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

Users who are viewing this thread

    superchuck500

    U.S. Blues
    Joined
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages
    5,083
    Reaction score
    13,021
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Offline
    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.


     
    I just... I don't know. :idunno:



    I do - it’s pure BS

    The exchange made me think about these lyrics with a chuckle.


    Regarding Rachel's interview, there are three things that are very clear.

    She does not take any responsibilities for her actions at all. She says someone gave her the ice axe and implies that means she shouldn't have been charged with possessing a deadly weapon. Unless there was a super strong, instant adhesive on the handle she could have dropped it at any time. Even if it was super glued to her hand, she could have left or at the very least not use it to break a damn window.

    She says the police never actually told her to leave. Okay, that's a bit absurd of a defense, but let’s take her at her word. The police didn't tell you to leave that's why you didn't leave. Did the police need to tell you not to try to push through their barricade? Is that something you really needed them to say aloud so you could understand that you are expected to stay on your side of the barricade? Do the police need to tell you not to break into the Capitol building? Do you need to be told to not break into a bank to know that you're not supposed to break into a bank? I mean come on.

    Then she says she feels like she was tricked while admitting she has no proof or evidence she was set up. In her own very sincere words, none of her choices were her fault.

    The second thing that is clear is she shows no remorse for her actions outside of how it adversely affects her by proxy of her family. She makes it very clear in her own very sincere words that the only remorse she has is for how it hurts her family and even hints that it's the government hurting her family by sending her to prison and not her choices that are hurting the family. In other words, I regret what the government is doing to my family based on my actions, but I don't regret my actions. She has no remorse, because she doesn't think she's responsible for what she chose to do.

    Last point, she says she doesn't deserve to be held accountable, the government is taking away the last thing they can which is her children she loves so much, and she cries, "I don't deserve this, and my kids don't deserve this, like have we not been through enough...?" When asked if she felt duped by Trump and that maybe she was wrong about her belief that there was election fraud she answered "no, not at all" without any hesitation to both questions. She's a true believer within the cult of Trump. I have no doubts that she is highly likely to commit violence again in the name of Trump.

    Blaming everyone else for what she did, having zero remorse for what she did and being unwavering in her false beliefs from the false idol Trump means she is still a danger to society and can't be shown any sentencing leniency, which is why she wasn't.
     
    Last edited:
    The exchange made me think about these lyrics with a chuckle.


    Regarding Rachel's interview, there are three things that are very clear.

    She does not take any responsibilities for her actions at all. She says someone gave her the ice axe and implies that means she shouldn't have been charged with possessing a deadly weapon. Unless there was a super strong, instant adhesive on the handle she could have dropped it at any time. Even if it was super glued to her hand, she could have left or at the very least not use it to break a damn window.

    She says the police never actually told her to leave. Okay, that's a bit absurd of a defense, but let’s take her at her word. The police didn't tell you to leave that's why you didn't leave. Did the police need to tell you not to try to push through their barricade? Is that something you really needed them to say aloud so you could understand that you are expected to stay on your side of the barricade? Do the police need to tell you not to break into the Capitol building? Do you need to be told to not break into a bank to know that you're not supposed to break into a bank? I mean come on.

    Then she says she feels like she was tricked while admitting she has no proof or evidence she was set up. In her own very sincere words, none of her choices were her fault.

    The second thing that is clear is she shows no remorse for her actions outside of how it adversely affects her by proxy of her family. She makes it very clear in her own very sincere words that the only remorse she has is for how it hurts her family and even hints that it's the government hurting her family by sending her to prison and not her choices that are hurting the family. In other words, I regret what the government is doing to my family based on my actions, but I don't regret my actions. She has no remorse, because she doesn't think she's responsible for what she chose to do.

    Last point, she says she doesn't deserve to be held accountable, the government is taking away the last thing they can which is her children she loves so much, and she cries, "I don't deserve this, and my kids don't deserve this, like have we not been through enough...?" When asked if she felt duped by Trump and that maybe she was wrong about her belief that there was election fraud she answered "no, not at all" without any hesitation to both questions. She's a true believer within the cult of Trump. I have no doubts that she is highly likely to commit violence again in the name of Trump.

    Blaming everyone else for what she did, having zero remorse for what she did and being unwavering in her false beliefs from the false idol Trump means she is still a danger to society and can't be shown any sentencing leniency, which is why she wasn't.

    Yep, she doesn't deserve a hint of leniency considering her complete lack of remorse. She absolutely would do this again based on her comments. Her sentence wasn't long enough.
     
    I just... I don't know. :idunno:



    Playing the "innocent" grandmother. Beotch, Please! Enjoy your time in prison, you deserve it!

    The pandemic forked her up like it did many other people. I know a woman who went through the same transformation to right wing extremist as she did. I used to argue with her all the time on Facebook as she went through that change until it became too combative and she became untethered and I had to unfriended her right after Biden's election. The combination of isolation, being online all the time, going down conspiracy rabbit holes and no mental health service really did a number on about 30% of our population. I don't think they will ever recover from it.
     
    Yeah, beat the J6 drum, just do it sparingly enough. Do more indeed.

    I think abortion and SCOTUS issues are more compelling to voters right now.

    I agree it can't be the only thing. But it's important

    If Rihanna was openly thinking about getting back with Chris Brown there are probably a lot of reasons why that's a bad idea.

    But you absolutely must talk about THE reason
     
    I agree it can't be the only thing. But it's important

    If Rihanna was openly thinking about getting back with Chris Brown there are probably a lot of reasons why that's a bad idea.

    But you absolutely must talk about THE reason
    I agree it's important, but I also think it's already as baked into the cake as it's ever gonna get. Cooking it longer just burns the cake.
     
    Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) covered his face on Tuesday after CNN showed him footage of Trump supporters who still believe that Antifa was responsible for the January 6th riots at the United States Capitol.

    During a wide-ranging interview, the Illinois Republican who serves on the House committee investigating Jan. 6 was asked about Republican voters who refuse to even watch the committee's hearings. He was then shown an example of some Trump supporters during a recent Trump event in Arizona.

    "We saw it when it all went down and saw a lot of the [Black Lives Matter] and Antifa people in the building as well, and it is just, it is just nonsense!" one Trump supporter told CNN's Donie O'Sullivan.

    The camera then cut back to Kinzinger, who had his hand in his face and was seemingly trying to suppress laughter. "Your face says it all," commented host Brianna Keilar.

    Kinzinger addressed criticisms made by some Trump supporters that the hearings were too one-sided, and he pointed out that the vast majority of witnesses who testified were Republicans who served in the Trump administration.

    "It only has been Republicans, mainly Republicans appointed by Donald Trump that have testified," he said. "We haven't had a Democratic witness, maybe one or two, I don't know what their personal political affiliation. But it is only Republicans coming in and testifying."

    He then went on to address the Trump supporters shown in the video.

    "They are being lied to and manipulated," he said. "They are told that somehow Nancy Pelosi or Muriel Bowser controls the National Guard. The only person with control of the D.C. National Guard, by the way, is the president of the United States.".............

     
    A county in Virginia finally realized that their reporting of the 2020 election results was off by approximately 4,000 votes.

    The county underreported Joe Biden’s margin of victory, originally shorting Biden’s numbers by about 1600 votes, and over counting Trumps numbers by around 2400 votes.

    Funny how they keep finding that Biden won by a larger margin than originally reported.

     
    A new “hostage” gets sentenced nearly every day per my Twitter feed. It’s glorious.


    These people got what they deserved. However, in my opinion, 5 years is nothing for what he did. You can't just punch people for nothing and then claim that you didn't and all your actions were so "peaceful".
     
    Is the US government prepared to withstand another January 6? That’s the question a new documentary sparking conversation at the Sundance film festival chillingly poses, arguing that US government and military officials must brace for the possibility of a potential political coup in a divided America.

    War Game, directed by Jesse Moss and Tony Gerber, observes a closed-door, unscripted simulation of an armed attack on the Capitol based on the events of 6 January 2021, when a mob of Trump supporters and far-right stormed the building to disrupt lawmakers’ certification of Joe Biden’s election.

    The six-hour exercise asked a bipartisan group of US defense, intelligence and elected policymakers spanning five presidential administrations to role-play the administrative response to a political coup backed by rogue members of the US military in the wake of a contested election.

    The exercise was developed by the Vet Voice Foundation, an organization helping military veterans in civic leadership and policy, to help US government officials practice responses to a January 6-level threat to democracy and understand the threat of extremism from within the military.

    The film notes that one in five criminal defendants from the Capitol attack were military veterans.

    January 6 “did not surprise those who follow far-right movement”, says Kristofer Goldsmith, a combat veteran from the war in Iraq who developed the game’s “red cell” of insurgents.

    War Game opens with footage of Goldsmith and his colleague Chris Jones scouting out Washington DC for how a potential social media and conspiracy theory-fueled mob attack would unfold.

    Both experts on domestic extremist movements, the two based their mock insurgency group, the Order of Columbus, on Q-Anon, Donald Trump’s Maga movement and far-right groups involved in the Capitol attack, such as the Proud Boys or Oath Keepers.

    The war game, held at a hotel in Washington, DC in January 2023, imagines a fictional 6 January 2025, in which the Order of Columbus has called an attack on Congress to prevent the certification of President Hotham (played by the former Montana governor Steve Bullock) after a contested election.

    Bullock’s president, in a war room with several advisors, intelligence officers and military heads, must decide how to respond to an escalating series of threats including: the storming of the Capitol aided by rogue national guard members, disinformation on social media and coordinated uprisings on several state capitols.

    They must contend with messages from a Trump-like rival candidate inciting more violence, and a video from a high-ranking general, based on the former Trump official and Stop the Steal rally speaker Michael Flynn, calling on the military to disobey the commander in chief.

    The point of the exercise is to “think about the unthinkable”, says Benjamin Radd, a game producer who recalls living through Iran’s 1979 revolution as a child, in which stability and institutional authority collapsed.

    Do you respond with a strong show of force? How much force? Focus on messaging? When do things get dire enough to justify invoking the Insurrection Act, a law allowing the president to use the US military on its own citizens, considered the game’s nuclear option.……

     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom