At least the Academy uses auditors for their votes. Maybe we should take their lead and do the same with U.S. Elections.John Maplethorpe said:
Billy Crystal doesn't just read names from an envelope, has the power to choose the Academy Award winner for best actor.
User name checks out.Correction said:VP is elected by the electoral college, not appointed by POTUS, and has to resign or be impeached to be removed from office.BQ78 said:
Pence gonna get fired tomorrow.
leftcoastaggie said:What alternate electors? There are no alternate electors. If you think there are alternate electors, I have a bridge to sell you.lb3 said:
The Vice President has the power to open the ballot envelopes. He presumably has the power to count the votes but that isn't entirely clear.
But even if Pence opens and counts the alternate electors in the contested states and we get democrat protests, the law says if the house and senate can't agree, the electors certified by the state secretaries will be counted.
The senate doesn't have the votes to side with Trump so the best we could hope for is for McConnell to hold an extended floor debate, delaying the Senate vote, beyond Inauguration Day, at which point Nancy Pelosi becomes president.
Trump has no viable options short of releasing video of conspirators confessing to altering votes. And even that likely wouldn't persuade enough democrats to back Trump.
I'm hoping that deals are being cut to drop the protests in exchange for an investigation into the election and mandating two factor authentication for all future elections.
Quote:
R Republicans in Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, New Mexico, and Nevada entered competing slates of electors for President Donald Trump on Monday as Electoral College members in six contested battleground states officially cast their ballots for Democrat Joe Biden. [Update: Although initially blocked by state authorities, a delegation of 16 Michigan Republican Electors were eventually able to convene and cast their ballots for President Trump, bringing the tally to seven states entering competing slates.
BMX Bandit said:determined to be unconstitutional by whom?oats04Ag said:
If the VP wasn't intended to have any say in which EC votes are valid, why not just have a clerk do the counting? There is precedent for the VP counting votes as he sees fit. Thomas Jefferson, for example, included EC votes in the count which had been determined to be unconstitutional, giving himself the presidency.
LINKQuote:
Wait, Thomas Jefferson pulled this trick? Indeed he did. The 1800 Presidential election was a contest between Jefferson, Aaron Burr, John Adams, Charles Pinckney, and John Jay. Jefferson, as the current Vice President, was the President of the Senate when it came time to count the votes. And he counted them in his own favor! Bruce Ackerman and David Fontana explain what happened in their article "Thomas Jefferson Counts Himself into the Presidency" (90 Virginia Law Review 2004, 551-643):Read that again: Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, the man whose face adorns Mt Rushmore, among the most revered founding fathers of our country, only became President because he used his unilateral power as President of the Senate to open and count the presidential ballots in his own favor.Quote:
Thomas Jefferson was remarkably aggressive as President of the Senate. Georgia's certificate - granting four electoral votes to Jefferson - was constitutionally defective on its face, a deficiency that was announced on the floor of Congress and reported by leading newspapers of the day. To resolve all doubts, we have located Georgia's certificate in the National Archives, and it does indeed reveal striking constitutional irregularities
Nevertheless, Jefferson failed to pause before counting George's four electoral votes into the Republican column, declaring the final vote as if nothing were amiss. Had Georgia's ballot been excluded, the vote countwould have admitted all five candidates into a runoff in the House Without the decisive use of his power as President of the Senate, Jefferson might never have become President of the United States. (emphasis added)
Well, they did screw it up in 2017 when PWC gave out the wrong envelope.atmtws said:At least the Academy uses auditors for their votes. Maybe we should take their lead and do the same with U.S. Elections.John Maplethorpe said:
Billy Crystal doesn't just read names from an envelope, has the power to choose the Academy Award winner for best actor.
https://www.investopedia.com/what-does-an-accounting-firm-for-the-oscars-do-4586515
Quote:
Vasan Kesavan, in "Is the Electoral Count Act Unconstitutional?" (80 NC L. Rev. 2001-2002), records another example where the President of the Senate unilaterally determined the winner of the Presidential Election:And yet the votes were counted because the President of the Senate opened and counted them. The President of the Senate's choice was more powerful than the collective will of Congress.Quote:
In the election of 1856, the five electors of the State of Wisconsin did not cast their votes on the day prescribed by federal law because of a snowstorm. The President of the Senate counted Wisconsin's electoral votes over the objections of both Representatives and Senators assembled in convention. When Representative Lechter objected to Wisconsin's electoral votes and moved to exclude them, the presiding officer (the President of the Senate) simply stated that no debate was in order when the votes were being read by the tellers or even after they were finished.' When Senator Crittenden then asked the presiding officer, "Do I understand the Chair to decide that Congress, in no form, has power to decide upon the validity or invalidity of a vote?,"' the presiding officer replied that it was his constitutional duty to announce the result of the electoral count and that "[w]hat further action may be taken, if any further action should be taken, will devolve upon the properly-constituted authorities of the country, the Senate or House of Representatives, as the case may be.' Several Members of Congress were concerned that the decision to count Wisconsin's electoral votes would set a dangerous precedent. According to Senator Pugh, unlike the Missouri Incident which was "never likely to happen again," the Wisconsin Incident "may occur one hundred times again, if the Government should stand that many years.' Almost every Member of Congress who spoke on the subject agreed that the votes of Wisconsin should not have been counted.' (emphasis added)
Quote:
What is the historical pedigree to which Foley refers? The Congressional Record of the passage of the Electoral Count Act records the opinion of many prominent legislators who held the view that the President of the Senate opens and counts the votes, even though some weren't happy about it:Foley, also obviously unhappy with this situation, goes on to explain:Quote:
"The counting function is vested in the President of the Senate and the Necessary and Proper Clause does not confer on Congress the power to assume unto itself the duty which the Constitution imposes on that officer." - Sen. Wilson
"If the Constitutiondoesby fair implication, vest in the President of the Senate the power and duty not only to open, but also to count, the votes, then Congress can not, by this or any other legislation, take away or transfer to any other "person or officer that power and duty; - Rep. Baker
"The Constitution says that 'the votes shall then be counted,' and if this mandate be addressed to the President of the Senate, that ends the question so far as the counting is concerned. The Constitution has then entrusted him with the whole power, and any legislation to direct him, would be an impertinent intrusion upon his prerogative." - Sen. Spear
"The President of the Senate's discretion in opening certificates shows the necessity of an amendment of the Constitution." - Sen Morton.Quote:
(Thus) Republicans (can) point to the historical pedigree of this position, observing that Republicans made the same argument during the disputed election of 1876 and that at least some recent law journal scholarship has supported this position. Unembarrassed by the apparent conflict of interest caused by Mike Pence simultaneously being a candidate for reelection and arbiter of the electoral dispute, these Republicans observe that Thomas Jefferson was in essentially the same position during the disputed election of 1800 and yet the Twelfth Amendment left this provision in place when Congress rewrote the procedures for the Electoral College afterwards.
This is politics in kindergarten, Trump and Pence have worked in uniscance for four years.Correction said:VP is elected by the electoral college, not appointed by POTUS, and has to resign or be impeached to be removed from office.BQ78 said:
Pence gonna get fired tomorrow.
Those are called LARPers, not electors.lb3 said:leftcoastaggie said:What alternate electors? There are no alternate electors. If you think there are alternate electors, I have a bridge to sell you.lb3 said:
The Vice President has the power to open the ballot envelopes. He presumably has the power to count the votes but that isn't entirely clear.
But even if Pence opens and counts the alternate electors in the contested states and we get democrat protests, the law says if the house and senate can't agree, the electors certified by the state secretaries will be counted.
The senate doesn't have the votes to side with Trump so the best we could hope for is for McConnell to hold an extended floor debate, delaying the Senate vote, beyond Inauguration Day, at which point Nancy Pelosi becomes president.
Trump has no viable options short of releasing video of conspirators confessing to altering votes. And even that likely wouldn't persuade enough democrats to back Trump.
I'm hoping that deals are being cut to drop the protests in exchange for an investigation into the election and mandating two factor authentication for all future elections.Quote:
R Republicans in Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, New Mexico, and Nevada entered competing slates of electors for President Donald Trump on Monday as Electoral College members in six contested battleground states officially cast their ballots for Democrat Joe Biden. [Update: Although initially blocked by state authorities, a delegation of 16 Michigan Republican Electors were eventually able to convene and cast their ballots for President Trump, bringing the tally to seven states entering competing slates.
https://amgreatness.com/2020/12/14/republican-electors-in-7-contested-states-cast-conditional-votes-for-president-trump-gop-electors-in-michigan-blocked/
VitruvianAg said:This is politics in kindergarten, Trump and Pence have worked in uniscance for four years.Correction said:VP is elected by the electoral college, not appointed by POTUS, and has to resign or be impeached to be removed from office.BQ78 said:
Pence gonna get fired tomorrow.
You think Pence wants to commit political suicide?
His chances for 2024 will go "puff" without Trump's endorsement; if it comes to that!
Pence will do what's right!
there is no 2 hour constraint in 3 U.S. Code 15.Vader Was Framed said:"Alternate electors" are not part of any count during the joint session. Only certified elector votes. Objections to the count are limited to 2-hours. Mitch can't stall.lb3 said:
The Vice President has the power to open the ballot envelopes. He presumably has the power to count the votes but that isn't entirely clear.
But even if Pence opens and counts the alternate electors in the contested states and we get democrat protests, the law says if the house and senate can't agree, the electors certified by the state secretaries will be counted.
The senate doesn't have the votes to side with Trump so the best we could hope for is for McConnell to hold an extended floor debate, delaying the Senate vote, beyond Inauguration Day, at which point Nancy Pelosi becomes president.
Trump has no viable options short of releasing video of conspirators confessing to altering votes. And even that likely wouldn't persuade enough democrats to back Trump.
I'm hoping that deals are being cut to drop the protests in exchange for an investigation into the election and mandating two factor authentication for all future elections.
Hey read this. It blows you "alternate electors" theory to bits. Thanks for the resource.lb3 said:there is no 2 hour constraint in 3 U.S. Code 15.Vader Was Framed said:"Alternate electors" are not part of any count during the joint session. Only certified elector votes. Objections to the count are limited to 2-hours. Mitch can't stall.lb3 said:
The Vice President has the power to open the ballot envelopes. He presumably has the power to count the votes but that isn't entirely clear.
But even if Pence opens and counts the alternate electors in the contested states and we get democrat protests, the law says if the house and senate can't agree, the electors certified by the state secretaries will be counted.
The senate doesn't have the votes to side with Trump so the best we could hope for is for McConnell to hold an extended floor debate, delaying the Senate vote, beyond Inauguration Day, at which point Nancy Pelosi becomes president.
Trump has no viable options short of releasing video of conspirators confessing to altering votes. And even that likely wouldn't persuade enough democrats to back Trump.
I'm hoping that deals are being cut to drop the protests in exchange for an investigation into the election and mandating two factor authentication for all future elections.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/15
I had kind of wondered this myself. I think this is looking more and more likely.Vader Was Framed said:
I'm guessing Grassley runs the session and not Pence, to save face. Grassley is next in line.
John Maplethorpe said:
Billy Crystal doesn't just read names from an envelope, has the power to choose the Academy Award winner for best actor.
I put that link in the post before yours. I'm familiar with it. Pence can count any ballots he chooses just as Jefferson did. The state certified elector slate clearly wins if the house and senate vote differently on a protest.leftcoastaggie said:Hey read this. It blows you "alternate electors" theory to bits. Thanks for the resource.lb3 said:there is no 2 hour constraint in 3 U.S. Code 15.Vader Was Framed said:"Alternate electors" are not part of any count during the joint session. Only certified elector votes. Objections to the count are limited to 2-hours. Mitch can't stall.lb3 said:
The Vice President has the power to open the ballot envelopes. He presumably has the power to count the votes but that isn't entirely clear.
But even if Pence opens and counts the alternate electors in the contested states and we get democrat protests, the law says if the house and senate can't agree, the electors certified by the state secretaries will be counted.
The senate doesn't have the votes to side with Trump so the best we could hope for is for McConnell to hold an extended floor debate, delaying the Senate vote, beyond Inauguration Day, at which point Nancy Pelosi becomes president.
Trump has no viable options short of releasing video of conspirators confessing to altering votes. And even that likely wouldn't persuade enough democrats to back Trump.
I'm hoping that deals are being cut to drop the protests in exchange for an investigation into the election and mandating two factor authentication for all future elections.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/15
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/6
Seriously, I'll give you a sweet deal on that bridge.
. The way I read it, TexAgs Forum 16 could certify our own set of electors and submit them along with our papers purporting to be certificates. That doesn't mean the President of the Senate would count them.Quote:
... as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented,
TurkeyBaconLeg said:If Pence asserts that he has the authority to do this, who has the authority to tell him he doesn't?Tom Kazansky 2012 said:
Oh boy.
Sounds like it would go to SCOTUS.
Thus, no certification on Jan 6th.
You are welcome. When you get the chance click on the links and then other links from there for more history and analysis. I got a little obsessed about the Electoral Count Act these last few weeks and have been doing my research.TTUArmy said:
Once again, Dame Hawg has made me a little smarter today than I was yesterday.
Thank you for that bit of history and politics lesson.
The final ascertainment determined the electors. Neither your theoretical TexAgs electors nor the LARPer electors have the credentials to be electors.lb3 said:I put that link in the post before yours. I'm familiar with it. Pence can count any ballots he chooses just as Jefferson did. The state certified elector slate clearly wins if the house and senate vote differently on a protest.leftcoastaggie said:Hey read this. It blows you "alternate electors" theory to bits. Thanks for the resource.lb3 said:there is no 2 hour constraint in 3 U.S. Code 15.Vader Was Framed said:"Alternate electors" are not part of any count during the joint session. Only certified elector votes. Objections to the count are limited to 2-hours. Mitch can't stall.lb3 said:
The Vice President has the power to open the ballot envelopes. He presumably has the power to count the votes but that isn't entirely clear.
But even if Pence opens and counts the alternate electors in the contested states and we get democrat protests, the law says if the house and senate can't agree, the electors certified by the state secretaries will be counted.
The senate doesn't have the votes to side with Trump so the best we could hope for is for McConnell to hold an extended floor debate, delaying the Senate vote, beyond Inauguration Day, at which point Nancy Pelosi becomes president.
Trump has no viable options short of releasing video of conspirators confessing to altering votes. And even that likely wouldn't persuade enough democrats to back Trump.
I'm hoping that deals are being cut to drop the protests in exchange for an investigation into the election and mandating two factor authentication for all future elections.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/15
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/6
Seriously, I'll give you a sweet deal on that bridge.. The way I read it, TexAgs Forum 16 could certify our own set of electors and submit them along with our papers purporting to be certificates. That doesn't mean the President of the Senate would count them.Quote:
... as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented,
aggiehawg said:
Again, same link.Quote:
What is the historical pedigree to which Foley refers? The Congressional Record of the passage of the Electoral Count Act records the opinion of many prominent legislators who held the view that the President of the Senate opens and counts the votes, even though some weren't happy about it:Foley, also obviously unhappy with this situation, goes on to explain:Quote:
"The counting function is vested in the President of the Senate and the Necessary and Proper Clause does not confer on Congress the power to assume unto itself the duty which the Constitution imposes on that officer." - Sen. Wilson
"If the Constitutiondoesby fair implication, vest in the President of the Senate the power and duty not only to open, but also to count, the votes, then Congress can not, by this or any other legislation, take away or transfer to any other "person or officer that power and duty; - Rep. Baker
"The Constitution says that 'the votes shall then be counted,' and if this mandate be addressed to the President of the Senate, that ends the question so far as the counting is concerned. The Constitution has then entrusted him with the whole power, and any legislation to direct him, would be an impertinent intrusion upon his prerogative." - Sen. Spear
"The President of the Senate's discretion in opening certificates shows the necessity of an amendment of the Constitution." - Sen Morton.Quote:
(Thus) Republicans (can) point to the historical pedigree of this position, observing that Republicans made the same argument during the disputed election of 1876 and that at least some recent law journal scholarship has supported this position. Unembarrassed by the apparent conflict of interest caused by Mike Pence simultaneously being a candidate for reelection and arbiter of the electoral dispute, these Republicans observe that Thomas Jefferson was in essentially the same position during the disputed election of 1800 and yet the Twelfth Amendment left this provision in place when Congress rewrote the procedures for the Electoral College afterwards.
AggieDub14 said:
It's a good thing we don't live in a country where the executive can just declare things and they are automatically part of the law.
I read this and conclude that the author, Alexander Macris, probably doesn't know what he is talking about. If you are referencing a "comic book creator and internet supervillain" as a basis for your legal argument, you should probably re-think your position.aggiehawg said:
Read THIS and draw your own conclusions.
