Napoleon once said “treason is a matter of dates.” The Democrats seem to have taken Napoleon’s words to heart in declaring Republicans traitors or anti-Democratic in their planned challenge the certification of electoral votes next week. Both the media and Democratic members have advanced this narrative despite Democratic members repeatedly raising such challenges in the past. In the few acknowledgments of that history, Democrats seem to be advancing a simple and familiar defense: Trump. Once again, open hypocrisy is negated by Trumpunity. After all, they cannot be anti-Democratic because they are Democrats. That conclusory position was evident in the spin this week on CNN by former California Sen. Barbara Boxer who led such a challenge to the 2004 election results.
In January 2005, Boxer joined former Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones to challenge George W. Bush’s victory over Democratic challenger John Kerry in the state of Ohio. I was working for CBS in that election and shared concerns over the voting irregularities. At the time, Boxer argued that Republicans had engaged in voter suppression that contributed to Bush’s victory. The media and Democratic leadership was highly supportive. Indeed, many who are condemning the challenge today heaped praise on Boxer in 2004. There was no hue and cry in the media over anti-democratic measures and refusing to respect the election results.
For example, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called the current challenge an assault on democracy but, in the 2004 election challenge, she praised Boxer’s challenge as “witnessing Democracy at work. This isn’t as some of our Republican colleagues have referred to it, sadly, as frivolous. This debate is fundamental to our democracy.”
Notably, many Democrats like Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., raised analogous complaints over voting systems and insisted that “as Americans, we should all be troubled by reports of voting problems in many parts of the country.”
Sen. Dick Durbin has also denounced the challenge this year but took to the Senate floor to praise Boxer in 2005. He declared “Some may criticize our colleague from California for bringing us here for this brief debate. I thank her for doing that because it gives members an opportunity once again on a bipartisan basis to look at a challenge that we face not just in the last election in one State but in many States.”
Now however Democrats are claiming that it is unfair to compare their earlier actions and statements to the present day. As we have seen in other areas, such clearly conflicting positions present little problem for Democratic politicians when they are not being raised or challenged in the media. In today’s siloed media and politics, Democratic voters are largely protected from such counter viewpoints. Boxer’s interview is an example of the light treatment given to such members. She was left largely unchallenged on clearly opportunistic and assailable positions in the CNN interview.
Boxer insisted that the challenge had “nothing to do with overturning the election” because it was only brief and would not succeed. This current effort will also fail after a debate on some of the same issues of voting irregularities. Nevertheless, Boxer insisted “No, why would I regret spending an hour talking about the right to vote? Not at all. If these Republicans are going to lie about it and say it’s the same thing, that’s on them, and I’m sorry they’re doing this.”
CNN simply carried that transparently hypocritical spin without meaningful challenge. After all, this is deemed spin, not lies. While MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell (and recently Jake Tapper) have pledged not to interview Trump figures because they are “liars”, Democratic members can voice absurd denials without challenge. The fact is that this is an important interview despite the absence of a substantial questioning. It is information, not disinformation. The problem is the biased approach in booking such political figures depending whether they support or oppose Trump.
Ultimately, this is not “on them.” And it is on Boxer because it is the same thing. However, I did not view Boxer as engaging in an attack on democracy by using her right to object in 2005 and I do not view those objections today as anti-democratic. I did not support the challenge in 2005 and I do not support this challenge. Yet, this is a legal challenge under constitutional and statutory law. Yet, Democrats and media outlets like CNN want to portray the vote as virtually unprecedented and even treasonous.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) told CNN that members of Congress who question the election results “are bordering on sedition and treason.” That would mean more than 70 percent of Republicans and 10 percent of Democrats nationwide are potentially traitors for believing Trump won. Shaneen and her colleagues denounced Trump for calling people traitors and sought to protect officials who denounced his use of the label “enemies of the people” against reporters. Just two years ago, Trump was called a Stalin for using such labels by Democrats. It is same position taken recently before the Supreme Court by Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who called a legal challenge to the election “seditious.” Of course, the use of the courts or Congress to raise such objections is the very opposite of sedition, which seeks to overthrow the legal system.
As I noted earlier, Democrats did not accuse their colleagues of treason or sedition when they sought to block the certification of Ohio’s electoral votes in Congress in 2004. They did not call Hillary Clinton traitorous for advising Biden not to concede any Trump victory on Election Night. They did not describe members of Congress or the media as traitors for repeatedly declaring Trump “illegitimate” over the last four years.
Thus, in the end, as Napoleon said, “treason is a matter of dates.” And the key date in the United States, for now, appears to be Nov. 7 — the day the media declared Joe Biden the presumptive winner. All court challenges then became unethical for lawyers and all congressional challenges became sedition for members. It is just a matter of dates.
Dates are very important when making fruitcake.
Speaking of treason, nutty attorney Lin Wood is tweeting things like “When arrests for treason begin, put Chief Justice John Roberts, VP Mike Pence @VP @Mike_Pence, & Mitch McConnell @senatemajldr at top of list,” and “If Pence is arrested, @SecPompeo will save the election. Pence will be in jail awaiting trial for treason. He will face execution by firing squad. He is a coward & will sing like a bird & confess ALL.”
You’d think he’d explain why he thinks Pence is guilty of treason.
Probably too much to ask of someone who also claims that Jeffrey Epstein is still alive.
“who also claims that Jeffrey Epstein is still alive”
Whether Epstein is technically still alive or he is actually dead is irrelevant, thanks to Ghislaine Maxwell still being alive.
I realize that is way above your pay scale as a troll. But if you had even a smidgeon of critical thinking skills you’d know why.
Epstein being dead is totally relevant to Lin Wood being a nut and claiming that Epstein is alive.
Rhodes, objects to ridiculing a nutcase and accuses the commenter of being a ‘troll’. But, as everyone knows, Rhodes is the main troll of this blog.
John Kerry Never Invited Violence To The Streets Of Washington
Yet Trump Is Encouraging RightWing Extremists To Turn Out In Big Numbers
In the weeks since the 2020 presidential election, a coalition of loyalists of President Trump, conspiracy theory adherents, white nationalists, self-proclaimed militia members and other fringe figures have flocked to the nation’s capital to support the president’s baseless claims of election fraud. As Trump’s hopes of reversing the election results have faltered, those who falsely believe the election was stolen or fraudulent have grown increasingly angry and desperate.
During two weekends of pro-Trump demonstrations in November and December, violent melees spilled into the streets of downtown Washington.
On Wednesday, Trump’s supporters and a litany of far-right groups who believe the president’s baseless claims of voter fraud will again converge in D.C. to demand that Congress overturn the results of the election. That same day, Congress is set to convene to certify electoral college votes, declaring President-elect Joe Biden the winner.
Trump continued on Friday to publicize the right-wing demonstrations on Twitter. “The BIG Protest Rally in Washington, D.C., will take place at 11.00 A.M. on January 6th,” Trump tweeted, although none of the organizers requesting permits gave that start time. “Locational details to follow. StopTheSteal!”
Trump’s far-right supporters have announced plans to return to D.C. on Jan. 17 and in the days around Biden’s Jan. 20 inauguration, during which some militants are touting a “Million Militia March.”
On Wednesday, four simultaneous rallies are expected to draw pro-Trump demonstrators to areas around the Washington Monument, Freedom Plaza and the Capitol to hear speeches from prominent conservatives, including Trump ally Roger Stone and incoming Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has endorsed the baseless QAnon conspiracy.
Permit applications estimate thousands of attendees will spread throughout various sites downtown, chanting and waving flags. But in encrypted chat apps and online message boards, a different kind of day appears to be taking shape.
For weeks, anonymous users have posted tips and strategies for smuggling firearms into D.C., where carrying without a permit is prohibited and guns are banned at protests. Organizers on the left and right have warned their followers to prepare for violence.
Neo-Nazis took to Telegram, an encrypted chat app that allows users to broadcast to a channel of subscribers, to encourage followers to attend, saying they need “boots on the ground” to intimidate lawmakers and push for a nationalist agenda.
Comments on a YouTube video announcing the Hotel Harrington’s decision to close during the days leading up to Wednesday’s protest — after a Washington Post report on how D.C. ‘s oldest continuously running hotel became a Proud Boys rallying spot — devolved into calls for violence and an armed takeover along the Mall.
“At what point do armed Americans seize DC and start hanging politicians? It’s an honest question that is not without merit or precedence,” wrote a user in a post that was up-voted by other contributors more than 1,100 times.
A number of commenters indicated they believed — or hoped — a civil war may soon begin against a perceived band of enemies that includes communists, socialists and anyone deemed a member of “antifa.”
Members of the Proud Boys, an all-male far-right extremist group with ties to white nationalism, boasted about their plans to break off into smaller groups to roam the streets looking for counterprotesters to confront.
Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, who did not respond to a request for comment for this article, wrote in a post that was widely shared on Parler and Telegram that the group will turn out “in record numbers on Jan. 6,” promising “1,000 boots on the ground.”
Edited from: “DC Is Becoming A Protest Battleground. In A Polarized Nation, Experts Say That Is Unlikely To Change”
The Washington Post, 1/1/21
“ Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, who did not respond to a request for comment for this article, wrote in a post that was widely shared on Parler and Telegram that the group will turn out “in record numbers on Jan. 6,” promising “1,000 boots on the ground.”
Which is to say you will not be trolling this blog on Jan 6 because you will be sniffing the boots of Proud Boys in hopes one of them plows your ass.
You are not Svelaz, as your icon makes clear. You are only trolling under Svelaz’s name. What a sad life you must have that this is how you entertain yourself.
An anonymous troll flagging an anonymous troll…now that is sad
Isn’t that a laugh?! The constant mischief maker demanding respect. Like somehow he’s credible despite endless name changes. Inflating comment counts with parroting puppets.
That has to be work even for a creep; ‘sitting on Turley’s threads all day’. Making sure no discussion ever develops.
Poisoning the well so ‘no one’ can drink! That’s our troll 7 days per week.
Where does he find the time?
‘An invalid’, perhaps? ..Or dedicated Right-To-Lifer harassing liberals in God’s name?
One can only speculate ‘who’ the troll might be. He enjoys that, of course. It gives our troll control of Johnathan Turley’s blog.
Is there a point somewhere in here?
Pitman, we’ve never seen your name before. Just popped out of nowhere to raise that one question?
“a perceived band of enemies”
It appears that the propaganda shills masquerading as “journalists” at the Washington Post are getting very nervous.
They should be.
For those that support an election challenge on January 6 and respect the views of views of JT, please keep in mind that JT in this blog today said “I do not support this challenge”. I agree with this position and think it was the most important thing JT said.
When JT really does not support something, he writes a lengthy post about all the reasons why he does not support it. He could write a post demolishing any notion that this is legal. A single sentence just stating so means little from JT.
I assume JT means what he says so I am going to highlight his correct position even though he tried to focus on hypocrisy (which you refuted persuasively).
Thx.
What carries more weight? An identified and respected scholar’s simple declarative sentence, or some anonymous d-bag who denies the significance of the first statement? Gee, I wonder…
Some things are self evident and do not require a lengthy treatise.
Had he said the maneuver had little if any chance of success, a lengthier explanation would be in order.
Concerned Citizen and MollyG.
January 6th is just the beginning of your problems.
The in your face FU election fraud has awakened a sleeping giant.
You should bear in mind that the vast majority of the US Military are from “flyover country”, and they took an oath to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Newton’s Third Law: “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
AKA: Karma. Or reaping that which you have sown.
Do you actually think you are exempt from those laws?!
Rhodes again with the physical threats and references to election fraud, evidence of which he can’t produce. He is wrong on the threat part too.
The states with the most total active duty and reserve members of the military, as of September 2017, were:
California: 184,540.
Texas: 164,234.
Virginia: 115,280.
North Carolina: 112,951.
Florida: 92,249.
Georgia: 88,089.
Washington: 64,066.
South Carolina: 55,369.
New York: 48,974
Colorado: 47,636
The Left lie as if it merits them pay increases for trolling
Violence from Leftists have been on the rise since 2017. To wit, number of violent crimes 2020 vs 2019
California: 184,540 vs 175,374
Texas: 164,234 vs 126,394
Virginia: 115,280 vs 109,273
North Carolina: 112,951 vs 98,267
Florida: 92,249 vs 89,326
Georgia: 88,089 vs 73,972
Washington: 64,066 vs. 61,492
South Carolina: 55,369 vs. 52,937
New York: 48,974 vs. 42,491
Colorado: 47,636 vs. 42,302
It is so ironic that those who claim to love our country the most are the ones calling for a military coup.
Well golly, don’t they know all coups are required to be carried out by the IC/FBI/DOJ, in accordance with the current internal Democratic party directives?
TRUMP WON!
AMERICA AND AMERICANS LOST.
Americans have to listen to and accept the fabricated and/or nonexistent “evidence” with reference to the felonious likes of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, George Floyd, etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseam, the illegal claims regarding irrefutably unconstitutional DACA, the direct, clear and present dangers constituted by threats to treasonously and “fundamentally transform” the United States of America into a one-party communist state and the lies of the Clinton and Biden Crime Families, but the voluminous, empirical evidence of election corruption and vote count tampering in November, 2020, is not even presented, much less adjudicated, in a court of law, founded on an inane, arbitrary, biased and entirely ideological and ostensibly judicial finding of a dearth of standing on the part of Texas et al., including the actual landslide election winner, President Donald J. Trump.
___________________________
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
– William Casey, CIA Director
_______________________
WWGWD?
What Would George Washington Do?
What did George Washington do?
___________________________
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776
I am interested in how Jonathan sees the recent testimony by Pulitzer on the Georgia fraudulent ballots.at: https://generaldispatch.whatfinger.com/jovan-hutton-pulitzer-testimony-in-ga-election-hearing-that-changed-everything/
For those who want scientific and provable evidence of fraud, here it is. That is if you have the courage to see it and accept it–not based on your political persuasion.
It is 45 minutes of him claiming small printing misalignments on the ballots. Weak. The kracken was at least amusing.
“It is 45 minutes of him . . .”
Nice straw man. Misrepresenting someone’s argument, though, is not amusing. It’s dishonest.
Rheba, we never saw your name before. Just popped out of nowhere to post that?
https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/fact_check_georgia_senate_masquerades_failed_treasure_hunter_as_hacker_and_election_security_expert
He didn’t provide scientific and provable evidence of fraud.
Rheba: “. . . testimony by Pulitzer . . .”
Thank you for that video.
Pulitzer’s credentials are impressive, as is his argument that there are serious problems with some of the physical ballots in Georgia.
Three takeaways from his presentation:
— That some democrat mail-in ballots do *not* have bar codes (“tracking codes”). Apparently, all mail-in ballots are supposed to have them.
— The insanely high “adjudication rate” in Fulton County, GA: 93% (?!) vs. the national average of some 3%. And a massive jump over the two previous elections.
— That someone is playing keep away with physical ballots, thus preventing investigators from determining whether those ballots are authentic or counterfeit. (Note: The GBI small-sample signature audit is a *separate* issue.)
I did not doubt that Trump won legally. And I was in opposition to Trump and that is perfectly fine. What I did not ever want or advocate for is to violate the constitution, engage in a massive lying campaign, or file dozens (or any) meritless suits.
This was supposed to be in response to Thinkitthrough.
Most here are missing the political point. The Republicans are pointing out irregularities in the vote not for the purpose of overturning the election. They know that the Democrats are going to try to tell us how wonderful the mail in voting has worked in this election. The Democrats in California have allowed mail in voting and ballot harvesting. This is their model for expansion to the rest of the nation. Laws have been made to make sure that observance of the election process can be made by both sides. Do you think that these laws were enacted because there had never been any election malfeasance? Taking into account the history of the action by those of bad intent makes questioning of the election process necessary in a free nation. There are now and have been in the past national leaders who have threatened imprisonments and death to those who would question the results of an election. Senator Shaheen is a poignant example.
The election was corrupted and tampered with from the outset, by design of the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs), as support by a completely absent Supreme Court which rejects fundamental law and the essential fundamental aspect of Ben Franklin’s restricted-vote republic, an accurate and fair vote.
Tuesday is one day; one 24-hour period.
By law, the election must occur in a “…time, place and manner.”
The time is Tuesday.
The place is a polling place.
The manner is secret physical ballot.
Anything other than that is not an election.
Communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) cheat in plain sight and expect rational citizens to accept their fraud.
An election is not fraudulent or corrupt or illegal just because you don’t like the specifics of the voting procedures. Early and mail voting has been accepted as valid for decades.
TRUMP WON!
TRUMP LOST!
“Trump ends Obama’s 12-year run as most admired man: Gallup”
President Trump has ended former President Obama’s 12-year run as the most admired man in America, edging out his predecessor in the annual Gallup survey released Tuesday.
Eighteen percent of the survey’s respondents named Trump as their most admired man, compared to 15 percent who named Obama and 6 percent who named President-elect Joe Biden. Three percent named National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci, while 2 percent chose Pope Francis.
– The Hill
The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) had China release “China Flu, 2020” in an American presidential election year, to interdict the inexorable Trump landslide victory, from its Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China. China understood that the well-planned release would assist in its pursuit of global hegemony and eagerly accommodated.
Look at Wuhan now.
“No Wuhan Wet Market Animals Were Harmed In The Making Of This Video”
Ain’t communism great?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13624781/chicago-teachers-union-puerto-rico/
https://thespectator.info/2021/01/01/chicago-teachers-union-leader-claims-its-unsafe-for-teachers-to-return-to-the-classroom-while-tanning-poolside-in-puerto-rico/
PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP WON.
_______________________________
“Another reason Trump won in a landslide”
I’ll give you another reason President Donald J. Trump won in a landslide reelection fight against Hapless Joe Biden. He was easily the most admired man in an annual poll by Gallup. How does this qualify him? First of all, you have to know that the Gallup poll is statistically biased toward Democrats. That’s been known for years – and yet Trump won, easily. Want to know where Joe Biden finished? A distant third with just 6% of Americans naming him the most admired man.
Can you believe that difference? Is there any way Biden could have surpassed Trump in the record-breaking election? It defies reason. And guess who came in second in the poll: Barack Obama – by a lot over third-place Joe. Obama was named most admired by 15% of those polled. Trump tied Obama for the honor last year. And remember, this is a stacked poll. We’re supposed to believe Trump lost the election to Biden in a year few people were even thinking of Joe as the leader of his party. And we’re supposed to believe that Biden got millions more votes than Trump when it is Trump who is the most loved American leader of his age.
President Trump displaces Obama after a 12-year run on top – the longest since Dwight Eisenhower’s reign. And guess who was the most admired woman. Do you suppose it was Dr. Jill Biden? Nope. She didn’t even show up in the running. So, who was the third-place winner as most admired woman? First lady Melania Trump, as one would expect in a wildly biased poll – though not nearly as rigged as the national presidential election.
Donald J. Trump is the most admired man in America. We saw in the campaign that he had become the most LOVED man in America.
Then how could he have lost an honest election?
– Joseph Farah
Three points:
1. The president almost always tops that poll, so what is surprising is not that Trump is on top now, but that he failed to be on top in previous years.
2. Only 15% of those polled picked Trump.
3. The only poll that actually matters, is the voting that leads to the EC, and in both of those Trump lost by a fair bit.
Molly, I am resting assured that your belief in the EC was just as adamant in 2016 and you have not been dedicated to the resistance for the last four years. We all appreciate your even handed approach.
I’m a Democrat. We should amend the Constitution to eliminate the EC. But that hasn’t happened yet. Biden won the EC and he also won the popular vote. He will be inaugurated on Jan. 20.
Explain what you would change about the Electoral College system?
I counter your notion with the idea that every state in the union should enact a Electoral College System for each State’s Elections and even that playing field.
Why should one City Control an entire State’s politics?
The president gets elected by the popular vote. Easy, fair to all since all votes will count equally.
I’d eliminate it. It’s past time for the President to be chosen by popular vote, where each voter’s vote counts equally.
As for your second question, where is this city that you imagine controls an entire state’s politics?
I have never heard a defendable reason to eliminate the EC. It has performed exactly how and why it was instituted.
It was instituted because of slavery and the smaller number of eligible voters – land-owning white men – in souther states compared to northern states.
Alexander Hamilton: “The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negr0es. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.”
Correction: that should be James Madison, not Hamilton.
If Jake Tapper and company don’t want to interview people on the basis of being “liars” then maybe guests should refuse to be interviewed by these talking heads for the same reason.
Hm1342, I like the cut of your jib. However, every chance to counter their propaganda must be taken even if it requires stepping into the den of iniquity. The battle must be waged even if on their ground.
Sedition requires twenty years in prison. Treason holds the death sentence. Senator Shaheen has intimated that these crimes may be present. You Republicans had better sit down or imprisonment or even death may be in your future. I can imagine her hand on the keys to the cell or the needle on the steps to the gallows. She basically warned that the fate of the noose may be in their futures. No standing against such intimidation is to be found here by our left leaning commentators. Mighty moralists one and all.
Jonathan: I guess dates do matter. There is a stark difference between what happened in the 2020 election and the one in 2004. Then Senator Barbara Boxer and Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones forced a brief delay in counting of the electoral votes to protest GOP voter suppression of Black voters in Ohio. There challenge was not to overturn the election but to point out that the GOP had been using voter ID laws and other schemes to keep Black voters from exercising their right to vote. In the 2020 election Trump and his GOP allies tried to do the same thing. Trump complained that mail-in-voting would result in massive election fraud. He even had his Post Master General slow down the mail. All these efforts at voter suppression failed but Trump still refuses to concede. Trump’s last ditch effort is to get the Republican controlled Senate to refuse to certify the electoral college vote and declare him the winner. So up steps Sen. Josh Hawley who cites Boxer’s challenge in 2005 to justify his challenge: “They [Boxer, et. al.] were praised by Democratic leadership and the media when they did it…But now those of us concerned about the integrity of this election are entitled to do the same”. This is this is a false comparison. The “integrity of the election” Hawley claims is not in dispute. Trump lost all of his legal challenges and the electoral college confirmed the election results. Even your buddy Bill Barr has said there was no widespread voter fraud and no basis to challenge the election. But Trump still refuses to concede and Senator Hawley is backing Trump’s false claim the election was “stolen” from him. What Trump, Hawley and most Republicans want to do is OVERTURN the election to keep Trump in power. They will fail but their continuing efforts are really an attempt to overthrow the Constitution and the legal order. That’s sedition and treason and not comparable to what Boxer and the Democrats did in 2005!
Denis M. In 2004 the Democrats were saying that the suppression of Black votes put the election in question. Just pointing out the suppression of the black vote without having a consequence would have been pointless. Your saying they were pointing out the suppression just for the sake of pointing it out with no end game in mind. There motivation was two fold. One to question the election and two to label the Republicans with racism. Tactics easily seen by those with ocular acuity. Your minimization of their motivations is either naive or built on malice. You are certainly not naive.
Dennis,+10
Treason is a matter of reason in holy season.
If you’re a crook, you’re a crook and a crook all the way. From your first cigarette to your last dying day. At age 55. Man smoker won’t be alive after 55. Guns are quicker.
We have Jovan Hutton Pulitzer demonstrating on live TV that the Georgia voting machines are not only connected to the Internet, not only are they on wifi which they should not in any universe be, but they are actually connected TO CHINA, he provided us with the user’s ID. Democrats looked in vain for this much evidence in their 3 year Russia collusion coup de Trump. Now, none of the MSM will even cover it. The FBI won’t investigate. Judges look the other way. And yet the 80 million people who voted for Trump, who saw video of suitcases of ballots being unpacked at 4 am in Georgia, who have collected over 52 thousand affidavits of electoral fraud, are just supposed to quietly go home and accept that the guy who couldn’t fill a parking lot magically got more votes than Obama. If we don’t, we’re “treasonous.” Treason is when you collaborate with an enemy power to manufacture and release a biological weapon to bring your own country to its knees, and incidentally kill hundreds of thousands of peoples, to achieve a political end. But since it’s politically correct treason, it will go unpunished. Instead of Trumpunity, call it Dempunity. That’s what it really is.
deboluccia, tells us why Georgia’s Republican governor won’t admit to this Chinese conspiracy. Brian Kemp ran as a Trump loyalist and Georgia’s Secretary of State is also a Republican. Why would these two allow their state’s voting system to be connected to China?? There’s no logic here! It’s just a mindless conspiracy like the kind Alex Jones has alway promoted.
“Brian Kemp ran as a Trump loyalist and Georgia’s Secretary of State is also a Republican. Why would these two allow their state’s voting system to be connected to China??”
The more important point is that a witness, in real time, hacked into Georgia’s voting machines, and that’s not supposed to happen. If he can do that, then who else can?
Second, there is still the issue of election laws being changed in a way that bypasses the legislature. It also occurred in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. Still the Democratic and MSM response is “nothing to see here”. It is certain that if Trump had won under the same circumstances these same Dems and MSM talking heads would be screaming bloody murder about a stolen election.
Can you link to a video of this person you claim hacked into Georgia’s voting machines? When I google that to see if I can find it, I instead get results like “Georgia voting machines audit shows no hacking.”
Dozens of Judges disagree with you that “there is still the issue of election laws being changed in a way that bypasses the legislature..”
“Can you link to a video of this person you claim hacked into Georgia’s voting machines?”
I believe that the OP is referring to this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46CAKyyObls
It is a demonstration by the *head election official* in Coffee County, Georgia. She demonstrates the ease by which one can alter the vote of a paper ballot, that has already been scanned. She is operating a *Dominion* machine to flip votes.
What the election official demonstrates is what has been widely known for years, by people on both sides of the isle: The Dominion system is easily corrupted. Their system is porous. It’s like the security guard who leaves a back door unlocked, with a sign posted outside the door: “Thieves. Enter here.”
Anon, Alex Jones and Cenk Uygur. Twins gone bad.
“Why would these two allow their state’s voting system to be connected to China?? There’s no logic here!”
If it happened, there are lots of logical explanations that do not include your conspiracy theory straw man. Here’s an obvious one: Perhaps they did not know. And now, because there are so many irregularities under their watch — they do not want to know.
Yet, this is a legal challenge under constitutional and statutory law.
Leave it to our traitorous founding fathers to give us a constitution and legal system that permits challenges to our electoral process. It’s as if they knew some very bad people would try to steal an election to fundamentally transform our country to something else altogether.
Olly, show us ‘where’ exactly, in the Constitution, we can find the part that covers these challenges. The references I saw were from an obscure 1870’s law.
It does not. The Constitution is quite clear that if one candidate has a majority of the EC then that is it, done, end of story, no votes needed.
GFY. If you believe they are unconstitutional, prove it.
Olly, you were the one who brought the Constitution into this. I presumed you might know something we don’t know. So show us what part of the Constitution covers this.
you were the one who brought the Constitution into this.
Treason? Sedition? Politicians challenging the actions of other politicians? NEWSFLASH! This is a legal blog hosted by a constitutional law professor; the constitution was already brought in to this. So you’re the one defending the allegations, prove why they have constitutional merit.
Easy.
From 12A:
“The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;-The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed;”
Since Biden got the majority of the EC, there is no vote to take, no procedure to object to EC votes, and no certification needed from the VP.
Don’t forget the Electoral Count Act of 1887, currently known as 3 U.S. Code Section 15.
It establishes a procedure for how the votes are counted, how to raise objections, and how to resolve disputes. First, it says that the vice president indeed presides over the proceedings. Then, it says the House and Senate leaders each designate two tellers. The VP opens the envelopes with the vote certificates and hands them to the tellers for counting. The tellers then read them out loud, count them, and hand them back to the VP to announce the results.
Then, in rather convoluted language, the law says that Congress members can object. At least one objection from each chamber is needed to trigger a separate vote by both House and Senate on the objections. If both chambers agree, the objected voters are rejected. That’s virtually out of the question given the Democrats’ majority in the House.
If two sets of electors are presented for counting, the House and Senate need to separately vote on which set is legitimate and which should be rejected. If each chamber votes differently, the set certified by the state’s governor should count. That would hand the victory to Biden.
The problem is, there’s a voluminous body of legal analysis arguing that the Electoral Count Act is unconstitutional. Congress has no business granting itself the authority to decide which slate of electors is the correct one and which votes should be rejected. Nor does Congress have the power to designate state governors as the final arbiters, a lineup of legislators and legal scholars have argued.
There are two arguments for who has the constitutional power to decide which electors to choose.
https://m.theepochtimes.com/disputes-over-power-to-count-or-reject-electoral-votes-loom-over-jan-6-session_3636866.html
I did not forget about that, I just think that it has major constitutional issues. If there is a legitimate dispute because a state sends two EC votes or some other major issue, then that law fills in some gaps that the 12A is silent on. But if there are no competing EC and one person gets a majority of EC votes then the Electoral Count Act would be clearly unconstitutional if Congress tried to change the outcome. In this election, there are no competing EC votes and Biden did win the majority.
It was so obscure Democrats have used it twice recently.
The most venomous comments here always happens when the Professor points out hypocrisy by Democrats. The howls of indignation are heard around the world. His disapproval of Republicans is pushed to the shadows in order to support their psychosis. A comment is never made in support of any position he takes. Partial blindness is correctable. Complete blindness has no cure. The mind can be made blind through choices made by itself. TDS is also diagnosed as Turley Derangement Syndrome. All mirrors have been removed from there houses.
The sad truth is that both sides would immediate flip their narratives if roles were reversed. No one is truly concerned with the facts and truth, only an agenda.
hm1342 we’ve never seen your name before. And you’re telling us that if Trump had won the Popular Vote by 7.1 million, Democrats would have challenged his victory..?? Historically Popular Vote margins that size have never been challenged with any degree of public support.
We continue to observe you dry humping people on this legal blog. Why cant you get laid in West Hollywood like your Grindr chaps? Or do they fear you attacking their leg and going at it?
Regarding Above: hm1342 is our usual troll first known as Estovir.
“Regarding Above: hm1342 is our usual troll first known as Estovir.”
If that’s what you wish to believe then by all means help yourself, but that doesn’t make it true and in fact, you’re wrong.
“hm1342 we’ve never seen your name before”
And your point is what, exactly? I have made a few comments before but it’s not a daily thing for me.
“And you’re telling us that if Trump had won the Popular Vote by 7.1 million, Democrats would have challenged his victory..??”
Uh, no. What I am saying is simply switch Trump and Biden and leave the rest of it as is…accusations and all. Both parties and their media sympathizers would be reversing their narratives. It’s not rocket science.
And full disclosure I didn’t vote for either Trump or Biden.
No, they wouldn’t, which is why you didn’t see these kinds of accusations about widespread voter fraud in 2016.
“No, they wouldn’t, which is why you didn’t see these kinds of accusations about widespread voter fraud in 2016.”
The scenario in 2016 is not the same as 2020. But you’re certainly entitled to your opinion.
You also don’t see Democrats making these arguments now in the states that Biden lost.
“You also don’t see Democrats making these arguments now in the states that Biden lost.”
If you’re ahead in the EC count and Republican challenges have hit a brick wall, why bother?
If you truly believe that fraud has occurred, you’d raise it regardless of whether you’re ahead.
“If you truly believe that fraud has occurred, you’d raise it regardless of whether you’re ahead.”
Only people of good character would be so inclined. I don’t see many of those in our nation’s capital. The Presidency is just too valuable to both political parties for there to be much in the way of integrity. IMO there are just a handful who have occupied the Oval Office that I thought were worthy.