Treehouse has been totally wrong on many things.

Get it through your heads: Nothing is happening in Congress on January 6th. This Commission might be our only chance.

The Vice President doesn't have magical powers because "muh President of the Senate". He has a job, set forth by the 12th Amendment. It's to "open all the certificates". That's it. It doesn't even say who counts them, it doesn't deal with how to resolve disputes, which is why the Electoral Count Act was passed 83 years later. To fill in those blanks.

• The only way to remove/replace electors under the ECA is by written objection from at last one Representative and at least one Senator. (Ok, we got that.)

• Next the House and Senate have to debate the objections. They are only upheld if both chambers approve by majority votes. (The one-state, one-vote thing only happens if there is a contingent election in the House. Not up to that yet.)

• Dems control the House and will vote against any objections, along with GOP cucks like Adam Kinzinger.

• Even if the Senate upholds the objections (a big "if" with the likes of Romney, Collins, Murkowski, Sasse, etc.), a split vote between the House and Senate leaves the governor-certified Biden electors in place.

• Biden wins.

Unless...

The U.S. Constitution supersedes any federal law, the Electoral Count Act included. If the state legislatures of GA, WI and AZ were to meet and approve a new slate of Trump electors before Jan 20, they would have a very real shot at overturning the fraudulently-certified Biden slates in court. Their argument would be simple:

The Constitution gives us the power to choose electors and does not constrain that power in any way. No law can diminish our inherent constitutional authority in this area. To the extent that the ECA sets out "Safe Harbor" deadlines and presumes to allow Congress to make the final decision about which of two competing elector slates from our state is the right one, the ECA improperly usurps that constitutional authority. Our final decision on electors is the Trump slate, and we demand they be the only ones counted."

The problem here is not one state legislature has voted to send Trump electors. Yes, there are stories that some Trump electors acted themselves, but that will not hold any weight without a formal resolution being passed by their states' legislatures.

They don't need their governor to call them into a special session.

They don't need their governor to certify the new slate.

They just need to meet and ACT.

The Cruz proposal provides a mechanism for them to do just that.

Do they need it? No, but they are being a bunch of weak pussies and they need something to kick their asses into gear. Rudy and his team's presentations were incredible, but everyone knows that he is the President's faithful friend and personal attorney/campaign attorney, so many of those legislators discount the evidence for that reason.

But if all of that evidence is distilled down to the "cream of the crop" and is powerfully and concisely presented to a Commission that in turn reports their findings back to the state legislatures, that just might give them the courage they need to do their duty and approve the Trump electors.

Then it would be up to the courts. I can't see this Supreme Court telling the states "No, you can't pick your electors."

Treehouse has been totally wrong on many things.

Get it through your heads: Nothing is happening in Congress on January 6th. This Commission might be our only chance.

The Vice President doesn't have magical powers because "muh President of the Senate". He has a job, set forth by the 12th Amendment. It's to "open all the certificates". That's it. It doesn't even say who counts them, it doesn't deal with how to resolve disputes, which is why the Electoral Count Act was passed 83 years later. To fill in those blanks.

• The only way to remove/replace electors under the ECA is by written objection from at last one Representative and at least one Senator. (Ok, we got that.)

• Next the House and Senate have to debate the objections. They are only upheld if both chambers approve by majority votes. (The one-state, one-vote thing only happens if there is a contingent election in the House. Not up to that yet.)

• Dems control the House and will vote against any objections, along with GOP cucks like Adam Kinzinger.

• Even if the Senate upholds the objections (a big "if" with the likes of Romney, Collins, Murkowski, Sasse, etc.), a split vote between the House and Senate leaves the governor-certified Biden electors in place.

• Biden wins.

Unless...

