Posted on 09/20/2020 4:04:28 AM PDT by Libloather
It's time for President Trump to start telling the raw truth to the American people. He knows it. I know it. Most voters who don't suffer from "Trump Derangement Syndrome" know it. Anyone with a brain and common sense knows it.
If you think your choice in this election is Donald Trump versus Joe Biden, you're blind, deaf or really dumb. Biden's not the candidate. Biden is just a placeholder, a brand name at the top to scam voters. But he will never serve as the actual president. Who's dumb enough to not see that?
The real behind-the-scenes winners will be Kamala Harris as president and Nancy Pelosi as vice president. Add in the infamous radical Commie Squad as the Cabinet. That's who's really running the Democratic Party nowadays: Reps. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. And don't forget former President Barack Obama and Rep. Maxine Waters for the Supreme Court.
That's the team you're really voting for when you vote for Biden: two California crazies and a bunch of commies (literally).
But it's certainly not Biden. Even Biden knows it. He spilled the beans just days ago. He called it "the Harris-Biden administration" while talking to the press. Can you imagine? Even the presidential candidate knows deep down he's not going to be the actual president.
Days ago, Harris spilled the beans by mistake, too. She was talking to the press and called it "the Harris administration." Has any VP candidate in history ever made this mistake? Did Dan Quayle forget George H.W. Bush and call it "the Quayle administration?" Did Al Gore forget Bill Clinton and call it "the Gore administration?" Did Joe Biden forget Barack Obama and call it "the Biden administration?" Of course not.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Kamala can tap dance till she drops-—
She still will be NOT ELIGIBLE to be either President or VP.
You raise an interesting point.
It is obvious that after January 20, an "Acting President" Pelosi could cause all manner of mischief and you give us an example.
Although it makes little difference, I think it perhaps more likely Clinton would be installed as president not via the Succession Act but rather by determination in the House.
Perhaps even more likely, and much cleaner, is that Clinton formally replaces Biden prior to the election and it is the Electors that vote him into office. Assuming, of course, the D's carry the day.
What about Vice President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or, to diversify the ticket even more, Ilhan Abdullahi Omar?
No, it will be Nancy P. as President #46 with Hillary as VP. With Obama as Sec. of State (the real power at the White House).
Then all early ballots for Biden would need to be discarded. Were Clinton to replace Biden in October every ballot cast for Biden could not in any way be transferred to Clinton of whoever takes Biden’s place.
Also the dangers of early voting ought to be obvious to the Dems. Had there been early voting in 2000 there likely would have been no crisis. Bush was comfortably ahead until the DWI story broke a week before the election. His lead evaporated. With early voting following the polling then he wins. This is why October Surprises are now September surprises and the debates have lost their impact.
There is the argument that when the Party formally replaces a candidate whether that candidate withdrew voluntarily or for reasons of incapacity the Electors are free to vote for the Party's replacement. I.e., there is no "faithful elector" issue due to impossibility and, as a practical matter, who else are they going to vote for?
Which of the two possibilities sounds most reasonable?
President Kamala Harris and Vice President Nancy Pelosi
It would prove there is a hell before you die and death doesn’t seem all that bad after all.
But the electors are themselves elected. So any votes for the electors pledged to Biden prior to his replacement must be discarded. While NY,Cal, Ill, Ma would not matter, Mi, Fl, Wi, Mn, Az, Va, Pa most certainly would.
Ugh. Never liked the stuff.
Are you arguing the Electors become disqualified? That may be true with a certain state but it is difficult to believe a state would hamstring itself in such as fashion given a last minute replacement.
Which goes to my point, if Biden is replaced one way or the other prior to the election, or even shortly thereafter, given the impossibility of performance those Electors are relieved of that pledge.
We may continue to disagree, but you can have the last word.
We are in a freaking war. George Patton wouldn’t have sat and talked about how strong the Germans were. It’s time to quit wringing our hands and fight.
If the communists win the election, the Nation is probably finished...
If the GOP doesn't replace Ginsberg before election, the Nation is guaranteed to be finished permanently if the communists win the election...
No I am not talking about the electors. I am talking about the early votes . The voters choose which slate of electors vote. Early voters voted for Biden and his electors but the name on the ballot was Biden. If he is replaced with Clinton while the elector slate is the same the name on the ballot is now Clinton. The early votes for Biden cannot be merged with later votes for Clinton. It cannot be presumed that a Biden voter would automatically be a Clinton voter. So the early Biden votes would be discarded. Enough discarded votes Trump wins the state and his slate of electors votes
Well, I said you could have the last word, but we have had a polite, even interesting discussion so let me offer this for your consideration.
Based on the summaries provided by observers, the July 6, 2020 USSC Colorado v Baca opinion would seem to support your view. At least until one gets to the footnotes.
Consider this one:
8...some States have drafted their pledge laws to give electors voting discretion when their candidate has died. And we suspect that in such a case, States without a specific provision would also release electors from their pledge. Still, we note that because the situation is not before us, nothing in this opinion should be taken to permit the States to bind electors to a deceased candidate.
That goes to the "impossibility of performance" issue I raised; Kagan was writing in terms of a death but I would argue that any event that made the elector's vote one for a "nonperson" would suffice. Since the pledge of the electors is fulfilled at the moment the vote is cast, that pledge could be modified where appropriate as the elector and the state agreed.
I would even go so far as to contend that a State had the right to modify its Certificate at any time prior to delivering it to the Joint Session.
Cheers.
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.