Disenfranchising the Nonexistent and Illegal Voters

American Thinker.com ^ | November 29, 2020 | Clarice Feldman

[Kaslin]

A few days ago, I forwarded a note about the proposed joint resolutions of the Pennsylvania legislators to refuse to certify the results of a patently fraudulent election. I got a response which certainly anticipates the Democrats’ talking points: “Disenfranchising voters is not what conservatives do.”

Of course not. It's what Democrats do by diluting their votes time and again with illegal and nonexistent voters. Refusing to recognize fraud by removing such votes from the tally at certification time is what conservatives should do. To fail to do so is to ensure that we will never have free, honest elections again and legal voters voting in accord with relevant laws will be disenfranchised while illegal and nonexistent voters will win. Scott Adams observes correctly that when people lose confidence in the regularity of elections, the orderly respect for government and the willingness to comply with it will end. To fail to do so, as well, means the legislatures in these states will have gelded themselves by refusing to enforce their prerogatives under the law. In the meantime, while state legislatures ponder their responsibilities, a large number of election challenges are being litigated around the country. Here are the most significant ones.

Pennsylvania

Prior Supreme Court Ruling

The rule changes permitting the mail-in ballots’ deadline extension has already been heard by the Supreme Court when Justice Barrett had not yet been confirmed. While the Court said late-arriving ballots must be segregated it indicated it was likely to rehear the matter post-election. That case does not involve all of the issues respecting the mail in ballots -- the failure to verify and match signatures on mail-in ballots as required by law was not then under consideration -- though the issue may have been preserved as it had been raised in the lower court.

[ml/nj]

Has there been even a single complaint of a fraudulent vote counted for Donald J. Trump?

ML/NJ

[where's_the_Outrage?]

“Given how the PA Supreme Court has ruled previously on election matters, expanding procedures beyond what even the legislature adopted, I don’t see how this survives the PA Supreme Court.”

The PA Supreme Court threw out the case with prejudice:

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3910446/posts

[SmokingJoe]

The PA Supreme Court made the unconstitutional ruling to extend acceptance of mail in ballots way beyond Nov 3, in the first place.
They were in effect sitting down in judgment against their own ruling. Of course they ruled for themselves.

[sauropod]

Bkmk

[Rurudyne]

I’m sure there are Democrats suspicious of those 3,000 votes when Biden got nearly 400,000 in the same 90 minutes, IIRC.

[upchuck]

Clarice Feldman ping.

If you'd like to be on or off the Clarice Feldman ping list, usually issued only on Sunday morning, please click Private Reply below and drop me a FReepmail.

[jmacusa]

The Democrats have NEVER run an honest campaign or held a valid election in their entire history.

[RipSawyer]

“The Democrats have NEVER run an honest campaign or held a valid election in their entire history.”

That may actually be the truth as bad as it sounds. I was born in 1944 in South Carolina when it was part of the “Solid South” and you could not find a Republican without conducting a long and arduous search. My father was a lifelong democrat and he used to talk about all the vote fraud going on back then when he had to be talking about his own party, there were no republicans there for him to talk about. It must have been democrats cheating against other democrats.

[jmacusa]

I was born in an average size working class town in Northeastern New Jersey in 1956. In Hudson County. Hudson County,NJ was at the time, was previously and still is a Democrat controlled and crooked as a rat’s hind leg.

Democrats. They cheat. That’s how they roll.