Posted on 11/06/2020 5:45:06 AM PST by CivilWarBrewing
Beijing Biden won the popular vote over Trump..
Beijing Biden got more votes than Obama's landslide win in 2008..
Beijing Biden got more votes than ANY presidential candidate in the history of the United States!
THIS IS WHAT THE NUMBERS SHOW AND IT'S TOTAL BULLSHIT AND I AIN'T BUYIN' IT.
Dear President Trump, WE LOVE YOU AND WE WILL FIGHT FOR YOU!
Oh and.. FIRE CHRISTOPHER WRAY TODAY PLEASE!!!!!
I would be very interested in seeing the Voter Registration rolls sorted by ADDRESS. I would bet that you will find Large Numbers of Voters at the same address on multiple occasions.
Per Fox News, Pennsylvania just flipped to Biden.
Send in the postal inspectors, Postmaster General.
The census has recent residency information.
The ‘rats are experts at getting out their voters.
Constructive Fraud.
Was there fraud? yes In the 100’s of thousands in each state? NO
The problem is the takers are outnumbering the makers. When a candidate says he is going to wipe out your student debt, give you a home, free college and healthcare they vote for that guy.
Face it, the country is becoming more gimme gimme gimmee pro socialist.
How we win:
1) via the State Legislatures who control the State Electors,
2) Via the State Electors in Congress (each State has 1 vote; we have 28 Republican States vs 22 Democrat states),
3) Via the Senate where we hopefully maintain the majority, and,
4) Via the Supreme Court where we have a 5:4 advantage (not including Roberts).
A caveat: Some say states’ governors might give electoral college votes to Biden if he wins the popular vote....
this despite their states’ voting in the majority for Trump.
npr.org
Suzan Walsh AP
CIRCA July 6, 2020
The USSC decides that Electoral College delegates have “no ground for reversing” the statewide popular vote;
States’ ‘Faithless Elector’ Laws that remove or punish rogue Electoral College delegates Are Constitutional
The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously upheld laws across the country that remove or punish rogue Electoral College delegates who refuse to cast their votes for the presidential candidate they were pledged to support.
The decision Monday was a loss for “faithless electors,” who argued that under the Constitution they have discretion to decide which candidate to support.
Writing for the court, Justice Elena Kagan, in a decision peppered with references to the Broadway show Hamilton and the TV show Veep, said Electoral College delegates have “no ground for reversing” the statewide popular vote. That, she said, “accords with the Constitution — as well as with the trust of the Nation that here, We the People rule.”
The decision was a relief to election law experts as well as Democratic and Republican party officials, who have long supported faithless elector laws such as those upheld Monday.
If the case had gone the other way, it would have been a “nightmare scenario” in which people unhappy with the general election results could “go after electors and try to threaten them or cajole them or bribe them to vote in a particular way,” said Richard Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine.
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser echoed those sentiments: “This was one where I did not want to contemplate what the other consequence would have looked like,” he said.
Even Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig, who represented the rogue electors before the Supreme Court, appeared only mildly disappointed at the loss. “We took this case initially because we just thought this needed to be resolved before it created a constitutional crisis,” he said.
Thirty-two states have some sort of faithless elector law, but only 15 of those remove, penalize or simply cancel the votes of the errant electors. The 15 are Michigan, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Indiana, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Washington, California, New Mexico, South Carolina, Oklahoma and North Carolina. Although Maine has no such law, the secretary of state has said it has determined a faithless elector can be removed.
Monday’s Supreme Court decision, however, is so strong that it would seem to allow states to remove faithless electors even without a state law. Duke University School of Law professor Guy-Uriel Charles said that nonetheless, it would be prudent for states to pass laws to prevent electors from going rogue.
“States certainly would be better off by imposing some statutory basis ... for removing or sanctioning rogue electors,” Charles said, adding, “But I don’t see anything in this opinion that requires them to do so.”
Monday’s case began after the 2016 election when a handful of Electoral College delegates pledged to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in Colorado and Washington state voted for other individuals, such as Colin Powell or John Kasich.
As Michael Baca, the faithless elector from Colorado, put it in an NPR interview, the idea was to “reach across the aisle” to Republican electors in 2016 and try to find a candidate that some Republican delegates would be willing to support other than Donald Trump.
Baca was removed on the spot under Colorado’s faithless elector law, and the Washington state delegates were fined $1,000 each. In 2019, Washington’s law was amended to require that faithless electors be removed as well.
On Monday, the Supreme Court put its stamp of approval on either approach, at minimum.
Kagan’s opinion noted that the original Electoral College system created by the framers of the Constitution failed to anticipate the growth of political parties. By 1796, the first contested election after George Washington’s retirement, the system exploded in disarray, with two consecutive Electoral College “fiascos.”
That led to passage of the 12th Amendment in 1804, “facilitating the Electoral College ... as a mechanism not for deliberation but for party line voting,” Kagan wrote.
Nothing in the Constitution prevents the states from “taking away presidential electors’ voting discretion,” she said. For centuries, almost all electors have considered themselves bound to vote for the winner of the state popular vote. If the framers of the Constitution had a different idea, she said, they never committed it to the printed page.
Justice Clarence Thomas, joined in part by Justice Neil Gorsuch, agreed with the outcome but wrote separately to explain his different reasoning.
Rather than interpret the Constitution’s sparse language about the Electoral College as authorizing states to impose conditions on electors, Thomas argued that power is reserved to the states by the 10th Amendment.
Although many Americans think that they elect the president and vice president, in fact, it is the Electoral College, an arcane intermediary mechanism dreamed up by the Founders, that Electoral College, an arcane intermediary mechanism dreamed up by the Founders, that formally determines who wins the election.
