Trump loyalists in Congress to challenge Electoral College results in Jan. 6 joint session (Update: Insurrectionists storm Congress)(And now what?) (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

I guess it's time to start a thread for this. We know that at least 140 members of Congress have pledged to join the objection. Under federal law, if at least one member of each house (HOR and Senate) objects, each house will adjourn the joint session for their own session (limited at two hours) to take up the objection. If both houses pass a resolution objecting to the EC result, further action can take place. If both houses do not (i.e. if one or neither passes a resolution), the objection is powerless and the college result is certified.

Clearly this is political theater as we know such a resolution will not pass the House, and there's good reason to think it wouldn't pass the Senate either (with or without the two senators from Georgia). The January 6 joint session is traditionally a ceremonial one. This one will not be.

Many traditional pillars of Republican support have condemned the plan as futile and damaging. Certainly the Trump loyalists don't care - and many are likely doing it for fundraising purposes or to carry weight with the fraction of their constituencies that think this is a good idea.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32717.pdf

 

[Xeno]

But republicans won that seat, a trumper.. trump definitely won Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Georgia.. easily.. and as the cases play out Biden will be decertified.. hopefully they give trump three terms for the obstruction

What seat? Who?

 

[Complex Kid]

So if there is no evidence why isn’t the thousands of people that swore to affidavits in jail for perjury? Asking for a friend.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/20/affidavit-giuliani-vote-fraud/

As the Trump campaign will remind you, these are sworn statements. But according to legal experts, the jeopardy faced by those behind them is relatively minimal.

“There is a remote chance that sworn statements (if they are actually sworn statements — most documents that appear to be ‘sworn’ don’t count within the meaning of the statute) could subject the declarant to some exposure under the perjury statutes,” said Lisa Kern Griffin, an expert on evidence at Duke University, in an email. “But perjury prosecutions are rare and almost never arise from statements outside of the context of proceedings in which oaths are formally administered — such as depositions, congressional testimony, grand jury proceedings, or trial testimony.”

A key issue is whether the affidavit is filed in court, as most filed by the Trump team haven’t been. Beyond that, any false statements would need to be deemed to be “material” to the proceedings — i.e. relevant to the actual claims. And from there, any legal jeopardy would require that the statements made were knowingly false.

 

[jitss617]

What seat? Who?

a precinct above Sunset Boulevard, which roughly runs from Trousdale Estates to the Los Angeles Country Club, with the Beverly Hills Hotel between them, voted for Trump 56% to 44%, according to an analysis conducted by the Los Angeles Times.
Trump should be the president,, he won by a lot

 

[DaveXA]

Sure

MUST READ: Democrats Were ONLY Able to "Win" in 2020 By Breaking Chain of Custody Laws in EVERY SWING STATE | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

by Jim and Joe Hoft Democrat election violations: (left to right) Secret ballot counting in Georgia, Secret ballot deliveries at 3:30 AM in Detroit, Blocking observers from viewing inside the TCF Center in Detroit At midnight on election night, President Trump warned his supporters not to let...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

EXCLUSIVE: Here's the Breakdown on the 80 Cases Related to the 2020 Presidential Election | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft

The media in the United States is no longer interested in the truth. They are corrupted beyond belief. They used to be biased, now they are clearly dishonest. Over and over we heard how President Trump didn’t win a single case in the 2020 Presidential election related to fraud in the election...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

thegatewaypundit.com is hardly a reliable or valid source. Try again.

 

[jitss617]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/20/affidavit-giuliani-vote-fraud/

As the Trump campaign will remind you, these are sworn statements. But according to legal experts, the jeopardy faced by those behind them is relatively minimal.

“There is a remote chance that sworn statements (if they are actually sworn statements — most documents that appear to be ‘sworn’ don’t count within the meaning of the statute) could subject the declarant to some exposure under the perjury statutes,” said Lisa Kern Griffin, an expert on evidence at Duke University, in an email. “But perjury prosecutions are rare and almost never arise from statements outside of the context of proceedings in which oaths are formally administered — such as depositions, congressional testimony, grand jury proceedings, or trial testimony.”

