Trump's Post Election Fallout: Legal & Obstruction actions

[DevoHusker]

6 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

It's misleading and disingenuous. There is nothing about this election that says "fraud" other than orange man. 

 

I agree. 57+ judges agree. 

 

I just pointed out that this isn't a "horrible Republicans" action in general. 

[schriznoeder]

 

[knapplc]

31 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

I just pointed out that this isn't a "horrible Republicans" action in general. 

 

It is, though. The challenges from Dems in 2000, and 2016 were based on legitimate questions about the process. Our own intelligence has been insistent the Russians interfered in 2016, and we all remember the Florida disaster of 2000. 

 

This was about as run-of-the-mill election as we've had. Challenging this election is absurd. Challenging it to this extent is absurd. And after all those challenges have been quashed by judge after judge after judge, to bring yet another challenge to the electoral process is not just absurd, but horrible. 

[Decoy73]

Doesn’t Hawley’s little stunt make life more difficult for his fellow GOPers in the senate?   It appears to put them in a no-win situation if a vote would be forced.  

[DevoHusker]

42 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

It is, though. The challenges from Dems in 2000, and 2016 were based on legitimate questions about the process. Our own intelligence has been insistent the Russians interfered in 2016, and we all remember the Florida disaster of 2000. 

 

This was about as run-of-the-mill election as we've had. Challenging this election is absurd. Challenging it to this extent is absurd. And after all those challenges have been quashed by judge after judge after judge, to bring yet another challenge to the electoral process is not just absurd, but horrible. 

 

I said I agree with your stance on the election/results. I have seen nothing to convince me that evidence exists to challenge the results. Me personally. 

 

I disagree with anyone who is trying to cast this as against the rules, or a horrendous example of R's being bullies, like it is being portrayed far and wide on social media and in print. The fact of the matter is, this is the 3rd time since 1887 (when the law was enacted) that one party actually got a Congressman and a Senator to put their objections in writing, which forces the action of the entire body. (That doesn't  count the attempts by Waters and others that I linked above, where the protocol was not followed)

 

The previous two times, involving the 1968 election and the 2004 election, were done by D's.

[Enhance]

[knapplc]

1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

I disagree with anyone who is trying to cast this as against the rules, or a horrendous example of R's being bullies, like it is being portrayed far and wide on social media and in print.

 

What about this has merit in your opinion?

[DevoHusker]

7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

What about this has merit in your opinion?

The process itself has merit. It will be determined if the allegations have merit, because of the process.

 

I personally feel the allegations do not have merit. But, I don't try to impose my worldview or opinion as the only possible correct answer. 

[knapplc]

21 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

The process itself has merit. It will be determined if the allegations have merit, because of the process.

 

I personally feel the allegations do not have merit. But, I don't try to impose my worldview or opinion as the only possible correct answer. 

 

 

So calling this a spurious process is imposing my my worldview or opinion as the only possible correct answer.

 

I'll remember that any time you express an opinion from now on. Good to know.

 

 

[Scarlet]

12 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

The process itself has merit. It will be determined if the allegations have merit, because of the process.

 

I personally feel the allegations do not have merit. But, I don't try to impose my worldview or opinion as the only possible correct answer. 

@DevoHuskerthe problem is that this objection is based on the repeated lies, which have been proven to be just that by court after court including the Supreme Court, of a malignant narcissist trying to cling to power by damaging the trust in our elections.

 

The Electoral College votes have been certified.  This isn't a fact finding mission with good intentions.  The worst of intentions lie behind this and the result is that the very foundation of country is being cracked over the tried and true propagandist technique of repeating a lie so often people begin to believe it.  This is the fuel for the gaslighting. 

 

Your assertions that this is ok because the Democrats did it before I think misses the fact that they weren't trying to overturn the will of the voters.  This is light years more misguided and nafarious.  

[DevoHusker]

10 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

So calling this a spurious process is imposing my my worldview or opinion as the only possible correct answer.

 

I'll remember that any time you express an opinion from now on. Good to know.

 

 

Slow down there...I NEVER referred to you. I meant nationally, and I am pretty sure you know that.

 

But, if you want to automatically shift to "gotcha" mode, feel free.

[knapplc]

Just now, DevoHusker said:

Slow down there...I NEVER referred to you. I meant nationally, and I am pretty sure you know that.

 

But, if you want to automatically shift to "gotcha" mode, feel free.

 

This is the kind of response that makes me shift there. You've done this multiple times.

 

I asked a simple question and you respond with that. It's a reasonable take.

 

[DevoHusker]

11 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

@DevoHuskerthe problem is that this objection is based on the repeated lies, which have been proven to be just that by court after court including the Supreme Court, of a malignant narcissist trying to cling to power by damaging the trust in our elections.

 

The Electoral College votes have been certified.  This isn't a fact finding mission with good intentions.  The worst of intentions lie behind this and the result is that the very foundation of country is being cracked over the tried and true propagandist technique of repeating a lie so often people begin to believe it.  This is the fuel for the gaslighting. 

 

Your assertions that this is ok because the Democrats did it before I think misses the fact that they weren't trying to overturn the will of the voters.  This is light years more misguided and nafarious.  

But they did try just that...4 short years ago. They just didn't follow the mandated protocol.

[DevoHusker]

3 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

But they did try just that...4 short years ago. They just didn't follow the mandated protocol.

I should have specified that I meant all the twitter pontificating and articles from CNN etc all. I will definitely try to be more specific. Mea Culpa.

 

Edit: that was for @knapplc

[Moiraine]

8 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

But they did try just that...4 short years ago. They just didn't follow the mandated protocol.

 

 

What are you referring to?