Posted on 11/10/2020 5:58:30 PM PST by Mariner
” Will the Supreme Court have the balls to back this up?”
Even the three nutcases will back this,
The question is who voted for whom.
I read on a Zero Hedge article tha the election statutes are non severable, that is if one part is violated, all the rest of the statutes are considered violated.
I read on a Zero Hedge article tha the election statutes are non severable, that is if one part is violated, all the rest of the statutes are considered violated.
******************************************************************************************
I think I read something similar somewhere about PA. IIRC, When the law was passed to allow VBM, the deadline was set for receipt @ 8pm on election night.
The law also provided that if a judge, election board etc. made changes, then the entire law was to be voided. So no severability.
“in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct”
So what did the PA Legislature direct? Do they allow for a Governor or Judge to meddle? I doubt it, but we need to see who wields authority once the Legislature has directed. If they say that the SoS shall certify, based on the popular vote, yada, yada, then they may be trapped by their own laws.
“Those votes are being tallied separately and are not in the totals that the Secretary of State has released. Alito’s order mandates that. So without them Biden is still up by almost 50,000 votes.”
That what Alito ordered, that’s NOT what happened. The votes were not segregated.
“The Constitution clearly says the legislatures have the sole right to appoint electors.”
No, it says they have the power to determine the manner in which those electors are appointed.
If the process is not followed, what happens? Do they have a fallback provision?
In 2004, the Florida legislature was preparing to intervene and name a slate of electors when the Supreme Court ruled against Gore in the selective recount.
I am not aware of a specific case on this topic, but I believe the USSC would be hard pressed to overturn a legislative vote on it.
2000, was it not?
The Secretary of State claimed they were. If Trump can prove otherwise then it's a start.
That's not the way it works. It's incumbent on the SOS to prove compliance to the Supreme Court....
yes sorry my mistake. 2000.
As I now read the statute (and talk with legislators), it will be challenging for the legislature to act. The 1937 statute would require those counties in question to have a judicial resolution PRIOR to being certified by the PA SOS.
If they are certified, the votes count and the electors get named.
Others from PA with more detailed knowledge are welcome to contribute. The message I received was..stay tuned.
They can essentially do what they want.
They can bypass the governor per Article 2 of the constitution if they so choose. They can find that because of the numerous questions and sworn witnesses willing to brave charges for perjury attesting to fraud, that the vote is so tainted that the validity of the election can never be ascertained to the at least the rueful or sullen satisfaction of all parties. Thus the legislature can take direct control of the choosing of the electors.
No...the Constitution gives over riding direction in this case. It is a Federal directive specifically aimed at the legislatures, not their “state laws”.
It’s happened before.
The legislature has a right to have their questions answered....evidence is another issue. Why should they trust the SOS based on their say so.
The legislature Pubs in Pa took the majorities in their house and senate. Isn’t it reasonable to ask why, if they won their majorities, didn’t Trump win in with the same rough ratios as they Pubbies did in the house and senate of their state? That should be question number 1 right there!
Federal Constitution holds sway....the legislature can do it. Now I wouldn’t doubt the other side wouldn’t put up a fuss but the court will end up saying... audited recounts like the legislature demands or the legislature decides. Heck I wouldn’t even be surprised if the SOS tried to throw amendment 10 back in their faces to which they would counter with the 14th amendment.
I think they’ve got proof for that though the MSM has bottled up a lot of the news. Yet we already know from witnesses and directives that the SOS had on Nov. 3 said to go ahead and throw the late arriving ballots into the counts.
Do a forensic audit and improve all systems for future elections to avoid any and all potential for fraud....we have the technology.
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.