I read that a couple days ago. It is interesting but does not deal with election law. I read the entire filing. They do say "fraud vititates everything," in the opinion, but it is not a decisive use of the phrase, but rather used as a well known axiom to enhance the opinion's validity. Still has bearing, though. Worth paying some attention.
That is how the left is framing the narrative. Why though? All he has to prove is that their was a concerted effort to fraudulantly change the outcome of the election, beyond "random" acts of individual malfeasance.
Indeed, in 1892 (McPherson v. Blacker), in upholding Michigan's practice of dividing the state's electors by congressional district (as done today in Maine and Nebraska), the Supreme Court wrote, "The legislature possesses plenary authority to direct the manner of appointment, and might itself exercise the appointing power by joint ballot or concurrence of the two houses, or according to such mode as it designated." In Bush v. Gore, the high court reiterated that any state legislature "may, if it so chooses, select the electors itself."
I've heard the argument that it is a Property Law case, and it's insane to depend on it. But I also know that nobody would make it their whole case. It has been floating around for the last three or four weeks.
I read a good article about this from (I think) shipwreckedcrew on twitter last week some time. It's not what it seems, and doesn't apply here. Search it up, he shoots this line of argument down completely unfortunately.
I don’t think this can be applied to the election. The amount of fraud to invalidate an election is not well defined by “fraud vitiates everything”. If there is systemic fraud by one person does that throw out the county? If done systemically in a state does that throw out the country’s results? What happens if the Democrats cheat on behalf of republicans and use the precedent this would set to automatically disqualify them. Doesn’t work by any standard.
Clear fraud will allow vote batches to be disqualified. Likely potential fraud due to laws and processes not being followed will cause decertification.
Sadly it won’t stand when it comes to elections... the reason is that it’s not the fault of every legal voter that fraud took place that didn’t envolve them at all.
I am not going to read a little bit of election law and then pretend I know how the supreme court should rule or the case that the Trump team should be making.
i assume this is true only if the pedophile himself or an authorized leader of this campaign can be tied directly to the fraud. if some asshat in wayne county did it, that is one thing, if they did it at the direction of the campaign, boom.
one is harder to prove, unless they get flippers.
I think this indirectly applies even though it is based on contracts. Consider a situation where the SCOTUS tells a state that they didn't do signature matching and that they must go back and do it. The state comes back and says they burned all the envelopes... no signatures. The unvetted ballots are now swimming around in GenPop. What do you do? You pretty much have to declare all mail in ballots corrupted and therefore tossed out.
This sort of thing is best used to show that Biden is invalid as a candidate rather than attacking the election directly. If he can be proven to be illegitimate, the election is over.
I read that a couple days ago. It is interesting but does not deal with election law. I read the entire filing. They do say "fraud vititates everything," in the opinion, but it is not a decisive use of the phrase, but rather used as a well known axiom to enhance the opinion's validity. Still has bearing, though. Worth paying some attention.
Lol tempted to edit my post. We do need that hopium.
The Hopium Wars
I just read about the opium wars. The CCP faggots used it to addict the only people that might oppose their power.
Dang those facts again...
That is how the left is framing the narrative. Why though? All he has to prove is that their was a concerted effort to fraudulantly change the outcome of the election, beyond "random" acts of individual malfeasance.
You're correct, but I think it can be applied to elections!
If the axiom is followed it is a good thing for us.
Also puts the Dems on the defense. Attack from every possible angle.
It won’t though. Reason being, it’s not every individual voters fault that fraud took place.
Res Ipsa Loquitur.
The thing speaks for itself.
Good point
https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-state-legislatures-rectify-election-fraud
Would that invalidate the entire election? I think there should be a do over. In person and with ID
No. The case is not really applicable to the election
Here's the link for anyone interested.
I hope the fraud is proven criminal and they all have their assets seized and go to jail. Sucker berg, Gates, Bloomberg, the DNC, Soros, Etc.
I've heard the argument that it is a Property Law case, and it's insane to depend on it. But I also know that nobody would make it their whole case. It has been floating around for the last three or four weeks.
In that case, just commit fraud against yourself every election. You'll never lose.
I read a good article about this from (I think) shipwreckedcrew on twitter last week some time. It's not what it seems, and doesn't apply here. Search it up, he shoots this line of argument down completely unfortunately.
I personally wasnt talking about it because I forgot all about that case. That was 150 years ago and I was only 12 at the time.
Are you new here? That’s been posted for at least 2 weeks now. But reminders are good!
Nope, definitely not new, just haven't seen it
But the news people said Uncle Sniffy was our new President.
A juvenile weasel could get out of that legal theory without breaking a sweat.
We need SCOTUS with honor and backbone.
Two issues with this:
Combine the two of them and it's impossible this will stand
Sorry lads, this would be a funny win but people would also rage too much
let's stick to flipping EC votes by proving fraud
Wasn't this the Land Dispute Ruling? I've seen it posted and discussed at length on here like 5 times at least over the past few weeks.
I don’t think this can be applied to the election. The amount of fraud to invalidate an election is not well defined by “fraud vitiates everything”. If there is systemic fraud by one person does that throw out the county? If done systemically in a state does that throw out the country’s results? What happens if the Democrats cheat on behalf of republicans and use the precedent this would set to automatically disqualify them. Doesn’t work by any standard.
Clear fraud will allow vote batches to be disqualified. Likely potential fraud due to laws and processes not being followed will cause decertification.
That'll be the next day I watch fake news channels (NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, MSDNC)!
But the more fraud they prove, the tigher the rope around the deep state's neck will be.
Sadly it won’t stand when it comes to elections... the reason is that it’s not the fault of every legal voter that fraud took place that didn’t envolve them at all.
I am not going to read a little bit of election law and then pretend I know how the supreme court should rule or the case that the Trump team should be making.
If that happens, some Democrats may suddenly become sticklers for rules next election, haha
This is a MOAB
i assume this is true only if the pedophile himself or an authorized leader of this campaign can be tied directly to the fraud. if some asshat in wayne county did it, that is one thing, if they did it at the direction of the campaign, boom. one is harder to prove, unless they get flippers.
I think this indirectly applies even though it is based on contracts. Consider a situation where the SCOTUS tells a state that they didn't do signature matching and that they must go back and do it. The state comes back and says they burned all the envelopes... no signatures. The unvetted ballots are now swimming around in GenPop. What do you do? You pretty much have to declare all mail in ballots corrupted and therefore tossed out.
This sort of thing is best used to show that Biden is invalid as a candidate rather than attacking the election directly. If he can be proven to be illegitimate, the election is over.
I appreciate the enthusiasm but that's not how it works. Don't spread this it's garbage.