Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I don't know what your point is. It took a lot less people for Bush to steal Florida. Trump was trying to steal 5 states though. Don't think that more Republicans wouldn't have went along if it was only 1 or 2 states Trump lost.Missing enough armed insurrectionists to stand off the US Armed Forces, right?
That the same Cheney who said Pelosi's J6 phone records would be subpoenaed?
LOL.....was chicken shit scared of following procedures laid out in the COTUS for objecting to an election.......you know, just like the democrats had done before.
60 years ago the same issue happened. Your lefty media is feeding you people BS and you ate it without a fork.
The 2020 Georgia situation mirrors events of 60 years ago in Hawaii, revealing that everything the media have said about ‘fake electors’ is wrong.
Headlines recently proclaimed that eight of Trump’s “fake” electors accepted immunity deals. Of course, in reporting the news, the corporate outlets all missed the real story — that the electors’ testimony failed to incriminate anyone, including Trump, and that the county prosecutors engaged in massive misconduct. Equally appalling, however, was the corrupt media’s continued peddling of the “fake electors” narrative.
There were no “fake” electors. There were contingent Republican electors named consistent with legal precedent to preserve the still ongoing legal challenges to the validity of Georgia’s certified vote.
Nor was appointing an alternative slate of electors some cockamamie plan devised by Trump lawyers. On the contrary, Trump’s election lawyers and the contingent electors followed the precise approach Democrats successfully used when the date Congress established for certifying an election came before the legal challenges John F. Kennedy had brought in Hawaii were decided. And that approach allowed Kennedy to be certified the winner of Hawaii’s three electoral votes on Jan. 6, 1961, even though the Aloha State had originally certified Richard Nixon the victor.
__________________________________
The Hawaii scenario in 1960 mirrors in every material respect the facts on the ground in Georgia on Dec. 14, 2020 — the date both the Democrat and Republican presidential electors met and cast their 16 electoral votes for Joe Biden and Donald Trump respectively.
__________________________________
Based on the original count in favor of Nixon, the acting governor of Hawaii, Republican James Kealoha, certified the Republican electors on Nov. 28, 1960. On Dec. 13, over the objections of the state attorney general, state circuit court Judge Ronald Jamieson ordered a recount. Then, on Dec. 19, both the Nixon and Kennedy electors met, “cast their votes for President and Vice President, and certified their own meeting and votes.”
_________________________________
Ten days later, on Dec. 30, 1960, Judge Jamieson held that Kennedy had won the election. In so holding, Jamieson stressed the importance of the Democrat electors having met on Dec. 19, as prescribed by the Electoral Count Act, to cast their ballots in favor of Kennedy. That step allowed the Hawaii governor to then certify Kennedy as the winner of Hawaii’s three electoral votes and, in turn, Congress to count Hawaii’s electoral votes in favor of Kennedy.
________________________________
On Dec. 4, 2020, then-President Trump and Republican elector David Shafer filed suit in a Fulton County state court against Raffensperger, arguing tens of thousands of votes counted in the presidential election had been cast in violation of Georgia law. While Trump’s lawsuit was still pending, on Dec. 7, 2020, based on the recount, Raffensperger recertified Biden as the winner of Georgia’s 16 electoral votes by a margin of 11,779.
Trump and Shafer’s Fulton County lawsuit contesting the election results remained pending on Dec. 14, 2020, the date the presidential electors were required by federal law to meet. Thus, while the Democrat electors met and cast their ballots for Joe Biden, the Republican electors met separately and cast their 16 votes for Trump.
At that time, Shafer made clear the Trump electors had met and cast their votes to ensure Trump’s legal battle in court remained viable. Nonetheless, following Biden’s election, Fulton County Prosecutor Fani Willis targeted the Republican electors as part of her criminal special purpose grand jury investigation.
While the grand jury has since issued a report and been disbanded, Willis agreed to grant immunity to eight of the electors, likely to push them to implicate the other electors. However, their lawyer confirmed in a court filing that none of the electors implicated anyone in criminal activity.
Since then, Shafer’s attorneys, Holly Pierson and Craig Gillen, wrote Willis a detailed letter reviewing the Hawaii precedent. The attorneys noted they had made three prior written requests to meet “to discuss the factual and legal issues” relevant to Shafer’s role as a contingent Trump elector but had “not yet received any response to those requests.”
_____________________________
In addition to detailing the Hawaii precedent from 1960, Shafer’s lawyers highlighted the fact that in contesting the 2000 election, lawyers for then-Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore cited that very precedent to support his position that two elector slates could be appointed. In fact, Democrat Rep. Patsy Mink of Hawaii suggested the 2000 Florida electoral dispute be resolved based on that Hawaii precedent too. And three Supreme Court justices in Bush v. Gore cited the Hawaii precedent as a basis for allowing the Florida recount to proceed.
_________________________________
As the letter and Hawaii precedent make clear, Shafer and the other Trump electors not only did nothing wrong, but they acted prudentially to ensure that if the state court lawsuit resolved in the president’s favor, Georgia’s electoral votes would be properly counted on Jan. 6, 2020
Here we see one of the only differences between Trump’s legal challenge and Kennedy’s: The Hawaii state court promptly resolved the merits of Kennedy’s legal challenge, while in violation of the Georgia Election Code that requires lawsuits contesting elections to be heard within 20 days, the Fulton County court delayed assigning a judge to hear Trump’s election dispute and then delayed the first scheduled hearing until Jan. 8, 2021 — two days after Congress certified Biden the winner of the 2020 election.
Now you know the rest of the story. There were no fake electors. The question now is whether Willis will charge Shafer and others with fake crimes.
The Left's 2020 ‘Fake Electors’ Narrative Is Fake News
“contingent” electors.
LOL...
If you look at all the facts of the 2000 election, you see that Republicans stole Florida. Clearly. Shady Diebold Voting Machines. Republicans deny this but accuse Dominion. Even House Speaker Mike Johhson pushed a false conspiracy theory about Dominion.Yeah, like George Floyd bought a pack of cigarettes with a "contingent" $20.00 bill.
Pretty obvious.I don't know what your point is.
Bush didn't steal Florida......Al Gore tried to, only wanting Dade County counted.....Democrats lied and cheated with the hanging chad bullcrap. SCOTUS stepped in and ended it.It took a lot less people for Bush to steal Florida.
LOL...........oh the famous 61 lawsuit mantra that never really meant anything...You clowns are stuck on stupid.Even the Supreme's Trump appointed didn't back him up here.
You are a dickhead.You are Nazi's.
Pretty close.Nope, not the same.
Pretty close.
They followed the same approach the democrats did in Hawaii. Contingent electors following established legal precedent.Here's a similarity...
They followed the same approach the democrats did in Hawaii. Contingent electors following established legal precedent.
Wrong...Nope, they didn't. As outlined in post #87.
Wrong...
Ha ha ha.....tell me why they needed contingent electors then.
So a party candidate wins a state, that states electors cast their votes for that party candidate.......so the other party candidate files an objection to the results, court decides in that party's favor, tosses the election results, the electors that had already cast their votes for the new winner?They didn't. Trump didn't win any of those states they tried to represent. That makes them fake electors, not contingent electors.
So a party candidate wins a state, that states electors cast their votes for that party candidate.......so the other party candidate files an objection to the results, court decides in that party's favor, tosses the election results, the electors that had already cast their votes for the new winner?
Not how it works.....you need to read the OP article.If the losing candidate proves in court they really won, THEN they certify the electors for that candidate. That's what happened in 1960. The state can't certify electors for the losing candidate just because the losing candidate is objecting to losing.
Not how it works.....you need to read the OP article.
All states involved were actively pursuing court rulings.#1 Hawaii was in the middle of a court supervised state recount. Emphasis on the fact that the courts were actively involved.
Doesn't have to be done under court supervision. You are aware election rules/procedures vary state by state.#2 The party did not certify the electors and send them to the National Archives and to Congress, it was don't under court supervision and under the authority of the State Executive.
All states involved were actively pursuing court rulings.
Doesn't have to be done under court supervision. You are aware election rules/procedures vary state by state.
Yet He was challenging the votes in court......It's determined in every state by which candidate wins the state. Trump didn't win any of those states.
It's illegal for electors to sign a fake certificate claiming they are casting their vote for the losing candidate as though their candidate won.
All states involved were actively pursuing court rulings.
Doesn't have to be done under court supervision. You are aware election rules/procedures vary state by state.
Quit making up crap.The courts were not involved with the actions of the fake electors. Glad we could agree that Hawaii in 1960 though was acting under the authority of the State Executive and the courts.
