Trump goes to U.S. Supreme Court, asks justices to reverse Pennsylvania election cases

https://justthenews.com/politics-po...reme-court-reverse-pennsylvania-supreme-court

Here is the petition:
https://cdn.donaldjtrump.com/public-files/press_assets/trump-v-boockvar-petition.pdf

excerpt from campaign statement:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/trump-campaign-taking-constitutional-fight-to-supreme-court/

No one can predict what the SCOTUS will do here. I would prefer the Trump campaign be allowed to air their grievances in court and let the chips fall where they may. That said, the courts have thus far refused to hear it.

Hearing this case will go a long way in preventing a challenge on January 6th in the full Congress session. SCOTUS refusing to hear this case on the merits will open the door for debate in Congress. Either way, I predict the evidence, whatever it is, will be seen by the public.

What was done in darkness shall be seen in the light. ~ The Bible

 

Ooops, The sound of the golden one needing financial support. His idiots better send another check. LOL

 

This is the big one. This is it. Get ready.

Trump loves losing.

 

The items of the petition have merit as they (or most of them) stem from unconstitutional changes enacted by a judicial body that has no right to do so. However when talk of a desired remedy moves into the realm of overturning an entire states results my support is lost because I've not seen anything that shows me the outcome would have been changed. Because the assumption is that these votes never would have happened without these unconstitutional rules and I think the assumption should be that the people who case them in such a manner would have likely found other ways to do so. I think the best way to handle this is to profoundly declare 12th hour rule changes via judicial bodies to be a gross violation of election integrity and set a solid precedent moving forward, but as far as nullifying an entire election I just don't see how that could be accomplished.

 

If what you are saying is true, and I agree for the most part, then how do you think Congress will vote when the electors are challenged on 1/6? They way I understand it, each state delegation in Congress will issue 1 vote and the GOP has the majority of states. TBH, I don't have a solid grasp on how that could happen, but I do know it is a possibility.

 

I would invalidate the entire election and have another with no voting machines, only paper ballots. But that's just me and I like it when the correct candidate wins.

 

Pelosi will ensure that doesn't happen. You need a majority of both chambers for a vote by Congress

 

Waste of time and money, they should have challenged it before the election.

 

From what I understand, it takes one member of each chamber to initiate debate. Pelosi can't stop it.

 

No. That process only takes place if no one gets a majority of EC votes.

 

To initiate debate. It takes a majority of all members of both houses to start the process you are referring to.

Google is your friend.

 

Well, the Pennsylvania case aside, the role of Congress on Jan 6 is to hear the telling of each state's electors in joint session for the purposes of certifying their votes and at that point objections could be submitted, state-by-state, by a House Rep which would have to be also carried by a Senator at which point a single state's elector telling is in constestation and Congress goes back to its various chambers to debate before holding a vote on whether to accept or reject that state's elector telling. They'd have successfully reject at least 5 or 6 states in order to nullify enough EC votes to reduce PE Biden's telling count to under 270. If that happens then a contingent election via the 12th Amendment would come into play where the state delegations in the House of Reps would name a President and the Senate a Vice President.

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

 

trump lost as an incumbent to a dementia patient.
But it has been obvious for 6 weeks now, who really is the dementia patient. Well a true narcissist patient. He lost fair and square. He is trying to cheat the vote of the people.

 

Back to the OP - yet another delusion that will be quickly aborted by the court.

 

What has not been proven and most likely cannot be proven is even if these alkegations were true did any of these so called or alleged "irregularities" negatively affect even one single vote from going from Trump to Biden? Example did Trump lose any votes? I already know the answer, NO!

 

Debate yes. Then there's a vote. The House is not going to swing Trump's way.

 

They can challenge. It’s doomed and nothing more than theatrics. You don’t have the support in either house. Trump lost and he least “bigly” it was a landslide loss. Makes Jimmy Carters loss pale in comparison.

 

If the electoral votes are challenged, the chambers separate for two hours to debate the challenge. Then what? If the electoral votes are challenged, resulting in neither candidate getting a majority (270), they proceed to a contingent election, right?

In a contingent election, this is how they vote:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-resolve-contested-election-part-3-when-elections-fail

 

Lol...Fond memories.

 

Then you have not seen the audit in Northern Michigan!

 

Loved that show.

"That's not my Lena. That's somebody's hyena!"

"Hey Esther. Come stick your face in this dough. I'm making gorilla cookies."

 

Just stunning to think that 74-million people in this country actually cast a ballot for this delusional republican madman.

He’s leaving Washington with a whole series of conspiracy theories and things that are so nutty and loopy that people are shaking their head wondering what in the world has gotten into this man. -- Mitt

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/m...ad-and-embarrassing-11608491012?mod=home-page

 

Is it the Kraken?

 

How many states sent alternate electors?

Also, have you seen this article that says if a state's slate is fraudulent, the VP can send them back to the state legislature?

https://nationalfile.com/law-prohib...ently-certified-states-constitutional-lawyer/

 

Act 12 PA General Assembly as amended. Section 1308 Subsection ii
Canvassing Absentee Ballots and Mail In Ballots
Sub paragraph 1.1 Paragraph Say that authorized representatives e.g. Watchers of each political party
shall be permitted to be in the room....
It those say that the watchers can gawk over the shoulders of the election workers, nor say that watchers can ask questions nor make objections or make accusations or compare signatures or in any way interfere in the counting ......
I read though the entire amendment and there is nothing that the Gen Assembly changed regarding checking or verifying signatures.

In other words this change in the law did not change the law in any way that would enhance ballot fraud.
The changed sections are in bold font.
Here is the link, read it all as I did.,

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdoc...Type=HTM&yr=2020&sessInd=0&smthLwInd=0&act=12