I was watching the hearing. One of the lawyers for the defense said somethings about the case being moot because there was no procedure in place for a fraudulent election? Did I hear right?
I didn’t listen, but that is definitely an argument they’ll make: even if they prove all the fraud in the world, the constitution has no clause concerning a do over, nor is there any remedy about what to do if there is fraud. The constitution has a very strict procedure concerning when the election occurs and when the president is inaugurated. If that’s the case, I can only hope the military will suspend the constitution for as long as it takes to fix the situation.
I was watching the hearing. One of the lawyers for the defense said somethings about the case being moot because there was no procedure in place for a fraudulent election? Did I hear right?
I didn’t listen, but that is definitely an argument they’ll make: even if they prove all the fraud in the world, the constitution has no clause concerning a do over, nor is there any remedy about what to do if there is fraud. The constitution has a very strict procedure concerning when the election occurs and when the president is inaugurated. If that’s the case, I can only hope the military will suspend the constitution for as long as it takes to fix the situation.
So their new argument is so what if we cheated there’s no laws against fraud of this magnitude?
MIL removes illegitimate hostile enemy forces. It really is that simple.
Any way the rest of us can view or read this?
But there is procedure in place for treason.