Replies

The conference vote will happen on the 12th. The EC vote will happen on the 15th. Unless you can figure a way for the Court to schedule oral arguments and decide the case on the merits in 3 days, that scenario ain’t happening.

If the Court takes the case, their ruling would need to happen before 1/20/09. If so, then we would be witnesses to history - the first time that clause of the 20th Amendment has ever been acted on.

If the ruling were to take place after 1/20/09, the nation would have to depend on Pelosi to approve Impeachment hearings, and the rest of the Dim majorities in the House and Senate to impeach and then remove Obama for fraud.

Yeah, right.

the nation would have to depend on Pelosi to approve Impeachment hearings, and the rest of the Dim majorities in the House and Senate to impeach and then remove Obama for fraud.

Yeah, right.

Then we have a huge hammer to beat the Dems and Obama into submission every day for defrauding the nation.

The conference vote will happen on the 12th. The EC vote will happen on the 15th. Unless you can figure a way for the Court to schedule oral arguments and decide the case on the merits in 3 days, that scenario ain’t happening. If the Court takes the case, their ruling would need to happen before 1/20/09. If so, then we would be witnesses to history - the first time that clause of the 20th Amendment has ever been acted on. If the ruling were to take place after 1/20/09, the nation would have to depend on Pelosi to approve Impeachment hearings, and the rest of the Dim majorities in the House and Senate to impeach and then remove Obama for fraud.

I think I tend to agree, the only feasible way that we lose the Kenyan, if that he is, is for the election to be thrown into the House. Although elections have been thrown into the House before. In the Election of 1800, where two candidates from the same party each got the same number votes, the House finally picked Jefferson over Burr, Burr then became VP, as was intended all along by their party. That led to the 12th amendment proceedure whereby votes are cast separately for President and VP. In the election of 1824 the House choose between Adams (II), Jackson and Crawford. Henry Clay came in 4th and what not considered, but he made a "deal" with Adams, and even though Jackson originally got the most electoral votes (and popular votes which were counted the first time in that election), Adams was selected. He only served one term though, and Jackson beat him handily in 1828.

The election of 1876, while it did not go to the House, did involve quite a mess, and was only finally settled 3 days before the Inauguration was to take place. That was decided by an ad hoc Electoral Commission created by Congress and consisting of 5 Supreme Court justices, 5 senators, and 5 House members. But they could do that because the disputes involved election returns and certification of electors in the states, not any Constitutional qualification of the candidates.

So, bottom line, the Fat Lady hasn't sung yet.

There is one way that things could "go down" before the 15th. That is for a state official, or officials, to refuse to authorize the electoral college (they send an official list to the federal government,...well tomorrow) vote, or say they will not send the election results in to the feds, until they see some documentation. Then Obama, the DNC, and the entire MSM will take that to the Supremes, who can then deny cert. That could, barely happen by the 15th. Hawaii could supply a certified copy of whatever they have to each Governor and/or Secretary of State needing one (they might just have a " direct and tangible interest in the record", and certainly a court in their state would be a court of competent jurisdiction and could issue a "request" for the copy).

Then once it's out of the bag, the chips would fall where they may.

Long shot, but barely possible.