I tried to post this video last night and the damn Newsmax app kept crashing on me.
Until I watched this video last night, I didn’t know the Seklow’s and the ACLJ were on Trump’s legal team for this. I am with whomever said above if Sidney Powell is on the team it lends a lot of credit to the case being winnable. I feel the same way with the Sekulows and the ACLJ. The ACLJ and the father Jay Sekulow has a lot of experience bringing cases in front of the SCOTUS. And they have a terrific winning record in front of SCOTUS. Knowing this I feel much more energized that there is real tangible evidence. Not just eye witness, sworn affidavit evidence. And that there actually may be enough to stop the certification of a fraudulent election.
Now we have to wait for the first of the lawsuits that Jordan Sekulow said is going to be filed on Monday or Tuesday. I’m guessing we will see some real evidence in that lawsuit. Man, I feel much more confident that election tampering will be able to be proven on a scale large enough to effect the results. I hope my feelings are right.
I think so, too, but it get's better. I stopped thinking a long time ago, even before election day, that there doesn't have to be fraud or tampering to the degree that it changed the outcome. If they can show that the election was in violation of the Constitution, then the electoral votes should not be accepted, and Congress should be tasked with choosing the President and VP. Trump's team has at least two Constitutional challenges as I see it.
One challenge would be the way the election rules were changed by the State Supreme Court or other office besides the legislature. The Constitution says that the rules of states' elections must be decided upon by the legislature. The founders did this precisely so the rules are set by the people through their representatives. Allowing any other body or individual to make the rules puts the outcome of the election at the whim of judges, Secretaries of State, Governors, unelected officials (elections directors), etc. None of those represent the people insofar as the Constitution recognizes them. We know PA courts changed the rules just days before election day, allowing additional time for mail-in ballots to arrive. Not their right to do that. Since the state also ignored Supreme Court injunctions to segregate the late ballots from the on-time ones, there's no way to correct that in the ballot count. The damage is irreversible.
Another challenge is the 14th Amendment's equal protection under the law. In 2000, the Bush legal team used this to successfully argue that elections must be conducted evenly and fairly among all presidential candidates and parties. In Florida, the recount was one-sided, allowing only counties that leaned heavily Democrat to be recounted. During the recount, ballots that were originally not included in vote totals by virtue of them having errors were being reexamined manually to ascertain what the voters' INTENTIONS were. If the ballot failed to be processed because they made stray marks, failed to punch "chads" completely, or didn't vote for the race at all because they were confused by the layout of the ballot ("Butterfly Ballots"), or voted for too many candidates in a race, the examiner would make a judgement call in the one race -- the Presidential race -- to decipher whether the voter "intended" to mark the ballot for Gore or Bush.
Since these formerly spoiled or unreadable ballots were being resurrected only in counties that might help Gore, the Supreme Court ruled that the recount must include ALL counties regardless of party "leanings", or the recount would be invalid. That decision came down just 2 hours before the deadline to certify the state election results. Obviously, a full Florida statewide recount was impossible in 2 hours, so the whole recount that took over a month's effort was halted and the results never used. The original numbers from before any recounts began were used, and Bush became the President Elect ... again!
This election, there are accusations that ballots which had errors in Democrat-leaning counties or precincts were being remedied by workers contacting the voters. If it was a mail-in (most were), then the mismatched or missing signature, missing date, miss-marked ballot, or other mistakes were corrected so the ballot would count. In Republican-leaning areas, the option to contact voters and correct ballots was not being offered as an option to the workers. Sounds awfully close to the same unequal treatment of ballots as happened in 2000. You can't spoil one party's ballots while correcting another party's.
There are all kinds of examples of how a few states, mainly PA, MI and WI, violated the Constitution as well as their own state laws. A big one is refusing to allow GOP observers in the counting areas. One party was allowed to run the counting (Democrat-run government) while the other party was excluded from observing and ensuring the rules were followed. Again, this sounds like a 14th Amendment violation. Can't give parties different treatment, even if (especially if) your party is running the state.
The best outcome for Trump would be for the Supreme Court to order the election be given to Congress to decide. Having an electoral college perform the selection of president would be unfair if they allowed a few swing states to certify tainted results, and the electoral votes wound be incomplete if they let fewer than 50 states meet in the electoral college. Giving it to Congress at least includes reps from all 50 states.
This is going to be an election for the history books, making 2016 look like a normal election by comparison.
Fun fact: Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett all worked on the Bush legal team that argued the Florida recount cases in Gore v. Bush. It's going to be pretty interesting to see lawyers for Trump standing before that group arguing nearly the same facts and Constitutional points of law that they themselves argued 20 years ago.
