2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

[a fan]

He's no different than Boxer or Tubbs-Jones in that regard. He has acknowledged that he is just one Senator & he's doing what he can to get answers about the conduct of the election for the citizens of MO whom he represents.

Yes, he is different. When those token objections were lodged, as I've said several times now, Gore and Hillary had conceded.

Trump has done no such thing, which makes what Hawley is doing, at best, ill-considered.

[old salt]

He's no different than Boxer or Tubbs-Jones in that regard. He has acknowledged that he is just one Senator & he's doing what he can to get answers about the conduct of the election for the citizens of MO whom he represents.

Yes, he is different. When those token objections were lodged, as I've said several times now, Gore and Hillary had conceded.

Trump has done no such thing, which makes what Hawley is doing, at best, ill-considered.

...ill conceived, with zero chance of changing the outcome of the election.
It's just a political statement, as were the objections in '04, '16, & several previous elections.
Media hyped PTDS hysteria.

[old salt]

Has Sen. Weasel Hawley said anything like what Sen. Boxer said at the time:

"The move was not designed to overturn the re-election of President Bush, said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones and California Sen. Barbara Boxer, who filed the objection."


Has Trump, as the losing candidate, said anything like John Kerry said at the time:

"Our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome of the election," Kerry said.

Answer -- of course they didn't.

And Weasel Hawley is objecting to PA's election. As a Yale Law grad and former SCOTUS clerk, he obviously knows that the Trumpers lost at least 15 court cases in PA. Including decisions by the PA Supreme Court and by a Trump appointed federal judge. And also including three cases over PA heard by SCOTUS.

So take your lame what-about-ism Salty and shove it up your butt.

For a guy who once swore to defend the Constitution, you are a forking disgrace.

Thanks for this post.

+1

...nice. Don't take it personally ladies. I don't need instruction from the likes of you on oath keeping.

Apparently you do. It’s the United States, not your political party, to which you made that oath long long long ago.

Hawley is more honest about it, in the end, than you:

https://mobile.twitter.com/jaketapper/s ... 25/photo/1

Show me Hawley's words advocating overturning the election. I see a lot of words about examining the process, none about changing the outcome. He's telling us what he intends to do with his single vote.

[seacoaster]

Has Sen. Weasel Hawley said anything like what Sen. Boxer said at the time:

"The move was not designed to overturn the re-election of President Bush, said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones and California Sen. Barbara Boxer, who filed the objection."


Has Trump, as the losing candidate, said anything like John Kerry said at the time:

"Our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome of the election," Kerry said.

Answer -- of course they didn't.

And Weasel Hawley is objecting to PA's election. As a Yale Law grad and former SCOTUS clerk, he obviously knows that the Trumpers lost at least 15 court cases in PA. Including decisions by the PA Supreme Court and by a Trump appointed federal judge. And also including three cases over PA heard by SCOTUS.

So take your lame what-about-ism Salty and shove it up your butt.

For a guy who once swore to defend the Constitution, you are a forking disgrace.

Thanks for this post.

+1

...nice. Don't take it personally ladies. I don't need instruction from the likes of you on oath keeping.

Apparently you do. It’s the United States, not your political party, to which you made that oath long long long ago.

Hawley is more honest about it, in the end, than you:

https://mobile.twitter.com/jaketapper/s ... 25/photo/1

Show me Hawley's words advocating overturning the election. I see a lot of words about examining the process, none about changing the outcome. He's telling us what he intends to do with his single vote.

He sure did: fundraising off of a rube electorate’s acceptance of vacuous claims that their election was illegitimate, based on the word of a shameless would-be authoritarian. Whom you have carefully and tirelessly propped up for years. Your oath? Please.

[RedFromMI]

Examining the process is entirely different than objecting to the final count.

The process actually has been looked at - and no court, for example, has found _any_ evidence worthy of even considering modifying the results. So this is essentially the wrong forum to actually look at the process. Those sort of things should be done either before the election, or in preparation for the next one (never mind that there is no real reason to change it).

The point Hawley is making is that he is willing to make noise in a vaguely seditious manner to appear to Trump supporters as one of "them".

[Typical Lax Dad]

Examining the process is entirely different than objecting to the final count.

The process actually has been looked at - and no court, for example, has found _any_ evidence worthy of even considering modifying the results. So this is essentially the wrong forum to actually look at the process. Those sort of things should be done either before the election, or in preparation for the next one (never mind that there is no real reason to change it).

The point Hawley is making is that he is willing to make noise in a vaguely seditious manner to appear to Trump supporters as one of "them".

You mean like this...... https://apnews.com/article/f5f6a73b2af5 ... b35e82c18d

Junk mail voting is different. Need to take a look at it.

[seacoaster]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... democracy/

"What is particularly reprehensible about Hawley’s move is that, unlike some of the deluded House members who signed onto the lawsuit, he knows his complaint is groundless. He is a graduate of Yale Law School, the former attorney general of Missouri and a law professor at the University of Missouri School of Law. He clerked for Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and subsequently wrote Supreme Court briefs. He knows that what he is doing is antithetical to the Constitution, his oath of office and his obligations as a lawyer. Yale should ask for its diploma back; the Missouri bar should move to take away his license. Georgia voters should send Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock to the U.S. Senate to deprive Hawley of the gavel on any committee and his party of the majority.

Whenever the MAGA set whines over someone calling for the Republican Party’s demise or keeping track of the politicians who betrayed our democracy, one need only point to the fleet of prominent Republicans who have demonstrated their contempt for democracy. This includes Hawley; the 18 state attorneys general who filed suit to overturn the election; Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who volunteered to argue that lawsuit before the Supreme Court; and the 126 House members who supported that lawsuit. A party that celebrates such characters is unworthy of holding power; the people who have rushed to incinerate our democracy deserve not merely to be thrown out of office, but to be shunned by patriotic Americans."

And Randy.

[old salt]

Has Sen. Weasel Hawley said anything like what Sen. Boxer said at the time:

"The move was not designed to overturn the re-election of President Bush, said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones and California Sen. Barbara Boxer, who filed the objection."


Has Trump, as the losing candidate, said anything like John Kerry said at the time:

"Our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome of the election," Kerry said.

Answer -- of course they didn't.

And Weasel Hawley is objecting to PA's election. As a Yale Law grad and former SCOTUS clerk, he obviously knows that the Trumpers lost at least 15 court cases in PA. Including decisions by the PA Supreme Court and by a Trump appointed federal judge. And also including three cases over PA heard by SCOTUS.

So take your lame what-about-ism Salty and shove it up your butt.

For a guy who once swore to defend the Constitution, you are a forking disgrace.

Thanks for this post.

+1

...nice. Don't take it personally ladies. I don't need instruction from the likes of you on oath keeping.

Apparently you do. It’s the United States, not your political party, to which you made that oath long long long ago.

Hawley is more honest about it, in the end, than you:

https://mobile.twitter.com/jaketapper/s ... 25/photo/1

Show me Hawley's words advocating overturning the election. I see a lot of words about examining the process, none about changing the outcome. He's telling us what he intends to do with his single vote.

He sure did: fundraising off of a rube electorate’s acceptance of vacuous claims that their election was illegitimate, based on the word of a shameless would-be authoritarian. Whom you have carefully and tirelessly propped up for years. Your oath? Please.

Support & defend the Constitution. Trump was elected, & Hawley is acting, IAW the Constitution.
All the rest is histrionics. Get over it.

[ggait]

Show me Hawley's words advocating overturning the election.

Has Hawley ever recognized Biden as the president-elect?

Boxer did that, making clear that her stunt (still stupid imo) was about another issue. I tried to find a place where Hawley has actually recognized Biden's victory and could not find one. But maybe I missed it.

Hawley's alleged main beef is that PA "did not follow its own election law." Well Trump appointed federal judges in PA called BS on that. As did the PA Supreme Court (several times). As did SCOTUS (several times; unanimously). Led by Hawley's former boss CJ Roberts.

So does Hawley think that Roberts is in the tank for Joe? Or that every SCOTUS justice (six of whom are GOP appointees) just got it wrong?

Heck, maybe former Roberts law clerk Hawley believes (as Lin Wood, Esq. does) that Roberts: (i) is a pedophile with connections to Jeffrey Epstein and (ii) is on tape with Breyer plotting to kepp that MF-er Trump from being re-elected, and (iii) had some involvement with Scalia's death.

We all know Hawley's two hours will be complete BS, and that Salty will eat it up with a shovel and tell us it is what-about fair play. Like I said, Salty's a disgrace.

This captures what is really going on:

https://twitter.com/skolanach/status/13 ... 2633506817

[njbill]

No member of Congress has any legitimate basis to file a complaint as to any states’ slate of electoral voters. It should go without saying that a “complaint” within the meaning of the statute has to mean a legitimate complaint. It cannot mean an illegitimate one, or one filed simply as a political stunt.

Most significantly, I believe 49 of the 50 states met the Safeharbor deadline of December 8. That means their certified state of electors are “conclusive” (the statutory word) on Congress. Accordingly, no legitimate objection can be filed. Frankly, the president of the Senate would be within his rights, I think, to rule any objections filed to electors from states that met the Safeharbor deadline to be out of order. Of course, Pence won’t do that.

The only state that did not meet the Safeharbor deadline was Wisconsin. The reason it didn’t was because its supreme court had not resolved all challenges by December 8, though that court did resolve the last challenge about an hour before the Wisconsin electors met on December 14. So while Wisconsin’s slate of electors don’t have safe harbor protection, the slate is entirely legitimate, and there is no legal basis to file a valid “objection” in Congress.

I haven’t seen any commentators write about this, but I believe that if Congress were to somehow try to reject electors from states that met the Safeharbor deadline, the courts, including the Supreme Court, could nullify that action since Congress would have violated its own law.

[old salt]

Show me Hawley's words advocating overturning the election.

Has Hawley ever recognized Biden as the president-elect?

Boxer did that, making clear that her stunt (still stupid imo) was about another issue. I tried to find a place where Hawley has actually recognized Biden's victory and could not find one. But maybe I missed it.

Hawley's alleged main beef is that PA "did not follow its own election law." Well Trump appointed federal judges in PA called BS on that. As did the PA Supreme Court (several times). As did SCOTUS (several times; unanimously). Led by Hawley's former boss CJ Roberts.

So does Hawley think that Roberts is in the tank for Joe? Or that every SCOTUS justice (six of whom are GOP appointees) just got it wrong?

Heck, maybe former Roberts law clerk Hawley believes (as Lin Wood, Esq. does) that Roberts: (i) is a pedophile with connections to Jeffrey Epstein and (ii) is on tape with Breyer plotting to kepp that MF-er Trump from being re-elected, and (iii) had some involvement with Scalia's death.

We all know Hawley's two hours will be complete BS, and that Salty will eat it up with a shovel and tell us it is what-about fair play. Like I said, Salty's a disgrace.

This captures what is really going on:

https://twitter.com/skolanach/status/13 ... 2633506817

Recognize ? There's no formal recognition process. Hawley is just not voting to acknowledge the validity of the election results as conducted in (so far) 1 state. How many (D) congress members have yet to rhetorically recognize Trump as our legitimate President ? I missed your outrage about them.

[ggait]

Salty is such a bad faith weasel.

Sen Boxer clearly acknowledged W won. As did Kerry.

Banana Republican Hawley of course will do no such thing. Disgraceful, just like Salty.

Reports are that 140 BRs will object to the election. Recognize that all 140 just got elected in the same election that they claim is invalid. Wait, what? Including those elected in pa, ga, az , wi, etc.

It is just disgraceful. If you want to live in a country that runs that way, you’re free to move to Russia or Brazil, Salty. Seems like you’d be happier there.

[Matnum PI]

It doesn't feel like a coincidence that Biden will replace Trump in the White House on about, if not the exact, same day that we'll learn about the College Lacrosse game schedules.

[Matnum PI]

Congress overrides Trump's veto. https://flip.it/-BhIS1

[Farfromgeneva]

Has Sen. Weasel Hawley said anything like what Sen. Boxer said at the time:

"The move was not designed to overturn the re-election of President Bush, said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones and California Sen. Barbara Boxer, who filed the objection."


Has Trump, as the losing candidate, said anything like John Kerry said at the time:

"Our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome of the election," Kerry said.

Answer -- of course they didn't.

And Weasel Hawley is objecting to PA's election. As a Yale Law grad and former SCOTUS clerk, he obviously knows that the Trumpers lost at least 15 court cases in PA. Including decisions by the PA Supreme Court and by a Trump appointed federal judge. And also including three cases over PA heard by SCOTUS.

So take your lame what-about-ism Salty and shove it up your butt.

For a guy who once swore to defend the Constitution, you are a forking disgrace.

Nowhere in his statement, press release, or public appearances (which I have seen) does Hawley advocate, or even mention, overturning the election.

https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sen-hawle ... cess-jan-6

He's no different than Boxer or Tubbs-Jones in that regard. He has acknowledged that he is just one Senator & he's doing what he can to get answers about the conduct of the election for the citizens of MO whom he represents.

In your line of work, do you find personal attacks & insults effective ?

Does it in yours? “Money changer”. Or is hypocrisy more effective?

