The Electors votes are opened and DJT will have 270 or more votes for POTUS; and / or Pence will have 270 or more votes for VP.
There wont be 270 votes for either POTUS or VP, and then it goes into contingent voting:
For POTUS, it goes to the House members to vote by State Delegation (each State gets 1 vote; so Rhode Island with 2 House seats gets 1 vote; and CA with 53 House seats gets 1 vote.) Majority of votes to win.
For VP, the voting goes to the Senators to decide. The list of names that are eligible have to come from the top vote getters from the Electors. Majority of votes to win.
Also to note, Electors and congress can only vote for eligible people; so those that are ineligible either for already serving say 8 years as Potus; or not (natural born) US Citizens; who received votes, their vote totals = zero (eg the Dem Ticket.)
If no one gets a majority for either POTUS or VP in immediate contingent voting; the timeline goes into "Overtime phase" of re-voting by the House or Senate, until winners are selected by Jan 20th. More rules follow, some rules are also not constitutional as well in the overtime phase. In the event, that none are selected, If it goes down this path; there will be more legal challenges including to things like unconstitutional provisions in Amendments which need to be stricken down too.
Another note: New congress gets sworn in on Jan 3rd; and of course there's issues with many House and some Senate seats; including violations by having voting occur before Election Day and after Election Day; which violates the US Constitution & US Code from it.
Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1: Time, place, and manner of holding
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing [sic] Senators.
Which congress has set in "2 U.S. Code § 7.Time of election"
The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.
See how enforcing the US Constitution as written solves most all these "problems" which have been created by intentionally violating the US Constitution by the democracy party.
Pence can look at Pennsylvania (or any) and decide, "Oh wow! That's a substantial amount of fuckery. Let's just pretend Pennsylvania (or any) doesn't exist this year."
So Pence can choose Dem or Rep electors, if boths' electoral certificates are submitted (which is the case in some states.) Or he can just decide NOT to accept any electors from a contested state. Because, according to the Constitution, that is his legal right as President of the Senate.
The way it "normally" works, is State Legislatures appoint two SLATES of ELECTORS (one DEM, one REP) before Election Day. Then, whichever side wins the public's votes on Election Day for POTUS/VP; that's the party's who's SLATE is "certified" by the Sec of that State & Governor of that State. [This process btw violates what is written in the US Constitution, but it's what nearly everyone does for awhile, particularly since 3 USC 1 etc was passed and took effect in June 1948, which is why/how Dem President Truman "won" his re-election in Nov 1948 with post-midnight ballot dumps as well.]
So by US Constitution, congress can set when the Electors do their voting for Potus & VP; this was/is set as Dec 14th.
So in these 5-ish "battleground" States (aka the Dem Fraud/Cheating States), on Dec 14th, both the DEM and REP SLATES of ELECTORS did their voting.
So now these States have two sets of Electors votes signed & sealed & sent into DC to be opened on Jan 6th.
So Trump for POTUS ( & Pence for VP ) has over 270 Elector Votes to win, if open/count the Republican Elector SLATES.
How will there be no 270 votes for anyone?
If both the DEM & Republican SLATES get tossed out, means these "battleground" States will have sent zero "legit/legal" Electoral Votes; thus no one will likely have the 270 required; and this means it goes to the "contingent voting" by the House (for POTUS) and Senate (for VP).
In the US Constitution, as per Article 3's (Vesting clause), it is the judiciary's job to "judge"/decide these things as it is with any violations of the Law/US Constitution. These is still 1 week left for the judiciary to do their job on this Elector matter. (Unless the judiciary strikes down the 20th Amendment in the next week, which would unamend the US Constitution and restore the March date rather than the January Date for all this to occur; which isn't on anyone's radar atm.)
So in these 5-ish "battleground" States (aka the Dem Fraud/Cheating States), on Dec 14th, both the DEM and REP SLATES of ELECTORS did their voting.
So now these States have two sets of Electors votes signed & sealed & sent into DC to be opened on Jan 6th.
So Pence can consider these "alternate slate of electors" even if it was just a small number of State Legislators (30 out of 100, or whatever small minority) that got together and sent it to him? Does not require a majority of State legislature in order to be a valid Slate?
Yes. Both the (DEM & REP) SLATES have had their names selected by their State Legislatures. Both SLATES have voted on Dec 14th. Both SLATES have signed and sealed their tallies as required in the US Constitution. Now obviously, both SLATES are not (cannot be) legal/constitutional at the same time; one or both are illegal/unconstitutional.