A key issue is whether the affidavit is filed in court, as most filed by the Trump team haven’t been. Beyond that, any false statements would need to be deemed to be “material” to the proceedings — i.e. relevant to the actual claims. And from there, any legal jeopardy would require that the statements made were knowingly false.

Gasping for air ,, still won’t make these witnesses go away.

 

[jitss617]

thegatewaypundit.com is hardly a reliable or valid source. Try again.

I bet gate way is more reliable than your sources lol

 

[FullMonte]

If you read the article it says they exist and are waiting for courts to allow evidence.. can you at least admit they EXIST?

Speaking of reading articles...I read part of your first article...the one about the chain of custody issue. I say "part of" because I stopped after the first example.

"Late at night on election night after the election officer in charge, Ralph Jones, sent all of the election observers and media home for the night, he instructed Democrat operatives to drag hidden ballot suitcases out from under the tables to be counted.

There was no chain of custody."

There is literally a video out there of a member of the GBI walking a newscaster through the entire day's worth of video from that counting center showing:
--The tables being set up that morning (with nothing underneath them)
--Ballots being removed from their envelopes in the presence of election observers, election officials, and members of the media
--Those ballots being placed into containers, which were then placed in large black bins
--Those large black bins being placed under the table, out of the way
--Those large black bins being removed from under the tables, the ballots taken out, and scanned as normal.

To say there was no chain of custody is laughable when there is actual video evidence showing the entire life of those ballots while they were in the counting center.

 

[Complex Kid]

Gasping for air ,, still won’t make these witnesses go away.

The courts rejecting and shredding the affidavits that where presented to them is not "gasping for air" it's a total dismissal of your nonsense you keep peddling. This isn't Trumplandia where you get to scream fake news to everything someone says that you don't agree with and go a long your merry way.

 

[Xeno]

a precinct above Sunset Boulevard, which roughly runs from Trousdale Estates to the Los Angeles Country Club, with the Beverly Hills Hotel between them, voted for Trump 56% to 44%, according to an analysis conducted by the Los Angeles Times.
Trump should be the president,, he won by a lot

One voting precinct? No wonder I couldn't find it on any electoral maps lol. I don't know your definition of "a lot" but 34,000 out of 4,100,000 ain't mine.

 

[jitss617]

Speaking of reading articles...I read part of your first article...the one about the chain of custody issue. I say "part of" because I stopped after the first example.

"Late at night on election night after the election officer in charge, Ralph Jones, sent all of the election observers and media home for the night, he instructed Democrat operatives to drag hidden ballot suitcases out from under the tables to be counted.

There was no chain of custody."

There is literally a video out there of a member of the GBI walking a newscaster through the entire day's worth of video from that counting center showing:
--The tables being set up that morning (with nothing underneath them)
--Ballots being removed from their envelopes in the presence of election observers, election officials, and members of the media
--Those ballots being placed into containers, which were then placed in large black bins
--Those large black bins being placed under the table, out of the way
--Those large black bins being removed from under the tables, the ballots taken out, and scanned as normal.

To say there was no chain of custody is laughable when there is actual video evidence showing the entire life of those ballots while they were in the counting center.

Come on lol there is video of the Fulton country election workers telling observers to go home, we are done counting, as soon as they leave they pull out The hundreds of thousands of ballots.. hmmm

 

[jitss617]

The courts rejecting and shredding the affidavits that where presented to them is not "gasping for air" it's a total dismissal of your nonsense you keep peddling. This isn't Trumplandia where you get to scream fake news to everything someone says that you don't agree with and go a long your merry way.

How many affidavit were thrown out? Link?? I’ll wait hehe

 

[jitss617]

One voting precinct? No wonder I couldn't find it on any electoral maps lol. I don't know your definition of "a lot" but 34,000 out of 4,100,000 ain't mine.

Trump flipped it,, and if he can flip that Democrat area.. he definitely won Georgia, Pennsylvania.. easy

 

[bdb13]

Trump flipped it,, and if he can flip that Democrat area.. he definitely won Georgia, Pennsylvania.. easy

The demographics are different... This is why you know nothing Jon Snow.

 

[jitss617]

The demographics are different... This is why you know nothing Jon Snow.

Is this substance? Let me guess voted for sleepy joe?

 

[Complex Kid]

How many affidavit were thrown out? Link?? I’ll wait hehe

Literally the article I linked too that you responded too has several examples. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you didn't even bother reading it before responding with your talking points.



" But among the witnesses who have had their allegations aired in court, many have been dismissed by judges as inadmissible or not credible. One particularly high-profile one alleged many precincts in Michigan had more votes than actual voters, but shortly after Giuliani et al. raised the issue Thursday — alongside their pleas to take the affidavits seriously — it fell apart."




One Michigan judge noted that the evidence wasn’t direct evidence, despite the Trump campaign’s contention that it was:

TRUMP LAWYER: Your Honor, in terms of the hearsay point, this is a firsthand factual statement made by Ms. Connarn, and she has made that statement based on her own firsthand physical evidence and knowledge —
JUDGE: “I heard somebody else say something.” Tell me why that’s not hearsay. Come on, now.
TRUMP LAWYER: Well it’s a firsthand statement of her physical –
JUDGE: It’s an out-of-court statement offered where the truth of the matter is asserted, right?

The judge later dismissed the complaint as “inadmissible hearsay within hearsay.”


A similar thing happened in Chatham County, Ga., where the GOP called two witnesses as part of its allegation that 53 ballots received after Election Day were predated to make them appear valid. But under questioning, the witnesses acknowledged they didn’t know whether the ballots were actually received after the deadline, while witnesses for the local elections board testified under oath that they were received on time.

 

[jitss617]

Literally the article I linked too that you responded too has several examples. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you didn't even bother reading it before responding with your talking points.



" But among the witnesses who have had their allegations aired in court, many have been dismissed by judges as inadmissible or not credible. One particularly high-profile one alleged many precincts in Michigan had more votes than actual voters, but shortly after Giuliani et al. raised the issue Thursday — alongside their pleas to take the affidavits seriously — it fell apart."




One Michigan judge noted that the evidence wasn’t direct evidence, despite the Trump campaign’s contention that it was:


The judge later dismissed the complaint as “inadmissible hearsay within hearsay.”


A similar thing happened in Chatham County, Ga., where the GOP called two witnesses as part of its allegation that 53 ballots received after Election Day were predated to make them appear valid. But under questioning, the witnesses acknowledged they didn’t know whether the ballots were actually received after the deadline, while witnesses for the local elections board testified under oath that they were received on time.

So no where in your article does it say they were disproven, just judges that don’t want to get involved in elections.. I get that.. but you have no evidence they were investigated and disproven. And if they are in front of the judge they took the oath and should be in jail.. no?! Mic drop..

 

[bdb13]

Is this substance? Let me guess voted for sleepy joe?

is it substantive to say that you need to look at how the demographics In Beverly Hills are different than the demographics in a changing and growing metro Atlanta in order to more properly assess the validity of what you're saying?

Yeah, I think so. The other Jon Snow part isn't so much substantive, no. But it's about a substantive as a drivel you're posting, so whatever.

 

[jitss617]

is it substantive to say that you need to look at how the demographics In Beverly Hills are different than the demographics in a changing and growing metro Atlanta in order to more properly assess the validity of what you're saying?

Yeah, I think so. The other Jon Snow part isn't so much substantive, no. But it's about a substantive as a drivel you're posting, so whatever.

You have no substance.. trump won Georgia by a lot! You can’t have ballot boxes on the street with no supervision lol haha then send home observers, and pull out thousands of ballots from under the table lol haha