SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
2021-01-07 14:44:44 UTC: UPDATE (See below the fold).
Pro-Trump rioters breach the US Capitol on historic day in Congress:
Supporters of President Donald Trump breached the US Capitol on Wednesday while Congress was meeting to certify the Electoral College's votes for president and vice president.
The Capitol has been put on lockdown and the certification vote has been paused. Vice President Mike Pence was evacuated from the building. House and Senate leadership is safe and in undisclosed locations, according to a person familiar with the situation.
Congress' counting of electoral votes is typically little more than an afterthought. But this joint session was expected to be a contentious affair that would last late into the evening and possibly on Thursday. Some Republicans are objecting to the count and delaying the inevitable certification of President-elect Joe Biden's win.
Also at AlJazeera (In Pictures: Pro-trump mob storms US Capitol building) and c|net (Mob storms Capitol forcing halt of election vote count).
[2021-01-06 22:33:53 UTC; UPDATE] NOTE: This is a chaotic time.
The Electoral College votes are currently being confirmed and tallied. Runoff votes in Georgia are being tallied and the results may swing the balance of power in the US Senate. The Georgia secretary of state [has been] relocated from [State] Capitol for security reasons. Mitch McConnell goes off on Trump. Pro-Trump reporter gloats over access to fleeing Hill staffer's computer. And Trump hand-picks replacement for Atlanta's US attorney after surprise resignation.
Let's please try and keep the discussion civil.
Also, please be polite and share your popcorn!
[Updates Begin]:
(1) Fox News reports Biden's Electoral College victory certified -- hours after Capitol chaos:
The U.S. Congress early Thursday certified the Electoral College vote that gave Democrat Joe Biden his presidential victory -- after a day in Washington that was marred by pro-Trump protesters storming the U.S. Capitol.
Vice President Mike Pence, who had announced he would not overturn the will of voters, confirmed the Biden victory at 3:41 a.m. ET.
Lawmakers had returned to the chamber in an act of defiance, with some Republicans who initially vowed to challenge states' results due to voter fraud concerns announcing they'd instead vote to certify.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called the breach of the Capitol a "failed insurrection," adding that those who "tried to disrupt our democracy" had not succeeded.
(2) President Trump "Responds" via Staffer's Twitter Account after His Account was Suspended:
Statement by President Donald J. Trump on the Electoral Certification:
"Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th. I have always said we would continue our...
...fight to ensure that only legal votes were counted. While this represents the end of the greatest first term in presidential history, it's only the beginning of our fight to Make America Great Again!"
(3) Facebook, Twitter lock Trump's account following video addressing Washington rioters:
- Twitter and Facebook on Wednesday said they would lock the account of President Donald Trump after he continued to make false claims about the results of the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
- Facebook, YouTube and Twitter on Wednesday removed a video by President Donald Trump addressing Washington rioters.
- Meanwhile, calls are mounting for Twitter and Facebook to suspend Trump's accounts.
(4) The Associated Press has called the results for the Georgia Senate elections: both Democratic candidates defeated their GOP opponents:
With projected victories in the twin races of Warnock and Ossoff, President-elect Joe Biden will have the narrowest majority in the Senate, with both parties holding 50-50 seats apiece, allowing the tie-breaking vote to be cast by Vice President-elect Kamala Harris.
Also at The New York Times.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Jiro on Wednesday January 06 2021, @11:28PM (9 children)
Antifa and BLM supporters rioted for months. The police rarely touched them and they were often allowed to destroy anything they wanted.
So now, some right-wingers saw that and took away the wrong lesson. They assumed that it meant that you can get away with rioting, when it really meant that you could get away with politically favored rioting. Everyone's going to be all over them because they're the wrong kind of rioters.
That also includes the peaceful protestors. The media's going to blame them for giving cover to violence, even though when exactly the same thing happened with leftist rioters, we were assured that the peaceful protestors have no connection to the rioters.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 06 2021, @11:34PM (2 children)
BLM supporters protested for months, not rioted. There were some riots and police always touched them, with rubber bullets that maimed some, and arrests of innocent protesters. Sad to see your bought into the rightwing propaganda instead of doing your homework and seeing what really happened.
Also, fun note, most of the rioting happened only after the police assaulted protesters. Not that it makes the rioting ok, but it is a hell of a lot better than these assholes who intended to commit violence from the start.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:48AM (1 child)
Portland was riots, night after night. Take your lies elsewhere please.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:12AM
No, it wasn't. It was Portland. Perhaps you do not know Rose City?
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:47AM
I know some people who were at nearby BLM protests. The cops *always* attacked them and arrested a bunch of them, regardless of whether they were peaceful or not.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 4, Informative) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @05:02AM (4 children)
You know what the BLM protesters never did? They never smashed the windows of the Capitol and forced Congress to adjourn and move to a safe location.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @05:48AM (1 child)
Some of the CHAZ types are actually jealous that they were not the ones to do this. Progressives are carefully controlled by the Democratic Party and BLM will be shelved now.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @05:56AM
Too bad the GOP couldn't control their stooges.
(Score: 2) by Jiro on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:31PM (1 child)
They smashed other people's windows. Or at least the rioter part of them did, just like the rioters here.
I'm not sure how many shop windows are equivalent to one Capitol window.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @06:53PM
Simple. One is vandalism, the other is sedition.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday January 07 2021, @12:02AM (49 children)
Being Canadian, i may be wrong about this (I don't 'religiously' follow American politics but have an interest):
1. Trumps supporters are mostly 'less educated people', so I've heard.
2. Trumps supporters seem to have turned against science and towards 'religion' and 'Satan' and thus.
3. Trumps supporters seem not to have read much about Adolf Hitler (but i can assure you Trump has)
4. Trumps supporters believe the polls when a Republican wins, but that there is fraud when a Democrat wins
5. Trumps supporters are mostly 'less educated people', so I've heard.
Notice some kind of trend? "Humans are the most intelligent species on Earth" my arse: 'we' seem to be the most intelligent FECES on Earth.... glad I'm not human...maybe Martian? From another galaxy? I dunno, but even i can see Trump is an ass and only cares about himself and winning, just like Adolf Hitler in WW2: he was willing to sacrifice EVERY German to win the war, but in the end when he KNEW all was lost, he committed suicide. Does Trump have the balls to do the same?
Ah, if only they hadn't run Hillary.... butterflies spreading their wings in history now.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2020/06/15/biden-vs-trump-the-college-education-divide-may-be-wider-than-ever/?sh=322db8c07999 [forbes.com]
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/sep/29/donald-trump-still-king-poorly-educated/ [washingtontimes.com]
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @12:10AM (48 children)
Another nice troll. Thank you Gaaaarrff.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday January 07 2021, @12:25AM (47 children)
As i said:
5. Trumps supporters are mostly 'less educated people', so I've heard.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @12:48AM (46 children)
Don't be partisan. Not everyone who thinks there was election fraud is a Trump supporter.
As best I can tell the level of shenanigans with the US election was extreme. Opportunities to resolve any doubt were shit all over. The courts failing to actually hear the cases on merits means we don't actually know what level of validity does or does not exist.
There is enough doubt about the election, in my mind, that I would like to see it fully investigated and audited. I'm not "Orange Man Bad" but I am also not a Trump supporter. When the crowd was chanting "We Love Trump" I was sickened. I'd still like to see a good faith audit of the election performed. If I was a member of Congress I would contest certification until such a time.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @12:58AM (17 children)
They failed to make their case, even in front of judges Trump appointed.
Yes, we know your echo chambers have repeated things often and loudly but if you actually had something solid to base an accusation of shenangians on, well let's just say Rudy would have had a much better holiday week.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @01:23AM (16 children)
What cases were heard? If a case is thrown out with something like an issue with standing it doesn't mean much. For instance one of the cases involving the constitutionality of the Electoral Count Act was rejected because the defendant should have been Congress and not one of the states or their executive or what ever.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @01:43AM (15 children)
Look, if you really want to drill down into each of the 50+ filings you're either going to walk away saying "nope, no evidence" or "wow... the best legal teams money can buy were sitcom-level incompetent!" Or maybe some hybrid of the two. Whatever, but the more you waffle on about how apparent the shenanigans were the harder it is to make a plausible claim that anything was ignored.
BTW Cavanaugh's rejection alone should have you behaving a lil more introspectively right now.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @01:52AM (14 children)
If you could provide some details that would be useful for improving communication. Are you talking about the lawsuit that went to SCOTUS that was attempting to compel a state to follow their own laws that govern their own elections and failure to do so violated the rights of the rest of the citizens of the several states because it dilutes their representation? The one that was not heard based on the idea that one state has no interest in the actions of another state?
Do you really want to latch onto that concept? There was a war over this in the past.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:03AM (13 children)
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:25AM (12 children)
It's complicated? Yeah there were some pretty obviously massive shitty lawyers like Wood and Powell and a marginally less shitty lawyer like Guiliani. For some of the petitions to the court that Powel filed best case she didn't notice her space bar broke and worst case she's fuckin crazy. I think she's closer to fuckin crazy myself. Wood has obviously lost his mind.
Shitty lawyers don't explain SCOTUS refusing to hear the case I mentioned though. For that one you can try a mental exercise. What happens if you ask a majority conservative court if one state has an interest in controlling the actions of another? If the conservative justices stick to their principles they have to decide that way. Was that the right decision? I would have preferred if the case was heard on the merits and I could read their debate instead of their rejection letter.
There was a cost to not holding trials and I think it was a major mistake on the part of the people who think the elections were not fraudulent. The cost of not holding real trials was the people who were bursting at the seams to tell their stories of what they believed to be fraud that they saw with their own eyes did so with the media and the various legislatures. The media has no rules. The legislatures have very relaxed rules compared to a trial.
For instance when I was watching the testimony being given to the Michigan senate I caught Guiliani using techniques that the opposing council would have absolutely objected to and it absolutely would have been upheld if objectively evaluated. Great plan there, this would have been much better handled in the courts.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:52AM (11 children)
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:27AM (10 children)
I do not understand at all why there is so much momentum and drive to avoid something like a trial where there would be public records generated and well established procedural rules. Is there even a single case that made it into any court and generated something like a decision we can review? I'm not aware of one. I find this to be highly unfortunate.
I don't understand your mode of reasoning either. If these cases are baseless they certainly won't take very long to work out and then there would be something more substantial to discuss than "haha no court would hear it" which is only something to gloat over if you value short term gains at the cost of long term quality.
In the absence of that I'm left doing the best job I can while wearing my juror hat, which has been worn before when I actually sat on a jury (and I voted to aquit a person that I thought was guilty of the crime but we could not convict because of the racist basis for the case the state of California brought against the defendant). My juror hat says "there is more than enough evidence presented to form many circumstantial evidence trials" and I just so happened to have sat on a circumstantial evidence case.
I would very much like to hear the other side of the claims made by the people who presented evidence. The way that a circumstantial evidence case works is that the defendant needs to provide an explanation for the incident in question of which there is not sufficient evidence for a normal trial. I would very very very very much like to hear what the reasonable reasons are for the many things I heard. The witnesses could be wrong but with out trials we can't even begin to usefully identify if they are or are not.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:31AM (4 children)
You think Democrats wouldn't hold up an undesirable election with frivolous filings? Cos I do.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:59AM (2 children)
Just to clarify: I think Democrats would abuse the process if they could in order to delay an election and would like to know if you disagree with that. I apologize for my poor phrasing.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:02AM (1 child)
They didn't do it for 2 insanely close elections where they won the popular vote, so while I don't trust the establishment democrats it seems pretty clear they wouldn't pull this type of shit. Now if there was actual evidence of fraud, yes I'm sure they would.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:26AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:02AM
I think both Republicans and Democrats would do anything to maintain power. It seems the only thing they agree on is that Democrats and Republicans should remain in charge. When the left started going "oh ho ho it looks like Mitch McConnell rigged the election too!!!!!!! Take that!!!!" I went "yeah it wouldn't surprise me at all."
Trump is quickly becoming old news. That leaves us with Democrats and Republicans both of which would fuck us in a heart beat including rigging the elections.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @11:56AM (3 children)
There were dozens. And most of the complaints, responses, arguments, amicus briefs and rulings are available online.
In Pennsylvania (the PA supreme courts has a whole *section* for election cases) , Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia and pretty much every other state cases that involve governmental issues are public records. In the Supreme Court too.
15 seconds on a search engine will find "[state] election cases" at places like http://www.pacourts.us/courts/supreme-court/ [pacourts.us] and the like.
I'll warn you that it will blow up your uninformed, preconceived notions about the election litigation after the 2020 election.
But better you know the truth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @01:53PM (2 children)
Thanks for tossing me a bone. The link to the PA courts page about election cases is http://www.pacourts.us/news-and-statistics/cases-of-public-interest/election-2020 [pacourts.us]
I'll take a look through there but there's quite a bit of stuff to pour through. If there was a link to the documents from a specific case it would be beneficial for everyone to make the link as available as possible. I suggest a link to the case (or a case name or even just the state) for the example that was given elsewhere of a judge asking Guiliani to provide a statement, under oath, under formal trial rules, about the election fraud and Guiliani saying, under oath, that he has none.
Such a link would be very useful and extremely difficult for anyone to argue with.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @09:36PM
This drives me nuts. The stories and court documents have been there but so many people claiming voter fraud haven't even taken the time to look. Giuliani himself has repeatedly said that
Repeatedly. A judge even went so far as to point out
Or what about
But that red meat wasn't good enough and many on the right ignored what they were actually saying. No, you all just keep repeating what you are told and feels good while accusing the rest of being the "sheeple" doing the same. So then the lawyers got the genius idea of claiming it is "undetectable." And you can see that all over the court documents. They cannot offer evidence in court of the fraud because there is no evidence of the fraud. You got that? The lawyers are literally saying there is no evidence of voter fraud because it can't exist. All they can do is offer vague allusions many of which have still been shot down in court. All of this and more has been all over the news. I've linked to plenty of the exact court documents on this website to show exactly what is going on, repeatedly. And often to the same username. How someone can keep their head in the sand for so long drives me nuts. There is not someone so blind as he who will not see.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @04:08AM
How about this one?
https://electioncases.osu.edu/2021/01/summary-of-post-election-cases/ [osu.edu]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @06:20AM
Educate yourself. You're ignorant, yet spouting off anyway. Always a good look.
https://electioncases.osu.edu/2021/01/summary-of-post-election-cases/ [osu.edu]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:15AM (10 children)
But everyone who is a Trump supporter thinks there was election fraud. But the funny thing is, there wasn't! Not one provable case, and certainly nothing that could change the outcome of the election. So basically if you think there was election fraud, when there was not, you might as well be a Trump supporter, because you match the cognitive skills of one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:32AM (9 children)
Pray tell sir, how did you form your conclusion there is no evidence?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:49AM (7 children)
You can't prove a negative, it is up to Trump's lawyers to provide the proof. Jesus y'all are dumb.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:12AM (6 children)
Then what is your definition of evidence? I'm trying to figure out if you don't think the massive amount of testimony was evidence or if you are the type of person who does absolutely no research at all but still thinks their opinion is worth anything.
You have asserted there is no evidence. Testimony and affidavits are by definition evidence. You can see some of that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG2RkKBHX0M [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @06:22AM (4 children)
According to you idiot Trumpers testimony is just hearsay and gossip, not evidence. Well, at least it isn't evidence when it inconveniences your fat daddy.
So which is it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:09AM (3 children)
Rip your head out of your partisan ass. You are making assumptions about me so you don't have to argue on merits.
What the witnesses gave was testimony. Some of them signed affidavits which come with penalty of perjury associated with them. What a pile of people who worship Trump say has no bearing on a discussion between you and I.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:21AM (2 children)
No, your head being up your partisan ass is fairly strong evidence that our assumptions about you are well attested to, under pain of perjury, and sending sex videos to your new boyfriend's ex. Now shut the fuck up, Trumptard!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:01PM (1 child)
It's not possible for me to be partisan since I'm neither a Democrat nor am I a Republican. I'm not a Trump worshiper either. I'm not entirely sure what I am since no label fits but the closest I can think of would be classical liberal. The kind that has conservative tendencies but isn't unworkably rigid. Abortion? Have at it. Burn a flag? Don't care, have fun. Racism is bad, in all forms, including the kind where white people think they are better than other races and the kind where financial, economic and other policy decisions are based on race alone.
People like you shove others into buckets they don't belong into.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:01PM
Liar! We all know what "classical liberal" means! TMB brand of alt-right crypto-Republican fascist! Time to either pull your head out of your ass, or push it so far up that you turn right-side out again. Best wishes!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @06:21AM
https://electioncases.osu.edu/2021/01/summary-of-post-election-cases/ [osu.edu]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @06:20AM
https://electioncases.osu.edu/2021/01/summary-of-post-election-cases/ [osu.edu]
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @05:47AM (16 children)
The courts did hear it. Then when it came time to actually make an actionable claim under oath, Giuliani stated that he had none. At that point, there's nothing more to hear. Were you expecting the judges to serve tea and crumpets at that point or what?
When concerns were brought to election officials, video was reviewed and nothing found. Trump's people got TWO recounts in Ga, buth agreed with the original count. They demanded a signature audit, no problems found. They demanded a closer examination in Michigan (IIRC) and they actually found 2 fraudulent ballots (both were votes for Trump!).
The matter has been heard,re-heard, then heard again (and again and again).
Trump has had well more than his day in court and he lost.
What we're seeing now is a two year old laying on the floor and screaming because Mom and Dad said it's time to leave the toy store and a bunch of people who are old enough that they should know better siding with the toddler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @05:59AM (9 children)
The courts rejected most of the cases with either a standing argument, or saying the case was brought too early or too late.
At a minimum, SCOTUS should have heard the Texas case.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @06:25AM (5 children)
Cute, that Trumper was really hoping the supreme court nominations were the final brick in their coup wall. Looks like Trump got played by everyone, the useful idiot king who would let corruption run free and take all the blame.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:54AM (4 children)
What's the problem with hearing the case?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @09:02AM (2 children)
Do your research and I'm sure you'll be able to figure it out ;-)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:11PM (1 child)
Could you spend maybe a couple extra seconds and say something useful?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @08:02PM
Could you do more than troll discussions? No? Fuck off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @12:11AM
You mean other than the fact the Supreme Court said that the U.S. Constitution doesn't let them?
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:02AM (1 child)
Sorry, no. There are time limits for a reason and courts have always frowned on cases where you allege that the defendant WILL wrong you but hasn't yet.
As for the Texas case, why in the world should they have heard it? Constitutionally, it's none of Texas' business how Georgia handles it's election. If Georgia wants to decide it based on which candidate wins 2 of 3 rounds of tiddlywinks, that's it's business (of course, if a resident of Ga wants to challenge that, the court might be receptive).
It's not uncommon for courts to reject cases where the plaintiff cannot win as a matter of law. For example, when the crazy dude claimed to be God and that David Copperfield usurped his divine powers to perform stage magic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:14AM
It's very interesting to see people make these arguments today. I seem to recall Texas previously had a disagreement with some of the other states about being told what to do inside their borders.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @06:23AM
Not really. That was the situation where that made *legal* sense, but certainly not *most* of the cases.
https://electioncases.osu.edu/2021/01/summary-of-post-election-cases/ [osu.edu]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:12AM (5 children)
Citation please. I'd like to read about it. I must have missed that in the deluge of info and I can't find it when I search.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:32AM (1 child)
Try this [latimes.com], and and this [nytimes.com].
But honestly, it was all over the news, including a suit alleging that republican observers were barred from observing where the attorney was forced to admit under oath that the number of Republicans observing the election was non-zero.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @10:02AM
Yeah, bringing inaccurate charges that you are forced to admit are wrong is a really bad look. Lots of enjoyment watching judges bitch slap them though while they impotently sit on their hands.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @12:00PM (1 child)
Read the damn court documents!
http://www.pacourts.us/courts/supreme-court/ [pacourts.us]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:19PM
More useful link: http://www.pacourts.us/news-and-statistics/cases-of-public-interest/election-2020 [pacourts.us]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @06:24AM
https://electioncases.osu.edu/2021/01/summary-of-post-election-cases/ [osu.edu]
And you're welcome.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Thursday January 07 2021, @01:44AM (12 children)
It's a CoupVID party!
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:14AM (11 children)
"Ironic" me thinks.
The fed decided to get all sensitive snowflake about people saying mean things about the government. So people who considered complex arguments shut up because the surveillance was getting a little too overt. After that the only people talking were those who took the simple minded arguments flung about by congress seriously. And low and behold, all the fundamentalists showed up at the door. Talk about chickens coming home to roost. Chilling of the 1st has been happening, and this is a reflexive response to that.
In any case, the minions of the orange fuhrer, and his senator from the south carolina aryan nation are going to use this event to say that further abuse of the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th amendments is neccessary to keep the undesirables in check. But of course it isn't about that, so much as saying reasonably intelligent mean things about the government is scary... to encumbants. Which is why they are so adamently in favor playing one half of the poor against the other half. Better violence, than loss of title.
The congress is still thinking like 18th century brits. Of course some asshat is going to say I am a righty or lefty. Nope. I vote 3rd party, every time. Elevating the debate, is by definition introducing new ideas. That can't be expected from a uniparty that looses nothing with the predictable handover to a different brand of the same petulent frat house.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @12:07PM (10 children)
Those points are orthogonal.
If you vote third-party for these guys [wikipedia.org] you're a lefty.
If you vote third-party for a candidate supported by these guys [wikipedia.org] you're a righty.
See how that works?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:29PM (9 children)
By constraining yourself to left or right doctrines, you voluntarily subordinate yourself to the ideas of both. See how that works, ass hat sock puppet?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:42PM (5 children)
Of course an obnoxious jerk like you misses the point.
Sigh.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:19PM (4 children)
And of course a jerk cheese knuckle-dragging doctrine fapper fails to make one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @12:23AM (3 children)
That's really amusing, given that you, apparently don't understand the meaning of the word "orthogonal."
I'm sorry if it was too long for you to understand. I do tend toward the sesquipedalian.
I'll try to keep things to one syllable or less so you don't get confused next time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @02:35AM (1 child)
Oh noze! I'm completely undone by your literary talent! /s
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @11:04PM
And still you misunderstand! You are not undone by the literary talent of others; you are undone by your own functional illiteracy and paltry vocabulary. I, for one, am tired of having to explain words to Republicans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @03:03AM
Okidokey,
teach me some geometry, what exactly was I supposed to discerne from your magical and inexhaustible lexicon?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @12:32AM (2 children)
Except I'm not constraining myself. At all.
I merely (I guess I have to explain, as you're apparently too thick to understand) pointed out that voting third party doesn't *require* you to be left/right/smack-dab in the middle/from ganymede. In fact, saying "I vote third party" doesn't provide *any* information other than that you don't vote for one of the major parties, which says *nothing* about your political stance on *anything*.
Rather it's just virtue signaling, not a statement of political ideas.
Especially since in the US the Rs have become a far-right party and the Ds are a center-right party, so left/right in that context is pretty murky anyway.
Are you this thick naturally, or do you have to work at it?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @02:45AM (1 child)
Assuming that you can convey an idea with so little language is typical narcissist behavior. Everybody else is supposed to know what is in your head because you are just the only thing of any importance in the universe. Nobody likes you. Nobody cares what you have to say. You are as alone as you think you are. Go back to twitter, or better yet suck on a gas pipe. Gee, this is fun. Post again! Post again!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @03:54AM
English, motherfucker. Do you speak it? [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:09AM (6 children)
Trump just had his Twitter(R)(TM) account temporarily suspended: https://www.npr.org/sections/congress-electoral-college-tally-live-updates/2021/01/06/954190994/twitter-locks-trumps-account-warns-of-permanent-suspension-if-violations-continu [npr.org]
I've said it before, the President of the United States of America has absolutely no business posting directly on a private social media web site.
Hopefully now you see why.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:19AM (1 child)
I'm fine with the president of the US posting directly to social media rather than calling press conferences to communicate with the public. The problem in this case wasn't the tech of Twitter, the problem was the person holding the phone.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Thursday January 07 2021, @06:03PM
Which circles back to the source of the problem, how people (ab)use this private communications medium.
Also every time he twats only on Twitter(R)(TM), it acts a promotion for Twitter(R)(TM). It is not cool for someone in this position to endorse a specific product or service. Otherwise it is no different than: This Prezidential Announcement has been brought to you by Carl's Jr!
For whatever it is worth now, Trump has also had his Facebook account suspended. Did he even use Facebook? (I don't know, I block Facebook's IP).
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @05:11AM (3 children)
It is a strange choice for anyone to put their message on Twatter, where the company can arbitrarily censor you, and any crank can criticize you in full view of your audience.
Trump should have seen the writing on the wall by November and at least picked an alternate platform to mirror his Twats. Even better, he should have hosted a non-commentable short message platform right on whitehouse.gov. Enterprising app developers would have developed social media integration.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:58AM (2 children)
He loves the built in audience and fellating he gets on Twitter too much to give it up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:19AM (1 child)
You just described the vast majority of the politicians and then acted like it's unique to Trump.
