|
Replies: 14
| visibility 519
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [93603]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95381
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Relax.
Dec 16, 2020, 12:33 PM
|
|
It will never get that far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
There are three main Constitutional steps
Dec 16, 2020, 12:34 PM
|
|
Starting with the most impactful, and ending with the most ceremonial.
1. States appoint their Electors - Complete
2. Electors vote for President and Vice President - Complete
3. Congress counts the vote - Not yet complete
In the final step, it is just a count of the vote that has already occurred. There is no mechanism for altering the number of votes at that time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
Sure there is, Congress could invalidate the electors.
Dec 16, 2020, 12:37 PM
|
|
But it won't happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Where is that in Article II or the 12th Amendment?
Dec 16, 2020, 12:39 PM
|
|
I don't see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Re: Where is that in Article II or the 12th Amendment?
Dec 16, 2020, 12:40 PM
|
|
"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"
It's just a count. No evaluation of whether the votes are valid, or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34092]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33592
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Where is that in Article II or the 12th Amendment?
Dec 16, 2020, 12:43 PM
|
|
Presumably someone confirms that what they're counting are actually the valid votes, right?
Or can we prank Congress with some phony ballots because the Constitution requires them to count whatever papers show up in the room?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
No, the Constitution does not say they open up
Dec 16, 2020, 12:45 PM
|
|
whatever papers show up in the room. The will open up: "which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate"
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34092]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33592
Joined: 9/13/99
|
OK, so someone has to confirm that they've received the
Dec 16, 2020, 12:51 PM
|
|
right lists. Again, in case we (or someone else) decides to prank them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Touche. I read it:
Dec 16, 2020, 12:54 PM
|
|
They can only object if they don't think the electoral votes are the real ones. That's obviously not applicable to this case. That's more what spooneye said, like if there was an envelope that came from some other place, not from the actual electors.
"those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed"
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
I agree that there does not appear to be any reasonable
Dec 16, 2020, 1:01 PM
|
|
means to execute it, and the law would be subject to constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court. But can we currently assume and expect the Vice President, Senators, and Representatives to act based upon what is correct and not on partisan political pressure? I'd hope not and would expect that the majority would proceed honorably and with integrity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: There are three main Constitutional steps
Dec 16, 2020, 4:40 PM
[ in reply to There are three main Constitutional steps ] |
|
Prodigal,
If you read the article it clearly lays out how the process might go south.
"By law, the House and Senate meet together on Jan. 6, and if any state's ballots are challenged by one member of the House and Senate, the chambers must meet separately and vote on the challenge. Given that 126 members of Congress signed on to the Texas lawsuit to overturn Joe Biden's victory, and that many GOP senators have not accepted Biden as the president-elect, some states are going to be challenged."
After that, a significant delay could throw the election into the house and the Senate.
I am NOT saying this is likely, but the mechanism is there and I will not be surprised by challenged EC votes in both houses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
Don't forget the insurrection act.
Dec 16, 2020, 12:35 PM
|
|
Declaring martial law and installing Trump as a dictator is the best way to own libtards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3612]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3789
Joined: 1/21/16
|
Re: I hate to feed the beast but
Dec 16, 2020, 6:02 PM
|
|
Let me preface by saying that, as a Constitutional conservative, I believe that the EC vote on Monday decided the Presidential election. It's done.
Any criminal activity found during ongoing investigations of this election should be fully prosecuted without any effect on the outcome unless a smoking gun is found--and that ain't gonna happen.
But what I'm not hearing from the legacy media: several states selected two sets of voters, both a D set and an R set, so technically both Biden and Trump received 270+ EVs to become President. It's just that right now, the D voters are presumed to be official.
This will allow the ongoing investigations into the irregularities from Dominion voting machines and bureaucratic non-transparency to continue with a possible Constitutional conclusion of Congress choosing to select the R electors if substantive vote-switching is found in these states.
This is NOT unprecedented. In 1960, Hawai'i voted for R Richard Nixon, but chose 2 sets of electors; when the EVs were cast in January, the D electors were the ones allowed to cast the state's votes for Kennedy.
I haven't done the research into what created that controversy in 1960.
The lazy legacy media is trying to turn outspoken Constitutional Republicans into boogeymen in order to perpetuate their marginalization.
We continue to talk past each other without hearing what each other's complaints really are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 14
| visibility 519
|
|
|
50
