No Matter What Happens, We Won’t Know Who The Next President Will Be Until December 19th

what-public-domainMost Americans assume that their votes decide who the next president will be, but that is actually not the case.  It is the Electoral College that will elect the next president, and they don’t meet until December 19th.  And the truth is that all of the members of the Electoral College never meet in one place.  Rather, electors gather together in all 50 state capitals on the second Wednesday in December, and it is at that time that the next president and vice president are officially elected.  Of course members of the Electoral College have voted according to the will of the people about 99 percent of the time throughout our history, but with how crazy this election has turned out to be you never know what might happen.  For example, later on in this article you will see that one elector in Washington state has already publicly stated that he will not cast his vote for Hillary Clinton.  If other “faithless electors” emerge, that could potentially change the entire outcome of the election.

If you are not familiar with the basics of how the Electoral College works, here is a pretty good summary from Wikipedia

Even though the aggregate national popular vote is calculated by state officials, media organizations, and the Federal Election Commission, the people only indirectly elect the president, as the national popular vote is not the basis for electing the president or vice president. The President and Vice President of the United States are elected by the Electoral College, which consists of 538 presidential electors from the fifty states and Washington, D.C.. Presidential electors are selected on a state-by-state basis, as determined by the laws of each state. Since the election of 1824,[35] most states have appointed their electors on a winner-take-all basis, based on the statewide popular vote on Election Day. Maine and Nebraska are the only two current exceptions, as both states use the congressional district method. Although ballots list the names of the presidential and vice presidential candidates (who run on a ticket), voters actually choose electors when they vote for president and vice president. These presidential electors in turn cast electoral votes for those two offices. Electors usually pledge to vote for their party’s nominee, but some “faithless electors” have voted for other candidates.

A candidate must receive an absolute majority of electoral votes (currently 270) to win the presidency or the vice presidency. If no candidate receives a majority in the election for president or vice president, that election is determined via a contingency procedure established by the Twelfth Amendment. In such a situation, the House chooses one of the top three presidential electoral vote-winners as the president, while the Senate chooses one of the top two vice presidential electoral vote-winners as vice president.

In an attempt to make sure that their electors vote according to the will of the people, 29 states have passed laws that impose penalties on “faithless electors”.  In many cases the punishment consists of a fine, but that may not be enough to keep some electors in line this time around.  According to ABC News, one elector that was supposed to be committed to Hillary Clinton has already announced that he is refusing to vote for her despite the fact that he will get hit by a $1,000 fine…

One elector has already said he won’t vote for Clinton, despite a fine. Robert Satiacum, a member of Washington’s Puyallup Tribe, says he believes Clinton is a “criminal” who doesn’t care enough about American Indians and “she’s done nothing but flip back and forth.”

Satiacum faces a $1,000 fine in Washington if he doesn’t vote for Clinton, but he said he doesn’t care.

“She will not get my vote, period,” he told The Associated Press.

And there are 21 states that do not impose penalties on “faithless electors” at all.

So while it is true that over 99 percent of all Electors throughout our history have voted the way that they were supposed to, that may not happen in 2016.

There is also the possibility that the winning candidate could die or become incapacitated between Election Day and December 19th.  If that happens, the electors that are supposed to be committed to the winning candidate would be free to vote for someone else.  The following comes from archives.gov

If a candidate dies or becomes incapacitated between the general election and the meeting of electors, under federal law, the electors pledged to the deceased candidate may vote for the candidate of their choice at the meeting of electors. Individual states may pass laws on the subject, but no federal law proscribes how electors must vote when a candidate dies or becomes incapacitated. In 1872, when Horace Greeley passed away between election day and the meeting of electors, the electors who were slated to vote for Greeley voted for various candidates, including Greeley. The votes cast for Greeley were not counted due to a House resolution passed regarding the matter. See the full Electoral College vote counts for President and Vice President in the 1872 election.

