Civil Discourse Now

Where the far left and far right overlap for fun and enlightenment

Dr King: w/o Right to Vote, I do not possess myself; SCOTUS case 16-1464.

   In Memphis on 4/3/68, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King said, in his last speech: “Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right.”  On 5/17/57 at the Lincoln Memorial, Dr. King said, “So long as I do not firmly and irrevocably possess the right to vote I do not possess myself.”
   I quote Dr. King because his life’s work for civil rights was inextricably tied with the right to vote.
   The right to vote is the foundation for all of our rights. The most basic rights are illusory if the right to vote undermined. Wesbury v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 17 (1964). The right to vote includes the right to have one’s vote counted. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. at 561. 
   On 11/8/2016, the right to vote for President of the United States was denied every voter, except the few who knew Trump was “picked” by Russia’s dictator, Vladimir Putin, and wanted a Russian puppet in the Oval Office.
   Today, the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”) has set for conference Bailey et al. v. U.S., docket 16-1464, which seeks (1) independent investigation of the 2016 election and, (2) if Trump/GOP-Russia collusion affected the election results, an order the election be declared void ab initio.
   One question: why have an investigation when Special Counsel (“SC”) Robert Mueller is at work to investigate, thoroughly, Russian interference?
   First, SC’s office is in the Executive branch. Only the Attorney General (“AG”)can fire SC. The AG recused himself from the Russia investigation, thus Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein is the person whom Trump can order to fire SC Mueller if SC’s gets too close to home. Trump can fire Mr. Rosenstein if the DAG refuses to fire SC Mueller, and keep firing people down the line until someone carries out Trump’s order. The “Saturday Night Massacre” of Watergate had a similar flow chart, but under different statute. Eventually someone fired Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox for President Nixon.
   Any new investigative effort would lose time as it was created and brought up to speed.
   Second, if SC Mueller finds a “smoking gun” (for hypothetical example, Trump on tape to Putin, “You gave me an Electoral College victory, you’re my boss.” Special Counsel can recommend prosecution. It appears a sitting President cannot be charged. Impeachment is in the hands of Congress.
  In the Bailey case, the Court can order an independent investigation. A Special Master would act within the Judical branch, independent from the Executive. The Court then could order the election results void.
   Disclosure: I am counsel of record for the twelve (12) Petitioners in Bailey. 
   The effort in Bailey et al v U.S. is not “partisan” for either party.  The effort is to take control of the Oval Office back from a hostile foreign power—Russia.
   If you agree that, at the very least an independent investigation be conducted, please share this blog. Also, you can visit Revote2017.net.

Views: 54

Comment

You need to be a member of Civil Discourse Now to add comments!

Join Civil Discourse Now

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2017   Created by Mark Small.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Offline

Live Video

My Great Web page