Jan 6, 2021 | Constitution, Liberty Articles
By Harold Pease, Ph. D.
Some senators, notably Ted Cruz, seek to reinstate an Electoral Commission to resolve the contested electoral vote of the states forwarding two slates, one Democrat and one Republican, to the President of the Senate as required by the Constitution. This happened in the contested presidential race of 1876 between Democrat Samuel J. Tilden, needing a single electoral vote to win, and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, needing 20. Amazingly the Commission of eight Republicans and seven Democrats, ruling on party lines, gave the election to Hayes.
Unfortunately the Commission solution is not in the Constitution, then or now, and in fact displaces what is. It denies the President of the Senate his constitutional role to reject multiple submissions or deny submissions that did not follow the rules or law. Past practice has Thomas Jefferson the first to use it in the presidential election of 1800. It happened again in 1856 when the President of the Senate counted five votes in Wisconsin over objections from both the House and Senate and prohibited any debate on the issue (Who Counts the Votes of the Presidential Electors?, Alexander Macris December 7, 2021). He is the the only authority figure identified in Article 2 . He is part of the integrity of the solution. His entire role in the Senate is to have the deciding vote when a tie exists. Likewise his role in the joint session, he is required to assemble, is more than just as a vote counter or face to bring the houses together.
Overwhelming, even televised fraud viewed by millions, should be reason enough for any President of the Senate to reject electors from double slated states who themselves were not able to resolve their entry. At this point, given a defaulting Supreme Court and defunct state legislatures, the Constitution gives only The President of the Senate and the House of Representative a function in resolving the election. Is Mike Pence strong enough to defend this part of the Constitution. Probably not.
Perhaps the President of the Senate could give the seven multiple slated states, now again in session, 48 hours to forward a new slate with the signatures of the state legislators approving. If a majority sign, this would prove that it is the will of the state legislatures as required by the Constitution. These then would be counted. States not meeting this deadline would lose their electors on the basis that the election in their state was too fraudulent to count. It would also remind them of their soul function to choose electors, not hand it off to hostile governors. The issue is then constitutionally resolved.
A Commission also displaces the House contingency vote outlining a state delegation vote as the next appropriate constitutional process, thus essentially removing it from the Constitution. “But in choosing the President the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the States, and a majority of all states shall be necessary to a choice” (Amendment 12). This too would solve the Constitutional crisis within 48 hours or less. It also favors Trump as 28 of the House congressional delegations are Republican, a majority. This has a much better option of the desired outcome for Republicans than an unconstitutional and flawed commission.
It is too late for a commission. Pelosi would appoint hardened Democrats, McConnell, luck warm Republicans, as in Mitt Romney that may even side with Biden just to move on. Either might delay appointment of commissioners to apply pressure on Trump to just concede before January 20th. The Supreme Court under Chief Justices John Roberts, is an anti-Trump Republican and less trusted than McConnell. Who knows who he would appoint if we had 15 commissioners five from each body, probably himself and the three Democrat Justices he often votes with. Predictably the end vote of the Commission would be a Biden win.
One hundred and forty-six years ago the Commission had until March 4, 1876 to render a decision and they did so March 2. Today this Commission would have 10 days but that is after it is formed and its results reviewed by all contending state legislatures who need time to assimilate and forward a new slate of electors. As of the submission of this article for publication we have 14 days before the inauguration of either Biden or Trump. This is not enough time.
Unfortunately, there exist no neutrals in our day as evidenced by the failed judicial system in contended states with Democrat judges. They each refused to see the evidence. “Nothing to see here,” while hundreds of whistleblowers said otherwise and Americans viewed Georgia video tapes of counting hidden ballots after Republicans were dismissed from the room. Nothing shows that the evidence even matters to Democrats. Even the Supreme Court, that should have ruled on the Texas case, and still can on the Pennsylvania case but prefers to “run out the clock,” has refused to do so.
When the Republicans did this in 1877 they succeeded because they bribed the Democrats by consenting to remove Civil War federal troops still stationed in the South if they would agree to give the presidency to Rutheford B. Hayes. The South hatred the troops still in their land and agreed but the election, nevertheless, was stolen from them. Today we have nothing with which to bribe them.
The Constitution, as written, can still resolve the 2020 presidential election crisis. Going off script, as with a commission, will not. As written gives only the President of the Senate a function to accept or reject electoral slates and the House alone to vote by state delegation. Anything more than this is a perversion of the Constitution. As written also restores lost integrity to the election.
Dr. Harold Pease is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for over 30 years at Taft College. Newspapers have permission to publish this column. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit .www.LibertyUnderFire.org.
Dec 30, 2020 | Constitution, Liberty Articles
By Harold Pease, Ph. D
The most expensive U.S. Senate race in history was that of incumbent Sen. Lindsey Graham and his Democratic challenger, Jaime Harrison, where between the two $238 million was spent in South Carolina prior to November 3, 2020. In the third quarter Harrison alone raised $57.9 million which became the record for a three month effort—until now.
In the past two months, since November 3, all four Georgia U.S. Senate contenders have raised more than this. Challenging Democrats Jon Ossoff has raised $106.8 million and Raphael Warnock $103.4 million. Republican incumbents David Perdue raised $68 million and Kelly Loeffler $64 million over the same time period. Total estimates for the ending spending price tag for the two senate seats range from $340 million to $400 million (Democrats shatter fundraising records ahead of Georgia Senate runoffs, by James Arkin and Zach Montellaro, POLITICO, 12/24/2020).
The vast majority of this money for the Georgia races comes from non-Georgians. So who is purchasing Georgia’s Senators—certainly not Georgians! Since disclosure of big donors is not required until the end of January, long after the vote, we do not know but again, it is not Georgians.
No one but Georgians should purchase this or any other Georgian election. This should never happen but will again until blocked by an amendment to the U. S. Constitution. Why, because politicians love to be purchased.
LibertyUnderFire is the lead advocate for ending outside influences in other state’s elections and thus offers the following new amendment to the U.S. Constitution to stop it. “All election funding, outside a candidate’s personal wealth, in all elections shall originate from eligible voters in the district served by the election and donated since the last election to the same office.”
Remember Michael Bloomberg’s boast in the February 25, 2020 Democratic Party Presidential debate of having elected 21 members of the House of Representatives in 2018 giving the House back to the Democrats. This made Nancy Pelosi Speaker again (Dan Merica, “Bloomberg catches himself from saying he ‘bought’ House races in 2018,” CNN, February 25, 2020).
But Bloomberg is not alone in purchasing elections, for some time we have been reporting the influence of the moneyed elite, the billionaire club, notably Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, and Tom Steyers, in choosing our elected officers from the White House down to local races. This happens when money flows in from outside where the candidate will serve allowing those of wealth, to replace constituent influence thus effectively purchasing the representatives from outside the voting districts. If constituents have lost their power to decide their leaders, how can we pretend that we have a democratic republic? It used to be that Democrats opposed billionaire influence in the elections. Today they openly embrace it.
Big Tech companies (Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, Twitter, and Facebook) combined gave more than $50 million in the 2020 election cycle, all heavily weighted, 75% or more, for Democrat candidates and all heavily funded Joe Biden for president (“Big Tech and CEOs Poured Millions Into The Election. Here’s Who They Supported,” By Sissi Cao and Jordan Zakarin, Observer, 11/02/20).
Propositions are a part of most elections and can be considered without attachment to a candidate. This would not stop the funding or creation of ads for or against a candidate, or ballot issues, so long as ALL monies used in such originates from voters within the district served by the candidate. The word originates is designed to stop donation transfer from outside district sources to inside donors to circumvent the amendment.
Why have we not stopped this? Because both political parties benefit from it. On the congressional level, those holding “safe seats,” as for example Democrat Nancy Pelosi and Republican Kevin McCarthy, can either buildup gigantic arsenals to “nuke” a threatening contender, or worse, handoff their unneeded donations to a like-minded candidate in another state to favorably impact elections often adverse to the will of its citizens. This outside funding has to stop.
More funding allows more signs and literature to be distributed, and more newspaper, radio and television ads to destroy an opponent or get a message out resulting in a higher probability of winning. Candidates with the most money and publicity usually win and the rich, by their funding, select contenders long before the people vote, therefore they dominate the result. In many cases more money originates from outside a voting district than within. If no candidate could receive money from outside his/her district, it would stop much influence peddling.
Under this amendment the Clinton Foundation monies could not be used to influence elections as much of that money comes from international contributors. No contribution could be made to influence any contest to which the contributor could not personally vote. This amendment would limit the billionaire class to the “purchase” of only THEIR congressman, senators, governor, mayor, district attorney and etc—not a large group of them.
Congressmen from “safe” districts could not “handoff” their unneeded donations to a like minded candidate in another district. Nor could they holdover funding from previous victories to “nuke” a future opponent. Contributions are a form of voting, normally intended for this candidate only, and for this election only, and they could only be accumulated since the last election for that office.
Dr. Harold Pease is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for over 30 years at Taft College. Newspapers have permission to publish this column. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org.
Dec 23, 2020 | Constitution, Liberty Articles
By Harold Pease, Ph.D.
Even with the most political censorship in U.S. History people of integrity know that the 2020 presidential election was the most fraudulent in our history. Opponents first said, “Show us the evidence.” When shown they next admitted, “Okay, there was fraud but not enough to change the outcome.” When hundreds of whistleblowers, many Democrats, surfaced and millions of Americans viewed captured videos of filmed corruption in nightly news broadcasts showing otherwise, that lie evaporated. Thousands either participated in it or witnessed it. When corruption could no longer be denied the narrative changed to, “It is too late to do anything about it!! Accept the election!” But if you accept fraud in any degree, aren’t you participating in it?
This election is no longer about Joe Biden and Donald Trump but is about the integrity of every American. Sadly the U.S. Supreme Court bought the line that it was too late and themselves violated the Constitution by refusing to hear the evidence presented by Texas and seven sister suing states. States suing other states have no other recourse than the Supreme Court. They damaged the Constitution by effectively removing this portion out of the document. If eight states and the president have “no standing” who does? No one!!
We were told this was the last deliberative body that could address this election. The people were left with two bad choices, accept fraudulency or revolt. These justices, unless they accept one of several cases still pending, especially Pennsylvania, will stand in infamy as the worst in U. S. History because they should have resolved the issue but didn’t. Fortunately the Constitution gives us yet another option for an honest and free 2020 presidential election.
Presumably the president of the Senate, Mike Pence, has received all certified election results from all states due December 23, as required by federal law. This is followed January 6 by a joint meeting of Congress to count and declare a winner. In this meeting the electors of any state can be challenged by legislators of either body. At this point the process follows The Election Count Act of 1887 as follows:
“Objections to individual state returns must be made in writing by at least one Member each of the Senate and House of Representatives. If an objection meets these requirements, the joint session recesses and the two houses separate and debate the question in their respective chambers for a maximum of two hours. The two houses then vote separately to accept or reject the objection. They then reassemble in joint session and announce the results of their respective votes (Constitution Daily, December 15, 2020, Scott Bomboy).
Because of widespread election fraud several members of the House have announced their intention to object to the election results of at least Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and perhaps Arizona and Nevada as well. A change in three would change the November 3 outcome. Senators objecting are yet to be announced. Results from each state must be considered and resolved individually before proceeding alphabetically to the next state beginning with Alaska than Arizona, and so on. Objections require Congress to separate for 2 hours of debate in each body and in each state objected to before rejoining with results—perhaps six times. If so, the 2020 presidential election could take several days.
Since seven of these state legislatures, including New Mexico, forwarded two slates of electors to the Electoral College, one for each candidate, Congress is forced to decide which is the legitimate count, or neither. Section 2 of the Electoral Count Act requires each state to have conducted its election obedient to existing state and federal law. Most of these states arbitrarily changed the law ignoring standing law and their state legislatures who made that law. It also required disputes regarding what would be submitted to the Electoral College on December 8, to be resolved “at least six days before the electors vote,” December 14 (June 25, 1948, ch. 644, 62 Stat. 673). This deadline, December 8, extended to them “safe harbor” status, because they had followed the law and there was no dispute as to electors voting for them, Congress would not reject their electoral voters. Since most of the contending states cannot claim “safe harbor” protection, forcing Congress to be in effect an arbitrator, they invite being thrown out.
This is not without precedent, Democrats used the Electoral Count Act in January 2005 in an unsuccessful attempt to throw out Ohio’s electoral votes for George W. Bush. Democrats, Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Senator Barbara Boxer each objected alleging “they were not in all known circumstances regularly given.” Regularly given encompass corruption, fraud or “may also include situations where the elector did not vote in accordance with applicable constitutional and statutory requirements” (Wikileaks, The Electoral Count Act, “Regularly given”).
Today actual fraud has been viewed by millions in televised news clips and testimonies of hundreds of whistleblowers. Moreover Democrats have not denied that they did not follow existing law, which The Election Count Act of 1887 requires for seating their electors. So if there remains any integrity in the House of Representatives they, with the Senate, will reject the electors gaining position due to fraud.
Forget political party. Integrity is more important. State legislatures honored the Constitution in rejecting the fraudulent electors in their states, sending in a second slate of delegates not elected by illegal ballots. Will Congress seat them? We should have enough integrity in Congress to easily have vast majorities in both houses; but do we? We will see January 6. The Constitution gives people with integrity one more option for an honest 2020 election.
Dr. Harold Pease is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for over 30 years at Taft College. Newspapers have permission to publish this column. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit .www.LibertyUnderFire.org.
Dec 9, 2020 | Constitution, Liberty Articles
By Harold Pease, Ph.D.
This is the most bizarre presidential election in U.S. History. There exist six options forward, five reseat Trump for a second term. 1) Trump will concede the fraudulent election to Biden to save the country from possible civil war. 2) Biden will concede the fraudulent election to Trump to save the country from possible civil war. Biden will not do this; nor should Trump with the tsunami of evidence of election fraud against Biden.
The credibility of this election, and all elections that follow, is at stake. At no time has Biden publicly opposed the illegal vote in his favor. If Biden wins by fraud he will be inclined to serve despotically (as do Democrat governors respecting COVID) with censorship because the people will never fully trust him. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, participated, so election fraud can never be fully hidden. It will be a permanent stain on his administration. If he wins by manipulating the vote, he will stay in power by the same practice. It’s unlikely that fraudulent elections will ever end.
3) State legislatures are constitutionally required under Article II, Section 2 to decide the Electors for the College for their state, which supersedes state law subsequently making it based upon population. If state elections were fraudulent, and if legislatures have integrity, they will reassume this responsibility. Five of the contested states have Republican legislature majorities who themselves come up for reelection in two years. If they do not step forward now, given the enormity of the evidence of Democrat election fraudulency, they will face hostile constituencies then. Trump should win these five states and the election. All he needs is three of them. The state legislature should do its job. This is the preferred and probable win option. Look for the Supreme Court to expect the state legislature to perform.
4) The Supreme Court must accept the pending Texas suit, joined by Louisiana and others states, against Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin as it is a state suing another state therefore, under original jurisdiction, it does not have to be advanced through lower courts. This suit is attempting to prevent these states from voting December 14 in the Electoral College on the basis of due process and equal protection of the law (14th Amendment clauses) contending that these states have knowingly used the pandemic to break election law. These four states comprise 62 Electoral College votes. This will prevent either candidate from having 170 electoral college votes and the presidency. Therefore, Joe Biden is not president-elect. The Supreme Court is likely to encourage the state legislatures to solve the problem by Article II Section 2 as described above. Two paths are now possible. State legislators will follow through as described above, if they refuse the House of Representatives will decide.
5) Should the election be thrown into the House of Representatives, Trump still benefits. The Constitution only allows each state one vote regardless of its population. Trump only needs 26. Currently Republicans govern 29 of these and Democrats 19. Trump will win whatever is contested here. Pelosi knows this so will not encourage the use of this part of the Constitution.
Should the Supreme Court accept election law suits it must throw out all illegally cast votes. This alone would give the election to Trump. It could also declare a states popular vote too fraudulent to call and require it to forfeit it’s Electoral College vote, or give it to Trump as no fraudulency has been alleged on the Republican side and he was significantly ahead before known fraud was injected into the election, although no precedent for these actions presently exist.
Theoretically the Supreme Court also could void the Electoral College count in the 28 states using Dominion voting machines or states using Smartmatic software if states using it had foreknowledge of its ability to rig elections. A judge in Wisconsin has ordered the impounding of 22 Dominion voting machines used in the county that switched 6,000 Trump votes to Biden. If vote switching is prevalent in other machines and shown designed to do so, such could be seen as a coup against a seated president and treason, more especially if the previous administration had foreknowledge of this capacity or intent to do so. This is amplified if these machines or software came from China or any other foreign entity intending to overthrow an election. Treason and national security now come into play big time. At the moment treason or nation security appear draconian.
6) Congress could reschedule the election of the president from December 14 to a future date as per Article II, Section 1 Clause 4 which reads. “The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.” This option is very unlikely as Congress consists of two bodies the Senate and the House of Representatives, the latter of which is run by Nancy Pelosi who would never support an election day beyond December 14. This would only give her opponents more time to reveal more 2020 election fraud.
Of these options the only path for Biden is if Trump concedes the election or neither the Republican state legislatures or Supreme Court have the constitutional integrity to stand. Trump will serve a second term.
Please pass this column to friends before it too is censored. Youtube just announced that it now censors all information “alleging that wide spread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election.” Look for Twitter, Google and Facebook to do the same. The Democrat news outlet have already done so.
Dr. Harold Pease is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for over 30 years at Taft College. Newspapers have permission to publish this column. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org.
Dec 2, 2020 | Constitution, Liberty Articles
By Harold Pease, Ph.D.
Most do not realize that there exists no language in the Constitution authorizing a popular vote for the executive branch of government. Why? Because we are a republic—not a democracy. The latter supports tranny by the majority, the former does not. Explaining this may require another column. The election of the president was entirely left to the state legislatures not the masses. Article II, Sec. 2 of the Constitution reads, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.” But none could be government officials.
No political parties existed when the Founders formed the Constitution, so such had no place in the selection of these special electors. These non-governmental individuals (sometimes called wise men), were to be appointed by the state legislatures presumably for their known and demonstrated integrity, experience, success, and wisdom, who would have no personal gain by the selection and would protect the interests of the states and the republic in their selection. They called it the Electoral College.
The citizens appointed to be Electoral College voters do so in their separate state capitols usually sometime in late November and that vote is sent to, and read by, the vice president of the United States before a combined session of both Houses of Congress usually the first part of December. Normally there is little media coverage of the REAL election of the president as they disdain it. Until this body meets, this year December 14, there is no president-elect. The media have no constitutional authority to call the election before these Electors vote.
Also, there is nothing in the Constitution that attaches college electors to a popular vote. The now existing popular vote for president began shortly after the 1824 election of John Quincy Adams when the Electoral College rejected the Andrew Jackson bid for the presidency because they thought him emotionally unstable for that office. His followers began a “symbolic” vote in his favor that the media has since treated as the real vote for the presidency. Jackson overcame the negatives against him and was given the presidency by the Electoral College in 1828.
But we have not remained faithful to original intent. Today both major political parties make their own list of Electors, all party loyalists, and in most states whichever party wins the popular vote activates their list— essentially leaving out the state legislators as sole determinators of the Electors as required by the Constitution and making the position extremely partisan.
In most, state law requires electors to vote as the popular vote had, which has effectively destroyed their independence. In this both parties have been complacent. Those who do not vote along party lines are called faithless and penalized if possible. Just the opposite was intended. Once selected, they should be able to vote as their integrity requires. To mandate that they vote a certain way beforehand defeats, in part, the purpose for their existence.
Although it may take some time to get back to original intent with respect to the independence of the Electors in the College, the relatively recent decision in Bush vs. Gore in 2000, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist did restore the authority of the state legislature to “take back the power to appoint electors at any time.”
It reads, “In exercising their power to decide how electors are to be chosen, legislatures could not be constrained by either state law or the state’s constitution. If a state’s constitution, for example, said that the people shall choose the electors in an election, that rule did not in fact constrain the state legislature. Instead, ‘after granting the franchise’ to the people, was a majority of the Supreme Court in Bush put it, a legislature could ‘take back the power to appoint electors at any time.’ Or put differently, when the legislature acted pursuant to the power granted to it by Article II, it stands above any limits imposed by state law” (https://www.lawfareblog.com/state-state-legislatures).
In the 2020 Presidential election Trump attorneys are documenting that in the battle ground states especially, Biden only won because of the illegal vote, thus they claim their list of Electors. If they argue for election integrity, which would throw out dead voters, multiple voting and Dominion switching of Trump votes to Biden and etc., Republicans get their list of Electoral voters and Trump is easily reelected with both the popular and Electoral College. It is that
simple.
Given the tsunami of 2020 election fraud evidence and whistleblowers, hundreds of pending lawsuits in Georgia alone, both parties must give the courts time to sort out the facts and if election fraud is verified, reject the fraudulent popular vote. and allow the state legislatures to fulfill their above noted constitutional responsibility. Evidence certainly calls into question the validity of the popular vote in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Nevada,. To protect the integrity of future elections both major political parties must agree to count ONLY legal votes throwing out all others as has been the case since 1789—but Democrats cannot support election integrity as it would cost them the election.
If Democrats choose not to support election integrity it is well to remember that five of the six above identified states are controlled by Republican state legislatures. Since a recent poll showed over 70% of Republicans believe the election fraudulent and stolen, it is likely that these state legislatures will give Trump a second term. Essentially Biden counts on censorship and social media to give him the election and Trump upon the constitutional process which includes the courts. Constitutional Integrity will give Trump Reelection
Dr. Harold Pease is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for over 30 years at Taft College. Newspapers have permission to publish this column. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org.
Nov 25, 2020 | Constitution, Liberty Articles
By Harold Pease Ph.D.
With over 1,000 affidavits from persons of both parties swearing under penalty of perjury to have personally witnessed voter fraud, such cannot be dismissed lightly but has been by most Democrats and their media outlets. Were it the other way around they would see it everywhere.
Democrat media outlets, mostly every outlet excepting Fox News and Newsmax, pipe two messages, “There is nothing to see here and if there were corruption it is not enough to make a difference in the election.” Democrat platforms Twitter, Google, YouTube, and Facebook censor the evidence showing corruption as quickly as their algorithms find it, just as they did prior to the election with thousands of Hunter Biden laptop emails and Tony Bobulinski’s evidence of Joe Biden corruption in China. But they cannot yet remove everything. Nothing to see here either—unless you are willing to get beyond the controlled presses. Freedom of the press and “real” journalism are quickly becoming an endangered species.
So what is Trump’s path to a second term? Two exist, both depend upon following the Constitution. The first, is using the constitutional process through the presidents legal team headed by Rudy Giuliani. This takes time and patience. Either side can challenge the results in state courts. Local election officials count ballots and announce results. At this point all votes: illegal, dead persons, same person multiple ballots, and etc. remain counted in each state unless contested and removed by court order. These are alleged to have given Biden the win. Almost all battleground states are led by Democrat governors and judges who used any method available to count these normally unlawful or illegal votes. Consequentially Trump’s legal team expected to lose most cases in these state courts and did.
State judges sometimes uphold a challenge and order a recount, as in Georgia. But this still is only a count of ALL votes and may not change anything because without a court order to remove, the fraudulent votes are just counted again. Democrats want every vote, even illegal, to count. Republicans insist that only citizens and legal votes should count as in every election since 1789. To get this to happen Trump must get his case beyond the potentially corrupt or biased state courts to a district court, then to a circuit court and, if failing there, appeal directly to the Supreme Court. A favorable vote here is likely because the Constitution supports only legal votes.
The Trump legal team believes they have time to make this happen and the courts try to accommodate the emergency situation. They firmly believe that this is the most corrupt election in U.S. History with Trump entitled to 410 Electoral College votes and a popular vote of 70%, translating into at least 80 million votes. They will focus on the 14th Amendment especially Section I due process and equal protection of the law, clauses.
The second path to a second term for Trump is led by Sidney Powell, former federal prosecutor, independent of the President’s legal team but working with them and choosing to be self funded. It hypothesizes that Smartmatic software used in Dominion machines in at least 28 states and in 2000 jurisdictions throughout the nation was specifically designed to “rig elections” and had done so previously in Venezuela, Chile, Mongolia and Argentina. She argues that she has evidence that will prove that “officers in the states who bought the software….know that they can win the election if they are using that software.” If so, this is treason described in Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution, perhaps even another coup to unseat a duly elected president, and should easily disqualify the “Biden win.”
That Dominion was created in Venezuela to help the socialist Hugo Chavez government remain in power and is headquartered in Canada adds a foreign component to the puzzle—“foreign owned and created with communist money,” says Powell, hence the possibility of foreign intervention in our election. Apparently, hackers could “stick a thumb drive in the machine or load software to it, even from the Internet. They can do it from Germany or Venezuela. They can remote access anything. They can watch votes in real time. They can shift votes in real time” (Sunday With Maria, Sidney Powell and Maria Bartiromo, November 15, 2020).
Why the servers housing vote data regarding the 2020 election were housed in Barcelona, Spain and Frankfort, Germany, extremely vulnerable to vote manipulation, no one has explained. Raids by U.S. forces, confiscated these sources shortly after the election. We apparently have the raw vote data.
Trump attorney Lin Wood, examined Powell’s evidence and tweeted “Dominion was [a] Communist voting system used to control our election.” And another, “In 2020, Communist China materially interfered with our election.” Lou Dobbs told viewers Nov. 23 that “Dominion donated $25-50k to the Clinton Foundation and received from the same a “$2.2 million contract. Dominion also hired Nancy Pelosi’s former chief of staff.” Yet another source ties Dominion to George Soros. So much yet to learn!
Either path for a Trump 2nd term requires that the evidence be presented before the Supreme Court and time is running short. On November 24, three positive rulings came down for Trump attorneys, a Nevada court agreed to hear the evidence presented by the Trump legal team. In Michigan state lawmakers agreed to look into “irregularities and anomalies”that have plagued the election. In Pennsylvania the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has granted the Trump campaign’s request to review a lower courts dismissal of the campaign’s request to stop the states certification (Lou Dobbs, November 24, 2020). The tide may be turning in Trump’s favor.
Dr. Harold Pease is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for over 30 years at Taft College. Newspapers have permission to publish this column. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org.
