Georgia On Our Minds

We’re back from the holiday break and have Georgia on our minds. As such we welcome Erick Erickson, host of “Atlanta’s Evening News” on WSB AM/FM, and he joins to us to analyze “suitcase-gate” and give us his take on January’s double US Senate election in the Peach State. (Erick’s podcast is available right here on Ricochet.)

Then we talk to old friend Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Professor of Medicine at Stanford University. As the Covid-19 vaccination comes to market, what’s the best way to do it? Who gets priority and who shouldn’t be bothered?

Eustace C. Scrubb walks away with the coveted Lileks Member Post of the Week for his essay on the passing of David Prowse, one half of the man behind Darth Vader.

Music from this week’s episode: The Devil Went Down to Georgia by Charlie Daniels.

 

Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

Please Support Our Sponsors!

Caucus Room

Jordan Harbinger Show

Tommy John

Now become a Ricochet member for only $5.00 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

There are 216 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Blue Yeti Admin
    Blue Yeti
    @BlueYeti

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    I think the Wisconsin Board of Elections did tweak some things. Not sure.

    They did and then the SCOTUS over-ruled them. The system worked. Still waiting for examples where it didn’t. 

    • #181
  2. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    I also view this demand for “more time” with respect to the electoral college vote as similar to the Democrats’ demand for “more time” to investigate Brett Kavanaugh.  

    I think they raked Kavanaugh over the coals for way too long.  I also think that the losing candidate shouldn’t be allowed to hold America hostage just because he got his feelings hurt.

    • #182
  3. Blue Yeti Admin
    Blue Yeti
    @BlueYeti

    kedavis (View Comment):I think an argument can be easily made that a Dec 14 “deadline” is only assuming a clean process otherwise. If the process is not clean, that doesn’t mean that cheating succeeds just Because Deadline. If you like, I would be all in favor of locking up those responsible for not properly meeting the deadline: governors, state Supreme Court justices, whoever. But the idea of “Deadlines Uber Alles” is just silly. If that’s all that matters, then the state governors could just write down whatever electoral vote they like and send it over on Dec 13, and nobody could do anything about it. Because Deadline.

    Except there have been several dozen court cases and 99% of them have failed. Maybe if the win-loss record had at least a few W’s in it, we’d be talking about extending deadlines. Or are we just supposed to extended deadlines that have been in place for years and years just because some people continue to insist that “massive fraud” has occurred even though they have not been able to convince multiple courts, Congress, most state legislatures, and the majority of the American public of it in the past 35 days?

    Be honest: if the shoe were on the other foot and Democrats were making the same arguments with the same amount of evidence and court wins, would you be in favor of extending these deadlines? Of course you wouldn’t.

    • #183
  4. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    @blueyeti

    I’d be interested in what Richard Epstein or John Yoo or Andrew McCarthy thinks of the Safe Harbor deadline, which is tomorrow.  

    Do they see that date as when it’s all over?  Or would they still think that some significant changes could conceivably be made to the electoral college counts for Biden and Trump between December 8 and December 14?  

    Do they think that any of the electors will be challenged on January 6, 2021?  In January 2005 the Ohio electors were challenged by Senator Barbara Boxer and several US House members.  

    • #184
  5. Blue Yeti Admin
    Blue Yeti
    @BlueYeti

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    @blueyeti,

    I’d be interested in what Richard Epstein or John Yoo or Andrew McCarthy thinks of the Safe Harbor deadline, which is tomorrow.

    Do they see that date as when it’s all over? Or would they still think that some significant changes could conceivably be made to the electoral college counts for Biden and Trump between December 8 and December 14?

    Do they think that any of the electors will be challenged on January 6, 2021? In January 2005 the Ohio electors were challenged by Senator Barbara Boxer and several US House members.

    We’re recording a Law Talk with Epstein & Yoo tomorrow and I will put this on the rundown. 

