Much of Twitter is misunderstanding Bruce Castor’s speech at Trump’s impeachment trial because much of Twitter is absolutely NOT Bruce Castor’s audience.

This man is on it. He knows he only needs to keep *over 1/3 with him. Then more so, he needs the American nation on his side.

Honestly, Twitter misunderstanding what Bruce Castor is doing right now is like Twitter misunderstanding how Brexit & Trump won back then

“Why fear the people who were smart enough to pick you?” (*Listen*)
And yes, ditto for David Schoen. He knows who his audience is.

And he’s on target.
Two different audiences
1) Castor: public opinion
2) Schoen: the law
Oooooh, he held up the Red book. OUCH 😖😆
Schoen has landed multiple legal blows.
Schoen clearly came in after playing “Mama said knock you out” on loop
Schoen just knocked out Apollo Creed in Rocky II
Rasking just waived his 30 mins right to rebuttal to all that? Wow.
Early indicator:
56-44 voted to proceed.

So 44 voted not to proceed, which is more than 1/3 objectors needed to acquit, as an indicator.

More from Maajid أبو عمّار

Texas is disputing US election results in 4 swing states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin & Georgia

Under Article III, US Supreme Court settles disputes between 2 or more states

Due to safe harbour, Trump’s remaining legal routes are narrow after

Brief analysis:
The Texas case is about the contested swing states’ executive & judicial branches VS their legislatures, on mail-in ballot rules

On Tuesday before safe harbour, SCOTUS rejected a similar lawsuit brought by Republican Rep. Mike Kelly

But a 3rd & eerily similar case has been with Justice Alito (as circuit judge for PA) & the Supreme Court since before the election. It’s about this very same executive & judiciary VS legislature dispute. That case, PA Republican Party vs Boockvar, may be decided in time, or not


The below is also worth noting:


There is also the issue of ‘safe harbour’ being said to only be “procedural”. This view rests on a reading of the Bush v Gore Supreme Court ruling.
Analysis

The US Supreme Court has ducked hearing the case of Trump, Texas & 17 other states, on a procedural issue

They did not comment on any recent newsworthy fraud allegations

Trump still refuses to concede, so what are his remaining long shot legal routes?

Read my THREAD:


1) There is still this dormant PA Republican Party vs Boockvar US Supreme Court case, but it may remain dormant, since the Court already indicated yesterday that it (understandably?) simply doesn’t want the serious heat on this one


2) Mon Dec 14th Electoral College need to cast their votes alongside their states’ choice (the crux of the dispute)

Matters escalate if:
i) the Electoral College is tied

ii) “faithless” electors don’t vote for their state candidate

Note: in the key swing states, this is legal


OR:

iii) the House rejects some Electoral College votes, resulting in neither candidate receiving a majority.

3) If the above long shot occurs (aren’t we already in unprecedented times?) what happens next?

Under the 12th Amendment, when the House meets Jan 6th they can refuse to approve the Electoral College votes. They instead vote on a 1 vote per 1 state basis

Trump wins that vote.

More from Politics

1/ Imagine that as soon as the referendum result the EU announced that it was looking forward to the end of free movement of UK citizens in the EU


2/ Imagine if the EU said finally all those retired Brits in the EU27 could go home

3/ Imagine if the EU said finally all those Brits in the EU could stop driving down wages, taking jobs and stop sending benefits back to the UK

4/ Imagine if the EU said it was looking to use UK citizens as “bargaining chips” to get a better trade deal

5/ Imagine if the EU told UK citizens in the EU27 that they could no longer rely on established legal rights and they would have to apply for a new status which they have to pay for for less rights
"3 million people are estimated not to have official photo ID, with ethnic minorities more at risk". They will "have to contact their council to confirm their ID if they want to vote"

This is shameful legislation, that does nothing to tackle the problems with UK elections.THREAD


There is no evidence in-person voter fraud is a problem, and it wd be near-impossible to organise on an effective scale. Campaign finance violations, digital disinformation & manipulation of postal voting are bigger issues, but these are crimes of the powerful, not the powerless.

In a democracy, anything that makes it harder to vote - in particular, anything that disadvantages one group of voters - should face an extremely high bar. Compulsory voter ID takes a hammer to 3 million legitimate voters (disproportionately poor & BAME) to crack an imaginary nut

If the government is concerned about the purity of elections, it should reflect on its own conduct. In 2019 it circulated doctored news footage of an opponent, disguised its twitter feed as a fake fact-checking site, and ran adverts so dishonest that even Facebook took them down.

Britain's electoral law largely predates the internet. There is little serious regulation of online campaigning or the cash that pays for it. That allows unscrupulous campaigners to ignore much of the legal framework erected since the C19th to guard against electoral misconduct.

You May Also Like