Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Breaking News
posted by martyb on Wednesday January 06 2021, @10:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the stock-up-on-popcorn! dept.

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:

Dan Scavino 🇺🇸 🦅@DanScavino:

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...

Dan Scavino 🇺🇸 🦅@DanScavino:

...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.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:52AM (11 children)

    by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 07 2021, @02:52AM (#1096144)
    So ALLLL the lawyers were so shitty they dragged down that compelling evidence against them? Just how low of a threshold would you would set for the courts to hear these cases?
    --
    🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:27AM (10 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:27AM (#1096177)

    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)

      by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:31AM (#1096182)

      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)

        by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 07 2021, @03:59AM (#1096207)

        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)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:02AM (#1096210)

          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

            by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:26AM (#1096233)
            I wish I shared your optimism, but I wouldn't risk giving either side the power. But yes it all circles back to actual evidence.
            --
            🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:02AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @04:02AM (#1096211)

        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)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @11:56AM (#1096409)

      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.

      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)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @01:53PM (#1096437)

        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

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 07 2021, @09:36PM (#1096695)

          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

          This is not a fraud case.

          Repeatedly. A judge even went so far as to point out

          The parties specifically stipulated in their comprehensive stipulation of facts that there exists no evidence of any fraud, misconduct, or any impropriety with respect to the challenged ballots. There is nothing in the record and nothing alleged that would lead to the conclusion that any of the challenged ballots were submitted by someone not qualified or entitled to vote in this election.

          Or what about

          We are not alleging fraud in this lawsuit. We are not alleging anyone stealing the election.

          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

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @04:08AM (#1096851)

          Such a link would be very useful and extremely difficult for anyone to argue with.

          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

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08 2021, @06:20AM (#1096904)

      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.

      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]