The New York Times on Wednesday published two memos from the 2020 Trump campaign legal team showing their early planning for using alternate electors and the Jan. 6 Electoral College certification date to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.
Pretty soon, there will be a full complement of smoking guns—all pointing directly at Donald Trump.
The live hearings in Spring are going to be lit.
Fair to a despotic megalomaniac tyrant, perhaps…
and yet Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) has the nerve to state “We know one thing from the Democrats this year: It is that if they can’t win by the rules, they’ll change the rules.”
smh
That’s really a mind boggler of a statement. A fair reading of our election laws says that we can ignore them and all the votes.
With today’s GQP, every accusation is a confession.
I cannot believe all this scheming was initially instigated by Nancy Pelosi. But then again, how well do you really ever know a person?
"Cheesedick - Troupis" - it sounds like a venereal disease.
“In conclusion, it appears that voting by an alternative slate of electors is unproblematic in Arizona and Wisconsin; slightly problematic in Michigan (requiring access to the senate chamber); somewhat dicey in Georgia and Pennsylvania in the event that one or more electors don’t attend (require gubernatorial ratification of alternates); and very problematic in Nevada (given the role accorded to the Secretary of State).”
That’s the whole point of having the electoral college to begin with, to be able to correct the mistakes of voters in having voted for the wrong person.
Then it failed in 2016
Aye, that it did.
Founders weren’t perfect. They also created impeachment, which has successfully removed zero presidents in the entire history of the country.
This should be the subject of questions during daily hearings of the 1/6 Committee.
We are reading about it on TPM, but to get it into the general consciousness, the committee should be going full Watergate. The Democrats must be getting their messaging advice from the ghost of Neville Chamberlain.
It’s so enlightening to know that when lawyers open their thesaurus, they find that “problematic” is an acceptable synonym for “illegal”.
It will be. What you don’t do is invite someone to a public hearing when you don’t know what they might say.
And the only way to know what they’re going to say is to have them have sworn testimony behind closed doors first, so you’ve got a copy of how they should answer any given question in public.
The process effectively removed Richard Nixon.
I vote to impeach again.
And they will.
But not until they have all the information at their fingertips so that they will not be surprised by any of the witnesses’ answers.
This isn’t 1973. The Democrats are not the problem. The media is.
The threat of it. No way to really say for certain that if called to do it publicly, the Senate would have followed through on the threat.