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

 

[Booker]

President for life? Trump says 'maybe we'll have to give that a shot some day'

"Maybe we'll have to give that a shot some day," Trump says following Chinese President Xi Jinping's effort to abolish term limits.

www.google.com

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Trump claims 'total authority' over state decisions

States on both coasts on Monday announced regional plans for reopening on their own timelines.

www.politico.com

 

[Eeyore]

Truly ? Wow.. that is really bad.
Could you link to where he said that ?

3:14 minute mark







1:38 minute mark

Trump claimed Article 2 of the Constitution gives him the right to do 'whatever I want as president,' but that's not true

Trump on more than one occasion contended he had the authority under the Constitution to fire the former special counsel Robert Mueller.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Roofgardener]

Just go away. We don't have time for this shirt any more.

Oh CHARMING. I point out that a post is in error, and THAT is your response ? "Just go away" ?

How witty. Such an elegant debate riposte. Such incisive reasoning. I bet Noel Coward and Oscar Wilde are just KICKING themselves that they didn't think of such a piquant epigrammaticism !

 

[SystemShock]

I'd recommend just responding in as thoughtful a way as possible.

I'd recommend not responding at all.

Dont assume retreads,

"Styles make fights".

 

[wardorican]

Ward, you gotta come of this "Dad" schtick.

We don't negotiate with terrorists. The end.

"Where are all the conservatives?"

One pops in, even though it is under the guise of still having some sort of moral authority..

"Get out of here"

Yall can't have it both ways.

Be angry about all this, but dont lose your heads. All you do is prove them right that you are all just hostile to opposing views.

 

[Roofgardener]

Mulvaney just quit.

I suspect there will be many more. They want to avoid - as far as is possible - being tainted.

 

[wardorican]

"Pretty obvious to everyone..". As in... "pretty obvious to everyone who wants an excuse - ANY excuse - to criticise Donald Trump". If he was so candid, could you give me an example of where he wished to be an autocrat ?

Mind you, in his previous role as CEO of the Trump Empire, he didn't have as many restrictions on his actions as he does now, that is true.

Didnt wish, he essentially claimed it. This is the easiest example. The others require looking at various White House actions, such as completely ignoring congressional subpoenas.

Trump: Article II gives me right to do whatever I want

 

[efil4]

I suspect there will be many more. They want to avoid - as far as is possible - being tainted.

Too late

They may salvage a portion of their reputation, but a bulk of it is stained for life.

 

[Taurus]

"Where are all the conservatives?"

One pops in, even though it is under the guise of still having some sort of moral authority..

"Get out of here"

Yall can't have it both ways.

Be angry about all this, but dont lose your heads. All you do is prove them right that you are all just hostile to opposing views.

Okay.

Eeyore and Booker just did the work. Expending way more energy to answer this dude's questions than he expends in asking.

What do you think he'll do next?

I've debated YEC's enough times to know the opening moves of this strategy.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I suspect there will be many more. They want to avoid - as far as is possible - being tainted.

Unfortunately for them, that ship sailed years ago.

 

[RobF]

Thank you for your warm welcome. I was under the impression that this was a DEBATE forum. Do you treat all people with a differing opinion this way ? And why on earth should I be banned ?

When people register on a new site and immediately start posting in a relatively aggressive and confrontational way, it tends to suggest they're not actually here for good faith debate and can provoke such responses. It can also often be taken as the behaviour of a sock puppet (that is, a new account created by an existing, or previous, member). So @Brandon13's observation is certainly blunt, but I think it's also understandable. If you are here for genuine debate, you can easily address that by perhaps dialing it down a notch.

And yet - curiously - you can't provide such evidence ? So who's being disingenuous or ignorant now ?

Such evidence can easily be provided - as @Eeyore has just shown. You're confusing the exasperation that comes from someone demanding evidence for something that's so well established at this point with an absence of evidence, and they're very much not the same thing.

It's like demanding evidence that the Earth isn't flat. That people may not be willing to entertain you by supplying the evidence is an indication that you're asking for something that's been shown over and over again and that no-one paying any attention at all should really need to ask for at this point. It is not a sign that you're onto something or have a point; it's very much the opposite.

 

[Roofgardener]

< various youtube clips >

Oooh right, thanks for that Eeyore; I had no idea !

 

[The moose]

Update on the above....
That was NOT Donald Trump speaking. It was Peter Baker of the New York Times (a newspaper dedicated to denigrating Trump wherever possible) who said that ! Donald Trump was sarcastically quoting him !

He sent a group of asshats to the capital. Fact. It is what he wanted because he sent them to do it.

When you stir the pot you get that pathetic stew of humanity that was on display yesterday.

We are truly not gonna play the game with you.

Especially considering how he lost this election by more than he won the last one.

Voter fraud on this scale would be absolutely impossible to keep under wraps and would be easily proven. This is not the case here.

When this guy can't even get anything done without a leak from his people why would you expect thousands and thousands of votes in multiple states to be fraudulent without one shred of proof?

My god the judges put in by the republicans in charge shot everything down quickly because they have no proof.

The best witness they had was Melissa Carone that drunk Hooters waitress.

How people don't see just how ungodly stupid this is beyond the way my brain works.

 

[efil4]

Oooh right, thanks for that Eeyore; I had no idea !

So you were provided proof and thats your reply?

Charming.

 

[wardorican]

Oooh right, thanks for that Eeyore; I had no idea !

Says you're from the UK. What brings you here?

 

[wardorican]

Okay.

Eeyore and Booker just did the work. Expending way more energy to answer this dude's questions than he expends in asking.

What do you think he'll do next?

I've debated YEC's enough times to know the opening moves of this strategy.

Also, by laying it out there, you create a self fulfilling prophecy.

This could be a discussion for later in our board about patterns seen over the years.

 

[Roofgardener]

Says you're from the UK. What brings you here?

I was bored of my regular forum censoring (or rather, locking) debate threads for what I regarded as being trivial (or political) reasons, so I googled "political forums', and you guys popped up.

 

[brandon]

"Where are all the conservatives?"

One pops in, even though it is under the guise of still having some sort of moral authority..

"Get out of here"

Yall can't have it both ways.

Touche, but...

Also, by laying it out there, you create a self fulfilling prophecy.

This could be a discussion for later in our board about patterns seen over the years.

As @Taurus noted, we've seen this pattern before, and after yesterday, there's simply no room for it in serious discussion any longer.

I guess I was expecting some of the conservatives we've had around here, or new ones like this guy, to come to the board admitting their mistake and showing some contrition. I recognize that was probably a ridiculous assumption, but it's really the only correct line of thinking at this point. Anything less is simply distraction and deserves nothing short of summary dismissal.