8 ms·

Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? The military woul

by proc0 2y ago

Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? The military would have taken back that building in 10 seconds, and the process can be postponed till the next day or the next week. Nothing was at danger, that is not how a country functions. You need an armed militia or at least half of the military to take over.

Timon3 2y ago
> Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? No, and I don't know anybody who thinks like this, because it's a misrepresentation of the insurrection that happened. The danger was never that some random person sits down in a government chair and suddenly becomes the new government. > The military would have taken back that building in 10 seconds, and the process can be postponed till the next day or the next week. And that's what the republicans counted on - they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. And who could have stopped them? The supreme court they stacked? That's the insurrection. Do you disagree with any of this? All of it is quite well documented. > Nothing was at danger, that is not how a country functions. You need an armed militia or at least half of the military to take over. If not for the actions of a few individuals, the sitting president would have literally overturned the election results. That's absolutely a huge danger to the country. You don't need an armed militia if half the politicians are working together with the insurrectionists.
- proc0 2y ago
  > they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. That's the insurrection. I'm trying to understand, you are saying that the military would have showed up and forced Pence to overturn the election? Or what did I miss? I'm saying even if the protesters would have taken the building, the national guard takes it back immediately, and the electors get certified the next day in another building. In this scenario the national guard is not joining in on the effort in any way. It would just delay it. I could see how it could be a real threat to the election if there was proof of a large coordinated effort with firearms, by which I mean people conspired to actually takeover the building and launched a plan to do it, as oppose to a large mob with bad actors.
  - Timon3 2y ago
    > I'm trying to understand, you are saying that the military would have showed up and forced Pence to overturn the election? Or what did I miss? No, where did you come up with the military? Trump wanted to force Pence to overturn the election. He manufactured a scenario in which their reading of the constitution would allow Pence to choose which electors to count. Where does the military come into play? > I'm saying even if the protesters would have taken the building, the national guard takes it back immediately, and the electors get certified the next day in another building. In this scenario the national guard is not joining in on the effort in any way. It would just delay it. And the republicans specifically counted on this happening, as it would give Pence plausible cause to count fake electors. The delay is an essential part of the insurrection. The terrorists storming the Capitol did their job. They only had to delay the counting. The rest of the attempted insurrection was done by the sitting president and their party. I don't know how to be more clear than this. If you only look at the actions of the terrorists, and ignore the actions of the politicians, of course the whole thing looks like a hap-hazard attempt at taking over power - you're literally ignoring the most important parts! > I could see how it could be a real threat to the election if there was proof of a large coordinated effort with firearms, by which I mean people conspired to actually takeover the building and launched a plan to do it, as oppose to a large mob with bad actors. How is that a real threat to the election, while the sitting president attempting to force their vice president to count fake electors is not?
    - proc0 2y ago
      > And the republicans specifically counted on this happening, as it would give Pence plausible cause to count fake electors. The delay is an essential part of the insurrection. I don't think that would have changed Pence's mind, I think that's where I disagree then. Pence was going to do what he was going to do regardless. A delay wasn't going to make people change their minds. It seems more plausible to me that Trump actually thought (and still thinks) it was rigged and was supporting a protest just like any other and then things got out of control. He was a bad president in that moment, which would have affected him negatively if it was just left alone.
- wordofx 2y ago
  > And that's what the republicans counted on - they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. And who could have stopped them? The supreme court they stacked? That's the insurrection. Do you disagree with any of this? All of it is quite well documented. Wow this is an amazing conspiracy theory.
  - Timon3 2y ago
    No conspiracy theory necessary when documents detailing the plan circulated in the weeks before, all the pieces were in place, and they literally made their attempt. Or are you trying to tell me the fake electors weren't real fake electors? That Trump wasn't doing everything in his power to pressure Pence into counting them?
UncleMeat 2y ago
The goal was in steps. Trump and his team were putting together slates of false electors, but they weren't all in place yet. They needed Pence to refuse to certify the election or for the certification to be delayed. Trump told Pence to refuse to certify, but Pence wasn't going along with it. The constitution says that the vote count happens on a specific day chosen by law. The law says that it happens on that day. "The next day" opens a legal challenge similar to the one in Bush v Gore where the process is not allowed to be postponed until the next day or week. Instead, the constitutional backstop kicks in and the election goes to the state delegations, where the GOP had a majority at the time.

by proc0 2y ago

Timon3 2y ago

> Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? No, and I don't know anybody who thinks like this, because it's a misrepresentation of the insurrection that happened. The danger was never that some random person sits down in a government chair and suddenly becomes the new government. > The military would have taken back that building in 10 seconds, and the process can be postponed till the next day or the next week. And that's what the republicans counted on - they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. And who could have stopped them? The supreme court they stacked? That's the insurrection. Do you disagree with any of this? All of it is quite well documented. > Nothing was at danger, that is not how a country functions. You need an armed militia or at least half of the military to take over. If not for the actions of a few individuals, the sitting president would have literally overturned the election results. That's absolutely a huge danger to the country. You don't need an armed militia if half the politicians are working together with the insurrectionists.

proc0 2y ago
> they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. That's the insurrection. I'm trying to understand, you are saying that the military would have showed up and forced Pence to overturn the election? Or what did I miss? I'm saying even if the protesters would have taken the building, the national guard takes it back immediately, and the electors get certified the next day in another building. In this scenario the national guard is not joining in on the effort in any way. It would just delay it. I could see how it could be a real threat to the election if there was proof of a large coordinated effort with firearms, by which I mean people conspired to actually takeover the building and launched a plan to do it, as oppose to a large mob with bad actors.
- Timon3 2y ago
  > I'm trying to understand, you are saying that the military would have showed up and forced Pence to overturn the election? Or what did I miss? No, where did you come up with the military? Trump wanted to force Pence to overturn the election. He manufactured a scenario in which their reading of the constitution would allow Pence to choose which electors to count. Where does the military come into play? > I'm saying even if the protesters would have taken the building, the national guard takes it back immediately, and the electors get certified the next day in another building. In this scenario the national guard is not joining in on the effort in any way. It would just delay it. And the republicans specifically counted on this happening, as it would give Pence plausible cause to count fake electors. The delay is an essential part of the insurrection. The terrorists storming the Capitol did their job. They only had to delay the counting. The rest of the attempted insurrection was done by the sitting president and their party. I don't know how to be more clear than this. If you only look at the actions of the terrorists, and ignore the actions of the politicians, of course the whole thing looks like a hap-hazard attempt at taking over power - you're literally ignoring the most important parts! > I could see how it could be a real threat to the election if there was proof of a large coordinated effort with firearms, by which I mean people conspired to actually takeover the building and launched a plan to do it, as oppose to a large mob with bad actors. How is that a real threat to the election, while the sitting president attempting to force their vice president to count fake electors is not?
  - proc0 2y ago
    > And the republicans specifically counted on this happening, as it would give Pence plausible cause to count fake electors. The delay is an essential part of the insurrection. I don't think that would have changed Pence's mind, I think that's where I disagree then. Pence was going to do what he was going to do regardless. A delay wasn't going to make people change their minds. It seems more plausible to me that Trump actually thought (and still thinks) it was rigged and was supporting a protest just like any other and then things got out of control. He was a bad president in that moment, which would have affected him negatively if it was just left alone.
wordofx 2y ago
> And that's what the republicans counted on - they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. And who could have stopped them? The supreme court they stacked? That's the insurrection. Do you disagree with any of this? All of it is quite well documented. Wow this is an amazing conspiracy theory.
- Timon3 2y ago
  No conspiracy theory necessary when documents detailing the plan circulated in the weeks before, all the pieces were in place, and they literally made their attempt. Or are you trying to tell me the fake electors weren't real fake electors? That Trump wasn't doing everything in his power to pressure Pence into counting them?

UncleMeat 2y ago

The goal was in steps. Trump and his team were putting together slates of false electors, but they weren't all in place yet. They needed Pence to refuse to certify the election or for the certification to be delayed. Trump told Pence to refuse to certify, but Pence wasn't going along with it. The constitution says that the vote count happens on a specific day chosen by law. The law says that it happens on that day. "The next day" opens a legal challenge similar to the one in Bush v Gore where the process is not allowed to be postponed until the next day or week. Instead, the constitutional backstop kicks in and the election goes to the state delegations, where the GOP had a majority at the time.