The system has been considered a formality because usually the winner of the popular vote also wins the Electoral College.
But twice in the past two decades, the unexpected took place: The winner of the popular vote did not become president; instead, the winner in the Electoral College prevailed. Trump, who got nearly 3 million fewer votes overall than Clinton, won the state-by-state allotment of Electoral College votes in 2016 and became president. And in 2000, George W. Bush became president, winning five more Electoral College votes than Al Gore, though Gore won roughly half a million more popular votes.
In total, the popular vote winners have failed to win the Electoral College vote on four occasions, the first two occurring during the 1800s.
But the fact that the last two occurred in just the past 20 years has provoked various suggestions for reform, including getting rid of the Electoral College altogether. With the country as polarized as it is, however, that seems unlikely, as it would require a constitutional amendment, and that in turn requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress, and approval by three-quarters of the states.
Several states have signed on to a proposal to sidestep the Electoral College altogether by joining a “National Popular Vote Interstate Compact” to pledge their Electoral College votes to whichever candidate wins the national popular vote, regardless of how the candidates perform in their state. So far, the compact has the support of 15 states and the District of Columbia, making up 196 electoral votes of the 270 needed to win the White House.
That scheme, which would only go into effect once enough states have joined to tip the election, would surely be challenged in court as well.
Flawed as the Electoral College system may be, at the oral arguments in May, the justices expressed concern about tinkering with laws that bind the delegates to vote for the popular vote winner in their states.
Justice Samuel Alito observed that if the popular vote is close, the possibility of “changing just a few votes” in the Electoral College would rationally “prompt the losing party ... to launch a massive campaign to try to influence electors, and there would be a long period of uncertainty about who the next president was going to be.”
Similarly, Justice Brett Kavanaugh alluded to what he called “the chaos principle of judging, which suggests that if it’s a close call ... we shouldn’t facilitate or create chaos.”
None of those concerns surfaced explicitly in Kagan’s majority opinion. She instead pointed to the text of the Constitution as well as more than 200 years of history and tradition to make her case.
“The Constitution’s text and the nation’s history both support allowing a state to enforce an elector’s pledge to support his party’s nominee — and the state voters’ choice — for President,” Kagan wrote. “... The Electors’ constitutional claim has neither text nor history on its side.”
Mailed blank ballots may have been taken from recycling bins and centers.
One question I haven’t seen anybody yet raise but in all those ballot dumps and those being filled in by Democrat counters how many just checked the box for the presidency only or the presidency and may be a Senate race?
Of the massive vote dumps how many were just for president only or President and senator?
My ballot had lots of choices and it took us a while to fill it out even though we knew how we were voting.
If you’re going to commit voter fraud for the issues that matter you can do it fastest by voting president only and maybe one or two other choices and skip the other crap
I wonder if there is a pattern there
They didn’t “get out”
Mail
Constructive Fraud, is the issue
We all knew it was coming.
“The ‘rats are experts at getting out their voters.”
Every voter drive in my area was set up and managed by the democrat party or liberal groups.
I do not recall any Republican or conservative voter drive going door to door ever in my area.
Conservatives are lousy at getting new voters. It needs to be said and corrective action needs to happen.
I want a FORENSIC analyst who specializes in documents, printers, inks, facsimiles, etc., to INSPECT BALLOTS RANDOMLY to see if CHINESE COUNTERFEIT BALLOTS PRE-SELECTED FOR BIDEN are among them. CHINA GAVE US COVID TO UNDERMINE TRUMP, THEREFORE IT IS NOT BENEATH THEM TO HAVE ENGAGED IN MASSIVE COUNTERFEIT BALLOT INFESTATION OF OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEMS! THIS WAS MOST LIKELY PART II OF THE COVID CONSPIRACY AS WE KNOW IT WAS COVID THAT THE DEMONRATS USED TO JUSTIFY 'MAIL-IN' VOTING!!..
Especially look for Biden selections MADE BY PRINTER instead of BY HAND. This is VERY important because it would be difficult to FORGE the numbers of ballots for Joe Biden that we are talking about here, ALTHOUGH THE DEMONRATS HAVE HAD MONTHS TO GENERATE THEM, POSSIBLY EVEN OFF-SITE OR IN ANOTHER COUNTRY (and NO I'm not kidding).
Also, HOW MANY TRUMP BALLOTS HAVE BEEN THROWN AWAY OR DISQUALIFIED.
Scanner and computer forensics is ALSO required..
Prosecute ANY poll worker engaging in nefarious activity.
Also, don't focus too much on COUNTING BALLOTS. It is totally USELESS to count ballots if they are FRAUDULENT OR COUNTERFEIT ballots. Focus on the BALLOTS THEMSELVES, THE SCANNERS, TABULATORS AND SOFTWARE AND LISTINGS USED TO ESTABLISH VOTE TALLIES.
So how does Colorado pass a law to disregard their allocation of EVs and post all Colorado EVs based on the national popular vote?
State constitutions might require the ability to get legal redress for every wrong, such as election fraud.
I live in Florida, and lawyers rule the roost here.
Pattern analysis is the best way of tracking down election fraud.
The Iranians were able to reconstruct documents shredded into confetti in 1979.
Don't forget that the easiest way to FORGE large numbers of ballots is to make the candidate selection A PART OF THE PRINTED IMAGE ON THE BALLOT. That way, no hand selection is necessary and I sincerely hope the Repubs hire a FORENSIC analyst who will check this particular aspect of potentially counterfeited or fraudulent ballots.
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.