Wow! My Response from a Seriously Partisan Member of “The Electors”

The other day, I came across a link to a website that asked citizens to email members of the Electoral College with their concerns, so I did so.  Here’s the content of my brief email stating my concerns:

Dear Electors: 

My name is Xxxxx Xxxxx from Winnemucca, NV. (Name withheld — I don’t need any death threats from the wrong-wing)

Given that:
— Hillary Clinton won the popular vote nationwide
— The CIA has found that there was collusion between Russia and WikiLeaks to influence the election to assure an election for Donald Trump
— Trump has not released his taxes so citizens can see to whom he is indebted which may influence actions he might take based on that indebtedness
— Trump appears intent on not putting his business empire in a bona fide blind trust to assure citizens across this nation that he will act in our country’s best interests, and not just his own
— Trump is staffing up his cabinet with Goldman/Sachs financiers and Generals as though he might be planning some type of coup to usurp our nation’s commons for himself and his buddies of the 1%

I, therefore, urge you to cast your vote on 12/19/2016 for Hillary Clinton, who won the national popular vote by a significant margin. If you are unable to see your way to do that, then I urge you to consider voting for the one leader who may clearly have bi-partisan support throughout our nation — Joseph Robinette “Joe” Biden Jr., our nation’s current Vice President.

Thank you for your time and consideration, I appreciate and respect the role you serve in our electoral process.

While I got a number of “bounce notices” … apparently a number of electors promptly deleted their email accounts … I did get a seriously partisan reply from a Texas elector by the name of Alex Kim.  Here’s his return response:

DISCLOSURE: By responding to this email you are waiving your right to any privacy or remedy. By responding to this email, for the consideration of me reading your email, you are giving consent for me to publish, disseminate, or otherwise distribute any information contained for any purposes I deem appropriate. If you do not consent to this condition, then do not reply.

Thank you for writing.

I am receiving about 4,000 emails a day so I have set this to an auto-response.

You should know that I have no interest in Hillary Clinton becoming our next President. I reject the Democratic Party principles and I reject Hillary Clinton.

I will not do anything that will open a path for HRC to become our next President.

There is no such thing as a national popular vote. The only vote that matters to me as a Texas Elector is the Texas vote.

We are not a democracy, we are a republic, for good cause.

We all have differing opinions and I respect your part in the political process, but frankly, since I am a Texas elector, the political opinions of non-Texas voters means nothing to me. I do not vote or get involved in your state, I am not sure why you are trying to interfere in mine. As an American citizen, your voice should be able to be heard by all, so I have this email address available, but I owe no duty to any non-Texan.

I encourage you to be active in the political process where your vote matters.

Finally, I will not vote for a 3rd candidate. A 3rd candidate only opens the door for HRC to enter the White House through the House of Representatives. I will do nothing to enable HRC to become President of the United States, no matter how remote the chances are.

Best Regards,

Alex

Elector, Texas Congressional District 24

(Note: bolded emphasis is mine)

Now that, my friends, is some serious partisanship.  Clearly Mr. Kim is more willing to flush our nation down the toilet or hand it over to Vladimir Putin than to consider anything from anyone who doesn’t conform to the Republican mold of the way things need to be!  If we want to take people like this out of our political process, then WE need to get off our butts and make that happen.

Related Posts;

Advertisements

How the Democratic Party Lost Its Way 

During my 20 years in Democratic campaigns, I’ve seen the party operation decline into an insular and myopic letdown. But I also know how it can recover.

I made my first visit to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 1998, when I was campaign manager for a longshot candidate running against an entrenched incumbent. By the time we left the building, we felt empowered and connected. We had a campaign roadmap that offered organizational and financial benchmarks, a point of contact with the committee, weekly talking points and an organization behind us that made introductions and offered advice when we needed it.

Fast forward 18 years. This time, I’m the congressional candidate running in a longshot North Carolina district in a year that many people thought might be a Democratic sweep, and ……..

Read the full article here: How the Democratic Party Lost Its Way – POLITICO Magazine

On the Horizon … 2018

"I like what I do, so I'll consider it but I like what I do," Sen. Dean Heller said. | Getty
“I like what I do, so I’ll consider it but I like what I do,” Sen. Dean Heller said. | Getty

Dean Heller is the only Republican senator up for re-election in 2018 who serves a state won by both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, meaning he’ll be the DSCC’s top target this cycle … if he in fact runs again. But he might instead prefer to run for Nevada’s open governorship, a possibility he now says he will “consider.” That’s a somewhat stronger statement of interest than the last time he spoke publicly about this race back in May, when all he would say is, “I always keep my options open.”

Heller would almost certainly be the GOP’s strongest candidate for governor, but he was fairly hostile to Trump all year, which has almost certainly pissed off a certain segment of Republican primary voters. That could inspire an opponent from the unabashedly racist wing of the party to throw up a roadblock for Heller if he ran for governor, something he likely wouldn’t face if he seeks another term in the Senate.

It’s Now Up to Hamilton Electors on The Electoral College

Elector Bret Chiafalo discusses the role of the Electoral College as a fail-safe for our country. 37 Patriots can save our Country by voting against #trump or by abstaining from voting at all.  Learn more at www.hamiltonelectors.com.

 

To Defend Democracy, We Must Demand Financial Transparency from Trump

From executive appointments to policy, understanding Trump’s personal financial interests will be essential to judging his adminstration

— by Jeff Hauser
_whereareyourtaxes

As we hear of a settlement in the “Trump University” civil fraud case brought in part by New York State Attorney General and learn more and more about potential Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, the phrase “personnel is policy” takes on an unfortunate new meaning.
Will Trump’s appointees to high government office ensure Donald Trump does not use control of the executive branch to enrich himself and his family?

Trump enriching himself as president is not an idle or libelous question. Trump himself raised the prospect in 2000 to Fortune Magazine, telling them that “[i]t’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”

Matt Yglesias puts the threat to the rule posed by Donald Trump and the “Trump Organization” in stark language, arguing “Trump’s first 100 days could also be the last 100 days in which America’s system of republican government can be saved.” Yglesias fears that the potential for corruption is so great that “political favor” might become “the primary driver of economic success.”

The Wall Street Journal editorial page employs less ominous language to come to a surprisingly similar conclusion, noting problems posed by the fact that “The President is exempt from federal conflict-of-interest law.”

As Bloomberg put it, the Trump family business poses an “unprecedented potential conflicts of interest.”

The last line of defense against the installation of a kleptocracy is the U.S. Senate, which can insist that President Trump meet the same standards for public disclosure and avoidance of conflict of interest as past presidents and presidential candidates of both political parties.

The U.S. Senate can and should demand transparency into Trump family finances. Moreover, the U.S. Senate can and should demand an end to the inherent conflicts of interest posed by the ongoing existence of “The Trump Organization.”

The Senate can do so by refusing to confirm any nominations until Trump takes the following steps to promote faith that a Trump presidency will not enrich himself and his family:

  1. Releases his tax returns;
  2. Releases a detailed and current financial disclosure that includes beneficial ownership information on all “shell companies”* that are part of the Trump Organization;
  3. Follows the advice of the The Wall Street Journal editorial page that “Mr. Trump’s best option is to liquidate his stake in the company” via “a leveraged buyout or an initial public offering”; and
  4. These disclosure requirements should be treated as annual requirements.

Having President Trump and his children reconstitute a “Trump Organization” to receive payouts from foreign countries and rent-seeking businesses is a serious concern that cannot be prevented merely by an ensuring initial clean post-liquidation start. The Saturday Washington Post includes an article suggesting that diplomats understand the advantages of spending money at Trump’s DC hotel.

There should be particular concern about all non-publicly traded assets he and his children might hold. Trump and his children cannot be allowed to use “shell companies” to hide his actual business partners, creditors, and assets, including dealings with foreign governments or companies with significant potential dealings with the executive branch.

Without these comprehensive actions, Senators have no way to know what conflicts of interest they should be concerned about.

Does the Trump Organization have business dealings with, for example, Japan? If so, that suggests a line of questions for a potential Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs.

Is a Trump company being investigated by the SEC? That matters for potential SEC Commissioners.

Even a Trump infrastructure bill raises questions. Would Trump follow the Dennis Hastert precedent and put forward highway projects designed to increase value of Trump family owned properties?

Trump announces a tax plan – would it benefit him?

Trump Energy Department actions – would they boost Trump family energy investments?

And assets are not the only issue. Senators need to know if any appointments constitute Trump repaying literal debts.

Every part of the federal government can be used to benefit private interests, and thus for all positions, the Senate requires clarity into Trump’s financials.

That goes for Trump-era law enforcement as well. David Dayen has wondered if the Trump win provides “a massive lifeline to Deutsche Bank, the German financial firm that has been rocked recently by rumors that they would have to pay a $14 billion fine to the Justice Department over crisis-related mortgage abuses.”

What’s the basis of Dayen’s curiosity? The fact “that one of Deutsche Bank’s biggest borrowers – Trump – will soon be sitting in the White House.”

Senators need to know how to provide oversight of the executive branch. To have confidence in Trump appointments and governance, Senators must demand both transparency and an end to conflicts of interest. Otherwise, it is all too likely he and his family will make money off control of the executive branch.


Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

Jeff Hauser runs the Revolving Door Project at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, an effort to increase scrutiny on executive branch appointments and ensure that political appointees are focused on serving the public interest, rather than personal professional