Capitol Riots 2

1242527293032

Comments

  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 27,376

     
    Rioter who encountered senator gets over 4 years in prison
    By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
    Today

    A Maryland man affiliated with the far-right Proud Boys extremist group was sentenced on Monday to more than four years in prison for storming the U.S. Capitol, where he encountered Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer as his armed security detail led the New York Democrat to safety.

    Joshua Pruitt, 40, was one of the few Capitol rioters to come face-to-face with a member of Congress during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack by a mob of Donald Trump supporters, according to federal prosecutors.

    “One look at Pruitt, and the leader of Senator Schumer’s security detail immediately saw the threat and hustled the 70-year-old senator down a hallway, having to change their evacuation route on a dime,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexis Loeb wrote in a court filing ahead of Monday’s hearing.

    U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly sentenced Pruitt to four years and seven months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release, according to Bill Miller, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia.

    Prosecutors had recommended a five-year prison sentence for Pruitt, a Silver Spring, Maryland, resident who has worked as a bartender and personal trainer. They described him as an aspiring Proud Boys member whose intimidating figure made him an “ideal recruit” for the group on Jan. 6.

    The leader of Schumer’s security detail told the FBI that their encounter with Pruitt was a harrowing, unforgettable moment. Pruitt was advancing and only seconds from reaching Schumer when the security detail turned and ran with the senator away from an elevator and back down a ramp, detail members said.

    “At the end of the ramp, officers closed and locked the doors. The security detail and (Schumer) pursued a secondary evacuation route. Once the doors were being closed, Pruitt turned around and retraced his steps,” Loeb wrote.

    Pruitt and other prospects and recruits of the local Proud Boys chapter often used encrypted communications to discuss storming the Capitol, civil war and confrontations with police, according to prosecutors. They said Pruitt wanted to stop Congress from certifying the Electoral College vote on Jan. 6.

    “He personally forced a 70-year-old Senator to run and find another path to safety. Among all the rioters who stormed the Capitol, it is a notorious distinction,” Loeb wrote.

    Defense attorney Robert Jenkins Jr. said Pruitt saw the security detail but didn’t recognize Schumer, now Senate Majority Leader, at the time of the encounter.

    “It’s not as though that Mr. Pruitt ran toward the detail or made any threatening posture toward them. He noticed that they were there. They went down a hallway. Mr. Pruitt went in a different direction,” Jenkins said after the sentencing hearing.

    Jenkins had sought a three-year prison sentence for Pruitt. The defense lawyer said he believes the 55-month sentence is disproportionately higher than other Capitol rioter cases, given that Pruitt wasn’t armed and didn’t assault any police officers.

    More than 240 riot defendants have been sentenced, mostly for misdemeanor offenses. Only four of them have received longer prison sentences than Pruitt, and all four of those had been convicted of assaulting or obstructing law enforcement officers.

    “He thought that the court would be far more lenient on him,” Jenkins added.

    Vice Media co-founder Gavin McInnes founded the Proud Boys in 2016. Before the Capitol riot, the group was best known for street brawls with antifascist activists at rallies and protests.

    Dozens of Proud Boys leaders, members and associates have been charged with Capitol riot-related crimes. Some have been charged with seditious conspiracy for what authorities say was a plot to forcibly oppose the lawful transfer of presidential power.

    Prosecutors called Pruitt a “one-man symbol of the angry mob at the Capitol that day.” Many of the police officers guarding the Capitol on Jan. 6 remembered him as an instigator, according to prosecutors.

    “Wearing a tactical glove with knuckle pads and a cut-off t-shirt with the logo of the ‘Punisher’ — an antihero known for dispensing violent vigilante justice — Pruitt made a calculated choice to use his thickly muscled appearance to communicate to the police that they faced a dangerous person,” Loeb wrote.

    Pruitt was on probation and wearing an ankle monitor on the day of the riot. He initially was arrested on the night of Jan. 6 for violating a curfew imposed by the mayor of Washington, D.C. He has been jailed since a judge ordered his pretrial detention in January 2022.

    Pruitt pleaded guilty in June to a felony charge of obstruction of an official proceeding, the joint session of Congress for certifying President Joe Biden’s victory over Trump, the Republican incumbent.


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 27,376

     
    Ex-NYPD officer sentenced to record 10 years for Jan. 6 riot
    By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
    17 mins ago

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A retired New York Police Department officer was sentenced on Thursday to a record-setting 10 years in prison for attacking the U.S. Capitol and using a metal flagpole to assault one of the police officers trying to hold off a mob of Donald Trump supporters.

    Thomas Webster's prison sentence is the longest so far among roughly 250 people who have been punished for their conduct during the riot on Jan. 6, 2021. The previous longest was shared by two other rioters, who were sentenced separately to seven years and three months in prison.

