Though President Trump’s odds of prevailing in the recent election diminished greatly after the Supreme Court refused to hear the case brought by Texas and eighteen other states based on
gutlessness lack of standing, there are other aspects of the challenge working towards a conclusion. One of these strategies being considered is for a Senator or Member of Congress to object to the votes submitted by the half-dozen or so states where fraud or gross incompetence was the rule of the day.
How it would work is like this. On January 6, the votes of the Electoral College will be submitted to Congress. As the votes are announced in each house and state-by-state, the Electoral Count Act of 1887 permits senators and members of Congress to submit written objections to the results from any state. This is not unheard of. In 2017, several Democrat members of the House objected to several state votes for President Trump because they were either dishonest hacks or nitwits who had been sucked into the Brennan/Clapper/Comey Russia Hoax.
The catch is that an objection in one chamber of Congress is meaningless. It is where at least one member of each chamber objects to the votes of the same state. When that happens, counting ceases as the chambers meet and take a vote on the objection. This has happened once in recent history. In 2005, the aptly named Senator Barbara Boxer and the aptly named Representative Stephanie Tubbs challenged Ohio’s votes based on allegations of improperly functioning voting machines.
If only one chamber votes to reject the votes, they are accepted. If both chambers reject the Electoral College votes, we are in uncharted waters and dueling slates of electors. This is why GOP electors in AZ, MI, PA, etc., made a big deal about meeting to vote on December 14 so that even though their votes were not certified by the state, they could play a role in a contested election. There is no guarantee that some sort of unity ticket wouldn’t emerge. Just remember, “No man’s life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.”
This item sells for $39.95 on Amazon. Today's special promotion is offering a massive discount on this item. President Trump 2020 Coin (Gold & Silver Plated) - Claim 1 Free OR Claim a Discount + Free Shipping This coin is a symbol of President Trump's victory and success. Get Coin HERE Or Click on the image bellow.
Right now, there is at least one House Republican, Mo Brooks from AL-5, who will object to several state votes. He will probably be joined by Majorie Taylor-Greene (GA-14), Barry Moore (AL-2), and Bob Good (VA-5). The trick will be getting a partner in the senate. Supposedly, four senators have expressed an interest in participating. These would be Josh Hawley (MO), Ron Johnson (WI), Rand Paul (KY), and Kelly Loeffler (GA, assuming she wins her special election).
Axios reports that McConnell, along with John Thune and Roy Blunt, was on a conference call yesterday where they encouraged their caucus not to get involved. The story pushed by the media and various quislings and VichyCons is that this is a meaningless vote and a “hard” vote.
One of these is bullsh**; the other is true but not for the reason being claimed.
On the surface of it, the odds of the Democrat House voting to refuse any of the Electoral College votes approaches zero. A senate with a Mitt Romney and Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski (and it seems a McConnell, Blunt, and Thune) is also quite a reach. But you don’t know that until you count the votes. In the words of Hockey legend Wayne Gretzky, “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.” If nothing else, a vote would lay down a marker that the Senate and the House GOP caucuses stand four-square with the American people in refusing to acknowledge Joe Biden as a lawfully elected president. So not voting because you may not win is a loser’s strategy. If the nation had followed that philosophy, we never would have declared independence from Britain and Texas, and the southwest would still belong to Mexico.