JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Books

Election Not Decided: Seven states send two sets of Electors

 Despite the press reports, Joe Biden does not have 270 guaranteed Electors

Seven States of the US have sent alternate electors to Congress, also known as “Dueling Electors”. This keeps Electors for Donald Trump in play until January 6. Those states are Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada & New Mexico. This keeps alive the possibility that Congress can endorse Electors for Trump in those states.

In Michigan, the GOP electors were refused entry to the State Chamber. There are claims that Governor Whitmer ordered some 200 officers to guard the doorway, allegedly over “security concerns”? So at least one Democrat governor is acting as if the archiac subclause of alternate electors is still quite the threat to Biden’s election.

MI Attorney General is threatening legislators w criminal investigation and possible prosecution if they disagree with her, and the MI Governor and other officials are shutting down the peoples’ house and preventing them from gathering today to perform their constitutional duty.

TheBeckerSubstack

Alternate Electors sent from 7 US states, Map. Election 2020.

Alternate Electors sent from 7 US states, @KyleBecker

In other news Bill Barr resigns before Christmas.Who knows, is he clearing the way for the new AG to enact EO 13848? The split was amicable with Barr writing a glowing resignation letter about Trump.

Kyle Becker on Duelling Electors

My intepretation of the dueling Electors process can be found here, but I encourage people to do their own research because we’re heading into arcane territory. Regardless of where this all leads, the history books will have to note that some state legislatures were *NOT* okay with certifying fraudulent ballots in the 2020 election.

The official news and press release:

 GOP electors cast votes for Trump in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania

Washington Times

Republican electors in Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania cast votes for President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence on Monday in hopes a court might overturn Joseph R. Biden‘s win, even as the Electoral College voted across the nation to certify the Democrat’s victory.

Georgia Republican Party Chairman David Shafer said Republican electors met at the state capitol to cast votes for Mr. Trump because a Trump campaign lawsuit challenging the state’s election is still pending.

“Had we not meet today and cast our votes, the President’s pending election contest would have been effectively mooted. Our action today preserves his rights under Georgia law,” Mr. Shafer tweeted.

Republican Electors Case Procedural Vote @PAGOP

Harrisburg PA: At the request of the Trump campaign, the Republican presidential electors met today in Harrisburg to case a conditional vote for Donald Trump and Mike Pence for Vice President respectively.

“We took this procedural vote to preserve any legal claims that may be presented going foward” said Bernie Comfort, Pennsylvania Chair of the Trump Campaign. “This was in no way an effort to usurp or contest the will of the Pennsylvania voters.”

Today’s move by Republican party electors is fashioned after the 1960 Presidential election, in which President Nixon was declared the winner in Hawaii. While Democrat legal challenges were pending, Democratic presidential electors met to case a conditional vote for John F Kennedy to preserve their intent in the event of future favourable legal outcomes.

Donald Trump had warned that legislators who certify votes as being legally compete and correct when there was massive fraud are committing a severally punishable crime. Perhaps that helped to motivate nervous or weak Republican legislators?

@RealDonaldTrump

Swing States that have found massive VOTER FRAUD, which is all of them, CANNOT LEGALLY CERTIFY these votes as complete & correct without committing a severely punishable crime. Everybody knows that dead people, below age people, illegal immigrants, fake signatures, prisoners and many others voted illegally. Also, machine “glitches” (another word for FRAUD), ballot harvesting, non-resident voters, fake ballots, “stuffing the ballot box”, votes for pay, roughed up Republican Poll Watchers, and sometimes even more votes than people voting, took place in Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, and elsewhere. In all Swing State cases, there are far more votes than are necessary to win the State, and the Election itself. Therefore, VOTES CANNOT BE CERTIFIED. THIS ELECTION IS UNDER PROTEST!

8.7 out of 10 based on 88 ratings

125 comments to Election Not Decided: Seven states send two sets of Electors

  • #

    Be great if the electors overturned the popular vote.

    748

    • #
      Strop

      The popular vote was already overturned by the Dems and Dominion? That’s what started this problem.
      If the electors vote for Trump it can be argued they’re endorsing the popular vote.

      734

    • #
      Crakar24

      You understand like everyone else the popular vote means diddly squat and yet you raise it as an issue. Your TDS continually clouds your mind and makes you look stoopid

      344

    • #
      TdeF

      There is nothing to overturn. The Presidential and Senate races are NOT based on one man one vote. (CAPS because you like them)
      That is the very basis of the formation of the United States with very unequal member states. The same in Australia where Tasmania has as many senators as New South Wales with 1/16th of the population. The popular vote is in the Congress or our House of Representatives.

      90

      • #
        TdeF

        In Congress, Maine has two Congressional districts. California has 53. That’s a popular election.

        America is a Presidential BiCameral system. Incidentally the only countries with Unicameral systems are Armenia, Bulgaria, Denmark, Hungary, Monaco, Ukraine, Serbia, Turkey, and Sweden. Bicameral system allowed Federations to be formed and most countries have a Senate and President or Monarch at the top.

        50

      • #

        It is one person one vote in each state for which the electors decide. The electors choose the candidate with the most votes in their state. But as I said- let them ignore the people and vote the other way.

        31

    • #
      Fuel Filter

      YOU ARE UNREAL!!

      First one on a thread, the party hasn’t even started, and you throw a tu£d in the punchbowl.

      Dollars to donuts, live, I’ll just bet you are a real joy to be around.

      I’ll bet your masters just can’t wait to buy you your next Fosters.

      51

    • #
      Richard Ilfeld

      It is more likely that we will proceed with a president that was not properly elected.
      We have done this a number of times before.
      Hayes, Harrison Jackson were well before my time,but certainly doubtful.
      Kennedy almost certainly won a stolen election.
      Democrats still don’t fancy George Bush, although that was a conundrum of their own making due to third party extremists on their side;
      Clinton suffered a similar fate.

