Arizona Senate President: State’s 11 Electors Cannot Be Recalled After Maricopa Audit

epoch times ^ | 7/18/2021 | jack phillips

[Jim Noble]

The bottom line is that SCOTUS has held that an election of any United States official can be challenged based on fraud or error by a writ of quo warranto

Do you contend that the Biden/Harris Electors did not receive Certificates of Ascertainment? Do you contend that they really voted for Trump/Pence and the votes were switched?

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Very nice reference!

Unfortunately, I managed to get through High School and College without reading or studying Shakespeare. He sure knew men, didn’t he?

[The MAGA-Deplorian]

Fight for whats right until I win or my ass gets kcked!. Whats yours?

[odawg]

“Tell me what I should do. What is the next step you’re taking? Sitting here being outraged and saying that something must be done is not a plan.”

You and me by getting in line and supporting the people who are making the effort. There are many people with the credentials and knowledge working on it, such as the audit in Arizona to prove fraud and the effort is underway in Georgia and Pennsylvania and other states.

And Mike Lindell is spending his money assembling experts and evidence and is due to show what he has next week or so as he has been saying for quite a while. He has bound to have a lot, and you will hear wails and screams about conspiracy theories and misinformation if he is on target.

[Svartalfiar]

Do you contend that the Biden/Harris Electors did not receive Certificates of Ascertainment? Do you contend that they really voted for Trump/Pence and the votes were switched?

It's not that the electors' votes were illegitimate (directly), it's that the election of the electors was fraudulent. Fruit of the poisoned tree - if the electors were not correctly elected, then how can any of their actions have been legal?

[CrazyCatChick]

Supporting the strongest Conservatives in every primary with money and time.

What do you mean by “fighting?”

[CrazyCatChick]

That’s an action. What does “support” entail?

My action is to put time and money behind the strongest Conservatives in as many primaries as I possibly can.

[Nextrush]

I forgot that part but I keep my money close to me and don’t waste it on tough word Republicans.

[CrazyCatChick]

That’s always the conundrum, isn’t it?

[humblegunner]

I don’t need to have my animus aroused

Oh please.

You're a BLOGGER.

Everything you do is done to cause yourself some kind of arousal.

[odawg]

“What does “support” entail?”

You should not expect some grandiose, swelling music that accompanies grand actions and sweeps up everything in its path. That does not apply to most of us. You support by educating yourself, talking to your friends, sending emails, etc., and as you said, voting. In other words, you do what demos instruct their minions to do to pursue their objectives. They advise for everyone to persuade at least one person.

[Dr. Franklin]

A seated federal officer has never been so sued because congress has plenary power over all federal officers.

Funny, but two courts in 2020 ruled that certain people were not lawfully serving in federal offices that they claimed:
2019–2021 Department of Homeland Security appointment disputes
That wasn't the first time that a court had ruled that way either...

[Mariner]

It was GAO that found them improperly appointed.

That’s the US Congress.

And GAO (Congress) pursued a judicial affirmation.

[Dr. Franklin]

It was GAO that found them improperly appointed. That’s the US Congress. And GAO (Congress) pursued a judicial affirmation.

I must give you credit. You are very consistent. You are wrong, yet again!

"Immigrant advocacy groups sued the administration last year on behalf of five Honduran asylum seekers — two adults and three children — who challenged the legality of the new restrictions on multiple grounds. Moss’s ruling addressed the first of their claims: that Cuccinelli lacked the authority to change U.S. asylum policies in the first place.
Moss agreed, writing that the vacancy rules require a federal agency’s “first assistant” to assume leadership when the top job is open."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ken-cuccinellis-appointment-to-top-immigration-job-was-unlawful-court-rules-invalidating-policy-memos-he-signed/2020/03/01/fdc7fda0-5bea-11ea-8baf-519cedb6ccd9_story.html

"The judge described an illegitimate shuffling of leadership chairs at the Department of Homeland Security, the agency responsible for immigration enforcement, for the predicament of Wolf's leadership and that of his predecessor, Kevin McAleenan. "Based on the plain text of the operative order of succession," Garaufis wrote in the Saturday ruling, "neither Mr. McAleenan nor, in turn, Mr. Wolf, possessed statutory authority to serve as Acting Secretary. Therefore the Wolf Memorandum was not an exercise of legal authority."
The ruling is part of an ongoing case with DACA recipient Martín Jonathan Batalla Vidal serving as the lead plaintiff in a six-plaintiff case against Wolf and the Department of Homeland Security. The suit initially challenged the state of Texas' attempt to thwart DACA.
On Saturday the National Immigration Law Center responded to the ruling on Twitter: "VICTORY!""
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/federal-judge-rules-acting-dhs-head-chad-wolf-unlawfully-appointed-n1247848

[Dr. Franklin]

Do you think any State is ready, willing, and able to do that?

AZ is getting very close. The audit creates political pressure for the reluctant to act. I think they need to start by arguing that their senator is illegitimate. That process would start in state court probably. Once one senator is proved to have been denied participation in the Jan. 6th certification/objection process, then the whole certification process is unlawful. Objections to the electors in four other states failed for lack of a Senator joining the objections of the House members.

[Mariner]

It was the GAO that brought the original suit, at the urging of the US congress (particularly, Nadler).

Once the decision was made, the judge had no choice but to find for the Hondurans.

It was the plenary power of congress that found the appointments illegal, and therefore all their subsequent actions illegal.

IF congress had decided to let the appointments stand, there would have been no legal issue. Certainly no judge or court would have been empowered to unilaterally intervene.

[Dr. Franklin]

It was the GAO that brought the original suit, at the urging of the US congress (particularly, Nadler).
Once the decision was made, the judge had no choice but to find for the Hondurans.

Well there you go again. You are wrong yet AGAIN!

"On March 1, 2020, the District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Cuccinelli was not lawfully appointed to serve as acting USCIS Director and invalidated certain actions taken by him; the government dropped its appeal of this case in August 2020. On August 14, 2020, the Government Accountability Office released a finding that McAleenan, Wolf, and Cuccinelli had been appointed improperly to their Acting Secretary and Deputy Secretary positions; the DHS rejected this finding.
On November 14, 2020, the District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that Wolf was not lawfully serving as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security and overturned a set of his orders as lacking "legal authority""

2019–2021 Department of Homeland Security appointment disputes

[Mariner]

I apologize for arguing minutia while not paying attention.

My original statement to which you took umbrage was:

No court has jurisdiction over the matter of a seated federal officer.
No court.

And that statement was referring to whether the courts had authority to remove a seated (congressionally certified) federal officer.

They do not, the code of the District of Columbia not withstanding.

I stick by that statement.

Of course the courts have ruled innumerable times that the actions taken by federal officers were illegal under statute or constitution. And to date those officers have respected those rulings for the most part. The famous exception being Andrew Jackson.

That said, the feds have used quo warranto as a tool to remove seated state officers under the 14th Amendment.