Posted on 01/04/2021 1:28:37 PM PST by Sense
Congress cannot change powers expressly stated in the Constitution based on a voice vote...
I note, today, the sudden end of that effort trying to convince us that the Vice President, the sole authority empowered under the Constitution to conduct the election on January 6th, really has no such power. The ruse intends: as his role is purely ceremonial, he has no ability to prevent frauds being practiced in our elections. Having failed in that effort...
Today, instead, I hear the Congress has voted to pass new "rules" for the conduct of the election on January 6th, which rules are BASED in that same error, claiming that the Congress, also, has no power under the Constitution to do anything but RUBBER STAMP frauds, and the products of frauds, as they are handed to them.
Congress does not have that power, in a voice vote, to deny they have those powers... and that responsibility... that the Constitution SPECIFICALLY imposes on them.
Their refusal to accept responsibility... has meaning.
Congress has abandoned its duty.
Beyond abandoning its duty, Congress has fostered a fraud in process that is intended to subvert the Constitution.
It is a fiction for any responsible actor under the Constitution... to deny they have the power to oppose fraud... or the responsibility to oppose it.
So, on January 6th... when we reach Alabama...
There should be an objection from Alabama... not to the counting of the electors from Alabama, when called for, but PRIOR to Alabama being called... to object to a process, that is, by definition, being conducted outside the requirements of the law and the Constitution.
The process must be made legitimate, before it may be allowed to proceed...
Products of fraud are fraud.
Frauds are not admissible as legitimate, and cannot legitimately be protected from the proper operation of the law.
That is true as a matter of law.
Process intending the opposite... is not proper.
Process designed and INTENDED to RUBBER STAMP FRAUD... while disclaiming power to do anything else... wholly illegitimate.
Public officials claiming they have no power to address frauds being practiced... while claiming instead to be bound by the Constitution to ACCEPT fraud... are traitors to the Constitution.
Perhaps the Senate parliamentarian will have an answer to Alabama's objection... and the question about that process being followed... and whether or not it should admit, and submit, to the requirements of the law and the Constitution before proceeding ?
A refusal to acknowledge the known products of fraud... as fraud... is a practice of and participation in fraud.
Denying that power exists... something else entirely.
Participation in process that is based in that set of errors, that is purposed to validate that error ?
Incorporating, into law, a requirement for process, that denies power exists under the Constitution requiring those charged must act, to uphold the law... and as that power DOES exist, when the law proceeds to also impose a requirement for the knowing acceptance of the products of fraud, by wrongly declaring there is no power, and thus there is nothing they can do about that ?
Declaring that is what the Constitution intends... cannot be correct. It conflicts with every element in the history of law... and upends those fundamental rights whose existence is SELF EVIDENT...
The rule of law... does not exist to validate fraud.
I expect Alabama to object to proceeding under rules that legitimize TREASON under the guise of routine process.
I demand PUBLIC accountability. The rules must be voted on, again... with full transparency... CALL THE ROLL.
I expect any intent on proceeding to commit that treason, to end the 6th of January with their heads on a pike.
Those who wish to avoid that fate... might be wise to insist that the responsible parties are named.
Not So Fast, Mitch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMdr7lPh6Cs
I wasn’t able to find anything in today’s vote on the “rules” for the count to be any different than what’s already spelled out in US Election law.
What do any of you think was different in what was passed today?
All that said, I agree - a vote, whether roll call or by voice, cannot change a process clearly enumerated in US election law. (Not that I think it DID change anything, but I wouldn’t put anything past Mitch or Pelosi).
Are the states required to be called in alphabetical order?
voice vote to change constitution. wow.
Nice job.
so if pence refuses to comply with the voice vote, the senate sergeant at arms will cut off his mic, forcably drag him away from the podium and arrest him?
and then, what? DC is surrounded by peaceable trump supporters.
dragging pence from the podium is an act of treason.
dc is asking for trouble.
We have delegated our power to the Congress, in the agreement that is the Constitution.
They have abandoned that agreement.
if pence has the floor, who commands the sergeant at arms?
mcconnell?
pelosi?
a joint committee consisting of mcconnell and pelosi?
Yes, the call the States in alphabetical order.
Alabama before Arizona.
Process issues are perhaps best discussed first...
Yes - states are called in alphabetical order during the vote reading.
i will ask again, where is the pence SS detail to be positioned in relation to the congressional sergeant at arms goon squad?
And before Alaska.
Is that convention or by law?
Power of Vice President to Count or Reject Electoral Votes Disputed
The problem is, there’s a voluminous body of legal analysis arguing that the Electoral Count Act is unconstitutional. Congress has no business granting itself the authority to decide which slate of electors is the correct one and which votes should be rejected. Nor does Congress have the power to designate state governors as the final arbiters, a lineup of legislators and legal scholars have argued.
There are two arguments for who has the constitutional power to decide which electors to choose.
More at the link
All that said, I agree - a vote, whether roll call or by voice, cannot change a process clearly enumerated in US election law.
***************
We are no longer a nation of laws. We are a nation of fraud and corruption, all condoned by both political parties.
once congress abandons the rule of law via a cowardly (unaccountable) voice vote, flyover folks may decide that they are better off without DC than with DC...
Great speech, Mr Henry would probably be proud of the thoughts. My trouble lies in when he gave his speech, there were around 3% of the populace willing to go to the wall for the Country. I’m not sure we can muster that now. I’m also not sure we have a true patriot orator that could give it. Thanks
Pence is the presiding officer...
He’s the only one with the power to direct the Sergeant at Arms...
Sergeant at Arms FAQ
https://www.senate.gov/reference/common/generic/saa_faq.htm
Sergeant at Arms: Offices and Functions
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/sergeant_at_arms.htm
Sergeant at Arms Michael C. Stenger
https://www.senate.gov/reference/common/person/stenger_michael_c.htm
Yeah, making "demands" on the internet.
You're a freakin' hero, pal.
Get a job.
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.