Trump abruptly comes home early

[Dave Watchman]

You realize that "Russia collusion nonsense" lead to several arrests, Trump demonstrably did say that there were "fine people on both sides" at a rally arranged by neo-Nazis, and Trumps handling of the coronavirus pandemic - including lying to the public about it, openly dismissinh medical advice, pushing conspiracy theories about the origin of the virus, waiting weeks before enacting an effective lockdown and shutting down the US' pandemic taskforce - are all things that happened, right?

And not only that, he called it the "China virus".

Not the "mainland China virus".

He's bad bad bad bad bad, he's nationwide.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm interested in Trump leaving home (the one in DC).
I hope that goes smoothly.

 

[Dave Watchman]

There is no majority in the House. There will not be one. That means that Trump lost.

It's not the House that matters.

Watch the video again.

The Republicans can protest but that will not be a majority vote of the House and Senate.

Last stage goes to each of the States, each State gets a vote and the Republicans have a majority.

The main thing to focus on, the important thing to recognize, is that Trump has NOT CONCEDED.

Here is another witness, more detail, this guy is explaining the exact same thing:

If Trump did not have a case, what he appears to be doing, would not be feasible.

I'll say again, I think something big is going to happen in January.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Deludional idiot" is just stupid, and three paragraphs won't change that. You only state one.

Have you listened to the man when he rants about the election and cheating? He is worse than any creationists that you know of. Seriously that was an accurate description of him. That is not a case of TDS.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's not the House that matters.

Watch the video again.

Last stage goes to each of the States, each State gets a vote and the Republicans have a majority.

The main thing to focus on, the important thing to recognize, is that Trump has NOT CONCEDED.

Here is another witness, more detail, this guy is explaining the exact same thing:

If Trump did not have a case, what he appears to be doing, would not be feasible.

I'll say again, I think something big is going to happen in January.

Your first source appears to be worthless. Your second source made a statement that tells us that this is over. He said "if the election is not certified" all states certified their elections. All states chose one slate of electors. There have been people that played make believe, but they were never chosen.

And one has to be careful when reading the Constitution. Amendments change the Constitution. Your second source also ignored the 12th Amendment. The problems that he talks about were fixed there:

The 12th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

 

[Dave Watchman]

Your first source appears to be worthless. Your second source made a statement that tells us that this is over. He said "if the election is not certified" all states certified their elections. All states chose one slate of electors. There have been people that played make believe, but they were never chosen.

The States certifying their elections, is not the same thing as the individual States each having one vote in January IF inauguration day is a failure.

You might be stopping the videos before all the steps are mentioned.

Don't forget, both authors are saying the same thing.

From your Constitutional link, when all else fails:

"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.
​

Each State will have one vote, and the States are a Republican majority. This is not the same as the States "certifying" a good election, which would occur earlier in the timeline. This process of the States each having one vote happens at the end, when all other avenues are exhausted.

This is probably why the dude in the second video was so frustrated with the process and suggested ways for a change.

This is probably why Trump still will not concede.

This is probably why something very big is going to happen in January.

 

[Dave Watchman]

Arden Farhi
@ArdenFarhi

NEWS: Roughly a dozen Republican senators are in talks to join Missouri Senator Josh Hawley in objecting to the electoral college results when congress meets Wednesday, according to multiple Republican sources familiar with the ongoing talks. w/​

The list is expected to include Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Mike Braun (R-IN) and incoming senators Bill Hagerty (TN), Tommy Tuberville (AL) and Cynthia Lummis (WY). The incoming senators all shared the ballot with
@realDonaldTrump
.https://twitter.com/ArdenFarhi/status/1345404477839446017

​

John McCormack
@McCormackJohn
News:

@SenTedCruz is circulating a letter calling for the rejection of Electoral College results until a 10-day "emergency audit" can be conducted to examine "unprecedented allegations of voter fraud."
​

11:51 AM · Jan 2, 2021·Twitter Web App
https://twitter.com/McCormackJohn/status/1345412426435596290

December 31, 2020
If enough senators challenge the election results, Trump wins
By Andrea Widburg

As I wrote in September, when no one was paying attention to this kind of thing, the Constitution is remarkably clear on the subject. If there are not enough Electoral College votes to hand victory to any one candidate — as will be the case if the Senate refuses to accept Electoral College votes predicated on manifest and overwhelming fraud — the Constitution spells out who picks the winner: fifty members (one for each state) from the newly seated House of Representatives decide.

