Georgia Gov. Kemp Calls For ‘Signature Audit’ After Ballot Stuffing Video Released

[NightHawkeye]

“Georgia's current secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, told CNN a signature audit is outside his office's legal purview. It would need to be ordered by a court, and currently, there is no basis to conduct one.”


“Make me!”

Which puts responsibility squarely on the Georgia legislature.

 

[OddityCrisis]

Thanks for doing something we told you to do 3 weeks ago. Hope you enjoy your one term as anything, ever again.

 

[GDL]

Which puts responsibility squarely on the Georgia legislature.

Which seems to be the clear message Giuliani & Jenna Ellis have taken on the road to the legislatures informing them of allegations with signed affidavits & quoting the section of the USC that specifies the legislatures' authority.

Since this approach is with the USC, it seems a good appeal point to the Supreme Court if nothing gets done???

 

[SimplyMe]

Which seems to be the clear message Giuliani & Jenna Ellis have taken on the road to the legislatures informing them of allegations with signed affidavits & quoting the section of the USC that specifies the legislatures' authority.

Since this approach is with the USC, it seems a good appeal point to the Supreme Court if nothing gets done???

I don't understand what you are saying here -- are you claiming that if the legislatures refuse to act that Giuliani can appeal to the Supreme Court?

 

[Tiberius Lee]

And some, Christians or not, don't believe all the statistics about all deaths being from Covid. And some believe........... Whether nefarious or incompetence or mistakes or ???, there is more than 1 issue here.

They don’t believe COVID death is because that fit the narrative of the political party they support. They will all believe in COVID related death as soon as Biden take over the WH.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Incorrect.

The actual legal remedy in such matters is to remove the number of defective ballots from the appropriate stack of ballots.

When has this actual remedy actually been applied?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Which puts responsibility squarely on the Georgia legislature.

What part of "It would need to be ordered by a court" suggests this is a job for the legislature?

 

[GDL]

They don’t believe COVID death is because that fit the narrative of the political party they support. They will all believe in COVID related death as soon as Biden take over the WH.

Not completely true on the first statement. You're dreaming on the second one.

 

[GDL]

I don't understand what you are saying here -- are you claiming that if the legislatures refuse to act that Giuliani can appeal to the Supreme Court?

No. I'm simply saying that the legislatures are obviously part of a legal strategy or all we'd be seeing is lawsuits.

Some legal analysts I've read have pointed out that constitutionally, the ones in charge of such election matters are the legislatures and the opinion is that some judges and state government officials have been making decisions re: elections that are constitutionally not within their authority.

I'd suppose how this would get to the Supreme Court is via the usual process, but all of what comes before the SC it seems may be a bit more complex and the legal team may well be covering bases with a view to a more complete case at the high court. Maybe not. If nothing else, the matters being presented to the legislatures seem constitutionally where such things should go or should have gone first.

 

[SimplyMe]

No. I'm simply saying that the legislatures are obviously part of a legal strategy or all we'd be seeing is lawsuits.

Some legal analysts I've read have pointed out that constitutionally, the ones in charge of such election matters are the legislatures and the opinion is that some judges and state government officials have been making decisions re: elections that are constitutionally not within their authority.

I'd suppose how this would get to the Supreme Court is via the usual process, but all of what comes before the SC it seems may be a bit more complex and the legal team may well be covering bases with a view to a more complete case at the high court. Maybe not. If nothing else, the matters being presented to the legislatures seem constitutionally where such things should go or should have gone first.

I have a hard time seeing how a proper legal analysis would make that conclusion.

Yes, the Constitution allows the legislature to decide how to choose the Presidential Electors from their state. Every state legislature has passed laws delegating that authority to the citizens of the state, allowing them to vote on what Presidential Candidate (what slate of Electors) will be chosen.

Part of those laws are setting up election officials in the state, as well as creating the laws that these officials must follow. So, the election officials are to run the election in accordance to state law and the Federal Constitution.

If a person believes that the election officials are not performing their duties, running the election, in accordance to state law, then they can take their claim to state court -- who then determine if the election is being run in accordance to the laws passed by the legislature. If they don't feel it is being run according to the US Constitution or feel that the laws created violate some US Constitutional protection, they can sue in Federal Court. And, if they don't like what the court tells them (from either a state or Federal court) they can appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court.

This is why the courts are involved -- the Constitution has the legislature create the laws, but the "enforcement" and interpretation of those laws is Constitutionally given to the courts. The Constitution does not allow the legislature to "enforce" their laws.

As such, the move for the legislatures to "overturn" the election is wrong. From what I have seen, the election procedures have been followed and any claims that the election did not follow the law are properly (per the Constitution) to be handled by the courts. If the legislature wants to change their process for future elections, that is well within their rights; but they shouldn't (and most experts I've seen state legislatures don't) have the right to change the rules after the election has already been completed.

 

[Pommer]

No. I'm simply saying that the legislatures are obviously part of a legal strategy or all we'd be seeing is lawsuits.

Some legal analysts I've read have pointed out that constitutionally, the ones in charge of such election matters are the legislatures and the opinion is that some judges and state government officials have been making decisions re: elections that are constitutionally not within their authority.

I'd suppose how this would get to the Supreme Court is via the usual process, but all of what comes before the SC it seems may be a bit more complex and the legal team may well be covering bases with a view to a more complete case at the high court. Maybe not. If nothing else, the matters being presented to the legislatures seem constitutionally where such things should go or should have gone first.

The Georgia legislature can enact any election legislation that it deems wise for future elections but (already) existing Law rules today.

You can’t “change the rules” after the game has been played, to affect this past election.

 

[GDL]

I have a hard time seeing how a proper legal analysis would make that conclusion.

Thanks for your input.

Maybe this article will help. FWIW I just searched for one and this came up. I've no underlying position in choosing it, but it seems to cover the how's and whys of the current approach to the legislatures. Maybe it'll answer your questions:

Why President Trump Has A Legal Case To Contest Pennsylvania (thefederalist.com)

 

[Tiberius Lee]

Not completely true on the first statement. You're dreaming on the second one.

They will believe in COVID death in Biden administration because that way they can count “how many COVID death per day under Biden” and blame him for it! This is like the de-ja –vu with economy , under Obama unemployment rate 4.0 was a hoax and fabricated , but under Trump the very rate was the testament of how Trump economy was doing!

 

[GDL]

The Georgia legislature can enact any election legislation that it deems wise for future elections but (already) existing Law rules today.

You can’t “change the rules” after the game has been played, to affect this past election.

I don't see this being about someone trying to change the rules now, but re: rules, seeking to show how the rules were changed illegally before the election (and how and why the alleged fraud happened).

This pertains to PA, but it seems to detail some of the legal approach being made to the legislatures:

Why President Trump Has A Legal Case To Contest Pennsylvania (thefederalist.com)

 

[SimplyMe]

Thanks for your input.

Maybe this article will help. FWIW I just searched for one and this came up. I've no underlying position in choosing it, but it seems to cover the how's and whys of the current approach to the legislatures. Maybe it'll answer your questions:

Why President Trump Has A Legal Case To Contest Pennsylvania (thefederalist.com)

Two points, the strategy being talked about is one crafted by Jenna Ellis, Trump's lawyer. So, not only does she have a reason to want to push her idea as correct, she also does not have a strong background in election law (there is a similar article, for those wanting a more "right wing" source, in the Wall Street Journal).

Secondly, the "legal expert" writing the article is not a lawyer, instead, "Matt Beebe served as a countermeasures engineer in the Air Force and a contractor in the intelligence community before launching an IT and computer security firm in San Antonio, Texas."

 

[GDL]

They will believe in COVID death in Biden administration because that way they can count “how many COVID death per day under Biden” and blame him for it! This is like the de-ja –vu with economy , under Obama unemployment rate 4.0 was a hoax and fabricated , but under Trump the very rate was the testament of how Trump economy was doing!

Thanks. Understand your thinking better, but it'll be a big turn-around for many to start counting deaths when positioned that so many reported Covid deaths are not really Covid. Also, there is an increasing number positioning that enough is enough with all this shut-down and distancing stuff. Biden's apparent statement about a national mask mandate for 100 days is going to go over quite well I'm sure (assuming he gets to make such a mandate).

Politically you could very well be right - the hypocrisy is ever there & little surprises at this point. I guess we'll see.

 

[GDL]

Two points, the strategy being talked about is one crafted by Jenna Ellis, Trump's lawyer. So, not only does she have a reason to want to push her idea as correct, she also does not have a strong background in election law (there is a similar article, for those wanting a more "right wing" source, in the Wall Street Journal).

Can't read the article - don't want to subscribe to things. Right or left wing bias is a such a tragedy at this juncture - law s/b law & elections are not new...

I've heard the same thing from a legal mind - sorry but I don't remember who or where at this point - re: the FL precedent discussed in the Federalist article.

I'll see if I can find any discussion or excerpts from the WSJ piece.

 

[Tiberius Lee]

Thanks. Understand your thinking better, but it'll be a big turn-around for many to start counting deaths when positioned that so many reported Covid deaths are not really Covid. Also, there is an increasing number positioning that enough is enough with all this shut-down and distancing stuff. Biden's apparent statement about a national mask mandate for 100 days is going to go over quite well I'm sure (assuming he gets to make such a mandate).

Politically you could very well be right - the hypocrisy is ever there & little surprises at this point. I guess we'll see.

You think Trump’s evangelical will have hard time switching position on COVID because that might be too hypocritical ? Oh you forgetting these Jesus loving “silent moral majority” of last 50 years who preached “ character matters” , “ family value” embraced Trump for past 5 years, many of them belief God sent Trump to protect Christians in America from persecution.. …..and you think they gonna hesitate changing position on COVID death !!!!

 

[cow451]

"Thou shall not bear false witness" is not something the folks in control of this election understand but that is expected when they are doing satan's bidding

Governor Kemp is doing the work of Satan along with legions of Republicans involved in the election process in Georgia?

 

[Pommer]

I don't see this being about someone trying to change the rules now, but re: rules, seeking to show how the rules were changed illegally before the election (and how and why the alleged fraud happened).

This pertains to PA, but it seems to detail some of the legal approach being made to the legislatures:

Why President Trump Has A Legal Case To Contest Pennsylvania (thefederalist.com)

November 13th?

That case had its wheels fall off.
And again, yesterday...
Pennsylvania Supreme Court turns down Kelly, again, in election lawsuit