Editors Note: Normally, we would not get into the legal weeds to this extent. But since the Arizona Attorney General, elected by a controversial 280 votes wants national attention, we don’t have much choice. The arguments currently being made before the Supreme Court now become important to the Arizona case.
Justice Sotomayor is not the brightest bulb in the box, so when she thought she had Team Trump by the you-know-what with her “fraudulent elector” theory, she must’ve felt pretty proud of herself. However, her victory was short-lived because Team Trump flipped the script on her and turned her talking points into ash during the back-and-forth over President Trump’s claim that he has “presidential immunity.”
Sotomayor found herself left holding her crumpled bag of useless talking points once Trump’s lawyers were done with her.
Trump Lawyer NUKES Sotomayor’s “Fraudulent Electors” Talking Point at SCOTUS
“Apply it to the allegations here. What is plausible about the president assisting in creating a fraudulent slate of electoral candidates, assuming you accept the facts of the complaint on their face, is that plausible that that would be within his right to do?” Sotomayor asked.
“Absolutely, your honor,” Trump attorney John Sauer responded. “We have the historical precedent we cite in the lower courts of President Grant sending federal troops to Louisiana and Mississippi in 1876 to make sure that the Republican electors got certified in those two cases, which delivered the election to Rutherford Hayes.”
“The notion that is completely implausible, I think, just can’t be supported based on the faces of this indictment or even…” he continued.
“Knowing that the slate is fake, knowing that the slate is fake, that they weren’t actually elected, that they weren’t certified by the state. He knows all those things…” Sotomayor objected.
“The indictment itself alleges, I dispute that characterization. The indictment affixes the word label to the so-called fraudulent lectures. It fixes the word fraudulent, but that’s a complete mischaracterization,” he replied.
“On the face of the indictment, it appears that there was NO DECEIT about who had emerged from the relevant state conventions, and this was being done as an alternative basis,” he concluded.
Thus buries a dishonest partisan Democrat talking point about the “fake electors” plot. It is a Constitutionally authorized process contingent upon the results of Electoral College votes.
This is what the Democrat-controlled media does: Twist the language to promote their political agenda in defiance of the law and the U.S. Constitution.
You need to watch this one:
Of course, the drama queens over at CNN acted as if they needed a fainting couch after Trump’s lawyer made his point about “fraudulent electors.”
Trump ‘absolutely’ had a right to put forward fake electors, his lawyer says
Underscoring the sweep of Trump’s claims, Sauer said that his client “absolutely” had a right to put forward Republican electors in states that he lost in 2020, commonly called “fake electors.”He made these comments under questioning from liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who asked if “it’s plausible” that a president might have the right to help create a “fraudulent slate” of electors, which would mean that it would be an official government act that might be covered by immunity.
In response, Sauer said there was historical precedent for presidents to get involved with these matters, pointing to the contested presidential election of 1876, where there were well-founded claims of fraud, and multiple slates of electors in several key states. (Sauer used the term “so-called fraudulent electors.”)
These comments were a remarkable embrace of a plot that many see as a corrupt scheme to overturn the will of the voters. And it’s clear that federal and state prosecutors clearly disagree with Sauer – they consider the Trump campaign’s seven-state ploy to be a criminal scheme.
What the divas over at CNN fails to tell you is this historical fun fact:
Not only that, but CNN’s own Van Jones explained rather eloquently that alternate electors are not illegal.
In addition, there are no such things as “fake electors,” only alternates. Perhaps someone should send this to Justice Sotomayor:……
*****
Continue reading this article at Revolver News.
For more articles like this visit The Prickly Pear.org
