Liz Cheney Shuts Down Trump's 'Malicious Lies' With Blunt Jan. 6 Reminder
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) on Friday checked Donald Trump over his latest string of “malicious lies,” after the president-elect continued his push to rewrite the history of the deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol just days before the fourth anniversary of the attack.
“Donald, this is not the Soviet Union. You can’t change the truth and you cannot silence us,” Cheney wrote in a social media post.
Her remarks come after Trump complained on his Truth Social platform about President Joe Biden honoring both her and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) — who helped lead a House committee that investigated the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, attack — with the Presidential Citizens Medal.
She responded to Trump by reminding him of lies he’d told about the 2020 presidential election and of his failed coup attempt before the end of his first term in the White House.
“Remember how you sent a mob to our Capitol and then watched the violence on television and refused for hours to instruct the mob to leave? Remember how your former Vice President prevented you from overturning our Republic? We remember,” Cheney wrote.
“And now, as you take office again, the American people need to reject your latest malicious falsehoods and stand as the guardrails of our Constitutional Republic — to protect the America we love from you.”
Trump’s Truth Social post featured false claims about Cheney and the House Jan. 6 committee, incorrectly stating that members “destroyed and deleted all evidence” from its investigation into the attack. (The panel’s final report and supporting materials are available online. )
It also falsely claimed that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) “refused to accept the help which was offered for security” on the day of the insurrection. (This has long been debunked. )
“Liz Cheney, Cryin’ Adam Kinzinger, Bennie Thompson, and the rest of these dishonest Thugs have gotten away with horrible things under the pretense of January 6th,” the president-elect wrote of those who’d served on the House committee.
“They have destroyed the lives of many people, and are rewarded by getting Biden Fake Medals. This is not America. January 20th cannot come fast enough,” he added, referring to the date of his upcoming presidential inauguration.
Last month, Trump accused Cheney of “ egregious and unthinkable acts of crime ” after Republicans criticized the House committee in an interim report.
Cheney, in response, said that the GOP-backed report “disregards the truth” and described Trump as a “cruel and vindictive man.”
Tags
Who is online
219 visitors
Here's Trump's ridiculous post:
>>>
Here's Cheney's reply:
>>>
IMO, the best part is when she reminds him that he's a traitor:
"Remember how your former Vice President prevented you from overturning our Republic? We Remember."
Neither can you Liz. Tampering with witnesses is a federal offense.
So is tampering, withholding, and destroying evidence.
ridiculous
But it's true and you can't offer any evidence to the contrary
Neither claim has merit. Both have been debunked, and it isn't very hard to find that out.
This does illustrate something, though—that Trump and MAGA politicians can make frivolous claims and his supporters will just swallow them hook, line and sinker.
It doesn't even matter if the claims are debunked, and Trump knows it, because he knows how stupid and easily manipulated his supporters are. Once the bullshit has been dispersed with enough conviction on Fox and other places, no amount of debunking will completely unplant the seed from their minds. This is evidenced by how many people still, to this day, refuse to believe that Trump did anything wrong after the last election, when the truth is he committed what should be considered the highest of high crimes, attempted subversion of the Republic itself.
No, Greg, that is not how it works. You have to prove (or at least show persuasive evidence) that Cheney did these acts. The individual making the accusation has the burden or proof.
How do you know it is true? Show us the proof. Your mere belief is meaningless.
He believes it so it just has to be true!
he has one of those magic maga 8 balls ...
I think that the HOR is held to HOR rules on committees, and not to US code.
and
Where is YOUR proof?
Only have to say it, no evidence necessary
Just call him what he is, a fat, skin skinned narcissist liar. No use wasting breath on that POS he just keep lying.
maga traitor is easier to type ...
Mega hater is even easier
it's very disconcerting that more than half of all voters chose a candidate that is a convicted felon and who himself, attempted to steal a free and fair election with a campaign of lies denying the results and advice of his own WH counsels, and by instigating other willfully ignorant traitors to obstruct a constitutionally mandated certification of the election. we've faced them before, and we'll face them again, defending our constitution. that is the price of keeping what's left of our liberty.
Yep, they sure did vote for him.
That should tell you something about the status of the democrat party in the minds of the voters. But it probably won't penetrate thick progressive skulls
Meanwhile, the status of the Republican Party is that of an insurgent, proto-fascist party that couldn't care less about things like honor and truth; with an evil, traitorous tyrant at the helm.
Pat yourself on the back.
tells people capable of clear thinking, is not enough Republicans are drinking enough, so as they might have a plausible X cuse to make defending the disgrace they have left US All to face
funny how it seems that to truly make america great again, criminal/traitor loving maga needs to disappear ...
The triggering is so bad that many on the left are siding with one the most conservative war hawks in recent memory. Hilarious!
Rational people agree with Cheney because her position is based on fact and logic. What is sad (sick?) are the number of 'conservatives' who have abandoned the core conservative principles of their party and have instead accepted the Trump-infected variant of the GOP.
Lol.. The woman who flipped her abortion position on a dime because Kamala demanded it is now the embodiment of a principled person.
Amazing seeing Trump supporters abandon their conservative roots and hold as a villain one of the few GOP members who did not sell out to Trump.
What's amazing is watching how easily people are gulled by a career politician trying to maintain relevance if she says something that aligns with their biases.
It is easy to distinguish rational thinking from misguided, cultish behavior. Those who support Trump no matter what he does are not thinking for themselves and they continue to damage our nation. Those like Cheney who criticize Trump based on fact and logic are holding true to integrity and character.
As long as someone hates Trump as much as they do rational thought goes out the window and they proclaim the person a hero.
Conflating harsh criticism for someone so wholly unfit to be PotUS with hatred is naive and simplistic (and, of course, rushing to defend Trump ... again). Most who are against Trump are not so because they (emotionally) hate the guy but rather because fact and logic shows that he has no business holding any public office and is very bad for this nation.
For example, I could set aside the fact that Trump is an asshole if he had qualities that net make him good for the nation. You know, qualities like integrity, presidential demeanor, character, intelligence, sense of and respect for duty, ... But Trump is the extreme opposite in all those criteria.
What has really been conflated? The lefts conflation hammer has been in turbo mode with Trump for over five years now.
Not interested in that rhetoric in the least.
Not in the least ……
[✘]
Parts of this thread were removed for no value.
Why aren't you concerned that Cheney didn't address the biggest threat that day, which was the attempt on the life of incoming Vice President's at the DNC.
What an oddball question to come from nowhere.
What are you talking about?
Funny you have no idea that there were two pipe bombs planted the early morning hours of Jan 6th. Kamala Harris for some strange reason was at the DNC on inauguration day Jan 6th (which she has never explained why). One of the pipe bombs was located at the DNC that could have killed Harris. The discovery of these bombs took place at the same time the riot at the Capital took place. All of the agencies abruptly stop their investigations of these bombs without finding the bomber or giving any explanation of the event.
Interesting take since there have been news articles in my news feed for about a week now of the FBI investigation and a released video of the suspect. The House dropped their investigation report on the 2nd.
You are correct, there are a few people in congress and media that aren't letting the story die. The video you mentioned has been altered to a frame rate slower than any commercial camera used, another interest note about the video, the eyes of the suspected bomber have been blurred out.
You seem to have missed the point. What does your question have to do with my comment?
You did say you agreed with her based on fact and logic, correct. Then you should be concerned that she along with the J6 committee totally ignored the "fact" there where pipe bombs placed on Jan 6th that could have killed the incoming Vice President. There is no logical explanation as to why this person hasn't been caught, when they have used geofencing to apprehend other people on Jan 6th that did nothing other than be somewhere they weren't supposed to be. Facts surrounding this investigation are astounding that these agencies are either totally incompetent or they know who it is and just don't want to say.
I agree with her assessment of Trump's wrongdoing after his election loss in 2020. You know, the subject of the seed:
Stop with the dishonest strawman tactics, pay attention to the most basic context and stick with what I wrote.
No, it doesn't work like that, if Cheney deliberately ignored evidence because it didn't fit the narrative of what she and Thompson were pushing she needs to be called out. You can call it a strawman which only puts you in the same boat. BTW don't try and speak about conservative principles.
... uh, you really should be used to it by now ...
the visual metaphor would be a hawk casually crossing the sky with 1 or 2 sparrows attempting to attack it ...
Now you shift to the debunked talking point of Cheney ignoring evidence. You are all over the map. And you are of course denying the overwhelming evidence of Trump's wrongdoing.
A Trump supporter is on a very compromised foundation to pretend that he is upholding conservative principles. Supporting Trump is an abandonment of many (not all, but many) of the principles of conservatism such as:
Trump does abide by other conservatives principles (e.g. national security) but he grossly violates the ones I have enumerated. So stop pretending that Trump is supporting conservative values and principles ... he is doing what he wants to satisfy his own desires.
what's hilarious is watching people trade what's left of their patriotism for fealty to a self centered autocrat ...
If find some peoples definition of patriotism to be sophomoric at best.
At best …..
Yeah, there's nothing more patriotic than supporting a demagogic tyrant and traitor to the Republic. That's top notch.
Opinions do vary
It is not a matter of opinion that Donald Trump committed an act of tyranny by trying to take power illegally after losing in 2020, betraying his oath, the Constitution, and the American people. An effort that resulted in Americans attacking and desecrating their own Capitol because of his lies.
Seriously, why don't you care about that?
Yes it is but discussing it here is a huge non sequitur.
No it isn't, and claiming otherwise is utterly perverse.
Let me quote Dismayed Patriot who offered this a while back when someone suggested that there are rational reasons to support Trump:
Yup. And this is one way I have summarizes the scoundrel:
One of the most bizarre phenomena of recent times is the ability of Trump supporters to robotically and repeatedly deny the undeniable. They do not seem to care that their 'arguments' and deflections destroy their credibility. Seems as though they are gratified to defend Trump even if their defense is an obvious house of cards that cannot stand up to even the most basic scrutiny.
[deleted][✘]
Future generations are going to look back on this era with shame and bewilderment. I imagine it'll be a somewhat similar feeling to how today's Germans look back on the 1930s, a "How could anyone in their right mind go along with that?" kind of thing. And to be honest, I don't know if the country will still be intact when they do.
some will. Many won’t. C’est la vie.
Except, again, this isn't a matter of opinion. Trump tried to subvert the 2020 election in an attempt to take power that wasn't lawfully his. It's an undeniable fact. It's also an act of tyranny against our Republic.
We have his public lies about "massive fraud" and being the "real" winner. We have the Eastman Memos. We have the fake electors. We have Pence's last-hour act of long awaited courage and integrity to thwart the attempted coup. We have all the other evidence and testimony from the Jan 6 investigation, a great deal of it from Trump's own officials.
Denying it, or pretending it's a matter of opinion is literally sick.
Many current generations are already embarrassed and bewildered.
I have had the same thought many times. This is incrementalism in action. Too many people do not pay attention, too many people dismiss trends until they experience pain personally (way too late).
Certainly sickening to behold. It is as though blind partisanship can overpower critical thinking, morality and integrity.
And just look at the pathetic platitudes that are offered as 'rebuttals'.
You have to remember, they weren't allowed to view any of the hearings. Cause that's the proper way to get down to the actual truth about something, you know, bury your fckn head in the sand, shove your fingers in your ears, go nah nah nah na nam, and only listen to Tump, the biggest LIAR of all pols i've ever seen, and the clowns on the 'right', say llike Fox News Entertaintmeant for gullibles" who had to pay $787,000,000.00 Million damn dollars for promoting Dons election lies, way to go guys.
Good seed, and way to put in place those who can't seem to face, as they've Made America Giant Ass, whole heartedly and retardedly, can't think for themselves, as unfortunately ignorance does seem to rule this country with a newly elected fool, and total Tool
I agree and the only fix... the only way to get on the other side of this is to go through. Trump is the symptom the problem is the 25% that comprise the MAGA base and those within that are using Trump to rise to power. The 1930's German Nazi's didn't give up power without violence. I'm hoping we don't repeat that history, but I fear we will.
I expect a vast majority of Trump voters (and maybe Harris voters too) dont know any more about Hitler or Nazi Germany that what they see on "Inglorious Bastards" or Hogan's Heroes.
There is one thing “rebuttals” like this deserve. Laughter. Hard to take nonsensical comments like this serious.[✘]
Leave Donald Trump out of it.
[deleted]
What some people find sickening others find amusing
It can and has for centuries. Just like hatred can overpower critical thinking, morality and integrity.
The thing is people doing either one can never see they are doing it. But others can.
Sometimes a platitude is all a ridiculous comment deserves. They may not be a rebuttal as much as a statement that the comment was not taken seriously in the first place.
[✘]
The wide ranging belief amongst that crowd are that you can't be a patriot if you didn't vote for trmp. He is my president but that doesn't mean I'm going to support every last position he takes. I'm an American. I'm not a prole under a tyrannical government
The Frog in boiling water
Projection.
Yes, often times some folks project what they are doing on to others but can not see they are doing it themselves. But others can.
While I do see that I think I see it even more often from the left saying anyone that voted for Trump is not a patriot.
It is called thinking for yourself and you should be proud of it. Agreeing with everything of every position taken by someone just shown checking a brain in at the door IMO.
I don't remember anyone calling someone not patriotic if they vote (d) for Trump, but I do distinctly remember a couple who said you were unpatriotic if you did vote for him, one of them stating it many, many times.
The comment is that voting for Trump is irrational, irresponsible, and unpatriotic.
Distinguish criticism of an act from a categorical claim about the person.
voting for a criminal that has no respect for the constitutional rule of law pretty much says it all ...
Given there is nothing in the constitution that barred him from running or anybody from voting for him...
Yes people could vote for him. The criticism was about voting for a scoundrel.
That's a matter of opinion.
no need to explain misplaced patriotism to me, I've seen plenty of maga examples in the last 16 years ...
Alleged scoundrel
Then demonstrate you understand it and people won't explain it to you.
Yup, you defend Trump yet again ... deny the blatantly obvious fact that he is a scoundrel.
There is a difference between stating a fact and defending Trump. It is an opinion that he is a scoundrel, not a fact as some would have you believe. And I have not even given my opinion on the claim so once again you accuse someone without any knowledge.
I wish you luck on walking that tightrope. I wonder if any non biased person is buying it.
disagreeing with your opinion is not defending anybody, deflecting, projecting or anything else you want to spout off.
He exists as a scoundrel only in your imagination.
And that's my opinion of your fuzzy logic.
In the most basic example: this is like the difference between calling out a lie (an act) and deeming someone a liar (categorical claim about the individual).
Pretty sure most everyone understands this distinction.
Obviously there is nothing that Trump can do that you will recognize as wrong.
