It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 07:54 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

I think you are right there. I remember hearing him call into Limbaugh's show and Limbaugh asked him why he spent so much time battling accusations instead of staying on message, and his answer was that he wasn't accustomed to letting blatant lies go by like that without answering them.

So if that's the case, and this is a case where he is being pulled into a lawsuit over essentially a paid endorsement as though he had something to do with the day-to-day running of the business, then I can well see him not letting it go. He would feel like he had done nothing wrong and expedience would be an admission that he had done something he shouldn't have.




posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye


I am just too cynical.


I thought that was me?


I won't feel comfortable until after Trump puts his hand on that book and says the words that he will indeed be the 45h president of these United States.

The globalists have worked too hard to let us mere peons thwart their plans.

Whatever we're in for I would bet they aren't just rolling over.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

You Sir, are absolutely correct in your summation.

Buck



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Wow! I thought I was probably the most distrusting of political personages of any who live today.
While I don't doubt that the Clinton Cabal is furiously scheming, I just can't see how they could bribe or threaten enough electors to change the results of the election.
Do you not realize that the electors are the most partisan of the parties? The phrase "die hard" comes to mind because the people chosen for those positions are willing to die hard to uphold the party. Take a look at the names of the people chosen as electors for your state. These people are picked for their party loyalty. They are not in positions of power other than this one time. I honestly don't think even the Clintons could find enough dirt on them to threaten enough of them to make a difference.
Unless the Republican leadership were in on this plot, I simply can't see it happening. It would make an excellent tv plot but as a practical matter, I think it is the least of our worries. It doesn't even give my tinfoil hat a tingle.
I think the Republicans have the best of all possible worlds with the entire legislature, the Supreme Court and the White House in their control. With Ginsburg leaving the US, the Donald will have to find two Supreme Court justices quickly. May the Creator guide his choices.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: dragonridr

I think you are right there. I remember hearing him call into Limbaugh's show and Limbaugh asked him why he spent so much time battling accusations instead of staying on message, and his answer was that he wasn't accustomed to letting blatant lies go by like that without answering them.

So if that's the case, and this is a case where he is being pulled into a lawsuit over essentially a paid endorsement as though he had something to do with the day-to-day running of the business, then I can well see him not letting it go. He would feel like he had done nothing wrong and expedience would be an admission that he had done something he shouldn't have.


But also consider this...he wouldn't be named in this suit if a Court did not find some merit to move it forward to trial with Trump named as a Defendant.

I know I am probably overreacting...but, I still think that any length will be gone to, to make Hillary president and they have prepared to make it happen no matter what.

edit on 12-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
It's been obvious that these claims were made just to sabotage Trump's candidacy in the first place.
There were other threads with the details.


No trump university was pretty much a fraud.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical

Whatever we're in for I would bet they aren't just rolling over.


Exactly...why would they not plan ahead and prepare for all scenarios?

So many very bad signs, IMO. Including the protests. Probably Hillary protestors will die over Trump and I am sure Trump supporters will be blamed. All orchestrated. I sense drama. Lots of sh*tty invented drama.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt
Wow! I thought I was probably the most distrusting of political personages of any who live today.
While I don't doubt that the Clinton Cabal is furiously scheming, I just can't see how they could bribe or threaten enough electors to change the results of the election.
Do you not realize that the electors are the most partisan of the parties? The phrase "die hard" comes to mind because the people chosen for those positions are willing to die hard to uphold the party. Take a look at the names of the people chosen as electors for your state. These people are picked for their party loyalty. They are not in positions of power other than this one time. I honestly don't think even the Clintons could find enough dirt on them to threaten enough of them to make a difference.
Unless the Republican leadership were in on this plot, I simply can't see it happening. It would make an excellent tv plot but as a practical matter, I think it is the least of our worries. It doesn't even give my tinfoil hat a tingle.
I think the Republicans have the best of all possible worlds with the entire legislature, the Supreme Court and the White House in their control. With Ginsburg leaving the US, the Donald will have to find two Supreme Court justices quickly. May the Creator guide his choices.