As to a candidate who dies or becomes incapacitated between the meeting of electors and the counting of electoral votes in Congress, the Constitution is silent on whether this candidate meets the definition of “President elect” or “Vice President elect.” If the candidate with a majority of the electoral votes is considered “President elect,” even before the counting of electoral votes in Congress, Section 3 of the 20th Amendment applies. Section 3 of the 20th Amendment states that the Vice President elect will become President if the President elect dies or becomes incapacitated.

If a winning Presidential candidate dies or becomes incapacitated between the counting of electoral votes in Congress and the inauguration, the Vice President elect will become President, according to Section 3 of the 20th Amendment.

Our Constitution really should be amended to deal with a situation where a winning candidate dies between Election Day and the Electoral College vote, but up until now that has not happened.

So the cold, hard reality of the matter is that we will enter a period of great uncertainty between November 8th and December 19th.  Even though the American people will have spoken, we will not have a “President-elect” yet, and if something happens to the winning candidate that could throw us into an unprecedented constitutional crisis.

And of course if the election results are very tight and a few “faithless electors” throw the election in the opposite direction on December 19th, that could create an enormous constitutional crisis as well.

Following the vote of the Electoral College on December 19th, a joint session of Congress takes place on January 6th of the following year to formally declare the winner

The Twelfth Amendment mandates that the Congress assemble in joint session to count the electoral votes and declare the winners of the election.[53] The session is ordinarily required to take place on January 6 in the calendar year immediately following the meetings of the presidential electors.[54] Since the Twentieth Amendment, the newly elected House declares the winner of the election; all elections before 1936 were determined by the outgoing House.

Two weeks later, the winning candidate will be inaugurated on January 20th, and at that point the next president will begin to serve.

It would be a whole lot simpler and more rational to just allow the American people to directly elect the president, and it would probably take a major crisis in order to get the kind of constitutional amendment that is needed to do that.

But for now the system is what it is, and that means that the election is not over until it is over.

So November 8th is definitely not the end of the story, and the craziest chapters of this election season may still be yet to come.

Are The Polls Rigged Against Trump? All Of These Wildly Divergent Surveys Cannot Possibly Be Correct

donald-trump-photograph-by-michael-vadonSome of these polls are going to turn out to be dead wrong.  With just over two weeks to go until election day, some surveys are showing a very tight race, while others say that Hillary Clinton has a massive lead.  For example, the tracking polls put out by Rasmussen, the L.A. Times and IBD/TIPP have all consistently shown that the race is either tied or Donald Trump is winning by a small margin.  But Fox News has Hillary Clinton ahead by six points, Bloomberg has Clinton ahead by nine points, and the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Clinton ahead by twelve points.  So what in the world is going on here?  If the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll is correct, we are likely to see a landslide of historic proportions for Clinton, and this is what many of the experts are now projecting.  But if Rasmussen and the L.A. Times are correct, the race could easily go either way.  So who are we supposed to believe?  Could it be possible that some of the polls are rigged against Trump?

Well, when you take a closer look at the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, it does appear that it is not as accurate as it could be.  It turns out that those that conducted the survey purposely included 9 percent more Democrats than Republicans

“METHODOLOGY – This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats – Republicans – Independents.”

But as Zero Hedge has pointed out, registered Democrats have never outnumbered registered Republicans by 9 percent at any point over the last several decades.

So how in the world can ABC News and the Washington Post possibly justify their methodology?

Other major surveys have also purposely oversampled Democrats.  The following comes from Gateway Pundit

With all the liberal distortions and dishonesty we decided to have a small team of actuarial and statistics professionals take a look at a couple of the recent polls to get their take on the reliability of these polls. They selected the recent FOX poll from October 14 showing Hillary up by 7 and the WSJ/NBC poll from October 16 showing Hillary with an 11 point lead.

The first observation is that both polls are heavily skewed towards Democrats. At a high level, the FOX poll consists of 43 Dems to 36 Reps to 21 Other while the NBC poll shows 44 Dems to 37 Reps to 19 Other.

By selecting more Dems the polls are designed to provide a Dem result.

