Posted on 01/02/2021 9:45:55 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
As thousands of Trump supporters prepare to descend upon the Capitol this coming week amid a presidential election they are contesting, there is a mass of confusion and conflicting information about what happens next.
You may have heard that a growing list of Republican members of the House and Senate have pledged to object to the electoral count of some states during Wednesday's joint session of Congress.
Most analysts have said such objections, in practical terms, amount to nothing because while they can trigger debates lasting up to two hours, it would take a majority in both the House and Senate to reject the state results naming Joe Biden the next president of the United States.
There are other less discussed and, some insist, less likely scenarios. Some of them are examined in a legal analysis by John Yoo and Robert Delahunty. Published in October, about two weeks before the presidential election, it plays out multiple scenarios including under circumstances like the ones we face today. It is titled "What Happens if No One Wins? The Constitution provides for election crises—and its provisions favor Trump."
Here are some applicable excerpts from the analysis.
"Suppose states send electoral votes that—even if certified by the governor—remain under question, whether because of fraud in the vote, inability to count the ballots accurately under neutral rules, or a dispute between branches of a state government...
...Vice President Pence would decide between competing slates of electors...
...If the electoral count remains uncertain enough to deprive either Trump or Biden of a majority in the Electoral College, then the 12th Amendment orders that “the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President...
...If today’s House chose the president, voting by state delegations, Trump would win handily."
John Yoo and Robert Delahunty, Oct. 19, 2020
(Excerpt) Read more at sharylattkisson.com ...
If Pence does this, he will be one of the greats in American history, and I for one will be very proud to be wrong in my estimation of him.
“If Pence does this, he will be one of the greats in American history, and I for one will be very proud to be wrong in my estimation of him.”
What more can one say?
Don’t hear that heralded loud and clear do we.
I have never trusted Pence. Validation will come soon. I hope my assessment was incorrect.
I think Pence is a stand up guy. Look, If we were in his
shoes, it would require an awful log of ducks in a row for
us to do something like we’re asking him to do.
It’s a weighty issue. I think it’s warranted, but you know
the media is going to play it up to the point his family
will be targets.
Then in your own head you have to ask yourself, is this
what I should be doing? Should I? Shouldn’t I?
You know, we can be very convinced of things and shoot
off a comment on a bulletin board, but we’re not the ones
having to make the call whether there was verifiably enough
crime to have turned the election around.
I think so, but I haven’t seen all the evidence that has
been or will be presented to him.
Would it hold up in court? I think it should, but then we
don’t get all the best information. We hear a lot of
sensational stories, and they sure have convinced me.
I’m still not the one man having to make this call.
I feel for the guy.
God be with him.
So far everyone on this site has bad-mouthed Pence even before he goes on stage on January 6th. We don't know what he will do.
It is best to withhold judgment until you have a reason to convict him.
But I will agree with you that if he does what is just and gets Trump's rightful second term restored to him, not only will he be a hero to 74 million+ Trump supporters but he will save the Republic for a while longer in the process.
He would be a shoe-in for president in 2024 as the man who saved Trump's win and the Republic.
He would be worthy of a real-life profile in courage.
Pence will not only have the weight of the world on his shoulders, he will have the fate of the world, too.
He and his extended family will require protection for years. Mrs Pence may or may not want to bring this upon her family. But one would hope that she has true grit. She is so opaque to me that I can’t come to any conclusion about her, and even him.
Epoch's "Facts Matter with Roman Balmakov" - currently not yet banned by YouTube - does an outstanding job of explaining the details and nuances of upcoming days.
Check him out on YouTube.
Pence Asks Judge to Reject Gohmert Lawsuit; House Doesn't Want VP Powers Clarified | Facts Matter
I have exactly and precisely the same observation.
I think the above scenario only works if the state legislatures certify the second slate of electors. So far, it is only talk and no one is walking. It is as if they are doing enough to say they agree there is fraud, but not following through. This is like many votes at the federal level that they make to win reelection, but not really trying to support. Shadows without substance.
I have been suggesting that sidney Powell raise the stakes by holding a mock hearing and present evidence live streamed on the steps of the supreme court.
“If Pence does this, he will be one of the greats in American history, and I for one will be very proud to be wrong in my estimation of him.”
I concur. I think Pence will pray for the right answer, and it will come to him...
Seems to me that Vice President Pence and/or his lawyers should read this legal analysis before he sits down with the electoral ballots on January 6th.
It advises that he would be the one to judge the validity and legality of any competing slate of electors.
Anybody have his official email address?
“I have a duty under the Constitution Article II, Section 1, Clause 3, to count the votes for President and Vice President presented to me by the Electoral College. Under the constitution, my count is final.”
“The elections in the following states: Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and Wisconsin, are, based on evidence presented and noticed in public, hereby declared to be fraudulent.”
“The Senior Senator from Kentucky is out of order and will remain in his seat until I have finished.”
“The Speaker of the House is out of order and will remain in her seat until I have finished.”
“The Electoral College, having failed to vote for a candidate with a majority of 270 votes, is set aside, and the vote now goes to the joined houses of Congress for state caucus voting.”
“My ruling is final. This matter is adjourned, and the combined Houses will now vote.”
(words to preserve western civilization by. one can always hope.)
It is at the point of WE MUST. There is nothing after that.
Would it hold up in court?
I honestly don't think we have any courts we can rely on at this point. It's been a narrowing funnel, we are near the bottom of the funnel.
Now here is an interesting tidbit. The SCOTUS, by refusing to hear any case on the election, particularly the Texas case which was joined by many states, means that the dispute between the states remains decisively in place. And thus there is a controversy in those electors.
At the time it was frustrating when SCOTUS decided to ignore a complaint between states for lack of standing. If the states do not have standing to pursue constitutional disputes between states than what purpose does SCOTUS actually serve? But perhaps by denying a hearing they have inadvertently opened another venue for the case to be heard, on Jan 6 in the Senate when the President of the Senate decides if there is any "controversy or contest" in the electors presented. Hmmmm....
does it hold up in court?
Do they have standing?
Ping for your thoughts RummyChick???
Hah! Isn’t it strange?
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.