Jan 6 Committee: New Bombshell Testimony and Evidence (6/28, 1pm)

Investigation of trump and co-conspirators is underway currently according to DOJ.

 

I get your point, but it seems to me to be apples and oranges. In 2020 there was no evidence of any wrong doing and all accusations had been investigated and run through the courts. It was obvious it was all made up.

I am not necessarily say what happened in prior elections was “ok”, but it was indeed different.

 

No, I specifically objected to the idea that Republican members of Congress were culpable for objecting to the vote count and said it’s important to distinguish between the two.

I don’t think I have so much as mentioned Trump in this thread, only responded to a post saying that 60% of Republicans in Congress are “un-American” to say that I think it’s problematic to lump electoral objections or longshot legal maneuvers in with January 6th more broadly.

 

70% of republicans believe the big lie and think Trump should still be potus. That is all you need to know.

 

But I think the same is largely true with respect to 2000 (which had already reached the Supreme Court), 2004 (where even Kerry had already conceded there was no “there, there”), and 2016 (where, no matter what you think of Russia, the idea that you don’t recognize the election results because of it is nonsensical - as is the idea that the State of Florida needed a congressman from Maryland to tell them whether being a presidential elector was an “office” that implicated Florida’s state-level resign-to-run law).

I think elector objections are fairly uniformly pointless “sore-losering,” but Democrats are treading on pretty iffy ground to lump it in with everything else that happened around January 6, 2021 and call those kinds of objections treasonous when, at least prior to January 6, 2021, it was a form of pointless sore-losering that had been the exclusive province of Democratic Members of Congress.

 

You killed someone and I rolled through a stop sign. We both broke the law

 

Now explain to me the meaningful difference between objecting to the certification of Pennsylvania’s electoral votes in 2021 and objecting to the certification of Ohio’s in 2005.

 

I think I know what you were seeking to say here, but I believe there's a word missing there--and since I didn't actually bother to tune in to the View ("the one in Congress"), I'm kinda' flying blind here. Help a brother out....

 

Defense of 'the witch' for witchery, apparently.

I don't know though. I don't do witch trials.

 

Every statement was preceded by something to the effect of...I think she's probably full of chit.

 

Well then, I'm sure any day now, this reality TV bombshell series will start gaining some traction in the real world.

So far, it's just resonating in the ChinaJoe-kamala'sphere ehco chamber.

...I mean, the Roe supporters are losing their shit....

(oops...perhaps I conflate one group of left flakes for another, though surely there's a shit pile of overlap...).

 

Seriously? I get that you’re trying your damndest to “whatabout” this but you’re minimizing a COORDINATED effort to interfere with the electoral count and comparing it to some foot stomping.

 

Yes, really.

 

As usual, your response is the usual bombastic nonsense.

Answer the question that I posed, why aren’t the Trumpsters swearing UNDER OATH about 1/6?

What is it about you folks that you prefer an authoritarian government?

 

So you can’t.

This is my whole point - go after everything else that happened on January 6th all you want, but to insist that the specific act of formally objecting to the electoral count is “treasonous” is going to be pretty uncomfortable given that Democrats have done it themselves in every single election Republicans have won in the 2000s.

 

You’re intentionally glossing over the “coordinated” part. Carry on with trying to minimize what happened.

 

We've never had a 60% of a party vote to deny a presidential election. And that was after the insurgency riot at the Capitol. After all that, 60% of the party still voted to reject either AZ, PA or both. And there was no evidence of election fraud despite many investigations and court cases. You can point all you want to a few Dems making symbolic objections in past elections (and in 2001 they had a real case to reject Florida). Nothing like Jan 6 has ever happened. It was unprecedented. When you combine that with what the Repubs have done since, it's very easy to see that the Republican party as a whole has become hostile to democracy.

 

So, with respect to the objections, what’s the difference?

Do you think Representative Tubbs and Barbara Boxer didn’t “coordinate” their objection regarding the 2005 election?

If our only distinction is that it’s okay to file frivolous objections to the electoral count so long as there aren’t idiots outside, that seems like a pretty thin reed (and one that isn’t doing much more than trying to craft a reason why it was okay when Democrats filed doomed objections in three of the five prior elections, but literally treason when Republicans finally did it too).

I’m actually okay with the idea that making frivolous objections to the electoral count is nearly never permissible, but that position is going to be pretty uncomfortable for the two members of the committee who have done it themselves.

 

It certainly seems that way.