Mo Brooks yesterday applying for Legendary God Status: he is going to refuse the state electors when they get to Congress and bring debate to the floor. HERO
(streamable.com)
🛑 STOP THE STEAL 🛑
posted ago by 2Curved_Hollow_Fangs
+8470 / -2
Comments (353)
sorted by:
Mo Brooks doesn't get a lot of press but he is ALWAYS on the side of right. Love that guy.
STOP THE STEAL!
Great Slogan pede.
WHEN STATES CORRECT, I’LL BE ERECT!
YES! THIS!!!! Great slogan!
THIS IS PERFECT!
FUUUUCK YEEEEEAAAAHHH!!!!!!! FUCK THESE PEOPLE LET'S GOOOOOO!!!!
Wake me up when you need real fighters
Don't expect Mo Brooks' plan to delay it for more than 2 hours at most.
The dems tried to block it in Jan 2017 only for Biden as VP/President of the Senate to gavel them and shut them up. At the very end Biden said "Give it up. It's over."
Completely different scenario this year. Oh and Pence is VP this time.
Right? Um it’s pence now
right, and at that time every swamp creature in D.C. was overly confident that they could “convince” the newly and duly elected DJT45 to become one of them...turns out they were WRONG, and never stopped trying to end his presidency, ultimately running joe “you know, the (swamp) thing” byedone as a shield from prosecution for his corruption.
What the hell is up with u/Anaconda ?
It's like a love/hate relationship.
Xir always gets downvoted, but we keep he/she/it/Xir around for fun?!?!
👌🤔🤔🤔👍😉😂😋
Anaconda often has great insight. We don't always have to agree, but Anaconda has proven himself to be correct in his perspective many times.
All that's necessary is for Pence to set aside the electors from Arizona, Georgia, and PA and TRUMP WINS
So they delay it half a day or something. That doesn’t do anything for us, if we let it get that far we’ve lost. We need SCOTUS right now.
Edit: y’all are downvoting me but my main point is there is too much uncertainty going this route. Obviously if we have to do it we do but WINNING before this is the better route. In the end I have no doubt I things will go our way no matter what we have to do.
I disagree. The VP can refuse the electors according to the rules. Rumor is John Roberts will not hear any cases. We have to use every available option.
If Roberts does that, it must be punished as treason
If any 4 judges want to see a case they will. That does not depend on Roberts
If there are not multiple slates of electors, Pence can't really do anything based on what I am understanding. His job is very clear. If there are multiple slates of electors in his hand from one or more states, then the constitution gives him a lot of leeway as to what he can do.
"As long as he gets the state legislature to appoint his presidential electors directly, and those electors submit their purported electoral votes to the President of the Senate—who happens to be his vice president, Mike Pence—he has a fighting chance. His position is much weaker than if Pennsylvania sends Pence only one certificate of electoral votes that supports him. But Trump has no chance at all if Pennsylvania sends only one certificate that supports Warren. [23]"
Note, this is a hypothetical scenario where Warren was the dem nominee. Just replace Warren with Biden. We really need state legislatures to grow a pair at this point. Safe harbor is going to happen. Electors are finalized /soon/.
"Either way, this language contains no provision for what to do in the event of a dispute, whether with respect to the “certificates” to be “open[ed]” or with respect to the “votes” contained therein. It certainly says nothing about what to do if the President of the Senate has received two conflicting certificates of electoral votes from the same state, each certificate purporting to come from the state’s authoritatively appointed electors. As the distinguished jurist Joseph Story observed early in the nineteenth century, this crucial constitutional language in the Twelfth Amendment appears to have been written without imaging that it might ever be possible for this sort of dispute to arise."
"Given the language of the Twelfth Amendment, whatever its ambiguity and potential policy objections, there is no other possible single authority to identify for this purpose besides the President of the Senate."
However, this is ONLY in the case of a disputed election. In the case of only one slate of electors his job is clear. 12th amendment:
"[T]he President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;—"
SHALL be counted. It's not optional. This is why the next week and a half is so critical to make our voices heard.
"Subject only to the joint observational role of the Senate and House of Representatives, the President of the Senate decides authoritatively what “certificates” from the states to “open” and thus what electoral votes are “to be counted.”
But, if there is no option of what votes are "to be counted" (e.g. one slate) this whole legal theory falls apart. It is all based on multiple slates of electors according to Foley. He then goes on to explain how Congress can counter his move of not counting certain electors, it's well worth a read in my opinion. FWIW, Foley doesn't seem very biased throughout this whole document. However, if you want a more friendly interpretation of these matters check out Heritage foundations' writings on these topics.
Source: https://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/students/publications/llj/pdfs/vol-51/issue-2/7_Foley%20(309-362).pdf
edit: Because of all this, the specific language in the constitution and the fact that none of these specific processes are delegated to the SCOTUS they are highly loathe to get involved at this point. Basically, Congress and Senate have to fight it out procedurally and congress has the upper hand if there aren't multiple slates of electors. Multiple slates of electors. are. everything. right. now.
Yeah, at this point I am suspect of anyone who claims to know what is going to happen.
The new President doesn’t become Pelosi. The House will vote, each state getting one vote.
Pede, did you read that entire document? That academic believes the situation we're contemplating ends in a contested outcome of the variety Mo Brooks will induce with his proposed actions. This means the Supreme Court will need to intervene.
Read the conclusion again:
CONCLUSION We must hope that none of what is described in this article comes to pass. Instead, the nation will be well served if the outcome of the 2020 presidential election is so lopsided as to be impossible to dispute. Even if President Trump were inclined to resist a result that everyone else, including all Republican Senators accept, it would be impossible for him to cling to power as long as Congress conclusively concludes that his opponent is the winner. America’s military will recognize Trump’s opponent as the new commander in chief once Congress authoritatively declares this electoral outcome, and any protests from Trump to the contrary will be utterly ineffectual. The problem would occur, if it does, when the two houses of Congress cannot agree as to which candidate won the presidential election. This kind of disagreement is unlikely to develop unless something happens that gives Republicans and Democrats in Congress a plausible basis for disputing the outcome. But a key premise of this article is that it would not take an extraordinary calamity, like a foreign cyberattack, for there to be conditions enabling partisans to dispute the result. Instead, a dispute engulfing Congress could arise from a situation as routine as the kind of “blue shift” described at the outset. Given this possibility, it is truly irresponsible that Congress has not attempted to eliminate—in advance of the 2020 election—the 2019] Preparing for a Disputed Presidential Election 351 ambiguities that plague the Electoral Count Act. The purpose of the statute is to handle the circumstance in which Congress is divided over the outcome of a presidential election. But the statute is woefully inadequate for its intended purpose. If Congress fails to remedy this inadequacy before ballots are cast, then the nation will have to cope as best as it can if the two houses of Congress disagree when they meet on January 6, 2021, to officially declare the result of the 2020 election. And the more it appears that Congress is unable to resolve this disagreement before noon on January 20, when the new president is to be inaugurated, the more it will appear necessary that the Supreme Court must settle the matter again, despite whatever reluctance it might have for a repetition of its role in 2000.
I think there is some stained reasoning in this paragraph. I'm sure if this particular scenario played out the Supreme Court would want a say in it, instead of just the presumption of "it doesn't matter"
Quoted Text
While these legal arguments are powerful, they ultimately may not matter. As we shall shortly see, what matters is whether or not Congress receives a submission of electoral votes from a state, not whether that submission is legally valid according to some standard that Congress might not recognize as binding. Thus, the two houses of Pennsylvania’s legislature may not be legally entitled to negate popular appointment of the state’s presidential electors after that appointment has occurred. The legislature may require concurrence of the governor before any such move could be considered a valid rescission of the statute authorizing popular appointment. Even so, if the two houses of the state legislature purport to do this, and if the electors purportedly appointed meet and cast their electoral votes—and, most importantly, if these electors send their electoral votes to the President of the Senate—then the President of the Senate has these electoral votes in hand. That is enough for Congress to consider the votes and potentially accept those votes as the authoritative electoral votes from Pennsylvania.
I see. In a strict party-line vote on disputed electoral votes, Biden wins because he has a majority in the House.
The problem is there seems to be a lot of uncertainty with this route. I certainly don’t feel comfortable with it while we have better options, but if it comes to it than of course it’s a must. Especially if that’s true of Roberts, I hadn’t heard it but it certainly wouldn’t surprise me.
Getting to this point would be the very last resort, and one that I hope we don't see happen- however, VP Pence can toss out electors on the basis of immense fraud and force it to go to a contingent election.
There's a few other paths which are substantially better through the courts and convincing legislators, or alternatively by using Directive 51.
Agreed but fuck it. It’s this are civil war.
I disagree, I think President Trump will use it if it gets to it. No point in having s country otherwise.
You better believe Biden and the leftists will use and abuse every power of the office to crush any opposition.
that's because they cheating in 2016 also, just not enough. they knew they would have been found out then, and folded. why else wouldn't hillary have challenged states that she barely lost?
now in 2020, they have shoved all-in at the river, but didn't realize TRUMP was going to get so many more votes compared to 2016. now, they can't fold, they have to hope their massive bluff holds up, and forces us to fold.
little did they know that we are holding the absolute nuts hand, TRUMP has called their bluff, and will win at the showdown. ALL the chips are ours boys and girls!
100 fucking percent.
I'm ready though. Just in case. Hope everyone is prepared for options B, C, and D.
millions of us are ready.
Yes, exactly!
you keep posting this around
you don't know what you are talking about
this is a different set of circumstances.
Pence is the VP as well
This is a big deal, stop trying to down;lay it with false information
Nah.
FYI, the post and video link are legit. The stuttering is what shorted his system and made him blurt the quiet part out loud. Watch this be some sort of infection he gets in his foot after they perform surgery on that broken ankle or some other BS thing like that the media will try to push.
TOO BAD HE WON'T BE PRESIDENT TO STEP DOWN IN THE FIRST PLACE
Only if you’re a Republican - if you’re a Dem then you don’t get a lot of press when you do the wrong thing.
Some say the mysterious humming heard round the world is actually Mo Brooks' enormous balls altering the Earth's gravitational field.
He doesn’t get a lot of press BECAUSE he’s on the side of right.
Fuck why can't every state have low key heroes like Mo. Pisses me off to see RINO congressmen in blue states
JOE BIDEN WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT
a demented kid sniffer
And a RIGGER
Please, the politically correct term is Patriotic Chicom!
President-elect of Pedostan.
Media-select Joe "Biden" his time
You are so wrong... Biden will never be President.
Since when does our country reward blatant fraud and cheating as what has been shown and more fraud will be shown?
Since when? Where have you been?
Talking about blatant fraud and cheating here.
Just a few months ago a couple of actress moms went to prison for trying to cheat their kids into a slot in a university. Outwardly...cheating and fraud isn't as accepted as you may think.
Just wait.
Well i guess I’m going to start sniffing kids then
Yes he does and we just need a single Senator to do the same and Congress then has a big task ahead of them.
They can only delay for a few hours for each state they reject. Then both houses go debate (for only a few hours) then house/senate must BOTH reject the state's electors.
The best this would do is delay half a day and make it appear that the republicans did something.
This is not a real path to victory.
Well, both under 270
Suppose PA and GA get invalidated and Biden gets 270, what would happen if Biden gets 1 or more faithless electors, effectively giving him under 270? Would it still be a contingent election?
Can faithless electors happen anymore? I thought there was a SC ruling that said electors need to comply with their state
It is both under 270, AND if some of Joe’s states lose certification... it opens the door wide.
Another scenario is a state like PA submits multiple certifications, one from democrats and one from republicans. Pence throws the state's certification out and nobody gets 270.
Correct- however, the VP can also choose to intervene and toss out electors.
