Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Approaching The Inflection Points

Approaching The Inflection Points

Reader: “I, like many legal immigrants, do not see current events as a contest between any two candidates, but whether Americans retain their right to chose their leaders or not.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L83-chSOmY

I have received numerous requests to explain where I think things stand now in the post-election legal battles.

This email came in today:

I just read your post about why Justice Alito might be giving Respondents in PA so much time to respond. Thank you. Can you please share your thoughts on the overall status of the Trump team’s fight as of December 5, Saturday, in light of the many developments? Do you still believe there is a path to victory?

I was born and grew up in the Philippines, where, as a child, I witnessed the disenfranchisement of millions of Filipinos by an oppressive and corrupt regime. Many of the “low tech” methods deployed by that regime have re-surfaced in this country that I love, sans the goons with guns. But I fear that too many Americans do not understanding the ramifications of a corrupt election.
I, like many legal immigrants, do not see current events as a contest between any two candidates, but whether Americans retain their right to chose their leaders or not.

Your credentials and clear writing style can help people like me better understand what’s going on.

Thank you for any insights you may be willing to share with me by email or in your next post.

I wish I could give a legal pep talk because my heart is with so many of the readers. But I wouldn’t be true to myself or to you if I put on a happy face in the current circumstances.

My position has been clear since just after the election, on November 7, that the legal options were a long shot, but worth taking:

So it’s not over, but we have to be honest with ourselves that it remains a longshot. Trump needs hard evidence of major fraud, miscount, or computer malfunction to prevail in court. A specific category of ballot that was not legally cast is going to have to be identified, and it’s going to have to be in a sufficient quantity to make a difference. I hope they find it.

I revisited this problem on November 26, after Sidney Powell filed the lawsuits in Georgia and Michigan:

I’ve now had a chance to read through the entire Georgia complaint. The allegations demonstrate an unreliable election took place in which numerous safeguards were removed and/or ignored and/or violated through open connivance and deception.

What is lacking is the who/what/when/where that would show (1) a clearly identifiable group of ballots for Biden that were unlawfully counted, or for Trump that were not counted, as opposed to some unspecified number anecdotally demonstrated through affidavits, and (2) the software actually was manipulated in this instance, as opposed to being vulnerable to manipulation. That is not something Powell could know without an inspection of the computer systems, though there is circumstantial evidence of anomolies.

In a normal case, this pleading would be enough to get into the discovery phase, at which point documents and systems could be inspected, and more testimony taken. The problem here is that we have a short deadline until the electoral college process kicks in, and there’s not enough time. This election may have been stolen, but it was stolen months ago when Democrats weakened the type of control mechanisms that would give certainty, and on election night and thereafter when Democrats concealed what they were doing from Republican view.

Democrats had zero evidence that the 2016 election was stolen by the Russians, but kept up the claim of illegitimacy against Trump for 4 years. This time there is a lot of evidence that the 2020 election was suspect, but likely not enough evidence to get a court to throw the whole thing out and to reject certification.

Since then, there have been more legal losses, including in Pennsylvania and just yesterday in Nevada.

The calendar is the main enemy. We all know that something went very wrong here, too many first-hand accounts of suspicious activities. By way of example, the same media that gaslit the election, now is gaslighting us by denying that on Election Night Republican and media observers in Fulton County were told counting was over for the night so they could leave (they left, the counting went on). Georgia’s Secretary of State is denying any wrongdoing, but don’t tell us there never was an announcement that counting was suspended — it’s things like that that cause people to be suspicious.

In a normal lawsuit, there would be time for discovery — to take depositions, to get document production, to conduct forensic examinations of computer software and hardware systems. Maybe there’s a there there, maybe not. But as reflected in the Nevada decision, Trump was expected to have all the evidence at the inception of the legal proceedings. It’s a very difficult standard, somewhat unique to election contests, with the added time pressure of the electoral college vote coming up on December 14.

That’s a long-winded way of saying that I’m not expecting the legal challenges to succeed. I hope I’m surprised, but that’s my current assessment. It will take wins in multiple states to change the election outcome. That said, it’s important to see the legal challenges through to the end, because if you don’t try, you can’t succeed.

We will know soon. We are at the legal inflection point. We’ll likely have a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Pennsylvania by the end of next week, and likely other court resolutions as well.

The legal inflection point is just one of many.

We are nearing another inflection point: Georgia runoffs on January 5. If Republicans do not win at least one of those races, Chuck Schumer is the Majority Leader (since a VP Harris would be the deciding vote) in the Senate, and if Biden is president, he will try to fulfill his threat to “change America” if he gets that power.

There is yet another inflection point, which is how Trump supporters react if he loses and Biden is inaugurated. This website started in October 2008 just before Obama’s first win, and in the aftermath, it would have been very easy to give up. But the opposite happened, people were energized. There was the launch of the Tea Party movement and the crushing Republican House win in 2010. People didn’t (just) get mad, they got even. Of course, we always fight the battle on two fronts — Democrats and establishment Republicans. It was true then, and it’s true now, but the situation actually is much better now.

I’ve gone somewhat off track, something of a stream of consiousness.

Don’t give up, no matter what the eventual outcome of this election. In a word: #Resist.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Professor,

Did you see this, by Shipwreckedcrew at Redstate? You are cited and commended about half way through the article. I don’t understand it as well as I’d like, but do pick up a glimmer of hope in the article.

https://redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/12/05/is-there-another-scenario-that-makes-justice-alitos-dec-8-response-date-meaningful-in-different-way-n289672

    stevewhitemd in reply to MrE. | December 5, 2020 at 9:31 pm

    Interesting analysis but I don’t see the USSC doing that; it would indeed be the ‘mother of all cancellations’. The Democrats would be outraged (for being caught and called out), the GOPe would be outraged at the disruption of the process (much tut-tutting would ensure), and the Trump supporters would demand the same be done in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona.

    Not sure I see the end-result there, but the tossing of all ‘our rascals’ isn’t one of them.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to MrE. | December 6, 2020 at 4:36 pm

    And in light of this…….. Hmmmm…….

    Excerpted from the book: ‘Hidden Hand: Exposing How the Chinese Communist Party Is Reshaping the World’

    In 2018 the well-connected Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin pointed out that China had been building networks of influence in the United States over many years, and that the U.S. government “is preparing for the possibility that the Chinese government will decide to weaponize” them to get what it wants. (Although Beijing is not known to use Russian-style “active measures” in the West, deploying them is only a matter of political calculation.)

    One of the CCP’s most auda­cious penetration operations, Chinagate in 1996, saw a top intelligence operative meeting a naive President Clinton in the White House, along with donations to the Clinton campaign made through people with ties to the Chinese military.

    Beijing has been working to gain influence in the U.S. Congress since the 1970s. Through the activities of the CCP’s International Liaison Department, and Party-linked bodies like the China Association for International Friendly Contact, China has made some influential friends. Nevertheless, Congress has for the most part remained skeptical of China, although its voice has been muted at times by the influence of “pro-China” members. The president, the White House, the bureaucracy, think tanks, and business lobby groups have all been targeted by Beijing, to good effect.

    Democratic Presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden gestures as he speaks during the final presidential debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., on Oct. 22, 2020. (Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images)

    Until recently, almost all players in Washington D.C. and beyond were convinced by the “peaceful rise of China” trope, and the value of “constructive engagement.” The common belief was that as China developed economically, it would naturally morph into a liberal state. This view was not without foundation, because the more liberal factions within the CCP did struggle with the hardliners, but in the U.S. it reinforced a kind of institutional naivety that was exploited by Beijing. Many of those who stuck to this view even after the evidence pointed firmly to the contrary had a strong personal investment in defending Beijing.

    The billionaire businessman and former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg was a late entrant in the contest to become the 2020 Democratic Party candidate for U.S. president. He is the most Beijing-friendly of all aspirants. With extensive investments in China, he opposes the tariff war and often speaks up for the CCP regime…..

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/chinas-elite-capture-strategy-bidens

There is a larger question, and I will take great care to avoid suggesting one answer or another.

What has happened over the last four years, and especially since the election, amounts to an attempted revolution. The question then is:

Can one put down a revolution by using only the legal process?

Many people are skeptical about it. Until recently, AG Barr seemed to think it was possible. Whether or not he really did, or still does, I don’t know.

Obviously, it’s better for almost everyone if the law alone is sufficient. We will see if it is.

The legal process has been corrupted by the unprecedented practice of allowing the private sector to outright buy high positions in law enforcement (Soros and Bloomberg flooding the campaign chests of AGs and DAs, and even literally paying the salaries of staff in their offices).

When any legal system refuses to prosecute dangerous rioters and arsonists, puts them back on the street without even bail, but brings the total power of the law down on citizens defending themselves from these same thugs (Strickland, Baca, the McCloskeys, Rittenhouse), it deserves any level of radical reformation that can be waged against it, up to and including suitable applications of high explosive.

As for that snake-in-the-grass Barr, I prefer to be informed by the opposite of any opinion he may utter.

I will quote Robert Barnes. This is going to be like a Hail Mary pass from the 50 yard line, but you have Doug Flutie as your QB.

Trump has done some miraculous things. He may or may not pull of another miracle.

One thing is clear. The courts alone are not going to save Trump. It is going to take effort from GOP politicians to help him out. Politicians who are in their position because of Trump. Trump should pressure them and force them to show their hands.

If he doesn’t receive the support, which so far he hasn’t, he should do what Andrew jackson did. Start his own political party.

In fact my feeling is that Trump is going to do everything he can to win, but is really looking forward to using the loss as an excuse to start a new party.

    Absolutely. And we should all do our part by reregistering as unaffiliated independent as soon as possible should he not prevail.

    This is a corrupt Uniparty problem, not a Rep vs Dem problem. It annoys me that so many of us continue to see the Uniparty corruption as a Democrat problem. Voters from “both” parties disgusted with the corruption needs to do this. It would send an unambiguous signal that this election failed to produce a ruling consensus.

    One or “both” of these parties have to go. Gutting the Republican party first to create a Trump party would lead to the subsequent wreck of the Democratic party too. What just happened does not reflect where the American people are and we do have a very effective first step to take. Re-register! Unaffiliated independent!

    Can anyone deny that it was the Republican party itself that caused this catastrophe? If anyone is responding to any of these RNC e-mails from Ronna McDaniel, shame on you! I usually get 10 to who knows how many e-mails asking for money. How do I know which are for Trump and which are just RNC?

    One of the downsides of Trump running Republican is that he had to provide his fundraising lists to the RNC where the GOPe learned where Trump’s “hidden” support came from. We are now ALL on that list.

When conservatives lose faith in our elections the only thing left will be for them to use the 2nd amendment to remove tyranny. The progressive fascists better be careful because the results will be unpleasant for them.

    Dathurtz in reply to ConradCA. | December 5, 2020 at 10:43 pm

    This is exactly it. Will this happen or will it not? That is the real question if an armed populace truly loses faith in elections and the rule of law.

    Maybe the courts will wake up and do the right thing. Maybe elected officials will wake up and do the right thing. If not, then I hope we do have a revolution that can restore our republic. I wouldn’t say we have been overly successful in safeguarding our own freedom.

Eastwood Ravine | December 5, 2020 at 10:42 pm

We all recognize that we are in some state or stage of civil war. We know the other side should not be permitted to re-obtain power. Martial law should be on the table at this point, with the goal of redoing of the election.

    “Martial law” can only exist in the USA when the civilian courts are incapable of operating. So long as there exists a court that can do business, even if it is only through Zoom™, “martial law” is a nullity.

      alaskabob in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 12:18 am

      “Incapable of operating” or choosing not to. Functionally the same. I still go back to the question. Why is this fraud not the same as money laundering? In those cases, who actually sees the pallets of cash being accepted by the launderer yet here we have video that matches the injection of large amount of votes for Biden. We have a simultaneous false cessation of counting in several cities which speaks coordination. The answer is simple… either one is in on the fix or chooses to ignore the evidence or ignore serious allegations. It isn’t worth their time and like the paralysis in major cities, no one will be held accountable. Action means accountability and with it risk. Like much in society, risk is too risky. The legal system is now a safe space for criminal activity at the highest level which means there is no real rule of law. This is now a feudal system. The chains not only lay softly on the shoulders but provide comfort and a sense of security.

        Milhouse in reply to alaskabob. | December 6, 2020 at 4:19 am

        All over this country the courts are not only capable of operating but are fully functioning. That they don’t do what you want does not allow martial law. Martial law simply cannot exist in the USA while there is a court that is open for business.

          We want them to ENFORCE THE LAW! The state supreme courts themselves have legalized ignoring their own constitutions! How can you possibly define that as “operating and fully functioning”? Good grief.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 9:19 am

          That has nothing to do with it, and you know it very well. The courts are open. They are doing business. People are filing suits all the time; trials are happening. The election is completely irrelevant to this. If you are calling for martial law when the courts are open then you are a traitor to the United States, and worse than any Democrat.

          Enforcing the law “has nothing to do it”? I’ll have to add that to the growing list of Milhouse’s Laws;

          Law #!: “Trying is the first step to failure.”

          Law #2: “State Supreme Courts are not bound by their states’ constitutions.”

          Law #3: “Courts at every level are not bound by any laws.”

          You must be a social scientist. It’s hard to believe that you are a practicing lawyer (not to be confused with reciting the wording of laws).

          stevewhitemd in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 10:47 am

          That they don’t do what you want does not allow martial law. Martial law simply cannot exist in the USA while there is a court that is open for business.

          There is a difference between the courts being open for their usual business and the courts being willing and able to deal with the fundamental issue on the table.

          You’re being obtuse. Again.

          We are told time and again that the solution to a legal wrangle or problem, small to largest, is to go to court. This election is the largest. If the courts took a good, long, sober look at the evidence and said, “no, we won’t overturn” then that’s one thing.

          But as has been amply demonstrated, the courts aren’t doing that. The PA Supreme Court is an open arm of the PA Democratic Party and permitted an election that was expressly in violation of their own state constitution, and now says that it’s ‘too late’ to do anything about it.

          A Nevada Court threw out thousands of affidavits of cheating saying that they weren’t ‘evidence’, even though an affidavit is a traditional piece of evidence in all our courts. Other state courts have refused hearings.

          You’re saying that we should trust the courts that are open for business — yes, they’re open, but they’re also in on the con.

          Katy L. Stamper in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 11:48 am

          Thank you, Steve White, M.D.

          alaskabob in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 1:01 pm

          A lot of courts have been “open for budiness” even in the most oppressive regimes in the world. so… “If even one Last court is open for business ….” Milhouse.. ..we are living in a country whose first document of note was absolutely treasonous according to English law. This was followed by extra-legal military actions also against English law. Those said traitors colluded with a foreign power…France… To wage war on their fellow British citizens and government. Talk about a “peaceful transition of power”…

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 11:41 pm

          All three of you are idiots. Whether the court are willing to enforce election laws is completely irrelevant. You are calling for martial law, and martial law cannot exist in the USA if the courts are open. What issues they’re willing to deal with simply does not figure into it. No, I did not say “that we should trust the courts that are open for business”; I simply pointed out that they are open for business, and that fact alone absolutely precludes martial law. And yes, “a lot of courts have been ‘open for budiness’ even in the most oppressive regimes in the world”; what has that got to do with it? In those regimes, martial law is illegitimate. That they have anyway it is precisely what makes them oppressive.

          Look, you people seem to think the president has some sort of inherent power to declare martial law. He doesn’t. If he were to make such a declaration the military would not obey and would immediately arrest him, because it would be a coup against the constitution, and their loyalty is to that, not to him.

JusticeDelivered | December 5, 2020 at 10:48 pm

#Resist is fine, #Retaliate would be more gratifying.

One example is getting Trump supporters to ditch Google, Amazon, Facebook and Twitter. If significant numbers do this it will hurt their bottom line.

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to JusticeDelivered. | December 6, 2020 at 10:46 am

    Justice, we are fleeing many est’mt platforms.

    I have attended about 4 or 5 Atlanta Stop the Steal rallies and the one in D.C. Speaking with attendees, they were discussing how they were leaving FB, etc., and discussing alternatives such as Parler and Gab.

    Good group of gals I spoke with!

The problem with the way the law currently is is that it seems impossible, in the case of the kind of massive and widespread election fraud Trump is currently facing, to develop and present the necessary evidence to a court in a timely manner.

Not difficult. Impossible.

But if that’s true, the law is effectively telling the fraudsters–go ahead and perpetrate your massive election fraud; there will be no penalty and you can defraud your way into power with impunity.

If this is what the law is telling us, then the law needs to be changed. By force, if necessary.

    It’s like all the looting and arson all summer long. When has that ever been put down, much less track down, charge, prosecute and jail the perpetrators. No one disputes what happened – shelf-bare stores and burned out buildings attest to what happened. But our system seems to be more geared toward individual crime and punishment, not violent / lawless mob actions.

    I find myself wondering when/if Trump will invoke the insurrection act – when the governors, secretaries of state, state supreme courts, et al, ignore such obvious evidence and 73M victims of a pre-planned and coordinated, multi-state fraud operation.

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to Wisewerds. | December 6, 2020 at 10:51 am

    Wise:

    John Adams, observed, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

    So the inadequacies of our laws – which foreigners have no scruples against violating – were baked into our system. We presume a certain level of morality.

    So, in Georgia, we KNOW that 66,000 minors registered to vote – I forget how many actually did vote – before the law permitted them to register.

    This in and of itself is plenty to invalidate Biden’s current margin over Trump.

    But I agree, the “law” is making it impossible to win this contest.

That said, it’s important to see the legal challenges through to the end, because if you don’t try, you can’t succeed.

This. And that is why the Dems are putting so much effort to gaslight Trump into giving up. But when a patient is in a critical condition, and things don’t look good, you do whatever you can. You pray; you try experimental drugs; you search for a top surgeon who will be willing to operate. You don’t choose hospice until there aren’t any viable options left, or until the likely cost to the patient of those options when they don’t work outweighs the tiny chance of benefit if they do. The time may soon come to accept defeat, but it’s not here yet, and nobody has the right to demand that we accept it one moment before we have to. The president must continue to fight, not for himself but for all of us.

    Dathurtz in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 7:07 am

    That is mostly where I am. I don’t know what accepting defeat will look like, but my doubts are growing that it ends without blood in the streets. I think people aren’t thinking about how horrible that possibility would be. I have six ancestors buried just north of Atlanta from the last time it happened.

I agree with the Professor that legal redress is well neigh impossible. The problem is the time frame. Only a very fearless jurist would look at the evidence presented and stop the certification process in WI, MI, PA, GA and NV, pending complete, in-depth investigation. If one were done, than it might well be possible to prove that sufficient fraud occurred in those locations to illegally swing the election to Joe Biden. It might also show that, the illustrated irregularities might not have produced sufficient illegal and improper votes to change the current outcome, significantly. What we do know is that election laws were violated in all of these locales through the exclusion of authorized poll monitors. There have been significant irregularities documented which could easily be actual fraudulent instances of fraud. Further statistical evidence indicates that the likelihood of fraud is very high.

Now, it is not the job of the plaintiffs in these cases do investigations of criminal activities. That is the duty of the state. However, in these cases, the state is not only not actively pursuing an investigation into violations of the law, but has seemingly already decided that they are wholly innocent. So, it now becomes one of the duties of the court to allow the plaintiffs to conduct a reasonable investigation of the improprieties observed. Yet, just as with the rest of governmental authority, the courts have seemingly chosen to ignore the evidence that significant vote fraud occurred. They, like the rest of the government has decided that it is simply better not to know if an Presidential election was essentially stolen in the middle of the night.

If government fails or refuses to do its duty to its citizens, then that is the point where the citizenry will take matters into its own hands. And 35-70 million angry people, who feel abandoned and have nothing to lose, can do a lot to redress grievances if he government will not.

    TX-rifraph in reply to Mac45. | December 6, 2020 at 5:58 am

    “If government fails or refuses to do its duty to its citizens…”

    I ask “What makes sense?” A passive failure by both the state and Federal LE agencies makes no sense. Then, what does? These particular state agencies and courts and the DOJ and FBI are not AWOL, they are active participants in the attack on the integrity of this country.

    If Durham does some small act that makes sense, is it just a shiny object to distract us? Do I trust the legal system? No. Do I trust the political system? No. I trust parts of the military (not the Obama Generals), most LEOs (not Police Chiefs), and the citizens (not the elites).

    Trump was elected. Biden/Harris were selected. We are under active attack by enemies, both foreign and domestic — Enemies who fear the 2A and the people.

The answer to a corrupted election is not in the courts and never was. It can only be found if our elected representatives in Congress stand up for what is right.

God help us.

    Milhouse in reply to irv. | December 6, 2020 at 12:14 am

    And do what?

      Aha! Why don’t YOU help us work that out! What good are lawyers who can only chart the path to defeat? We have a Declaration of Independence as our founding document underpinning the US Constitution as the framework of how we secure of God-given rights. When the US Constitution fails, we still have the Declaration of Independence… if we dare.

      We can avoid crossing that line by either Trump prevailing in court or Trump can gut the GOP by founding a new party whence we finally get to peel the last skins of the onion. The moment of truth will be to see how many of the useless “conservatives” (Ted Cruz? Tom Cotton? Jim Jordan? You name them.) choose to go down with the GOP ship. Same on the Dem side. We gotsta know who is with us and who isn’t and soon.

        Subotai Bahadur in reply to Pasadena Phil. | December 6, 2020 at 3:53 pm

        “Trump can gut the GOP by founding a new party”

        And just as the Left and GOPe have no regard for the rule of law or the electoral process, neither will the new party – until a new, stable, free and operating with the consent of the governed – political entity is firmly established.

        Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln.

        It is the reality of human nature.

        Subotai Bahadur

        You’re the one who’s demanding that “our elected representatives in congress” do something, but you have no idea what they can do. Why do you imagine there is anything they can do to stop it?

          “…you have no idea what they can do.”

          Please look up “US Constitution”. You keep arguing that our state legislatures and judges are not bound by any laws yet now you are saying that they cannot do anything. Which is it? Who is the idiot on this thread? The many of us who disagree with you? Or YOU?

Since everyone knew many months ago that pandemic concerns would significantly increase the use of mail-in ballots, especially from Democratic voters, why oh why didn’t the Republican President and the Republican state leaders prepare for the inevitable chaos that predictably occurred? President Trump has been screaming for many months that mail-in would not be secure, but why did nobody in a position to do something preemptively – do something preemptively? This is my problem with all this retrospective litigation. That, and the parade of witness from Rudy’s traveling road show that sound like rejects from the Mos Eisley cantina. (Who in their right mind ever thought that crazy lady from Michigan would seem credible?) The Kraken theory from Georgia now includes the governments of Germany, Serbia, Iran, Venezuela and China, Dominion Voting Systems, local elected officials in multiple counties, the people driving the trucks and the vans with the fake ballots, hackers, Governor Brian Kemp, and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger – with no one of these ‘co-conspirators’ actually testifying in court (with immunity from prosecution) about the actual plan to steal the election? That’s why the litigation is failing and will continue to fail. Things needed to be addressed months ago, not retrospectively, and the only people who could have done that failed to do it.

    Milhouse in reply to RNJD. | December 6, 2020 at 9:34 am

    The “Kraken theory from Georgia” is a distraction. It’s a crazy theory that is meant to make the entire case for fraud look crazy. There is clearly nothing going on with the Dominion machines, and there’s certainly nothing going on with Venezuela or wherever, just as there was nothing going on with Diebold in 2004 when the Democrats went through the same craziness; but now anyone who points at real verifiable fraud can be written off as a nutcase who thinks Dominion is about to steal his kidneys and the Pentagon is beaming mind-control rays from space. Come on, people, that’s Democrat territory; we’re supposed to be smarter than that.

    Just last week I tried to tell someone that NYC’s “red”, “orange” and “yellow” zones were not based on any science but were drawn up in Cuomo’s office based on how those neighborhoods vote, and his response was “Yeah, and vaccines cause autism, right?”. He could not be moved from this fat-headed response; would not listen to anything. I tried to tell him it’s mostly Democrats like him who believe that, not Republicans; that almost everyone who promotes that idea is a Democrat; but he was like a broken record. And the fact is that there are a small number of nuts on our side, just enough to enable the other side to mock us even though they have the lion’s share of the nuts.

      Dathurtz in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 9:54 am

      I am remaining skeptical of the kraken until a lot more support is released.

      I am much more worried about the literally millions of votes that lack chain of custody, especially as there are now thousands of statements, signed under penalty of perjury, that raise critical issues of election integrity. Especially combined with well-done statistical analyses pointing to impossible D performance.

      If our courts cannot address this is a meaningful way, then our constitution is already void and our republic is over. The questions become “What will replace it?” and “How will that transition occur?”

    Dathurtz in reply to RNJD. | December 6, 2020 at 10:36 am

    If I remember correctly, people did contest it, but it was slow-walked until “can’t do anything; too close to the election” happened. Or was it a standing issue?

      TheOldZombie in reply to Dathurtz. | December 6, 2020 at 1:00 pm

      Yes. That’s one of the issues we saw in Pennsylvania.

      There was a lawsuit before the election but it was tossed because the plaintiffs had not been harmed by the new election law regarding mail-in ballots so they had no standing. Those same plaintiffs sued on the very same issue after the election and the state supreme court tossed out the suit on the laches theory that it was too late.

      This is the suit filed not by Trump’s campaign but by Republicans running for office in the state. The one where even a PA judge said they would likely win on the merits but then the PA Supreme Court grabbed the case and threw it out.

      We can not rely on the courts especially in PA.

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to RNJD. | December 6, 2020 at 11:01 am

    I’m in Georgia. Honestly, I believed Trump had it nailed down here and I wasn’t worried. Especially after August, it seemed fine.

    And I will say, in light of Fulton County’s actions, I believe even if we had obtained more votes for Trump, the dems would just have created more fake ballots to steal the election.

    As for DATA, here is Matt Braynard of the Voter Integrity Project (think that’s the name). His group has obtained the Master Death File, the National Change of Address file, and voter registration data for Georgia, and found thousands and thousands of illegal actions. He had to pay for these files. He raised $600,000 for this project in just about a week or two.

    Unsure why he hasn’t testified in Georgia legislative hearings. Or if he did, I missed it, BUT I believe his findings have been in the lawsuits, but I have to go read them.

    He went to Michigan, think they legislature didn’t allow him to testify. His group ran the numbers in the 6 states at issue.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH9ihoLi1NA

Martin_Knight | December 6, 2020 at 5:39 am

First of all; I am not a lawyer.

That said; the actual date when it’s all over is January 6th, when Congress meets to accept the results of the election. Trump’s only way forward is by gathering and presenting solid forensically supported evidence that the election was stolen.
Here’s how you get forensic evidence of election fraud, by the way;
https://i.postimg.cc/W27vSm8k/fraud-detect-banner.png

Ultimately, asking judges to enjoin states from certifying results and appointing electors with only indicators (i.e. “red flags”; math and statistics), but no actual proof of fraud was never going to be an easy sell given the deadlines imposed by the electoral college process.

As Jonathan Turley has pointed out, there is a legal Catch-22 here; to prove fraud, you need access to the election systems to examine ballots and machines, but to get access to the system, judges insist you need to prove fraud.

Interestingly, I think the states certifying their results and their slates of electors by the January 8th “safe harbor” deadline actually strengthens Trump’s hand in obtaining the access he needs to the state election systems.

As President, he has the inherent and statutory authority to investigate election crimes, especially with regard to Federal elections. It’s black letter law that the Federal government has law enforcement jurisdiction over any election with a federal office on the ballot.

Furthermore, the affidavits, statistical evidence, and reports of irregularities are plentiful and substantial enough to serve as legal justification for launching an investigation.

And given the likelihood that many of the local officials may then try to destroy the evidence (e.g. deleting machine logs, incinerating ballots and poll books, etc.), the Trump Administration can easily cite exigent circumstances to protect evidence and send in the Marshals to secure the materials without first seeking a warrant.

Even if they challenge the seizures in court, apart from the jurisdiction issue being against them, State officials cannot claim injury after the safe harbor date. And as this is a completed and already certified election, the ballots, poll books and machine logs are not required for any pending official purpose by the local or State authorities.

Furthermore, in this case, the issue of not being “enough” to overturn the results is irrelevant – election/voter fraud at any level is a crime whether or not it affects the results.

Furthermore, significantly, Trump can now use Federal resources to forensically examine the ballots, records and machines.

Even better, as it happens, the four most egregious states, MI, PA, GA and WI fall under the purview of Kavanaugh, Alito, Thomas and Barrett respectively. Trump may even expand his investigation into MN which is under Kavanaugh (8th Circuit). Kagan may not even be able to stop similar investigations into AZ and NV.

Ultimately, if the Trump Campaign conclusively finds and announces that hundreds of thousands of ballots (as I suspect) with votes for Biden were actually marked with toner (i.e. printer ink), and that without them, he loses PA, WI, MI, AZ and GA, the certifications and electoral college won’t matter.

Joe Biden will never take the oath of office in those circumstances.

    Milhouse in reply to Martin_Knight. | December 6, 2020 at 9:44 am

    That said; the actual date when it’s all over is January 6th, when Congress meets to accept the results of the election.

    It’s practically over on December 14 when the electors vote. No new electors can vote after that date. The only thing that can happen on Jan 6 is for Pence to decide not to count certain purported electors’ votes, but he’s almost certainly bound by the Electoral Count Act which requires him to count the votes of any set of electors that was certified by December 8. In addition, even if he decides he’s not bound by it (and the courts agree, or decide to stay out of it), any votes he doesn’t count would reduce the majority Biden needs. And although the constitution’s text doesn’t seem to give congress any say in the matter, the precedent of 1877 is that it will insist on one anyway.

      stevewhitemd in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2020 at 10:51 am

      Relevant part of the 12th Amendement: “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…”

      Disallowing the EV of a state does not lower the bar. The bar is 270 EV, that being a majority the ‘whole number of Electors appointed’. That some Electors’ votes might later be not counted doesn’t change their appointment status.

      If one or more state’s EV are not counted, the bar remains 270.

        Milhouse in reply to stevewhitemd. | December 6, 2020 at 11:48 pm

        Disallowing the EV of a state does not lower the bar. The bar is 270 EV, that being a majority the ‘whole number of Electors appointed’. That some Electors’ votes might later be not counted doesn’t change their appointment status.

        You are wrong. If they were appointed then Pence must count their votes. He doesn’t get a choice in the matter. The only reason that would allow him not to count their votes would be that he disputes their appointment. And if they weren’t appointed then there aren’t 538 electors, so the majority is not 270.

    TheOldZombie in reply to Martin_Knight. | December 6, 2020 at 1:15 pm

    Actually, it’s not even Jan 6 that is important. The only date in the Constitution is Jan 20th at noon. Inauguration.

    All other dates for a meeting of electors and Congress certifying are just federal laws.

    The courts could push everything back if needed telling the Electoral College and Congress to wait until it makes decisions on any pending cases.

The easier fix is follow the Constitution and 5 state legislatures should vote if they are sure the election was rigged and then vote the electors themselves.
Really thought Pa would do that but seems they chickened out.
And Pennsylvania had the biggest vote lead by President Trump.
Couple weeks ago thought if 1 state did it others might follow.

isn’t the real issue time?–ironic that the dems/fascists insist on the Trump campaign following the consittution’s time frames when they have clearly acted ” by any means necessary ” to thwart many of its safeguards

like an earlier poster, have many ancestors planted around here and in virginia who gave their lives to protect our way of life and am conscious of the profound debt of honor we owe to all of them–while personally feel that WE must follow the law also insist that the LAW must be followed by EVERYONE–if the law in fact applies(or may be subverted to apply)to only a select few, then it ceases to be the law of the land as originally conceived

surely there must be a mechanism in place to halt this head-long rush over the cliff which the dems/fascists insist upon–to theorize about ANY other election after this one(holding the senate, retaking the house in 2022, trump running again in 2024) being lawful/honest is pure folly

if allowed to stand, the dems/fascists will have proven to themselves/all of us/the world that they may truly act without any fear of the law/the people/the consequences

Legal battles to ensure the integrity of an election (and future ones) is a worthy endeavor.

Legal battles to stroke Trump’s ego are a sad sight.

The sooner Trump takes his reality show to the private sector the better.

Liberalism should be fought, but Trump is not a leader.
Never has been.

    MarkS in reply to BAB. | December 6, 2020 at 8:41 am

    Typical Repub type of response! Fight “next time”! No, Trump has the right idea, fight the battle at hand now, do not surrender and the get all puffed up talking about how the next time you might do something.

      BAB in reply to MarkS. | December 6, 2020 at 9:12 am

      The emporer has no clothes.

      I’m for small, limited government. Trump is not.

        Dathurtz in reply to BAB. | December 6, 2020 at 9:17 am

        Sadly, that isn’t an option that we are likely to be presented with.

        I would like to drive peacefully down the middle of my lane. However, if somebody coming head on comes into my lane, then that option goes away no matter how much I prefer it. I have to choose between a devastating collision or taking my chances leaving the road.

        TX-rifraph in reply to BAB. | December 6, 2020 at 9:39 am

        The fight is for the integrity of elections. Your reframing sounds like the typical surrender language of the eGOP and the Dems – say something that is true but irrelevant.

        A Marine in the middle of a firefight would prefer to be at home drinking a beer. He must first fight to survive.

        Isolden in reply to BAB. | December 6, 2020 at 2:25 pm

        Best of luck for you with the Biden administration then! And with any establishment republicans. Trump was the only one that got anything done, gop was just failure theater

        Milhouse in reply to BAB. | December 7, 2020 at 12:10 am

        This is true. Trump is not for limited government, just as the Bushes weren’t. But whatever he is for or against, government under him is much more limited than it would be under the alternative, and in fact seems in some ways to be more limited than it was when he took office.

        Trump is not a conservative, but he’s been governing mostly as if he were one. And that counts more than words or beliefs. In practical terms he’s achieved more of the conservative agenda than Reagan managed, and Reagan was a true believer as well as an intellectual who actually understood why conservative policies were good.

    Milhouse in reply to BAB. | December 7, 2020 at 12:06 am

    BAB, Trump’s ego has nothing to do with this. Nobody here is concerned about his ego. We’re concerned about the destruction that would be caused by allowing the Dems to steal the election.

    Unfortunately there’s very little that can be done, and as you can see some people find that hard to accept. But what little can be done must be done, and as far as I’m concerned I don’t give a sh*t whether Trump wants to fight or not; he owes it to us to fight for exactly as long as there is still even a wisp of hope.

    If and when even that is gone it will be time to accept defeat and start planning for how to keep the USA in existence so there will be a next time. We must never accept His Fraudulency as the legitimate president. We must do all we can to frustrate his destructive plans. But none of that is relevant right now, because he hasn’t won yet and there’s still a tiny little hope that he won’t.

      Dathurtz in reply to Milhouse. | December 7, 2020 at 6:53 am

      I think this is the point where we differ: I do not believe there will be a meaningful next time.

      This vote plainly is plainly untrustworthy because of both negligence and active wrongdoing across many precincts and many states. If allowed to stand, this results in a non-representative government and dramatically increases the odds of future non-representative government that is run by people who have demonstrated indifference or antipathy toward rule of law. This is worsened by the inability or refusal of our existing institutions to combat this clear wrong.

      For those reasons many people, including myself, believe armed conflict preferable to submission.

AF_Chief_Master_Sgt | December 6, 2020 at 9:46 am

It appears that the trolls have now infected Legal Insurrection. They leave their snide comments like schiff on the carpet. No logical discourse. No intelligent conversation or points. Just crass comments of negativity or gaslighting.

To them, we should not believe our eyes. To them, they demand that we call an apple a banana, and tell us we are crazy if we don’t.

Legal battles to stroke Trump’s ego are a sad sight.

The sooner Trump takes his reality show to the private sector the better.

Liberalism should be fought, but Trump is not a leader.
Never has been.
________________________________________________________

thank you for the early-morning laugh–how are things in china btw?–or is your mom asleep and you’ve gotten a hold of her computer again?

Inflection point, like earlier parameters, seems to have invaded ordinary conversation bereft of its mathematical meaning.

In the states where the results are contested, every state legislator that votes to send their electoral voters to cast a vote needs to be exposed. Those same people need to be primaried in their next election ( I would prefer removal from office before the next election, but that won’t happen).
If the are willing to basically endorse a contested election then they need lose their jobs as representatives of the people.
I am not sure beyond the shadow of a doubt election fraud occurred but there seems to be enough to raise serious doubts that have not been resolved.

    Milhouse in reply to buck61. | December 7, 2020 at 12:14 am

    In the states where the results are contested, every state legislator that votes to send their electoral voters to cast a vote needs to be exposed.

    That would be nobody, because the state legislatures do not vote to send the electors. State legislators play no role whatsoever in the election. Their job is to set the rules before the popular election is held, and they did that years or decades ago. Now the state simply follows those rules, without consulting the legislature at all.

America needs a voting system that has the highest degree of credibility and transparency. Many countries, including Canada, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands don’t allow electronic voting machines. France has banned mail-in voting except in very limited circumstances. “Voting in person, on paper ballots, while requiring a voter ID, makes it virtually impossible for widespread fraud to take place.”  See https://amgreatness.com/2020/12/03/cleaning-up-the-mess-of-our-electoral-system/

    TheOldZombie in reply to Cache. | December 6, 2020 at 1:32 pm

    An advantage those other nations have is they are small in terms of government whereas the US is essentially 50 “countries” in a union. Yes I know it’s 50 states for those of you who want to be critics but I’m just pointing out a concept.

    So those nations in Europe or the rest of the world can pass a law for the whole nation regarding elections. In America, we need to go to all 50 states and get things changed.

    A tall order…..

Katy L. Stamper | December 6, 2020 at 11:23 am

Matt Braynard’s statements on Michigan’s info:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8ukz9SDIdk

A few more comments.

Let’s get this Kraken Theory out of the way, first. There has been significant evidence developed that outstanding irregularities occurred with the Dominion voting machines, during this election. There is even evidence that the machines removed Trump votes which were eventually posted for Biden. And, this apparently happened across the entire spectrum of users of those machines. There is also evidence that the machines were connected to the internet, during the election, and may have exchanged information with servers outside the US. None of this proves that organized fraud occurred or that the number of votes transferred swung the election results. So, the theory is largely moot, in the short term and a distraction [I have so stated previously].

Now, the real problem with the litigation road is time. There is simply not enough time for a conclusive investigation to be done concerning the level of election fraud involved in this Presidential election. Under most circumstances, the court would recognize this limitation and rule to suspend he process, to a reasonable date certain, to allow for investigation and discovery to occur. This, even if it means placing a statutory or Constitutional deadline on hold, temporarily. For, once the transition has occurred, it becomes effectively impossible to reverse it, judicially, no matter what evidence is presented. However, the courts appear to be unwilling to do this, even though they seem to have no problem ignoring statutory and Constitutional conditions in virtually every other case before them.

Finally, people have to understand the politics involved here. And, everything is politics. The left has already shown a willingness to use extra-legal means to gain its objectives. Riots, arson, looting, intimidation, etc. have been on display bu the left since the beginning of the year. If the election results were revrsed, most people expect these extra-legal activitie to resume. On the other hand, the Pro-Trump supporters are traditionally law abiding. In the past, they have choosen to eschew violent action in favor of allowing the political processes in the nation do their job. Therefor, the politicl class has deided that it is better to turn a blind eye to the obvious illeglities involved in ntional election for the highest office in the land rather than deal with radical actions by the left. However, times have changed. It has become increasingly obvious that the oliticaal class and our national institutoons are simply not responsive to the legitimate will of one half of the electorate. This body has been sending out cries for help and warnings for the lat decade and has been ignored. Now, we have arrived at the place where none of us wnt to be. In order to gain ny reasonable redress of obvious greivances, the law abiding members of society are faced with having to use estra-legal means to achieve that. In 1861, half of this country seceeded, for thi reason. This was a legal and non-violent means of redress of greivances. We saw how that turned out. Today, secession is off the table. This leaves armed insurrectiction. And that terrifies everyone with half a brain. But, as with everything else in life, a cost-benefit analysis has to be run on the subject. Either way, we know that violence is goowing to occur. It is now too late to stop that from happening. So, is it better to deal with the violence from the left, which can be controlled with the application of legal LE action, or to deal with a unknown level of insurrection from the deplorables, which will be firmly grounded in righeous indignation? Is it better to allow a radical transformation, against the clerly stated wishes of at least half the ntion, or mintain the lawful status quo? Either way it is going to be painful. I suppose where one lives has something to do with whih option one chooses. After all, if one lives in a Democrt controlled enclave, they are going to bear the brunt of the violence. Leftists seem to destroy their environment, while those supporting Trump are most like to destroy someone elses backyard. That this encompasses Democrat controlled enclaves, in booth cases, may tend to influence the thinking of residents of those areas of both persuasions.

This is not going to be pretty.

    alaskabob in reply to Mac45. | December 6, 2020 at 12:40 pm

    Absolutely nailed it. I would add that their extra-legal means included actors within the legal system to thwart due process. It’s a mix of pure power grab while others see it as a moral duty stemming from their beliefs and ideology. They have rendered half the population second class citizens (if they even would consider them that) and will continue to strip them of rights. The social compact of actions confined to within the constraints of the law is shredded. “Law abiding” has no meaning. This two tier system is exactly the same as in the Soviet Union…. The Communist Party functioned on their own level while forcing the populace to abide by laws it was bound by.

    Antifa and BLM were let loose by local governments…imagine a national enablement under the tacit approval of a Federal government. We are almost there.

    texansamurai in reply to Mac45. | December 6, 2020 at 2:01 pm

    years ago, when a young samurai, trained with a man who would go on to co-found delta–regarding urban warfare, he once said something i’ve never forgotten: ” gentlemen, remember that there is nothing on this earth more dangerous, more unpredictable than a cornered human being. ”

    over the last twelve years or so have felt the insidious actions(for the most part covert but over the last few years definitely sans any pretense of disguise)of forces at work to effectively corner us–by ” us ” mean the vast majority of americans who simply want to live their lives in peace with minimal interference from government–do not believe we are far from that last door shutting and having to react from a cornered position–strangely enough, do not fear that situation much–am reminded of that brave young farmer on the village green at concord–thank God for him–he pointed the way that the rest of us might follow

    TX-rifraph in reply to Mac45. | December 6, 2020 at 2:09 pm

    “This leaves armed insurrection.”

    I think that is already occurring. What is pending is the armed defense on the Constitutional Republic or the end of it via surrender to the armed Marxists and the domestic traitors.

    “By any means necessary.” say the Marxists. They will force the rest of us to choose the political environment that our children and grandchildren live in. The Democrats have always believed in enslaving others. They intend to prevail “by any means necessary.”

    Katy L. Stamper in reply to Mac45. | December 6, 2020 at 8:43 pm

    Mac, thank you for your respectful mention of the War Between the States.

    From Mac:

    On the other hand, the Pro-Trump supporters are traditionally law abiding. In the past, they have choosen to eschew violent action in favor of allowing the political processes in the nation do their job.

    Therefor, the political class has decided that it is better to turn a blind eye to the obvious illeglities involved in national election for the highest office in the land rather than deal with radical actions by the left.

    However, times have changed. It has become increasingly obvious that the political class and our national institutions are simply not responsive to the legitimate will of one half of the electorate. This body has been sending out cries for help and warnings for the last decade and has been ignored.

    Now, we have arrived at the place where none of us want to be. In order to gain any reasonable redress of obvious greivances, the law abiding members of society are faced with having to use extra-legal means to achieve that.

    In 1861, half of this country seceeded, for this reason. This was a legal and non-violent means of redress of greivances. We saw how that turned out. Today, secession is off the table. This leaves armed insurrectiction. And that terrifies everyone with half a brain.

    But, as with everything else in life, a cost-benefit analysis has to be run on the subject. Either way, we know that violence is goowing to occur. It is now too late to stop that from happening.

    So, is it better to deal with the violence from the left, which can be controlled with the application of legal LE action, or to deal with a unknown level of insurrection from the deplorables, which will be firmly grounded in righeous indignation?

    Is it better to allow a radical transformation, against the clearly stated wishes of at least half the ntion, or maintain the lawful status quo?

#FightBack

Katy L. Stamper | December 6, 2020 at 12:44 pm

U.S. Representative J. Hice, from Georgia, has twerked that Ware County ran Trump/Biden ballots on a tabulator and it assigned Biden more votes than they fed it.

https://twitter.com/CongressmanHice/status/1334919630339641345

Haven’t found his source yet; he didn’t link to it.

Katy L. Stamper | December 6, 2020 at 12:46 pm

BTW, I got the Matt Braynard info and Jody Hice info, from NickJFuentes twerk account.

He’s finds some real nuggets of info!

twitter.com/NickJFuentes

Dear Professor:

When it comes to thinking about this year’s election result in Georgia, why not cast the outcome in these terms: “gotta love a classy candidate who refuses to lose with dignity and instead, opts for the good ol’ accuse your opponent of stealing the election route. Which was their next move. Literally.”

Why is it so hard/horrible to say that President Trump lost a close election in Georgia?

Consider the following facts (as in, “facts don’t care about your feelings”):

1) Georgia is a purple state and a close election was expected. Remember. Just two years ago, Stacy Abrams lost to Bryan Kemp in the Georgia Governor’s race by 0.4%
2). Republicans all over the country did better on down-ballot races than the Presidential election. If you have any doubts about that, ask Susan Collins. Georgia’s result fits with this pattern.
3) In Georgia, the Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, and Voting System Manager are all Republicans and all declared they voted for Trump. If there were fraud, is there any doubt they would want to expose it? Does anyone think Brian Kemp likes the President tweeting about him?

Why can’t you, as a leading political and legal analyst, acknowledge and explain these facts, and maybe even suggest that at this point the President is acting like a “sore loser?” At least with respect to Georgia. The Lieutenant Governor of Georgia said pretty much those words today: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/12/06/geoff-duncan-georgia-trump-election-tapper-sotu-sot-vpx.cnn

I hope my suggesting one might think about the President’s current behavior as akin to that of a “sore loser” didn’t offend you, nor the beginning of my message which noted “gotta love a classy candidate that refuses to lose with dignity…” Both of those quotes are from Legal Insurrection (11/16/18 and 1/29/19), in describing Stacy Abrams’ refusal to concede her loss to Brian Kemp two years ago. It was a close election, and she lost. She did finally concede ten days after the election, without demanding one recount, let alone three.

Do as I say, not as I do. Et tu, Professor?

    Sanddog in reply to WAJfan. | December 6, 2020 at 4:34 pm

    I’ve been watching Georgia elections for decades. I voted in Hall, Cobb and Fulton counties. The very idea that Fulton county could run a clean election is laughable. If you think the Georgia Secretary of State has a clue about what actually happens on the ground in any county, you’re delusional. Our voting system depends on trusting government employees to do the right thing, even when no one is watching. Until we remove “trust” from the equation and have a system with complete transparency, robust oversight and legal accountability for those who can’t seem to bring themselves to follow the rules, we’re never going to have free and fair elections.

    Mac45 in reply to WAJfan. | December 6, 2020 at 4:45 pm

    Let us examine the evidence for election fraud in Georgia, shall we?

    1) we have video evidence of all REP witnesses being sent home, following fictitious water main break.

    2) During this period of time, when the REP observers were excluded, we have further video evidence showing election workers removing four large wheeled suitcases from under a covered table, removing large white sheets of paper from them [similar in size and shape to official ballot forms], placing these sheets of paper on desks next to counting machines, then loading these sheets of paper into vote counting machines and running them through the machines, sometimes more than once.

    3) During this period of time, the machines registered a significant, actually unbelievable, spike in votes attributed to Joe Biden.

    So, while not absolute proof of vote fraud, it is just about as conclusive as one can get with circumstantial evidence. And, it is certainly far more than should be necessary to suspend any certification of the vote or to reverse an exiting certification. And, that a major Democrat controlled county in GA.

    This scenario, without the video evidence, played out in at least 4 more similar counties in PA, MI and WI. In addition, there were unlawful exclusion of counting monitors in PA, MI and WI.

    So, sore loser? Really? Why concede anything when there is a reasonable doubt as to the validity of the outcome of the election? Oh, yeah. Because by contesting what appeared to be fraud in the election, to begin with, Trump continues to expose more and more of it? The situation becomes worse and worse for Biden and his supporters, not for Trump and his.If Trump were ever to get a neutral hearing on the evidence collect so far, the certification process would screech to halt o fast tht the entire nation would suffer whiplash. But, that is not likely to happen.

    As to why the Republican Governor and SecState of GA do nothing to investigate the fraud and even to obstruct an investigation, is because there have not been two independent main political parties in this country for decades. They are all part of the Establishment. Trump is not a member of the Establishment and so is a target of just about every politician and bureaucrat in the country, not to mention the news media.

    Nice try to deflect, but we have a pretty good idea who the real sore losers are here.

    TX-rifraph in reply to WAJfan. | December 6, 2020 at 8:48 pm

    “Why is it so hard/horrible to say that President Trump lost a close election in Georgia?”

    Because he did not lose the election.

Mac45,

I enjoyed reading your post. Most of the circumstantial “evidence” you cite has been debunked (https://www.11alive.com/article/news/politics/elections/fact-checking-claims-about-fulton-countys-election/85-89c150d2-c917-44b6-b7ab-a29dd9dcb888), but that is not the underlying issue. The President (and people like you) believe the election was rigged, so my question is: who did the rigging?

As you know (and I mentioned above), every senior state official in Georgia, and about 60 percent of both the Georgia State Senate and House of Representatives are Republicans.

The Georgia government leadership, and their election/Voting administrators, all viewed the same video clips and had access to the same affidavits that you are citing. Had any one of them stepped forward to assert the “massive election fraud in Georgia” now being claimed by President, it would have blown this issue wide open. When I suggested their silence was reflective of no fraud, your response is that they are silent because they are all members of the Establishment.

I am not sure what you think it means to be in the Establishment. None of the top State elected officials went to Ivy League colleges, and in one case, Gabriel Sterling (the top Voting administrator) lost friends for being too pro-Trump (https://www.reporternewspapers.net/2020/12/02/now-famous-for-rebuking-trump-an-election-official-is-a-familiar-sandy-springs-figure/).

So these lifelong Republicans’ silence (actually, they filed a brief against the latest case alleging fraud in Georgia’s election) in the face of all of the information, videos and affidavits that are in the public domain, can only suggest one of two outcomes: (1) either they have scrupulously concluded that there was no meaningful fraud in the Georgia election, or (2) that their stance makes them complicit co-conspirators to rigging the election.

Since the President, you, and many others have continued to insist there must be fraud in the Georgia election, then we now know who rigged it: the entirety of the Republican statewide elected officials (Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State) are, by complicity, the riggers. Not to mention Gabriel Sterling, who should know more than anyone about such fraud.

Thank you for making it clear that it is more important for these people to keep their membership in the Establishment than to back fraud allegations in the recent Georgia election. By your logic, because of that, they have decided they would rather have Biden/Harris and their entourage of AOC/Bernie/the Squad/Schumer/Pelosi leading the Executive Branch instead of Trump/Pence and their senior people.

I hadn’t figured this out because I didn’t understand how important being part of the Establishment is to certain people.

And somewhere, in his grave, Hugo Chavez is smiling.

    Mac45 in reply to WAJfan. | December 7, 2020 at 12:45 pm

    Lets debunk your debunking, shall we?

    Just prior to 2300 hrs on election night, the Fulton County vote tabulation center was cleared of all but about 4-6 employees and all of the REP monitors. While so cleared, these employees removed four large ballot containers from under a table and began running the contents through tabulators. From the video, it appears that they ran the same papers through the tabulators more than once. This continued for approximately three hours. Tabulating without the monitors present is a violation of Georgia election laws as well as departmental operating procedures. Now, the question is, what ballots were run through the tabulators during that period and why were they run through more than once? There are several possibilities, some reasonable and benign and some not. The problem is, until these questions are answered, satisfactorily, none may be discounted. And that includes deliberate fraudulent activity. What the Trump campaign is asking for is time to answer these questions.

    Now, the “water main break” came into play, because the elections officials gave that as the reason why the tabulation center was cleared. As it turns out, and in this your debunking source is correct, the “leak” occurred the previous night and was so insignificant that a work order for its correction was never generated. So, the next question is why was the tabulation center cleared on election night?

    Now, the Establishment. Let’s define that term, shall we? The Establishment is a loose group of people sharing common personal goals, in positions of power, who depend upon their positions to provide them with an ongoing source of money and prestige. In other words, members of this group have a good thing going and do not want to see it disrupted. They also tend to see themselves as elites and abhor populism and the populace. It is a class thing to which politics are merely an adjunct to achieving the members’ goals. Other than the desire to maintain power and wealth, the Establishment has many factions who also have divergent ideas on how to achieve those goals. And, in politics, NO politician lasts long in that field, if he threatens, or appears to threaten, the basic aims of the Establishment.

    You are trying to argue that the traditional notion of partisan politics still exists, with regard to the preeminent major political parties in the US. In fact, it does not and has not since the 1980s. What we have today is a political system structured around class, with the two main actors being the status quo loving Establishment and the populist movement within the populace. Trump could not have been elected under a partisan political party scheme. And, in fact, he was never expected to be nominated, let alone elected. But, the populist movement elected him. This terrified the Establishment. It was a direct threat to their power and position. So, the Establishment, including members of both major parties, openly attacked Trump for four years. Not because he was a personal threat, but because of the populist threat which he represented.

    Now, you have grasped the essence of the problem within our political leadership. They will do what they have to do to protect THEIR wealth and positions. The wealthy can survive lockdowns [especially if they ignore them] which cripple the rest of the populace. In the last year, where the Global economy has be largely shut down, who made money, lot of money? Investors. How is that possible and who comprises the investor class? And, why is the trend in politics for politicians to be elected to office with little or no significant wealth become millionaires within a four or five years? Where do you think that wealth comes from, safeguarding the public’s welfare?

    Yes, as we have seen over the last four years, our career elected officials care nothing for the people they allegedly serve. They lie to get elected. They lie throughout their term off office. They they lie in their memoirs. And still, they get rich, in office. See anything which might suggest that they should not be trusted out of sight of their constituents?

    So, follow the evidence. Ask thee questions and demand answers. If th facts show that no fraud occurred, fine. That settles that. If it hows that fraud did occur, well that opens up a couple more cans of worms. But, demanding that people simply stick their heads in the sand and ignore the situation is not a good idea.

I fear the Professor is right, we are out of time. Time for working through this was going to be extremely short, critically so, and everyone knew it. It was important for plaintiffs to move quickly and they did. State legislatures and their respective committees knew time was short and had only to slow roll proceedings, invoke bureaucratic procedures, deliberations, and other obfuscations to run out the clock and in many, enough, cases did and are doing so. Courts, to the extent necessary, could simply ‘rule’ to clog up and slow down the process, and they have. These institutions will claim profound, sincere desires to be thorough, work through the problem, in accordance with the law but none, not one, will expedite the process. Democrats and the media remain stonily silent about the mere prospect of cheating, never mind expressing interest, concern, or outrage at any of the allegations. They aren’t the solution to the problem, they are part of it. Keep fighting, even after Slow Joe and the Ho are sworn in. Expose as much of this travesty as is humanly possible. We must.

Close The Fed | December 7, 2020 at 8:09 am

I think there was a bit of miscalculation on the part of Trump’s and the GOP‘s legal teams. They tried to delay certification for example in Georgia, but many election contests cannot be filed in Georgia until certification.

So they basically made the process longer than it needed to be. I understand the psychological aversion to permitting certification, but from a legal standpoint I believe they made a strategic error.

PDJT still has a couple of significant actions left available if SCOTUS does not fulfill their sworn duty

regardless of whether ” admissible ” or not, there is ample evidence(from first-person, video, sworn statements, anectdotal, etc.) to support the existence of deliberate fraud in this election–the purpose of that fraud is to subvert the lawful selection of our government–isn’t that a workable definition of a coup?

if SCOTUS fails in their duty, then there are only a couple of ” lawful ” steps remaining to prevent a takeover

PDJT has the constitutional authority to act and should have our full support(as well as that of millions of americans not yet born) if he is compelled to do so

I agree, #Resist. But how we #Resist must be very different going forward. I marched in tea party demonstrations in 2009. But this time it is very different. Back then we assumed that our actions and campaigning could lead to winning elections. And in fact the House flipped in 2010. But now we can’t assume election results are accurate. The leftists are stealing this one in plain sight, and once they have consolidated enough power they will make sure they never lose power again.

Mac45,

Thanks for continuing to school me. I am a little slow on the uptake sometimes, but I appreciate your patience.

You didn’t directly address the question I posed in my prior post, so let me ask it more pointedly: despite the unresolved concerns about election fraud in Georgia that you cite above, given that the secretary of state of Georgia certified the election yesterday, without any objection (and presumably support) from the other senior elected officials and voting administration officials in the state of Georgia (all of whom are Republicans), in your eyes does this make those gentlemen (lifelong Republicans) complicit in rigging the election against Trump, and prove that they actually would rather have Biden and Harris as their national leaders instead of Trump and Pence, for whatever the reason may be?

    Martin_Knight in reply to WAJfan. | December 8, 2020 at 9:19 am

    Let me take a stab at it.

    The fact that Georgia’s top elected officials at the state level are Republicans does not mean that every county – the level at which elections are administered – is controlled by Republicans.

    Fulton County, for example, is thoroughly dominated and controlled by Democrats.

    It also doesn’t mean every member of staff in offices like that of the Secretary of State is a Republican.

    Raffensberger appears to be an incompetent c who acceded to every demand by the GA Democrat Party to loosen all ballot integrity measures and now is desperately trying to save face.

    The reality is that without the SoS, no one has any way of ascertaining what really went on in Fulton, Gwinnett, DeKalb, etc. and is simply trying to avoid the crosshairs of a Press Corps that will do everything to destroy anyone who stands in Kamala Harris’ path to the Presidency.

Thanks, Martin. Just one more question: is it possible that Biden actually got more votes than Trump and actually won in the State of Georgia?

Martin_Knight | December 8, 2020 at 1:00 pm

Yes – it’s possible he legitimately won the state of Georgia.

It’s also just as likely and in fact, more likely, that he didn’t win more votes, especially given what happened in counties under the control of Democrats in Georgia.

I see no reason why we should ignore the more likely possibility for the lesser.

And screaming “debunked!” at sworn legally actionable statements without an attempt at investigating is not a convincing argument.

If I screamed, I apologize. That wasn’t my intention.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend