Well, this is an interesting move on the part of GOP legislators in some of the contested states
While the Democratic electors in the states of Pennsylvania and Georgia are casting their votes for Joe Biden, slates of Republican electors in those states cast votes for President Trump just in case legal challenges succeed.
There’s also word that Michigan may be doing it as well. Michigan GOP Electors were prevented from getting into the state house to vote. But they can vote anywhere.
So what that means is that they are trying to ensure that ultimately they have enough votes on record.
It also offers Congress and the state legislatures an alternate slate of electors in the contested states.
Of course, this is dependent on legal challenges succeeding, so I can’t say I’m optimistic.
One thing 2020 has driven home is the fact that in the realm of election fraud by Democrats, prevention is everything because no legal remedy will be applied. And by “applied” I mean that cases will not even be heard so that the evidence can be fully aired. This does not serve the public and is especially pernicious in a case like that of 2020 in which nearly half the public thinks that the election was fraudulent.
When I see people criticizing those who think that widespread fraud occurred, saying there’s no evidence or insufficient evidence, I wonder just what they would consider sufficient evidence and how they imagine that evidence could actually be obtained in time to mount a legal challenge. Short of confessions, or easily obtainable recordings of plotting sessions, or software that gives big banner warnings that say “now the fraud begins,” I can’t think of evidence that would convince them.
And maybe even those things I listed wouldn’t convince them.
[NOTE: I continue to be very worried about the “voting reform” legislation scenario I sketched in this post two days ago.]
The issue of evidence being sufficient or not is absolutely fascinating. There have probably been very few criminal trials in which the evidence for guilt was more persuasive and more overwhelming than the infamous case involving a certain O.J., acquitted only because of the incompetence of the prosecution and of the racial composition of the jury. In the case of our recent election, only five weeks have brought forth voluminous evidence of illegalities, irregularities, and numerical as well as statistical impossibilities (to say nothing of dozens of hours of testimony on video, as well as hundreds of sworn affidavits), yet the incessant cry of “baseless claims of fraud” is trumpeted far and wide as though it were a proven fact, and as though the MSM had not been lying continually about every important issue, domestic and foreign, over the past four years.
Either Biden confessed the crime on tape or he is so brain damaged that he coincidentally misspoke that he committed a crime he is being accused of committing. So democrats either voted for a fraud or an idiot.
According to the Epoch Times, PA, GA, NV, and AZ Republican electors cast their ballots today.
There was a WI Supreme Court ruling that hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots were illegal. I don’t know if the results from those can be separated out, however.
Dave, embrace the power of “and.”
Keeping hope alive.
I have a hard time believing the 2020 election had almost 100% turnout.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/voter-turnout-in-presidential-elections
There were 152 + million votes cast and 154 million registered voters.
If Trump had stated – as Biden did – at a public event that his campaign team had “… the most comprehensive and diverse fraud machine…” in US history, we’d never have heard the end of it.
I just saw that Barr is stepping down.
“maybe even those things I listed wouldn’t convince them.” neo
It’s not a question of how convincing the evidence must be but that however convinced, they accept that the end justifies whatever means are necessary.
Demonstrated by a poll which revealed that, “One in six Biden voters polled, 17 percent, said they would have changed their vote had they been aware of these stories.” The converse being that 83% of Biden voters condone disenfranchising those who simply disagee with them. Even more significantly, it reveals that 83% of those Americans who voted for Biden no longer honor the social contract enacted under the Constitution. Which inescapably leads to the conclusion that 83% of Biden voters are not only Americans-in-name-only but are active enemies of the Constitution for they have voted for an illegal dissolution of it.
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.
The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America .
Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.” Czech President Vaclav Klaus
Klaus kindly ascribed foolishness to those who voted for Obama.
In the election of 2020, the 83% who voted for Biden demonstrate that it is not fools with which we face but people for whom treason is an acceptable means to the end they desire.
Mark Andrew Dryer, in his article, “Disparate Impact for Thee but Not for Me?” hoists SCOTUS and the democrats upon their own petard.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/disparate_impact_for_thee_but_not_for_me.html
He points out that “disparate impact” has long been accepted as statistical proof of institutional discrimination and a justified legal presumption of organized manipulation.
All the justices on the S.C. know the truth.
It’s my understanding that in GA, you cannot vote in January if you did not vote in November. Yet Stacey Abrams is bragging about 85k absentee ballots from those who did not vote previously.
Can she be jailed for that?
Of course not. She’s a Democrat.
Edward R. Bonderenka:
It is my understanding that you ARE allowed to vote in the runoff in GA even if you didn’t vote in the election. It’s just that you can only do that if you actually moved there for good in the interim, in a bona fide move.
Trouble is, you can’t tell at the time of the election who has really moved there for good and who hasn’t and is just there temporarily. So it’s a law of toweringly incredible stupidity, opening the whole thing up to enormous fraud.
Granted, when they passed the law they didn’t realize that Georgia would be the last stand for the US republic.
Yep. It seems I heard wrong.
In the words of Emily Litella, Never Mind.
If it was a misspeak, showing no sign at all on his face that he realized he had misspoke and tried to correct it was even more astonishing that he admitted he completely fraud on video, his mind is 80% gone. The same with the video he mistakenly called trump george and struggled at trying to recall trump’s name, its quite sad actually, because it reminds me the same illness can befallen on us one day.
I wonder just what they would consider sufficient evidence
“Doesn’t matter, because there isn’t any” they would sneer. I guarantee it.
Robert Barnes is my go-to guy on election law. Sign up at vivabarneslaw.locals.Com and give them a couple bucks.
Use the small “c” trick, assuming it still works.
If I submit a tax return to the IRS that has all sorts of questionable deductions, exemptions, etc, etc, and it raises some red flags, I’m going to be subjected to an audit. It’s not up to the IRS to produce evidence and prove that I committed tax fraud, it is up to ME to prove that I DIDN”T commit fraud.
I’d need to show up at the audit with all of the pertinent records to back up what I put in that return. If I don’t have the records, or they are suspicious looking, I’m in big trouble, and the tax return would be tossed out.
This may not have been the greatest analogy, but shouldn’t there be some kind of requirement, or significant burden of proof (other than them just saying “Its Ok, nothing to see here”) when it comes to elections in general, and Presidential elections in particular.
Neo-
I think at this point its just whistling past the graveyard. It will be generations before anyone has a chance to dislodge these entrenched machines. They now have control of the election system. They make only the most amateurish attempts to hide the fraud.
What seems more likely. They become better at hiding it? Or someone who cannot simply be overridden will grow a backbone and stop it?
Its not like anyone touting reform has any chance of advancing in those districts now
That is why vote fraud is so pernicious. Its nearly impossible to get rid of sans violence
Also in Michigan, the Black National Anthem was sung. WHAT is going on in this country? There is only ONE national anthem for all Americans. This divisiveness must stop or we are doomed.
Poll watchers may wish to go armed. If they won’t let you watch, or attempt to throw you out, then draw on them, and if necessary fire. Perhaps some military folks may want to do the poll watching…in uniform?
}}} This does not serve the public and is especially pernicious in a case like that of 2020 in which nearly half the public thinks that the election was fraudulent.
This fact alone make the election invalid. This is not some banana republic where a massive percentage of the nation thinks the election invalid and it stands unquestioned.
}}} the infamous case involving a certain O.J., acquitted only because of the incompetence of the prosecution and of the racial composition of the jury.
No, the mendacious actions of the investigators played into it sharply, as well. Were I on the jury, and it came out that the investigators had attempted to plant evidence, as they did, and as it did, there is absolutely no question I would have found him not guilty, even if he got up at the trial and yelled, “YEAH, I did it! So what?” (though, clearly, it would not have gone to the jury in that case, of course).
The point being, even more pernicious than letting a known criminal free, is the action of allowing the police to ever ever ever for a single moment imagine that they can get away with planting evidence.
I’m sure it still happens, but, no, you cannot allow them to stand fast when caught at it. At that point, you MUST bitchslap them as hard as you can. This is much much more important than finding a criminal guilty.
The police have to FEAR that more than they do the criminal getting free.
Up until 1937 when it moved to January 20, inauguration day was March 4. Moving it back to March 4 would add 43 days in which fraud could be investigated.
Maybe it’s time to move it back.
Random thoughts about a scenario:
Biden “gets” 270 electoral votes, is awarded presidency; Biden gets sworn in as President; investigation continues; 2,3,4 months in the future it is conclusively and irrefutably proved with publicly presented hard physical evidence that Biden’s win was the result of fraud and illegality; as president the only recourse to remove Biden from the presidency is impeachment in the House of Representatives followed by conviction in the Senate which – technically – can be done; Biden is removed from office; because Harris’ election to Vice President was also the result of fraud and illegality she cannot be permitted to illegally become President so she is impeached and convicted and removed; Constitutional succession stipulates Speaker of the House is next in line to become President.
Question 1A: With the public presentation of conclusive and irrefutable hard evidence of Biden’s fraudulent electoral victory the Democrat-controlled House refuses to undertake any consideration of impeachment.
What does the American public do at this point?
Question 1B: With a Democrat-controlled House of Representatives and the Democrat Speaker of the House virtually assured his/her ascendency to the Presidency, would any Democrat Speaker turn down that opportunity?
The selection of alternate electors by the various States is a necessary step to keeping the process alive. The House and Senate can then choose between the initial and alternate set of electors.
However, I don’t think the question is “how much evidence is necessary”; rather, it’s will they do the easy thing and go along with the fraudulent results or will they do the right thing and select the alternate electors.
Remember, the Democrats are trying to run out the clock. They know the fraud will be fully exposed and so do the Republicans but it will be too late. The easy thing gets them accolades from the media and gives them the personal satisfaction of spitting in the eyes of their voters. The right thing might energize some opposition in the next election from people who would never vote for them anyway. So, go with your supporters and the overwhelming evidence of election fraud or go with those who oppose you and certify the fraud?
It seems easy to me but I’m not getting all of that Chinese money to cripple the United States economy and destabilize the world. So does it come down to “Trump Won” or “Biden Yuan”?
In Michigan the totalitarian governor blocks Republican electors.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/got-freedom-video-shows-police-preventing-gop-electors-in-michigan-from-performing-lawful-duties-301192474.html
We need paper ballots, counted by precincts at the precincts – with lots of watchers. And security cameras on each counter.
Also time to take videos of voters – who they are, where they live, 10-15 phone camera video with their voices.
The Dems oppose Voter ID because they want more voters to vote – they want Mickey Mouse and dead folk to vote. They want fraud.
I’m a bit disappointed at hearing nothing about massive protests in GA against mail-in ballots and other methods of fraud coming up.
Lack of massive protests is taken by Deep State as lazy acceptance of the Fraud. Those unwilling to suffer a bit to attend protests that are inconvenient to others – such are very unlikely to be willing to fight in any effective way. So no big fear of actual popular revolt. Maybe by 2022 it will be too late.
No sleeping giant is waking up.
Thanks for sharing from across the pond.