Pages: 1 ... 484 485 [486] 487 488 ... 808   Go Down

Author Topic: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa  (Read 466575 times)

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4763
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9700 on: April 07, 2021, 03:17:03 pm »

I'm not defending Trump's win or loss.  I stated here months ago I thought he lost.  But I am defending his right to defend himself demanding recounts just as the congresswoman who lost by 6 votes has a right to defend her rights and demand recounts and fair play.

Has anyone denied him that right? Has anyone here on this forum suggested that?
Logged
--
Robert

James Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2347
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9701 on: April 07, 2021, 03:29:16 pm »

That's OK.  Others can read the article and make up their own minds.

I just read every word.  I'm baffled as to how you can come to the conclusion that Pelosi is trying anything underhanded here.  If you could point me to something specific in the article, or in Pelosi's actions, that support that, I'll listen.  That said, unless I missed it, the dispute seems to be over 22 votes that were not counted for some unspecified reason, and the Republican winner isn't actually disputing the legitimacy of those votes.

What am I missing?
Logged

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4851
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9702 on: April 07, 2021, 03:32:37 pm »

It's unfortunate you think of my consistent beliefs as "parroting".

Why is that unfortunate?
Logged

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9703 on: April 07, 2021, 03:34:25 pm »

just as the congresswoman who lost by 6 votes has a right to defend her rights and demand recounts and fair play.

Which you call "nefarious plans to overthrow the election and democracy", an "attempted diktat", "Overriding an election", a "power grab", and a "plan to overthrow the republican win by Congressional fiat". The congresswoman had an absolute ironclad right given to her by the Constitution to challenge the results in the House which she did with a formal challenge that was later withdrawn.

What was that you were saying about your "consistent beliefs"?
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9704 on: April 07, 2021, 04:19:11 pm »

Of course.  He defended this right to a recount some sixty times in courts across land and LOST.  Every single time but one, IIRC.

Do you also defend his right to ask Georgia to "find" over a thousand votes in his favour?

Do you also defend his right to request and support an insurrection in the Capitol in support of his perceived "right"?

(anyone taking bets on whether these questions get answers?)
I don't know about the 1000 votes question.
He didn't support an insurrection.  There was no insurrection. It was a demonstration that devolved into a riot because there weren't enough police to keep order.

Where do I collect on the bet?  :)

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9705 on: April 07, 2021, 04:24:02 pm »

I just read every word.  I'm baffled as to how you can come to the conclusion that Pelosi is trying anything underhanded here.  If you could point me to something specific in the article, or in Pelosi's actions, that support that, I'll listen.  That said, unless I missed it, the dispute seems to be over 22 votes that were not counted for some unspecified reason, and the Republican winner isn't actually disputing the legitimacy of those votes.

What am I missing?

You're not missing anything in the article. There is nothing unusual or nefarious whatsoever in a challenge to a congressional election being made to the House. In addition to the article's inclusion of this statement,

Lofgren has defended the work of the committee and pointed out that election contests are not unusual, and used by both parties. In fact, Republicans are currently challenging the win in Illinois of Democratic Rep. Lauren Underwood, which the committee is also reviewing.

"Republicans know how this process works – over the past 90 years the Congress has adjudicated, in a bipartisan manner, more than a hundred contested elections cases filed by Republicans and Democrats alike in races nowhere near as close as Iowa’s Second," Lofgren said. "With that history in mind, it is profoundly disappointing some of my Republican colleagues are now painting this process as somehow nefarious."

the article also includes a link to the response to the Republican candidate's objection to the challenge in the House which states,

As then-Judge Antonin Scalia once observed,

It is difficult to imagine a clearer case of “textually demonstrable constitutional commitment” of an issue to another branch of government to the exclusion of the courts than the language of Article I, section 5, clause 1 . . . . The provision states not merely that each House “may judge” these matters, but that each House “shall be the Judge.” The exclusion of others—and in particular of others who are judges—could not be more evident.

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/Hart-v.-Miller-Meeks_March-10-Letter-Reply-Brief_COS_FINAL.pdf
« Last Edit: April 07, 2021, 04:41:46 pm by TechTalk »
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9706 on: April 07, 2021, 04:32:11 pm »

There was no insurrection. It was a demonstration that devolved into a riot because there weren't enough police to keep order.

Pure fantasy. There were enough police to keep order for a demonstration. Only when it became a violent riot and insurrection, led by domestic terrorists, were they overwhelmed.

How ridiculous to blame the police that were protecting the Capitol, many of whom were seriously injured or even died, for what the terrorists did. Shameful in the extreme!
« Last Edit: April 07, 2021, 04:39:22 pm by TechTalk »
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9707 on: April 07, 2021, 04:47:08 pm »

You're not missing anything in the article. There is nothing unusual or nefarious whatsoever in a challenge to a congressional election being made to the House. In addition to the articles inclusion of this statement,

Lofgren has defended the work of the committee and pointed out that election contests are not unusual, and used by both parties. In fact, Republicans are currently challenging the win in Illinois of Democratic Rep. Lauren Underwood, which the committee is also reviewing.

"Republicans know how this process works – over the past 90 years the Congress has adjudicated, in a bipartisan manner, more than a hundred contested elections cases filed by Republicans and Democrats alike in races nowhere near as close as Iowa’s Second," Lofgren said. "With that history in mind, it is profoundly disappointing some of my Republican colleagues are now painting this process as somehow nefarious."

the article also includes a link to the response to the Republican candidate's objection to the challenge in the House which states,

As then-Judge Antonin Scalia once observed,

It is difficult to imagine a clearer case of “textually demonstrable constitutional commitment” of an issue to another branch of government to the exclusion of the courts than the language of Article I, section 5, clause 1 . . . . The provision states not merely that each House “may judge” these matters, but that each House “shall be the Judge.” The exclusion of others—and in particular of others who are judges—could not be more evident.

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/Hart-v.-Miller-Meeks_March-10-Letter-Reply-Brief_COS_FINAL.pdf

The republican won. Democrat Pelosi wanted to use Congress to override the election in a power grab. That's democracy?  The last time Congress threw out an election was in 1938; that's 83 years ago.  It's amazing that people who complained about Trump trying to "overturn" an election can support a power grab like this.  Even the Democrat congresswoman who lost had the commonsense and decency to admit defeat and put this whole thing to bed.  They went through a recount and analysis.  Pelosi changing the results at that point would have been a pure power grab.

James Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2347
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9708 on: April 07, 2021, 04:55:46 pm »

The republican won. Democrat Pelosi wanted to use Congress to override the election in a power grab. That's democracy?  The last time Congress threw out an election was in 1938; that's 83 years ago.  It's amazing that people who complained about Trump trying to "overturn" an election can support a power grab like this.  Even the Democrat congresswoman who lost had the commonsense and decency to admit defeat and put this whole thing to bed.  They went through a recount and analysis.  Pelosi changing the results at that point would have been a pure power grab.

Why do you think "Democrat Pelosi" wanted to "override the election in a power grab?"
Logged

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9709 on: April 07, 2021, 05:28:02 pm »

The republican won. Democrat Pelosi wanted to use Congress to override the election in a power grab. That's democracy?  The last time Congress threw out an election was in 1938; that's 83 years ago.  It's amazing that people who complained about Trump trying to "overturn" an election can support a power grab like this.  Even the Democrat congresswoman who lost had the commonsense and decency to admit defeat and put this whole thing to bed.  They went through a recount and analysis.  Pelosi changing the results at that point would have been a pure power grab.

You appear to arrive at this conclusion by simply ignoring every inconvenient fact which doesn't fit your false narrative. The only reason there was a challenge in the House is because the Democratic candidate filed one. That's how it works. Pelosi didn't file it for her. That is NOT how it works. There was no "Pelosi power grab". It exists only in your fevered imagination.

And yes, that is democracy. Contested congressional elections can be challenged in Congress as established in the Constitution by the framers. It's happened many times. There were 107 contested election cases considered by the U.S. House of Representatives from the 73rd Congress through the 111th Congress, 1933 to 2009. Here's a list of each of those.

https://fas.org/Congressional Research Service/Contested Election Cases in the House of Representatives: 1933 to 2009.pdf

And, your assertion that "The last time Congress threw out an election was in 1938; that's 83 years ago." is not only irrelevant but also false. The last time it happened was in 1985 with Rep. Frank McCloskey.

https://www.cambridge.org/journals/studies-in-american-political-development/contested-election-cases-in-the-house-of-representatives

Article I, Section 5, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution states: “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns, and Qualifications of its own Members. . . .” With this simple statement, each chamber of Congress is granted complete authority over how its membership will be comprised. Thus, when a given election is contested, that is, when there is a dispute over who is the rightful occupant of a given seat after the ballots have been collected and tallied, each chamber acts as the sole arbiter without external constraint. This constitutional guarantee was an artifact of English and colonial rule, as fear of executive authority led the House of Commons and nearly every colonial legislature to adopt similar protections.
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9710 on: April 07, 2021, 06:45:05 pm »

the dispute seems to be over 22 votes that were not counted for some unspecified reason

The brief, which was filed to answer questions from the House committee on the election challenge, details the 22 ballots which were never counted and which would have given the win to the Democratic candidate. They are sorted into various categories beginning on page 10 of the brief in answer to question #3.

Question 3

Please describe as clearly, precisely, and comprehensively as possible (a) any ballots that were validly cast by eligible voters but were erroneously excluded from the state-certified vote totals at any point during the initial tabulation of results, the canvass, or the recount, and (b) what, if anything, the Committee should do to determine whether and how each of these ballots should be added to the vote totals.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/reply-hart-brief

Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9711 on: April 07, 2021, 07:15:03 pm »

Why do you think "Democrat Pelosi" wanted to "override the election in a power grab?"
Demcrats have a very small margin of seats in the house.  So another Democrat would help her position as speaker and Democrat power there overall.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9712 on: April 07, 2021, 07:44:48 pm »


You appear to arrive at this conclusion by simply ignoring every inconvenient fact which doesn't fit your false narrative. The only reason there was a challenge in the House is because the Democratic candidate filed one. That's how it works. Pelosi didn't file it for her. That is NOT how it works. There was no "Pelosi power grab". It exists only in your fevered imagination.

And yes, that is democracy. Contested congressional elections can be challenged in Congress as established in the Constitution by the framers. It's happened many times. There were 107 contested election cases considered by the U.S. House of Representatives from the 73rd Congress through the 111th Congress, 1933 to 2009. Here's a list of each of those.

https://fas.org/Congressional Research Service/Contested Election Cases in the House of Representatives: 1933 to 2009.pdf

And, your assertion that "The last time Congress threw out an election was in 1938; that's 83 years ago." is not only irrelevant but also false. The last time it happened was in 1985 with Rep. Frank McCloskey.


https://www.cambridge.org/journals/studies-in-american-political-development/contested-election-cases-in-the-house-of-representatives

Article I, Section 5, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution states: “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns, and Qualifications of its own Members. . . .” With this simple statement, each chamber of Congress is granted complete authority over how its membership will be comprised. Thus, when a given election is contested, that is, when there is a dispute over who is the rightful occupant of a given seat after the ballots have been collected and tallied, each chamber acts as the sole arbiter without external constraint. This constitutional guarantee was an artifact of English and colonial rule, as fear of executive authority led the House of Commons and nearly every colonial legislature to adopt similar protections.
I should have clarified that the 1938 decision threw out a seated congressman after an election.    So it would have been 83 years if the same thing happened this time in 2021 as in 1938. Apparently the 1985 decision, there was no seated member.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-warning-to-pelosi-on-iowa-11616453810

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9713 on: April 07, 2021, 08:06:32 pm »

Apparently the 1985 decision, there was no seated member.

In 1985, the Republican candidate was certified as the winner by 34 votes by the Republican Secretary of State in Indiana who rushed the recount and certification process. The House refused to seat either member and conducted its own vote recount with independent auditors from the General Accounting Office. At the end of the process, the Democratic candidate was declared the winner by 4 votes and seated at the beginning of May following a vote by the entire House.

Speaker Pelosi could have refused to seat the candidate certified by Iowa in her "nefarious plans to overthrow the election and democracy", as you refer to it, until the challenge was decided. In her diabolical and nefarious plot, she decided to seat the congresswoman during the challenge.

« Last Edit: April 07, 2021, 08:14:29 pm by TechTalk »
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

dreed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1715
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9714 on: April 07, 2021, 08:33:48 pm »

Republicans are changing the rules nation wide to try and prevent them from losing the election again:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/07/lets-not-miss-whats-important-about-anti-voting-legislation/

It isn't just Georgia.

it is happening elsewhere too.

Georgia is just the first.
Logged

JoeKitchen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5022
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9715 on: April 07, 2021, 08:36:15 pm »

Republicans are changing the rules nation wide to try and prevent them from losing the election again:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/07/lets-not-miss-whats-important-about-anti-voting-legislation/

It isn't just Georgia.

it is happening elsewhere too.

Georgia is just the first.

BlueAnon much?

And they say progressives are susceptible to conspiracy theories.   ;D ;D ;D
Logged
"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9716 on: April 07, 2021, 08:44:22 pm »

BlueAnon much?

Someone has to oppose the RepubliQans!
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4690
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9717 on: April 07, 2021, 08:54:34 pm »

I don't know about the 1000 votes question.
He didn't support an insurrection.  There was no insurrection. It was a demonstration that devolved into a riot because there weren't enough police to keep order.

Where do I collect on the bet?  :)

Not from me, I assure you.  You didn't answer the questions, you simply deflected with your usual bullshit.

Do you really expect us to believe you haven't heard of orngman's telephone call to Georgia? 
Do you really expect us to believe that "there was no insurrection"  We all watched it on TV FFS.

Logged

James Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2347
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9718 on: April 07, 2021, 09:03:21 pm »

Demcrats have a very small margin of seats in the house.  So another Democrat would help her position as speaker and Democrat power there overall.

Oy.

Not, "For what reason would Pelosi be trying to interfere in an election," but rather, "What actual action makes you think Pelosi is underhandedly interfering in an election." 
Logged

James Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2347
Re: Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa
« Reply #9719 on: April 07, 2021, 09:14:56 pm »

BlueAnon much?

And they say progressives are susceptible to conspiracy theories.   ;D ;D ;D

It's hardly a conspiracy theory to suggest that Republicans try to suppress Democratic votes through legislation.  Heck, Republicans have admitted it more than once, in more than one venue. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 484 485 [486] 487 488 ... 808   Go Up