by naturalborncitizen, ©2021

(Jan. 7, 2021) — Here’s the punchline up front: Biden can be ousted from Office by a Writ of Quo Warranto as determined by a civil jury. This is not a fairy-tale. This is not a “Hail Mary.” This is the proper legal procedure our government provides for erroneous or fraudulent elections. And President Trump will have a much better chance of succeeding if he starts the process before Biden is inaugurated. Spread this post everywhere fast. This action needs to be filed yesterday.

If the State Legislatures moved faster in early November, they could have appointed electors then. Biden would have run to SCOTUS and lost. That didn’t happen, but the Legislatures are moving fast now. Pence could have bought them more time. But Pence has failed us. All he had to do is kick it back to the Legislatures for a few days. Instead he gaslighted America by indicating that President Trump asked him to “unilaterally” override the Constitution. No he didn’t. He asked Pence to obey the Constitution over a statute.

The unconstitutional Electoral Count Act of 1887 is virtually unreadable. Nobody understands it. Nobody can say if it’s even a statute or a legislative rule. (Don’t believe me? Read this.) But we certainly know that it does not override the Constitution, which grants the Legislatures plenary authority over who gets the electors. So why didn’t Pence let Biden run to SCOTUS for help? Because Pence is a sad creature of politics. He is as deep state entrenched as you can possibly get. Just ask General Flynn. I haven’t trusted Pence since he threw Flynn to the wolves.

It’s truly a blessing that state legislatures are coming around to see the actual fraud in their states, and it’s not too late to right the ship. President Trump can institute a statutory Writ of Quo Warranto. This is a rarely tested federal statute that gives Trump a genuine chance for a jury to decide whether the election was stolen.

THE FEDERAL QUO WARRANTO STATUTE

Chapter 35 from The Code of the District of Columbia is entitled “Quo Warranto”. § 16–3501 states:

“A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.”

The President is a public officer of the United States. If the President obtained the office by fraudulent means, or by mistake in the electing process then he unlawfully holds the office, and a Writ of Quo Warranto may be issued to oust him from that office.

§ 16-3502 of the Quo Warranto statute states that the proceeding may be instituted by the Attorney General or the U.S. Attorney without leave of the District Court. That means if Trump moves fast – before Biden puts a new AG in – the current AG or U.S. Attorney may bring the action without seeking a Judge’s permission. If Attorney General Rosen and U.S. Attorney Sherwin are unwilling to bring the case, then Trump can petition for leave of the District Court on his own relation under § 16-3503. If the District Court allows Trump to bring it, any attorney can act in the name of the United States:

§ 16-3541: When a quo warranto proceeding is against a person for usurping an office, on the relation of a person claiming the same office, the relator shall set forth in his petition the facts upon which he claims to be entitled to the office.

If the facts are sufficient, then comes a trial and judgment:

§ 16-3544: Issues of fact shall be tried by a jury if either party requests it. Otherwise they shall be determined by the court.

§ 16-3545: Where a defendant in a quo warranto proceeding is found by the jury to have usurped, intruded into, or unlawfully held or exercised an office or franchise, the verdict shall be that he is guilty of the act or acts in question, and judgment shall be rendered that he be ousted and excluded therefrom and that the relator recover his costs.

And that, America, is how it’s done. This is now the only way forward. And Trump needs to bring two counts in order to get the process started immediately. If he waits until Biden is sworn in, his chances of the new AG, or U.S. Attorney, bringing the action go way down. Rosen and Sherwin might not do it either, but we know for sure Biden’s men won’t. Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats are a real party. They NEVER break ranks the way Pence did yesterday. The District Court Judge will have to sit in judgment of the petition’s evidence before it goes to a jury, unless the AG or U.S. Attorney institutes the case. If the Judge punts, he could get overturned on appeal, but it would be much better not to bother with judicial approval.

Biden is not President yet. But he is “President-Elect”. § 16-3501 applies to “a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States“. According to the Presidential Transition Act, the President-Elect is entitled to a massive monetary budget to prepare for taking office, and that my friends makes his status a government franchise. This is why the action can be instituted immediately against Biden regarding his status as President-Elect. Trump can add another count to the action, challenging for the actual Office of President, only after Biden is sworn in as president.

STANDING

The case will be styled, United States v. Joe Biden, and we get a jury trial. If Trump has to pray leave of the District Court to file, and the Judge refuses, he can appeal – with guaranteed standing – to the DC Circuit, and then to SCOTUS. Standing is directly granted by the statute.

In a follow up post, I will do a deep dive on various Quo Warranto cases, but trust me on this one – standing is granted in the statute. § 16-3503 states: “[T]he interested person may apply to the court by certified petition for leave to have the writ issued.” The case law is quite clear that an “interested person” is the person who would hold the disputed office, but for the unlawful election of the other party. This means that, while every citizen is interested in who is President, we don’t have standing. But Trump does, because his interest is in holding the office. You can take that one to the bank, folks. Trump is the only person who has standing.


Read the rest here.

Looking for all of your news in one place?  Try Whatfinger, your one-stop aggregator of news, opinion and everything else.

Join the Conversation

5 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Well written, but I do not believe this will work as to the President or Vice-President since the Constitution sets Impeachment and Conviction as the sole remedy given for high crimes and misdemeanors.

    A statute cannot change or modify the Constitution, unless the explicit wording in the Constitution authorizes Congress to make such law. That authority has not been given, so this method has no utility.

    1. Does the Impeachment process really apply here? The article states that T should institute this action before leaving office. Biden isn’t sworn in yet so he didn’t commit high crimes and misdemeanors in that sense , at least not alone. There are certainly others to be charged. Biden did know however about the fraud as he stated it in public when he said they have biggest organization for vote fraud to win his election. We can not let him take or stay in office.

    2. “… the Constitution sets Impeachment and Conviction as the sole remedy given for high crimes and misdemeanors.”

      from the article, re Writ of Quo Warranto: “This is the proper legal procedure our government provides for erroneous or fraudulent elections.” So, assert ‘error’ and not ‘fraud’, thereby taking high crimes and misdemeanors ‘off the table’. Proceed under the argument for an ‘erroneous election’.