Amanda Chase: Chasing the Crazy Vote

Amanda Chase

by Kerry Dougherty

At a time when many of us are railing against Gov. Ralph Northam’s arbitrary and capricious executive orders, a Republican who wants to replace him is calling on President Trump to declare martial law.

Just what we need, another governor with tyrannical impulses. Not that State Sen. Amanda Chase has any chance of winning next year.

Chase published this on her Facebook page.

(Joe Biden) Not my President and never will be.  The American people aren’t fools.

We know you cheated to win and we’ll never accept these results.  Fair elections we can accept but cheating to win; never.  It’s not over yet.  So thankful President Trump has a backbone and refuses to concede.  President Trump should declare martial law as recommended by General Flynn.

Martial law?

By tossing out such a vacuous proposal Chase shows herself to be an unserious candidate unworthy of consideration to shape public policy.

But Chase threw it out there, which prompted The Hill to point out how radical such a move would be.

“The U.S. has never declared martial law, which gives the military broad powers in a time of crisis, at the federal level. But it has been used in some instances at state and local levels during disasters or times of unrest, such as in Hawaii following the attack on Pearl Harbor,” reported The Hill yesterday.

The GOP is struggling in Virginia. Face it, when Democrats nominate nuts they win elections. When Republicans do the same they lose.

But the new far-left majority in Richmond may have gone too far with its attacks on law enforcement and gun owners, Northam’s endless emergency orders and out-of-control parole board. Oh, and absurd laws like the one that gives driving privileges to illegal aliens.

The best chance for the GOP to win a statewide race is not by chasing the crazy vote, but with a candidate like Del. Kirk Cox.

A conservative who’s not a loon.

Cox is a retired high school teacher who’s served in the House of Delegates since 1989. He was Speaker of the House until the GOP lost its majority in 2019.

“Senator Chase’s suggestion that martial law be imposed is absurd and dangerous,” wrote Cox in a news release. “I taught government for 30 years and have great respect for our constitutional republic. Per that system and the electoral college vote yesterday, Joe Biden will be the next president.”

Chase and Cox will compete for the Republican nomination at a convention next spring.

Chase is the darling of the far right. No doubt she’s now the darling of Virginia’s far left, too, as she drives independents far away from the Republican Party with her idiotic call for martial law.

This column is republished with permission from Kerry: Unemployed & Unedited.

There are currently no comments highlighted.

89 responses to “Amanda Chase: Chasing the Crazy Vote

  1. Are you saying that Chase does not represent a good number of voters?

    In rural Va, would Cox beat Chase?

  2. So, you’re going to vote for her?

    • Not me! But my bet is that she DOES represent a significant number of Conservatives – the way that many Conservatives are these days – she does have the support of that part of the GOP so funny that more moderate GOP paint her as “out there by herself”. Nope. She knows her constituency!

  3. She is what is referred to as a “wack a do”but in reality she is a clear and present danger. She and her fellow extremists are not real Americans. They refuse to accept that there is no evidence of massive fraud. Courts have said that, the Attorney General said that, and the Supreme Court refused to take up the Texas case on its merits.
    People like Chase are fomenting insurrection and will have blood on their hands.

    • I guess only Democrats can talk about the potential for election fraud and the need for voter confidence.

      “How are you gonna keep it from us being able to be in a position where you can manipulate the machines, manipulate the records?… I think we should pass a federal law mandating that the same machines with paper trails be mandatory for every federal election”
      – Joe Biden

      • What we all need are facts that are verified. I favor a National Commission chaired by Presidents Clinton and Bush that is structured like the base realignment commission and made up of people of stature and credibility. Let them look into how the election actually worked, what went wrong and then identify needed fixes. Congress would have to either accept or reject the recommendations. We may not be able to survive as a republic if we have many more elections like this past one.

        • James Wyatt Whitehead V

          A commission is a waste of time and money. What did the Kerner Commission of 1968 actually produce in outcomes?

          • The difference is making this one where Congress has to accept or reject. If you don’t like my proposal, what is yours?

          • We don’t need a commission. Jimmy Carter was a poor President, but at least he was honest. The Carter/Baker report was well done and should be used as an objective basis for any discussion of voter integrity and building confidence in U.S. elections.

            The work has already been done, and one need only look around the world at what works and what does not. For example, mail in voting is not secure. Other countries know that, but we seem to have forgotten.

