« Hannity

Hannity: Texas AG challenge to vote results 'could be a game-changer'

2020-12-08 | 🔗
Fox News host Sean Hannity reacts to Supreme Court ruling and latest 2020 election developments
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Nor am I, nor are you, nor is the audience huge breaking news. The United States Supreme Court just ordered a response to the legal challenge that was filed by the State of Texas, where officials there are now contesting the election results in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. This is the blockbuster suit. We told you was likely coming. We began to discuss it. The deadline for the response is Thursday by 300 p dot m. This challenge has now officially survived outright dismissal. Contrary to what many experts who are predicting today could be a game changer. We will lay out the case and have exclusive reaction from the person who brought that suit. If Texas Attorney General KEN Paxton, we begin with first tonight, though, you need to know about this critical new challenge. All you need to know the mob, the media. They will all dismiss it.
This is a well written case. It was well thought out and it was well delivered and apparently received well enough that they want to hear arguments first and foremost, article III are our: U Dot S constitution. This is really not complicated. Stay with us requires the case be filed directly at the: U Dot S Supreme Court, which has whats called original jurisdiction in disputes against multiple states. If the Supreme Court decides to take up the case, the justices will be tasked with deciding whether or not these states, Georgia, Wisconsin Michigan Pennsylvania, whether in fact they violated the? U dot S constitution in a variety of ways. That is all laid out here in this suit brought by Texas. It includes Article ii of our constitution, which clearly articulates the following. Each state shall appoint in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct a number of electors.
In other words, it is constitutionally up to state legislatures to decide election policy, for example in Pennsylvania. We already all know this was clearly violated when the mail in ballot deadline was pushed back without approval. Article ii was likely violate thered the state of Georgia, with that idiotic consent decree which relaxed signature, verification requirements in mail in ballots, creating what was an unequal system. This policy was once again done without lawmaker approval. It was a consent agreement with the Secretary of State of Georgia and constitutionally. As we pointed out, it is the legislature of Georgia that should have decided any such thing. Welsh remember that lawsuit was brought by the Georgia Democratic Party, the democratic senatorial Campaign Committee and the democratic congressional campaign commit teus. This was a consent agreement
just with the Secretary of State, not with the state legislature thats. Not all this New Texas suit also alleges multiple violations of what is known as the equal protection clause and relies on very compelling court precedent. Chris Kobach had a great interview with me on radio today pointed in a terrific op ed in the land mark case you heard of it Bush v Gore, the Supreme Court agreed it violated the amendment when one Florida county treated ballots, one way and another county treated ballots a whole different way. We saw clear examples of all of this unequal treatment among counties in state after state that includes vastly different policy force, election observers poll workers and county procedures in Michigan. We know some of the counties denied access to any partisan observers which the statutory language calls for, and other counties forced observers back at a distance of six feet.
Others twenty feet away from the vote, counting process which prevented them from doing what they were legally allowed to do and frankly, was written into the law. Other counties decided to allow full access to partisan observers. Ask yourself: how is that unequal application of the law? Make no mistake. This case deserves to be heard. It has merit and precedent, and the american people deserve their day in court. If laws are violated in one state, voters feel the consequences that would be lets say: disenfranchising their honest and legal votes thats. Why? According to the suit quote a dark cloud, hangs over the twenty twenty presidential election, this new gallop poll, eighty nine percent of Americans have serious doubts about this election process. Fifty seven percent of Republicans dont want the president to concede. Today the president called on
lawmakers the Supreme Court to do what is right, take a look. Hopefully, the next administration will be the Trump administration, because you cant steal hundreds of thousands of votes. You cant have fraud and deception and all of the things that they did and then slightly win a swing state and you just have to look at the numbers. Look at whats been on tape. Look at all the corruption and well see you cant win an election like that. Lets see whether or not somebody has the courage, whether its a legislateor or legislatures, or whether its a justice of the Supreme Court or a number of justices of the Supreme Court lets see if they have the courage to do what everybody in this country knows is right tonight. Like always, we will continue our own independent path. We dont follow the mob, the media, any other show we do our own thing here. Lawsuit from Texas is a very serious legal challenge. At the very least, it has a right to be heard.
The country deserves it. You deserve it. We the people deserve it. I dont know what the justices are going to do, but the american people deserve answers. We need to have confidence in both the integrity and the results of every states election in the process, because we have millions of innocent Americans in states where the law the constitution were followed. They are then disenfranchised in a corrupt process, its not okay, that partisan observers are blocked from performing what they are legally allowed and the law calls for them to do their critical duties. Its not okay. The chain of custody gets lost, its not okay. Election laws are changed by politicians at a whim in the middle or after the games been played without any legislative approval. Its not okay, that mail in ballots have different signature, verification requirements and in person ballots, as the Texas suit
perfectly describes, our country stands at an important crossroads: either the constitution matters and must be followed, even when some officials consider it inconvenient or out of date or simply a piece of parchment on display at the national archives. We ask the court to choose the former in the coming days: the, U Dot S Supreme Court, will send an important message. Make no mistake. Whatever happens, this will have serious long, lasting implications ramifications for every single election to come thats. Why tonight, every decent republican attorney general with a brain needs to get busy.
Transcript generated on 2020-12-08.