PDA

View Full Version : Electors demand intelligence briefing before Electoral College vote




CPUd
12-12-2016, 02:19 PM
Electors demand intelligence briefing before Electoral College vote

The request represents the latest effort by Democratic electors to look to the Electoral College as a possible bulwark against a Trump presidency.


In its first show of public support for efforts questioning the legitimacy of Donald Trump's victory, Hillary Clinton’s campaign said it is supporting a request by members of the Electoral College for an intelligence briefing on foreign intervention in the presidential election.

“The bipartisan electors' letter raises very grave issues involving our national security,” Podesta said in a statement Monday. “Electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed.”

“Each day that month, our campaign decried the interference of Russia in our campaign and its evident goal of hurting our campaign to aid Donald Trump,” he said. “Despite our protestations, this matter did not receive the attention it deserved by the media in the campaign. We now know that the CIA has determined Russia's interference in our elections was for the purpose of electing Donald Trump. This should distress every American.”

Podesta’s statement follows an open letter from 10 members of the Electoral College, including Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi’s daughter Christine and a former member of Congress, who are demanding a briefing from U.S. intelligence officials on any ongoing investigations into Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.

In a letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, the electors — nine Democrats and one Republican — argue that they require the information ahead of Dec. 19, when the Electoral College is set to meet and select the next president.

“The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations,” they wrote. “We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States.”
...
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/electors-intelligence-briefing-trump-russia-232498

Jamesiv1
12-12-2016, 02:23 PM
Dang Russkies!!!

jllundqu
12-12-2016, 02:26 PM
Is it OK if I secretly hope that the Electors do something stupid or that Obama declares martial law? The mask partially came off this election, but I would love to see the full monty of this fraud of a government. If Obama declared the election a fraud or tried to void the results, we would have a literal civil war... and I actually think it would be a healthy thing for the country.

THoughts?

CPUd
12-12-2016, 02:31 PM
I doubt anything will come from it.

phill4paul
12-12-2016, 02:33 PM
Is it OK if I secretly hope that the Electors do something stupid or that Obama declares martial law? The mask partially came off this election, but I would love to see the full monty of this fraud of a government. If Obama declared the election a fraud or tried to void the results, we would have a literal civil war... and I actually think it would be a healthy thing for the country.

THoughts?

Sounds good to me. It's about time for another Sherman's "March to the Sea." Only this time let's do the D.C. tour.

Brian4Liberty
12-12-2016, 02:38 PM
808403980221108224
https://twitter.com/USAB4L/status/808403980221108224

staerker
12-12-2016, 02:50 PM
The Washington Post is working on it right now. Should only take a few days.

69360
12-12-2016, 04:10 PM
Is it OK if I secretly hope that the Electors do something stupid or that Obama declares martial law? The mask partially came off this election, but I would love to see the full monty of this fraud of a government. If Obama declared the election a fraud or tried to void the results, we would have a literal civil war... and I actually think it would be a healthy thing for the country.

THoughts?

Doubt it would happen and doubt even more civil war. Trump and Clinton had huge negatives. Neither had strong enough support to start a war.

enhanced_deficit
12-12-2016, 04:14 PM
Deep-Dive briefing may not be available for few more weeks, so far is inconclusive unless they want FBI briefing that did not find Russia's hand:

Secret FBI assessment says Russia was not trying to help Trump win White House (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?505240-Secret-FBI-assessment-says-Russia-was-not-trying-to-help-Trump-win-White-House&)

Obama orders 'deep dive' of election-related hacking (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?505168-Obama-questions-the-integrity-of-elections&)
Politico
President Barack Obama has ordered a "deep dive" into the cyberattacks that plagued this year's election, the White House said Friday.
Obama has asked the intelligence community to deliver its final report before he leaves office.



There is some unconfirmed speculation on internets that DGP may consider using executive order to void elections, it is not clear if he could really do that without facing impeachment risk.





Related

(http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?505297-The-Incredible-Spineless-Hillary-Clinton&)Electors could demand to interview media employees who secretly colluded with Hillary campaign (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?505360-Electors-could-demand-to-interview-media-employees-who-secretly-colluded-with-Hillary-campaign&)

The Incredible, Spineless Hillary Clinton (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?505297-The-Incredible-Spineless-Hillary-Clinton&)


Not a single Elector has demanded to hear audio tape of Hillary proposing Election rigging

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BONM8IJktFE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BONM8IJktFE

Madison320
12-12-2016, 04:44 PM
I'm not one to say I told you so, but I told you so!

"If Trump wins what are the chances Hillary concedes?

Wouldn't it be funny if Trump won and Hillary protested the results? It's ironic that the media is making a big deal out of Trump not accepting the results, when I think it's far more likely that Hillary (and most of the media) would protest a Trump victory."


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?502883-If-Trump-wins-what-are-the-chances-Hillary-concedes

enhanced_deficit
12-12-2016, 04:55 PM
I'm not one to say I told you so, but I told you so!

"If Trump wins what are the chances Hillary concedes?

Wouldn't it be funny if Trump won and Hillary protested the results? It's ironic that the media is making a big deal out of Trump not accepting the results, when I think it's far more likely that Hillary (and most of the media) would protest a Trump victory."


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?502883-If-Trump-wins-what-are-the-chances-Hillary-concedes


You were right:

This "attack on democracy" and 'will of the people" might be part of team work:


http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/barack-obama-hillary-clinton-hug-photoshop-battle-56.jpg

(http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?505168-Obama-questions-the-integrity-of-elections&p=6382206&viewfull=1#post6382206)

Is Hillary Clinton Trying To Question The Legitimacy Of Donald Trump Winning? (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?505168-Obama-questions-the-integrity-of-elections&p=6382206&viewfull=1#post6382206)


NPR
- ‎1 hour ago‎




Amid news of possible Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election, a top Hillary Clinton adviser is publicly casting support for a push by some members of the Electoral College to receive an intelligence briefing ahead of their formal vote next week. "The bipartisan electors' letter raises very grave issues involving our national security," Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta said in statement Monday. "Electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed."

It's the losing Democratic nominee's most public show of support yet for efforts to question the legitimacy of election results that gave Donald Trump the presidency. And it follows news over the weekend that the CIA has concluded that Russia intervened in the election to help the Republican win.
The letter (https://extranewsfeed.com/bipartisan-electors-ask-james-clapper-release-facts-on-outside-interference-in-u-s-election-c1a3d11d5b7b#.x4o0mhw6a) comes from 10 mostly Democratic electors, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's daughter Christine and New Hampshire Rep.-elect Carol Shea-Porter. Only one signatory is a Republican, Texan Chris Suprun, who has already said (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=0) he is refusing to vote for Trump despite his state's results.

Madison320
12-12-2016, 05:30 PM
It sounds really sinister, "Russia hacked the election for Trump!". But what could Russia really do? From what I understand the voting process is decentralized and not hooked up to a network, so I don't see how they could change the votes. There was the Wikileaks but even if Russia was responsible the emails weren't made up. They really did exist and if Hillary wasn't trying to hide what she was doing and use an unprotected server those emails never would've been available. She got caught by her own stupidity and corruption. Besides that the media barely mentioned Wikileaks in comparison to the Trump tape.

robert68
12-12-2016, 05:33 PM
Is it OK if I secretly hope that the Electors do something stupid or that Obama declares martial law? The mask partially came off this election, but I would love to see the full monty of this fraud of a government. If Obama declared the election a fraud or tried to void the results, we would have a literal civil war... and I actually think it would be a healthy thing for the country.

THoughts?

Less legitimacy for the head of the beast would be good. There wouldn't be a civil war IMO. Lot of Trumpsters in ER's though.:cool:

Lovecraftian4Paul
12-12-2016, 05:47 PM
It sounds really sinister, "Russia hacked the election for Trump!". But what could Russia really do? From what I understand the voting process is decentralized and not hooked up to a network, so I don't see how they could change the votes. There was the Wikileaks but even if Russia was responsible the emails weren't made up. They really did exist and if Hillary wasn't trying to hide what she was doing and use an unprotected server those emails never would've been available. She got caught by her own stupidity and corruption. Besides that the media barely mentioned Wikileaks in comparison to the Trump tape.

