The language in the constitution says majority of the electors appointed. If these three states are still recounting and appoint no electors, the number for majority is reduced.
“The language in the constitution says majority of the electors appointed. If these three states are still recounting and appoint no electors, the number for majority is reduced.”
There’s another argument: “The President is elected by a majority, not of possible electors (270), but by a majority of electors ACTUALLY APPOINTED (it says that, right in Article II and again in Amendment XII).” Posted by Freeper Jim Noble here: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3498796/posts?page=8#8
It’s the two different opinions, that Hillary, and perhaps even most of the Uniparty and Globalists, fueled by the addition of some creative b.s. storyline pumped out continuously by the Dept. of Propaganda until the public warms to the idea, which they hope to have the Court decide.
Even if Trump somehow can’t count the 46 EV’s from MI, WI, and PN, that changes the electoral vote totals to Trump-260 and Hillary-232. There would still need to be some other reason to have the Court decide to throw the election to Congress, perhaps some crazy new (FALSE) evidence that the Russians really did hack the election, and even more states are involved. So how does a Republican Congress somehow then vote to give Hillary the election? They’d run the risk of war if they did such. In addition to the Russian hacking fabrication, would they say Trump was complicit? Why Hillary is going for the recount when she still can’t win makes no sense. It certainly seems that there must be something more in the works, with the recount being just the first step.