More than 50 Electoral College members who voted for Donald Trump were ineligible to serve as presidential electors because they did not live in the congressional districts they represented or held elective office in states legally barring dual officeholders.
Thus Donald Trump should not be President:
“We have a list of 50 illegal electors,” Clayton said. “That puts Donald Trump below the threshold that he needs to be elected president. Let’s debate it in an open session. According to the Constitution, the Congress, if nobody wins on the first round of balloting, picks from the top three candidates. That will be Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump and Colin Powell.”
Ho hum.
What is amusing though is that the transgressions are the sort of minor thing that happen in any complex organisation. And yet these people doing the complaining are the ones insistent that government can solve all our ills.
You know, government fucks up so let’s have more of it?
Lol.
“Trump’s ascension to the presidency is completely illegitimate,” said Ryan Clayton of Americans Take Action, who is promoting the effort. “It’s not just Russians hacking our democracy. It’s not just voter suppression at unprecedented levels. It is also [that] there are Republicans illegally casting ballots in the Electoral College, and in a sufficient number that the results of the Electoral College proceedings are illegitimate as well.”
Completely bipartisan, you guise.
Pam Bondi is the attorney general of the state of Florida and the Florida Constitution says that you cannot hold two offices.
Mmkay. No idea if being in the electoral college counts as public office in the sense he means, but let’s roll with it anyway…
And she holds the office of Attorney General and she holds the office of federal elector in the Electoral College. That is a violation of the law. That is a violation of the Constitution. And the vote that she cast in this election is illegal.
Nope. It’d be in conflict with Florida law at most, if that, so she might be subject to local difficulties. But federal law overrides that, because federal. Just as a local bylaw can’t nullify, say, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011.
This is from Alternet via Salon so it’s in the statue-of-Elvis-found-on-Moon category of ridiculous hysterical bullshit. These people should still be crushed like insects, of course.
And how many Democrat electors are in the same boat?
HTF do you become a member of the electoral college, anyway? Collect enough token off packets of laundry soap? Auctions on E-bay? Inherit it? Presumably, in Chicago or Detroit, you mug a previous member.
Oh, I left out donate to the Clinton Foundation. Or was that covered in #4?
@BiS: It’s a kind of meaningless honor thing in the US that party bosses can bestow on people they owe a favor or people they want something from. “Sorry we gave the comptroller job to someone else. Wanna be an elector?”
Also, the guy wants to give the decision to Congress? Congress is more Republican than the electoral college.
These college electors weren’t picked at the last minute, were they now? So the likes of Clayton and Rosenfeld had plenty of time to point this out before the electoral college vote. Or indeed the public vote.
Funny they’re bringing it up now. Can’t think why.
If these fuckers really did believe that Trump is Hitler they wouldn’t dare produce this sort of crap, because they’d know he’d have them shot.
The president of the Florida state senate is a federal office? Well, I learn something new every day.
Colin Powell for President? Fine by me – only trouble is that he’s turned the job down.
This is the kind of idiocy you see in student government, so no wonder it surfaces on the left.
“And yet these people doing the complaining are the ones insistent that government can solve all our ills.”
In case you hadn’t noticed most Americans think government can solve all our ills. The difference is the perceived ills. The statement just doesn’t fit reality.
These people aren’t just fascists, they are unbelievably bad losers too.
Actually, the law cited exists… It precludes federal officeholders from being electors. It does not bar state, county or local level officeholders from being electors.
Beyond that, each state is given the authority to regulate who may, or may not, be electors. Each state also has mechanisms to vet and certify every individual nominated for the position of elector.
Once again, we have “professional” journalists pushing a fake news story that fits their agenda because they are either too stupid to know the subject at hand and/or too lazy to verify the accuracy of said story.
There’s a reason I object to you calling yourself a journalist, Timmy, and this is it.
And by the way, Florida law doesn’t bar state officeholders from being electors.
Unlike the professionals, I looked it up.
They’ve gone through all 538 electors and found 50 unqualified electors and all 50 are Trump electors? No, they’ve gone through the Trump electors and found 50 unqualified electors. With a small finite set you test EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE, you DO NOT test only those that break your prefered theory. Odds on there are 50 unqualified Trump electors and 40 unqualified Clinton electors, so Trump still wins.
I’ve had people present better arguments at a Hot Food Licensing hearing.
“No, they’ve gone through the Trump electors and found 50 electors that they can vaguely claim to the honking seals are unqualified.”
There, fixed that for you.
@ DtP
Thanks – I had no idea where to look it up.
In future can you tell me about the USA and check with me if there is a question about UK rules?
Bill Clinton was a Dem elector? As a former President, he’s still a federal employee, isn’t he?
john77 –
Yes.
SE –
No. Bill Clinton is a former office-holder, and is therefore eligible to be an elector. Last time I checked, he was an employee of the Clinton Foundation.
Here’s the link you need: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html
Note the very first two sentences: The U.S. Constitution contains very few provisions relating to the qualifications of Electors. Article II, section 1, clause 2 provides that no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Clearly the highly trained professional journalists at Raw Story, AlterNet and Slate don’t understand the phrase “under the United States”.
Morons.
Here’s more: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/officials.html
Money quote: Under the Constitution, State legislatures have broad powers to direct the process for selecting electors, with one exception regarding the qualifications of electors. Article II, section 1, clause 2 provides that “no Senator, Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States” may be appointed as an elector. It is not settled as to whether this restriction extends to all Federal officials regardless of their level of authority or the capacity in which they serve, but we advise the States that the restriction could disqualify any person who holds a Federal government job from serving as an elector.
All found in less than five minutes with one Google search: “Electors”.
Journalism.
@ DtP
Thanks
As I said earlier: I didn’t know where to look
Rob – “These people aren’t just fascists, they are unbelievably bad losers too.”
This. These people are exceptionally bad losers. And think, if they are doing this from outside the White House, if they are doing this without much control over the levers of power, what might they do if the voters are ever dumb enough to let them back in?
Venezuelan Supreme Court?
It would probably be like the recount, Clinton lost more votes.
All this, yet apparently there was no process requiring Obama to prove he was indeed a natural born citizen of the USA, and to ask him to do so was racist.
Jgh
‘I’ve had people present better arguments at a Hot Food Licensing hearing.’
This did make me laugh out loud to increasingly baffled looks from my work colleagues!
Clearly the highly trained professional journalists at Raw Story, AlterNet and Slate don’t understand the phrase “under the United States”.
They probably read that as “in the United States”.
I don’t think Salon believes much in the meaning of specific words.
Does it matter? AIUI in most States Electors are required to vote as instructed anyway. From elsewhere in DtP’s excellent link:
So even if they had put someone in place who didn’t contravene the rules (I get DtP’s point that they weren’t but lets go with the original claim) they would have still voted Trump.
Paul Carlton said:
“It would probably be like the recount, Clinton lost more votes”
And the disloyal elector campaign.
Dear Mr Worstall
“MAKE AMERICA VOTE AGAIN”
Until they get it right?
Just like the EU.
DP
“It is over.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3ht6gi5jsE