Fake electors
- Thread starter BuilderBob6
- Start date
You do realize that far more illegal immigrants enter the country legally and just stay past their visa, right?
So you really think that a wall where someone can simply climb over with a ladder will stop illegal immigrants? Some of whom have died swimming across rivers or packed inside an 18-wheeler truck so I really don't think a wall will stop them. Moreover, isn't the right's favorite argument against a ban on assault weapon is "Bad guys will always find a way to get guns so it is no use to ban?" So using the same logic, can't they understand "Desperate immigrants will always find a way to get into the country so it is no use for a wall"?
It isn't just about wealth. North Korea is a poor country, but they can still bomb the sh!t out of South Korea if it so desires. Since WW2, US has been the de facto leader and maintain the world order, pushing for policies that greatly favor the US (e.g. having USD as the reserve currency). Well, to maintain that leadership position, US can't just shut its doors when allies come begging for help, esp. if they are bullied by a common enemy. Just leaving Ukraine and Europe to hang dry sends a chilling message to all our allies that US simply cannot be trusted. Trump already f***ed up big time by betraying the Kurds. Can you see beyond the immediate step?
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2...f-the-kurds-is-a-blow-to-americas-credibility
We are #1 in export but only #3 in food production. And so what? We are also the #1 producer in crude oil, but it isn't like we won't be seriously affected if Russia (#2) and Saudi (#3) both decide to freeze us out.
If you watched the video or paid attention to the testimony in the hearings you would have no choice but to conclude that trump and his servants tried to have state and federal officials violate their oath and take actions to unconstitutionally overturn an election.
So you don't watch. You don't pay attention. People like you attack the messenger and ignore the message. That's your thing.
Gr8 said as much.......and mentioned another point I agree with. Economic conditions come and go. I don't don't like paying more for gas and food. I'm getting close to retirement, these things matter to me and all Americans.
But 1) These economic conditions are not permanent and will change. 2) What trump was trying to do could have fundamentally changed how our elections are carried out and the results are interpreted and instituted. Might not have been permanent, but the future of our democratic republic would have been seriously affected going forward, unlike anytime in our history.
For me, as I've said before, no one issue or group of issues is more important than the integrity and stability of our democracy. It's not even close. Trump is a clear and present danger to that. He has repeatedly demonstrated the lengths he will go to to stay in power. I do not regret my vote for Biden in the least......because there is at least one thing that is far more important than the issues you and yours complain about daily.
You vote will your wallet......as do many Americans and that's fine. Sometimes I do to. But that will NEVER take priority over the integrity of our democracy for me. I don't think it would for most people if they could get over their tribalism and see trump for what he is.
That ain't happening. What is happening is trumpers.......at least publicly.......are turning away from him for reasons that have nothing to do with his authoritarianism. Tired of the drama, ego, drama etc. Ironically the same things they made fun of and accused never trumpers of saying for years.
The reality is they are finally seeing that he is a fundamentally flawed individual and dangerous......but are unwilling to say it and are using his personality traits as their reasoning for pulling their support.
Reporter says Democrats in Congress told her ‘nobody gives a bleep about Jan. 6’ - Washington Examiner
iFrame ObjectTwo congressional Democrats conceded that voters don't care about the Jan. 6 committee hearings, according to a reporter who spoke with them.Politico national correspondent Betsy Woodruff Swan shared what she heard as Capitol Hill gears up for the 2022 midterm elections during a...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
Again, if so very few are paying attention to this, how does the nation come to the conclusion you had before this even started?
And yes, I will be happy if this results in Trump not running. But you are living in a fantasy land if you think most people care about this at all. Even some Dems know...see article.
As far as Trumpers turning from Trump, this committee is NOT the reason. Him losing the election, to Biden opened their eyes, that it will take someone else to unseat the Dem-media conglomerate from their stranglehold on this nation.
And that Dem media conglomerate is a more dangerous force to this nation, BY FAR, than Trump ever was btw.
Democrats in Congress told her 'nobody gives a bleep about Jan. 6'
Reporter says Democrats in Congress told her ‘nobody gives a bleep about Jan. 6’ - Washington Examiner
iFrame ObjectTwo congressional Democrats conceded that voters don't care about the Jan. 6 committee hearings, according to a reporter who spoke with them.Politico national correspondent Betsy Woodruff Swan shared what she heard as Capitol Hill gears up for the 2022 midterm elections during a...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
Last edited:
I didn't, but that cannot possibly be the case since Brandon opened the Southern Border .
