Robin Messing 
Member since Dec 14, 2016


Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Links to Me

Recent Comments

Re: “Springs math teacher sues the state to vote his conscience as a member of the Electoral College

I have written a rather lengthy article explaining why Judge Daniels got this wrong. It is in response by this article, also written by Corey Hutchins, which discusses Judge Daniels' ruling in more detail.

http://www.coloradoindependent.com/162834/electoral-college-lawsuit-colorado-judge-denied

Here are some of the highlights from my article.

There are five reasons why Judge Daniels clearly got this wrong.

1)As noted above, he clearly went against the wishes of our Founding Fathers.

2)As noted by the Electors' lawyer, Jason Wesoky, if Hillary had won the election and the FBI later disclosed that she had engaged in criminal activity, Trump's lawyers would be filing suit arguing that the Electors should be free.

3) Judge Daniel's insistence that electors should get the legislators to change the law can only be classified as cute. He knows that this is no remedy since the odds of convincing the legislators of changing the law before December 19th are zero. It is also an abdication of his judicial responsibility for striking down unconstitutional law.

4) Those who voted for Clinton did not just vote for Clinton. They also voted against Donald Trump. A sizeable portion probably held their nose in voting for Clinton because they saw no alternative. (An August 2016 Pew Research Survey showed that 46% of those who planned to vote for Clinton were doing so mainly because they wanted to prevent Trump from becoming President.) Judge Wiley claimed that voters who had voted for Clinton would be harmed if their Electors were free to vote for someone else. However, if all Electors were bound to their candidate then Trump would be guaranteed to become President and all Clinton voters would suffer 100% harm. Freeing the Electors to vote their conscience would set a precedent for judges in other states to unbind their states' Electors. This would increase the chance that someone other than Trump would become president, thus partially satisfying the wishes of a substantial number of Clinton voters. In other words, the harm suffered by Clinton voters would be reduced by unbinding the Electors. The same argument would hold even more strongly for unbinding the Electors who were pledged to Trump. That same Pew Research Survey showed that 53% of those planning to vote for Trump were primarily doing so to prevent Clinton from winning. Their interests would arguably be better served by freeing the electors to vote for another candidate. The next point explains why EVERYONE'S interests, both voters and nonvoters, are better served by unbinding the Electors.

5)The Constitution is not a suicide pact. So warned Justice Robert Jackson in his dissent in Termineillo v. City of Chicago. So too did many who justified increased electronic surveillance of American Citizens as a response to the 9/11 attack. And while he was arguing for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the U.S., Donald Trump said, "The Constitution there's nothing like it. But it doesn't necessarily give us the right to commit suicide, as a country, OK?" If the Constitution is not a suicide pact, then certainly a state law binding selectors is not a suicide pact either. I will argue below why enabling Trump to become President is equivalent to entering a national suicide pact, or at the very least, equivalent to playing Russian Roulette. But before arguing this, I shall present several non-suicide related reasons for allowing the Electors to reject Donald Trump. . . .


To summarize, Donald Trump poses a great threat to the existence of the United States.

1)He is sure to antagonize most of the 1.6 billion Muslims around the world.

2) He is likely to antagonize the Chinese government that represents 1.35 billion people, or 20% of the world's population. This government commands the largest military in the world and possesses over 200 nuclear warheads.

3)Trump has said that China must take stronger action against North Korea to pressure it to halt its nuclear weapons program. He has even suggested that China should invade North Korea to solve this problem for us. It is impossible to imagine China invading North Korea under even the best of circumstances. Imagining it will increase cooperation with the U.S. in any realm while we are challenging the One China policy is folly.

4)He has already antagonized our neighbors to the South with his threat to build a wall and make the Mexicans pay.

5) He has, perhaps inadvertently, created major divisions within our society by creating conditions where the Ku Klux Klan and neo-nazis flourish.

6) He has called global warming a hoax and is seeking a way to withdraw from the Paris Agreement to fight climate change by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. He is reportedly considering stripping NASA's budget to prevent it from monitoring climate change.

7) He may be looking for an excuse to abandon the Iran nucler deal. It is extremely unlikely that other nations will join us in reinstating a sanctions regime against Iran if we torpedo the deal. If the deal collapses we will be faced with a choice of letting Iran's nuclear program go unchecked or going to war with Iran.

8) Putting Donald Trump in charge of nuclear weapons is not just playing Russian Roulette with our national security. It is playing Russian Roulette with human survival.

Again, this has only included the highlights of my article, The entire article can be found here.

http://themessinglink.com/TrumpSuicidePact

10 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Robin Messing on 12/14/2016 at 3:02 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent

Website powered by Foundation