Official Stealing The 2020 Election For Harris/Biden Watch Thread

[spurraider21]

no wonder trump won florida and NC

[ChumpDumper]

royal ancestry

I didn't have that on my grifter bingo card but I should have.

[Winehole23]

"elite strike force"



https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-jen...am-11607038900

[Leetonidas]

The best people

[TimDunkem]

lol Qhris self-ownage. Trump won FL, MS, and NC dumbass.

[Reck]

Grifting in the open.

How do you offer to pay people and ask for donations in the same tweet? Lol

[Chris]

[ChumpDumper]

Qhris thinks SCOTUS is a magic wand.

[Chris]

Qhris thinks SCOTUS is a magic wand.

Bend over, I'll show you a magic wand.

[clambake]

Bend over, I'll show you a magic wand.

Before or after maddow?

[Reck]

Bend over, I'll show you a magic wand.

So comfirmed?

[Winehole23]

Chris with the late night pillow talk, how macho

[Chris]

The only cons utionaly set date in the election process is January 20th.

All other dates are set by federal law and are arbitrary, founded on obsolete concerns such as the slowness of horse travel 200 years ago.

Experts believe that the basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power, a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel.

The only Electoral college deadline specifically required by the Cons ution is noon on January 20th when Trump's first term officially ends.

All other deadlines including the "safe harbor" deadline of December 8th, the Electoral College voting on December 14th, and even the Congressional vote count on January 6th - are dates set by federal law.

It is well established that the U.S. Cons ution is the highest law in the land, holding precedence over both state and federal laws.

In the event that federal law presents an obstacle to faithfully adhering to cons utional requirements, it is necessary to disregard the statute in favor of the plain meaning of the Cons ution.

The so-called "safe harbor" provision in federal law (3 USC 5) simply asserts that if a state has established laws governing the appointment of Electors, and a determination made according to that law has been made at least six days prior to December 14th, then that determination is final on December 8th. SCOTUS has ruled that the law does not actually require states to appoint Electors by that date in order for those Electoral Votes to be counted by Congress when determining the winner of a presidential election.

In the current context, states have laws in place awarding presidential Electors according to the popular vote. Because the laws governing the vote were violated in numerous ways in several key states, certification of the election results cannot be said to have been made in accordance with the laws established in those states. Therefore, the resposibility still rests with state legislatures to appoint their state's Electors, because no "determination made pursuant to such law" has actually been made.

There is significant flexibility and precedent in U.S. law for changing the date that electors are appointed, changing the date electors convene to vote, and changing the date electors have their vote certified by Congress.

The investigation into fraud will be rigorous and will continue whether or not the Electoral College vote is held December 14th.

The deadlines for the seating of electors and their voting is not necessary for the effective transition of power. These deadlines were created for the convenience of travel, just as election day was placed uniformly on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November to allow farmers to complete the full harvest prior to voting.

These dates have nothing to do with the transition of power and are largely not relevant to a time when electors do not have to ride horses to Washington, D.C. to vote. Accordingly, these dates should not interfere with state legislatures effectively investigating the management of the election, especially when we experience unprecedented manipulation of election rules calling into question hundreds of thousands of ballots.

The Cons ution makes clear that the responsibilty rests with state legislatures to appoint Electors. This should be done as expeditiously as possible, but the only deadline state lawmakers have an obligation to meet is the one set forth in the Cons ution - noon on January 20th, 2021.

[ElNono]

The only cons utionaly set date in the election process is January 20th.

All other dates are set by federal law and are arbitrary, founded on obsolete concerns such as the slowness of horse travel 200 years ago.

Experts believe that the basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power, a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel.

The only Electoral college deadline specifically required by the Cons ution is noon on January 20th when Trump's first term officially ends.

All other deadlines including the "safe harbor" deadline of December 8th, the Electoral College voting on December 14th, and even the Congressional vote count on January 6th - are dates set by federal law.

It is well established that the U.S. Cons ution is the highest law in the land, holding precedence over both state and federal laws.

In the event that federal law presents an obstacle to faithfully adhering to cons utional requirements, it is necessary to disregard the statute in favor of the plain meaning of the Cons ution.

The so-called "safe harbor" provision in federal law (3 USC 5) simply asserts that if a state has established laws governing the appointment of Electors, and a determination made according to that law has been made at least six days prior to December 14th, then that determination is final on December 8th. SCOTUS has ruled that the law does not actually require states to appoint Electors by that date in order for those Electoral Votes to be counted by Congress when determining the winner of a presidential election.

In the current context, states have laws in place awarding presidential Electors according to the popular vote. Because the laws governing the vote were violated in numerous ways in several key states, certification of the election results cannot be said to have been made in accordance with the laws established in those states. Therefore, the resposibility still rests with state legislatures to appoint their state's Electors, because no "determination made pursuant to such law" has actually been made.

There is significant flexibility and precedent in U.S. law for changing the date that electors are appointed, changing the date electors convene to vote, and changing the date electors have their vote certified by Congress.

The investigation into fraud will be rigorous and will continue whether or not the Electoral College vote is held December 14th.

The deadlines for the seating of electors and their voting is not necessary for the effective transition of power. These deadlines were created for the convenience of travel, just as election day was placed uniformly on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November to allow farmers to complete the full harvest prior to voting.

These dates have nothing to do with the transition of power and are largely not relevant to a time when electors do not have to ride horses to Washington, D.C. to vote. Accordingly, these dates should not interfere with state legislatures effectively investigating the management of the election, especially when we experience unprecedented manipulation of election rules calling into question hundreds of thousands of ballots.

The Cons ution makes clear that the responsibilty rests with state legislatures to appoint Electors. This should be done as expeditiously as possible, but the only deadline state lawmakers have an obligation to meet is the one set forth in the Cons ution - noon on January 20th, 2021.

Talk about a word salad, and a number of omissions.

First thing omitted is that the opportunity for legal electoral contests as plastered in 3 USC 5 expire on that date (Dec 8th).

So while legislatures can certainly "investigate" whatever they want post-facto, the candidates (in this case Trump) can't keep filing frivolous lawsuits (I mean, he can, but the safe harbor date precludes, by law, the contest of the election result, which makes them moot).


Then there's the "there is significant flexibility and precedent in U.S. law for changing the date that electors are appointed, changing the date electors convene to vote, and changing the date electors have their vote certified by Congress.". Sure, but the dates are already set this year, votes are certified, electors are appointed, so there's no apparent reason, at least yet, to delay that vote. It would make sense in a situation like Bush vs Gore, where a recount was ongoing, and elections were not certified, but that's not the case here.


Then it claims "the responsibilty rests with state legislatures to appoint Electors". Well, yes, but it omits something else which is very important. State electoral law, voted by the state legislatures, determine how electors are appointed and under what criteria.

This is important because it means state legislatures would need to reconvene and vote on a new electoral law that does away with the previous one and appoints these electors. It also brings into question whether the governor can veto, considering that's certainly an authority held by the governor when it comes to state laws.

But it won't get anywhere near close to that, no legislature so far has shown the inclination of doing anything remotely like that (rightly so, it's political suicide), and clock's ticking. Plus this would need to happen not just in GA, but GA, PA and a third state to even come close to turning the election around.

[MASSA]

[LaSíSí]

YOU CALL THAT A WORD SALAD!?!?!

[Spurtacular]

Anti-Voter Fraud Group Finds Su ious Link Between Nevada State Website and Intelligence-Linked Pakistani Company

[Spurtacular]

China was printing ballots.

https://www.cmmedia.com.tw/home/articles/24456

[Spurtacular]

Hey look, black people wearing Biden masks!

They're poll workers. They're not supposed to do that. Highly unprofessional.

[Spurtacular]

[Spurtacular]

They got caught.

[Spurtacular]

WTF are these Karens handling ballots for?

Chumpettes! You gotta lot of splaining to do!

[Spurtacular]

[We Are All Witnesses]

[Winehole23]

The only cons utionaly set date in the election process is January 20th.
All other dates are set by federal law and are arbitrary, founded on obsolete concerns such as the slowness of horse travel 200 years ago.

Experts believe that the basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power, a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel.

The only Electoral college deadline specifically required by the Cons ution is noon on January 20th when Trump's first term officially ends.

All other deadlines including the "safe harbor" deadline of December 8th, the Electoral College voting on December 14th, and even the Congressional vote count on January 6th - are dates set by federal law.

It is well established that the U.S. Cons ution is the highest law in the land, holding precedence over both state and federal laws.

In the event that federal law presents an obstacle to faithfully adhering to cons utional requirements, it is necessary to disregard the statute in favor of the plain meaning of the Cons ution.

The so-called "safe harbor" provision in federal law (3 USC 5) simply asserts that if a state has established laws governing the appointment of Electors, and a determination made according to that law has been made at least six days prior to December 14th, then that determination is final on December 8th. SCOTUS has ruled that the law does not actually require states to appoint Electors by that date in order for those Electoral Votes to be counted by Congress when determining the winner of a presidential election.

In the current context, states have laws in place awarding presidential Electors according to the popular vote. Because the laws governing the vote were violated in numerous ways in several key states, certification of the election results cannot be said to have been made in accordance with the laws established in those states. Therefore, the resposibility still rests with state legislatures to appoint their state's Electors, because no "determination made pursuant to such law" has actually been made.

There is significant flexibility and precedent in U.S. law for changing the date that electors are appointed, changing the date electors convene to vote, and changing the date electors have their vote certified by Congress.

The investigation into fraud will be rigorous and will continue whether or not the Electoral College vote is held December 14th.

The deadlines for the seating of electors and their voting is not necessary for the effective transition of power. These deadlines were created for the convenience of travel, just as election day was placed uniformly on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November to allow farmers to complete the full harvest prior to voting.

These dates have nothing to do with the transition of power and are largely not relevant to a time when electors do not have to ride horses to Washington, D.C. to vote. Accordingly, these dates should not interfere with state legislatures effectively investigating the management of the election, especially when we experience unprecedented manipulation of election rules calling into question hundreds of thousands of ballots.

The Cons ution makes clear that the responsibilty rests with state legislatures to appoint Electors. This should be done as expeditiously as possible, but the only deadline state lawmakers have an obligation to meet is the one set forth in the Cons ution - noon on January 20th, 2021.

tsk, tsk, the US CODE is law of the land bishes, same the Cons ution itself

This Cons ution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Cons ution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Cons ution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cons ution/articlevi

tick tock