4 ms·

> They broke the law. They committed sedition--I copy-pasted the actual definition of the law. It doesn't matter why they were trying to break law, they still v

> They broke the law. They committed sedition--I copy-pasted the actual definition of the law. It doesn't matter why they were trying to break law, they still violated the law. This presumes that your perspective on the alleged fraud is factually correct. If we don't presume the facts of the matter one way or the other, it looks like they may have been petitioning their government for redress. > Let me put it like this: if I were to kill the President, I would be a murderer. It doesn't matter if I think he's a deranged nutcase whose continued presidency would irrevocably damage the country: I would still be committing first-degree murder I think the same argument applies to vote fraud. It doesn't matter how much you hate the president (or think him incompetent, or whatever), vote fraud is vote fraud. > Some cosplayers did pretend to make electoral vote certificates to compete against, but cosplaying an electoral vote does not meet the legal requirements to create a valid electoral vote certificate. So they are trying to prevent the cosplayers from successfully impersonating actual electors. > I'm not going to respond to all of your points because my blood pressure can't take this, but I will close out with this comment: what happened yesterday is the electoral equivalent of lynching. Thats hyperbolic and undemocratic. > Even if you think it is justified, it is still an extralegal attempt by a mob to execute their will, damning the due process of anyone they come across. Yeah I didn't support their actions but its kind of like the protests last summer: riots are the language of the unheard.

jcranmer 6y ago
> So they are trying to prevent the cosplayers from successfully impersonating actual electors. The cosplayers are the people who pretended to be the Republican electors in the states of Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, despite failing to meet the statutory requirements of meeting in the appointed place, having the vote signed by the respective Secretary of State, and having the vote receipt submitted to the National Archives. In other words, these are people whose actions as purported electors are not legitimate. It is as if I were to put on a shirt with the word "POLICE" on it and print out a badge that had the same word of it--it doesn't actually make me a police officer, merely someone cosplaying a police officer. (Although as electors are not public officials, they are unlikely to run afoul of any laws, unless there is some fraud statute that is broad enough to cover this). Their actions did not have the force of law. The seditionous mob who wanted to stop the electoral count are the people who want to install cosplayers as electors in flagrant violation of the law. > Thats hyperbolic and undemocratic. A lynching is a mob taking it upon themselves to murder someone in response to an alleged crime in an extralegal attempt to achieve justice, completely in violation of all due process. What happened yesterday was a mob taking it upon themselves to overturn the lawful results of the election in response to an alleged crime in an extralegal attempt to achieve justice, completely in violation of all due process. That is the antithesis of rule of law; it is not hyperbolic or undemocratic to draw that comparison.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  > The cosplayers are the people who pretended to be the Republican electors in the states of Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, despite failing to meet the statutory requirements of meeting in the appointed place, having the vote signed by the respective Secretary of State, and having the vote receipt submitted to the National Archives. We've already seen that failure to meet statutory requirements is not sufficient to disqualify an election, elector, or ballot. Otherwise PA would have gone to trump because of the backdated postmarks. > In other words, these are people whose actions as purported electors are not legitimate. According to you. Other people feel that these are the legitimate electors. Since legitimacy is a social construct and not a physical phenomenon, there is no objective answer. > It is as if I were to put on a shirt with the word "POLICE" on it and print out a badge that had the same word of it--it doesn't actually make me a police officer, merely someone cosplaying a police officer. Likewise, if the result of an election is altered due to ballot stuffing and other forms of compromise, the apparent victor is not legitimate, but a cosplayer. > What happened yesterday was a mob taking it upon themselves to overturn the lawful results of the election in response to an alleged crime in an extralegal attempt to achieve justice, completely in violation of all due process. Yes that's your opinion. If you refrain from assuming your own opinion about unknown facts to be automatically correct, then you can see how they may have felt themselves to be members of the public who were petitioning their government or performatively airing grievances just like their antifa/blm counterparts have been doing for years.

jcranmer 6y ago

> So they are trying to prevent the cosplayers from successfully impersonating actual electors. The cosplayers are the people who pretended to be the Republican electors in the states of Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, despite failing to meet the statutory requirements of meeting in the appointed place, having the vote signed by the respective Secretary of State, and having the vote receipt submitted to the National Archives. In other words, these are people whose actions as purported electors are not legitimate. It is as if I were to put on a shirt with the word "POLICE" on it and print out a badge that had the same word of it--it doesn't actually make me a police officer, merely someone cosplaying a police officer. (Although as electors are not public officials, they are unlikely to run afoul of any laws, unless there is some fraud statute that is broad enough to cover this). Their actions did not have the force of law. The seditionous mob who wanted to stop the electoral count are the people who want to install cosplayers as electors in flagrant violation of the law. > Thats hyperbolic and undemocratic. A lynching is a mob taking it upon themselves to murder someone in response to an alleged crime in an extralegal attempt to achieve justice, completely in violation of all due process. What happened yesterday was a mob taking it upon themselves to overturn the lawful results of the election in response to an alleged crime in an extralegal attempt to achieve justice, completely in violation of all due process. That is the antithesis of rule of law; it is not hyperbolic or undemocratic to draw that comparison.

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> The cosplayers are the people who pretended to be the Republican electors in the states of Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, despite failing to meet the statutory requirements of meeting in the appointed place, having the vote signed by the respective Secretary of State, and having the vote receipt submitted to the National Archives. We've already seen that failure to meet statutory requirements is not sufficient to disqualify an election, elector, or ballot. Otherwise PA would have gone to trump because of the backdated postmarks. > In other words, these are people whose actions as purported electors are not legitimate. According to you. Other people feel that these are the legitimate electors. Since legitimacy is a social construct and not a physical phenomenon, there is no objective answer. > It is as if I were to put on a shirt with the word "POLICE" on it and print out a badge that had the same word of it--it doesn't actually make me a police officer, merely someone cosplaying a police officer. Likewise, if the result of an election is altered due to ballot stuffing and other forms of compromise, the apparent victor is not legitimate, but a cosplayer. > What happened yesterday was a mob taking it upon themselves to overturn the lawful results of the election in response to an alleged crime in an extralegal attempt to achieve justice, completely in violation of all due process. Yes that's your opinion. If you refrain from assuming your own opinion about unknown facts to be automatically correct, then you can see how they may have felt themselves to be members of the public who were petitioning their government or performatively airing grievances just like their antifa/blm counterparts have been doing for years.