Yeah, exactly. As far as anyone knows, there was zero vote hacking. All the "hacks" refer to breaking into the Hillary and DNC email accounts. They're trying to make the American people pissed that Russia turned on the light while the Hillary underlings had their hands caught in the cookie jar, colluding with the media and rigging the Dem primary, among other unsavory things.

Russia did a valuable service if the hacks were real by exposing corruption in our own ranks and preventing her election. Of course their intentions weren't pure, and it wasn't for our benefit. But when has that mattered? The French didn't come to our assistance during the revolutionary war because they had some great yearning for the American people to be free.

Seraphim
12-12-2016, 06:01 PM
Clinton breaches security protocol by having an unsecured private server hold classified information and email correspondence >> Someone CLOSE to Clinton knows what she and her ilk do, takes the server data and hands it over to Wikileaks >> Wikileaks verifies the authenticity of the data dump >> Wikileaks releases data, forever damning Clinton and her ilk based on THEIR OWN BEHAVIOR >> Clinton lies about the whole thing under oath >> Clinton "Unfathomably" loses Presidential election to Trump >> Clinton says data she idiotically handled was a Russian hack job to undermine her Presidency >> Clinton insinuates 70 million Trump voters are Russian agents >> Clinton/ilk trying to sway the electorate away from Trump because the entire process was a Russian coup

Stranger than fiction.

tod evans
12-12-2016, 07:27 PM
Is it OK if I secretly hope that the Electors do something stupid or that Obama declares martial law? The mask partially came off this election, but I would love to see the full monty of this fraud of a government. If Obama declared the election a fraud or tried to void the results, we would have a literal civil war... and I actually think it would be a healthy thing for the country.

THoughts?

Past due.

tod evans
12-12-2016, 07:28 PM
Less legitimacy for the head of the beast would be good. There wouldn't be a civil war IMO. Lot of Trumpsters in ER's though.:cool:

You must live in a city....

CPUd
12-12-2016, 08:37 PM
Yeah, exactly. As far as anyone knows, there was zero vote hacking. All the "hacks" refer to breaking into the Hillary and DNC email accounts. They're trying to make the American people pissed that Russia turned on the light while the Hillary underlings had their hands caught in the cookie jar, colluding with the media and rigging the Dem primary, among other unsavory things.

Russia did a valuable service if the hacks were real by exposing corruption in our own ranks and preventing her election. Of course their intentions weren't pure, and it wasn't for our benefit. But when has that mattered? The French didn't come to our assistance during the revolutionary war because they had some great yearning for the American people to be free.

They were phished.

Jamesiv1
12-12-2016, 09:45 PM
This guy makes some pretty good points (and less shrill than most)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP77G_9-PMQ

Madison320
12-13-2016, 10:50 AM
Is it OK if I secretly hope that the Electors do something stupid or that Obama declares martial law? The mask partially came off this election, but I would love to see the full monty of this fraud of a government. If Obama declared the election a fraud or tried to void the results, we would have a literal civil war... and I actually think it would be a healthy thing for the country.

THoughts?


I doubt any of us would want to live thru an actual civil war.

I think the best case scenario for actual change is for a state to secede peacefully. And that doesn't have a chance of happening until we get the "Final Crash", by that I mean a dollar crash, where we can no longer borrow and print our way out of it. We're in a cycle of stimulate-crash-bigger stimulate-bigger crash and the end game is when the dollar can't take it anymore and we get really bad inflation.

jllundqu
12-13-2016, 11:01 AM
I doubt any of us would want to live thru an actual civil war.

I think the best case scenario for actual change is for a state to secede peacefully. And that doesn't have a chance of happening until we get the "Final Crash", by that I mean a dollar crash, where we can no longer borrow and print our way out of it. We're in a cycle of stimulate-crash-bigger stimulate-bigger crash and the end game is when the dollar can't take it anymore and we get really bad inflation.

I hate this slow-kill BS. I would also like secession/decentralization to occur, but this is unlikely. Sooner the crash gets here the better. Humanity can't move forward until it comes.

CPUd
12-13-2016, 11:16 AM
California Secession: From Russia With Love?

One of the primary backers for #Calexit makes no secret about his connection with Russia.


Following the election of Donald Trump to the American presidency, a raft of geopolitical issues have roared to the fore. From stability in Ukraine and the Baltics, to American security relations with Japan and South Korea, to the likely demise of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, numerous tenets of American regional policy are suddenly in question.

Closer to home, however, Trump’s election seems to have sparked a related question of sovereignty – this time, on the domestic front. Due to any number of issues – from Trump’s trade policies, to the threat his administration may pose to civil liberties, to the outright illegitimacy with which many Americans view a Trump presidency – there has been a rapid surge in backing for the concept of California secession. Known colloquially as #Calexit, those pushing for California’s departure from the United States can suddenly point to far more individuals now offering support for splitting the most populous state from the union.

To be sure, the likelihood of a successful California secession remains about as likely as Trump stewarding a peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsula. And the infrastructure pushing California’s secession movement, for what it’s worth, pales in comparison to other states, most especially Texas. (Unlike Texas, which received recognition during the mid-19th-century from Britain, France, and a handful of other nations, no foreign countries ever recognized California’s pre-American claims to independent nationhood.) But the movement behind California’s secession – especially as it pertains to the nascent leadership – maintains a series of foreign ties that casts a continued pall over the movement.

The primary organization pushing California’s secession, Yes California, is based out of Fresno, California. However, the group’s head, Louis Marinelli, spent only a handful of years living in California, and says he now lives in Russia. (Neither Marinelli nor Yes California responded to The Diplomat’s questions.) Indeed, it appears Marinelli only lived in California for a few years before uprooting for Russia; as he recently told RT, a Kremlin-backed outlet, “I could no longer live under an American flag.” Marinelli also added that he expects Russia’s support for his push to fracture the United States, comparing California’s potential secession to Moscow’s recent occupation of Crimea, and noted that he wants California’s first embassy to open in Russia. One of the primary potential financiers of the movement, Shervin Pishevar, also recently met with Russian President Vladimir Putin, and received pledges of financing for his Hyperloop venture.

But it’s not simply that the head of California’s secession drive lives in a country fingered by myriad American intelligence agencies for interfering in the recent U.S. presidential election. Marinelli, a few months ago, also attended a secession conference in Moscow – one that was funded, in part, by the Kremlin. Joined by representatives of the Texan, Puerto Rican, and Hawaiian (via videoconference) secession movements – some of whom took photos together on Red Square – Marinelli stated his case to his Russian audience. For good measure, Marinelli also recently Tweeted that he supports “peace with Russia.”

As it is, Marinelli hasn’t gone to great lengths to hide his affiliations with Russia, and has defended his actions by noting that “[e]verybody’s using everybody.” In a recent interview with Business Insider, Marinelli added that Yes California – which began formal secession processes this week – is willing to work with any and all potential partners: “That’s why we don’t [have] a problem with me being in Russia, for example, or signing an agreement with a group in Russia.” (Other California secession groups, however, have disowned Marinelli for his relationship with Russia.) Indeed, Yes California recently, and curiously, Tweeted about the support from foreign powers the United States received during its own push for independence.

Again, there’s negligible likelihood Marinelli’s drive to wrest California from the United States will succeed, and there’s no reason to believe the Kremlin is playing any direct role in steering Yes California’s efforts. But given the Kremlin’s financing of events that bring together those who’d fracture the United States – to say nothing of Marinelli’s personal history – the cheery sheen on Yes California’s drive for independence is that much murkier, and that much stranger, than organizers would otherwise let on.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/11/california-secession-from-russia-with-love/

Madison320
12-13-2016, 01:02 PM
I hate this slow-kill BS. I would also like secession/decentralization to occur, but this is unlikely. Sooner the crash gets here the better. Humanity can't move forward until it comes.

I totally agree, I just don't want actual war. Plus the longer it takes for the crash, the bigger it will be because we'll have accumulated more debt and more malinvestments.

Change doesn't happen until the pain of staying the same is greater than the pain of the change.

nobody's_hero
12-13-2016, 01:56 PM
I guess Russia is the new boogeyman. Step aside ISIS.

tod evans
12-13-2016, 01:59 PM
I guess Russia is the new boogeyman. Step aside ISIS.

Does that mean the weapons shipments go to Russia now?

Madison320
12-13-2016, 04:21 PM
I guess Russia is the new boogeyman. Step aside ISIS.

I think it's funny that now the democrats are on the side of confrontation and the republicans are the non-interventionists. It has nothing to do with principles, it's just political expediency.

Anti Federalist
12-13-2016, 06:32 PM
I doubt any of us would want to live thru an actual civil war.

Not many of us would want to live through having a lung removed because it was growing a huge cancerous tumor either...but it's better than the alternative.

I would LOVE to see peaceful secession and break up, but, barring that, if it takes a fight to get smaller, to remove the growth tumor that is cancerous government, I say bring it on.

CPUd
12-14-2016, 03:13 PM
The number is up to 29 now, but 28 of them are democrat electors so it doesn't help their cause much. The RNC is running an aggressive whip operation to make sure their electors vote the way they are supposed to vote.

jllundqu
12-14-2016, 03:38 PM
Not many of us would want to live through having a lung removed because it was growing a huge cancerous tumor either...but it's better than the alternative.

I would LOVE to see peaceful secession and break up, but, barring that, if it takes a fight to get smaller, to remove the growth tumor that is cancerous government, I say bring it on.

God damn right. THIS TOWN NEEDS AN ENEMA!

Anti Federalist
12-14-2016, 07:05 PM
God damn right. THIS TOWN NEEDS AN ENEMA!

The one and only Joker.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKofnVkUwBA

TheTexan
12-14-2016, 07:07 PM
Not many of us would want to live through having a lung removed because it was growing a huge cancerous tumor either...but it's better than the alternative.

I would LOVE to see peaceful secession and break up, but, barring that, if it takes a fight to get smaller, to remove the growth tumor that is cancerous government, I say bring it on.

Can it wait until the Walking Dead season is over?

CPUd
12-17-2016, 12:55 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx9dNXJby64

Weston White
12-18-2016, 01:58 AM
...America's Founders didn't provide an emergency brake in case the voters got their votes wrong, they only ensured that largely populated states didn't drown out the votes of competing states. SMH for Pete's sake!


On Thursday evening, he found himself in the Library of Congress. Strolling through its stacks, Koller sought a librarian with one request: Can I see the original Federalist Papers?

He looked to see Federalist No. 68, written by Hamilton to describe the need for the electoral college.

“We have been getting a civic lesson we weren’t prepared to get,” Koller said. “They gave us the fail-safe emergency brake, in case the people got it wrong. And here we are, 200 years later. It’s the last shot we have.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-last-shot-bid-thousands-urge-electoral-college-to-block-trump-at-monday-vote/2016/12/17/125fa84a-c327-11e6-8422-eac61c0ef74d_story.html?utm_term=.5220ac41eb1e


Here is what Federalist 68 states:


which is, that the people of each State shall choose a number of persons as electors, equal to the number of senators and representatives of such State in the national government, who shall assemble within the State, and vote for some fit person as President. Their votes, thus given, are to be transmitted to the seat of the national government, and the person who may happen to have a majority of the whole number of votes will be the President. But as a majority of the votes might not always happen to centre in one man, and as it might be unsafe to permit less than a majority to be conclusive, it is provided that, in such a contingency, the House of Representatives shall select out of the candidates who shall have the five highest number of votes, the man who in their opinion may be best qualified for the office.

bunklocoempire
12-18-2016, 06:04 AM
I demand proof of intelligence from the electors.