There is going to be a lot more of this coming your way Trumpster

[pbmus]

Trump warns Electoral College lawsuit could undermine his election

Donald Trump is warning that a Colorado lawsuit brought by two Democratic members of the Electoral College could harm his bid to become president.

“It is little exaggeration … to say that this lawsuit threatens to impair the interests of the President-elect and the Campaign,” attorney Christopher Murray argued on Trump’s behalf in a filing submitted to the U.S. District Court of Colorado. The judge in the matter, Bill Clinton-appointee Wiley Daniel, is set to consider the matter Monday afternoon.


The suit, brought by Colorado electors Polly Baca and Robert Nemanich, is intended to overturn a state law that forces them to support the statewide popular vote winner when the Electoral College convenes to pick the president on Dec. 19. In Colorado’s case, the winner was Hillary Clinton but a legal victory could invalidate similar laws in 28 other states, including several where Republican electors say they’re legally required to support Trump.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-electoral-college-lawsuit-232515

[Gothmog]

1. The law is somewhat clear and the electors have the right to vote for whoever they want

State laws purporting to bind electors are not valid

[LaydeeBug]

5. The Colorado judge disagrees with you (with us) I am on your side. nt

[Gothmog]

6. A state court judge is construing a state law

I trust Prof. Tribe on this http://www.factcheck.org/2016/11/could-electoral-college-elect-clinton/

“Presidential Electors are theoretically free to vote as their consciences dictate, something the founders anticipated Electors would indeed do under Hamilton’s Electoral College invention,” Laurence Tribe, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School, told us via email.

Tribe said the constitutionality of imposing a fine on a “faithless elector” is “open to doubt, and it is even more doubtful that a court would compel any Elector to be ‘faithful’ to the State’s winner-take-all outcome. Nor is it likely that the Vice President, who presides over the process of opening the Electors’ ballots and counting the votes cast by the 538 Electors, would feel free to ‘correct’ a faithless Elector’s vote. So, in theory, if enough Electors pledged to Mr. Trump decline to make him President-elect and vote instead for Secretary Clinton, she would become the President-elect and would be the 45th President upon taking the Oath of Office on January 20, 2017.”

But Tribe said such a scenario is highly unlikely as a matter of practice, in part because it would likely be opposed by President Obama and Clinton herself.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

7. A federal judge said the same thing

The electors have filed with the 10th U.S. Court of Appeals.

[Wounded Bear]

2. After 8 years of undermining President Obama at every turn...

I don't think I'll be listening to any Repub complaints about undermining the presidency.

Fuck you, Trump, and the Red State high horse you rode in on.

[lame54]

3. If they are legally required what's the point...

Why doesn't the winner just get the electoral votes on election night

[Crunchy Frog]

4. I thought the EC was supposed to be a deliberative body

and a check against the "mob" electing someone who is totally unsuited to the office. What other purpose are they supposed to serve?