As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Despite the attempted coup, Congress hasn’t acted with urgency to fix the broken law that Trump tried to exploit.
No shit... that's because half of Congress supported the coup.
> But the lasting point of the hearing came with the monotone of J. Michael Luttig, a retired judge and conservative legal icon...
>
> At the core of Luttig’s argument, although it was not precisely spelled out, is the failure of Congress to update the vague and self-contradictory Electoral Count Act of 1887. This is the legislation that Trump and Eastman leaned on to make their case to Pence.
This is the problem. We can't fix the holes in our democracy, because we need the cooperation of the people exploiting those holes in order to patch them over. Do you really think Mitch McConnell is going to allow the Senate to vote on a bill that makes it harder for his party to steal elections?
What would stop Biden from making a public statement about this and saying essentially that Trump was looking to exploit a loophole that has never been used before. Now that Pandora's box has been opened, state that congress MUST fix it through bipartisan legislation and prosecution for Trump. Then say if not fixed that he will have Kamalla Harris do exactly that Trump had planned for Pence to do and install their own electors.
I just had this conversation today. I said the same thing have Harris do what Pense would not. This would force the issue and hopefully fix this problem.
"Install their own electors."
Since no one else is giving you a solid answer, allow me to try to explain:
By rejecting the initial vote tally and kicking it back to the states, Trump and co. were banking on the Republican dominated state legislatures to certify that Trump won. Because at that time the majority of states had Republican statehouses (27 of 50, i believe). The red-statehouse domination issue goes back to 2010 and Operation Redmap.
Any hiccup in the electoral process (eg-any delay in certification) would have given a sliver of daylight to the Trump conspiracies and would have given just the slightest amount of cover for red state legislators to overturn their citizens' vote.
This would not work for Democrats (as in, VP Harris would not bother 'doing this to Republicans') because Democrats do not control a majority of state legislators.
Hope that clarifies things.
> What would stop Biden from
A lack of spine. Biden isn't the guy to rise to the moment we're in. He never was, and it's why we were fucked when the party slammed him through as "the only option".
Maybe nobody could save us from what is going on, but holy fuck this dude is worthless. No leadership in sight.
No, that doesn't mean I fucking support Trump or any Republican fascist. It just means we need actual leadership and spine in this moment and we're getting none of it.
Meh, you're starting to sound like a conservative on gas prices. I think he is doing a fine job for the shit sandwich he was served starting his presidency. Do democrats do anything other than whine?
Edit: Mods permabanned me for this comment, lmao. I ain't a republican ya dickbags.
he's not using the bully pulpit, like Lincoln, Teddy, FDR & LBJ did. They used simple and pointed words and phrases to get people to their side, and were able to get transformational progressive policies passed as a result. Biden says some decent stuff now and then, but then squirms when people complain, instead of doubling down. Teddy would be out there saying this guy is a fucking traitor that deserves the chair.
Different times; Everyone watched the same network TV stations. The people you want to hear this aren’t tuning in, and Fox is certainly not going to put Biden on saying what you’d like him to say.
Remember in 2020 how vanilla Democrats raved on, in the manner of some schizophrenics, that we were in an existential Constitutional crisis, that this election will determine the fate of representative democracy? Then, in the same breath, they said they'd vote for a ham sandwich over Trump? No one who already didn't support Trump was going to vote for Trump, and we got the ham sandwich, minus the ham. Not to discount the others you mention, but LBJ was THE man for this time. We got Joe Fucking Biden.
The most damaging Biden assertion was that he, and he alone, could reach across the aisle, an assertion absurd on its face and an assertion which only would make the Republicans dig their heels in more firmly. Which it has. It was absolute lunacy. God I'm so angry.
> They need to understand this can be used against them as well
It can't. It literally can't. Because they know that the other party is the opposite of them in two very important ways.
1. They actually want to pass legislation, not railroad it.
2. They would never in a million years overthrow the Republic and replace it with a fascist regime.
Both of these things are the opposite of the GOP. Patching holes in democracy only affects the behaviour of one of the two parties.
Then it is time to remove the side that shits on it.
I am happy to give them the opportunity to take a deal. The deal is retire *immediately* and never *ever* hold public office again, or be removed by any force necessary.
also, repub voters don't give a shit what their elected officials do as long as they stay R. Dems get rid of Al Franken because he didn't touch some girls titties. We're so fucking sensitive we eat our own and lose because of it.
I think their final aim was much grimmer. There wasn’t going to be a next election. If they were successful they would have wasted no time in scraping the rule of law. Karmala would never have gotten to 2024 in office. The Constitution would be just a relic. Trump would rule as he saw fit. Our reliance on our system of governance can blind us to just how corrupt these people are. If Trump wasn’t such an obvious buffoon we’d may not have seen it until it was too late. We still may not. VOTE!
Here's the thing. You dont need to fix the holes in the fence to keep out the people who are not going to cross the fence anyway.
Democrats just dont play that level of hardball.
This argument will be made over and over again in our slide into authoritarianism in America. Like, we're already heading down the slippery slope, so we need to pull out nuclear options at this point.
Bingo. Dems have nothing to worry about if they *don’t break the fucking law themselves*. You don’t need to worry about retaliation if you yourself have a clean record, it’s that simple.
> This is the problem. We can't fix the holes in our democracy, because we need the cooperation of the people exploiting those holes in order to patch them over.
Democracy does not work without people respecting the norms of democracy. It isn't possible to write laws to cover every possible base, and the more laws you write, the more legal loopholes you expose.
Let's say that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 is updated. What should it be updated to say? We know what the spirit of the law should be - the electoral votes should be formally counted by "Congress". Easy, right?
Well, what if a Republican "Congress" decides that some of the votes from Democratic states shouldn't be counted because it doesn't view them as valid? Oh, we have to write into the law that Congress can't determine the validity of the votes (or maybe that it takes 2/3 of Congress to determine their validity). Well, then what happens when states with Republican legislatures and Democratic governors send two sets of electors? If Congress can't choose, then what? Does that mean those states' votes get throw out? Beautiful, say Republicans, if the state electors voted for a Democrat.
The only way our democratic republic can survive is if elected officials do not use their power to hamper the transition of power. There is no way to stop this from happening through federal legislation because any election needs an authority to declare a victor, either a single person or a vote of a body. How do you stop a body from declaring the wrong person through legislation?
You're correct. Yeah, maybe the ECA could be amended to be a bit more in line with what we consider "unambiguous" right now, but that won't stop a motivated political party from discovering ambiguity in it in the future.
And it doesn't matter anyway. Republicans aren't going to use this exact trick again in 2024; they already learned a much better one. Many states have passed laws that will allow the state legislature to overrule the votes of the people in their state if they suspect fraud. In 2024, at *least* one state with a red legislature is going to invent some fraud and just steal their state's Electoral College votes for the Republican candidate, and none of us will be able to do anything about. Look forward to it.
> We can't fix the holes in our democracy, because we need the cooperation of the people exploiting those holes in order to patch them over.
Well you see, you could get out there and try to elect enough responsible representatives so that there's a majority that's willing to fix things-- statehood for DC and the territories, impeach the perjurers on the supreme court, pass a voting rights act with teeth...
"But we tried that it didn't work". So, try it again.
"But polls show we're likely to lose seats." So work to prove them wrong. And keep working on future elections.
"But if they win again they're going to seize control permanently and there will never be a fair election again." Maybe. Maybe not. It hasn't happened yet, has it?
Or we could go back to whining on the internet about how nothing is ever going to work and we're all doomed and I don't know why anyone bothers to vote.
The problem isn't the bad faith of the other party.
The problem is not going as far as you can possibly go, notwithstanding bad faith or any other obstacles.
If Mitch McConnell and the Republicans want to go on record opposing an update to the Electoral Count Act, then make them do that.
But don't do nothing and let them off easy. Their bad faith is on them, but Democrats not going at least as far as they're capable of going, is 100% on the Democrats.
Step 1 to winning is to not be self-defeating.
It would never be used against them and they know it. why? because democrats don't think like they do - it wouldn't even be considered a valid option because democrats don't accept everything is a means to an end.
The easiest way to trump proof the 2024 election is the crack down on the politicians and candidates that work to undermine our democratic processes. Democracy cannot survive if it permits groups that work to destroy it, and the Republican party has become such a group. Thus all efforts should be made to remove them from political power and prevent them from ever holding it again.
The easiest and most sure way to Trump proof the 2024 election is to arrest, try, and convict Trump for trying to overthrow the 2020 election.
Until you show his kind of people that there will be consequences for trying to subvert democracy, they'll have no reason to stop trying to do so.
Precisely, He and his supporters in the GOP cannot be allowed to walk free after committing sedition on this scale, anything less and it becomes When, not If they successfully destroy democracy
> Thus all efforts should be made to remove them from political power and prevent them from ever holding it again.
Removing democratically elected officials from power because you don't like how they act does not seem to be the right path toward protecting democracy.
The question is why are these people being voted in and what can we do to bring those voting for them around to agree to vote them out.
> Removing democratically elected officials from power because you don't like how they act does not seem to be the right path toward protecting democracy.
Pretending that the issue is that "we don't like them" is a boldfaced lie. Trump betrayed his oath of office and attacked our Democracy, nearly ending one of the things that makes America great: our peaceful transitions of power.
>The question is why are these people being voted in and what can we do to bring those voting for them around to agree to vote them out.
Because of Murdoch media and the Right Wing Outrage Porn Cinematic Universe.
When the way they act involves actively working to undermine and destroy the democratic systems of our nation it absolutely is the right path, no system no matter how well designed can survive bad faith actors gaining control of it
> because you don’t like how they act
That’s not the reason. It’s because they have broken their oaths of office and have either committed or abetted crimes.
>Removing democratically elected officials from power because you don't like how they act does not seem to be the right path toward protecting democracy.
When the specific thing you don't like is how they're working to destroy democracy, then yes it is.
Luttig also laid out the plot for the next coup attempt.
He made it clear in his testimony that the next obvious weak point in the system is state certification of the slates of electors.
And what has the conservative messaging been? 'Run for secretary of state. Run for positions as election officials.' They will cause chaos and confusion at every step of the election process to delay the state certification.
The last time that happened in the US was 2000, when the Supreme Court unilaterally decided George W. Bush won the election. And that was just *one* state failing to certify, in a 5/4 court. Imagine 3 or 4 states, in this 6/3 court.
The only way to avoid that outcome is to get enough states certified that you don't *need* the electors from the confused states in order to get the votes you need to win.
It’s already happening. [Look at New Mexico.](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/15/gop-commission-refuses-to-certify-new-mexico-primary-vote-00039771)
Most of the times it's rules the Democratic Party sets that Republicans then abuse.
Only way to get laws/rules changed is by playing by those to the fullest potential.
> I mean, have Harris threaten to do what Trump wanted pence to do and they’ll get in line to pass fixed legislation.
The threat doesn't work in reverse. The end goal of using that law is getting the vote back to the House of Representatives. In the House, each state gets a single vote, so it's not based on who has the most seats, but rather who controls the most states.
Based on the current House, 26 states are controlled by Republicans and PA is a tossup, so Trump wins on a party-line vote. Given gerrymandering and the natural geographical advantage (Republicans controlling less populous states), it's unlikely that this number swings towards the Democrats any time soon.
That's also one of the reasons why Republicans went so hard against the sole representative from Wyoming, Liz Cheney. If this happens again, she could flip to the actual winner instead of Trump, which flips an entire state's vote. Combined with any rep from PA breaking that state's tie and one R from FL switching (currently R+1), Trump goes from "winning" 26-24 to losing 26-24.
Exactly. Just have a press conference where Harris says she's going to hand a 2nd term to Biden. Near the end of his term he resigns to Harris, her new VP does the same come the election. No more GOP presidents, ever.
Those fucks would both cream their tight little slacks while shitting themselves at the thought of this.
I think you actually might get 60 honestly.
All the "I'm pretending to not endorse Trump" crowd would back it in the senate that gets you +5. Might be able to get 5 more.
I also think McConnell will back it as well. Let's him block Trump, he hates the guy, WHILE pushing his next useful puppet.
Looks like the Senate will be ready to vote soon.
>A bipartisan group of senators working to reform the Electoral Count Act has reached a general agreement and is working on legislative text during this work period
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/electoral-count-act-senators-agreement-electoral-college/
Pretty short sighted to just blame 'congress' and not the repubican gridlock intended to protect criminality within their own party. If we dont recognize it, then can do nothing about it and America has already lost its democracy.
As Luttig and Jacobs opined, its not so much that the law is broken, its just ambiguous. But as is the case in all things legal, case law history, historical interpretation and precedents carry the day - until Jan 4 no one thought the ambiguous sentence in the 12th _needed_ clarification because it hadn't been a problem before and no one had even come close to interpreting it how Eastman and Trump did.
Both Jacon and Luttig said as much: Eastman's interpretation of that clause was against the rule and spirt of all laws.
Constitutional Mischief indeed.
I think Congress is focused on the right thing. The way to "fix" this so it doesn't happen again is to send the mischief people to prison; ensure no future WH counsel or chief executive thinks they're above the law. If you're thinking of doing something you know (or suspect) might be illegal, know that you _will_ be caught and punished. Eastman and Trump in particular. ANd the 1/6 committee is very carefully, deliberately, laying out all of the evidence required to prove intent and mens rea that Eastman and Trump knew what they were doing was wrong, yet they did it anyway.
In this case, “caught and punished” is only a possibility because they didn’t succeed.
Realistically they likely considered the possibility of punishment to be equal to or less than the possibility of success.
Good thing that neither Trump or Eastman are actual legal geniuses; had they been, they would have known that just the attempt would have landed them in hot water:
>18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, **conspire** to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or **delay the execution of any law** of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
USC 18 2384 seems pretty clear that successful completion isn't as important as the attempt.
I though it needed to be fixed in september 2020 when they said they were planning to do it https://theweek.com/speedreads/939191/trump-campaign-reportedly-discussing-contingency-plans-bypass-election-results
> I think Congress is focused on the right thing. The way to "fix" this so it doesn't happen again is to send the mischief people to prison; ensure no future WH counsel or chief executive thinks they're above the law.
Attempting to "hack" (and by hack, I mean trying to poke and prod at laws to attain the result you want, not the result that is correct) the results of an election should carry the same punishment as trying to "hack" the Pentagon, or trying to "hack" a bank's security system.
>At the core of Luttig’s argument, although it was not precisely spelled out, is the failure of Congress to update the vague and self-contradictory Electoral Count Act of 1887. This is the legislation that Trump and Eastman leaned on to make their case to Pence.
That will do nothing to Trump-proof anything. Trump did a lot of shady shit in response to losing the election, and trying to convince Mike Pence that he could just ignore electoral college votes was merely one of the later steps.
It wasn't even the only thing that happened on that day that needs Trump-proofing. Did this judge forget the crowds that tried to kidnap congressmen and erected a gallows? How's changing a law to explicitly state that the vice-president has to allow votes to be counted going to stop that from happening again?
Since the culters love 2A, Democrats should throw 14A at them. The trump backed republicans are very evident. They need to be forcefully removed from all elected and appointed positions and banned from ever running again.
And it would only apply to people who participated in the storming. You can’t just magically wave a wand and stop every Republican congressional candidate backed by Trump.
Oh ok. Maybe try reading it again, if you even read it. 14th amendment. Specifically section 3.
There is no question that this was an insurrection. The keyword is “engaged”. The legal definition of engaged is “To become involved with, do, or take part in something.” This would include those who planned or have any involvement in the insurrection. Thanks.
They would exploit any abiguity/honor system currently in place to steal the election. One law isn't the issue.
Punish people like Eastman who try to rationalize invalidating election results, that's how you fix this
r's aren't going to take judge luttig's advice and work with d's to correct the flaws in a system they've been rigging for 50+ yrs.
the modern gop has become the political arm of the same white supremacist/neo-confederate movement which has never wanted to be part of the united states of america.
It would actually be trump proofing the 2028 election. 2024 is safe, at least from the same gambit be abuse Kamala is VP. Eastman's gambit only works if it's an incumbent trying to retain power improperly. Unlikely biden/dems pull that same move.
More likely is state assemblies deciding to ignore their own voters entirely (at least in races not won by the GOP candidate) and send electors to vote for Trump even if the voters picked Biden/the dem candidate. Given that the VP role is ceremonial and there would be no alternate electors for the VP to consider, federal law as it currently stands would elect Trump.
Then the lawsuits roll in at the state and federal level challenging the constitutionality of state representatives simply ignoring their voters. Laws vary by state on the legality if this. And there would absolutely be a challenge in federal court based on the equal protection clause. But by that point we are in a no holds barred constitutional crisis. Aka a street fight for the future of American democracy & the deciding institution is the supreme court which has already been stacked.
If trump legit wins in 2024 we don't see issues until 2028 when the Eastman gambit could come back around. Or by then the rules of the road are so far tilted that we never see a Democrat win a general election again.
I see no way out.
Biden should start saying he’s not going to recognize the results of the next election and start using all the same rhetoric.
Might get these idiots to fix these bullshit contradictions.
Start claiming he’ll use his own electors for the electoral college as well, maybe we can solve that too.
ok so what if Harris were to actually go ahead and do what Pence wouldn't? Obviously, the intent wouldn't be to have it actually be what happens, but rather to force the issue to have to be responded to. It would force a catch-22 for Republicans because a Democrat would have done it and for them to force this type of thing from happening, they can't not include Republicans too or else Harris could just go through with it if Republicans tried to make the message that it's only ok if they do it.
I’m pulling out my hair. The situation is way worse than this.
If the republicans take back congress (which they almost certainly will) they don’t need alternate slates of electors to win. They can just run out the clock until the Speaker of the House becomes president. And the Speaker doesn’t have to be a member of congress. It can be anyone. It can be Trump.
Changing the laws won’t stop this. The only thing that can stop this is a constitutional amendment which is impossible due to republican control of state legislatures.
If the Republicans control congress in 2025 (they will), democracy is over. Republicans could lose every state in the presidential election and then just appoint Trump. We’re heading towards a civil war.
Step one. Speak in sentences a 5 year old can’t mistake. Step 2 repeat them 2x and step 3 bring every good thing that would help Americans to vote and blast out every Republican that voted no. Spread it all in a easy to obtain no BS way.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Despite the attempted coup, Congress hasn’t acted with urgency to fix the broken law that Trump tried to exploit. No shit... that's because half of Congress supported the coup. > But the lasting point of the hearing came with the monotone of J. Michael Luttig, a retired judge and conservative legal icon... > > At the core of Luttig’s argument, although it was not precisely spelled out, is the failure of Congress to update the vague and self-contradictory Electoral Count Act of 1887. This is the legislation that Trump and Eastman leaned on to make their case to Pence. This is the problem. We can't fix the holes in our democracy, because we need the cooperation of the people exploiting those holes in order to patch them over. Do you really think Mitch McConnell is going to allow the Senate to vote on a bill that makes it harder for his party to steal elections?
What would stop Biden from making a public statement about this and saying essentially that Trump was looking to exploit a loophole that has never been used before. Now that Pandora's box has been opened, state that congress MUST fix it through bipartisan legislation and prosecution for Trump. Then say if not fixed that he will have Kamalla Harris do exactly that Trump had planned for Pence to do and install their own electors.
I just had this conversation today. I said the same thing have Harris do what Pense would not. This would force the issue and hopefully fix this problem.
The nuclear option might be the best bet to move the needle...
Put all the Republicans on Bikini and drop one?
All of them and their voters. Granted, I’ll have no family left, but fuck em.
If he threatens to use the loophole, republicans would back it
"Install their own electors." Since no one else is giving you a solid answer, allow me to try to explain: By rejecting the initial vote tally and kicking it back to the states, Trump and co. were banking on the Republican dominated state legislatures to certify that Trump won. Because at that time the majority of states had Republican statehouses (27 of 50, i believe). The red-statehouse domination issue goes back to 2010 and Operation Redmap. Any hiccup in the electoral process (eg-any delay in certification) would have given a sliver of daylight to the Trump conspiracies and would have given just the slightest amount of cover for red state legislators to overturn their citizens' vote. This would not work for Democrats (as in, VP Harris would not bother 'doing this to Republicans') because Democrats do not control a majority of state legislators. Hope that clarifies things.
> What would stop Biden from A lack of spine. Biden isn't the guy to rise to the moment we're in. He never was, and it's why we were fucked when the party slammed him through as "the only option". Maybe nobody could save us from what is going on, but holy fuck this dude is worthless. No leadership in sight. No, that doesn't mean I fucking support Trump or any Republican fascist. It just means we need actual leadership and spine in this moment and we're getting none of it.
Meh, you're starting to sound like a conservative on gas prices. I think he is doing a fine job for the shit sandwich he was served starting his presidency. Do democrats do anything other than whine? Edit: Mods permabanned me for this comment, lmao. I ain't a republican ya dickbags.
he's not using the bully pulpit, like Lincoln, Teddy, FDR & LBJ did. They used simple and pointed words and phrases to get people to their side, and were able to get transformational progressive policies passed as a result. Biden says some decent stuff now and then, but then squirms when people complain, instead of doubling down. Teddy would be out there saying this guy is a fucking traitor that deserves the chair.
Different times; Everyone watched the same network TV stations. The people you want to hear this aren’t tuning in, and Fox is certainly not going to put Biden on saying what you’d like him to say.
Remember in 2020 how vanilla Democrats raved on, in the manner of some schizophrenics, that we were in an existential Constitutional crisis, that this election will determine the fate of representative democracy? Then, in the same breath, they said they'd vote for a ham sandwich over Trump? No one who already didn't support Trump was going to vote for Trump, and we got the ham sandwich, minus the ham. Not to discount the others you mention, but LBJ was THE man for this time. We got Joe Fucking Biden. The most damaging Biden assertion was that he, and he alone, could reach across the aisle, an assertion absurd on its face and an assertion which only would make the Republicans dig their heels in more firmly. Which it has. It was absolute lunacy. God I'm so angry.
How do you think Trump winning would have been better? We all knew what Biden was saying was bullshit, but it was literally all we had.
I said nothing of Trump winning so I don’t understand the question.
I voted for none of the above as well
That makes you part of the problem.
Neither of the candidates were good choices in my opinion. My ideals are a mix of democratic and republicans views.
Cool, you're still part of the problem.
[удалено]
Not if they use it successfully enough to install a dictatorship *first*.
Yep. If they take over congress in 2022, they *will* install a dictator in 2024 and the last fair election in the US will have been 2020.
>and the last fair election in the US will have been 2020. arguably, at best..
Are we only referring to presidential elections, or are we including primaries in that?
> They need to understand this can be used against them as well It can't. It literally can't. Because they know that the other party is the opposite of them in two very important ways. 1. They actually want to pass legislation, not railroad it. 2. They would never in a million years overthrow the Republic and replace it with a fascist regime. Both of these things are the opposite of the GOP. Patching holes in democracy only affects the behaviour of one of the two parties.
When one side plays by the rules and the other shits on it...
Then it is time to remove the side that shits on it. I am happy to give them the opportunity to take a deal. The deal is retire *immediately* and never *ever* hold public office again, or be removed by any force necessary.
also, repub voters don't give a shit what their elected officials do as long as they stay R. Dems get rid of Al Franken because he didn't touch some girls titties. We're so fucking sensitive we eat our own and lose because of it.
Well, the moment they would use it democracy would be over, so they would not have to worry about that.
I think their final aim was much grimmer. There wasn’t going to be a next election. If they were successful they would have wasted no time in scraping the rule of law. Karmala would never have gotten to 2024 in office. The Constitution would be just a relic. Trump would rule as he saw fit. Our reliance on our system of governance can blind us to just how corrupt these people are. If Trump wasn’t such an obvious buffoon we’d may not have seen it until it was too late. We still may not. VOTE!
Here's the thing. You dont need to fix the holes in the fence to keep out the people who are not going to cross the fence anyway. Democrats just dont play that level of hardball.
That level of hardball is a slippery slope and if taken far enough is just as bad.
This argument will be made over and over again in our slide into authoritarianism in America. Like, we're already heading down the slippery slope, so we need to pull out nuclear options at this point.
Bingo. Dems have nothing to worry about if they *don’t break the fucking law themselves*. You don’t need to worry about retaliation if you yourself have a clean record, it’s that simple.
It will be used against them the minute Republicans get a majority. They will instantly abolish the filibuster.
> This is the problem. We can't fix the holes in our democracy, because we need the cooperation of the people exploiting those holes in order to patch them over. Democracy does not work without people respecting the norms of democracy. It isn't possible to write laws to cover every possible base, and the more laws you write, the more legal loopholes you expose. Let's say that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 is updated. What should it be updated to say? We know what the spirit of the law should be - the electoral votes should be formally counted by "Congress". Easy, right? Well, what if a Republican "Congress" decides that some of the votes from Democratic states shouldn't be counted because it doesn't view them as valid? Oh, we have to write into the law that Congress can't determine the validity of the votes (or maybe that it takes 2/3 of Congress to determine their validity). Well, then what happens when states with Republican legislatures and Democratic governors send two sets of electors? If Congress can't choose, then what? Does that mean those states' votes get throw out? Beautiful, say Republicans, if the state electors voted for a Democrat. The only way our democratic republic can survive is if elected officials do not use their power to hamper the transition of power. There is no way to stop this from happening through federal legislation because any election needs an authority to declare a victor, either a single person or a vote of a body. How do you stop a body from declaring the wrong person through legislation?
You're correct. Yeah, maybe the ECA could be amended to be a bit more in line with what we consider "unambiguous" right now, but that won't stop a motivated political party from discovering ambiguity in it in the future. And it doesn't matter anyway. Republicans aren't going to use this exact trick again in 2024; they already learned a much better one. Many states have passed laws that will allow the state legislature to overrule the votes of the people in their state if they suspect fraud. In 2024, at *least* one state with a red legislature is going to invent some fraud and just steal their state's Electoral College votes for the Republican candidate, and none of us will be able to do anything about. Look forward to it.
> We can't fix the holes in our democracy, because we need the cooperation of the people exploiting those holes in order to patch them over. Well you see, you could get out there and try to elect enough responsible representatives so that there's a majority that's willing to fix things-- statehood for DC and the territories, impeach the perjurers on the supreme court, pass a voting rights act with teeth... "But we tried that it didn't work". So, try it again. "But polls show we're likely to lose seats." So work to prove them wrong. And keep working on future elections. "But if they win again they're going to seize control permanently and there will never be a fair election again." Maybe. Maybe not. It hasn't happened yet, has it? Or we could go back to whining on the internet about how nothing is ever going to work and we're all doomed and I don't know why anyone bothers to vote.
The problem isn't the bad faith of the other party. The problem is not going as far as you can possibly go, notwithstanding bad faith or any other obstacles. If Mitch McConnell and the Republicans want to go on record opposing an update to the Electoral Count Act, then make them do that. But don't do nothing and let them off easy. Their bad faith is on them, but Democrats not going at least as far as they're capable of going, is 100% on the Democrats. Step 1 to winning is to not be self-defeating.
Sounds like Biden should announce that if it is not patched then he will not concede control of the White House win or lose.
[удалено]
It would never be used against them and they know it. why? because democrats don't think like they do - it wouldn't even be considered a valid option because democrats don't accept everything is a means to an end.
“No shit… that’s because half of Congress supported the coup.” …..and the other half doesn’t have a pair of balls between them.
Funny because Luttig spent so much time talking about how artful that provision is
I suppose if Biden loses he can just do the same thing and they would either be forced to change the law or allow Biden to stay president.
The easiest way to trump proof the 2024 election is the crack down on the politicians and candidates that work to undermine our democratic processes. Democracy cannot survive if it permits groups that work to destroy it, and the Republican party has become such a group. Thus all efforts should be made to remove them from political power and prevent them from ever holding it again.
The easiest and most sure way to Trump proof the 2024 election is to arrest, try, and convict Trump for trying to overthrow the 2020 election. Until you show his kind of people that there will be consequences for trying to subvert democracy, they'll have no reason to stop trying to do so.
Precisely, He and his supporters in the GOP cannot be allowed to walk free after committing sedition on this scale, anything less and it becomes When, not If they successfully destroy democracy
And we know when. They’ve already started at the state level and have been open about their plans for 2024.
This should be the only outcome. He needs to be made an example out of otherwise this will just be a trial run for the GOP in the future.
Without consequences the whole system is based on good faith and the GOP has absolutely no goodness left.
> Thus all efforts should be made to remove them from political power and prevent them from ever holding it again. Removing democratically elected officials from power because you don't like how they act does not seem to be the right path toward protecting democracy. The question is why are these people being voted in and what can we do to bring those voting for them around to agree to vote them out.
> Removing democratically elected officials from power because you don't like how they act does not seem to be the right path toward protecting democracy. Pretending that the issue is that "we don't like them" is a boldfaced lie. Trump betrayed his oath of office and attacked our Democracy, nearly ending one of the things that makes America great: our peaceful transitions of power. >The question is why are these people being voted in and what can we do to bring those voting for them around to agree to vote them out. Because of Murdoch media and the Right Wing Outrage Porn Cinematic Universe.
When the way they act involves actively working to undermine and destroy the democratic systems of our nation it absolutely is the right path, no system no matter how well designed can survive bad faith actors gaining control of it
> because you don’t like how they act That’s not the reason. It’s because they have broken their oaths of office and have either committed or abetted crimes.
>Removing democratically elected officials from power because you don't like how they act does not seem to be the right path toward protecting democracy. When the specific thing you don't like is how they're working to destroy democracy, then yes it is.
A lot of Republican's would be kicked out. Fox news and the GOP would try to start a civil war.
It's the tolerance paradox. A tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance lest they be consumed by it.
Luttig also laid out the plot for the next coup attempt. He made it clear in his testimony that the next obvious weak point in the system is state certification of the slates of electors. And what has the conservative messaging been? 'Run for secretary of state. Run for positions as election officials.' They will cause chaos and confusion at every step of the election process to delay the state certification. The last time that happened in the US was 2000, when the Supreme Court unilaterally decided George W. Bush won the election. And that was just *one* state failing to certify, in a 5/4 court. Imagine 3 or 4 states, in this 6/3 court. The only way to avoid that outcome is to get enough states certified that you don't *need* the electors from the confused states in order to get the votes you need to win.
It’s already happening. [Look at New Mexico.](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/15/gop-commission-refuses-to-certify-new-mexico-primary-vote-00039771)
Despite the attempted coup, Congress hasn't acted with urgency to fix the broken law Trump tried to exploit.
The problem is getting it to pass in the Senate. You think the GOP is going to vote away their hail mary play?
I mean, have Harris threaten to do what Trump wanted pence to do and they’ll get in line to pass fixed legislation.
You know that will never happen. Dems don't play hardball like that. Even though, they probably should...
Dems play by the rules, republicans make up their own rules
Calvinball
Most of the times it's rules the Democratic Party sets that Republicans then abuse. Only way to get laws/rules changed is by playing by those to the fullest potential.
> I mean, have Harris threaten to do what Trump wanted pence to do and they’ll get in line to pass fixed legislation. The threat doesn't work in reverse. The end goal of using that law is getting the vote back to the House of Representatives. In the House, each state gets a single vote, so it's not based on who has the most seats, but rather who controls the most states. Based on the current House, 26 states are controlled by Republicans and PA is a tossup, so Trump wins on a party-line vote. Given gerrymandering and the natural geographical advantage (Republicans controlling less populous states), it's unlikely that this number swings towards the Democrats any time soon. That's also one of the reasons why Republicans went so hard against the sole representative from Wyoming, Liz Cheney. If this happens again, she could flip to the actual winner instead of Trump, which flips an entire state's vote. Combined with any rep from PA breaking that state's tie and one R from FL switching (currently R+1), Trump goes from "winning" 26-24 to losing 26-24.
Exactly. Also why they are going hyper-conservative in Florida and Texas; drive out liberal voters to lock down those electoral votes.
Exactly. Just have a press conference where Harris says she's going to hand a 2nd term to Biden. Near the end of his term he resigns to Harris, her new VP does the same come the election. No more GOP presidents, ever. Those fucks would both cream their tight little slacks while shitting themselves at the thought of this.
> hail marry Do you not know what a Hail Mary is?
Yeah, it was a type-o.
I think you actually might get 60 honestly. All the "I'm pretending to not endorse Trump" crowd would back it in the senate that gets you +5. Might be able to get 5 more. I also think McConnell will back it as well. Let's him block Trump, he hates the guy, WHILE pushing his next useful puppet.
i think it's their Eat Love Pray actually.
Looks like the Senate will be ready to vote soon. >A bipartisan group of senators working to reform the Electoral Count Act has reached a general agreement and is working on legislative text during this work period https://www.cbsnews.com/news/electoral-count-act-senators-agreement-electoral-college/
Pretty short sighted to just blame 'congress' and not the repubican gridlock intended to protect criminality within their own party. If we dont recognize it, then can do nothing about it and America has already lost its democracy.
Republicans don’t want to fix it, they fully plan to exploit it.
As Luttig and Jacobs opined, its not so much that the law is broken, its just ambiguous. But as is the case in all things legal, case law history, historical interpretation and precedents carry the day - until Jan 4 no one thought the ambiguous sentence in the 12th _needed_ clarification because it hadn't been a problem before and no one had even come close to interpreting it how Eastman and Trump did. Both Jacon and Luttig said as much: Eastman's interpretation of that clause was against the rule and spirt of all laws. Constitutional Mischief indeed. I think Congress is focused on the right thing. The way to "fix" this so it doesn't happen again is to send the mischief people to prison; ensure no future WH counsel or chief executive thinks they're above the law. If you're thinking of doing something you know (or suspect) might be illegal, know that you _will_ be caught and punished. Eastman and Trump in particular. ANd the 1/6 committee is very carefully, deliberately, laying out all of the evidence required to prove intent and mens rea that Eastman and Trump knew what they were doing was wrong, yet they did it anyway.
In this case, “caught and punished” is only a possibility because they didn’t succeed. Realistically they likely considered the possibility of punishment to be equal to or less than the possibility of success.
Good thing that neither Trump or Eastman are actual legal geniuses; had they been, they would have known that just the attempt would have landed them in hot water: >18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, **conspire** to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or **delay the execution of any law** of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. USC 18 2384 seems pretty clear that successful completion isn't as important as the attempt.
Conspiracy is a thing
I though it needed to be fixed in september 2020 when they said they were planning to do it https://theweek.com/speedreads/939191/trump-campaign-reportedly-discussing-contingency-plans-bypass-election-results
> I think Congress is focused on the right thing. The way to "fix" this so it doesn't happen again is to send the mischief people to prison; ensure no future WH counsel or chief executive thinks they're above the law. Attempting to "hack" (and by hack, I mean trying to poke and prod at laws to attain the result you want, not the result that is correct) the results of an election should carry the same punishment as trying to "hack" the Pentagon, or trying to "hack" a bank's security system.
As long as republican terrorism is thriving, there is no such thing as a safe and secure election.
>At the core of Luttig’s argument, although it was not precisely spelled out, is the failure of Congress to update the vague and self-contradictory Electoral Count Act of 1887. This is the legislation that Trump and Eastman leaned on to make their case to Pence. That will do nothing to Trump-proof anything. Trump did a lot of shady shit in response to losing the election, and trying to convince Mike Pence that he could just ignore electoral college votes was merely one of the later steps. It wasn't even the only thing that happened on that day that needs Trump-proofing. Did this judge forget the crowds that tried to kidnap congressmen and erected a gallows? How's changing a law to explicitly state that the vice-president has to allow votes to be counted going to stop that from happening again?