    Webster, a 20-year NYPD veteran, was the first Capitol riot defendant to be tried on an assault charge and the first to present a self-defense argument. A jury rejected Webster's claim that he was defending himself when he tackled Metropolitan Police Department officer Noah Rathbun and grabbed his gas mask outside the Capitol on Jan. 6.

    U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta sentenced Webster, 56, to 10 years in prison plus three years of supervised release. He allowed Webster to report to prison at a date to be determined instead of immediately ordering him into custody.

    “Mr. Webster, I don't think you're a bad person,” the judge said. “I think you were caught up in a moment. But as you know, even getting caught up in a moment has consequences."

    Webster turned to apologize to Rathbun, who was in the courtroom but didn’t address the judge. Webster said he wishes he had never come to Washington, D.C.

    “I wish the horrible events of that day had never happened,” he told the judge.

    The judge said Rathbun wasn't Webster's only victim on Jan. 6.

    “The other victim was democracy, and that is not something that can be taken lightly,” Mehta added.

    Federal prosecutors had recommended a prison sentence of 17 years and six months. The court’s probation department had recommended a 10-year prison sentence. Mehta wasn't bound by the recommendations.

    In a court filing, prosecutors accused Webster of “disgracing a democracy that he once fought honorably to protect and serve.” Webster led the charge against police barricades at the Capitol’s Lower West Plaza, prosecutors said. They compared the attack to a medieval battle, with rioters pelting officers with makeshift projectiles and engaging in hand-to-hand combat.

    “Nothing can explain or justify Mr. Webster's rage. Nothing can explain or justify his violence,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Hava Mirell said Thursday.

    Defense attorney James Monroe said in a court filing that the mob was “guided by unscrupulous politicians" and others promoting the lie that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from the Republican incumbent. He questioned why prosecutors argued that Webster didn't deserve leniency for his 25 years of service to his country and New York City.

    “That is not how we measure justice. That is revenge,” Monroe said.

    In May, jurors deliberated for less than three hours before they convicted Webster of all six counts in his indictment, including a charge that he assaulted Rathbun with a dangerous weapon, the flagpole.

    Also Thursday, a New Jersey man pleaded guilty to using pepper spray on police officers, including one who later died. Officer Brian Sicknick suffered a stroke the day after the riot and died of natural causes. He and other officers were standing guard behind metal bicycle racks as the mob of pro-Trump supporters stormed the Capitol.

    Julian Khater, 33, pleaded guilty to two counts of assaulting or impeding officers with a dangerous weapon. He could face up to 20 years in prison, though will likely face a sentence ranging from about 6 1/2 to 8 years at a hearing set for December.

    The case against Khater and a second man have been among the more notable brought by the Justice Department. George Pierre Tanios brought the pepper spray in a backpack. Tanios previously pleaded guilty and is also set to be sentenced in December.

    Webster had testified at trial that he was trying to protect himself from a “rogue cop” who punched him in the face. He also accused Rathbun of instigating the confrontation.

    Rathbun testified that he didn’t punch or pick a fight with Webster. Rathbun said he was trying to move Webster back from a security perimeter that he and other officers were struggling to maintain.

    Rathbun’s body camera captured Webster shouting profanities and insults before they made any physical contact. The video shows that Webster slammed one of the bike racks at Rathbun before the officer reached out with an open left hand and struck the right side of Webster’s face.

    After Rathbun struck his face, Webster swung a metal flag pole at the officer in a downward chopping motion, striking a bike rack. Rathbun grabbed the broken pole from Webster, who charged at the officer, tackled him to the ground and grabbed his gas mask, choking him by the chin strap.

    Webster drove alone to Washington, D.C., from his home near Goshen, New York, on the eve of the Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally, where Trump addressed thousands of supporters. Webster was wearing a bulletproof vest and carrying a Marine Corps flag on a metal pole when he joined the mob that stormed the Capitol.

    Webster said he went to the Capitol to “petition” lawmakers to “relook” at the results of the 2020 presidential election. But he testified that he didn’t intend to interfere with Congress’ joint session to certify President Joe Biden 's victory.

    Webster retired from the NYPD in 2011 after 20 years of service, which included a stint on then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s private security detail. He served in the U.S. Marine Corps from 1985 to 1989 before joining the NYPD in 1991.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this report.


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, ColoradoPosts: 9,971
    Good
    Lock that fucker up
    But no segregation he needs to be in genpop 
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 27,376

     
    Michigan man gets 5 years in prison for role in Capitol riot
    Today

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A Michigan man was sentenced on Friday to five years in federal prison for his role in the U.S. Capitol attack by a mob that disrupted Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's 2020 electoral victory.

    Chief Judge Beryl Howell also sentenced Anthony Robert Williams, 47, of Southgate, Michigan, to three years of supervised release after his prison term and ordered him to pay $2,000 in restitution and a $5,000 fine, according to a U.S. Justice Department news release.

