Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. Loc: Pa

I'm not an attorney, but I believe:

1 - You don't just go to court because you don't like the outcome. There needs to be a violation of law.

2 - The whole e******n won't go to SCOTUS because e******ns are not conducted by the Fed Gov, they are conducted by the states. So we actually have 50 different e******ns going on. Each one is judged on it's own merit.

EmilyD

In a just government that may happen, but we do not have a just government. What concerns me more is the future for my son and his children. I hope they will not have to suffer in a Socialist environment. My heart is sad thinking about that.

EmilyD

My husband and I are in the same boat age-wise as you, but my son and grandchildren, of course, are not. You are right...the "Soylent Green" (in today's world it will be mandated v*****es) situation scares me - for the reasons I just stated. I hope, somehow, the people I love do not suffer. That drives my sadness.

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. Loc: Pa

I did look it up - found NOTHING.

It's probably just a rumor in the right wing echo chamber or the creation of one of your right wing conspiracy theory rags.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Something's fishy!
https://parler.com/post/26dcb213da0c4d01afe8ddfd4970b54c

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

The c***ting is being revealed as we speak.

There will be lawsuits.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

I agree, our offspring will pay dearly if the dems pull this off.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

To my thinking, the same odd pattern repeated where Biden suddenly pulls ahead, is good cause for recounts to ensue.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Nothing would convince you anyways.

Check out dtuckers link.

Carol Kelly

The Republican Party should have started legal proceedings when the Democrats came up with this mail-out/mail-in b****t thing. The way it’s handled with no checks is bound to be trouble. Should have been addressed by the Supreme Court before Ginsberg died. Even she would have seen the danger in this and she’d have been against it. Just my opinion.

EmilyD

Can't sign in to Parler without having an account with them...don't want to do that.

11Bravo

The enemy keeps saying b****ts, it's not about b****ts , legal v**es that count towards any candidate.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

There's a real world out here, things are happening right under your nose that would scare the crap out of any American worthy of the name, and you are either incapable of seeing it or in denial or just delusional. Get out of that bubble you're stuck in?

Here's an opportunity for you to learn something.

Republican-controlled state legislatures can rectify e******n f***d committed by courts and governors
By the proper power our Constitution gives them.

Who determines the outcome of the p**********l e******n in a given state? Governors? Secretaries of state or boards of e******n superintendents? The courts? Fox News' decision desk? Nope. The president wins a state when e*****rs selected by state legislatures conduct a v**e in their respective states on Dec. 14. Thus, ultimately, according to the Constitution, the state legislators wind up serving as the kingmakers in a disputed e******n.

Endless pots of unverified mail-in b****ts that often fail to meet state e******n law standards weren't created overnight at 3 a.m. on Nov. 4. They were created by a mix of illegal administrative actions taken by Democrat administrations in the key states and state and lower federal courts overriding long-standing state e******n laws. This has been going on for years, but accelerated to a fever pitch over the past few months.

The Constitution, in Art. I, §4, cl. 1, gives state legislatures the power over the times, methods, and procedures of e******ns and provides no "public health emergency" exception that enables governors or judges to override them and create a new system for e******ns. At its core, this is why we have such post-e******n chaos, and it was by design – set in motion for years by the courts and crystalized over the past few months by using C****-** to remake the in-person v****g e*****rate into a postal b****t free-for-all, in what Justice Gorsuch described as the greatest judicial intervention in e******ns in 230 years.

Well, now state legislatures can have their revenge and have the final say, as intended by the Constitution. Mark Levin reminded his audience today that state legislatures are the ones who choose the e*****rs who directly v**e for president in each state.

Mark R. Levin
@marklevinshow
REMINDER TO THE REPUBLICAN STATE LEGISLATURES, YOU HAVE THE FINAL SAY OVER THE CHOOSING OF E*****RS, NOT ANY BOARD OF E******NS, SECRETARY OF STATE, GOVERNOR, OR EVEN COURT. YOU HAVE THE FINAL SAY -- ARTICLE II OF THE FED CONSTITUTION. SO, GET READY TO DO YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY

In case you think this is some desperate tactic Levin has concocted because he doesn't like the impending results of the state b****t tallies, he has been warning about this for months. While everyone slept as the courts rewrote e******n law, Levin, a constitutional lawyer, warned on Sept. 18, "As in Pennsylvania, the Michigan legislature is controlled by the Republicans. They must meet in emergency session and exercise their Article II power under the federal Constitution and seize back control over the e******n system."

In the run-up to the e******n, courts have allowed "late v****g, namely submission of b****ts after E******n Day so long as they are postmarked before. In addition, a Michigan court allowed b****t-harvesting under certain circumstances, which appears to have occurred late at night in Wayne County. There has been a series of rulings or administrative decisions in numerous states, which are contrary to state law and in some cases federal e******n law, that enabled Democrats to upend the e*******l process – putting aside questions of additional fraud in the early morning of Nov. 4.

Liberals say they want every v**e to count, but having v**es submitted by insidious special-interest groups that violate the terms and conditions of absentee b****ting ensures that the lawfully cast v**es of individuals indeed do not count. We can debate the policy merits of some of these anomalous v****g procedures, but everyone agrees that state legislatures control the process. In many blue states, they have already codified Democrat priorities on b****t-harvesting, registration deadlines (or lack thereof), and weak v**er verification systems. But in states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, there were laws on the books that were illegally ignored by the Democrat governors and the courts.

In his 2005 book "Men in Black," Levin noted that the reason the Supreme Court ruling on the Florida recount in 2000 was final was not because the courts are supreme over the e*******l process. Quite the contrary, the Supreme Court was merely rectifying a mistake the state court made, because Democrats were the ones who involved the courts in the e******n process to begin with. But why did Al Gore ultimately accept the decision in Bush v. Gore?

"The Florida legislature could have (and, in fact, was preparing) to intervene and name a slate of e*****rs if the Florida Supreme Court continued to interfere with the e******n," wrote Levin on page 170. "The legislature, which was controlled by the Republican Party in 2000, had absolute authority under the Constitution to choose Florida's members of the e*******l college."

Art. II, Sec. 1, §2 of the Constitution stipulates that "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct" the e*****rs to v**e for president. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to set the date of that v**e, which, pursuant to 3 U.S.C. §7, is the Monday after the second Wednesday in December of p**********l e******n years. This year it is Dec. 14.

Notice how the Constitution specifically gives the job of choosing e*****rs to the legislature, and unlike with standard legislation, there is no shared jurisdiction or responsibility with the governor, much less some random state or federal judge. Charles Pinckney, one of the signers of the Constitution from South Carolina, reiterated on the Senate floor on Jan. 23, 1800, how careful the framers were to cut Congress out of the process.

"The E*****rs are to be appointed by each State, and the whole direction as to the manner of their appointment is given to the State Legislatures," said Pinckney during a Senate debate. "Nothing was more clear … that Congress had no right to meddle with it at all; as the whole was entrusted to the State Legislatures, they must make provision for all questions arising on the occasion."

Technically, this means that state legislatures could even appoint e*****rs and completely avoid or cancel out popular e******n b****ts we have today, at least for the president and vice president. This was the practice in some states in the early days of the republic. As Justice Joseph Story wrote in his 1833 "Commentaries on the Constitution," state legislatures choosing the e*****rs themselves "has been firmly established in practice, ever since the adoption of the constitution, and does not now seem to admit of controversy, even if a suitable tribunal existed to adjudicate upon it."

Indeed, in 1892 (McPherson v. Blacker), in upholding Michigan's practice of dividing the state's e*****rs by congressional district (as done today in Maine and Nebraska), the Supreme Court wrote, "The legislature possesses plenary authority to direct the manner of appointment, and might itself exercise the appointing power by joint b****t or concurrence of the two houses, or according to such mode as it designated." In Bush v. Gore, the high court reiterated that any state legislature "may, if it so chooses, select the e*****rs itself."

Obviously, none of us wants to abolish popular e******ns, but why would the Constitution even grant state legislatures such power? Well, the framers understood that, unlike Congress, these are the bodies that are closest and most accountable to the people, and unlike judges or executives (state or federal), they are numerous in a deliberative body and won't wield unilateral authority without some degree of consensus.

By overriding the legislatures in how to properly conduct the popular e******ns that choose these p**********l e*****rs, the courts and governors have disenfranchised their v**ers. A Michigan court extended E******n Day for two weeks. A Pennsylvania court, along with the Democrat secretary of state, essentially nullified signature verification for mail-in b****ts.

Thus, if there is ample evidence of v***r f***d that would be sufficient to alter the will of the people through this popular e******n, it is incumbent upon the state legislatures in those states to reclaim their authority over the E*******l College and rectify the fraud that has upended our e******n process.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Parler (French for talk or speak) is an emerging social network created to counter Facebook and eliminate censorship.

Mark Levin dumped Facebook and now has a Parler account.

bylm1-Bernie

We obviously need to have more oversight of Federal e******ns conducted by individual states. I don't know what more evidence you would need than this current mess we have.