3 ms·

> This is not a matter of perception. Their stated plan was to end the constitutional order in America. No. The hope was to get Congress to investigate the "vo

> This is not a matter of perception. Their stated plan was to end the constitutional order in America. No. The hope was to get Congress to investigate the "voting irregularities" found in several key states, such as Georgia. Investigating fraud isn't unconstitutional. If anything, certifying fraud against is against the spirit of democracy. Certifying fraud doesn't make the fraud right. But alas, fake news and simply repeating lies won the day, as no investigation happened.

ModernMech 4y ago
> no investigation happened. Every claim made by the Trump campaign has been looked at. Every claim they made turned out to be untrue. And as Trump's advisors testified under oath, Trump admitted in private to them that he knew he lost, and there was no fraud. All we have to know to realize that the Trump campaign was not actually interested in investigating "voting irregularities" is the phone call between Trump and Georgia election officials. They spend the entire call going through his claims point by point, and telling him how their investigations did not support his claims. If Trump were merely interested in investigating voting irregularities, that would have been the end of a call, with a "Thanks for looking into this for me". Instead, Trump threatened the Georgia Secretary of State with prosecution if he didn't find Trump the exact number of votes needed to overturn the election in his favor. That's not a concerned citizen looking to secure the vote for all, that's a wannabe dictator trying to stay in power. > Investigating fraud isn't unconstitutional. Agreed. But there's a time and a place for those investigations, and they must come to a close when all legal avenues have been exhausted. Trump had the right to pursue lawful recourse through the courts, and he exercised that right. The cases the Trump campaign brought to court lacked evidence and failed to make any concrete claims, because they were not actually filed to find fraud; they were filed to give legitimacy to the idea there fraud was the reason for the loss. The claims were heard and Trump lost. At that point, the thing to do in the spirit of democracy is to concede, not to work to burn the whole system down. > If anything, certifying fraud against is against the spirit of democracy. Which is exactly what Trump wanted Pence to do by throwing out genuine Certificates of the Vote in favor of the forgeries. That would have been certifying a fraud.
acdha 4y ago
> The hope was to get Congress to investigate the "voting irregularities" found in several key states, such as Georgia. More accurately, they wanted Congress to give credence to unfounded allegations which had already been investigated and rejected by the actual legal authorities. Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State didn’t sabotage the election against his own party when he rejected false claims, he simply did his job and recognized that the evidence didn’t support those claims, and Congress didn’t have any valid basis for refusing to follow the legal process just because some people wished they hadn’t lost a fair election.

ModernMech 4y ago

> no investigation happened. Every claim made by the Trump campaign has been looked at. Every claim they made turned out to be untrue. And as Trump's advisors testified under oath, Trump admitted in private to them that he knew he lost, and there was no fraud. All we have to know to realize that the Trump campaign was not actually interested in investigating "voting irregularities" is the phone call between Trump and Georgia election officials. They spend the entire call going through his claims point by point, and telling him how their investigations did not support his claims. If Trump were merely interested in investigating voting irregularities, that would have been the end of a call, with a "Thanks for looking into this for me". Instead, Trump threatened the Georgia Secretary of State with prosecution if he didn't find Trump the exact number of votes needed to overturn the election in his favor. That's not a concerned citizen looking to secure the vote for all, that's a wannabe dictator trying to stay in power. > Investigating fraud isn't unconstitutional. Agreed. But there's a time and a place for those investigations, and they must come to a close when all legal avenues have been exhausted. Trump had the right to pursue lawful recourse through the courts, and he exercised that right. The cases the Trump campaign brought to court lacked evidence and failed to make any concrete claims, because they were not actually filed to find fraud; they were filed to give legitimacy to the idea there fraud was the reason for the loss. The claims were heard and Trump lost. At that point, the thing to do in the spirit of democracy is to concede, not to work to burn the whole system down. > If anything, certifying fraud against is against the spirit of democracy. Which is exactly what Trump wanted Pence to do by throwing out genuine Certificates of the Vote in favor of the forgeries. That would have been certifying a fraud.

acdha 4y ago

> The hope was to get Congress to investigate the "voting irregularities" found in several key states, such as Georgia. More accurately, they wanted Congress to give credence to unfounded allegations which had already been investigated and rejected by the actual legal authorities. Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State didn’t sabotage the election against his own party when he rejected false claims, he simply did his job and recognized that the evidence didn’t support those claims, and Congress didn’t have any valid basis for refusing to follow the legal process just because some people wished they hadn’t lost a fair election.