M.ovement A.gainst D.emocracy - Alternative Electors

[stevil]

From the MAD files, this episode.
The 2020 presidential election's Alternative Electors Scheme
Donald Trump and die-hard supporters of “Stop the Steal” have settled on getting Congress to count alternative slates of electors from seven states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — who cast their states’ votes for Trump despite certified popular vote totals showing Trump lost those states.
"As we speak today, an alternate slate of electors in the contested states is going to vote, and we're going to send those results up to Congress," Stephen Miller said. "This will ensure that all of our legal remedies remain open."

The E2E GAME PLAN
- Have some people claim to be electors in states that Trump lost and have them vote for Trump
- Have VP Pence acknowledge that there was ambiguity as to who were the electors in those states and use this ambiguity as justification to throw out results from those states from the electoral college
- Have Pence appoint Trump as the victor of the 2020 election

If it had WORKED
- Trump would be president
- The Republican party would control the White House
- Elections in USA would no longer matter as the VP could always just throw out states his party lost in.

The EXECUTION
Georgia
Jeffrey Clark (then-acting head of the Justice Department’s civil division)
Drafted a letter dated Dec. 28
The letter was distributed to Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and state legislative leaders
Instructing that an alternative slate of electors — that is, electors for Trump — might be accepted on Jan. 6 should the legislature demand that happen.
THWARTED
Jeffrey Rosen (acting attorney general), Richard Donoghue (acting deputy attorney general) rejected the letter out of hand
Meh UN-THWARTED
Georgia Republicans held their own invalid vote on Trump’s behalf

Arizona
a group that claimed to represent the "sovereign citizens of the Great State of Arizona" submitted signed papers casting votes for what they want: a second term for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. "We seated before the legislators here. We already turned it in. We beat them to the game," Lori Osiecki said.

Osiecki said she and others associated with a group called "AZ Protect the Vote" have attended the postelection rallies protesting the results. She left that gathering upset that Gov. Doug Ducey wasn't supporting the president's efforts and so she and the others chose electors as a result.
Osiecki's elector documents are part of a weeks long effort, led by Trump, his advisers, and involving Arizona Republican Party officials and three members of Arizona's GOP congressional delegation casting doubt on the legitimacy of Biden's victory in Arizona and nationally.

Pence
Jan 4 - The plan was first proposed to Pence when Eastman was with Trump in the Oval Office
John Eastman, in a two-page memo laid out a six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election for Trump, which included throwing out the results in seven states because they allegedly had competing electors.
"The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission -- either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court," Eastman wrote.
Eastman spoke at the January 6 rally that preceded the attack on the Capitol.

DONALD TRUMP's direct involvement
Dec 27 - the day before Clark drafted the letter to Georgia state legislative leaders, Trump had pressured Rosen “just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen.”
Dec 28 - Clark was introduced to Trump by Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), and he began talking with Trump directly. Trump began speculating about tossing Rosen in favor of the more acquiescent Clark.
Jan 2 - Trump called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger
“All I want to do is this,” Trump said. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.”
Jan 6 - Trump spoke in front of a large protest group, instructing them to go down to the capitol and help Pence to overthrow the election.

DEFENDERS of USA's democratic election
Jeffrey Rosen (acting attorney general), Richard Donoghue (acting deputy attorney general) rejected Clarke's letter to Georgia state legislative leaders out of hand
On Dec. 31, Rosen and Donoghue met with Clark to tell him to back off his false claims about the election.

A number of senior Justice Department officials had promised to resign should Trump fire Rosen and replace him with Clarke, which the New York Times credits with helping preserve Rosen’s job.

The U.S. attorney for Georgia, a Trump appointee, resigned on Jan. 4 after receiving a call spurred by the White House complaining about his failure to launch investigations of alleged fraud.

After being approched by Pence seeking advice on whether he should throw out results from seven states, former Vice President Dan Quayle and the Senate parliamentarian, who were both clear in telling him he had no authority beyond counting the votes.

While Lee and Graham heard out the cases from Trump's lawyers about throwing out the results from the seven states, they soundly rejected their claims.
Lee was shocked by the claims the memo was making, since no state had considered, let alone put forward, any alternate slates of electors.

References to all the above information
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-about-trumps-last-ditch-push-steal-election/
Arizona group's fake electors try to cast 11 electoral votes for Trump
Memo shows Trump lawyer's six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election - CNNPolitics

 

[spiritfilledjm]

Arizona, Michigan, Nevada don't matter. They have laws in those states voiding any "faithless electors"

Faithless elector - Wikipedia

 

[A_Thinker]

From the MAD files, this episode.

The 2020 presidential election's Alternative Electors Scheme

Donald Trump and die-hard supporters of “Stop the Steal” have settled on getting Congress to count alternative slates of electors from seven states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — who cast their states’ votes for Trump despite certified popular vote totals showing Trump lost those states.
"As we speak today, an alternate slate of electors in the contested states is going to vote, and we're going to send those results up to Congress," Stephen Miller said. "This will ensure that all of our legal remedies remain open."

The E2E GAME PLAN
- Have some people claim to be electors in states that Trump lost and have them vote for Trump
- Have VP Pence acknowledge that there was ambiguity as to who were the electors in those states and use this ambiguity as justification to throw out results from those states from the electoral college
- Have Pence appoint Trump as the victor of the 2020 election

If it had WORKED
- Trump would be president
- The Republican party would control the White House
- Elections in USA would no longer matter as the VP could always just throw out states his party lost in.

The EXECUTION
Georgia
Jeffrey Clark (then-acting head of the Justice Department’s civil division)
Drafted a letter dated Dec. 28
The letter was distributed to Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and state legislative leaders
Instructing that an alternative slate of electors — that is, electors for Trump — might be accepted on Jan. 6 should the legislature demand that happen.
THWARTED
Jeffrey Rosen (acting attorney general), Richard Donoghue (acting deputy attorney general) rejected the letter out of hand
Meh UN-THWARTED
Georgia Republicans held their own invalid vote on Trump’s behalf

Arizona
a group that claimed to represent the "sovereign citizens of the Great State of Arizona" submitted signed papers casting votes for what they want: a second term for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. "We seated before the legislators here. We already turned it in. We beat them to the game," Lori Osiecki said.

Osiecki said she and others associated with a group called "AZ Protect the Vote" have attended the postelection rallies protesting the results. She left that gathering upset that Gov. Doug Ducey wasn't supporting the president's efforts and so she and the others chose electors as a result.
Osiecki's elector documents are part of a weeks long effort, led by Trump, his advisers, and involving Arizona Republican Party officials and three members of Arizona's GOP congressional delegation casting doubt on the legitimacy of Biden's victory in Arizona and nationally.

Pence
Jan 4 - The plan was first proposed to Pence when Eastman was with Trump in the Oval Office
John Eastman, in a two-page memo laid out a six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election for Trump, which included throwing out the results in seven states because they allegedly had competing electors.
"The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission -- either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court," Eastman wrote.
Eastman spoke at the January 6 rally that preceded the attack on the Capitol.

DONALD TRUMP's direct involvement
Dec 27 - the day before Clark drafted the letter to Georgia state legislative leaders, Trump had pressured Rosen “just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen.”
Dec 28 - Clark was introduced to Trump by Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), and he began talking with Trump directly. Trump began speculating about tossing Rosen in favor of the more acquiescent Clark.
Jan 2 - Trump called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger
“All I want to do is this,” Trump said. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.”
Jan 6 - Trump spoke in front of a large protest group, instructing them to go down to the capitol and help Pence to overthrow the election.

DEFENDERS of USA's democratic election
Jeffrey Rosen (acting attorney general), Richard Donoghue (acting deputy attorney general) rejected Clarke's letter to Georgia state legislative leaders out of hand
On Dec. 31, Rosen and Donoghue met with Clark to tell him to back off his false claims about the election.

A number of senior Justice Department officials had promised to resign should Trump fire Rosen and replace him with Clarke, which the New York Times credits with helping preserve Rosen’s job.

The U.S. attorney for Georgia, a Trump appointee, resigned on Jan. 4 after receiving a call spurred by the White House complaining about his failure to launch investigations of alleged fraud.

After being approched by Pence seeking advice on whether he should throw out results from seven states, former Vice President Dan Quayle and the Senate parliamentarian, who were both clear in telling him he had no authority beyond counting the votes.

While Lee and Graham heard out the cases from Trump's lawyers about throwing out the results from the seven states, they soundly rejected their claims.
Lee was shocked by the claims the memo was making, since no state had considered, let alone put forward, any alternate slates of electors.

References to all the above information
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-about-trumps-last-ditch-push-steal-election/
Arizona group's fake electors try to cast 11 electoral votes for Trump
Memo shows Trump lawyer's six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election - CNNPolitics

I think that the US population's reverence for the power of their vote ... would result in the eventual voting out of any state officials who made a practice of overriding their votes ...

 

[stevil]

I think that the US population's reverence for the power of their vote ... would result in the eventual voting out of any state officials who made a practice of overriding their votes ...

