Michigan electors cite threats over Trump vote

a reply to: TorqueyThePig
I was going to suggest a "private prosecution", but it appears that U.S. law has nearly abolished that right.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
So if we see a significant number of faithless electors this election, I think it would be very suspect, and would likely cause a civil war.

Cause a civil war? I posit there is one going on already without anyone calling it that.

originally posted by: MysticPearl
So the same party who wouldn't stop blabbering about Trump accepting or not accepting a loss, are having their people threaten to put guns in the mouths of Trump electors who would simply be following the choice of the voters they represent.

That's not on hypocritical by the left, it's 100% anti-American, never mind criminal.

It's an idle threat, we all know they would NEVER do anything (support gun violence) in such stark contrast to their core belief.

[/sarcasm]

a reply to: alphabetaone

The is a nationwide issue, being addressed by diverse sources.

I'm not. I'm basing my dismissal of his claims based on his calm and caviler attitude over death threats and voter intimidation in the video he made and distributed to the public, and based on his personal responsibility, given his his position in the Republican party, to contact the authorities regarding this, not "sensationally" blow his dog whistle to rile up the populous.

This guy is a self serving, self promoting manipulative little ##! He should lose his Electoral College representation over this irresponsible stunt!

a reply to: alphabetaone

ya know there just may have been a few electors, delegates, whatever, considering going against the vote of the people in the state, but well...
because of these idiots....
it would just cause more problems to do that.
so, the idiots just blew the chance that the delegates could possibly go with the popular vote instead.

Hopefully they take heed of this harassment and go Trump with all votes to send a message!

a reply to: Profusion

Well...My immediate thought is that unlike a typical threat, threatening an elector with violence meets the definition of a terroristic threat...An attempt to influence government policy or process through violence etc.

Trump is an idiot and an self-obsessed giant oompa-loompa...but these folks threatening electors should get a visit from the feds.

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Profusion

My immediate thought is that unlike a typical threat, threatening an elector with violence meets the definition of a terroristic threat...

Sorry, I, personally, refuse to pull the "Terrorism" trigger everytime something untoward happens in this country.
Don't you think that exercising the freedoms and liberties that we cherish means having to accept a certin amount of risk?

To me, it would be completely inappropriate to start labeling every act of violence as terrorism because at some point, anything at all can be labeled in such a way.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Profusion

My immediate thought is that unlike a typical threat, threatening an elector with violence meets the definition of a terroristic threat...

Sorry, I, personally, refuse to pull the "Terrorism" trigger everytime something untoward happens in this country.
Don't you think that exercising the freedoms and liberties that we cherish means having to accept a certin amount of risk?

Threatening to kill the guy in line in front of you at the gas station who takes 10 minutes to come up with his lotto numbers is a different thing than calling up someone who has volunteered to perform a civic duty that involves electing the President of the United States.

I am not saying they should be immediately prosecuted, but I am saying it technically qualifies as a terroristic act and I think the feds should visit some of these idiots and explain the same to them. I wouldn't tolerate it if it was HRC as Pres. elect and I don't think anyone should tolerate it just cuz an oompa-loompa won.

a reply to: Profusion

Haiti has come up in another thread and while looking at Haitian news I came across an extremely ironic article related, I think, to this thread so I'm going to link an article from Haiti News as an example of the flagrant, and I mean flagrant, duplicity the U.S. government engages in and hope no one thinks I'm engaging in thread drift.

Haiti's presidential and parliament elections are November 20th and the U.S. (the U.S. has too much control over Haiti in my perspective) is warning Haitian citizens to not engage in electoral violence; a warning and meaningful law enforcement response sorely lacking in the U.S. right now. It's mind blowing for me to see this in the Haitian news yet factions within our government and elite appear to be encouraging certain types of folks in the U.S. to act out violently against Trump supporters and the electoral college.

Link

Do you see?

Uck!!!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
For the record...here is MI as it stands right now...

MI Vote

Looks to me like Trump won the popular vote, but the margin is razor thin at 10k +/- votes, or 0.3%.

Looking at the county by county breakdown I don't see how the electors can pledge/vote any way other than Trump really.

Depends. If you look at the biggest counties, like the top 2, both were Hillary.

Top 4:
Wayne County(700k+ votes): 66.7% Hillary, 29.51% Trump
Oakland County (600k+ votes): 51.71% Hillary, 43.59% Trump
Macomb County (400k+ votes): 53.63% Trump, 42.08% Hillary
Kent County (300k+ votes): 48.3% Trump, 45.24% Hillary

This election is another example of why the electoral college exists. Even though Trump won the popular vote in Michigan, it was still very close and, more importantly, most of the Hillary votes are in the large counties. The winner in individual states is based on popular vote and it's winner takes all. There're many instances across the nation where candidates will win individual states because a high population county significantly favors them. Nationally it's different, since the largest population states are prevented from having too much electoral weight by lending more weight to the smaller states to counter it.

Why rural areas seem to be more republican should be investigated further. Why so many voted for Trump, especially in blue states.

a reply to: Profusion

It is not only happening in Michigan, but all over the U.S. Leftwingers are sending death threats to electoral college voters all over the nation.

This is a video of one of the electors from Michigan and he mentions that he has received a lot of death threats.



Here is the news from "The Detroit News"

www.detroitnews.com...

Presidential electors harassed, threatened by anti-Trump left

And the death threats are not only being thrown by the extremists in the left.

Whether you are in the left or the right, death threats are not ok simply because you disagree with other people.



Quay Manuel, a black Trump supporter who has voiced his opinion about all the lies the media, and the left in general claim about Trump has also received death threats.





He has been insulted, including receiving racial slurs and death threats by extremist leftists.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Profusion

Whether you are in the left or the right, death threats are not ok simply because you disagree with other people.

In my view, the fact such a large number of entities (I'm not going to call them people) in this country think it's OK to use death threats as a way to force change is more evidence to me these entities' minds have been infiltrated and taken over by something very vile. Most people didn't use to think this way but it's becoming more and more prevalent, acceptable and "trendy."

These entities are given much media exposure by those who secretly cheer them on.

May the law of cause and effect be swift.

According to the civil rights act amendment, it should be considered a hate crime and can be federally prosecuted.

The Civil Rights Act of 1968 also enacted 18 U.S.C. § 245(b)(2), which permits federal prosecution of anyone who "willingly injures, intimidates or interferes with another person, or attempts to do so, by force because of the other person's race, color, religion or national origin" [1] because of the victim's attempt to engage in one of six types of federally protected activities, such as attending school, patronizing a public place/facility, applying for employment, acting as a juror in a state court or voting.