By Gary Gindler | The American Thinker
The Inauguration of George Washington
From
The Granger
Collection CC BY-NC-SA
4.0
Who chooses the President of the United States?
This question is by no means
rhetorical. For example, the mass disinformation media has chosen Joe
Biden as the winner of the 2020 election. Many people liked this news,
but I must disappoint them – the television broadcasters have, according to the
U.S. Constitution, nothing to do with who will live in the White House for the
next four years.
Maybe the Supreme Court chooses the
President? No, the Constitution does not provide for this.
Could it be that the citizens of America
choose their President? Following the U.S. Constitution, no.
So, who then chooses the President?
Before answering this question, let us note
that, contrary to popular misconception, the President of the United States is
not a representative of the American people. State legislators and
governors are representatives of the people, and at the federal level so are
the members of the House of Representatives of the United States
Congress. (Currently, senators are also representatives of the people, but
before the ratification of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 1913, they
were appointed by state legislators).
So, who does the President represent?
The President of the United States of America, according to the Constitution, represents state legislators' interests and no one else.
In general, the federal government's
structure in America reflects the numerous attempts of the Founding Fathers of
the United States to introduce a system of effective state control over the
federal government.
The fact is that the main difference between
our country and all other countries, without exception, is that it was
organized "from the bottom up," that is, individual colonies
voluntarily united against a common enemy – the British Empire.
All other "republics" on the planet
were created "from the top down," when the already existing provinces
were graciously granted some independence by the already existing central
government.
In building the American state, the
fundamental principle was state control over the newly created federal power
structure. Therefore, from the Founding Fathers' point of view, the
federal government in Washington should consist of both representatives of the
people (congressmen) and representatives of the state leadership – the federal
President and senators.
This is how the institution of the Electoral
College was invented and implemented. The electors are appointed by the
state legislatures, and they are the ones who elect the President of the
country.
So why do American citizens need to
participate in the presidential elections? Well, strictly speaking, it is not
necessary. It is just that there is a long tradition in America – state
legislators appoint electors in such a way that these appointments correspond
to the mood of the people (in some states, this is even enshrined by
law). This is a tradition, but according to the U.S. Constitution, the
participation of the people in presidential elections, generally speaking, is
not required. According to the Constitution, the people participate in
the direct elections of their legislators, which is quite enough.
There is nothing reprehensible in this –
after all, the President of America is not the representative of the American
people. He is the representative of state legislators. From the
point of view of the states, the President (and pre-1913, two senators from
each state) are the "overseers" of the federal government. In
other words, the President, from the point of view of state legislators, is
"our man in Havana" (that is, in Washington), who is responsible for
the observance of state rights by the federal government.
Thus, under the Constitution, state
legislators have the right to generally ignore the results of the voting of
citizens of their state and appoint those who they deem necessary to the
Electoral College. Why did the Founding Fathers of the United States give
state legislators such unprecedented power? Because most of the Founding
Fathers were geniuses with impressive foresight. They did not know
precisely when this would happen, but they knew it would eventually happen: the
election's published results would have nothing to do with how the citizens
voted.
This is exactly what happened in 2020.
Of course, there have been falsifications in
the counting of votes in America before. However, in 2020, the Democrats
went all-in with a scam, and for the first time in American history, they were
close to success. Actually, they simply had no other choice. They
knew very well that another Trump term would be enough to crush the American
left to its core.
Now, more than a week after the elections, it
is already clear what the Trump team is doing. They are working in two
directions.
First, they sue in states where there was a
clear violation of the electoral law. Violations include the counting of
votes that came after polling stations closed, turnout of more than 100%, the
use of computer systems that were systematically "wrong," always in
favor of Biden, the thousands of Pennsylvania voters born on January 1, 1900
(or even on January 1, 1800), and much more.
For example, election results in some
Democrat-controlled states violate fundamental laws of both mathematics and
physics. The votes cast for Biden do not comply with the statistical law
of distribution of digits (Benford's
Law), while the ballots cast for Trump do adhere to this law.
Thousands of mailed ballots were received even before they were officially
sent. Thus, the 2020 election showed compelling evidence of the
possibility of time travel.
Secondly, the Trump team calls on state
legislators to use their constitutional powers to rectify the local executive
authority's criminal actions to the point of completely ignoring the falsified
voting results.
These are the expected steps. Any
presidential candidate would and should take such measures. Al Gore did
the same in 2000, but then the case concerned only the state of Florida.
In 2000, the country did not know the name of the winner for 35 days, and in
2020 we should not expect a faster resolution of the issue because now we are
talking about at least six "problem" states.
Only now is the reason for the frenzy with
which the Democrats attacked the three Trump-nominated Supreme Court justices
is becoming clear. The fact is that the Trump-nominated current U.S.
Supreme Court justices – Gorsuch, Kavanagh, and Barrett – were on Bush's legal
team that secured the Supreme Court case in favor of Bush in 2000.
But the main difference between the 2020
elections and the 2000 elections is the involvement of the federal government's
apparatus in investigating violations. The investigation is carried out
by both prosecutors of the Department of Justice and FBI agents.
According to the Constitution, all courts and
all other voting problems must be resolved by the first Monday after the second
Wednesday of December, which falls on December 14 this year.
If on December 14, the Electoral College fails to elect a president, then the Constitution also provides for this scenario. Per the 12th Amendment to the Constitution, in this case, the President and Vice President will be elected by the House of Representatives (however, if for some reason the Vice President cannot be elected by the House of Representatives, then the right of his choice is transferred to the Senate.)
In the House of Representatives, state
delegations will be voting, not the individual congressmen themselves.