            Any study now wouldn’t be truthful because Democrats have come to realize that insecurity favors them. It’s that simple.

            “More than 1,700 Georgians were singled out for illegally casting two ballots in 2020 elections — including last month’s hotly contested presidential race — but their fraudulent votes weren’t canceled out, according to state election officials. And so far, none of the cheaters has been prosecuted, raising concerns about continued fraud as Georgia prepares to vote again in twin U.S. Senate runoff elections next month.”

            “The majority of double voters were Democrats who cast an absentee ballot either by mail or drop box and also voted in person on Election Day, officials said, which is a felony under state law.”


          • Instead of cursing the darkness, why don’t you offer a proposal for improving the integrity of our voting system? Do you really think that voter game playing was only done by democrats? I like to say that I was born at night, just not last night.

          • Give me a break. Have you read the Carter-Baker report? That’s what I suggest going forward to ensure elections are secure. It’s too lengthy to repeat everything in comments.

            But for example, limit mail in voting to special situations, return to signatures and signature matching which Democrats have done away with in some locations, enforce postal stamp verification which Democrats have done away with in some locations, etc.

            For this election, I suggest appointing a Special Counsel and giving him or her the resources to follow up on allegations of fraud and impropriety. Every sworn affidavit represents either voter fraud or perjury. Get to the bottom of each and every one and prosecute no matter which side of the dime it falls on. The report should be made public as was the Mueller report.

        • “What we all need are facts that are verified.”

          That’s exactly what Republicans have been seeking, but Democrats have been doing everything in their power to stop from happening.

          Without the power to subpoena evidence and compel witnesses testimony the facts cannot be verified. Why do Democrats oppose this so strenuously?

          According to Democrats, we aren’t even allowed to talk about it, much less conduct a proper investigation.

          • Where is your evidence that this is taking place?

          • Dick Hall-Sizemore

            The courts have been the forum to “subpoena evidence and compel witness testimony” and the Republicans have failed to do so. Last Saturday, a federal judge, just recently nominated by President Trump and approved by the Senate, held a day-long hearing in Wisconsin in which the Republicans were allowed to present their case. The result: “In his ruling, Judge Ludwig wrote that Wisconsin’s election officials had followed state law, which clearly says that the state’s electors should be chosen by a popular vote. Even though they instituted changes like allowing drop boxes for absentee ballots and loosening restrictions for certifying ballots, the moves were not illegal, Judge Ludwig wrote, and officials used acceptable ways to implement the law.”

            So much for the “evidence” and claims of fraud.

        • That’s not a bad suggestion, but my guess Dems will prob not go for it.

        • We may not be able to survive as a republic if we have many more elections like this past one.” Really? The chirping over the trumped up charges of “stealing the election” seem pretty harmless to me. Court cases have been filed. Court cases have been rejected. A few loudmouths have “popped off” about martial law. So what? I don’t see the riots. I don’t see the serious threats. I just see Loon E Tunes characters like Amanda Chase playing the role of Daffy Duck.

          Annoying but ultimately harmless.

          • What about the Proud Boys in DC this past weekend and other so called vigilante groups who are threatening violence and even stating that Biden will never take office. If you don’t see what is going on as a serious threat to our system, what would?

    • “She and her fellow extremists are not real Americans”

      Yes, yes they are real Americans. Misguided, and ignorant they are, but they are “real Americans”.

      2016 called, and said you’re hypocrite.

      • But given the events of the last month, still electable, and if not, appointable by whatever autocratic ruler the GOP has in place. The party has shown that but for the judiciary, they’d welcome an end to this wasted energy we call “voting”.

        • Umm both parties would much rather the voters be taken out of the equations.

          However, the hypocrisy abounds on all levels from 2000, 2016 and even 2020 from both sides.

          • So… now Hillary has credibility with you? As a Democrat, I hold Hillary in the same high esteem as Rush.

          • “Nancy_Naive | December 17, 2020 at 9:58 am |
            So… now Hillary has credibility with you? As a Democrat, I hold Hillary in the same high esteem as Rush.”

            Please feel free to state where I didn’t give her credibility?

            Ironic consider either this week or last you said the only other candidate as smart as her was JFK.

            Also, that’s a lovely defection she was your “parties” like nominee for the Presidency and I’m sure you voted for her too.

          • Even SnakeFace Pelosi wouldn’t go along with this. Would she?

