Replies

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4133096/posts#3

This “case” (which is actually not one) is Constitutional science fiction.

The “election” alleged to be fraudulent has no Constitutional existence. The 50 State Legislatures which appoint 535 Electors (and Congress, which appoints 3) have all adopted the custom of having people voting as the means by which the appointments are normally made, but this creates 51 elections, not one.

Those 51 elections occur at the direction of, and are subservient to, 50 legislatures and Congress. The States unwisely granted Congress 3 Electors by ratifying the XXIII Amendment in 1960, so Congress does have supervisory power OVER THOSE THREE, but not otherwise.

There is only one Presidential election in the Constitution, it takes place in December, there are 538 voters, and in December 2020 Biden got 306 of them and was elected President.

No State Legislature objected that its Electors were not the ones they had appointed. No State Legislature even convened to consider the matter. In the case of Pennsylvania, the Legislature fled to avoid considering the matter.

It has never been alleged that a single one of the 306 votes for Biden/Harris was a forgery, that the Electors who casted them were impersonating someone else, or that the Legislatures had secretly appointed other Electors.

There is zero space for an allegation of fraud in the Constitutional Presidential election of December 14, 2020.

As far as the 51 elections which occurred on November 3, 2020, they may very well have been rife with fraud, but since the appointment power of the 50 State Legislatures (535) and Congress (3) is plenary, that’s a problem for those legislatures to deal with should they choose to do so.

This “case” (which is actually not one) is Constitutional science fiction. ...
As far as the 51 elections which occurred on November 3, 2020, they may very well have been rife with fraud...

Thanks for your opinion. If the gist of your comment, at least as it can be understood, is correct, then there would not have been a need for the Jan6 "disruption" of the Special Congress.

There is no doubt a motivated Pence could have found a means by which to have the matter given further consideration and Constitutional measures brought to bear. There was certainly enough time in the process for such. It appears Pence and his legal advisors also believe that.

Anything the Electoral College does is still up for review and approval, by Congress. Congress and the Vice President have the authority to evaluate the electors and ask the states they came from if they are settled slates.

Inauguration Day was March or even April until 1937. That span of time allowed voting irregularities to be ironed out.

You have a lot of your concepts, wrong.

Even if all you write is correct, there is no such thing as coerced behavior in the USA. So Pence could have simply declined to perform the so-called “ceremonial” acceptance. If challenged, he could have resigned.

If impeached, he (and trump) could have presented the state level evidence gathered up until that point in time. The states would have been forced to rebut the charges in the court of congress and the court of public opinion (which seems fair).

Yes, it would have been difficult and a constitutional crisis of sorts, but better than sliding further into darkness as we seem to be doing now.