Trump loyalists in Congress to challenge Electoral College results in Jan. 6 joint session (Update: Insurrectionists storm Congress)(And now what?) (30 Viewers)

That wouldn’t sell the narrative, though. Lol.

SaintForLife said:

Click to expand...

Seems like there's a lot of "the media isn't covering" stuff going around.

Man, I don’t see how a news executive could say “there’s no indication Pence seriously considered” the memo. That’s just crazy talk. Pence was practically begging someone to tell him he could do it. He talked to at least two people that I know of.

Also, pretending this guy is fringe is a bit of revisionist history as well. He is still a member in good standing in the Federalist Society and has recently given an address there, IIRC. He used to be dean at a law school. He still is visiting faculty at a law school in Colorado, even though many asked that he be shown the door. He’s an establishment conservative. It should be given much more coverage than it has.

I would bet Glenn has never mentioned it at all.

superchuck500 said:

Seems like there's a lot of "the media isn't covering" stuff going around.

Click to expand...

I would agree that I don't believe that Trump memo is getting enough play in the media.

MT15 said:

I would bet Glenn has never mentioned it at all.

Click to expand...

You would win that bet (at least, as far as mentioning things on twitter goes).

RobF said:

You would win that bet (at least, as far as mentioning things on twitter goes).

Click to expand...

Ole Glenn is exquisitely aware of on which side his bread is buttered, lol.

bdb13 said:

I would agree that I don't believe that Trump memo is getting enough play in the media.

Click to expand...

Something else getting almost no coverage:

I have been unaware of this - where is Rudy testifying under oath? Does this have to do with the Dominion lawsuit? And, I mean we knew he was being idiotic, but mon dieu!

MT15 said:

Man, I don’t see how a news executive could say “there’s no indication Pence seriously considered” the memo. That’s just crazy talk. Pence was practically begging someone to tell him he could do it. He talked to at least two people that I know of.

Also, pretending this guy is fringe is a bit of revisionist history as well. He is still a member in good standing in the Federalist Society and has recently given an address there, IIRC. He used to be dean at a law school. He still is visiting faculty at a law school in Colorado, even though many asked that he be shown the door. He’s an establishment conservative. It should be given much more coverage than it has.

I would bet Glenn has never mentioned it at all.

Click to expand...

Those two people you mentioned he discussed it with, told him also he didn't have the Constitutional power, right or legitimacy to overturn Biden's democratically won election last year, one of them was former VP Dan Quayle who told him, politely but point-blanky, "No, Mike you don't possess the political power nor is it within your legal jurisdiction to carry out what Trump's proposing you to do in contesting or holding up the EEC certification process on January 6". If Pence was indeed that desperate to know whether or not he legally could hold up the EEC vote days before the January 6 insurrection occurred, we need to also remember, Pence was under extreme, intense pressure from Trump, his misguided, authoritarian idealogues in the WH that remained still in his cabinet like Mike Pompeo, Jared Kushner, Rudy---Trump and co. likely believed at the time, with some possible reasoning, that Mike Pence was a light weight pushover because he'd shown those tendencies to do their bidding with few objections, all throughout Trump's presidency?

Why shouldn't January 6 be any different from what they'd expected from him so far? Pence ultimately said no and proved it with his actions, playing his constitutional role in just certifying the EEC votes before an armed mob tried and nearly succeeded in violently disrupting it?

Another part of Trump's contingency "election loss" plan was to rush through Amy Coney Barrett's SCOTUS nomination process after RBG's death so that if a repeat of Bush/Gore 2000 election occurred again, he'd have one more conservative judge to rule in his favor if it the election was too close to call in some battle ground state like Florida, Georgia, Arizona or Pennsylvania? Even when Trump's legal aides told him his electoral loss was too large and substantial to realistically object to the Supreme Court and that there wasnt some Florida 2000 voter fraud legal conundrum scenario he could rally around, he still kept calling those three SCOTUS justices he nominated during his presidency(Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gosisch) to try and offer some kind of legal intervention for him or listen to one of his judicial appeals he filed claiming voter tampering, or voter fraud? IIRC, they all declined except for Alito. Trump even blasted Barrett over the phone saying he wished he could rescind her SCOTUS nomination.
When Barrett had to tell Trump the sad, unfortunate news that SCOTUS justice terms, once approved, are essentially lifetime appointments unless the individual justice he/she/they(we might one day have a non-binary SCOTUS justice, still its good to be inclusive) decides to retire, Trump reportedly went ape-shirt, using expletives, and other disparaging comments and rhetoric, openly decrying nominating her to the Supreme Court was one of his biggest mistakes during his presidency. Its been reported that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts overheard their conversation, on Barrett's line of phone and told Trump to Please stop! in a defiant, angry voice and to never ever contact her again.

Saintman2884 said:

Those two people you mentioned he discussed it with, told him also he didn't have the Constitutional power, right or legitimacy to overturn Biden's democratically won election last year, one of them was former VP Dan Quayle who told him, politely but point-blanky, "No, Mike you don't possess the political power nor is it within your legal jurisdiction to carry out what Trump's proposing you to do in contesting or holding up the EEC certification process on January 6". If Pence was indeed that desperate to know whether or not he legally could hold up the EEC vote days before the January 6 insurrection occurred, we need to also remember, Pence was under extreme, intense pressure from Trump, his misguided, authoritarian idealogues in the WH that remained still in his cabinet like Mike Pompeo, Jared Kushner, Rudy---Trump and co. likely believed at the time, with some possible reasoning, that Mike Pence was a light weight pushover because he'd shown those tendencies to do their bidding with few objections, all throughout Trump's presidency?

Why shouldn't January 6 be any different from what they'd expected from him so far? Pence ultimately said no and proved it with his actions, playing his constitutional role in just certifying the EEC votes before an armed mob tried and nearly succeeded in violently disrupting it?

Another part of Trump's contingency "election loss" plan was to rush through Amy Coney Barrett's SCOTUS nomination process after RBG's death so that if a repeat of Bush/Gore 2000 election occurred again, he'd have one more conservative judge to rule in his favor if it the election was too close to call in some battle ground state like Florida, Georgia, Arizona or Pennsylvania? Even when Trump's legal aides told him his electoral loss was too large and substantial to realistically object to the Supreme Court and that there wasnt some Florida 2000 voter fraud legal conundrum scenario he could rally around, he still kept calling those three SCOTUS justices he nominated during his presidency(Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gosisch) to try and offer some kind of legal intervention for him or listen to one of his judicial appeals he filed claiming voter tampering, or voter fraud? IIRC, they all declined except for Alito. Trump even blasted Barrett over the phone saying he wished he could rescind her SCOTUS nomination.
When Barrett had to tell Trump the sad, unfortunate news that SCOTUS justice terms, once approved, are essentially lifetime appointments unless the individual justice he/she/they(we might one day have a non-binary SCOTUS justice, still its good to be inclusive) decides to retire, Trump reportedly went ape-shirt, using expletives, and other disparaging comments and rhetoric, openly decrying nominating her to the Supreme Court was one of his biggest mistakes during his presidency. Its been reported that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts overheard their conversation, on Barrett's line of phone and told Trump to Please stop! in a defiant, angry voice and to never ever contact her again.

Click to expand...

Where did you read this? I haven't heard anything like that before.

The dan quayle part was discussed on one of the npr programming. Ive not heard nor read the barrett part before.

Edit....and quite frankly that SC scenario was my concern regarding trumps plans prior to and after the election.

I cannot believe Trump is that ignorant to not know the judicial appointments are for life... okay... maybe I can sort of believe that but I'm sure someone had to tell him when he was doing the nominating.

Nobody can really tell Trump anything because he’s the smartest person in any room. He knows more than anybody about anything.

That said, I read that he didn’t know what happened at Pearl Harbor when he had to visit there early in his presidency.

MT15 said:

Nobody can really tell Trump anything because he’s the smartest person in any room. He knows more than anybody about anything.

That said, I read that he didn’t know what happened at Pearl Harbor when he had to visit there early in his presidency.

Click to expand...

One really should be wary of anyone who gives off the impression that their or a group of businessmen, legal advisers and/or political advisors/tacticians who hold on to this individual or collective deluded sense of being the smartest people in the room.

That sort of illogical, rash and ultimate intellectual hubris gave us Warren G. Harding's infamous Ohio Gang(The Teapot Dome scandal that ended Harding's presidency and life simultaneously was only really the worst, public scandal in an administration full of them, Teapot Dome scandal was Watergate of its time and Harding's.steadfast loyalty to his old, Ohio political comrades in trying to cover up and remedy their misdeeds has always struck me as very Nixon-esque. It ended Enron and bankrupted one of this nation's largest private accounting firms, Arthur Anderson.
That sense of intellectual arrogance, recklessness, lack of knowledge, geography and history of Southeast Asia is also what led LBJ to ignore his National Security Advisors warnings to not further escalate American military involvement in South Vietnam. LBJ's military advisors, Pentagon chiefs, and many within his own administration explained to him early in 1965 that even the most optimistic military scenario of American intervention that logistically might've significantly stopped NVA and VC guerrillas forays and advances in South Vietnam would require at least 150-200 thousand permanently stationed US combat troops, at least 5 years of in-country military tactical/logistical operations and occupation of the nation. LBJ's biggest mistake is that he assumed or equated Vietnam with some domestic problem or issue he could somehow solve or a riddle he could unwind like bending disobedient old segregationist Southern Democrats like George Wallace, Lester Maddox, or Russell Long who werent playing ball with his ambitious Civil Rights/Voting Rights legislation or in some cases, were subtly encouraging acts of racial violence, discord, and racially-motivated murders like 1964 Mississippi Burning murders of 4 Northern civil rights workers/volunteers by racist, bigoted local sheriffs or 16th St. Church bombings in 1963 by Birmingham Klansmen, led by " Dynamite" Bob Cherry. Wallace's own speechwriter, Asa Carter, was a known long-affiliated Klansmen.

superchuck500 said:

Seems like there's a lot of "the media isn't covering" stuff going around.

Click to expand...

Yeah it's not like the Trump scandals aren't covered ad nauseum.

MT15 said:

Something else getting almost no coverage:

Click to expand...

Russia living rent free in your brain.

SaintForLife said:

Russia living rent free in your brain.

Click to expand...

If at this point you can't objectively concede that Russia ultimately benefited from a Trump presidency (and the normalizing of hyper-partisan politics making America its own worst enemy) whether there is evidence of Putin's specific actions or not... then I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

I expect There’s going to be quite a few revelations revealed
===============
It has become a ubiquitous question in our politics: How close did Donald Trump come to pulling off an actual coup?

Efforts to grapple with this have been trapped largely in the zone of wild speculation. But guess what: We may actually get a real answer to it soon enough.


Key to this is the figure who has been portrayed as a hero of this sordid tale, because he refused to use his position as vice president to interrupt the count of electors in Congress: Mike Pence.

This remains poorly understood, but the Jan. 6 select committee is not just looking at the mob attack. It will also create a detailed account of how close we came to the unthinkable — to the procedural overthrow of a legitimately elected incoming government.


The true contours of this emerge from a New York Times excavation of the role of John Eastman, the lawyer who wrote the Trump coup memo. It outlined how Pence supposedly could exercise unilateral power (that he did not have) over the process to refuse to count President-elect Joe Biden’s electors, throwing the election to Trump.


Buried in that piece is an important revelation: Pence apparently went further than previously known in probing whether he could execute a version of Eastman’s scheme.


The select committee will be fleshing this out, Rep. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the committee, suggested in an interview.
“It’s an important part of the historical record to determine how close Trump actually came to achieving his scheme of getting Pence to declare unilateral power to reject electoral college votes,” Raskin told me……..