I do agree that this is more of a firewall/last resort. There's still several other paths to victory, and a true nuclear option would be invoking Directive 51. I hope it doesn't get to that, but I'd rather have that as opposed to a compromised president rigged in to serve China.
A Pence block would be dangerous and probably lead to the House voting for Biden. Only exception is if we reach the point of everyone agreeing that there was egregious fraud and it was too late to fix the electors.
I agree- which is why I believe it should be a last resort.
Also, that would be House Delegations which favor the GOP and Trump.
Yes, but if we have the optics that we’re “stealing it,” all the RINOs are going to stab us in the back. The past month made me wary of the House route.
The Rinos must be expected to stab us in the back whenever it's most damaging to us. Makes sense to expect it and not have to count on them at all.
I like the pathway of arresting Biden for corrpution under the Logan Act or something. Would be just desserts for Biden fucking over Flynn. Only one candidate left, Trump sweeps electors. Too bad nobody can count on the justice dept to do this. I'm not sure who else could.
Yah, it's 2 hours per state I believe is what he said. We might get 40-50ish hours of delay out of patriots while the rest may cuck out.
The VP does not have to accept a contested state's results.
Really hope someone like Rand will pull through
Gaetz is not a Senator though, he's a Rep in the house.
Hopefully Rand Paul sees it as an opportunity for revenge after he and his wife were attacked by Antifa goons following the RNC.
It’s our best chance.
You need 51 Senators to vote to sustain the objection.
We've got too many Rinos and need to win the elections in Georgia.
How does the Perdue/Loeffler runoff factor here? Currently there's a 52/48 majority, but doesn't their terms technically end before a vote would happen on January 6? That'd make it 48/50.
If anything, I appreciate it for simply being a show of support for the truth. So many Republicans are staying silent or bowing out, even if it has no power in the process, standing up for what's right means something.
yes he actually does. haha Nancy Pelosi threaten to do this exact thing last month if any of the battle ground states picked pro Presdient Trump electors. haha Isn't the US constitution great? 😎😁
VP Pence also has the authority to reject those states electors from contested states. Why do you think the media and dems want President Trump to give up?? Since President Trump refuses to concede he has multiple ways of winning this election now. haha The media nor the dems want anyone to know about it.
Scotus
State legislatures
Insurrection act
Pence refusal
Contingent election
There are many options
Dont be. GA and NV are locks for Trump to either flip or at least pull from Biden's total. The evidence brought out yesterday is staggering. Almost as good in WI and AZ. PA and MI have such staggering amounts of fraud I'm not sure Scalia could unwind them, so probably the best we can hope for there is for the electors to be declared compromised. Trump is either going to win in the EC or a House vote, barring a serious lack of Republican spine. Which is why this post is important. Brooks is show people the way. If others see there is hope, they will move in the right direction too.
You joined 10 fucking days ago and have done nothing but post doomer shit. You are a LARPer.
how's that "rely on scotus any anyone who disagrees is a doomer larper" taste now, shitbrain?
ok
It is a blockbusting power that no doubt the left will try to circumvent through all nefarious means.
Go doesn’t determine. If we can’t get the Dem house to agree then it gets reverted to the original EC vote
VP determines if they can keep the electoral votes!!??
So they won't vote on it?
If no candidate receives 270, doesn't it go to the house per state then first?
If at least one congressmen and at least one senator oppose, Congress have to debate elections for two hours and then vote on it. To invalidate the results there needs to be a majority both in the House and in the Senate. So that's not going to happen. Additionally, speaker of the house has some means of railroading the whole process.
The only real option now is to get enough States to not certify electors (electors, not elections). Or to get judicial remedies enjoining the certification of electors. But I'm afraid we may not have enough time left.
my understanding is that if 1 house member and 1 senator objects to a state certification there needs to be some kind of session and vote on whether to accept that certification.
So if one assume that said session does not change anyone's minds, this will just put a few hours pause on the process.
It will be the new congress, with the barest of bare Dem majority in the House.
We need a US senator to do it as well. Maybe Hawley or Cotton? Everybody else seems to be in on the Biden plan to keep deep state open but have R’s keep senate for “balanced” govt. Increase the funding for Gitmo!
Ted Cruz would definitely do it.
Or Rand
Rand would grin when he did it, too.
I am sending an old fashioned letter to Ted Cruz' office in DC today to encourage him to do so.
Rick Scott might.
I hope so.
Hawley was pissed last night, I think he will
The Senators need pressure on them. They unanimously acted against our interests the other day because of the H1B visa rules. We need to tell them to get their act together or get voted out.
If he really wants to make the point - Cocaine Mitch should stand up and do it.
I think he was always deep state turtle Mitch. But maybe he’ll prove that he was cocaine Mitch all along.
I'd say Marsha Blackburn or Tommy Tuberville could do it too.
We're finding out which politicians are actual Republicans and which ones are grifters in this election. Good times. Crush the Democrats here, in 2022 and 2024.
Trump has a way of exposing the RINOs that is absolutely brilliant!
If you weren’t sure about your politician before you should know by now if they need to get primaried.
Trump really is draining the swamp! By exposing them...
I voted for him. You’re welcome everyone!
Sweet Home Alabama! He's not my Congressman, but I'd have voted for Mo.
Mo fraud, mo problems
Alright, that made me chuckle.
Brooks - From the great state of alabama - probably one of the last 4 or 5 bastions of mostly non-cuckery left in the country.
Awesome state - mountains to forests to beaches all within 5 hr drive.
Plenty of TD pedes here live in AL. I am one. And yes, definitely a bastion of Constitutionalism and Trump. Especially South Alabama where I am.
Lol my job requires me to travel the world. Trust me pede I've seen it all. Wanst saying other states don't have it. But most states that do are pretty cucked beyond recognition.
Agreed. Colorado is beautiful, but the commies are ruining it.
Alabama is definitely extremely conservative. I don’t live in Alabama but it’s way too conservative for my liking (to be fair, I am a conspiracy theorist infowars anti-globalist moderate).
Oh come on. True "Leftists" compared to the Demonrat party of today are far right. We should just be happy that the slightly left among us have realized the destruction and misery that these globalists want to cause, and have came over to the MAGA party. You can't expect everyone to think exactly the same way, that's the kind of groupthink that transformed half the nation into miserable TDS sufferers.
I’m anti CRT/BLM, and want illegals deported with tough legal immigration laws. I also watch Alex Jones.
He should have been senator instead of dead baby Doug Jones but the democrats crossed over and voted Roy Moore in the primary.
Wow! Never heard of this gentleman, but I'll be watching him closely from now on! Way to go, Mo!
He has some zingers. I love Mo
Nice! I'll have to look him up.
I love this but unfortunately it doesn’t mean much with dems controlling the house.
WRONG.
That is NOT how it works.
You don't need a majority -- you need ONE representative and ONE senator to challenge.
And if it goes to a contingent election, the House votes by state delegation not individual member. That is 1 vote for each of the 50 states. Right now there are 27 R state delegations in the House v. 23 D state delegations -- Trump will win that vote.
Please don't be ignorant of the Constitution like the Dems are.
No. President of the Senate resolves.
Oh well, I thought you needed majorities. If you're right, then, Pence will have the test of his life - as a man of faith, he should look forward to that.
We are talking about two separate processes here
Excellence. I didn’t know that part! Thanks!
PS: Where can I find that so I can blast it on Twitter?
If both candidates fall short of 270 and the vote goes to the house, it's done as one vote per state, not a traditional house vote. Unlike the regular house count, state representation in the house is mostly Republican.
AND the votes must go according to PARTY. Guaranteed win for DJT!
Oh.... gotcha! Makes sense.
That's not the truth though.
Wouldn’t pence decide?
That would be in the SENATE, not the house...
You're assuming the Dems will have the house by Jan 6th.... Alot of flips can happen between now and Jan. The Dems right now are holding on to the smallest House majority in American history.
