“The oath of office is given to the candidates who abided by the rules, and did not compromise their integrity. In spite of all the Republican protestations, the oath of office should be given to Hillary Rodham Clinton and Tim Kaine.” ~ John Ibanez

I don’t like to engage in hyperbole, but I believe we are approaching a real existential, Constitutional crisis.

Up until now, I’ve been arguing that the only to remotely realistic choices we have is Pres. Trump or Pres. Pence. I know longer believe that is even Constitutionally acceptable.

John’s post (which I have pasted below) persuaded me. His last two paragraphs locked it up. Essentially, this whole administration is tainted. They have all “bitten of the poisoned apple”, as they sometimes say in law. Therefore this administration must be pulled up by the roots of the Republic is to survive as we have known it.

The solution may lie in a minor precedent called “Marks v. Stinson” ([MARKS v. STINSON | 19 F.3d 873 (1994) | Leagle.com]). The ruling states, in part, : “Substantial evidence was presented establishing massive absentee ballot fraud, deception, intimidation, harassment and forgery.”
According to the New York Times: “Judge Newcomer ordered that Mr. Stinson, a 49-year-old former assistant deputy mayor of Philadelphia, be removed from his State Senate office and that Mr. Marks, a 36-year-old lawyer and former aide to United States Senator Arlen Specter, be certified the winner within 72 hours.”

I am now convinced that as farfetched as this may sound, it is in fact the only real solution to our nation’s current dilemma.

The election must be overturned.

==============================
Post by: John Ibanez, Yesterday at 2:31pm · 1/29/2017
Some people are calling for impeachment. I believe impeachment would take too long. They first have to introduce articles of impeachment, then have hearings, then vote. If he is impeached by the House of Representatives, they then have to bring it before the Senate. The Senate would have their own hearings and then vote on whether to remove him from office. If he is removed from office, Vice President Mike Pence becomes President.

Impeachment would remove Trump, but then we get a President who believes GLBT people should be sent to some form of concentration camps to be reprogrammed.

I think Impeachment would take too long, and would not solve the problem.

 (Emphasis Mine – Mike) The intelligence community already has the evidence that a foreign government interfered in the election so that Trump & Pence would win. That foreign power was Russia. So long as Trump is in office, he will be beholden to Vladimir Putin. If Pence were to become President, he also would be beholden to Putin. The interference of a foreign power on behalf of one of the candidates invalidates the election, and the elected candidates are rendered unqualified to serve.

The oath of office is given to the candidates who abided by the rules, and did not compromise their integrity. In spite of all the Republican protestations, the oath of office should be given to Hillary Rodham Clinton and Tim Kaine.

NOTE Precedent-setting LINK:

  1. [MARKS v. STINSON | 19 F.3d 873 (1994) | Leagle.com]
Advertisements

The BRAD BLOG: DoJ Announces ‘End’ of Private For-Profit Federal Prison System; Plus: GOP ‘Civil War’ vs. Reality: ‘BradCast’ 8/18/2016

By Brad Friedman on 8/18/2016, 6:01pm PT

Guest: Carl Takei of ACLU’s National Prison Project

Shockingly good news on today’s BradCast, following today’s remarkable announcement by the U.S. Dept. of Justice that they are working to end the federal government’s “use of privately operated prisons”.

After that, you may want to pop up some popcorn to best enjoy the rest of today’s program. [Audio link to complete program is posted below.]

First up today, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates issued a memo, as Washington Post reported, instructing federal officials “to either decline to renew the contracts for private prison operators when they expire or ‘substantially reduce’ the contracts’ scope. The goal, Yates wrote, is ‘reducing — and ultimately ending — our use of privately operated prisons.’

Wow. Her memo goes on to cite a recent DoJ Inspector General’s report finding that privately run prisons do not provide same level of service, “do not save substantially on costs” and “do not maintain the same level of safety and security” as those run by the federal government’s Bureau of Prisons.

I am joined by Carl Takei, staff attorney for the ACLU’s National Prison Project, for both an explanation and a bit of a victory lap after his organization and others have spent decades taking on the private, for-profit prison industry. Takei details what the announcement means, why it has finally come about now, and how the ACLU and others — including investigative reporters, the Bernie Sanders campaign, and eventually the Hillary Clinton campaign — have long argued precisely what the DoJ has admitted today.

[Full Article Available Here]