    • #185
  6. Charlotte Member
    Charlotte
    @Charlotte

    So what’s the story on The Caucus Room, anyway? Is it basically Ricochet but with a more activist bent? Who founded it/operates it? Is it associated with Parler? Are they advertising here in order to poach members?

    • #186
  7. Blue Yeti Admin
    Blue Yeti
    @BlueYeti

    Charlotte (View Comment):

    So what’s the story on The Caucus Room, anyway? Is it basically Ricochet but with a more activist bent? Who founded it/operates it? Is it associated with Parler? Are they advertising here in order to poach members?

    We are partnering with Caucus Room to share members and will be giving you access to their site and vice versa. It’s much more of site for political activists than Ricochet as they have tools to help people run for local office, contact their reps in Congress, and promote specific policies and issues. We both think our businesses are complimentary not competitive (their membership is free), and in ’21 you will be seeing a lot more back and forth between us. 

    The site is run out of Colorado and LadyBrain Kelly Maher is one of the people who help run it. 

    • #187
  8. Charlotte Member
    Charlotte
    @Charlotte

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Charlotte (View Comment):

    So what’s the story on The Caucus Room, anyway? Is it basically Ricochet but with a more activist bent? Who founded it/operates it? Is it associated with Parler? Are they advertising here in order to poach members?

    We are partnering with Caucus Room to share members and will be giving you access to their site and vice versa. It’s much more of site for political activists than Ricochet as they have tools to help people run for local office, contact their reps in Congress, and promote specific policies and issues. We both think our businesses are complimentary not competitive (their membership is free), and in ’21 you will be seeing a lot more back and forth between us.

    The site is run out of Colorado and LadyBrain Kelly Maher is one of the people who help run it.

    Good information. Thanks, Yeti.

    • #188
  9. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

     

     

     

    • #189
  10. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    The Trump legal team’s effort to overturn Joe Biden’s win in Pennsylvania has been made denied by the US Supreme Court.

    120820zr_bq7d.pdf (supremecourt.gov)

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120820zr_bq7d.pdf

    You can read the order here.

    The lawsuit was brought by Republican Rep. Mike Kelly, who argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting is unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.

    • #190
  11. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    The Trump legal team’s effort to overturn Joe Biden’s win in Pennsylvania has been made denied by the US Supreme Court.

    120820zr_bq7d.pdf (supremecourt.gov)

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120820zr_bq7d.pdf

    You can read the order here.

    The lawsuit was brought by Republican Rep. Mike Kelly, who argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting is unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.

    Here’s Jenna Ellis’ tweet, about an hour later:

    The Supreme Court only denied emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny cert.

    @MikeKellyPA’s suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.  https://supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html…

    6:24 PM · Dec 8, 2020

     

    In the end, most likely the Court will simply throw up its hands and say that Biden stole the election fair and square.

    Even if they find that hundreds of thousands of votes were cast illegally, there’s no way to prove which candidate benefited (even if we really know it’s Biden).

    • #191
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Taras (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    The Trump legal team’s effort to overturn Joe Biden’s win in Pennsylvania has been made denied by the US Supreme Court.

    120820zr_bq7d.pdf (supremecourt.gov)

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120820zr_bq7d.pdf

    You can read the order here.

    The lawsuit was brought by Republican Rep. Mike Kelly, who argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting is unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.

    Here’s Jenna Ellis’ tweet, about an hour later:

    The Supreme Court only denied emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny cert.

    @MikeKellyPA’s suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. https://supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html…

    6:24 PM · Dec 8, 2020

    In the end, most likely the Court will simply throw up its hands and say that Biden stole the election fair and square.

    Even if they find that hundreds of thousands of votes were cast illegally, there’s no way to prove which candidate benefited (even if we really know it’s Biden).

    Seems like the numbers should show that easily enough.  Even without what I’ve mentioned before, the piles of ballots with I Am Fraudulent written on them, and signed and notarized by the perpetrators.

