I am getting so many questions about why I think that Meadows' argument is not laughably absurd and might win that I want to try again to explain.

Make sure you read this first: https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_Kanefield/110951211157155574

To be clear, I am not saying he WILL win. I am saying that he COULD win.

There is a difference.

Here is how the law works: To find out if Meadows meets the requirements of the statute, you have to look at the statute.

Then you break the statute into elements.

1/