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. ?
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).
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. ?
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).