\nZeroHedge.com<\/p>\n
Submitted by Jake Anderson via TheAntiMedia.org,<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n On Wednesday night, controversial filmmaker Michael Moore made yet another mind-numbing prediction: He strongly suggested<\/a> to late-night talk show host Seth Meyers that the Electoral College would deny President-elect Donald Trump a victory prior to his January 20th, 2017 inauguration.<\/strong> Moore previously stunned everyone by predicting Trump\u2019s victory<\/a> at a time when the analytics \u2014 and the political-media establishment \u2014 all favored Hillary Clinton.<\/p>\n There is a mechanism for what Moore is suggesting, however unlikely, and it exists within the Electoral College itself in the form of a decentralized, existential bunch of wonks.<\/strong> And, historically speaking, they have never actually asserted their power and changed a presidential election<\/a>. They\u2019re called \u2018faithless electors,\u2019 people nominated to represent the will of the people but who may, constitutionally speaking, revoke their duties. So far, there are seven \u2018faithless electors\u2019<\/a> who have defected from voting for Trump in the Electoral College. Count \u2018em, seven \u2014 out of 270. That\u2019s not a lot, obviously, but the mind balks at how quickly momentum could swing against a candidate that garnered over 2.5 million fewer votes<\/a> than his challenger in the popular vote.<\/p>\n As of Thursday evening, the first Republican \u2018faithless elector\u2019<\/a> declared he would not vote Trump and that the presidency \u201cis not a done deal.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Here are three reasons why I believe Trump could, incredibly, still lose this election:<\/p>\n With his selections for pretty much the full gamut of cabinet positions<\/a>, Trump has revealed himself to be an establishment<\/a> figure<\/a>, which is exactly the perception he ran against. Will his voters turn against him? Mostly no (or, at least, not yet). Will the other 74.5 percent of Americans<\/a> who did not support him reject his victory? Possibly. Will this alone cause Trump to end up losing the vaunted Electoral College? No. Of course not! That\u2019s why there are two more reasons.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n This is fact<\/a>. The number is actually growing. It\u2019s historic; it\u2019s actually disgusting if one is prone to be disgusted by electoral politics. Will this alone \u2014 or in conjunction with reason one \u2014 cause Trump to lose? No. Of course not! That\u2019s why there\u2019s one more, important<\/em>, reason.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n This happens. It happens more than you think. Usually, it happens before the popular vote \u2013 you know, when the votes are actually coming in, in the form of vote flipping<\/a> and \u201cmagic fractions.\u201d<\/a> The 2000 election<\/a> was stolen for Bush<\/a>,\u00a0the 2004 election<\/a> was stolen again<\/a> for Bush<\/a>, and the Obama elections<\/a>\u00a0probably would have been stolen except that he won by such huge margins it would have been obvious. And many, many elections<\/a> have been rigged or gerrymandered in some way.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n It can happen. <\/strong>The question is whether it can happen after the popular vote and before the inauguration, which, admittedly, is unheard of.<\/p>\n But here\u2019s why I think it will happen. [And, to be clear, this is not because I support Hillary Clinton, though, frankly, she would be better for alternative media than Trump. Why? That\u2019s for a future op-ed. Oh, it\u2019s also because Trump is a tyrant who will likely pass more draconian laws against journalists than Bush and Obama combined.]<\/em><\/p>\n A scenario that could easily turn the election \u2014 and would constitute \u2018stealing\u2019 an election according to the Right (the same Right that despised Trump not two months ago) \u2014 involves the \u2018faithless electors\u2019 launching a coup<\/strong>. You don\u2019t think coups happen in America? They happen a lot \u2013 you just don\u2019t hear about them from the mainstream media that is instructed, not permitted, to neglect them.<\/p>\n One coup happened between 2000 and 2001<\/strong>, when one political party hatched a bright-eyed and bushy-tailed populist moderate candidate whose conservative establishment convinced the elites to use their embedded political operatives and hackers to electronically steal<\/a> an election and then use a terrorist attack to embroil us in an endless war in the Middle East and legalize the\u00a0Patriot Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n Now it is possible the Dems and a rogue \u2018faithless elector\u2019 group<\/a> are working on a similar pitch to steal this election and push through a candidate who will give us more endless war in the Middle East and legalize the TPP.<\/p>\n There are other ways, too, involving \u201cfalse flag\u201d assassinations and terrorist attacks on Washington that would induct COG (\u2018continuity of government\u2019)<\/a>\u00a0schemes. But who\u2019s got time for that\u2026?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n So, this is it, liberal America. Do you have the temerity to trigger a gun-toting Right revolution? Do you have the audacity to cajole a \u2018faithless elector\u2019 coup? Because \u2014 not that I\u2019m endorsing it \u2014 that\u2019s how you could steal this election.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n
Trump has revealed himself to be fully in support of the establishment.<\/h2>\n
Hillary won the\u00a0popular vote by over 2.5 million.<\/h2>\n
Elections can be stolen.<\/h2>\n