Miss Constitution Analyzes. . . Day 28 of the Presidential Election Crisis
Miss Constitution asks each of you to focus on your country for the next six weeks and to pay close attention to detail.
The issue we are facing in our country is whether or not a coup d’ etat has been attempted through a fraudulent Presidential election. Miss Constitution asserts that we must have a definitive answer before we move on in the governance of our nation. If we move on without knowing the whole truth of the election, the possibility exists that the nation will have been overtaken by the treasonous, and it will not be possible to recover our Constitutional Republic. The process for challenging the validity of the election is spelled out in the United States Constitution. We are not in a Constitutional crisis because the Founders fully expected that something like this might happen and provided a series of safeguards that they expected could be completed before a new President is sworn into office. Miss Constitution thinks three things are required before anyone is certified as President-elect:
- An evidentiary hearing in an appropriate Court of Law
- An impartial investigation of facts surrounding the election by the Department of Justice on the federal level and equivalent investigations by state authorities in contested states
- Confidence by the public that these investigations were properly handled and that no facts that might embarrass or impugn character are left out of the public domain.
What is considered evidence? Evidence is “that probative material, legally received, by which the tribunal may be lawfully persuaded of the truth or falsity of a fact in issue.” Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition. The “burden of proof”, in other words the level of persuasion, is by a preponderance of the evidence in the case of election fraud. In a criminal case the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a higher standard because an individual’s loss of freedom is at stake. So, the plaintiffs in the case of election fraud must convince the Court that their facts are true by a preponderance of the evidence. There are two types of evidence, direct and circumstantial, and either or both are valid. The Court will decide who has the burden of going forward, in other words does the State have to show that if there was fraud it did not change the election results or does the accuser have to show that there was an amount of fraud so large as to invalidate the election? This will be important if an evidentiary hearing is held.
Miss Constitution wants to remind you that Presidential elections are really State elections with a Presidential component. Each State is different and has different voting mechanisms. The United States Constitution places the authority for these elections in the hands of State Legislatures, some of whom have transferred this authority to executive officers like the Secretary of State or the Governor. Regardless of the mechanisms, the vote for President must be by eligible voters, domiciled in their State of residence, and registered to vote. Proof is required and that proof is generally monitored by any Parties to the election. The issue now is whether an evidentiary hearing on admissible evidence will be held on allegations of election fraud before power is transferred or retained. There is no President-elect at this time there is only an apparent President-elect. There is no Office of President-elect.
If, unfortunately, there was deliberate fraud in the Presidential election that rises to the treasonous, the treasonous will do everything in their power to obfuscate that fact. Accusations will be called “baseless”, “stupid”, “without evidence”, “proof of insanity”, “a reverse coup d’ etat”, and so forth. Citizens will be asked to move on, to let go, to get over it. Christmas with its commercial aspects will take center stage. Football will take center stage. New Year’s will take center stage. Normalcy will be longed for and freedom from forced lockdowns will be sought. Once lost, however, the Republic cannot be revived. We need to know the truth and the only way we can know the truth is if evidence is produced and challenged and ruled upon in a Court of Law.
The ultimate question is, what will the Supreme Court of the United States do if these issues are not tested in a Court of Law? Miss Constitution does not think the public will tolerate anything less than assurance that our Constitutional Republic still exists and that an honest vote was held, no matter how many diversionary tactics are tried. She asks that you pay close attention in the next six weeks.
