Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: truthkeeper; All
As a side note to this thread, please consider the following.

Why don't these Republican lawmakers argue that, in stark contrast to hypocritical Democratic "All votes count" mantra, the states surrendered their power to make so-called "winner take all" laws for processing electoral votes when they ratified the 12th Amendment imo.

Excerpted from the 12th Amendment: "The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate [emphasis added]; […]"

Corrections, insights welcome.

Send "Orange Man Bad" federal and state government desperate Democrats and RINOs home in November!

Supporting PDJT with a new patriot Congress and state government leaders that will promise to fully support his already excellent work for MAGA and stopping SARS-CoV-2 will effectively give fast-working Trump a "third term" in office imo.

15 posted on 07/12/2020 11:18:06 AM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Amendment10; truthkeeper; 2banana; glennaro; Trump Girl Kit Cat; Skywise; cranked; Brilliant; ...
Strategy: How Trump may preserve and protect the Federal Election process in 2020 and beyond

October surprise:

President Trump issues an E.O. requiring Voter ID for Federal Elections. There's the instant end to all the Mail-in ballot non-sense.

Next, post at least one armed, National Guard member in full gear at every polling place in the US and have an ICE Agent on call. Protection of all voters is therefore assured. (e.g., No more Blank Panthers with clubs at Philadelphia polling places)

Issuing such an E.O. like this would cause Dems to judge shop and impose an injunction, but President Trump would ram it straight up the USSC on an emergency hearing, due to the shortness of time before the election.

It might actually be law right now (I am not a lawyer), but have President Trump declare that all polling places involved in Federal elections are surrogate Federal facilities, for the time of polling, because they are handling Federal documentation for a Federal election, where Federal Electors are selected per Article 12, as you note.

An official government issued ID will be required to enter the surrogate Federal facility for the time that ballots remain at the polling location. This is literally Voter ID. After the polls close, the ballots are remanded to Federal custody, and ferried to a Federally secured location accompanied by the National Guard member(s) already stationed at the polling place.

Since the USSC building and Federal polling places are each deemed to be Federal facilities under the protection and control of routine Federal facility access practices, there would be a seamless solution to which USSC could not object either conceptually and legally.

The USSC would have to acknowledge that entry to the USSC requires a Federal ID as does entrance to every other Federal Building.

Federal Property Law and Legal Definition:

“20 USCS § 107e defines “federal property” as any building, land, or other real property owned, leased, or occupied by any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States (including the Department of Defense and the United States Postal Service), or any other instrumentality wholly owned by the United States, or by any department or agency of the District of Columbia or any territory or possession of the United States.”

Theory: Could polling places used in Federal Elections be considered to be “occupied” by “department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States,” such as the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, for instance?

The Civil Rights Division of DOJ is vested with assuring that the voting rights of citizens are upheld, and it is the division to which voting right civil rights complaints may be filed. In essence the DOJ would supervise a Federal election as it deputizes the polling place for temporarily housing a division of local Civil Rights Division units of the DOJ.

Thoughts?

FReegards!

1st-Annual-Freeper-Convention-1million-vet-march

27 posted on 07/12/2020 1:23:21 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Amendment10

I don’t see the language in the 12th that invalidates winner takes all. The states are free to allocate their Electors any way they wish. There is no Constitutional requirement for a vote for the people to assign Electors, although all states have seen fit to do it.

I wouldn’t mind seeing a system where the popular vote winner in each Congressional District, is awarded one Elector and the winner of the states’ popular vote two Electors. But I see dems only agreeing to it for heavily red states while their strongholds remain winner-takes-all. It’s how they roll.


34 posted on 07/12/2020 5:41:24 PM PDT by hanamizu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson