'We control them all': Donald Trump Jr. texted

[Davin]

When the electoral college met in December, and elected Biden, it was over. Biden was the president-elect.
As per the Constitution, Biden was going to be sworn in in January.

It wouldn't matter, legally for purposes of Biden being elected, if Pelosi never reconvened Congress to count the vote.

If it was over in December, then why was Trump and his cronies still trying to overturn the election in January? Explain that one.

 

[Athanasius68]

If it was over in December, then why was Trump and his cronies still trying to overturn the election in January? Explain that one.

Because they were in agreement with Democrats that Congress 'certifies' the electoral college vote.

 

[Davin]

Because they were in agreement with Democrats that Congress 'certifies' the electoral college vote.

If they were in agreement with the Dems, than he wouldn't be trying to overturn the election. Hopefully Trump is at least paying you for your dumb comments.

 

[Athanasius68]

If they were in agreement with the Dems, than he wouldn't be trying to overturn the election. Hopefully Trump is at least paying you for your dumb comments.

Oh, I see-- if the Democrats want to do something its legal.
If Republicans want to do something, maybe not so much.
Nice standards. Its not clear why you think Republicans should accept them.

 

[Davin]

Oh, I see-- if the Democrats want to do something its legal.
If Republicans want to do something, maybe not so much.
Nice standards. Its not clear why you think Republicans should accept them.

Overturning an election by just ignoring the electoral votes is not legal. Now we know you don’t believe in law and order.

 

[element94]

Did Meadows report this sedition to the proper authorities? I'm thinking not, since this is the first we're hearing of it.
This and the fake electors! Where are the indictments?

 

[Athanasius68]

Overturning an election by just ignoring the electoral votes is not legal. Now we know you don’t believe in law and order.

I am not aware of anyone saying that.
Even the Trump folks, whose entire theory centered around such votes.

 

[Davin]

I am not aware of anyone saying that.
Even the Trump folks, whose entire theory centered around such votes.

Trump wanted pence to ignore the electoral votes and throw them out. Have you been under a rock since December 2020?

Trump says he wanted Pence to overturn the 2020 election and falsely claims it was vice president's 'right'

Former President Donald Trump in a statement Sunday said he wanted then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 presidential election, repeating the false claim that Pence had the power to do so and slamming recent bipartisan efforts to reform the Electoral Count Act.

amp.cnn.com

 

[Athanasius68]

Trump wanted pence to ignore the electoral votes and throw them out. Have you been under a rock since December 2020?

What he wanted Pence to do is put them to the side, and then for them to be considered as per the Electoral Count Act.

 

[Davin]

What he wanted Pence to do is put them to the side, and then for them to be considered as per the Electoral Count Act.

“Considered” lol he wanted them thrown out and ignored.

You and trump don’t believe in our representative democracy.

 

[Athanasius68]

“Considered” lol he wanted them thrown out and ignored.

You and trump don’t believe in our representative democracy.

The idea would be that Congress would debate those votes as per the ECA, and either replace them with others (the supposed "forged" votes) or send the vote back to the state legislature.

 

[Davin]

The idea would be that Congress would debate those votes as per the ECA, and either replace them with others (the supposed "forged" votes) or send the vote back to the state legislature.

There was no reason or proof that they needed to be debated. Just trump and his corrupt cronies trying to overturn the election with his idiot supporters making excuses.

Luckily trump and his supporters failed in their idiotic attempt.

 

[Athanasius68]

There was no reason or proof that they needed to be debated. Just trump and his corrupt cronies trying to overturn the election with his idiot supporters making excuses.

Well, that is a different issue. The ECA says they can have such a debate.

 

[Davin]

Well, that is a different issue. The ECA says they can have such a debate.

Not without reason and there was no reason to have the debate. You just love and support trumps corruption.

 

[iguanaman]

The internet pictures tell liberals what to think.

Yes and the Trumpists are told not to believe what you see and hear. Like the 3 monkeys..

 

[Athanasius68]

Not without reason and there was no reason to have the debate. You just love and support trumps corruption.

Well, the reason given is that Trump wuz robbed.
There you go. Condition satisfied.

 

[Davin]

Well, the reason given is that Trump wuz robbed.
There you go. Condition satisfied.

There was no proof or evidence he was robbed so no, not a valid reason. You support corruption, that's all I need to know. Thank you for verifying that for me.

 

[Athanasius68]

There was no proof or evidence he was robbed so no, not a valid reason. You support corruption, that's all I need to know. Thank you for verifying that for me.

So what? Congress sets its own rules for how it conducts its business.

If you wish to make this whole thing a political argument-- fine with me. I don't think gets you to where you think it should, but no objection.
Unfortunately, there are those who also insist this is a criminal justice issue-- and which nothing has been shown to be the case.

 

[Davin]

So what? Congress sets its own rules for how it conducts its business.

If you wish to make this whole thing a political argument-- fine with me. I don't think gets you to where you think it should, but no objection.
Unfortunately, there are those who also insist this is a criminal justice issue-- and which nothing has been to be the case.

Your support of corruption was already confirmed. Anything you say now is dismissed as hypocritical nonsense.

 

[Athanasius68]

Your support of corruption was already confirmed. Anything you say now is dismissed as hypocritical nonsense.

I have never said I supported what Trump was trying to do here-- with the exception of seeking recounts.

But the hysteria about the rest by the Trump critics is ridiculous.

 

[Davin]

I have never said I supported what Trump was trying to do here-- with the exception of seeking recounts.

But they hysteria about the rest by the Trump critics is ridiculous.

You've excused everything and said nothing against it. Sorry but you are confirmed to support Trump's corruption.

 

[Athanasius68]

You've excused everything and said nothing against it. Sorry but you are confirmed to support Trump's corruption.

Because we are dealing with hysteria here -- even by some of the posters who are typically calm in their criticism of Trump.

 

[Davin]

Because we are dealing with hysteria here -- even by some of the posters who are typically calm in their criticism of Trump.

It's hysteria to show that Trump wanted to overturn the election through nefarious means without any proof or valid reasons.

 

[Athanasius68]

It's hysteria to show that Trump wanted to overturn the election through nefarious means without any proof or valid reasons.

Yeah but look at what you are arguing-- Trump has no good reason to 'overturn' the election through 'nefarious' means.

So what are we saying here? That there is a legal way to overturn an election? Ok-- so what is it, and why would it be a crime to push for it? What are "non-nefarious' ways of doing it?
Because YOU don't agree with the reasons given by Trump? So what? I mean you did say in the earlier post that part of the problem is that the Democrats didn't agree with Trump.

 

[Davin]

Yeah but look at what you are arguing-- Trump has no good reason to 'overturn' the election through 'nefarious' means.

So what are we saying here? That there is a legal way to overturn an election? Ok-- so what is it, and why would it be a crime to push for it? Because YOU don't agree with the reasons given by Trump? So what? I mean you did say in the earlier post that part of the problem is that the Democrats didn't agree with Trump.

I'm arguing that there was no proof or reason for Trump to do what he did. He is corrupt and you are excusing that corruption. Thank god the majority of Republicans didn't go along with what you and Trump support.

Here's the real question, why are you excusing what Trump did?