NYT is running with the story on illegitimate electors

[sarah FAILIN]

I feel more positive on the story now

[frazzled]

1. Where?

I don't see it. Please provide the link.

[sarah FAILIN]

3. here

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/us/politics/donald-trump-transition.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

[frazzled]

6. Ah, in a (fairly snarky) post within the briefing blog

Such an exhaustive examination may well have turned up such issues for each of the recent presidential elections, but it is a mark of the continuing resistance to Mr. Trump that it was undertaken this go-round.

Will the Republican Congress listen? To ask is to answer.

We all know the answer.

I thought you meant there was a full news article: this is inside a web briefing section labeled "Dan Coats Expected to be Named Intelligence Director." That is why I didn't see it today.

[sarah FAILIN]

7. It had top billing in the fb link and all the comments were about this story

My apologies, I didn't read the actual story since I saw it here

[exboyfil]

2. Don't know if this is going anywhere but

it puts the Clinton faithless electors in context. Colin Powell is the 3rd highest vote getter. Would the House defy the will of their constituents and seat Powell instead of Trump?

Nice to dream, but we are probably still in the denial stage.

[sarah FAILIN]

4. NOW is when all the poop the CIA knows needs to hit the fan

The voters will be begging for a way to stop him

[2naSalit]

9. That's what I hope for

but am not sure what, if anything. will be done about it.

[Wounded Bear]

5. Prolly won't affect the election outcome...

but I'm glad it's getting some legs and exposure.

[red dog 1]

8. Where's the link?

The story supposedly came from Steven Rosenfeld of Alternet, but links to the entire story from Raw Story and Alternet itself are broken (The links don't work)

I just checked with the New York Times, and there is nothing there about it.

You saw it in the NYT?

[sarah FAILIN]

10. 3rd article down.

The fb version makes it look better.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/us/politics/donald-trump-transition.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&referer=

[red dog 1]

12. Got it, thanks

K&R

[ffr]

11. I'll just post it here, from the NYT

Show full article

One last effort to derail Trump’s presidency

Could Mr. Trump’s presidency be derailed on a technicality? Probably not, but his opponents keep trying.

A joint session of Congress will convene on Friday, with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. presiding, to count the electoral votes and officially name Mr. Trump the 45th president of the United States.

But wait!

A team of anti-Trump lawyers has done a painstaking, exhaustive look at each of the 300-odd electors who cast their votes for Mr. Trump. Their conclusion: at least 50 were ineligible to serve as electors, either because they did not live in the congressional district they represented or they held dual posts — elector and some other position — contrary to the rules of their states.

“We urge you, our representatives, to prepare written objections for Jan. 6th,” the team wrote at the top of a 1,000-page legal brief.

Such an exhaustive examination may well have turned up such issues for each of the recent presidential elections, but it is a mark of the continuing resistance to Mr. Trump that it was undertaken this go-round.

Will the Republican Congress listen? To ask is to answer. - New York Times

[red dog 1]

13. Thanks for that