Trump abruptly comes home early

[Audie]

BENGHAZI

Plenty of ways to spell it unfortunately

 

[Subduction Zone]

What you describe doesn't seem to be in line with the 12 Amendment... not as I read it, anyhow.

It is not. It is in a law that I linked earlier going into the details of how the electoral votes are to be counted after a Presidential election. I could link it again.

 

[Audie]

If there is at least one member of the House and at least one member of the Senate that objects to the electoral votes of one state they can object. But this is only a delaying tactic. A debate up to two hours long is held in each house with at most a five minute oration by A Senator or Representative in their respective houses is held. Then there is a vote in each house. It takes a majority vote in both houses to reject a state's votes. That will not happen since the House is Democratic. It will almost certainly not happen in the Senate since as least one Republican has openly said he will not vote for this.

It is simply show boating and pretending to do anything possible to get Trump in. These Republicans know that it will fail.

As often as you are rong I hope you are right

 

[Subduction Zone]

A little more clarity here so that some can hopefully learn. When the electoral votes are brought in objections can be raised. Probably starting with Arizona. Let's say Cruz objected. That would start a debate:

"The structure of the Electoral Count Act's procedural provisions generally requires that any questions arising during the counting process be determined by the two houses acting separately, rather than by both houses together on the House floor. Section 5 (now 3 U.S.C. § 18) states that "the President of the Senate shall have power to preserve order; and no debate shall be allowed and no question shall be put by the presiding officer except to either House on a motion to withdraw." Section 6 (now 3 U.S.C. § 17) states that whenever the two Houses have separated "to decide upon an objection ... or other question arising in the matter," each Senator and Representative may "speak to such objection or question" for five minutes, and not more than once.[43] After the debate has lasted two hours, the presiding officer of each House must "put the main question without further debate."[43] Once the two houses have both voted, "they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted."[36]

Section 7 (now 3 U.S.C. § 16) states that the joint session cannot be dissolved "until the count of electoral votes shall be completed and the result declared."[41] No recess can be taken "unless a question shall have arisen in regard to counting any such votes, or otherwise under [Title 3, Chapter 1]," in which case either House, acting separately, can recess itself until 10:00 am the next day (Sunday excepted).[41] But if the counting of the electoral votes and the declaration of the result have not been completed before the fifth calendar day after the joint session began, "no further or other recess shall be taken by either House."[41]"

Both full Houses would debate and vote on the matters independently.

And as I said, both Houses have to agree, by majority vote, to reject a state's certified electoral college vote:

"However, when considering such objections, Section 4 requires that – assuming "but one return [from the state] has been received" – no electoral votes from electors whose appointment has been "lawfully certified" under the ascertainment process (see above) can be rejected. The two houses may only reject a vote or votes if both houses agree that such vote(s) have not been "regularly given" by an individual elector or electors.[36] Under the law, Congress may still reject a state's electors if both houses decide to do so, but only when they determine either that the appointment of electors was not "lawfully certified" by the governor under the ascertainment process, or that the votes themselves were not "regularly given" by the electors.[10]:616"

Electoral Count Act - Wikipedia.

If that happens with enough votes to bring the count down below 270 then it would go to one vote per state. It will never get to that point. The House is Democratic and they would not support an illegal coup attempt by Trump.

The law is linked and explained in this post.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's

What you describe doesn't seem to be in line with the 12 Amendment... not as I read it, anyhow.

I quoted myself to provide the link. I will link it again here. It is the law that the Republican douches are relying on. Technically it is possible to overturn the election, but not in reality:

Electoral Count Act - Wikipedia

 

[ecco]

If I knew I'd tell you.

So, why are you talking about something that you don't even know exists? Is it because Trump tweeted something based on OAN's reporting like this bit of Trump Garbage?

“Georgia election data, just revealed, shows that over 17,000 votes illegally flipped from Trump to Biden.”
@OANN
This alone (there are many other irregularities) is enough to easily “swing Georgia to Trump”. #StopTheSteal​

I didn't know he was running a ploy to get more money.

You really need to get an understanding of what has been and is happening...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/11/13/trump-fundraising-pac-recount/

November 13, 2020 at 6:00 a.m. EST
President Trump’s campaign has been on a fundraising tear since the election he lost Nov. 3, emailing and texting supporters multiple times per day asking for contributions to his “Official Election Defense Fund.”


The campaign is raising money off false assertions that have apparently helped it pay down its outstanding debt and will help finance the leadership PAC that could allow Trump to retain influence in the Republican Party even after leaving office.

We won’t know how much the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee have raised through these fundraising appeals until Dec. 3, when post-election campaign finance reports are due. But it doesn’t look like much of the money he’s been raising will actually go to pay for the recounts or the legal challenges.


Although the fundraising emails refer to an “election defense task force” or an “election defense fund,” in reality, donors are giving to the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, where contributions are split between Trump’s committees and the RNC.
​

How is it possible that you were not aware of this?

​

Well now Ted Cruze just said they will not certify the election on the 6th until 10 days of "emergency" audits are done.

Please show where Ted Curz has the power and authority to make that happen.

Don't you understand that Cruz is just playing up to the Trump supporters so he can get re-elected. He knows he can ramble and the Sheeples will eat it up.

Do you remember this bit of nonsense...

Ted Cruz Offers to Argue Insane Texas Election Lawsuit at the Supreme Court
VISION 2020 DEC. 9, 2020
Ted Cruz Offers to Argue Insane Texas Election Lawsuit at the Supreme Court

Here’s what preeminent election-law expert Rick Hasen had to say about Paxton’s suit:
My view in brief: This is a press release masquerading as a lawsuit. Texas doesn’t have standing to raise these claims as it has no say over how other states choose electors

​

Cruz knew it was a sham. That didn't stop him. Republican Sheeples ate it up and praised Cruz for his valiant effort.

 

[ecco]

The House and the Senate then vote separately to accept or reject the objection, which requires a majority vote from both chambers.

Do you understand the part of your own linked article that I highlighted in red?

Where, in your wildest dreams, or in Ted Cruze's wildest dreams, do you see the majority controlled House voting to accept an objection?

“A fair and credible audit-conducted expeditiously and completed well before January 20 would dramatically improve Americans’ faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President. We owe that to the People,” the Republican senators said.

Tell ya what. Let's have Republican poll watchers and Republican operatives compile evidence of massive voter fraud. Let's present the accumulated evidence in Courts of Law to show that the election was rigged. Then we can take the rulings of the Court's that reviewed the evidence to the Congressional hearings and demand the electors be thrown out and new Republican electors be sworn in.

Oh, wait...

60:1

 

[ecco]

Investigate his taxes!

Donald's? Yep.
It couldn't happen to President Donald. J. Trump.
But it can sure happen to Mr. Donald J. Trump.

 

[ecco]

At the worst Benghazi was an example of near criminal incompetence.

The events that occurred in Benghazi were not caused by "near-criminal incompetence". State asked Chris Stevens to leave. He insisted on staying because he really believed he could do some good.
State had asked Congress for more money to protect vulnerable embassies; The Republican Congresses refused.

The early explanations of the cause of the events that occurred in Benghazi were not caused by "near-criminal incompetence". Consider fog of war.

The Republican hearings into everything Benghazi were not caused by "near-criminal incompetence". They were caused by a need to attack Democrats in general and Hillary in particular led by vindictive Republicans playing up to their voters.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The "fine nazi" thing is unsupportable if you
read the whole statement. SOME fine is not EVERYBODY.

Are you even reading my posts?

I'll make it simple. Trump said that there were "very fine people on both sides". One side of the protest were anti-Nazi, the other side of yhe protest were made up a mixture of Nazis and people who are totally okay marching alongside Nazis, listening to Nazi speeches, and supporting statues to people who fought and died for slavery.

There were no "very fine people" on the second side.

Like "maga kid" bssed one one selected photo and a false
narrative. A leftist narrative. Did you jump to conclusions
on thst one?

Do you even know what the protest was about and who arranged it?

Good reason to investigate,but four years and what, 50
million dollars could not turn up a real resson. Nothing.
Hillarys dossier about golden showers. Honestly,
that is like, the good guys dolng due diligence in the publuc good?

You've already acknowledged that the investigation lead to several arrests and DID uncover extensive Russian meddling in the election.

Concocted politically motivated "investigations"
are not cool. Does that need clarification?

And your nonsense conspiracy theories help nobody when thete is more than sufficient reason to justify an investigation. Or, you can continue to ignore that and continue to ignore literally all he facts that don't fit with your worldview.

 

[Audie]

Are you even reading my posts?

I'll make it simple. Trump said that there were "very fine people on both sides". One side of the protest were anti-Nazi, the other side of yhe protest were made up a mixture of Nazis and people who are totally okay marching alongside Nazis, listening to Nazi speeches, and supporting statues to people who fought and died for slavery.

There were no "very fine people" on the second side.


Do you even know what the protest was about and who arranged it?


You've already acknowledged that the investigation lead to several arrests and DID uncover extensive Russian meddling in the election.


And your nonsense conspiracy theories help nobody when thete is more than sufficient reason to justify an investigation. Or, you can continue to ignore that and continue to ignore literally all he facts that don't fit with your worldview.

Its you guys' fight. My "worldview "
is you guys are killing each other and
there is no good guy side.

Being no fan of racists, white black or brown,
it concerned me if the president when I lived there was
some racist.

The incident you speak of had some people who were out
to destroy public property, and others who were against it.
No question some sorry characters were involved.

I read all of what Trump had to say, as noted, it concerned me.
My take was that the two sides were for statue, and against statue.
That who he was talking about.
Trump is of course no wordsmith,.

Your chosen take is, I guess? that anyone against the
vandalism is perforce a nazi, or running dog.

Seems unfortunate and unhelpful to me,
and not different enough from the good guy bad guy
thing of our cultural revolution.

I know what you wrote, I just think its sad.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Its you guys' fight. My "worldview "
is you guys are killing each other and
there is no good guy side.

What are you even talking about? Who are "you guys"?

And it's quite telling that you again failed to acknowledge any of yhe facts I mentioned, or answer any of my questions. Your stance of downplaying Trump's corruption and failures in order to create some pretense of impartiality is as flimsy as paper.

 

[ecco]

Being no fan of racists, white black or brown,
it concerned me if the president when I lived there was
some racist.

It concerns many of us that he is a racist. That's why some people post about it here in the forum where you dismiss it. That's why some people march in protest against him. That's why they march in opposition to the "fine people" on the other side.


Isn't the guy in charge of where you live very racist? Perhaps you should be more concerned with that instead of arguing about what is going on here.