Giuliani admits that he lied about election fraud

[martin]

Not sure you're up to it but you should work more at thinking things through. I assume your shoplifter hadn't become the legal owner of the items he took and that when you use the term "federal election" you refer to a completed election, not an unfinished election. The Georgia election is a completed election, meaning the cast ballots have been certified as legally cast, and the particular ballots you flail about are included in the legally certified totals.

Not surprising you left legal practice.

 

[Flash]

obviously when state election officials conduct a federal election by means not authorized by a state legislature it is not a constitutional election when the constituton clearly states that only the state legislature can decide how an election can be conducted....

Yet, no federal or state court has ruled any state election was conducted unconstitutionally. Therefore, the 2020 election was obviously constitutional.

State election laws usually give local jurisdictions (usually counties) considerable discretion in administering election laws. Counties often determine the number and location of polling places and who is eligible to vote at each one. Whether they allow drop boxes, whether voting must be done in a building, times and dates for early voting, and many other factors are within the discretion of local jurisdictions. They must be flexible to account for unanticipated events such as pandemics, floods, storms, and other. So, if a county allows drop boxes it is legal as long as the law does not prohibit it.


Whether a local jurisdiction acted improperly is a function of the state courts. It does not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as the state passed the law establishing election procedures, not whether it was administered correctly.

And don't forget the state legislature does not have exclusive authority to make election laws because "... the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

If you followed the latest Supreme Court cases the court explicitly rejected the legislative supremacy theory advanced by Republicans who are unwilling to believe they lost the election.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Yet, no federal or state court has ruled any state election was conducted unconstitutionally.

you don't listen well.....two state supreme courts have.....

And don't forget the state legislature does not have exclusive authority to make election laws because "... the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

given that Congress has never passed legislation setting up unsupervised drop boxes, ballot harvesting or resuming counting after the observers were told it was stopped for the day, you point is entirely irrelevant.......

 

[Flash]

you don't listen well.....two state supreme courts have.....

Nowhere did those decisions say anything about being unconstitutional. WI said the Elections Board acted without statutory authority. Going against a statute is not the same thing as going against the state constitution.

Can you find one sentence in those decisions which declared the action as violations against the U. S. or state constitutions?

given that Congress has never passed legislation setting up unsupervised drop boxes, ballot harvesting or resuming counting after the observers were told it was stopped for the day, you point is entirely irrelevant.......

The point is that the state legislature does not have supreme authority to make laws establishing election procedures--those can changed by Congress.

The state law regulating elections does not have to provide for voter harvesting, drop boxes (supervised or not), or resuming counting. The local jurisdiction is often given discretion to make such decisions unless specifically prohibited by said law or constitution.

 

[Nordberg]

The difference is Rudy admitted lying. The other Repubs did too, but have not yet admitted it.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

WI said the Elections Board acted without statutory authority. Going against a statute is not the same thing as going against the state constitution.

well of course not.....it's against the US constitution....you can deny it a thousand times but it just means you're wrong a thousand times......time to stop being a repetitive, mindless cunt.....

 

[Dutch Uncle]

well of course not.....it's against the US constitution....you can deny it a thousand times but it just means you're wrong a thousand times......time to stop being a repetitive, mindless cunt.....

What part of the US Constitution, counselor? Citation, please.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

The state law regulating elections does not have to provide for voter harvesting, drop boxes (supervised or not), or resuming counting. The local jurisdiction is often given discretion to make such decisions unless specifically prohibited by said law or constitution.

that is an outright lie..it IS specifically prohibited by the constitution which says ONLY the state LEGISLATURE can decide those procedures...cope with the US constitution or shut the fuck up......

 

[Flash]

well of course not.....it's against the US constitution....you can deny it a thousand times but it just means you're wrong a thousand times......time to stop being a repetitive, mindless cunt.....

If a state acts in a manner that violates state law, that is not a violation of the U. S. Constitution because there is no constitutional provision that applies. The state did, in fact, make the law setting voting regulations. The state administered that law in a manner for which it did not have statutory authority--a violation of the state law but not the state or U. S. Constitution.

Still waiting for you to show us one provision in any of those court cases declaring anything unconstitutional.

I know you are having trouble understanding these concepts because you are getting hostile and throwing around insults and juvenile name-calling.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

If a state acts in a manner that violates state law, that is not a violation of the U. S. Constitution because there is no constitutional provision that applies. The state did, in fact, make the law setting voting regulations. The state administered that law in a manner for which it did not have statutory authority--a violation of the state law but not the state or U. S. Constitution.

Still waiting for you to show us one provision in any of those court cases declaring anything unconstitutional.

I know you are having trouble understanding these concepts because you are getting hostile and throwing around insults and juvenile name-calling.

He can't even cite the part of the Constitution that he claims is being violated.

 

[Flash]

that is an outright lie..it IS specifically prohibited by the constitution which says ONLY the state LEGISLATURE can decide those procedures...cope with the US constitution or shut the fuck up......

If the state law and local jurisdiction gave discretion to those administering the elections to do what is best for the locality, that means the legislature did decide those procedures by giving that authority to local jurisdictions rather than state government centralization of power that has no clue about local conditions