Post #436,918
11/2/20 10:39:27 AM
11/2/20 10:39:27 AM
|
(Hopefully) Hypothetical question
Suppose there's an election in the U.S. The votes are counted, the winner is sworn in. Then 3 months later irrefutable evidence comes out that the vote counts were manipulated on the servers that counted them. Are there any laws at any level - federal/state/local - that allow for invalidating a result after the "winner" is sworn in?
We keep talking about voter disenfranchisement, and suppression, and intimidation, and invalidating "naked" ballots, and the time frame for counting absentee or mail-in ballots. But even in the absolute worst-case scenario of straight up changing the totals after they're counted, I don't know that there's any recourse.
Does our democracy literally come down to who stands up and puts his hand on a bible first?
|
Post #436,920
11/2/20 11:27:44 AM
11/2/20 11:27:44 AM
|
It's called impeachment.
That's the only way, other than the 25th, to invalidate the results of a presidential election after it's been certified.
|
Post #436,921
11/2/20 12:41:59 PM
11/2/20 12:41:59 PM
|
In other words, make sure you steal the election sufficiently to also win the challenge to it
|
Post #436,922
11/2/20 12:51:30 PM
11/2/20 12:51:30 PM
|
Impeachment is nigh impossible against a Republican candidate
To actually remove the sitting president requires a 2/3rds vote in the Senate. Given the Republican attitude towards giving up something they possess, and their grip on a large number of small states, there will never be a successful impeachment of a Republican President in the near future.
The 25th amendment is likewise useless.
|
Post #436,926
11/2/20 2:12:09 PM
11/2/20 2:12:09 PM
|
Time to admit DC and Puerto Rico
|
Post #436,930
11/2/20 2:39:31 PM
11/2/20 2:39:31 PM
|
yes to puerto rico no to DC
DC was specifically setup not to be a state. Rico was captured during wartime "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
|
Post #436,934
11/2/20 3:14:40 PM
11/2/20 3:14:40 PM
|
Blacks were specifically set up to be property, things change
|
Post #436,936
11/2/20 3:19:28 PM
11/2/20 3:19:28 PM
|
??? there a point in there somewhere?
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
|
Post #436,938
11/2/20 3:22:54 PM
11/2/20 3:22:54 PM
|
"DC was specifically setup not to be a state." Why can't that change?
|
Post #436,939
11/2/20 3:29:05 PM
11/2/20 3:29:05 PM
|
it can change, constitutional ammendment
then the brawl would start between virginia and maryland over who gets the taxing rights because they were the ones it was carved out of. "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
|
Post #436,940
11/2/20 4:26:29 PM
11/2/20 4:26:29 PM
|
That's an open question I think.
Congress is in charge of DC. What if they said "poof, you're a state now" by law?
Or, change DC proper to be just the federal buildings and make the rest into a state. The constitution only limits how big it can get, not how big it has to be, IIRC. Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
|
Post #436,943
11/2/20 5:14:29 PM
11/2/20 5:14:29 PM
|
Virginia got its part of DC (Arlington and Alexandria) back already.
|
Post #436,947
11/2/20 9:57:08 PM
11/2/20 9:57:08 PM
|
no reason why the federal district cannot shrink (it did before)
and the rest of the remainder could become a state.
What would they use for tax base?
Have not been there for a number of years but other than the federal district it looked pretty run down. "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
|
Post #436,951
11/2/20 11:58:35 PM
11/2/20 11:58:35 PM
|
DC's pretty much a boomtown now.
They've got their finances in order and found ways to get people to come back to DC to live. They're finally working on developing Anacostia, also too. 720,000 people don't live in the federal buildings. ;-) https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-set-vote-dc-statehood-create-washington-douglass/story?id=71461781The boundaries of the proposed new state would encompass the district’s residential and business areas, but would exclude the federal monuments, the White House, the Capitol Building, the United States Supreme Court Building and the federal executive, legislative and judicial office buildings that are near the National Mall and the Capitol. Those excluded areas would then serve as the District of Columbia and would remain under federal oversight. HTH. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #436,957
11/3/20 9:54:16 AM
11/3/20 9:54:16 AM
|
Already more people than Vermont and Wyoming, and closing on Alaska *fast*
|
Post #436,961
11/3/20 10:44:16 AM
11/3/20 10:44:16 AM
|
There's the whole financial district in DC
Lots and lots of highly-paid businesses there. CPA firms, lobbyists, all manner of things that aren't federal. Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
|
Post #439,137
5/19/21 5:26:12 AM
5/19/21 5:26:12 AM
|
Was that his third or fourth shifting of the goalposts in this thread?
What would they use for tax base? WTF does that have to do with anything? But OK, if it does, you will of course have to rescind the statehood of all those States that live on Federal hand-outs (the fucking welfare queens)? That would also help fix the Rethuglican stranglehold on the US Senate. --
Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who Apparently Still Knows Fucking EverythingMail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi
|
Post #439,144
5/19/21 1:00:16 PM
5/19/21 1:00:16 PM
|
You're like my first wife
No argument is too old or too obscure to not resurrect.
Keep going, fun to watch.
|
Post #439,147
5/19/21 3:00:32 PM
5/19/21 3:00:32 PM
|
:-)
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
|