[Farfromgeneva]

Has Sen. Weasel Hawley said anything like what Sen. Boxer said at the time:

"The move was not designed to overturn the re-election of President Bush, said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones and California Sen. Barbara Boxer, who filed the objection."


Has Trump, as the losing candidate, said anything like John Kerry said at the time:

"Our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome of the election," Kerry said.

Answer -- of course they didn't.

And Weasel Hawley is objecting to PA's election. As a Yale Law grad and former SCOTUS clerk, he obviously knows that the Trumpers lost at least 15 court cases in PA. Including decisions by the PA Supreme Court and by a Trump appointed federal judge. And also including three cases over PA heard by SCOTUS.

So take your lame what-about-ism Salty and shove it up your butt.

For a guy who once swore to defend the Constitution, you are a forking disgrace.

Nowhere in his statement, press release, or public appearances (which I have seen) does Hawley advocate, or even mention, overturning the election.

https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sen-hawle ... cess-jan-6

He's no different than Boxer or Tubbs-Jones in that regard. He has acknowledged that he is just one Senator & he's doing what he can to get answers about the conduct of the election for the citizens of MO whom he represents.

In your line of work, do you find personal attacks & insults effective ?

Does it in yours? “Money changer”. Or is hypocrisy more effective?

[seacoaster]

More on Republicans' completely constitutional effort to just get Americans to look at the way we conduct elections -- not to install the Loser Moron:

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/ ... 4/full.pdf

The Plaintiff, the dumbest man in Congress (no, no, not Kevin McCarthy), thinks it means you have to take to the streets:

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1345213305577738240

This is what you support, if you countenance these efforts by GOP House and Senate members.

[old salt]

Salty is such a bad faith weasel.

Sen Boxer clearly acknowledged W won. As did Kerry.

Banana Republican Hawley of course will do no such thing. Disgraceful, just like Salty.

Reports are that 140 BRs will object to the election. Recognize that all 140 just got elected in the same election that they claim is invalid. Wait, what? Including those elected in pa, ga, az , wi, etc.

It is just disgraceful. If you want to live in a country that runs that way, you’re free to move to Russia or Brazil, Salty. Seems like you’d be happier there.

...that's high praise from a paid legal weasel.

The distinction you attempt to draw between Hawley, Boxer, & the 2016 objecting House members, is irrelevant. They're all doing the same thing. Registering their objections, on the record, to what they maintain are election irregularities. To draw attention to the issue & put down markers for future elections. This election was different than any previous & the differences are worthy of examination & Congressional attention, just as Pelosi's HR1 addresses concerns raised in previous objections.

Don't underestimate Hawley. He's no dummy nor bomb thrower. He clerked for John Roberts, was a successful AG, was encouraged to run for the Senate by John Ashcroft, Kit Bond & Jack Danforth. He soundly beat a two term incumbent. He's now bucking Mitch & the GOP old bulls in the Senate. This is a high risk play. If he fails to raise anything of substance, it could derail his future aspirations for higher office. ...or not, as in Halley-Hawley in 2024.

Thanks for the advice, but I feel no need to relocate. So far the only penalty in the USA for freely expressing my opinion is enduring childish insults & personal attacks from partisan zealots. Do you also dox people with whom you disagree.

[ggait]

Banana Republican Trump-sucker rat-forking caucus in the Senate now up to 12. Including Hawley (Yale Law), Cruz (Harvard Law), Kennedy (UVA Law) who obviously know better. Some real profiles in craven sleaze there.

If any of those 12 happen to get elected in 2024, we already know that their election was a fraud and so must be overturned.

And Salty will clutch his pearls in horror about how awful that effort would be.

[a fan]

If he fails to raise anything of substance, it could derail his future aspirations for higher office.

Right. Because the Republican voters are evenhanded, circumspect thinkers who would NEVER be fooled by utter nonsense.

My hope? The Dems sweep into both Houses of Congress in the next few elections, and follow the lead you have so generously given them....

...and then Federal Congress will start to control localized State elections. Nothing would make me laugh harder.


But sure, keep telling us that this is just SOP. Let me know when your man Trump concedes his loss.

Trump had his chance to present evidence of fraud to multiple State Courts. They came up with buffalo bagels.

Do you care? Nope. Those court decisions were make-pretend courts, with bunny rabbits and leprechauns presiding over each case. We need ANOTHER fake investigation into fraud that didn't happen. Who should the judge be THIS time so that you'll believe the outcome, OS? Bigfoot? Q?