Our experts next analyzed the data and calculated results using the same data from the two surveys on a split of 40 Dems, 40 Reps and 20 Other. The results show that using either sets of data Trump comes out ahead with a larger margin of victory using the FOX data.

Why would these major news organizations purposely try to give us distorted results?

One reason to do this would be to try to discourage Trump voters.  If they believe that Donald Trump is going to lose big, that might discourage some of them from going out to vote.

At this moment, the Real Clear Politics average of national polls has Trump down by 5.6 percent.  But some polls actually have him winning.  Here are the nine latest surveys that Real Clear Politics has compiled…

ABC News Tracking: Clinton +12

IBD/TIPP Tracking: Trump +2

Rasmussen Reports: Trump +2

Quinnipiac: Clinton +7

Economist/YouGov: Clinton +4

FOX News: Clinton +6

Bloomberg: Clinton +9

Reuters/Ipsos: Clinton +4

Monmouth: Clinton +12

There is a 14 point swing between the polls that show Trump up by 2 points and the polls that show Clinton up by 12 points.

This should not be happening.  There is no way in the world that there should be a 14 point difference between scientific polls at this stage in the game.  On November 8th the polling organizations that were way off are going to be exposed, and it will be exceedingly difficult for them to regain their credibility afterwards.

At this point, some of the largest news organizations in the country are openly projecting a Clinton landslide.  For example, Reuters says that Clinton now has a 95 percent chance of winning

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is on a definite path to the White House, according to the latest Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation poll.

The survey, released Saturday, found that Clinton is on track to win more than 300 votes in the Electoral College, which would solidly secure her the presidency. If the election were held this week, Clinton would win 326 Electoral College votes while Trump would win only 212, the poll said.

According to Reuters, Clinton currently has a 95 percent chance of winning the White House.

If Reuters isn’t right about this they are going to end up looking awfully foolish.

An analysis by the Associated Press also has Clinton as the overwhelming favorite.  And it is true that the poll results coming out of individual states seem to show Clinton with a seemingly insurmountable lead on the electoral map.

But once again, can we trust those polls?

Trump has regularly dismissed the national polls, but on Sunday his campaign manager did admit on national television that they are losing.  The following comes from the New York Post

Donald Trump’s campaign manager on Sunday acknowledged something her boss hates to do — losing.

“We are behind,” Kellyanne Conway admitted on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

The GOP nominee routinely brushes off negative polling as untrustworthy but Conway said Democrat Hillary Clinton does have an edge.

However, it is important to remember that the big national polls have been very wrong in the past.  Back in 1980, a Gallup survey that was released on October 26th showed Ronald Reagan trailing Jimmy Carter by 8 points, but of course Reagan went on to win the election by a landslide

“For weeks before the presidential election, the gurus of public opinion polling were nearly unanimous in their findings,” wrote John F. Stacks for TIME in April 1980. “In survey after survey, they agreed that the coming choice between President Jimmy Carter and challenger Ronald Reagan was ‘too close to call.’ A few points at most, they said, separated the two major contenders.

“But when the votes were counted, the former California Governor had defeated Carter by a margin of 51% to 41% in the popular vote — a rout for a U.S. presidential race. In the electoral college, the Reagan victory was a 10-to-1 avalanche that left the President holding only six states and the District of Columbia.”

Could a similar thing happen on November 8th?

Without a doubt, Trump supporters are far more enthusiastic than Clinton supporters are, and that matters.  The key on election day is to get your voters to turn out in large numbers, and the fact that Donald Trump is drawing record crowds to his rallies is a very good sign.

But even if Donald Trump legitimately wins the election, it could still be stolen from him via election fraud.

In recent days Democrats have been playing down the idea that this could possibly happen, but the truth is that even Barack Obama has admitted that election fraud is a major problem in the past.  For instance, just consider what he said about this back in 2008

“Well, I tell you what it helps in Ohio, that we got Democrats in charge of the machines,” Obama said regarding the threat of election-rigging.

