Fulton election board member files appeal on decision saying board must certify election

I'm glad the GA Bd of Elections is appealing this decision. To say that an election result MUST be certified even if there is credible evidence of fraud makes a mockery out of the definition of the word "certification" and our state's election process altogether.

Imagine you buy a famous painting with a "certificate of authenticity" only to find out later the painting is a fake. But, the seller then points to the certification itself to prove the painting is authentic. Would that make sense? Of course not. When you certify something you are attesting that it is "true and accurate".

I'm glad the GA Bd of Elections is appealing this decision.

I don't think the board is appealing; it's one member that's appealing. That's a problem!

It’s a ridiculous decision McBurney made. He obviously wants to be overturned.

Why have a BoE if their only allowable job is simply to rubber stamp the results? He nullified the entire reason for their existence.

Maybe the GA legislature made a mistake, shoulda just turned over the elections to the Judiciary, let them make all the decisions.

where is she appealing the superior court judge’s ruling??

If certifying officials are nothing but a rubber stamp, why have them?

Alternatively, if she refuses to certify the election what will the judge do? Contempt? Throw her in jail?

The judge's ruling violates the 13th Amendment banning slavery.

If certifying officials are nothing but a rubber stamp, why have them?>>> So you can eventually get rid of them. baby steps.

It will be determined the Board of Elections has no standing.

/snarkasm

The “Cheat” is very big and at many levels.

Thank you for referencing that article CFW.

"Fulton election board member files appeal on decision saying board must certify election"

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

It wouldn't be surprising if most counties in the country, under the boots of the corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties, are not complying with constitutional rules for electoral votes. More about the electoral vote rules shortly.

To begin with, the states have never expressly constitutionally given ordinary citizen voters the power to vote for POTUS like we have for members of Congress.

To the contrary, the Constitution mandates a very small number of official state legislature-appointed electors for each state.

After all, constitutional drafters established the Electoral College to make sure that the right person is in the wartime Oval Office.

At the other extreme, the Electoral College is MAJOR OVERKILL for making sure that the right person is in the peacetime Oval Office to make sure that your mail is delivered promptly, the US Mail Service being one of the very few MAJOR powers that the states have given to the feds to dictate domestic policy.

"Article I, Section 8, Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;"
"It is one of a few government agencies explicitly authorized by the Constitution of the United States." (non-FR)
The congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as follows.
”Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government [emphases added]. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country.” —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.

In other words, if a given federal social spending program is not reasonably related to the Mail Service, then you can bet that it is unconstitutional, based on stolen state powers, and win your bet probably most of the time.

Getting back to constitutional electoral vote rules, note that official electors are required to meet together, vote by write-in ballot, make lists of vote totals for each candidate, then sign, certify, seal and transmit the sealed lists to President of Senate in unbroken chain of custody imo.

"Article II, Section 1, Clause 2: 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 [emphasis added]: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."
Excerpted from 12th Amendment (12A):
"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots [all emphases added] the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; ..."

Given electoral vote rules, it is logistically impossible for millions of people in each state to meet together and comply with these rules imo.

Also, note that 12A requires only the small number of electors in each state to certify candidate vote counts, federal Democrats possibly refusing to certify a hopeful Trump 47 win just more 12A-ignoring smoke and mirrors imo.

Democrats Have Objected to Electoral Vote Certification For the Last 3 GOP Presidents (1.1.21)

Next, I'm going to pick on California (CA) regarding how long it might take a small number of official electors to determine who gets their state's electoral votes, CA's electoral votes the most of any state.

Simply put, given CA's 64 electors, I could probably tally votes for all candidates, including double-checking totals, in under an hour.

In other words, the work of deciding candidate vote totals from millions of political party politically correct voters is more political smoke screen, evidenced by compromised FN (imo) saying that totals might not be ready for a few days.

HERE WE GO AGAIN: Head of Fox News Decision Desk Warns Election Result Will Take Around Five Days (10.21.24)

Also, regarding state winner-take-all laws for electoral votes, the states actually surrendered their power to make such laws when they ratified Constitution imo.

In fact, despite hypocritical "all votes count" mantra by elite desperate Democrats, Justice Joseph Story had explained that when political parties divide a state's electoral votes, doing so weakens (obviously) a state's total electoral votes for each candidate, comparable to when a state's federal senators vote yes and no on an issue, effectively cancelling each other's votes.

"In case of any party divisions in a state, it may neutralize its whole vote [emphasis added], while all the other states give an unbroken electoral vote." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3, Commentaries on the Constitution 3, 1833.

Since Congress and renegade states have repeatedly proven that they are enemies of the people imo, it is now up to Democratic and Republican Trump supporters to effectively "impeach and remove" ALL (exceptions?) state and federal lawmakers and executives in November.

In fact, it's up to us Trump supporters to take the first MAJOR step in draining the swamp by supporting hopeful Trump 47 with a new, Constitution-respecting Congress, new state lawmakers too, not only so that he will not be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will support him to quickly finish draining the swamp.

Finally, let's not allow the anti-Trump media try to fade our memories of what we witnessed on July 13.