Should Trump Step Down?

[Hidden In Him]

OK.
Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Yes, I'm aware of what is stated in the Wiki. Quoting the 3rd paragraph:

The experiences of the 1796 and 1800 presidential elections – showing that the original system caused the election of a President and Vice-President who were political opponents of each other, constantly acting at cross-purposes – spurred legislators to amend the presidential election process, requiring each member of the Electoral College to cast one electoral vote for president and one electoral vote for vice president.

This means that the 12th Amendment is invoked under special circumstances as I was referring to in a previous post. The current situation does not warrant doing so.

 

[Hidden In Him]

This means that the 12th Amendment is invoked under special circumstances as I was referring to in a previous post. The current situation does not warrant doing so.

"Under the new rules, a contingent election is still held by the House of Representatives if no candidate wins a presidential electoral vote from a majority of the electors" (3rd paragraph).

 

[Hidden In Him]

I am talking about under the Constitution and rule of law in the United States.

I'm not.

 

[WaterSong]

Yes, I'm aware of what is stated in the Wiki. Quoting the 3rd paragraph:

The experiences of the 1796 and 1800 presidential elections – showing that the original system caused the election of a President and Vice-President who were political opponents of each other, constantly acting at cross-purposes – spurred legislators to amend the presidential election process, requiring each member of the Electoral College to cast one electoral vote for president and one electoral vote for vice president.

This means that the 12th Amendment is invoked under special circumstances as I was referring to in a previous post. The current situation does not warrant doing so.

Actually that third paragraph refers to what made the 12th amendment necessary.

 

[farouk]

I'm not.

Well, law and Constitution are what the United States is.

It would be a shame if other countries looking on saw the United States descend into anarchy.

 

[April_Rose]

And oops,.. I thought that @lforrest was the OP since I have Hidden on ignore.

 

[WaterSong]

"Under the new rules, a contingent election is still held by the House of Representatives if no candidate wins a presidential electoral vote from a majority of the electors" (3rd paragraph).

"...Electoral College under the Twelfth Amendment
While the Twelfth Amendment did not change the composition of the Electoral College, it did change the process whereby a president and a vice president are elected. The new electoral process was first used for the 1804 election. Each presidential election since has been conducted under the terms of the Twelfth Amendment.

The Twelfth Amendment stipulates that each elector must cast distinct votes for president and vice president, instead of two votes for president. Additionally, electors may not vote for presidential and vice-presidential candidates who both reside in the elector's state—at least one of them must be an inhabitant of another state.

If no candidate for president has a majority of the total votes, the House of Representatives, voting by states and with the same quorum requirements as under the original procedure, chooses the president. The Twelfth Amendment requires the House to choose from the three highest receivers of electoral votes, compared to five under the original procedure.

The Twelfth Amendment requires a person to receive a majority of the electoral votes for vice president for that person to be elected vice president by the Electoral College. If no candidate for vice president has a majority of the total votes, the Senate, with each senator having one vote, chooses the vice president. The Twelfth Amendment requires the Senate to choose between the candidates with the "two highest numbers" of electoral votes. If multiple individuals are tied for second place, the Senate may consider them all. The Twelfth Amendment introduced a quorum requirement of two-thirds of the whole number of senators for the conduct of balloting. Furthermore, the Twelfth Amendment requires the Senate to choose a vice president by way of the affirmative votes of "a majority of the whole number" of senators.

To prevent deadlocks from keeping the nation leaderless, the Twelfth Amendment provided that if the House did not choose a president before March 4 (then the first day of a presidential term), the individual elected vice president would "act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President". The Twelfth Amendment did not state for how long the vice president would act as president or if the House could still choose a president after March 4. Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment, adopted in 1933, supersedes that provision of the Twelfth Amendment by changing the date upon which a new presidential term commences to January 20, clarifying that the vice president-elect would only "act as President" if the House has not chosen a president by January 20, and permitting Congress to statutorily provide "who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected" if there is no president-elect or vice president-elect by January 20. It also clarifies that if there is no president-elect on January 20, whoever acts as president does so until a person "qualified" to occupy the presidency is elected to be president."


Source:ThoughtCo "....Key Takeaways: 12th Amendment

• The 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution modified the way in which the president and vice president are elected under the Electoral College system.
• The amendment requires that the electors of the Electoral College cast separate votes for president and vice president, rather than two votes for president.
• It was approved by Congress on December 9, 1803, and ratified by the states, becoming a part of the Constitution on June 15, 1804. "

 

[farouk]

The most recent occasion when some observers thought the US was about to descend into anarchy was possibly when General MacArthur was relieved in 1951 at the height of the Korean War and MacArthyism and some thought that a march on the White House by a mob loyal to the General might succeed. What happened was that, despite hysteria, the General was questioned point by point in Congressional Committee and his arguments were assessed as not overruling the prerogative and decision of the President to relieve him, under the law and Constitution.

 

[jaybird]

IMO there has been voter fraud in pretty much every election. from the beginnings the ruling class has always worked hard to make sure like blacks, women, poor, minorities, religious groups etc had their voice silenced. why is this election so different.

 

[farouk]

IMO there has been voter fraud in pretty much every election. from the beginnings the ruling class has always worked hard to make sure like blacks, women, poor, minorities, religious groups etc had their voice silenced. why is this election so different.

Even Bob Woodward in his reporting on the activities of the CIA (Veil: the Secret Wars of the CIA, Simon and Shuster) seems to accept that it's supposedly a good idea, in favour of US interests, to give money to newspaper editors of foreign countries in order to influence the fortunes of their election candidates. It should be of no surprise therefore that some people think similarly about the US's own institutions.

 

[Hidden In Him]

"...Electoral College under the Twelfth Amendment
While the Twelfth Amendment did not change the composition of the Electoral College, it did change the process whereby a president and a vice president are elected. The new electoral process was first used for the 1804 election. Each presidential election since has been conducted under the terms of the Twelfth Amendment.

The Twelfth Amendment stipulates that each elector must cast distinct votes for president and vice president, instead of two votes for president. Additionally, electors may not vote for presidential and vice-presidential candidates who both reside in the elector's state—at least one of them must be an inhabitant of another state.

If no candidate for president has a majority of the total votes, the House of Representatives, voting by states and with the same quorum requirements as under the original procedure, chooses the president. The Twelfth Amendment requires the House to choose from the three highest receivers of electoral votes, compared to five under the original procedure.

The Twelfth Amendment requires a person to receive a majority of the electoral votes for vice president for that person to be elected vice president by the Electoral College. If no candidate for vice president has a majority of the total votes, the Senate, with each senator having one vote, chooses the vice president. The Twelfth Amendment requires the Senate to choose between the candidates with the "two highest numbers" of electoral votes. If multiple individuals are tied for second place, the Senate may consider them all. The Twelfth Amendment introduced a quorum requirement of two-thirds of the whole number of senators for the conduct of balloting. Furthermore, the Twelfth Amendment requires the Senate to choose a vice president by way of the affirmative votes of "a majority of the whole number" of senators.

To prevent deadlocks from keeping the nation leaderless, the Twelfth Amendment provided that if the House did not choose a president before March 4 (then the first day of a presidential term), the individual elected vice president would "act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President". The Twelfth Amendment did not state for how long the vice president would act as president or if the House could still choose a president after March 4. Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment, adopted in 1933, supersedes that provision of the Twelfth Amendment by changing the date upon which a new presidential term commences to January 20, clarifying that the vice president-elect would only "act as President" if the House has not chosen a president by January 20, and permitting Congress to statutorily provide "who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected" if there is no president-elect or vice president-elect by January 20. It also clarifies that if there is no president-elect on January 20, whoever acts as president does so until a person "qualified" to occupy the presidency is elected to be president."


Source:ThoughtCo "....Key Takeaways: 12th Amendment

• 
  
  
  • The 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution modified the way in which the president and vice president are elected under the Electoral College system.
  • The amendment requires that the electors of the Electoral College cast separate votes for president and vice president, rather than two votes for president.
  • It was approved by Congress on December 9, 1803, and ratified by the states, becoming a part of the Constitution on June 15, 1804. "

We don't seem to be getting anywhere, LoL. This is the same information provided in a previous post.

But I know what my answer is now: The 12th Amendment is invoked if there is no clear winner of the electoral college numerically because neither candidate attains to the prerequisite number of electoral votes, such as happened in 1824. That is not the case here. Unless Biden's electoral count is somehow overturned in enough States so that neither he or Trump have enough to win the election, the Amendment will never come into play. As it stands now, Biden has more than enough electoral votes to win the Presidency.

This is why it being taken or not taken to the courts is paramount, hence the scenario described in the OP.

 

[WaterSong]

We don't seem to be getting anywhere, LoL. This is the same information provided in a previous post.

But I know what my answer is now: The 12th Amendment is invoked if there is no clear winner of the electoral college numerically because neither candidate attains to the prerequisite number of electoral votes, such as happened in 1824. That is not the case here. Unless Biden's electoral count is somehow overturned in enough States so that neither he or Trump have enough to win the election, the Amendment will never come into play. As it stands now, Biden has more than enough electoral votes to win the Presidency.

This is why it being taken or not taken to the courts is paramount, hence the scenario described in the OP.

Neither myself nor learned sources appear to be able to help you understand the procedures in the 12th amendment, particularly those pertaining to the EC, and even those procedures in the event of a tie, are pro-forma.
I wish you the best in finding an answer you are able to understand and accept.
God Bless.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Neither myself nor learned sources appear to be able to help you understand the procedures in the 12th amendment, particularly those pertaining to the EC, and even those procedures in the event of a tie, are pro-forma.
I wish you the best in finding an answer you are able to understand and accept.
God Bless.

Well that's ok, LoL. I can be hard-headed on occasion. I'm notorious for thinking for myself, and I question everything and do not simply accept things without substantiation. It has always held me in good stead, in both politics and spirituality.

But I can assure you I will be keeping my ears open when I hear the subject broached.

God bless, and thanks for the polite conversation. I like your pictures at the very least : )

 

[Heart2Soul]

Trump should NOT concede and Christians must NOT sit back and do nothing. This is what happened back in the 70's when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of atheists to remove prayer from schools...letting the enemy get a foot in the door....and after that every liberal and far-left agenda was being promoted and put into law thereafter....
If Christians would have fought against all this in the beginning we wouldn't be where we are now....
I thank God we have the ACLJ now who defends the rights of Christians in legal action against any and all entities that suppress our religious freedoms.

 

[Brakelite]

This thread is not intended as a platform for inciting armed revolution.

Too late. Millions of screen shots are now circulating around the world on every social media network available. We don't know you.

 

[farouk]

Factually, whether or not Mr Trump publicly concedes or not will not make a difference as to what happens on January 20, if the electoral college and Senate ratify Mr Biden's win. At noon on that day, he ceases to be President under the law and Constitution. This is straightforward, whatever opinions and aspirations - however good, noble and attractive -Mr Trump or anyone including myself may have.

 

[WaterSong]

Factually, whether or not Mr Trump publicly concedes or not will not make a difference as to what happens on January 20, if the electoral college and Senate ratify Mr Biden's win. At noon on that day, he ceases to be President under the law and Constitution. This is straightforward, whatever opinions and aspirations - however good, noble and attractive -Mr Trump or anyone including myself may have.

Thank you God the Republican party are the majority in the Senate.

 

[farouk]

Thank you God the Republican party are the majority in the Senate.

Are you saying that the Senate on partisan grounds should just throw out a result upheld by the courts and which the electoral college ratifies?

Under the separation of powers, Legislature, Executive and Judiciary do not arbitrarily write their own rules on partisan grounds.

 

[WaterSong]

Are you saying that the Senate on partisan grounds should just throw out a result upheld by the courts and which the electoral college ratifies?

Under the separation of powers, Legislature, Executive and Judiciary do not arbitrarily write their own rules on partisan grounds.

No. I was remarking to what you'd said, "...if the electoral college and Senate ratify Mr Biden's win."
I.E. Thank God we have a majority in the Senate, the Senate majority party is the Republican, and should the EC seek to ratify the election results using the fraudulent count that showed Biden the winner.

 

[farouk]

No. I was remarking to what you'd said, "...if the electoral college and Senate ratify Mr Biden's win."
I.E. Thank God we have a majority in the Senate, the Senate majority party is the Republican, and should the EC seek to ratify the election results using the fraudulent count that showed Biden the winner.

Where should the facts about the fraud or the lack of it be established or overruled? surely in the courts and the electoral college? a partisan vote seems a poor basis for establishing what legal arguments before courts have hitherto failed to demonstrate.

My problem with the culture of Fundamentalism is that people sometimes seem to want to read their own ideas into Scripture because they strongly wish it.

Similarly, whatever one thinks of an election result, and wishes it otherwise, if legal arguments before the courts fail to overturn vital details of the result and these results are reflected in what the electoral college ratifies, I don't understand how wishful partisan intervention overturns the whole balance of the system under the separation of powers.

The same arguments apply, whichever candidate happened to be ahead. I don't even feel I should be trying to advance either candidate.