Also VP has a constitution right to reject any contested State's electors.
President Trump starts his second term in Jan 2021 anyway.. most of us just a show for normies.
It’s impossible to control the house by January. You have to have an election to flip seats.
It's based on state delegations, not the overall numbers of representatives. R's control 26 state delegations, which means that Trump wins in a vote.
again, not the same process Mo Brooks is initiating.
+1
+1
Solid stats Pede! Thanks for sharing
While this is great, I absolutely don’t want to get to the point that we have to rely on The senate to save if this republic.
It's about time someone stands up, but THE KRAKEN document may explain why so many are afraid. This filing from Sidney needs to be in the TOP posts.
How does he walk around with balls so big?
He's actually just a set of balls with a man attached
Wheelbarrow
His story about voter fraud in his 1982 election really tugged at my heart strings. We need to fight! We need to stop the Democrats from ever doing this again!
For now and for the future of our great Republic 🇺🇸
Bama's so based, rolltide. Best state in the country.
Flood the offices of Mo Brooks with phone calls and emails of support and thanks for standing for truth and justice.
Thank god for alabama, a true home of patriots
Wow, it's going to be a great debate that will last for 50 years....but Trump is Still Your President elected BT THE PEOPLE!!
I am going to move to Alabama's 5th District just so I can vote for this guy.
Roll Tide
Yeeeeees!!!! Thank you Mo!!
Remember Mo. now let’s get Ted Cruz and Jim Jordan to join him
He was the best candidate in that senate primary but the voters of Alabama were dumb enough to pick a weird clown stuck in the 1950’s in Roy Moore and the appointee Luther Strange that was chosen by Bentley in a crooked deal (Strange would get the seat if he didn’t investigate Bentley).
The Constitution only requires ONE Senator and ONE Congressman to dispute the state's electors to prevent their entry into the count.
Read the playbook, the Dems anticipated this and have many, many options of cockblocking that can drag the process out until Jan 20 and prevent a contingent election (that they will lose).
Shit is going to have to get bad enough on the streets that they chose to lose for the good of the country.
Prepare for insurrection act, and martial law.
Can the one senator and one congressman be overruled if they refuse to budge? Or is that all it takes to send it to congress to decide?
He will be overruled by the Dem/Rino controlled Congress. This isn’t the way. It’s good posturing for re-election, etc and good for more eyes on the prize, but this has an exact 0% chance of accomplishing our goal.
That’s my question, can they be overruled? My understanding is that it takes only 1 Senator and 1 Representative to stop the certification of results. If they don’t budge, can they filibuster the election results?
Did Bannon miss the previous 2-3 shows because he's sick? His voice sounds off.
Said on assignment
Got it
HAPPY FRIDAY TO ALL WE WILL WIN THIS WAR LOVE YOU ALL <3
Can one congressman do that? Can't Pelosi just say no?
thank you.........
Losing strategy though given UNIPARTY and Trump really needs the votes he earned.
Hero and treu Patriot!!!
https://thedonald.win/p/11QlFgKm6Z/pedes-get-in-here-i-just-found-a/
Upvote this for visibility. He might be on to something here
Patriot.
My congressman!
Way to go Mo !
Uncle no mo joe!
We need a Senator to join him or it'll happen like 2000 when House Reps were trying to do this an 0 Senators joined.
Hollow and fruitless plan. Good optics tho for re-elections
God Bless This Man!
Odd how only one stepped up. Tells u all u needs to know about Republicans.
Some say the mysterious humming heard round the world is actually Mo Brooks' enormous balls altering the Earth's gravitational field.
This shouldn't stop momentum on the lawsuits to get Trump electors selected, as that is a longshot, and this is a moonshot.
That's my Congressman!!
Outstanding news!
If socialists are happy to kill millions of their countrymen to solidify their power...
btw here's this brand new vaccine...
He's not from my district, but I'm proud to see someone from my state taking a stand to stop the steal
Imagine if they vote and select joe biden and then VP Mike pence