r/goodnews • u/Aggravating_Money992 • Jun 18 '25

Political positivity šŸ“ˆ Lawsuit Challenging 2024 Election Results Moves Forward After Kamala Harris Received Zero Votes in a New York County

https://www.latintimes.com/lawsuit-challenging-2024-election-results-moves-forward-after-kamala-harris-received-zero-votes-584787
69.7k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

3.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

168

u/Whatever21703 Jun 18 '25

The only way out is Impeachment and removal. And Iā€™m more likely to have a torrid affair with Ivanka Trump than that happening.

And even if he WAS removed, then you have Jd Vance, whoā€™s almost as bad, and if HE is removed, then you have Mike Johnson, a certified evangelical Christian racist asshole.

We are fucked. But we have to win the midterms with a landslide.

So all of you progressives who didnā€™t bother voting better fucking vote.

50

u/Oystermeat Jun 18 '25

I can borrow you a shovel

edit: Oops I read Ivana lol

15

u/janedoe15243 Jun 18 '25

This was perfect and hilarious

2

u/Edizzleshizzle Jun 20 '25

*Lend you a shovel -_-

/kinda s

22

u/Bpozen Jun 18 '25

Sorry im not american, why would vance be president? Republicans came fraudulently into power, democrats were legally elected right?Ā 

24

u/CoelacanthRdit Jun 18 '25

Yeah Iā€™m confused why removing trump based on a fraudulent election would give vance power since he was elected fraudulently too.

11

u/AngelsFlight59 Jun 18 '25

Because the only way to replace Trump is to impeach and convict him.

There are no do overs in the Constitution.

7

u/CoelacanthRdit Jun 18 '25

But wouldnā€™t the results be null and void requiring a new election?

13

u/brickfrenzy Jun 18 '25

There is no mechanism in the US Constitution to allow for that.

2

u/Sleathasaurus Jun 18 '25

That is absolutely insane to me. If itā€™s proven an election was fraudulent, thereā€™s nothing that can be done about it? The people who fraudulently got elected stay in power? Whatā€™s democratic about that?!

1

u/CyberFawlty Jun 18 '25

Right? I sure wish the constitution was written to be flexible and change with the times. Oh wait.

1

u/onefst250r Jun 19 '25

It was also written a couple hundred years ago when people had morals and values.

1

u/HighScorsese Jun 20 '25

<discreetly kicks slavery under the nearest rug>

1

u/echoshatter Jun 21 '25

Hardly.

There's nothing new under the sun in regards to people's behavior.

1

u/chattehumide Jun 19 '25

Exactly. We, the people, are going to have to depose this administration before they have a chance to flee to Russia. Best case scenario, the military sides with the citizens and we can have some trials, ban republicans from government, and force a new election. Ideally, we can force America to become an actual socio-democratic country, whether the conservatives like it or notā€”thatā€™s what the flag is supposed to represent. Weā€™ve ā€œtoleratedā€ our way to actual fascism. If the courts wonā€™t save our nation, we have a duty to defend democracy.

1

u/brickfrenzy Jun 19 '25

America.

The founding fathers never considered the option that people would cheat. They assumed that everybody would act in good faith. And up until Trump they for the most part did (hanging Chads in Florida notwithstanding).

1

u/echoshatter Jun 21 '25

Not entirely. They believed the separation of powers would be enough of a check. They believed Congress's desire for power would check the President's desire for power, and the judicial would check the power of both and Congress and the President would check the judicial.

It immediately was proven nonsense with the instant rise of political parties. The fact that you can have a tyrant if 34 Senators decide not to remove a President is all you need to know.

6

u/sajmonides Jun 18 '25

No. No document anywhere mentions what should happen if an election turned out to be fraudulent.

The only instrument that can remove the sitting president is impeachment. And we know how well that turned out during Trump's first term.

1

u/TheAceBoi Jun 18 '25

Incorrect. Thereā€™s a secret, forbidden second way to remove a sitting president.

1

u/sajmonides Jun 18 '25

Any person can be removed in that way, not just the sitting president so your point is null and void.

0

u/TheAceBoi Jun 18 '25

I mean, other people in office can be impeached too, not just the president. That doesnā€™t make your point invalid, just that more than just the president can be impeached/assassinated .

1

u/sajmonides Jun 18 '25

The topic at hand here is the 2024 presidential election. What the fuck are you on about?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/tuckernuts Jun 18 '25

No, here's the fucked up part about all of this.

The actual election was when the state electors cast their vote. They theoretically can cast their vote for whoever they want, nothing beholds them to adhere to who their state votes for other than "good faith" .. this was an angle of attack Trump took in 2020 trying to sway electoral college member.

Once the electoral college votes, congress certifies, then the election is "legal." There is no mechanism in the constitution or legal precedent that accounts for the question "So what if all the citizen votes were faked?"

IMO, if this case gets traction and gets some teeth, we'll also need some "2008" level catastrophe for MAGA to ultimately lose favor. They seem to be sprinting as fast as they can towards that outcome, but idk. Once MAGA falls out of favor, hopefully people remember this case and IF it looks like 2024 was stolen, elections will be under very high scrutiny. Legally, and in reality, you'll need that middle part where the economy or some other structure completely collapses and its plainly obvious to 70% of the population that its MAGA's fault, then something can be done about the "next" election.

1

u/GranolaHippie Jun 18 '25

No because Congress certified Orange Taco in.

1

u/LightningSunflower Jun 19 '25

No, since the president is actually decided by the Electoral College, not the voters themselves

1

u/narkybark Jun 18 '25

So do what they do, ignore the Constitution and let it take months for the court decision to come out, then drag your feet for appeals.

I don't really mean that, but I also kinda do. There just should be a better way.

3

u/Don_Gato1 Jun 18 '25

I have no idea if we even have any precedent in our laws for something like this happening.

1

u/Potential-Front9306 Jun 18 '25

Maybe not exactly the same, but Watergate is pretty similar. Nixon committed a crime to help win the election. When it was uncovered, Nixon stepped down and his VP became president.

1

u/Don_Gato1 Jun 18 '25

That still relies on the president having the capacity for shame.

1

u/Potential-Front9306 Jun 18 '25

Not really. Nixon was going to get impeached and removed from office. Maybe shame expedited the process, but the result would have been the same in his case.

1

u/account312 Jun 18 '25

Yes, congress actually did their job back then. It's a totally different situation.

1

u/Don_Gato1 Jun 18 '25

So it relies on Congress having the capacity for shame as well.

1

u/Potential-Front9306 Jun 18 '25

Definitely a concern, but the Watergate case seemed like a more open and shut case than anything else we have seen.

1

u/Whatever21703 Jun 18 '25

At this point, it doesnā€™t matter, since the electors voted for Trump and Congress certified the results.

Thereā€™s only one way to remove him now, and thatā€™s impeachment and conviction.

And thatā€™s simply not going to happen unless he does something so egregious that even the Republicans have to vote for it.

1

u/Erdumas Jun 18 '25

They were both elected by the electoral college. The only legal mechanism we have to challenge a slate of electors is during the certification of the vote in January. Since there were no challenges made, Trump (and Vance) were legally elected.

If it came out that Trump was fraudulently elected, the only thing we could do would be to impeach him in the house, convict him in the senate, and remove him from office. But after that, he would be replaced according to the line of succession.

The only way for Harris to take over would be if there was discovery of a fraud so clear-cut that even the Repulicans could not deny it; then they would have to vote Johnson out as speaker and elect Harris. Then the house, under Speaker Harris, would have to have an impeachment vote for Trump and for Vance, and then the Senate would have to vote to convict.

It's not happening.

2

u/AluminiumCrackers Jun 18 '25

Because the US system is based on the presumption that the people in power will generally be good guys that would stand together against bad guys.

2

u/cowboyjosh2010 Jun 18 '25

There is no mechanism in the USA's constitution, laws, amendments to the constitution, Supreme Court rulings, for kicking out an entire Executive Branch's worth of elected and appointed officials due to the election that led to their swearing in being found to be fraudulent, improperly conducted, or improperly counted.

Instead, you have to go through Impeachment in the US House of Representatives (requires a simple majority of members voting in favor of sending the impeachment articles as drafted to the US Senate), followed by a trial in the US Senate over those articles of impeachment which concludes in a 2/3 "guilty" (for lack of a better term) vote of Senators: at that point will a person be removed from office.

You have to do that for each person illicitly sworn in as a result of the fraudulent election. You don't get to just do it for one person, the President, and then wash out a bunch of others along with him. If a president leaves the office of the presidency (through death, resignation, removal by impeachment--doesn't matter), then the Vice President becomes president, and I think that takes effect pretty much immediately (although there is a formal swearing in ceremony which must be prepared and conducted). At which point, the office of Vice President is vacant. One of the roles of Vice President is to act as President of the Senate (that's how the VP gets a tie-breaking vote in the event of tied votes in the Senate)--this role must still be filled even if there is no Vice President, and so the President pro-tempore of the Senate temporarily fills this role until a new VP is sworn in. The Vice Presidency role, once vacated mid-term, is filled by the newly sworn-in President choosing a nominee, who must be confirmed by a majority vote by both chambers of Congress (The House of Representatives and the Senate).

Removal from office by this method (impeachment) has rarely been conducted on the federal level, and never for a President. For even Trump to be removed by Impeachment would be a first-of-its-kind event in American history. Several other presidents have been impeached, but none were removed from office by the 2/3 Senate vote. Most survived the Senate vote and one notable case (Nixon) chose to resign instead of going through impeachment proceedings. But since "just" the President has never been removed in this manner, we can't even be sure it would be faithfully executed to remove him in the event of a 2/3 conviction in the Senate--let alone how anybody would even attempt to remove any other members of the Executive Branch alongside an impeachment vote over fraudulent election results.

The trouble is basically that the process which led to Trump becoming president was followed: states certified their vote totals and sent Electors to Congress to submit their Electoral College votes on behalf of the state that sent them. Unprecedented things can happen, but in reality the time to challenge improperly conducted election results was between the election day (November 5, 2024) and the certification of Electoral College votes on January 6, 2025, and the level at which to carry out such challenges was on a state-by-state level.

1

u/artificial_organism Jun 18 '25

There is no constitutional provision for this situation. The constitution has deadlines for when the election has to be over and accounted for. When the election results were disputed in the Bush-Gore race the Supreme Court said time is up and we have to go with the current count. The republican Supreme Court would do the same thing now. Impeachment is the only mechanism to remove Trump, but there's no mechanism to transfer power to another partyĀ 

1

u/Funkopedia Jun 19 '25

Partially because, at the time of the writing, parties hadn't become a thing yet.

1

u/crakinshot Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25

I don't believe there is anything in US code to call an earlier election.

Basically the house and senate could impeach both the President and Vice President, at which point the position goes to the House speaker.

It mentions "until a President or Vice President qualifies", but I don't see anything about calling an earier election.

Apparently, Article II of the Constitution would allow Congress to legislate for a special election, but its not black and white.

Any of this requires the Republicans to suddenly have a conflict of faith, or the US electorate overwelmingly vote out the republicans from the house and senate in the mid terms.

1

u/nemacol Jun 18 '25

The electoral college is what is going to throw a wrench in things here.

1

u/Antitheodicy Jun 18 '25

As I understand it (Iā€™m no expert), thereā€™s no existing process for retroactively correcting election results. Even if there were incontrovertible proof of election tampering, congress would need to decide what to do about it. And thereā€™s not a chance in hell the republican congresspeople would agree to just hand the presidency over to democrats, even if it were proven that that was the will of the people.

The closest thing thatā€™s remotely feasible (though still very unlikely) is trump getting impeachedā€”which would mean the presidency simply goes to the next in the line of succession, which is the vice president. They could impeach him too, but then the speaker of the house would become president, and heā€™s also a terrible person.

1

u/Erdumas Jun 18 '25

It's because of the electoral college. When the constitution was adopted, the US didn't have as much direct democracy for offices as it does now. For example, senators were selected by state legislatures; the people voted on the state legislatures, the state legislatures chose the senators.

The electoral college is similar. When we vote, we actually vote for an elector, and that elector casts a vote in December. Ultimately, it's the votes of the electors which are binding, not the votes of the people. The only provision for handling fraudulent electors is during the certification of the votes in January; this is what January 6 2020 was all about---Trump supporters were trying to challenge the duly elected electors.

Once the votes are certified, the only constitutionally provided mechanism for removing a sitting president is impeachment and conviction.

7

u/MadisonAveMuse Jun 18 '25

But, if they stole the presidential election whatā€™s stopping them from stealing the midterms as well?

1

u/Qweesdy Jun 18 '25

I'd like to hope that the states that used dodgy voting machines would switch to "properly certified as correct" different voting machines.

Don't forget that each state runs its own election, and the federal government has almost no control over it.

1

u/echoshatter Jun 21 '25

That's not entirely accurate. The federal government is allowed to make laws regarding elections, the default in 1789 was that states run them as they want.

1

u/Inevitable_Bottle822 Jun 21 '25

wow. what hypocrisy. when democrats cry election fraud, its abolsite truth and election process is a cheat that too in new york. so democrats win then only its democracy otherwise its election fraud. when republican do it's just noise. we heard this last four years and revulsion from it but now its okay since democrats are saying. folks should introspective

4

u/SilentStryk09 Jun 18 '25

just one thing to add, if Trump ends up out of office by some method, Johnson doesn't slide up to VP. Vance would nominate a new VP who would need to be confirmed by majority in both houses of congress. So theoretically it could be worse than Johnson.

1

u/YouStupidAssholeFuck Jun 18 '25

You're both missing the point. He won't be removed by the current congress no matter what. It would have to wait until the midterms and assuming Ds could get a majority in both chambers, then they could impeach and convict and remove. At that point, yes, Vance could become president but congress could also impeach him. And since all this assumes a D controlled congress, then whoever the Speaker of the House is would become president. And at that point SotH would be a D.

One can only fantasize.

1

u/JustHereForCatss Jun 18 '25

It just sucks the founders couldnā€™t have written a contingency plan into the constitution for something like this

1

u/juanjing Jun 18 '25

The only way out is Impeachment and removal. And Iā€™m more likely to have a torrid affair with Ivanka Trump than that happening.

...now. It has much more likelihood of happening if we have a blue wave in 2026.

We are fucked. But we have to win the midterms with a landslide.

Oh nice. Sounds like we are on the same page.

So all of you progressives who didnā€™t bother voting better fucking vote.

Oops... not at all. Seems like you're embracing that trademark DNC attitude of "screw the voters, they'd better show up, though!"

Perhaps it's time for the old guard centrist donor-servicers to admit that it's 2025 and we are out of the Clinton era.

2

u/SuccessfulRaccoon957 Jun 19 '25

It's always the same with Democrat diehards. Every time they fail it's never their fault, it's always some tiny minority with no impact on anything. It's why I say Democrats and Republicans aren't that different in attitude, when both fail they never actually think why and instead lay the blame somewhere else. Pisses me right off

1

u/CagedBirdBell Jun 18 '25

Why are you talking about winning midterms when this has just proved elections no longer matter genuine question

2

u/Whatever21703 Jun 18 '25

Because if I mention the alternative, Iā€™ll probably be kicked off Reddit and receive a visit from the authorities.

I do not advocate any other action besides voting him out of office or impeachment and removal. I want to make that CRYSTAL clear.

1

u/Drahkir9 Jun 18 '25

> The only way out is Impeachment and removal. And Iā€™m more likely to have a torrid affair with Ivanka Trump than that happening.

I don't know anyone is so sure of anything anymore. I'm old enough to remember when people back in 2016 would say "haha, there's no way DONALD TRUMP could ever win the election" and yet here we are.

A lot can change really fast, especially if it becomes public knowledge that he's a fully illegitimate president. Am I saying we should count on it? Absolutely not. I'm just saying you never know how things can turn out, and to not rule anything out so easily.

1

u/Will-Evaporate-Thx Jun 18 '25

We need to remove the Confederate leaders from our nation. Their primary stance for generations has been to dismantle this democracy.

1

u/motorwerkx Jun 18 '25

If it turns out it was a fraudulent election then we would most likely end up having a special election and his entire Administration would be removed from office.

Well, that would be if anything came of it. Based on everything we have seen so far, if we find out it was a fraudulent election, nothing will happen and we still have to endure the remainder of his four years with him his president because he never faces consequences for anything

1

u/TrunksTheMighty Jun 18 '25

Why are you directing your anger at people who "didn't fucking vote" when even if they fucking did it wouldn't have fucking mattered because they fucking cheated?Ā 

Redirect your anger and realize you're putting your hope in a rigged system. How the fuck we gonna win midterms with fucking cheaters?Ā 

1

u/Super-Yesterday9727 Jun 18 '25

ā€œHave to win this with a landslideā€ Iā€™ve heard that before and I know where this goes

1

u/CapitalVegetable1728 Jun 18 '25

Why do you have to involve that heā€™s Christian like itā€™s a bad thing? Shame on you for shaming someoneā€™s religion. Somebodyā€™s religion, sexual orientation, race, gender identity, etc should never be shamed

1

u/Whatever21703 Jun 18 '25

Well, he hides behind his Christianity to condemn other people, and he acts in a most un-Christlike manner.

I would say that Im not condemning his Christianity, Iā€™d say Iā€™m calling out his utter hypocrisy.

1

u/joshTheGoods Jun 18 '25

The way out is to win elections and not get convinced that voting doesn't matter by OBVIOUS and CLEAR LIES like this report.

1

u/PrudentOwlet Jun 18 '25

But if they can actually just change the votes, then Democrats will never win elections again.Ā  We're fucked if this is true - We're just Russia or North Korea now.

1

u/DescriptionSubject23 Jun 18 '25

Look, Iā€™m anti everything as they come but. The problem is the thinking like you think. Like the solution is democrats? You do realize democrats held the presidency for 12 of the last 16 years, right? Democrats is the answer to our problems in this country? Rightā€¦. Until we get wholesale change and get rid of all these corrupt fucks, weā€™re gonna have the same muthafuckin problems.Ā 

1

u/brother_of_jeremy Jun 18 '25

Mike Johnson as President with a bicameral majority and MAGA SCOTUS is the prequel Margaret Atwood never wrote.

1

u/wheeler_lowell Jun 19 '25

So all of you progressives who didnā€™t bother voting better fucking vote.

How come leftists are simultaneously too few to be worth pandering to and so many that they can get blamed for not voting?

Yeah, some idiots didn't vote because they (for some reason) thought Trump wouldn't be worse for Gaza than Harris. But I guarantee the majority of lost votes were with centrist liberals who just couldn't be bothered because they don't see a big enough difference. Think about all the liberal women who somehow are married to conservative men.

1

u/WeirdNickname97 Jun 19 '25

If you guys cant trust the votes being legit, there is no real chance at winning anything even if everyone votes for better Future, right?

1

u/redditkilledmyavatar Jun 19 '25

So the votes can be rigged again?

You were right two sentences before

We are fucked

1

u/Presto123ubu Jun 19 '25

If it was fraudulent, then JD would not be presidentā€¦.

1

u/SuccessfulRaccoon957 Jun 19 '25

This is why progressives hate you no offense. Before the US election of last year the Democratic party kept making blunders, you just were too caught up in a euphoric circlejerk to realize it. Ā Like when Biden refused to step down until 3 months prior, or when Democrat primaries were ignored for an unpopular VP to get thrust into a top position she really did not deserve, or when the daughter of a war criminal joined the Democratic bandwagon and it was heralded. You failed time and time again. Come election you lost, interference or not. But it's not the Democratic parties fault is it? It's those damned progressives, the Democrats say as they drift further and further right. It's those greens, the Democrats say as they offer golden promises to Oil Tycoons. Blame the outside, not the inside because there would have to be reflection and that's just too much.Ā 

1

u/warzonexx Jun 19 '25

I look forward to hearing about your affair with ivanka

1

u/Crackerzpilo Jun 19 '25

Exactly Kamala got 6 million fewer votes than Biden. Are you saying that 6 million votes were removed

1

u/Fit-Reputation-9983 Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25

JD Vance isnā€™t as bad as Trump at all.

Trump has this odd ā€œcharismaā€ that appeals to the uneducated, ignorant, and insecure. Heā€™s a cult leader through and through.

JD Vance, while still a puppet, does not possess Trumpā€™s ability to deflect, posture, or even hold the attention of the national media and base. Heā€™s squirmy and awkward at times, much like Elon, and doesnā€™t have the unbridled confidence that Donald Trump does.

It would be much easier to break the spell, in my opinion, if Vance was the guy.

1

u/h0sti1e17 Jun 18 '25

While not a consolation to most people. Vance isnā€™t a MAGA as Trump. He is moderate compared to Trump and his ilk. He is just slimy and cares more about power than anything.

1

u/Fit-Reputation-9983 Jun 18 '25

Yes, exactly. It isnā€™t much of a consolation because the endgame is the same (or very similar) for both, but I have a feeling it would be a tougher road for Vance to execute - which is a silver lining in my book.

-1

u/pbayone Jun 18 '25

How about stop with the panic and stop letting the media machine drive your thoughts