    • #192
  13. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Taras (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    The Trump legal team’s effort to overturn Joe Biden’s win in Pennsylvania has been made denied by the US Supreme Court.

    120820zr_bq7d.pdf (supremecourt.gov)

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120820zr_bq7d.pdf

    You can read the order here.

    The lawsuit was brought by Republican Rep. Mike Kelly, who argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting is unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.

    Here’s Jenna Ellis’ tweet, about an hour later:

    The Supreme Court only denied emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny cert.

    @MikeKellyPA’s suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. https://supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html…

    6:24 PM · Dec 8, 2020

    In the end, most likely the Court will simply throw up its hands and say that Biden stole the election fair and square.

    Even if they find that hundreds of thousands of votes were cast illegally, there’s no way to prove which candidate benefited (even if we really know it’s Biden).

    Seems like the numbers should show that easily enough. Even without what I’ve mentioned before, the piles of ballots with I Am Fraudulent written on them, and signed and notarized by the perpetrators.

    For example, it’s possible for the Trump people to prove that 130,000 persons voted illegally in Georgia; but they can’t prove whom they voted for.

    The only remedy would be to re-run the election, and judges will avoid doing that even if they have to bend the law into a pretzel.

    • #193
  14. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I heard one of the Breitbart reporters talking about the lack of controls in Georgia. Both Pennsylvania and Georgia should be thrown out by their state legislatures. 

    • #194
  15. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I heard one of the Breitbart reporters talking about the lack of controls in Georgia. Both Pennsylvania and Georgia should be thrown out by their state legislatures.

    The state legislatures don’t have the authority to throw out the results of the election that was already held according to the state laws of the time.  

    However, they can modify state law for future elections.  

    Trump is toast.  Trump can whine and complain.  But he won’t be president on January 21, 2021.  

    • #195
  16. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    The state legislatures don’t have the authority to throw out the results of the election that was already held according to the state laws of the time.

    I don’t think the constitution is written that way, but I’m not going to get into a big argument about it. 

    The controls and equal protection were a joke. 

    • #196
  17. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I heard one of the Breitbart reporters talking about the lack of controls in Georgia. Both Pennsylvania and Georgia should be thrown out by their state legislatures.

    The state legislatures don’t have the authority to throw out the results of the election that was already held according to the state laws of the time.

    However, they can modify state law for future elections.

    Trump is toast. Trump can whine and complain. But he won’t be president on January 21, 2021.

    Isn’t it the point that the elections were not held “according to the state laws of the time”?  

    For example, the assertion is that, in Georgia alone, 130,000 illegal (underage, ineligible, etc) votes were cast.  

    Furthermore, in all of the problematic inner-city voting districts, Republican poll watchers’ legal rights were trampled upon.

    • #197
  18. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    The state legislatures don’t have the authority to throw out the results of the election that was already held according to the state laws of the time.

    I don’t think the constitution is written that way, but I’m not going to get into a big argument about it.

    The controls and equal protection were a joke.

    The left uses “equal protection” all the time to get things they want that it doesn’t really apply to.  We shouldn’t hesitate to ram it down their throats when it actually DOES apply.

    • #198
  19. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    The state legislatures don’t have the authority to throw out the results of the election that was already held according to the state laws of the time.

    I don’t think the constitution is written that way, but I’m not going to get into a big argument about it.

    The controls and equal protection were a joke.

    The left uses “equal protection” all the time to get things they want that it doesn’t really apply to. We shouldn’t hesitate to ram it down their throats when it actually DOES apply.

    Trump’s judicial nominees don’t seem to be playing along with Trump’s plans.

    • #199
  20. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Trump’s judicial nominees don’t seem to be playing along with Trump’s plans.

    You are changing the topic.

    • #200
  21. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Trump’s judicial nominees don’t seem to be playing along with Trump’s plans.

    You are changing the topic.

    Which topic were you talking about?

    • #201
  22. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Which topic were you talking about?

    We are talking about certain state legislatures taking control of their elections, per the Constitution.

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Trump’s judicial nominees don’t seem to be playing along with Trump’s plans.

    I don’t see what this has to do with it.

    • #202
  23. Blue Yeti Admin
    Blue Yeti
    @BlueYeti

    Taras (View Comment):

    Here’s Jenna Ellis’ tweet, about an hour later:

    The Supreme Court only denied emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny cert.

    @MikeKellyPA’s suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. https://supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html…

    6:24 PM · Dec 8, 2020

    In the end, most likely the Court will simply throw up its hands and say that Biden stole the election fair and square.

    Even if they find that hundreds of thousands of votes were cast illegally, there’s no way to prove which candidate benefited (even if we really know it’s Biden).

    Incorrect. Kelly has not applied for cert in his case and further more, there is no case from Kelly pending on the Court’s docket. Predictably, the link in her Tweet links to a blank page.

    And yet, people criticize me when I say Trump’s legal team stinks.

    • #203
  24. Blue Yeti Admin
    Blue Yeti
    @BlueYeti

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Trump’s judicial nominees don’t seem to be playing along with Trump’s plans.

    You are changing the topic.

    No he didn’t. 

    • #204
  25. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Trump’s judicial nominees don’t seem to be playing along with Trump’s plans.

    You are changing the topic.

    No he didn’t.

    I have already explained myself.

    • #205
  26. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Which topic were you talking about?

    We are talking about certain state legislatures taking control of their elections, per the Constitution.

    Here is Article 2, section 1, clauses 2 and 3 of the US Constitution:

    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; but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States shall be appointed an Elector.

    The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

    The US Congress enacted legislation that placed the presidential election on November 3rd.  That is when the electors were chosen.  

    State legislatures can not choose electors on a different date. 

    • #206
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Which topic were you talking about?

    We are talking about certain state legislatures taking control of their elections, per the Constitution.

    Here is Article 2, section 1, clauses 2 and 3 of the US Constitution:

    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; but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States shall be appointed an Elector.

    The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

    The US Congress enacted legislation that placed the presidential election on November 3rd. That is when the electors were chosen.

    State legislatures can not choose electors on a different date.

    If they set it for November 3, that would seem to mean that all absentee and mail-in ballots are illegal.

    • #207
  28. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Taras (View Comment):

    Here’s Jenna Ellis’ tweet, about an hour later:

    The Supreme Court only denied emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny cert.

    @MikeKellyPA’s suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. https://supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html…

    6:24 PM · Dec 8, 2020

    In the end, most likely the Court will simply throw up its hands and say that Biden stole the election fair and square.

    Even if they find that hundreds of thousands of votes were cast illegally, there’s no way to prove which candidate benefited (even if we really know it’s Biden).

    Incorrect. Kelly has not applied for cert in his case and further more, there is no case from Kelly pending on the Court’s docket. Predictably, the link in her Tweet links to a blank page.

    And yet, people criticize me when I say Trump’s legal team stinks.

    I found a nice account here: https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/constitutional-law-attorney-either-doesnt-understand-there-isnt-a-rep-kelly-petition-pending-or-shes-lying/

    According to Rep. Kelly’s lawyer:

    “We did ask that the Court treat our application for writ of injunction as a petition for certiorari, but the Court has declined to do so, so now we need to separately file a petition for certiorari, which we are preparing now and will file ASAP.”

    Apparently Ellis thought the Kelly petition for certiorari had been already filed.

    • #208
  29. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    State legislatures can not choose electors on a different date. 

    I’m not arguing that.

    They can pick whatever electors they want or they can choose to not send any electors.

    • #209
  30. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I think this is what is really happening with the Texas lawsuit. They are trying to raise a great big stink so they can get the left to back off on all of the ballot harvesting and lawfare. 

    https://omny.fm/shows/the-dan-proft-show/december-9-2020

    When the next guest comes on they start talking about it at the end of that segment, too.

    • #210
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.