Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,094
This is the third time you have spammed this debunked claim despite you knowing it has been debunked.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
2020 United States presidential election - Conspiracy theories, alleged fraud, etc
- Thread starter Venom
- Start date
- Status
This is the third time you have spammed this debunked claim despite you knowing it has been debunked.
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,094
Ken Paxton's indictment in 2015, in which he was charged with two counts of first-degree securities fraud and one count of third-degree failure to register with the state securities board......
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/04/... serious charges,-degree securities fraud, Mr.
He (Ken Paxton) is also an ally of the president and serves as co-chair of the Lawyers for Trump coalition.
https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10/05/texas-ken-paxton-bribery/
Last edited:
Gish-galooping and content-free, Bubba still remains oblivious to reality.
Last edited:
This is the third time you have spammed this debunked claim despite you knowing it has been debunked.
Have some compassion. Bubba's world is crumbling.
Just kidding. No mercy for BS.
Guys, I think we need to chant "Its over" louder.
https://newsla.localad.com/2020/12/...g-arizona-is-officially-a-contested-election/
https://newsla.localad.com/2020/12/...g-arizona-is-officially-a-contested-election/
Last edited:
Ah, the dying promise of the dream. It's like crying over an ice cream cone that landed on the sidewalk. You can look at it, and there it is. But it's just not there anymore.
Trump is over, and good riddance.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
"Your access to this site has been limited by the site owner
Your access to this service has been limited. (HTTP response code 503)
If you think you have been blocked in error, contact the owner of this site for assistance."
Your access to this service has been limited. (HTTP response code 503)
If you think you have been blocked in error, contact the owner of this site for assistance."
Looks like right wing loony sites are censoring this too.
Where did the storm go Bubba?
Where be the Kraken? Did it drown?
Is the plan still to be trusted?
Also, WWG1WGA: do you all go to Losertown together?
P.S. Aren't you the slightest bit sheepish (snicker) that the troll pretending to be Q gulled you so completely?
Last edited:
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,094
Slight problem Bubba.
"Daniel McCarthy (Republican Party) ran in a special election to the U.S. Senate to represent Arizona. He lost in the special Republican primary on August 4, 2020. "
https://ballotpedia.org/Daniel_McCarthy_(Arizona)
I told them to say that only if you clicked on it
Worked OK just now
https://newsla.localad.com/2020/12/...g-arizona-is-officially-a-contested-election/
Last edited:
What do you think this means? Do you realize that Arizona has certified their election? It's a bit late for take-backsies.
Looks to me like President Biden is a done deal.
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,094
Pssst....Bubba.......some extreme US right wing sites don't allow us foreigners to read their right wing crap. They stop foreigners from seeing their websites.
You are aware there are other countries in the world, right?
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Pssst....Bubba.......some extreme US right wing sites don't allow us foreigners to read their right wing crap. They stop foreigners from seeing their websites.
You are aware there are other countries in the world, right?
Oh, my! Are you missing out, then. The article tells us, very clearly, that Rep. Daniel McCarthy (I'm assume sales Rep of some kind) has a letter (quantity 1) from Arizona legislators (quantity unspecified, but probably as many as 4) invoking Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution.
It is entirely unclear what "invoking" means in this context, but it must be something all very important. Nonetheless, Amway sales rep Daniel McCarthy may have communicated this latest revelation to the vice president via the certified and bonded official message courier known as Twitter.
Now, if only that pesky Safe Harbor provision could be disabled....
TellyKNeasuss
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 3,808
What does "invoke Article 2, Section 1" even mean? AFAIK, Article 2, Section 1 will be invoked when the members of the Electoral College vote on Monday.
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 7,686
The safe harbor thing doesn't mean a lot. Under Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the electoral votes are counted in a joint session of Congress. Under 3 USC 15 that happens on January 6.
Under that same law, during the count an electoral vote can be objected to by a written objection submitted by at least one U.S. Representative and one U.S. Senator. The counting stops and the House and Senate each go and vote on the objection. The objection to the vote is only sustained if both the House and Senate approve the objection. (With a Democratic House and Republican Senate, that is not at all likely to happen.)
But that same law says that a vote shall not be rejected if it was "regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified." That means they were appointed by the state, voted at the meeting of electors, certified by the Governor, etc.
The law 3 USC 5 provides the "safe harbor". That law says that if there is a controversy concerning the appointment of electors and the state has laws made prior to that appointment (they do) and the state resolves the controversy according to those laws by at least 6 days prior to the meeting of electors, then that determination is conclusive.
That means that if an election is legally resolved by the deadline, the state's decision is conclusive and cannot be overturned by the House and Senate. A state can resolve the controversy after that date (or even not according to the state's laws) but then those vote are subject to objection in the joint session of Congress.
With a split House and Senate, that isn't going to matter for this election. However, it is possible there may be an objection during the count on the grounds that the state did not resolve the controversy according to state law.
But this has been important to courts. In Bush v Gore (2000) the decision to not order a statewide recount was determined, in part, because it could not be completed by the safe harbor date and would put Florida's electoral votes at risk. Courts have shown reluctance to issue an order changing an election after the safe harbor date has passed. They still could, but it is one more reason not to do so.
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 7,686
I presume it is meant to refer to the counting of votes in Congress, where the votes could be challenged, although under Federal law, not the Constitution. (See my previous post.)
My guess would be that he is claiming that he has a copy of a written objection to the Arizona electors issued by an Arizona U.S. Representative and U.S. Senator that has been issued to Vice President Pence (who is the President of the Senate and to whom such objections would be issued).
But the law says the objections must be submitted upon reading the certificates during the joint session. So I don't think submitting an objection now would actually be anything.
And, of course, it is odd he didn't post the letter. Or that the Representative and Senator who wrote it did not post it and that, for some reason they instead gave it to this guy.
- Status