Gateway Pundit: The Constitution demands that the Presidential race be held on a specific day (the first Tuesday in November) and should be completed on that day – argues a legal expert.
One legal scholar argues the above and presents his case in detail at thepostemail.com. The argument is simple. The Constitution requires Presidential elections to be performed on a certain day. It doesn’t say they should run on for days or weeks like we saw in 2020. Any states who waited till after election day to manufacture votes and steal the election for Joe Biden are in trouble. These states’ results are void due to being outside Constitutional mandates. more
Silly scholar. You don’t quite get these are special times, special circumstances. The Constitution is more of a guideline during the Kung Flu pandemic.
Voting is required to occur on Election day. But there is no mention about having the results tallied on that same day. A century or more ago it took days or even WEEKS to finish tallying votes. So this “scholar” is totally wrong in his assertion. And this doesn’t even take into account “absentee voting” or “early voting”….both of which have already passed muster as far as the courts are concerned. The author of this nonsense is just throwing sh*t against the wall to see what sticks. There are plenty of MUCH more valid arguments to be made as to why this election was defective and should be nullified.
This is not helpful. For Republicans, anyway. If the situation were reversed, and Democrats were making this argument, I’m sure there would be plenty of judges stroking their chins and slamming their gavels in agreement. For us, only the mocking laughter of trolls and Democrat lawyers. We can’t even get an acknowledgement of the evidence of massive vote fraud, much less a nod to hair-splitting Constitutional frivolities.
The bullies ate our lunch, and they’ll do it again tomorrow, and the next day, until they get hurt bad. This Constitutional whinge ain’t bringing the pain.
Unless there’s a virus with a 99.97% survival rate.
I believe his point is that ballots accepted after election day are invalid.
^^^ If they can be separated, yes. Otherwise, I dunno.
AC: they separated the ballots from the envelopes and intermingled them to prevent such action. That is why they hide behind the “not enough to affect the outcome” lie. The USSC hasn’t got the integrity to declare the ballots void on tainted ballots.
https://populist.press/kemp-linked-directly-to-chinese-spy-operation-that-trump-shutdown/
Kemp linked to chinese spy operation.
@ Sippin’ Coffee DECEMBER 8, 2020 AT 10:26 AM
IN the 2004 Washington gubernatorial election theft Democrat operatives separated ballots that were cast by ineligible felons from the envelopes, Democrats deliberately co-mingled them and then claimed it was impossible to know which was which. I distinctly remember some worthless piece of shit of a University of Washington professor arguing that felons would vote Democrat or Republican in the same percentages as the population of eligible voters who cast ballots.
While that would get my agreement if owe were to consider eligible voters in Seattle, it is abject bullshit when you look Statewide. Of course the State Supreme Court bought that argument.
The precedent for more counting after election day was possibly the 2000 election. Gore demanded recounts and got them. The SC ruled on the election and Bush was the winner.
If the SC rules in favor of something that strengthens it. Trump has to use other arguments.