Trump

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I wonder what the intent of the the Eastman memo was.

John C. Eastman tried to convince then-Vice President Mike Pence that he could overturn the election results on January 6, 2021 (when Congress counted the Electoral College votes) by throwing out electors from seven states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Washington, D.C.) because they allegedly had competing electors although, in fact, no state had actually put forward an alternate slate of electors. Under Eastman's scheme, Pence would have declared Trump the winner with more Electoral College votes after the seven states were thrown out, at 232 votes to 222.

His intent was to overturn the results of a free election, and whoever Eastman is, he should be held accountable for that.

fair enough?

Paul, i’ve shown here a million times that i have exactly zero problem calling out republicans when they behave badly, which happens all the time.

i also don’t want trump to run again. too sleazy.

i think you’re all so used to
ignoring it when your own side misbehaves, that you assume everyone else ignores it. I dont.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

His intent was to overturn the results of a free election, and whoever Eastman is, he should be held accountable for that.

fair enough?

Paul, i’ve shown here a million times that i have exactly zero problem calling out republicans when they behave badly, which happens all the time.But the eastman memo showed the Trump legal team was trying to overthrow the election and the vast majority of R congressman seemed to support it. over 60% of R refuse to believe Biden was fairly elected. Trying to overturn (or prevent the Pres. confirmation) a Presidential election is much more important to me than a disagreement about policy or taxes. It is the heart of our country. He wasn't just some guy writing a memo. It was shared amongst the highests R in the country - from Trump on down.

i also don’t want trump to run again. too sleazy.

i think you’re all so used to
ignoring it when your own side misbehaves, that you assume everyone else ignores it. I dont.I don't, I cringe when I see/hear some things.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

NM

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

NM

"But the eastman memo showed the Trump legal team was trying to overthrow the election"

I never, ever said Trump wasn't trying to overturn the election, obviously he was. Thankfully, he failed.

What I said, and I'll say it again because it's true, is that it would be nice if you guys could hold the left to the same standard.

"over 60% of R refuse to believe Biden was fairly elected"

And that's embarrassing and stupid.

But it's equally stupid that dems think Trump won because of Russian collusion, that Hilary lost because of sexism, that Republicans are racist and only care about the wealthy, that the morons in the capital ever had a plan to overturn the election, that pro life people hate women, etc. I can go all day with demonstrably false BS that's generally (not universally) accepted on the left

People are mostly sheep who believe what they are told.

"I cringe when I see/hear some things."

That's true, you do, and Rockhound to some extent. Not the others. Never.

I'd love to get away from attacks (which obviously I contribute to, and shouldn't) and fear mongering, and talk about the pros and cons of actual policy, that's what's interesting to me, that's how you learn.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

His intent was to overturn the results of a free election, and whoever Eastman is, he should be held accountable for that.

fair enough?

Paul, i’ve shown here a million times that i have exactly zero problem calling out republicans when they behave badly, which happens all the time.

i also don’t want trump to run again. too sleazy.

i think you’re all so used to
ignoring it when your own side misbehaves, that you assume everyone else ignores it. I dont.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How about the rest of the Trumplicans in the House and Senate who aided and abetted the Trump administration in their efforts to throw out the results of the election after they had exhausted all legal remedies because they didn't like the results.
You can listen to Peter Navarro explain just how the coup was supposed to work.

The Constitution only works if you respect it, otherwise it's just another piece of paper.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

How about the rest of the Trumplicans in the House and Senate who aided and abetted the Trump administration in their efforts to throw out the results of the election after they had exhausted all legal remedies because they didn't like the results.
You can listen to Peter Navarro explain just how the coup was supposed to work.

The Constitution only works if you respect it, otherwise it's just another piece of paper.

I think the congressional republicans are exactly as guilty, as the democrats in 2016 who urged electors to not vote for the candidate who won, and exactly as guilty as the congressional democrats in 2016 who voted to challenge the election results in more states than the GOP challenged in 2020.

In all those cases, the losing party acted like spoiled brats and were willing to undermine the constitution rather than graciously accept defeat.

I don't care if we ignore it, talk about it,. arrest them, or execute them. But let's apply the same standard to everyone who refuses to accept election results. You all only care when Republicans do it.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I think the congressional republicans are exactly as guilty, as the democrats in 2016 who urged electors to not vote for the candidate who won, and exactly as guilty as the congressional democrats in 2016 who voted to challenge the election results in more states than the GOP challenged in 2020.

In all those cases, the losing party acted like spoiled brats and were willing to undermine the constitution rather than graciously accept defeat.

I don't care if we ignore it, talk about it,. arrest them, or execute them. But let's apply the same standard to everyone who refuses to accept election results. You all only care when Republicans do it.

None of them had a plan to get the Vice President to ignore his constitutional duties, nor did they abdicate their own duties.
If you look at the 2016 election, Never Trumpers were a significant force in pressuring electors to not vote for Trump.
Many of the reasons for doing so have since proven to be valid.

There is no valid whatabout.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

None of them had a plan to get the Vice President to ignore his constitutional duties, nor did they abdicate their own duties.
If you look at the 2016 election, Never Trumpers were a significant force in pressuring electors to not vote for Trump.
Many of the reasons for doing so have since proven to be valid.

There is no valid whatabout.

Ok. So this is what you're saying...

If you lose a presidential election, it's OK with you to try and overturn the results using any method possible, other than getting the VP to do it.

So according to you, if you lose an election...

it's OK if you pressure the electors to not cast their votes for the winner, for no reason other than you hate the guy who won fair and square.

it's OK if your congressmen challenge the results in states, for no reason other, than you hate the guy who won fair and square.

But, if you pressure your VP to forego his duties in order to overturn an election, THEN it's bad.

All other ways to overturn an election for no good reason (other than you lost and can't accept it) are acceptable to you, except the method Trump selected.

Do you seriously expect any sane person to buy that, Pete?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Ok. So this is what you're saying...

If you lose a presidential election, it's OK with you to try and overturn the results using any method possible, other than getting the VP to do it.

So according to you, if you lose an election...

it's OK if you pressure the electors to not cast their votes for the winner, for no reason other than you hate the guy who won fair and square.

it's OK if your congressmen challenge the results in states, for no reason other, than you hate the guy who won fair and square.

But, if you pressure your VP to forego his duties in order to overturn an election, THEN it's bad.

All other ways to overturn an election for no good reason (other than you lost and can't accept it) are acceptable to you, except the method Trump selected.

Do you seriously expect any sane person to buy that, Pete?

You’re the master of obfuscation and certainly qualify as a person who doesn’t really support Trump 🤦
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

His intent was to overturn the results of a free election, and whoever Eastman is, he should be held accountable for that.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

was any of this by this eastman fellow illegal?....surely if it was that Legal Tiger that now runs the justice department and thankfully is not on the supreme court, will be pursuing them with abandon....

otherwise, sounds like political maneuvering...

not like the democraps don't try every trick in the book at every opportunity...I could name a couple currently going on...