he's wrong on 1 point. 2 hour debate isn't required. that's the maximum for each challenge.
Each congressman gets to speak once for up to 5 minutes. So with 24 congressmen (maybe less with a few seconds between each), it's easy to get up to the 2 hours.
But if for example, only 3 congressmen wanted to speak, it would be over in about 15 minutes, not 2 hours.
What consequences would you foresee from Twitter taking such an action? The point is that there is plenty of illegal shit going on that no one is doing anything about. In 2020 the law doesn't really seem to matter much if you have enough power and/or money. Twitter qualifies as having enough of both along with Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Apple. Sure, you could bring a civil suit bit how many years would that take until adjudication?
Why do people think this is happening? This NEEDS A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE FIRST to cancel the votes. Both house and senate. We are not going to be able to cancel the votes down below 270
Just drive a truck through the doors f the Capitol and drop off 10 billion electoral votes for Trump. If anyone objects tell them to fuck off because they have no standing. Proceed to put cardboard in the windows and count the votes. Trump wins!
This is a very good reason to continue to call your state and US congressmen. Let them know you expect them to support their incumbent Republican president.
sad but true. for this scenario to work, a majority is required (i believe). sadly, i think what will come of it is a crystal clear list of those who do, or don't, support POTUS.
🤞
Many say each state gets a vote along party lines. I myself have repeated it but I looked yesterday at the 12th amendment and didn't see the party line thing being non negotiable. Is this fake news? Where does it say it has to be along party lines?
Sorry Ron, but it doesn't work that way. Per 3 U.S. Code § 5, states which resolved all challenges prior to the safe harbor date can't have their electors challenged in Congress on the 6th. I don't know exactly how many states that is, but I imagine most of the non-swing-states met the safe harbor deadline.
That isn't what Ron is suggesting. He suggests challenging every electoral vote - all 538 of them. That kind of delay tactic wastes time and is more of a desperate move than a legitimate way to win.
I do believe Congress should challenge the electors from contested states. That is the right thing to do.
The exact wording is below. If you just read the bolded parts and leave out the fluff, it says exactly what I summarized it as.
If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made *at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned.
That law was written for the sole intent of preventing frivolous challenges to electoral votes. Ron is suggesting Congress challenge and debate all votes, when only certain votes are eligible to be challenged.
Nothing happens until Jan 6th that is binding
so the electoral college met on the DEC 14th
The Safe Harbor Statute says the electoral college has to include your electors if you resolve an Electoral College by Dec 8
The Electoral College voted on Dec 14th So then that Certification goes to the Archivist who then gives it to the VP
On Jan 6th the VP announces who is certified as Electors
at that point under the Electoral Contest Act passed in 1887 (if that Law is binding)
then a House member AND a Senate member must join and object to the Electors from a particular state (i.e. Marjorie, Rand, Turberville? As trump likes to say, “We’ll see what happens”)
IF they do then the House and Senate have a meeting about it for 2 hours
come back and vote then you have to get a majority vote from both
but thats only 1 interpretation there is another interpretation that claims both the House AND the Senate have to approve the electors or else they’re not approved
but the 12th amendment says to goto the House by state delegation and THEY get to deiced whether or not the electors are contested and they get to decide whether or not there will be replacement electors
thats where the ultimate power of any presidential election contest sits in the Congress.
Contest every single one. Fuck the demon party. If the laws don't apply to them then we'll ram Trump into office by force and they can suck a dick. It's time to stop treating these faggots like human beings.
It has to be contested with a Representative and Senator signing the contest elector paperwork. Who is the senator that will sign with Representative??
perdue said he will, i have my doubts. however, there are a number of senators that have been trying to stop the steal from the start, they are better bets.
This!!!
Every Biden elector s suspect now that we know there was massive fraud every-fucking-where we've looked
Contest All Biden Electors
Why not contest EVERY Dem elector?
It was actually suggested on The Hill (!) a while back, of all places: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/530306-no-biden-hasnt-won-yet-one-more-nightmare-scenario
think this is just it. For the 6th, Pedes should have tens of thousands of copies of that report and distribute them to the masses that day.
Might be a nightmare to them. More precious the salt.
Me too, in on 5th out on 7th late afternoon
Congress folks better stack up on adderall lol
it will get contested; its just a matter of what happens afterward; 100pct.
Even one vote will identify for all to see, who is MAGA and who is RINO.
he's wrong on 1 point. 2 hour debate isn't required. that's the maximum for each challenge.
Each congressman gets to speak once for up to 5 minutes. So with 24 congressmen (maybe less with a few seconds between each), it's easy to get up to the 2 hours.
But if for example, only 3 congressmen wanted to speak, it would be over in about 15 minutes, not 2 hours.
He was also wrong when he said Trump's twitter account would be blocked by last Friday.
I don’t think Twitter can block Trump legally as long as he’s president.
What consequences would you foresee from Twitter taking such an action? The point is that there is plenty of illegal shit going on that no one is doing anything about. In 2020 the law doesn't really seem to matter much if you have enough power and/or money. Twitter qualifies as having enough of both along with Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Apple. Sure, you could bring a civil suit bit how many years would that take until adjudication?
Then nothing CodeMonkeyZ says should be considered credible.
Being wrong about one thing doesn't make him wrong about all things. That said, he should be taken with increasing skepticism.
I should instead say none of the sourced predictions he makes should be considered credible.
I thought it was a minimum of 2 hours.
"After the debate has lasted two hours, the presiding officer of each House must "put the main question without further debate.""
no, debate is halted at 2 hours. doesn't prohibit the vote from happening sooner than 2 hours. but it can't go longer.
Why do people think this is happening? This NEEDS A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE FIRST to cancel the votes. Both house and senate. We are not going to be able to cancel the votes down below 270
is that the plan? to delay for 14 days? thats some interesting tactic
And we trust contests? I suspect Brian kemp style rinos to fuck us
I don’t trust the house. Has anyone here laid out those votes as to who we expect to vote which way? Rinos gonna fuck us?
It is a frivolous delay tactic. It won't work. Democrats hold the record for the longest filibuster in US history.
yeah this is a better summary of his point; maybe one of the last angles left
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/530306-no-biden-hasnt-won-yet-one-more-nightmare-scenario
Good read and overview! President Pelosi is a scary thought, but seems highly likely
Just drive a truck through the doors f the Capitol and drop off 10 billion electoral votes for Trump. If anyone objects tell them to fuck off because they have no standing. Proceed to put cardboard in the windows and count the votes. Trump wins!
They have to vote along party lines, as in if Republican = Trump. Rs have 26 states Ds 23 as far as I know
This is a very good reason to continue to call your state and US congressmen. Let them know you expect them to support their incumbent Republican president.
That list includes senators. Is it house members or both house and senate members? I also heard it was state delegations in legislatures also.
It's 27-21-2 R advantage or something, with two states tied.
sad but true. for this scenario to work, a majority is required (i believe). sadly, i think what will come of it is a crystal clear list of those who do, or don't, support POTUS. 🤞
The best way to make sure a plan succeeds is to outline it for literally everyone to see weeks in advance.
hopefully televised publicly so our esteemed elected know the country and their constituents are watching how they vote.
Biden will never be President
Any district where dominion was used should be contested individually and all of Cali.
Many say each state gets a vote along party lines. I myself have repeated it but I looked yesterday at the 12th amendment and didn't see the party line thing being non negotiable. Is this fake news? Where does it say it has to be along party lines?
I have been saying exactly this for weeks now. Welcome to the program. https://thedonald.win/p/11R4q0Kb5E/x/c/4DruJmcZaEr
It's a nightmare.👹💀👹
what about RINOs in red states? Could a red state have a "never Trumper" vote for Joepedo in that scenario?
They should all read the constitution out loud.
Ted Cruz and Rand Paul need to tag team it.
Pretty sure they can choose to debate them as a whole rather than individually... I think they have done so in the past without fuss.
This guy is a genius.
Sorry Ron, but it doesn't work that way. Per 3 U.S. Code § 5, states which resolved all challenges prior to the safe harbor date can't have their electors challenged in Congress on the 6th. I don't know exactly how many states that is, but I imagine most of the non-swing-states met the safe harbor deadline.
non-swing states aren't needed to flip, I think any combination of 3 swing states will stop Joe from getting to 270, which I believe is the objective.
That isn't what Ron is suggesting. He suggests challenging every electoral vote - all 538 of them. That kind of delay tactic wastes time and is more of a desperate move than a legitimate way to win.
I do believe Congress should challenge the electors from contested states. That is the right thing to do.
yeah, I need some sleep.
The exact wording is below. If you just read the bolded parts and leave out the fluff, it says exactly what I summarized it as.
That law was written for the sole intent of preventing frivolous challenges to electoral votes. Ron is suggesting Congress challenge and debate all votes, when only certain votes are eligible to be challenged.
I understand your point, but Trump winning according to the Constitution holds a lot more legitimacy that way.
Nothing happens until Jan 6th that is binding so the electoral college met on the DEC 14th The Safe Harbor Statute says the electoral college has to include your electors if you resolve an Electoral College by Dec 8 The Electoral College voted on Dec 14th So then that Certification goes to the Archivist who then gives it to the VP On Jan 6th the VP announces who is certified as Electors at that point under the Electoral Contest Act passed in 1887 (if that Law is binding) then a House member AND a Senate member must join and object to the Electors from a particular state (i.e. Marjorie, Rand, Turberville? As trump likes to say, “We’ll see what happens”) IF they do then the House and Senate have a meeting about it for 2 hours come back and vote then you have to get a majority vote from both but thats only 1 interpretation there is another interpretation that claims both the House AND the Senate have to approve the electors or else they’re not approved but the 12th amendment says to goto the House by state delegation and THEY get to deiced whether or not the electors are contested and they get to decide whether or not there will be replacement electors thats where the ultimate power of any presidential election contest sits in the Congress.
Contest every single one. Fuck the demon party. If the laws don't apply to them then we'll ram Trump into office by force and they can suck a dick. It's time to stop treating these faggots like human beings.
love it much more the sticky post way. Pence force state legislature to choose on 24 Dec.
I don't trust the Republicans to vote for Trump in enough numbers to win it. Should just have Pence count only Republican electors.
It has to be contested with a Representative and Senator signing the contest elector paperwork. Who is the senator that will sign with Representative??
perdue said he will, i have my doubts. however, there are a number of senators that have been trying to stop the steal from the start, they are better bets.
Always was headed to a contested election.
This was the only place we keep laws intact and sidestep the corrupt assholes trying to destroy our republic.
I would absolutely call bullshit on this tactic if used against me. I don't consider this legitimate.
And frankly at this point I don't care.