If Trump can convince enough electors to relect him

So what has happened in every Trump lawsuit so far?

Trump's lawyers stand on the courthouse steps (or in the parking lot of a flower store) and proclaim the have piles of evidence of fraud.

Then ...

Trump's lawyers get into Court where lying can get them disbarred, they back down on any claims of fraud - 33 times now.

Trump's lawyers aren't going to burn down their careers by getting in front of the Supreme Court and laying down these types of crap cases.
That's why the reputable ones have left the Trump team.

 

You are still under the false impression that Trumps lawyers have brought all the 33 cases that were mostly rejected on standing.

 

What question? Sorry, I saw no question in your previous post.

 

Keep your expectations low.

 

The decision to do so rests with congress. Period. Aside from approving the measure, Biden's only role would be in nominating justices to fill the new seats.

 

That information is available:

https://www.dhs.gov/topic/election-security

Happy reading!

 

Do you support the right to secede? Assuming there is popular support, of course.

 

I would say it is about time. Here's hoping you are in your uniform!

 

This is a non sequitur. That web page is simply covering election security; it does not back up the hyperbolic--most likely, mendacious--claim that this election was the most secured election in American history.

 

Your use of the preposition "aside from" in that last sentence is absurdly used, holding a lot weight. Approving the measure and nominating the justices are fundamental in the expansion of the Supreme Court.

 

If you only rely on the MSM for your news you are missing a lot.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...count-dane-county-photos-report-gop-observer/
https://nationalfile.com/video-mass...aud-busted-by-former-houston-city-councilman/
https://www.latimes.com/california/...l-ballots-for-nonexistent-or-deceased-persons
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...eady-kentucky-reports-bins-ballots-discarded/
https://thenewamerican.com/democrat...tting-massive-mail-in-vote-fraud-for-decades/
https://www.kctv5.com/report-armed-...cle_c86ce532-9e4f-5144-808a-770e24195914.html
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...e-republican-attorney-general-issues-warning/

 

Biden is the defendant here and doesn't have to do anything. For Trump it is going to be a long tedious slog but if he makes his case in just one state, the rest will fall like dominoes because they all played the same game and didn't expect to get caught.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...ives-state-legislators-power-choose-electors/

 

They have been replaced, your point is therefore moot.

 

I'm asking for your insight in HOW they are going to do this.

If your car is broke down and I ask you "How you getting to work?" Telling me "In my car" doesn't answer the question.

 

The only legit source you cited was the L.A times and Kctv5, the rest are right wing fever swamp sites.

And what did the L.A Times reveal? That a REPUBLICAN cheated on 8000 ballots in a LOCAL election.

Wonderful.

And what did Kctv5 reveal? That QANON guys had a truck full of fake ballots.

Not dems, in other words.

Wonderful.

In any case, all elections of the national election size have irregularities, NONE of which prove Trump's allegation that dems are involved in a massive conspiracy to steal the election, not to mention NONE are sufficient, even if tossed out, to alter the outcome of the election.

That point is lost on you.

 

Hahahahaha your link, just has an article (published in Oct) of someone saying something happened. Of this was real why hasn’t Rudy and team presented this to the courts? Epic fail on your part.

 

Yeah,yeah ,yeah, remember election night 2016?

 

whatever.

 

You didn't actually ask me that, but okay.

I don't really have a strong opinion on that. I can see both sides, but favor neither.

For California, it would be fiscally beneficial in some ways, such as no more federal income tax, but they would still have the dreaded Franchise Tax Board, the agency that governs state income taxes. I can tell you from personal experience that the IRS are bumbling fools by comparison, as far as auditing and finding errors or outright tax fraud. But while California may save billions in federal taxes, they would also need to spend like drunken sailors in order to replace federally governed infrastructure, such as dams and bridges, plus maintenance of what are currently National forests (about 57% of their total forests), not to mention creating and arming a military.

I lean slightly against secession for any state because of the chaos it would cause. Imagine 40 million Californians, or 30 million Texans, having to decide whether to stay in the new republic, or relocate. Plus, many natives of a seceding state currently living elsewhere may decide to leave their current residence and relocate "back home," as I would likely do if it were the Republic of California. What a freaking nightmare all of that would be.

 

It depends on the state. Each one sets their own EC rules. Some absolutely require EC votes to be in line with the vote of the state, replacing them if they fail to do so. Some allow EC voters to vote otherwise, but just fine them. As long as you are willing to accept the fine, you can proceed with voting for someone your state voted against. Some states simply allow faithless electors outright.

On a personal level, I'd prefer that all EC votes be in-line with the votes of their respective states, either splitting their votes according to the way their state voted or going winner-take-all.

There isn't really a realistic path for Trump to get enough faithless electors to win. Short of finally producing some evidence in court (which he shows no sign of being capable of doing), he's lost.

 

How does it not? You asked about how they went about determining this, and I provided information. You simply don't want to accept the fact that Biden won fair and square. That's your problem, not mine.

 

Of course they are, but the actual decision to add seats, and how many to add, is in no way up to the POTUS.

 

When?

 

Let's put it this way, many states have a law that allows them to replace faithless electors with faithful ones

Read the column on the far right. Quite a number do.

https://www.fairvote.org/faithless_elector_state_laws

 

I realize that but they never have, they have only disciplined them and their vote stood.