Stephen Francis, All Eyes on Pence on January 6th

Stephen Francis

[Editor’s note: I was informed by Michael Ivey today that Mike Pence has reservations to fly to Israel on January 7, 2021, for a two-week vacation. If he betrays the President, I would not expect him to ever return to the US.]

The main premise is that VP Pence, on January 6, 2021 (and December 23rd), has the ability to unilaterally circumvent the ‘contingent’ election possibility and directly omit the electoral votes of six swing states because of fraud thus giving Trump a 232 to 227 win on remaining electoral votes.
There are many paths of success for President Trump. This is just one possibility.
Here is a good article explaining what a contingent election is. The MSM/Deep State is fixated on it because it is mainly a useful distraction for them at this point in the election. What is important here is that there is a directly related maneuver to the ‘contingent’ election possibility.
And also, the ‘contingent’ election has a low probability of success for Trump because individual state legislatures have to vote to reject their state’s electors…not gonna happen, mostly because of RINO Republicans. See again this election timeline for more clarity. Here’s a LATimes article explaining why it may not work.

Inline image

Enter Ivan E. Raiklin (TwitterBallotPedia)

The constitutional lawyer Ivan E. Raiklin (also Green Beret commander) says that Pence can unilaterally toss out (without consideration of the state legislature contingent process) the swing states electors because of election fraud.  The MSM carefully avoids this possible scenario and are possibly not even aware of it at this point. Mike Adams of Natural News has focused on this and refers to it as the Pence Raiklin Maneuver (PRM).
It’s all a matter of when and where the introduction of fraud enters the picture, either through state legislatures or through Mike Pence on Dec 23rd and Jan 6. Barring the successful decertification of state electors through recounts, this maneuver can develop legs or may not be necessary.
According to Mike Adams: Neither the Democrat or Republican electors would be paramount in this plan. If neither candidate has 270 electoral votes or a majority of the available electors and all the swing states were removed then the candidate with the higher count would win without a contingent election vote (go to 21:00 in this video). A contingent election only happens when there is a tie.
We are now passed the December 8th Safe Harbor date. See NBCNews“Under the law, Congress must count the electoral votes from states that chose their electors and resolve any legal disputes over the choices by the act’s deadline, which is six days before the electors meet to vote. Of course, if a state fails to meet the safe harbor deadline but chooses its electors by Dec. 14, Congress can still count the votes. But seven states have created a list of GOP alternate electors which sets up Pence’s grand move, which, at this point just perpetuates the process. See Yahoo News. None of these events considered the election fraud. The Deep State has purposely made this a fact.
The crux of this situation is that election fraud has been suppressed in all court proceedings, but Pence can dramatically change this situation and possibly will be thrust into a leading role in this election. Pence calls on the 4th Wednesday of December for the electoral list (USC Title III).  On Dec 23rd he could say that he has not received legitimate votes from those six states. Pence could site the recent Pennsylvania lawsuit. He could site new evidence… etc. Pence can literally tear up (like Pelosi did the State of the Union Address) the list of swing state electors contained in the Articles of Ascertainment, (Wikipedia) because he deems them a product of a fraudulent election. This would force the state legislatures to reconsider their electors. This line of thinking is a convergence of Mike Adams’ and the X22Report’s work on the issue and is obviously subject to various interpretations.
The MSM is not only silent on election fraud in this context but states there was none…this is very important, because they need the general population to also believe this in order to counter the PRM…of which they do…but not an overwhelming percentage of the 74 million Trump voters.
The MSM keeps claiming that Trump has lost all his court battles, but this is an incomplete statement. They omit that he lost on grounds of ‘standing’…not on the evidence of fraud…of which has never been adjudicated….by design…all the ‘standing’ cases were in swing states where judges could pull this off. It is possible that Trump has been withholding some proof of election fraud, such as the maneuvers of the 305th Military Intelligence battalion’s actions and also the Steve Pieczenik’s claim that there was a ‘sting’ created around blockchain watermarked ballots. See
This NYTimes article explains some of these issues but completely omits the brilliant PRM angle, and also omits any reference to fraud.

Inline image

The January 6th Joint Session of Congress

On December 23rd, Pence’s move to omit the swing states (creating 232-227 Trump win) would cause those states to sue in SCOTUS. They would try to force Pence to approve the electors. Pence’s move, which would then force those states into proving that their state’s elections were valid, and would also force the overwhelming evidence of fraud to be presented, all of which is impossible. There is nothing in constitution compelling Pence to accept illegitimate votes. On January 6th Pence would formally execute this process. He would reject both Democrat and Republican slates of electors and declare Trump the winner. The swing states, by not following constitutional law i (relaxing mail-in voting laws without congressional mandate) created their own demise.
Most importantly,

The Overwhelming Evidence of Election Fraud

Evidence of election fraud is key to Pence’s move on January 6th. He must have overwhelming evidence that the public is aware of and believes.
Trump anticipated in 2018 that the Dems (and China) would try to disrupt the elections with mail-in ballots….of which Dems did…
In 2018 signed the  Executive Order (13848) on Election Interference. see (Lawfare). “Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election.”
In this process he set up a war room where, on election night, he and his team were watching the fraud happen in realtime…they watched the votes being switched in Frankfurt Germany….all under the orders given to the 305th Military Intelligence battalion in Germany….making it a foreign cyber attack on America….the US has been operating under this emergency declaration since 2018.
Again, the MSM either doesn’t talk about this or tries to debunk it…..we’ll see.
This evidence plus hundreds of affidavits, the Navarro Report and so much more will be able to be presented in the PRM.

Inline image

Navarro Report

WashingtonExaminerPeter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud ‘more than sufficient’ to swing victory to Trump … The 36-page report “assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 Presidential Election by examining six dimensions of alleged election irregularities across six key battleground states” and concludes that “patterns of election irregularities … are so consistent across the six battleground states that they suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election, strategically game the election process in such a way as to … unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the Biden-Harris ticket.” The six dimensions of voting irregularities in the report include: outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, equal protection clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies. All six of those voting issues were present in at least two key states, according to the report, and a total of six battleground states experienced multiple examples of the other dimensions.

Trump is putting on a rally in Washington on Jan 6th (and in Georgia Jan 4th), the very day the Pence pulls off the greatest upset in American electoral history….
According to the X22Report, Pence is now being reported as rounding up hundreds of election fraud criminals…(and preparing for his POTUS run in 2024). MonkeyWerxUS is tracking the flights to and from Gitmo and other locations
Trump says it’s (Jan 6) gonna be ‘wild’.
We’ll see if it really happens. Our future is at stake.

Additional info:

Biden only won 17% of US counties, lost Hispanic and Black support, Biden lost 18 of 19 bellweather counties, Biden lost Ohio, Florida and Iowa, he lost 27 of 27 House tossups but somehow shatter popular vote… Biden says he got 80 million votes from 477 counties, Trump got 74 million votes from 2497 counties, … Bill Binney: 212 million registered voters, with 66% voting says 140 million people voted … that leaves only 66 million left for Dems …or 13 million more votes than eligible voters … Navarro 379000 illegal votes cast in Michigan… within 5 second period around 6:30 am Bidens vote total skyrocketed by 141000 votes and Trump got only 5768 votes in the same period, Then did this calculation on a state by state basis… under this it was determined that there were 141 million eligible voters … volumes could be presented on election fraud.
Please follow and like us:

89 thoughts on “Stephen Francis, All Eyes on Pence on January 6th”

  1. Trump: If Vice President Comes Through, ‘We Will Win the Presidency’
    President Donald Trump said Wednesday he will win a second term if Vice President Mike Pence takes action while Congress counts electoral votes.

    If Pence “comes through for us, we will win the Presidency,” Trump asserted in a tweet.

    “Many States want to decertify the mistake they made in certifying incorrect & even fraudulent numbers in a process NOT approved by their State Legislatures (which it must be). Mike can send it back!” he added.

    Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s team didn’t return a request for comment.

    In another missive, Trump said Pence “has the power to reject fraudulently chosen electors.” He also spoke of the matter while rallying in Georgia, saying his “hope” was that Pence delivers.

    The vice president serves as president of the Senate. In that role, Pence will be presiding over the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6.

    The power of Pence to reject electors is disputed. Some say he can reject some electoral votes, while others argue he cannot.

    According to the U.S. Constitution, electors of each state have to meet, make a list of their votes, “which they shall sign and certify,” and send those to the president of the Senate.

    “The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted,” the 12th Amendment says.

    The Electoral Count Act of 1887, currently known as 3 U.S. Code Section 15, says the vice president opens envelopes with the vote certificates and hands them to tellers to count. He’s then handed the envelopes back and reads the results out loud.

    Epoch Times Photo
    President Donald Trump (L) and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in file photographs. (AP Photos)
    Epoch Times Photo
    Supporters of President Donald Trump rally in Washington on Jan. 5, 2021. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
    If there are two sets of certificates for a state, as is the case for multiple states this time around, the House and Senate separately vote on which set is legitimate. If the chambers vote differently, the set certified by the state’s governor should count.

    Some argue the act constrains the power of the vice president. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) and Arizona’s Republican slate of electors sued Pence late last year, asking a judge to declare a portion of it unconstitutional. The portion of the act “limits or eliminates his exclusive authority and sole discretion under the 12th Amendment to determine which slates of electors for a state, or neither, may be counted,” they argued.

    That suit was rejected by a district judge and an appeal was dismissed.

    Some believe Pence’s role is narrower. “I don’t think the vice president actually counts under the law. He’s sort of just there. This is really on Congress, ” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said on Fox News on Tuesday night.

    Congress on Jan. 3 passed rules regulating how the joint session will be conducted.

    In seven states, so-called alternate electors cast ballots for Trump. Biden was certified the winner of all seven.

    In a scenario Trump and his supporters envision, Pence declares elections in certain states were run in violation of the state’s own election laws. He may mention fraud evidence or allegations. He then moves to certify the alternate slate for Trump.

    Democrats dismiss that possibility, along with some Republicans. They argue the election is over and the joint session is a formality.

    “I know many West Virginians are disappointed with the results of the election, but it is time to move on & put our country and our Constitution over any one person or party,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said in a statement on Tuesday.

    Pence has given little indication of what he will do. He asked the judge to reject Gohmert’s lawsuit, but didn’t commit to a course of action. His spokesman said he backs efforts to object to electoral votes, a second possible, but unlikely, path to victory by Trump.

    Trump’s campaign, meanwhile, said late Tuesday that Pence did not, as reported in an anonymously-sourced report, tell Trump that he doesn’t have the power to reject electoral votes.

    “He never said that,” Trump said in a statement from his campaign. “The vice president and I are in total agreement that the vice president has the power to act.”

    Petr Savb contributed to this report.

    I’m not a praying man, but this is foxhole time

  2. The Epoch Times
    Video: What the Constitution Says About the Jan 6 Electoral Votes—Interview With Rick Green
    Questions are swirling over what will happen when a joint session of Congress comes together on Jan. 6 to count the Electoral Votes from each state, given the various anomalies, lawsuits, and dueling electors. To learn more about this we’ve invited to speak with us Rick Green, founder of Patriot Academy and an expert on the US Constitution.

    It’s possible the best outcome would be Pence accepting the fraudulent set of electors. This would more likely precipitate a civil war than his other choices. That war would ultimately have a better chance at getting rid of the pedo elite scum. Nobody wants war, but if that’s what it takes, so be it.

  3. How Trump can Win…
    The Palmieri Report

    This information was republished at The Palmieri Report and the tweets were apparently from an Epoch Times article.

    The 12th Amendment sets forth a procedure for resolving a disputed election where neither candidate achieves a majority of electoral votes. In that case, a “contingent election” is held by the House: “the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote …”

    Thus, if Pence were to “open” and read the electoral votes cast by both of the competing slates of electors from the six swing states, and choose “not to count” either set—in light of the conflict—the House of Representatives would immediately vote to determine the winner, with each state getting one vote. Given that a majority of states are GOP-controlled (although the Democrats control a greater number of representatives), Trump would prevail.

  4. Politico (deep state) version of issues on Jan 6, (Jan 3rd)
    How Congress and coronavirus could quash Trump’s Electoral College gambit

    President Donald Trump’s last-gasp bid to overturn his 2020 election defeat appears doomed on Jan. 6, when Congress is set to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

    But the byzantine process by which Congress counts and validates the Electoral College results has left gnawing uncertainty about precisely how the final act in Trump’s undemocratic drama will play out.

    The law that guides the proceedings, the Electoral Count Act — passed in 1887 to address the disastrous election of 1876 — is vaguely written and full of gaps that have perplexed constitutional scholars for a century. Now, Trump and his allies are working to exploit those gaps to try to muscle their way to a second term.

    There’s little doubt that Biden will be certified as president by the end of the day on Jan. 6 or in the wee hours of Jan. 7, but Trump’s allies could cast a cloud over the process — grinding it to a halt, attempting to force votes on alternate slates of Trump-supporting electors and raising untold objections to the proceedings that could disrupt the traditionally ceremonial event.

    But the lack of clarity also creates enormous opportunities for those who wish to limit or prevent the daylong spectacle that Trump’s allies are promising. That could include both Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has been working to tamp down GOP support for challenges in recent days — drawing Trump’s fury.

    “This is actually a point at which Congress could do a great deal to curb some of the more dilatory moves that some people might try to take,” said Scott Anderson, a governance studies fellow at the Brookings Institution and senior editor of Lawfare. “There’s lots of spaces to fill in, in terms of how they intend to interpret and apply the Electoral Count Act.”

    In fact, while Congress has voluntarily submitted to the rules laid out in that 1887 law, there is a raging constitutional debate about whether lawmakers can deviate from it or ignore it altogether. And aides in both chambers say the rules are likely to change at least in some form for a simple reason: social distancing amid the pandemic.

    Here’s a look at some of the little-known intricacies of the process that could become enormously important.

    The Jan. 3 dilemma
    The least-understood aspect of Congress’ electoral vote certification occurs days before the main event. On Jan. 3, the first day of the new congressional session, the House and Senate will adopt a set of rules that govern the Jan. 6 meeting.

    The so-called concurrent resolution usually originates in the Senate, where the rules committee — chaired by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo) — would issue the first version. In recent decades, even after fiercely contested elections like in 2000 and 2016, the rules have been adopted unanimously and without debate.

    Those rules have been unaltered for decades, and they simply reaffirm that Congress will abide by the processes in the Constitution and in the Electoral Count Act. Those processes include a requirement that the vice president, in this case Mike Pence, will preside over the Jan. 6 session and that electoral votes are to be read aloud one state at a time, alphabetically.

    Those rules also lay out the process for challenging electoral votes: It requires one House member and one senator to join together in writing to object. If that happens, the branches recess to their chambers and hold a two-hour debate, with each participant speaking up to five minutes. Then the chambers vote on whether to accept or reject the challenged electoral votes and then return to the joint session. A simple majority in the House and Senate would be expected to defeat any challenge to Biden’s votes, as they did in 2005, when Democrats forced debate on a challenge to Ohio’s electors.

    But the rules aren’t etched in stone, and in fact some experts say Congress could ignore them altogether, since the House and Senate have broad authority to set their own internal rules and can’t necessarily be bound by the decisions of 19th-century lawmakers. But ignoring the Electoral Count Act altogether would create a new degree of legal peril that congressional leaders are loath to unleash. Blunt’s office has declined to respond to multiple requests for comment about whether this year’s rules will match those of previous cycles.

    Roy Blunt
    Sen. Roy Blunt, who leads the Senate’s Committee on Rules and Administration. | Rod Lamkey-Pool/Getty Images

    An aide to Pelosi affirmed that she views the Electoral Count Act as the basis for the Jan. 6 procedures. A McConnell aide didn’t respond to requests for comment on the majority leader’s intentions for the Jan. 3 resolution.

    Rather than take the extreme route of bypassing the Electoral Count Act altogether, constitutional scholars say lawmakers could use the opportunity to clarify and add to existing processes in order to stave off uncertainty stoked by Trump’s hard-line allies. That could include restricting Pence’s power to make sweeping procedural rulings or setting criteria that prevent him from introducing alternate slates of presidential electors in states won by Biden, a gambit some Trump allies have urged him to attempt.

    Rep. Louie Gohmert | AP Photo
    Judge throws out Gohmert suit aimed at empowering Pence to overturn 2020 election results
    The Eight Pieces of Pop Culture That Defined the Trump Era
    The Southern state where Black voters are gaining in numbers, but not power
    2020 Was the Year of the Black Voter—And Black Joy
    ‘What counts as a purported slate of electors from a state? Under what circumstances is a vice president allowed to present a potential slate of electors to the joint session? What types of objections are and aren’t in order?” said Michael Morley, a Florida State University election and constitutional law expert. These questions, he said, could all be clarified by Congress if lawmakers choose to supplement the Electoral Count Act rules with procedures that respond to the clear efforts of the president’s allies.

    The alternate slates of Trump electors carry no legal force. But the language of the Electoral Count Act indicates that Congress must consider any documents “purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes.” Multiple constitutional experts said in interviews that Congress could help define the boundaries of what are considered legitimate electoral votes — such as those endorsed by a governor, state legislature or other state authority — and prevent the Trump votes from being read into the joint session.

    Trump allies could also seek to make a stand on Jan. 3 by attempting to amend the rules in their favor or opposing any new constraints adopted in either chamber. Although those votes would likely fail, they would provide an early window into the level of support for any challenges that they intend to bring on Jan. 6 — and just how many Republicans are prepared to vote to affirm Biden’s victory as well.

    The Pence problem
    Pence’s role in the proceedings is the most amorphous aspect, and the one that may ensure there is an air of unpredictability, no matter how carefully Pelosi and McConnell attempt to script the process.

    The Twelfth Amendment requires that the vice president oversee the joint session of Congress and open each state’s certificate of electoral votes. The Electoral Count Act spells out his role further, requiring him to hand over the opened certificates to four “tellers” — two appointed by the House and two by the Senate — who then read them aloud to the chamber. Pence then asks for any objections.

    But neither provision indicates what criteria Pence may use to decide whether he may introduce alternative slates of Trump electors. In fact, the rules require him to introduce any papers “purporting” to be elector slates — and it’s up to him to determine whether Trump’s electors in states won by Biden should be considered by Congress.

    Mike Pence speaks during the eighth meeting of the National Space Council.
    2020 ELECTIONS

    Pence declined to back Gohmert-led effort to upend election, lawyers indicate

    Pence has huddled with the Trump allies who are attempting to overturn the results, and his public rhetoric has increasingly matched the president’s. One conservative Republican, Rep. Louie Gohmert, filed a lawsuit this week to throw out the Electoral Count Act procedures altogether, which he argues violate the Twelfth Amendment’s requirement that Pence use his own judgment about which electoral votes should be counted.

    The suit isn’t being taken seriously in legal circles, but it does raise one crucial question: What does Pence think? Gohmert’s attorneys revealed Tuesday that they had attempted to reach agreement with Pence before filing suit but were unable to come to terms.

    If Pence agrees with Gohmert’s theory, he can attempt to assert it when he presides over the Jan. 6 session. If he doesn’t, Trump and his allies are positioning it to be the ultimate betrayal of the president. And if Pence bows out altogether, the duty of presiding would fall to Senate President Pro Tem Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

    Pence has worked closely with Capitol Hill Republicans throughout his tenure. But it’s unclear how closely he’s coordinating his plans with McConnell or Pelosi’s offices, or whether he’s seeking clarity on the specifics of his authority. His aides did not respond to requests for comment.

    “What communication is there between the VP’s office, Senator McConnell’s office, Speaker Pelosi’s office?” wondered Ned Foley, a constitutional law expert at Ohio State University. “What has the VP’s office received by way of alternate electoral votes? Does he have a plan for presenting them in the joint session?”

    Alternate elector slates
    The language of the Electoral Count Act is extremely vague on this subject. It requires that any papers “purporting” to be official electors be considered during the Jan. 6 joint session. But there’s no clear understanding of what criteria would be deployed either by Pence or by the National Archives, which has in recent elections been a clearinghouse for states to deliver their elector documents.

    Foley noted that in 1889, after the first presidential election since the passage of the Electoral Count Act, a practical jokester from Oregon submitted a fake set of electors. In that case, the vice president at the time introduced the false electors during the joint session of Congress before requesting unanimous consent to ignore it and count the legitimate ones.

    In 1961, Congress was forced to adjudicate competing slates of electors from Hawaii, whose governor certified a set for GOP nominee Richard M. Nixon before reversing course after a recount and certifying a set for President-elect John F. Kennedy. But the outcome of that fight had no bearing on the results of the election.

    On Dec. 14, when electors gathered across the country to cast their formal votes for president, Trump’s electors in several states won by Biden — including Arizona, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Nevada — held informal gatherings to attempt to cast their votes as well.

    Though they were not certified by any state officials, these GOP slates have encouraged Pence to treat them as legitimate alternate slates on Jan. 6. And Gohmert’s lawsuit, joined by Arizona’s 11 GOP electors, seeks to remove any potential barriers to Pence making a unilateral decision about which electors to introduce.

    “The vice president’s office or the National Archives has never made any judgments as what qualifies,” Foley added.

    But federal laws also stack sharply in favor of counting only elector sets that have been certified by a Dec. 8 “safe harbor” deadline and, when disputes arise, to count only the slate certified by the state’s governor.

    The coronavirus factor
    There’s one aspect of the Jan. 6 process that House and Senate aides say will necessarily have to change — and it could have untold consequences. It’s simply untenable, they say, to cram 535 lawmakers into the House chamber, possibly for a daylong session, while Trump allies lodge objection after objection.

    Though no final procedures have been adopted, Pelosi’s office indicated that she is considering protocols that the House has relied on since the start of the pandemic: asking some lawmakers to sit in the public galleries to maximize social distancing and requiring votes to occur in small groups, with access to the floor strictly limited.

    “The procedures are outlined in the Electoral Count Act but the speaker will continue to consult with the Attending Physician on COVID protocols,” said spokesman Drew Hammill.

    It’s unclear, though, how those limits might impact the broader proceedings, and whether it could complicate the ability of Trump’s allies to upend the smooth transition of power.

    Pelosi on Tuesday rolled out a strict set of social distancing procedures that will limit access to the floor of the House on Jan. 3, when members of Congress will also be sworn in for a new session. The rules restrict access to no more than 72 lawmakers at a time. It’s unclear whether similar restrictions will be enforced on Jan. 6.

  5. House Asks Court to Dismiss Effort to Clarify Vice President’s Power in Electoral Counting

    BY ZACHARY STIEBER January 1, 2021 Updated: January 1, 2021biggersmaller Print
    The House of Representatives is asking a court to reject a petition from Republicans that requests judges to say Vice President Mike Pence has the authority to reject some electoral votes.

    “This Court should reject plaintiffs’ effort to overturn Congress’s centuries-old role in counting electoral votes and resolving disputes about them in the constitutionally mandated Joint Session,” the House said in an amicus brief on Dec. 31.

    Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) and other Republicans this week sued Pence, asking a judge to authorize Pence to pick Republican electors over Democratic ones. They said the U.S. Constitution gives Pence the “exclusive authority” to decide which Electoral College votes to count, and that a portion of the Electoral Count Act of 1877 is unconstitutional.

    The suit centers around the joint session of Congress that’s held every four years to count electoral votes. Electors meet in each states under the Electoral College system after presidential elections and cast ballots for the candidate that won the most votes in their respective states.

    In seven states this election, competing electors also cast ballots for President Donald Trump.

    The Democrat-controlled House in its new filing says the vice president during counting sessions, per the 1877 Act, “opens the electors’ certificates, but does not count the votes.”

    The court should reject the claim because the plaintiffs lack standing, the suit is not timely, and the constitutional challenges “have no merit.”

    “And the public interest and equities cut strongly against a first-of-its-kind injunction that would rewrite longstanding procedural rules for Congressional vote counting and create confusion just days before the required Joint Session,” it added.

    Epoch Times Photo
    Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, left, and President Donald Trump in file photographs. (AP Photo; Getty Images)
    In a statement accompanying the brief, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said: “The Gohmert lawsuit has zero legal merit and is yet another sabotage of our democracy. There is no doubt that, despite this desperate unpatriotic charade, on January 6, [Democrat presidential candidate] Joe Biden will be confirmed by the acceptance of the vote of the Electoral College as the 46th President of the United States.”

    Pence, a House member before becoming Trump’s vice president, agreed with the House. He also asked U.S. District Judge Jeremy Kernodle, a Trump appointee, to reject the suit.

    “A suit to establish that the Vice President has discretion over the count, filed against the Vice President, is a walking legal contradiction,” an attorney representing Pence argued in a separate filing.

    The lawsuit could have a major impact on the election, which remains contested just five days before the joint session. A constitutional expert told The Epoch Times this week that a less-covered aspect of the case, which seeks a court determination on how Congress should vote when Republicans object to slates of electors from six states where Trump has challenged the state-certified election results, could be a “big game-changer.”

    Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) announced Tuesday that he will challenge electoral votes during the congressional session. A quickly-rising number of representatives are also planning to file objections.

    Theoretically, objections could lead to the nullification of some state’s electoral votes, but the likelihood of challenges being upheld is considered unlikely because that would require a majority vote in each chamber. Democrats control the House and GOP Senate leadership has repeatedly criticized plans to file the objections.

    In the case neither candidate reaches 270 electoral votes during the session, a secondary system would be triggered, wherein the House decides the next president by voting by state. In that scenario, Republicans hold a slight edge.

    Biden’s team said this week the electoral counting is “merely a formality” and said Biden is already the president-elect.

    1. Upon reading this report and that one from 11:56 AM yesterday, whether Pence has the Constitutional authority or not, he does not seem to be stepping up to support Trump. I just don’t get it. And I doubt I am the only one.
      How many here realize the gravity of the situation we face. We are looking at the end of this Republic…or am I exaggerating?

      1. You are not exaggerating. Pence, like Roberts and McConnell and Meadows and Cipollone, appear to be traitors to the nation. They are betraying the American people.

  6. CONTINGENT ELECTION: Trump Advisor Agrees That Pence Can Throw Out AZ, PA, WI, MI On Jan 6

    Jason D. Meister, an Advisory Board Member for President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, published a series of tweets quoting an Epoch Times article about Vice President Mike Pence’s ability to toss the Electoral Votes from contested states with credible accusations of widespread voter fraud. This move would likely lead to a contingent election, which President Trump would handily win.

    As National File has previously reported, Pence will soon face a rare Constitutional event as competing slates of electors are provided on January 6. Meister notes that “Pence will be faced with dueling electors for the six disputed swing states, a Biden slate from the governors, and a Trump slate from the lawmakers.”

    This would leave President Trump with a thin majority of electoral votes, with 232 to Joe Biden’s 227.

    As neither candidate would win the requisite 270 vote majority, a contingent election would be necessary to determine the next President, in accordance with the Constitution.

    A contingent election would see the House of Representatives charged with voting for the next President, and the Senate with choosing the next Vice President.

    However, in a contingent election, each state represented in the House of Representatives will only have one vote, thus rendering the advantages of high population states like California and New York moot.

    The simple majority of states that have elected Republicans to the House of Representatives would likely hand President Trump a speedy victory.

    However, as National File has repeatedly noted, this strategy’s potential depends entirely on whether Pence is willing to defend the Constitution, President Trump, and election integrity on January 6.

    As noted by The Epoch Times, both The Amistad Project and a series of top state level Republicans and Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) have sued Pence to legally define his Constitutional role on January 6.

    Pence has thus far remained almost entirely silent on this issue, however, the vice president recently cancelled his planned trip to Israel, scheduled for immediately after the January 6 electoral college challenge.

      1. No doubt..Posted that from Jim Stone yesterday…..How much more evidence is needed before arrests begin? It’s way the hell beyond that point. This is criminal. The turning point has been reached. Get out the champagne!!

      2. What happens if the Democrats, in the face of overwhelming proof that the election was stolen, STILL WANT TO VOTE FOR BIDEN AND HARRIS (even knowing it’s not the real “Joe Biden”)? What happens then? A two-hour debate and final vote?

      3. If Pence does not step up, it’s a new Civil War on Inauguration Day.
        I see no other choice. It’s time to take the offensive.

      4. Ole Dammegard, who has predicted many false flags on the basis of clues left behind at the last, has found clues from Nashville that the next will be at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. I conjecture that it will be on 6 January 2021 to muck things up.

      5. Just received this email from Gun Owners of America….good info and a great summation:

        GunsAmerica Digest

        Hello Everyone,

        This email, like the others before it, is not for those of you who absolutely hate Donald Trump, and will stop at nothing to see him removed from office. However you are welcome to start another Twitter war, because I’m sure many of your friends would appreciate this message.

        This email is for the rest of us, who may be supporters of Trump, may be ambivalent, or maybe just didn’t even care. George Carlin once said, before they killed him, “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.”

        Even if you didn’t care, didn’t vote, even if you don’t care now. If you think it is all pointless, you have to take one more leap of faith right now and act.

        View some of the videos below, and decide for yourself if enough fraud occurred in the swing states to swing this election to a fraudulent conclusion. It did. Donald J. Trump won in a landslide, and IF YOU CAN FIND SOMETHING TO CARE ABOUT AT ALL, IT IS THIS.

        Call and email your elected representatives today, and tell them that they must stand up on January 6th, to reject the fraudulently acquired electors for Joe Biden, and accept the legitimate electors for Donald Trump.

        US House:

        US Senate:

        Also email and use social media to contact Vice President Mike Pence to stand up for the American people on January 6th.

        The one thing that unites all of us, no matter how hopeless and pointless it all may seem, is not a man. It is not a president. It is not an election, for or against any political ideal.

        What we all support is the United States Constitution. It is the document that preserves our G-d given rights in this great nation of ours, and prevents the government from stealing them.

        The 2nd Amendment was 2nd for a reason, because it is the last ditch effort We the People have against a treasonous government, but NOBODY wants our streets to devolve into armed conflict over a nothing like Joe Biden.

        You may think that this election is over, and that Joe Biden is going to be inaugurated on January 20th. This may not be the case. Dozens of US House members and at least one senator, Hawley, has agreed to step up and object to Joe Biden’s electors. It is political suicide to do this, or so the boot licking Republican politician class thinks.

        Our Patriots who have been willing to stand up need cover. They need you to call your elected officials and DEMAND that they view the actual evidence, and support the defense of the legitimate President Elect of the United States, Donald J. Trump.

        Senator Hawley objects to the Electoral College.


        Over a month ago, on November 25th, in of all places Gettysburg Pennsylvania, evidence began to finally come out documenting the fraud that occurred in the Nov. 3rd election. The full hearing has been taken down repeatedly by Youtube, but right now it is available below. Listen to your fellow citizens, many of whom have been vilified, threatened and fired from their jobs since then for standing up for the American people, for you and your right to a free and fair election.


        On December 1st we got to hear the stories coming out of Michigan. It was essentially the same playbook as PA. Block meaningful bipartisan oversight of the counting process. Mysterious vote deliveries in the middle of the night. Smug and confident inner city poll workers who had been assured that no matter what they did they were untouchable.


        Yesterday the Georgia senate passed a resolution to audit the ballots from the overnight period on November 3rd. This is the period where the election supervisor fraudulently called a stop to counting, sent everyone home, then proceeded to take cases of ballots from under a table and scan them multiple times, all on the security cameras built into the facility. This evidence has been out for nearly a month, yet nobody has been arrested, or even brought in for questioning.

        The video from yesterday got a late start. Rudy was already in the middle of his testimony.

        The second half is here:

        If you are interested, there is also a video of the house hearing where the officials were invited to explain their side of the story. It was very strange that secretary of state Brad Raffensburger asked his attorney to deadpan most of the answers.


        Last night two citizen watchdog organizations held a press conference and rally in Phoenix. In it they revealed house to house canvassing conducted by their members of mail in ballot addresses that added up to up to over 30% fraudulent.


        The same playbook happened in Milwaukie and other major cities, just like all of the other states where the Democrat fraud machine was overwhelmed with the numbers of election day voters, so had to cheat more than they had planned. Wisconsin is a particular story, because the Supreme Court there did rule on one fraudulent aspect that happened there. Mail in voting in Wisconsin is limited to indefinitely confined people. The Democrat fraudsters told people to claim that they were indefinitely confined, even though they were not. Two of Joe Biden’s electors reported themselves as indefinitely confined, and voted fraudulently. The hearing there tells a number of other stories, which by now are familiar to all of us.


        In our last email on these matters, the hearing in Nevada had just happened. Similar to much of the country, the lawsuits have been thrown out not on evidence, not on what’s right and what’s wrong. The courts have chickened out and allowed motions for standing and timeliness to silence the witnesses. An affidavit the court can call illegitimate. A witness, with honesty in their eyes and passion in their heart, cannot be denied, and it is why the courts absolutely refuse to hear them.

        For great daily coverage every day of what’s going on, tune into the most popular political podcast in the world, and a Youtube channel that often has 50k people watching live. Steve Bannon’s Warroom Pandemic is live every day at 10am and weekdays at 5pm.

        Thanks as always for being part of GunsAmerica.

        Paul (Shlomo) Helinski

      6. (( I conjecture that it will be on 6 January 2021 to muck things up.))

        At this point, anything is feasible. These creatures (an insult to creatures everywhere) will stop at nothing to fit their agenda. They’re all in. Are we?

        Hawley had better watch his back. Has anyone joined him as yet? Some support could save his life.

        Ole Dammegard has rarely, if ever, been wrong.

  7. GOP Representative-Elect: Word on the Hill Is That MITCH McCONNELL and Nancy Pelosi Possibly Working on Rule Change to Block Electoral College Objection

    TRENDING: BREAKING: “I Cannot Vote to Certify the Electoral College Results on January 6th” – MO Senator Josh Hawley Announces He Will Object to Electoral College Certification Process

    Following the news this morning Representative-elect Marjorie Taylor-Greene tweeted out that the “word on the Hill” is that GOP Senate Leader Mitch McConnell is working together with Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi on a rules change “deal” to block our Electoral College Certification objection.

    So far OVER 30 Republican representatives and Senator Josh Hawley have confirmed they will challenge the Electoral College count next week.

    The election was stolen.
    Several Republicans are standing up.

    If you are a Republican lawmaker and do not make a stand against this stolen election your days in office are numbered.

  8. EpochTimes

    Power of Vice President to Count or Reject Electoral Votes Disputed
    BY PETR SVAB December 29, 2020 Updated: December 30, 2020biggersmaller Print
    News Analysis

    At 1 p.m. local time on Jan. 6, members of Congress will gather in the chamber of the House of Representatives to observe the formal certification of Electoral College votes for president of the United States.

    While it’s usually a formality, nothing has been usual so far about this year’s election amid numerous allegations of voter fraud in key swing states.

    The situation is complicated by a lack of clarity on the legal and constitutional guardrails for the process. The joint session of Congress may well result in gridlock, in which a clear winner of the race isn’t announced at all.

    Based on current election results, former Vice President Joe Biden has received 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232 votes. Meanwhile, Republicans in seven states where Biden claimed victory have sent their own sets of electoral votes to Washington, and some members of the House have indicated that they will object to Biden electors in some states. Any objection would require support from one House member and one senator to be considered, and at least one senator has left open the possibility he would join the effort.

    So what will happen?

    The counting of votes is primarily governed by the 12th Amendment of the Constitution and the amended Electoral Count Act.

    The Constitution simply states that electors of each state have to meet, make a list of their votes, “which they shall sign and certify,” and send those to the president of the Senate, meaning Vice President Mike Pence.

    “The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted,” the 1804 amendment says.

    The Electoral Count Act of 1887, currently known as 3 U.S. Code Section 15, establishes a procedure for how the votes are counted, how to raise objections, and how to resolve disputes. First, it says that the vice president indeed presides over the proceedings. Then, it says the House and Senate leaders each designate two tellers. The VP opens the envelopes with the vote certificates and hands them to the tellers for counting. The tellers then read them out loud, count them, and hand them back to the VP to announce the results.

    Then, in rather convoluted language, the law says that Congress members can object. At least one objection from each chamber is needed to trigger a separate vote by both House and Senate on the objections. If both chambers agree, the objected voters are rejected. That’s virtually out of the question given the Democrats’ majority in the House.

    If two sets of electors are presented for counting, the House and Senate need to separately vote on which set is legitimate and which should be rejected. If each chamber votes differently, the set certified by the state’s governor should count. That would hand the victory to Biden.

    The problem is, there’s a voluminous body of legal analysis arguing that the Electoral Count Act is unconstitutional. Congress has no business granting itself the authority to decide which slate of electors is the correct one and which votes should be rejected. Nor does Congress have the power to designate state governors as the final arbiters, a lineup of legislators and legal scholars have argued.

    There are two arguments for who has the constitutional power to decide which electors to choose.

    Some jurists say it’s the VP who has the sole discretion to decide which votes to count. The argument is that the framers intended for the VP to be the sole authority over the counting of the votes because the unanimous resolution attached to the Constitution said that the Senate should appoint its president “for the sole purpose of receiving, opening, and counting the votes for president.”

    Moreover, before the adoption of the Electoral Count Act, it was always the VP counting the votes, sometimes despite major objections from Congress. Thomas Jefferson did so as the VP in the 1800 election, counting Georgia’s constitutionally deficient votes and de facto securing his own presidency.

    Arizona state lawmakers and GOP electors, together with Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), have filed a federal suit asking for the court to clarify the law to the effect that the Electoral Count Act is unconstitutional and the VP’s power is paramount.

    Not everybody agrees, though.

    University of Virginia professor John Harrison, an expert on constitutional history, says the VP doesn’t have “any constitutional power to make decisions” over which votes to count.

    He argued that the law is deficient to the effect that “Congress doesn’t have the power to make the announcement [of its decisions regarding the vote count] conclusive.” But that doesn’t mean it can’t prescribe any rules at all.

    “The Constitution does call for counting the votes with both houses present, so I think that setting up procedures for a count is within Congress’s power,” he told The Epoch Times via email.

    The second argument is that the Constitution grants the authority to determine how electors are picked to state legislatures. As such, any disputes over which votes should be counted should be resolved by state legislatures.

    The problem is, state legislatures aren’t in session and they can’t assemble in a special session without a call from the governors, who have refused to do so. Meanwhile, the legislatures have usually delegated the power to certify electors to the Governors and Secretaries of State, undermining their own authority on the matter.

    The conservative Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society has filed a federal lawsuit arguing that the power of the legislatures is both “exclusive and non-delegable,” and thus any state and federal statutes to the contrary are unconstitutional and void.

    That would not only knock down some provisions of the Electoral Count Act, but also render electoral votes that haven’t been certified post-election by state legislatures illegitimate.

    Regardless of what the courts will say, the core question is what will take place in the House chambers on Jan. 6? Will Pence refuse to follow the Electoral Count Act? Will some of the tellers dissent? If things go wrong for the Democrats, will House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) try to end the session prematurely?

    There’s no way to tell. Pence hasn’t let his intentions be known.

    Follow Petr on Twitter: @petrsvab

      1. Sure hope that happens….at least that will open up a potential of at least 100 hours of debate (not sure, as I have ready a few different interpretations) if I understand all this correctly. All one has to do is go out and talk to anyone and it becomes very apparent only a very small percentage have any idea that is happening and even fewer realize what is actually at stake.

  9. GOP Lawmaker Sues to Give Pence ‘Exclusive Authority’ to Overturn Election Results
    Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) filed a lawsuit against Vice President Mike Pence in a bid to overturn the presidential election results, asking a court to give Pence “exclusive authority” to decide which Electoral College votes should be counted.

    According to the lawsuit (pdf), Pence has a role in the upcoming Jan. 6, 2021, joint session of Congress to count all 50 states’ Electoral College votes. Gohmert’s lawsuit, which was filed against Pence in his capacity as vice president, is asking a federal judge to strike down the 1887 Electoral Count Act and to grant Pence the authority to overturn the election results in favor of President Donald Trump.

    Gohmert’s lawsuit is claiming that any action taken by Pence on Jan. 6 to certify the Electoral College results to secure a win for Joe Biden will be fraudulent. Gohmert is also asking Judge Jeremy Kernodle, a Trump appointee, to determine that Pence is authorized to pick GOP electors who cast votes for Trump during the Joint Session of Congress.

    The White House and Pence’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

    “Vice-President Pence determines which slate of electors’ votes count, or neither, for that State,” Gohmert’s lawsuit states. “If no candidate has a majority of 270 elector votes, then the House of Representatives (and only the House of Representatives) shall choose the President.”

    It adds that the 12th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution “contains the exclusive dispute resolution mechanisms” over elections.

    The court should render a judgment on whether “Vice President Pence, in his capacity as President of Senate and Presiding Officer of the January 6, 2021, Joint Session of Congress under the Twelfth Amendment, is subject solely to the requirements of the Twelfth Amendment and may exercise the exclusive authority and sole discretion in determining which electoral votes to count for a given State, and must ignore and may not rely on any provisions of the Electoral Count Act that would limit his exclusive authority and his sole discretion to determine the count, which could include votes from the slates of Republican electors from the Contested States,” Gohmert’s lawsuit says.

    Gohmert noted that GOP-selected electors in several key states being contested by Trump have cast votes for Trump and Pence. The Republican parties in the states said they did so to preserve lawsuit options for the president. Electors that were certified by the key states’ executive branches cast votes during the Dec. 14 Electoral College vote, giving Biden 306 votes to Trump’s 232 votes.

    Meanwhile, Gohmert said in the suit that he’s joining a GOP-led effort to challenge the Electoral College vote-count efforts on Jan. 6. The bid, which is being led by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), has dozens of supporters in the House, Brooks told Fox News on Dec. 28.

    Trump has supported the effort led by Brooks and the other Republican lawmakers to challenge the counting. But so far, it’s not clear if any senators have joined, which is needed to carry out the challenge of the electoral votes.

    Gohmert filed the suit in the Eastern District of Texas. Tyler Bowyer, Nancy Cottle, Jake Hoffman, Anthony Kern, James R. Lamon, Sam Moorhead, Robert Montgomery, Lorain Pellegrino, Greg Safsten, Kelli Ward, and Michael Ward also joined the lawsuit.

    The case is Gohmert v. Pence, and the case number is 6:20-cv-00660.

  10. Dr. Steve Turley
    BREAKING! Lawsuit to FORCE Vice President Mike Pence to Hand Trump Election!!!
    Louis Gohmert’s bill would strike down the 1887 law that governs electoral procedures…
    Objections are per state…so it’s actually possible that 50 states x 2 hr debate = 100 hours of debate
    If both bodies sustain objections then certain states tossed out of the electoral college…
    What happens if the chambers split on a state’s electors? … is unchartered territory … This vagueness is where Gohmrets lawsuit applies … Pence is the final arbiter …
    Pence does have enormous power on Jan 6 to select elector he reads out slates he could select GOPs
    or Pence could omit slates so that neither candidate has 270 electors…
    Either way, it all gets passed to the individual state Houses …then ultimately goes to one state one vote outcome giving Trump the win
    A growing number of Republicans are getting on board with all this
    Gohmert’s lawsuit makes it explicit that Pence can’t approve of electors from fraudulent elections???
    What does it mean that Pence didn’t do all this on Dec 23rd….he could have????
    It all depends now on public opinion which according to the latest Rasmussen poll is squarely on the side of Trump.

    and Rasmussen polls show Trump is winning immigration argument

    1. Will Pence step up and not betray Trump and We the People? Or will he follow Gore’s lead and betray us? It’s more than suspicious he’s on his way to Israel that very day.
      Do your duty, Pence or be labeled a traitor to this republic. There is no middle ground here.

  11. Tom Fitton / Mo Brooks
    What Happens with the Electoral College on January 6?
    On Jan 6, at least one member of House and Senate must object to elector slates, the members then retire to their respective chambers and have a two-hour debate.
    the remainder of the video is concerned with the mind-boggling complexities of congressional debate procedures….
    30 House members now willing to sponsor objections
    After 2-hour debate there are House and Senate floor votes to determine if any states should be rejected
    but the Senate is a real problem in this regard (wimps waiting to see which side is going to win)
    The issues are mirky concerning procedures after the debate
    It looks like both Pence and SCOTUS are in play at that point.

  12. Ivan Raiklin’s (former Green Beret commander, constitutional lawyer) video on what President Trump needs to do in the next 9 or so days…
    Activate the emergency national broadcast system…to inform the American people of what investigations, evidence..(state by state, swing states) etc to election fraud has been collected. It must happen before Jan 6 in order to give state legislatures enough time to correct their elector slates…

  13. Here is Ivan Raiklin’s response to the naysayers (Pence powerless on Jan 6)

    Raiklin: That’s correct, the double negative commentary below acknowledges that Pence does have the power to reject unconstitutionally submitted electors to the United States Government. Here is the analysis:

    From: #WeThePeople

    If all Congressmen and Senators vote based on political party affiliation Jan 6 Trump will be re-elected 26-21-4, Pence 52-48 in a worst case contingent election scenario. (See Analysis below)

    there are at least three related pics, could only upload one



      The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;–the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;–The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. 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 the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.–]The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. AMENDMENT:

    2. The 1876 election……

      The results of the U.S. presidential election of 1876 were a mess. A Democratic candidate had emerged with the lead in the popular vote, but 19 electoral votes from four states were in dispute. In 1877, Congress convened to settle the election—and their solution proved to be the beginning of the end for Reconstruction in the south.

      At the time, support for Reconstruction was dwindling across the nation. With the Republican Party dominating the federal government for nearly a decade after the Civil War ended—thanks in part to thousands of newly enfranchised African-American men—Congressional Reconstruction policies resulted in biracial governments across the South by the early 1870s.

      But a severe economic downturn in 1873 had plunged the country into its severest depression to date, with widespread unemployment and plummeting cotton prices that hampered the South’s postwar economic recovery. The nation’s economic woes, and allegations of rampant corruption in Ulysses S. Grant’s presidential administration, helped Democrats win control of the House of Representatives in 1874 for the first time since the war.
      Dismantling Reconstruction

      Racism remained a pervasive force in the North as well as the South, and by the early 1870s many Northerners had begun blaming Reconstruction’s problems on the supposed inferiority of Black voters.

      At the same time, key decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court struck at the protections afforded by Reconstruction-era constitutional amendments and legislation. The Court’s decision in the Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), established that the 14th Amendment applied only to former slaves, and protected only rights granted by the federal government, not by the states.

      Three years later, in United States v. Cruikshank, the Supreme Court overturned the convictions of three white men convicted in connection with the massacre of more than 100 Black men in Colfax, Louisiana in 1873, as part of a political dispute. The men had been convicted of violating the 1870 Enforcement Act, which banned conspiracies to deny citizens’ constitutional rights and had been intended to combat violence by the Ku Klux Klan against Black people in the South.

      The Supreme Court’s ruling—that the 14th Amendment’s promise of due process and equal protection covered violations of citizens’ rights by the states, but not by individuals—would make prosecuting anti-Black violence increasingly difficult, even as the Klan and other white supremacist groups were helping to disenfranchise Black voters and reassert white control of the South.
      Rutherford B. Hayes Emerges as President
      1876 Election

      The 1876 Electoral College.

      AndyHogan14/Wikimedia Commons

      In 1876, when the nation went to the polls to elect Grant’s successor, Democratic candidate Samuel Tilden, governor of New York, emerged with a lead of more than 260,000 popular votes. But Tilden had amassed only 184 electoral votes—one shy of the number needed to defeat his Republican opponent, Governor Rutherford B. Hayes of Ohio. Returns from three states (Louisiana, Florida, South Carolina) were in dispute, with both sides claiming victory. Together, the states represented a total of 19 electoral votes, which along with one disputed elector from Oregon would be enough to swing the election Hayes’s way.

      The U.S. Constitution provided no way of resolving the dispute, and now Congress would have to decide. As Democrats controlled the House of Representatives, and Republicans dominated in the Senate, the two sides compromised by creating a bipartisan electoral commission with five representatives, five senators and five Supreme Court justices.

      Though the commission was supposed to be comprised of seven Republicans, seven Democrats and one independent, the independent—Supreme Court Justice David Davis—ended up dropping out when he was offered a Senate seat, and a Republican was named to replace him. In the end, after a series of votes along strict party lines, the commission awarded Hayes all three of the contested states in early March 1877, making him the winner by a single electoral vote.

  14. From …video
    “This is War: Trump Must Act to Stop The Fraud”

    In this explosive interview with The New American magazine’s Alex Newman, constitutional lawyer and former military attorney Joanna Martin (also known by her pen name as Publius Huldah) gives a lawful and constitutional roadmap for President Trump to defeat the 2020 election fraud and the effort to destroy America’s constitutional republic. After outlining how Congress, the Supreme Court, and even the executive have failed so far, Martin explains that Trump still has not just a right, but a duty to invoke the Insurrection Act. Article 4 of the Constitution requires the federal government to guarantee to every state a Republican form of government. And the Constitution also provides for the militia to execute the laws of the union and put down insurrections, both of which are required right now. Trump must act now, especially if Congress does not do its duty on January 6.

    1. Start here because anything prior is in regard to our failed Supreme court, state legislators and CONgress……..this is where TRUMP must step forward and execute his CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE!. THIS IS A DAMN INSURRECTION….AN UPRISING…A DAMN COUP. PERIOD!

    2. “We are at war…… would be disgraceful if President Trump just rolled over and let them take over”…SHOW PRESIDENT TRUMP THAT WE HAVE HIS BACK. WE MUST NEVER, EVER LAY DOWN AND ROLL OVER”
      Does it get any clearer?
      So, all of you on this site complaining about this or that or whomever is really behind all this, IT DOES NOT F’ING MATTER AT THIS MOMENT. Accept it or not, we have been invaded. Are we going to ask …”hey, who is that invading us….who’s behind it….let’s find out and get that all cleared up.” It’s time to repel the invasion and worry about the source when all this is settled.
      Anything less is insanity and a shirking of out patriotic duty.

    Former Defense Dept official Andrew Knaggs:

    OANN… POTUS Has Authority To Appoint Special Counsel And Seize Machines …video paraphrased: Trump has many options of varying and controversial nature…he could appoint special counsel without AG involvment, seize voting machines…and invoking the Insurrection Act…and even potentially rerunning the 2020 election … on the special counsel. …it doesn’t have to be confirmed by Congress … POTUS enjoys all the powers of the AG and all government agencies… martial law is embedded within the Insurrection Act … will involve federal troops utilized in a law enforcement manner to put down an insurrection … a cogent argument could be made the widespread election fraud would come under the Act’s decrees…

  16. Conservative Legal Team Sues Mike Pence, Demands He Reject Unconstitutional Electoral College Slates
    The lawsuit before the Supreme Court seeks to direct the Vice President to refuse to include the Electoral votes from five states until those state legislatures can certify their votes

    2020 Dec 25…NationalFile…Conservative Legal Team Sues Mike Pence, Demands He Reject Unconstitutional Electoral College Slates The lawsuit before the Supreme Court seeks to direct the Vice President to refuse to include the Electoral votes from five states until those state legislatures can certify their votes … In one of the most potent lawsuits to reach the US Supreme Court, the Amistad Project has filed a lawsuit on a point of constitutional order that would force the President of the Senate – Vice President Mike Pence – to remand the Electoral College votes of five states to their respective legislatures for certification. The Thomas More Society’s Amistad Project filed a lawsuit on December 22, 2020, claiming that a several federal and state laws, some enacted under the guise of COVID protection, had unconstitutionally and illegally delegated the authority of the various state legislatures to certify Electoral College votes to state executive branches. … The Amistad Project is arguing that the state legislatures of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Arizona – by virtue of this unconstitutional transfer of power, were prohibited from exercising their rightful power under the US Constitution to certify the presidential Electors’ votes cast on December 14, 2020, in their respective states.

  17. Here’s a local patriot that saw Adam Schiff (my representative I might add – yeah, thanks) escorted from the Los Angeles airport by police yesterday.

    So hoping this turns into something. I could use a Christmas present.


    1. Just found this after Stone said it was a rumor…

      CONFIRMED: Schiff Arrested at LAX Airport!!! ARREST RECORD FOUND!!!

      Maybe he was trying to leave the country?

      I’m currently at Los Angeles international Airport (LAX) and Congressman Adam Schiff was just being escorted back out of a terminal with about 15 LAPD/Airport police!?

      Adam Schiff was taken from LAX international airport to the Los Angeles FBI building and has not exited since going in a little after 10:00 a.m. this morning, my FBI source is telling me!
      YES! He is listed on the Los Angeles ARREST RECORD!!!!


      BURBANK, CA, 91501 BURBANK, CA, 91504

      LOS ANGELES, CA, 90012

      Burbank is his District! Burbank is in Los Angeles County.
      Adam Bennett Schiff (born June 22, 1960)….in June 2020 he turned 60 years of age!

      1. Also read that he was on The Hill television program at the time, but I have not been able to find it.

        Detractors are saying that because the original twitter poster did not take pics “that it didn’t happen.” Some one else said that it didn’t happen because it wasn’t on the news. Haw haw. The PRESIDENTIAL CHRISTMAS ADDRESS wasn’t on the news either.


      2. I searched on a site called Info-tracer and found no arrest record for Adam Bennett Schiff born 6/22/1960….but I did find his phone number in MD….301-299-0451
        8204 Windsor View Ter, Potomac, MD 20854
        There were several other addresses…this guy moves around like the roach he is….

      3. Nor did the ‘news’ cover this Trump speech on December 23 in which he makes his case for election fraud and his response to it. This speech which is of such import to the American people – and it’s the President of the United States, for chrissakes! – and I could only find the complete video on Reddit.

        And people ask, ‘Why doesn’t he just lay out the case hmmmm?”

      4. Without the bs media behind them, Biden and the rest of these criminal bastardz would be in the dust bin of history.

    1. Thanks, Will. To you and everyone else who contributes here, have a great Christmas! It’s a special time to treasure with your friends and family.

  18. From Ivan Raiklin’s Twitter … video update

    In the video Raiklin seems to indicate that Pence, and others, is a defendant in a lawsuit brought by the Amistad Project (Thomas More Society) part because he did not uphold his constitutional duty to reject the swing state electors…based on rampant election fraud by those states.

    this lawsuit is directly related … ???
    from Wisconsin Public Radio (deep state)

    Wisconsin GOP Lawmakers Join New Federal Lawsuit Seeking To Overturn Presidential Election
    Reps. Jeff Mursau, David Steffen Sign On To Latest Legal Bid To Overturn Biden Victory
    By Rich Kremer
    Published: Wednesday, December 23, 2020, 11:45am
    Updated: Wednesday, December 23, 2020, 1:25pm

    Two Republican state lawmakers in Wisconsin have signed onto the latest federal lawsuit seeking to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s victories in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Arizona.

    State Reps. Jeff Mursau, R-Crivitz and David Seteffen, R-Green Bay, joined a suit filed late Tuesday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by the conservative Wisconsin Voters Alliance. It seeks to require the state legislatures in the five states to certify presidential electors before their votes are counted, a requirement that would be without precedent. Also included among the plaintiffs is Debbie Jacques, a Republican who is running to replace outgoing state Rep. John Nygren in the 89th Assembly district.

    Mursau told WisPolitics, “All my constituents are just screaming about having someone do something about this,” in reference to election issues raised in the lawsuit.

    Vice President Mike Pence, Congress and the Electoral College are named as defendants, as are Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and GOP state Sen. Howard Marklein, who is incorrectly listed as the state Senate majority leader.

    Attorney Erick Kaardal of the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society argued in a legal brief that having governors certify electors without support of state legislative bodies violates the U.S. Constitution.

    “The Defendants violate the Plaintiffs’ constitutionally-protected voting rights by recognizing Presidential electors who have not received state legislative post-election certification and by counting their votes,” wrote Kaardal.


  19. From Ivan Raiklin’s Twitter
    #PenceCard2 on Jan 6 still in play, however, lots more coming these next 14 days. Detailed plan coming out later. It’s a whole of government strategy: Executive, Legislative, States, Grass Roots invoking multiple bold authorities.

    and see:
    Mike Pence is being held out as the potential savior of a fair election
    By Andrea Widburg
    For the most part, Americans assume that the Vice President lacks power. The President may assign him responsibilities, but the Constitution does not. Instead, he’s the understudy, there just in case something happens to the president. Except that, in this strange year of 2020, we may learn that the Vice President is the most powerful man in America. Ivan Raiklin, a constitutional lawyer, claims that the Constitution grants Mike Pence the power to overturn a manifestly fraudulent election.

    On December 22, Raiklin sent out a tweet urging Pence to inform the Secretaries of State in those six contested states that, despite overwhelming evidence of fraud, certified Electors, that he cannot accept those certifications because the electors were not legally appointed.

    The tweet has attached a memorandum for President Trump that purports to come from the White House itself, for it’s written on what appears to be official White House letterhead. Here’s my attempt to summarize in plain English the core claims in the memorandum:

    Under Art. II, Section 1 of the Constitution, each state, as its legislature “may direct,” will “appoint” its Electors. Because the six disputed states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) ran entirely fraudulent elections, and because their Legislatures did not dictate fraudulent elections, there is nothing to certify. (For the vast scope of both traditional and electronic fraud in each state, you can find an excellent short summation here and an excellent long summation here.)

    Because the legislatures in those six states did not authorize fraud as a basis for selecting Electors, those six states, on December 14, could not and did not validly certify their Electors. The problem is one of fraud in the inception: When fraud permeates an election, the state lacks the power to appoint Electors because no law authorizes the state to act in the absence of an honest election. Notably, more than 50 courts have refused to examine the mountains of evidence attesting to illegality in the elections. The cases were decided only on procedural grounds. Thus, no authority within these states has ever properly ruled upon election fraud. There is, however, one person who can examine that evidence and act accordingly.

    First, of course, the Vice President (who is also President of the Senate) has available to him all the evidence the public has seen. However, he also has unique information available to him that state representatives, Supreme Court justices, and other senators haven’t seen. He gets classified information, which includes evidence about foreign intervention in the election under President Trump’s 2018 Executive Order 13848. (We’re still waiting on DNI Ratcliffe’s final report, although he has confirmed that Iran and China interfered in the election.)

    Additionally, Pence has access to federal information about other criminal investigations, including investigations at the DOJ, Election District Offices, FBI Field Offices, US Attorneys’ Offices, the US Post Office’s Postmaster, and the US Post Office’s Inspector General.

    The combination of his special knowledge and his special authority means that Pence has the sole right to demand proper certification from the states and the “sole plenary power” to determine whether the Elector appointments he receives are legitimate.

    Significantly, President Trump retweeted Raiklin’s thread:

    A few observations:

    1. I’m not a constitutional scholar so I don’t know if this idea is valid.

    2. Trump’s retweeting it does not make it valid. He may just have been charmed by the idea.

    3. Trump’s retweeting it does suggest, however, that Trump still believes he has some tricks up his sleeve regarding the election.

    4. Raiklin’s tweet, which went out on Tuesday, asked Pence to send out his letters on Wednesday, something that did not happen. This video indicates that Wednesday may or may not have been a drop-dead deadline:

    BREAKING! Vice President Pence Poised to REJECT Biden’s Electors!!!

    5. This idea puts enormous pressure on Pence. He’s has proven to be a rock of stability and competence He’s also a man of deep faith and patriotism, both of which contribute to courage. And courage is what Pence would need to act on this legal advice.

    America was built on the courage of extraordinary men. When the Founding Fathers signed the Declaration of Independence, each man knew he might, at that moment, have signed his death certificate for each signature was a hanging offense. Likewise, when the American patriots took up their arms, they didn’t risk only dying in battle; they too risked hanging for treason.

    If Raiklin is right about the law and the publicly and privately available information about election fraud make it patently clear that Trump won the 2020 election, will Vice President Pence have the courage to act?

  20. Here is the relevant page about what happens on the fourth Wednesday of December concerning the electoral college


    Federal Inquirer
    Will Mike Pence defend the Constitution and the republic today?

    Vice President Mike Pence can play the “Pence Card” today. We’ve discussed this before, most notably with constitutional scholar Ivan Raiklin over two weeks ago. I’ve generally been lukewarm on the notion until a report from National File and the President’s second speech of the night yesterday made me more hopeful that it could actually happen. First, here’s the path described by National File:

    Pence can deny Electoral College certificates from states with widespread election fraud.
    Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution requires that “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.” Therefore, the papers (or “slates”) the states attempted to submit to the President of the Senate and Archivist of the United States are not legal, permissible certificates of votes and lists by Electors as recited in Title 3, U.S.C., sections 9 and 11. Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin violated the U.S. Constitution’s Art. 2, S.1, Cl.2 and 14th Amendment, Section 1, Equal Protection Clause in administering their elections, therefore rendering their slates impermissible.

    On Dec. 14, the States consummated a fraudulent and Constitutionally deficient certification of their electors as required by 3 USC 7. State and federal authorities have discovered Overwhelming evidence of election fraud and irregularities since Nov. 4, likely rising to the level of criminal election fraud and public corruption. Civil courts dismissed these claims procedurally, rather than on substance.

    Pence must then notify the Secretary of State in each contested state that they have until January 6 to send a legal Electoral College certificate.
    The President of the Senate, as the Vice President, statutorily sits on the National Security Council and is privy to information no other individual in the Presidential electoral process has — not the States, not the SCOTUS, not U.S. Congress. This specifically includes any classified evidence and assessments which emanate from EO 13848 regarding foreign interference with US elections. Therefore, the President of the Senate is uniquely qualified to issue judgement on impermissible electors.

    This is not an option for Pence. If he intends to follow the law from December 23 until January 6, he must instruct these states to remedy their Electoral College certificates.
    JUDGMENT: All of these factors above inform and contribute to the Vice President’s analysis in deciding that he, as the representative of the Federal Seat of Government did not “receive” a constitutionally permissible slate of electors. For that reason, he is not only duty-bound to request that the States send certificates and lists as required by Title 3, U.S.C., sections 9 and 11 from Electors that were appointed in the manner that the State Legislatures directed as soon as possible, he is also the sole plenary power that has the authority to make this determination.

    The drafters of the memo also tell National File that, assuming the six contested states – Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada – do not remedy their Electoral College certificates by either selecting them in the Legislature or holding another election, President Trump will prevail in the Electoral College.

    Alone, this is interesting but not enough to compel me to believe it’s going to happen. Memos are passed around in the White House like face masks at a California grocery store. They often amount to very little other than intellectual fodder or thought experiments. But the President’s second speech last night was conspicuously timed just ahead of today, just ahead of crunch time for the Vice President. That may be coincidence, but if 2020 has taught us anything, it’s that coincidences are rarely coincidental.

    Here’s the video Tweeted by the President:

    Smells like FREEDOM. Order Founders Blend Organic Coffee from Freedom First Coffee. Use “NOQ” as the promo code for 10% off!

    Statement by Donald J. Trump, The President of the United States

    Full Video:

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 23, 2020

    This speech could have been delivered last week or even the week before. It could have been delivered after Christmas. Instead, it was delivered the day before Pence is scheduled to make decisions. Could this have been intended to lay out the administration’s case ahead of a blockbuster move by the Vice President?

    It’s all speculation until it does or does not happen. And as I’ve said on pretty much every podcast I’ve done for the past week or so, the easiest path through which we can put an end to the coup and make President Trump’s reelection official is through a “MOAB” – Mother Of All Bombshells. We’ve seen tons of evidence of voter fraud, statistical anomalies, and technological oddities to the point that most Trump supporters and at least 17% of Democrats believe the election was stolen for former Vice President Joe Biden. I’ve often argued that anyone who looks at the evidence and still concludes Biden received 12 million more votes than Barack Obama is a fool.

    The “MOAB” is the key to an elegant conclusion that sees President Trump victorious while also exposing many of those who participated in the coup attempt. Call it wishful thinking, but this is the path I’d pick if I had my druthers. But nothing has been easy in 2020 and if the “Pence Card” is our best play, then let’s play it.

    The nation’s future is at stake. Pence is as good of a man as there is in Washington DC. I do not doubt his motives. I do not doubt his character. I DO have some doubts about his courage. This would be the boldest move he’s ever made in his professional life, and he’s not one who’s known for taking chances. But as I’ve said for a while, it will be God’s will that moves this election one way or the other. If Pence is to be the vessel through which the end of the coup is realized, I trust that he’s up for the task.

    Today, Vice President Mike Pence can use his constitutional authority to set in motion the end of this coup attempt. Does he have the courage to act? If he abides by his oath of office, he MUST act.

    As a side note, we discussed this last night during an attempt to record a NOQ Report podcast. My audio was poor, so I did not upload it but it’s available on Facebook if you’d like to listen:

    see video at end of this page

    1. Well, by Pence not acting TODAY pretty much says he agrees with the results. Would I be wrong? AND, if so, it will be up to We the People to correct this miasma. We should know by the end of the day. If we do not, I propose we all start to make plans to get some contact info, figure out the best date to get the hell to DC and just do it. I would suspect there must be groups making plans. Anyone here know of any? Anyone here ready to go or what?
      We need to organizer NOW.
      Or let’s just all STFU and hide in some fetal position in a corner and accept our fate.

      1. I am with you, Will. 100%. The Chief of Staff, the General Counsel, the Attorney General and–it would then be obvious!–the Vice President, too, will have abandoned the Constitution and electoral integrity for what? Reports abound of massive payoffs and bribes. We must do this for ourselves.

      2. Jim, we are not getting an overwhelming response. Where are our regular contributors?

        I have not been to ZH lately. Just went there….unrecognizable.

        Whatfinger does not seem to have anything new.

  21. The National File (TNF) was Mike Adams’ source on his Pence Raiklin Maneuver.
    TNF offered this on Pence’s possible actions today:

    The drafters of this White House memo believe that the federal check to the states’ elections resides with Vice President Mike Pence in his role as President of the Senate. Additionally, Pence has the sole power to determine whether to reject impermissible states of electors. However, Pence is legally required to do this on the fourth Wednesday in December, which this year falls on December 23…

    The revelation that Pence alone can reject allegedly fraudulent Electoral College certificates shifts the spotlight from President Trump and Congressional leaders significantly by putting President Trump’s electoral destiny squarely on Pence’s shoulders.

    1. Seems to me, that Pence making a move now or at least on the 6th would be to his own advantage as VP and a possible presidential candidate in 2024. Did they get to him? It will not take long to find out. The wise move would be an offensive move TODAY, throwing the communists off guard. Get the hell off this defensive position…it’s killing us.

      1. Treasonous cowardice. The rats are fleeing the ship of state…I see no choice but some kind of limited martial law. Pence had better step up.

  22. Simple question to anyone….IF the certificates have to be filed TODAY with Pence and the other parties, why not make his move now instead of 1/06?…..Does he have to wait until the 6th to count them and throw out the contested states (IF he does not betray us)?

  23. President Trump Gives Update on Fight Against Democrat Voter Fraud in Statement From White House (VIDEO)

    Trump’s statement is also a great sign that his administration is finally taking the necessary steps to overturn the fraudulent election.
    Pence has everything he needs to omit the swing state’s electors

  24. From Gateway Pundit …

    Will Vice President Pence Tomorrow Step In and Throw Out State Electoral College Picks That Are Based on Fraudulent Results and Ask the State Legislatures to Step In?

    Ivan Raiklin: If Pence were to act tomorrow then the election would no longer be confirmed by the Governors and Secretary’s of States in select swing states, it would be in the hands of the legislatures. From this point forward it would be in the hands of the legislatures.

    The Georgia Judiciary Committee has already voted and agreed there is enough information to decertify the vote for Joe Biden.

    Is this interpretation correct? …rather… GP’s interpretation of Ivan Raiklin is inconsistent with Raiklin’s own statements??? …. and Mike Adams’ interpretation also…
    According to Adams, Pence can unilaterally omit the swing states without consideration of the State Legislatures…
    I’m looking forward to a clarification on this point.

  25. From Gateway Pundit …

    Will Vice President Pence Tomorrow Step In and Throw Out State Electoral College Picks That Are Based on Fraudulent Results and Ask the State Legislatures to Step In?

    Ivan Raiklin: If Pence were to act tomorrow then the election would no longer be confirmed by the Governors and Secretary’s of States in select swing states, it would be in the hands of the legislatures. From this point forward it would be in the hands of the legislatures.

    The Georgia Judiciary Committee has already voted and agreed there is enough information to decertify the vote for Joe Biden.

    Is this interpretation correct? ….It differs from Mike Adam’s’ take on the situation

      1. After he and his cohorts stole the election (irrefutable EVIDENCE) he has the G-D nerve to say he’s not going to violate the CONSTITUTION. ARE YOU SERIOUS? THIS MAN IS A PROFESSIONAL LIAR , DECEIVER, CRIMINAL (ALONG WITH THE REST OF HIS FAMILY) AND LIKELY A DOPPELGANGER.

      2. Whatever you think of him, editing a video to push an agenda is wrong and no one should support it.

      3. A small deviation (yet to actually been proved out of context NOT to be true) compared to the onslaught of lies and deceptions the Dems have subject this country to in the last 4 years and continue to do as we fight off this incredible election theft.
        Fight fire with fire.

        Be stirring as the time; be fire with fire;
        Threaten the threatener and outface the brow
        Of bragging horror

      4. To continue….(post of 9:37 AM)….I will support any action within reason and morality that rids us of this disease called Biden who has lied, deceived and taken advantage of those who put this monster in office for the past 47 years plus! Those of us who give a damn about our country of birth are now
        beholden to do whatever necessary to save this Republic. If that strategy involves a slight edit to get a point across that we are dealing with Satan’s minions, so be it….I am sure we will be forgiven.

      5. the sily thing is that is so easily found that the video was edited, but the people who hate Biden already don’t care. That’s sad. Right, left, whatever, editing videos like that makes everyone look bad.

      6. MikeN…Do not mistake that We the People are at war. No one at war comes out looking good. It’s a nasty business. My last concern is “looking good”. And believe me, we will never approach the deception, criminality and literal horrors the Dems have committed over the years. SO, a video edit is the least of my concerns.

      7. If you have no problem with people editing a video, then you are no better than Biden or anyone else you disagree with.

      8. MikeN……… “If you have no problem with people editing a video, then you are no better than Biden or anyone else you disagree with.”

        I believe that’s response is known as a Tu Quoque (translated ‘you too’)..a form of a ad hominem attack. Let’s stick to the facts. I have posited that an edit of a video is a rather mild form of warfare considering the techniques used by the Dems and Biden for the past four years. Now, I have no problem with your disagreeing with that stance, but your claiming
        I am as bad as the other side because of that stance (not possibly knowing who I am) is a logical fallacy.

      9. PS….He has the charm and charisma of a rattle snake. Listening to him is like chalk screeching on a blackboard.

  26. In one County there’s 125 registered voters. When the votes were counted there were 300 votes for Biden in that County. How did that happen? I suspect fraud…is that too harsh an opinion? What do you think?


Leave a Reply