Posted on 01/27/2021 4:13:51 PM PST by familyop
Democrats have talked about packing the Supreme Court and seeking to end lifetime appointments of justices. Now a new commission under the Biden administration will be looking at the subject of court reforms. Indeed, President Joe Biden's White House is staffing the panel, which will examine reforms to the nation's top court and the federal judiciary, Politico reported. "The president remains committed to an expert study of the role and debate over reform of the court and will have more to say in the coming weeks," a White House official said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Read the constitution.
Read the constitution. I’m not spoiling for a pissin match, I’m just tellin ya, if it’s not spelled out in the constitution, those powers are not subscribed to the vice president.
I can’t blame Pence, although I think if he had just refused to accept those electors, whether he had the authority or not, the Supreme Court would have to have ruled on the Constitutionality of that decision, which would have been interesting!
But I blame the feckless state legislators of Pa., Wisc., Mi.,Az. who, in the face of a great deal of controversy chose to appoint electors under highly suspicious and blatantly fraudulent voting contrary to the laws they themselves approved for voting in their state. Think for a minute how this election would have gone had the controversy been reversed. The Democrats from local dog catcher to Pelosi and Schumer would have stood in lock-step against the fraud. Instead, the Republicans have so many Casper Milquetoast members with no fortitude. Now, with the fight lost, certifying the fraud, they will not likely prevail in any election in the future. We can only blame the Republican elected officials and the Republican-appointed Supreme Court appointees for allowing this violation of the Constitution
and the dismantling of our true democratic institution.
>>I can’t blame Pence, although I think if he had just refused to accept those electors,<<
Again, where in the constitution does it subscribe the power to accept or reject electors as part of the president of the senate duties?
I’m not trying to be mister no it all. I’m just saying, if the power was given to the senate president to either accept or reject any specific slate of electors for a state...it would have been written plainly in the constitution.
It is not. I’m just as frustrated as everyone else, but to suggest Pence was a traitor is ridiculous. He was simply following the constitution.
Now, that said...where does the power to reject or accept a slate of electors reside?
You are correct at the end of your post...The state legislatures. This is where our founding documents laid the responsibility. They failed in their duty. Not Pence.
>>POINT OUT WHERE IT SAYS IT IS LAWFUL TO CERTIFY FRAUDULENT ELECTORS.<<
Well, if you were a leftist (which I’m sure you are not), but pretend you are...you just ignore the constitution and do whatever the hell you wish.
So, you’re a leftist, the slate of electors comes to you as the president of the senate. You are highly politicized. You simply refuse to accept a states electors as a way to circumvent at the very last hour a free and fair election.
This is WHY the framers did not give one man the power to accept or reject a states electors, rather giving each states legislative body this power to thwart any attempt at corruption by just one man.
It is so obvious. If the constitution does not spell out that particular power...you cannot just wish it in. You cannot just say the constitution says something when it is CLEARLY not there.
If you cannot see through your emotions, I’m sorry, but Pence was not the problem...it was the state legislatures.
Congratulations, Justice Roberts. Pfft.
The power to accept or reject electors lies with Congress in joint session, over which the Vice President is merely the presiding officer.
But the presiding officer has considerable power, in fact the ultimate power, when the Houses of Congress are divided on a question. For any objection made against the presiding officer’s decisions must be sustained by majorities in both Houses of Congress in order for the presiding officer’s ruling to be overturned.
So, while the Vice President alone has no real power, the Vice President backed by either 50 Senators or 218 Representatives can make a final determination as to the status of electors. Whereas without the Vice President, you need both 51 Senators AND 218 Representatives to make that determination.
I mean, how many ministerial procedural functions have been utterly politicized over the years, especially the last four years. This is a terrible excuse.
And a hypocritical one. At 1pm Pence, sensing the mood in the room of kleptocrats, decided he did “not believe he has the power” to exercise his Constitutional authority in a certain way. But at 2pm, when his voters showed up to tell him a piece of their mind, he suddenly found that the Vice President and Acting Secretary of Defense had Constitutional authority to call out the military.
"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" - Amendment XII, ratified 1804.
Agree with your statements. However, he could have refused those electors as a matter of conscious despite thinking or knowing he did not have that authority. Then it would have forced the Supreme Court to rule on that when they certainly dodged the issue with Texas et al vs Pa. Ask yourself if Kamala has to make the decision Pence had to make, do you think for one second she wouldn’t have “tested the constitution” in this matter. Yes, I know the constitution to the Democrats is just an outdated piece of paper!
“Yes, but the make up of the court is determined by congress.”
Easy solution for the Rats. Impeach Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas. Appoint 3 rat justices, Senate stays nuclear and approves justices.
Now you are 7-2 Rat.
The Sniffer n Cheat wants his “Star Chamber.”
Where does it say you must commit a crime and certify a fraud?
He was privy to the same information Trump was.
Standing there and going “oh gee, procedurally I must do this” is a copout.
We are putting together a “blue ribbon” committee, so to examine the possibility of creating a Committee on the Creation of Committees ...
Is everyone scared yet?
If I were feeling optimistic, this would signal that Biden is not supportive of packing the court and he is using this committee to delay until people forget about it and in the end use them to justify not doing it.
This is the plan. Kick out all the conservatives and pack it with Marxists. I hope America is proud of what they have done to this free nation. Making it a nation of prisoners in their own country. Put is in jail for THINKING differently than them. They think differently than us, but we did not jail any of them, even tho 95% of them deserved it, including the current commissar in charge biden. He ain’t no president of mine. He is a communist commissar just like Stalin was.
>>where in the constitution does it subscribe the power to accept or reject electors as part of the president of the senate duties?<<
“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” -
Amendment XII, ratified 1804.
Exactly...so where does it say the president of the senate may or may not accept or reject slates of electors?
Where does it say the VP can determine fraud or fraudulent ballots?
Where is it in the constitution that says the VP has the authority to adjudicate good ballots and or bad ballots?
It doesn’t. We cannot read in to the constitution what we want it to say.
The duty of the president of the senate is to open the certificates and read out what has been certified by the states...that’s it.
I’m done.
To reform a imperfect union.
Acceptance of the certificates is inherent in the act of "opening" and "counted".
Where does it say the VP can determine fraud or fraudulent ballots?
It is inherent in all acts of government, let alone in all acts relating to private parties, that fraud when detected should be addressed and remediated.
The duty of the president of the senate is to open the certificates and read out what has been certified by the states...that’s it.
And what has been certified by the states? Let us imagine a situation in which the Governor of a state, having assumed dictatorial and tyrannical control over the state using an army of henchmen, has built walls around the state border, slaughtered his legislature, butchered his courts, and has issued certificates based on an election held, in violation of the law passed by the legislature while it yet lived, limited to one ballot cast by the Governor. Should those certificates be accepted automatically?
And when the Governor of the state has accomplished his fraud not through force of arms, the shedding of much blood, and obvious strength, but merely through bribery and connivance and conspiracy, should his fraud and that of his co-conspirers be ignored, and the certificates be accepted automatically?
You might argue that neither of these cases applies here, but what I mean to prove by these exaggerations is that the VP has a role to play, and Congress has a role to play, in determining that the certificates received are valid certificates, and accepting them or not accepting them.
This is different from saying, "I don't like the vote on this ballot, therefore I will not accept it."
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.