…alternative electors

All coordinated

All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

(07-18-2023 04:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

ranks right up there with muh no mo' bail for violent crimes, Ja?!

yeah, buggy ... the 'muh law o' land o' empty lakes'...

#wtgdfe

(07-18-2023 04:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

It’s something both parties have done many times when a state was close so they would have someone if the result was overturned. It worked for jfk with Hawaii. But you are looking like Tom being a water carrier for the dnc’s stupid hypocritical position on this.

(07-18-2023 06:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 04:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

It’s something both parties have done many times when a state was close so they would have someone if the result was overturned. It worked for jfk with Hawaii. But you are looking like Tom being a water carrier for the dnc’s stupid hypocritical position on this.

No one has pulled this type of action *after* a state itself has certified. Hawaii may very well have prepared a slate prior to that. These in MI were done after the certification, and after all legal challenges in the state had ended.

JFKs were done as the certification by Hawaii had not occurred before the safe harbor date. Michigan's certification was presented well before the safe harbor date and before the 'alternate electors' submitted theirs. That is the 'alternate electors' submitted after certification and after the end of all litigation.

Hawaii recounts were still going on *as* the safe harbor act passed, *and* the state had not yet certified anything by the safe harbor.

If a state certifies before the safe harbor, anyone trying to claim otherwise is in doodoo.

MI goes darker & darker Blue. RIP

(07-19-2023 06:44 AM)Bronco14 Wrote:  MI goes darker & darker Blue. RIP

By...what...enforcing the laws? Remember when the GOP at least pretended to be the party of law and order?

These people coordinated a scheme and signed a document they sent to DC claiming they were the state's electors...they weren't...and signed a document claiming they followed Michigan law by meeting in the Senate...they hadn't. Among other things...

#ETTD

(07-19-2023 09:54 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-19-2023 06:44 AM)Bronco14 Wrote:  MI goes darker & darker Blue. RIP

By...what...enforcing the laws? Remember when the GOP at least pretended to be the party of law and order?

These people coordinated a scheme and signed a document they sent to DC claiming they were the state's electors...they weren't...and signed a document claiming they followed Michigan law by meeting in the Senate...they hadn't. Among other things...

#ETTD

All I'm saying is that all the D's have to do is run on this for 30 years & that'll be enough.

I am aware of the authoritarian 'law & order' lockdowns that Big Gretch ended the moment after Plugs got in, tho, yes. Garbage governor

https://csnbbs.com/thread-973289.html
Maybe do a quick glance at existing threads first

Michigan’s Prosecution of Trump-Supporting ‘Fake Electors’ Raises Political Controversy

Quote:According to Michigan law, the state’s Electoral College electors must gather in the state Senate chamber after the election and vote for the party nominee who appointed them, after which the state sends the vote’s certificate to Congress, per the U.S. Constitution. These steps were reportedly not followed by the accused false electors, who are said to have met in the Michigan Republican Party’s office basement, according to NBC News.

These charges represent the first time legal action has been taken against alleged false electors during the 2020 election. Nevada’s Democratic Attorney General, Aaron Ford, has declined to pursue alleged false electors in his state, and the Department of Justice has also declined to file charges after Nessel referred the Michigan case to them.

The ‘fake electors’ controversy has been criticized as being misleadingly portrayed in the American media as an insidious plot, instead of a controversial practice that has been applied without criminal actions taken against alternate electors in some instances in U.S. history.

The popular pundit and investigator Kanekoa pointed to examples of Democrat supporters encouraging electors to reject Donald Trump, even if he should win the popular vote in state elections, in the 2016 election.

“In 2016, Democrats, Hollywood celebrities, and corporate news outlets urged electors to vote against President-elect Donald Trump,” he wrote. “Lawrence Lessig’s article in The Washington Post on November 26, 2016, argued that Republican electors had the constitutional right and duty to switch their votes from Trump to Hillary Clinton. This sparked a movement supported by figures like Michael Moore, John Podesta, Keith Olbermann, Rosie O’Donnell, and several Hollywood celebrities. While they only convinced a few electors, it’s important to recognize the double standard of justice in the treatment of Democrats and Republicans when objecting to elections.”

As Lessig argued, “The framers believed, as Alexander Hamilton put it, that ‘the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the [president].’ But no nation had ever tried that idea before. So the framers created a safety valve on the people’s choice. Like a judge reviewing a jury verdict, where the people voted, the electoral college was intended to confirm — or not — the people’s choice. ”

Kanekoa added that, “Liberal activists like Chris Hayes, Norm Eisen, Laurence Tribe, and George Takei urged electors to vote against President-elect Donald Trump in 2016.”

He also pointed to editorials at liberal news outlets: “The Daily Beast: “It’s not too late for electors to change history.” Slate: “Will enough electors go rogue to stop Trump?” Vox: “Let conscientious electors do their jobs.” Time: “Electors against Trump are faithful not faithless.”

The question of whether anyone should face criminal prosecution related to the submission of alternate slates of pro-Trump electoral votes in 2020 merits comparison to historical instances. The case of the 1876 election involving South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana illustrates the complexities of such electoral disputes. The differing situations in these states illustrate the issue; particularly, Democratic candidate Samuel Tilden’s weak position in South Carolina.

Despite this, Tilden’s electors in South Carolina cast their votes for him, though their status as the state’s official electors was unanimously rejected by the Electoral Commission. Interestingly, despite their unfounded claims, these individuals were not criminally prosecuted.

(07-18-2023 05:03 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 04:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

ranks right up there with muh no mo' bail for violent crimes, Ja?!

yeah, buggy ... the 'muh law o' land o' empty lakes'...

#wtgdfe

Yesh. You would think the whole covid show us your papers routine wouldve clued folks in

Bannana republic police state

(07-18-2023 07:10 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 06:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 04:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

It’s something both parties have done many times when a state was close so they would have someone if the result was overturned. It worked for jfk with Hawaii. But you are looking like Tom being a water carrier for the dnc’s stupid hypocritical position on this.

No one has pulled this type of action *after* a state itself has certified. Hawaii may very well have prepared a slate prior to that. These in MI were done after the certification, and after all legal challenges in the state had ended.

JFKs were done as the certification by Hawaii had not occurred before the safe harbor date. Michigan's certification was presented well before the safe harbor date and before the 'alternate electors' submitted theirs. That is the 'alternate electors' submitted after certification and after the end of all litigation.

Hawaii recounts were still going on *as* the safe harbor act passed, *and* the state had not yet certified anything by the safe harbor.

If a state certifies before the safe harbor, anyone trying to claim otherwise is in doodoo.

Yes hawaii’s we’re. I gave you the example and you still choose to tow the dishonest party line. Democrats are the new Nazis.

(07-19-2023 05:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 07:10 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 06:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 04:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

It’s something both parties have done many times when a state was close so they would have someone if the result was overturned. It worked for jfk with Hawaii. But you are looking like Tom being a water carrier for the dnc’s stupid hypocritical position on this.

No one has pulled this type of action *after* a state itself has certified. Hawaii may very well have prepared a slate prior to that. These in MI were done after the certification, and after all legal challenges in the state had ended.

JFKs were done as the certification by Hawaii had not occurred before the safe harbor date. Michigan's certification was presented well before the safe harbor date and before the 'alternate electors' submitted theirs. That is the 'alternate electors' submitted after certification and after the end of all litigation.

Hawaii recounts were still going on *as* the safe harbor act passed, *and* the state had not yet certified anything by the safe harbor.

If a state certifies before the safe harbor, anyone trying to claim otherwise is in doodoo.

Yes hawaii’s we’re. I gave you the example and you still choose to tow the dishonest party line. Democrats are the new Nazis.

Hawaii recount was still ongoing. That issue was up in the air at the time of presentation of both slates.

In the current issue, no ongoing recounting and all state court cases were decided.

Presentation of the alternate slates with certification by the state and no legal issues is fraud. Pure and simple.

The circumstances of Hawaii 1960 are very different.

(07-19-2023 06:46 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-19-2023 05:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 07:10 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 06:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 04:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  All a witch hunt. Got it.

How dare anyone be charged for presenting themselves as a Presidential elector to Congress when, well...... uh....... they arent. Or werent.

It’s something both parties have done many times when a state was close so they would have someone if the result was overturned. It worked for jfk with Hawaii. But you are looking like Tom being a water carrier for the dnc’s stupid hypocritical position on this.

No one has pulled this type of action *after* a state itself has certified. Hawaii may very well have prepared a slate prior to that. These in MI were done after the certification, and after all legal challenges in the state had ended.

JFKs were done as the certification by Hawaii had not occurred before the safe harbor date. Michigan's certification was presented well before the safe harbor date and before the 'alternate electors' submitted theirs. That is the 'alternate electors' submitted after certification and after the end of all litigation.

Hawaii recounts were still going on *as* the safe harbor act passed, *and* the state had not yet certified anything by the safe harbor.

If a state certifies before the safe harbor, anyone trying to claim otherwise is in doodoo.

Yes hawaii’s we’re. I gave you the example and you still choose to tow the dishonest party line. Democrats are the new Nazis.

Hawaii recount was still ongoing. That issue was up in the air at the time of presentation of both slates.

In the current issue, no ongoing recounting and all state court cases were decided.

Presentation of the alternate slates with certification by the state and no legal issues is fraud. Pure and simple.

The circumstances of Hawaii 1960 are very different.

Just keep towing the dishonest party line, you Democrat you!

It’s only a crime when conservatives do something like this.
It’s fine for liberals.

(07-20-2023 09:50 AM)450bench Wrote:  It’s only a crime when conservatives do something like this.
It’s fine for liberals.

Last I saw, no one -- I said 'no one' -- has ever tried to short circuit the electors, or even tried to short circuit the Electoral Counting Act, in this manner.

Can you point me to that crime or even a scintilla of an action that that a liberal has done this before?

I am sorry, there doesnt seem to be this vast hypocrisy in 'something like this' that you complain about above.

(07-20-2023 10:00 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2023 09:50 AM)450bench Wrote:  It’s only a crime when conservatives do something like this.
It’s fine for liberals.

Last I saw, no one -- I said 'no one' -- has ever tried to short circuit the electors, or even tried to short circuit the Electoral Counting Act, in this manner.

Can you point me to that crime or even a scintilla of an action that that a liberal has done this before?

I am sorry, there doesnt seem to be this vast hypocrisy in 'something like this' that you complain about above.

He knows this. He's just incapable of anything other than a low-hanging fruit type talking point.