caryking said:
Civilized said:
caryking said:
Oldsouljer said:
I don't know about the particulars of the Georgia case, but given the public statements of the Fulton County DA, I'd have to agree that any legal process would and should take place outside of Atlanta. Where? Tough call. Dems would cry foul if it were to occur anywhere north of Atlanta, particularly in Marjorie Taylor-Greene territory. Perhaps Augusta would possibly be the best shot for a balanced, fair trial, assuming that there is any actual real substance to the indictments.
That case is the biggest sham of them all! Just go listen to the phone call. That is an absolute legal maneuvering to suggest Trump ever asked The GA SOS to turn the election.
What were the fake electors for then?
Civ, the State Legislature has the right to send in a different set of electors. In fact, Vice President Nixon accepted another set of electors, when he lost to Kennedy.
Even if they send in those electors, that doesn't mean they are fake. They are executing their legal right to do so.
Let's say Trump asked them to send in another set of electors…. The State legislature has to do it. When they do, it's a legal process for them to do so…. Trump can't make any State Legislators do such a thing. Also, if he demanded it, and they did, it's still not illegal. Why? Because they are allowed to do it…
Yeah, no they don't. Why would it be legal to send in a different set of electors as an alternative to the legitimate electors that are acting on the results of the state's election? That makes zero sense, and that's not what happened in the Kennedy election in 1960.
Trump's alternative electoral voters were not the result of close races or ongoing recounts.
Trump and his allies, by contrast, attempted to appoint electors in 7 states where he had undeniably lost. Trump lost New Mexico, one of the states involved in the scheme, by nearly 100,000 votes. In Georgia, two vote counts and an audit proved that President Joe Biden won by about 12,000 votes.
Trump's team did not submit the alternate slates of electors solely because they believed a state would flip in their favor, as was the case with the alternative Kennedy electors in 1960. According to the Associated Press, pro-Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro wrote in a December 13, 2020 email that the plan "'was not to use the fraudulent electors only in the circumstance that the Defendant's litigation was successful in one of the targeted states.' Instead, he wrote, 'the plan was to falsely present the fraudulent slates as an alternative to the legitimate slates at Congress's certification proceeding.'"
The purpose of Kennedy's alternative voters was simply in the case of a recount coming down in their favor, as it was a legitimate possibility. The goal of appointing alternate slates of electors in the 2020 election was not just in the hopes that one of Trump's bogus lawsuits would result in any of the states flipping, but was also part of the plan to strong-arm former Vice President Mike Pence and members of Congress to interfere with the certification of Biden's victory.
Trump's efforts were fueled by baseless conspiracy theories aimed at altering the outcome of the 2020 election.
In a 300-page report on Trump's efforts in Georgia, the Brookings Institute wrote:
Under the circumstances of the Hawaii case, the court-ordered recount created reasonable uncertainty surrounding the vote total, giving the Kennedy electors a justifiable basis for their production of a Kennedy certificate. The 2020 Georgia Trump electors, on the other hand, met and signed their fraudulent certificate on December 14, seven days after the results were recertified (for the second time) on December 7. The governora Republicannever approved. Furthermore, Nixon's initial Hawaii victory (pre-recount) was by a margin of only 141 votes, well within the realm of possibility for a recount to change; Biden's total, on the other hand, was more than 12,000 votes (and still 11,779 after the second recount) greater than Trump's, a much larger advantage unlikely to be overturned by a recount. [Brookings Institute, 11/2022]
