Is a Trump Win Still in the Cards?
By Paul Dowling
“All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” – Sun Tzu, in The Art of War.
Where Is Bill Barr?
As Democrats busy themselves with their attempt at stealing a presidential election, everyone seems unhappy that Bill Barr appears to be missing in action. But is he, really? Or is Barr just occupied with matters behind the scenes that he would rather not reveal at this juncture in time? President Trump, who has taken philosopher-warrior Sun Tzu’s advice more than once, may have told Barr not to give the game away by seeming too strong. Let the Democrats feel totally immune for a while, and they will certainly show their hand to a much greater extent than they have already.
Trump Loves the Constitution
President Trump knows the Constitution and likes to hear from his advisors about its textual meaning’s ins and outs. Article II, Section 1, of the US Constitution says this: “Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.” In other words, nothing in the text of the Constitution requires a popular vote to determine which party’s electors should be chosen; Trump knows this.
The Colorado Difference
The State of Colorado was admitted to the Union in 1876. According to the Colorado Virtual Library, “Because Colorado became a state in August, and election day occurred in November, the new state did not have time to organize a Presidential election, so the Colorado legislature selected the state’s electors. The Republicans controlled the Legislature at the time – so Colorado’s three electoral votes went to the Republicans. In one of the United States’ closest presidential elections, Rutherford B. Hayes won the race – but by only one electoral vote.” Without Colorado, Hayes would have lost the election by two votes. This is the last time that state-appointed electors without first certifying a popular vote of its citizenry, but in so doing, the State of Colorado made a significant difference in the life of the American Republic.
An Interesting Possibility
If it turns out that the Democrats’ attempted theft of several state presidential elections cannot be righted by some means that will sufficiently correct the ballot count, it would be possible, in theory, for the affected states to go around the results of a corrupt popular election by directing their Republican electors to vote for Donald Trump and Mike Pence. Is it possible that Attorney General Bill Barr, who has been quiet in the early days of the Democrats’ balloting scandal, has been working behind the scenes to contact legislative leaders in states whose cheating is most obvious, to remind them of their legal prerogatives? It is interesting to note that, in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona, the Republicans enjoy bicameral control of the legislatures. And, Constitutionally-speaking, each state’s legislature appoints its presidential electors without any involvement from the state’s chief executive.
The case might be put to the legislative leaders of these states that, if the vote count proves too corrupt to be righted, justice can prevail in the form of a state legislature’s directing its electors to vote for the candidate who should have rightfully won at the polls. The president was headed to victory, according to Dave Hodges, in the five states (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Georgia) that “suddenly stopped [counting ballots] without any explanation. In four of the five states, the President held such a commanding lead that the odds defied a Biden victory without cheating.”
The Threat of Amy Coney Barrett
At this writing, the president seems headed to victory in Arizona, and it would also appear that Wisconsin might be about to undo its chicanery and flip back to Trump. But, in any case, where such electoral mischief is not adequately corrected, some other action will inevitably be required to right the wrong. State legislators – be they Democrat or Republican – hate to be told what to do by federal courts; and, with Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court, the Democrats may wish to avoid a court hearing, rather than face the Constitutionalist ire of the newly constituted majority of the High Court. So it should come as no surprise, should recounts fail to bring fair results, if one or more legislatures choose to appoint presidential electors without regard to what a corrupt vote tally might recommend.