2020 ELECTION NOT OVER BY A LONG SHOT!
Over 100 House Republicans, and 12 Senate Republicans Playing Dem’s Game! Is it over, and there is still a path to a re-inauguration for President Trump. This obscure law could be Trump’s final gambit to rightfully claim the presidency. It is called the Electoral Count Act, and the concept is simple.
Update: Proof that America’s 2020 election stolen!!
No matter what the media says, this race isn’t over.
In fact, the Democrats tried it in 2017 and 2001 after the 2016 and 2000 elections.
Obviously, Democrats failed. But with widespread allegations of voter fraud and data irregularities, President Trump could succeed with this route. In short, Congress must certify the election results after each state certifies its results, but the certification process can be challenged, and on Wednesday January 6th there will be over 100 House Republicans and now 12 Republican Senators who will be challenging that Process!
There are multiple allies on Capitol Hill who are willing to fight for President Trump, and if there any Democrats who are believers in the Constitution, the ‘Rule of Law,’ but more than that, the ‘Will’ of the American People, but are now tired of taking marching orders from Nancy Pelosi for all these years, just know that you are not alone!
It’s also time for the American People to realize that both Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Chief Justice Roberts have been outed as those insiders that those Chinese professors who were caught on video bragging about how China have Republicans and others in high places in our government to assist in not only fixing the election, but protecting the ‘Bad Actors’ in the Obama Administration, then protecting Obama and his Administration for all the times they violated the Constitution during for all those years without any pushback or actions by the House to impeach President Obama when the Republicans had that same ability Pelosi had when she impeached a duly elected President over a Phone call, especially when it was the Republican who controlled the House from 2011 to 2019!
The insider ‘Never America’ Speakers of the House during that span were first John Boehner, and than Paul Ryan who lied to President Trump about guaranteeing that he would the ‘Wall’ fully funded if he left the funding of the ‘Wall’ out of the budget negotiations before the 2018 elections! Well, President Trump lived up to his promise and left the ‘Wall’ financing out of those Budget negotiations, but Ryan lied, but not only lied, but left Congress altogether never to heard from again!
Politico explains:
President Donald Trump’s arsenal for overturning the election will soon be down to one final, desperate maneuver: pressing his Republican allies on Capitol Hill to step in and derail Joe Biden’s presidency.
Although the Electoral College casts the official vote for president on Dec. 14, it’s up to Congress to certify the results a few weeks later. And federal law gives individual members of the House and Senate the power to challenge the results from the floor — a rarely used mechanism meant to be the last of all last resorts to safeguard an election.
“Nothing is off the table,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.).
Gaetz pointed out that in January 2017, a handful of House Democrats took this precise procedural step before their efforts flamed out during a joint session of Congress presided over by none other than Biden, then the outgoing vice president.
“It is over,” Biden said at the time, gaveling down Democrats as Republicans cheered.
This time, Vice President Mike Pence will be in the chair for any potential challenges — a potentially awkward scenario as his boss continues to deny the reality of the election he lost.
The framers declared that the presidential election isn’t official until lawmakers certify the winner. The voters, on Nov. 3, picked 306 electors for Biden and 232 for Trump. Those electors cast their formal votes for president on Dec. 14.
An obscure 1887 law called the Electoral Count Act, and several subsequent updates, spell out the process, setting Jan. 6 after a presidential election as the official certification date and outlining vague, complicated procedures.
On that day, the House and Senate meet in a joint session at 1 p.m. — just three days after a newly constituted Congress is sworn in. One of their first orders of business is to pass judgment on the Electoral College vote.
That same federal law also gives a tiny number of lawmaker’s enormous power to challenge the results.
If a single House member (There are over 100) and a single senator (There are 12) join forces, they can object to entire slates of presidential electors. They must do so in writing and provide an explanation, though there are no guidelines on how detailed it must be.
If they do, the House and Senate must retreat to their chambers and debate the outcome for up to two hours before voting on the matter. Each state’s electors are certified separately, meaning lawmakers bent on challenging the results have multiple chances to force lengthy delays.
If the Democrat-run House and GOP-controlled Senate disagree? That outcome has never been tested before, though it would likely give governors in key states — including the Democrats who lead Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan — a larger role, but overall U.S. governors – number by political party affiliation 1990-2019 Published by Erin Duffin, Jul 16, 2020 In 2019, there were 27 Republican governors and 23 Democratic governors in office.
There have been whispers of the Electoral Count Act.
However, it appears that most mainstream media members are refusing to cover the possibility.
It’s not just Politico.
The New York Times confirms this is a possibility:
Remember, this is the New York Times that had to rely on China to bail them out to prevent them from going under, and now who owns 17% of the New York Times! I’m only mentioning this because for the NYT to even acknowledge that the possibility exists is ‘HUGE!
President Trump’s last-ditch efforts to reverse the election seem to come down to a far-fetched scenario, one in which Republican-led state legislatures choose the members of the Electoral College, overturning the will of voters.
Could it work? Election law experts are highly skeptical. And leaders of the Republican majorities in legislatures in key states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, and Georgia, told The New York Times this week through their offices that they saw no role for themselves in picking electors.
That has not stopped some high-profile supporters of the president, including the talk radio host Mark Levin and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, from suggesting that Republican-led legislatures should consider ignoring the popular vote in close-fought states won by President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. and handing their electoral votes to Mr. Trump.
This political gambit, to the degree that it’s an organized strategy at all, has a theoretical basis in law, according to experts. But if it were to proceed, it could cause widespread outrage and be an attempt to subvert the democratic process!
Dear Editors of the New Your Times,
Is stealing an election where 40% of the Nation believes the election was fixed isn’t a bigger outrage when it comes to subverting the democratic process?
Benjamin Ginsberg, until recently one of the Republican Party’s top elections lawyers, called the strategy an act of desperation, one that many Republican lawmakers would not buy into. “The most partisan Trump legislators might, but I believe enough would rebel at hijacking their constituents’ votes that such actions would fail,” he said.
Here’s how such a scheme would theoretically play out. The Constitution gives state legislatures the power to determine the “manner” in which electors are appointed to the Electoral College, the body of 538 people who formally choose the president. Every state has already done that, by specifying in its laws that the winner of the statewide popular vote is entitled to the state’s presidential electors (Maine and Nebraska apportion some electors by congressional district).
The Electoral Count Act, a 19th-century law, sets up the mechanism for how that takes place. It directs governors to certify both the election results and a slate of presidential electors to represent the will of the people. In general practice, governors certify electors chosen by the party of the presidential candidate who won their state.
The Electoral Count Act also says that in the event of “failed elections,” in which voters have not made a choice for president, state legislatures are empowered to step in and appoint electors. The 1876 law is ambiguous about what constitutes a “failed” election. But the law does contain a deadline for states to certify elections: the “safe harbor” date, which this year is Dec. 8. Electors chosen before that date cannot be challenged by Congress.
A flurry of lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign, most of which have been defeated in court, appear aimed at slowing down states’ certification timelines and possibly providing a pretext to declare a “failed” election.
Time will tell whether this will happen.
Hopefully it doesn’t get to the Electoral Count Act, but if, god forbid, the election continues to be contested into the new year, the Associated Press lays out the next steps. According the Twelfth Amendment, the new Congress that takes their seats in January will preside over a “contingent election” — something that only ever happened once, early in the country’s history, when John Quincy Adams became president in 1825.
In this scenario, the House will cast the deciding votes for president, choosing among the three candidates who received the most electoral votes. The Senate chooses the vice-president.
If by some pattern of chaos, a president still hasn’t been voted in by the House by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President-Elect as chosen by the Senate becomes acting president until a president is picked. If neither has been successfully voted in by that point, then under the Presidential Succession Act, the Speaker of the House becomes president. Which, as far as we know, will be Nancy Pelosi.
This is a lot of ifs, and it’s not hard to imagine that some constitutional crisis will arise before these constitutional solutions — which Trump will not like! — can take effect.
Notice how another important ‘crossing point’ will probably be decided again by you know who, Chief Justice Roberts who could now influence another terrible Decision by the Supreme Court that’s hurt instead of helped America and the American People, but that’s only if he even lets the court even hear the case!
Just to refresh your memory Chief Justice Roberts according to professionals in the legal world, orchestrated the ‘Citizens United’ Decision, violated the Constitution by making Obamacare’s mandate a tax, and just recently refusing to hear the recent Texas case challenging those Swing states who changed their election rules shortly before the 2020 elections, and changed them in the same way California did back in the 2018 MIdterm elections when they stole the House back!
Trump has his conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but Chief Justice John Roberts is no William Rehnquist, and it’s not implausible to see that he would not want the court wading into the so-called political thicket again the way the court did in 2000.
In multiple 5-4 decisions this year, Roberts sided with the liberal bloc likely to avoid having the court be overtly political, and he is nothing if staunch about this idea.
“When you live in a polarized political environment, people tend to see everything in those terms. That’s not how we at the court function and the results in our cases do not suggest otherwise,” Roberts said last year, pushing back on statements by President Trump that cast the court in specific partisan terms.
Stay tuned for a 2 part series that I’ve been working on for the last week titled the ‘Prez’s Oath of Office, the Constitution, and Martial Law ‘Will’ Save America!