    In June, a jury convicted Williams of a felony count of obstructing the Jan. 6, 2021, joint session of Congress for certifying the Electoral College vote. Jurors also convicted him of four related misdemeanor offenses.

    Prosecutors had recommended a prison sentence of five years and four months for Williams, who was arrested in Detroit in March 2021.

    In a Facebook post three days after the riot, Williams called himself an “Operation Swamp Storm veteran" and referred to Jan. 6 as the “proudest day of my life.” He added that it "felt like the founding fathers were smiling down on us in that room, and I guarantee my dad and gramps, both vets, would be proud.”

    “Williams’ participation in the riot was purposeful, extensive, enthusiastic, and remorseless,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing.

    Outside the Capitol, Williams stole water bottles that police intended to use for decontaminating themselves from chemical spray, according to prosecutors. They said Williams entered the Capitol through the Senate Wing doors and joined other rioters in overwhelming police officers in the Crypt area.

    “Williams advanced to the Rotunda where he celebrated with other rioters and smoked marijuana," prosecutors wrote. "When the police tried to force Williams out of the Rotunda, he joined with other rioters and actively resisted and mocked the police.”

    Williams' attorneys requested a sentence of 15 months of incarceration.

    "Mr. Williams has learned from his experience and from listening to the testimony at trial and during jury selection. He will not become involved in something like this ever again," they wrote.

    More than 870 people have been charged with federal crimes for the conduct on Jan. 6. More 260 of them have been sentenced, with roughly half of them receiving a term of imprisonment ranging from seven days to 10 years. Only five other Capitol riot defendants have been sentenced to a longer prison term than Williams.


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 27,376
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • Sure, it can't happen here. Sure.

    From Yesterday's NYT email blast:

    Democracy challenged

    This is an election year unlike any we’ve experienced in recent decades. Not only do candidates of both major parties in the United States have starkly different views on the pressing issues of the day, including climate change, war, taxes, abortion, education, gender and sexual identity, immigration, crime and the role of government in American life. They also disagree on democracy itself, especially one of its essential pillars — willingness to accept defeat at the polls.

    All year, our staff has sought to balance what we think of as politics, the candidates, polling, policy positions, campaign strategies, and views of voters on important issues, with coverage of acute challenges to democracy. Those include a deterioration in the integrity of constitutional democracy, manipulation of state election laws to limit or overturn the will of voters, and a global trend toward autocracy in places where democratic institutions once seemed solid. While we may continue to witness robust political competition in this midterm election cycle in ways that appear in keeping with American history, threats to that electoral system have grown relentlessly at the same time. Our coverage must examine both.

    So while we have a large staff dedicated to reporting on politics, a special team of some of our best journalists, nationally and internationally, has produced dozens of explanatory and investigative stories on the causes of our democratic decline. These include the rise in political violence, especially on the right, election denial and its hold on many Republicans, disinformation and the profiteers peddling falsehoods, the people and money behind the Jan. 6 insurrection, the origins and popularity of leading conspiracy theories, and the partisan political motives of some leading jurists.

    It is our deep and ongoing commitment to expose the cancers eating away at democracy, as well as joining the search for solutions. We have been gathering our coverage in a collection called Democracy Challenged.

    An overview

    The latest piece in the collection, by David Leonhardt, covers the two biggest threats to American democracy: first, a movement within the Republican Party that refuses to accept election defeat; and, second, a growing disconnect between public opinion and government power. Below, we summarize the main points:

    The Jan. 6 attack on Congress was only the most obvious manifestation of the movement that refuses to accept election defeat. Hundreds of elected Republican officials around the country falsely claim that the 2020 election was rigged, suggesting they may be willing to overturn a future election. “There is the possibility, for the first time in American history, that a legitimately elected president will not be able to take office,” Yascha Mounk, a political scientist, said.

    Even many Republicans who do not repeat the election lies have chosen to support and campaign for those who do. Representative Kevin McCarthy, the Republican House leader, has gone so far as to support colleagues who have used violent imagery in public comments, such as calling for the killing of Democrats.

    • But there are also many senior Republicans who have signaled they would be unlikely to participate in an effort to overturn an election, including Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate. He recently said that the United States had “very little voter fraud.”

    • This combination suggests that the risk of an overturned election remains uncertain. But the chances are much higher than would have been fathomable until the past few years. Previous leaders of both parties consistently rejected talk of reversing an election outcome.

    • In addition to this acute threat, American democracy also faces a chronic threat: The power to set government policy is becoming increasingly disconnected from public opinion.

    Two of the past four presidents have taken office despite losing the popular vote. Senators representing a majority of Americans are often unable to pass bills, partly because of the increasing use of the filibuster. And the Supreme Court is dominated by an ambitious Republican-appointed bloc even though Democrats have won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections — an unprecedented run of popular-vote success in U.S. history.

    • Parties in previous eras that fared as well in the popular vote as the Democrats have fared in recent decades were able to run the government and pass policies they favored. Examples include the Democratic-Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson’s time, the New Deal Democrats and the Reagan Republicans.

    • The growing disconnect from federal power and public opinion generally springs from enduring features of American government, some written into the Constitution. But these features did not conflict with majority opinion to the same degree in past decades. One reason is that less populous and more populous states tended to have broadly similar political outlooks in the past.

    • A sorting of the population in recent decades has meant that the less-populated areas given outsize influence by the Constitution also tend to be conservative, while major metropolitan areas have become more liberal. In the past, “the system was still antidemocratic, but it didn’t have a partisan effect,” said Steven Levitsky, another political scientist. “Now it’s undemocratic and has a partisan effect.”

    • Over the sweep of history, the American government has tended to become more democratic, through women’s suffrage, civil rights laws, the direct election of senators and more. The current period is so striking partly because it is one of the rare exceptions: The connection between government power and popular opinion has become weaker in recent decades.

    Here is the full story on democracy’s twin crises.

     

    A rally in Lansing, Mich., last fall, organized by the Election Integrity Force.Mark Peterson/Redux, for The New York Times


    More from the series
    The following are some of the other articles in The Times’s continuing series, Democracy Challenged:


    The election-denier movement didn’t start in 2020. It began even before the Trump presidency.

    The Arizona Republican Party’s experiment: First, it turned against the establishment. Now it has moved to anti-democracy sentiment — the principles, the process and even the word itself.

    A team of Times journalists analyzed 1,150 episodes of Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show and produced an interactive feature explaining how he pushes extremist ideas and conspiracy theories into millions of households.

    As American feminists came together in 2017 to protest Donald Trump, Russia’s disinformation machine set about deepening the divides among them.

    Viktor Orban — Hungary’s populist prime minister and a hero to many American conservatives — changed voting rules to help his re-election campaign.

    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Carried over from the Biden thread:

    HughFreakingDillon said:
    well, based on most of them leaving when the violence erupted, I'd say it's an accurate assessment. 
    From where do you get the info that most left when the violence erupted? I would like to read up on it. It got me thinking about #s at the ellipse vs. #s at the capitol, etc. 

    This article from ABC News estimates 10k people came onto capitol grounds… granted, only 20% or so entered the building, but that’s a still a decent amount who marched down there after listening to speeches invoking trial by combat & fighting like hell. https://abc7.com/jan-6-insurrection-us-capitol-riot/11428976/

    Do we know how many were at the ellipse vs how many marched down to the capitol grounds?
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 7,680
    Carried over from the Biden thread:

    HughFreakingDillon said:
    well, based on most of them leaving when the violence erupted, I'd say it's an accurate assessment. 
    From where do you get the info that most left when the violence erupted? I would like to read up on it. It got me thinking about #s at the ellipse vs. #s at the capitol, etc. 

    This article from ABC News estimates 10k people came onto capitol grounds… granted, only 20% or so entered the building, but that’s a still a decent amount who marched down there after listening to speeches invoking trial by combat & fighting like hell. https://abc7.com/jan-6-insurrection-us-capitol-riot/11428976/

    Do we know how many were at the ellipse vs how many marched down to the capitol grounds?
    As you said, 10k showed up to the capitol, 2,000 - 2,500 entered the building. From all the footage I've seen, the majority were just being stupid. More seem to be roaming around, taking selfies than assaulting people.
    Its difficult to post an opposing opinion here without it being taken out of context. That doesn't mean I'm defending anyone. I think many of them deserve jail time. Anyone who entered the capitol should face some consequence. I just don't think it automatically means they are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. Some I'm sure would, but the majority aren't wanting a civil war and won't be taking up arms.
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 32,673
    edited September 2022
    How many is 1 in 10? From January of this year.

    Nearly a quarter of Americans say it's sometimes OK to use violence against the government — and 1 in 10 Americans say violence is justified "right now."

    That's the finding of a new report by The COVID States Project, which asked 23,000 people across the country whether it is "ever justifiable to engage in violent protest against the government?" The report is one of several in recent months that find people more likely to contemplate violent protests than they had been in the past.

    Nearly 1 in 4 said violence was either "definitely" or "probably" justifiable against the government. A similar percentage of liberals and conservatives agree on this point.

    That's not surprising when you think about how American history is taught, said COVID States Project co-director David Lazer.

    "You know, we begin with the American Revolution against an illegitimate government and so we are, in a sense, taught from grade school that it is at some points in history justifiable to engage in violent protest," he said.

    https://www.npr.org/2022/01/31/1076873172/one-in-four-americans-say-violence-against-the-government-is-sometimes-okay


    Post edited by Halifax2TheMax on
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • mace1229 said:
    Carried over from the Biden thread:

    HughFreakingDillon said:
    well, based on most of them leaving when the violence erupted, I'd say it's an accurate assessment. 
    From where do you get the info that most left when the violence erupted? I would like to read up on it. It got me thinking about #s at the ellipse vs. #s at the capitol, etc. 

