Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ElementaryPenguin

(7,849 posts)
69. This "idea" of mine is admittedly a desperate one...
Sun Jan 15, 2017, 04:38 PM
Jan 2017

And I appreciate you pointing that out to me. Again, I want you to show me where it is written in the Constitution that the Supreme Court can step in and prevent a state from determining it's own electors - as the Supremes did in 2000 - stopping a recount that would have left Al Gore as the winner in Florida - and the President - whereas the foul Fat Tony Scalia and his gang essentially appointed George W. Bush as President. I would submit that Vladimir Putin has done the same thing this election.

The 20th Amendment - adopted in 1933 - obviously did not foresee electronic voting fraud, fake internet news, and a whole host of modern issues we are now confronted with - and may be about to cost us our form of government. Your legal scholarship is, again, appreciated, but unfortunately does not get us out of a predicament would should not be in. I understand we are a nation of laws - but the other side isn't playing by them - not the GOP - and certainly not Putin isn't obliged to. The strict adherence to some of these rather arbitrary dates (over the accuracy and validity of the vote count) is incredibly absurd - as absurd as the electoral college has become for us. (But of course, that is another debate).

My personal education and work history is not a part of this debate (though, admittedly, I was the one who brought it up). It's true that I was a law student, and my father was an attorney. I later clerked for him, as well as a few other law firms - supporting myself with it for a time - but I did not complete law school, as I went into an entirely different field.

Look - I understand this is a crazy notion I'm suggesting here. I'm just trying to float ideas out there that perhaps others can build on - and perhaps develop. Some are stronger and more feasible than others. This one may be more flawed than others. I believe we're all on the same side here - and our arguments are fine to have, and overall constructive. When I've gotten personal, I've regretted it - but these are frustrating times for any Americans (particularly progressive ones) who give a damn!

Lynch and Obama should have fired Comey way back when vlyons Jan 2017 #1
Yes. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #2
Have no idea of legality triron Jan 2017 #3
Crazy circumstances - perhaps requiring ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #4
Maybe there is a genius somewhere triron Jan 2017 #6
I'd love to read in history books that Obama ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #15
With Justice Kennedy? longship Jan 2017 #33
What I'm interested in is finding any - even out of the box solutions ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #36
Than you should clearly understand that POTUS' surrogate to SCOTUS is the Soliciter General... longship Jan 2017 #37
Don't worry, LS - I will likely not get to be POTUS to try out my hypothesis, ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #41
I did not laugh at you, my friend. longship Jan 2017 #48
Glad that you are ardent about this! triron Jan 2017 #38
Thanks for that. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #42
First there has to be a case!! And you damned well know it longship Jan 2017 #49
By this point, it is embarrassing for DU. My cat is facepawing. dionysus Jan 2017 #62
Lynch could have stopped Comey right before the election. She didn't. jalan48 Jan 2017 #5
Because more evidence has now come to light! ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #7
She was Comey's boss. She could have told him not to release the "new" info on Clinton's emails. jalan48 Jan 2017 #14
You may be right but no one knows that for a fact. She could... ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #21
I would like it to be the case but her past actions say no. jalan48 Jan 2017 #34
Tend to agree with you on this, Wellstone ruled Jan 2017 #27
I say let 'em launch ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #30
Adventure! Melodrama! Escape from... reality! Welcome to GD:P dionysus Jan 2017 #66
That would be President Pence shadowrider Jan 2017 #8
"Point of order" - Point of reality. n/t PoliticAverse Jan 2017 #9
There isn't much "reality" ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #11
There's plenty of reality that many people can't accept. PoliticAverse Jan 2017 #12
The "Reality" is that the Supreme Court can rule as they please ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #19
The reality is that folks like Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer and Kagan onenote Jan 2017 #56
Pence cannot become President without becoming Vice-President ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #10
You might want to read the 20th Amendment to the US Consitution, it disagrees with you Lurks Often Jan 2017 #23
Lurks, I just read it - thank you. This is a very convoluted argument, but ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #25
No the House of Representatives would then determine who becomes President Lurks Often Jan 2017 #29
No. The House only chooses if the President-elect dies and there is not a Vice-President elect ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #35
You have a very flawed understanding of the 20th amendment. onenote Jan 2017 #57
Unless the was good evidence triron Jan 2017 #32
Duty to Act not SCOTUS' zagamet Jan 2017 #13
Right. But Wrong. Show me where in the Constitution ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #17
While I think the Court decided Bush v. Gore incorrectly onenote Jan 2017 #58
"he would be arrested, and he would not be sworn in as President on Jan. 20th" PoliticAverse Jan 2017 #16
There doesn't have to be. The Supreme Court can (AND DOES) rule as they please. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #18
And then what? zagamet Jan 2017 #28
Trump was not elected by the American people ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #44
I think that the AG position is just ceremonial these days. They have no power. CentralMass Jan 2017 #20
Not true. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #22
There is no recent demonstrable proof of that CentralMass Jan 2017 #43
Agreed. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #47
Are you feeling ok??? greytdemocrat Jan 2017 #24
Definitely not!! ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #26
There is NO political, legal or judicial solution to a coup. underthematrix Jan 2017 #31
Thank you! fleur-de-lisa Jan 2017 #40
We certainly are in uncharted waters... ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #45
You may be correct, and T. Jefferson might concur... ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #46
This is false.... Put those who are part of the cout on jail before they're put in office uponit7771 Jan 2017 #51
Yep! triron Jan 2017 #52
Tell me how you think that would happen underthematrix Jan 2017 #53
+1 2naSalit Jan 2017 #76
grand jury cjbgreen Jan 2017 #39
Any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a HAM sandwich. - Sol Wachtler Brother Buzz Jan 2017 #50
have you ever been on a grand jury? onenote Jan 2017 #59
No, and no, but I understand a good prosecutor can be very persuasive Brother Buzz Jan 2017 #60
knr triron Jan 2017 #54
You say you're a former law student. You should ask for your money back onenote Jan 2017 #55
What are the Constitutional limitations on treason charges? Just interested. nt JCanete Jan 2017 #64
Link. onenote Jan 2017 #67
This "idea" of mine is admittedly a desperate one... ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #69
It's not desperate, it's a fantasy Lurks Often Jan 2017 #72
Perhaps. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #73
And I appreciate your more measured tone. onenote Jan 2017 #74
I understand where you're coming from...reality. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #75
That will never happen - but the American people, when they have had enough of this can Dan Jan 2017 #61
Good post, Dan. ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #71
Good lord, this is the most foolish thing i've read today. dionysus Jan 2017 #63
Welcome to the 2016 Postmortem forum! FBaggins Jan 2017 #65
Try reading your President-elect's tweets for this day - or any day! ElementaryPenguin Jan 2017 #70
Everybody is afraid to act. They do not know what to do. UCmeNdc Jan 2017 #68
Message auto-removed Name removed Jan 2017 #77
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Loretta Lynch could file ...»Reply #69