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

 

[DaveXA]

I'm of the feeling that anyone attempting to cross established security lines should be shot on sight. Cross the line and you take your life in your hands.

Usually, they are though. There have been several people shot and killed in federal buildings surrounding the Capitol over the years. It's rare, but it does happen. Last week was a bit different because security was overrun and I've read the Capitol police on site was told specifically not to use their weapons, which I can understand. A massacre or gun battle in the Capitol would have been a whole lot more dangerous.

The lady getting shot, while tragic, was just a stupid decision to try and enter a secured area. It was secured for a reason and deadly force was definitely justified in that case.

All of that could have been prevented had they secured the Capitol before the crowd got there though. That's something that will need to be investigated and determine how this can be avoided in the future.

 

[jdn9201]

I don't talk a lot about my faith on the boards, but it was precisely my faith that prompted me to reject Trump from the beginning. I've never understood the adration and irrational support he gets from a lot of Christians and other people of faith.

An example of this was apparent to me yesterday. I told my neighbor who is a conservative Christian that I've always had a problem with Trump's behavior. Never liked his acting like a bully and how he deals with people. And his propensity for embellishing and exaggeration (lying) is second to none. I read his book "Art of the Deal" many moons ago, and it just was not compatible with how I view and treat people. Her response and justification for supporting Trump was "But he has good policies! His behavior doesn't really matter."

Ugh! You can have the perfect platform, but if you're a crappy human being, you're not getting support from me.

I admire you for voting by your faith and as a fellow Christian I wish I had done the same in 2016. Looking back the hypocrisy is mind boggling - in 2012 I was living in Jacksonville at the time and got dirty looks at church because I had attended a Mitt Romney rally and was wearing a button the next day at church. Many of them said “he seems like a good person with some decent ideas but I can’t vote for him because he’s Mormon”. Yet many of these same people embraced Trump with open arms, just because he can fake being a Christian by holding up a Bible.

 

[wardorican]

This is a great thread from a couple who attend and record with photos lots of demonstrations in DC. It’s well worth the time to read it. It’s chilling and fascinating.

I'm reading it now.

The part about the underwhelming Law Enforcement presence is really pathetic. I mean, this is our own Benghazi.

At least in Benghazi, the excuse is we don't have enough manpower nearby. So, is the Capitol building less secure or as secure as a random diplomatic compound (not even an embassy)?

Is this going to be similar to sending US troops to SE Louisiana and it took days to straighten out, because the DoD needed to sign off on it?

 

[SystemShock]

Supporting a man who openly calls for violence can in no way be in agreement with their faith

If you read the Bible, you'll realize it is.

 

[wardorican]

Not sure of the full context, but from that - this seems to be a bit exaggerated.

Granted, given her other tweets, I'm not sure I should be giving her the benefit of the doubt.

That's an awful hot take. She wasn't doing that at all.

 

[DaveXA]

If you read the Bible, you'll realize it is.

Just...no. Regardless, we're not having that debate here.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

That's an awful hot take. She wasn't doing that at all.

So, my initial thought was she was like Chris Tucker's character Ruby Rhod from the Fifth Element when we was broadcasting as the opera was being attacked.

 

[wardorican]

So, my initial thought was she was like Chris Tucker's character Ruby Rhod from the Fifth Element when we was broadcasting as the opera was being attacked.

That's the way I take it.

notice the chambers comment is past tense. There is nothing useful in saying that the speaker has been evacuated. Doesn't say where. Doesn't say when, what door. I mean, if I were broadcasting for a coordinated attack, I'd actually mention useful information.

What we learned, was most of the congressmen and women, when their own personal safety was threatened, banded together, outside of the few true believers. That's human nature.

 

[MT15]

I agree that the tweet criticizing her is way overblown. Nevertheless she is one of the “true believers“. She argued very passionately against certifying the election. She should be not be given the benefit of the doubt as far as her intentions.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

So, my initial thought was she was like Chris Tucker's character Ruby Rhod from the Fifth Element when we was broadcasting as the opera was being attacked.

Yes, like Ruby Rhod, but much more melodramatic. (If you've seen her commercials you know what I mean)

 

[SystemShock]

Just...no. Regardless, we're not having that debate here.

I didn't reply to you. If you don't want to have that debate here, why do you get into it?

 

[Optimus Prime]

I don't talk a lot about my faith on the boards, but it was precisely my faith that prompted me to reject Trump from the beginning. I've never understood the adration and irrational support he gets from a lot of Christians and other people of faith.

An example of this was apparent to me yesterday. I told my neighbor who is a conservative Christian that I've always had a problem with Trump's behavior. Never liked his acting like a bully and how he deals with people. And his propensity for embellishing and exaggeration (lying) is second to none. I read his book "Art of the Deal" many moons ago, and it just was not compatible with how I view and treat people. Her response and justification for supporting Trump was "But he has good policies! His behavior doesn't really matter."

Ugh! You can have the perfect platform, but if you're a crappy human being, you're not getting support from me.

Calling BS on this (from your neighbor not you) whatever constitutes "good policies" pro-life, tax cuts, judge appointees etc there were 15 other people during the primaries that would have offered exactly that

It's a weird version of MLK - Want people to be judged by their policies and not the content of their character

Ana Navarro was on CNN this morning and basically said that there is no policy good enough that would cause her to abandon everything she believes in

 

[Dragon]

I agree that the tweet criticizing her is way overblown. Nevertheless she is one of the “true believers“. She argued very passionately against certifying the election. She should be not be given the benefit of the doubt as far as her intentions.

This - go read some of her deleted tweets or some of the local articles about her and you get another picture.. She is full blown Trumper and one of the last tweet she posted before the run on the Capitol was this

 

[Incumbent]

That's the way I take it.

notice the chambers comment is past tense. There is nothing useful in saying that the speaker has been evacuated. Doesn't say where. Doesn't say when, what door. I mean, if I were broadcasting for a coordinated attack, I'd actually mention useful information.

What we learned, was most of the congressmen and women, when their own personal safety was threatened, banded together, outside of the few true believers. That's human nature.

Agreed that the fuller context puts it in a different light. Thanks. A real benefit of our discussions here is sorting through the noise and fog of confusion.

There remains a legitimate concern about the rhetoric that has led us to this point, inciting rioters well into the hours leading up to the attack on the Capitol, and Boebert is one of the elected officials who continues to bear responsibility in that.

 

[Taurus]

This - go read some of her deleted tweets or some of the local articles about her and you get another picture.. She is full blown Trumper and one of the last tweet she posted before the run on the Capitol was this

"It's not a coup, it's a revolution!"

 

[DaveXA]

I didn't reply to you. If you don't want to have that debate here, why do you get into it?

Because it wasn't a debate to begin with.

 

[Booker]

This - go read some of her deleted tweets or some of the local articles about her and you get another picture.. She is full blown Trumper and one of the last tweet she posted before the run on the Capitol was this

Yeah, she's a full on Qanon nut. Unfortunately she represents a safe Republican district -- she primaried the incumbent last year because he only voted with Trump 95% of the time. I'm hopeful she just gets marginalized for the next couple of years and then gets primaried herself or faces tougher competition in the general.

 

[DaveXA]

Calling BS on this (from your neighbor not you) whatever constitutes "good policies" pro-life, tax cuts, judge appointees etc there were 15 other people during the primaries that would have offered exactly that

It's a weird version of MLK - Want people to be judged by their policies and not the content of their character

Ana Navarro was on CNN this morning and basically said that there is no policy good enough that would cause her to abandon everything she believes in

Absolutely. Well said. I even told her that, and she just shrugged, lol. I think she's just so conditioned to hating Democrats that she won't criticize anyone that opposes them. And she believes everything she reads on Gateway Pundit.