He continued, “Whenever people are in power, they have this tendency to try to tilt things in their direction. That’s why we’ve got to have, I believe, a voting rights division in the Justice Department that is nonpartisan, and that is serious about investigating cases of voter fraud.”

“That’s why we need paper trails on these new electronic machines so that you actually have something that you can hang on to after you’ve punched that letter—make sure it hasn’t been hacked into,” he added, admitting that even Democrats have “monkeyed around” with election results:

“I want to be honest, it’s not as if it’s just Republicans who have monkeyed around with elections in the past. Sometimes, Democrats have, too.”

I know that these comments almost sound too good to be true, but you can actually watch video of Obama making these comments right here.  And it is odd that he specifically mentioned Democrats having control of the voting machines in Ohio, because I documented extreme voting irregularities in Ohio in the last election during a recent visit to Morningside.

And an increasing number of Americans are starting to become concerned about election fraud.  In fact, a brand new Reuters survey found that 70 percent of Republicans believe that if Hillary Clinton wins the election it will be “because of illegal voting or vote rigging”.

So even if Hillary Clinton gets into the White House, she may find that she has an exceedingly difficult time trying to govern the nation.

A lot of people have made a lot of predictions about the outcome of this election, and we don’t have very long until we find out who was right and who was wrong.

At this point, voting has already begun in many states, and the early results in Nevada don’t look encouraging for the Trump campaign

According to the estimable Nevada journalist Jon Ralston, Democrats have a 20-percentage-point turnout edge so far based on early and absentee voting in Clark County (home to Las Vegas), Nevada. And they have a 10-point edge in Washoe County (home to Reno).

But in the key swing state of Florida, so far 498,153 Republicans have voted compared to just 478,175 Democrats.  So that would seem to be some very good news for the Trump campaign, because Trump cannot win without carrying the state of Florida.

To me it seems as though Americans are more emotionally invested in this campaign than they have been in any presidential campaign in decades.

The stakes are incredibly high, and in just over two weeks we will find out what happens.

Let us just hope and pray that America makes the right choice.

After This October Surprise, Donald Trump Only Has One Option Left: Expose The Clinton Crimes

hillary-clinton-vs-donald-trump-photo-by-donkeyhoteyIt is going to take a miracle of Biblical proportions for Donald Trump to win the election now.  If nothing changes between now and election day, Hillary Clinton is going to win in a landslide.  Out of all the candidates that were running for president this election cycle (including third party candidates), a Hillary Clinton presidency would be the worst possible outcome, but it appears that is precisely what we are going to get.  The 2005 recording in which Donald Trump admits that he used his celebrity status to grope women would instantly kill the career of a normal politician, but Donald Trump is no normal politician.  In essence, he admitted to being a sexual predator, and there is no way that you can spin that to make it acceptable.  Of course these comments were made 11 years ago, and Trump is a different man now, but that isn’t going to matter much to the mainstream media or to a large portion of the American public.  No matter what you or I may think about this, the cold, hard reality of the matter is that he is going to lose a lot of votes over this, and those were votes that he desperately needed if he hoped to defeat Hillary Clinton in November.

Since this recording came out, Trump has lost an incredible amount of support within his own party.  At this point, 73 prominent Republicans have either publicly attacked him or have announced that they will not be voting for him in November.

The release of this recording came at almost the perfect time for the Clinton campaign.  There is less than a month to go until election day, and this recording will be played over and over and over again between then and now.  If it had been released earlier, the effect of the scandal would have likely faded before election day, and if it had been released just prior to election day there would not have been enough time for everyone in America to be exposed to it.

If Donald Trump can come back from this and win the election, it will be the greatest political miracle of all time.

For those that still are not familiar with this recording, you can find it along with the Washington Post article that originally broke this story right here.  The things that Trump said are truly disgusting, and his remarks are too dirty to be reproduced in this article.

According to a different Washington Post article, producers at Access Hollywood only just recently started looking through their archives for past interviews with Trump…

NBC News first became aware of the footage late Monday after receiving notice from producers at “Access Hollywood,” a syndicated entertainment-news program owned by NBC. The program’s producers had combed their archives for interviews with Trump after reading an Associated Press account of crude remarks he had made about female contestants on “The Apprentice,” the NBC reality program that Trump had starred on for 14 seasons.

I find this highly suspicious.  Trump has been the biggest story in politics for more than a year, and Access Hollywood only started searching their archives for Trump material just a few days ago?

If you believe that, then I have a very large bridge on the west coast that I would like to sell you.

After the tape was supposedly “discovered”, it was then subsequently leaked somehow to the Washington Post, but NBC News says that they have absolutely no plans to investigate how the tape was leaked.

This doesn’t smell right either.  Unless you are negligent to the extreme, you definitely would want to know who is leaking your biggest news stories to your competitors.

Personally, I have a feeling that this was discovered a long time ago and was held back so that it could be an “October surprise”.  I cannot prove this of course, but that is my gut feeling.

And even worse material could still be coming.  In fact, a former producer on The Apprentice says that Donald Trump said “far worse” things on that show than were on the recording that was just released…

Following Friday’s release of audio in which Trump bragged about kissing and grabbing women without their permission, Bill Pruitt, a former producer on the show, said that there are “far worse” comments Trump made on tape.

“NBC had tape 11 yrs. Apprentice producer says they have more & worse. So why not release in 2015? In March? Why wait till October? #MSMBias” Cruz tweeted, referencing supposed bias towards Trump in the mainstream media.

Ted Cruz made an interesting point, but those tapes are actually not owned by NBC.  They are owned by Mark Burnett, and so they might not ever be released.

Before we get to the Clinton crimes, I also want to point out that the other voice on the infamous recording that has been released belongs to Billy Bush.

And Billy Bush just happens to be related to George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and Jeb Bush.  The following comes from CNN

Is he really…? Yes. Billy Bush is a member of that Bush family.

His father, Jonathan Bush, is a banker and GOP donor who is the brother of former President George H.W. Bush. That means Billy Bush is a cousin to former President George W. Bush, as well as failed 2016 presidential nominee Jeb Bush.

So after everything that has been said and done, it looks like the Bush family is going to get their revenge on Donald Trump.

There was some talk in Republican circles of trying to replace Donald Trump, but the rules make it virtually impossible to remove a nominee.  And early voting has already begun in some states, and so it is pretty much too late to do something even if Trump was inclined to willingly step down.

At this point, the only option that Trump has left is to show the American people that the crimes of the Clintons are substantially worse than anything that he has ever done or said.

No mainstream Republican politician has ever really been willing to go there, but perhaps Trump will now be willing to discuss the fact that Bill Clinton is a notorious sexual predator.  The following are just some of the women that have publicly accused Bill Clinton of sexual misconduct: Kathleen Willey, Connie Hamzy, Juanita Broaddrick, Eileen Wellstone, Sandra Allen James, Christy Zercher, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, Sally Perdue, Lencola Sullivan, Susie Whitacre and Bobbie Ann William.

And in the aftermath of this Trump scandal, some of Bill Clinton’s accusers are publicly speaking out once again.  For example, Juanita Broaddrick is being very bold about the fact that Bill Clinton raped her

Bill Clinton rape accuser Juanita Broaddrick is weighing in on Donald Trump’s controversial comments from 2005 that are mysteriously resurfacing just hours before the second debate and weeks before the general election.

“How many times must it be said,” she tweeted Saturday morning.

“Actions speak louder than words. (Donald Trump) said bad things! (Hillary Clinton) threatened me after (Bill Clinton) raped me.”

And Breitbart is currently featuring an extended interview with Broaddrick that is absolutely stunning.  The following is a short excerpt

I was completely dressed. I had a skirt and a blouse. He tore the waist of my skirt. And then he ripped my pantyhose. And he raped me. It was very vicious. I was just pinned down… I did not know what to do. I was so frightened. I was only 35 at the time. And it was horrible. I just wanted it to be over with. So he would go away.

KLEIN: He got up?

BROADDRICK: No, he held me down for a long time. And then he did it again. I was so ready for him to leave me alone. When he started raping me again. And it was very brief… And he did get up and he straightened himself. And my mouth was bleeding and it was hurting. And he just straightens himself and goes to the door.

KLEIN: With you still on the bed?

BROADDRICK: Yes, crying. He straightens himself and he goes to the door. And puts on his sunglasses. And tells me to get some ice on that on my list. And goes out the door.

Hillary Clinton has a long list of sexual skeletons in her closet as well, but the mainstream media won’t touch them with a 10 foot pole.

In addition to the things mentioned above, here is a list of 18 other Clinton scandals that Donald Trump needs to bring up if he has any chance to winning this election…

1. Benghazi

2. Emailgate

3. The “Energizer”

4. Defending a child rapist

5. The Clinton Foundation

6. Whitewater

7. Vince Foster

8. Using the IRS to target their enemies during the Clinton administration

9. The FBI background report scandal

10. Chinagate

11. Travelgate

12. Looting the White House

13. Cattle Money

14. “Sniper Fire” in Bosnia

15. Huma Abedin

16. Jeffrey Epstein

17. The “Lolita Express

18. The Clinton Body Count

Do you know how quarterbacks “take a knee” at the end of football games to run out the clock when their teams are winning?

Well, the Clinton campaign is almost at that stage.

Unless we see some sort of a complete and utter collapse, Hillary Clinton is on course to cruise to victory.

The only chance that Donald Trump has of winning now is to somehow show America that the Clintons are much worse than he is.  There are decades of skeletons that Trump could dredge up if he is inclined to do so, and the American people definitely deserve to be exposed to the truth about the Clintons.

If Trump just sits back and tries to “focus on the issues”, Clinton will keep hammering him with this newly revealed recording over and over, and Trump will get absolutely destroyed on election day.

That may not sound fair, but this is how the game of politics in America is played.

If Trump wants to have any hope of winning, he has got to be willing to expose the Clintons, and he has got to be willing to go all the way.

America Has Become A Lawless Nation – Hillary Clinton Magically Cleared By The FBI

Hillary Clinton - Photo by Nathania JohnsonIt is hard to be proud to be an American today after watching FBI director James Comey magically clear Hillary Clinton of all wrongdoing.  Sadly, Comey is likely to go down in history as the man that struck the final death blow to the rule of law in America.  During his address to the media, Comey admitted that Clinton sent or received 110 emails in 52 email chains that contained classified material at the time they were sent.  But of course there were probably many more.  Comey told the press that it was “likely that there are other work-related emails that they did not produce … that are now gone because they deleted all emails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices.”  So basically Clinton turned over to the FBI whatever she felt like turning over, and then she destroyed the rest of the evidence.  As a former lawyer, this infuriates me, but it doesn’t surprise me.

In fact, it doesn’t surprise me at all that Hillary Clinton was allowed to skate.  I expected this all along.  If you search the thousands of articles that I have posted on The Economic Collapse Blog and End Of The American Dream, you will find many articles where I say that Hillary Clinton should be in prison, but not a single one where I ever said that I thought she would be going to prison.

This is how politics in America works today.  People like Bill and Hillary Clinton could openly sacrifice children to Satan on the White House lawn and still probably not get into trouble.  Despite scandal after scandal going all the way back to Arkansas in the 1980s, nothing ever sticks to them, and nothing probably ever will.

In this case, FBI director James Comey essentially had to rewrite federal law in order to clear Clinton.  This is something that Andrew McCarthy explained very well in his article entitled “FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook”

There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.

—–

In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

The amazing thing is that the FBI handled a highly similar case very, very differently less than a year ago.  Just check out what happened to Naval reservist Bryan Nishimura

U.S. Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman immediately sentenced Nishimura to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine, and forfeiture of personal media containing classified materials. Nishimura was further ordered to surrender any currently held security clearance and to never again seek such a clearance.

According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system.

Nishimura’s actions came to light in early 2012, when he admitted to Naval personnel that he had handled classified materials inappropriately. Nishimura later admitted that, following his statement to Naval personnel, he destroyed a large quantity of classified materials he had maintained in his home. Despite that, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation searched Nishimura’s home in May 2012, agents recovered numerous classified materials in digital and hard copy forms. The investigation did not reveal evidence that Nishimura intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel.

So what is the difference between Nishimura and Clinton?

Neither of them ever intended to do anything wrong.

So why were they treated so differently?

Needless to say, social media is exploding with outrage over this decision to let Clinton go free.  Many Americans are openly asking why they should continue to play by the rules if politicians like Hillary Clinton are not required to do so.

Unfortunately, this is what America has become.  Our politicians are a reflection of who we are as a society, and as I have stated before Hillary Clinton is going to be the overwhelming favorite if there is an election in November.  At this moment, she has solid leads in all of the “swing states”, and she only really needs to win one of them

Perhaps you enjoy talk of battleground states. Well, there’s a scenario for you, too. First, pick the six “closest” swing states (VA, NH, IA, OH, FL, NC). Got it? Now understand that New Hampshire excepted, Clinton only has to win one of them in order to reach the requisite 270 electoral votes to win. (Optional third step for Republicans only: start shotgunning Pabst Blue Ribbon and don’t stop until November.)

Lest any Trump supporters seek solace in poll numbers, recent polls have Trump sliding further behind in all the relevant swing states. According to a Ballotpedia battleground poll released last week, Trump trails by 14% in Florida, 4% in Iowa, 10% in North Carolina, 9% in Ohio, and 7% in Virginia.

Hillary Clinton is a horrible, evil, miserable human being, and right now she is the odds-on favorite to become the next president of the United States.

But ultimately it is the American people that are to blame for blindly supporting corrupt politicians such as Clinton, and if they willingly pick her to be our next president then we will certainly deserve whatever consequences follow.

Republican Operatives Launch All-Out Effort To Unbind The Delegates And Deny Trump The Nomination

Donald Trump Cube - Public DomainIf you think that Donald Trump already has the Republican nomination locked up, then you don’t understand what is going on behind the scenes.  It has long been my contention that the elite will move heaven and earth in order to keep Trump from ever setting foot in the Oval Office.  One way that they could try to do this is by attempting to deny him the nomination at the Republican convention next month.  Over the past couple of days, the Washington Post, CNN and a whole host of other mainstream news outlets have been reporting on a new “last-ditch effort” that has been launched by Republican operatives to get the Republican convention Rules Committee to unbind all of the delegates and allow them to vote however they want.  As you will see below, they can do this, and if they get enough votes they will do it.

This current effort is different from what we have seen so far during this campaign season, because it is actually being organized by the delegates themselves.  The following comes from the Washington Post

Dozens of Republican convention delegates are hatching a new plan to block Donald Trump at this summer’s party meetings, in what has become the most organized effort so far to stop the businessman from becoming the GOP presidential nominee.

The moves come amid declining poll numbers for Trump and growing concern among Republicans that he is squandering his chance to defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton. Several controversies — including his racial attacks on a federal judge, his renewed call to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the United States and his support for changing the nation’s gun laws — have raised fears among Republicans that Trump is not really a conservative and is too reckless to run a successful race.

This movement is being spearheaded by a delegate from Colorado named Kendal Unruh.  She is actually a key member of the Republican convention Rules Committee, and this is very important for reasons that I will explain below.

For her, it is not about getting some other specific candidate nominated.  Rather, the entire goal is simply to stop Donald Trump

This literally is an ‘Anybody but Trump’ movement,” said Kendal Unruh, a Republican delegate from Colorado who is leading the campaign. “Nobody has any idea who is going to step in and be the nominee, but we’re not worried about that. We’re just doing that job to make sure that he’s not the face of our party.

So what will it take for Unruh and her allies to be successful?

As Fox News explained, there are basically two courses of action…

To prevail, Unruh needs a majority of the 112 members of the convention rules committee, which has two delegates from each state and territory. Then, a majority of the full convention’s 2,472 delegates would have to approve.

There’s a Plan B. If Unruh can win over one-fourth support from the rules committee — just 29 delegates — the full convention must vote on her proposal. So far she’s got around 10 supporters though some prefer delaying the rule’s impact until the 2020 convention, she said.

On Thursday night, Unruh was on a conference call that included at least 30 delegates from 15 different states, and the Washington Post says that regional coordinators for this effort have been recruited “in Arizona, Iowa, Louisiana, Washington and other states.”

One individual that took part in this conference call on Thursday night told CNN that calls are pouring in from people all over the country that want to be part of this movement…

I will tell you, about every two hours people contact me about how to join this effort,” Lonegan said. “This has never been done before, so there’s no textbook on how to do it. So we’re building an organic effort, state by state, to convince members of the Rules Committee to sign onto a rule that unbinds the delegates to vote their moral conscience.”

So could the Republican convention Rules Committee actually do this?

Could they actually unbind all of the delegates and allow them to vote however they wished?

Well, yes they actually could do this.  As Time Magazine has explained, the Republican convention Rules Committee essentially has the power to make up any rules that they want…

It has the power to review and amend all of the rules of the Republican Party, pending ratification by the full convention. If it wanted to, it could insert a rule that says only candidates with blue hair could be the party’s nominee. It’s that powerful. In a contested scenario, the Rules Committee would be ground zero for fights over who and how candidates are nominated on the floor, as well as how the convention itself is conducted.

And thanks to political wrangling by the Cruz campaign, we do know that the rules committee is dominated by delegates that are loyal to Cruz

The convention rules committee is made up of one man and one woman from each of the 50 states, U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia. Dominated by party insiders and loyalists to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz—who aggressively worked state conventions to secure slots on the committee—it remains to be seen what the committee’s appetite would be for such a dramatic break from the existing rules.

If I was Donald Trump, I would be taking this very, very seriously.

But at this point he seems to be brushing it off

“I have tremendous support and get the biggest crowds by far and any such move would not only be totally illegal but also a rebuke of the millions of people who feel so strongly about what I am saying,” Trump said in a statement. “People that I defeated soundly in the primaries will do anything to get a second shot — but there is no mechanism for it to happen.”

Right at this moment we still have about a month left before the convention.

So that gives those involved in the anti-Trump movement quite a bit of time to rally their forces.

The rule change that would unbind all of the delegates and free them up to “vote their consciences” has already been drafted.  Here is the text of the proposed rule change…

Preserving Delegates’ Ability to Vote Their Individual Conscience

The secretary of the national convention shall receive and faithfully announce and record each delegate’s vote in accordance with these rules. If any such delegate notifies the secretary of his or her intent to cast a vote of conscience, whether personal or religious, each such delegate shall be unbound and unconstrained by these rules on any given vote, including the first ballot for the selection of the Republican nominee for President of the United States, without the risk of challenge, sanction, or retribution by the Republican National Committee. Allowable personal reasons shall include the public disclosure of one or more grievous acts of personal conduct by a nominee candidate, including but not limited to, criminally actionable acts, acts of moral turpitude or extreme prejudice, and/or notorious public statements of support for positions that clearly oppose or contradict the policies embodied in the Republican Party’s platform as established at the national convention.

In my new book, I warn about the great political shaking that is coming to this nation, and if this rule change is even attempted at the Republican convention it would create seismic shifts in the U.S. political landscape.

Of course there is still one huge question that I have not even addressed in this article yet.

If Trump has the nomination taken away from him, who would the Republican nominee be?

Some are convinced that it would be Paul Ryan, but I believe that it would be somebody else.

Mitt Romney has certainly not hidden his disdain for Donald Trump, and right now he is quietly waiting in the wings.  If the anti-Trump forces get their way, I believe that he would be the man that ultimately walks away with the prize.

*About the author: Michael Snyder is the founder and publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog. Michael’s controversial new book about Bible prophecy entitled “The Rapture Verdict” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.*

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!