The Corsi Remedy

In his new book and in recent interviews, Jerome Corsi, Ph.D. is touting a legal theory of how Trump can quickly vanquish his political enemies who are attempting to steal this election. It could very well be a neat, viable solution for the president, and one which is currently available to him at the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).

According to Dr. Corsi, electoral fraud and voting irregularities must  first be proven in a trial court before they can be appealed up the chain to the SCOTUS. As we all know, a trial proceeds slowly in a federal district court, according to the rules of civil/criminal procedure. These include the initial pleading stage, followed by motions to dismiss, then a long discovery phase, voir dire to empanel a jury, etc. It may take many months, perhaps even a year or more until there is a final jury verdict. And then there is the appeal to the federal circuit court of appeals. Again, that too has a long time frame, allowing for briefs to be prepared and hearings scheduled. Only then is the case or controversy ripe for review by the SCOTUS as it is is an appeals court that does not determine issues of fact.

There are ways to expedite an urgent legal matter. However, the timeline between election day and the meeting to choosing electors to the electoral college is just over one month, hardly time for a typical court challenge and appeal.

But Dr. Corsi states that procedural challenges that violate the election of the president as set forth in Article 2, Sec. 1 of the U.S. Constitution can be immediately submitted to the SCOTUS by writ of certiorari. And given the gravity and urgency of the matter, the SCOTUS is almost certain to accept the case.

In fact, the Supreme Court did accept just such a constitutional challenge in Gore v. Bush. There, the justices ruled that because Florida had no procedure for recounting all the votes before the hard stop date when the electors are chosen (and would soon after meet), then the recount was to stop right away and whoever had the most votes tallied at that moment would win. Bush had more votes at that exact moment, so Bush won. 

This, says Dr. Corsi, is the precedent affording the Trump team their entre to the SCOTUS. Moreover, according to Dr. Corsi's reading of the U.S. Constitution, under Article 2, Sec. 1 only a state legislature can alter voting procedures which has to be done by their passing a law to permit that to happen. Thus, in the case of offering voters mail-in ballots and extending the time lines beyond the actual election day for votes to be counted (and other last minute changes implemented among various states in the 2020 presidential election) each and every one of these changes in procedure would need to be established in law before they could be considered valid.

Dr. Corsi says that he has researched whether any of the state legislatures in the swing states passed any laws that changed the voting procedures for the 2020 election. He found none. Therefore, according to his legal reckoning, none of these mail-in ballots, and especially the ones received after November 3, were valid. They and all ballots that are non-conforming to the norms of voting procedure in a presidential race—as already established by each state legislature—must all be discarded as illegitimate.

Thus, voting and electoral fraud, although it exists on a massive scale, need not be proven at trial before the electoral college comes into play in order for the Trump to win. All the same, the many cases already filed should work their way through the courts as a matter of belatedly curing the harm that was done to our electoral process.

And so to recap, under the US Constitution, Article 2, Sec. 1, only a state legislature—not governors, not boards of elections, not secretaries of state, and not the courts have the power to mandate changes to electoral procedure involving presidential races. As no such legislative action was undertaken in any of the swing states (and most likely in other states) all of the free and easy changes to the voting procedure, once challenged, must be rejected, albeit after-the-fact. 

Once the mail-in ballots (and other obviously illegal ballots) are eliminated, Corsi is certain that Trump wins, as it appears that the number of excluded mail-in ballots reduces the vote count so that votes for Trump far exceed the votes for Biden. Trump wins in the fair and square landslide that actually did occur, instead of what has purported to have occurred in the Democrats’ fantasy world.

Dr. Corsi predicts that under the Gore v. Bush precedent the SCOTUS should accept jurisdiction, accept certiorari, and accept this proposed legal argument, should Trump’s legal team make it. 

In other words, if state procedure falls short and impinges on the constitutional standards for electing a president, then SCOTUS has jurisdiction and the power to declare that constitutionally addled procedure invalid. That is the precedent.

And if Jerome Corsi is correct, then the dim-witted Democrats and their “lawfare” sure don’t know their U.S. Constitution. This quick “Trumpian fix” was right in front of them the whole time. This means they committed all of this vote and election fraud for naught! They and their lawyers were too ignorant to have gone to the state legislatures long before the election to at least seek for themselves a legal foundation for their intended crimes.

As viewed under this constitutional lens, these criminal socialist-globalists traitors and their "lawfare" legal advisors appear to be anything but bright!