    This article from ABC News estimates 10k people came onto capitol grounds… granted, only 20% or so entered the building, but that’s a still a decent amount who marched down there after listening to speeches invoking trial by combat & fighting like hell. https://abc7.com/jan-6-insurrection-us-capitol-riot/11428976/

    Do we know how many were at the ellipse vs how many marched down to the capitol grounds?
    As you said, 10k showed up to the capitol, 2,000 - 2,500 entered the building. From all the footage I've seen, the majority were just being stupid. More seem to be roaming around, taking selfies than assaulting people.
    Its difficult to post an opposing opinion here without it being taken out of context. That doesn't mean I'm defending anyone. I think many of them deserve jail time. Anyone who entered the capitol should face some consequence. I just don't think it automatically means they are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. Some I'm sure would, but the majority aren't wanting a civil war and won't be taking up arms.
    I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the mob that stormed the Capitol and kicked the shit out of the Capitol police are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. 


    You can complain all you want about being taken out of context, but you're also contradicting yourself. Yesterday you said you wouldn't assume the intent of the people who were there, and here you're assuming what they are & aren't willing to do. 
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 44,114
    edited September 2022
    mace1229 said:
    Carried over from the Biden thread:

    HughFreakingDillon said:
    well, based on most of them leaving when the violence erupted, I'd say it's an accurate assessment. 
    From where do you get the info that most left when the violence erupted? I would like to read up on it. It got me thinking about #s at the ellipse vs. #s at the capitol, etc. 

    This article from ABC News estimates 10k people came onto capitol grounds… granted, only 20% or so entered the building, but that’s a still a decent amount who marched down there after listening to speeches invoking trial by combat & fighting like hell. https://abc7.com/jan-6-insurrection-us-capitol-riot/11428976/

    Do we know how many were at the ellipse vs how many marched down to the capitol grounds?
    As you said, 10k showed up to the capitol, 2,000 - 2,500 entered the building. From all the footage I've seen, the majority were just being stupid. More seem to be roaming around, taking selfies than assaulting people.
    Its difficult to post an opposing opinion here without it being taken out of context. That doesn't mean I'm defending anyone. I think many of them deserve jail time. Anyone who entered the capitol should face some consequence. I just don't think it automatically means they are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. Some I'm sure would, but the majority aren't wanting a civil war and won't be taking up arms.
    So we got about 2,500 domestic terrorists invading the capitol (these people are not average joes) and only a few hundred police officers who tried their best to keep them out. That is a massive difference in the amount of "troops" each side had. Looks like about half of those officers sustained injuries. Some died  

    Who else did you want these domestic terrorists to assault in order for it to not mostly be a tourist visit, in your eyes? They easily outnumbered and defeated police presence rather easily. Then they got in and acted stupid. --They had already assaulted everyone they needed to get to that point, mace. There was literally nobody left for them to assault, unless they achieved their goals in actually getting to members of congress. But they failed.

    Stop saying you're not defending them. You've been defending them for a year and a half now. 

    Post edited by The Juggler on
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,509
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    I'm through with screaming...

    Darwinspeed, folks...I'm out


  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 44,114
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Calling people who breached police barricades en route to invading the capitol building, in an effort to stop the certifying of our election "average joes" is akin to defending them in my opinion. Sorry Hugh. I have no sympathy for anyone who approached the capitol building that day.....including the republican nominee for governor in my state. I think he represents the type of people who were there perfectly. No evidence that he set foot in the capitol, but he was there and he is certifiably crazy and a direct threat to the future of our country. 
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Yes he has.

    You defended them too when you suggested they just 'wanted to be part of something' or got 'caught up in' the riot, as if those people weren't there to answer the call from their cult leader to go fight like hell to overturn the election. 
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,509
    edited September 2022
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Yes he has.

    You defended them too when you suggested they just 'wanted to be part of something' or got 'caught up in' the riot, as if those people weren't there to answer the call from their cult leader to go fight like hell to overturn the election. 
    I was referring to the people who were at the rally but went to the capitol but did not engage in violence. 
    Post edited by HughFreakingDillon on
    I'm through with screaming...

    Darwinspeed, folks...I'm out


  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,509
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Calling people who breached police barricades en route to invading the capitol building, in an effort to stop the certifying of our election "average joes" is akin to defending them in my opinion. Sorry Hugh. I have no sympathy for anyone who approached the capitol building that day.....including the republican nominee for governor in my state. I think he represents the type of people who were there perfectly. No evidence that he set foot in the capitol, but he was there and he is certifiably crazy and a direct threat to the future of our country. 
    k, let me rephrase, as I haven't read every single comment in this thread. I haven't SEEN him defending them. I didn't see the original average joe comment; I came in at your response to it. 
    I'm through with screaming...