When DeBlasio put his "Hey Jews, and also everyone else, stay locked up god damnit! We have police for people like you!" Tweet out a radio DJ from Florida replied with "Are we supposed to call your phone number every time we see a Jew on the street?"
My first thought was that politicians are idiots and don't understand what Twitter is because they are used to be isolated from the public. I don't know why they would sign up for that service and lose that control. They apparently don't even know they are losing that control.
Now I've got an answer: stroking their egos is more important.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @09:40PM
Nowhere in there did I "act like it was unique to Trump."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @06:43AM (3 children)
ICFI/Socialist Equality Party: The fascist coup of January 6 [wsws.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:34AM (1 child)
Throw every single person that stormed the capitol into prison for 20 years.
(Score: 2) by istartedi on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:33AM
Mein Kampf was written in prison. According to a quick search I did, Hitler was sentenced to 5 years for his first attempt at treason, and served just nine months. That sounds about how it would go in our prison system too. Some other sources claim that this period actually allowed him to develop politically, although that seems like speculative history to me.
Nevertheless, sending all these people in to a system that's not known for being a particularly effective rehab and is known to be a place where they study law and write doesn't seem wise. I say, strip them of their voting rights and keep them on supervised release (parole) so that they have to be preoccupied with putting food on the table like everybody else. Staying offline could also be a parole condition; but giving them 3 hots, a cot, and a few years to stew on our dime? No.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:48PM
ISA/Socialist Alternative (ISA USA): As 2021 Begins: American Capitalism Faces Multifaceted Crisis [internationalsocialist.net]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:45AM (11 children)
As a Citizen of the United States and long time resident of one of the "contested" states, I am sick and damned tired or Trump and his horde of flying monkeys trying to deny me my right to vote. He has tried repeatedly to invalidate my vote (as one of millions). I cast my ballot fair and square as did millions of others in my state. It turns out I was in the majority this time (not so much in 2016). Trump's repeated suggestions and demands that my ballot be tossed in the shredder is an insult to everything this country is supposed to stand for.
At this point, I'm ready to agree to a wall, a big tall beautiful wall topped with shiny barbed wire, around Mar-a-lago. And we should make Trump pay for it. Failing that, chuck him in any handy supermax.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday January 07 2021, @06:10PM (10 children)
I'm sick and tired of both parties complete disregard for the integrity of our elections. The tactics both sides use range from technically legal but unethical to straight up fraud and we are supposed to just continue to go along with that? I can't claim to know which candidate "really" won any of the past several elections, but I do know that we can't keep going this way. If control of the country continues to be decided in a few small jurisdictions with both parties doing every underhanded thing they can (legal or not) to swing it their way, this sort of thing will only continue to escalate. A large number of Americans believe Biden's election to the presidency not to be legitimate, probably even more than thought the same of Trump's, which is more than the number who thought Obama's wasn't and Bush's before that. We had a mob disrupting congress this time around and we will be lucky if it stops there. This needs to be fixed before the next election and it's not just an issue with the integrity of our elections, it's an issue with the integrity of our people and the willingness justify any means to satisfy our ends.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:22PM
Yeah, most liberals have been wailing about election reform for years now, and many were quite upset about the DNC fuckery that gave us Clinton and Biden. We shall now see if Democrats are up to the job of pushing election reforms.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @07:33PM (8 children)
Don't give me that both sides argument. Trumps actions and a significant part of the GOP lining up to kiss his ass are orders of magnitude beyond. The dem's few procedural questions and challenges don't even move the needle. For one, none of them were probable felonies (the now infamous call to Raffensperger) frivolous (the MANY MANY lawsuits that presented no evidence or even claims in some cases) or seditious (Trump calling on his flying monkeys to storm the capitol). In 2000 Gore brought one clearly troubled State election to the Supreme court. A ruling was made and Gore accepted the result. In 2016, Clinton gracefully conceded as soon as the writing was on the wall. To this day, Trump is still refusing to accept the results, even after they have been checked, re-checked, checked again and ratified by the House and Senate.
If the GOP wants to maintain any legitimacy they'll confiscate Trump's membership card and incinerate it.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:24PM (7 children)
The point is that it's escalating and by excusing the behavior of your side and pointing the finger at the other saying that "they" are worse is how it happens.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:44PM (6 children)
That's like A saying to B "You robbed a bank and killed 3 people" and B replies "Well you didn't finish your peas before you had dessert!".
Short of just not running against a Republican in order to avoid trouble, what more can the Dems do to de-escalate? As I said, in 2016, Clinton conceded promptly and urged unity as soon as the counts were in.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday January 07 2021, @09:47PM (5 children)
How about listening to the opposition and working together to address everyone's concerns? The Republicans should do the same.
(Score: 3, Touché) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @10:46PM (4 children)
Movement of goalpost noted.
It's been tried. The Dems frequently compromise only to be told compromise some more. After a few iterations the bill looks exactly like the republican proposal and they still reject it because a Democrat might get the credit.
We're already at the point where the Dems are a bit to the right of many countries conservatives by default.
We've tried "so what's your proposal?" as well. Before he even took office, Trump promised this amazing healthcare reform that we were "going to love". He has less than 2 weeks left and we're still waiting.
At this point, the GOP compromise proposal is more of less "Tell you what, give Trump another 4 years then we can hold a new election....".
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday January 07 2021, @11:06PM (3 children)
So then continue to push your agenda while ignoring and demonizing everyone who disagrees and we'll see where that gets us. I'll bet it's nowhere good.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday January 07 2021, @11:42PM (1 child)
So you're saying the Dems must fully surrender or the country gets it?
And you consider this to be somehow a reasonable position?
How about when the Dems offer a compromise, the GOP should compromise back? And stop supporting 70-something toddlers when they throw a tantrum.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Friday January 08 2021, @01:22AM
This is what I'm asking of both sides. Just keep going back and forth with this until something that both sides can accept is reached. It helps when each new proposed compromise addresses the objections raised against the last one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @01:04AM
TIL: reality == political agenda
at least in the minds of Republicans :|
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:48PM (4 children)
How there is anyone left at this point that supports Trump I don't know.
I've been engaging in discourse with ya'll which has been an interesting experience. I've got some new digging to do at http://www.pacourts.us/news-and-statistics/cases-of-public-interest/election-2020 [pacourts.us] which so far is the most useful link provided through all of the heat and noise here. There have been some very specific claims about very specific cases with out any specificity provided about the case so it can be found and read on its own. The best we have so far is some reporters opinion and take on them and one news paper citing another news paper about it. That is not high quality information. If anyone can provide the links to the specific documents or provide specific case names, docket numbers, what ever, I would like to see them collected here. There's plenty of vague "if you did your research you'd find it" in the discourse so it is not needed to replicate such here.
The objective fact is that Trump either does not believe there was fraud or he walked off and left his strongest supporters out to dry while one of them died. Those people were chanting "We Love Trump" an hour before which I heard with my own ears. I never had faith in Trump in the first place so I can't lose it now. Trump is Trump and I'm not surprised he did that. I asked a friend 2 weeks ago what he thought the probability was that Trump would deploy the guard against his own supporters. Looks like it was 100%
Ya'll are still arguing over Trump or Biden because most of you are partisan as fuck. This is serving as an excellent distraction for voting fraud which should be a topic of concern for everyone. The Democrats and the Republicans would both engage in voter fraud, vote suppression, and all types of shenanigans if they thought they could get away with it. The validity of the current fraud accusations aside from what I've seen over the past 2 months the process followed if repeated guarantees getting away with it.
If anyone wants to discuss fraud please do so here. Not Trump. Not Biden. Fraud.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @08:12PM (1 child)
The courts reviewed over 50 lawsuits, the states recounted and investigated, and nothing substantial was found across multiple states. There is nothing to discuss except how to improve our election security.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @10:36PM
Notably most of those justices were appointed by brand R of the uniparty. So if it was a conspiracy, then brand R would have to be in Cahoots with brand D wouldn't they? So if there is a conspiracy, it is nice to know that the people who want to make victems of others, are themselves the victems of their own ignorance.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @06:31AM (1 child)
Here's a site (with links and citations to the court rulings) which covers many of the post-election cases.
It's quite illuminating.
https://electioncases.osu.edu/2021/01/summary-of-post-election-cases/ [osu.edu]
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @04:45PM
As the OP thank you.