Hillary Supporters’ Threats to Electors Are Escalating
Nov 28, 2016 by Raven Clabough
The “tolerant” Left continues to flail in the weeks following the presidential election. Clinton supporters have already made headlines over their petulant and in some cases violent reactions to the election results, but after their kicking and screaming has failed to make any change, they’ve resorted to bullying and threats. According to WND.com, disgruntled individuals and groups have reached out to Electoral College voters not only to persuade them to switch their votes to Hillary Clinton, but also to threaten them with violence if they refuse.
The Electoral College will convene on December 19 so that the electors can cast their votes for Trump or Clinton, and all electors have pledged to vote for the candidate elected by their state.
But Clinton’s supporters are reaching out to the electors in states wherein it is not illegal for electors to change their votes. WND writes, “If Clinton’s supporters can get enough of the 163 electors from states where Trump both won and votes can legally be switched on Dec. 19, Hillary Clinton becomes the next president of the United States.”
In the history of the Electoral College, it is extremely rare for electors to vote against the candidate elected by their state. According to Fairvote.org, there have been 157 electors since the founding of the Electoral College who changed their vote, of which 71 were changed because the original candidate died before the Electoral College cast its votes, and three chose to abstain from casting their vote for any candidate. No faithless elector has changed the outcome of an election.
Therefore, Clinton’s supporters are resorting to escalating threats to convince electors to violate their duties to vote for the candidate chosen by the state. According to BuzzFeed, the #NotMyPresident Alliance released the personal information of dozens of Electoral College members in states that went to Trump in an effort to encourage disgruntled people to reach out to and sway the electors.
One such harassed elector is Michael Banerian of Oakland County, Michigan, who told the Detroit News that he has received numerous threatening e-mails demanding that he vote for Clinton instead of Trump, despite it being illegal for Banerian to change his electoral vote in Michigan. “You have people saying ‘you’re a hateful bigot, I hope you die,’” he said. “I’ve had people talk about shoving a gun in my mouth and blowing my brains out. And I’ve received dozens and dozens of those emails. Even the non-threatening-my-life emails are very aggressive.”
“I’ve just gotten a lot of ‘you’re a hateful bigot and I hope you die,’ which is kind of ironic,” Banerian said, “that they’re calling me hateful and yet wishing for my death. They don’t even know me.”
Banerian is not the only one, according to the Michigan Republican Party. “Hearing from them that they are also receiving threats, I’m interested in getting a consensus from the group … and seeing if it’s something that we should report to the police,” Sarah Anderson, the Michigan Republican Party spokeswoman, told the News. “It’s obviously something that we’re taking very seriously.”
Electors in Arizona are also being harassed, Fox News reports. “Arizona’s presidential electors are reportedly being hit by a flood of emails and phone calls demanding they defy the voters in their state and choose Hillary Clinton instead of President-elect Donald Trump — as part of a last-gasp bid to overturn the election,” Fox reported.
Georgia’s electors too are being bullied and threatened by Clinton supporters, as indicated in a statement by Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp. “The Presidential election is over but, unfortunately, the vitriol remains,” said Kemp. “Our office has received numerous reports of individuals hurling insults and threats at Georgia’s Electors because they are unsettled with America’s choice for President of the United States. This is absolutely unacceptable and those participating in or encouraging these efforts should stop. The electoral process in America has worked, and everyone — Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and others — should respect the will of Georgia’s voters and the Electors who represent them.”
In Texas, Republican Alex Kim said he and his fellow electors have been bombarded with e-mails and phone calls asking them to switch their votes to Clinton. “At first, everyone was kind of enchanted by it,” Kim told NBC5 in Dallas-Fort Worth. “Now all the electors are starting to get beaten down. There are some electors who have been threatened with harm or with death.”
Two Democratic electors are leading a movement called #HamiltonElectors to encourage members of the Electoral College to “vote their conscience” and dump Trump, the Washington Times reports.
Additionally, over four million people have signed a petition on Change.org asking all of the 538 electors to vote for Clinton instead of Trump. The petition reads like the rant of an angry bunch of sore losers:
On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, in 14 of the states in Trump’s column, they can vote for Hillary Clinton without any legal penalty if they choose.
