32 Comments

Now wouldn't Mike Pence deciding the election thoroughly cook some liberal noodles. May the games begin.

Expand full comment

Truth be told, it would most definitely suit my dark sense of humor! Make it so Race Bannon.

Expand full comment

This would be glorious, and it would necessitate martial law in many American cities in the following weeks.

Expand full comment

I do not believe so. The only reason anarchy and old night reined in the D led S-holes was that they were allowed to do so. When the traitors tried to riot in Dallas (and other mid-west cities) they were shut down before they could even get started. Even in the People's democratic republic of Austin the rioters where easily handled by the .gov and LEO forces. Should President Trump deem it necessary, the Guard can be deployed in Cali, Oregon, Washington, etc. Remember, these "adult" children have NO concept of struggle against odds, or the ability to proceed through pain, or the cognitive abilities required to succeed. This really is a non-issue.

Expand full comment

Agree- people forget what real riots look like. And what the force of the federal government can deliver in such times. My uncle at the time was Bat Fire Chief over Watts during the riots- his stories were epic of what it took and what was delivered by forces necessary to bring it back under control.

From Wiki: "Nearly 14,000 members of the California Army National Guard[5] helped suppress the disturbance, which resulted in 34 deaths[6] and over $40 million in property damage.[7][8] It was the city's worst unrest until the Rodney King riots of 1992."

Expand full comment

Would explain the House attempting to neuter the Marshal Law ability of the President in the "Covid" releif bill.

Expand full comment

Playing out the hand, this would throw the election to the House, no? How does that help?

Expand full comment

Oh because they vote as states not as individual representatives, yes, clever. That would cause maximum wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Expand full comment

Yes. Neat trick, isn't it!

Expand full comment

We will go to war with the left and globalists if they attempt to finish stealing this election. I am not talking about political war, i am talking about civil war. They have crossed a line in the sand by stealing this election with open, in your face fraud and half this country, the armed to the teeth half, will not stand for it. Proceed at your own peril.

Expand full comment

Thank you doing this research. Interesting.

Expand full comment

Given how Mr. Trump has mostly just gone along with the homeostasis of Washington (most notably by over and over appointing people who serve other agendas than his own putative ones), I don’t see any clever, ballsy moves like this happening. Then again, the stakes are high for all parties (law suits, threats of jail, pogroms, etc.). Nevertheless, the system seems to have a certain built-in failsafe system (as evidenced by no prosecutions, indictments, accountability, etc.) of how far it permits challenges to rocking the applecart. While highly intriguing and historically as well as legally possible, as I said, I don’t see a lot of rubicon crossing, but I’ll keep some popcorn in reserve just in case somebody decides to grow a pair.

Expand full comment

It's hard to predict how far things will go. I have emergency popcorn in airtight sealed canisters in my survival bunker just in case.

Expand full comment

Im not convinced that Pence is entirely on the side of team freedom. I expect betrayal but hope to be wrong.

Expand full comment

It’s not that he’s not on the side of Team Freedom. But I don’t think he will take any action he feels is morally wrong in the eyes of the Lord. As a Christian, and I believe he is a strong believer, he knows he has to do the right thing — no game-playing, no sneaky tricks, and he knows whatever the outcome, it’s all in God’s hands, because he believes in the sovereignty of the Lord. He is in the most difficult position of his life.

Expand full comment

I concur. We're getting four more years of America first. Thank God almighty.

Expand full comment

If the votes from the disputed states are left out of the count, will the winner be determined to be the person with the most votes from those that were counted? OK This well written article does not address this aspect. (I expect that this would be true but one never knows.)

Expand full comment

Maybe. There is an interesting Constitutional question, there, too. To win, do you need a majority of the votes that were counted, or a majority of the votes including uncounted? No one knows...

Expand full comment

It goes to the house for votes by states.

Expand full comment

I just found your "blog" on "twidder" shared by Rasmussen. I am glad to find this interesting discussion.

Expand full comment

I am learning so much

Expand full comment

I hope that Mike Pence uses this power.

Expand full comment

Pence is going to do the right thing. He is the most honest person to have this decision to make. God is watching.

Expand full comment

Mike Pence will do no such thing. Mike Pence is phonier than a 3 dollar bill. His whole schtick is an act. He behaves like he came out of a Republican politician factory.

-Mike Pence "used to be" besties with Never Trump lunatic, Senator Jeff Flake.

-Mike Pence had a serious bromance with Paul Ryan in Congress.

-Mike Pence participated in the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax by having General Flynn fired.

-Mike Pence has done very, very little to help expose election fraud. In the rare instance he does talk about it, it's simple, safe, weak messaging that is only meant to bolster his political image for a potential presidential run in 2024.

Personally, I would never, EVER vote for Pence unless he fights for President Trump. It's pretty clear that won't happen.

Pence makes me cringe. He reeks of inauthenticity, and behaves like he came out of conservative politician factory.

Expand full comment

Wow you're sweating.

Expand full comment

Looking at you list of articles below.....why should I believe THIS one has any more of a chance of being correct?

Expand full comment

I don't want anyone to "believe" me. I want you to read critically and make a considered judgment as to what you think. I share my sources so you can do your own investigation if you want.

Expand full comment

Good, because critical reading shows that citation to the losing side of the argument in the Congressional record doesn't provide historical "heft" to an argument. They LOST the argument and the legislative body decided otherwise.

Expand full comment

That is correct, the proponents of the counter-argument carried the day during the passage of the ECA. There are, however, strong arguments that the ECA is unconstitutional. I address that in a later article ("Chaos is a Ladder") which summarizes what I consider all of the possible permutations.

Expand full comment

Moreover, the 1800 electoral rules were different. This is an anachronistic and inapt analogy based on oversimplification of the actual historical record. It breaks down completely in the context of the details.

Expand full comment
User was indefinitely suspended for this comment. Show
Expand full comment

I was happy to allow you to post when you made reasoned arguments but since you've advanced to ad hominem attacks accusing everyone who disagrees with you of religious and ethnic bigotry, you get a permanent ban. Goodbye.

Expand full comment