Message from @Recalibar
Discord ID: 784916634276069427
Arguably, constitutional law is supreme in these instances. But that's only arguably so.
They may not have announced in a news report, but one I follow explained on her FB page.
Right now, it's not looking like MI is even considering decertifying. Two reps I follow have stated (in FB posts) that their looking to fix security issues for the NEXT election.
The US Constitution says that the legislatures are to determine the "manner" that the electors are selected. By certifying the vote in the manner that they prescribed, they have no standing to overturn the result - as I understand it.
That's not inconsistent with the past... In the south, there were many elections where mass voter suppression was proven, but they always kicked the can down the road and said they'd fix it next time.
Which republican leader in AZ? Kelli Ward?
I'm hearing it both ways...yours and @Recalibar - but not from anyone who knows Constitutional Law to any degree.
I do believe that. All US government is slow as molasses.
Even state level
I have a physical copy of the constitution here, haha. I mean, it depends really if you're a traditionalist or not. And there are what, 3 or 4 traditionalists on SCOTUS right now?
4
May I just say that I'm REALLY thankful we've actually been discussing the election today? I keep popping in this thread and finding so much chitter chatter that it's too much to try and find anything meaningful quickly. Today has been good, strong, election discussion.
Question here.... am I correct in thinking that each Justice is over a district for the sole purpose of reviewing case requests....and once that Justice approves it, the case is then scheduled before the full Supreme Court?
It amazing this strategy of getting a bunch of people to just send a bunch of spam affidavits to a web site and wave them around worked on some people to a extent. Guliani is going back to the original plan. Just calling the judges unfair for him not making s good case. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/rudy-giuliani-accuses-judge-creating-fantasy-says-we-dont-need-courts-election-fight-1552597%3famp=1
Honestly, it's anyone's guess what happens. And yes, I've been banned from groups leaning liberal for even talking about the possibility of electoral fraud as an argument from "bad faith" when I even pointed out to them in real time how I caught missing votes from Floyd county GA indicating the margin would be more narrow than 10,000 if it was a biden win at all. 2 weeks later news comes out those votes were found.
Reminds me of getting kicked out of the majority of right wing servers for being critical of trump
LOL - I've lost almost all of my business (small - sideline) because an "expert" in my industry is far-left and decided to call me out publicly on Facebook.
Didn’t those ballots only net like 1000 votes for trump? There were Biden ballot in those finds as well. That’s actually less than the Florida recount in 2000 where they went from like a 2000 ballot difference to 300 @Recalibar
And I'm actually an Independent who voted for Trump because the way the Democrats are headed scares the stuffing out of me. Especially after they've been infringing on people's rights constantly since mid-March.
Right right. I brought up how there were supposed to be some 20% reporting for Floyd county, and that number dropped to like 91% with no votes added. The margin was supposed to be more narrow, and indeed it was.
Oh those internet percentage things are never accurate
In general
It was narrow by like 1000 votes
Why did Trump pick Guliani.. there have to be better lawyers that he could have bought
Maybe, but I didn't make any other claims about missing votes because I didn't really catch any. All of a sudden I'm a conspiracy theorist for bringing up something that came up rather plainly in my data, and even turned out to be right.
My understanding is that they are just keeping tabs. There is some combination of the Chief Justice and a certain number of Justices needing to accept the case, but I do not know what those criteria are off the top of my head.
does anyone know what this refers to?
I voted for Bernie back in 2016 primary, and felt like throwing a vote for Trump in because I was angry that leaks were coming out about how the DNC wanted their darling Clinton in instead.
I know they were doing the ballot duplication study that found a 3% swing
I'm looking for more context or the origin of this audit^^^
Big if true.
They all knew that fraud is always committed. They just have to meet the threshold allowed.
does anyone have a link for the specific case or court docs?
I found this article very informative and it makes sense to me. The author seems legit by his bio page, but that's the extent of what I know: https://www.justsecurity.org/73274/no-state-legislatures-cannot-overrule-the-popular-vote/
Would like this as well.
Saved for later reading
@MatiLuc @JonasRobert @james j I posed a thought experiment and people have been sharing their ideas. I have enjoyed the resulting conversation - I hope they have. If you are interested, it is here: https://discordapp.com/channels/760945067107680286/771201221145919499/784832307219136612
Imo, I think the situation is different when the state legislators are sufficiently convinced of wrongdoing. That's more or less what Guliani is currently doing by lobbying the legislatures.
@Recalibar, you just advanced to level 6!