Mr. Trump and Fraudulent Election Balloting
Mr. Trump is quite justified in worrying aloud about the possibility of voter fraud what with absentee balloting and reliance on, ugh, the US Postal Service.
The instances of chicanery in this regard are too numerous to deserve specific mention. It is not for nothing that their product is widely known as “snail mail.” This is the group that loses money by the billions, not the millions.
More important than any documentation of past swindles is the issue of what, if anything, can be done about this. Our quick solution is an executive order to cut the Post Office out of the loop, via support from the Supreme Court.
At present, the high court cannot be relied to support the president in any such endeavor. Quite possibly, it would be deadlocked with a four to four decision. But happily, with Amy Coney Barrett seated on the bench, the likelihood of a positive five to four decision is vastly increased.
Mr. Trump has indicated in no uncertain terms that if he loses a non-fraudulent election, he will fully cooperate with the process of handing over the reins of government to the winner. All men of good will wish nothing other than precisely that, if violence is to be kept to a minimum.
When should this executive order be issued? We are tempted to say “yesterday” but will compromise with “today.” No time must be lost, if the newly constituted Supreme Court is to make a ruling which will obviate voter fraud. These things take time to wend their way through the lower courts!
A one two punch of an executive order along these lines, coupled with a fast nomination process are the last best hope of our beloved nation to avoid chaos.
Happily, a second avenue has just arisen to this end. Thank goodness for Tulsi Gabbard, remember her? (for the forgetful: she is the congressman from Hawaii who pretty much deep-sixed Kamala Harris’ bid to become the Democratic candidate for president). She has just introduced legislation (co-sponsored with Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL)) to “withhold federal funds from states that allow a third party to collect ballots from voters.”
Here, Congressman Gabbard is out of step with much of her Democratic Caucus, which pooh poohs this danger. Arguendo, let us assume she is in the wrong here, as is President Trump.
Still, it is important, in order to obviate chaos, that this sort of voting be strictly prohibited. For if it occurs, and Mr. Trump loses, claiming a fraudulent election, a constitutional crises will likely ensue. But that would be the least of it. For with BLM, Antifa, the Proud Boys all on the scene, the “peaceful protests” of Seattle, Portland Oregon will actually seem serene in retrospect.
All the more reason to obviate this in several ways. Mach schnell on changing Amy Coney Barrett’s title from Judge to Justice. Register an executive order banning vote harvesting. And support the Gabbard-Davis bill.
Send this article to a friend: