More than 100 state legislators ask Pence to delay certification of electoral votes by 10 days

Just The News ^ | Jan 5 | By John Solomon

[RandFan]

More than 100 state legislators from contested battleground states have asked Vice President Mike Pence to delay by 10 days the congressional certification of the elections in their states so they can have more time to investigate irregularities and illegalities.

The dramatic requests, delivered in various letters on the eve of a joint session of Congress, added intrigue and drama to a process that normally is pro forma.

While Pence has said he supports lawmakers who are concerned about the conduct of the November election he has not indicated whether he’d be willing to go as far as delaying counting votes from states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona and Pennsylvania or whether such a manuever would be deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court.

Nonetheless, the 11th hour letters from state legislator added to a growing momentum among Republicans to contest Joe Biden’s declared election victory.

“We write to ask you to comply with our reasonable request to afford our nation more time to properly review the 2020 election by postponing the January 6th opening and counting of the electoral votes for at least 10 days, affording our respective bodies to meet, investigate, and as a body vote on certification or decertification of the election,” one letter to Pence signed by 88 state Republican legislators read. “This action can be completed prior to the inauguration date, as required by the Constitution.”

That letter attached an appendix listing irregularities and illegalities in the battleground states where Trump has contested the election results showing Biden the winner.

The appendix, the lawmakers wrote, “provides evidence of a coordinated and structured multi-state effort to undermine state law protecting election integrity." ....

[DoodleDawg]

what law?....

This law. 3 U.S. Code § 15 - Counting electoral votes in Congress

its not in the constitution....

No, it's in the law

[DoodleDawg]

But what happens if Pence does it anyway? Just declare it so. 10 days should be enough. The only way to stop this is for the Supreme Court to step in.

Deliberately violate the law? What do you think Pence is? A Democrat?

[enumerated]

Wanna bet?

[rxsid]

President Trump won on election day, Nov 3rd this last time around.

Votes can not be counted on Nov 4th, Nov 14th or Dec 4th.

Any vote counted after "election day" is ILLEGAL. A unanimous SCOTUS decision confirms this.

We have an election "day," not an election "days" or "weeks" or "months.'

Election Day.

"At midnight on the evening of November 3, and as illustrated in Table 1, President Trump was ahead by more than 110,000 votes in Wisconsin and more than 290,000 votes in Michigan. In Georgia, his lead was a whopping 356,945; and he led in Pennsylvania by more than half a million votes. By December 7, however, these wide Trump leads would turn into razor thin Biden leads – 11,779 votes in Georgia, 20,682 votes in Wisconsin, 81,660 votes in Pennsylvania, and 154,188 votes in Michigan."

 

SCOTUS 9-0: Election Day Is One Single Day. Listen to oral argument from Foster v. Love (1997)
https://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3914566/posts

 

Questions regarding "early voting," which is legal, are answered in post #16.

[DoodleDawg]

Wanna bet?

Sure. Let's see what happens tomorrow.

[piasa]

Levin is great tonight I hope someone gets the script and sends it to their congresscritters because he’s laying out the nonconpiratorial, no-tinfoil reasoning for what is going on.

[enumerated]

Yup

[piasa]

He could ignore it if he was a Democrat. Maybe he should switch parties and throw them inyo confusion.

[DoodleDawg]

Implicitly, he can delay the vote if he deems it necessary.

So you keep saying. I know of no implied power that allows the Executive branch to ignore legislation passed by the Legislative branch.

It has been delayed before.

When?

State legislatures are writing to request the delay. The letters will be published tomorrow...

So? If a minority of the legislators wrote Pence and requested he pronounce Trump the winner with 306 electoral votes then does he have the power to do that?

[rxsid]

"

LOOKING PAST JANUARY 6th

Now let’s look past January 6th. And let’s imagine that the United States Supreme Court issues an order after its January 8, 2021 conference, stating that no votes in Pennsylvania can be counted which arrived after the time set by its Legislature for the Presidential Election to end, which was 8 P.M., Nov. 3rd. And let’s assume that two other states see their results overturned by their Legislatures, or the Supreme Court, after January 6th, but before January 20th? What happens then?

