Ignore that. Is a battle cry, not case law. Don't believe me? Look that case up and see if SCOTUS did anything about alleged fraud. Answer: nope...threw the case out. No court heard the fraud claim from that case. The quote people keep throwing around is actually quoted in the case from an early 1700s legal treatise. It isn't even the words of the court.
Trump is signalling that the conditions are now ripe to introduce this topic - a new election.
There is a process that takes place when an idea moves from fringe into mainstream. Level of chatter, discussion. The very idea of a NEW ELECTION is something some folks have entertained, but there has been no real, mainstream discussion of the topic.
DJT putting this idea out there now is the sign - it seems to me - that things are now ready to build the awareness of the idea in the wider population.
They are in a position of absolutely having to STOP Trump.
They might hate having Brandon where he is right now, but the hate the possibility of DJT even getting a second run at the stolen election far, far more. They will oppose anything they perceive as adding to or enhancing DJT's position, including a campaign that would mobilize the MAGA 'extremists' even more and also essentially admit that Biden only got in because they cheated. Big time.
And if they admit Biden got in because they cheated, they essentially admit that they've been cheating all these years.
Don't see that happening, unless....
"Yes, we cheated and the election was stolen, but it's all Donald Trump's fault anyway". /s
At no time ever have we had an election 2 years into a term for something that happened during the last election for that office. So no, there is no precedent.
At no time in history has a federal law enforcement agency raided a former presidents home either. Now there is precedent so Bush, Clinton, 0bama beware.
I didnt specify any sort of time period, you did. Yes precedent exists, where elections have been overturned after the fact, even after the "victor" serves some period of time in the office they held. 2 years, perhaps not. But there is a reason why election records are required to be held for a minimum of 22 months after the fact. If what is happening in present day does not fall into those reasons then why the requirement?
"Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members"
Plainly, they decide whether that particular congressional election was valid. Not anyone else.
Impeachment is the only method of removing a sitting president. Otherwise, they serve 4 years, and there are no other means to remove them.
If election of President/Vice President were a statutory creation and not Constitutionally created, a case could be made under Article III that a court could use equitable powers to remedy this. But because it is not a creature arising from statute, there is no lawful way for any court to intervene here. Congress is where the buck stops.
So, if the fraud fooled our congress people, there is no recourse? Even if a foreign power infiltrated our ranks and cheated from the inside? No recourse. Hmm,
There's no mechanism in the Constitution for this. We don't have to like it, but wishing there was one doesn't write one in. Nor does a need manifest itself as an actuality.
But you are mistaken that fraud "fooled" congress. They knew damn good and well. Every single one of them was well aware. Many were in on it. The Constitution wasn't built to protect us from falling asleep and allowing an infiltration takeover by a corrupt cabal. It is precisely our own apathy that has allowed this to occur. This didn't occur overnight. It happened right under our own noses over decades.
We cannot realistically expect that the Constitution would contain provisions about how things should be handled in the event it had been violated. That is when the people sworn to uphold the Constitution defend it based on a higher law. ?
Typically when governments decay to the point where this type of corruption has taken over, that country's civil society is code blue. They either revolt, as we did from the British. Or they become subject to tyrannical rule, like we've seen in places like the Soviet Union, Mao's China, & Kim il Sung's Best Korea.
I have been actively seeking examples of military coups that turned out better than what they replaced. They are few and far between. Definitely the exception, and not the norm. Arguably, the Soviet "coup" in 1991 was an example. Even though the coup plotters were not in favor of the decentralization of the state. It failed. But that failure resulted in the failure of the USSR. Hard to argue that was a bad thing. Except that the military was going to preserve communism there; something that would have likely resulted in another Stalin-esque purge.
Egypt's coup of the muslim brotherhood might be a more modern example. I am not sure. I don't know enough about what has occurred there lately, and whether or not the generals are mostly running the place. But Egypt hasn't been in the news for being dysfunctional that I'm aware of.
All I know is that odds of seeing tanks and bradleys and apc's in our streets giving us relief from these people are not very good. And by the time they deploy, it will be too late to stop them. So if this ends up happening, its going to be a real shitty mess. Given that these same people we are hoping save us from this have also been watching this in real time for decades without acting, that doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy...
Office matters. That's why I said it. "Elected office" is not one size fits all. Your county commissioner is not the same as your House representative. Your state senator is not the same as your US senator. The way you are trying to twist this, you could apply the same logic to any act being somehow of meaningful precedential value. The arrest of one pedo is "precedent" to arrest cabal pedos... a complete non sequitur when corruption is what shields them from prosecution.
People can petition the AG to institute Quo Warranto proceedings to remove unlawful office holders. If the AG refuses, people can file a request in DC district court to have any duly licensed attorney appointed to represent the United States before the court in this matter. Except the House/Senate/President/Vice President are exempt from this statute, because they exist as explicitly created by the Constitution. Which has its own framework for office qualifications & the process by which they assume office. None of which involve judges/courts/SCOTUS.
The legality of it matters, and the courts are the arbiters of the law. AG's are weak, as are most legislators. Fraudulent elections, are not constitutionally legal, regardless of the legal framework or precedent, or temporary allowance of such. They are in no way legal, as they alienate others from their constitutional right to representation. Courts at the federal court level, at the state court level and at the county level are all responsible for hearing cases brought forth by interested parties at the jurisdiction level appropriate level of government in which the fraud was perpetrated (County, state, federal).
You speak only in platitudes and cliches. At no point do you address anything I said. It is nothing more than "this is wrong, thus, someone can lawfully fix it." Simply not true. That isn't how it works.
First, you have no constitutional right to vote for president/vice president. The state legislatures could appoint electors directly without your input, and historically this has happened. Second, each house is responsible for judging the elections of their own members. If they want to act lawless and allow a fraudulently elected rep to serve their term, they act lawless. No judge can usurp that determination for them.
As I said before, you cannot bring suit to remove any federal office holder from unlawfully holding office anywhere but the DC circuit. And House/Senate/Pres/VP are exempt from this. Want to remove a sitting president? Impeach him. Otherwise, he serves the 4 year term. Want to remove a senator/congressman? Convince 2/3rds of that body to expel them. Otherwise, they serve their 6/2 year terms. State officials would vary based on the particular state's constitution.
The legality of it matters, and the courts are the arbiters of the law.
They already weighed in on this over the centuries. The answer is no, they can't do this no matter how mad you are about it, and no matter how badly you want them to.
There was rumor the SC overturned the election just before vacation and it would be revealed upon their return. So it is possible this is all lining up for the reveal
He has to help the midterms. The only way the election can get revoked is by the States. The only way we can have fair elections is because the State Legislatures demand it via fixing the election laws.
Trump does not expect this to happen because of the FBI/Laptop story. His tactic is to get the public talking about both the laptop and a new election for when more fraud evidence is revealed.
Im not sure, but I know in the case of a totally illegitimate election, you would essentially have no elected chain of command, since everyone elected would be illegitimate. In such a scenario the military takes over control and chain of command protocols are activated to ensure continuity of government. I think FEMA steps in and some other organizations, I dont remember all the details, but the military is in control under such a scenario.
At some point the military would then organize and run a new election using their own personnel and infrastructure to reinstate an elected government.
Well, anything is possible I suppose - but, this is the definition of "unprecedented"... "Fraud vitiates everything", sure, but, what does that mean if fraud is openly proven? There has never been a re-election for POTUS based on voter fraud before. The SCOTUS would be determining all new decisions/laws to make this a reality.
Unless there is some kind of Federal law that addresses the "What if..." scenario of needing to have a special election for POTUS in the case of election theft.
It all comes back to Congress. Because of the electoral college and Congress, there is no Constitutional basis at this point for SCOTUS to do anything. If they did, it would be as lawless as when Pence counted the known fraud states. I like the outcome, but isn't the entire point to be lawful? If that is the case, Congress is the only one who can remove those fraudsters. And they won't have the votes to do it until January; presuming they win enough seats. The 67 votes in the Senate seems to be insurmountable. Unless there are sleeper dems who will help. I somehow doubt they are there.
So, the law that covers what happens if there’s neither a POTUS or a VP specifically says that whoever ends up taking over acts as President til the end of the then-current term. There are some scenarios where someone could end up bumping someone else out, but there is no provision for calling a special election under any circumstances.
Interestingly, though, prior to the 1947 Succession Act, the previous ones, which were passed in 1792 and 1886, DID state that, if such a vacancy happened prior to the start of the last year of a presidential term, there WOULD be a special election for a new POTUS and VP, who would then start a new, four-year term after being elected. That provision was obviously never enacted, and the current law from 1947 specifically and clearly states there will NOT be a special election.
So, we’d have to revert to pre-1947 law and have both Biden and Harris out of commission for a special election to be called.
And it has to be before 2023…? I think?
You can call for help or a pizza but they still STOLE everything and THAT erases the word, “legal” and “illegal” for anything in retaliation. How else would it be handled? ZERO laws were written for this issue, there’s none to break. One thing was written for this issue, and that’s 2A. The rest of that second amendment was stopped there because it is not needed. Only a reason to USE the 2A. The constitution can’t hold your hand. Not meant to. Simply gives guidance and tools that say it’s all “legal”, so whoever says anything else, is against it and us. So, what law can anyone find to explain how to handle all of this? IT IS 2A - so why does anyone here think America has been tip toed around? Because it’ll be fighting fire with fire. Unlike anywhere else. So what are they using? Who cares now charge or sleep.
God -> People -> constitution -> laws -> traditions and precedence.
If we the people desire it, we can overthrow the constitution. It does not bind us; it binds the government. Those who served the government had to take an oath to support it, but we the people never did and never will.
If there was fraud, the election is null and void and THERE IS NO GOVERNMENT. There is only the people.
CTL+F to the term: " This government is acknowledged by all to be one of enumerated powers. The principle, that it can exercise only the powers granted to it, [is] now universally admitted."
And read from there .....
It is quite ...eh ....flabbergasting that the perversion was introduced with the Constitution, as this doc was created by Hamilton to make easier to tax and thus payback the revolutionary debt.
Whether it is legal or not, speech of this type gets more and more people talking, asking questions, observing the world around them, and going more and more down What If Lane. Works for me.
Allowmetoexplain, thank you so much for telling a knowledgeable truth. We need lots more like you, to help people like me grow. We all must learn the real truths, down to the base,of who we are. So god willing, we get to help in the new building of our new style of government. Work with our constitution, but a shitload less representatives, but people from our productive parts of a true economy. We could lift all boats. You know carpenters, farmers, heavy construction, bridges and stuff. Throw in educators , engineers, but only 90 days a year job . No retirement,and no more than 8 years served.
"Fraud vitiates everything."
SCOTUS: 98 U.S. 61-25 L.Ed. 93 - UNITED STATES v. THROCKMORTON.
Thanks, was looking for something like this.
Ignore that. Is a battle cry, not case law. Don't believe me? Look that case up and see if SCOTUS did anything about alleged fraud. Answer: nope...threw the case out. No court heard the fraud claim from that case. The quote people keep throwing around is actually quoted in the case from an early 1700s legal treatise. It isn't even the words of the court.
It shouldn't be ignored. It needs to be taken up from where it was left by the side of the road and hailed as a battle cry - as you suggest.
Because fraud in any deal poisons the whole deal.
Military is the only way
Yep, more than likely.
So let's git 'er done.
As a lawfag, I can tell you it’s unfortunately not that simple.
We need more lawfags here. And sciencefags.
Came here to say this….beat me too it
Me too.
We would need a big BOOM to kick things off in that direction.
I think this statement is it.
Trump is signalling that the conditions are now ripe to introduce this topic - a new election.
There is a process that takes place when an idea moves from fringe into mainstream. Level of chatter, discussion. The very idea of a NEW ELECTION is something some folks have entertained, but there has been no real, mainstream discussion of the topic.
DJT putting this idea out there now is the sign - it seems to me - that things are now ready to build the awareness of the idea in the wider population.
This fren reads the tea leaves
I imagine that dems would even be open to this if they could try to vote someone else in besides sleepy Joe.
Hmmm.... I don't think so, myself.
They are in a position of absolutely having to STOP Trump.
They might hate having Brandon where he is right now, but the hate the possibility of DJT even getting a second run at the stolen election far, far more. They will oppose anything they perceive as adding to or enhancing DJT's position, including a campaign that would mobilize the MAGA 'extremists' even more and also essentially admit that Biden only got in because they cheated. Big time.
And if they admit Biden got in because they cheated, they essentially admit that they've been cheating all these years.
Don't see that happening, unless....
"Yes, we cheated and the election was stolen, but it's all Donald Trump's fault anyway". /s
Immediately if not sooner. SHEESH. How long can it take? President Trump was beyond gracious to leave the Oval Office.
Precedant exists
At no time ever have we had an election 2 years into a term for something that happened during the last election for that office. So no, there is no precedent.
At no time in history has a federal law enforcement agency raided a former presidents home either. Now there is precedent so Bush, Clinton, 0bama beware.
I didnt specify any sort of time period, you did. Yes precedent exists, where elections have been overturned after the fact, even after the "victor" serves some period of time in the office they held. 2 years, perhaps not. But there is a reason why election records are required to be held for a minimum of 22 months after the fact. If what is happening in present day does not fall into those reasons then why the requirement?
Not of house/senate/president/vice president.
Article I § 5 cl. 1
"Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members"
Plainly, they decide whether that particular congressional election was valid. Not anyone else.
Impeachment is the only method of removing a sitting president. Otherwise, they serve 4 years, and there are no other means to remove them.
If election of President/Vice President were a statutory creation and not Constitutionally created, a case could be made under Article III that a court could use equitable powers to remedy this. But because it is not a creature arising from statute, there is no lawful way for any court to intervene here. Congress is where the buck stops.
So, if the fraud fooled our congress people, there is no recourse? Even if a foreign power infiltrated our ranks and cheated from the inside? No recourse. Hmm,
There's no mechanism in the Constitution for this. We don't have to like it, but wishing there was one doesn't write one in. Nor does a need manifest itself as an actuality.
But you are mistaken that fraud "fooled" congress. They knew damn good and well. Every single one of them was well aware. Many were in on it. The Constitution wasn't built to protect us from falling asleep and allowing an infiltration takeover by a corrupt cabal. It is precisely our own apathy that has allowed this to occur. This didn't occur overnight. It happened right under our own noses over decades.
We cannot realistically expect that the Constitution would contain provisions about how things should be handled in the event it had been violated. That is when the people sworn to uphold the Constitution defend it based on a higher law. ?
Typically when governments decay to the point where this type of corruption has taken over, that country's civil society is code blue. They either revolt, as we did from the British. Or they become subject to tyrannical rule, like we've seen in places like the Soviet Union, Mao's China, & Kim il Sung's Best Korea.
I have been actively seeking examples of military coups that turned out better than what they replaced. They are few and far between. Definitely the exception, and not the norm. Arguably, the Soviet "coup" in 1991 was an example. Even though the coup plotters were not in favor of the decentralization of the state. It failed. But that failure resulted in the failure of the USSR. Hard to argue that was a bad thing. Except that the military was going to preserve communism there; something that would have likely resulted in another Stalin-esque purge.
Egypt's coup of the muslim brotherhood might be a more modern example. I am not sure. I don't know enough about what has occurred there lately, and whether or not the generals are mostly running the place. But Egypt hasn't been in the news for being dysfunctional that I'm aware of.
All I know is that odds of seeing tanks and bradleys and apc's in our streets giving us relief from these people are not very good. And by the time they deploy, it will be too late to stop them. So if this ends up happening, its going to be a real shitty mess. Given that these same people we are hoping save us from this have also been watching this in real time for decades without acting, that doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy...
Again, I stated no specific office. You did.
Office matters. That's why I said it. "Elected office" is not one size fits all. Your county commissioner is not the same as your House representative. Your state senator is not the same as your US senator. The way you are trying to twist this, you could apply the same logic to any act being somehow of meaningful precedential value. The arrest of one pedo is "precedent" to arrest cabal pedos... a complete non sequitur when corruption is what shields them from prosecution.
People can petition the AG to institute Quo Warranto proceedings to remove unlawful office holders. If the AG refuses, people can file a request in DC district court to have any duly licensed attorney appointed to represent the United States before the court in this matter. Except the House/Senate/President/Vice President are exempt from this statute, because they exist as explicitly created by the Constitution. Which has its own framework for office qualifications & the process by which they assume office. None of which involve judges/courts/SCOTUS.
The mechanism in this instance would be mass revolt from the states.
This is, unfortunately, unlikely at this juncture.
The legality of it matters, and the courts are the arbiters of the law. AG's are weak, as are most legislators. Fraudulent elections, are not constitutionally legal, regardless of the legal framework or precedent, or temporary allowance of such. They are in no way legal, as they alienate others from their constitutional right to representation. Courts at the federal court level, at the state court level and at the county level are all responsible for hearing cases brought forth by interested parties at the jurisdiction level appropriate level of government in which the fraud was perpetrated (County, state, federal).
You speak only in platitudes and cliches. At no point do you address anything I said. It is nothing more than "this is wrong, thus, someone can lawfully fix it." Simply not true. That isn't how it works.
First, you have no constitutional right to vote for president/vice president. The state legislatures could appoint electors directly without your input, and historically this has happened. Second, each house is responsible for judging the elections of their own members. If they want to act lawless and allow a fraudulently elected rep to serve their term, they act lawless. No judge can usurp that determination for them.
As I said before, you cannot bring suit to remove any federal office holder from unlawfully holding office anywhere but the DC circuit. And House/Senate/Pres/VP are exempt from this. Want to remove a sitting president? Impeach him. Otherwise, he serves the 4 year term. Want to remove a senator/congressman? Convince 2/3rds of that body to expel them. Otherwise, they serve their 6/2 year terms. State officials would vary based on the particular state's constitution.
They already weighed in on this over the centuries. The answer is no, they can't do this no matter how mad you are about it, and no matter how badly you want them to.
There is no precedent, but we have no President…
u/#q4587
Rematch!
mulligan!
I think he is laying the groundwork for after the midterms. Should get interesting!
There was rumor the SC overturned the election just before vacation and it would be revealed upon their return. So it is possible this is all lining up for the reveal
That court does nothing in secret. I suppose it is possible they have an election case currently on the docket, but I could find no such case.
If this were happening their faggot leaker would have already leaked it
Not strictly true about not doing anything in secret, but the leaker would 100% leak it anyway.
I think so. That leak took the imminent blow of the news before Roe did come down.
If there was no leak I could see a Antifa comeback tour when the news hit.
I am not saying it is true was just rumored by several people.
He has to help the midterms. The only way the election can get revoked is by the States. The only way we can have fair elections is because the State Legislatures demand it via fixing the election laws.
If you stole the jewels from Tiffany’s, you gotta return them.
Wakey Wakey eggs and bakie
Trump does not expect this to happen because of the FBI/Laptop story. His tactic is to get the public talking about both the laptop and a new election for when more fraud evidence is revealed.
When the power is vested in the people you can. accomplish anything.
When in the course of human events...
I believe we are near the ending and all will soon come to light by what is happening now
Thank God... I don't know how much more of this movie my wallet can take lol
Im not sure, but I know in the case of a totally illegitimate election, you would essentially have no elected chain of command, since everyone elected would be illegitimate. In such a scenario the military takes over control and chain of command protocols are activated to ensure continuity of government. I think FEMA steps in and some other organizations, I dont remember all the details, but the military is in control under such a scenario.
At some point the military would then organize and run a new election using their own personnel and infrastructure to reinstate an elected government.
Military intervenes and new elections are held.
Well, anything is possible I suppose - but, this is the definition of "unprecedented"... "Fraud vitiates everything", sure, but, what does that mean if fraud is openly proven? There has never been a re-election for POTUS based on voter fraud before. The SCOTUS would be determining all new decisions/laws to make this a reality.
Unless there is some kind of Federal law that addresses the "What if..." scenario of needing to have a special election for POTUS in the case of election theft.
It all comes back to Congress. Because of the electoral college and Congress, there is no Constitutional basis at this point for SCOTUS to do anything. If they did, it would be as lawless as when Pence counted the known fraud states. I like the outcome, but isn't the entire point to be lawful? If that is the case, Congress is the only one who can remove those fraudsters. And they won't have the votes to do it until January; presuming they win enough seats. The 67 votes in the Senate seems to be insurmountable. Unless there are sleeper dems who will help. I somehow doubt they are there.
I like the first option better.
I found this on Quora:
So, we’d have to revert to pre-1947 law and have both Biden and Harris out of commission for a special election to be called. And it has to be before 2023…? I think?
You can call for help or a pizza but they still STOLE everything and THAT erases the word, “legal” and “illegal” for anything in retaliation. How else would it be handled? ZERO laws were written for this issue, there’s none to break. One thing was written for this issue, and that’s 2A. The rest of that second amendment was stopped there because it is not needed. Only a reason to USE the 2A. The constitution can’t hold your hand. Not meant to. Simply gives guidance and tools that say it’s all “legal”, so whoever says anything else, is against it and us. So, what law can anyone find to explain how to handle all of this? IT IS 2A - so why does anyone here think America has been tip toed around? Because it’ll be fighting fire with fire. Unlike anywhere else. So what are they using? Who cares now charge or sleep.
Law flows in the US as follows:
God -> People -> constitution -> laws -> traditions and precedence.
If we the people desire it, we can overthrow the constitution. It does not bind us; it binds the government. Those who served the government had to take an oath to support it, but we the people never did and never will.
If there was fraud, the election is null and void and THERE IS NO GOVERNMENT. There is only the people.
Technically you are correct. Though Justice Marshall in 1816 does not agree with that idea .....This is due to missing phrases like "Expressly".
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/mcculloch-v-maryland
CTL+F to the term: " This government is acknowledged by all to be one of enumerated powers. The principle, that it can exercise only the powers granted to it, [is] now universally admitted."
And read from there .....
It is quite ...eh ....flabbergasting that the perversion was introduced with the Constitution, as this doc was created by Hamilton to make easier to tax and thus payback the revolutionary debt.
Perhaps not in the U.S. but there is precedent for a Snap Election
Purple dye on the finger, one day of voting, paper ballot. Time to start watching the printers to see any unusual activity!
Been waiting for someone, anyone of importance, to say this publicly! 🙏🏻 it is the impetus for it to actually happen.
Whether it is legal or not, speech of this type gets more and more people talking, asking questions, observing the world around them, and going more and more down What If Lane. Works for me.
Biden would go from the most votes ever to the least votes ever.
Anyone see top FBI official get escorted out today? Mr Thibaut, I think
No! More details please. Where did you see that?
Does this mean that elections are secure?
Allowmetoexplain, thank you so much for telling a knowledgeable truth. We need lots more like you, to help people like me grow. We all must learn the real truths, down to the base,of who we are. So god willing, we get to help in the new building of our new style of government. Work with our constitution, but a shitload less representatives, but people from our productive parts of a true economy. We could lift all boats. You know carpenters, farmers, heavy construction, bridges and stuff. Throw in educators , engineers, but only 90 days a year job . No retirement,and no more than 8 years served.
For some reason this felt like a code for, election are ready, let’s do it for real now.
Maybe they are safe(er)?
Despite what we think, Trump knows more than we ever will.
Whatever Trump says may be misinfo. May not.
TLDR; Trust the Trump.
TLDR; Devolution. 'nuff said.
Patriots are correct to persue this. We must do this with vigor.
Seems like a watershed moment in the Plan.
DJT beginning to call for a NEW ELECTION marks the introduction of the topic into mainstream discussion.
I expect to see more about this, and the talk to increase in weeks going forward.
DO IT
The part that DJT put in quotes - is that an actual quote from the FBI? From somewhere?
Just don't get captured alive; see J6 POW's....
I think the real answer to that is, never let them catch you alone.