The ECA Proves the Georgia Case Against Trump to be Legally Unsound

You're welcome to give me your interpretation. The ECA states:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/15

"(d)Procedure at Joint Session Generally.—

(1)In general.—The President of the Senate shall—

(A) open the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the votes of electorsappointed pursuant to a certificate of ascertainment of appointment of electors issued pursuant to section 5, in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and

(B) upon opening any certificate, hand the certificate and any accompanying papers to the tellers, who shall read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses."

What do you think "papers purporting to be certificates of the votes of electors" is referring to? It seems obvious to me that it's referring to an alternate slate of electors and their votes. If we go deeper into the ECA of 1887 we will see them discussed explicitly.

Maybe someone else can give me an example of ANYTHING ELSE that term could be referring to other than an alternate slate of electors and their votes.

 

It definitely means that the President must call state officials and pressure them to find him 11,780 votes so he can win an election that they ALREADY certified his opponent had won. What else?

 

The central unsoundness of "Slap My Big" Fani's indictment is the lack of a crime. To claim that Trump did legal things "corruptly" does not turn legal actions into illegal ones.

And now we know that Fani is nothing more than an oversexed embezzler, the entire case collapses. A new prosecution team will need to be installed and they very well may not want to try these indictments which are unlikely to survive the Courtroom.

Especially in a State where Trump is +6.6 over Bribed Joe.

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/georgia/trump-vs-biden

Fani Willis' Humping Her Special Prosecutor She Hire To Get Trump


Wasn't thinking with the right head.

'Down in Georgia, site of one of the four major lawfare assaults to damage Trump and make him radioactive to the electorate, Fani Willis, the district attorney, is after the former president because — it is alleged — he tried to overturn the 2020 election. How did he do this? By telling the secretary of state Brad Raffensperger that “I just want to find 11,780 votes.” The conversation was taped and the New York Times went to town with it, claiming that Trump “pressured” Raffensperger to manufacture the votes.'

'Vocabulary quiz: what is the difference between the words “find” and “manufacture?” Use each in a sentence.'

'That’s not the sort of test the Times is likely to pass. Remember back during the 2016 presidential election campaign when Trump said, referring to Hillary Clinton’s “lost” emails, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” The Times instantly accused him of “essentially urging a foreign adversary to conduct cyberespionage against a former secretary of state.” '

'But it gets better. It turns out that the delightfully named Fani Willis hired her boyfriend, Nathan Wade, as chief prosecutor to go after Trump. He had no experience in such legal matters. Doubtless he has other skills. One skill is extracting money from the taxpayer. So far, Willis has paid him $654,000 in legal fees. Some of that money went to pay for lavish trips with Willis to Napa, Florida, the Caribbean and elsewhere. We know all this because Wade is in the middle of a divorce and details of his shenanigans have leaked.'

 

When the count is taking place the votes are technically "not official" yet.

All it is saying is open the certificates and papers. Until this has been approved by the Congress these certificates are "purported to be certificates of the votes of electors appointed". It's not referring to an "alternate slate" it's referring to slates that HAVE been certified by their respective slates. They are only "purported" because the full Congress has not voted on them yet. The FAKE elector certificates submitted by Republicans in swing states were never appointed by the respective states. They were never opened by the VP and they were never counted.

To have them opened and counted was part of the illegal elector scheme concocted by John Eastman and put into play by Trump, Giuliani and Chesbro. Chesbro has pled guilty to his part of the scheme. Trump and Giuliani and many others are under indictment.

 

You were expecting them to come back with actual facts instead of just hate for trump?

You expect too much!

 

No sir it explicitly says "open the certificates AND the papers purporting to be certificates". You're asserting they're the exact same thing and the wording is simply redundant. But you know that's not how laws are written.

They differentiated between the certificates and those papers purporting to be certificates. And we know why they did this when you read the actual ECA from 1887. Because there is a process for alternate electors. And it's not illegal.

 

What you are reading was the changed version after the 2020 was already over wih

Trump followed the Electoral Count Act of 1887....a law on the books for 135 years.... He did nothing illegal at all... but what did happen was the Democrats knew he followed the law and did nothing wrong but scrambled into Congress to change it to their likings...... thus the 2022 amendment after the 2020 election

Amendments
2022-Pub. L. 117–328, §108(a)(1)–(4), (6)–(, inserted ", after the meeting of the electors shall have been held," after "When", struck out "and list" after "certificate of vote" and after "send up the certificate", and substituted "in December," for "in December, after the meeting of the electors shall have been held,", "or, if the President of the Senate be absent" for "or, if he be absent", "lodged with such officer" for "lodged with him", "the duty of such chief election officer of the State" for "his duty", and "by the most expeditious method available" for "by registered mail".

