total of 5 or 6 states. Arizona and Pennsylvania were the only ones that went to a vote because the applicable statute requires objections from both a House member AND a Senator for the objection to even be considered … and they were the only two where the objections met that condition.
No, there were not.
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.