Posted on 12/22/2020 3:45:48 PM PST by djf
Ok. Newsmax today says that if, at the reading of the Electors, for each one, a Senator AND a House Member objects, then, AT THAT TIME the houses are divided and each one conducts debate amongst themselves for two hours. If, and only if, this debate goes on until Jan 18th, then the election GOES TO THE HOUSE where each State GETS ONE VOTE. So my question is do we have enough support to sustain this effort? Are there enough senators and house members to carry on a 12 day debate? Does anyone think this can be done?
I think you are too kind. Your post suggests that republicans don't do they right thing because they are timid. They don't do the right thing because they lied to us all about what hey believe and who the are and the fact is that they are on the side of the dems. They just pretend to not be so we have the illusion of having a choice in elections. When the chips are down and it really matters though they always back up the dems.
It doesn’t sound like it. This coup runs deep. It may be up to us.
Yes, I see that happening as well.
No. Democrats control the House and there’s goin to be more then enough republican in the Senate to vote with the Democrats to kill any objection. Besides, it takes both houses to agree to reject electors. If only the Senate votes to reject, then the votes of the electors are accepted. You can look at the elections of 1864 and 1868 for examples of this.
No, both chambers have to sustain the objection in order for the electors to be rejected.
If the states in question in any combination decertify enough electors then it goes to the House. If those states award the electors to Trump to put him over 270 you might see some token objections but it won’t matter unless enough congresscritters flip and vote with the other party to disregard the electors and force a House vote.
https://law.justia.com/codes/us/2018/title-3/chapter-1/sec-15/
3 U.S.C. § 15 (2018)§15. Counting electoral votes in Congress
Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o'clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer. Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified. If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State. But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted. When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted. No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.
MY REP IS IN !!!
THIS IS MY U.S. HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE !!! GO GET’EM TED !!!
HE EVEN VOTED NO ON THE BILL !!!
Rep. Ted Budd
@RepTedBudd
Yes, I plan to object on January 6th.
MILLIONS of Americans saw what I saw:
- Voter safeguards removed
- No signature verification
- Outdated voter rolls
- Ballots accepted after Election Day
- Poll watchers denied access
#WeThePeople will keep fighting for
@realDonaldTrump
It is up to us.
It hinges on whether we fight or we refuse. Expect no help from the Courts. The Courts have already made plain where their sympathies lie. The Supreme has told us GFY. What makes one think that they have changed their minds? If we are not willing to put our lives on the line as the Colonists did...... So be it.
y
This is the problem I am having. I need a brief explanation in English. Also had the same problem reading the 12th amendment. I bet I’m not the only one. Sorry.
“From what I understand, there have to be enough states in dispute that Biden’s total drops below 270”
Yes, that is the goal. I am assuming they go alphabetically as well and Arizona may be the first objection. If we could win that one it may make it easier for more dominoes to fall.
They have been working for 30 years on importing enough voters to give the Democrats a permanent majority, amnesty is the capstone of the Bush Plan for North Mexico (aka USA).
Republicans are purposely making themselves a permanent minority party.
Do we... It depends if Republicans got backbone of not... I hope the new group will be there to fight for Trump... If not, we’ll never have a fair and free election...
I agree. I really think most on the Right are letting it play out to the end. There’s no use in jumping the gun.
So to speak.
“From what I understand, there have to be enough states in dispute that Biden’s total drops below 270 before anything like that happens”
Both Houses have to vote to reject electors from any one state. If one chamber doesn’t, then the votes from states in dispute stand.
All of this should be political theater until after the Dominion voting machines have all been forensically analyzed. What is happening here is what happens in banana republics.
Great comment. The internet is full of brief explanations, and as Mencken observed, " For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." Sadly, my thoughts on the matter are not brief, clear or simple; and may be wrong.
Dershowitz added to the to the discussion when he stated on Newsmax that he believed denying Biden 270 electoral votes would force a contingent election House state delegations for president. The GOP has the advantage there.
However, the 12th Amt. states:
"...The person having the greatest number of votes [in the joint session Jan 6] for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; 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..."
I put "appointed" in bold type because that is the only point not clear to me. Is it a majority of the number "appointed" by the states originally (270), or is it a majority the number "appointed" by action in the joint session after removal by agreement of both houses? The latter takes the House contingent election out of it. And the whole damn thing is probably moot anyway, given the majority of Rats in the entire Congress.
“No, debate on objections is limited to 2 hours.”
Max of 2 hours per disputed electoral vote. Max of 5 minutes per person speaking.
There would be a LOT more support IF there was a criminal investigation - i.e. subpoenas and arrest warrants. In other words, there needs to be a reason (cover).
If that does not occur, I fear that there is not enough testicular fortitude within the GOP.
[#1] if, at the reading of the Electors, for each one, a Senator AND a House Member objects, then, AT THAT TIME the houses are divided and each one conducts debate amongst themselves for two hours. If, and only if, this debate goes on until Jan 18th....
[#49] This is the problem I am having. I need a brief explanation in English. Also had the same problem reading the 12th amendment. I bet I’m not the only one. Sorry.
A two hour debate cannot last until Jan 18th.
If the two Houses fail to reach agreement, the electors certified by the executive of the State shall be counted.
[12A] "But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted."
Correction. My attribution to 12A was in error. It should have been 3 U.S.C. § 15.
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.