Imagine if you would-!!! That Americans "TAKE BACK" America-!!! The Strengh of The Tea Party will be shown this coming year-!!! STAY STRONG-!!! D.C. hasn't seen nothing yet-!!!
I am not disagreeing that fraud did occur. It is the means of resolving it by law that signifies in your post.
Is what you suggest federally legal? Do you assume the Federal government can repeat this election?
Or put another way in metaphor,
'The operating room head surgeon tells his staff to stop. The heart procedure was incorrectly performed and the patient has died. We will simply have to redo the operation.'
Find in the Constitution where the Congress is specifically authorized to recertify Presidential electoral results. The process is not a board game. You do it like you mean it.
At this stage, the issue of election process is moot, but removal from office directly applicable. The documented election fraud that was certified 'as-is' would be substantive and frankly necessary for impeachment.
All legal definitional identity and empowerment flows from the Constitution in specificity. The states have broader authority than the federal government in intra-state matters, because the Constitution specifically says so in the Bill of Rights. The Federal Government may not act unless the Constitution specifically says so, the nature of the authority also specifically is spelled out.
The means of redress authority is what now perplexes. The Constitution describes the certification process as 'one-way' every four years. Impeachment with conviction event opportunities proceed from installment to the end of term (although Pelosi even violated that trying to disqualify Trump from further service).
If the Joint-Congress may re-certify as it determines it needs to, then the controlling majority likely will do so for outcomes it does not desire. I do agree that the 2020 certification is a framable example of what not to do.
Dodged the bullet? No, the entire 2020 election was BLOWN-UP a fraud on the American Electorate. Read the Constitution. The States have the Constitutional authority to manage elections. The States create election laws, not congress. Congress serves at the will of the States not the other way around... fire this law professor he is at best misinformed and more likely an agent of Marxism. And yes, STATES DO ELECT THE PRESIDENT/ Presidents are not elected by the popular vote. States determine how their ELECTORS are allocated and can change that formula at any time they desire.
America has a representative government, we are a union of soverign states... a Republic, not a democracy. That is an essential concept which when understood, clearly makes the Federal Government the servant and creation of the States. Our Constitution intended the States to elect the President, not the popular vote as the smaller states were concerned that a popular vote would be unfair to them. Divided government is a key element in our Constitutional Republic... it is essential to the need for restraining government and keeping it in check... under the control of the people and not some political entity or party system.
In recent years we have gotten away from that concept (states rights and soverignty)... First, thru passing the 17th Amendment, the State's Constitutional control over the selection of US Senators was removed from the State Legislature and assigned by popular vote. This removed the State's ability to directly influence the acts taken up by US Senate. Next, attacks on the Electoral College led to the popular vote unduly influencing the State's ability to directly influence the elections of our President. The State Legislatures now use some formula based on the popular vote to determine how State Electors are assigned to Presidential candidates.. .a process that once rested solely with State legislatures... under the original Electoral College Constitutional process. The Constitutional process remains, however, the media and political interests have largely subverted it from its intended purpose...to permit state legislatures to assign electors AS THEY SAW FIT... giving the States the direct power to elect a president. Thus strengthening State's rights and putting the power to govern closer to the citizens governed.
The US Senate and the Electoral College gave the small states equal representation in the Republic... again we are a Republic, a union of soverign states. The Central Government ... the Federal government is supposed to be responsive and subservient to the States, not the other way around. To, that end US Senators once served at the will of the State they served. States under the original Constitutional rules could recall their US Senator at will. America needs to return to the original method for selecting US Senator and appointing Electors for the President... State Legislatures need to do both without the coercive influence of a popular vote
America needs to return to DIVIDED GOVERNMENT as originally established by our founders... assigning the proper respect for State and individual rights under the 9th and 19th Amendments to the States and the People. A divided government is much easier to restrain and manage.
Skeptical > Ronald A. Nelson COL, USA, RetiredAugust 7, 2021 at 2:42am
"we are a union of soverign states"
I like the lower case stealth 's'. The uppercase 'S' just triggers some folks who come right after a body.
So the declared election results, regardless of bonafide indications of impropriety, must never be questioned or examined, and always followed through 'in-lockstep'?
If ever a saw an intellectual worthy of a Gulag, this guy is it!
The Several States are Constitutionally assigned the primary responsibility for regulating elections... which would by necessity include OVERSIGHT and AUDIT powers. The Federal Government was never intended to be the primary source of election law... albeit they have Constitutional authority to "...make or alter such regulations (state regulations)... they may not establish stand-alone federal statutes. See Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 of the US Constitution.
Skeptical > Ronald A. Nelson COL, USA, RetiredAugust 6, 2021 at 4:33pm
Yeah, but the order suggests the intent to relegate the federal involvement in state elections to secondary, or remedial if the preferred process fails to achieve legitimate results, I'd say.
Election due-process and integrity must not be neglected, AND WE HAVE in trusting whole faith in its security. Mass Mail-in, unrequested, unverified ballots submitted well before, and after election day? Silly us!
Replies
Imagine if you would-!!! That Americans "TAKE BACK" America-!!! The Strengh of The Tea Party will be shown this coming year-!!! STAY STRONG-!!! D.C. hasn't seen nothing yet-!!!
If the election was fraudulent, they need to be redone.
I am not disagreeing that fraud did occur. It is the means of resolving it by law that signifies in your post.
Is what you suggest federally legal? Do you assume the Federal government can repeat this election?
Or put another way in metaphor,
'The operating room head surgeon tells his staff to stop. The heart procedure was incorrectly performed and the patient has died. We will simply have to redo the operation.'
Find in the Constitution where the Congress is specifically authorized to recertify Presidential electoral results. The process is not a board game. You do it like you mean it.
At this stage, the issue of election process is moot, but removal from office directly applicable. The documented election fraud that was certified 'as-is' would be substantive and frankly necessary for impeachment.
All legal definitional identity and empowerment flows from the Constitution in specificity. The states have broader authority than the federal government in intra-state matters, because the Constitution specifically says so in the Bill of Rights. The Federal Government may not act unless the Constitution specifically says so, the nature of the authority also specifically is spelled out.
The means of redress authority is what now perplexes. The Constitution describes the certification process as 'one-way' every four years. Impeachment with conviction event opportunities proceed from installment to the end of term (although Pelosi even violated that trying to disqualify Trump from further service).
If the Joint-Congress may re-certify as it determines it needs to, then the controlling majority likely will do so for outcomes it does not desire. I do agree that the 2020 certification is a framable example of what not to do.
The "Karl Marx" School of Law...or should I say....Groucho Marx....perhaps a combination of both.
Dodged the bullet? No, the entire 2020 election was BLOWN-UP a fraud on the American Electorate. Read the Constitution. The States have the Constitutional authority to manage elections. The States create election laws, not congress. Congress serves at the will of the States not the other way around... fire this law professor he is at best misinformed and more likely an agent of Marxism. And yes, STATES DO ELECT THE PRESIDENT/ Presidents are not elected by the popular vote. States determine how their ELECTORS are allocated and can change that formula at any time they desire.
America has a representative government, we are a union of soverign states... a Republic, not a democracy. That is an essential concept which when understood, clearly makes the Federal Government the servant and creation of the States. Our Constitution intended the States to elect the President, not the popular vote as the smaller states were concerned that a popular vote would be unfair to them. Divided government is a key element in our Constitutional Republic... it is essential to the need for restraining government and keeping it in check... under the control of the people and not some political entity or party system.
In recent years we have gotten away from that concept (states rights and soverignty)... First, thru passing the 17th Amendment, the State's Constitutional control over the selection of US Senators was removed from the State Legislature and assigned by popular vote. This removed the State's ability to directly influence the acts taken up by US Senate. Next, attacks on the Electoral College led to the popular vote unduly influencing the State's ability to directly influence the elections of our President. The State Legislatures now use some formula based on the popular vote to determine how State Electors are assigned to Presidential candidates.. .a process that once rested solely with State legislatures... under the original Electoral College Constitutional process. The Constitutional process remains, however, the media and political interests have largely subverted it from its intended purpose...to permit state legislatures to assign electors AS THEY SAW FIT... giving the States the direct power to elect a president. Thus strengthening State's rights and putting the power to govern closer to the citizens governed.
The US Senate and the Electoral College gave the small states equal representation in the Republic... again we are a Republic, a union of soverign states. The Central Government ... the Federal government is supposed to be responsive and subservient to the States, not the other way around. To, that end US Senators once served at the will of the State they served. States under the original Constitutional rules could recall their US Senator at will. America needs to return to the original method for selecting US Senator and appointing Electors for the President... State Legislatures need to do both without the coercive influence of a popular vote
America needs to return to DIVIDED GOVERNMENT as originally established by our founders... assigning the proper respect for State and individual rights under the 9th and 19th Amendments to the States and the People. A divided government is much easier to restrain and manage.
"we are a union of soverign states"
I like the lower case stealth 's'. The uppercase 'S' just triggers some folks who come right after a body.
So the declared election results, regardless of bonafide indications of impropriety, must never be questioned or examined, and always followed through 'in-lockstep'?
If ever a saw an intellectual worthy of a Gulag, this guy is it!
The Several States are Constitutionally assigned the primary responsibility for regulating elections... which would by necessity include OVERSIGHT and AUDIT powers. The Federal Government was never intended to be the primary source of election law... albeit they have Constitutional authority to "...make or alter such regulations (state regulations)... they may not establish stand-alone federal statutes. See Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 of the US Constitution.
Yeah, but the order suggests the intent to relegate the federal involvement in state elections to secondary, or remedial if the preferred process fails to achieve legitimate results, I'd say.
Election due-process and integrity must not be neglected, AND WE HAVE in trusting whole faith in its security. Mass Mail-in, unrequested, unverified ballots submitted well before, and after election day? Silly us!
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next