The U.S. Constitution supersedes any federal law, the Electoral Count Act included. If the state legislatures of GA, WI and AZ were to meet and approve a new slate of Trump electors before Jan 20, they would have a very real shot at overturning the fraudulently-certified Biden slates in court. Their argument would be simple:

The Constitution gives us the power to choose electors and does not constrain that power in any way. No law can diminish our inherent constitutional authority in this area. To the extent that the ECA sets out "Safe Harbor" deadlines and presumes to allow Congress to make the final decision about which of two competing elector slates from our state is the right one, the ECA improperly usurps that constitutional authority. Our final decision on electors is the Trump slate, and we demand they be the only ones counted."

The problem here is not one state legislature has voted to send Trump electors. Yes, there are stories that some Trump electors acted themselves, but that will not hold any weight without a formal resolution being passed by their states' legislatures.

They don't need their governor to call them into a special session.

They don't need their governor to certify the new slate.

They just need to meet and ACT.

The Cruz proposal provides a mechanism for them to do just that.

Do they need it? No, but they are being a bunch of weak pussies and they need something to kick their asses into gear. Rudy and his team's presentations were incredible, but everyone knows that he is the President's faithful friend and personal attorney/campaign attorney, so many of those legislators discount the evidence for that reason. But if all of that evidence is distilled down to the "cream of the crop" and is powerfully and concisely presented to a Commission that in turn reports their findings back to the state legislatures, that just might give them the courage they need to do their duty and approve the Trump electors.

Then it would be up to the courts. I can't see this Supreme Court telling the states "No, you can't pick your electors."

Treehouse has been totally wrong on many things.

Get it through your heads: Nothing is happening in Congress on January 6th. This Commission might be our only chance.

The Vice President doesn't have magical powers because "muh President of the Senate". He has a job, set forth by the 12th Amendment. It's to "open all the certificates". That's it. It doesn't even say who counts them, it doesn't deal with how to resolve disputes, which is why the Electoral Count Act was passed 83 years later. To fill in those blanks.

• The only way to remove/replace electors under the ECA is by written objection from at last one Representative and at least one Senator. (Ok, we got that.)

• Next the House and Senate have to debate the objections. They are only upheld if both chambers approve by majority votes. (The one-state, one-vote thing only happens if there is a contingent election in the House. Not up to that yet.)

• Dems control the House and will vote against any objections, along with GOP cucks like Adam Kinzinger.

• Even if the Senate upholds the objections (big if with the likes of Romney, Collins, Murkowski, Sasse, etc.), a split vote between the House and Senate leaves the governor-certified Biden electors in place.

• Biden wins.

Unless...

The U.S. Constitution supersedes any federal law, the Electoral Count Act included. If the state legislatures of GA, WI and AZ were to meet and approve a new slate of Trump electors before Jan 20, they would have a very real shot at overturning the fraudulently-certified Biden slates in court. Their argument would be simple:

The Constitution gives us the power to choose electors and does not constrain that power in any way. No law can diminish our inherent constitutional authority in this area. To the extent that the ECA sets out "Safe Harbor" deadlines and presumes to allow Congress to make the final decision about which of two competing elector slates from our state is the right one, the ECA improperly usurps that constitutional authority. Our final decision on electors is the Trump slate, and we demand they be the only ones counted."

The problem here is not one state legislature has voted to send Trump electors. Yes, there are stories that some Trump electors acted themselves, but that will not hold any weight with a formal resolution being passed by their states' legislatures.

They don't need their governor to call them into a special session.

They don't need their governor to certify the new slate.

They just need to meet and ACT.

The Cruz proposal provides a mechanism for them to do just that.

Do they need it? No, but they are being a bunch of weak pussies and they need something to kick their asses into gear. Rudy and his team's presentations were incredible, but everyone knows that he is the President's faithful friend and personal attorney/campaign attorney, so many of those legislators discount the evidence for that reason. But if all of that evidence is distilled down to the "cream of the crop" and is powerfully and concisely presented to a Commission that in turn reports their findings back to the state legislatures, that just might give them the courage they need to do their duty and approve the Trump electors.

Then it would be up to the courts. I can't see this Supreme Court telling the states "No, you can't pick your electors."