Posted on 11/18/2020 3:51:08 PM PST by White Lives Matter
Thanks again, Great stuff.
“spinell(R): open to interpretation as to whether or not follows the statute. we can’t figure that out tonight.
jacobs (D) agree, we can’t figure that out tonight.”
Don’t follow the statutes- Then it’s illegitimate.
now discussing covid rules. bunches and bunches of covid rules.
some (rs) seem to be sympathetic. knudsen has residual concerns...
BREAKING: Wayne County MI election board Republicans rescind votes to certify, file affidavits that their families were threatened— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 19, 2020
Affidavit of William Hartmann - interesting question on pg4 about 'private monies directing local officials' https://t.co/Z24g9jRNMd pic.twitter.com/cqDNj2XDEw— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 19, 2020
Brave of them!
It will only get worse.
Bless them.
Whose jurisdiction is it to protect these federal election canvassers turned whistleblowers???
“Whose jurisdiction is it to protect these federal election canvassers turned whistleblowers???”
No idea.
As the saying goes: “ When you’re seconds from death, the police are minutes away.”
Ex post facto? Or does that apply to instituting law covering past events? —NOT A LAWYER
It applies to criminal cases as specified below in the definition provided by Black's Law Dictionary, 11th Ed.
ex post facto law. (18c) Constitutional law. A statute that criminalizes an action and simultaneously provides for punishment of those who took the action before it had legally become a crime; specif., a law that impermissibly applies retroactively, esp. in a way that negatively affects a person’s rights, as by making into a crime an action that was legal when it was committed or increasing the punishment for past conduct. • Ex post facto criminal laws are prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. But retrospective civil laws may be allowed. See retroactive law.“The ex post facto clause might have served as a prohibition of federal laws impairing the obligation of contracts and also as a ban on state laws hostile to vested rights, even when those laws could not be said to impair contractual obligations. But the Court has always adhered to the doctrine that ex post facto laws ‘relate to penal and criminal proceedings, which impose punishments or forfeitures, and not to civil proceedings, which affect private rights retrospectively.’ This doctrine was first enunciated by the Court in 1798 in Calder v. Bull. It was later challenged by Justice William Johnson in his separate opinion in Ogden v. Saunders and again in his concurring opinion in Satterlee v. Matthewson. Because of the refusal to extend the prohibition of ex post facto laws to civil as well as criminal cases, said Johnson, ‘this Court has had more than once to toil up hill, in order to bring within the restriction on the states to pass laws violating the obligation of contracts, the most obvious cases to which the constitution was intended to extend its protection.’” Robert L. Hale, The Supreme Court and the Contract Clause, 57 Harv. L. Rev. 512, 513-14 (1944) (citations omitted).
Trump was smart on his recount by omly doing the worst two counties all eyes are on the county rather then spread all over the state, this means it will be real hard to do fraud in theses recounts.
Hope someone has preserved an unmodified copy of the 2018 Wisconsin manual. Stealth changes are being proposed under cover of darkness. Commissioner Dean Knudson is holding the rats to being accountable. Appears to be one of the good guys. 25 minutes till midnight and they’re still going.
they could have been working on a rewrite for 10yrs and it wouldn’t matter....the rules have not been officially changed...
i am having a vague thought that the election recount manuals codify rules which should be legislated at the time that voting law is legislated (might be missing something).
this would also serve to deter proposing and passing laws with no real checks on procedures.
perhaps laws that effectively void certain checks and effectively create unequal classes of citizens depending on avenue of exercising a right (eg voting) could be (should be?) declared unconstitutional.
GOP are backstabbers.
How many Representatives (of either party) a state has elected to Congress is not relevant.
There are 32 states which are GOP controlled (Assembly{House}, Senate, Governor), each state legislature sends one person to vote.
How many Representatives (of either party) a state has elected to Congress is not relevant.
There are 32 states which are GOP controlled (Assembly{House}, Senate, Governor), each state legislature sends one person to vote.
That is not how contingent presidential elections are held. Under the 12th Amendment, if no presidential candidate gets a majority of electoral votes, the U.S. House of Representatives elects the president, choosing from among the top three electoral votegetters, with each state delegation in the House getting one vote and a majority of delegations being required for election. State legislatures play no role whatsoever once the Electoral College has met.
Not only is the 12th Amendment clear about this, but that’s exactly how John Quincy Adams was elected president in 1824. (That’s also how Jefferson was elected over Burr in 1800, albeit pursuant to the pre-12th-Amendment constitutional norms, which also provided for each state delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives getting one vote.)
Similarly, if no VP candidate gets a majority of electoral votes, it is the U.S. Senate that elects the VP (choosing from between the top two VP electoral votegetters), with a majority of senators being required for election.
“There are 32 states which are GOP controlled (Assembly{House}, Senate, Governor), each state legislature sends one person to vote.”
No. The House of Representatives, not the state legislatures, vote.
REALLY? NO ONE HERE thought to ping ME? LOL!
That said, I told ya, and I told ya, and I TOLD ya ALL that Dane and Milwaukee Counties would be FILLED with fraud this election.
So happy and PROUD that our President is kicking @ss and taking names.
The Socialist Democrats and card-carrying Communists in those counties are shameless CHEATERS. They MUST be punished. Severely.
I watched most of the wi election committee meeting live online but missed the final order. The reps on the committee were holding the line on changing the recount manual. Not sure how it ended as I had to leave for a meeting.
See reply #120.
SteveH wrote:
“admin recommended to strike the part that said ballots that did not include an address. republicans don’t like striking that. democrats say that is reflecting law. republicans say leave it alone under fair play don’t make last minute changes.
all motions to change the 2018 manual fail (generally all on 3-3 votes). so the 2018 manual stands (flaws and all).
(if the manual differs from the law then it’s likely to be a matter for the courts if the recount proceeds)
now considering public health (covid19) concerns which were apparently broken off.”
So, there weren’t any changes made?
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.