      History and due process will tell us that Mr. Biden did indeed earn of substantial majority of the popular vote, but not a majority of the legal
      ballots sufficient to win the electoral college of a fair basis. Mr. Biden earned a majority in a significant minority of the states.

      The last hope for America is electoral reform on a state by state basis. The principle that a voter should be a citizen, be identified as a citizen to register
      and vote, and cast an auditable and recountable ballot once and only once in each election is simple and constitutional.

      The effort the left puts into fighting for something other than this tells you all you need to know about how they prefer to win elections.

      Unsolicited sending of mail-in ballots returned and counted without verification is provision of coupons for tyranny.

      Many Democrats have records of supporting legitimate voting reform. I expect them to be completely silenced, verifying that the fix is in.

      172

    • #

      It would be great if the electors overturned the choice of big data and the media, so that the peoples choice could prevail.

      Speaking of big data, the indemnity clause in section 230 is specifically limited to actions done in good faith and its primary motivation was to protect children from adult material. The censoring done by big data to affect the election was definitely not done in good faith and was done only to protect adults from the truth. Section 230 should be enforced as written in which case big data will loose.

      120

      • #
        Serp

        Is it some non english speaking software engineer whose predictive text algorithm keeps throwing up “loose” for “lose”?

        Or is it a planned culling of vocabulary along the lines of Ogden’s Basic English philosophy as enunciated in the 1930s? Orwell drew on the concept in Nineteen Eighty-Four.

        There is a wikipedia page but had I marked the phrase as a link this post would be thrown straight into moderation necessitating my emailing support to have it released.

        10

  • #
    Dennis

    The Art Of The Deal.

    91

  • #
    David Maddison

    If the Left are so certain that the election was fair and honest, why do they refuse to allow proper auditing of the votes?

    611

  • #
    Simon

    There is only one Electoral College and they have voted. Congress and the Vice President have to accept the result.

    938

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      Not so. The Electoral College vote has still to be confirmed by Congress on January 6. Alternate votes for Trump have been tabled. If electoral malfeasance or illegality can be proven and acknowledged the Trump votes may prevail.

      422

      • #
        Cargill

        If electoral malfeasance or illegality can be proven and acknowledged the Trump votes may prevail.

        Those “alternative votes” have no standing in law – and in fact all 50 slates have been certified by each governor (including Republican ones). And the Democrat-majority House will never acknowledge election fraud, and it takes a majority vote in bothhouses to change any Electoral College results. And even then there are serious constraints.

        It can’t and won’t happen.

        611

      • #
        Cargill

        The Electoral College vote has still to be confirmed by Congress on January 6.

        Just to update: Mitch McConnell has congratulated Joe Biden as President-Elect, and has requested that his senators not object to the official electoral votes that were determined on 14 December.

        Even if some Republican senators defy this call, the chances of both houses overturning the official electoral slates (as is required) are effectively zero.

        01

    • #
      Simon

      Nonsense. These self-proclaimed electors are not certified by state executives and have no legal standing.

      720

    • #

      “There is only one Electoral College…”

      Congress may accept the results, but the 74+ million people who voted for Trump will not. Unlike 2016 when HRC had to invent fake Russian collusion claims to push the narrative of an illegitimate election, there are over 1000 sworn depositions and so much circumstantial evidence of systemic fraud, that claims of illegitimacy are infinitely more real this time. Even if there was not enough voter fraud to flip the election, the fraud perpetrated by big data and the media certainly was. Either way, unethical cheating was involved and the ends did not justify the means.

      The left have traditionally been the low road bullies while the right takes the high road and turns the other cheek. That’s not going to happen this time. The fact that Trump showed the right how to fire back is largely why the left hates him so much.

      132

      • #
        Cargill

        […] there are over 1000 sworn depositions and so much circumstantial evidence of systemic fraud, that claims of illegitimacy are infinitely more real this time.

        I still do not understand why – if there is genuine concrete evidence – that the Trump legal team has not been able to lay out the case to a judge, given 60 chances to do so!

        Is the team that incompetent, or are they scared of perjuring themselves? If the evidence were solid it should all be out there now … it’s far too late after the EC has voted.

        I think the worst thing they did was get entangled with Sidney Powell – she really has not helped the Trump cause.

        34

        • #
          James Hein

          Simple. If you read through the court decisions they essentially refused to hear the cases or they were simply too small for a judge to be concerned with them in the case of individual voter presentations. If the judge refuses to hear the case then the evidence cannot be presented. It doesn’t matter how many witnesses, affidavits and hard evidence you have if it is not heard, it is not seen. This is translated through the mass media filter as “there is no evidence of election fraud.”

          Another tactic has been “hearing this case will not overturn the election results.” Adding up the collective evidence would do that easily but if taken in slices and rejected at that level then it is impossible to get the the critical numbers.

          There is some anecdotal evidence that there have been threats dissuading judges from hearing cases. Since evidence for this is scant and based on singular witnesses it carries no weight.

          No matter how much actual evidence there is, if it is never heard then . . ..

          The remaining Supreme Court cases are pending and it may finally be allowed to be shown there.

          70

          • #
            Cargill

            Another tactic has been …

            Are you implying that the courts (many with Republican – and even Trump – judges or justices) have been complicit in the cover-up of election fraud?

            If so, it’s a stretch! I think it’s more useful to look at the poor quality of the evidence presented.

            31

            • #
              robert rosicka

              Eye witness accounts and affidavits as someone has previously suggested are all that’s required to put someone in the bighouse , has to be a trial first though and not much of that going on .

              40

            • #
              Neo

              Are you implying that the courts (many with Republican – and even Trump – judges or justices) have been complicit in the cover-up of election fraud?

              Of course they are. Massive conspiracy in the justice system to Steal the Election from the anointed by the Lord Ruler of the Not Particularly United and Disease Infested States. Get with the program Cargill!! Remember, rule 1 through 10 is, dont trust any source that doesn’t tell you what you want to hear. 🙂

              20

          • #
            Cargill

            [Duplicate]

            00

    • #
      Mark J

      Certifications and votes can be removed if there is fraud. They have till Jan. 20. I doubt congress will overturn it on the 6th.

      00

  • #
    Jonesy

    How deep does this hole go? This is going to make one amazing movie plot!

    152

  • #
    RossP

    I think Bill Barr left because President Trump wants to declassify everything about the Hunter Biden/ Joe Biden business matters. Barr had sat on it for months, so there was obviously a difference of opinion and he said good bye.
    The new guy is a seat warmer, effectively.
    Any action on the EO will be done the military and the intelligence people Trump has reporting directly to the WH. No use relying on the DOJ –they do not know anything about action.

    211

    • #
      Yonniestone

      There’s reports of a huge WikiLeaks online data dump, everything from the Clintons, Obama’s to globalist elites, this would be a good time for the public to finally see who their real enemy is and how they’ve been controlled.

      321

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Yup.

        We know the enemy…..globalists….

        Like Bhamphomet Bill ( a man with no epidemiology qualification) rabbiting about how everyone needs the little vaccine that appears to roger your DNA is in fact “good” for you and you cant go out to play kiddies unless you take uncle bills little franken-jab….

        Supwr safe….like zero fraud voting machines…

        Funny how they speculated originally the virus had HI V grafted into it and then…oh goodness…people testing positive to HI V after getting a variant…um….nothing to see here…

        Yeah…huge Caveat Emptor on that foolishness…

        141

    • #

      Ross P
      Bill Barr does not seem to have accomplished much in prosecuting former Obama officials for trying to derail Trump’s 2016 campaign, and lying to Congress about what they did. One low level Obama Administration lawyer pleaded guilty to altering records. Ho hum.

      Bill Barr is over age 70, and would not be expected to serve after late January 2021. He decided to end his government career one month early to spend the Christmas holidays with his family. Trump said nothing bad about him, although I don’t know why.

      Barr did not sit on the Hunter Biden investigation for months. He did say there was an investigation. Probably after the news had leaked out. The mass media ignored it. Along with all other bad news about Bidens. And there was lots of bad news. That media silence cost Trump the election. Up to one third of Biden voters knew nothing about Robert “Hunter” Biden, and some of them would not have voted for Biden if they had known.

      Hillary Clinton was smeared by James Comey on TV in 2016 — he listed her criminal behavior, then never charged her with a crime. Cost her the election, in my opinion. Investigations are supposed to be secret. If the public knows you are being investigated, your reputation will be hurt, even if you did nothing wrong.

      The election was decided yesterday, December 14.
      There is no such thing as “alternate” electors.

      06

      • #

        “Bill Barr does not seem to have accomplished much in prosecuting former Obama officials”

        This remains to be seen. He positioned Durham so that it will be difficult for Biden to remove him, moreover; Durham just expanded his team. Something is up.

        He also acknowledged that investigations into election fraud are still ongoing.

        I get that Barr didn’t want to be accused of election tampering like Comey, which could de-legitimize ongoing investigations. The glowing departure messaging tells me that there’s a lot more behind the scenes than we are unaware of. Have you ever seen Trump hold back on criticizing departing officials that did not act in his best interests?

        80

  • #
    David Maddison

    Yet more fraud.

    https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/1001505

    Audit Finds Mich. County’s Dominion Voting Was Rigged to Create Fraud

    Read Newsmax: Audit Finds Mich. County’s Dominion Voting Was Rigged to Create Fraud

    By Brian Trusdell
    Monday, 14 Dec 2020 11:03 PM

    A forensic audit of the presidential vote tally by Dominion Voting Systems software used in Antrim County, Michigan, showed a more than 68% error rate, with auditors claiming the system intentionally creates the errors so the machine can have them “adjudicated” – allowing individuals to change the result.

    The error rate is astounding considering the Federal Election Commission allows a maximum error rate of just 0.0008 percent for computerized voting systems.

    “We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results,” the audit report prepared by Allied Security Operations Group read.

    “The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail.”

    Go to link for full article.

    281

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Trump has to drop martial law on the country and do a massive round up of the miscreants, clean up the courts and restore the Peoples confidence in the system.

      Maybe the DNI report will result in “Shanghai Joe” being clapped in irons soon….

      132

    • #
      Cargill

      Audit Finds Mich. County’s Dominion Voting Was Rigged to Create Fraud

      Who did the audit … were they non-partisan? And who paid them to do it? How did they gain access to the Dominion machines and software that were used in the election?

      12

      • #
        Strop

        Who did the audit

        Allied Security Operations Group https://asog.us/

        .

        were they non-partisan?

        Is anybody? Check out their web site and see if you think they’re more or less likely to report a result they want rather than conclude / speculate based on evidence.
        Or read their report https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20423772-antrim-county-forensics-report which Jo had linked.

        .

        And who paid them to do it?

        Report says client: Bill Bailey and attorney: Matthew DePerno
        Apparently Bill Bailey is a local realtor.

        .

        How did they gain access to the Dominion machines and software

        It was court ordered.

        81

  • #
    Chris

    Epoch Times – Josh Phillips has followed the Dominion / China trail . “http://www.theepochtimes.com/2020-election-investigation-who-is-stealing-america_3617562.html

    181

    • #
      • #
      • #
        RickWill

        There has to be a massive reset of all this corruption. It is so thorough. So many people intimidated. 97% of the press have the same script writer. It is fanciful. Always the same words of derision for Trump. Zero questions on massive election irregularities.

        Is Trump letting these fish run so they swallow the hook and he will pull them all up with a big heave in the coming weeks. It remains entertaining but very sad if it is not corrected.

        162

        • #
          RickWill

          About 2 minutes from the end there is a scene with a group of Trump supporters and amounts the placard there is one that stands out stating:

          I voted for Biden
          9 times

          Made me laugh!

          90

          • #
            mobihci

            there is a good one i saw from some rally –

            its a scene from the movie the sixth sense and it says-

            “I see dead people

            Voting”

            80

    • #
      TedM

      Thanks for this Chris, a must watch video. Interesting to see how Dominion appears to now be on the run.

      51

  • #
    david purcell

    Hi Joanne

    Thanks for all your posts on the US election. Relying on the usual media outlets for information is hopeless. Well done!

    321

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      Time for the purchase of some Christmas Chocolates for Jo and family. She needs to keep her energy up. Y’all know I’m right! So dig deep.

      191

    • #
      TdeF

      Ditto. Amazing stuff. I remember when the good people of Michigan were so upset at Trump stealing their election in 2016 they crowdfunded millions for a hand recount. Yes, there was massive fraud. All Democrat. They stopped the recount and nothing more was said. The win at any costs part of the Democrat party is part of the pattern of illegality which surrounds the Clintons and Biden in particular, career lawyers who keep moving to stay ahead of lawsuits like Whitewater. And pack the CIA and FBI and the DNC with like minded people. As the firing of the Ukranian chief prosescutor to protect Biden’s sons boss proved. And imagine if Trump had done anything like that?

      However this is the first time anyone has seriously challenged what has become extreme cheating. And it is now far beyond ballot stuffing as they found in Michigan. As I have suggested, the US Congress needs to look at what it will take to protect free and fair elections because they are obviously not fair. How can a country which promises free and fair elections in places like Afghanistan allow this to happen at home? Computers are the new dictator’s tools, but clearly the Democrats threw everything at this one but in the end they had to resort to manual editing after 2am. That will be discovered and many books will be written and many people will go to jail. 42 went to jail for Watergate, which was an amateurish failed wire tap operation. Nothing compared to what has occurred over the last five years, approved by the FISA court to spy on even the President.

      They had not counted on Trump and his popularity last time and look to have severely miscalculated this time too. We hope. Swamp? Trump has to clean out the stables.

      343

      • #
        Cargill

        As the firing of the Ukrainian chief prosecutor to protect Biden’s sons boss proved. And imagine if Trump had done anything like that?

        This has been debunked more than once. Joe Biden asked / pressured the Ukraine government to sack an allegedly corrupt prosecutor because he was NOT doing his job properly … not because he was.

        It conferred no benefit on Burisma or Hunter Biden – potentially the reverse.

        00

        • #
          Serp

          No chance of your supplying a link to this “more than once debunked” story?

          30

          • #
            • #
              Serp

              It’s a beaut photo of Hunter and Joe which if you hold it at the right angle shows the dollar signs in their eyes.

              These blokes are in it for a quid and would be kicking themselves for missing the mail on the plundering of the fabled 1MDB billions.

              I doubt anybody emerges clean from financial transactions in the Ukraine so, prima facie, Trump was entirely justified in having a go.

              And thanks for the link (and its two dozen internal links) Cargill but energetic though it be this particular instance of debunking is not at all definitive.

              10

  • #
    Cargill

    The seven slates of “alternative electors” have no standing in Congress on 6 January. If there is a dispute between two slates then the following applies:

    (1) WHich slate was selected according to the rules on 3 November?
    (2) Which slate was ascertained and settled by the “safe harbor” date of 8 December?
    (3) Which slate was certified by the state executive (the governor)?
    (4) Which slate participated in the formal ELectoral College meeting of 14 December?

    On all these counts – all of which are fatal to the “alternative electors” – Congress is required to accept the formally certified Biden Electoral College votes.

    This position will be doubly confirmed because the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives.

    The creation of “alternative elector” slates by the Trump Team will not be able to prevail. If there is solid evidence of election fraud between now and 6 January, or even 20 January, then something else might happen – but it won’t be as a result of the official electoral votes being overturned … they are baked in according to law.

    84

    • #
      Ian

      Your comment seems pretty definitive. I wonder if commenters above will adjust their thinking. Probably not as they are in denial as to the fact the election has not been deemed fraudulent by any court or the FBI or the DoJ

      614

      • #
        Cargill

        I’m not a lawyer, and I’m not dogmatic either, but I’ve certainly read a lot about how the certification of a presidential election works.

        There may have been certifiable election fraud, and it should have been stopped and exposed … but we’re at 15 December and hardly anything credible is on the table … Hugo Chavez reaching from beyond the grave, nefarious Dominion “algorithms”, and deadly DOD v CIA firefights in the streets of Frankfurt … these claims are rightly ridiculed.

        Courts want testable evidence.

        94

        • #

          Who’s in denial? The rules on November 3 were that observers should be able to watch.

          By your point 1. Trump won.

          151

          • #
            Simon

            Observers were able to watch, on the condition that they follow pandemic social distancing guidelines. They were present at the recounts too. Observation is optional, it is not necessary for a vote to be counted.

            014

            • #
              Kalm Keith

              So, the PanDemic wins again.

              Peter Pan would be so proud.

              60

            • #
              Serp

              Clearly there was no forward planning about how to manage scrutineering in an environment where social distancing obtains.

              Sure they posted out millions of unsolicited ballots to eliminate problems for voters on the day by shielding them from the propinquity hazards of the polling place but in regard to actually counting those ballots no thinking was done with the lamentable outcomes of which we’ve heard all the way up to total exclusion of observers as if that doesn’t matter when in truth such a travesty of process ought to invalidate the counts wherever it occurs.

              70

              • #
                Serp

                Counting was suspended while waiting for truckloads of freshly minted ballots to arrive from interstate.

                Surely counting should have been suspended at the outset until a social distancing ballot observing protocol satisfactory to all parties present had been established.

                Ah hindsight!

                30

              • #
                Kalm Keith

                Exactly

                20

          • #
            Cargill

            I’m not in denial at all … I am neither pro-Trump nor pro-Biden; I am far more in the “pox on both your houses” camp, I expect.

            Mainly I like the political rhetoric and wishful thinking to be played down much more.

            The law in each state says that the electors are chosen by the rules in place before and on 3 November. That means the popular vote winner, and it is unambiguous.

            If election observers were barred from doing something – and it was because massive fraud was occurring – then you would think Team Trump might have presented solid evidence in one of the 60 chances they have had.

            Their failure to do so … tells us what? These judges are not leftwing partisans, in general … Trump has had his “day in court” many times.

            25

            • #
              Lucky

              “the rules in place”
              Yes but the rules were broken. Further the rules that apply are those voted by legislatures, not as over-ridden or weakened by administrators or even Governors.

              “solid evidence”
              Windows boarded up, announcements about closing for the day.. The rules required observers, then observers were prevented from seeing in detail what staff were doing, or were not allowed in the same room, this is quite compelling evidence.

              Question, how many cases to the supreme court have been heard?
              I think that number remains at zero, so the solid evidence required has not been presented. Cases were dismissed for quirks such as Laches and Standing. Make up your reasons, leftwing extremists, corruption, fear or whatever, the fact remains that the evidence demanded by some commentators here exists and has not been allowed to be presented.

              10

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          “Courts want testable evidence”.

          That may be true but we are also entitled to expect that Courts Will Test that Evidence, not run away and hide.

          110

        • #
          Neo

          Courts want testable evidence

          That seems to be the issue here. None or very little of the “evidence” is making it past the initial vetting, state level investigations, that determine if there is actually a case to be argued. Just because someone makes an affidavit does not mean that what they are attesting is true. That doesn’t mean they are lying, just that they are wrong.

          expect that Courts Will Test that Evidence

          FAIL. You can expect that the justice SYSTEM, courts, investigators, electoral officials……. will test credible accusations and evidence.

          03

    • #
      Broadie

      Cargill, you may display a good understanding of the electoral college yet you are absent on the laws and regulation governing the vote. The Justice system can determine anything it wants. Anyone who ignores the cctv footage, the after hours vote dumps and the affidavits and claims there isn’t evidence of fraud has their head in the sand or is supporting the corruption.

      And cold-blooded premeditated murder is against the Law yet this person walked free.

      Laws are opened to interpretation and this appears to be why the election is in the hands of brave men and women and not the courts.
      We will wait and see what they do when confronted with the terrifying reality of Biden and Harris defending the Free World.

      91

      • #
        Cargill

        Anyone who ignores the cctv footage, the after hours vote dumps and the affidavits and claims there isn’t evidence of fraud has their head in the sand or is supporting the corruption.

        I don’t believe the 80 judges in 60 cases are corrupt, partisan, inattentive, or stupid … no. I can only reiterate that if there were compelling evidence sufficient to change a result in any state, then it would (and should) have been presented as proof, and Team Trump would have won the case.

        What does it tell us that Team Trump has not been able to present convincing evidence? It’s a genuine question … I remain deeply intrigued that Trump has not been able to break through.

        I’m not saying the election was squeaky clean – but it’s pretty clear Biden won it, since no credible evidence has swayed even one court that this wasn’t the case.

        I see Mitch McConnell has just now congratulated Joe Biden as the President Elect.

        16

        • #
          Broadie

          You are correct, no compelling evidence has been presented. The cases have for the most part not been heard due to standing, prior to the election due to the absence of an affected party and after the election due to impact on the voters rights to vote.
          The group on trial for this crime have motive, they demonstrate intent, they display premeditation (Joe refers to the organization of the fraud in a speech)and they were caught in the act.

          You are confusing the shenanigans of the Legal system, with Justice. This is a point in history when the likes of the Westphalian Tribunals begin to form and operate.

          Your argument may be correct in legalese read by an over indulged and gutless bar, only you miss the point, a Harris Presidency will have to violently suppress the ‘We the People’ as occurred in Venezuela and Hong Kong. The difference is ‘We the People’ are heavily armed and enough have sufficient knowledge of history to understand how important their freedoms under their constitution are.

          90

          • #
            Cargill

            The group on trial for this crime have motive, they demonstrate intent, they display premeditation (Joe refers to the organization of the fraud in a speech)and they were caught in the act.

            I think it’s a stretch to argue there is a group on trial for a crime … there is no trial and there is no demonstrated or proven crime. It is not like Bush v Gore – where one justice in one tipping point state decided who would be president. The Trump Team, and other pro-Trump entities, have now lost something like 60-1. It tells us something about the evidence offered.

            I don’t think it’s reasonable to support the rule of law if and only if one’s side wins. As I have said elsewhere, I am not pro-Trump or pro-Biden, but it seems to me that Biden’s vote tallies were so decisive in multiple swing states that the courts set a fairly high bar in terms of the “evidence” that they would hear.

            We could argue whether Trump is the worst president ever, and whether Biden will be a good one … but I think a lot more people voted for Biden (or against Trump) than voted for Hillary in 2016.

            And I think just about every fair-minded person would agree that a lot of the court filings from pro-Trump legal teams have been pretty awful.

            14

            • #
              Greg Cavanagh

              “… there is no trial and there is no demonstrated or proven crime.”

              You can’t prove a crime until you have a trial. You’re still arguing the tail should wag the dog.

              51

              • #
                Cargill

                You can’t prove a crime until you have a trial. You’re still arguing the tail should wag the dog.

                Some 80 judges/justices in 60 cases have decided that either the parties didn’t have a case for their court (no standing, no damage, wrong court), or that they were not presenting evidence of fraud sufficient to proceed.

                What does this tell us?

                01

      • #
        Cargill

        [Duplicate]

        03

    • #
      Gnrnr

      The seven slates of “alternative electors” have no standing in Congress on 6 January. If there is a dispute between two slates then the following applies:

      (1) WHich slate was selected according to the rules on 3 November?
      (2) Which slate was ascertained and settled by the “safe harbor” date of 8 December?
      (3) Which slate was certified by the state executive (the governor)?
      (4) Which slate participated in the formal ELectoral College meeting of 14 December?

      You are incorrect in nearly all of the above, but number 3 is the main failure. The constitution states that the electors are selected by the method chosen by the state legislators, not the governor. The legisators have certified the Trump electors. Suffice to say, this isn’t the first election where this has occurred, it wont be the last, but it is the first time they have had multiple states put forward two sets of electors. The house and the senate will discuss, but it will be the newly sworn in representatives, not the current crop, which I believe gives the republicans the majority in both houses. It isn’t the full senate that gets to decide either. Refer to Robert Barnes on youtube discussing the process.

      20

      • #
        Cargill

        You are incorrect in nearly all of the above, but number 3 is the main failure. The constitution states that the electors are selected by the method chosen by the state legislators, not the governor. The legislators have certified the Trump electors. Suffice to say, this isn’t the first election where this has occurred, it wont be the last, but it is the first time they have had multiple states put forward two sets of electors.

        The house and the senate will discuss, but it will be the newly sworn in representatives, not the current crop, which I believe gives the republicans the majority in both houses. It isn’t the full senate that gets to decide either. Refer to Robert Barnes on youtube discussing the process.

        I have to come back and say you are incorrect in nearly all of this. I would articulate all the points of disagreement, but three are critical:

        (1) Following the swearing in of the new Congress, the Democrats will have a majority in the House of Representatives – a slim one, but still a majority.

        (2) All but one state (WI) certified the original Electors prior to the “safe harbor” date (8 Dec), and those Electors (in the swing states) are Biden’s – and the “alternative electors” who met outside the official Electoral College were not certified, and still are not certified.

        (3) The Electoral Count Act of 1887 says that if the House and Senate disagree on an objection (including in relation to competing slates), then it is the Electors certified by the state governor(s) that prevail.

        AFAIK, not a single state governor (or Secretary of State) has changed their certification to the “alternative electors” put up by some Republicans in the swing states. I’m not sure they even have authority to do so after 8 and 14 December.

        Therefore the official electors (Biden’s) still stand, even if the Senate supports the “alternative electors” – which is itself considered highly unlikely.

        Anyway – I guess we’re getting too far down into the weeds on this.

        00

  • #

    Since time immemorial, political parties in general and politicians and bureaucrats in particular have been famous for cover-ups.
    On November 12th 2020 the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued a joint statement about the veracity of the US elections.
    The keynote from the statement was as follows; “The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history”.
    Chris Krebs, as head of CISA made that statement, something he just simply could not realistically do.
    They were far removed from the ballot tables, the counters, the watchers, the voters and the millions of slips of paper.
    Common sense says the statement was arrant nonsense, aimed at trying to convince the population that there were no problems and trying to knock on the head any suggestions of irregularities before they gained credence.
    Trump, as would anyone of average intelligence, saw this for the malevolent ploy that it obviously was and sacked him.
    As if this statement wasn’t insulting enough, the very last sentence was excruciatingly patronising, quote;
    “When you have questions, turn to elections officials as trusted voices as they administer elections.”
    The whole statement was condescending and hyperbolic, two sure signs that something needed to be covered up.
    The U.S.A has a lot of homework to do if they are to maintain their standing on the world stage.

    162

    • #
      John R Smith

      It is interesting that I first heard of the CISA from the Tin Foil Hat Netosphere.
      Yet it truly exist.
      Same with the Great Reset.
      Yet.
      Funny how it was the same with ‘Climate Change’.
      I’m afraid the most of us are gonna end up like the maid in ‘Being There’ in the dingy rest home yelling at the television “that boy is a complete moron”.
      As Barrack, Michelle, Joe, and Kamala walk on water into the sunset (with Bill Nye and Michael Mann close behind).

      71

    • #
      Ian

      Attorney General Willam Barr said the same as Chris Krebs. Was he lying? More than 80 justices up and down the US have said Trump’s lawsuits are evidence free. Are they all lying? Were the justices in SCOTUS lying? Why is it that everyone is out of step except Donald Trump? Why have Facebook and Twitter taken a hard line with Trump leaving far right entities such as Parler and Bitchute and One America News to make extravagant and inaccurate claims. The sheer weight of evidence against Trump seems to be totally ignored by yourself and others who appear to be totally in thrall to his lies.

      48

      • #

        Ian, quote the judges, and check before you do that they even allowed Trumps team (or associates) to present the evidence.

        You’ll find farming your brain out to judges blindly will not lead you to the truth any more than Climate Models do.

        PS: PA judge McCulloch did look at the evidence:

        Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment,” McCullough wrote.

        There is no evidence against Trump. There are only opinions.

        If the Dems really won the votes they wouldn’t object to recounts with audits would they?

        152

        • #
          Simon

          There were recounts with audits in Georgia and Wisconsin. The results were unaffected. Trump actually lost votes in Wisconsin, despite paying for the recount 🙂

          49

          • #
            David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

            Still no link?? Even to support such a big claim?

            51

          • #
            Gnrnr

            You keep repeating the claim they did an audit. They didn’t. A full audit would be a reassessing of the out envelopes of mail in ballots to ensure they were a legal ballot. None of these steps were done. They did some auditing of the tabulators, but doing some hand count checks against what the tabulators got, but recounting the same number of both legal and illegal ballots will unlikely give you a difference result.

            70

        • #
          Ian

          Jo

          This link seems to answer your criticisms reasonably competently. https://tinyurl.com/yaunszcv

          04

          • #
            Gnrnr

            Thank you Ian for the link confirming that the cases were not rejected on merit, but on Standing. I.E the courts in effect claim is did not suffer injury or they are pulling the “you left it too long” argument to not hear the case.

            30

  • #
    George McFly......I'm your density

    Many thanks Jo for keeping us up to date. Anyone who believes that the election was not rigged needs to drink stronger coffee.

    182

  • #
    Cargill

    The keynote from the statement was as follows; “The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history”.

    Chris Krebs, as head of CISA made that statement, something he just simply could not realistically do.

    I also thought it was a pretty big call at the time, however I think it was understandable on two grounds:

    (1) He was primarily (if not totally) talking about the cybersecurity aspect of the election, rather than the nuts and bolts stuff in the voting booths and counting rooms; and

    (2) there was (and is) so much disinformation and wild theories flying around, that he felt he had a duty to try and calm the horses.

    On both these grounds I would cut him some slack … it’s reasonable to assume he was just trying to do his job.

    422

    • #

      Cargill
      Sorry but I disagree, this was designed to give the gullibles somewhere to hang their hat. Same with Bill Barr who said he couldn’t find any evidence of fraud, without even looking.
      People need to read a bit about the moral decline in the West and not be so trusting that people in or trying to gain power will always do the right thing.
      When Trump walked down to that Episcopal Church and held up a bible everybody ridiculed it as just another stunt. I believe he was saying that he supported the Judeo-Christian ethic on which his country was founded and was suggesting people look for what the other mob stood for.

      213

      • #
        Cargill

        When Trump walked down to that Episcopal Church and held up a bible everybody ridiculed it as just another stunt. I believe he was saying that he supported the Judeo-Christian ethic on which his country was founded and was suggesting people look for what the other mob stood for.

        Just setting aside that Trump had his people tear-gas and baton-charge lawful and peaceful demonstrators … I expect it cost a lot of votes.

        But it seems to me that one achievement of the Judeo-Christian ethic is the development of parliamentary democracy, and it is a system based on playing by a civilised set of rules.

        But the USA has become so polarised, that what should be simply the “opposition” or “the other party” is demonised and vilified as un-American.

        Any accommodation with the other side is seen as tantamount to treason … I don’t see how such a system can survive, let alone deliver decent outcomes to the citizenry. It’s pretty crazy.

        24

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          We understand where you’re coming from; you believe that BLM and Antifa riots before the election were acceptable.

          Death and destruction are acceptable and must not be resisted by the law.

          90

          • #
            Cargill

            We understand where you’re coming from; you believe that BLM and Antifa riots before the election were acceptable.

            I think it’s always risky to assume what I believe. But setting that aside, I also think that when genuine protests flip over into arson and looting it’s not acceptable to most people. I also found it pretty amazing that the cities where the major issues occurred did not do more to control things. Letting fires burn themselves out is often not the best option.

            But let’s not ignore the riots and mayhem (and deaths) that have occurred as a result of right-wing behaviour. And many of these were given a pass by police too. There are bad people (and crazies) on both sides (to paraphrase Donald Trump).

            I expect the DNC was really concerned that the city riots were going to hurt them badly in the General ELection … and they might well have contributed to the relatively poor performance of the Democrats down-ballot in many states.

            13

        • #
          Richard Ilfeld

          The Dog that didn’t bark — Part two and part Three.

          Part two, Florida. Florida was the laughingstock of the universe after Bush v Gore, with the picture of a judge trying to determine
          if a chad was hanging symbolizing the foolishness. Florida was not happy, so cleaned up their elections. Democrats won some seats,
          Republicans won some seats, many were very competitive, but there aren’t fraud charges flowing back and forth. There is voter ID, and
          ballots filled out by voters before being submitted to tabulators secured in storage should an audit be required. There is a formal, reliable,
          and tested absentee process. So Florida dodged the bullet this time around, as, to be fair, did many other states.

          Part three. The silent minority of Democrats. A significant part of the Democrat party is members in states like Florida, where they are,
          outside of a few University towns and big cities, much like the Republicans they live in peace with. This is probably 15% of the Democrat party.
          Where will they land when this is settled? Where will they land, if their way of life is threatened by Progressives/elites.

          When you hate on Walmart shoppers, you are not singling out Republicans.

          50

  • #
    Jim in Newcastle

    Memo USA. Before you return to telling other countries how to manage their affairs, ‘Tidy your own room first’.

    72

  • #
    Gee aye

    Epoch times

    Only losers lose. I’m not a loser. Therefore I won. By a lot. Therefore by the largest margin in history. Therefore election rigged.

    Fox says I lost. Therefore Fox are traitors. Therefore I won.

    All cheer & yell at my rallies. Therefore everyone loves me. Therefore I won. Only losers lose. I’m not a loser. Therefore I won. By a lot. Therefore by the largest margin in history. Therefore election rigged.

    Fox says I lost. Therefore Fox are traitors. Therefore I won.

    All cheer & yell at my rallies. Therefore everyone loves me. Therefore I won.

    728

    • #
      Broadie

      Yes, GA the people cheer and love Trump and more people voted for Trump than in 2016. Fox declared Trump had lost when he was leading in the swing States and would have been declared the winner at this point in time in any other Presidential election. Counting stopped the Poll watchers were sent home and the Biden/Harris votes were added to the tally in the middle of the night.
      This is an epic struggle for freedom and we are watching events as they unfold though somewhat limited by censorship. Too bad you are absent, much like your poor ol’Joe or completely without the support of the people like Kamala.

      211

      • #
        Ian

        “more people voted for Trump than in 2016.”

        They did indeed but Trump got only 46.9% of the total vote which is less than he got in 2016. The reason he got more votes is because not only were there more eligible voters in 2020 than in 2016 but also a larger number voted. It is percentages that count not total numbers

        416

        • #
          Ian

          Fascinating to see 13 people disliked my comment which is entirely factual. There were more eligible voters in 2020 than in 2016 and more of these voters did vote than in 2016 and Trump did get get more than 46.9% of the vote in 2016.

          Commenters here presumably believe Trump because they cannot accept reality. Shame really.

          23

          • #
            Analitik

            No, the commenters here don’t accept your blind acceptance of the number votes for Biden as legitimate.

            61

            • #
              Cargill

              […] your blind acceptance of the number votes for Biden as legitimate.

              However 80 judges in 60 cases so far haven’t found compelling evidence of voting fraud or administrative malfeasance either.

              Ian would seem to have numbers on his side – in both sense.

              02

  • #
    FrankH

    “Donald Trump had warned that legislators who certify votes as being legally compete and correct when there was massive fraud are committing a severally punishable crime.”

    Should be “complete” and “severely“.

    Keep up the good work Jo.

    132

  • #
    Celtic Hammer

    Jo not sure if you have seen this interview and the information about Hilary Clinton. https://twitter.com/Rothbard1776

    00

  • #
    CHRIS

    With all this going on…might be interesting when the GA Senate runoffs occur in January. If the GOP win both, then we are in for an interesting time if Biden is officially declared President and inaugurated on January 20….he then won’t have control of the Senate.

    30

  • #
    Richard C (NZ)

    Texas Electors Place Their Votes for President Trump and Then Vote to Condemn Supreme Court for Throwing Out Texas Lawsuit’
    By Joe Hoft

    So now 8 states.

    40

    • #
      Richard C (NZ)

      Governor Mike DeWine @GovMikeDeWine
      Today, I was proud to participate in the electoral college process in which all of Ohio’s votes are going to @realDonaldTrump

      Now 9 states

      50

    • #
      Ian

      Why are you commenting on Texas and OhioElectoral colleges voting for Trump? It’s hardly unexpected as he won the popular vote in both States

      24

      • #
        Richard C (NZ)

        >”Why are you commenting on Texas and Ohio Electoral colleges voting for Trump?”

        The title of the post is:

        “Election Not Decided: Seven states send two sets of Electors”

        The running total is now nine states.

        Hope this helps.

        61

        • #
          Richard C (NZ)

          >”The running total is now nine states.

          Not quite right. Trump already has 232 Electoral College votes including Texas and Ohio except that Texas in particular is vehemently opposed to the 306-232 EC total being the final result.

          So now we have a situation where there’s 232 + disputed: Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada & New Mexico:

          2020 electoral map: Which states have Trump, Biden won?

          232 + 20 + 16 + 16 + 10 + 11 + 6 + 5 = 319

          40

          • #
            Richard C (NZ)

            >”Texas in particular is vehemently opposed to the 306-232 EC total being the final result”

            Republican Party of Arizona Chairwoman Dr. Kelli Ward:

            “On December 14, the true electors for the presidency met yesterday. Yes — the Republican electors. We gathered together we took a vote for President Trump and for Mike Pence for president and vice president,” Ward said.

            “We have transmitted those results to the proper entities in Washington, DC, for consideration by Congress. We believe that we are the electors for the legally cast votes here in Arizona,” she continued, explaining that the move — which Republican electors did in other key swing states — is not without historic precedent, citing what occurred in the election of 1960.

            Breitbart

            30

        • #
          Cargill

          “Election Not Decided: Seven states send two sets of Electors”

          The running total is now nine states.

          No it isn’t – Texas and Ohio have sent one electoral slate to Congress … the Dems have not sent in alternative ones.

          As noted above Texas and Ohio had already sent slates that are comfortably in the Trump column.

          Anyway – the question is moot – the seven states sending “alternative elector” slates have no chance of their being accepted. Particularly as Mitch McConnell has congratulated Joe Biden on his win, and asked his senators not to raise objections.

          Some might still do so, but (a) such a vote will probably fail in the Senate, and (b) even if passed in the Senate, that vote cannot dislodge the formally certified slate of electors in the seven (Biden) swing states.

          00

  • #
    Cargill

    […] the move — which Republican electors did in other key swing states — is not without historic precedent, citing what occurred in the election of 1960.

    The 1960 election in Hawaii was a special case – at the time of voting, a re-count was incomplete, and an alternative (Democrat) slate was submitted a bit later.

    The then Vice President Richard Nixon (who was in the presidential race, no less) agreed that the later slate voting for the Democrats was the one that should be accepted, because the recount gave the state to the Democrats.

    It is nothing like the current situation. Biden won 25 states and Trump 25 states. The Democrats in the 25 Trump states could also put together “alternative electors” and send them to Congress … but they would have no more sway than the “alternative electors” some Republican in the swing states have created.

    Why have Republican governors and secretaries of swing states certified the Biden victories in ALL of them? Because there is a lawful process to adhere to, including very critical dates, and they have done so.

    They have seen no evidence of fraud, and they are following the rules – plus they are never going to concede that the elections they oversee are flawed.

    01

  • #