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.
There is no earthly way what you are describing could have ever been successful, not to mention that you've all contradicted each other about what is legal and what is not, what there is a process for and what there is not. It's been very amusing to say the least.
Talk about cult conspiracy theories, this one takes the cake!
Wrong. Eastman planned for that too...
4. Howls, of course, from the Democrats, who now claim, contrary to Tribe’s prior position, that 270 is required. So Pence says, fine. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, no candidate has achieved the necessary majority. That sends the matter to the House, where the “the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote . . . .” Republicans currently control 26 of the state delegations, the bare majority needed to win that vote. President Trump is re-elected there as well. 5. One last piece. Assuming the Electoral Count Act process is followed and, upon getting the objections to the Arizona slates, the two houses break into their separate chambers, we should not allow the Electoral Count Act constraint on debate to control. That would mean that a prior legislature was determining the rules of the present one — a constitutional no-no (as Tribe has forcefully argued). So someone – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, etc. – should demand normal rules (which includes the filibuster). That creates a stalemate that would give the state legislatures more time to weigh in to formally support the alternate slate of electors, if they had not already done so. 6. The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission – either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court. Let the other side challenge his actions in court, where Tribe (who in 2001 conceded the President of the Senate might be in charge of counting the votes) and others who would press a lawsuit would have their past position -- that these are non-justiciable political questions – thrown back at them, to get the lawsuit dismissed. The fact is that the Constitution assigns this power to the Vice President as the ultimate arbiter. We should take all of our actions with that in mind.
Imagine that, after all this time they decide to indict just before the 2024 election. What a coincidence!
Multiple slates are not illegal if a state has not resolved all disputes prior the “Safe Harbor” deadline in mid December 2020z
Trump lied on J6 that those seven states wanted their certificates back which was also part of the fraudulent attempt to convince Pence not to count those seven stars and declare Trump/Pence the winner which would have thrown the entire 2020 election into chaos all entirely based upon Trump’s lies that began on election night before all the votes were even counted.
The only fraud I see here is that Biden actually got 81 million legitimate votes when we keep finding out he didn't.
View attachment 938067
'Fake electors to be counted' - sheer lunacy.
Spoken like a true enemy of democracy.Spoken like a loyal Nazi…
Nope. You're the ones claiming Pence will announce that he has multiple slates from one state to congress, while claiming that multiple slates are illegal.
Hey, we're making progress here, at least you're now admitting it was impossible for them to be counted. You think the people that supposedly tried to put forth this plot didn't know that?
Have you considered the idea that...'Fake electors to be counted' - sheer lunacy.
Still relies on the prior steps, Pence announcing to congress that he has multiple slates, which you claim are illegal, and doesn't count them. Never happens.
Not sure where you got these 'steps' from, if they're even legitimate or illegal themselves. You've basically proven nothing.
Unquestionable Lawfare! AZ has already got laws that deal with "faithless electors" which are limited to fines and removal and replacement. Attempting to make new court cases where none exist is nothing more than election interference.No such thing as a fake elector. That's for Congress to decide which slate to approve.
The OP is therefore more leftoid lawfare.
In a day when clearer minds prevailed, in 1985, Sol Wachtler, then the chief justice of New York's Supreme Court said, “Any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.” The democrat party has pretty much proven that to be true during this administration. Meh.File a brief with the Grand Jury and the State of Arizona.
This is a dumb post that arises from ignorance. They aren't charged with being faithless or fake electors. They are charged with forgery and criminal conspiracy.Unquestionable Lawfare! AZ has already got laws that deal with "faithless electors" which are limited to fines and removal and replacement. Attempting to make new court cases where none exist is nothing more than election interference.
Again, that's your strawman and it fails you every time. Again, plausibility plays no role in determining if this is a crime or not. Intent does. And those Republicans intended to try to flip the election they lost by sending an uncertified slate of electors to Congress.
Again, that's you conflating state crimes with federal crimes. You do realize a crime can be at a state level and not at the federal level, right?
Have you considered the idea that...
... bear with me here...
That you don't understand all of this because...
...hear me out...
... you don't understand any of this and dont know much about it?
Unquestionable Lawfare! AZ has already got laws that deal with "faithless electors" which are limited to fines and removal and replacement. Attempting to make new court cases where none exist is nothing more than election interference.
Again, conflating state and federal crimes. You're on a roll with that one, huh?
