Tim Canova: Supreme Court Considers Case Seeking to Overturn 2020 Presidential Election

gateway pundit ^ | 12/13/2022 | Tim Canova

[zeestephen]

Please see my follow up Comment #40.

I agree that Congress has a Constitutional right to certify a fraudulent election.

On the other hand, Congress does not have a Constitutional right to imprison people who peaceably assemble to protest against a fraudulent election.

[Drew68]

GP is as wacky as QAnon.

Griftway Pundit becoming today what Wingnut Daily was back during the Obama birther issue.

"Supreme Court gonna give us a do-over!"

Didn't happen then. Ain't gonna happen now.

A whole lotta FReepers got their hopes up though (as a long time resident of Planet Reality, I wasn't one of them).

[WalkerinSC]

Maybe they can get the AZ Crying UPS Delivery Driver to file a Friend of the Court brief.

[semimojo]

The prosecution must prove that the Constitutional right of the Congress to certify a fraudulent election takes precedence over the First Amendment right of an individual to protest a fraudulent election.

You're assuming facts not in evidence.

Trump's team has never even claimed fraud in court, let alone proven it.

[Vaduz]

Interesting now that many things have come to light.

[philman_36]

In short, there is nothing whatsoever that is "astounding" here.

Yep, the process is working fine and there is, as you imply, nothing "astounding" about that process.

However, I would argue that the subject matter of the case is what is actually astounding.

Catch-22 for the Court. You hold them to their Oath of Office or break your own Oath in not taking up the case.

Not everybody will see it that way, but many will.

[Jim Noble]

Is there even a provision in the Constitution to reverse an election even if it is proven to be crooked?

Since the Constitution does not mention "elections" as a method for State Legislatures to appoint the President, that's unlikely.