The argument has been made, at least in the cryptic legalese of Twitter that there is no constitutional path back to restore the original winner(s) even if there is proof established about Voter fraud in the 2020 election.
And it’s not just Donald Trump, but several Republican Senate seats and dozens of House seats also fell victim to this theft, thus handing power of Congress to the Democratic coalition in such a way that it may be in perpetuity.
This constitutional argument falls into the same general category of a medical diagnosis of terminal cancer, by saying, “Well, It sucks to be you.”
No really, for should a state audit reveal enough votes to discard that would switch winners, these experts still say it’s beyond the reach of courts to undo these votes as a matter of law (forget evidence) because they have all been recorded in a timely manner with the Electoral College, and the Law makes no provision how the courts might remedy this.
This in turn enables Democrats to offer expert testimony in mathematics and probabilities under oath, that “Yes, it is entirely possible, mathematically, that several hundred thousand uncounted votes could just show up after the midnight vote-counting stoppage, and that 95% of them could have been cast for just one candidate. Totally possible.”
But enough of probabilities. How about impossibilities, as when in Arizona it has taken 6 weeks to audit only 50% of the Maricopa County ballots, while the law only gave Arizona (and every other state) only 38 days, from election close on Nov 3 to submit those votes to the Electoral College by December 11.
So the mathematical impossibility is that even if an audit were ordered the day after the election, it could still not have been completed by the 38-day deadline for the Electoral College votes to be submitted to Congress!
I won’t go over the list of other voting irregularities that have been alleged, only that, as in at least five other states, counting stopped just after midnight and was taken up again about three hours later. (FACT) All sorts of other things have been alleged, in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and where state legislatures had the political power to call hearings, statements have been under-oath, often in televised hearings. This included my own Virginia, whose Republican Party hadn’t the “testosteronomical fortitude” to challenge, thereby losing two, possibly three, House seats because of it. Nary a whimper.
So here we are today, in an America faced with an election system that for the most part cannot be reviewed credibly (in terms of logical process and simple math) in fewer than 6 weeks, (FACT) while state and federal law require that these vote counts must be certified and submitted to the Electoral College in 5 weeks.
A Catch-22.
Still, some of our greatest legal minds say that even if Arizona, or even 6 or 7 states, should reverse their election count, “it just sucks to be us.”
Actually this won’t happen. It’s just academic chin rubbing.
Some are suggesting that Donald Trump should be simply reinstated to serve out the remainder of his term, approximately 3 1/2 years, while the Biden Administration simply receivines an asterisk (*) in history books and almanacs, sort of like Roger Maris’ 61 home run record because he’s played in seven more games than Babe Ruth.
Of course a reinstated Donald Trump and a reconstituted Congress, would have to work overtime just to redo and re-fire all the old job slots he’d begun 2016-2020; taking the better part of three years just to get America back to where it was before Anthony Fauci stepped centerstage to begin the process of undoing the giant leaps forward our economy had catapulted toward, 2017-2019. I assume the limp-wristed Mike Pence, who was also on the ballot, and who also had his own bout of “testosteronomical-itis” at the Electoral College, will agree not to be re-sworn so that President Trump can name a replacement.
There may also be the international fallout, particularly China, who probably was in on this election steal and Covid up to its ears, and who, now exposed, may wonder if being blown back to the Stone Age is actually worth doubling down on their bet should Trump be reinstated. I can’t say.
But it will get nasty out here on the hustings either way.
So Part One of my argument against the expert constitutionalists’ argument, is that this is in every sense a case of first instance, which the government has encountered before as when the Supreme Court took it upon itself to declare act of Congress void if it is inconsistent with the Constitution…even though it was not a power specifically enumerated in Article III. Today the Constitution does not provide for any sort of post-inaugural withdrawal-and-changing of votes by states from the electoral college and back-dating of a national election. But neither did it foresee a Marbury vs Madison (1803) when Chief Justice John Marshall unilaterally imbedded the principle that a court may declare an an act of Congress unconstitutional. That has remained Law for 218 years of our 234 years.
Still, to my mind, such a Court reversal would work, just logistically messy.
But there is another Way…
…perhaps not as messy in the government offices but it might also keep those 600+ million privately-owned guns locked away.
What modern students of history lose sight of is that Law and Order in Nature operates in reverse order. It’s “Order and Law”, the “order” part arising from ancient laws dating back to the Decalogues (Ten Commandments) which themselves form the core of a body of natural laws that Nature looks upon as “survival-enhancing” because it is based on reciprocity. A good thing for society to have, but we seem to be losing our grip on it of late. (I’m part of a series of essays on this subject, soon to be a book, for view at UnwashedPhilosophy.com if you want broader background.)
Just suffice it to say that civil order is based on a morality that predates codified law by many years, and is one of the flaws of modern post-war liberal thinking because they have lost sight that fact.
American history is filled with establishing this order, from Jamestown to the Oregon Territory and the California gold fields and every town and city in between. I’ve discussed this recently here in a series about America’s move west, where people got there years before Law could be written down enforced. How most towns ended up depended on the moral sensibilities of the people who built it. The town sheriff came before the judge and the courthouse and sometimes the vigilantes had to help the sheriff out, as in several rougher places, like mining camps.
England had a similar period during its Civil War in the 1600s, between Roundheads, largely Protestants and Parliament, and Cavaliers, or Royalists, who were Roman Catholics and held to the Divine Right of Kings, when an unlikeable man, but their very best military general, decided that England needed to end the absolute power of kings altogether, and called for the Stuart king to be beheaded. A bit harsh, Parliament sought a middle course and refused…after all they were the king’s principal beneficiaries…and this general simply declared a protectorate, naming himself Lord Protector. A dictatorship, backed by the army.
Oliver Cromwell died before his plan could be completed, and Parliament invited back the Stuart kings. But his design survived, and in 1688 the people rose up to bring on what history called “The Glorious Revolution” where a non-Catholic daughter of the Stuarts, and her husband, William & Mary would become monarchs, but under the Parliamentary system Cromwell had designed. (Read this especially.)
And so it has been in England since, all because a dictator who could have named himself king, didn’t.
In 1840 Thomas Carlyle published his lectures “On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History” in which in his lecture “The Hero as King” he named Oliver Cromwell over Napoleon Bonaparte, who as a French Army general in the same situation during the French Revolution, saw the ineptitude of the young revolutionaries and simply appointed himself as king. Tory historians, some very fine ones, hated Cromwell because of the way he treated the aristocracy, but even those had to admit that he saved England. But he chose not to be king, preferring a Parliament that worked well.
It’s not so much that we should prefer this second path, but while I was only a so-so lawyer, I am an expert in How Things Work in Nature and human society, and know that this choice, should the US military decide to go this way, and pave that road, that yes, we might be able to clean this all up in three and a half years and leave American with a long term plan by 2024 looking more like we did in 1952 than 2022.
All that is required is a man who doesn’t want to be King and patriots at the grass roots who are willing to dedicate a larger potion of their lives to see that the institutions work. Let the state clean up the streets.
