this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
364 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19104 readers
3315 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sixteen people forged documents and claimed to be "duly elected and qualified electors" for the state of Michigan, Attorney General Dana Nessel said.

all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MicroWave 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The 16 people being charged in Michigan allegedly met in the basement of the state's Republican Party headquarters and signed multiple certificates claiming they were “the duly elected and qualified electors for president and vice president of the United States of America for the state of Michigan,” Nessel said in recorded remarks.

[–] Phlogiston 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

“They may have felt compelled to follow the call to action from a president they held fealty to. They may have even genuinely believed that this was their patriotic duty.” She continued, “But none of those reasons or feelings provide legal justification to violate the law and upend our Constitution and our nation’s traditions of representative government, self-determination, and a government by the people.”

So if their defense ends up being "we were just following orders" does that mean they could flip and become witnesses against trump? How many of them, in how many states, would it take before all these charges land in his lap too?

[–] DontMakeItTim 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m getting the opposite from that quote.

[–] Phlogiston 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Agreed, its not that they can succeed


the original quote points out that "none of those reasons or feelings provide legal justification to violate the law". What I was wondering is if this is a HINT that perhaps these folks could testify about why they might have felt it was a call to action from the president. Like, did he literally call them and ask them to commit this crime? Would they testify to that in return for, maybe, having this weak ass excuse be accepted and they don't spend time behind bars?

Anyway, thats what I was wondering. (And of course this is a simplification. Probably a few levels between them and Trump)

[–] Acronymesis 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's Summer Christmas in Trump World baby!!!

Edit: In celebration, we will all write each other speaking indictments that inexplicably also exonerate us from the charges!

[–] TokenBoomer 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why meet in the basement? Why not a Waffle House? Optics man, they matter.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Waffle House doesn't come this far north unfortunately.

[–] TokenBoomer 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's tough, but human rights, legal weed, and freedom kind of make up for it.

[–] tallwookie 2 points 1 year ago

eh... sort of, I guess.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago
[–] RunningInRVA 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think there is some provision in their state law that states the electors have to cast their votes on the grounds of the state capitol.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

So basically they were fine with breaking the law when it came to forging elector certificates, but doing it in a waffle house was a legal line even they wouldn’t cross 😂

[–] Spacebar 10 points 1 year ago

What do Republicans always say?

  • ignorance of the law is no excuse
  • anyone under indictment shouldn't run for office
  • felons shouldn't be allowed to vote (but in Michaigan they can after serving their time)
  • if you do nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about
  • no one is above the law
[–] Skaryon 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] DontMakeItTim 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Unless Trump actually contacted them and told them what to do, I don’t see that much flipping to be done here.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Well it would be surprising if he personally contracted any of them, but it pretty obvious it was managed centrally to a pretty significant degree, and that is likely to roll uphill close enough to be uncomfortable for him.

Unfortunately you usually have to do something in order to do something illegal, and he's gotten out of things over the years mainly through plausible deniability. Plenty of people did overly illegal things here, just a matter of how close to it he got in this case

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Seems deranged to do this without some kind of promise of a pardon or similar.

…At the same time, it’s not hard to believe that there are 16+ deranged republicans risking their freedom by conspiring in a basement to own the libs.

[–] FlyingSquid 2 points 1 year ago

Did Trump personally tell them what to do? Probably not. Did they do this on their own without his administration's involvement? Doubtful.

[–] Chainweasel 2 points 1 year ago

It doesn't have to be trump personally. it could be any one of his cronies like MTG, Boebert, Gym Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, Rudy, Mike Pillow, etc. They just need to turn on whoever they were in contact with in order to come up with the plan in the first place. Then follow the chain to the top.

[–] billiam0202 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Trump? No, he's not smart enough. But it is odd that this scheme would have happened in more than one state completely organically. So either 1) a whole bunch of people were all equally stupid at the same time (and let's face it, when talking about Trump's supporters that's a fair given) and/or 2) there was some level of coordination, most likely involving John Eastman and other, more scheming individuals in Trump's cabal (Miller? Bannon?).

[–] TokenBoomer 1 points 1 year ago

My bet’s Bannon. I think he’s talked about it on his top-rated podcast, though I’ve never listened.

[–] Pohl 5 points 1 year ago

AG Nessel don’t fuck about!

Give ‘em hell Dana, that’s what we sent you there to do.

[–] Spacebar 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] btaf45 2 points 1 year ago

Reminder that Steve Bannon frankly confessed Trump's Start the Steal conspiracy plans to a group of Trump insiders before the election.

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/22/1112138665/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript

…audio from Trump advisor, Steve Bannon, surfaced from October 31st, 2020, just a few days before the Presidential election.

Let’s listen. [Begin Videotape]

STEVE BANNON: And what Trump’s going to do is declare victory, right? He’s going to declare victory, but that doesn’t mean he’s a winner. He’s just gonna say he’s a winner. The Democrats — more of our people vote early that count. Theirs vote in mail. And so they’re going to have a natural disadvantage and Trump’s going to take advantage — that’s our strategy.

He’s gonna declare himself a winner. So when you wake up Wednesday morning, it’s going to be a firestorm. Also — also if Trump is — if Trump is losing by 10 or 11:00 at night, it’s going to be even crazier. Because he’s gonna sit right there and say they stole it. If Biden’s wining, Trump is going to do some crazy shit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

About damn time!