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title3-section12&num=0&edition=prelim

 

They are scared of something if all of a sudden they are tying to change a 135 old law on the books... after they tried it in 2000, 2004, and 2016..

Trump followed the law and did nothing wrong...

https://www.collins.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/one_pager_on_electoral_count_reform_act_of_2022.pdf

 

Trump tried to exploit vague wording in the ECA to his benefit. The wording was so vague that Congress had to reword it and sign it into law. You can't find someone guilty for trying to exploit wording so vague that the law had to be re-written.

 

Just more garbage from the MAGA crowd.

What's the difference between "find" and "manufacture"? In this case, not a whole lot.

The phone call took place on January 2nd. By this point the vote count had been certified by the Governor for over a month and a half (November 20). Trump and his allies had filed court cases attempting to over turn that result. All had failed. By 1/2/2021 there were no more avenues for overturning the results. Trumps phone call to Raffensperger was a "Hail Mary" pass attempt to get Raffensperger to change the result in Trump's favor. Unfortunately for Trump there was no legal mechanism for Raffensperger to do that. This made Trump's request for the change illegal. He was attempting to get Raffensperger to violate his oath of office, a violation of O.C.G.A. 16-4-7 & 16-10-1 (Count 28 of the indictment)


16-4-7. Criminal solicitation.
(a) A person commits the offense of criminal solicitation when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony, he solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.
(b) A person convicted of the offense of criminal solicitation to commit a felony shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than three years. A person convicted of the offense of criminal solicitation to commit a crime punishable by death or by life imprisonment shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.
(c) It is no defense to a prosecution for criminal solicitation that the person solicited could not be guilty of the crime solicited.
(d) The provisions of subsections (a) through (c) of this Code section are cumulative and shall not supersede any other penal law of this state.

16-10-1. Violation of oath by public officer.
Any public officer who willfully and intentionally violates the terms of his oath as prescribed by law shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.

 

The wording was not "vague"

It was old, it was not how it would be worded today...it was not vague.

 

I agree it wasn't. Especially when you read the entirety of the ECA

 

The wording was so vague that Congress had to reword it. If it wasn't vague, they wouldn't have had to reword it.

 

When you offer up steaming manure, what exactly do you expect in return ?

 

Yes, and in section B (that YOU posted)

(B) upon opening any certificate, hand the certificate and any accompanying papers to the tellers, who shall read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses."

This isn't talking about two different things. This is the certificate AND the accompanying papers that state the certificate has been ascertained by the Governor the state they come from. There was only ONE certificate from Georgia AND one set of "accompanying papers". This has nothing to to do with any kind of "alternate electors"

 

No because those accompanying papers you're referring to are not purporting to be certificates. The accompanying papers are the papers purporting to be certificates (the alternate slates of electors and their votes). They are PURPORTING to be actual certificates. Then it is congress' job to determine which of those read are the legitimate ones.

 

No, absolutely not.

The "accompanying papers" are the certification from the Governor.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.archives.gov/files/electoral-college/2020/ascertainment-georgia.pdf

The FAKE elector certificate was never given to Pence. It was attempted but a Pence staffer rejected them out of hand.

 

Fake news. We have the transcript of the conversation. Trump wanted a signature verified audit, which has yet to be produced, and to make sure that there were no uncounted legally cast ballots. You may not like that he asked for this, but it was not a crime for him to ask for something you don't like.

Too much of the Left has this strange idea that having views and making statements that they disagree with is a 'crime'. It's not. In fact the criminals here appear to be this oversex prosecutor and her lawyer sex toy that she hired to go after Trump.

That's because they seperated the ballots from the signature envelopes and did not preserve the means of ensuring that the unusually large number of mail in ballots were legally cast ballots. Even though you seem to want to criminalize opposing opinions, there is nothing wrong with Trump noting and stating these concerns.

It's not a crime to ask to make sure that legally cast ballots have been counted.

He made no such request. We have the transcript.

Too bad your oversexed Soros prosecutor blew the case because she couldn't keep her pants on around her direct report.

And it's interesting that Trump is +6.6 in GA and very likely to win the state and draw a favorable jury pool if this pile of crap of a case survives that long.

Criminalizing speech and points of view, what a sick strange world some folks would force us into if only they could have their evil ways prevail. Thank goodness that this is blowing up in their self-righteous faces so hard.

 

No one in the entire conversation mentioned "signature verified audit". Hell, the only mention of "audit" of any kind was by Raffensperger who was telling Trump they had already done an audit. You may no like this fact but that's the fact.

