Yes, It Was a Coup Attempt. Here’s Why.

#652
#652
RockyTop85 said:
I’m disappointed that, three years in, you still think that persuading you of anything is the objective.
Click to expand...
Absolutely nobody here thinks that. We all realize that all you want to do is act out like a 5 year old when nobody buys your bull **** synopses of things you’ve convinced yourself on
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol
#653
#653
hog88 said:
It is in the discussion of whether or not this fits the definition of a coup.
Click to expand...
Ok. 12th amendment:
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, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, 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. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.—The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
 

Attachments

  • 1632492440116.jpeg
    1632492440116.jpeg
    187 KB · Views: 3
#654
#654
NorthDallas40 said:
Absolutely nobody here thinks that. We all realize that all you want to do is act out like a 5 year old when nobody buys your bull **** synopses of things you’ve convinced yourself on
Click to expand...

What does “buying [my] ********” mean in your dialect?

If you realize that my purpose is not to persuade you, then why would I care whether anybody “buys my ********?” This seems internally inconsistent. There has to be something I don’t understand about the meaning of that phrase.
 
#655
#655
RockyTop85 said:
Ok. 12th amendment:
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, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, 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. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.—The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the copy and paste but completely irrelevant to the questions I posed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#656
#656
hog88 said:
Thanks for the copy and paste but completely irrelevant to the questions I posed.
Click to expand...
Did you miss the “If it was legal for Pence to refuse to count the electoral votes for Biden and declare Trump the winner, how is that a coup?” It wasn’t legal. Question answered.
 
#657
#657
RockyTop85 said:
Did you miss the “If it was legal for Pence to refuse to count the electoral votes for Biden and declare Trump the winner, how is that a coup?” It wasn’t legal. Question answered.
Click to expand...

Hence the "if". If it were legal (which I agree it's not) it wouldn't have been a coup. Since the answer to the other questions I asked is yes it's legal, this wasn't even an attempted coup.
 
#658
#658
RockyTop85 said:
What does “buying [my] ********” mean in your dialect?

If you realize that my purpose is not to persuade you, then why would I care whether anybody “buys my ********?” This seems internally inconsistent. There has to be something I don’t understand about the meaning of that phrase.
Click to expand...
What it means is I’m calling you a liar on your assertion. You come in here with your stupid synopses (yes plural, primarily Mueller and Jan 6) which we all discount flatly out of hand. Then you start stomping your damn feet like a 5 year old when we don’t buy it. So in summary with your assertion that you don’t care that we don’t accept your brilliance see the gif below. Because your outsized ego isn’t equipped to deal with it.

0B634AA4-7806-492D-BFD6-1924744E9FB3.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#659
#659
hog88 said:
Hence the "if". If it were legal (which I agree it's not) it wouldn't have been a coup. Since the answer to the other questions I asked is yes it's legal, this wasn't even an attempted coup.
Click to expand...
That makes more sense if you were initially going to argue that it was legal to refuse to count certain electors and changed your mind, but I guess it only matters that we agree on that, now.

Drafting or discussion of the memo is clearly not illegal. We agree. That’s not the relevance the memo, in my opinion.

The memo clarifies what Trump was asking of Pence in multiple tweets, at least two different speeches, and an unknown number of private conversations. He wanted Pence to illegally refuse to count the votes.
 
#660
#660
RockyTop85 said:
That makes more sense if you were initially going to argue that it was legal to refuse to count certain electors and changed your mind, but I guess it only matters that we agree on that, now.

Drafting or discussion of the memo is clearly not illegal. We agree. That’s not the relevance the memo, in my opinion.

The memo clarifies what Trump was asking of Pence in multiple tweets, at least two different speeches, and an unknown number of private conversations. He wanted Pence to illegally refuse to count the votes.
Click to expand...

Asking or even cajoling Pence was not illegal so again, not a coup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#661
#661
NorthDallas40 said:
What it means is I’m calling you a liar on your assertion. You come in here with your stupid synopses (yes plural, primarily Mueller and Jan 6) which we all discount flatly out of hand. Then you start stomping your damn feet like a 5 year old when we don’t buy it. So in summary with your assertion that you don’t care that we don’t accept your brilliance see the gif below. Because your outsized ego isn’t equipped to deal with it.

View attachment 396828
Click to expand...
Lol. You said you didn’t think I was trying to persuade anyone in the same exact post. 👇

1632494816108.png

So I’m lying about not trying to persuade people AND you don’t think I’m trying to persuade anyone?

That is IMPRESSIVE.

Oh wait, maybe I think I’m trying to persuade people, but I’m not actually trying, and am therefore lying by saying I’m not trying because I actually think I’m trying but since you know that I’m actually not trying despite thinking I’m trying you know it is a lie when I say I’m not trying.
 
#664
#664
RockyTop85 said:
Lol. You said you didn’t think I was trying to persuade anyone in the same exact post. 👇

View attachment 396833

So I’m lying about not trying to persuade people AND you don’t think I’m trying to persuade anyone?

That is IMPRESSIVE.

Oh wait, maybe I think I’m trying to persuade people, but I’m not actually trying, and am therefore lying by saying I’m not trying because I actually think I’m trying but since you know that I’m actually not trying despite thinking I’m trying you know it is a lie when I say I’m not trying.
Click to expand...
What’s clear is you are so wrapped up in your own bull **** you can’t stand it when people aren’t convinced by it. And it was clear what I was alluding to which sent you off on your current parse tantrum 🤡
 
#666
#666
hog88 said:
Asking or even cajoling Pence was not illegal so again, not a coup.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that memo crap is much different than the hanging chad tantrum. Lawyers making bank trying to insert a stupid narrative and thinking they can change an outcome. Hmmmmm… that sounds familiar 🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#667
#667
NorthDallas40 said:
What’s clear is you are so wrapped up in your own bull **** you can’t stand it when people aren’t convinced by it. And it was clear what I was alluding to which sent you off on your current parse tantrum 🤡
Click to expand...
I’m feeling reasonable today, so I will concede that it was only marginally less clear than your usual standard.
 
#670
#670
RockyTop85 said:
You clearly don’t need to be a good lawyer or be advised by one to know that that’s a coup.
Click to expand...

A bad lawyer would think it was a coup.

But for ***** and giggles let's just say it was an attempted coup, what's going to happen? Who's going to be prosecuted? I'd like to think the DOJ would take an attempted coup seriously and prosecute those involved.
 
#672
#672
hog88 said:
A bad lawyer would think it was a coup.

But for ***** and giggles let's just say it was an attempted coup, what's going to happen? Who's going to be prosecuted? I'd like to think the DOJ would take an attempted coup seriously and prosecute those involved.
Click to expand...

I already agreed there’s nothing illegal about asking or cajoling; it’s a genuine agreement. Without even getting into the pitfalls of presidents prosecuting their predecessors, there’s no criminal statute to prosecute him under. Impeachment was the remedy.

I’d be fine with criminalizing the VP’s refusal to perform their function under the 12th amendment and make “asking or cajoling” them a free standing charge.

The only takeaway I’m really interested in is that Trump’s narcissism/nihilism took us to the point where the only thing between us and whatever turmoil this would have initiated was one career politician deciding to put the national interest over his personal interests. Pretty thin.
 
#675
#675
luthervol said:
Considering heading back to middle TN. That's about as far north as my wife would ever agree to go. She's more for heading south.
Click to expand...
I’d say you’d probably like Nashville. Housing market is crazy right now though.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top