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

Skip to comments.

President Trump Stated That He Can Contest The Election Via Constitutional Means During A Rally Before The Elections – He Has Two Steps First The Courts, Then The House
Conservative US ^ | 12.12.2020 | Alex Hall

Posted on 12/12/2020 1:33:30 PM PST by USA Conservative

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last
To: JoSixChip

It is by state delegation not by member


41 posted on 12/12/2020 3:23:43 PM PST by joshua c (President Elect joshua_c. Hey if Joe can do it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: USA Conservative

President Trump’s battle plans!


42 posted on 12/12/2020 3:30:56 PM PST by NetAddicted (Just looking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn

#PDJT’s (battle)plans!


43 posted on 12/12/2020 3:32:05 PM PST by NetAddicted (Just looking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

This is an honest and realistic assessment -including the part about Pence. I dont know where Pence goes from here but he is not about to make some wacky move.


44 posted on 12/12/2020 4:00:14 PM PST by RummyChick (I BLAME KUSHNER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jmclemore; All

“Trump only has 1 constitutional path that the Supreme Court can’t stop - Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election” 🇺🇸

As a matter of reality, you are correct.

In fact —

- There was/is sufficient knowledge of, or reason to believe, or proof, either to know or believe, US election laws were flagrantly and pervasively broken, involving very real, coordinated, foreign access to tabulation influence and or inputs

- There is proof, or reason to believe, this is part of a greater “foreign and domestic” global socialist plan (which did involve at least 7 countries),

- There was foreign derived *SMOTE(GRU)/Smartmatic derived algorithms, and software, and hardware, which were indeed unlawfully involved/relied upon, (and regardless of tabulation), our national election was penetrable, even if not penetrated,

- Hundreds of millions of dollars did flow from CCP China illegally (at least), to impact and direct the outcome of this election, and high level Chinese officials habe admitted to, and broadcasted it

These violations are beyond the basic thresholds necessary to utilize “Martial Law” (limited at least), for the sake of our “national security”, and survival of our Constitution, liberty, and nation

- Numerous states (becomes a federal issue) did violate both Federal and State aligned election laws and processes, with the intent to defraud and steal the actual vote from their own legitimate voters (creating significant disparity/inequality between counties and states which were deliberately not allowed the same equality under the law), and have as matter of strategy denied all Constitutional redress and justice to both majority of voters, and their jurisdictions.

Trump has the moral duty and responsibility, as Commander and Chief, to utilize his Emergency authority, to protect the US Constitution and America citizens from otherwise total and indefinite loss of our just, honest, and lawful Constitutional election system.

What we have just experienced, is the greatest and most threatening, successful, nation ending, coordinated attack on the US Constitution and our nation, which we have experienced since 1812, or CV1.


45 posted on 12/12/2020 4:23:48 PM PST by patriotfury ((May the fleas of a thousand camels occupy mo' ham mads tents!) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty

🇺🇸👍


46 posted on 12/12/2020 4:24:37 PM PST by patriotfury ((May the fleas of a thousand camels occupy mo' ham mads tents!) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: convoter2016

bkmk


47 posted on 12/12/2020 4:40:01 PM PST by plsjr (<>< Mankind "knows" by trial and error. Only the CREATOR really knows His creation... and the TRUTH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MayflowerMadam

The Presidential term started on March 4 from 1789 - 1936.


48 posted on 12/12/2020 5:02:32 PM PST by Jim Noble (Lo there do I see the line of my people, back to the beginning)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

“First of all, all four GOP Legislatures (PA, WI, GA, MI) have accepted Biden as President-Elect.”

Easy. One Congressman and one Senator agree to contest due to the unreliability of the vote counts and failure to follow the Constitutional mandate of manner of selection being determined by state legislatures. Next.

“ruling by Pence (and I do not think he would rule for Trump)”

Of course he will. There are good reasons to contest the selection of electors in PA, WI, GA, MI, and maybe elsewhere.

“will be appealed to the floor where the Democrats have a majority”

You have more knowledge and experience in the procedures, but I would expect that this would require Pence to accept the appeal. He will have the gavel, right?

What are the ramifications of not following the rules of order? Has the Supreme Court EVER interjected itself into procedural matters here?

“The one-state one vote rule in the House cannot come into play until Congress certifies that no candidate has a majority of Electors appointed.”

I think it is the opposite. We are looking at a scenario in which certification does NOT happen.

Relevant wording of the 12th amendment:

“and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.”

If any path leads to no candidate getting 270 electoral votes by the deadline, the House MUST vote. Looks like it is Pence’s call. The language says, “House of Representatives shall choose immediately”. I’m assuming that Pence presides. Correct me if I’m wrong.


49 posted on 12/12/2020 5:22:14 PM PST by unlearner (Be ready for war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

Yes! They should stuff the ballot box with elector votes for Trump...just like Democrats did! A good place to look for the votes would be in a suitcase under a table.


50 posted on 12/12/2020 5:33:58 PM PST by FrdmLvr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: USA Conservative

Can the state legislatures act in discretionary fashion at this late date? Or are they bound by laws previously passed?


51 posted on 12/12/2020 5:44:08 PM PST by ChessExpert (NAFTA - Not A Free Trade Agreement)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gw-ington

It’s not the Congress-Congress. The reference is to the *delegations*. In this count, the GOP outnumbers the dems 27-22 (the article says 26, so I may be off).


52 posted on 12/12/2020 5:44:26 PM PST by jazminerose (Every lawful voter in America has freakin’ “standing”, fools.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: unlearner

You left out the relevant part of the Twelfth Amendment.

Your excerpt refers to what happens “if no person have such majority.” But what is “such” majority? That refers back to a phrase in the first part of the sentence, immediately before your excerpt: “a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed.”

Note that — not the number that could have been appointed, but the number actually appointed. The number 270 does not appear in the Constitution. It arises solely from the calculation based on the number of electors appointed.

If, somehow, the appointments by PA, WI, GA, and MI were vacated, then the total number of electors appointed would drop from 538 to 476. A majority would be 239. Outside of those four states, Biden has 244 electoral votes, so he would still have a majority (unless there were at least 6 faithless Dem electors, which is very unlikely).

What has to happen instead is that some of those Republican legislatures (add AZ as well) have to appoint Trump electors. A few legislators have called for that. Most of the Republicans, however, seem unwilling to fight. If they were going to do it, they should and would have done it by now, i.e., before December 14.


53 posted on 12/12/2020 6:01:28 PM PST by Eagle Forgotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: USA Conservative

Reference bump for AM review - thanks.


54 posted on 12/12/2020 8:16:28 PM PST by Tunehead54 (Nothing funny here ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Forgotten

“But what is ‘such’ majority? That refers back to a phrase in the first part of the sentence, immediately before your excerpt: ‘a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed’... Note that — not the number that could have been appointed, but the number actually appointed. The number 270 does not appear in the Constitution. It arises solely from the calculation based on the number of electors appointed.”

Well, I did consider that. As far as I know this would be uncharted territory.

“Clause 2 — Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”

“Clause 3 — The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted.”

It appears that the “majority of the whole number of Electors appointed” would include ALL the votes counted which is also the same number as ALL of the electors who were appointed and certified. My reading (and preferred reading) is that number of electors “appointed” is not reduced by some of them being rejected. Being rejected does not change that they were appointed.

Even Reuters made the same point, citing legal experts, that the specifics in this case have never been “stress tested”:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-contested-scenarios-expl/explainer-what-happens-if-the-u-s-election-is-contested-idUSKBN2781FS

Another problem is that it would not be the current Congress and Senate that makes these votes, but the one seated in January.

It is also unclear what would happen in the case of dueling electors (two sets from one state, one set from the governor and one from the legislature). The Constitution specifically says the legislatures certify, but the law gives preference to electors sent by the “executive” of the state.


