1. #34701
    Old God Kathranis's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    10,074
    Quote Originally Posted by arandomuser View Post
    its crazy to think it isnt just diehard maga people who believe everything trump says but 74 million people...
    maybe we should just split up, i read somewhere 70% of the gdp is in counties that voted for biden
    so lets say all the blue countys go into the new dem country and red countys will be trumptopia
    It's important to remember that these folks are an extremely vocal minority. Of the 350m~ people in the US, only about 20% actually voted for Trump. Of them, only about 10k gathered or the "Million" MAGA March. I can't really tell you how many are active on Twitter, but most people don't really actively follow politics. If you step away from the small rallies and protests, most people have already moved on from the election, apart from perhaps their nightly news.

  2. #34702
    Over 9000! PhaelixWW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    9,029
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    That's not set in any law or case law. So if this happens, it goes to Trump's 6-3 SCOTUS.
    It's set in the Constitution; specifically, the 12th Amendment:
    The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.-- The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
    What they're trying to do is stall the Electors from being appointed by virtue of the votes in the respective states. Right now, there are just lists of people who would become Electors should the state certify a winner.

    If the winner is certified, then the appropriate party's Electors are appointed, and they'll vote for Biden. If Trump's strategy were to succeed, then they would never be appointed at all, which means they don't count as part of the requirement for the majority win via the 12th.


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  3. #34703
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathranis View Post
    If you step away from the small rallies and protests
    It's amazing how often we still see "Biden had smaller rallies, he should have lost" being used, in public, as "evidence" of fraud.

  4. #34704
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    Sure, but it would be a legal sham, supported by SCOTUS. That's the issue.

    I get what everyone is saying if this comes about (which is highly unlikely, but still technically possible). Rise up and revolt and don't pay taxes and don't seat GOP House members and all that will get ugly, fast. And that road to perdition is terrifying.
    I mean, if it's what it takes, then it's what it takes. The Civil Rights movement wasn't pretty, but they persevered.
    Nothing is ever easy.

    Anyways, it'll never get there so it's a non issue that y'all need to chill about. The GOP are simply humoring Trump long enough to get help in Georgia and at least hold the Senate. That's it.

    Trust me, they're not interested in a coup anymore than you are, because there's no money and comfort to be made in civil unrest. They don't want to risk being forcibly removed for someone who holds no loyalty but to himself like Trump.

  5. #34705
    We have two different realities at this point. Someone posted this about what just happened. I responded by telling them to watch what gets said in court and then I got called a liar for saying they are 1-29 in court, somehow there have only been 3 court cases. I dont know how you get through to these people anymore.

    I just watched one of the most shocking and astounding press conferences I've ever seen by Sidney Powell and others. Blew my mind! I am now 95% convinced that this election was illegitimate and they claim to have the proof. Find the press conference on line and watch it. It gave me chills that something like this could actually happen. This does not appear to be at all fake and this is not over by a long shot. Sidney Powell is a very very well respected attorney. Watch it... I believe that this is going to be an historical moment in the history of this nation that will never be forgotten. If what they say is true, this is of 9/11 proportions. Seriously, you are probable scoffing but watch it before you decide.

  6. #34706
    I am Murloc! Noxx79's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Kansas. Yes, THAT Kansas.
    Posts
    5,474
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    It's set in the Constitution; specifically, the 12th Amendment:

    What they're trying to do is stall the Electors from being appointed by virtue of the votes in the respective states. Right now, there are just lists of people who would become Electors should the state certify a winner.

    If the winner is certified, then the appropriate party's Electors are appointed, and they'll vote for Biden. If Trump's strategy were to succeed, then they would never be appointed at all, which means they don't count as part of the requirement for the majority win via the 12th.
    If they stall the count, the house just won’t do the count. Trump ceases being president on 1/20 per the constitution. With no VP, the order of succession means acting president Pelosi.

    Trumps team has absolutely no idea what they’re doing

  7. #34707
    Over 9000! PhaelixWW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    9,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathranis View Post
    It's important to remember that these folks are an extremely vocal minority. Of the 350m~ people in the US, only about 20% actually voted for Trump.
    Just don't forget that of the 330m people in the US, only about 240m are actually eligible to vote, so your 20% becomes 31%.