It appears to me that many Republican supporters are Trump fans and will vote for whomever Trump tells them to. Trump obviously wants Trump loyalists.
If the AG and if the VP did everything Trump wanted, he might be still the president even though he lost the election.

 

[Albion]

It appears to me that many Republican supporters are Trump fans and will vote for whomever Trump tells them to. Trump obviously wants Trump loyalists.
If the AG and if the VP did everything Trump wanted, he might be still the president even though he lost the election.

In that case, he wouldn't have lost the election.

But isn't this all much ado about nothing? It's long past time for this conspiracy theory to have any significance.

What needs to be done now is to insure that there will be fair elections in 2022 and 2024 and defeat the attempt by Pelosi to give the federal government control over all state elections and mandate the various means of encouraging vote fraud that were rampant in 2020, regardless of whom you think the real winner was.

 

[Pommer]

This movie sounds boring.

 

[cow451]

In that case, he wouldn't have lost the election.

But isn't this all much ado about nothing? It's long past time for this conspiracy theory to have any significance.

What needs to be done now is to insure that there will be fair elections in 2022 and 2024 and defeat the attempt by Pelosi to give the federal government control over all state elections and mandate the various means of encouraging vote fraud that were rampant in 2020, regardless of whom you think the real winner was.

You are saying Nancy Pelosi is facilitating the means to support widespread election fraud in 2024?

 

[stevil]

In that case, he wouldn't have lost the election.

Bill Barr quit rather than do Trump's bidding on this, Rosen refused to do Trump's bidding, Pence refused to do Trump's bidding.

But isn't this all much ado about nothing?

You consider a serious attempt by D Trump and various conspirators to ignore the democratic vote, throw away state results and declare himself the winner "much ado about nothing?"
I'm sure you'd be up in arms if Biden tries this at the next presidential election.

It's long past time for this conspiracy theory to have any significance.

It's not a conspiracy theory. It actually happened. The people involved, in support of it, are happy to ignore elections. Should these people ever have power again?

What needs to be done now is to insure that there will be fair elections in 2022 and 2024

Typically USA's elections have been pretty fair. Although you did have Russians trying very hard to interfere in 2016, and Trump tried to force the Ukraine president (who very nearly went along with it until it was exposed last minute) to publicly announce an investigation into Trump's political rival.

 

[A_Thinker]

It appears to me that many Republican supporters are Trump fans and will vote for whomever Trump tells them to. Trump obviously wants Trump loyalists.
If the AG and if the VP did everything Trump wanted, he might be still the president even though he lost the election.

If Trump can get people to vote for whom he wants, so much the better.

That's the basis of our system of government ... the power of the peoples' vote at the ballot box.

What you saw last election was our checks and balances in operation. The power and resolve of the AG, VP, and various state election officials (all Republicans, BTW) ... stopped the former president from accomplishing the overriding of the system that he desired. And though there is action at the state level to enable the overriding of constituents' voting, I don't believe that the American people will long stand for that.

You might say that Trump only has to get it to work once, ... but I predict such a popular hue and cry the first time a state legislature tries to overturn the votes of their people ... that it will, ultimately be seen as a failing strategy.

Something else to consider is that the states where the vote of the people is being attacked ... are Republican voting states, so even these efforts don't much change the balance of power. We have some time to deal with these efforts.

The honest truth is that, in America, even though the states are entrusted with the running of elections, ... a national consensus to respect the voice of the people has been embaced (by enacting nationwide popular voting). It hasn't always been this way here, and we have made much progress in that respect (for instance, voting rights have been extended to every American citizen of age). Also the US Senate, which used to be appointed by the states, are now elected by the people.

It is true that we have come to a point where some Republicans believe that the only way to hold on to power is to subvert or override the peoples' vote, ... but I truly believe that ship has sailed. The majority of the American people ultimately won't stand for it ...

 

[spiritfilledjm]

Guys...this kinda thing, rogue electors, happens just about every election. The rogues typically end up trying to vote for a third party though. This one does seem to be a little different in that, in some cases, it's "sovereign citizens" (which isn't a thing) who are still hopped up on the QAnon koolaid trying, hilariously, to influence an election that was decided months ago instead of focusing on midterms, as they should have been doing already.

 

[Tom 1]

It's long past time for this conspiracy theory to have any significance.

Conspiracy theories attempt to construct explanations for events through randomly connected speculations, based on assumptions, superficial connections and an emotional need to believe something. Things that actually happened, that are on record and can be observed are by definition not theories. That Trump attempted to overturn a legitimate election is documented, historical fact - there is no need for speculation, the series of actual, real, events is clear and can be verified.

 

[Tiberius Lee]

In that case, he wouldn't have lost the election.

But isn't this all much ado about nothing? It's long past time for this conspiracy theory to have any significance.

What needs to be done now is to insure that there will be fair elections in 2022 and 2024 and defeat the attempt by Pelosi to give the federal government control over all state elections and mandate the various means of encouraging vote fraud that were rampant in 2020, regardless of whom you think the real winner was.

I agree with your first part that we need to move on and have voter decide who will go to congress in 2022 and in White House in 2024.

However I am puzzle by your last sentence “encouraging vote fraud that were rampant in 2020, regardless of whom you think the real winner was.”

In this sentence you are saying there were voter fraud in 2020 and we don’t know who is “real winner”

If you can’t accept that in 2020 Joe Biden won the election fair and square, then there is no moving on. If I were a Trump supporter I would say “election was stolen in 2020, now democrats are in power so they will make sure election will be stolen in 2022 and 2024”. Or as someone who think election was fair and Biden won legitimately, I would say “ what is the point of having election in 2022 or 2024 when 40% country don’t believe free and fair election taking place in America”

 

[Albion]

I agree with your first part that we need to move on and have voter decide who will go to congress in 2022 and in White House in 2024.

However I am puzzle by your last sentence “encouraging vote fraud that were rampant in 2020, regardless of whom you think the real winner was.”

In this sentence you are saying there were voter fraud in 2020 and we don’t know who is “real winner”

I don't know why that would be your conclusion, even on this discussion board where people seem constantly to reinterpret what someone else has written.

I said we should care about vote fraud, and yes, there has been vote fraud. That is undeniable. People have gone to jail for it. The bigger issue is, of course, did the fraud cause someone to win an election that he actually had lost if the fraud were disallowed?

As far as the 2020 presidential election goes, we don't know yet who won. The winner's party has moved heaven and earth to prevent any reasonable investigation into the problem, even though there have been many eyewitnesses come forth and testify under oath to what they saw, and in some cases the numbers just do not balance.

But that isn't exactly what you were asking me. What you quoted was pointing to the fact that numerous changes in voting regulations, some of them flatly illegal, were made shortly before the 2020 elections which made fraud much more likely.

And now the Democratic Parties in state after state are saying "NO way!" to returning to the normal way--or even a somewhat more lenient system than had before 2020. And that's despite the fact that these changes were made, allegedly, as emergency measures owing to the problem of Covid!

Among them are mailing out millions of ballots to supposed voters, without them having requested an absentee ballot or needing one. Many were misaddressed, sometimes because the voter had moved. And then they came back to the local election clerks and the required signatures often not only didn't match but there was no attempt made to compare them with the registration rolls.

Perhaps worse, it is now legal in some state for just ANYONE (most often a political party worker) to go around and tell nursing home residents, etc. that they--a complete stranger--will take that person's ballot back to election central for them. A single person is allowed to do this with with multiple voters. It's called "vote harvesting."

So that's a little bit of info that just skims the top of the problem which is about units of government having made cheating very easy to accomplish. No one of any political party should countenance such things in a free country.

 

[cow451]

I don't know why that would be your conclusion, even on this discussion board where people seem constantly to reinterpret what someone else has written.

I said we should care about vote fraud, and yes, there has been vote fraud. That is undeniable. People have gone to jail for it. The bigger issue is, of course, did the fraud cause someone to win an election that he actually had lost if the fraud were disallowed?

As far as the 2020 presidential election goes, we don't know yet who won. The winner's party has moved heaven and earth to prevent any reasonable investigation into the problem, even though there have been many eyewitnesses come forth and testify under oath to what they saw, and in some cases the numbers just do not balance.

But that isn't exactly what you were asking me. What you quoted was pointing to the fact that numerous changes in voting regulations, some of them flatly illegal, were made shortly before the 2020 elections which made fraud much more likely.

And now the Democratic Parties in state after state are saying "NO way!" to returning to the normal way--or even a somewhat more lenient system than had before 2020. And that's despite the fact that these changes were made, allegedly, as emergency measures owing to the problem of Covid!

Among them are mailing out millions of ballots to supposed voters, without them having requested an absentee ballot or needing one. Many were misaddressed, sometimes because the voter had moved. And then they came back to the local election clerks and the required signatures often not only didn't match but there was no attempt made to compare them with the registration rolls.

Perhaps worse, it is now legal in some state for just ANYONE (most often a political party worker) to go around and tell nursing home residents, etc. that they--a complete stranger--will take that person's ballot back to election central for them. A single person is allowed to do this with with multiple voters. It's called "vote harvesting."

So that's a little bit of info that just skims the top of the problem which is about units of government having made cheating very easy to accomplish. No one of any political party should countenance such things in a free country.

Where is the credible evidence that widespread voting fraud caused Donald Trump to lose a single state?

 

[wing2000]

As far as the 2020 presidential election goes, we don't know yet who won.

Yes *we* do.

 

[cow451]

Yes *we* do.

That right, kemo sabe.

 

[Tiberius Lee]

I don't know why that would be your conclusion, even on this discussion board where people seem constantly to reinterpret what someone else has written.

I said we should care about vote fraud, and yes, there has been vote fraud. That is undeniable. People have gone to jail for it. The bigger issue is, of course, did the fraud cause someone to win an election that he actually had lost if the fraud were disallowed?

As far as the 2020 presidential election goes, we don't know yet who won. The winner's party has moved heaven and earth to prevent any reasonable investigation into the problem, even though there have been many eyewitnesses come forth and testify under oath to what they saw, and in some cases the numbers just do not balance.

But that isn't exactly what you were asking me. What you quoted was pointing to the fact that numerous changes in voting regulations, some of them flatly illegal, were made shortly before the 2020 elections which made fraud much more likely.

And now the Democratic Parties in state after state are saying "NO way!" to returning to the normal way--or even a somewhat more lenient system than had before 2020. And that's despite the fact that these changes were made, allegedly, as emergency measures owing to the problem of Covid!

Among them are mailing out millions of ballots to supposed voters, without them having requested an absentee ballot or needing one. Many were misaddressed, sometimes because the voter had moved. And then they came back to the local election clerks and the required signatures often not only didn't match but there was no attempt made to compare them with the registration rolls.

Perhaps worse, it is now legal in some state for just ANYONE (most often a political party worker) to go around and tell nursing home residents, etc. that they--a complete stranger--will take that person's ballot back to election central for them. A single person is allowed to do this with with multiple voters. It's called "vote harvesting."

So that's a little bit of info that just skims the top of the problem which is about units of government having made cheating very easy to accomplish. No one of any political party should countenance such things in a free country.

Here is the thing, the winner's party Did NOT move heaven and earth to prevent any reasonable investigation into the problem. Here is AG of Trump own administration came to the conclusion about 2020 election

“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the AP.

But you don’t want to accept that. You keep insisting there is voter fraud. Even the SCOTUS didn’t take election fraud seriously, that is why they thru out any case came before them. But that is not good enough for you.

Do I care about voter fraud, off course I do. But we can’t fix something which is not broken. There is no wide spread voter fraud that could change election result- Not my word, but AG of Trump administration – “not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome”

So how long you want to investigate this issue , until you agree with the outcome of investigation?

 

[A_Thinker]

Guys...this kinda thing, rogue electors, happens just about every election. The rogues typically end up trying to vote for a third party though. This one does seem to be a little different in that, in some cases, it's "sovereign citizens" (which isn't a thing) who are still hopped up on the QAnon koolaid trying, hilariously, to influence an election that was decided months ago instead of focusing on midterms, as they should have been doing already.

jm ...

It's not rogue electors that's being focused upon ... it's the right of the state to declare its electors as it wills. This is legally left, for the most part, to the discretion of the states, which is why our history starts with only wealthy landowners having the right to vote. The right to vote was only slowly extended to a wider base, and, ultimately, to the entire of-age population.

The idea that's being played around with now ... is that some states may return to the situation where fewer voters (or no voters) are involved in determining the voting of the state's electors. It's a dicey strategy, at best, as typically, the same persons you would deprive of a vote in the national election, ... are entitled to vote in elections for state officials. If you take away their right to vote nationally, they may simply vote you out in the next state elections ...

 

[wing2000]

On what basis are you alleging enough fraud to dismiss the election results? It’s been nearly two years and you have presented no significant verifiable widespread vote fraud.

I'm really disappointed if you confused me with someone else

 

[A_Thinker]

As far as the 2020 presidential election goes, we don't know yet who won.

Yes, ... we do.

Every counting of the votes cast, every recount, every audit, every court challenge to the election's validity for almost a year now ... has resulted in Joe Biden's favor. If anyone has any ample evidence to demonstrate that Joe Biden did not handily win the 2020 presidential race, ... they have had plenty of time to bring that evidence forward ...