55 posted on 12/13/2020 1:14:02 AM PST by unlearner (Be ready for war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: unlearner
My reading (and preferred reading) is that number of electors “appointed” is not reduced by some of them being rejected. Being rejected does not change that they were appointed.

It would depend on why they were rejected. A vote cast for an ineligible candidate (too young, failed the residency requirement, or not a natural-born citizen) would be rejected, but the elector who cast that vote was still one who had been appointed. In those circumstances I would agree with you.

In the hypothetical we're discussing, though, the reason for the rejection would be that the Nov. 3 vote was so messed up that the state's appointment of its electors couldn't be honored. The only reason to reject an elector's vote for Biden would be to reject that elector's appointment. With the appointment nullified or vacated, the would-be elector no longer counts toward the total. (I specified Biden votes. Suppose Congress rejects Harris votes on grounds of eligibility. Then Biden would still have a majority and would become President. Neither Harris nor anyone else would have a majority of the electors appointed, and the Twelfth Amendment would send the VP selection to the Senate. I don't expect that to happen.)

Another problem is that it would not be the current Congress and Senate that makes these votes, but the one seated in January.

Agreed.

It is also unclear what would happen in the case of dueling electors (two sets from one state, one set from the governor and one from the legislature). The Constitution specifically says the legislatures certify, but the law gives preference to electors sent by the “executive” of the state.

No, the Constitution does not specifically say that the legislatures certify. The exact language (Article II, Section 1, Clause 2) is: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors...." In every state, the legislature has directed that the method is appointment based on the popular vote. The Constitution is silent on two questions: First, who in the state (if anyone) is responsible for certifying that the manner directed by the legislature has been followed? The federal statute adopted decades ago fills in this gap by designating the governor. As you say, this has not been stress-tested. It would be tested this year if any of the Republican-controlled legislatures vote to appoint Trump electors, but so far none of them have shown the will to do so.

Second, can the legislature change its directive retroactively? For example, could the Georgia legislature now meet and vote to adopt, for the 2020 election, the Maine and Nebraska procedure of choosing electors by Congressional district? Could the Dems who control the Maine legislature now switch to the statewide vote, thus taking away the one electoral vote Trump won there? This is purely hypothetical for this year but it could come up in the future.
56 posted on 12/13/2020 5:12:41 AM PST by Eagle Forgotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: jazminerose
It’s not the Congress-Congress. The reference is to the *delegations*. In this count, the GOP outnumbers the dems 27-22 (the article says 26, so I may be off).

That's incorrect. If both Courts and Republican legislatures fail to deliver for President Trump, then that's the end of the road for President Trump's reelection chances. Given the U.S. House Democrat majority, it will reject any Republican objections to the states' EVs during the Jan. 6 vote count, led by VP Pence, so Sleepy Joe Basement-Biden would become the official President-Elect on that day.

The House state "delegations" you mention will become involved only if the Jan. 6 EV count does not result in one of the candidates getting 270+ electoral votes. If neither gets 270+, then the House will meet separately to select the President based on state "delegations." But the House majority will ensure it never gets to that stage (SEE previous paragraph).

57 posted on 12/13/2020 8:18:02 AM PST by gw-ington (The Office of the President-Elect gw-ington and Vice President-Elect Loch Ness Monster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Forgotten

This why I come to Free Republic. Nowhere else on the Internet can I find such interactive, reasoned discussion from knowledgeable people. Thanks.


58 posted on 12/13/2020 11:32:12 AM PST by unlearner (Be ready for war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: unlearner

Back atcha! I don’t agree with everything you wrote, but I appreciate seeing posts about the Constitution that quote the actual Constitution.


59 posted on 12/13/2020 2:45:09 PM PST by Eagle Forgotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: USA Conservative

bkmk


60 posted on 12/13/2020 3:18:22 PM PST by Grandpa Drudge (Just an old man, desperate to preserve our great country for my great grandchildren.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last

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.

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