        • NN – But it’s okay to skip the judiciary and overrule voters in the House of Representatives? That’s what Democrats plan to do to get their Democrat friends seated from Iowa and NY.

          “Iowa’s Largest Newspaper Calls Out Democrat Over Attempted Election Steal: It’s Time to Concede”

          “In Iowa’s Second Congressional District, the Republican candidate has won and the Democratic candidate has lost. This is what the initial vote tally determined, as did the official recount. The state formally certified the result. The losing candidate chose not to appeal to Iowa’s courts. Instead, she’s appealing to the Democrat-run House of Representatives to ignore the will of voters and Iowa’s entire system in order to “get the result we need” (i.e., overturning the outcome and stealing the election):”

          Nothing Democrats say applies to them, so get off your high horse.

          I’ve distanced myself from Amanda Chase, but will not back down from encouraging a thorough investigation into what happened in 2020. All impropriety (from either side) must be exposed and dealt with.

          • Amen to that!

          • If you are in favor of a thorough investigation, you should tell the Democrats. They are the ones stonewalling any attempt to gather evidence that would settle the matter.

            Sen. Rand Paul railed against voter fraud in the 2020 election during a Senate hearing, saying voter fraud happened and that the election was “in many ways stolen.”

            “The fraud happened,” the Kentucky Republican said during a Wednesday Senate hearing on election security. “The election in many ways was stolen, and the only way it’ll be fixed is by in the future reinforcing the laws.”

            “We can’t just say, ‘It didn’t happen,’” Paul said about fraud allegations across the country. “We can’t just say, ‘Oh, 4,000 people voted in Nevada that were noncitizens, and we’re just going to ignore it.’”


          • If you fact check the Nevada claim, it is an assumption based on its DMV automatically registering anyone who gets a drivers license. There were 3800+ non citizen who got licenses. No one has established that they voted which is easy to determine. As the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, “we’re all entitled to our opinions, just not our own facts.”

          • “If you fact check the Nevada claim, it is an assumption based on its DMV automatically registering anyone who gets a drivers license.”

            I’m well aware of that. Hence the need for a proper investigation, which the Democrats oppose. It’s not illegal to be registered in two places. It’s illegal to vote in two places in the same election. That requires an investigation to determine.

            The Democrats are shouting for verified evidence, at the very same time they are closing the door to investigations that might provide it. It’s completely disingenuous and unproductive.

            It’s like putting someone in debtors prison until he is able to pay his debt. He can’t get free unless he pays the debt, but he can’t earn anything to pay the debt unless he’s free.

          • I’m not sure how democrats are “shutting the door” but if the claim of 3800+ non citizens voting is true, it still wouldn’t change the results in Nevada. Biden won by 33,596 votes.

          • “No one has established that they voted which is easy to determine.”

            Not true. That work has been done

            “New: FBI requests files of people voting ‘in multiple states’”

            “The FBI, apparently and finally eyeing voter fraud claims, has requested the files from an independent investigation of people who allegedly voted in several states.”


            It while it may be easy to determine that someone is recorded to have voted in multiple states, proving who actually did the voting is another matter altogether. Charging someone with a crime requires an investigation. Private citizens can’t do that. Lawsuits were filed by private citizens.

            The more we dilute voter IDs and signature requirements the easier it is for someone to say that someone else voted in the other state, not them. How do you prove that in a court of law? And if it isn’t punished, it will grow.

          • The New York vote is undergoing judicial review and the Iowa outcome will be interesting. The democrat decided to bypass her appeal rights and is seeking to get the House Ds to seat her. They will do so at their peril.

          • “… if the claim of 3800+ non citizens voting is true, it still wouldn’t change the results in Nevada. Biden won by 33,596 votes.”

            That’s only one of many issues. The problem isn’t leads to follow, it’s time. Presidential elections are different than those for Senator or Representative.

            Your frequent references to AG Barr’s comments and the Supreme Court are meaningless. I don’t think you understand the particulars of either situation and what it tells us.

            Hopefully someday we will know the full extent of what happened in the 2020 election. An objective analysis of the 1960 election would tell you that Nixon was the rightful winner, but that wasn’t apparent until long after Kennedy was sworn in.

            We need to do better.

          • While you have no idea what I understand or don’t understand, we both agree that we need to do better. I have made one suggested approach in this threat. What is your’s?

          • “I have made one suggested approach in this threat. What is your’s?”

            You missed it?


            “While you have no idea what I understand or don’t understand..”

            I don’t claim to know. I qualified what I said by saying “I don’t think…”

            Whenever someone suggests that the Supreme Court ruling regarding Texas makes a statement about the merit of the arguments within the complaint, that suggests to me that there’s a lack of understanding. The Supreme court rejected the case on the basis of standing, which made the specific complaints moot.

          • But Justices Thomas and one other said that the Court could have taken it and granted no other relief. The Supreme Courts in the four states involved all dismissed the suits brought in their states and cited no evidence.
            The Nevada story appears to be a case of voter fraud but throwing out all of those votes would not have changed the outcome. The Constitution gives states the authority to run their elections as they see fit. States like Georgia with republican governors and secretary of states certified the results. What about the Attorney General’s conclusion of no evidence of serious fraud?

          • This summer AG Barr gave very stern warnings about the dangers of what was happening with regard to the expansion of mail-in voting and the delusion of important safeguards. He was either condemned and ignored, but the very thing he predicted has come to pass. Watch the video.

            Barr warns Democrats ‘playing with fire’ over ‘grossly irresponsible’ mail-in voting push

            ‘I have friends who haven’t lived in California in 21 years who received ballots,’ AG says

            The “reckless” push by Democrats to expand mail-in voting could raise “serious questions about the integrity of the election,”

            Attorney General William Barr told “Hannity” in an exclusive interview Thursday.

            “I think it is grossly irresponsible to be doing what the Democratic Party is doing now,” Barr said. “We’ve had very close races in recent history, the country is divided. If anything, we should be assuring the integrity of our elections so that government going forward would be legitimate and be accepted as legitimate.”


            So after being ignored or condemned, he is then placed in a position of being expected to come to a conclusion about the extent of the fraud in the November election within weeks of the election.

            AG Barr’s predicament was like someone attending a wedding when the preacher asks if anyone present knows of any reason why these two people should not be united in holy matrimony. Would you want to raise your hand, even if you had some concerns? I wouldn’t.

            After the election the damage is done and it will be years before the full extent of the problems will be known, if ever. Robert Mueller was never required to come to a definitive conclusion that soon.

            AG Barr said the only thing he could at this stage.

            There are three things to keep in mind.

            1. There have been documented cases of fraud sufficient to overturn elections in the past.

            2. I’m not aware of any cases of election fraud sufficient to overturn an election that could have been proven this close to the election itself, however.

            3. Most importantly, there would likely be no fair and timely remedy. Presidential elections are inherently different from other elections. They can’t stay in limbo while potential impropriety is investigated and sorted out, nor does the Constitution give us the option for a re-run.

            I’ll make you a deal. Ping me in a couple years, and lets discuss this again. We may know more at that time.

          • re: ” ‘I have friends who haven’t lived in California in 21 years who received ballots,’ AG says”

            Does that mean they could have also voted in person ?

            This type of thing is a lapse of proper maintenance of the voter lists – but how does it enable massive fraud of one side to prevail over the other?

            Does one assume that Dems are more inclined to cast fraudlent ballots than GOP?

          • “Does one assume that Dems are more inclined to cast fraudlent ballots than GOP?”

            It’s a fact, not an assumption. Dead people vote for Democrats, illegal aliens vote for Democrats, etc. That’s why Democrats oppose cleaning up the voter rolls and other security measures recommended in the Carter-Baker report.

            “More than 1,700 Georgians were singled out for illegally casting two ballots in 2020 elections – including last month’s presidential race – but their fraudulent votes weren’t canceled out, according to state election officials. And so far, none of the cheaters have been prosecuted, raising concerns about continued fraud as Georgia prepares to vote again in twin U.S. Senate runoff elections next month.”

            “The majority of double voters were Democrats who cast an absentee ballot either by mail or drop box and also voted in person on Election Day, officials said, which is a felony under state law.”


          • Political dishonesty is not partisan. The majority of double voting in one county may have been democrat but that is far short of all and 50%+ 1 is a majority. Isn’t it about time to just admit that our system is in need of repair?

          • Is there actual data that show this?

            BTW – some of the links you reference, like this one , don’t really bolster your case – they just confirm partisan thinking.

    • The thing is that Chase is not some wack-a-doodle lone wolf out there by herself. She actually does represent a significant number of people and THAT’s is what is even more scary. It’s actually not about voting, it’s about what to do if voter suppression fails and votes actually go against you, what then?

      • “The thing is that Chase is not some wack-a-doodle lone wolf out there by herself. She actually does represent a significant number of people and THAT’s is what is even more scary. It’s actually not about voting, it’s about what to do if voter suppression fails and votes actually go against you, what then?”

        That’s your opinion, that’s not “fact”.

        No, most peoples issues stem from the largesse granted to voters this year all in the name of “pandemic”. Legislatures set election laws, not Judges and tyrannical Governors beholden to no one under Emergency decrees.

        There were instances of fraud in this election, there are instances of fraud in every election. If you’re of the mind “well it wasn’t enough to change the results” than you are signaling you’re okay with fraud, as the results coincide with your wishes.

        Voter suppression is a boogeyman, like “Soros, Koch” and the like. Lots of people seem to want to do away with the EC and go with a PV. Well if that is a route you want to take you had best believe that you’ll be taken the same documents required to get a drivers license to ensure that widespread fraud doesn’t occur.

      • You’re conflating again. A significant number of people suspected fraud in this election. I was one. Again, suspected. Then came the lawsuits and the unanimous Supreme Court decisions and Bill Barr’s commentary. My suspicions are answered. No significant fraud. Now comes Amanda Chase demanding martial law. There is not a significant number of people who support that.

    • Election Reform is not a new idea, but its time has certainly come…. again.

      The voting and election processes, like many other in government, involve the collection and management of information about the citizen, and their status and participation in a specific governmental process – voting.

      Governments need to ensure that citizens have full and easy access to voting and that their participation is legitimate, secure, protected, and not open to fraudulent hacking of their information or the information concerning their vote. Governments need to be able to positively identify and authenticate their citizens and ensure their vote is legitimate, protected and counted, while protecting the integrity of the process.

      After the 2000 US election, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and created the Election Assistance Commission which is bi-partisan, with four appointed commissioners. EAC’s job is to assist the states and local election commissions in the performance of their duties. In 2005, the Commission on Federal Election Reform was created to improve the integrity of US elections.

      The US election system is dispersed across the 50 states and with thousands of election officials and volunteers managing the entire electoral process. The Department of Homeland Security is tasked with ensuring the security and integrity of the US election infrastructure.

      According to Tiana Epps-Johnson, the Executive Director for the NGO Center for Tech and Civic Life, most states only spend around 1% of budgeted funds for elections and her organization received and distributed $350M in grant money to 49 states in support of their election systems and processes. Epps-Johnson has been focused on the state of the electoral system in the US for ten years, has spoken at TED, and together with NGO Center for Civic Design, they are working to improve election systems and processes across America and have won a Skoll Award in 2020 for their work. Google and Facebook are among corporate sponsors for their efforts.

      Lots of smart and dedicated Americans available to focus on the problem. I agree Biden needs to make this a priority.

  4. If we had rank choice and Cox and Chase and a Dem were all on the ballot, what would happen?

    • People would elect Chase… the name sounds cooler than Cox… besides most voter would associate Cox with Cox Communications and that’s a downer for him.

      • No question in Rural Va IMHO.

        I don’t know how much of the GOP in Virginia is more aligned to Chase than Cox but pretty sure the GOP concerned if she becomes the Candidate.

        Just the mere fact that even Congressmen in Virgina sign on to the “fruad” issue tells you that in their district – Chase would win – AND if it’s COX , they may not turn out!

        The GOP is splitting apart – not unlike what has happened in Europe between moderate and right Conservatives.

        And legislation to succeed will require a coalition and I suspect to Chase group won’t join up with other GOP or the Dems.

        The moderate GOP faces the task of maintaining a more moderate wing and legislative compromises. The Trump/Chase folks won’t go away. They’ll remind us all just how close to diaster the country really is.

  5. Comparing Amanda chase to northam is absurd

  6. Comparing Chase to COX is absurd also but real in terms of what would happen if they ran against each other and then would face a typical Dem.

    And I think that is a problem no matter a convention or primary. I’m not sure how a convention would turn out if Chase supporters are allowed free access.

    • From what I’ve seen of RPV the last few years, the convention will be a dumpster fire no matter who shows up.

      • How can you say that when the 2013 convention brilliantly sent EW Jackson off to run against Ralph Northam?

        Other 2013 Republican contenders for Lt Governor in 2013:

        Jeannemarie Devolites Davis
        Scott Ligamfelter
        Steve Martin
        Corey Stewart
        Susan Stimpson
        Pete Snyder

        And the MENSA society members in that convention decided that EW Jackson had the best chance.

        I agree with you. The Republican convention will be a dumpster fire. And Amanda Chase isn’t as out of it as a collection of sane people might think.

  7. James Wyatt Whitehead V

    Who cares if Chase is a wingnut? What matters is that she is using the political rage of millions to stake out a claim of the electorate.

  8. Larry has stumbled into a partial truth, or he is prescient, or he reads the newspapers and wants to appear prescient.

    Chase has declared that she will run as an independent. Or should I not believe what I read in the RTD? So Larry’s scenario of Cox, Chase and a Democrat in a race for governor is not so far fetched, and that is the real threat.

    • Yep. In the 2013 gubernatorial election McAuliffe got 47.8% of the vote, Ken Cuccinelli got 45.2% and Robert Sarvis (Libertarian) got 6.5%.

      Third party / independent candidates can definitely make a difference.

    • Then I would further point out really inappropriate it is for the Dems and GOP to “own” the redistricting process. It ought to be “3-way” and let the independents and libitarians and assorted waKa-a-doodles play and maybe be the tie-breaker vote when the Dems/GOP are at loggerheads.

      But Chase will easily win Bedford, Cambell County, and a slew of others similar to them in demographics and voting tendencies.

      The Dems ought to be just as vulnerable to rogue wack-a-doodles, no?

  9. Chase has been drumming up support in SWVA for months and is embraced by the far right. Those same supporters are the people who are so radical they turn independents and some right leaning voters off. Photos of Chase and many local leaders are easy to find. The same local “leaders” who have insulted most of the voters in the area. However, most voters know she can not win in NOVA and on the Eastern Shore. SWVA doesn’t have enough far right voters for her to win. The GOP needs a better option – NOT Cox.

  10. @Bill O’Keefe – The proud boys seem like those people who carried torches and rioted in Charlottesville. Violent but not a threat to the survival of the republic. Tell me when elements of the active duty military start acting like the proud boys. Then I will worry.

    • I guess you haven’t been following what has been going on in Michigan and Georgia as well as DC last week. See
      How bad does it have to get before you think that the threat is serious?

      • I knew the threat was serious when violent armed hooligans burned parts of Richmond and other violent armed hooligans burned parts of other America cities earlier this year.

      • Bannernacht.

        • It will be interesting to see how violent these morons get once these figure out that they are not going to get what they want (or in their minds were promised) from a Biden administration.

          • You mean they’re gonna try to kidnap Biden also?

          • Larry,

            We already know how “progressive” leftists behave when they don’t get their way or when they feel betrayed, so who knows?

          • Keep two things in mind:

            The left is violent.

            There’s no way to be sufficiently accommodating to please them and prevent violence.

            “As protesters arrive at their doorsteps, Democratic mayors in Portland, St. Louis abandon their homes”

            “As hundreds of protesters gathered Monday outside a condo building where the mayor lives in the upscale Pearl District of Portland, Ore., some set off fireworks, sprayed graffiti and broke windows. After someone tossed a burning object inside, police pushed the crowd away and made 19 arrests.”


          • Leftists plots to kill or harm people, discovered?

            Both sides have extremists – no question. But for the most part, the “left” is anything BUT organized while the right often tends to be organized as well as stupid enough to brag about it on social media and pose in group photos… and make it easy for the law to indict them for attempted kidnapping… of a gov.

            You can bet if Antifa was caught planning to kidnap some Red State Gov – the right would go apecrap!

  11. Virginia State BoE, Fairfax Office of Voter Registration just sent me a letter inviting me to sign up for Absentee Ballots for all of 2021.

  12. Like I said, call me when a unit of the active duty military decides that upholding the constitution means keeping Biden out of the White House.

    Chicago has more than 700 murders this year. How many have the proud boys killed?

    There is no threat to the Republic no matter what the fops and dandies at Vanity Fair say.

  13. In its December 15th edition the Virginian-Pilot editorial board had this headline “Wittman disappoints on lawsuit”. It involved U.S. Rep Rob Wittman of Virginia’s 1st District signing on to the recent Texas suit to the US Supreme Court. He was one of 127 Republican members of Congress to do so. To quote the editorial board, ” This decision permanently tarnishes his reputation and undermines his authority to lead. How can residents trust a man willing to tear down our most sacred institutions in service to a defeated and unpopular president? How can he elevate the interests of Donald Trump over that of his district and this nation? Instead of standing up for democracy and the Constitution, Wittman has turned his back on both. He ‘s turned his back on you. His actions are an unforgivable affront to his constituents, this commonwealth, and the rule of law that we had assumed Wittman held sacred.”
    It seems clear to me that the Republican Party of Virginia has faded away much as the national party has done. Both have become not much more than a mere personality cult.

  14. Rob Wittman is a big disappointment because of this one act. The Virginian Pilot has said it well. He has done a lot of good for his district and Virginia but if he doesn’t apologize and ask for forgiveness, he will always wear the stain of cultism.

    • I agree. It’s hard to understand why he did it. Before this, I saw him as a principled steady-as-you-go Conservative. Now I don’t know what he really is.

    • When Justice Samuel Alito or Clarence Thomas retires and writes a memoir, we may finally know why the Supreme Court did what it did. Until then, we are left to speculate, because they said very little.

      A careful reading of the statement will show that none of the justices commented on the merits of the complain. There are several elements of this case, and only two were touched on in their brief dismissal.

      Standing (right to file a complaint) 7 no 2 yes

      Findings of facts – no comment

      Findings of law – no comment

      Proposed relief – Thomas and Alito opposed granting relief

      “I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant any other relief”

      They opposed granting relief because the Constitution doesn’t provide any for the court to grant. The improprieties outlined in the complaint must be dealt with in Congress, or not at all. If it were any other office, there would most likely have been a new election such as happened in NC.

      “North Carolina will hold a new election for a congressional seat following an investigation into alleged ballot-tampering for a Republican candidate.”

      • Excuse the typo. I meant to say “Conclusions of law” not “Findings of law.”

        Conclusion of law – a judge’s final decision on a question of law which has been raised in a trial or a court hearing, particularly those issues which are vital to reaching a judgment. These may be presented orally by the judge in open court, but are often contained in a written judgment in support of his/her judgment.

      • What the NC case showed clearly, was that if there is actual evidence, actual facts , real evidence, then action IS taken!

        But you can’t just go running around claiming that you think there is but you can’t provide any evidence.

        The scandal referenced involved someone actually going around and successfully collecting absentee ballots… in one district.

        Is there any evidence of this now in Georgia or Pennsylvania or Michigan ? and how do you explain that on many of these ballots – they voted for Biden but also voted for the GOP candidates for Senator and Congress?

        The GOP pretty much kept the Senate and actually gained seats in the House – the same ballots that Trump lost on.

        • You have no grasp of the law or Constitution.

          Look at the date of the NC decision. There’s no time for such an investigation and remedy for a Presidential election. Someone must be sworn in come January 20.

          Other elected offices are different as they can remain vacant while it’s sorted out. The office of President is unique.

          • I don’t think it is unique at all if there is actual evidence of a conspiracy.

            But you just can’t go running around claiming there is and have no evidence to support it.

            That really does border on conspiracy theory where folks are essentially say they are “sure” but no facts and no reality confirm it.

            We can’t operate like that. It’s Alice in wonderland.

          • Larry – “I don’t think it is unique at all if there is actual evidence of a conspiracy.”

            Thank you for documenting my point. What anyone thinks is irrelevant. Under the U.S. Constitution, the office of the President is unique in the election process and other aspects of the office.

            “In general, a combination of state or congressional actions could delay elections but not postpone the selection of a president and vice president. The only hard deadline spelled out in the Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term on January 20 of the year following a general election. (That same deadline applies regardless of term limits imposed on the president under the 22nd Amendment.)”

            “The Constitution’s text requires that a group of electors, commonly called the Electoral College, chooses the next president. If a majority of electors fails to agree on a winner, Congress picks the winner in continent elections held within Congress under the terms of the 12th Amendment.”


          • We’re kind of all over the map here. Is the issue mail-in votes or the electoral college or what?

            You guys sound like you’re calling in everything you can think of as “possible” .

            What if every election went this way, no matter who won? What would the courts do?

            I still think you have to present real evidence and not conjecture.

            If there was actual, demonstrable fraud – then it COULD affect the POTUS.

            In fact in Florida – they DID have to resolve the voting issues.

            What ya’ll are saying in addition to the “might have” is that you need 3-4 months or longer to “prove” it.


Leave a Reply