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: 5
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

This lawsuit is just the only way, I can see, that the election might be overturned.

I think the minds behind Hillary know this, too, and are laser-focused on it.




posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
I need to correct my earlier comment. The trial is in California, but the same concern applies:


Is it true that voter registration lists are used to select citizens for jury duty?

Yes. California State Statutes require that lists of registered voters be provided to the Jury Commissioner to be used for jury duty selection. Another source for selection of jurrors is from the Department of Motor Vehicles' list of licensed drivers and identification cardholders resident within the area served by the court.


Link



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Does this mean that there is a possibility that an illegal immigrant could be empaneled in the jury?

They can have CA driver licenses.

And even if there isn't an illegal on the jury, it's still in CA.

And isn't this (as are the how many others?) a civil case?

I would think that if it were criminal, law enforcement agencies would be doing the investigation and prosecution.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yes, it is a civil case.

I wouldn't be so concerned that it might have an effect if I hadn't read this:



"While the open cases are civil, some legal scholars raise the prospect that a court could ultimately find Trump University or even Trump personally liable for fraud. In the worst case, a finding that fraud took place — even by a civil court — could provide Congress with the grounds to consider impeachment proceedings."


Trump's lawyers urge Court to move back his fraud trial until after the inauguration

If it could be used as grounds to consider impeachment...then I think it could be used as grounds for considering objections to the electoral college votes in Congress, and/or grounds for electors to switch their votes, if the trial concludes before January 6.



edit on 15-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   

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.


This is what my gut is telling me. He is in charge of the transition too. Worthy of it's own thread..



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Its a politically motivated piece of litigation.

He's a businessman that measures risk. I suspect his decision is more about negating risk.

If the faithless elector issue overturns the election, though....Trump supporters have guns. Ugly will become explosive instantly.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Ugly will become explosive instantly.


I know...

Civil unrest is so useful though to those who orchestrate it.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So they over turn a Nation election for possible fraud, and replace Trump with Hillary? The queen of fraud, lies, and theft?

I don't think you need a crystal ball to see what the future will hold.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Just to add some weirdness to this...

So the Trump team tried to make a case that he should not stand trial as President Elect or that it should be postponed.

That argument was shot down because of court precedence...

Specifically how years back Pres. Clinton made the same argument when Paula Jones was suing him..and the courts ruled that yes, a sitting President can be sued.

Know who that lawyer for Paula Jones was? That set the legal precedent allowing Presidents to be sued while in office?

Kelly-Anne Conways husband...she is Trumps campaign spokesperson that you see all over the news.

So her husband is the reason that Trump can't skip the court date in December as his legal team tried to argue.


edit on 16-11-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So they over turn a Nation election for possible fraud, and replace Trump with Hillary? The queen of fraud, lies, and theft?

I don't think you need a crystal ball to see what the future will hold.


As I understand it, if the electoral college is scuttled or Trump becomes irrevocably toxic and electors defect...it doesn't go to Hillary...it is kicked to the GOP congress to appoint the POTUS.
edit on 16-11-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So they over turn a Nation election for possible fraud, and replace Trump with Hillary? The queen of fraud, lies, and theft?

I don't think you need a crystal ball to see what the future will hold.


As I understand it, if the electoral college is scuttled or Trump becomes irrevocably toxic and electors defect...it doesn't go to Hillary...it is kicked to the GOP congress to appoint the POTUS.


I think it will depend. If faithless electors flip their votes to Hillary, there will be objections to the counting of the votes. Those objections will have to be signed by one member of the House and one senator, and if they get those two signatures, the two houses will deliberate to determine if they have "merit."

The legal use of the term "merit" is interesting to me. Surely a jury verdict against Trump for fraud cannot be considered to be without merit. An objection to those flipped votes would potentially be determined to not have merit.

So those flipped votes may stand...regardless of who has control of Congress.


edit on 16-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

And, likewise, if a verdict is reached after the electors cast their votes but before Congress counts them...Trump votes may be objected to, and those objections might be found to be meritorious. Of course, that scenario still doesn't give Hilary the 270 she would need. But then I go back to that word 'merit,' again.

***

Also, I find your Kelly-Anne factoid interesting. But then I have a theory that there is a long-running plan underway to seize our election system that began with an orchestrated election debacle, in Florida, in 2000. Both parties are in on it. The Bushes and Clintons set it into motion. The ultimate goal is the abolition of our Electoral College system, but our election systems had to be seized to make it happen. Gerrymandering had to happen to control the electoral votes.

'They' have to get two elections back-to-back where a Democrat won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote AND one where the Republican won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote.

If they can pull that off...then they can maybe get 3/4 of the states to vote to abolish the electoral college within the seven year deadline...or make it seem plausible when they rig the various state elections on the issue.

But perhaps it began before then...with the Paula Jones case.

edit on 16-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Just to add some weirdness to this...

So the Trump team tried to make a case that he should not stand trial as President Elect or that it should be postponed.

That argument was shot down because of court precedence...

Specifically how years back Pres. Clinton made the same argument when Paula Jones was suing him..and the courts ruled that yes, a sitting President can be sued.

Know who that lawyer for Paula Jones was? That set the legal precedent allowing Presidents to be sued while in office?

Kelly-Anne Conways husband...she is Trumps campaign spokesperson that you see all over the news.

So her husband is the reason that Trump can't skip the court date in December as his legal team tried to argue.



Trump could fire his lawyer, right now, and be granted a continuance to find new counsel.

I feel like there's a reason for the argument they used which finds precedence in the Paula Jones case....especially if this case has any impact on the voting, counting, and certifying of the EC votes.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

This from Ben Swann, made me think of your thread, another point of possible friction




posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

FASCINATING!

I actually did like Kasich.

I'll be keeping this on my radar.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

This new twist has some interesting implications and perks up my ears.

I wonder if there are any other connections or coincidences in these cases?



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: MotherMayEye

This new twist has some interesting implications and perks up my ears.

I wonder if there are any other connections or coincidences in these cases?



I was thinking earlier that there really is a Cast of Characters going back decades.

I found the Kelly-Anne connection so interesting.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

Weren't they betting on Kasich to win a contested convention way back in January?

I don't think it would matter to a lot of the Trump voters, as long as Hillary is not put in the position, and I think this is exactly what they have planned all along.

We are such a predictable and malleable lot.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: MotherMayEye

This new twist has some interesting implications and perks up my ears.

I wonder if there are any other connections or coincidences in these cases?



I'm going to dig deeper into this and start posting on anything interesting I find.

I'll start with the judge in the Jones case, Judge Susan Webber Wright:



Federal judicial service[edit]
Recommended by Hammerschmidt,[3] Wright was appointed to both the Eastern District of Arkansas and the Western District of Arkansas by President George H.W. Bush on September 21, 1989, both seats having been vacated by Elsijane Trimble Roy. Wright was confirmed by the United States Senate on January 23, 1990, and received her commission the following day. On December 1, 1990, she was reassigned to serve only on the Eastern District of Arkansas. Wright served as chief judge of that District from 1998 to 2005. She took senior status on August 22, 2013.


In my mind, it's interesting Bush Sr. appointed her...and then she was reassigned within a year to the Eastern Arkansas district (where Mena is, too, btw).


On April 1, 1998, Wright granted summary judgment to Clinton in a 39-page ruling that expressed exasperation with both Jones and her lawyers, and stated that she believed the case to be without legal merit.[6] Jones' appeal to the Eighth Circuit was dismissed when Clinton settled with her out of court.


There's that word again..."merit." Clinton's case was ruled to have NONE.

Will there be merit to the Trump University fraud case?



Wright was also involved with Kenneth Starr's investigation of the Whitewater scandal, and issued numerous rulings that were both favorable and unfavorable to Clinton.


Speaks for itself...it's a wow connection.




Wright was appointed to a seven-year term on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by Chief Justice John Roberts. She was appointed on May 18, 2009, and her term expired on May 18, 2016.[11] Wright is a former judge of the FISA court.[12]

Link

Just a complete holy sh*t to me. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and FISA?

Jiminy criminy. There's a lot there for my poor tin covered brain to think about.

edit on 16-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Good Investigating as always





top topics



 
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join