To not recognize Trump —of all people— as a scoundrel is total partisan blindness.
I'm here talking to it, aren't I?
winter is coming for the J6 traitors when they get pardoned ...
Also, fuzzy logic is a term in mathematics that deals with levels of certainty (as opposed to the strictly binary 100% false vs. 100% true). It is clear that you are using the term inappropriately.
Doesn't demonstrate your understanding.
I understand the distinction. The interesting part is trying to determine how it is being used in a particular instance.
Good, now you need to work on recognizing it.
I already do, especially when it is so glaringly obvious.
[✘]
it's probably too late for a second career ...
Regime Media Will Never Forgive You For Not Caring More About J6 – HotAir
CNN Has the Numbers on How Voters Feel About January 6
It's a safe bet that the lefties will be bringing this dead issue again for the midterms
It is amusing to watch some folks whose lives still seemed to be wrapped around Jan 6th get so upset when they can't get folks that have moved on to not join their obsession.
Trump set a terrible precedent and with his reelection has done so without any consequences. By not holding this traitor accountable, this precedent now stands and will encourage similar behavior from future scoundrels. This is, in effect, an open wound on our nation and you should care about it.
Thanks for the fine example of what I was talking about.
Maybe future "scoundrels" will be elected, maybe not, that would be up to the American people
Thanks for the advice about what I should care about but I will continue to make up my own mind about what I should care about and not let a stranger on the internet tell me.
I explained to you why this is not a dead issue.
Yes, and I rejected it
You explained why, in your opinion, it was not a dead issue.
I explained that in my opinion it was up to the American people to vote for who they want, even if it means they vote for someone who some believe is a traitor or scoundrel or fascist or any other name Du jour. As long as the person is constitutionally allowed to run then they can run. Maybe the dems should look into changing of the constitution to include accused scoundrels are not allowed to run for Potus.
Do you actually consider Trump an upstanding moral and ethical role model ?
Cause he’s a fckn scumbag scoundrel that so many bend over backwards for whatever stupid reason, to deny and or defend,as it has not an end, and that is the sure fire sign of a cult. Ever run through the wall chasing a pitcher…?
Of course not. Neither do I think he is the brother of Beelzebub
he’s more likely related to zbeelzebub
no use in negotiating with those unwilling to compromise. speak to maga in a language they can understand.
Nah, watching liberals kissing Cheneys ass over their Trump triggering, is by far one of the funnies things I’ve ever seen.
Left wing loons kissing the ass of a right wing loon ……
You can’t write shit like this.
MAGAs be like, "Yeah, but what about Portland?"
And leftists be like "yeah, but what about Charlottsville".
What is your point?
[✘]
[deleted][✘]
[deleted][✘]
Here Are The Top 10 Lies Of Liz Cheney And The January 6th Committee
Yeah, I'll trust Bill Cosby to make me a drink before I believe anything Cheney has to say.
The Federalist is one of the biggest purveyors of pro-Trump misinformation and propaganda out there. Good choice...
Right off the bat, the very first item on the list is a non-starter. Try looking up the definition of the word insurrection. If Jan 6 wasn't a revolt or uprising against an established government or authority, then nothing is. The word is applicable.
I read the whole piece and every single point is classic propaganda, taking kernels of truth and twisting them into something intentionally designed to mislead and whitewash a situation.
For example, number 5 was not a "lie" told by anyone during the hearings. The claim was always presented as a secondhand account and was anecdotal, not a claim of firsthand, in-person certainty. Hutchinson didn't testify that it happened, but that Anthony Ornato told her it happened, and she wasn't the only witness to testify that they heard something similar from him. He of course claimed he "couldn't recall" saying it—the classic legal loophole, because "can't recall" is different from a hard denial, and is often used as a way to avoid actually answering questions, while simultaneously avoiding future charges of perjury.
There's not much point in going through the rest of it, being more of the same and obviously written to appeal to nothing more than the confirmation bias of Trump supporters. In other words, mostly worthless.
So because you can't disprove any of the information, you want to cry about the source?
These MAGA cultists have been allowed, mainly by the media, to present a redefining of Jan 6th that puts the Lost Cause of the Confederacy to shame. Trump will now put pedal to the metal about this, just this weekend he held a party at Maralago celebrating Jan 6 conspiracists like Eastman, Michael Flynn, and Giuliani. Trump "truths" about this topic almost every day. He will not rest until history proclaims him the victim of Jan 6th, instead of what he is, the cause.
Why is the original J6 so important to the left right now. It's ancient history and only delayed an official function for a day or so. Then Biden proceeded to destroy democracy for the next four years. Trump did cause the half assed riot, much less an insurrection
Did you even read my reply? I offered you perfectly valid "disprovals" of two of the claims, and didn't see the point in wasting any more time on the rest of it.
I heard about that. It's disgusting.
Something that'll never happen outside of his cult's bubble.
Freudian slip?
Trump is trying to set the stage for authoritarianism. He even wants the power rewrite history, which authoritarians all claim. And because of weakness in the media he is getting away with it.
You lost any point crying about the source. Why continue?
Nice cop out.
I don't really care, though. You consistently strike me as an unserious bad faith actor, not worth wasting much time on.
You started by crying over the source.[✘]
You're preaching to the choir, John. lol
And there have been failures across the board, not just with the media. DOJ wasted far too much time worrying about appearances of bias, and Harris and Walz should have been much more blatant and honest about him in their campaigning.
See? This is what I mean. You are quite often provided with information from members I see you interacting with, information you simply ignore while claiming the other person can't "back up their claims."
It's as if you're just trolling, hence the appearance of being unserious, and someone acting in bad faith.
And yet you provided no information. Just opinion. Just like many others.
I did not provide you with opinion, I relayed facts.
You keep arguing the point [deleted][✘]
You're being ridiculous.
No. I'm just not buying into the BS. Don't cry about a source and expect to have any credibility in the next sentence.
I didn't give you any BS. I'm starting to think you may just be incapable of discussing anything more complex than a bumper sticker slogan, so you have to find ways like this to avoid doing so.
sosdd
From 7.1
You began your comment crying about the source. Then went off on some rant without a single thing to back up any of your claims. [deleted][✘]
LOL. This again? See? You do it all the time. It's a cop out. If you don't like someone's "claims," then reply with a thoughtful explanation of how or why. That's how discussions work. Nobody is going to provide you with footnotes for every single word they type, nor should they have to.
Says the guy who posted something from The Federalist. That's rich.
leonard leo is a domestic terrorist.
The source is nothing but far right wing fascism.
The source is really irrelevant. You can't dispute the information.
How so? Be specific
So in other words, the MBFC source definition need not be off limits? Interesting. Thanks for the clarification.
dementia ...
[✘]
Despite the whines and cries and lies of the sore losers, Trump was overwhelming elected by a very diverse electorate, and the Republicans are in firm control now. It's hard to understand why the left keeps up this pathetic lack of self-blame for their loss of power and influence and simply move on. They seemingly are not capable of taking any responsibility for their own failures.
Trump is a criminal degenerate.
No one of any worth cares.
obviously
And the far right wing are the same because they just don't care that Trump is the most evil POS on the planet.
... J6
[deleted]
I want to ask a serious question of those who deny that Trump attempted to take power illegally after losing in 2020, and I'll make it a simple and straightforward one.
Here's an excerpt from the statement Pence released on Jan 6, 2021:
"It is my considered judgment that my oath to support and defend the Constitution constrains me from claiming unilateral authority to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not."
Now, my question is this: What do you think Pence was talking about there?
Serious and sincere replies only, please.
Good luck
Link the source of the statement. It might remove the "False" statement results of the search.
I did. Can't you find it? See how the word "statement" is colored blue? That denotes a hyperlink. It's a pretty standard way of doing things. You'll see it in almost everything you read online.
Of course, you could have just highlighted the quote and googled it. You'll get about a million returns that way.
Google fact check uses keywords. The fact that a Google fact-check was not found for a particular expression of a claim simply means that either no fact-check has been published matching the claim or that the language you used to express the claim simply did not match. Use keywords instead.
The lack of a match does NOT mean the claim is false. Your post is dishonest.
Then you need to take it up with the new site function. Not. My. Problem.
Then you need to take it up with the new site function. That is where teh "False statement" is founded.
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
I just explained the new site function to you. You, like others, are (intentionally) trying to portray the lack of a fact check (or the lack of matching your claim query to a fact check) with a claim being false.
When Google fact check cannot find a matching fact check, that does not mean the claim is false.
This is stated in bold in the fact check results:
[deleted][✘]
Hyperlinks ARE a site function and always have been. It's amazing that you don't seem to know how to use them, considering they're as old as the internet itself. The blue word "statement" is a link back to the source material of the quote.
If you tried to use the new fact checker on the quote and you think it gave you a result of false, then you obviously don't know how to use that either. You can't just throw a random quote with no context into it.
Instead of making a grand show about how embarrassingly computer illiterate you are, how about just trying to answer the question—what was Mike Pence talking about in that quote?
It can be done. It's getting the strong keywords that can be a problem. It was for me. But I got determined one day and kept trying til I got something I could use
I guarantee you did not get "False statement" for that quote.
[✘]
And for those who do not know how to use links:
Is that supposed to change something?
If you read the letter from Pence you will see the exact quote Dig delivered.
The total nonsense going on above for about a dozen posts shows us why NT is struggling.
Many of the right wing here are helpless to try and debate actual facts, so they play games by attempting to use an inaccurate fact check function to make some sort of lame, delaying, point.
It took me less than 10 seconds to get this from an internet search. Why in hell are we catering to the nonsense that goes on in many of these threads ?
www.fox13news.com /news/in-letter-to-congress-pence-says-he-cant-claim-unilateral-authority-to-reject-electoral-votes
In letter to Congress, Pence says he can't claim 'unilateral authority' to reject electoral votes
FOX TV Digital Team 3-4 minutes 1/6/2021
By Stephanie Weaver
Updated January 6, 2021 2:40pm EST
LOS ANGELES - In a letter to Congress, Vice President Mike Pence said he does not believe he has the "unilateral authority" to decide which electoral votes should be counted as Congress meets in a joint session Wednesday to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.
Paul Gosar objects the counting of the electoral votes in Arizona
Congress moved to debate Arizona's results on Wednesday.
Pence, in a statement issued minutes before he was to begin presiding over a joint session of Congress to count electoral votes, said, "It is my considered judgment that my oath to support and defend the Constitution constrains me from claiming unilateral authority to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not."
Trump has pressured his vice president to toss electors from battleground states that voted for Biden during the session.
"The presidency belongs to the American people, and to them alone," Mr. Pence wrote in the three-page letter .
"Vesting the Vice President with unilateral authority to decide presidential contests would be entirely antithetical to that design. As a study of history who loves the Constitution and reveres its framers, I do not believe that the Founders of our country intended to invest the Vice President with unilateral authority to decide which electoral votes should be counted during the Joint Session of Congress and no Vice President in American history has ever asserted such authority," Pence said in the letter.
When the letter was released, Trump was speaking at a rally near the White House, where several thousand protestors cheered Trump and his disproven claims of widespread election fraud."We will not let them silence your voices," Trump told the protesters. "We will stop the steal."
During the rally, Trump told supporters he will "never concede" the election as Republican lawmakers began challenging the Electoral College votes.
Trump put pressure on Pence to toss electors from battleground states that voted for Biden.
"I hope Mike is going to do the right thing. I hope so. I hope so," Trump said. "Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election."
After Pence’s letter was released Wednesday, Trump criticized the vice president, claiming that Pence did not have "the courage to do what should have been done."
"Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!" Trump wrote on Twitter.
This is a developing story.
[✘]
You could prove it with a screenshot, you know. You don't need to show us your entire screen, just crop out the fact check part where you think it shows that.
It's mind blowing how such a simple exercise can turn into lunacy like that, and still none of the coup deniers have even tried to answer the question.
Coup deniers!
[deleted]
[✘] Answer the question posed in post 10, Greg.
traitor voters ...
Come on coup deniers, it's not that hard.
What was Pence talking about? What was going on that made a sitting VP and President of the Senate, for the first time in history, feel the need to release a completely out of the ordinary statement like that?
Could someone have been pressuring him to attempt something unconstitutional? Heaven forbid!
What could it have been?
why do think Mike Pence's opinion is the ultimate arbiter of anything?
I don't. That's what Trump wanted him to be.
Go ahead and answer the question. What made Pence feel the need to release a statement like that?
The point of this statement is to reveal that Trump asked him to unilaterally decide which electoral votes would be counted and which would not. Trump wanted Pence to disenfranchise many millions of people on the basis of nothing.
Changed state rules on voting timetables is not , in any way shape or form, a sufficient reason to disenfranchise millions of voters.
Great. Then we agree Mike Pence's opinion on the powers of the Vice Presidency aren't any more relevant than anyone else and don't have any bearing on the claim "Trump attempted to take power illegally after losing in 2020"
What made Pence feel the need to release a statement like that
To explain his actions.
Yes. There was a legal question whether the VP had the power to do that. Trump thought he did. Pence did not.
There was no legitimate legal question. What Trump wanted was unconstitutional ... no basis in the CotUS. Hell, even Eastman admitted that.
So you are trying to excuse Trump WANTING to disenfranchise millions of voters on a sham. Whether or not Trump "thought" Pence had the power, what was to be the basis of it? None of those states results were legitimately contested. Trump knew that because the election authorities in the various states had told him that, and the company he hired to look for voter fraud had told him that. Even contemplating that Pence might do it makes Trump unfit for office.
There was no legitimate legal question
This is a law review article from 2016.
Trump secretly hired two firms for more than $1.35 …
Apr 27, 2023 · The Washington Post revealed that behind the scenes, former President Donald Trump hired a law firm at $750,000 to find voter fraud in the 2020 election. They found nothing.
===================================================================
Yet Trump wanted to disenfranchise millions of voters. He's a scumbag.
For almost any opinion there is someone out there who supports it.
Focus on the facts. There is nothing in the CotUS that gives the VP the power to determine which votes should be counted.
A little common sense helps too. Why on Earth would the framers place such power in the hands of one person?
And this opinion was mainstream enough to appear in law review journals.
The problem you and others seem to be having is claiming it's a crime to offer legal arguments you disagree with or find meritless. Presidents make unconstitutional arguments all the time. Unlike in this case, Presidents sometimes advocate for actions in direct opposition to actual Supreme court rulings on the issue. That doesn't make them criminal to argue, which is the claim being made.
The idea that Mike Pence's interpretation of the Constitution demonstrates Trump's acted illegally is simply preposterous.
Show me in the CotUS where the VP has the authority to determine which certified votes may be counted.
The VP's power in Congress is established in the CotUS. The VP is the president of the senate. The greatest influence provided is the ability to cast a tie-breaking vote. Other than that, the role is to merely preside over the senate. It is largely ceremonial as the VP does not even have a normal vote and does not participate in deliberations.
Show me in the CotUS where you find these extraordinary powers that you (absurdly) believe exist for the VP.
Please tell us what would have been the factual basis for Pence to disenfranchise millions of voters . Trump's thoughts that he didnt want to relinquish office dont count.
Lol. First. Get that strawman! Second, Is that your argument? YOu are now an ultra strict constructionist? Or just in this thread? I'll have to remember that. Good bye Brown v Board of Ed and the administrative state!
Weren't you the one just claiming non lawyers have to defer to lawyers on legal questions and now you want to claim a law professor's published opinions are so far beyond the pale that it's criminal to suggest they have merit? Flip-flop...
You obviously have nothing but bullshit.
What drives someone like you to try to argue that Trump's unconstitutional suborning of Pence to table certified votes has merit?
Is there no end to the kowtowing to Trump by his supporters? Is there no point where Trump supporters do not simply accept his claims?
The absurdity of 'arguments' by (seemingly every) Trump supporter is staggering.
Uh, no. Don't miss the forest for the trees. Pence was the linchpin in the final effort to illegally take power after losing in the courts. You know, "the Pence card."
Trump basically (short and simple version here) wanted Pence to either reject valid electors in favor of fake ones, or to maybe just reject specific Biden electors and 'send it back to the states' as Trump put it, where apparently he was confident the fix was in. The end result being the same, to allow Trump to pull off a coup and take power that was not lawfully his after losing the election. That was the point of it all. That's the forest.
Pence didn't have the authority to do that, and in the end turned out to be honorable and patriotic enough to not go along with the plot.
I tried to find the relevant parts in that, which seem to be about the question of what to do if a state sends multiple slates of electors, right? What authority the Senate president would have in a situation like that? Could he or she pick and choose? Is that what you meant for that to represent?
If so, then I'd say it doesn't even apply to 2020, because no state sent more than one official slate of electors. There was no real conflict for the Senate president to potentially resolve.
The fake electors didn't come from state governments, so they weren't official or valid. They were conceived of and organized by the Trump campaign – mostly Trump, Eastman, Cheseboro, and Giuliani.
I know - reality is harsh for you - but -
U.S.Constitution - I, 3 - The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate
U.S.Constitution - II. 2. - lis t of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List 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.
Think that's called "certification process".
Amazing, isn't it? If the VP has the unilateral authority to decide who becomes POTUS, then why would the Founders have put anything about elections or the Electoral College in the Constitution at all? They'd be redundant and unnecessary. The VP could just do it.
Also, we'd have a permanent single-party presidency, since sitting VPs would always choose a POTUS from his or her own party, even themselves.
The entire notion is ridiculous on its face.
I asked:
Do you actually believe your comment provided that? Did you even read what you posted?
We know the VP is the president of the Senate. I have already stated that.
We know the VP presides over the certification process as he/she does preside over the Senate. Again, I have already stated that.
Nobody has questioned the certification process. You showing the certification process does not, in any way, show where the VP has the authority to determine which certified votes may be counted.
Are you aware of how fully you failed to address the request?
The vast majority of the Trump defenses in general are beyond stupid on their face. It is truly amazing that some people seem to care more about rushing to defend Trump than they do about their own credibility. Just sad.
What drives you to misrepresent my argument?
Not sure anyone here cares whether they are credible or not to you and others of the set mindset among liberals.
We know and your friends don't care. But don't generalize and say anybody which more less implies everybody
We know and your friends don't care. But don't generalize and say anybody which more less implies everybody
Do you think people that have been called everything from fascist to un American and everything in between really care the same people calling them all those names adding lack of credibility to the list really care??
How much credibility do you believe they think the source of those accusations have?
Do you care what anyone here thinks about your credibility?
Those who consistently post outrageous nonsense in defense of Trump obviously do not care about their own credibility. So it stands to reason that they do not care if people note their dishonest (and often absurd) behavior. Most of us understand that they just do not care how stupid or dishonest their comments make them look.
To some people, being a good Trump supporter ... being part of Team Trump ... getting accolades from fellow team members ... is all that matters. As long as one is being contrary, no matter how factually wrong, how logically inconsistent, or how utterly stupid the comment ... the other Trump supporters will high five the effort.
Fact and logic, truth, integrity, character, etc. do not seem to matter.
It is ridiculous and irresponsible, but that seems to be how the Trump defense operates.
How about yours? You know, bitching about something you can't control continuously in hopes of changing millions of minds much less, anyone here. It ain't gonna happen, my friend.
Show me where my comments are dishonest or stupid.
Where do I suggest I hope to change millions of minds? I often state that I do not expect to change the mind of any Trump supporter.
You are inventing your own 'facts'.
And you are beating the hell out of a dead horse. Why?
The only reason I can figure out why you waste time bleating the same "message".
There is enormous futility attached to engaging with these people. I would just as soon tell them to go F themselves, but that is not allowed here. The very nature of Newstalkers gives legitimacy to their dishonesty.
We have pretty exhaustively provided them with facts, but clearly facts dont work in an environment where someone who is the biggest public liar in US history can be "re elected" to the presidency. The truth is our country is fucked, and all we can do right now is hope it is not permanent.
I am responding to the utterly stupid posts made by Trump supporters and the stupid utterances stemming from the asshole you voted for.
Nobody requires that you be here to read the posts of those of us who criticize the narcissistic loose-cannon who now, because of people like you, is the voice and face of our nation.
I hear ya.
Would promoting an opinion as fact be considered dishonest in your opinion?
Ditto
At least TiG writes comments that are worthwhile and interesting to read.
As long as one doesn't mind reading the same shit day after day after day, you would be correct.
Opinions vary
What makes you think that you dont write the same shit day after day? At least Tig is mostly correct.
sosdd
Is someone holding a gun to your head?
Exactly my feelings. Good that you are aware of it
Because for the most part there is agreement with your position
As long as Trump continues to illustrate how unfit he is to hold any public office I will continue to opine with criticism. And as long as you, et.al. continue to put forth factually flawed, irrational, dishonest, faux obtuse, and blatantly absurd defenses, I will criticize the crap you post.
I have to admit I am surprised.
There seems to be a lot of that going on.
Your comments never acknowledge anything negative about Trump. It is a predictable joke that your comments will claim ‘not proven’ at every turn.
[✘]
So much for if you say something enough it magically becomes truth and proof
i will assume you thought you were responding to someone else
What does never being honest or forthright get you?
Obviously, the White House. Why are MAGA so mad?
You won...
Really? I thought it was a moment of clarity.
No. Yours? His?
So if nobody is holding a gun to your head kwityerbitchin
Are they?
The person I voted for didn't win but Kamala didn't win either. Maybe I half won.
Ditto. Your approval of the lather, rinse, and repeat shtick is noted.
I'm not the one bitching about people's comments. I read them and may reply but I certainly don't bitch at them that I'm tired of their comments
Really?
... the previous 4 years excepted, of course, hilarious.
Yikes. Sorry John. Not sure how I managed to reply to you.
That was meant to be a reply to @10.2.64
The unknown person who remains unknown (or at least unmentioned).
Yes, he is the one
Far right wing fascists don't much care for reality. They prefer their worldview of hate of the other.
Because none of it has been proven.
Some seem to have a problem when their opinions get called out as, well, opinion.
Why should he mention any names.
It is well known that you, et al, will do nothing but berate him by telling him that because he did not vote for Harris, his vote kept the DEI hire, idiotic world salad, incompetent dumbass out of the White House.
In reality, you should thank us for keeping the DEI hire out.
Like I opined before, Donald Trump win was a consolation prize.
It is pretty amusing
Sad when the response of some folks is so predictable it makes the question not worth responding to.
Amusing but true.
Some seem to feel their opinion is more valid that other opinions because their opinion is based on other opinions.
And as accurate as a game of telephone.
And most times, both of those opinions are wrong.
The second one is me criticizing a comment because IMO the poster clearly doesn't have his own thoughts. The third comment is because IMO his comment had nothing to do with the discussion thus irrelevant.
I'll give you credit for number one. And I am impressed that you were able to find 3 comments in such a short time
Thus bitching about it.
But yet you chose to comment. Not sure it was needed but that's just me.
Pence's own words from that clip:
"I want the American people to know that I had no right to overturn the election, and that on that day President Trump asked me to put him over the Constitution, but I chose the Constitution."
And that is just one little piece of the MOUNTAIN of evidence in the public domain.
It is NOT OPINION that Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election and take power unconstitutionally.
Trump is a TYRANT — because placing oneself over the Constitution and trying to take power illegally in our Republic, especially that of the highest office in the land, is a TYRANNICAL ACT.
Trump is a TRAITOR — because the aforementioned TYRANNICAL ACT was a BETRAYAL of his Oath, the Constitution, the American People, and the Republic itself.
If that doesn't make a person UNFIT to hold power again, then WHAT THE HELL WOULD?
Seriously, Trump people... HOW COULD YOU HAVE VOTED FOR THAT?
You are NOT patriots of this Republic. More like enemies of it.
To support Trump, it would seem that one must hide in an alternate reality that does not include facts like these.
The right wing media bubble. Billions, if not trillions have been made by various outlets manufacturing outrage through misinformation and propaganda, keeping their viewers and listeners woefully detached from reality.
People like Rupert Murdoch should probably be in prison for what they've done to this country.
I'm no fan of the thumper Q-tip, but at least there was one patriot left in the last trump shithouse ...
I feel the same way. Don't really like him, but I'll certainly give him credit for ultimately doing the right thing.
1 smart move in a career of mediocrity ...
which just proves that thumper theocrats have no business in the 3 branches of government ...