Read the Twentieth Amendment, § 3:

“If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President…”

That’s the Constitution of the United States, folks. Nobody knows what that means, because the United States Supreme Court hasn’t fully interpreted Section 3 yet.

But understand this: the Pennsylvania GOP case has been “DISTRIBUTED for conference 01/08/2021" at SCOTUS. So maybe the Court will interpret Section 3 soon enough. Until January 20th, high noon, we are in muddy Constitutional waters.

LOOKING PAST JANUARY 20th

After a wrongful election, where one candidate takes office, there’s always the possibility of a Writ of Quo Warranto. Some have argued that only impeachment and conviction in the Senate can remove a sitting President President. But if you get a Writ of Quo Warranto issued, that means the White House occupant it’s issued against was never actually President. Their holding the Office of President becomes a nullity. The person has not technically been “removed” from office, but rather, a Writ of Quo Warranto acts as if that person was never President to begin with.

There is a line of cases that issue Writs of Quo Warranto for false election results caused by fraudulent or faulty tabulation machines, after the wrong person takes office:

“Challenges to the outcome of a general election based upon alleged voting machine malfunctions necessarily fall within the purview of quo warranto.” Matter of Delgado v. Sunderland, 97 N.Y. 2d 420 (2002), 767 N.E. 2d 662.

Here is the federal Quo Warranto statute:

“A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military.”

If President Trump has the will to keep fighting, then this horrific saga in United States election history still has a very long road to go before the final result is determined."

https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2020/12/20/the-arizona-state-legislature-must-invoke-nuclear-option-to-choose-electors-since-subpoena-was-ignored/

[DoodleDawg]

He could ignore it if he was a Democrat.

But he's a Republican. We're the law and order party, remember?

[b4me]

law = pharisee/OT. God set USA Foundation on roots of His full word for best ways to have a country and it’s people, that is on truth, not adhear to man made law while going against Truth/God.

[ScottfromNJ]

“The date is set by law. Pence can’t just ignore it.”

Is that a real law or just one that exists in the imaginations of concerned DU trolls like yourself?

[MayflowerMadam]

Rutherford B. Hayes, I think. “Highly contested election.” IIRC, Electoral commission dragged into March.

[DoodleDawg]

Is that a real law or just one that exists in the imaginations of concerned DU trolls like yourself?

Real law. "Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o’clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer." - 3 U.S. Code § 15 - Counting electoral votes in Congress

[The Pack Knight]

Any vote counted after "election day" is ILLEGAL. A unanimous SCOTUS decision confirms this.

No, it doesn't. "We hold today only that if an election does take place, it may not be consummated prior to federal election day." Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67, 74 n.4 (1997) (emphasis added). Foster does not say anything at all about counting votes after election day.

Foster concerned a Louisiana law providing for an open primary for Congressional elections a month before election day, where a candidate would be elected if he received a majority of votes. It had nothing to do with the counting of votes after election day.

[DoodleDawg]

Rutherford B. Hayes, I think. “Highly contested election.” IIRC, Electoral commission dragged into March.

The current law governing the process of confirming the electoral results was written in response to that and passed in 1887.

[Zeddicus]

The date is set by law. Pence can’t just ignore it.

ROFL! Dude, THERE IS NO MORE RULE OF LAW. No more ligitimate court system.

The left has made this a lawless nation and we're still bringing broken bottles to battles where the enemy has automatic weapons.

You can't ever win by faithfully following every rule when the enemy flagrantly ignores them and there is no referee.

The courts? They are the enemy too.

[rxsid]

A federal election can NOT BE consummated AFTER "election day."

Any vote "completed" or consummated AFTER election day...is ILLEGAL.

It's illegal to consummate the Presidential election 1 day, or 1 week or 1 month AFTER the "election day."

[CottonBall]

Great point!