    Darwinspeed, folks...I'm out


  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,509
    now I'm a capitol riot defender. at that to the preposterous list. HAHAHA
    I'm through with screaming...

    Darwinspeed, folks...I'm out


  • some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Yes he has.

    You defended them too when you suggested they just 'wanted to be part of something' or got 'caught up in' the riot, as if those people weren't there to answer the call from their cult leader to go fight like hell to overturn the election. 
    I was referring to the people who were at the rally but went to the capitol but did not engage in violence. 
    Any info on the # of people who left when the violence started? You made the statement before that the majority of the crowd dispersed when violence broke out. 

    I'm interested to read up on that. 
  • now I'm a capitol riot defender. at that to the preposterous list. HAHAHA
    Yeah, that's going to happen when you make excuses for them. 
  • I don't recall the Shaman being violent.  That's one at least.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 7,680
    mace1229 said:
    Carried over from the Biden thread:

    HughFreakingDillon said:
    well, based on most of them leaving when the violence erupted, I'd say it's an accurate assessment. 
    From where do you get the info that most left when the violence erupted? I would like to read up on it. It got me thinking about #s at the ellipse vs. #s at the capitol, etc. 

    This article from ABC News estimates 10k people came onto capitol grounds… granted, only 20% or so entered the building, but that’s a still a decent amount who marched down there after listening to speeches invoking trial by combat & fighting like hell. https://abc7.com/jan-6-insurrection-us-capitol-riot/11428976/

    Do we know how many were at the ellipse vs how many marched down to the capitol grounds?
    As you said, 10k showed up to the capitol, 2,000 - 2,500 entered the building. From all the footage I've seen, the majority were just being stupid. More seem to be roaming around, taking selfies than assaulting people.
    Its difficult to post an opposing opinion here without it being taken out of context. That doesn't mean I'm defending anyone. I think many of them deserve jail time. Anyone who entered the capitol should face some consequence. I just don't think it automatically means they are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. Some I'm sure would, but the majority aren't wanting a civil war and won't be taking up arms.
    I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the mob that stormed the Capitol and kicked the shit out of the Capitol police are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. 


    You can complain all you want about being taken out of context, but you're also contradicting yourself. Yesterday you said you wouldn't assume the intent of the people who were there, and here you're assuming what they are & aren't willing to do. 
    That’s not contradicting. I didn’t say I wouldn’t assume their intent. I believe I said we can’t know for sure, we’re arguing a hypothetical and that is my opinion. It’s still my opinion. I don’t know for sure what was going on in their heads, but I can have an opinion about it. And I could be completely wrong. Maybe they were hoping to murder some politicians and have a violent takeover, but I just don’t believe the majority wanted to and wouldn’t want to in the future.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 7,680
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Calling people who breached police barricades en route to invading the capitol building, in an effort to stop the certifying of our election "average joes" is akin to defending them in my opinion. Sorry Hugh. I have no sympathy for anyone who approached the capitol building that day.....including the republican nominee for governor in my state. I think he represents the type of people who were there perfectly. No evidence that he set foot in the capitol, but he was there and he is certifiably crazy and a direct threat to the future of our country. 
    I’m not defending those people. All I’m saying is I don’t believe the majority of those people are really wanting a civil war, willing to take up arms or personally inflict violence on government officials.
    It looked like a couple hundred attacking police, then 2000 more just followed and roamed around an empty Capitol taking selfies. They let the mob mentality take over. 
    Thats not defending them. I don’t feel sorry for anyone being arrested who entered the building. They’re getting what they deserve. My comment is simply arguing against the idea that millions are willing to take up arms against the government and that Jan 6 is proof of that. 
    My average Joe comment wasn’t that they were all average joes who just showed up, but that more of the people there (the average person in the crowd) wasn’t there to start a civil war.
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 44,114
    edited September 2022
    mace1229 said:
    mace1229 said:
    Carried over from the Biden thread:

    HughFreakingDillon said:
    well, based on most of them leaving when the violence erupted, I'd say it's an accurate assessment. 
    From where do you get the info that most left when the violence erupted? I would like to read up on it. It got me thinking about #s at the ellipse vs. #s at the capitol, etc. 

    This article from ABC News estimates 10k people came onto capitol grounds… granted, only 20% or so entered the building, but that’s a still a decent amount who marched down there after listening to speeches invoking trial by combat & fighting like hell. https://abc7.com/jan-6-insurrection-us-capitol-riot/11428976/

    Do we know how many were at the ellipse vs how many marched down to the capitol grounds?
    As you said, 10k showed up to the capitol, 2,000 - 2,500 entered the building. From all the footage I've seen, the majority were just being stupid. More seem to be roaming around, taking selfies than assaulting people.
    Its difficult to post an opposing opinion here without it being taken out of context. That doesn't mean I'm defending anyone. I think many of them deserve jail time. Anyone who entered the capitol should face some consequence. I just don't think it automatically means they are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. Some I'm sure would, but the majority aren't wanting a civil war and won't be taking up arms.
    I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the mob that stormed the Capitol and kicked the shit out of the Capitol police are willing to resort to violence for political reasons. 


