Liz Cheney says Trump appears to have been ‘personally involved in planning’ 6 Jan insurrection

[Who_Me?]

Liz Cheney says Trump appears to have been ‘personally involved in planning’ 6 Jan insurrection​

Ya think?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldestyle wrote: Where in that mess was any "written plan" to destroy our Democracy? Why do you talk out of your ass, Notfooled? You always get called on it and you always look like an idiot. 21OCT25-POST#320

READ: Trump lawyer's memo on six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election
By: CNN Updated 8:20 AM EDT, Tue September 21, 2021

READ: Trump lawyer's memo on six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election | CNN Politics

John Eastman, a conservative lawyer working with then-President Donald Trump's legal team, outlined in a two-page memo a scheme to try to persuade then-Vice President Mike Pence to subvert the Constitution and throw out the 2020 election results on January 6.

www.google.com

“”” The 12th Amendment merely provides that “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.” There is very solid legal authority, and historical precedent, for the view that the President of the Senate does the counting, including the resolution of disputed electoral votes (as Adams and Jefferson did while Vice President, regarding their own election as President), and all the Members of Congress can do is watch. The Electoral Count Act, which is likely unconstitutional, provides: If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State. But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted. This is the piece that we believe is unconstitutional. It allows the two houses, “acting separately,” to decide the question, whereas the 12th Amendment provides only for a joint session. And if there is disagreement, under the Act the slate certified by the “executive” of the state is to be counted, regardless of the evidence that exists regarding the election, and regardless of whether there was ever fair review of what happened in the election, by judges and/or state legislatures. So here’s the scenario we propose:


1. VP Pence, presiding over the joint session (or Senate Pro Tempore Grassley, if Pence recuses himself), begins to open and count the ballots, starting with Alabama (without conceding that the procedure, specified by the Electoral Count Act, of going through the States alphabetically is required).
2. When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.
3. At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States. That means the total number of “electors appointed” – the language of the 12th Amendment -- is 454. This reading of the 12th Amendment has also been advanced by Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe (here). A “majority of the electors appointed” would therefore be 228. There are at this point 232 votes for Trump, 222 votes for Biden. Pence then gavels President Trump as re-elected.
4. Howls, of course, from the Democrats, who now claim, contrary to Tribe’s prior position, that 270 is required. So Pence says, fine. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, no candidate has achieved the necessary majority. That sends the matter to the House, where the “the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote . . . .” Republicans currently control 26 of the state delegations, the bare majority needed to win that vote. President Trump is re-elected there as well.
5. One last piece. Assuming the Electoral Count Act process is followed and, upon getting the objections to the Arizona slates, the two houses break into their separate chambers, we should not allow the Electoral Count Act constraint on debate to control. That would mean that a prior legislature was determining the rules of the present one — a constitutional no-no (as Tribe has forcefully argued). So someone – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, etc. – should demand normal rules (which includes the filibuster). That creates a stalemate that would give the state legislatures more time to weigh in to formally support the alternate slate of electors, if they had not already done so. 6. The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission – either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court. Let the other side challenge his actions in court, where Tribe (who in 2001 conceded the President of the Senate might be in charge of counting the votes) and others who would press a lawsuit would have their past position -- that these are non-justiciable political questions – thrown back at them, to get the lawsuit dismissed. The fact is that the Constitution assigns this power to the Vice President as the ultimate arbiter. We should take all of our actions with that in mind. TRUMP-Jan6-COUPattempt “””

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Where in that mess was any "written plan" to destroy our Democracy? Why do you talk out of your ass, Notfooled? You always get called on it and you always look like an idiot.

The memo written by Eastman, Trump's lawyer, ya dipshit.

You rude little child. You demand people go look everything up and spoonfeed it to your lazy ass.Tthen half the time you don't even read it. And when you do, you lie about it and make more demands.

 

[Lesh]

The memo written by Eastman, Trump's lawyer, ya dipshit.

You rude little child. You demand people go look everything up and spoonfeed it to your lazy ass.Tthen half the time you don't even read it. And when you do, you lie about it and make more demands.

Eastman is now trying to weasel his way out of this claiming "someone" (he can't remember who) asked him to write that memo on Christmas Eve 2020.

Can't remember who?

Yea...sure...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Eastman is now trying to weasel his way out of this claiming "someone" (he can't remember who) asked him to write that memo on Christmas Eve 2020.

Can't remember who?

Yea...sure...

Maybe digging into his personal finances would help to jar his memory.

 

[Lastamender]

Eastman is now trying to weasel his way out of this claiming "someone" (he can't remember who) asked him to write that memo on Christmas Eve 2020.

Can't remember who?

Yea...sure...

It worked for Benghazi. There were a lot of "I don't recall"s.

 

[Lastamender]

Maybe digging into his personal finances would help to jar his memory.

You mean violating his rights.

 

[Lesh]

You mean violating his rights.

Nope

 

[Lesh]

It worked for Benghazi. There were a lot of "I don't recall"s.

So you think he's lying?

Me too

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You mean violating his rights.

Nah, it would all be above board. He was high up in the money laundering and embezzlement machine full of foreign money that was the Trump campaign. All of that will come out eventually, too.

 

[Oldestyle]

The memo written by Eastman, Trump's lawyer, ya dipshit.

You rude little child. You demand people go look everything up and spoonfeed it to your lazy ass.Tthen half the time you don't even read it. And when you do, you lie about it and make more demands.

If the memo written by Eastman is what you're claiming is the "written plan" to destroy Democracy then why are you spamming the rest of that mess? Cite the memo.
So now that I've read your tiny little print memo...how in that is our democracy destroyed? It's a challenge to the election taking place in the House and Senate. It's not an armed insurrection. It's a legal challenge that would be addressed by the Supreme Court if it proceeded that far. Doing so would be a validation of the strength of our democracy not the destruction of it!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If the memo written by Eastman is what you're claiming is the "written plan" to destroy Democracy then why are you spamming the rest of that mess? Cite the memo.

Because we are talking about more than just the memo or any written plan. Try to keep up.

 

[surada]

Liz Cheney says Trump appears to have been ‘personally involved in planning’ 6 Jan insurrection​

Ya think?

Feds Looking at Communications Between Insurrectionists and Lawmakers

Investigators want to know whether lawmakers wittingly or unwittingly helped the insurrectionists who attacked the Capitol on January 6.

www.rollingstone.com

Federal law enforcement officials are examining communications between insurrectionists and members of Congress to determine whether lawmakers aided members of the mob who attacked the Capitol on January 6th, according to CNN.

Investigators want to know “whether lawmakers wittingly or unwittingly helped the insurrectionists,” a US official briefed on the matter told CNN, and so far they have gathered data that includes “indications of contact” between “alleged rioters discussing their associations with members of Congress.” More than two dozen prosecutors are assigned to help the effort.

So far investigators are not yet targeting any individual member of Congress, and they have not issued any warrants. But they are still gathering communications, including cell phone data for people to help identify people in the Capitol during the attack who were not authorized to be there.

 

[Lesh]

Feds Looking at Communications Between Insurrectionists and Lawmakers

Investigators want to know whether lawmakers wittingly or unwittingly helped the insurrectionists who attacked the Capitol on January 6.

www.rollingstone.com

Federal law enforcement officials are examining communications between insurrectionists and members of Congress to determine whether lawmakers aided members of the mob who attacked the Capitol on January 6th, according to CNN.

Investigators want to know “whether lawmakers wittingly or unwittingly helped the insurrectionists,” a US official briefed on the matter told CNN, and so far they have gathered data that includes “indications of contact” between “alleged rioters discussing their associations with members of Congress.” More than two dozen prosecutors are assigned to help the effort.

So far investigators are not yet targeting any individual member of Congress, and they have not issued any warrants. But they are still gathering communications, including cell phone data for people to help identify people in the Capitol during the attack who were not authorized to be there.

We're starting to get names though. MTG, Boebert, Gosar, Gohmert, Brooks, Cawthorne...others

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We're starting to get names though. MTG, Boebert, Gosar, Gohmert, Brooks, Cawthorne...others

Coincidentally enough, those are the same people who were downplaying the riot on the floor of Congress and blaming it on Antifa, after returning from their safe rooms.

Like children. "Antifa did it!"

 

[surada]

We're starting to get names though. MTG, Boebert, Gosar, Gohmert, Brooks, Cawthorne...others

This is so sad for our country.. Really hideous.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Lol, wasting taxpayer money...its just like the impeachment, each of those committee members knows exactly what they want to find, and how they are going to vote. There is no chance this doesn't end without a guilty ruling and referral to the doj.

Why the pony show, we all already know where this is heading. Just vote already.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

each of those committee members knows exactly what they want to find, and how they are going to vote.

But even if that WERE true.. and what they find is strong evidence that people in Congress assisted this, and the President approved and knew of it...

Then what?

 

[ThisIsMe]

We're starting to get names though. MTG, Boebert, Gosar, Gohmert, Brooks, Cawthorne...others

About that.....

AOC has stated that all those people should be expelled from congress, and I agree, if there is evidence that shows they helped plan the riot, and I mean EVIDENCE, not just "well he said this so I think that means......etc", actually evidence, then yes, expelled them, then place congress on hold while special elections are held and their replacements can be elected.

But! I also think that if no evidence is found, those making false accusations against members of congress should then be expelled from congress.

If they want to levy accusations and then demand expulsion, then they need to be held to the same standard. You shouldn't be able to willy nilly accuse fellow congress members of something, then get out of it Scott free as if it's no big deal. Have proof before you start tossing out accusations, or be held to the same punishment you are demanding of them.

 

[Lesh]

then place congress on hold while special elections are held and their replacements can be elected.

Nope.

AOC has stated that all those people should be expelled from congress, and I agree, if there is evidence

Yup

But! I also think that if no evidence is found, those making false accusations against members of congress should then be expelled from congress.

Then expel everyone who falsely accused Clinton. No? Ohhh...you didn't actually mean