DJT indirectly supporting and pointing towards SCOTUS Brunson v Adams 22-380 case?
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (44)
sorted by:
We are NOT talking about POWER per se, BUT the Power of BOTH Houses to do their due diligence AND THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT...Both Chamber DID NOT DO "DUE DILIGENCE"
No, we're talking about AUTHORITY, as explicitly delegated in and by the Constitution. Congress has no authority to adjudicate presidential Electoral disputes because the Constitution doesn't give it any.
"Due diligence" means following the Constitution. Congress attempting to usurp the law to wield power it is not authorized with, would be the exact opposite of due diligence. Same applies to the President of the Senate.
If you don't like what the Constitution says or doesn't say, then your problem is with the law. Work to get it changed. But don't lie about it actually says and doesn't say.