↓
 
Home » What’s even better than election denial?

What’s even better than election denial?

The New Neo Posted on by

Pre-election denial, says Hillary Clinton.

To wit:

“I know we’re all focused on the 2022 midterm elections, and they are incredibly important, but we also have to look ahead because, you know what, our opponents certainly are,” Clinton said in the video. “Right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election, and they’re not making a secret of it.”…

“Just think, if that happens, the 2024 presidential election could be decided not by the popular vote or even the anachronistic Electoral College but by state legislatures, many of them Republican-controlled,” Clinton said before promoting Indivisible’s Crush the Coup campaign.

“Crush the Coup” has a webpage, of course, which you can easily reach by doing a search. Its rationale is that Republicans (MAGA Republicans, that is) must be defeated at the state level in 2022 to avoid an election steal by the Republicans in 2024 at the presidential level. It focuses on the key states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, and Arizona. Here’s their reasoning, such as it is:

In June, the Supreme Court announced it would hear Moore v. Harper this fall, with a decision likely coming next year. Right now, right-wing advocates are urging the Supreme Court to adopt an extremist and fringe legal doctrine, called “independent state legislature theory,” that would give state legislatures unchecked authority over election procedures and voting laws, and would grant broad power to gerrymander electoral maps, even if those laws blatantly violated the state’s constitution. An extreme ruling from the right-wing Supreme Court could have huge implications for how states run federal elections and ultimately give state lawmakers the power to overturn voters’ choice in presidential elections.

So what they’re saying is that their own failure to pass HR1 and wrest election control from the states, and the possibility of a SCOTUS ruling that yes, states set their own election rules (within Constitutional boundaries, of course), would somehow lead to each state legislature doing whatever it wanted in an election and overruling the will of the people.

What is the actual issue being decided by Moore v. Harper? This one:

Whether a state’s judicial branch may nullify the regulations governing the “Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives … prescribed … by the Legislature thereof,” and replace them with regulations of the state courts’ own devising, based on vague state constitutional provisions purportedly vesting the state judiciary with power to prescribe whatever rules it deems appropriate to ensure a “fair” or “free” election.

In other words, state legislatures have the express right to make laws regarding elections in their states, and yet in 2020 state court judges overruled legislatures and established their own rules. According to Hillary and the Crush the Coup people, the votes of the elected state legislative bodies are somehow less reflective of the people’s will than the decision of state judges (mostly unelected, I presume) and some also-unelected “experts” chosen by these judges.

More on the “independent state legislature theory” here:

In Moore v. Harper, the speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, Timothy Moore, asks the Supreme Court to consider what has come to be known as the “independent state legislature” theory — which holds that the Constitution gives state legislatures alone the power to regulate federal elections in their states, without the oversight of state courts. Moore notes that the Constitution’s elections clause states that the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.” Moore argues that unlike other constitutional provisions, the clause does not refer to the state itself, but a particular institution of government.

Last November, the North Carolina legislature enacted a new map for congressional elections in response to the 2020 U.S. Census data. Respondent Rebecca Harper and 25 other North Carolina voters sued in state court to prevent the new map from taking effect, arguing that the map violated various provisions of the North Carolina constitution and represented an unlawful partisan gerrymander. In February 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court enjoined the new map, concluding that although the state legislature “has the duty to apportion North Carolina’s congressional … districts,” the legislature’s “exercise of this power is subject to limitations imposed by other [state] constitutional provisions,” and “the state judiciary … has the responsibility to protect the state constitutional rights of the citizens.” The court further concluded that the map was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. On remand, the state trial court issued an order adopting a different congressional map proposed by three court-appointed experts.

Moore and other state legislators then filed an emergency application asking the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the North Carolina Supreme Court’s order invalidating the legislature’s map and to stay the state trial court’s order adopting the replacement map. The justices denied emergency relief. Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, filed a dissenting opinion, calling the independent-state-legislature theory “an exceptionally important and recurring question of constitutional law” and saying that “further review of the judgment below may be warranted once a petition for a writ of certiorari is filed.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred in the decision to deny the stay, but he agreed that “if the Court receives petitions for certiorari raising the issue, … the Court should grant certiorari … [and] carefully consider and decide the issue next Term after full briefing and oral argument.”

So the case is really about unelected judges, advised by an unelected panel of “experts,” redrawing the voting districts and usurping the power explicitly given state legislatures by the US Constitution. You’ve got to give Hillary and Crush the Coup points for creative “reimagining” of what a case is about.

Comments

What’s even better than election denial? — 21 Comments

  2. Kari Lake, the extremely charismatic and very charming “Trump in heels”, who now seems likely to beat her incompetent, insufferable, and alarmingly unintelligent opponent in AZ’s contest for governor, has brilliantly turned this idiotic term of abuse (“election denier”) against all those Democrats (including HRC) who have been guilty of such “denial” in the past. The extent to which leftists are absolutely terrified of the courageous and clever Kari can be judged by the story prominently featured on Yahoo today (“Is Arizona’s Kari Lake the Most ‘Dangerous’ Politician in America?”). What remains to be seen is how much chicanery the Democrats will be getting away with next month.

  3. Thank you Hill, now I know not to stuff the ballot box in 2024, like you Dems did in 2020.

  4. They will lie, cheat, steal, and do whatever it takes to STAY IN POWER. They will not give up. They will never succeed. It will be ALL DEMOCRATS, ALL THE TIME, for eternity. They will make sure they can never be stopped. The January 6 hearings are just a taste of what they will do to EVERY REPUBLICAN and EVERY REPUBLICAN SUPPORTER that they can. They will trash the Constitution and destroy every last vestige of it. They will silence and imprison all opposition.

    Call me pessimistic.

  5. Holy Moly..Susan Sarandon(!?)
    Unbelievable…
    “…Susan Sarandon BRUTALLY honest about who Democrats really are right now…”—
    https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2022/10/25/didnt-start-with-gas-chambers-susan-sarandon-brutally-honest-about-who-democrats-really-are-right-now-with-accurate-af-meme/
    H/T Instapundit

    Tulsi Gabbard poked a hole in it…but the dam may have just burst…

    Speaking of Gabbard, here she is, on “Biden”‘s current—I’m sure it’s all a coincidence—persecution of Elon Musk.
    https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1583414733478064128
    H/T also Instapundit.

  6. Re: Susan Sarandon

    I think she is more worried about Musk / Twitter and FoxNews than liberal dominance of the media / gatekeepers.

  7. Hillary,
    Stay home and bake cookies for your grandchild. and stuff a few in your own mouth so we don’t have to listen to you.

  8. Pennsylvania also ignored Alito’s requirement to segregate late arriving mail-in ballots. The Court did not follow up in any way so they got away with it.

  9. Putting out there if the Democrats lose it has to be by fraud, no other way to explain it to their bubble

  12. It looks like Democrats have gone through denial and anger to acceptance that they are about to be clobbered in the mid-terms.

    Which is not to say they “accept” the coming results, but they recognize those results are coming and they are now laying the groundwork to deny them.

  14. @ Barry > “Susan Sarandon BRUTALLY honest about who Democrats really are right now”

    Lots of serendipity tonight – look at your own comment about the Boxheimer Documents.

    https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/10/25/open-thread-10-25-22/#comment-2649744

    The documents were one of many wasted opportunities to face Nazi evil head on and squash it. Although some Germans instantly recognized the truth, too many considered these documents an aberration. These were the same people who later claimed it impossible to foresee the depths of Nazi evil. They were “misled.”

    Don’t label extremism and violence as foolishness or mistakes. When someone tells us who they are, believe it.

  15. The other serendipitous thing was this other link Barry posted on the Open Thread.
    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19027/google-mum
    “If You Liked Big Brother, Meet Google’s Big MUM”

    Daniel Greenfield illuminates how the Search algorithm is rigged to produce Google’s desired results rather than actually, you know, searching the internet for information YOU want to have.

    Google first unleashed MUM to fight what it considered COVID “misinformation” by making sure that everyone saw “high quality and timely information from trusted health authorities like the World Health Organization”. By reducing the number of sources to only those that agree with its agenda, Google is able to deliver fast results while getting rid of different points of view.

    Google long ago ceased being a way to find different answers and its search results are deliberately repetitive. Search is an illusion. The user thinks that he’s browsing the internet when he’s actually spinning his wheels in Google’s walled garden.

    I liked their neologism “prebunking” aka anticipatory debunking — although not what they are doing with it.

    Jigsaw, the company’s most explicitly political arm, is researching what it calls “prebunking” or attacking views it opposes before they can even gain traction.

  16. Apropos the conversation – David Harsanyi counts the ways.

    https://thefederalist.com/2022/10/25/democrats-the-only-way-to-save-democracy-is-one-party-rule/

    At this point, it would save everyone time if Democrats could simply point to a policy agenda item that isn’t going to save democracy — if such a thing exists.
    If Republicans vote, they are killing democracy. If they don’t vote, they are killing democracy. The only way to “save democracy,” writes The Washington Post’s Max Boot, is to empower one-party rule — a position that probably sounds counterintuitive to anyone with a middle-school education. “Now you need to vote to literally save democracy again,” contends President Joe Biden, or we will lose our “fundamental rights and freedoms like the right to choose, the right to privacy, the right to vote — our very democracy.”

    Chilling stuff. But it doesn’t end there. You will remember that by failing to “reform” the filibuster, which would entail authorizing the thinnest of fleeting majorities to shove through massive generational “reforms” without any national consensus or debate, we are also killing democracy. This has been the position not only of left-wing pundits and the New York Times editorial board, but also senators tasked with defending their institution. I wonder if they will support this democracy-saving fix next session, as well?
    …
    Just last night, Hillary Clinton, one of numerous prominent Democrats who wouldn’t accept the legitimacy of the 2016 presidential election, claimed that “right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election.” This is the kind of preemptive election denialism Democrats have been engaged in for nearly two decades. Democrats don’t lose elections; they are victims of gerrymandering or voter suppression or “structural” problems or too much free speech or Fox News or Russian gremlins.
    …
    Democrats, who have spent years delegitimizing the Supreme Court and rule of law, undermining legislative norms, cheering on unprecedented and blatant executive abuses, and using the DOJ to target their political enemies, among other “democracy”-destroying behaviors, do not occupy any high moral ground. And while “democracy” was once just a transparently silly euphemism for “stuff we want,” it has since evolved into a rhetorical device that denotes a decisively illiberal mindset.

  17. In re “If You Liked Big Brother, Meet Google’s Big MUM” — serendipity strikes again.
    Google seems to be engaged in a coup de ta.*

    https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2022/10/25/google-is-trying-to-sway-the-election-by-suppressing-gop-email-and-search-results-again-n505710

    We previously looked at a report showing that GOP fundraising emails were being immediately directed to Gmail users’ spam folders at a vastly more frequent rate than those of Democrats. You can read what you like into that news since everyone seems to have issues with their spam folders in Gmail. But another substantial brick was set in this wall following an investigation from mrcNewsBusters that found disturbingly similar results in the search returns from three major browsers provided to users looking for information about several upcoming critical midterm Senate races. NewsBusters evaluated the search returns from Google, Bing, and DuckDuckGo and the disparity was stark. Google buried search returns seeking information about Republican Senate candidates while copiously highlighting the campaign material from their Democratic opponents. This requires an immediate investigation, but thus far Google is remaining mum on the subject and will not even comment on the question.

    I don’t think Jazz intended a pun there, as he doesn’t reference Greenfield’s post.
    RTWT — the stats are infuriating.
    Don’t use Google for your internet searches.

    *It’s a Democrat variant of a coup d’état.
    https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/10/24/the-sins-of-the-father-january-6th-and-the-reffitt-case/#comment-2649720

  18. When they talk about “saving democracy”, it is enlightening to consider what the Left defines that as:

    > All must be able to participate in voting, regardless of citizenship or criminal record.

    > None can be “inconvenienced” by safeguards that would assure ballot integrity.

    > Once the vote is taken, all must submit to the “collective will” as The One True Way – it has been decided!

    What is forgotten in all that, is this:

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.– That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

    Not just any powers that sound good to us, but just powers … powers that do not work against the reason government is instituted: to secure these rights.

    If our rights are unalienable, they are beyond the reach of a majority vote … let alone the vote of a majority influenced, manipulated by, and in submission to an elite few who Know Better™, that see the rest of us as “infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals” as C. S. Lewis described the viewpoint of the moral busybody.

    And if our rights our unalienable, they are to be limited or restricted ONLY when their exercise poses a clear, present and significant threat to the unalienable rights of others,

    Democracy is only a tool, and a tool that can be misused.

    Liberty is the objective.

  19. The whole Russia!Russia!Russia! thing started as Clinton’s effort to meddle in the 2016 election, and continued as a deep state coup against Trump (and against American voters).

    Everyone who pushed Russia!Russia!Russia! in media, government or tech was, at minimum, an election denier. But really, much worse.

  20. Hillary is insatiably greedy and an outrageous liar. That half of the US believes her, voted for her, says to me the Union is lost and we should go our separate ways.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