Just when I settled down and thought 'faithless electors' would never overturn this election...

a reply to: dragonridr
Thanks for explaining that, I feel better hearing it that way

a reply to: windword

INTERESTING.

Do you know why they denied the first request for delay?

Because if that reason is still paramount...that will tell us if the Court will allow the request, this time.


ETA: Wait...has the judge already ruled on the current delay request? The link you posted was from September, so I assumed that's what you were referring to.

Do you have a link to a ruling on the renewed request from two days ago?

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
What is that event in comparison to Hill's Foundation, the Paid Riot Squads, the email treason angles, and so on?

Republican electors aren't flipping for these liberal crybabies and such pales in comparison charges.

The liberals trying to steal the election are nuts to think otherwise.

But what if they succeed?

a reply to: infolurker

I hope you're right. But I'm thinking anything is still possible -- especially before the inauguration.

If Trump is truly the outsider that he claims and is perceived to be, then I expect the entrenched powers will resort to some pretty dirty and desperate tricks.

If he's not, then this could be a way to nullify the election results... with Heaven only knows what end.

(I hope the OP isn't giving them any ideas!)

originally posted by: goou111
Speaking of faithless electors there was one in Washington that said he would not give his vote to Hillary if she won.

So it is not unheard of.

I saw that story, too, just BEFORE the election, and, in hindsight...I feel like it was almost meant to set the stage for a 'faithless electors' sh*storm or the undoing of the EC vote....or something like that.

The link I posted in, the OP, says an objection to Congress over the EC vote would have to have two votes and then would be deliberated to see if it has MERIT.

'Merit' is exactly the term I would use to explain why this civil case was allowed to move forward AND IF it results in a verdict against Donald Trump? Yeah...I think we really might be in the midst of a sh*tstorn.

I don't like any of it. I feel like our election might be manipulated...with help from a man that I have long believed might be a plant.

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I was worried about something like this... some technicality... some something. I finally convinced myself it was a done deal. Damn!

Thanks for the heads up. I'll be watching.

Don't worry one bit. This has about as much chance of happening as the Clinton's going to prison for their long list of crimes.

I hope you are right....

But I remain a cynic when in comes to Hillary Clinton and the presidency...every single time I evaluate anything about this election.

originally posted by: dragonridr
By the way the court will never find him guilty they will find the company and owners guilty ultimately Trumps participation was a paid endorsement. And no court has ever found someone guilty of fraud from a paid endorsement.

But you forget...only Hillary is above the law.

Keep your eyes open and don't underestimate them. They already have Plans A through Z ready. Whatever it takes.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I was worried about something like this... some technicality... some something. I finally convinced myself it was a done deal. Damn!

Thanks for the heads up. I'll be watching.

Me, too.

You know I am not a Trump fan, I think his friendship with the Clintons is meaningful. But I will take him, anyday, and give him my highest hopes and open mind....

...if 'they' don't do anything to manipulate this election.

I have felt very disenfranchised for 16 years. I don't know if I can tolerate any more disenfranchisement.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
And Pence takes the reins, surrounded by the Hawks and leading the Free World into WWIII, all over some event in the Middle East.

No, starting WW111 was Hillary's job. Pence is the one who is going to be president after some disgruntled democratic radical takes him out after Hillary's followers plan to alter the vote fails.

I really think our country is falling apart, splitting up at every possible seam.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

You know I am not a Trump fan, I think his friendship with the Clintons is meaningful. But I will take him, anyday, and give him my highest hopes and open mind....

...if 'they' don't do anything to manipulate this election.

I have felt very disenfranchised for 16 years. I don't know if I can tolerate any more disenfranchisement.

You're not alone. I think many of us feel exactly the same way. I'm hoping and praying Trump really is the outsider. I'm hoping and praying this is an opportunity... maybe even a reprieve of sorts.

But we need to stay on our toes. Especially up until inauguration.

originally posted by: Boadicea
(I hope the OP isn't giving them any ideas!)

Trump could SETTLE this.

He must have a liability insurer for claims, like this. I think I read he currently has something like 75 civil cases in the works. I am sure dealing with civil claims is a regular thing in his position.

If he doesn't settle this and it becomes a catalyst for overturning this election, then no one will ever convince me that he isn't the plant I suspected.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Well, now, neither will I!

And if that comes to pass, I'll have to question if the FBI investigation and lack of charges wasn't part of the plan to give her some credibility... some plausible deniability... some candy for the public consumption.

Majority of people liked the course. This is beyond retarded. Even the person making the claim is on record stating she liked the course. WTF over. Nonsense.

The real civil case(s) is Hillary dealing with FOIA lawsuits. A few dozen of them in fact. That b**** is going to loose every singe one of them. Total disregard for the law. Just did not give a s*** and said f*** it. Her and her entire staff gave two middle fingers to the American people and are now pleading the 5th and refusing to answer basic questions. That works great for criminal proceedings but not civil. She is about to get fried like catfish on a Saturday night in La.

a reply to: Boadicea

Agree...and I think it served some distraction purpose that really only appealed to people who were anti-Hillary anyway...ha...like me.

Many people have said all along...it's the investigation into the Clinton Foundation that was the real scandal. I have always suspected they were right.

a reply to: LifeMode

Again...you forget that Hillary is above the law and pretty much no one else is.

I left a comment in another thread that pretty much applies here, too:

You have to remember that Bill and Hillary kicked-off their long history as career criminal-politicians BY BLOCKING & CONTROLLING INVESTIGATIONS AT EVERY LEVEL.

With the Mena CIA drug smuggling, it was Bill who blocked an investigation at the state level (coincidentally Gary Johnson's running mate, William Weld, blocked it at the federal level).

If there is one thing that the Clintons know how to do well it's BLOCKING AND CONTROLLING INVESTIGATIONS. They've even used petty investigations to distract from their more serious crimes.

I don't trust Comey or the FBI. The FBI falsified witness statements into the Vince Foster murder -- including Vince Foster's wife's statements.

The FBI wasn't worried about any other investigation exposing their cover up of Hillary's email server crimes. All investigations into Hillary are safely controlled, on every level, by the Clintons.

a reply to: MotherMayEye


What a laugh, looks like she has just dodged a bullet. If she does get back in she will have an immunity granted by the Pope. http://_national_report_dot_net_/obama-secretly-pardon-hillary-clinton-benghazi-emailgate-sources-say/

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Boadicea

Agree...and I think it served some distraction purpose that really only appealed to people who were anti-Hillary anyway...ha...like me.

At the very least, it's just a dog-and-pony show, carefully scripted, the sole purpose to provide protection under cover of investigation. "See? No evidence! She's cleared!!!"

Many people have said all along...it's the investigation into the Clinton Foundation that was the real scandal. I have always suspected they were right.

Me too. Although I'm also pretty sure when all is said and done, the two go hand-in-hand. Not to derail, but I suspect if we can follow the trail between the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation, that we could also follow the trail between the CDC and the CDC Foundation. I haven't been able to really check it out yet, but from what I have read, there's much room for abuse, a supposedly lot of hanky-panky going on there. I'm betting it's similar in nature. But I really have nothing concrete... yet.

originally posted by: Boadicea
But I really have nothing concrete... yet.

The CDC is funded by our corrupt federal government. That is enough to give me pause, at the very least.

Just like the Brennan Center for Justice is funded, in part, by George Soros' Open Society Foundation, and that gives me pause about the 'research' they produce that has helped support election reforms that have made our election and voter registration systems less-secure.

Some might say, it's not enough...the funding, the money. I make no apologies for raising my eyebrow though. It's justified.

The phrase "follow the money," exists for a reason.

a reply to: darepairman

Looking at the state our country is in right now, what do you think the outcome would be if they over turned the election and put Hillary in as the President of the United States of America?

Our country is broken, the people are broken. America would never survive such an action.

Would we be watching history repeat itself.

The kiddie version.
8 Reasons Why Rome Fell

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: windword

INTERESTING.

Do you know why they denied the first request for delay?

Because if that reason is still paramount...that will tell us if the Court will allow the request, this time.


ETA: Wait...has the judge already ruled on the current delay request? The link you posted was from September, so I assumed that's what you were referring to.

Do you have a link to a ruling on the renewed request from two days ago?

Hm. I read it 2 days ago! But you're right, I can only find news from Sept.

Apparently, They're going to file the NEW delay request on Monday.

Petrocelli said he planned to file a formal request for a delay by Monday.

www.theguardian.com...