Posted on 10/04/2021 5:50:57 PM PDT by Enlightened1
After the comprehensive Arizona audit of Maricopa County was completed, Arizona Senator Wendy Rogers unveiled what she called the “new Declaration of Independence” in which 41 state legislators across America called for a 50-state wide 2020 election audit, and should those audits suggest a flawed election, mass decertification of the original 2020 election results, National File previously reported.
“This is our new Declaration of Independence. This is our manifesto of freedom,” Rogers declared.
This comes after the forensic audit of Arizona’s Maricopa County revealed thousands of discrepancies and issues with EV32 and EV33 ballot forms, along with a number of other serious election integrity problems, as National File reported.
Today, the number of state legislators that have signed on to the letter has more than doubled – with 92 signatories joining in calls for election integrity.
92 Legislators from Multiple States Write a Letter to the American People Calling for a 50-State Audit, Decertification Where Appropriate, and Possible Convening of the US House of Representatives
https://twitter.com/WendyRogersAZ/status/1445024591584403466
As National File Senior Reporter Patrick Howley reported on September 28, the number of voters in the 2020 Presidential election in Maricopa County, Arizona “with no record” of their existence far outnumbers the margin of “victory” that Joe Biden supposedly achieved last year, thus putting immense pressure on Arizona Senate President Karen Fann to take action and move to decertify the results of the 2020 election, as the true results of the 2020 political contest appear to be unknown.
“All voters within the Final Voted File, or VM55, was cross-checked against a commercially available data source provided by Melissa called Personator and 86,391 individuals were found with no record in the database for either their name, or anyone with the same last name at the address in the VM55 file,” according to page 56 of the report entitled “Maricopa County Forensic Election Audit: Volume III: Result Details.”
However, constitutional experts across America have indicated that decertification would be sound legal recourse for a corrupted election after-the-fact.
“We are in uncharted territory, but there are a couple of things to point to,” began Eastman. “We can point to the Hawaii Election of 1960, when the Governor subsequently certified another slate of electors after they discovered error in the initial certification.”
“We can point to Section 2 of Title 3 of the United States Code that says when a state has had an election, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, which is, you know, the choice that was made. The assumption was that it was fraudulently given because of illegal votes. The electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such manner as the legislature of such state may direct,” Eastman continued. “So that recognizes the authority of the Legislature to fix a problem.”
“We also have a backdrop of Common Law, which is, when you have a fraud, the actions taken pursuant to the fraud, are unraveled after discovery of the fraud. If the evidence really does come in as definitive, that the election and the electorals cast from Arizona were fraudulently given, and they should have been given in the other direction, then I think there is ample authority to fix this problem,” Eastman said. “We don’t have to live with a fraudulent election.”
The first demand letter to Maricopa County was sent from the Arizona Attorney General’s office asking for multiple documents relating to the election, in what appears to be the start of the investigation from the recently created Elections Integrity Unit following the Arizona audit report being released to the Arizona Senate, National File reported. The evidence included in the AG office’s request includes:
Decertify almost a year later. Is it because you think the law was broken? Or is it because it’s become inconvenient?
Is there really a decertification process? I mean something that written into the law? Pretty sure there isn’t anything in the Constitution.
Most people take that as a question of law.
My point of view is to have broader horizons. Nixon wasn;t forced out of office "by action of law." Not at all.
Who knows what the public reaction is, when the public decides the election had whatever the public decides is too much fraud. Who knows what happens when a critical mass of the public rejects the institutions.
Not totally uncharted territory, just unpredictable territory.
Four from Colorado. Interesting.
Yes, that is correct.
Even more than that, it is actually State Legislatures that elect the President (indirectly).
Now, has ONE SINGLE STATE LEGISLATURE, acting AS A BODY, either through legislation or otherwise, disputed the result of the 2020 election? No.
How many State Legislators are there in the United States?
7383. Seven Thousand, Three Hundred Eighty Three.
What percentage of 7383 is 92? 1.2% One point two percent.
1.2% of a body doesn't get to "demand" anything.
1.2% of a voting body HAVE no standing to demand the other 98.8% do something.
No, of course not.
7300
Good summary.
the question is when there is no one on your side with any kind of pull or power you pissing in the wind
Leaving aside for a moment the difficulty in getting enough states to call for the convention much less ratify anything coming out of it, what would your amendment to solve this election problem look like? How would you word it?
Maybe direct election of the executive by state legislatures?
Maybe not. As always, political winds shift and heavy mirage affects downrange precision....(using a long range shooting analogy) so it’s harder to assure a target hit.
I'd be surprised if a single state voted to ratify an amendment like that. Senators? Maybe. President? No.
Rhino horn is supposedly an aphrodisiac. RINO horn makes you impotent.
Who decides it's a 'clearly fraudulent election'? Right now you have half the people believing the election was fraudulent and half believing it was fair. Both sides claim proof for their position. Absent the courts weighing in any disqualification would be a purely partisan decision and would do nothing to restore credibility to elections.
So it's an entirely partisan action. How is that supposed to restore faith in the process?
The language can be limited specifically to those who voted to certify the 2020 presidential election results on Jan. 6-7, 2021.
Based on what criteria?
Sorry, I don't believe that the U.S. is divided 50-50, unless you want to allow illegal immigrants to cancel the votes of American citizens.
What would you put the percentages at?
The time for the courts to have fixed this mess has largely passed, and it now becomes a political issue.
Impose a completely partisan solution and you make the matter worse not better.
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.
