Fake Electors? Looks like there was nothing wrong with that in 2000...or 2016

a reply to: JinMI

Sorry, I apologize for my wording. As they were fraudulent electors, the charges are all related to that and the document they signed. So:

All defendants were charged with the following eight felonies: Forgery (two counts) and conspiracy to commit forgery (one count) Election law forgery (two counts) and conspiracy to commit election law forgery (one count) Uttering and publishing (one count) and conspiracy to commit uttering and publishing (one count)

They are political in the fact that you had a President’s attorney allies concoct a scheme to bring a bunch of electoral votes not certified properly to Pence because even though his court cases, DOJ, his 2 independent investigations told him he lost, he refused to believe it and wanted to remain President and was trying anything to delay the electoral count.

You can say, he believes it and that you believe it. However there has been no proof whatsoever in any verifiable, legal cases to show enough fraud to overturn the election. Yes, yes, I know he'll give it to us, or Lindell will give it to us some day. But it's been over 3 years. And yes, I know, you'll say the courts are rigged and all the governors and SOS are all crooks, and the poll workers are crooks, all a huge conspiracy. We will disagree.

a reply to: frogs453

However there has been no proof whatsoever in any verifiable, legal cases to show enough fraud to overturn the election.

That's the rub isn't isn't it.

You (in the broad sense) don't get to tell anyone else what to think or believe:

And yes, I know, you'll say the courts are rigged and all the governors and SOS are all crooks, and the poll workers are crooks, all a huge conspiracy. We will disagree.

I say the courts are spineless where it matters, governors and SoS' are political animals and poll workers are subject to all sorts of compartmentalization and manipulation with or without political bias.

Yet this is about fraud, right. Yet that doesn't add up so now they are trying in under forgery statutes. Fine, lets see where it lands but to pretend that this isn't political power being used to go after political opponents is absurd.

a reply to: JinMI

So, someone who was never legally an elector, signs a fake certificate of ascertainment that states they were and they were signing it not following the other guidelines and the law for a legal elector, then wanted that document to go directly to congress to have the VP of the U.S. stop, delay or change the outcome of the National election, at the behest of the current sitting President who lost the election and the charges are "just political powers going after an opponent"?

Wow. Just wow.

a reply to: frogs453

The mental gymnastics the Trump defenders will go through to just not admit his close zealots conspired to commit crimes agsisnt the constitution and a democratic process.

"Its just political theater bro!".

One of the main architects of the whole scheme Kenneth Chesebro plead guilty to conspiracy to commit filing false documents.

www.justice.gov...

SPAM

a reply to: strongfp

Not mental gymnastics. At all. Nothing happened.

Now, if all of these people showed up on 1/6 in DC and stormed the building, I would have a different view. That is why I showed the comparison to 2016 where true electors were being lobbied to change their vote.

2020 - Lets be ready if we are needed
2016 - Current Electors mush Change your vote

If you look at the two...are they the same or is one worse than the other in your eyes?

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: JinMI

So, someone who was never legally an elector, signs a fake certificate of ascertainment that states they were and they were signing it not following the other guidelines and the law for a legal elector, then wanted that document to go directly to congress to have the VP of the U.S. stop, delay or change the outcome of the National election, at the behest of the current sitting President who lost the election and the charges are "just political powers going after an opponent"?

Wow. Just wow.

Sure, if you want to be dishonest and omit a few steps and assume criminality to make your case go for it.

SPAM

What states approved the fake slates of electors per state law?

Which fake electors were also part of their state's official slate of electors?

a reply to: matafuchs

This link I provide might be helpful. The constitution does not prevent an elector from voting against the elected candidate, however a state may have a pledge that the elector signs stating they will vote for the party accordingly. If they do not do that, they would be a faithless elector, in which according to most states, is not criminal, but may be sanctioned.



National Archives

No where can I find that random people can duplicate a certificate of ascertainment and claim they are the elected electors, even though they did not follow any of the state laws and process of becoming electors and send that document in to the National Archives and congress.


ETA: If that is not considered illegal, what's to stop me and 20 others, make a copy of a certificate of ascertainment, claim we are electors and just mail it in? Can you imagine the chaos if people did that? That's why there is a process in place and the names and addresses of the electors are certified by the governor during a process outlined in the state election laws. Trump didn't have a plan for faithless electors, he wanted the states he did not win to provide a whole alternate of ascertainment certificates stating HE won the state. With no current court case of substance in the system.

In reference to Hawaii, there was a recount going on at the time with a potential change in winner and the Secretary of State signed off on both slates. That did not occur in 2020. There was a clear winner and the groups did it covertly.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: strongfp

Not mental gymnastics. At all. Nothing happened.

Now, if all of these people showed up on 1/6 in DC and stormed the building, I would have a different view. That is why I showed the comparison to 2016 where true electors were being lobbied to change their vote.

2020 - Lets be ready if we are needed
2016 - Current Electors mush Change your vote

If you look at the two...are they the same or is one worse than the other in your eyes?

With everything you say you just show how little you know or how little you care to acknowledge of the situation.
Maybe just go silent about this situation since you clearly have no idea how any of this works.

a reply to: matafuchs

Challenging an election isn't he issue. Offering alternate electors isn't an issue. Lobbying electors or trying to persuade electors to change their vote isn't an issue. All of those things can be done legally.

Wanna know what isn't legal? Falsify documents with fake electors to meddle in the final vote.

a reply to: Threadbarer

None...and why 'fake' elector? They are not fake.

a reply to: frogs453

Thanks frogs. I understand how it works and how there are states that have individual laws. I have never said that the people who were the 'back up Trump electorate' were legal. They are not. They would have to be in a state where an alternate slate can be assigned (this is why I attached FL in 2000). This can happen..

To me, these are people who wanted to be prepared of the electoral review came back to the states in anyway. I do not see anything criminal. They were simply prepared.

If a guy buys 15 AR-15s and he talks about how the government is corrupt and he is ready if the SHTF is he an insurrectionist because of his thoughts? He could even build a militia which would have more power than the electors.

We can all have opinions. That is what makes America great. If we disagree we disagree. Thanks for not putting dwon thoughts or ideas like others.

a reply to: Allaroundya4k

How about telling us what is wrong with the statements instead of your childish insults? Are a f'n question maybe.

a reply to: matafuchs

Of course, I often agree to disagree, and honestly because I will need to back up statements or opinions, I learn things as well when I research, which is a good thing caused by other members. I try to never name call or put down, even when I'm name called, told I'm stupid or whatever.

I get what you're saying about wanting to have a back up. I mean, maybe that's OK in certain circumstances. Seems like that's what Hawaii did. However, the Secretary of State was fully aware and signed off on it.

I do believe what these people did is a crime. They hid to do it, in Michigan recruited some elderly people, some who thought they were just signing a "sign in sheet". Eastman and Flynn were also literally trying to figure out the quickest way to get these to Pence. But, they left out any state officials in the whole mess and provided the fraudulent ascertainment to the group.

a reply to: matafuchs

When someone or something is purported to be something it isn't then it is fake.

You yourself just admitted these people did not adhere to the states' processes for properly selecting electors. Yet they claimed in the documents they submitted to Congress and the Archivist that they were duly selected electors.

Ergo, they are fake electors.

a reply to: frogs453

I'll agree that parts of it were shady. Their could have been some deception...but it amounted to nothing.

I do believe what these people did is a crime. They hid to do it, in Michigan recruited some elderly people, some who thought they were just signing a "sign in sheet". Eastman and Flynn were also literally trying to figure out the quickest way to get these to Pence. But, they left out any state officials in the whole mess and provided the fraudulent ascertainment to the group.

No one was hurt. If you want to fine them or give them the same time as Mr Epps I would have no problem. I would not. But to blow this up like Trump was leading the way and they were close to overturning the election is just fodder for the media.

Especially if one takes the time to look at what was done post election in 2016. Again, not saying what they did either could be construed on all counts as illegal but there is not another election in history that had the elected party and the opposition party convince over 80 electors to be faithless.