The wall is 30 feet high, so someone cannot "simply climb over with a ladder" --- not that anyone needs to be concerned with that now that the border is open.
And Russia can hit us with nuclear warheads. Why would any American want to take any risk of that by getting involved in a conflict on Russia's border - but thousands of miles from ours.
Which 'ally' came begging for help? Ukraine? Why would Ukraine be an ally of ours in the first place?
The 'chilling' message from Trump was that our so-called allies could not depend on continuing to rip us off while he was in office. That was also a 'chilling' message to our vast military/industrial/foreign policy/regime media complex that thrives on the big taxpayer money to be made from our incompetent and deadly forays around the globe (Vietnam, Irag, etc.) Are you somehow in on this corrupt money-making machine - or just another taxpayer helping pay for it all?https://www.economist.com/leaders/2...f-the-kurds-is-a-blow-to-americas-credibility
So what?? It shows we have the means to not have to depend on other countries for our food and energy - not that Brandon seems to think that is important.
Thus, we can stay out of these idiot foreign policy misadventures and wars that you seem enamored of - that is, as long as you don't have to go yourself, right?
Did you know that Ukraine is accepting volunteers? Why don't you step up and show you are willing to commit yourself to more than just cheap talk?
But you are fine with someone a few steps from assisted living and having his diaper changed. Cool.
No, I am not really. But given the choice between egomaniacal tyrant bent on keeping power by undermining key tenets of our Democracy vs. an old guy who is not particularly effective, I’ll choose the latter every single time.
I am guessing you aren't a particularly effective person either.
Alot happened post November election to back your assertions. BUT, you did not have that info on election day. So your evidence to back your reason for your voting decision seems to be post election.
To me though, I just think about all the middle class strughling under Biden. I can relate I am one. Costing us each thousands. Don't know how anyone can be proud of being part of voting for someone who is causing so much pain to millions in the low and middle class.
It was plainly evident that Trump was unfit for office in my opinion in 2016 when I didn’t vote for him. It was reinforced time and again. As to undermining democracy, his treatment of media that disagreed with him was enough. It’s not just saying you don’t like it, but calling anything critical of you “fake news” and lending credence to sources like Newsmax and OANN is damaging to the fabric of the country. That’s shit Putin and every other dictator in the world does: only endorse voices supportive of him, persecute everyone else. That was also plainly evident in 2016 when I wouldn’t vote for him.
That he then came out and tried to hold on to power by undermining the constitution isn’t all that surprising.
Obviously your opinion isnt worth sh*t.
How did you feel about Obamas statements about winning a 3rd term? That would seem to be trying to hold on to power vs challenging a very sketchy elections results.
''only endorse voices supportive of him, persecute everyone else.'' That sounds 100% what the left has been doing, congratulations.
Fair enough.
However, it should be noted that the some media (CNN, NBC, MSNBC) recently admitted that it was not going to be fair to both parties. Those are not the opinion shows, but the actual news shows. Tech media has exhibited this same one sidedness in its editing. And this media unfairness & one sidedness is the biggest danger to our Republic by far imo.
Newsmax news division (not opinioon shows) is gaining credibility. Do not know anything about oann?
I think for example like @ FOX people judge networks on their terrible one sided opinion shows.....NBC, CNN, FOX, NEWSMAX etc all have these.
News is different on these networks and should be judged seperately. I don't watch anymore, but the actual main primetime news show on FOX was very fair. When you have the news guys @ CNN, NBC saying outright they are not going to treat both parties the same that is a red flag that hopefully you can see. One side reporting is what happens in communist and represive regimes. Dangerous.
As to your "fake news" comment....I point out the fake Russia narrative in the news for 3 years & the media saying that Hunter Biden's laptop was just Russian disinformation. Both clearly fake. So you might open your eyes a bit there.
CNN, NBC, MSNBC journalists say Republicans can't be covered equally with Democrats
Liberal media figures including Brian Stelter, Don Lemon, and Lester Holt have all called for the GOP to be treated differently than the Democratic Party.
Last edited:
There’s plenty of media bias and always has been. It’s not new, and it goes both ways. Some of the best Presidents we’ve had were masters of manipulating the media to suit their purposes. Theodore Roosevelt comes to mind. But he also didn’t denounce anything being critical of him as “fake”.Fair enough.
However, it should be noted that the some media (CNN, NBC, MSNBC) recently admitted that it was not going to be fair to both parties. Those are not the opinion shows, but the actual news shows. Tech media has exhibited this same one sidedness in its editing. And this media unfairness & one sidedness is the biggest danger to our Republic by far imo.
