What would you do if you were POTUS and the courts ignored clear evidence of voter fraud ?

[perplexed]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

 

[Pommer]

Good luck on your thread.

 

[MIDutch]

Well, when Rudy finally produces some ...

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

I would accept that I am not entitled to the position and move on.

 

[lasthero]

I would ask myself why I hired such a bunch of incompetent lawyers to save my presidency.

 

[stevil]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

If there was strong evidence of voter fraud then that evidence should be gathered up and presented to the courts.
If the courts are throwing out the cases, then perhaps the evidence isn't strong and isn't compelling and as such you should give up the idea that the election was stolen, or perhaps your lawyers are incompentent and you should get better laywers.

 

[childeye 2]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

I would show the evidence to the AG and begin a major investigation with all the might of the justice department.

 

[HTacianas]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

There is nothing that can be done. The results have been certified and it's over. If I were the president right now I would accept it and move on.

 

[Belk]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

If there was strong evidence and the courts ignored it I would start looking around for some reason as to why. Courts in the US don't just ignore things of that nature. I would enlist the FBI to start looking to see if relatives had been kidnapped by foreign actors or other equally serious ways to control people's responses.

 

[perplexed]

Good luck on your thread.

Well it looks like I was silly to even start the thread in my defense I think it something interesting to think about, what should the leader of a democracy do if the election is stolen and the courts do not investigate.

 

[mmksparbud]

Well it looks like I was silly to even start the thread in my defense I think it something interesting to think about, what should the leader of a democracy do if the election is stolen and the courts do not investigate.

Admit there is no evidence for fraud---as every single one of his lawyers admitted before a judge and accept the fact he lost by as whopping 6-7 million votes and move on. That is the adult thing to do.

 

[driewerf]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

The President was candidate and thus partial in the matter by definition. He had a vested interest. That's why there are courts: they are (supposed to be) impartial. And guess what? Impartial courts didn't find any steal. So your OP is build upon a false premisse, that some "steal" happened.
I didn't. Learn to live with a loss. The democrats had to cope with that in 2016, now it's your turn.

 

[driewerf]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

Well, he has tweeted a lot about how he won nonetheless. That's a lot of work, no?

 

[A2SG]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

I would probably have to reexamine that evidence because it apparently isn't as clear as I thought. I would also consult other legal minds and experts to examine it as well, since I could have been mistaken when I examined it beforehand.

In other words, I'd consider the idea that I was wrong.

-- A2SG, but, somehow, that idea may have eluded our soon-to-be ex-POTUS.....

 

[A2SG]

Well it looks like I was silly to even start the thread in my defense I think it something interesting to think about, what should the leader of a democracy do if the election is stolen and the courts do not investigate.

Um, courts don't investigate things. That's the plaintiff/prosecution's job.

Courts render decisions. If you haven't investigated your claim before you get there, the court has nothing to base their decision on.

-- A2SG, which is why Trump's lawyers lost so many cases, they didn't do their job first.....

 

[Zoii]

Has the current POTUS used any of his powers to "stop the steal". If you were the POTUS how would you "stop the steal"

please assume that there is strong evidence the election was stolen, there is no point disputing it here there are plenty of other threads for that

The courts are there to follow evedentiary process. They are not to act on heresay or rumour. So to answer your question, the President of your country is no different to anyone else. He is to respect the law, and the judiciary process, and uphold the constitution. His path is clear then. He is to leave office and he can do so with good grace, or disgrace.

 

[RDKirk]

Well it looks like I was silly to even start the thread in my defense I think it something interesting to think about, what should the leader of a democracy do if the election is stolen and the courts do not investigate.

When my own justice department, my own FBI, and my own attorney general report to me that by their investigations there was no fraud, I would accept that as a fact.

 

[jayem]

Seems to me that this thread is begging the question. It assumes that a premise is true. And it asks for a response when that response is already contained within the premise. It’s like asking if I would not eat a plate of liver if I hate liver. It’s just a variation of circular reasoning.

And BTW, I do hate liver. Especially when served with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.

 

[Pommer]

Well it looks like I was silly to even start the thread in my defense I think it something interesting to think about, what should the leader of a democracy do if the election is stolen and the courts do not investigate.

I’m sorry, the information that you’ve hypothesized is incorrect.
The Courts do no “investigations”, the courts are the arbiters of evidence, (what’s “admissible evidence”, what’s “rumor or hearsay”, which “affidavits” are on the up-and-up and are material to the case at hand).

At the Federal level the DOJ/FBI would do the actual “investigations”.

Do you think that a President wouldn’t have called for such an investigation by her Attorney General?

 

[Freodin]

The problem here is the sheer mass of rejections/rebuttals.
When the whole world tells you that you are wrong... you should at least consider the options that this is true.