What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.

[MaryAnne11]

QUOTE="DJT for Life, post: 19561051, member: 64285"]

If fraud is proven, it seems to me that the winner of the most popular votes should become president. However, our Constitution doesn't address that. If Trump and Pence are indicted and/or impeached - I certainly don't want Paul Ryan to become president.

Well, we certainly won't have an Indian in the White House.

We've already tried a black and that failed miserably. Country doesn't
want a fatass woman.

Can't see some slope getting the nod. The President is required
to speak English, thus that leaves the beaners out.

I guess, we'll just keep it like it is. There won't be anybody removed from
office...so everything will carry on.[/QUOTE]
That is the only answer your post deserves.

 

[kaz]

The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.

Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.

I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.

Doesn't matter once the Electoral College proclaims their decision.

I disagree. Such a constitutional crisis must be dealt with - somehow.

What crisis? The Electoral College gets the blame.

Where does the Electoral College get its legal authority?

Um ... the Constitution. You didn't know that, Pocahontas? Seriously?

 

[JQPublic1]

You've been attacking people who look like the source ever since you've fouled these boards with your presence. How ironic it is that you now use the words of one of those people you so despise to bolster your weak premise. But the link does not prove that voter fraud exists. The article is full of conjectural prose and is crammed with inuendo. His main source? The morally bankrupt Heritage Foundation kool aid factory has started to seduce Black fools into pushing it's RW extremist agenda.

Attacking the source. Ad hominem fallacy.

Your sources should be attacked and thoroughly scrutinized. Apparently you just copy and paste without reading the whole link. You're sooooo gullible. You poor thang!

You want reliable, non-partisan fake news sources only

I want to see tangible evidence, not spurios hearsay.

Makes zero difference to you. If it serves the leftist cause, you don't care if it's made up. If it doesn't, no amount of evidence would convince you

Well, arrests and convictions would do wonders for me. Without those, i see no good reason to accept anything less.

 

[JQPublic1]

Hillary was illegally cheated out of the presidency.

Bullshit. You can't point to a single illegal vote Trump recieved. On the other hand, Hillary recieved millions of illegal votes.

Proof?

Voter Fraud Is Real. Here’s The Proof

BWHAHAHAHAHA. You actually took the word of a black man over whites... John Gibbs, the author of your centerpiece is very Black. Gee...youve practically got his testicles in your mouth.You are so enamored of him you lovingly posted his narrative 3 times on the same page. Ahhh...its spring and love is in the air....

LOL, you're going on about blowing a black guy when you recently were able to breathe for the first time in eight years because you were blowing a black guy ...

Im not ghey like Bi- RAT. You pull a dick on me and I'll kick your arse.

 

[kaz]

Attacking the source. Ad hominem fallacy.

Your sources should be attacked and thoroughly scrutinized. Apparently you just copy and paste without reading the whole link. You're sooooo gullible. You poor thang!

You want reliable, non-partisan fake news sources only

I want to see tangible evidence, not spurios hearsay.

Makes zero difference to you. If it serves the leftist cause, you don't care if it's made up. If it doesn't, no amount of evidence would convince you

Well, arrests and convictions would do wonders for me. Without those, i see no good reason to accept anything less.

That makes no sense

 

[kaz]

Bullshit. You can't point to a single illegal vote Trump recieved. On the other hand, Hillary recieved millions of illegal votes.

Proof?

Voter Fraud Is Real. Here’s The Proof

BWHAHAHAHAHA. You actually took the word of a black man over whites... John Gibbs, the author of your centerpiece is very Black. Gee...youve practically got his testicles in your mouth.You are so enamored of him you lovingly posted his narrative 3 times on the same page. Ahhh...its spring and love is in the air....

LOL, you're going on about blowing a black guy when you recently were able to breathe for the first time in eight years because you were blowing a black guy ...

Im not ghey like Bi- RAT. You pull a dick on me and I'll kick your arse.

I still can't understand what you're saying because of all the gurgling. Can you take Obama's dick out of your mouth and say that again?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.

Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.

I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.

The USSC stuck their necks in Bush VS. Gore. Let them decide this one!

There is nothing to decide.

 

[BluesLegend]

What happens if the election was a computer simulation and we are all living in the Matrix?

That would explain the last election......

Awe, tissue?

In the Matrix? Tissues aren't real in the Matrix

Your posts aren't real, your new screen name is SyriuslyFake.

LOL that explains all of your posts then- all machine generated from a Right Wing meme generator.

SyriuslyFake you are lying again, not your best effort so only a 3 rating this time.

 

[JQPublic1]

Your sources should be attacked and thoroughly scrutinized. Apparently you just copy and paste without reading the whole link. You're sooooo gullible. You poor thang!

You want reliable, non-partisan fake news sources only

I want to see tangible evidence, not spurios hearsay.

Makes zero difference to you. If it serves the leftist cause, you don't care if it's made up. If it doesn't, no amount of evidence would convince you

Well, arrests and convictions would do wonders for me. Without those, i see no good reason to accept anything less.

That makes no sense

Ok dummy. I'll dumb it down for ya. Arrests and convictions of fraudulent voters is the only way to prove that voter fraud is as widespread as you puss moles say it is.
Dead people can't vote but many are still registered to vote as Republicans or as Democrats. Why didn't the article mention that? Yet, you would have us believe that someone is voting for the dead. I don't see how you can prove that. You must also consider that some deceased voters share names with living voters. Consider too that some people vote and die shortly thereafter..
And many voterals are registered to vote in 2 or more states because they moved several times and forgot to notify the authorities of the address change. But that doesn't mean they voted in every state in any particular election year. That notion is ludicrous.

 

[Syriusly]

That would explain the last election......

Awe, tissue?

In the Matrix? Tissues aren't real in the Matrix

Your posts aren't real, your new screen name is SyriuslyFake.

LOL that explains all of your posts then- all machine generated from a Right Wing meme generator.

SyriuslyFake you are lying again, not your best effort so only a 3 rating this time.

The Matrix doesn't allow me to lie Bluefibber.

 

[kaz]

You want reliable, non-partisan fake news sources only

I want to see tangible evidence, not spurios hearsay.

Makes zero difference to you. If it serves the leftist cause, you don't care if it's made up. If it doesn't, no amount of evidence would convince you

Well, arrests and convictions would do wonders for me. Without those, i see no good reason to accept anything less.

That makes no sense

Ok dummy. I'll dumb it down for ya. Arrests and convictions of fraudulent voters is the only way to prove that voter fraud is as widespread as you puss moles say it is.
Dead people can't vote but many are still registered to vote as Republicans or as Democrats. Why didn't the article mention that? Yet, you would have us believe that someone is voting for the dead. I don't see how you can prove that. You must also consider that some deceased voters share names with living voters. Consider too that some people vote and die shortly thereafter..
And many voterals are registered to vote in 2 or more states because they moved several times and forgot to notify the authorities of the address change. But that doesn't mean they voted in every state in any particular election year. That notion is ludicrous.

The only enforcement we have is when they admit they aren't citizens. So of course there aren't a lot of arrests. Duh.

You've designed a system with no enforcement, then you demand the proof you prohibited we collect. It's a disingenuous argument.

Let's investigate voters for real. There's no reason not to. Legit voters can easily prove it

 

[JQPublic1]

Proof?

Voter Fraud Is Real. Here’s The Proof

BWHAHAHAHAHA. You actually took the word of a black man over whites... John Gibbs, the author of your centerpiece is very Black. Gee...youve practically got his testicles in your mouth.You are so enamored of him you lovingly posted his narrative 3 times on the same page. Ahhh...its spring and love is in the air....

LOL, you're going on about blowing a black guy when you recently were able to breathe for the first time in eight years because you were blowing a black guy ...

Im not ghey like Bi- RAT. You pull a dick on me and I'll kick your arse.

I still can't understand what you're saying because of all the gurgling. Can you take Obama's dick out of your mouth and say that again?

You couldn't hear me anyway with you head up Trump's arse...sucking from the inside out.
I'm done with you fags...your love for bi- Rat is clear now...you certainly defend your lover well.

 

[JQPublic1]

I want to see tangible evidence, not spurios hearsay.

Makes zero difference to you. If it serves the leftist cause, you don't care if it's made up. If it doesn't, no amount of evidence would convince you

Well, arrests and convictions would do wonders for me. Without those, i see no good reason to accept anything less.

That makes no sense

Ok dummy. I'll dumb it down for ya. Arrests and convictions of fraudulent voters is the only way to prove that voter fraud is as widespread as you puss moles say it is.
Dead people can't vote but many are still registered to vote as Republicans or as Democrats. Why didn't the article mention that? Yet, you would have us believe that someone is voting for the dead. I don't see how you can prove that. You must also consider that some deceased voters share names with living voters. Consider too that some people vote and die shortly thereafter..
And many voterals are registered to vote in 2 or more states because they moved several times and forgot to notify the authorities of the address change. But that doesn't mean they voted in every state in any particular election year. That notion is ludicrous.

The only enforcement we have is when they admit they aren't citizens. So of course there aren't a lot of arrests. Duh.

You've designed a system with no enforcement, then you demand the proof you prohibited we collect. It's a disingenuous argument.

Let's investigate voters for real. There's no reason not to. Legit voters can easily prove it

Thats what I thought...you have nothing on which to base your spurious claims...pure conjecture...duhhh

 

[kaz]

Makes zero difference to you. If it serves the leftist cause, you don't care if it's made up. If it doesn't, no amount of evidence would convince you

Well, arrests and convictions would do wonders for me. Without those, i see no good reason to accept anything less.

That makes no sense

Ok dummy. I'll dumb it down for ya. Arrests and convictions of fraudulent voters is the only way to prove that voter fraud is as widespread as you puss moles say it is.
Dead people can't vote but many are still registered to vote as Republicans or as Democrats. Why didn't the article mention that? Yet, you would have us believe that someone is voting for the dead. I don't see how you can prove that. You must also consider that some deceased voters share names with living voters. Consider too that some people vote and die shortly thereafter..
And many voterals are registered to vote in 2 or more states because they moved several times and forgot to notify the authorities of the address change. But that doesn't mean they voted in every state in any particular election year. That notion is ludicrous.

The only enforcement we have is when they admit they aren't citizens. So of course there aren't a lot of arrests. Duh.

You've designed a system with no enforcement, then you demand the proof you prohibited we collect. It's a disingenuous argument.

Let's investigate voters for real. There's no reason not to. Legit voters can easily prove it

Thats what I thought...you have nothing on which to base your spurious claims...pure conjecture...duhhh

JQObamaBlower: Prove there is voter fraud

kaz: Let's find out

JQObamaBlower: Exactly, I won't let you investigate which proves there is no fraud

At least that's what I could piece together since you refuse to take Obama's dick out of your mouth

 

[Cecilie1200]

If fraud is proven, it seems to me that the winner of the most popular votes should become president. However, our Constitution doesn't address that. If Trump and Pence are indicted and/or impeached - I certainly don't want Paul Ryan to become president.

Why am I not surprised that that's how it "seems to you"?

In actual fact, the Constitution AND subsequent laws provide procedures for disputed elections. They were intended more for vote count issues and such, but would likely also apply to other disputes.

Alternatively, I guess you could impeach.

Frankly, I'm not sure if your scenario invalidates the election, though. It isn't as though anyone's alleging that the votes themselves were tampered with.

 

[Lakhota]

So-called widespread voter fraud is nothing more than a NaziCon myth.

The Kris Kobach Voter Fraud Trial Was About Much More Than Kris Kobach

 

[bendog]

The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.

Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.

I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.

I think the const is just fine. If it comes to light that Trump broke the law in conspiring with Putin/Assange to illegally hack dem emails, he should be impeached and convicted. If he accepted help from Russia in creating their ad strategy in exchange for an express promise about something ... Benedict Arnold there too.

If he just accepted help ..... well I'd never vote for him under any circumstance, but I'd hope he lose in 20.

The real problem is the Founders based their hopes on an "informed" electorate. We were not informed about Russia and Trump because Comey and the FBI were misused by the Obama admin after Bill met with Lynch on the Tarmac. Lynch should have been dismissed, a new AG appointed, who would have had to choose whether to prosecuted Hillary for disclosing secret emails.

 

[Lakhota]

The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.

Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.

I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.

I think the const is just fine. If it comes to light that Trump broke the law in conspiring with Putin/Assange to illegally hack dem emails, he should be impeached and convicted. If he accepted help from Russia in creating their ad strategy in exchange for an express promise about something ... Benedict Arnold there too.

If he just accepted help ..... well I'd never vote for him under any circumstance, but I'd hope he lose in 20.

The real problem is the Founders based their hopes on an "informed" electorate. We were not informed about Russia and Trump because Comey and the FBI were misused by the Obama admin after Bill met with Lynch on the Tarmac. Lynch should have been dismissed, a new AG appointed, who would have had to choose whether to prosecuted Hillary for disclosing secret emails.

Yeah, it's all Obama and Hillary's fault.

 

[bendog]

The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.

Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.

I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.

I think the const is just fine. If it comes to light that Trump broke the law in conspiring with Putin/Assange to illegally hack dem emails, he should be impeached and convicted. If he accepted help from Russia in creating their ad strategy in exchange for an express promise about something ... Benedict Arnold there too.

If he just accepted help ..... well I'd never vote for him under any circumstance, but I'd hope he lose in 20.

The real problem is the Founders based their hopes on an "informed" electorate. We were not informed about Russia and Trump because Comey and the FBI were misused by the Obama admin after Bill met with Lynch on the Tarmac. Lynch should have been dismissed, a new AG appointed, who would have had to choose whether to prosecuted Hillary for disclosing secret emails.

Yeah, it's all Obama and Hillary's fault.

The Clintons and Lynch. Obama was just looking towards his legacy and he'd lost his enforcer in Holder, and Biden was sick. bill wouldn't have dared go near Holder. Why Obama ever let the Clintons back into the executive branch is a question for ..... years. Comey was incompetent.

Trump ..... ? My guess is he's owned by the KGB

 

[bripat9643]

Attacking the source. How typical.

You've been attacking people who look like the source ever since you've fouled these boards with your presence. How ironic it is that you now use the words of one of those people you so despise to bolster your weak premise. But the link does not prove that voter fraud exists. The article is full of conjectural prose and is crammed with inuendo. His main source? The morally bankrupt Heritage Foundation kool aid factory has started to seduce Black fools into pushing it's RW extremist agenda.

Attacking the source. Ad hominem fallacy.

Your sources should be attacked and thoroughly scrutinized. Apparently you just copy and paste without reading the whole link. You're sooooo gullible. You poor thang!

I didn't copy&paste anything, dumbass. I posted a link. You have yet to identify anything in the article that isn't a fact.

You copied and pasted the link or we couldn't click on it you stupid buzzard.
The link leads us to a narrative so full of holes
only a rat like you might think it is cheese.
View attachment 184256

Putting a link in your post isn't normally considered to be copy and paste, you fucking moron. If you think it's full of holes, then point them out. All you're doing is whining petulantly like a 5-year-old who just dropped his ice cream cone on the pavement.