Trump loyalists in Congress to challenge Electoral College results in Jan. 6 joint session (Update: Insurrectionists storm Congress)(And now what?) (2 Viewers)

[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

 

[SaintForLife]

Refresh my memory....what evidence did Chansley's lawyer provide that his client wasn't provided access to the evidence?

(which can be easily confirmed).

Reading is hard

 

[brandon]

(which can be easily confirmed).

Reading is hard

Oh, you must be talking about the video evidence where he was at the Capitol, leading the riot via megaphone, and not at that particular moment defacing the halls of the Senate, even though he was definitely still trespassing.

Right? That evidence?

 

[SaintForLife]

Plus, you never answered the question: the Q-nut was actually there. If he was let into the Capitol by police he would have known that right? If he was escorted everywhere within the Capitol by police he would have known that as well. Here’s a clue: he wasn’t in either of those cases.

What about this tape is actually evidence? Monte explained to you a long time ago in this very thread why it isn’t pertinent to the crimes committed. What makes this portion of video evidence?

I've never argued that he's innocent and committed no crimes, but it's required by our justice system to provide all evidence to the defense. Any videos of him would be considered evidence. How would he have known what videos there were of him?

It's funny how Trump broke the brains of many on the left. You guys now support anything and believe everything that comes from the FBI/CIA, are okay with censorship of American's speech in the name of disinformation, and yall don't think it's necessary for the government to provide all evidence to the defense(Brady Rule) in the cases of Chansley and Flynn.

 

[FullMonte]

(which can be easily confirmed).

Reading is hard

No..I can read. I just wanted to work through this piece by piece. So, thst makes your sentence:

A made up story by a lawyer is quite different that a lawyer stating his client wasn't provided Brady material(which can be easily confirmed).

So, I have two more questions:

1) How do you know that Chansley's lawyer didn't make up the story about the evidence being denied his client?
2) Why can't Hunter Biden's lawyer's story be confirmed?

 

[FullMonte]

I've never argued that he's innocent and committed no crimes, but it's required by our justice system to provide all evidence to the defense. Any videos of him would be considered evidence. How would he have known what videos there were of him?

It's funny how Trump broke the brains of many on the left. You guys now support anything and believe everything that comes from the FBI/CIA, are okay with censorship of American's speech in the name of disinformation, and yall don't think it's necessary for the government to provide all evidence to the defense(Brady Rule) in the cases of Chansley and Flynn.

Twice you say "all evidence", and you have referred in this post (and others) to the Brady Rule. So, let's clear that up. According to the Cornell Law School, prosecutors do not have to provide "all evidence" to defendants. The Brady Rule is fairly clear. Cornell law says "The Brady material has three components: “The evidence at issue must be favorable to the accused, either because it is exculpatory, or because it is impeaching; that evidence must have been suppressed by the State, either willfully or inadvertently; and prejudice must have ensued” concluded in the Strickler v. Greene case."

So, let's look at a couple of those:
"The evidence at issue must be favorable to the accused, either because it is exculpatory, or because it is impeaching"
--That's simply not the case here. The video evidence provided by Tucker Carlson is not exculpatory or impeaching. There is clear video of Chansley entering the building illegally. Congress recessed because the mob was entering the building. The moment Congress recessed, the crime that Chansley pleaded guilty to occurred. Any video of him at any time after that is not evidence that he did not commit the crime. Also, the video that Tucker Carlson provided does not show anything beyond Chansley walking around the building and officers around him. Chansely's own statement was that as he was walking around, officers were telling him to leave the building, and he ignored them. That video does not, in any way, disputed Chansley's statement.

"prejudice must have ensued"
I'll leave this one up to the legal experts, but I can't imagine a claim of prejudice holding up when someone pleads guilty. I guess it's possible that the argument could be made that they would not have accepted a plea deal if they were aware of evidence that could have exonerated them, but for that, see the previous item.

 

[MT15]

(which can be easily confirmed).

Reading is hard

But it has not been confirmed, has it?

 

[MT15]

I've never argued that he's innocent and committed no crimes, but it's required by our justice system to provide all evidence to the defense. Any videos of him would be considered evidence. How would he have known what videos there were of him?

It's funny how Trump broke the brains of many on the left. You guys now support anything and believe everything that comes from the FBI/CIA, are okay with censorship of American's speech in the name of disinformation, and yall don't think it's necessary for the government to provide all evidence to the defense(Brady Rule) in the cases of Chansley and Flynn.

All videos are evidence? I don’t think so, what makes you think so? What makes you think the DOJ had that video and purposefully excluded it?

Why would a video of him walking out as the police were clearing the Capitol be considered evidence? Of what value is that in proving the crimes he had already committed? If the police weren’t charging him for the behavior in the videos you are talking about, how are they considered evidence? They don’t have any bearing on the crimes, which had already been committed at that point. The videos in question do not provide any exculpatory evidence, they have no bearing on his crimes.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

All videos are evidence? I don’t think so, what makes you think so? What makes you think the DOJ had that video and purposefully excluded it?

Why would a video of him walking out as the police were clearing the Capitol be considered evidence? Of what value is that in proving the crimes he had already committed? If the police weren’t charging him for the behavior in the videos you are talking about, how are they considered evidence? They don’t have any bearing on the crimes, which had already been committed at that point. The videos in question do not provide any exculpatory evidence, they have no bearing on his crimes.

apparently, when you stop your violence and destructon, all that happened before is irrelevant, only what you did at the end matters.
I know they were trying to clear the capitol as fast as they could so they could finish the procedings. Once the national guard showed up with the tear gas, IMO, they should have brought the hammer down on everyone still there.

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[GrandAdmiral]

This could go here or in the Trump jail thread, but I figure Pence saw appealing was a lost cause.

Pence will not appeal ruling requiring him to testify to Jan. 6 grand jury

The ruling limited the topics that prosecutors may ask Pence about.

www.politico.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

Wasn’t sure where to put this
======================
Ali Alexander, the organizer of the “Stop the Steal” rally that preceded the Capitol riots, has apologised after being accused of asking teenage boys for sexual photographs.

“I apologise for any inappropriate messages sent over the years. Forgive me,” he said in a statement posted to his Telegram channel, the Rolling Stone reported.

Referring to “battling SSA”, which appears to be an acronym for same-sex attraction, he said that he had “repented before God”.

He said that he had been “careless” in his flirtation, adding that “I’ve flexed my credentials or dropped corny pickup lines”.

He added that “nothing unlawful has occurred” and that he’s been targeted by “fake accusers or literal honey pots eager to frame me”.

His apology comes after Milo Yiannopoulos, a controversial British provocateur and one-time Alexander ally, released video interviews and other evidence to prove that Mr Alexander had sexually propositioned adult men in their 20s and at least two teenagers, reported The Daily Beast……..

‘Stop the Steal’ organiser apologises for asking teenage boys for sexual pictures

Ali Alexander says in his apology he ‘repented before God’

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

battling SSA? the right wing will do anything to avoid admittng they are gay.. Thats probably why he has so much hate is because he can;t admit it.
You don't see any Drag Queens out there rioting and trying to kill people.. SMH
I'm not gay, i just have SSA, but i'm getting treated for it..LOL!

 

[Taurus]

battling SSA? the right wing will do anything to avoid admittng they are gay.. Thats probably why he has so much hate is because he can;t admit it.
You don't see any Drag Queens out there rioting and trying to kill people.. SMH
I'm not gay, i just have SSA, but i'm getting treated for it..LOL!

SSA meetings. Kind of like AA, but the refreshments are WAY better.

 

[Optimus Prime]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The song is simple and tinny, but that hasn’t stopped it from being embraced by former President Donald Trump and his allies in their campaign to rewrite the history of the deadly Capitol riot.

The tune, “Justice for All,” is the Star-Spangled Banner, and it was sung by a group of defendants jailed over their alleged roles in the January 2021 insurrection. Recorded over a prison phone line, the national anthem sounds more like a dirge than celebration and is overlaid with Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

Despite its low fidelity, “Justice for All” has garnered a lot of fans. Trump, a Republican, played it at a recent rally in Waco, Texas, as images of Capitol rioters flashed behind him on a big screen, and the $1.29 song last month briefly vaulted to No. 1 on iTunes, supplanting such recording artists as Miley Cyrus and Taylor Swift.

Experts on extremism and propaganda say the song is another example of how Trump and his most ardent allies are trying to gloss over an avalanche of evidence proving the Capitol riot was anything but an act of patriotic resistance.


And it shows how such revisionists have dug deep into authoritarian playbooks that rely heavily on the use of national identity to sway public opinion. In this case, Trump and his allies are ironically relying on America’s most patriotic song in their efforts to whitewash an insurrection that contributed to five deaths and left more than 120 police offices injured, experts said.

“We should not be surprised that this propaganda is effective, but it is shocking to see this in this country,” said Federico Finchelstein, chair of the history department at the New School for Social Research in New York, an expert in authoritarian disinformation. “What they are demanding is that reality be put aside for the loyalty of the leader. And that leader in this case is Donald Trump.”

Law enforcement officials who battled rioters are aghast, calling the song a cynical effort to mislead Americansabout the truth of what transpired during the Jan. 6 attack.

“Some of these people are trying to get a rise out of people, and some of these people are just using it to make a buck,” said Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn, who received the Presidential Citizens Medal for his actions on Jan. 6. “People can believe whatever they want to believe, but this is real life.”…….

Revisionists attempt to whitewash Jan. 6 riot with ‘Justice for All’ song

A song featuring ex-President Donald Trump and a choir of prisoners charged with crimes related to the deadly Capitol insurrection briefly took the No. 1 spot on iTunes last month, edging out Taylor Swift. The song is another effort to whitewash Jan. 6, 2021, when the Republican president's...

apnews.com

 

[nolaspe]

Traitorous grandpa munster needs to be in jail...

 

[nolaspe]

LOL, he FAAFO'd for realz...

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Like Trump, Cruz could be caught with knife in hand and his suppoerters wouldn't bat an eye..

 

[zztop]

Man gets 14 years in 1/6 case, longest sentence imposed yet

A Kentucky man with a long criminal record has been sentenced to a record-setting 14 years in prison for attacking police officers with pepper spray and a chair as he stormed the U.S. Capitol with his wife. Peter Schwartz’s prison sentence is the longest so far among hundreds of Capitol riot...

apnews.com