Posted on 12/05/2016 5:36:02 AM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
Trump people need to contest the count on the grounds that there has been no security or chain of custody of the votes where all interested parties oversee all the locked up votes 24/7 until the SOS certifies the election.
But, us Constitutionalists must not ^depend^ on party affiliation to proffer our cause in this issue.
Just because an affiliation is ideological (e.g; “Republican”) this does not mean the judge will not bend to political expediency for sake of their (well paid) position.
SCOTUS-CJ-Roberts comes to mind. It appears he did not want pitchforks and torches outside his home if he decided against Obamacare. Neither would he consider Arkancide as an alternative.
We must be aware that personal considerations of the court adjudicators (overall, human) may change for any number of reasons.
Terrible mistake to involve the courts. Suppose Hillary and her team have been judge shopping since November 9. Suppose they have 3 Federal judges to nullify the results in PA, WI, and MI.
Now, you take it to the USSC, and their 4-4 deadlock leaves the lower court ruling in place.
You, by submitting this for adjudication by a Federal Court, are basically affirming that the authority of these courts extends over the State Legislatures' power to appoint electors, when it obviously does not.
NEVER NEVER NEVER acknowledge that Federal Courts can nullify a State Legislature's appointment of electors. They have no such power.
Motions filed in those courts do not deserve a reply. Orders of those courts should be ignored.
The Legislature of Michigan has appointed its electors. They should meet, vote, and send their votes to Congress. Let the courts go hang.
Or until this "order" is ignored, as it should be.
Some people “blanked” the presidential election.
They only voted for down ballot candidates, because they didn’t want Clinton or Trump nor did they want any of the minor party candidates.
No selection for president should remain a non-vote for any candidate.
The press will NEVER tell an honest story involving politics.
This decision amounts to circumventing a two day delay imposed by law, in starting the recount. If Trump wins his appeal in state court, there was two days of counting that are a waste. It Trump loses on appeal, the recount goes on "as planned," except for starting the recounting two days earlier.
As for the opinion itself, it conflates the "right to vote" (invented by courts) and a "right to recount."
Nope.
Contest the “recount” as being ONLY specific to the POTUS vote and, consequently only to determine the “Stein-implied” impropriety in the voting.
Why simply recount the POTUS vote without investigating the “impropriety” alleged by Stein? Nonsensical!
The easy step is to re-verify the votes in all precincts by voter rolls and find anomalies. That is what Stein’s filing imposes; since she has no aggrieved standing in the POTUS vote total.
:: Some people “blanked” the presidential election ::
Consider the “sample” of #nevertrump voters on this board alone.
Intent, defined as ^not to vote^ should be considered. Down-ticket conservative or liberal are NOT an indication of POTUS intent.
Michigan has already sent their votes to Congress.
Is this a question or fact?
Then no other action by anyone is necessary.
If Goldsmith wants a recount, bring him the ballots and let him get going on it. Sh*t, even offer to send take-out, because it's going to take him a while.
Thought for sure they’d be asking for a recount in the College Football Playoff. Harbaugh’s really been coming unhinged.
What does the 6th circuit’s record look like? Their decision is likely to be the one that counts assuming the SCOTUS will wind up in a 4-4 decision along ideological lines.
They are heavily conservative. Only two out of 16 are Obama picks. And only one or two Clinton. Rest are Reagan or Bush.
No it must not. But will it?
Thanks. That is a ray of light in this murkiness.
The cost of this recount should be enough to cover (over)due diligence. But will it?
Lose the Woody Hayes glasses, Jim. Anyway, I think they must be the wrong prescription for you. No harm, no foul (cough)...Just think about it, wouldya?
Alright I stand corrected, even better. Though a google search told me otherwise.
That is not what a WI state Senator said. He said if the recount is not completed by the time it has to be certified, the elector vote will not count. Some say this is why they are doing it, if they can sue for a recount and the recount is not "state certified" by the time the electors vote, they will not vote due to the ongoing recount.
If this is true, then the PA, MI nor WI electorate votes will not count and then Trump will be below 270 votes and then is marginalized and not a legal elected POTUS.
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.