Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: ****1/6 Committee Hearings Day 3, thread ONE**** [View all]crickets
(26,168 posts)92. Luttig does appear genuinely upset by what happened Jan 6
and by the attempt to introduce 'alternate' electors. He firmly rebukes Eastman's claim of historical/legal precedence.
eta from Wonkette:
1:30 Luttig frames the issue as the survival of democracy, whether the foundational rule of law
"I believe that had Vice President Pence obeyed the order from his president, during the joint session of congress on January 6 2021, and declared Donald Trump the next president of US notwithstanding that then president Trump had lost the electoral college vote as well as the popular vote in the 2020 presidential election, that declaration of Donald Trump as the next president would have plunged America into what I believe would have been tantamount to a revolution within a constitutional crisis in America. Which in my view, and I'm only one man, would have been the first constitutional crisis since the founding of the Republic."
"I believe that had Vice President Pence obeyed the order from his president, during the joint session of congress on January 6 2021, and declared Donald Trump the next president of US notwithstanding that then president Trump had lost the electoral college vote as well as the popular vote in the 2020 presidential election, that declaration of Donald Trump as the next president would have plunged America into what I believe would have been tantamount to a revolution within a constitutional crisis in America. Which in my view, and I'm only one man, would have been the first constitutional crisis since the founding of the Republic."
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
127 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I always check on the CSPAN website since they are controlling the cameras
BumRushDaShow
Jun 2022
#39
I disagree. There are enough other people there who make up for whatever deficiencies
JohnSJ
Jun 2022
#19
Correct, plus just maybe she's a Repub draw for those viewers who need to watch.
txwhitedove
Jun 2022
#35
A good move in my view. I don't think it will happen, but it might motivate Pence to testify.
JohnSJ
Jun 2022
#22
I think he will run in the Republican primaries. The only thing I don't want is to see DeSantis
JohnSJ
Jun 2022
#48
Marc Short video testimony: Eastman knew on Jan. 4 refusing to count electoral votes was illegal
Mersky
Jun 2022
#31
Again, the witnesses are going to be Republicans, conservative Republicans no less.
crickets
Jun 2022
#42
Jacob: "December 7th" first hearing about this looney 12 Amendment theory
BumRushDaShow
Jun 2022
#47
Exactly, he is being very careful with his chosen words, because this is a very significant
JohnSJ
Jun 2022
#111
He does seem to be doing a lot of thinking about his words before saying them.
crickets
Jun 2022
#65
I guess.............. it's good ...................... to be.............................
Scrivener7
Jun 2022
#59
"The first constitutional crisis since the beginning of the Republic" ONLY thing he didn't repeat.
ancianita
Jun 2022
#72
J6 Committee giving master class in civics, citizenship, law, news and TRUTH.
txwhitedove
Jun 2022
#82
No. Their justification was, "We don't want to have lost." But they couldn't
Scrivener7
Jun 2022
#122
No "mere" or legal precedent. Not even a passing acquaintance with precedent.
txwhitedove
Jun 2022
#109
Oh good! He's disagreeing with Jacobs saying the Constitution is "inartful"
Scrivener7
Jun 2022
#106
Luttig is now explaining his Sept. 22, 2021 tweet/analysis refuting Eastman's scheme
Mersky
Jun 2022
#107