Now in the House of Representatives, the majority of delegations – 26 – belong
to Republicans. In the Senate, the Republicans also have an
advantage. So, the only reason Trump can lose the election now, a week
after the election, is his own admission of defeat. But such a strange
decision by Trump is unlikely – this guy is from Queens, and if he gets
involved in a fight, he will see it through to the end.
It is also unlikely that Trump does not
understand that if the chronic vote-rigging by Democrats is not stopped now,
America will end. The Trump team is well aware that such an opportunity
to end the creeping socialist revolution may no longer be presented.
As a result, Democrats will likely not
recover from this fraud. The disinformation media (which Fox News joined
on the election night) will not recover from deliberately covering up this
fraud, this attempted coup.
If the Democrats went for broke, then Trump
could, most likely, also go for broke.
Trump may have already destroyed the
Democratic National Committee, but they just do not know it yet.
In military terms, Trump's team conducted
careful reconnaissance and intelligence on the enemy for a week. They
collected numerous affidavits about the electoral fraud of Democrats, witnesses
who confirm their testimony under oath. But on the evening of November
10, the reconnaissance was completed, and massive artillery bombardment began
in the form of lawsuits in several key states and the initiation of criminal
investigations into violations by the Department of Justice.
If this does not help, Trump will bring into
the battle the strategic reserves available only to the President of the
American state apparatus – for example, in the form of a complete
declassification of Obamagate. In any case, our country is by no means at
the end; we are at the very beginning of this process.
From a legal perspective, Biden is an
impostor, a false president, at least until December 14 of this year. If
Biden can declare himself President-elect without any legal basis, then any
other American citizen can also declare himself President-elect.
Therefore, I am forced to repeat my advice
once again – to survive in this leftist madhouse, turn off the TV and start
thinking for yourself. If you have read the article so far, you will
definitely succeed.
And remember – if the laws in our country are
still observed, then the chances of the Harris-Biden administration (in this
order) are practically zero. If the laws in America are not followed,
then the great American political experiment will unfortunately end.
Gary Gindler, Ph.D., is a conservative
columnist at Gary
Gindler Chronicles and the founder of a new science: Politiphysics.
Follow him on Twitter and Quodverum.
RELATED
ARTICLE
Pollster: It's Curious How Biden
Underperformed Hillary Clinton In Every City...Except These Four.
By Matt
Vespa | Townhall.com
Source: AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
Until all the votes are counted and all the allegations
of voter fraud are investigated, I think it’s too early to declare a winner in
the 2020 race. You keep fighting. For now, the legal challenges are hitting
snags in the courts. Still, President Trump should keep fighting to the end. We
have dead people voting. We have allegations of ballots being illegally
backdated. Everything should be looked at right now.
Was this election stolen? Well, millions feel that way.
The turnout numbers are odd in some states, like Wisconsin, which hit 89
percent. Now, is that figure impossible? No. Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley
Strassel did the math, but it’s highly improbable given the turnout rates in
the surrounding areas. It would require 900,000 people showing up for same-day
registrations. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was blunter last Sunday, when
he said, “I think he would have to do a lot to convince Republicans that this
is anything except a left-wing power grab, financed by people like George
Soros, deeply laid in at the local level, and, frankly, I think that it is a
corrupt, stolen election.” He was commenting on Biden’s call for unity. Yet, he
also gave a hat-tip to someone we have written about here: Democracy
Institute’s Patrick Basham.
“We believe these people are thieves, we believe the big
city machines are corrupt,” the former House Speaker said. “Interestingly
Patrick Basham, who's the most accurate pollster, he's British, wrote in a
British newspaper...that this clearly was a stolen election, that it is
impossible to imagine that Biden outran Obama in some of these states.”
Indeed, Basham quoted Joseph Stalin’s remarks about
elections, where the Soviet dictator mentioned something about how it’s not
important who votes but how they are counted, which appears to ring “eerily
true” with this race. Basham has more in his piece in the Sunday Express, where
he first highlighted how his data was again on the money regarding Democratic
turnout, the shy Trump vote, and how the president’s law and order approach
prevented catastrophic bleeding with suburban women voters. Suburban white
women and urban black males were the shy Trump voters of this year. The
president drew 10 million new supporters in 2020. He also took aim at the 2020
pollsters as a whole this cycle as well.
“If you count the ballot fraud, most pollsters clearly
failed. If you don’t include the fraudulent ballots, most pollsters failed on a
spectacular scale,” wrote Basham. Yet, here’s where things get fishy in the
2020 race which he mentions at the end of his column. He cites Richard Baris of
Big Data Poll who noted something funny about Biden's numbers in the cities,
how it lagged behind Clinton's numbers, but shot off to the moon in these four
cities. Just take a look at the states in which these cities are located as
well:
How
curious that, as Baris notes, “Trump won the largest non-white vote share for a
Republican presidential candidate in 60 years. Biden underperformed Hillary
Clinton in every major metro area around the country, save for Milwaukee,
Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia.”
Robert
Barnes, the foremost election analyst, observes in these “big cities in swing
states run by Democrats…the vote even exceeded the number of registered
voters.”
Trump’s
victories in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin were on target until, in the
middle of the night, counting was arbitrarily halted. Miraculously, several
hundred thousand votes – all for Biden – were mysteriously ‘found’; Trump’s
real leads subsequently vanished.
The
protracted, eventual outcome will determine the contemporary relevance of
Stalin’s observation. No matter who wins, most pollsters already have lost
their credibility and influence.
Trump is still very much in 'Hail Mary' territory
regarding pulling this out, but it’s no longer about this election. It’s about
the next one. If Democrats can get away with these shenanigans this year, do
you think they’ll stop?
I think you all know the answer to that question. You all
know the kind of left-wing scum we’re dealing with here.
