Posted on 12/12/2016 4:08:45 AM PST by Enlightened1
Well bless ol’ Soros’s heart. I guess he just didn’t want Hillary to win after all.
Thank you Soros.
Soros and his people certainly wanted Clinton to win.
The Soros people were apparently outsmarted.
Excellent point....
Yes - 90% of guns are in red countries. And those people know how to handle weapons safely and know how to shoot.
Inner city thugs are no match.
The Soros people were apparently outsmarted.
********************
As I said...... Thank you Soros
“Who’s to say this whole thing wasn’t fabrication by Obama and his CIA to throw attention away from them?”
They most certainly DO want to draw attention away from any investigation into the Clinton foundation and all those with ties to it, and keep attention away from their satanic pedophile rituals. Exposing all the sub-humans with their hands in that cookie jar would be the biggest shake up in our nation’s history.
Actually, it does.
Twentieth Amendment Section 3:
It might be that the Establishment is setting up a case to declare that Trump failed to qualify due to a tainted election. Once they rule that Trump failed to qualify, they will then "declare... the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected" will be another election in early 2017. They could declare that the Speaker of the House "act" as President until this new election occurs.
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
The language in section 3 is about selecting a temporary person who "acts" as President until "a President... shall have qualified." I wonder if the Establishment can wiggle this to mean that the new election will not just select an acting President, but will actually be the qualifying event for the new President.
I'm just speculating here, but I think there is enough ambiguity in the Twentieth Amendment to get away with this.
-PJ
And in what way does Trump not qualify?
In any way that Congress declares.
That's the thing about false-flag operations, it's supposed to give the cover for those in power to do what they couldn't otherwise get away with.
I'm suggesting that there are some in Congress who would use the report of Russian hacking of the election to declare that Trump failed to qualify due to a tainted election. I'm not saying it's true, or even credible.
I am saying that it can be enough cover for some parties to try to make a Twentieth Amendment case over it. I'm saying that some people might try to define what "failed to qualify" means to their own advantage, since the Constitution leaves it to Congress to make that determination without specifying exactly what "failed to qualify" means, short of age, citizenship, and residency.
-PJ
> “It might be that the Establishment is setting up a case to declare that Trump failed to qualify due to a tainted election.”
The term “tainted” has no weight of meaning here. The 20th was passed to shorten the lame-duck period and then to take care of loose ends should a president-elect die before being sworn or if the election had no winner.
In this case, the election had a winner who was Donald Trump. To deny Trump his win, the election would have to be declared null and void — not going to happen.
The recounts of Stein/Clinton failed miserably. The crowing about “Russian Hacking” has no proof.
> “Once they rule that Trump failed to qualify, they will then “declare... the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected” will be another election in early 2017.”
Once ***they*** rule? Who is ‘they’? Congress? — not going to happen.
The entire crowing about ‘Russian Hacking’ is to give the democrat base an excuse to whine about for the next 4 years and for its leaders to be pestilent about in seeking to control cyber-warfare cheating for which they were denied in 2016.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3503822/posts?page=59#59
I personally don't think it will happen, but it's potentially a loophole that desperate people (aka people desperate enough to declare that Russians hacked the election without any proof) might try to take advantage of.
-PJ
Your fear and paranoia is understandable but the 14th was inadvertently written as an executable for lower courts to expand over the 10th and others.
The 20th Section 3 clause regarding “fail to qualify” means failure to meet clear personal qualification standards such as age, natural born AND failure to win a majority and not necessarily meaning a ‘tie’ which is covered elsewhere in the Constitution. Failure to win a majority meant that if a president-elect were to die and his opponent or VP had no majority, then the 20th specifies how to proceed in general. This would prevent the temptation of an opponent or VP from cavorting with elements of assassination to take over the White House. In the near past of the 20th, there had been an assassinations of a president-elect.
Unlike the 14th, the 20th is very specific and is not expandable without Supreme Court intervention and that is not going to happen as it is presently deadlocked nor was any evidence presented to show the election was stolen. Therefore, Trump will be sworn in according to the timetable that the 20th sets and the entire “Russian Hacking” charade will shut down from that moment onward.
To use the 20th to say that Trump did not win would necessitate a recount of the election. That is not going to happen.
Here’s a highly plausible set of facts that point to hacking but not the hacking the democrats and RINOs are squawking about. It gives insight to what the demo leaders are really after. What to do about it is also included at the bottom:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3503822/posts?page=59#59
PING!!!
Article and comments, esp #59
President Trump needs to call on Congress to convene a Commission for setting mandatory uniform secure voting system standards in the United States.
Read more
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3503822/posts?page=59#59
Thanks, Hostage & H/T WildHighlander57
What utter nonsense. How does that deal with a new election?
Trump is a natural born citizen over 35 years old, who has spent more than the last 14 years living in this country and who won more than 269 electoral votes in the last election. He qualifies in every sense the Constitution requires.
-PJ
-PJ
That has nothing to do with calling for a new election. Moreover trump will be certified so it is moot
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.