Replies

Without studying the citations, I have two thoughts on this ...

First, should a decertification be handled by a court, the outcome of the court case is whatever the whim of that judge happens to be.

Second, the fact of decertification does not, of its own, compel Congress to do anything at all. In other words, a decert is a “so what” event. Much like deciding after an execution that the defendant was innocent, he’s still dead, and “so what” if the system decides to announce his innocence. Arizona can decertify, and the only “mandatory” ramification is the court of public opinion.

Guaranteed that if a legislature asserts its rightful authority and decertifies, there will be other bodies who come in and assert the opposite. In other words, courts will render opinions that say decertification is illegitimate, that the findings of fraud are flawed, etc. It’s a battle in the court of public opinion, and the institutions are fundamentally dishonest. Public is left confused, and that I suppose is what the institutions want.

For the sake of argument, if enough states decertified to put the presidential election into question, the onus is on Congress to “deal with it.” Legislators don;t ever want to deal with it, hence all the “the election was perfect” rhetoric.

Nevermind all the unconstitutional usurpation, e.g., governors and election boards taking legislative power.

I’m of the mind that the government is illegitimate. I don;t expect honesty or integrity from it, in fact, I expect the opposite.