Posted on 12/17/2016 1:03:50 PM PST by DOC44
In Georgia and Idaho, the threats have been so extreme that the secretaries of state both released statements calling for the harassment to end. But the federal law enforcement agency that should be acting to stop these threats the U.S. Department of Justice has not done a thing. Section 11b of the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. §10307) makes it a crime for anyone to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote. While this has been applied in the past to ordinary, everyday voters in federal elections, the language does not limit it only to such voters. Electors who are casting their votes for president and vice president are also protected by Section 11b since the Electoral College is an essential part of the federal voting process. This is supported by Section 14(c) of the VRA, which says that voting includes all action necessary to make a vote effective in any primary, special, or general election. Obviously, the votes cast by Americans on Nov. 8 will not be effective if the electors they chose are intimidated from casting their votes in the Electoral College. Federal law (3 U.S.C. §7) requires electors to cast their votes on the first Monday after the second Wednesday of December, which this year is Dec. 19. These are recorded as certificates of vote, signed, sealed, and delivered by December 28 to the president of the Senate and the archivist of the United States (3 U.S.C. §11). Congress is required to meet on Jan. 6, 2017 in joint session to count the Electoral College votes (3 U.S.C. §15).
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
“partisan and unfair” Take it up a few notches. Evil, racist and corrupt is more like it.
Precisely my point.
Though the election is for a national office, presidential elector procedures are determined at the state level, and it would seeem logical that the various states' jurisdictions would take precedence.
Then again, logic and .gov rarely team up . . .
The DoJ isn’t doing anything about alleged threats because no one has reported any threats to the DoJ.
because she wasn’t hired to do an actual job- just to collect a paycheck and badmouth republicans
trump should say He’s considering loretta for attorney general for another term- watch the left go mental over that
Same reason she didn’t open a civil rights probe after all of those revelations were made about what was going on in Wisconsin with the harassment and prosecutions of people who just merely donated to Scott Walker’s campaign - because it involved Republicans, who don’t deserve protection under the law, apparently, in their view.
I agree. It is illuminating to me that the Electors are not reporting the alleged threats to law enforcement. Michigan Elector Mike Banerian is the only one to report a threat to his local police. Of course, Banerian said he wasn't afraid of the threat (indicative that the alleged threat is not a prosecutable "true threat"). Banerian also talked about the alleged threat on TV for two weeks before the media shamed him into reporting it to law enforcement. That suggests to me that Banerian thought that the "threat" was crude political speech.
...because Odungo is on vacation and now says he doesn’t know anything about it...
It’s probably a very safe bet that many of these threats cross state lines. Maybe covered by interstate commerce laws in addition to civil rights, election laws, etc. (the left loves to use ‘interstate commerce’ to cover a variety of activities).
The fascist pigs in the federal government who are aiding and abetting this harassment need to be arrested for treason. And make the arrests memorable and frightening to the traitors by activating the 101st Airborne to carry out the arrests.
Can you imagine this scenario when Obama was elected?
How about posting their names and threatening emails online somewhere?
So why aren’t the state AGs charging anyone? Threats are a crime independent of voting.
States have AG’s also. States should protect their own.
It is bluster, but intimidating. Sequestering for safety, in a lovely place, would be great.
Because the electors aren't Muslim?
Threatening to murder someone and their family is not political speech, crude or otherwise.
The state police or local police should take action against these criminal moonbats because the federal aholes under Obama’s control certainly are not.
See Watts v. United States. #FirstAmendment
I honestly don't think that law enforcement should do anything based on allegations made in media interviews. If the Electors would like law enforcement to do something, they should report the alleged threats to law enforcement.
But the federal law enforcement agency that should be acting to stop these threats the U.S. Department of Justice has not done a thing.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As everyone knows by now the DOJ has been corrupted by the POTUS and his AG. Therefore it would be quite shocking to learn that the DOJ has intervened to stop the threats that have been encouraged by their own silence.
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.