That lying scumbag...
Which one you ask? I forgot his name, but a congressman-elect. Again which one? The one from N.Y. (I think). But, which one? The one in news, regarding his mother dying on 9-11, and again a few years back. George Santos (googled) might be his name, but does anyone really know?
In any case, there is a bill supposedly being introduced to make lying a crime... for a politician. One can only imagine how jammed up the courts would be, with something like that. Frankly, I would wonder about a politician's integrity, that proposed such a thing. Classic misdirection, imho.
In any case, he was duly elected, so stop asking for do overs. You sound like Trump, which is not a good thing, imho.
Yes, there may be some skullduggery around how he obtained his wealth, but once again... tread lightly. There are a lot of politicians seemingly getting rich on small salaries.
An ethics investigation is warranted, but would seem to require investigators with ethics.
One of those other lying scumbags...
I won't draw this out... Trump. There are many items on this list. After years of proclaiming Trump is a liar, the media and certain politicians acted surprised, that his tax returns did not match his public pronouncements. That was the only proof of his lying? Did he actually lie on his income tax returns? That is up for debate, discussion, whatever.
Then we have "authoritative" people saying that Trump can't run in 2024, because of charges of insurrection. Due process and they know it. That insurrection charge has to be litigated in court. I would expect the Justice Department to take it under their advisement, then slow walk it into early 2024, then claim it would be improper to consider it in an election year.
That's fancy talk for keeping Trump in the public eye. Crazy! Not really, as he can't win in 2024. He can divide the conservative base and ensure a democratic landslide. That's really what it is all about. Even if the republicans wake up to this scenario... they are still left with Trump in the news, as it would be a flight of fancy to think Trump, would bow out gracefully.
A show trial will not happen, as the potential for a hung jury would loom large. Such an action would have massive implications for the republic, imho.
Of course, there is the possibility that all the conspiracy theories are proven as being true, but it would require quite a conspiracy to pull that off.
Electoral College...
It is old, antiquated, no longer necessary, etc. Except it will continue to be around for a very long time. The closest threat, was the National Popular Vote attempt. Last I heard is was stuck at 195 and would require additional states with a combined 75 electoral votes... to push it over the finish line. After this last census, is 195 still the current number, or has it slipped a bit?
Of course, there is a constitutional amendment, which could be proposed. It would require 2/3's of each chamber in congress and then... 3/4's of the state legislatures must ratify the amendment. It has been nearly 31 years, since an amendment was ratified (27th) and it was a fluke... considering it was one of the original amendments proposed, back during the bill of rights days.
Prior to that, it was the 26th, or "right to vote" lowering the age to 18. That was over 51 years ago.
If you are expecting an amendment or popular vote movement... you are in for a long wait.
The other option is if 3/4's of the states request a constitutional convention. Be very careful, as it was a constitutional convention called to remedy flaws in the Articles of Confederation... which led to an all new and current constitution.
There is already disagreement as to whether this has happened. Apparently, some word differences in the wording of various state convention requests have held it at bay. As it stands right now... 19 states have passed the muster and another 22 are "thinking" about it. TPTB, do not want a constitutional convention, because everything is up for grabs, AND the potential for breaking apart the republic... is very real.
Article VII
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.
If you wanted to join, you had to ratify. Think about it.
Makes for great fodder to pander to the public about the need for electoral reform in defense of democracy, BUT... those folks in Philadelphia, so long ago, nearly failed to create the current constitution... due to distrust of apportionment of Representatives. The small states were finding it unacceptable.
Then along came the Connecticut Compromise, which then lead to 2 senators per state and the electoral college for Presidential elections, which broke the deadlock. Something about "tyranny of the majority."
It ain't happening!
