Boštjan M. Zupančič believes that fraud occurred in the counting of ballots in the USA: Democrats knew what they were doing!

0
0
Aleš Ernecl in Boštjan M. Zupančič (Photo: prinscreen)

“When Democrats forced the vote by mail, they knew what they were doing,” commented Dr. Boštjan M. Zupančič on the complications surrounding the US elections and compared the current situation to a subversion. “Fraud is a result of anomie,” he sociologically described the U.S. problem in the absence of all moral norms. As he explains, the case of the US election will certainly end up in the Supreme Court, as it is clearly a legal issue.

On his YouTube channel, Slovenian philosopher, journalist and podcaster, Aleš Ernecl hosted  the always interesting and insightful Boštjan M. Zupančič, a kind of champion of Slovenian constitutionalism, popularly called BMZ. In an almost an hour and a half long conversation, they discussed three hot topics: the US elections, the issue of abortion and the abuse of the rule of law in public discourse by the Slovenian left and recently by European institutions such as the European Commission.

Zupančič spent a good part of his legal career at the best law universities in the USA, and he is familiar with the American constitutional and electoral system. The initial part of the debate was therefore devoted to the elections in America and the complications surrounding the counting of ballots.

There could be irregularities in the U.S. election due to postal voting

BMZ first explained how the electoral system works and outlined its advantages and disadvantages. He also explained how vote-count fraud can occur in certain states and why he believes this has happened. Additionally, BMZ and Ernecl talked about excessive differences between states in terms of voter legitimacy requirements and postal elections, which can cause problems to the American system. Zupančič said that postal voting was banned in France already in 1975, but this problem is still unresolved in the USA, which he attributes partly to the naivety of Republicans, partly to legislation that leaves too much space to individual states. He continued to say that he had already found mail vote suspicious the first time he heard of it, and now information is coming to light on how the matter had been ‘over-planned’. As he explained, this is not a small error, it is a bigger story. “When Democrats forced the vote by mail, they knew what they were doing,” commented Dr. Boštjan M. Zupančič on the complications surrounding the US elections and compared the current situation to a subversion. “Fraud is a result of anomie,” he sociologically described the U.S. problem in the absence of all moral norms. As he explains, the case of the US election will certainly end up in the Supreme Court, as it is clearly a legal issue.

Zupančič is convinced that the naivety of the Republicans is to blame and believes that they should know that this cannot be resolved at the federal level, but only at the level of individual states, as in legal terms the problem is subsumed under the 14th Amendment, which provides freedom to federal states to do certain things about elections on their own, independently from federal laws.

They continued to talk about the legal and philosophical aspects of discussions about abortion, about the Platonic pneumo or a soul, which is the hidden premise of all discussions (When does something loose a soul?). They discussed the Aristotelian-Thomistic, Catholic-biological view of the issue of abortion and its idea of derivatives. Zupančič mentioned that the European Court – in his opinion out of cowardice – never decisively stated its position on abortion, although there is a legal basis for it. Namely, there is legal precedence established with a case, which granted legal subjectivity to a person whose brain and some other functions have not functioned. The fact that legal subjectivity was granted to a person in such a condition, offers the basis for it being able to be granted to the embryo as well.

Tanja Fajon has no idea about the meaning of the rule of law

At the end of the conversation, they discussed the rule of law and the use of this phrase by the Slovenian opposition, especially Tanja Fajon and recently also Ljudmila Novak. Zupančič said that he had introduced the term rule of law into the debate in Slovenia because people had previously, similarly ignorantly, talked about the lawful state, which is an expression of German origin, similarly difficult to define and change.

Regarding Slovenian politicians, especially Tanja Fajon, who use this phrase rather carelessly, he said that they have no idea what they are talking about. He said the same for President of the European Commission. Regarding measures as something that would violate rights, he said that the balance between public health and violations of freedoms is always important in the assessment of measures, and that the proportionality of measures is important in the assessment.

Share