GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

 

[JustAGuy1]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

What the flying fuck are you taling about. It's a woman, and there are no alegations of forerign in6erfearance. Did you actually miss the part about marshal law. Once again you fail to impress with your intelect and anylitical skills

Son, You've NEVER impressed anyone with your intellect or anything else.

Son????
View attachment 429848

You post like a kid and you'll get treated like one.

 

[justoffal]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

This isn't the first republican to call for martial law.

While they say anyone who doesn't agree with them are fascists or communists taking away freedoms.

What is with republicans?

Collusion hoaxer.....you called for it when you pushed the collusion lie. The Chinese owned Dominion voting machines have become foreign soldiers on American soil.....it deserves a military response.

It seems Dominion voting machines lean left, while in the 2000 election, Diebold voting machines switched Gore votes to count for Dubya. And you RWNJs worry about the legitimacy of paper, mail-in votes, that cannot be hacked.


.

You talking about hanging chads dude? That was totally different....... they did not even approach the level of sophistication we are talking about today. However I wouldn't put it past the Bush Clan to pull almost anything....for two decades they were the most powerful family in DC behind these scenes and even though Daddy is gone they still carry considerable clout. Did Bush Cheat???? That would not surprise me at all in fact Sidney Powell has indicated that some of the recent Republican victories may also have been purchased from Dominion maybe even Kemps....this has to stop. Apparently Dominion is the Reason Bernie lost to Clinton and then to Biden......now that I can believe because I would have given you my eye tooth on a bet that Bernie was going to be the nominee......he has ten times the Base that Biden does but he also has a backbone and they couldn't have that.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

I never said he could just void it did I,,,

again respond to my full comment instead of your edited version,,,

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

I never said he could just void it did I,,,

again respond to my full comment instead of your edited version,,,

You said that he could call for a new election. What is the fucking difference. You are stil playing yuour childish and dishonest word games. Stop it!

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

I never said he could just void it did I,,,

again respond to my full comment instead of your edited version,,,

You said that he could call for a new election. What is the fucking difference. You are stil playing yuour childish and dishonest word games. Stop it!

the difference is why I said he could,,, why are you ignoring that part???

 

[Hossfly]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

Many Republican pols are calling for Trump to declare a Constitutional Crisis and a National Emergency. There's nothing Congress or SCOTUS can do. Their hands are tied and Trump can call for a new election. Everyone would vote in person. No mail in ballots.

Gotta call Bullsh#t on that. As a retired Officer, you know better than that crap. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Just a lowly First Sergeant and see post #41

Did not know. You still project "Bearing". Still disappointed in your statement. It is not how we do it here and at some level, you know it.

It's constitutional, it's legal and needs to be done. America has never had nationwide martial law and I hope we never will.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

I never said he could just void it did I,,,

again respond to my full comment instead of your edited version,,,

You said that he could call for a new election. What is the fucking difference. You are stil playing yuour childish and dishonest word games. Stop it!

the difference is why I said he could,,, why are you ignoring that part???

Stop it! Just fucking stop it with your cryptic crap. Explain what you're talking about or get out of my face.

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

I never said he could just void it did I,,,

again respond to my full comment instead of your edited version,,,

You said that he could call for a new election. What is the fucking difference. You are stil playing yuour childish and dishonest word games. Stop it!

the difference is why I said he could,,, why are you ignoring that part???

Stop it! Just fucking stop it with your cryptic crap. Explain what you're talking about or get out of my face.

my statement is in simple english and very short,, for the life of me I dont know why you cant read it,,,

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

I never said he could just void it did I,,,

again respond to my full comment instead of your edited version,,,

You said that he could call for a new election. What is the fucking difference. You are stil playing yuour childish and dishonest word games. Stop it!

the difference is why I said he could,,, why are you ignoring that part???

Stop it! Just fucking stop it with your cryptic crap. Explain what you're talking about or get out of my face.

my statement is in simple english and very short,, for the life of me I dont know why you cant read it,,,

Cut the crap. You are a major pain in the ass. I am not going to waist my time trying to figure out what you're taling about when you are to lazy and inarticulate to actually formulate a cogent and concise paragraph or two, with documentation , explaing exactly what you are saying. Get the hell out of here.

 

[progressive hunter]

This is complete insanity! What has happened to our country? People like this call themselves patriots, while at the same time engaging in dagerous rhetoric the threatens the very foundation of our republic. It is dangerous and irresponsible and suborns the idea that resorting to force is ok when you don't like the outcome of an election. They are not patriots. They are traitors and terrorists

GOP gubernatorial candidate in Virginia calls on Trump to declare martial law (msn.com)

The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's a legal grey area and any effort by Trump to use the military to overturn the election results would be immediately thwarted by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Trump's legal challenges to the election have been broadly dismissed by the courts, including the Supreme Court. The president and his campaign have not been able to prove the wild accusations they've made on social media and cable news.

if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

And that is written where exactly?

in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

Really??

The Constitution provides no mechanism for a re-vote of the Presidential election. However, it does provide three mechanisms by which a rigged election can be over-ridden.

1. The Electoral College can collectively ignore the election outcome. Electors are nominally pledged to vote for a given candidate, but if enough of them act as faithless electors, it can change the outcome of the election.
   [*]Congress can reject the electoral votes from states with voting issues. Doing so requires a majority vote in both houses of Congress; this happened in the 1872 election, when the votes from Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected due to voting irregularities.
   [*]Congress can reject the election entirely by not recognizing any of the electoral votes, sending the election to the House of Representatives and Senate as provided in the Twelfth Amendment. It's unclear what "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three" would mean in the context of an election where zero electoral votes were cast, so it's likely that, in practice, sufficient electoral votes would be accepted to generate a tie.
   [*]

your twisting what I said to fit your narrative,,, very dishonest of you but expected,,

What the hell am I twisting? I presented facts and that is all. Stop playing childish games. You stated that the Constitution gives the president power to hold a new election, WITHOUT presenting any documentation of your clim, like you always do.

thats not what I said,, go back and read it again,,

I did. You're full of shit as always

YOU SAID: if he can prove foreign intervention in the election he has a responsibility to call for it and a new election,,,

I SAID; And that is written where exactly?

You Said: in the constitution and supported by his oath of office,,

I said: That is a piss poor answer but exactly what I would expect of you

You said: only because you reject the constitution and what it says,,

next time dont edit my comment to fit your narrative,,

my statement stands,,, and is backed up by the constitution and his oath of office,,

I did not edit your comments. I reposted them and shoved them in your face to show what a liar you are. You think that you can gaslight me by posting shit and then denying that you said it. Not working Bud. I am smarter than that. I am smarter, and more honest than you.. You know what you said. Own it.

everytime you quoted me you edited wat I said,,, you have yet to address my full quote,,,

dont get mad at me for what the constitution says,, maybe you should read it instead of putting your progressive spin on it,,,


my statement stands,,

You're still trying to gaslight me by trying to make me doubt what I know to be fact. And, you are still making assertions about the constitution that you can't document. You are a real pathetic mess Bud. Get the hell out of here .

you just think that because of your progressive indoctrination,,,
POTUS has a duty to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign or domestic,, and the constitution gives him the power to do that,,

That does not mean that he can void an election based on the delusion that he was cheated.

I never said he could just void it did I,,,

again respond to my full comment instead of your edited version,,,

You said that he could call for a new election. What is the fucking difference. You are stil playing yuour childish and dishonest word games. Stop it!

the difference is why I said he could,,, why are you ignoring that part???

Stop it! Just fucking stop it with your cryptic crap. Explain what you're talking about or get out of my face.

my statement is in simple english and very short,, for the life of me I dont know why you cant read it,,,

Cut the crap. You are a major pain in the ass. I am not going to waist my time trying to figure out what you're taling about when you are to lazy and inarticulate to actually formulate a cogent and concise paragraph or two, with documentation , explaing exactly what you are saying. Get the hell out of here.

nothing to figure out,, its in simple english in about 6 words,,

are you just stupid or what???