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  8. #34708
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,524
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    It's set in the Constitution; specifically, the 12th Amendment:
    The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.-- The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
    What they're trying to do is stall the Electors from being appointed by virtue of the votes in the respective states. Right now, there are just lists of people who would become Electors should the state certify a winner.

    If the winner is certified, then the appropriate party's Electors are appointed, and they'll vote for Biden. If Trump's strategy were to succeed, then they would never be appointed at all, which means they don't count as part of the requirement for the majority win via the 12th.
    Nice - good read, too. I have to agree in what you're saying from what we're seeing in the 12th. My concern is that several legal scholars have mentioned this scenario, and never mentioned this piece of it. Now, they could have just been writing for viewership and shock value, but it gives me some concern.

    However, to be clear, I agree with your above analysis.

  9. #34709
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,907
    Quote Originally Posted by passingthrew View Post
    I got called a liar for saying they are 1-29 in court, somehow there have only been 3 court cases.
    I actually caught that part. Giuliani tried to say he led 3 cases, the rest were other people who couldn't possibly be working for Trump because they lost and Trump never loses.

    Your "friends" are saying the same thing.

    Once again, anyone can say something into a mic and camera. I could get in front of a mic and camera and say I had sex with Salma Hayek. If I try to say that under oath, I have a problem.

    Giuliani clearly wants to take all these assertions and claim he has a case. This begs the question, why hasn't he done so already?

  10. #34710
    Quote Originally Posted by Noxx79 View Post
    If they stall the count, the house just won’t do the count. Trump ceases being president on 1/20 per the constitution. With no VP, the order of succession means acting president Pelosi.
    So this is probably just an academic question, but then what happens? Does Pelosi get to stay president for 4 years? Or would there be another election? Or what?

  11. #34711
    Over 9000! PhaelixWW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    9,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Noxx79 View Post
    If they stall the count, the house just won’t do the count. Trump ceases being president on 1/20 per the constitution. With no VP, the order of succession means acting president Pelosi.
    The idea is that they're trying to stall certification only in states that went for Biden. They'll allow the other states to certify and send their Electoral panel to vote on December 14th.


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  12. #34712
    Quote Originally Posted by solinari6 View Post
    So this is probably just an academic question, but then what happens? Does Pelosi get to stay president for 4 years? Or would there be another election? Or what?
    She stays president until any legal hurdles holding up a Biden presidency are resolved. She steps down once Biden gets inaugurated and there are no "snap elections" so to say.

  13. #34713
    Over 9000! PhaelixWW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    9,029
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    Nice - good read, too. I have to agree in what you're saying from what we're seeing in the 12th. My concern is that several legal scholars have mentioned this scenario, and never mentioned this piece of it. Now, they could have just been writing for viewership and shock value, but it gives me some concern.

    However, to be clear, I agree with your above analysis.
    I thought I linked this earlier ITT (not that the pace doesn't bury things near-instantaneously), but...

    Justia: No, Republicans Cannot Throw the Presidential Election into the House so that Trump Wins

    Authors:
    Neil H. Buchanan, legal scholar
    Michael C. Dorf, Professor of Law at Cornell Law School
    Laurence Tribe, Professor of Constitutional Law at Harvard Law School

    Trump’s Denominator Problem

    But Republicans cannot have their cake and eat it too. They cannot plausibly argue that the Twelfth Amendment’s silences override the Electoral Count Act while ignoring the Amendment’s plain language. If neither slate of Pennsylvania’s electors is recognized, Biden’s 268 votes would fall short of a majority of the 538 total Electoral votes theoretically available. However, the Twelfth Amendment does not say anything about those votes. Instead, it says that “[t]he person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed” (emphasis added).

    We have italicized that last word—appointed—to emphasize that the Constitution does not say that a candidate must win a majority of the potential number of theoretically eligible electors who might have been appointed. He or she must win only a majority of the electors who were actually appointed. In the scenario in which the Electoral Count Act is set aside so that Pennsylvania’s votes do not count, its 20 votes are subtracted from both the numerator and the denominator. Now Biden’s (assumed) 268 votes would be a majority of the 518 votes cast by the “whole number of electors appointed.” Biden would win in the Electoral College, meaning that the decision would not go to the House.


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  14. #34714
    Trump's own team was ridiculing Giuliani on the stream today. Good thing he's sloshed 24/7 so will probably never know about it.

    Oh, also, whoever was running the stream accidentally left the password for the call visible on the stream for a while.

  15. #34715
    I am Murloc! Noxx79's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Kansas. Yes, THAT Kansas.
    Posts
    5,474
    Quote Originally Posted by solinari6 View Post
    So this is probably just an academic question, but then what happens? Does Pelosi get to stay president for 4 years? Or would there be another election? Or what?
    Pelosi gets to stay president until the house counts electoral votes, the democrats lose the house in 2022, or until the next presidential election in 2024.

    There’s no way, barring a full on military coup and government take over, that a Democrat isn’t president until at least 2022 (and as said above, the republicans would have to then take the house).

    The fact that nobody has tried to stall the presidential votes like this is a testament to respecting mutual assured destruction, but the republicans have no respect for the us government any more.

  16. #34716
    Quote Originally Posted by Noxx79 View Post
    Pelosi gets to stay president until the house counts electoral votes, the democrats lose the house in 2022, or until the next presidential election in 2024.
    But wait, if Pelosi became president, would she be "acting" president, and STILL also speaker of the house? Wouldn't the house get a new speaker in that case?

  17. #34717
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,907
    I looked and looked for an analysis of Giuliani's presser. Couldn't find one. Maybe because Giuliani personally attacked the press?

    But then I kicked myself, because of course it's FOX News top headline.

    Let me make this clear: if you go hunting around other sites, you just won't find discussion on it on any front page. FOX News covered it...but...yeah.

    Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani aggressively made the case on Thursday for the Trump campaign's legal challenge of the 2020 election results, alleging in a fiery news conference that there was a "centralized" plan to carry out voter fraud around the country.

    This is a different approach than the campaign has recently taken in court
    Interruption #1: this is actually important. This is admission they haven't used this, erm, """"evidence"""" in any legal battle yet.

    where they have primarily focused on the validity of ballots and counts without asserting fraud. While Giuliani did not present any direct evidence of a massive fraud scheme, Giuliani asserted that this is the "logical conclusion" reached as a result of incidents he said took place in several states.

    TRUMP CAMPAIGN DROPS LAWSUIT CHALLENGING MICHIGAN VOTING RESULTS

    "What I’m--
    "Whoa whoa whoa! When you cut and paste like that, you're supposed to skip banner ads and stuff, man! How long have you been doing this?"

    Oh no, that placement is critical.

    Interruption #2 is FOX News' decision, not mine. They actually put their usual ALL-CAPS mini headline, this time about Trump giving up on a lawsuit, in the middle of Giuliani saying they weren't giving up lawsuits.

    "What I’m describing to you is a massive fraud," Giuliani said at the Capitol Hill news conference with other members of Trump's legal team, who repeatedly lashed out at the news media and accused them of treating their efforts unfairly.

    At one point, Giuliani repeatedly told one reporter: "You're lying."

    His descriptions largely entailed recitations
    Interruption #3: This is FOX News doing the best they can to state what Giuliani stated, without them themselves lying. "Some guy said this!" Giuliani said, holding up a handful of papers, and FOX News is now saying "Giuliani says some guy told him this". If another article quotes FOX News, it better fucking be written by Kevin Bacon.

    of allegations put forth in several lawsuits that the Trump campaign has filed. Former Vice President Joe Biden is the projected winner in the contest, but the Trump campaign is contesting those calls, raising concerns in several battleground states.

    "My cousin calls it the 'titty twister'"

    The former New York City mayor spoke about incidents in Pennsylvania where Republican poll watchers claimed they were not allowed to observe the counting process because they were kept too far away. A judge had ruled in their favor and ordered that they be permitted six feet away from the counting at a center in Philadelphia, but that was overturned after officials appealed.

    Giuliani also claimed that while Pennsylvania does not allow absentee voters to fix any errors with their ballots, some were given that opportunity -- but not those from Republican areas.

    He cited sworn affidavits from cases in Pennsylvania and Michigan from poll workers who spoke about instructions from supervisors. One affidavit said that workers in Pennsylvania were instructed to assign ballots without names to random people, resulting in thousands of people in Pittsburgh showing up to the polls to find that votes had been cast in their names.

    Another affidavit said that a supervisorin Michigan instructed workers to change the dates on absentee ballots to show that they arrived earlier than they had. An affidavit also claimed that workers were told not to request photo identification from Michigan voters, even though state law requires it.
    Interruption #4: That's four "claims" of which one's already been ended in court. That "random names" one is new. I wonder if there's any truth to--

    (immediately finds list of debunked election claims)

    Didn't think so. I can't seem to find anything credible or more importantly local about thousands of Pittsburg votes being randomly assigned. You'd think, if it was thousands, Pittsburg's not that big, really. But, nope, nothing.

    Or, did I miss it? Can anyone find a credible source discussing this claim? Pittsburg would be the ideal place to grab votes, they do love their...Steelers.

    Giuliani also said that approximately 100,000 absentee ballots in Wisconsin should have been deemed invalid because there were no applications for them. President-elect Joe Biden leads President Trump in that state by roughly 20,000 votes.

    If you count the lawful votes, Trump won Wisconsin," Giuliani said.
    Interruption #5: Team Trump sure thinks it knows which votes are legal and which are illegal despite watching them all be counted. I don't think a vote is called "illegal" until you can prove which law was broken during its submission. Which you do in a court of law, not a literal field of manure next to a dildo shop, where "literally fuck this shit" must have come up once or twice.

    Trump campaign legal adviser Jenna Ellis explained the lack of new evidence at the news conference to support their allegations by saying this was merely an "opening statement," and that more evidence would be forthcoming in court.
    Interruption #6: Then do it already!

    Giuliani pushed back against a reporter who claimed he and his team were taking their time rolling out their cases.

    “We’re not going to drag it out. I mean it’s ridiculous for you to say we’re dragging it out," Giuliani said, noting that Al Gore took more time in the legal battle over the 2000 election.

    He also said that more lawsuits could be coming in Arizona and potentially New Mexico, where Trump trails Biden by nearly 100,000 votes. He also said a challenge could come in Virginia,
    Interruption #6: Then do it already!

    where Biden leads by almost 500,000 votes, if they believe they could overcome that deficit.
    Inter...I mean, end of citation statement: overcoming a gap of 500,000 votes in Virginia would be well over ten percent.

    Now FOX News didn't do any interruptions except the second, but you'll notice their careful, even surgical phrasing. Giuliani said this. Giuliani claimed that. Team Trump says there's evidence we can't see. Team Trump says more cases will be filed. And they sure dialed down on the commentary, as in, I don't see "Experts say this will work" or "Experts say this won't work". They're as silent as the GOP, and of course, silence is acceptance.

    Before hitting "submit" I went back over the top pages I usually go to for factual information. Again, I found Giuliani's press conference was not a top headline in any of them.

    COVID, yes. CDC Thanksgiving, yes. Biden's cabinet picks, yes. Nintendo asking people to stop making Animal Crossing about politics, no really, they did that.

    But not Giuliani's increasingly literal pile of shit.

  18. #34718
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by solinari6 View Post
    But wait, if Pelosi became president, would she be "acting" president, and STILL also speaker of the house? Wouldn't the house get a new speaker in that case?
    You'd have an acting speaker, yes.

  19. #34719
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    You'd have an acting speaker, yes.
    The perfect end to Trump's tenure.

  20. #34720
    I am Murloc! Noxx79's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Kansas. Yes, THAT Kansas.
    Posts
    5,474
    Quote Originally Posted by solinari6 View Post
    But wait, if Pelosi became president, would she be "acting" president, and STILL also speaker of the house? Wouldn't the house get a new speaker in that case?
    Yeah Pelosis job would have to be filled with however vacancies are filled in California.

    If they’re that worried though, there is actually NO actual requirement that the speaker of the house be an elected official. Legally they could vote Biden (or Hillary lol) speaker of the house and have him be president that way.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •