Author Topic: Recall How Leftists Everywhere Urged 2016 Electors To Defect To Hillary  (Read 212 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,170
As Michigan Charges Trump Electors With Felonies, Recall How Leftists Everywhere Urged 2016 Electors To Defect To Hillary

If you’re a leftist urging electors to change their votes, you’re a hero. If you do the same for a Republican, you might be a felon.

BY: JORDAN BOYD
JULY 19, 2023

If the last two election cycles have proven anything, it’s that Democrats hold an undeniable double standard when it comes to objecting to elections.

The radically different treatment Republicans receive when contesting poorly administered elections intensified this week when Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel charged 16 Republican electors in her state for participating in what she deemed a “false electors scheme.” Defendants, all 55 years or older, each face eight various conspiracy and forgery felony counts that carry a sentence of five to 14 years in prison each.

“The evidence will demonstrate there was no legal authority for the false electors to purport to act as ‘duly elected presidential electors’ and execute the false electoral documents,” Nessel, an avid anti-“election denier” activist, said in a statement. “Every serious challenge to the election had been denied, dismissed, or otherwise rejected by the time the false electors convened.”

*  *  *

Sanctimonious Scrambling
As soon as it was clear that Donald Trump, despite the deep state’s best efforts to hoax him out of the running, would become the 45th president of the United States, Democrats and their allies scrambled to influence electors to reject Americans’ wishes.

Corporate media quickly rose to the top as the loudest voice calling for electoral disobedience. Articles demanding state electors “prevent an irresponsible demagogue from taking office” and overrule Americans to install Hillary Clinton as president popped up in the pages of The Atlantic, The Washington Post, the Daily Beast, Vox, and Time.

The New York Times even published an article from a Texas-based Republican elector explaining “Why I Will Not Cast My Electoral Vote for Donald Trump.”

“The Electoral College is essentially an undemocratic system that’s been jury-rigged to make it somewhat more democratic,” another Vox article asserted to reassure any skeptics.

These last-ditch attempts to keep Trump out of the White House were eagerly amplified by people like MSNBC’s Joy Reid and NYT’s Jonathan Weisman, in tweets collated by journalist Michael Tracey.

*  *  *

No Such Thing As ‘False Electors’
In her charges, Nessel repeatedly painted the Michigan defendants as “false elector” co-conspirators who participated in a “desperate effort” to “interfere with and overturn our free and fair election process, and along with it, the will of millions of Michigan voters.” Legally, however, there’s no such thing as “false electors.”

*  *  *

Source:  https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/19/as-michigan-charges-trump-electors-with-felonies-recall-how-leftists-everywhere-urged-2016-electors-to-defect-to-hillary/

Online DefiantMassRINO

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,508
  • Gender: Male
Each State submits a "certified" Elector count.

The Green Bay Sweep included plans to fraudulently submit uncertified Elector vote counts as "official" "certified" documents to friendly US Congressmen, Senators, and the National Archives and Records Administration.

Electors may have been "alternate", but they were fraudlent because they were not certified by the Governor(s) as required by the Electoral Count Act.

Just because Al Gore and Hillary Clinton are sore losers, doesn't mean everyone else needs to be.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2023, 03:59:55 pm by DefiantMassRINO »
"It doesn't matter what temperature the room is, it's always room temperature." - Steven Wright

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,043
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
Yup.

The Electoral Count Act itself recognized the possibility of conflicting slates of electors, and had a mechanism -- albeit a confusing one -- to try to resolve that.  In other words, conflicting slates of electors were a recognized possibility within our legal system, not something outside it and therefore illegal.  If it was illegal to propose an alternative slate of electors, that mechanism wouldn't be necessary because you'd just arrest the people doing it.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-dueling-electors-explain-idUSKBN2712M7