emes nisht sheker

@Pekak – are you arguing semantics?

Per wikipedia (find a better source for your moronic point if you prefer), “the president-elect of the United States is the person who conclusively appears to have won a presidential election in the United States but has yet to take office as President.”

It seems the only relevance of that term is for the GSA being able to facilitate the transition, which does not require waiting till the electoral college votes. Frankly, Biden is president-elect and all of you saying otherwise are increasingly sounding stupid and detached from reality.

Let’s review:

Was there an election – Yes
Was there fraud that would justify undermining the elections – No evidence presented (go read the court transcripts if you think otherwise).
Who is the apparent winner of the election – Joe Biden
Conclusion – Joe Biden is the President-elect.

Unless the President has actual evidence or valid legal arguments to challenge this, Joe Biden is president-elect and will on Jan 20th be president.

@ Old Crown Heights – you are simply lying about the audio you heard where he was pressured to lie. That never happened in that audio.

Enough with the lies already.

Show evidence of widescale voter fraud. Otherwise shut up.

Biden is president-elect until you come up with that evidence. Get a life.

Project Veritas claims to have a wiretap on the guy when he met with the postal investigators. For some reason they released a few seconds that tells you nothing… Let Project Veritas release the full audio of what they have. What are they hiding? Let me guess, it is Richard Hopkins on tape recanting his allegations. Then he goes and makes a video later on saying he did not recant. This is simply ridiculous and no reason anyone should believe him. Project Veritas, an organization dedicate to perpetuating a fraud, is welcome to release what evidence they have, so far they have not. Seems like they have something to hide. Guess it is much easier to make up fake claims and say you have the evidence then to actually put it out there.

You are being ridiculous.

Saying fraud without evidence of fraud will make any action by the legislature illegal. The Supreme Court, even with 3 Trump justices, will quickly rule that such an action is illegal. So, no, there cannot be civil war with claims of fraud that have no sufficient evidence as you will have Biden as President in such a case and he will invoke the insurrection act to put down anyone threatening violence against the US. You will not have States getting into such a fight rather some people who are nuts.

On the other hand, if there is some absurd series of events that has precedent and laws trampled all over, you will have the House and the Senate declaring differing people as President. The end result will risk having States pick sides and risking civil war. As to the insurrection act, you will have 2 different presidents who will invoke it, setting up a split in the US military as well.

All I can say, is that this talk of having legislatures decide is dangerous and people should stop talking about it and giving strength to it. The bloodthirsty nature of those who are so righteous that they would push this country to civil war is just disgusting and abominable.

The constitution actually says:

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors…”

If you read the rest of that section and the analysis of it, the underlying facts as to who is an elector has to be based on election day. The legislative would actually be in violation of the constitution if they got together and selected electors against the result of the vote.

There is also something called the Electoral Count Act (ECA), which basically means that you have to select electors according to the law that was in place prior to election day. There is a safe harbor in the law that as long as the electors are designated six days prior (on 12/8/2020) to the electoral college voting (on 12/14/2020) then congress will respect those electors if they follow the rules of the ECA.

Then there is the Supreme Courts decision in Chiafalo, which very clearly describes respecting the vote as a tradition that goes back over 200 years and to go against it would be a major violation of due process. There is simply no way the Supreme Court it it wants to remain legitimate rules otherwise. To do so, would be to end American Democracy.

Basically, there is no scenario under which this somehow falls to the legislatives and Trump ends up as President.

So you suggest this theory as to fraud. Well then you have an issue that the Supreme Court of the USA is not a trier of facts in such a dispute, so the question as to fraud is actually determined by the State courts and not the Supreme court. So the only way this gets to the supreme court is if you first find substantial fraud at the State court and you don’t like the ruling of the State court on the legal implications of that.

So if you think about this, you have a big task ahead of you if you want this to be overturned on fraud allegations as you would need to find substantive fraud before the State sends its electors to congress and be able to make it to state court . Without that you just have a legal question as to what happens if there was substantive fraud, which is irrelevant without the evidence of fraud in the first place.

By comparison with Bush v Gore there were no substantive issues that needed evidence, rather it was pretty much a strict legal question. The facts were not in dispute, rather the legal questions where in dispute. Accordingly going to court was a much faster process.

In any case, Bush v Gore met the ECA requirements and hence no potential issues afterwards, in this case, if fraud were somehow ruled to be so substantial as to call into question the election (mind you, it would likely require new elections for other offices in that state as the whole election would be tainted… not going to happen as too many republicans just won elections) then there is simply no way that the House of Representatives will accept republican electors electing Trump as the ECA requirements will not have been met…. So we get back to either Pelosi is acting President on Jan 20th or the House ends up selecting the President and the Senate the Vice-President. I would not be surprised if Biden agrees to step aside (due to his age as the democrats in congress will not want to risk having the President die and getting a Republican as president then) for the good of the party to allow Kamala to get the Presidency in that case.

TL,DR – You are wrong about what the legislatures can do. Bottom line, if Trump is successful in proving fraud (good luck with that) and undermining the election we either get Pelosi as acting president on Jan 20 or we have Kamala Harris as President with a republican vice-president. There is simply no legal scenario in which Trump wins this election.

Did not say anything was wrong with Pelosi being acting president, but practically speaking it would be disruptive and further if it came to that we might be risking a further constitutional crisis and possibly an attempted coup by the other side. The best thing is that, like we have done in this country, numerous times, have a peaceful transition of power to Biden, who won the election. These claims of fraud were being made before, during, and right after the election. They were also made last election, which mind you, Trump won. Trump is pushing this country to the brink and the sad thing is so many are happy to have a demagogue that they think they agree with. Time for people to move on and admit, what they know, namely, that there is no valid reason to doubt the results of this election and Biden is the president-elect.

@smerel – the media is at fault? All I need to look at is Trump’s twitter account to consider him a lowlife. You don’t get to create a movement chanting lock her up and spending your time insulting people left and right and then say well it is the media as to why you think bad of me.

Trump brings out the worst middos in his supporters and unfortunately this is clear when you are around otherwise fine yidden who suddenly talk with arrogance, curses, and wishing violence on others. I hear this talk form wealthy and poor yidden. It is disgusting and disgraceful.

For all you claim to care about the Torah and think that Trump somehow stands for values advocated by the Torah, you are willing to conveniently ignore other values that the Torah used to stand for. In any case, voting in an election, if your objective is to enforce rules on others, clearly is not consistent with our tradition. You are in galus! What business do you have telling others what laws they must live by? If you claim to be doing this in the name of your religion, you would be better served going to your basement and praying for moshiach to come where you can have dominion again. On the other hand, darchei shalom is an overriding concern and that is perhaps the overriding concern you should be voting based on.

Wray seems to have kept his distance from Trump over the years allowing the FBI to maintain some semblance of independence during the past few years so not surprising he is not jumping into the fray here.

Bill Barr, may be having some second thoughts already. Trump already expressed his upset with him over the lack of “results” in prosecutions of political foes. Now with it becoming clearer that Trump is out of office, it might just be that Barr has no interest in sticking his neck on the line more than he has already. Barr, is not going to have another government job, and anyone on the Trump bandwagon trying to undermine an election with improper claims about fraud (especially as we see that these claims are risking leading to deadly violence) is likely risking any future career. Kayleigh McEnany is already coming across like Baghdad Bob. Just outright lying and trying to deny votes that people cast under what they were told was the rules at the time. Voting is the bedrock of democracy and this is what Trump and his accomplices is trying to undermine.

It is one thing to provide evidence that there is voter fraud or legitimate issues with the vote that need to be addressed, but to attempt to undermine a whole election and trigger people to commit violence is treasonous to the principles of American democracy.

Hopefully, congress will unite with one voice to condemn this attack on Democracy and make it clear that there is no possibility that Trump will ever have another term in office.

I get it that there are those who think Trump is good to Israel or this policy or that and that is why they want Trump as president, but to ignore the danger of undermining the foundations of Democracy and what that can mean for our future peaceful existence in the US is a bit much. People in office striving to uphold the principles of Democracy, I think, is far more important than specific legislation.

Syag – ha, it is so funny what you say! The Democrats tried undoing the 2016 election? An election they did not contest or throw a tantrum and go to court or threaten to go to court over. They did nothing to undo the election. Trump committed serious crimes while in office and he was impeached for that. But then of course, you might not know this, because you only get your news from articles approved by Hannity and Carlson.

Thanks for the laugh! 😀

@Health, very good so you realize both under Obama and under Trump money was withheld from Ukraine.

The key difference was in the objective of why they each withheld the money. One did it in accordance with proper US policy the other (Trump) did it for personal benefit. It might surprise you, but a President using his office and demanding investigations into political opponents is not proper US policy, rather that is something that stinks of autocracy and abuse of power. I thought this was pretty clear since the days Nixon was in office.

@syag – not going to respond directly to your points. They pop up all over the place here and they just make so many assumptions that people should see through. Once again you bring up Bill Clinton, which frankly, I suspect your main source of info on him has been Hannity and Limbaugh, two people who have defended themselves form libel suits by claiming to be entertainers and not presenting facts. Keep it up. How bitter does someone need to be to still live in the world from 20+ years ago. Just remember the vote today is between Biden and Trump, not Clinton.

@Health – You make a number of claims. I can respond to each of them but will just respond to your Ukraine one, as it illustrates the lies you and, I think, all Trump supporters have bought into. In Jewish tradition it is taught that Hashem hates lies so maybe you should think twice before spreading them.

The actions Joe Biden took with Ukraine, with withholding the money so they should fire the prosecutor, was 100% US policy at the time and was supported by other countries the US was working with. He did what he was supposed to and regardless of what conspiracy you want to make out of this, his actions were clearly proper. There was no crime or improper action here. If you think there was, show your evidence. Hannity or some other conspiracy theorist spreading lies is not evidence.

If you can persist in spreading this ridiculous lie I see no reason to take much of anything you say seriously..