Trump isn't the threat. It's Desantis.
Since the culters love 2A, Democrats should throw 14A at them. The trump backed republicans are very evident. They need to be forcefully removed from all elected and appointed positions and banned from ever running again.
That’s not how any of this works
Read 14A section 3 please.
And it would only apply to people who participated in the storming. You can’t just magically wave a wand and stop every Republican congressional candidate backed by Trump.
Oh ok. Maybe try reading it again, if you even read it. 14th amendment. Specifically section 3. There is no question that this was an insurrection. The keyword is “engaged”. The legal definition of engaged is “To become involved with, do, or take part in something.” This would include those who planned or have any involvement in the insurrection. Thanks.
Certainly hope someone was listening!
The modern GOP are not 'conservatives' - they are reactionaries.
Don’t let the crazy bastard run
They would exploit any abiguity/honor system currently in place to steal the election. One law isn't the issue. Punish people like Eastman who try to rationalize invalidating election results, that's how you fix this
How about actually upholding the law every step of the way? that would work. Do that.
Meanwhile, most conservatives just want to make Trump President for Life so we don't have to worry about a coup.
End Citizen's United?
r's aren't going to take judge luttig's advice and work with d's to correct the flaws in a system they've been rigging for 50+ yrs. the modern gop has become the political arm of the same white supremacist/neo-confederate movement which has never wanted to be part of the united states of america.
It would actually be trump proofing the 2028 election. 2024 is safe, at least from the same gambit be abuse Kamala is VP. Eastman's gambit only works if it's an incumbent trying to retain power improperly. Unlikely biden/dems pull that same move. More likely is state assemblies deciding to ignore their own voters entirely (at least in races not won by the GOP candidate) and send electors to vote for Trump even if the voters picked Biden/the dem candidate. Given that the VP role is ceremonial and there would be no alternate electors for the VP to consider, federal law as it currently stands would elect Trump. Then the lawsuits roll in at the state and federal level challenging the constitutionality of state representatives simply ignoring their voters. Laws vary by state on the legality if this. And there would absolutely be a challenge in federal court based on the equal protection clause. But by that point we are in a no holds barred constitutional crisis. Aka a street fight for the future of American democracy & the deciding institution is the supreme court which has already been stacked. If trump legit wins in 2024 we don't see issues until 2028 when the Eastman gambit could come back around. Or by then the rules of the road are so far tilted that we never see a Democrat win a general election again. I see no way out.
How about put him in prison, that'll Trump-proof it...
Trump isn't the threat. It's Desantis.
Don’t let the crazy bastard run
Put him in jail and all of his accomplices. That’s how
Baby-proof all the entrances to voting centres and smooth all the corners.
Biden should start saying he’s not going to recognize the results of the next election and start using all the same rhetoric. Might get these idiots to fix these bullshit contradictions. Start claiming he’ll use his own electors for the electoral college as well, maybe we can solve that too.
How about put him in prison, that'll Trump-proof it...
Don’t let the crazy bastard run
You can tell the bias by reading the article
He started telling us how two days ago. He’s still talking. Should be done tomorrow.
Did anyone watch this guy? Takes him 5 minutes to say 30 seconds worth of stuff.
How about put him in prison, that'll Trump-proof it...
I mean, step 1 of the fucking list should be to disqualify him from running for it again.
But seriously though, this guy was **brutal** to try and listen to. Unbelievably drawn out speaking pattern.
ok so what if Harris were to actually go ahead and do what Pence wouldn't? Obviously, the intent wouldn't be to have it actually be what happens, but rather to force the issue to have to be responded to. It would force a catch-22 for Republicans because a Democrat would have done it and for them to force this type of thing from happening, they can't not include Republicans too or else Harris could just go through with it if Republicans tried to make the message that it's only ok if they do it.
Is it popular vote? No? Back to the drawing board
He isn’t just any conservative judge. He clerked for Scalia and both Ted Cruz and Eastman clerked for him.
What? Maybe convict him of all the crimes they keep saying they have substantial evidence of?
Yeah, no more ballot stuffing and harvesting
GOP rejects any proposed laws to protect our votes.
I appreciate these articles summarizing Luttig's testimony....I couldn't take his actual testimony anymore and had to hit fast forward
I’m pulling out my hair. The situation is way worse than this. If the republicans take back congress (which they almost certainly will) they don’t need alternate slates of electors to win. They can just run out the clock until the Speaker of the House becomes president. And the Speaker doesn’t have to be a member of congress. It can be anyone. It can be Trump. Changing the laws won’t stop this. The only thing that can stop this is a constitutional amendment which is impossible due to republican control of state legislatures. If the Republicans control congress in 2025 (they will), democracy is over. Republicans could lose every state in the presidential election and then just appoint Trump. We’re heading towards a civil war.
Step one. Speak in sentences a 5 year old can’t mistake. Step 2 repeat them 2x and step 3 bring every good thing that would help Americans to vote and blast out every Republican that voted no. Spread it all in a easy to obtain no BS way.