    You can complain all you want about being taken out of context, but you're also contradicting yourself. Yesterday you said you wouldn't assume the intent of the people who were there, and here you're assuming what they are & aren't willing to do. 
    That’s not contradicting. I didn’t say I wouldn’t assume their intent. I believe I said we can’t know for sure, we’re arguing a hypothetical and that is my opinion. It’s still my opinion. I don’t know for sure what was going on in their heads, but I can have an opinion about it. And I could be completely wrong. Maybe they were hoping to murder some politicians and have a violent takeover, but I just don’t believe the majority wanted to and wouldn’t want to in the future.
    It's not like these people exist in a vacuum. It's relatively easy to form opinions based on the other decisions they made that put them there in the first place.  So while nobody knows exactly what is going on in someone else's brain, I don't think these are people deserving of the benefit of the doubt. They're not "average joes" who got caught up in a riot. They chose to attend a "stop the steal" rally. They participated in a march to the capitol building at the exact date and time the election was being certified. They chanted about killing the vice president and taking back the country. They broke through police barricades. They physically assaulted as many of the outnumbered police that were there until there was nobody left to assault. Then they posed for pictures and did the typical touristy thing once they broke into the building. No big deal. Just a lil coup attempt before grabbing dinner. 
    Post edited by The Juggler on
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 44,114
    edited September 2022
    mace1229 said:
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Calling people who breached police barricades en route to invading the capitol building, in an effort to stop the certifying of our election "average joes" is akin to defending them in my opinion. Sorry Hugh. I have no sympathy for anyone who approached the capitol building that day.....including the republican nominee for governor in my state. I think he represents the type of people who were there perfectly. No evidence that he set foot in the capitol, but he was there and he is certifiably crazy and a direct threat to the future of our country. 
    I’m not defending those people. All I’m saying is I don’t believe the majority of those people are really wanting a civil war, willing to take up arms or personally inflict violence on government officials.
    It looked like a couple hundred attacking police, then 2000 more just followed and roamed around an empty Capitol taking selfies. They let the mob mentality take over. 
    Thats not defending them. I don’t feel sorry for anyone being arrested who entered the building. They’re getting what they deserve. My comment is simply arguing against the idea that millions are willing to take up arms against the government and that Jan 6 is proof of that. 
    My average Joe comment wasn’t that they were all average joes who just showed up, but that more of the people there (the average person in the crowd) wasn’t there to start a civil war.
    There were only a couple hundred police to attack. After the mob assaulted them, there was nobody else for them to assault except members of congress who had just gotten away. 

    Over 50% of Republicans believe a Civil War is on the horizon. You can keep denying these things if you want. But these people are out there and they are a threat to our country's future. 
    Post edited by The Juggler on
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 7,680
    mace1229 said:
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Calling people who breached police barricades en route to invading the capitol building, in an effort to stop the certifying of our election "average joes" is akin to defending them in my opinion. Sorry Hugh. I have no sympathy for anyone who approached the capitol building that day.....including the republican nominee for governor in my state. I think he represents the type of people who were there perfectly. No evidence that he set foot in the capitol, but he was there and he is certifiably crazy and a direct threat to the future of our country. 
    I’m not defending those people. All I’m saying is I don’t believe the majority of those people are really wanting a civil war, willing to take up arms or personally inflict violence on government officials.
    It looked like a couple hundred attacking police, then 2000 more just followed and roamed around an empty Capitol taking selfies. They let the mob mentality take over. 
    Thats not defending them. I don’t feel sorry for anyone being arrested who entered the building. They’re getting what they deserve. My comment is simply arguing against the idea that millions are willing to take up arms against the government and that Jan 6 is proof of that. 
    My average Joe comment wasn’t that they were all average joes who just showed up, but that more of the people there (the average person in the crowd) wasn’t there to start a civil war.
    There were only a couple hundred police to attack. After the mob assaulted them, there was nobody else for them to assault except members of congress who had just gotten away. 

    Over 50% of Republicans believe a Civil War is on the horizon. You can keep denying these things if you want. But these people are out there and they are a threat to our country's future. 
    Just because 50% think it’s likely to happen doesn’t mean they want it to or are willing to die so Trump can get back in office. I can’t think of a single person I know that I believe would pick up their gun and jump into a battle. If that was really the case, statistically I’d know a few dozen. The number of people who are wanting and willing to make that happen are very few, despite how many people think it is likely.
    A civil war isn’t going to happen. Republicans aren’t going to forcefully take over. Millions of people aren’t going to take up arms against this country. That’s part of the fear spreading to make us hate each other even more.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin LouisPosts: 20,428
    I don't recall the Shaman being violent.  That's one at least.
    he was egging the mob on. he was at the podium. he was saying, on video, "ohhhhhh naaaaaancy!!!" was he not?
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there.Posts: 44,114
    edited September 2022
    mace1229 said:
    mace1229 said:
    some here seem to have a difficult time processing the difference between defending someone and stating an opposing viewpoint of events as they unfolded/not assuming what's going on in someone's mind based on who they are affiliated with. 

    mace has not been defending them. 
    Calling people who breached police barricades en route to invading the capitol building, in an effort to stop the certifying of our election "average joes" is akin to defending them in my opinion. Sorry Hugh. I have no sympathy for anyone who approached the capitol building that day.....including the republican nominee for governor in my state. I think he represents the type of people who were there perfectly. No evidence that he set foot in the capitol, but he was there and he is certifiably crazy and a direct threat to the future of our country. 
    I’m not defending those people. All I’m saying is I don’t believe the majority of those people are really wanting a civil war, willing to take up arms or personally inflict violence on government officials.
    It looked like a couple hundred attacking police, then 2000 more just followed and roamed around an empty Capitol taking selfies. They let the mob mentality take over. 
    Thats not defending them. I don’t feel sorry for anyone being arrested who entered the building. They’re getting what they deserve. My comment is simply arguing against the idea that millions are willing to take up arms against the government and that Jan 6 is proof of that. 
    My average Joe comment wasn’t that they were all average joes who just showed up, but that more of the people there (the average person in the crowd) wasn’t there to start a civil war.
    There were only a couple hundred police to attack. After the mob assaulted them, there was nobody else for them to assault except members of congress who had just gotten away. 

    Over 50% of Republicans believe a Civil War is on the horizon. You can keep denying these things if you want. But these people are out there and they are a threat to our country's future. 
    Just because 50% think it’s likely to happen doesn’t mean they want it to or are willing to die so Trump can get back in office. I can’t think of a single person I know that I believe would pick up their gun and jump into a battle. If that was really the case, statistically I’d know a few dozen. The number of people who are wanting and willing to make that happen are very few, despite how many people think it is likely.
    A civil war isn’t going to happen. Republicans aren’t going to forcefully take over. Millions of people aren’t going to take up arms against this country. That’s part of the fear spreading to make us hate each other even more.
    Yeah. It doesn't take millions, dude. Please stop taking posts so literal. I'm in a suburb of a blue state and I have clearly seen people I used to be friends with go off the deep end on facebook and would not be surprised to see them jump to action if the time comes. 

    Roe V Wade will never be overturned either, right? It's just a states issue, right?  Like I said, keep downplaying these things.....they're lurking on the horizon whether you choose to believe or not. The longer these far right politicians keep stoking the flames the worse things will get...

    Judging by your lack of response, I think we have common ground on the violence on Jan 6th though. At least we're getting somewhere!
    Post edited by The Juggler on
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • Is Moscow Mitchy Baby going to encourage his caucus to vote “no?” From WaPo:

    The House voted Wednesday to pass an electoral reform bill that seeks to prevent presidents from trying to overturn election results through Congress, the first vote on such an effort since the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob seeking to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s electoral win.

    The bill passed on a 229-203 vote, with just nine Republicans breaking ranks and joining Democrats in supporting the measure.

    The Presidential Election Reform Act, written by Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), explicitly cites the Capitol attack as a reason to amend the Electoral Count Act of 1887, “to prevent other future unlawful efforts to overturn Presidential elections and to ensure future peaceful transfers of Presidential power.”

    “Legal challenges are not improper, but Donald Trump’s refusal to abide by the rulings of the courts certainly was,” Cheney said Wednesday during House debate on the measure. “In our system of government, elections in the states determine who is the president. Our bill does not change that. But this bill will prevent Congress from illegally choosing the president itself.”

    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 27,376
    Is Moscow Mitchy Baby going to encourage his caucus to vote “no?” From WaPo:

    The House voted Wednesday to pass an electoral reform bill that seeks to prevent presidents from trying to overturn election results through Congress, the first vote on such an effort since the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob seeking to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s electoral win.

    The bill passed on a 229-203 vote, with just nine Republicans breaking ranks and joining Democrats in supporting the measure.

    The Presidential Election Reform Act, written by Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), explicitly cites the Capitol attack as a reason to amend the Electoral Count Act of 1887, “to prevent other future unlawful efforts to overturn Presidential elections and to ensure future peaceful transfers of Presidential power.”

    “Legal challenges are not improper, but Donald Trump’s refusal to abide by the rulings of the courts certainly was,” Cheney said Wednesday during House debate on the measure. “In our system of government, elections in the states determine who is the president. Our bill does not change that. But this bill will prevent Congress from illegally choosing the president itself.”


    its believed there are 10 gop senators supporting a senate version...
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Sign In or Register to comment.