Here's the Twelfth Amendment's language:

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. (U.S. Const., Amendment 12, Clause 3.)
​

What's of signal importance here is that the House as a body does not vote. Instead, one House member from each state votes. Handing the matter to the House in this way makes eminent sense because this is the body closest to the most recently expressed will of the American people. If the Electoral College failed, at least the majority of voters in each state will speak through the majority of House members from their states.

Under the 20th Amendment, the vote takes place not with the currently seated House, but with the incoming House. The incoming House has 27 states with a majority of Republican representatives, 20 states with a majority of Democrat representatives, and 3 states that are tied. That spells a clear victory for Donald Trump.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...hallenge_the_election_results_trump_wins.html​

 

[Subduction Zone]

The States certifying their elections, is not the same thing as the individual States each having one vote in January IF inauguration day is a failure.

You might be stopping the videos before all the steps are mentioned.

Don't forget, both authors are saying the same thing.

From your Constitutional link, when all else fails:

"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.
​

Each State will have one vote, and the States are a Republican majority. This is not the same as the States "certifying" a good election, which would occur earlier in the timeline. This process of the States each having one vote happens at the end, when all other avenues are exhausted.

This is probably why the dude in the second video was so frustrated with the process and suggested ways for a change.

This is probably why Trump still will not concede.

This is probably why something very big is going to happen in January.

Incorrect. The elections were certified by the states. That is a fact. Your claims are simply incorrect and out of date. By the way, quoting out of context is improper. You ignored what it takes to lead up to that point. You ignored this:

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,

All that the Vice-President can do is to open all of the certificates. There is only one set. We know what they say. The count will show that Biden won. At that point this largely ceremonial event is over. Please note you need the big "if" to proceed to where you want to go.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Arden Farhi
@ArdenFarhi

NEWS: Roughly a dozen Republican senators are in talks to join Missouri Senator Josh Hawley in objecting to the electoral college results when congress meets Wednesday, according to multiple Republican sources familiar with the ongoing talks. w/​

The list is expected to include Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Mike Braun (R-IN) and incoming senators Bill Hagerty (TN), Tommy Tuberville (AL) and Cynthia Lummis (WY). The incoming senators all shared the ballot with
@realDonaldTrump
.https://twitter.com/ArdenFarhi/status/1345404477839446017

​

John McCormack
@McCormackJohn
News:

@SenTedCruz is circulating a letter calling for the rejection of Electoral College results until a 10-day "emergency audit" can be conducted to examine "unprecedented allegations of voter fraud."
​

11:51 AM · Jan 2, 2021·Twitter Web App
https://twitter.com/McCormackJohn/status/1345412426435596290

December 31, 2020
If enough senators challenge the election results, Trump wins
By Andrea Widburg

As I wrote in September, when no one was paying attention to this kind of thing, the Constitution is remarkably clear on the subject. If there are not enough Electoral College votes to hand victory to any one candidate — as will be the case if the Senate refuses to accept Electoral College votes predicated on manifest and overwhelming fraud — the Constitution spells out who picks the winner: fifty members (one for each state) from the newly seated House of Representatives decide.

Here's the Twelfth Amendment's language:

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. (U.S. Const., Amendment 12, Clause 3.)
​

What's of signal importance here is that the House as a body does not vote. Instead, one House member from each state votes. Handing the matter to the House in this way makes eminent sense because this is the body closest to the most recently expressed will of the American people. If the Electoral College failed, at least the majority of voters in each state will speak through the majority of House members from their states.

Under the 20th Amendment, the vote takes place not with the currently seated House, but with the incoming House. The incoming House has 27 states with a majority of Republican representatives, 20 states with a majority of Democrat representatives, and 3 states that are tied. That spells a clear victory for Donald Trump.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...hallenge_the_election_results_trump_wins.html​

LOL! The fools keep putting in the big "if" that they cannot get over. There are enough electoral votes to determine the President. Biden got 306 votes and only needed 270.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And one more thing that you are forgetting. Pence, who would be needed for this to proceed, wants no part of it. Not all Republicans are immoral or idiots. It was known that he wanted no part of this so Louis Gohmert of Texas tried for the issue with a lawsuit:

Pence refused to sign on to plan to overturn election, lawyers say

Like the vast majority of Trump lawsuits he lost:

Judge throws out Gohmert suit aimed at empowering Pence to overturn 2020 election results

Your fantasy just went up in a puff of legal smoke.

 

[Dave Watchman]

Incorrect. The elections were certified by the states. That is a fact. Your claims are simply incorrect and out of date. By the way, quoting out of context is improper. You ignored what it takes to lead up to that point. You ignored this:

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,

Yes, the States did certify their elections, but that "certification" has, and is, being contested.

Remember that Texas and 21 other States had issue with the new methods that one of the States used in the election process that they "certified". While SCOTUS declined their standing in the suit, the legal theory remains valid. SCOTUS had no problem the legality of it, just that the thing was being sent from another State in the Union, who had no standing to contest it. This draws attention to a still unaddressed, and very important, issue for the nation.

Talk about context. Has there ever been an election in modern time with so much of it. States suing each other, Supreme court involvement, Senators making videos and letters calling for the rejection of Electoral College results. If a house is divided, how will it stand. Trump is not some out of context wild card sore loser dude. He wouldn't be doing this if he didn't see something wrong was going on.

All that the Vice-President can do is to open all of the certificates. There is only one set. We know what they say. The count will show that Biden won. At that point this largely ceremonial event is over. Please note you need the big "if" to proceed to where you want to go.

I know the language of the Vice President's role here is ambiguous if not merely ceremonial. I wonder if it wasn't set that way for a reason. And I know there is some unfortunate chatter surrounding Pence. Some suggest he should resign to make room for a favorable, more cooperative, replacement. I don't think it's necessary.

As long as Trump does not concede, and taking into consideration of the rest of the overall atmosphere, this, in all probability, will go to each State having ONE VOTE.

And it would be a far favorable outcome than to have a Vice President "count" the votes in his own favor. Logic would fear such an outcome.

"What's of signal importance here is that the House as a body does not vote. Instead, one House member from each state votes. Handing the matter to the House in this way makes eminent sense because this is the body closest to the most recently expressed will of the American people. If the Electoral College failed, at least the majority of voters in each state will speak through the majority of House members from their states.

"Under the 20th Amendment, the vote takes place not with the currently seated House, but with the incoming House. The incoming House has 27 states with a majority of Republican representatives, 20 states with a majority of Democrat representatives, and 3 states that are tied.

"That spells a clear victory for Donald Trump...​

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, the States did certify their elections, but that "certification" has, and is, being contested.

Remember that Texas and 21 other States had issue with the new methods that one of the States used in the election process that they "certified". While SCOTUS declined their standing in the suit, the legal theory remains valid. SCOTUS had no problem the legality of it, just that the thing was being sent from another State in the Union, who had no standing to contest it. This draws attention to a still unaddressed, and very important, issue for the nation.

Talk about context. Has there ever been an election in modern time with so much of it. States suing each other, Supreme court involvement, Senators making videos and letters calling for the rejection of Electoral College results. If a house is divided, how will it stand. Trump is not some out of context wild card sore loser dude. He wouldn't be doing this if he didn't see something wrong was going on.



I know the language of the Vice President's role here is ambiguous if not merely ceremonial. I wonder if it wasn't set that way for a reason. And I know there is some unfortunate chatter surrounding Pence. Some suggest he should resign to make room for a favorable, more cooperative, replacement. I don't think it's necessary.

As long as Trump does not concede, and taking into consideration of the rest of the overall atmosphere, this, in all probability, will go to each State having ONE VOTE.

And it would be a far favorable outcome than to have a Vice President "count" the votes in his own favor. Logic would fear such an outcome.

"What's of signal importance here is that the House as a body does not vote. Instead, one House member from each state votes. Handing the matter to the House in this way makes eminent sense because this is the body closest to the most recently expressed will of the American people. If the Electoral College failed, at least the majority of voters in each state will speak through the majority of House members from their states.

"Under the 20th Amendment, the vote takes place not with the currently seated House, but with the incoming House. The incoming House has 27 states with a majority of Republican representatives, 20 states with a majority of Democrat representatives, and 3 states that are tied.

"That spells a clear victory for Donald Trump...​

Why do you think that the majority of Trump supporters are idiots or immoral?

Is reality that hard to accept for them or you?

Once again if you look into this a majority of each house of Congress has to agree that the electoral votes are not valid. The new House is still majority Democratic. They will not agree with an attempt to steal the election. I doubt if very many Republican Senators would agree to this either.