We are calling on the 149 Electors in those states to ignore their states’ votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. Why?
Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.
Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.
Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump “won” is because of the Electoral College.
But the Electoral College can actually give the White House to either candidate. So why not use this most undemocratic of our institutions to ensure a democratic result?
SHE WON THE POPULAR VOTE.
There is no reason Trump should be President.
“It’s the ‘People’s Will’”
No. She won the popular vote.
“Our system of government under our Constitution says he wins”
No. Our Constitution says the Electors choose.
“Too many states prohibit ‘Faithless Electors’”
24 states bind electors. If electors vote against their party, they usually pay a fine. And people get mad. But they can vote however they want and there is no legal means to stop them in most states.
The irony, of course, is that the petition calls Trump a bully when the same people who support the petition are in fact bullying electors to vote for the person they want.
Meanwhile, the ire over the Electoral College as seen in the petition results from a fundamental lack of understanding of what it means to be a constitutional republic versus a democracy. It is a sad testament to the fact that public and higher education is failing to teach Americans the history of the republic and the government that was created by the Founding Fathers. Those who support the Electoral College understand that it was designed to protect the smaller states from being dominated by the more heavily populated ones.
For some, however, it’s more important to get their way than to protect everyone under the Constitution. They are still reeling from the fact that their safe spaces have failed to protect them from the blow that the election dealt.
Trump vs. Media: Dems Steal Votes — Media Lie About It and Blame GOP
Nov 28, 2016 by Selwyn Duke
A team of researchers just proposed that alternate universes exist and influence each other, and this just may be true.
Because the media appear to exist in one of them and, unfortunately, influence our universe.
Just consider the latest media contortion. When President-elect Donald Trump claims he would have won the popular vote had it not been for illegal voting, he’s not only branded a loon and a liar, but the media also insist there’s no “documented proof” of widespead electoral fraud. When Hillary Clinton joins in the Jill Stein inspired recount in Wisconsin — even though her campaign and the Obama administration state there’s no evidence of vote tampering and that the effort won’t change the result — it’s called justifiable.
Never mind that when the Left was sure they’d win the Nov. 8 contest, they warned that Trump’s threat to possibly not accept the outcome could “lead to violence.”
Then after Trump won, leftists who wouldn’t accept the outcome rioted.
Never mind that Clinton had called Trump’s pre-election statement “appalling,” “horrifying,” and a move that undermined “the pillar of our democracy.”
Now she apparently feels that an admittedly futile but divisive recount is just democracy at work.
And never mind that the Left also warned that not accepting the Election Day outcome could undermine “the legitimacy of the president.”
Now it has embarked upon electoral and media propaganda campaigns designed to do exactly that to President-elect Trump.
Let’s examine the claims at issue here. While the recount effort certainly raises Green Party nominee Stein’s profile and may fill her party’s coffers, she claims she embarked upon it because she was concerned about an alleged vote-count disparity between Wisconsin areas that used paper ballots and those using electronic voting; Stein’s idea ostensibly is, reports Raw Story, that “Russian hacking” might have cooked the vote. Of course, with Clinton’s and Obama’s admission that there’s no evidence of electronic hacking, little need be said. Nonetheless, it should be noted that Wisconsin’s electronic machines could not be “hacked” via the Web because they weren’t connected to the Internet. Each device would have to be tampered with individually. Moreover, as FiveThirtyEight pointed out last week, it is demographics, not hacking, that explain the election results.
Trump’s claim, however, is far more troubling — not because it lacks substance but because the substance is scary.
As for style, the president-elect was characteristically brash, stating in a November 27 tweet, “In addition to winning the electoral college [sic] in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” The media have been quick to jump on this, with CNN calling his allegation “unprecedented” and “without evidence.” And the Washington Post, which seems intent on winning the race to the bottom of the birdcage, called Trump’s claim “unsubstantiated,” “bogus,” and a “Twitter-born conspiracy theory.” Yet these claims themselves are unsubstantiated.
Simple analogizing illustrates the reality here: Can you tell me how many cases of speeding occurred in the United States last year? Not how many speeding tickets were issued, but how many such incidents occurred. Criminal activity is secret by nature, and when enforcement mechanisms are poor and the victims aren’t directly harmed (as in assault), what’s uncovered will be only the iceberg’s tip.
As for vote fraud, a man may run to the police station and complain his wallet was stolen, but who even knows when his vote was stolen (by someone illegally voting in a way negating it)? This brings us to IBTimes.com, which stated “Donald Trump Falsely Claims ‘Millions’ Voted Illegally” and that “there has not been any evidence of any widespread voter fraud on either side.”
This is, frankly, a lie.
Project Veritas caught one Democrat election commissioner on hidden camera (two videos below) admitting that “there is a lot of voter fraud.” Then there’s the Democrat operative who stated “We’ve been bussing people [illegal voters] in to deal with you f*****g a******s for 50 years and we’re not going to stop now,” in the midst of explaining how to commit vote fraud.
(Article continues below.)
Note that two of the Democrat operatives exposed by Project Veritas lost their jobs for conspiring to do what there’s “no evidence of.”
The Washington Post also makes a startling admission. Attempting to debunk Trump’s claim of millions voting illegally, the paper writes, “Even the researcher who produced the data [in question] said Trump was taking his findings out of context: ‘Our results suggest that almost all elections in the U.S. are not determined by non-citizen participation, with occasional and very rare potential exceptions.’”
So nothing to see here, move along? Is it not alarming that even a few elections could be swayed by interloping foreigners, and shouldn’t this be a red flag spurring us to action?
The Post devotes much ink attempting to debunk VoteStand.com founder Gregg Philips’ claim that three million illegal aliens voted this election cycle. And his number could be way off. But, again, it’s hard to know the extent of criminality — especially when little attempt is made to thwart it. The obvious solution, which would end this whole debate, is to institute voter ID. You know, that method for ensuring electoral integrity the Democrats and media fight tooth and nail. Never mind that ID is required for everything from receiving government benefits to entering many buildings (e.g., the White House) to boarding an airplane. The Left claims it would suppress the minority vote.
And it certainly would.
The illegal vote is (still) a minority vote, after all.
Here’s what we do know: 12 states and D.C. allow illegals to get driver’s licenses. And as Clinton campaign manager John Podesta wrote in a WikiLeaks email, “[I]f you show up on Election Day with a drivers [sic] license with a picture, attest that you are a citizen, you have a right to vote in Federal elections.” In other words, it’s an honor system.
Moreover, note that Trump did not say the issue was illegals voting, but illegal voting — of all kinds. As to this, I reported on vote fraud in 2005 after being contacted by a local Washington, D.C., community leader who had, as he put it, “done some computer work for several candidates over the years in DC.” Outlining how the transiency in inner-city neighborhoods enabled Democrat electoral criminality, he explained that local Democrat operatives known as “block captains” know who has moved out of their area and, with ID unnecessary, simply claim to be those people and vote in their stead.
Mind you, just recently I spoke to a Yonkers, N.Y., policeman who attested to this, saying he talked to poll workers who saw a man vote, leave, and then come back in a different shirt and try to vote again.
There’s much opportunity for such shenanigans, too. As this 2012 Pew study shows, approximately “24 million — one of every eight — voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate. More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters. [And] [a]pproximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.”
Of course, most telling is that the same media that before the election were calling vote fraud “virtually nonexistent” now apparently believe this non-existence justifies disruptive recounts. Why, a cynic might suspect that they know there’s vote fraud and that it benefits their chosen party — and that recounts provide yet another opportunity to engage in it.
Related previous post on this blog
Tagged: abortion, al-Qaida, “Muslim Mafia, benghazi, Caliphate, Chemical Weapons, Christian, collapse of America, Constitution, dictator, foreclosure, Hamas, immigration, IRS, ISIS, Islam, Islamist, Israel, jihad, Muslim Brotherhood, Nazi, NSA, Obama, obamacare, radical Islam, rights, Second Amendment, Syria, Tea Party, Trump, Tyrannical Government, voter fraud, White House