Here is hoping that today is a good day and the 6th of January is an even better one.
Here is hoping that today is a good day and the 6th of January is an even better one.
There is nothing to confirm that this is a WH memo.... they took that statement from a post the other day...
WWG1WGA
There is nothing to confirm that this is a WH memo.... they took that statement from a post the other day...
WWG1WGA
Another hope, leading to another disappointment. Tired of this shit man. Inb4 I get quoted tomorrow night after nothing happens.
Another hope, leading to another disappointment. Tired of this shit man. Inb4 I get quoted tomorrow night after nothing happens.
It's kinda like the movies "National Treasure 1 and 2" One clue leads to another. Hopefully we also find the treasure.
It's kinda like the movies "National Treasure 1 and 2" One clue leads to another. Hopefully we also find the treasure.
This is false. I wrote a book published earlier this year on the electoral college. The Electoral College for Patriots by Town Crier you can see my blogs on the electoral college at https://theelectoralcollegeforpatriots.com I will address this specific issue in my next blog. Anyway the certificates and list this thing requests are copies of the ballots and lists of how the other Electors voted. Sec. 9 tells Electors to make 6 copies of their votes. 10 tells them to make lists of how the other Electors voted and seal them with their votes. 11 instructs them to send 1 to Pres of Sen. 2 to Archivist of US. 2 to their Sec of State and 1 to the fed dist. judge where meeting occured. So this so called letter is requesting copies of the votes that Pence already has. Nowhere in the count procedure 3 USC ch 1 secs 15, 16 & 17 is the President of the Senate given power to reject votes of Electors. That power is Congress'. Both houses by separate roll call (not state delegations) votes must agree to throw out votes. This will only apply to States that sent in 2 slates of Electors. Michigan only sent in 1 slate of 16 votes. According to sec. 15 if those votes are from the people appointed as Electors those votes will count, but if more than 1 set arrive then Congress votes on which to accept. 3 possible options of which 2 are not good for Trump. Both houses agree to the original votes (bad), one house votes for objection other house votes against objection so original votes stand (bad), both houses vote for objection and replace original votes (good).
This is false. I wrote a book published earlier this year on the electoral college. The Electoral College for Patriots by Town Crier you can see my blogs on the electoral college at https://theelectoralcollegeforpatriots.com I will address this specific issue in my next blog.
Anyway the certificates and list this thing requests are copies of the ballots and lists of how the other Electors voted. Sec. 9 tells Electors to make 6 copies of their votes. 10 tells them to make lists of how the other Electors voted and seal them with their votes. 11 instructs them to send 1 to Pres of Sen. 2 to Archivist of US. 2 to their Sec of State and 1 to the fed dist. judge where meeting occured. So this so called letter is requesting copies of the votes that Pence already has. Nowhere in the count procedure 3 USC ch 1 secs 15, 16 & 17 is the President of the Senate given power to reject votes of Electors. That power is Congress'. Both houses by separate roll call (not state delegations) votes must agree to throw out votes. This will only apply to States that sent in 2 slates of Electors. Michigan only sent in 1 slate of 16 votes. According to sec. 15 if those votes are from the people appointed as Electors those votes will count, but if more than 1 set arrive then Congress votes on which to accept. 3 possible options of which 2 are not good for Trump. Both houses agree to the original votes (bad), one house votes for objection other house votes against objection so original votes stand (bad), both houses vote for objection and replace original votes (good).
Great info! Though I don't foresee the Dem House rejecting the original ballots. There will be reams of hard evidence of fraud and they will be fine with it.
If that occurs, hard evidence of massive fraud, and yet the house still accepts the original vote, are there any legal repercussions that can take place against the members of the house?
Great info! Though I don't foresee the Dem House rejecting the original ballots. There will be reams of hard evidence of fraud and they will be fine with it.
If that occurs, hard evidence of massive fraud, and yet the house still accepts the original vote, are there any legal repercussions that can take place against the members of the house?
Recalls.
Recalls.
Welcome TC!
Gotta love the stealth WWG1WGA on the back cover of your book: "Will We Go as 1 nation united or will We Go All divided?"
Are you familiar with ?
Welcome TC!
Gotta love the stealth WWG1WGA on the back cover of your book: *"Will We Go as 1 nation united or will We Go All divided?"*
Are you familiar with [Leo D'Onofrio's efforts to save the Republic](https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com)?
Heheheeee. Nice catch. I shall read that link post haste.
Heheheeee. Nice catch. I shall read that link post haste.
Lmao I did read the first article. I clicked the parler icon and my parley of the first article is where it took me. I am tjccrider there.
Here's something not mentioned : 3 USC ch. 1 sec. 2 (off top of my head) "Whenever an election is held to choose Electors and it fails to make a choice on the day prescribed by law (sec. 1- nov. 3rd this year) the legislature of such State may appoint the Electors in a manner it directs." So vote counts that were not certified on Nov. 3rd did not make the choice on the day prescribed by law therefore state legislatures were free to appoint as they saw fit from Nov. 4th onward.
Lmao I did read the first article. I clicked the parler icon and my parley of the first article is where it took me. I am tjccrider there.
Here's something not mentioned : 3 USC ch. 1 sec. 2 (off top of my head) "Whenever an election is held to choose Electors and it fails to make a choice on the day prescribed by law (sec. 1- nov. 3rd this year) the legislature of such State may appoint the Electors in a manner it directs." So vote counts that were not certified on Nov. 3rd did not make the choice on the day prescribed by law therefore state legislatures were free to appoint as they saw fit from Nov. 4th onward.
I've read the statutes in question and I'm not 100% sure this is an accurate conclusion, but hopefully Pence will step up to the plate regardless
I've read the statutes in question and I'm not 100% sure this is an accurate conclusion, but hopefully Pence will step up to the plate regardless
Another anon posted a couple detailed comments on this from a knowledgeable perspective, check the comments under this post. He agrees with your intuition.
Another anon posted a couple detailed comments on this from a knowledgeable perspective, check the comments under this post. He agrees with your intuition.
I wrote a book that the statutes in question are a major part of and can assure you this letter is 100% false in its conclusions. See my post in this thread.
I wrote a book that the statutes in question are a major part of and can assure you this letter is 100% false in its conclusions. See my post in this thread.
I wonder what the letter said Pence received at no names funeral.
I wonder what the letter said Pence received at no names funeral.
We all do. Maybe someday we will know, but I doubt Q will tell us.
We all do. Maybe someday we will know, but I doubt Q will tell us.
(post is archived)