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/
Lobbying or advice is one thing. Open harassment is quite another.
Thank you for posting this.
When we try to play both sides, we become hypocrites like the Democrats/liberals. Let’s not do that.
No, let’s not try to make this illegal. Let’s combat this legally. For one thing, let’s make it very public what kind of dirty tricks Hitlery is STILL up to.
I do agree that democrats who support this are enemies of the US Constitution. But we knew that already.
There is a disturbing trend on FR toward restricting 1st Amendment Free Speech rights since Trump has won. Remember, whatever is done by you can be done to you. Support Free Speech. (To the extent those people have been told to cease contact and still do, harassment laws address conduct, not speech.)
Agreed. Harassment is conduct, not speech. Nothing in the article even hints that the people petitioning elected officials are doing anything harassing according to the law. I know that people call it "harassment" when they hear things they'd rather not hear, but that alone is not harassment according to the law.
I have always advocated for peaceful means of getting rid of 0vomit, Hitlery, and their evil ilk. But if I found out that Trump/GOP electors were threatened, blackmailed, and coerced into voting for Hitlery, I might have to reconsider.
Free Speech. Electors voting their conscience is not a Constitutionally protected freedom.
Unleash the alphabets.
Ha. Give it a rest, troll
They’ve already started shooting people for voting DJT. See Man gunned down outside bar after he joked about voting for Trump http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3494979/posts
Harassment has never been protected speech. You may be an ITG (Internet Tough Guy) but a lot of the people who have volunteered to serve as electors are not. They deserve to right to go about their lives unmolested by dhimmocrat criminals.
There is a disturbing trend on FR toward restricting 1st Amendment Free Speech rights since Trump has won.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don’t know where you’re getting that from.
Electors should enjoy the same type of legal privacy that grand jury members do. Not having that sort of privacy allows the sort of vindictiveness and possibly violence that we may see in this case.
These leftists don’t give half a damn about the law or honor or the Constitution. Theirs is a will to power, and the only reasonable way to counter it is via strong law that is enforced.
Those doing the doxxing should be willing to be doxxed. Petition for redress by signing your name. Anonymous threats and intimidation should be dealt with as harshly as possible under law.
I read this from another Freeper regarding the Electoral Process. Can anyone verify if this is correct and if it solves the problem?
Election Rules
... the libs forgot this part of the process which states that BOTH the Senate and the House must ACCEPT the electors votes from each state.
If there is an OBJECTION sustained by both houses of Congress then that “electors” vote can be rejected or the electors votes from the ENTIRE state can be REFUSED:
Joint session of Congress and Contingencies
Further information: Contingent election
The Twelfth Amendment mandates Congress assemble in joint session to count the electoral votes and declare the winners of the election.[57] The session is
ordinarily required to take place on January 6 in the calendar year immediately following the meetings of the presidential electors.[58]
Since the Twentieth Amendment, the newly elected House declares the winner of the election; all elections before 1936 were determined by the outgoing House.
The meeting is held at 1:00 pm in the Chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives.[58]
The sitting vice president is expected to preside, but in several cases the President pro tempore of the Senate has chaired the proceedings.
The vice president and the Speaker of the House sit at the podium, with the vice president in the seat of the Speaker of the House. Senate pages bring in the two mahogany boxes containing each state’s certified vote and place them on tables in front of the senators and representatives.
Each house appoints two tellers to count the vote (normally one member of each political party). Relevant portions of the Certificate of Vote are read for each state,
in alphabetical order.
Members of Congress can object to any state’s vote count, provide objection is presented in writing and is signed by at least one member of each house of Congress.
An objection supported by at least one senator and one representative will be followed by the suspension of the joint session and by separate debates and votes in each House of Congress; after both Houses deliberate on the objection, the joint session is resumed.
A state’s certificate of vote can be rejected only if both Houses of Congress vote to accept the objection. In that case, the votes from the State in question are simply ignored.
The votes of Arkansas and Louisiana were rejected in the presidential election
of 1872.[59]”
Won’t happen. No electors are going to want to be responsible for the actual shooting-type civil war which would ensue were they to actually hand it to Hillary.
The Electors should get a lawyer and go all Hulk Hogan on Politico.
G-E-O-R-G-E S-O-R-O-S
Never retreating, never obedient to the law. This person and his various organizations all over the world have left chaos and discord in their wake, and have not advanced civilization in any positive manner.
The Democrat party has been a wholly-owned subsidiary, and the Clinton Crime Syndicate is a spin-off from one of the most successful assaults on Western civilization that has been launched since the advance of the Golden Horde, by grandsons of Genghis Khan.
Agreed on all counts, except they are enemies of all mankind, not just the US Constitution.
Was tried in 2001 (for the 2000) election with one rep objecting but could not get a senator to concur.
I hadn't seen that. Please show me where that to find those reports.
But that has to be a small subset of people who are expressing their opinions to elected officials. It seems this thread believes that contacting the officials is illegal.
You really expect the Clinton media to report on this? They’ve answered if they will accept the election results.
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.