Of course, I am probably overreacting. You're right...no one tops my distrust....ha! But if I am not wrong in my speculation, and the Trump University lawsuit does have an effect on the casting, counting, and/or certifying of the Electoral College vote...just remember this post.

I am totally of the belief that both parties work together to conspire against us for all the power, money, and freedoms they can rob from us. So, republicans being in on it? Yep, I think that could be true.

ETA: By the way, it only takes ONE senator and ONE member of the House to sign an objection and send it into deliberation. Such a scenario will result in a deliberation that the objection HAS MERIT, if Trump is specifically found liable or just Trump University is.

And if Trump's not specifically found liable and Congress still finds merit...oh, god. We really would be looking at the worst civil unrest we have seen in our lifetimes. I think the two parties in government would absolutely delight in- and profit from it in more ways than one.
edit on 12-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So you actually believe they would give up the chance to appoint justices to the Supreme Court?

Sorry, I just can't go that far, even in my most devious plot-building. This seems more like a feign to keep people occupied with watching the harbor for incoming ships when we should be watching the road behind us.

Like a lot of other folks around here I will not rest easy until the new guy is sworn in. Even then, I will pray for his safety simply because I've read a bit of history and know that dark forces are always out there. If all this kerfuffle about Hillary's health wasn't simply propaganda put out by her campaign to gain sympathy, then she's probably too busy recovering from all the recent shocks to do much plotting.

I don't believe for one minute the Republicans, even that old devil, Moneybags Mitch, would give up the opportunity to approve SCJs of a Republican president. Will they scheme against The Donald once he's in office? You betcha. But since Trump owes the party no favors----he's presently in a position of great strength. Surely you've noticed them scurrying to his side, even those who reviled him when it was thought he couldn't win.

For all the medias' attempts to make us believe that he is stupid----and Hillary is some sort of genius----Well---see how that worked out? He beat not only the corporate media attempts but the best the Democrat party could do to defeat him. I've said all along, I don't personally know any stupid people who have taken a million dollars and turned it into billions of dollars. That said, my experience with personal knowledge of people who were handed a million dollars is limited but both of the people I know personally who inherited a million or more are now living in subsidized housing, having lost/frittered away their entire fortunes. They are both loyal Democrats who blame the Republicans for their plight in life. Honestly. To hear them talk one would think that Ronald Reagan and George II came and held a gun on their heads to make them spend money on fast cars, big boats, horse races and poker. That's the plight of stupid people.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So you actually believe they would give up the chance to appoint justices to the Supreme Court?




Wait...let's start here...who are we talking about giving up the chance to appoint Supreme Court justices?

Republicans? Yes, I think they really would do whatever is necessary to work with Democrats, behind our backs, to slowly set up crises and *solutions* in elections that help the two parties hijack our election systems.

They would benefit from it.

Obstructionism and the two party divide are useful..and also profitable in money and power to those leading this federal government.


edit on 12-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So you actually believe they would give up the chance to appoint justices to the Supreme Court?




Wait...let's start here...who are we talking about giving up the chance to appoint Supreme Court justices?

Republicans? Yes, I think they really would do whatever is necessary to work with Democrats, behind our backs, to slowly set up crises and *solutions* in elections that help the two parties hijack our election systems.

They would benefit from it.

Obstructionism and the two party divide are useful..and also profitable in money and power to those leading this federal government.



Why is Trump entitled to appoint judges, when McConnell will not let congress vote on Garland. He is probably the most qualified jurist we have seen in 20 years.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 11:03 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

Don't know what you are getting at. I'm just kind of pissed that Senate Democrats didn't force a vote on Garland. Would have been a fight they probably won, but they didn't fight for it. I think it was worth fighting for.

But it was probably so much better to leave his seat vacant and try to extort the women's vote for Hillary with it.

Not willing to blame one party on this, sorry. Democrats put up no fight to try to force a vote.
edit on 12-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: BubbaJoe

Don't know what you are getting at. I'm just kind of pissed that Senate Democrats didn't force a vote on Garland. Would have been a fight they probably won, but they didn't fight for it. I think it was worth fighting for.

But it was probably so much better to leave his seat vacant and try to extort the women's vote for Hillary with it.

Not willing to blame one party on this, sorry. Democrats put up no fight to try to force a vote.


You do realize while in the minority, the democrats in the senate cannot do anything.

ETA: amazing how this political thing works, you must keep up, or you fall behind.
edit on 11/12/2016 by BubbaJoe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: BubbaJoe

Don't know what you are getting at. I'm just kind of pissed that Senate Democrats didn't force a vote on Garland. Would have been a fight they probably won, but they didn't fight for it. I think it was worth fighting for.

But it was probably so much better to leave his seat vacant and try to extort the women's vote for Hillary with it.

Not willing to blame one party on this, sorry. Democrats put up no fight to try to force a vote.


You do realize while in the minority, the democrats in the senate cannot do anything.

ETA: amazing how this political thing works, you must keep up, or you fall behind.


Do you realize they could have?
How Democrats could force a Supreme Court vote

Don't fall behind.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
It's no secret that I suspect Trump is a plant


I would say that's a really good guess. But I suspect FAR more than that. I suspect the whole thing is a circus and every single one of these clowns is in on it. While we're busy out here squabbling over which team won the last round, they're really all on the same team. Every. Single. Time.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
It's no secret that I suspect Trump is a plant


I would say that's a really good guess. But I suspect FAR more than that. I suspect the whole thing is a circus and every single one of these clowns is in on it. While we're busy out here squabbling over which team won the last round, they're really all on the same team. Every. Single. Time.


Me, too. Me, too. Me, too. Me, too.

Every. Single. Time.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye
You may be right but I still doubt they will give up one whole branch of government when they have the opportunity to control all three.
What people seem to be failing to consider here is the electors themselves. They are appointed by the party faithful. They aren't politicians, just hard workers for the party. At this point it would take turning nearly 40 people away from their party dedication. I have far more faith in the people who aren't politicians than to think that they could be turned to vote against their party.
Again, I think this issue is a red herring to keep us chasing our tails while they have something entirely different up their crooked sleeves.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt
You may be right but I still doubt they will give up one whole branch of government when they have the opportunity to control all three.
What people seem to be failing to consider here is the electors themselves. They are appointed by the party faithful. They aren't politicians, just hard workers for the party. At this point it would take turning nearly 40 people away from their party dedication. I have far more faith in the people who aren't politicians than to think that they could be turned to vote against their party.




I hope so much that you are correct about this.


originally posted by: diggindirt
Again, I think this issue is a red herring to keep us chasing our tails while they have something entirely different up their crooked sleeves.



I hope to god you are wrong about this part, but I think you could be right about this, too.

I think Jaded & Cynical said it best..."Whatever we're in for I would bet they aren't just rolling over."
edit on 13-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Isn't the vote December 19th?


Well, crappity crap...I am wrong about the date the trial begins.

IT BEGINS ON NOVEMBER 28!

Gah! Even more scary!

Link



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

AND there's this:



Judge recommended parties settle

Just hours after Trump met with President Barack Obama in the Oval Office on Thursday, lawyers for the President-elect appeared in court to prepare for the upcoming trial on Trump University.

US District Judge Gonzalo Curiel took a strong stance Thursday and recommended the parties settle the case to avoid the immense complications of a President-elect facing trial while preparing to take office.

"It would be wise for the plaintiffs, for defendants to look closely at trying to resolve this case given all else that is involved," Curiel said.

But Trump has previously refused to settle the cases and has defended the quality of the real estate program, which enrolled about 10,000 students from 2005 until it closed in 2010.

"This is a case I could have settled very easily, but I don't settle cases very easily when I'm right," Trump said in March.
However, Trump's top lawyer on the case, Daniel Petrocelli, alluded to a possible settlement Thursday, noting the unique responsibilities his client now carries.


Link

Trump needs to settle this case even if they feel confident. I do not want to see a Jury/Court verdict on this.

Settle this crap and then seal all the details.




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join