Mid December when EC meets. Then House would accept the vote soon afterwards.
He (Trump) doesn’t have a lot of time, that’s for sure.
MeanMrMustard
JoinedPosts by MeanMrMustard
-
-
-
-
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Not to mention, as I noted, earlier, Trump needs 3+ states to overturn their election results. 3+ states = 3+ SC cases.
Not really. If the validity of the elections is thrown into doubt to the extent that they can’t certify, and the electors can’t vote, then neither candidate gets to 270.
Then it goes to the House for a vote by state delegation. Probably not going to happen. But he doesn’t need the states to reverse.
-
-
-
MeanMrMustard
When the attorneys for Trump are pressed, and the choice is "lie before a judge to appease my client" and "retain my law license", well, option B wins every time.
Why do you think they are lying? They are gathering hundreds of affidavits. How is that lying?
30+ court cases so far. Maybe a couple dozen invalid votes found. No evidence of even hundreds, let alone thousands, of "fraudulent" ballots.
There are law suits being filed by all sorts of groups. Trump’s team filed 3. None have been thrown out. The one they dropped because they didn’t need it anymore - MI didn’t certify. They basically won there.
But let’s go back to the claim there is “no evidence”. Gathering hundreds of affidavits constitutes evidence, and would be considered such in court. The statistical anomalies constitute evidence as well. They claim documentation of some districts voting 150%, 200%, 300%. When you have 10 times the mail-in ballots, but 1/10th the rejection rate, it constitutes “evidence” of anomalies. Some of the sworn affidavits assert thousands of loose ballots arriving in a van, and ushered into the counting center. Thousands. When Republican poll watchers were kicked out, and votes processed through (as Biden took the lead) that legally could invalidate those votes. Those are hundreds of thousands of votes. All that constitutes “evidence”.
Let me repeat that for the guys in the back. NO EVIDENCE.
Yes, there is. Here is an interesting exercise: what would you consider “evidence”?
Guys, guys, guys....it's over. If there were evidence of fraud it would have been presented by now.
As stated - some has been. Sydney Powell made some incredible statements about the Dominion voting system. She claims that she doesn’t want to taint the results of the court process, or tip her hand before the trial. Yeah, that kinda sucks because if it were me, and I had evidence of any kind, of those claims, I would get the public involved first. But ultimately this has to be played out. It very well may end up with a Biden presidency. Actually, I would say 90/10 for Biden at this point.
-
-
-
MeanMrMustard
If the electoral college can’t certify, and the court can’t resolve it because they don’t know how to remedy fraud, constitutionally, it goes to the House for a majority vote, but it’s by state delegation. That is, each state gets one vote. If, for whatever reason, the House can’t come to a decision and vote by January 20, then I believe the speaker of the new House session is sworn in - which in this case would be Pelosi.
Also, if the electoral college meets and votes and someone gets to 270, then the House can either choose to accept it, or it can be contested there. And from there it can refuse to certify and hold a vote.
My opinion, though, is that if the electoral college can come to a decision, then the House will certify it and move forward. The sum of all fears (for everyone) would be a Pelosi presidency.
I think this is the procedure - but I could be wrong.
-
-
-
-
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@Funky:
Do you follow any of the law commentators on YouTube? They usually cover it live since courts aren’t having anyone appear in person - it’s all virtual.
-
53
Politics and Hope
by lriddle80 inso there are a lot of atheists on here.
my question: where does your hope come from?
that the right people will be put in political positions and will eventually form a utopian society that will meet all needs and we will have equality for all?.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
By then everyone posting on here will be dead, and so will their children, and probably their grandchildren. So what does it even matter?
Not me. I have the hope of everlasting life, remember?!
#HaHaHaHaStayinAlive
-
-
-
MeanMrMustard
It's not true Hillary was the first to promote that, during the primary.
https://www.businessinsider.com/did-hillary-clinton-start-the-birther-movement-2016-9
True. I was not precise enough. It was Hillary’s campaign. Whether it started with Blumenthal, or her campaign manager, not sure.
The point is that it didn’t start with Trump. But he picked it up. Not that it’s a bad question to ask.
-
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Trump was also behind the Birther movement and said Obama wasn't a U.S. citizen
Hillary was the first to promote that, during the primary.
-
52
Collapse of JW Org - Possibly on the Horizon?
by JWTom inthis topics get a great deal of discussion here.
what i find interesting is even some of my pimi family is embracing the reality that all is not well with jw.org and that many current jws are just going through the motions due to not having a good way out of the org.
wondering what could realistically lead to the collapse of jw.org in the not distant future?
-
-
MeanMrMustard
The WT won’t collapse. It will shrink over time. Money doesn’t matter as long as there are people that actually believe the ideology. As long as there are people invested in it, it will be around.
The only way stuff like this honestly goes away is to slowly convince those in the religion, and those who would become members, that it is untrue.
