GOP increasingly balks at calling Jan. 6 an insurrection

[tres borrachos]

It works both ways.
The problem is the use of violence to obtain a preferred political objective.

Which losing candidates were the rioters trying to have installed last summer?

 

[Athanasius68]

You're wrong. You should read post 342 in this thread and the attached link. You don't know what you are talking about. Pence's role was Ministerial, the role of the Legislature was not. 342 is not one of mine by the way though I know it to be accurate.

I was foolishly attempting to get our forum Righties to follow their own discourse and recognize where that left them, whereas the author of 342 simply cuts to the chase. In short it is a real process with real consequences.

I already responded to that post.

 

[Athanasius68]

Which losing candidates were the rioters trying to have installed last summer?

Oh I see-- political violence is acceptable only in certain circumstances.

 

[jnug]

I already responded to that post.

I read your response...the usual avoidance of reality gibberish.

 

[tres borrachos]

Oh I see-- political violence is acceptable only in certain circumstances.

You didn't answer my question. Who was the losing political candidate they were rioting over?

 

[Athanasius68]

I read your response...the usual avoidance of reality gibberish.

The reality is that all 50 states and DC had certified their elections in December.
The electoral votes were certified by their states.
There were no claims that these states did not certify their votes.
All Congress was doing was witnessing the counting of the electoral votes. That's it. Congress does not have the authority to certify a presidential election. They don't dont decide who the states elect as electors or the votes those electors cast.

 

[Athanasius68]

You didn't answer my question. Who was the losing political candidate they were rioting over?

I did answer the question. Political violence is evidently acceptable in certain circumstances and in certain causes.

 

[jnug]

The reality is that all 50 states and DC had certified their elections in December.
The electoral votes were certified by their states.
There were no claims that these states did not certify their votes.
All Congress was doing was witnessing the counting of the electoral votes. That's it. Congress does not have the authority to certify a presidential election. They don't dont decide who the states elect as electors or the votes those electors cast.

If they were unable to complete that process there would have been consequences as 342 points out. The election has to go somewhere to be certified in order to move forward to Inauguration. Biden could not have just said, "OK Inaugurate me". Donnie the Autocrat might have tried that but not Biden.

If the certification could not be completed the election would have been tossed to the House for a delegation count. Guess who has more delegations in the House regardless of who holds the Majority of House Representatives.

The only thing that saved the 2020 election was that the DEM's had the votes to end debate over state electoral counts for which the GOP had objected. This is another hole in our system of Norms and not Laws. The Founders did not anticipate such an utter breakdown of Norms of conduct for elected Representatives that processes of this sort would break down such as they did. In fact, the Founders did not even consider Political Parties all that important, never mind the level of partisanship that has infected everything government as well as everything politics.

We will have to cover some of these Norms with Laws if we are not going to adhere to the Norms.

 

[Jay59]

It was so non violent one of the peaceful protestors was shot and killed inside the capitol.

Hence the Kent State references.

If it wasn't against the government what were these peaceful protestors doing inside the heart of our democratic republic after clashing violently with the capitol police.

You just said it was not violent, which was correct.

What planet are you posting from?

USA, Earth. What planet are you posting from?

If they were unable to complete that process there would have been consequences as 342 points out. The election has to go somewhere to be certified in order to move forward to Inauguration. Biden could not have just said, "OK Inaugurate me". Donnie the Autocrat might have tried that but not Biden.

If the certification could not be completed the election would have been tossed to the House for a delegation count. Guess who has more delegations in the House regardless of who holds the Majority of House Representatives.

There was never any doubt the process would be completed. There was a half-baked idea that they would make a statement by disrupting the process. This has been done at state capitals before, which was likely the germ of the idea.

 

[eohrnberger]

It's not OK in any context. More than that, it's inviting disaster. This is the result: Expanded police powers turned against American citizens. This is the real threat. Such an agenda is not required to prosecute the Jan. 6 event. This is obviously a much larger scope than that. Do really think the state will carefully and judiciously employ these powers going forward?

Hmm. You can see where this is going, as it is fairly transparent.

"Administration officials said the Pentagon, DOJ and DHS are "pursuing efforts to ensure domestic terrorists are not employed within our military or law enforcement ranks and improve screening and vetting processes," administration officials said."

When 'Silence is Violence' and even opposing or differing political ideas and positions is considered as violence by some, this starts looking like an ideologically driven and ideologically based purge, and could be similar to the famous purges of history.

Biden quickly purges Trump allies from Voice of America ...​

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bi...s-from-voice-of-america-parent-agency-reports
Along with other sweeping changes during his first days in office, President Biden on Thursday quickly removed reputed allies of former President Donald Trump from the Voice of America (VOA) news...

Biden Purges US Commission On Fine Arts In Move Against ...​

https://thefederalist.com/2021/05/2...-move-against-popular-classical-architecture/
May 24, 2021 By Christopher Bedford President Joe Biden launched an unprecedented purge of the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts Monday, according to a letter reviewed by The Federalist demanding...

Resign or be fired; Biden 'purges' white male Trump ...​

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/0...trump-appointees-on-fine-arts-agency-1079223/
President Joe Biden orchestrated what is being characterized as a "purge" of Trump appointees at the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts on Tuesday when he announced that he will appoint four new members...

Biden's new Pentagon chief purges Trump loyalists ...​

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/biden-pentagon-trump-allies-lloyd-austin-b1797057.html
Biden's new Pentagon chief purges Trump loyalists — including one who called Obama a 'terrorist leader' Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announces 'immediate suspension' of former appointees,...

Biden's EPA purges dozens of Trump's science advisers ...​

https://thehill.com/changing-americ...86-bidens-epa-purges-dozens-of-trumps-science
Biden's EPA purges dozens of Trump's science advisers ... The agency under the Biden administration has taken numerous steps to demonstrate its commitment to making its decisions based on ...

Joe Biden's purge at the EPA - Washington Times​

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/25/joe-bidens-purge-at-the-epa/
May 25, 2021The Biden administration says they will allow all 42 purged scientists to "recompete" for their positions, but the final decisions on those members will also be made by the same administration...
​

Yeah, fairly transparent what the desires of the radicals in this administration want.

 

[jnug]

There was never any doubt the process would be completed. There was a half-baked idea that they would make a statement by disrupting the process. This has been done at state capitals before, which was likely the germ of the idea.

Ah-huh. Like I said, we will need a Law to cover this as the Norms upon which we have relied to this point are not holding.

 

[tres borrachos]

I did answer the question. Political violence is evidently acceptable in certain circumstances and in certain causes.

You didn't answer the question. What losing political candidate were they trying to get installed?

 

[j brown's body]

Hence the Kent State references.


You just said it was not violent, which was correct.


There was never any doubt the process would be completed. There was a half-baked idea that they would make a statement by disrupting the process. This has been done at state capitals before, which was likely the germ of the idea.

An insurrection has to start somewhere. The thing that made this one particularly dangerous its that it was goaded on by a sitting president who would have been more than willing to see it succeed, one way or another.

 

[Athanasius68]

You didn't answer the question. What losing political candidate were they trying to get installed?

I did answer the question.
Political violence is unacceptable

 

[bongsaway]

Hence the Kent State references.


You just said it was not violent, which was correct.


There was never any doubt the process would be completed. There was a half-baked idea that they would make a statement by disrupting the process. This has been done at state capitals before, which was likely the germ of the idea.

Bend my words, shape my words any way you want them you have the power to dismiss reality. So many moronic responses one after another gets rather mind numbing after a while.

 

[Fledermaus]

I have no objection to the VP counting the electoral votes in front of Congress.
I find the Electoral College a fine system.

So what?

What does that have to do with the Insurrection and the Insurrectionists trying to prevent the certification of the election per the USC?

 

[Fledermaus]

The VP counting the electoral votes in front of Congress was a legitimate function-- true.
However, that event was not a certification of the election.

USC says it is.

Hmmmmm

Who to believe?

 

[Fledermaus]

This has to do with regards to disputes within the states of whom they have elected.
There were no such disputes in 2020 as the states had all certified their electors in December.

States.

Not Congress as required by USC.

 

[j brown's body]

Hardly "destroyed". Congress completed their work of the day just a few hours later.

Its early yet. The attack continues, as the title of this thread alludes. Republicans want to ignore it, paving the way for another one. State Republicans are paving the way for them to make it legal next time.

 

[Athanasius68]

If they were unable to complete that process there would have been consequences as 342 points out. The election has to go somewhere to be certified in order to move forward to Inauguration. Biden could not have just said, "OK Inaugurate me". Donnie the Autocrat might have tried that but not Biden.

The thing here is that you think there is a fellow somewhere with a stamp and inkpad or a pen who affixes a signature or mark on a document that states "ye be president.'

That isn't how it works in the USA.

If the certification could not be completed the election would have been tossed to the House for a delegation count. Guess who has more delegations in the House regardless of who holds the Majority of House Representatives.

No. We already know who won since December.

The only thing that saved the 2020 election was that the DEM's had the votes to end debate over state electoral counts for which the GOP had objected. This is another hole in our system of Norms and not Laws.

Well no, because the states govern the elections. So there may be issues within a state that the state has to resolve before submitting their ballots.
The point of the law that you cited is to make it clear that the STATES have to settle those issues-- not Congress-- or the states risk their electors not being counted.

The Founders did not anticipate such an utter breakdown of Norms of conduct for elected Representatives that processes of this sort would break down such as they did. In fact, the Founders did not even consider Political Parties all that important, never mind the level of partisanship that has infected everything government as well as everything politics.

We will have to cover some of these Norms with Laws if we are not going to adhere to the Norms.

What laws could be made? Can't demand a recount? Can't protest decisions made by legislatures? What are you talking about?

 

[Athanasius68]

States.

Not Congress as required by USC.

States elect the president, not Congress.
Congress only has a substantive role if no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes.
Otherwise, whoever receives the majority of the votes, is president.

 

[Fledermaus]

The thing here is that you think there is a fellow somewhere with a stamp and inkpad or a pen who affixes a signature or mark on a document that states "ye be president.'

That isn't how it works in the USA.


No. We already know who won since December.



Well no, because the states govern the elections. So there may be issues within a state that the state has to resolve before submitting their ballots.
The point of the law that you cited is to make it clear that the STATES have to settle those issues-- not Congress-- or the states risk their electors not being counted.



What laws could be made? Can't demand a recount? Can't protest decisions made by legislatures? What are you talking about?

What do you not understand about the fact CONGRESS has a role, by law, that the Insurrectionists tried to prevent?

 

[Athanasius68]

USC says it is.

Hmmmmm

Who to believe?

The USA Constitution, which simply states Congress witnesses the counting of the electoral votes.

 

[Fledermaus]

States elect the president, not Congress.
Congress only has a substantive role if no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes.
Otherwise, whoever receives the majority of the votes, is president.

Congress, by law, has a role.

Multiple posters have laid that out for you.

I have personally directed you to the actual law.

By law.

January 6th.

Your ignorance of that fact is laughable at this point.

 

[Athanasius68]

What do you not understand about the fact CONGRESS has a role, by law, that the Insurrectionists tried to prevent?

The role isn't what you say it is.