Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Jack Black

My reading of 3 USC 15 indicates an objection may be presented by a team of at least one Senator and one Representative of the state from which any electoral votes are offered.

See my about page for more.


58 posted on 12/17/2008 11:34:38 AM PST by frog in a pot (Is there a definition of "domestic enemies" as used in federal oaths, or is that just lip service?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Jack Black

Ooops, that is obviously incorrect, doing to many things at once.
The language is silent as to whether the objection is to be made by a team from the state which is offering the electoral votes.


70 posted on 12/17/2008 12:13:06 PM PST by frog in a pot (Is there a definition of "domestic enemies" as used in federal oaths, or is that just lip service?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]

To: frog in a pot
My reading of 3 USC 15 indicates an objection may be presented by a team of at least one Senator and one Representative of the state from which any electoral votes are offered.

I looked up the full text of 3 USC 15, and I don't see that it has to be a Senator and Representative from the state of which the electoral tally is being challenged. Nor that the Senator and Representative need be from the same state as each other. Good Thing too, since it's going to be hard to find a non RINO Senator with the testicular fortitude to object. But I think there might be one or two that would be willing to give it a go. I hope.

I also hope they have some firm evidence, not just something collected on the internet, to back up their objection. Something the 'Rats cannot so easily dismiss. Like a Kenyan or UK birth certificate. Or even the one the state of Hawaii says they have.

Would a Senator or Representative have "standing" to obtain a court order for the BC?

121 posted on 12/17/2008 4:51:42 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]

To: frog in a pot

so does this mean they all have to be from California, since those are the EV that need to be in question? So in other words, a repbulican state that carried Bush would not matter if they objected to California EV?


188 posted on 12/18/2008 11:38:32 AM PST by nbhunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson