Objecting to Electors Will Allow Trump to Air Vote Fraud Allegations

[Trump Gurl]

Representatives, Senators Objecting to Electors Will Allow Trump, GOP to Air Vote Fraud Allegations

Representatives, Senators Objecting to Electors Will Allow Trump, GOP to Air Vote Fraud Allegations

Representatives and senators' objections to Electoral College votes on Wednesday will allow Republicans to air allegations of vote fraud.

www.breitbart.com

Representatives and senators are expected to object to Electoral College votes on Wednesday, which will set off a procedure allowing Republicans to air allegations of vote fraud.​

​

A growing list of Republicans in the House say they will object to electors from several states when the Congress convenes on January 6, U.S. Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) detailed on Wednesday.​

​

Ballotpedia reported that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 requires at least one representative and one senator to object to a state’s electors for it to be registered:​

​

Once a House member and Senator submit an objection, the two chambers of Congress separate to debate for two hours and to vote on whether to continue counting the votes in light of the objection. Both chambers must vote by a simple majority to concur with the objection for it to stand, otherwise the objection fails.​

Good. We can never let the Dems forget that THEY STOLE THE ELECTION

 

[Gary K]

Representatives, Senators Objecting to Electors Will Allow Trump, GOP to Air Vote Fraud Allegations

Representatives, Senators Objecting to Electors Will Allow Trump, GOP to Air Vote Fraud Allegations

Representatives and senators' objections to Electoral College votes on Wednesday will allow Republicans to air allegations of vote fraud.

www.breitbart.com

Representatives and senators are expected to object to Electoral College votes on Wednesday, which will set off a procedure allowing Republicans to air allegations of vote fraud.​

​

A growing list of Republicans in the House say they will object to electors from several states when the Congress convenes on January 6, U.S. Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) detailed on Wednesday.​

​

Ballotpedia reported that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 requires at least one representative and one senator to object to a state’s electors for it to be registered:​

​

Once a House member and Senator submit an objection, the two chambers of Congress separate to debate for two hours and to vote on whether to continue counting the votes in light of the objection. Both chambers must vote by a simple majority to concur with the objection for it to stand, otherwise the objection fails.​

Good. We can never let the Dems forget that THEY STOLE THE ELECTION

I hope you're correct. But the depth of the corruption in the swamp is worrying. Take a look at how many RINOs have come out and told Trump to concede. Do you really think they will vote differently in this circumstance than in the circumstances in which they've told Trump to concede? Do you really think that "China" Mitch will change his tune? How about "Mr. Corruption" Romney? How about all the rest of the RINOs. Are they really honest? I don't think so as decades of uniparty behavior on their part tells a completely different story.

I hope differently but their history of behavior says what their attitude is towards being honorable and honest.

 

[ok doser]

Enough of the country doesn't care. The main stream media doesn't care. You could provide incontrovertable proof and Congress would not act on it.

 

[Gary K]

Enough of the country doesn't care. The main stream media doesn't care. You could provide incontrovertable proof and Congress would not act on it.

I wouldn't say the MSM doesn't care. They care passionately about running Trump out of office by fair means or foul. I don't think there is a one of them that is neutral on Trump. They are all anti-Trump and don't care how dishonest they have to be to get rid of him.

 

[chair]

Enough of the country doesn't care. The main stream media doesn't care. You could provide incontrovertable proof and Congress would not act on it.

You could. If there was any....

 

[exminister]

Even Mike Pence knows Trump lost the election.

TYLER, Texas (KLTV) - Lawyers for Vice President Mike Pence have asked a federal judge to reject the lawsuit filed against Pence by U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tyler).
The response, which District Judge Jeremy Kernodle requested be submitted no later than 5 p.m. today, states the lawsuit is essentially meaningless, as it is leveled against the wrong party while also conjuring hypothetical situations which cannot be addressed in court. More specifically, the response states that Gohmert and his fellow plaintiffs should instead have focused their suit on the House of Representatives and the Senate.
“The Vice President—the only defendant in this case—is ironically the very person whose power they seek to promote. The Senate and the House, not the Vice President, have legal interests that are sufficiently adverse to plaintiffs to ground a case or controversy under Article III,” the response states.
Pence’s counsel has specifically requested that injunctive relief then be denied.

“Plaintiffs also have not established that they are entitled to the extraordinary relief of an injunction against the Vice President,” the response states. “Plaintiffs have made no allegation that the Vice President would refuse to respect a declaratory judgment issued against him. The extraordinary remedy of an injunction is accordingly unnecessary and inappropriate in this case.”
Earlier this week it was reported that Gohmert had filed suit against Pence in an effort to prevent him from counting the Electoral College votes and formally declaring President-elect Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 election.
However, even with the apparent rejection of this suit by Pence, the stated intent by Gohmert and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) to object to the Jan. 6 certification of electoral votes means there will be at least a short delay in formalizing President-elect Biden’s win. Following objections in the House and Senate, a floor debate will be held followed by a vote in each chamber.

VP Pence asks court to reject Gohmert lawsuit

Lawyers for Vice President Mike Pence have filed documents asking the court to deny an effort by US Rep. Louie Gohmert and others to empower Pence to deny electors in the presidential election.

www.ktre.com

 

[Trump Gurl]

Even Mike Pence knows Trump lost the election.

Trump won the election.

It is a fact that Democrats stole the election. A FACT.

 

[chair]

Trump won the election.

It is a fact that Democrats stole the election. A FACT.

No- it's nonsense. a fantasy. a delusion. The courts know that.
What exactly do you want to happen? 'Somebody with Power' will throw out millions of votes because of a bunch of unproven allegations? And then that 'Somebody with Power' will decide who runs the USA?

Drink much KoolAid?

 

[Trump Gurl]

No- it's nonsense

Yes, it is a fact CHAIR. The evidence of fraud is overwhelming. Only a complete idiot with a wanton desire to believe lies can deny it.

 

[expos4ever]

Trump won the election.

It is a fact that Democrats stole the election. A FACT.

How do you explain the fact that when these charges of election fraud are raised in a court - many presided over by Republican judges - they are thrown, often with a smackdown like this one:

This claim, like Frankenstein’s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together… This Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more

I am really curious to read your explanation of why no court has found any evidence of election fraud (other than the usual extremely isolated events that always happen and have no effect on the ultimate result).

Trump is playing twits like you like a fiddle.

 

[Trump Gurl]

How do you explain the fact that when these charges of election fraud are raised in a court - many presided over by Republican judges - they are thrown . . . .

Cowardice and corruption, that is how. Two things you should be intimately familiar with.

 

[expos4ever]

Cowardice and corruption, that is how. Two things you should be intimately familiar with.

Rrrrrright. In other words, more ridiculous conspiracy-theory thinking. All these Republican judges are in on the fix, I assume?

Trump's lawyers are not dumb. It is one thing to lie to 60 or 70 million dull-witted Americans. But they know that if they go into a court of law and lie, the consequences to their reputations will be severe. Hence we get exchanges like this one:

“In your petition, which is right before me — and I read it several times — you don’t claim that any electors or the Board of the County were guilty of fraud, correct?” asked the judge. “That’s correct?”

“Your Honor, accusing people of fraud is a pretty big step,” Goldstein replied. “And it is rare that I call somebody a liar, and I am not calling the Board of the DNC or anybody else involved in this a liar. Everybody is coming to this with good faith. The DNC is coming with good faith. We’re all just trying to get an election done. We think these were a mistake, but we think they are a fatal mistake, and these ballots ought not be counted.”

“I understand,” he told Goldstein. “I am asking you a specific question, and I am looking for a specific answer. Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?”

“To my knowledge at present, no,” Goldstein said.

“Are you claiming that there is any undue or improper influence upon the elector with respect to these 592 ballots,” queried the judge.

“To my knowledge at present, no,” was Goldstein’s reply.

 

[Trump Gurl]

Rrrrrright. In other words, more ridiculous conspiracy-theory thinking. . . .

Conspiracy - blah blah blah - Conspiracy - blah blah blah

That's all your dopey ilk knows how to respond. Everything is either racist or a conspiracy theory.

Need I remind you that for 4 years the idiots and liars on your side tried to promote the biggest conspiracy theory ever, that Trump colluded with Russians? Now THAT was a demented conspiracy theory.

And besides Mr. Ivy League Moron Who Cannot Read, I never said a word about conspiracy. I said "Cowardice and corruption".

Learn how to read, and then get back to me you socialist dupe.

 

[Trump Gurl]

 

[JudgeRightly]

How do you explain the fact that when these charges of election fraud are raised in a court - many presided over by Republican judges - they are thrown,

The reason is simple.

The Republican judges care more about their image than they do in upholding the constitution.

 

[Trump Gurl]

The reason is simple.

The Republican judges care more about their image than they do in upholding the constitution.

Correct.

And we could call that Corruption, as I did.

I wonder if expos4ever thinks that OJ Simpson is innocent just because a corrupt jury said he was.

 

[expos4ever]

The reason is simple.

The Republican judges care more about their image than they do in upholding the constitution.

This is not a very convincing explanation. How would their image benefit specifically from unfairly rejecting the arguments of Trump's lawyers? I could equally well set forth the bald unsupported claim that their image would benefit from accepting the Trump arguments.

In short, you are not offering an explanation.

 

[expos4ever]

I wonder if expos4ever thinks that OJ Simpson is innocent just because a corrupt jury said he was.

What, precisely, is your logic here? It appears to be this:

1. OJ was obviously guilty, yet was acquitted.
2. Therefore, dozens of judges, 20 years later, are committing a similar miscarriage of justice.

Is this really the position you wish to defend? If not, please explain precisely what your argument is for the "corruption" of these judges that have roundly rejected the Trump arguments.

 

[Trump Gurl]

What, precisely, is your logic here?

You seem to think that only conspiracy nuts can possibly think that courts and judges are corrupt, so I assume that you accept all court decisions as if they are Holy Writ.

So, I wonder if you think that OJ Simpson is innocent just because a court said he was?

 

[JudgeRightly]

This is not a very convincing explanation.

Truth doesn't always convince people.

And people will resist truth especially if it means they advance their careers.

How would their image benefit specifically from unfairly rejecting the arguments of Trump's lawyers?

They end up not looking like a zealot.

When a person is ok with killing children, it proves they have no commitment to anyone but themselves.

A republican judge who ignores the slaughter of 60 million innocent people might not be too concerned about election fraud.

I could equally well set forth the bald unsupported claim that their image would benefit from accepting the Trump arguments.

In short, you are not offering an explanation.

To quote a friend of mine:

"Most of our politicians, (judges included) are firmly ensconced in the darkest pitch of the autistic spectrum, (the concept of autism I just discovered being etymologically rooted in a fantastic obsession with oneself)."