Posted on 12/10/2020 8:28:32 AM PST by Red Badger
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s new mega law suit asserts that in “failing to follow the state statutory requirements for signature validation and other processes for ballot security, the entire body of such ballots is now constitutionally suspect and may not be legitimately used to determine allocation of the Defendant States’ presidential electors.”
The bombshell claim comes today – on the ‘Safe Harbor Day’ for electoral votes – as numerous challenges proceed to give Republicans more time to bring mounting evidence before federal courts as well as the Supreme Court.
Paxton’s case notes “significant and unconstitutional irregularities in the Defendant States” which includes Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
“Non-legislative actors’ purported amendments to States’ duly enacted election laws, in violation of the Electors Clause’s vesting State legislatures with plenary authority regarding the appointment of presidential electors,” it states, before moving on to address specifics in a whopping 154-page complaint.
It continues:
“Taken together, these flaws affect an outcome determinative numbers of popular votes in a group of States that cast outcome-determinative numbers of electoral votes. This Court should grant leave to file the complaint and, ultimately, enjoin the use of unlawful election results without review and ratification by the Defendant States’ legislatures and remand to the Defendant States’ respective legislatures to appoint Presidential Electors in a manner consistent with the Electors Clause and pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 2.”
The suit, filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, even notes how these states appeared to act in the very same manner:
“Each of Defendant States acted in a common pattern. State officials, sometimes through pending litigation (e.g., settling “friendly” suits) and sometimes unilaterally by executive fiat, announced new rules for the conduct of the 2020 election that were inconsistent with existing state statutes defining what constitutes a lawful vote.”
In terms of goals or “relief” the suit requests of the Supreme Court of the United States:
Declare that Defendant States Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin administered the 2020 presidential election in violation of the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Declare that any electoral college votes cast by such presidential electors appointed in Defendant States Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin are in violation of the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and cannot be counted. Enjoin Defendant States’ use of the 2020 election results for the Office of President to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College. Enjoin Defendant States’ use of the 2020 election results for the Office of President to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College and authorize, pursuant to the Court’s remedial authority, the Defendant States to conduct a special election to appoint presidential electors. If any of Defendant States have already appointed presidential electors to the Electoral College using the 2020 election results, direct such States’ legislatures, pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 2 and U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1, cl. 2, to appoint a new set of presidential electors in a manner that does not violate the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment, or to appoint no presidential electors at all. Enjoin the Defendant States from certifying presidential electors or otherwise meeting for purposes of the electoral college pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 5, 3 U.S.C. § 7, or applicable law pending further order of this Court. Award costs to Plaintiff State. Grant such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Read the whole suit here:
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/texas-fraud-suit/
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3914001/posts
"It'll even scan a batch of blank ballots and vote for whoever you tell it to! (Video)"
For example: You can collect 960 mailed-in ballots for Trump, and [administratively] mess them up enough to *force 'adjudication'* and then shred/trash those Trump ballots . . . and then substitute 960 pre-printed blank ballots and "administratively adjudicate" the blanks, for Biden.
As Freeper "Golden Eagle" points out:
According to one of the witnesses in Georgia, she said they printed tens if not hundreds of thousands of "test" ballots in Fulton county in the days before the election.This was her job, and they supposedly wanted that many to test not only 5e machines but also the logistics of simply moving that many ballots around. Her portion printed was just a fraction of all those printed by everyone, who could select whoever they wanted in the ballot.
But on election day, she said for some reason they were keeping all these supposed "test" ballots there in close proximity to real ballots. She said she took a couple of test ballots, and fed them into the election day counter just to verify that they wouldn’t be counted.
BUT THEY WERE counted.
When she pointed this out to her supervisors she was ignored. And of course those boxes of ballots were moved around later that night after she left for the night.
My goodness, when are the repubs going to read and act on the constitution. The person who counts and accepts or rejects the electorial collage votes is none other than our currant VP.
They are all going to complain, time is running out to do anything. Try to sweep it under the rug and kick the can down the road. It is what people in power do best.
It’s not that simple.
Ballots ought to be watermarked and serial numbered. Even if you can't tie a serial number to a voter you should be able to tie a set of votes to a serial number.
Maybe I could get a few million $100's as test dollars to see if my bank can handle the logisticst of depositing it into my account.
It's fraud.
As I’ve been saying for weeks, this idiocy about Dominion voting machines has nothing to do with the underlying legal challenges related to this election. These states have blatantly violated their own election laws by allowing all these mail-in votes to be cast. It’s that simple ... AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MACHINES THEY USED TO COUNT THE BALLOTS.
I believe there are methods out there — related to HIV — that link 2 anonymous databases. If they work the way I think they do, the concept is pretty simple — I don’t know who you are, and you don’t know who I am, but I can confirm your HIV status (or your vote) and you can do likewise.
I believe this would allow me to verify that the government KNOWS that I voted for Trump (but doesn’t know my name) and it allows the government to verify to me that 100% of counted voted were submitted by people who are living and registered to vote in this location.
You wouldn’t lose anonymity but you could clearly see where the votes came from. This isn’t a new thing — the HIV people set up a system like this about 40 years ago.
Yeah, but the video is not at YouTube; watch the video, if you want:
https://commonsenseevaluation.com/2020/12/10/a-dominion-voting-machine-in-action/
That’s how this whole conversation about “voter fraud” gained traction very soon after Election Day even though the media has gone overboard to suppress it. Once you had Trump’s legal team stand up there in Philadelphia and announce the names of dead people who had votes cast in their names in Pennsylvania, the cat was out of the bag. In order for these votes to be cast, someone has to take TWO steps that were tracked and documented by PA election officials. First they had to submit a request for a mail-in ballot, then the ballot had to be received by mail.
I have - yet another - dumb question: If a state wants to violate its own laws, isn’t that a “state’s rights” issue?
“AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MACHINES THEY USED TO COUNT THE BALLOTS.”
Yes, it does. Shouting it doesn’t make true. Fraud by any means is the basis of this claim by Texas.
We have the technology to keep every ballot secure while also maintaining the secrecy of the ballot, just using dual-key encryption. Add blockchain technology to that and we can also have a secure audit trail for every ballot to see every person who “touched” it from when the ballot is cast to when the ballot is tabulated.
It’s not 100% foolproof, but it’s as close as we are likely to get to a really secure voting system.
You are correct, that was a dumb question. Elected office holders take an oath to see that the laws are faithfully executed. A state cannot violate it’s existing laws. That was stated quite clearly in Gore v Bush in 2000.
That depends on which laws it chooses to violate. If they are "small effect" laws whose consequences are localized and limited, then it is a states rights issue. If they bear on federal laws and federal Constitutional issues and project harm to a large group of people, then it is no longer a local state's rights issue.
Okay but, the (admittedly) dumb question was regarding whatever standing the plaintiff states may or may not have to sue Pennsylvania, et al.
“I have - yet another - dumb question: If a state wants to violate its own laws, isn’t that a “state’s rights” issue?”
No, not if the state violates the Federal constitution.
And, not if the state violating the law impacts citizens of another state.
Bush v. Gore says they can’t do that.
What’s different in this case is that unlike elections for other offices, the process for a presidential election is clearly laid out in the U.S. Constitution ... and it specifically states that the presidential electors are to be appointed in a manner proscribed by each state’s legislature.
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.