This lady's entire premise is based on 2 USC Section 9 "or voting machine the use of which has been duly authorized by the State law." and then claims, with ZERO evidence, that modern voting machines don't fit the bill.
The problem is, this section is entirely self-executing. The 'voting machine' could be ANYTHING, literally, anything, and as long as it was authorized by State law (which all machines currently are and always have been), then nothing is 'broken', in premise 2 of her argument. Lady needs to read up on the USC and its relationship to state law, and rhetoric in general.
Secondly, if her premise WERE true, then Trump is not President NOW, or in 2016. This dancing near sov-cit legal voodoo BS.
This lady's entire premise is based on 2 USC Section 9 "or voting machine the use of which has been duly authorized by the State law." and then claims, with ZERO evidence, that modern voting machines don't fit the bill.
The problem is, this section is entirely self-executing. The 'voting machine' could be ANYTHING, literally, anything, and as long as it was authorized by State law (which all machines currently are and always have been), then nothing is 'broken', in premise 2 of her argument. Lady needs to read up on the USC and its relationship to state law, and rhetoric in general.
Secondly, if her premise WERE true, then Trump is not President NOW, or in 2016. This dancing near sov-cit legal voodoo BS.