Trump

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I’m not sure where you get your news from, but Trumps attempt to
undermine the 2020 election, was in fact stopped. Biden is president.

We under reacted to
january 6th? Should we send all
the trespassers to Guantanamo
Bay?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

One year ago, the storming of the U.S. Capitol marked a final, violent attempt to subvert a national election after earlier efforts by the former president and his allies had failed.

Those efforts principally sought to nullify states’ election results by filing dozens of lawsuits predicated on fictitious claims; coercing and possibly criminally soliciting state and local officials to commit election fraud; attempting to enlist the Justice Department in a campaign to overturn results; urging state lawmakers to “decertify” results themselves; pressuring the then-vice president to delay or block the counting of electoral votes by Congress; and petitioning the Supreme Court to delay certification in the event the vice president would not. As the Jan. 6 certification approached, the former president assessed how he might declare martial law in order to seize voting machines and “redo” the election. Then, he and allies incited a violent mob to ransack the Capitol. Threading these efforts together was the Big Lie: the former president’s Orwellian claim that others had in fact corrupted the election, and that he was its victim.

Pursuing accountability generates all sorts of risks, but avoiding accountability is riskier still. In light of the consequences otherwise, the pursuit of accountability for serious wrongdoing must be a given.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

One year ago, the storming of the U.S. Capitol marked a final, violent attempt to subvert a national election after earlier efforts by the former president and his allies had failed.

Those efforts principally sought to nullify states’ election results by filing dozens of lawsuits predicated on fictitious claims; coercing and possibly criminally soliciting state and local officials to commit election fraud; attempting to enlist the Justice Department in a campaign to overturn results; urging state lawmakers to “decertify” results themselves; pressuring the then-vice president to delay or block the counting of electoral votes by Congress; and petitioning the Supreme Court to delay certification in the event the vice president would not. As the Jan. 6 certification approached, the former president assessed how he might declare martial law in order to seize voting machines and “redo” the election. Then, he and allies incited a violent mob to ransack the Capitol. Threading these efforts together was the Big Lie: the former president’s Orwellian claim that others had in fact corrupted the election, and that he was its victim.

Pursuing accountability generates all sorts of risks, but avoiding accountability is riskier still. In light of the consequences otherwise, the pursuit of accountability for serious wrongdoing must be a given.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

are you going to spend the next four years insisting trump needs to go to jail for this now? since, despite your best efforts, you have failed for the last 5


you know he's going to run and win in 2024....it will be fun to see your reaction

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

are you going to spend the next four years insisting trump needs to go to jail for this now? since, despite your best efforts, you have failed for the last 5


you know he's going to run and win in 2024....it will be fun to see your reaction

Remember, long before he was a judge, Merrick Garland prosecuted the Oklahoma City bombing and the Atlanta Olympics bombing — and earned a rep of being silent, methodical, and deadly effective.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Remember, long before he was a judge, Merrick Garland prosecuted the Oklahoma City bombing and the Atlanta Olympics bombing — and earned a rep of being silent, methodical, and deadly effective.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

may the force be with you....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Pursuing accountability generates all sorts of risks, but avoiding accountability is riskier still. In light of the consequences otherwise, the pursuit of accountability for serious wrongdoing must be a given.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ok. SO the democrats who asked the electors in 2016 not to vote for Trump, and the democrats in Congress who voted to contest election results in a few states with zero evidence of wrongdoing (some of them are still in Congress)...where is their accountability, Pete?

If avoiding accountability is such an existential threat, how come you've never called for any of them top be accountable? What they tried to do, was undermine a free and fair election, because they didn't win. That's EXACTLY what Trump tried to do.

Just post what we all already know...you only think it's bad when Republicans do it.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Just post what we all already know...you only think it's bad when Republicans do it.

I wonder what they would be saying about the promised nationwide riots if trump had won...never mind...been there done that, we know the answer

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Ok. SO the democrats who asked the electors in 2016 not to vote for Trump, and the democrats in Congress who voted to contest election results in a few states with zero evidence of wrongdoing (some of them are still in Congress)...where is their accountability, Pete?

If avoiding accountability is such an existential threat, how come you've never called for any of them top be accountable? What they tried to do, was undermine a free and fair election, because they didn't win. That's EXACTLY what Trump tried to do.

Just post what we all already know...you only think it's bad when Republicans do it.

I think 7 House Ds objected to the 2016 election. 147 R objected to the 2020 election. There never where any D plans to decertify any states elections and flip the electorial votes like the Rs tried to do. So even an actuary should know is a difference of magnitude bt the 2 or are you trying to be dishonest by equating 2 things which are of different magnitude?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I think 7 House Ds objected to the 2016 election. 147 R objected to the 2020 election. There never where any D plans to decertify any states elections and flip the electorial votes like the Rs tried to do. So even an actuary should know is a difference of magnitude bt the 2.

"I think 7 House Ds objected to the 2016 election. 147 R objected to the 2020 election"

Correct. The house Ds objected to multiple states, I think the Rs in 2020 only objected to PA? Is that correct? I may be wrong.

"There never where any D plans to decertify any states elections and flip the electorial votes like the Rs tried to do"

Please explain. If the Rs only objected to PA (maybe I'm completely wrong about that?), even if PA switched, that wouldn't have changed the election.

You're very conveniently ignoring that some democrats asked the electors to not vote for Trump. That was an attempt to get someone else elected.

Some of you have said that Trumps crime was undermining public confidence in our elections. How did the democrats who voted to object, not cause the public to lose confidence in our elections?

And why do democrats (if they think democracy is good) use superdelegates in their primaries? The superdelegates exist for one reason only - to un-do the will of the people, if the kingmakers wish to do so.

Paul, I'm admitting that what Trump did was awful, and I desperately don't want him to run again. But none of you, not one, can find any fault with a single thing the democrats did after the 2016 election, nor can you condemn the 2020 riots. Because nothing can be wrong when democrats do it. Rioting, trying to undermine election results you don't like, making false claims of election fraud - those things only matter when republicans do them.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Paul, I'm admitting that what Trump did was awful, and I desperately don't want him to run again. But none of you, not one, can find any fault with a single thing the democrats did after the 2016 election, nor can you condemn the 2020 riots.

how many private American citizens felt terrorized, physically endangered or their businesses' threatened by the activities during the summer of love? and how many felt the same during the three hours of irrational exuberance at the capitol? that's the difference, the drama queens here and on msnbc, cnn and the dem politicians can scream at the sky, but most people don't care or have forgotten about it...they just know biden sucks right now

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

how many private American citizens felt terrorized, physically endangered or their businesses' threatened by the activities during the summer of love? and how many felt the same during the three hours of irrational exuberance at the capitol? that's the difference, the drama queens here and on msnbc, cnn and the dem politicians can scream at the sky, but most people don't care or have forgotten about it...they just know biden sucks right now

I wonder if it means a lot less to most of America than it means to liberals right now. I wonder if people have shrugged it off.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I wonder if it means a lot less to most of America than it means to liberals right now. I wonder if people have shrugged it off.

pretty sure when joe was rambling about some battle between democracy and autocracy going on in his head, most American's were just worried about their most recent oil bill and their kid's school shutting down again...

do you think he knows he's president?...it's hard to tell sometimes...

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"

You're very conveniently ignoring that some democrats asked the electors to not vote for Trump. That was an attempt to get someone else elected. From what I remember they didn't want to change the election to Clinton - it was more they objected to Trump being elected. And there were never any plans to have states say we aren't listening to the voters and instead we are going to send these other electors who happen to want a Pres. who didn't get the most votes in the state.

Some of you have said that Trumps crime was undermining public confidence in our elections. He continues to say day in and day out there was fraud when there was none. Even in the states who have recounted there has been none turned up. How did the democrats who voted to object, not cause the public to lose confidence in our elections?BC the magnitude of who said it - the Pres vs some 7 congressman.

And why do democrats (if they think democracy is good) use superdelegates in their primaries? The superdelegates exist for one reason only - to un-do the will of the people, if the kingmakers wish to do so.

Paul, I'm admitting that what Trump did was awful, and I desperately don't want him to run again. But none of you, not one, can find any fault with a single thing the democrats did after the 2016 election, nor can you condemn the 2020 riots. Because nothing can be wrong when democrats do it. Rioting, trying to undermine election results you don't like, making false claims of election fraud - those things only matter when republicans do them. Different degree of magnitude.

Edit - and to me it isn't about Trump as much as the others who are afraid to call him out on his lies. There are very few Rs congressman who admit he lost.

And from an article today (2 undermining confidence in our elected officials):

On the show, hosted by Stephen K. Bannon, one of Mr. Trump’s top former advisers, Representatives Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene laid responsibility on Democrats, the Capitol Police, the federal government and others.

The idea that people other than Mr. Trump’s own supporters were responsible for the violence that day has become a popular conspiracy theory among the far right. There is no evidence that undercover agents or other outsiders played a role in the attack and fact checkers have worked to debunk similar claims aired on Fox News. The pair of lawmakers offered little evidence for their claims during the show.

Mr. Gaetz, a Florida Republican, repeated some of the unfounded claims on Thursday, including that the government and police tried to set up the protesters.

“We’re here to get to the truth behind Jan. 6, the federal government’s own involvement with it,” Mr. Gaetz said in his hourlong interview on “Bannon’s War Room.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Edit - and to me it isn't about Trump as much as the others who are afraid to call him out on his lies. There are very few Rs congressman who admit he lost.

And from an article today (2 undermining confidence in our elected officials):

On the show, hosted by Stephen K. Bannon, one of Mr. Trump’s top former advisers, Representatives Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene laid responsibility on Democrats, the Capitol Police, the federal government and others.

The idea that people other than Mr. Trump’s own supporters were responsible for the violence that day has become a popular conspiracy theory among the far right. There is no evidence that undercover agents or other outsiders played a role in the attack and fact checkers have worked to debunk similar claims aired on Fox News. The pair of lawmakers offered little evidence for their claims during the show.

Mr. Gaetz, a Florida Republican, repeated some of the unfounded claims on Thursday, including that the government and police tried to set up the protesters.

“We’re here to get to the truth behind Jan. 6, the federal government’s own involvement with it,” Mr. Gaetz said in his hourlong interview on “Bannon’s War Room.”

"From what I remember they didn't want to change the election to Clinton - it was more they objected to Trump being elected"

True, thats correct. But Trump won fair and square, so where in the Constitution does it say they can try to change the results when they're sufficiently disappointed? They didn't like the result, so they tried to overturn it and get someone in they liked more. Wcich is what Trump tried to do.

"Different degree of magnitude."

How about putting kids in cages - fine when Obama did it. a crime against humanity when Trump did it.

Same with being opposed to gay marriage for religious reasons - fine when Obama and Hilary say it (didn't stop Obama from wining the Nobel Peace Prize), but when a Republican says it, they are hounded out of business, denied a chance to make a living.