 

[metis]

Yes, the States did certify their elections, but that "certification" has, and is, being contested.

Only by those who want a coup with Trump as dictator.

Trump is not some out of context wild card sore loser dude. He wouldn't be doing this if he didn't see something wrong was going on.

Trump is for Trump, so suggesting that he's doing what he's doing on some sort of politically moral basis is simply poppycock.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Talk about context. Has there ever been an election in modern time with so much of it. States suing each other, Supreme court involvement, Senators making videos and letters calling for the rejection of Electoral College results. If a house is divided, how will it stand. Trump is not some out of context wild card sore loser dude. He wouldn't be doing this if he didn't see something wrong was going on.

I think Trump not being a sore loser dude is debatable. ;-)

In your context, what will prevent every other losing party from doing the exact same thing? There is no real question here: Biden clearly won the election. The divided house is being divided by undemocratic tactics designed to obfuscate the American people.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I wont be annoyed with you for what you say to me from
yourperspective. But you Americans seem from mine
so myopic, so insular and really, so sorry, so spoilt with your little
high class worries.

i have concealed my identity since i first posted,
with only someone similar to me is my persona.
I don't want anyone to be able to find me or learn more
who I am. Its too dangerous for me.

Its not little high class worry. I can disappear.

You Americans are so oh Trump is the ogre,
everything of him is terrible. Cannot cope the virus.

Don't you know the virus started in China, and
the ccp forbids all travel out of wuhan
EXCEPT to go out to all parts of the world.

You do know this? So many other wrong things they do
only about covid never mind others.

What does Americans do about this ccp crime?
Oh Trump is a terrible racist to say China, to stop travel,.

ALL of western nations do a terrible job trying to resist the plague,
also China but the ccp is all lies about what happens there.

Lie that its from Italy, lies its us mi,Italy, lies about deaths,
lies about spread, tell the WHO
to lie, everything lies!

Don't you know? Americans so busy with hating Trump, if he says what i said, oh its a lie because he said it. Its no lie. Trump says China lies makes him a liar. So stuoid.

I'm stupid to write this, I'm in china
Your president takes a short vacation and you think he will become a dictator.
No real problems so lots of hysterical imaginings.

Nobody has an eye on the ball seems like.

I say this for love of America and freedom.

Americans say thats so corny stupid right wing
talk..

Sorry but this is so upsetting for me it makes me cry, please Americans wake up to things past ends of your nose!

Sorry I forget my English when its so emotional issue for me

Thank you, Audie for sharing your perspectives.

I am not defending China. I am not calling Trump a racist for criticizing China.

This thread is about Trump. Don’t you see? It is BECAUSE we never want to end up with an authoritarian like in China, that we make a big deal when Trump breaks the norms of our democracy.

This may seem small compared to China. I don’t deny this. But we cannot afford not to be vigilant. We have democracy and we don’t like it when buffoons like Trump erode it - even in a small way. We owe it to future generations to protect what we have very jealously. Why would I tolerate it, simply because it’s much worse in places like China?

 

[Dave Watchman]

Why do you think that the majority of Trump supporters are idiots or immoral?

My thoughts are not your thoughts.

Is reality that hard to accept for them or you?

Our ways are higher than their ways.

 

[Audie]

My thoughts are not your thoughts.



Our ways are higher than their ways.

We see him as weak and beholden to China.

Trump is super flawed but not a suck up to ccp.

 

[Audie]

Have you listened to the man when he rants about the election and cheating? He is worse than any creationists that you know of. Seriously that was an accurate description of him. That is not a case of TDS.

Drug addicts never admit they have a ptob.

 

[Dave Watchman]

In your context, what will prevent every other losing party from doing the exact same thing?

Because they never do.

The last time anything like this happened was in the 1800"s.

When it gets to this point, it means there's a problem.

If Trump was a nut, he wouldn't have so many prominent and serious supporters.

They would have taken him away in a straight jacket by now.

But they haven't, and he hasn't, conceded that is.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

If Trump was a nut, he wouldn't have so many prominent and serious supporters.

They would have taken him away in a straight jacket by now.

But they haven't, and he hasn't, conceded that is.

Um...you're aware of the proliferation of the QAnon conspiracy theories, right? And the sheer nuttiness of them?

To quote Kris Kristofferson, "It's all a bloody circus and the clowns are in control."