Posted on 11/16/2016 8:08:11 AM PST by IdahoVeteran
Reports from one of 21 states not binding electors to the state results. Activists have distributed contact information including FB, phone and cell numbers, email addresses. Electors report barrage of abuse. http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/nov/14/idaho-trump-electors-report-barrage-of-harassing-m/
It depends upon what methods they are using to “ask” the electors to change their votes . . . and if it can be proven in court.
As much as I am disgusted by the “protesting” against the President-elect - they have the right, until their right interferes with others rights. Once they infringe upon others, they are no longer engaging in constitutionally-protected speech.
Once they step off the sidewalks unto public thoroughfares, the become rioters. In my opinion.
I would think it is a form of voter intimidation
Are you arguing that one phone call, one email, or one Facebook message that says, "Please don't vote for Donald Trump" is enough for a criminal conviction?
Facebook is a public forum.
People have a right to block phone calls and emails they do not wish to receive.
You have made it very clear that you do not respect any rights of others. You fit right in with the commie Democrats.
That’s a separate issue. Petitioning the government for redress is not done anonymously. And threats and intimidation of electors is not tolerable, anonymous or not.
Define “harrassment” . Will it be harassment if these electors change their vote and are hung for it?
They know even their votes have to then be accepted by Congress.
This is how our Founders set it all up. Thankfully, Donald has a large margin of electors in his favor.
I believe it is correct.
This is happening in Texas as well.
I remember that Algore was presiding over the session that day. Hearing the sound of him asking "Is it signed by a senator?" and getting a negative response:— it was a feast day of "Sore Loserman" schadenfreude.
“November 8, 2016—Election Day
Registered voters cast their votes for President and Vice President. By doing so, they also help choose the electors who will represent their state in the Electoral College.
Mid-November through December 19, 2016
After the presidential election, the governor of your state prepares seven Certificates of Ascertainment. “As soon as practicable,” after the election results in your state are certified, the governor sends one of the Certificates of Ascertainment to the Archivist.
Certificates of Ascertainment should be sent to the Archivist no later than the meeting of the electors in December. However, federal law sets no penalty for missing the deadline.
The remaining six Certificates of Ascertainment are held for use at the meeting of the Electors in December.
December 13, 2016
States must make final decisions in any controversies over the appointment of their electors at least six days before the meeting of the Electors. This is so their electoral votes will be presumed valid when presented to Congress.
Decisions by states’ courts are conclusive, if decided under laws enacted before Election Day.
December 19, 2016
The Electors meet in their state and vote for President and Vice President on separate ballots. The electors record their votes on six “Certificates of Vote,” which are paired with the six remaining Certificates of Ascertainment.
The electors sign, seal, and certify six sets of electoral votes. A set of electoral votes consists of one Certificate of Ascertainment and one Certificate of Vote. These are distributed immediately as follows:
one set to the President of the Senate (the Vice President) for the official count of the electoral votes in January;
two packages to the Secretary of State in the state where the electors met—one is an archival set that becomes part of the public record of the Secretary of State’s office and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes;
two packages to the Archivist—one is an archival set that becomes part of the permanent collection at the National Archives and Records Administration and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes; and
one set to the presiding judge in the district where the Electors met—this is also a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes.
December 28, 2016
Electoral votes (the Certificates of Vote) must be received by the President of the Senate and the Archivist no later than nine days after the meeting of the electors. States face no legal penalty for failure to comply.
If votes are lost or delayed, the Archivist may take extraordinary measures to retrieve duplicate originals.
On or Before January 3, 2017
The Archivist and/or representatives from the Office of the Federal Register meet with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House in late December or early January. This is, in part, a ceremonial occasion. Informal meetings may take place earlier.
January 6, 2017
The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes. Congress may pass a law to change this date.
The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.
If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State on the Certificate of Ascertainment would be counted in Congress.
If no Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution provides for the House of Representatives to decide the Presidential election. If necessary the House would elect the President by majority vote, choosing from the three candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each state having one vote.
If no Vice Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment provides for the Senate to elect the Vice President. If necessary, the Senate would elect the Vice President by majority vote, choosing from the two candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each Senator having one vote.
If any objections to the Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If objections are presented, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.
January 20, 2017 at Noon—Inauguration Day
The President-elect takes the Oath of Office and becomes the President of the United States.
General Authority
The Archivist of the United States, as the head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is responsible for carrying out ministerial duties on behalf of the States and the Congress under 3 U.S.C. sections 6, 11, 12, and 13.
NARA is primarily responsible for coordinating the various stages of the electoral process by helping the States prepare and submit certificates that establish the appointment of electors and validate the electoral votes of each State.
The Archivist delegates operational duties to the Director of the Federal Register. The Federal Register Legal Staff ensures that electoral documents are transmitted to Congress, made available to the public, and preserved as part of our nation’s history.
The Office of the Federal Register Legal Staff reviews the electoral certificates for the required signatures, seals and other matters of form, as specified in federal law.
Only the Congress and the courts have the authority to rule on substantive legal issues.”
Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
That'll really convince them to vote for Hillary.
For myself, the more someone pushes, especially if they are not nice, the harder I dig in my heels.
"True threats" are not Free Speech. There is no evidence at all that the Idaho electors have faced any "true threats". In fact, one Idaho elector said that the contact isn't even intimidating.
You are making a lot of ASSumptions and broad brush statements with ZERO proof for what you are claiming.
IBTZ
For you in Idaho... you need to do the same!
Barrage with CALLS and VISITS to stand their ground....
And you are ASSuming that that is the content of the messages.
The electors are reporting abusive treatment and you know better?
If you have all the facts, post them here for all of us to see.
Otherwise, go back to DU where you came from.
Bizarre. I'm saying there is no evidence of threats or intimidation, therefore it is inappropriate to claim a crime has been committed. (At least one elector says there has been no intimidation.)
Due to the lack of evidence, I assume that there was no crime. You take the opposite position. There is no evidence, therefore it is a crime. "Go back to DU"? This is what concerns me about what FR has become.
Bid deal.
ONE elector says.......
Proves nothing.
And you have NO evidence for what you are claiming either. So you are condemning others for doing the very thing you yourself are doing.
That makes you a hypocrite.
Then leave already if you don’t like it.
It’s not your website and you don’t get to make the rules.
The First Amendment restricts the federal government, it does not restrict the people. People are free to do what they want with their own property.
In the instance where there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing, it is wrong to suggest someone should go to jail. Just because that position is defensible, it doesn't make sense to argue the other side that because there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing, there must be a crime.
Absolutely especially considering who they want as President: A MULTIPLE felon, and she IS a multiple felon. Just because we have a corrupt justice dept. that refuses to indict her doesn’t mean she isn’t. This crap has gone on long enough with the Clintons and the enemies of this country they embolden, 30 years of non-stop criminal activity, enough is enough. I pray to God Trump goes after her. Make Rudy Giuliani attorney general and I absolutely guarantee you Hillary will be indicted. I grew up in NYC and have seen first hand how Rudy works, he cannot stand criminals and especially her which is why he wasn’t laughing at all at that Al Smith dinner. Rudy knows exactly the kind of vile crook the Clintons are and he would LOVE to take her down. Look at this video if you haven’t seen it....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_euAvUdBKc
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.