Posted on 01/04/2021 2:05:41 PM PST by Sense
No it’s not.
“Pence fears ONLY God”
I guess we’ll know on Wednesday.
Under this theory, Camela Harris can determine who was elected. No thanks.
Come Friday morning she'll likely do it anyway.
“If that was even close to being true, then every Vice President would literally be a king-maker. He could accept the electoral votes he wanted to accept, and reject those he found to be “suspicious”.
You mean... kind of like a Secretary of State does at the State level ? Why aren’t fraudulent votes “legal” ? Why can’t your dog vote ? Why can’t you vote as many times as you want ? And, no one has any power to stop it ?
“Parallel Construction” in grammar, law enforcement, and Constitutional law... means different things ? In the Constitution, you find overlapping structure being repeated... like a check sum...
Note the PATTERN in the grants of power... and, yes, that’s correct... and the point... every Vice President... could accept the electoral votes he wanted to accept, and reject those he found to be “suspicious”.”
That’s his job.
Except that the VP’s role in PRESIDING as the administrator of the Election... doesn’t forstall Congress objecting... and THAT’s what prevents “every Vice President would literally be a king-maker” ever being close to true. His rulings are not final. They can be disputed.
It’s a precise mirror of the same situation in the States, where it is the Governor and SoS that CONDUCT the election, but, if they fail, or err, in conducting that task PROPERLY, they are NOT the final authority: the Legislatures are.
EXACT same thing here. The VP is the Executive, conducting the election. Just as the SoS in every state has the power to conduct an election, including the power to allow him to throw fraudulent ballots out...
So, why do you see the SAME people... arguing that Governors, and not State Legislatures, make the rules for elections... while arguing that VP’s have no power at all ?
The EXACT opposite argument... made by the SAME people ?
And, Governors acting to PREVENT legislatures voting to alter the electors ?
The Federal parallel... would be for Pence to announce the results... and then deny any objections being heard when he declares California voted for Trump... just like Georgia’s Governor is declaring Georgia voted for Biden ?
If you have a paywall preventing you seeing it, here’s the link to the American Thinker original:
Should have posted that in the first place. My fault.
I didn’t have any pay wall issues, and am not a subscriber, so not sure why others have an issue... My spam filters might be scraping their pay wall code ?
The problem being is that no, they are not competing for consideration. Only one slate of electors have been chosen and validated according to state law. No second slate of electors have been identified by any of the legislatures in the states in question. So at the end of the day, and even if he had the power to decide, Pence has one slate of electors to choose from. So it should be an easy decision for him.
Easy. The Constitution itself DIRECTS the VP on HOW he is to proceed.
12th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:
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;--the person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.
The President of the Senate SHALL, (not MAY,) open ALL, (not SOME,) [of] the CERTIFICATES and the votes SHALL, (not MAY,) then be counted.
No "may only open those votes he feels are legitimate." No "may at his sole discretion determine what constitutes a legitimately certified vote." OPEN AND COUNT ALL THE VOTES is what the Constitution DIRECTS THE VP TO DO.
Just like Vanna White.
Under this theory, Al Gore could have ignored the Florida votes for Dubya, and made himself President.
Decert. most occur if magnificent PDJT has a chance for a second term, short of bloodshed.
You make my point. Thanks.
You pointed to NO ONE ELSE the Constitution empowers.
You are wrong on the law, still.
The Constitution doesn’t give Power... to limit its use.
If what the states provide... are legitimate certificates... then there’s not an issue.
If they are not... the VP is REQUIRED to not accept frauds as “certificates”...
If I fart and call it “a certificate”... Pence has to count it ?
Read later.
that wasn’t an election.
It was a foreign coup masquerading as a US Presidential Election
Please show me where it says that in the Constitution, and please cite the specific article or amendment.
Some freepers have said the contested swing-states, such as Michigan, only sent one slate of electors to Congress (those certified by the governor, thus Biden slates). So if it's true the contested swing-states sent no Trump slates to Congress, then President of the Senate Pence must reject the Biden slates from the contested swing-states and simply continue counting the EVs for the uncontested states. If VP Pence were to do that, how do you think the Democrat/RINO Congress would react?
I have never trusted either one of them. Hell, we’re stuck with that back stabbing prick, John Cornyn. He’s a total a$$hole.
Right.
Have you checked out the Pope lately?
If we do why ha not a single court considered one shred of evidence? We have law that restricts us but doesn't seem to restrict the fraudsters, how is that the rule of law?
My opinion of the Constitution is right because it's actually based on a reading of the Constitution, the law, and history.
Just because a few legal opinion writers agree with you doesn't make you correct, besides it only takes one actual Judge to annihilate your opinion. We have the rule of the Lawless, not the rule of law.
I see legal eagles here every day screaming what they can't do because it is unconstitutional yet the other side continues what they are doing unfettered by the law. If you think that is a fair fight good luck keeping that Constitution you love to interpret for us morons. Rights belong to those that can defend them and you can't.
From my reading of the Constitution, it seems nobody else is involved in the counting of the EVs other than the President of the Senate. Thus it seems reasonable the President of the Senate also decides which EVs are legit and which aren't. Regardless of my opinion, where in the Constitution does it say the President of the Senate must entertain challenges?
“The VP is the SOLE AUTHORITY who will PRESIDE over the election on January 6th. Show me, in the Constitution, where it provide ANY POWER... to ANYONE ELSE... to DIRECT the VP in how he proceeds, or to do a damned thing about HOW the VP uses that power the Constitution gives ONLY him ?”
The Constitution states that Pence “shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.”
VP Pence’s role is to open the certificates and then Congress counts the votes.
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.