(Vanity) Premature Declaration?

Vanity | November 7, 2020 | Self

[PBRCat]

The media sponsored declaration was purposeful. It was designed to mislead the public and put a halt to the recounts and litigation.

Bear in mind that Pennsylvania officials had to file a responsive brief with the Supreme Court of the United States this afternoon by 2:00 pm (EST) as per Justice Alito's order.

The rush to declare Biden the winner was in part an attempt to suggest to the SCOTUS that the election is over. Why mess with a SCOTUS review of the flagrantly unconstitutional actions of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court -- which were contrary to state law and the US Constitution when Biden's media allies have announced a fait accompli?

Should the Supreme Court overrule the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and reinstate Pennsylvania's election laws, Biden stands to lose tens of thousands of votes.

Move along peasants, nothing to see here.

[PBRCat]

Big media trying to sway Chief Justice Roberts???

[Orosius]

The propaganda arm of the Democrat Party is making Biden’s “win” a fait accompli.

[max americana]

“Big media trying to sway Chief Justice Roberts???

Trying? You do realize this clown has never swayed our way. I heard he sways when little kids are involved..

[PBRCat]

I was trying to be polite.

[rktman]

The lames DO NOT make the final call. Butt there sure are a lot of dumbasses that believe they do. As for cj Roberts, he will end up minimized.

[38special]

Nothing is official until the Electoral College votes

[longtermmemmory]

could it be because somehow they “fixed” the judges/justices?

[llevrok]

I agree

Playing this out - Trump wins all his court challenges and the re-counts show him to be the winner.

After all the love shown for Biden in the media and celebrations in the streets, try to lead the country, let alone the traditional GOP, with out a total likely national melt down

[I got the rope]

EFF the supreme court. The legislative bodies will do their job or there will be war. This only ends in blood

[mass55th]

The media has no control over vote counting.

[Irenic]

I don’t mind what it does here, what bothers me is what is does in the world.

They see Biden as the winner and Trump as trying to hang on, this is going to cause other countries to get involved.

Germany has already been elbowing, Daily Mail UK was wall to wall BS stories on the election and the jackals were vicious in the comments.

China is already starting to pump their chest.

They will come to our shores and bring us to our knees, to ‘save’ us from Donald Trump.

World Govt/Communism is on like Donkey Kong.

Maybe I read too much into things but that’s what I’m feeling. (yeah drama but within the realm of possibility)

I keep thinking we are getting a different version of what Russia got, but similar, as in- our government as we know it, will fall.

I think this is do or die on auditing this election, not just wait until next time—because we don’t have honest elections and so no country.

[PBRCat]

The media has been carrying this invalid for weeks and months. He is in physical and mental decline.

While Trump was holding four to five rallies per day in front of thousands of spectators, the media was trying to tout Sleepy Joe’s five minute stops in neighboring Pennsylvania as important campaign events despite fewer than twenty attendees.

[OrangeHoof]

Premature electoration...

[shanover]

Overall,this has been a gut punch to the USA which was at its peak before Corona and Floyd.

[RideForever]

Premature emasculation?

[grey_whiskers]

Won't matter. Read this.

https://macris.substack.com/p/why-trump-will-triumph-in-pa-litigation

Excerpt:

Thus the situation as it stands is that there is still a petition before the Supreme Court to review the situation in Pennsylvania, it just refused to do so before the election.

Now that raises the question: What’s the situation in Pennsylvania? Let’s work through that.

In 2019, the PA legislature passed a law called Act 77 that permitted all voters to cast their ballots by mail but (in Justice Alito’s words) “unambiguously required that all mailed ballots be received by 8 p.m. on election day.” The exact text is 2019 Pa. Leg. Serv. Act 2019-77, which stated: “No absentee ballot under this subsection shall be counted which is received in the office of the county board of elections later than eight o'clock P.M. on the day of the primary or election.” I agree with Justice Alito: That is unambiguous.

Act 77 also provided that if this portion of the law was invalidated, that much of the rest of Act 77, including its liberalization of mail-in voting, would also be void. The exact text is: “Sections 1, 2, 3, 3.2, 4, 5, 5.1, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12 of this act are nonseverable. If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remaining provisions or applications of this act are void.”

To again put this into common English, the Pennsylvania legislature passed a law that said mail-in ballots had to arrive by 8PM on election day to be counted, and then said that if the Court over-ruled that law, the entire law that permitted mail-in ballots was invalid.

In the face of this clear text, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, by a vote of four to three, made the following decrees, summarized here by SCOTUS:

Mailed ballots don’t need to be received by a election day. Instead, ballots can be accepted if they are postmarked on or before election day and are received within three days thereafter. Note that this is directly contravenes the text above.

A mailed ballot with no postmark, or an illegible postmark, must be regarded as timely if it is received by that same date.

In doing so, PAs’ high court expressly acknowledged that “the statutory provision mandating receipt by election day was unambiguous” and conceded the law was “constitutional,” but still re-wrote the law because it thought it needed to do so in the face of a “natural disaster.” It justified its right to do so under the Free and Equal Elections Cause of the PA State Constitution.

.
.
.
There is a strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution. Justice Alito writes: “The provisions of the Federal Constitution conferring on state legislatures, not state courts, the authority to make rules governing federal elections would be meaningless if a state court could override the rules adopted by the legislature simply by claiming that a state constitutional provision gave the courts the authority to make whatever rules it thought appropriate for the conduct of a fair election.”

Justice Alito is referring to the following clauses of the US Constitution:

Art. I, §4, cl. 1, which states “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”

Art. II, §1, cl. 2, which states “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.”

Again, translating this into common English, the US Constitution grants state legislators the exclusive right to prescribe the time, place, and manner of holding elections, and to direct the appointment of the electors.

[joma89]

Agreed. It is pure information warfare designed to get the enemies of the democrats to willingly stop fighting. Pleaze don’t.

JoMa