We’re fine with Rita Hart taking her election case to the Democrat controlled House

• Rita Hart is taking her election case to the Democrat controlled House
• Be assured we are not hoping she wins  . . . but bear with us . . . 

Miller-Meeks is eminently qualified and we believe her to be the victor in Iowa’s 2020 2nd District Congressional race

First the political background                We have no doubt Mariannette Miller-Meeks (MMM), who we supported in the general election, won Iowa’s open Second District at least narrowly in large part as a result of the coattails of Donald Trump who won the district handily for the second time.  That the MMM win was largely due to Trump is clear because with Trump at the top of the ticket it allowed Republicans to nationalize the race by tying Hart to polarizing Democratic figures like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and that was a campaign strategy by operatives in this district and across the country in districts Republicans picked up.

That the district was an open seat this election meant that the Democrats could not run on an “I brought home the pork” message or name ID as the now retired congressman David Loebsack was able to do in his reelection contests.  The Dems still thought the blue collar district was theirs overall but it was not so against a Donald Trump or his coattails.

Word is her authentic coloring is red

Pity poor Rita and her CPC enthralled and employed supporters.   That Democrat Hart got as close as she did in the repeatedly tallied race, each count showing her to be a loser, we have no doubt was due to fraudulent voting (an unfairly common practice among Democrats, ranging from onesie-twosie to grand coordinated efforts*), dominant legacy media and corrupt social media working overtime to handicap the Republican message, and infusions of we believe unlawful electioneering support by the Zuckerberg funded organization Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) designed to benefit Democrat operations especially networked for Democrat targeted enclaves (counties in Iowa’s 2nd CD included).

But Hart, perhaps disappointed that the usual grab-bag cheating and more was not enough is now taking her case to the Democrat controlled House of Representatives rather than exhausting count challenges available to her in Iowa.  Dependably the House majority will focus on her claims and, if at all possible with a straight face, award the seat to her.

They need this seat as the new House will be sworn in on January 3 or 4th and unless Pelosi can maneuver something before then the Democrat component will be reduced to a much smaller majority and every additional caucus member is needed, and believe you us, Hart will be beholding to the Dem caucus.

That said, it is conceivable a discretion factor may come to bear on a few in the Dem caucus, but power plays are the general MO. Maybe Hart can honestly convince a majority that there were miscounts, or that legitimate votes were not counted, or some ballots were counted more than once, or election officials misapplied the law or did some skullduggery,  or whatever she is claiming and that those improprieties or illegalities were “sufficient to change the outcome.”

She is certain the court process prescribed in Iowa will not give her a fair shake  on the merits of actual legal votes as she counts them. They may even deny her standing. So let her have this avenue.

So while we wish Hart not to win, we believe she should have at it, exhaust her remedies as the rules allow even if those rules are of less substance than what guards the Presidential election process and the nature of our federal republic.

So we are being even-handed. We pray President Trump will try to exhaust all his legal availabilities. Fair minded people will not object. Accordingly Trumps election challenge may well end up in the House albeit under a different set of rules authorized in our Constitution from its origination — Article II Section1 and later modified by the Twelfth Amendment —  the well considered feature of the Presidential election process that puts the states as units ultimately in charge of the process (except as they violate the 14th Amendment).

If all judicial oriented challenges are foreclosed including a judicial resolution that elections be re-held in challenged states, a peaceful solution, here is another peaceful solution, a Constitutional scenario still open to President Trump as best we understand it —  explained in this article at The Epoch Times: (excerpt)

Electors in 7 States Cast Dueling Votes for Trump 

Republican electors in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico cast alternative slates of votes for President Donald Trump on Dec. 14, as the certified Democrat electors in the same states cast votes for former Vice President Joe Biden.

While there’s precedent for dueling sets of electors casting votes in a presidential election, the number of states involved in the action sent the 2020 election into uncharted territory. Democrats successfully executed the same gambit in Hawaii in 1960 by casting an alternative set of votes for John F. Kennedy after the state’s governor certified the electors for Richard Nixon.

Congress ultimately counted the Kennedy electors even though he wasn’t declared the winner in the election until 11 days after Nixon’s electors were certified. President Donald Trump and allied third parties are pursuing legal challenges to the election in all of the states involved, including a lawsuit filed in New Mexico on the same day as the Electoral College vote.

“Sending more than one slate of electors is not unheard of,” said Meshawn Maddock, Michigan Republican at-large national elector, in an emailed release. “It’s our duty to the people of Michigan and to the U.S. Constitution to send another slate of electors if the election is in controversy or dispute—and clearly it is.”

The Republicans in other states explained their rationale in similar terms, underlining that casting their votes would preserve Trump’s legal claim for the election as the president pursues legal challenges to the outcome.

. . .

The dueling sets will likely trigger a contested electoral vote count in Congress. Each slate of electors can be challenged with the approval of one member of the House and one senator. Both chambers of Congress would then retire to debate and vote on the slate.

* Sample articles referencing Democrat voter fraud, large and small.  If one thinks Democrats are not far and away the most frequent perpetrators of voter fraud, you are ignorant of American history and a political hack.

Here 

Here 

Here

Here 

Here 

Here

0

0