Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/28/2020 9:37:35 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Berlin_Freeper

what?! confused.


2 posted on 12/28/2020 9:39:09 AM PST by madison10 (Maranatha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Oh reported by the Hill...extra causation required.


3 posted on 12/28/2020 9:40:40 AM PST by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Guess they don’t trust him to reject the Dem electors.


4 posted on 12/28/2020 9:41:46 AM PST by philippa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

This makes no sense.


7 posted on 12/28/2020 9:44:57 AM PST by Coronal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Link to the “lawsuit”?!?


9 posted on 12/28/2020 9:46:57 AM PST by Carl Vehse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper
This is only good for publicity. VPOTUS according to the Constitution is the President of the Senate, and according to the Twelfth Amendment receives the electoral votes and presides over the joint session of Congress where they are counted. Separation of powers prevents the courts from dictating how the process proceeds. VPOTUS is immune from injunctions and other attempts to use the judiciary to control his actions. If Congress doesn't like how he runs the election count he could be impeached, but that is about all that could be done, and its after the fact. This lawsuit will go nowhere.
15 posted on 12/28/2020 9:57:52 AM PST by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

That splashing sound you hear is beads of sweat from the democrats hoping Rino’s will do their job for them.


16 posted on 12/28/2020 10:01:49 AM PST by Vaduz (women and children to be impacIQ of chimpsted the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

The headline is a lie, which probably means the rest of the article is a lie. It’s from the sHill? Yes, definitely lies.

A correct title would be more like:

“GOP lawmaker sues Pence in bid to overturn Biden installation”

or

“GOP lawmaker sues Pence in bid to overturn Biden fraud”

win =/= steal


17 posted on 12/28/2020 10:05:10 AM PST by In_Iowa_not_from
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
I offer this theory that that comes from American Thinker a couple of days ago. I don't endorse it or disagree with it. Just throwing it out there for discussion.

Link: It's for Mike Pence to Judge whether a Presidential Election Was Held at All

On January 6, a joint session of Congress will open with Vice President Pence presiding as president of the Senate.  His power will be plenary and unappealable.  You heard that right.  As president of the Senate, every objection comes directly to him, and he can rule any objection "out of order" or "denied."  His task will be to fulfill his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and to ensure that the laws be faithfully executed.  This is a high standard of performance, and V.P. Pence will have two choices.  He can roll over on "certified" electors, or he can uphold the law.

Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution gives state legislatures "plenary authority" as enunciated in Bush v. Gore.  This is key, since the counting of votes is discussed in Article II, the 12th Amendment, and 3 USC 15.  To this we must add the history of counting and objections recounted by Alexander Macris (here and here).  Put bluntly, it's as clear as mud.  Add to that the fact that the contested states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have sent dueling slates of electors to D.C.  This means that the V.P. has to decide how he will handle the situation when two sealed envelopes are handed to him from any of those states.

Macris points out that in 1800, even with constitutional deficiencies in Georgia, Thomas Jefferson blithely counted defective electoral votes from Georgia, effectively voting himself into the presidency.  This demonstrates that the president of the Senate is the final authority on any motions or objections during the vote-counting.  There is no appeal.  That doesn't mean there won't be any outrage.  Whatever Pence does, people will be angry.  But what does the law demand?

Seven contested states clearly violated their own laws.  Rather than list the facts, which have been detailed in multiple articles, we must consider the following:

An election is a process of counting votes for candidates. Only valid, lawful votes may be counted.  A valid lawful vote is:

• Cast by an eligible, properly registered elector as prescribed by laws enacted by the state Legislature.

• Cast in a timely manner, as prescribed by laws enacted by the state Legislature.

• Cast in a proper form as prescribed by laws enacted by the state Legislature.

Any process that does not follow these rules is not an election.  Anything that proceeds from it cannot be regarded as having any lawful import.

Most commentators suggest that a process of collecting pieces of paper with marks on them is an election regardless of errors, omissions, and even deliberate malfeasance.  This is a mistake.  Imagine a golf tournament where every bad shot by one player gets a do-over, but the competing player has to follow USGA rules in detail.  One player gets to drop freely out of hazards, but the other has to tackle every embedded ball as it lies.  The result is a travesty.

The same thing applies to elections.  If there are a handful of improper votes, we can suggest that there was in fact an election, perhaps tainted, but the election wasn't materially harmed.  But when the people charged with managing the election decide to ignore the law, whatever process they supervise is not the process defined by the law.  Therefore, it is not an election.

This leaves V.P. Pence with a dilemma.  He is a gentleman who regards our governmental traditions with a degree of reverence, so he will be reluctant to take any bold action.  But as an honorable man, faced with massive illegality, he must act to protect the law.  Consider how things might go down as the two closed envelopes from Georgia are handed to the V.P.  Rather than opening them, he says:

In my hand are envelopes purporting to contain electoral votes from Georgia.  They are competing for consideration, so it is essential that I consider the law that governs this.  That law, according to the Legislature of Georgia and Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution is the Georgia statute that includes procedures for signature-matching on absentee ballots, a requirement that all absentee ballots be first requested by a legitimate voter, and that election monitors be meaningfully present at all times while votes were counted.

The Georgia secretary of state, who is not empowered by the U.S. Constitution to make changes to election law, entered into a Consent Decree that gutted these protections enacted by the Georgia Legislature.  The processes that he prescribed and were ultimately followed were manifestly contrary to that law.  Further, the State of Georgia, in unprecedented concert with other states, suspended counting of ballots in the middle of the night, covering its conspiracy with a false claim of a "water main break."  We now know from surveillance video that many thousands of "ballots" were counted unlawfully in the absence of legally required observers.

Finally, the State of Georgia, under the authority of secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, a non-legislative actor, used fatally flawed Dominion voting machines that have been demonstrated to be unreliable.  In testing, the error rate of Dominion machines has exceeded 60%, far in excess of legal limits.  They are designed to facilitate fraud without creating the legally required paper trail.  This alone is far more than enough to swing an election.

Since the state of Georgia has failed to follow the election law established by its legislature under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, it has not conducted a presidential election.  Therefore, no "presidential electors" were appointed in Georgia.  Further, "electors" "certified" by non-legislative actors pursuant to this process are in fact not "presidential electors."  The competing slate of "electors" is similarly deficient, having not been elected through a presidential election.

Therefore, the chair rules that Georgia has not transmitted the votes of any presidential electors to this body.  Georgia presents zero votes for Donald Trump and zero votes for Joseph Biden.

The central point is that the VP, as the presiding officer and final authority, has the unquestionable authority to declare that the states in question have not conducted presidential elections.  There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, but no one has the authority to override his decision. The statement says nothing about who might or might not have "won" the contested states.  Rather, by not following their own laws, as enacted by their own legislatures, they have violated Article II, Section 1.  Thus, they have not conducted an election, and their results are void.

If the votes of all seven contested states are registered as zero, President Trump will have 232 votes, and Joe Biden will have 222.  The 12th Amendment says, "[T]he votes shall then be counted[.] ...  The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President[.]" In plain language, Donald Trump will be re-elected, since he has a majority of the actual electoral votes.  There will be no need to involve the House of Representatives to resolve a contingent election.

Richard Nixon chose not to contest the 1960 election because he felt that winning that way would lead to an ungovernable country.  If V.P. Pence does this, that same argument might be made.  But is the country governable even now?  Blue states such as California, Oregon, Washington, New York, New Jersey, and Michigan are already operating in an openly lawless manner with their "emergency" "COVID-related" restrictions.  Their denial of the civil rights of law-abiding citizens is horrific.  Their refusal to do basic policing and law enforcement is a recipe for open war.  How much worse would things be if the V.P. lived up to his oath and upheld the law?

24 posted on 12/28/2020 10:43:25 AM PST by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper; All
"Typically, the vice president’s role in presiding over the meeting is a largely ceremonial one governed by an 1887 federal law known as the Electoral Count Act."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

Noting that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 is evidence of conflicted political factions within a state trying to swing electoral votes in their favor imo, the VP’s role in presiding over the counting of electoral votes is enumerated into the 12th Amendment which was ratified in 1804.

"12th Amendment: The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted [emphasis added]; […]"

Regarding constitutional flexibility in counting electoral votes, consider that for the Civil War election of 1864 (Lincoln reelected), any electoral votes from the Confederate states were not counted since these states had claimed to be seceded, at least regarded as states not in good standing.

"As the Civil War was still raging, no electoral votes were counted from any of the eleven southern states that had joined the Confederate States of America.” —1864 United States presidential election

And since VP Pence has probably seen all the evidence for fraudulent vote counting in 2020 elections, I don’t have a problem if he likewise ignores electoral votes from the renegade swing states and appropriately reduces electoral votes needed for Trump win.

In fact, FReepers who had kept careful track of electoral votes on Election Day had noted that Trump had insurmountable lead in popular, and therefore electoral votes votes, thanks to red tsunami of patriot voters. So Trump was probably reelected by night of Election Day.

Corrections, insights welcome.

25 posted on 12/28/2020 10:46:30 AM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

LOL

Pence doesn’t “pick” anyone, he’s Vanna While, he just opens the envelope


29 posted on 12/28/2020 11:23:40 AM PST by baclava
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Berlin_Freeper

> “asks a federal judge in Texas to strike down the law as unconstitutional”

Er...what....?

The role of the VP in counting electoral votes is literally in the Constitution. You can’t declare something unconstitutional that is in the Constitution.


30 posted on 12/28/2020 11:24:53 AM PST by mquinn (Obama's supporters: a deliberate drowning of consciousness by means of rhythmic noise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson