This Ian Northon is a lawyer, not a lawmaker. How does he think he has any standing at all? (Albeit, he graduated from Ave Maria Law School, so perhaps that partially explains this.)
at 3:02, when the head GOP doofus is being interviewed, he takes off his mask. (“I won’t infect the capitol cops, but I’ll infect you guys.”)
at 3:25: “the GOP slate their chosen candidate, the Democrat electors are inside, I’m told, slating their chosen candidate” — Republicans never miss an opportunity to use the adjectival perjorative “Democrat” rather than “Democratic”.
My favorite part of the so-called “Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society”, whom this lawyer apparently represents:
Since it is unlikely that these investigations could be completed in time to meet constitutional deadlines for appointing presidential Electors, it is likely that the only remedy available in the presidential contest would be for the Michigan Legislature to exercise its lawful authority to appoint the state’s Electors.
That is, “since we ourselves say don’t know the actual results, let’s just use an entirely artificial process to inject GOP electors into the process. After the fact, we’ll figure it all out. Promise.” How does this make sense, even to them? How do they think it could possibly make sense to someone outside their bubble?
Horrifying. Bear in mind, the state legislature COULD appoint an alternate slate of electors. In fact, according to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, states who enacted the compact would assign their electors to whoever wins the popular vote, regardless of what the voters in the state decide. The wikipedia page is instructive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
This leverages the vagueness of the Constitution with regard to the Electoral College in the service of the popular vote, which I prefer to the Republican goal of assigning electors to whomever the Republicans want, regardless of the vote.
These dimwits have the same grasp of the law as the sovereign citizen type. Treating it like it’s some kind of magical talisman that means you have to be taken seriously when you say or do specific proscribed things.
One of the reasons they are trying to do this does make sense.
There are still outstanding court cases in play in Michigan. Longshots, all of them, but still in play.
Because of that, and the fact that the constitution of the US is very prescriptive on the whens and hows and wheres of the vote, a lot of these “GOP slates” were done in as official manner as possible so that if their long shot court cases win, the republicans can claim that they DID vote at the prescribed time and place and all that.
The alternative is, if they win their cases but still didn’t do the votes/etc at the prescribed time and place , the court could simply toss their case as being moot.
Can you imagine the confusion (and dumbass lawsuits) that will erupt when a state’s electors (by the compact) all go unanimously for the opposing candidate?
That’s why my prediction is: if the NPV compact is ever ratified, it will work. Once. But after any state (particularly one with a large number of electoral votes) has seen its votes go to the opposing candidate, the legislature will be pressured to leave the compact for any subsequent elections.
I’m legitimately curious about what this group, and many others who have staged ridiculous stunts, hope To gain from their political LARPing. Have we reached the point in our society where a low level grift is a legitimate goal for people?
And it might be so for years to come. That doesn’t affect the processes or timing of the transition of power.
To be clear: these false electors have no legitimacy, and for the most part, they know it. They represent a fraudulent effort to undermine our democracy, and, as pointed out above, know precisely how close to (or across) the legal line they tread.
truly a tragic hero. this summer i plan on rereading the whole thing. i haven’t revisited that when since king published the wind through the keyhole or whatever the title was.
in topic, it seemed like someone with the power of persuasion was needed and thankfully absent in the encounter from above.
I dunno that I would consider Eddie’s tale a tragedy, per se, despite his tear-jerker exit from the series; considering how his life would have turned out had Roland not intervened.
Either the smack or Balcazar would have ended up killing him.
My take on it is that we’re in the midst of the “reality tv” version of running a country, driven by social-media fueled mob rule.
Not “we” as in everyone’s doing it, that’s on the Repubs, but “we” as in we’re all living in it.