So Pence, like any government official, can do or not do things; in the name of upholding their Oath of Office to the US Constitution. And if people don't like that, they can sue him one way or the other. If Pence has been informed/knows there's fraud/cheating with a State's Electors, he can have the issue looked into before becoming part of the DEM fraud/cheat/steal (just as the governors could look into it before "certifying" which "governors certifying" btw is not in the Constitution.
Pence or anyone else along the chain of custody can say, "hey these are fraudulent" and others can say "hey these are real" no different than King Solomon deciding which woman was the real baby's mother; it is a judicial function to decide such things; this is the courts job. Absent a court of law willing to rule on the matter; then it's whatever justice occurs OUTSIDE of a courtroom rather than within (hence one of the whole reasons why courts exist in the firstplace to avoid settling things OUTSIDE or keeping things "unsettled".
To use a bad analogy:
It's sort of like if a renter wrote 3 checks the week before Rent was due on the 6th of the month, each on three separate bank accounts. And come time for the landlord to cash one of the checks on the 6th, but the money is only in one of the three accounts. Which account is it in? Is it in the REP account, the DEM account, or the no Slates count account.
This is why in the US Constitution, and the US Code which comes from it; there is NO power for the State Legislatures to "pre-date" their SLATES of ELECTORS. State Legislatures are only "empowered" legally to appoint Electors within the timeframe set by congress (as per the US Constitution). So nominating "SLATES" beforehand, isn't legit (same for afterwards, but again the Constitution isn't being followed either before or after.)
So now there's two SLATES, well, both could be invalid; heck realistically under the US Constitution all the SLATES of ALL the STATES are invalid; which means there's no short list for the joint-session to vote upon in a contingent-election. Which means, the congress would have to do as written in the US Constitution, and tell all the State Legislaturs again the time(day/timeframe) which they have to appoint their State's Electors; and congress (as per the Constitution) to say when(date) those new SLATES are to vote. And to bring those votes to a new joint-session to be opened. This is what the SCOTUS should do if it had the balls to enforce the US Constitution as written.
Well it generally will go one of two ways:
The Electors votes are opened and DJT will have 270 or more votes for POTUS; and / or Pence will have 270 or more votes for VP.
There wont be 270 votes for either POTUS or VP, and then it goes into contingent voting:
For POTUS, it goes to the House members to vote by State Delegation (each State gets 1 vote; so Rhode Island with 2 House seats gets 1 vote; and CA with 53 House seats gets 1 vote.) Majority of votes to win.
For VP, the voting goes to the Senators to decide. The list of names that are eligible have to come from the top vote getters from the Electors. Majority of votes to win.
Also to note, Electors and congress can only vote for eligible people; so those that are ineligible either for already serving say 8 years as Potus; or not (natural born) US Citizens; who received votes, their vote totals = zero (eg the Dem Ticket.)
If no one gets a majority for either POTUS or VP in immediate contingent voting; the timeline goes into "Overtime phase" of re-voting by the House or Senate, until winners are selected by Jan 20th. More rules follow, some rules are also not constitutional as well in the overtime phase. In the event, that none are selected, If it goes down this path; there will be more legal challenges including to things like unconstitutional provisions in Amendments which need to be stricken down too.
Another note: New congress gets sworn in on Jan 3rd; and of course there's issues with many House and some Senate seats; including violations by having voting occur before Election Day and after Election Day; which violates the US Constitution & US Code from it.
Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1: Time, place, and manner of holding
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_1:_Time,_place,_and_manner_of_holding
Which congress has set in "2 U.S. Code § 7.Time of election"
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/7
See how enforcing the US Constitution as written solves most all these "problems" which have been created by intentionally violating the US Constitution by the democracy party.
Thank you very much.
How Trump will have 270+ votes?
How will there be no 270 votes for anyone?
Pence can look at Pennsylvania (or any) and decide, "Oh wow! That's a substantial amount of fuckery. Let's just pretend Pennsylvania (or any) doesn't exist this year."
So Pence can choose Dem or Rep electors, if boths' electoral certificates are submitted (which is the case in some states.) Or he can just decide NOT to accept any electors from a contested state. Because, according to the Constitution, that is his legal right as President of the Senate.
You're welcome and Happy New Year's Eve/Day too!
Quick background:
The way it "normally" works, is State Legislatures appoint two SLATES of ELECTORS (one DEM, one REP) before Election Day. Then, whichever side wins the public's votes on Election Day for POTUS/VP; that's the party's who's SLATE is "certified" by the Sec of that State & Governor of that State. [This process btw violates what is written in the US Constitution, but it's what nearly everyone does for awhile, particularly since 3 USC 1 etc was passed and took effect in June 1948, which is why/how Dem President Truman "won" his re-election in Nov 1948 with post-midnight ballot dumps as well.]
So by US Constitution, congress can set when the Electors do their voting for Potus & VP; this was/is set as Dec 14th.
So in these 5-ish "battleground" States (aka the Dem Fraud/Cheating States), on Dec 14th, both the DEM and REP SLATES of ELECTORS did their voting.
So now these States have two sets of Electors votes signed & sealed & sent into DC to be opened on Jan 6th.
So Trump for POTUS ( & Pence for VP ) has over 270 Elector Votes to win, if open/count the Republican Elector SLATES.
If both the DEM & Republican SLATES get tossed out, means these "battleground" States will have sent zero "legit/legal" Electoral Votes; thus no one will likely have the 270 required; and this means it goes to the "contingent voting" by the House (for POTUS) and Senate (for VP).
In the US Constitution, as per Article 3's (Vesting clause), it is the judiciary's job to "judge"/decide these things as it is with any violations of the Law/US Constitution. These is still 1 week left for the judiciary to do their job on this Elector matter. (Unless the judiciary strikes down the 20th Amendment in the next week, which would unamend the US Constitution and restore the March date rather than the January Date for all this to occur; which isn't on anyone's radar atm.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesting_Clauses
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twentieth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
So Pence can consider these "alternate slate of electors" even if it was just a small number of State Legislators (30 out of 100, or whatever small minority) that got together and sent it to him? Does not require a majority of State legislature in order to be a valid Slate?
Yes. Both the (DEM & REP) SLATES have had their names selected by their State Legislatures. Both SLATES have voted on Dec 14th. Both SLATES have signed and sealed their tallies as required in the US Constitution. Now obviously, both SLATES are not (cannot be) legal/constitutional at the same time; one or both are illegal/unconstitutional.
So Pence, like any government official, can do or not do things; in the name of upholding their Oath of Office to the US Constitution. And if people don't like that, they can sue him one way or the other. If Pence has been informed/knows there's fraud/cheating with a State's Electors, he can have the issue looked into before becoming part of the DEM fraud/cheat/steal (just as the governors could look into it before "certifying" which "governors certifying" btw is not in the Constitution.
Pence or anyone else along the chain of custody can say, "hey these are fraudulent" and others can say "hey these are real" no different than King Solomon deciding which woman was the real baby's mother; it is a judicial function to decide such things; this is the courts job. Absent a court of law willing to rule on the matter; then it's whatever justice occurs OUTSIDE of a courtroom rather than within (hence one of the whole reasons why courts exist in the firstplace to avoid settling things OUTSIDE or keeping things "unsettled".
To use a bad analogy:
It's sort of like if a renter wrote 3 checks the week before Rent was due on the 6th of the month, each on three separate bank accounts. And come time for the landlord to cash one of the checks on the 6th, but the money is only in one of the three accounts. Which account is it in? Is it in the REP account, the DEM account, or the no Slates count account.
This is why in the US Constitution, and the US Code which comes from it; there is NO power for the State Legislatures to "pre-date" their SLATES of ELECTORS. State Legislatures are only "empowered" legally to appoint Electors within the timeframe set by congress (as per the US Constitution). So nominating "SLATES" beforehand, isn't legit (same for afterwards, but again the Constitution isn't being followed either before or after.)
So now there's two SLATES, well, both could be invalid; heck realistically under the US Constitution all the SLATES of ALL the STATES are invalid; which means there's no short list for the joint-session to vote upon in a contingent-election. Which means, the congress would have to do as written in the US Constitution, and tell all the State Legislaturs again the time(day/timeframe) which they have to appoint their State's Electors; and congress (as per the Constitution) to say when(date) those new SLATES are to vote. And to bring those votes to a new joint-session to be opened. This is what the SCOTUS should do if it had the balls to enforce the US Constitution as written.
Some of this I already knew. But thanks for this in-depth explanation! However, all of this is theory, I'm excited to see what will happen on Jan 6!