Newsmax news division (not opinioon shows) is gaining credibility. Do not know anything about oann?
I think for example like @ FOX people judge networks on their terrible one sided opinion shows.....NBC, CNN, FOX, NEWSMAX etc all have these.
News is different on these networks and should be judged seperately. I don't watch anymore, but the actual main primetime news show on FOX was very fair. When you have the news guys @ CNN, NBC saying outright they are not going to treat both parties the same that is a red flag that hopefully you can see. One side reporting is what happens in communist and represive regimes. Dangerous.
As to your "fake news" comment....I point out the fake Russia narrative in the news for 3 years & the media saying that Hunter Biden's laptop was just Russian disinformation. Both clearly fake. So you might open your eyes a bit there.
CNN, NBC, MSNBC journalists say Republicans can't be covered equally with Democrats
Liberal media figures including Brian Stelter, Don Lemon, and Lester Holt have all called for the GOP to be treated differently than the Democratic Party.www.foxnews.com
The truth comes out. It’s important to choose your sources carefully, and recognize the difference between news reporting and opinion. 24hr cable news and internet media consistently blur the line there. You simply can’t trust Fox, CNN, MSNBC, et. al. to just report any longer.
As I have mentioned numerous times, my preferred news source is the WSJ. Its editorial
pages and columns slant conservative. Its reporting is largely neutral.
If there’s a breaking story, I usually turn to CNN first, and often go to Fox to see if they’re reporting on it or get the other view point.
What alarms me is the lack of reporting consistency between the two. CNN constantly had Ukraine updates front and center for two months, and Fox would have political stuff about how Biden sucks. IMO, it shouldn’t be that way. It shouldn’t be the news sources deciding what is news and what isn’t. And that’s the problem with 24hr news and why I hate it.
You see it on this message board. Opinions on both sides are simply shaped by whatever internet source or TV news you turn on, and there is no attempt to even seek an opposing viewpoint on any topic.
One side says something is terrible, the other side just engages in “whataboutism” based on whatever their preferred source happens to have at the top of their feed.
And thats why I rarely engage here any longer because it is just a colossal waste of my time. That’s also why I don’t give a shit about Hunter Biden, and Russian interference, and I don’t give a shit about pursuing Trump in regards to January 6th. All fruitless witch-hunts with political motivations.
I DO care about how some of Trump’s people were planning to overturn a fair election, because I do think that matters and we need to understand the lengths he was willing to go to retain power. I doubt DOJ pursues charges, but I think people need to pay attention to that part so we don’t make the mistake of putting that particular man back in the White House again.
Bet you enjoyed CNN & WSJ hoodwinking you on that Russia, Russia, Russia investigation for 3 years. Shiff still on there saying he has evidence?
And are they both still saying the Biden laptop is Russian disinformation like they did for months at election time?
Thus, your CNN & WSJ media aren't just bias, they both have out & out lied to you for the last 4 years. But yet you admit they both STILL are your go to source for news.
One might call that gulible? Food for thought anyway.....
Hey, dipshit, I just told you I didn’t pay a bit of attention to either one of those stories because I sniffed them out for what they were early on, just as I don’t care about blaming Trump for Jan 6th.
How, exactly, does not paying any attention to political bullshit stories like that make me “gullible”?
If anything that you think any of it is important because Newsmax or Fox or whomever tells you it is is “gullible”.
That you think the Wall Street Journal is in the same cohort as 24hr news is alarming. And I CLEARLY said I look to CNN and then switch to see what Fox says so I get balance. But you ignored that part because it doesn’t suit your insults.
Dipshit?
I know I have won the discussion when the opposite side has to result in low class foul language and name calling.
Thanks.
Funny they chose to call them fake electors. I've heard them referred to as dueling electors and it's happened before in US history. Nothing Trumps team did in 2020 to change the outcome was novel.
'Dueling' electors, 'hanging chads': a history of contested U.S. elections
The combination of the coronavirus pandemic and President Donald Trump's accusations of mass voter fraud by Democrats has legal experts warning of the possibility of a contested presidential election.
www.reuters.com
"1876: Dueling electors
The most contentious and controversial presidential election in American history was arguably the 1876 contest between Republican Rutherford B. Hayes and Democrat Samuel J. Tilden.
In Southern states, the voting was marred by threats of violence from Democrats who aimed to keep black voters away from the polls. The Democrats also created ballots that carried pictures of famous Republican Abraham Lincoln to try to trick illiterate voters into choosing Tilden.
At the end of the tumultuous campaign, competing political camps in three states each sent two different slates of electors - one for Tilden, the other for Hayes - to Congress.
The dueling slates from Florida, Louisiana and South Carolina arrived with varying degrees of authority; the Republican slate from Louisiana supporting Hayes was sent by the state’s governor while the Democratic slate backing Tilden was sent by that party’s gubernatorial candidate.
The election hinged on the disputed states. If their Republican electoral votes were counted, Hayes would be president. If the Democratic slates were counted, Tilden would be elected.
Since Congress then had no existing procedures to decide which of the disputed returns should be counted, it created a 15-member commission to settle the dispute, with five members each drawn from the House, the Senate and the Supreme Court. That commission ultimately voted 8-7 along partisan lines to award each of the disputed electoral votes to Hayes, giving him the presidency.
Democrats accepted the result only after Republicans agreed to withdraw U.S. troops left over from the Civil War from Southern states. The compromise helped usher in the so-called “Jim Crow” era of legalized racial segregation and discimination that would last another century.
A decade later, Congress enacted the Electoral Count Act that was meant to establish a roadmap for resolving disputed elections in the future, though exactly how it would work remains unclear because of ambiguities in the language, election scholars say. The law has never been tested or intepreted by the courts."
Did you read the last paragraph? That was the very reason the Electoral count act was passed.Funny they chose to call them fake electors. I've heard them referred to as dueling electors and it's happened before in US history. Nothing Trumps team did in 2020 to change the outcome was novel.
'Dueling' electors, 'hanging chads': a history of contested U.S. elections
The combination of the coronavirus pandemic and President Donald Trump's accusations of mass voter fraud by Democrats has legal experts warning of the possibility of a contested presidential election.
"1876: Dueling electors
The most contentious and controversial presidential election in American history was arguably the 1876 contest between Republican Rutherford B. Hayes and Democrat Samuel J. Tilden.
In Southern states, the voting was marred by threats of violence from Democrats who aimed to keep black voters away from the polls. The Democrats also created ballots that carried pictures of famous Republican Abraham Lincoln to try to trick illiterate voters into choosing Tilden.
At the end of the tumultuous campaign, competing political camps in three states each sent two different slates of electors - one for Tilden, the other for Hayes - to Congress.
The dueling slates from Florida, Louisiana and South Carolina arrived with varying degrees of authority; the Republican slate from Louisiana supporting Hayes was sent by the state’s governor while the Democratic slate backing Tilden was sent by that party’s gubernatorial candidate.
The election hinged on the disputed states. If their Republican electoral votes were counted, Hayes would be president. If the Democratic slates were counted, Tilden would be elected.
Since Congress then had no existing procedures to decide which of the disputed returns should be counted, it created a 15-member commission to settle the dispute, with five members each drawn from the House, the Senate and the Supreme Court. That commission ultimately voted 8-7 along partisan lines to award each of the disputed electoral votes to Hayes, giving him the presidency.
Democrats accepted the result only after Republicans agreed to withdraw U.S. troops left over from the Civil War from Southern states. The compromise helped usher in the so-called “Jim Crow” era of legalized racial segregation and discimination that would last another century.
A decade later, Congress enacted the Electoral Count Act that was meant to establish a roadmap for resolving disputed elections in the future, though exactly how it would work remains unclear because of ambiguities in the language, election scholars say. The law has never been tested or intepreted by the courts."
Have we had anything like this since?
The electors had already met. They cast their votes. The votes were sent to Congress. These fake electors had no standing, even within their own state.
It wasn't novel, it was breaking the freaking law. There is no equivalence here. A law was established AFTER 1876 and has been followed ever since. The fake electors tried to break 150 years of precedence. Does a lawyer get to go back before Miranda and use a case as an argument in a current one? It's ridiculous. Like trump, you're grasping for anything to make this power grab seem like it's normal.
“Peace” as you said but you keep coming back. Be upfront and honest. Follow through. That’s what men do.
Yes I did. It also says "a roadmap for resolving disputed elections in the future, though exactly how it would work remains unclear because of ambiguities in the language, election scholars say."
I never said I agreed with it either. Just pointing out that it wasn't unprecedented.
This kidnapping verdict?
3 men convicted of supporting plot to kidnap Gov. Whitmer
https://apnews.com/article/michigan...p-plot-trial-0a5a930cf86e74f8a1365040b783de0d
