Posted on 02/15/2023 11:57:54 AM PST by bitt
A "rigged election" is equivalent to war since both "put into power" a "victor," argues plaintiff, and therefore allegations of a rigged election must be investigated.
The Supreme Court is set to reconsider whether to hear a lawsuit alleging President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Vice President Mike Pence, 291 House members, and 94 senators violated their oaths of office by refusing to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election before certifying Biden as the victor on Jan. 6, 2021, allowing for Biden and Harris to be "fraudulently" inaugurated.
The plaintiff, Raland J. Brunson, seeks the defendants' removal from office for violating their oaths.
After the Supreme Court declined on Jan. 9 to hear Brunson's lawsuit, he filed a petition for reconsideration on Jan. 23. On Feb. 1, the court scheduled the private conference for reconsidering the petition on Friday, when four of the nine justices must vote to grant the case a hearing for it to move forward.
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
This would be a case of first impression.
The constitutional assumption is the President is there legitimately and what he does AFTER in office is outlined. The Constitution doesn’t contemplate a fraudulent election process. The Court would need to adhere to sound constitutional intent.
It seems to me that if there was enough of the right kind of evidence the Court could rule the election and its results null and void and take it from there.
To me, this is like a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) case.
The Constitution does contemplate a way to head off fraud in an election - but the time frame and process has passed. The process is the electoral college.
Every case challenging the eligibility of bathhouse Barry also had merit and none were heard.
It is up to the state and Lake is going to the Arizona Supreme Court but I do think the evidence coming out in Maricopa has influenced the SCOTUS to put this back on the docket.
The Supreme Court didn’t put this back on the docket. Like many losers, the petitioners filed a Motion for Reconsideration so they can lose again. Extends the timeline to grift from the gullible.
“One could argue that the shenanigans of Maricopa County is up to the state of Arizona to correct. After all counties are subordinate to states.”
I have considered this for days. You could argue it, but it would be predicated that this is a ‘local’ event, without ‘interstate’ help to commit this crime. The election maneuvering isn’t local, maybe not even national anymore. It’s international, funded internationally, more likely than not. The complaints should go to the state of Arizona, but should prompt DOJ and FBI, potentially CIA investigations. The fact that it doesn’t, suggests they are in on it.
Don’t factor out ….God!
The Philadelphia convention debated for a long time about replacement of the Chief Magistrate, who later was called simply the “President”.
Every conceivable formula was considered, but what they came up with was appointment by State Legislatures, through representatives who would form an Electoral College.
This is the only “Presidential Election” in the constitution. It happens in December, and since 1964 there are 538 voters.
There is a REASON that all three branches of the national government were prevented from involvement in the process.
There’s no such thing as a national election for President. It could end tomorrow with no injury to the structure of our government.
There is no Presidential election in the Constitution, fraudulent or otherwise.
Uh, Article II, Sec. 1...
Might try reading it there Jim...
"The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector..."
As I said, the only "Presidential election" in the Constitution takes place in December (since 1936), has 538 voters (since 1964), and in the last such election, Biden got 306 votes and Trump 232.
There is nothing in the Constitution that requires individuals "voting for President", it would be perfectly legal and Constitutional for States to appoint their electors without anyone voting at all, and there was no evidence that there were uncounted (Electoral) votes in the only election that counted in 2020.
The electoral college IS the election - the only election (for President) found in the Constitution.
Now you’re switching gears there Mr. Jim.
You said, “There is no Presidential election in the Constitution.”
Wrong as rain.
Over and out.
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.