Every day the false narrative Joe Biden has already won the presidential election prevails in the media unanswered undermines what the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore (2000) described as "the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness" in our presidential election process.
My last article, "True Electoral Count Shows Trump Winning," presented a two-days after the election snapshot of elector projections, which was contrary to the mainstream media's projections, concluding that honest reporting by the press matters for two purposes: basic "freedom of the press" honesty and press objectivity, which is related to the first.
Biden and his friends in the press are posturing for litigation purposes. If the "narrative" is that Donald Trump is trying to steal the election, a skewed elector count in favor of Biden sets the stage. How can Biden claim that President Trump is trying to steal the election when President Trump is in the lead?
As of this morning, 13 November, Trump is still in the lead. The uncontested elector projections — contrary to the pro-Biden false narrative — are Trump 232 electors, Biden 227 electors, with the following six state's electors, totaling 79, either contested in court or subject to recount:
- Arizona (11)
- Georgia (16)
- Michigan (16)
- Nevada (6)
- Pennsylvania (20)
- Wisconsin (10)
Granted, the unofficial media projections currently show Biden ahead by narrow margins in these six States, but as we learned in Bush v. Gore, it isn't over until the Supreme Court rules.
In the meantime, if President Trump is able to "flip" a total of 38 Electors, e.g., Pennsylvania (20), Georgia (16) and one other of the four remaining contested States, he will be re-elected to a second term.
On Dec. 12, 2000, the Supreme Court ruled in Bush v. Gore: "When the state legislature vests the right to vote for president in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter."
In Bush v. Gore, the court also ruled that,
"The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court do not satisfy the minimum requirement for nonarbitrary treatment of voters necessary to secure the fundamental right. Florida's basic command for the count of legally cast votes is to consider the 'intent of the voter.' This is unobjectionable as an abstract proposition and a starting principle. The problem inheres in the absence of specific standards to ensure its equal application. The formulation of uniform rules to determine intent based on these recurring circumstances is practicable and, we conclude, necessary."
In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida, and "remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion." The rest is history.
So what do we do now? When I was giving a dinner talk to Veterans for Trump in Pennsylvania last Friday, one veteran asked me this very question. I replied that my best advice is the same as what then Pope John Paul II, now St. John Paul the Great, told a friend of mine during a one-on-one meeting in June of 2001:
"First, align yourselves with like-minded individuals;
"Second, always try to work from within the system if you can; and
"Third, never give up hope, because you are a Soldier of Christ."
Joseph E. Schmitz served as a foreign policy and national security adviser to Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. The opinions expressed in this article are his personal opinions. Schmitz served as Inspector General of the Department of Defense from 2002-2005 and is now Chief Legal Officer of Pacem Solutions International. He graduated with distinction from the U.S. Naval Academy, earned his J.D. degree from Stanford Law School, and is author of "The Inspector General Handbook: Fraud, Waste, Abuse, and Other Constitutional 'Enemies, Foreign and Domestic.'" Read Joseph E. Schmitz's Reports — More Here.