>Your complete original statement was "causing various states to (disingenuously) disagree about how to replace the lost documents" I said no such thing. It w

>Your complete original statement was "causing various states to (disingenuously) disagree about how to replace the lost documents" I said no such thing. It was this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32865748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32865748 that contains that information. Note that I (https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=nobody9999 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=nobody9999) am not the author of that comment. It was, in fact, a user called dane-pgp (https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=dane-pgp https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=dane-pgp) who wrote that. But you (apparently) ignored the rest of his comment which describes the 12th amendment process for the House to elect the President. So. Let's sum up here: 1. You disagree with someone (dane-pgp) and yell incoherently at someone else (Nobody9999); 2. When that someone else explains, in great detail, to make sure you understand their point, you produce further incoherent ramblings; 3. You continue to rant incoherently with no apparent regard for the law or the constitutuion. Good show. Catch you on the flip side, although I hope not.