“Live,” each morning, in a short video I discuss, and take questions about, Bailey v U.S., Supreme Court docket # 16-1464.. Yesterday, a person thought the video, and the header chosen for it—“Get off your butts”—were rude.
In the video I said I’d be glad to debate any “pundit” or Con Law scholar who has opined Petition in Bailey has no merit. I asked each person who believes, at minimum, an independent investigation be conducted, to get off her or his butt and send the same message to three other people. We need the Justices of the Court to know the people want the Court to hear the case.
To the person who complained I was rude (and she has supported our effort), I am sorry, but no mainstream media have given air time to the only legal action that seeks an independent investigation of the election and and order to void it. The case is set for conference on September 25, 2017, and needs public attention and support as a clear statement that the Justices should set the case for hearing. The 2016 campaign ended in a Russian “flip” of a relatively few votes so the LOSER of the popular vote could claim an illegal “win” in the Electoral College.
In the 2016 campaign, the GOP candidate frequently used George Carlin’s “seven words” to give voice to the anger some feel about where America is—btw, still on the North American continent—after years of an African-American in the Oval Office. Most of the anger is from whom? I think Charlottesville was a glimpse. Any Trump rally was a full-frontal.
Via Trump’s carnival sideshow, major media sold ads. Chris Mathews is culpable. More than once a Trump had free air time when a rally aired without interruption or commentary on “Hard Ball.” We have received air time from alternative media—Mike Honig, Grant Stern, and today on Sirius Radio. Dr. Wilmer Leon has graciously invited me and Kirstin Elaine Martin of Revote2017 dot net to discuss the case at noon on his show.
Maybe I was rude—I believe I was charitable to call one constitutional “scholar” a “putz”—when I issued a challenge to debate. Until now I have been polite: and no one from the major media—the networks, etc.—has paid us any heed.
Really? A SCOTUS case cites treason and invasion as reasons to void an election for Prez and receives no mention? Vulgarity maybe took second place to treason as a hallmark of the 2016 campaign. If I have to be rude to get people’s attention to look at the case, then I shall be rude.
I want to “call out” more people. People on the mainstream “left” have given the same amount of air time to this case as any other part of mainstream media. Michael Moore, Amy Goodman, Bill Maher, Samantha Bee, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow—I am a longtime fan. Why is there no mention of this case from any of you? Alec Baldwin—fictional Prez—not one line?
Disclosure: I am counsel of record for the Petitioners in Bailey. If you agree the case at least should be heard—this may seem rude, sorry—get off your butt! Go to the Revote 2017 dot net website and see where to write. OR? Call, write, e-mail—whatever—Michael, Amy, Bill, Samantha, Keith, Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Lawrence O’Donnell, Alec anyone else—and tell them about this case.
If enough people get out this message, someone will give it attention. The major media might not care about the Constitution, but they care about sales of dog food a/k/a ad time. Enough cards/e-mails/calls = controversy. Controversy gets people to buy dog food—or at least gets enough people to flip the Electoral College.