General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLet's not forget why Trump was so confident in his efforts to overturn the election results
Last edited Wed Oct 2, 2024, 08:03 PM - Edit history (3)
_____________________
...even as so many of his advisers and lawyers were telling him he had no chance of succeeding.
Absent from Jack Smith's 'immunity' filing to Judge Chutkan is any naming reference to the 147 republican House members who voted to reject the results of the election, just on their partisan will and whim, without any evidence those results weren't valid.
We have no idea if Smith will make any connection in an eventual trial between those congressmen and Trump's efforts to provide them with 'alternate' false slates of electors which were in his favor.
There were a few references to the 'Representatives' and 'Congress' in the filing, but they were mostly in reference to Mike Pence's role in that certification as the Special Counsel argued that the vice-presidential role in those proceedings which might fall under the 'official acts' ruling by the Supreme Court shouldn't be used to exclude his conversations with Trump from evidence used in his prosecution.
...for example:
1) a conspiracy to interfere with the federal government function by which the nation collects and
counts election results, which is set forth in the Constitution and the Electoral Count Act (ECA);
2) a conspiracy to obstruct the official proceeding in which Congress certifies the legitimate results
...and:
"Only if the state-appointed electors have failed to make a choice, i.e., no candidate has such a majority, does the choice fall to the House of Representatives, who, voting by state delegation, choose immediately, by ballot, from the three presidential candidates receiving the most electoral votes."
...also, there's this ONE intriguing reference to his co-conspirators in the House:
"In addition, although countless federal, state, and local races also were on the same ballots as the defendant on election dayincluding those of every sitting member of the House of Representatives, even those on whom the defendant was counting to object at the congressional proceedingthe defendant focused only on his own race, the election for President, and only on allegations favoring him as a candidate in targeted states he had lost."
What we can conclude from the described way 'the defendant launched a series of increasingly desperate
plans to overturn the legitimate election results in seven states that he had lost," is that he was either disturbingly delusional, or extremely confident that his efforts would be rewarded by a Congress stacked with 147 cultist co-conspirators ready to capitalize on either the chaos or ballots deliberately presented to them as in dispute.
I'm curious to see where that criminal, traitorous connection is revealed in the rest of the evidence Jack Smith is preserving for an actual trial. The threat (and the criminality) here isn't just one mentally-disturbed loser desperate to hold onto power. It's also the republicans who did their best to aid and abet that treasonous subversion of the will of the people.
B.See
(7,629 posts)I've always referred to that 147 as co-conspirators and insurectionists who should be sitting in jail alongside their fellow Capitol insurectionists.
bigtree
(93,312 posts)...and that he still believes this indictment was pared down to get it in before the election, leaving off prosecutable co-conspirators to keep it from bogging down.
I expect more indictments. Guiliani, for one. Bannon...
Tumbulu
(6,611 posts)But when does the statute of limitations kick in?
Kaleva
(40,119 posts)...
bluestarone
(21,057 posts)Just hope, IF they were then hope it's provable!
bigtree
(93,312 posts)...that's going to need a whistleblower.
bluestarone
(21,057 posts)bigtree
(93,312 posts)...a talking witness.
Or, some documents.
The Supreme Court has zero legally enforcable rules of conduct regarding gifts and other favors. Moreover, they just legalized bribing politicians.
The most realistic means of accountability is through impeachment which would take a sufficent majority in the House and in the Senate to convict.
bluestarone
(21,057 posts)Never know what he has now. Just to add, LOT'S of witness's will be coming forward.
bigtree
(93,312 posts)...and after Judge Chutkan rules, there's nothing really standing in the way of bringing more charges related to the Trump crimes, but he's not going to before the election.
Nov. 6...
pecosbob
(8,297 posts)A simple majority vote is all that is required to expel any member from the House...we've seen it done recently. Charges are not necessary, evidence is not necessary...it is a political action.
bigtree
(93,312 posts)Rec
hibbing
(10,519 posts)Jarqui
(10,804 posts)is Republicans enabling him
He couldn't be there without them