Judge in Georgia Dismisses Three Trump Charges

[Delldude]

You are trying to make the law political.

Democrats beat us to it............

 

[Robert W]

That was the crux of the Trump campaigns contingent electors and having to have them in place by December 14th. The Biden electors would vote on that day, if no Trump electors voted on that same day, and the courts gave the win to Trump, without any contingent electors to have voted, it would default to Biden.

I consider what Biden did to be the American equivalent to what Hitler did to Germany in 1933. The political prisoners this time are not at Dachau but there in DC prisons.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That was the crux of the Trump campaigns contingent electors and having to have them in place by December 14th. The Biden electors would vote on that day, if no Trump electors voted on that same day, and the courts gave the win to Trump, without any contingent electors to have voted, it would default to Biden.

You know that’s hogwash right?

In 1960 There was an ongoing challenge being resolved and that didn’t happen.

Now, of the STATE had both slates of electors that’s fine. Where the party screwed up was attempting to submit them directly to Congress as the “true” election outcome bypassing the states Executive Authority.

In no case does the party send electors directly to Congress. Not in 1960, nor in 2020.

That’s why the actors in the scheme pled guilty, made plea deals to turn evidence, or currently face criminal charges in Michigan, Nevada, and Georgia.

WW

 

[Delldude]

You know that’s hogwash right?

Not how they saw it, based on Chesebro's expert legal advice.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Not how they saw it, based on Chesebro's expert legal advice.

Chesebro... Chesebro...

..... ..... ..... Would that be Kenneth Chesebro who pled guilty as part of the fake electors plea deal for a reduced sentence and a commitment to turn states evidence and to testify in future proceedings?

..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... That Chesebro?

WW

 

[Delldude]

Chesebro... Chesebro...

..... ..... ..... Would that be Kenneth Chesebro who pled guilty as part of the fake electors plea deal for a reduced sentence and a commitment to turn states evidence and to testify in future proceedings?

..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... That Chesebro?

WW

You just found this out?

 

[WorldWatcher]

You just found this out?

No, knew who you meant.

It was a joke.

But it goes to support what I've been saying, the fake electors were sent to Congress by the party, because the party lied to him.

WW

 

[Delldude]

No, knew who you meant.

It was a joke.

But it goes to support what I've been saying, the fake electors were sent to Congress by the party, because the party lied to him.

WW

Not true.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Not true.

What isn't true?

That Chesebro is a convicted criminal having entered into a plea deal for reduced charges for turning states evidence?

Or are you referring what you said earlier: "Not how they saw it, based on Chesebro's expert legal advice."

If Chesebro's "expert legal advice" had been sound, he wouldn't be a criminal today.

(I think this is the part were you start referencing a vast left wing conspiracy out to get Trump.)

WW

 

[para bellum]

In no case does the party send electors directly to Congress. Not in 1960, nor in 2020.

12th Amendment

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 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 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;

 

[Delldude]

If Chesebro's "expert legal advice" had been sound, he wouldn't be a criminal today.

Yet they went ahead with it, some was based on your oft quoted 1960 thing.

 

[WorldWatcher]

12th Amendment

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 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 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;

Yes? So?

The losing side doesn't have electors.

Valid electors are those whose party won the election, and under the law those are the electors that get to vote and are certified by the State Executive Authority to be sent to Congress.

WW

 

[hadit]

Legalese is a hard language to speak. I'm surprised it's only three out of the 120+ that need the wording changed.

Lawyers make a lot of money speaking and writing it. I'm surprised they're so sloppy when attacking a former president. It's almost as if they expect not to be taken seriously.

 

[Delldude]

Valid electors are those whose party won the election, and under the law those are the electors that get to vote and are certified by the State Executive Authority to be sent to Congress.

And when congress accepts and certifies those electors and their candidates, and a court finds the other guy actually won (after certification) now what happens?

The losing side doesn't have electors.

LOL

 

[para bellum]

Yes? So?

You are wrong, that's what. The Constitution directs electors to transmit their votes to the President of the Senate. It says nothing about State authorities.

The losing side doesn't have electors.

Both sides always have electors. They are party faithfuls pledged to their candidate.

Valid electors are those whose party won the election, and under the law those are the electors that get to vote and are certified by the State Executive Authority to be sent to Congress.

WW

Your interpretation of the law has been woefully deficient throughout this argument.

The above is another example, since Hawaii obviously voted both slates on the designated day.

The ONLY thing you have is that the Trump electors were sent to Congress instead of being held by the party pending resolution of the challenge. That is not illegal, and as I have already shown you, the Congress via the ECA contemplated that possibility and laid out a very verbose and complicated process for resolving that situation.

 

[WorldWatcher]

And when congress accepts and certifies those electors and their candidates, and a court finds the other guy actually won (after certification) now what happens?

LOL

Just like they did in Hawaii in 1960 under court supervision.

But remember, in 1960 the party didn't identify alternate electors, it was done by the Courts.

In 2020, the State had nothing to do with the fake electors which is why they are under criminal prosecution in Michigan, Nevada, and Georgia.

The law clearly points out that it the Executive Authority that certifies the election, not the party.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Both sides always have electors. They are party faithfuls pledged to their candidate.

See that is what you are missing. Both sides have pledges. But only the winner has actually electors that can cast a vote to be certified by State Executive Authority (3 U.S. Code § 5).

Which was amended to clarify some thing via the Electoral Counting Act of 2022, however the Executive Authority being the party responsible for submitting the States certified election results was not fundamentally changed.

WW
.
.
.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4573/text

 

[para bellum]

See that is what you are missing. Both sides have pledges. But only the winner has actually electors that can cast a vote to be certified by State Executive Authority (3 U.S. Code § 5).

Both sides have electors, that is not even remotely controversial.

Ascertainment of the electors is the responsibility of the State executive. That's the process whereby the executive determines the winner of the election and transmits the certification to the Congress and the electors. That certification informs the Congress whose electors are the legitimate electors for that election.

That was done in 2020, and Trump's electors were not counted, the envelopes were not even opened.

Which was amended to clarify some thing via the Electoral Counting Act of 2022, however the Executive Authority being the party responsible for submitting the States certified election results was not fundamentally changed.

No one has made any allegations of wrongdoing by the State executive. They sent the ascertainment as required by the ECA. Those are the electors that were counted.

None of that has any bearing on the legality of Trump's electors casting their votes to preserve the challenges, or sending them to the President of the Senate. They did not send any certification of ascertainment that stated or implied that their votes were certified by the Governor or SoS.

This is what 3 USC 5 said in 2020:

"§5. Determination of controversy as to appointment of electors

If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned."

In 1960, the Governor certified Nixon's win prior to the meeting of the electors as required by 3 USC 5, yet Kennedy's electors still met and cast their votes.

Tell me this- why did Van Jones and Larry Lessig advocate Biden electors to do the same thing if it was illegal?

 

[WEATHER53]

6 down and the punctured dike is leaking down towards All Gone!

 

[mikegriffith1]

The vast majority of the charges against Trump seem specious and dubious. The charges relating to classified documents technically have some merit, but they smack of selective enforcement based on political motives.

I wish Nikki Haley or Chris Christie had won the GOP nomination. I wish Trump would just go away. But I am very troubled by the weaponization of the justice system against him. The Democrats are turning America into a banana republic.