He was not asking for legally cast ballots to be counted. He wanted the outcome changed to show that he (Trump) had won. He told Raffensperger there was nothing wrong with saying that he had "recalculated"

Soros has nothing to do with this case, just another MAGA deflection from the truth.

Whether or not Willis was having an affair with Wade is also irrelevant as it will not derail the case. It may (and probably will) derail her career, but her personal actions have nothing to do with the evidence that's been collected and was presented to the Grand Jury who returned the indictment.

So, let's go over your post here

"oversex" completely irrelevant. Just an attempt to to appeal to purient and prejudicial conduct. An attempt to get an emotional response that has nothing to do with the issue.
"Soros" boogey man of the right. Again, mentioned only to cast aspersions and is completely irrelevant to the case.
"crap of a case" Again, just offering a detrimental opinion because you know you are losing this argument.
"criminalizing speech" another legal analysis by a non lawyer. We can ignore it.
"sick strange world" - more emotional claptrap
"evil ways" - more aspersions with no evidence.


I have responded with facts, and only facts. If you can do the same and keep the editorializing out of it we might have a chance of making headway. Otherwise all you're doing is engaging in propaganda.

 

Great, I guess that means next January, Kamala can appoint ANY electors that she prefers. Instant victory for Biden. I don't think you have thought this through.

 

Yes he was.

And there is nothing wrong with Trump telling him that it's ok to admit a miscalculation.

Another corrupt Soros prosecutor, now caught up in an embezzlement sex scandal with her special prosecutor and sex toy that she hired to persecute Trump, and hump? Love the way you try to relegate discussion of that as out of bounds. Would you like to also claim it's a crime? Like they are trying to do to Trump?

The fact that both the Lead Prosecutor and her Special Prosecutor have been engaged in an ongoing felony conspiracy to defraud the GA and US Taxpayers for taxpayer funded sex trips is 'irrelevant'? You really want to inhabit a world were the ethics of the prosecutor are irrelevant, but that's not the world we live in. Look up the Clean Hands Doctrine.

If the citizens of GA thought Trump was guilty, why he is plus 6.6 in the polls? Meanwhile "Smack My Big" Fani is looking at impeachment, criminal charges and disbarment as well as her sex toy lawyer that she hired to go after Trump.

 

There was NO embezzlement. Even if every single allegation is true, it does not constitute embezzlement in any way, shape or form.

At BEST, at absolute freaking BEST you MIGHT get "fraud" but even that is a stretch.

You don't understand anything about what you are talking about, that is obvious.

 

lol no that's not how it works. The ECA states the legitimate ones are the ones with the state seal. However that doesn't change the fact that the ones PURPORTING to be certificates can only be one thing. A slate of alternate electors.

 

They were alternate electors as stipulated in the Electoral Act of 1887... a law on the books for 135 years... they are no different from the Hamilton electors, just change the names from fake to faithless and all is good...

Democrats set the precedent when overthrowing democracy.... would you like to talk about it?? George Santyana : "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

""America needs 37 “faithless electors” from states Trump won""
Looks like they will have to explain the “Hamilton electors,” a group of electors who have sworn not to vote for Trump.
https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/15/opinions/faithless-electors-save-america-piro/index.html

Meet the 'Hamilton Electors' Hoping for an Electoral College Revolt
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...oping-for-an-electoral-college-revolt/508433/

The last-ditch push for the Electoral College to stop Trump, explained
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...444/electoral-college-trump-hamilton-electors

""The faithless electors who opposed Donald Trump were part of a movement dubbed the "Hamilton Electors" co-founded by Micheal Baca of Colorado and Bret Chiafalo of Washington. The movement attempted to find 37 Republican electors willing to vote for a different Republican in an effort to deny Donald Trump a majority in the Electoral College and force a contingent election in the House of Representatives.""
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_electors_in_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election


""A group of so-called “Hamilton Electors” — nine Democrats and one Republican who borrowed the Found Father’s name in a nod toward his call for deliberation — has been working to persuade at least 36 other Republicans to ditch Trump, just enough to block his immediate election and send the contest to the House of Representatives.""
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/electoral-college-rogue-electors-hamilton-232802

 

You can make an argument the accompanying papers are those but you cannot make the argument that those papers are purporting to be certificates. And your assertion that they're the certificates which haven't been accepted yet doesn't hold water. Because then you're going to need to tell us what "the certificates" are in that section I quoted.

The ECA talks about two things. The certificates and the papers purporting to be certificates.

Define those two items or give examples.