4D chess endgame

[LetterRip]

Finally the end result is clear - the complete neglect of COVID-19, the sedition and insurrection - all to ensure Biden has a smaller inauguration turn out.

[Wayward Son]

I can hear Trump now, like the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

"OK, we'll call it a draw." 

[Seriati]

That does make sense, the media lying about the COVID-19 response (world record development of a vaccine for a novel virus), claiming insurrection and sedition on a pretty flimsy set of facts and broadly attributing it to hundreds (if not thousands or even all registered Republicans) and now "chatter" of even more violence to justify a massive lockdown to protect the defund the police caucus.  Claims of a mass attack that will never be proven because it never materializes, which negative proof - unlike with voter fraud - is going to be considered proof that these actions were required and justified.   All just to explain how a guy who "received 80 million votes" can't seem to fill his own backyard with supporters. 

You are right it does make sense.  I never realized how cynical the media really was thanks.

[TheDrake]

claiming insurrection and sedition on a pretty flimsy set of facts

Is it flimsy? I seem to recall a statement from the joint chiefs that characterized it as such.

[rightleft22]

That does make sense, the media lying about the COVID-19 response (world record development of a vaccine for a novel virus), claiming insurrection and sedition on a pretty flimsy set of facts and broadly attributing it to hundreds (if not thousands or even all registered Republicans) and now "chatter" of even more violence to justify a massive lockdown to protect the defund the police caucus.  Claims of a mass attack that will never be proven because it never materializes, which negative proof - unlike with voter fraud - is going to be considered proof that these actions were required and justified.   All just to explain how a guy who "received 80 million votes" can't seem to fill his own backyard with supporters. 

You are right it does make sense.  I never realized how cynical the media really was thanks.

Delusional and a hypocrite

"the relationship between Trump and his supporters is an abusive one.  When the mind is hijacked for the benefit of the abuser, it becomes no longer a matter of presenting facts or appealing to logic."

[msquared]

Serati

Where have you seen them attribute it to all Republicans?  You have to admit it should be applied to anyone who entered the Capital building.

And are you still on the voter fraud thing?  Where is your proof of massive voter fraud?

Biden is not trying to fill his back yard with supporters right now because that is not safe.

[Aris Katsaris]

That does make sense, the media lying about the COVID-19 response (world record development of a vaccine for a novel virus),

It's called 'technology has gotten better'. Nothing to do with Trump since medical companies in other countries did it in the same timeframe.

Btw, if any great government in the world had actual political courage though, it'd have been developed in just a handful of months, with human challenge trials -- using volunteers that'd be deliberately exposed to the virus to test the efficacy of the vaccine. Hundreds of thousands of lives would have been saved if we had done that.

claiming insurrection and sedition on a pretty flimsy set of facts

Also described as such by the joint chiefs of staff (https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics/joint-chiefs-memo-capitol-insurrection/index.html).

and broadly attributing it to hundreds (if not thousands or even all registered Republicans) and now "chatter" of even more violence to justify a massive lockdown to protect the defund the police caucus. Claims of a mass attack that will never be proven because it never materializes, which negative proof - unlike with voter fraud - is going to be considered proof that these actions were required and justified. All just to explain how a guy who "received 80 million votes" can't seem to fill his own backyard with supporters.

You are right it does make sense.  I never realized how cynical the media really was thanks.

Seriati is still trying to steal the elections in support of his wannabe dictator. And his argument keeps being that... Trump repeatedly created covid-19 superspreader events with reckless mass rallies, and the Democrats were too responsible to do so.

Let's however just imagine his reaction and the reaction of other supposed "conservatives" in the hypothetical case that Obama had lost the reelection on 2012, asked Biden to just throw out swing state votes that didn't go his way, Biden had refused, and then a crowd of black muslims (that Obama had just spent hours riling up) had burst into the Capitol shouting "Hang Biden" while waving an ISIS flag -- and while people associated with Obama, including his attorney, had tweeted about which politicians should go first before a firing squad.

I'm sure he'd not find anything worth impeaching there.

[yossarian22c]

Serati
...
And are you still on the voter fraud thing?  Where is your proof of massive voter fraud?
...

Haven't you been paying attention lack of evidence of fraud just shows how pervasive and easy it is to get away with massive voting fraud. Its impossible to find, even with half a billion dollars in funds you can never find evidence of fraud. Its the perfect crime, the democrats are so efficient and good there isn't even any evidence there was a crime much less enough evidence to find someone guilty of it. 

[Seriati]

claiming insurrection and sedition on a pretty flimsy set of facts

Is it flimsy? I seem to recall a statement from the joint chiefs that characterized it as such.

Yes it's flimsy.  Without a goal of overthrowing the US government these are an over charge.  There are plenty of laws that were violated and charges that can be properly brought.  Advocating for an overcharge is purely for political reasons.  Nothing we've seen so far is insurrection or rebellion, and even for sedition we haven't seen the actual evidence (which is entirely within the private communications of those accused).  The largest problem with charging sedition is going to be showing intent.  Can you prove the intent of the protestors was to over throw the government rather than to hold it accountable or even demand it follow the Constitution?  Maybe in your head, but we haven't seen such evidence.  The mere fact of their actions doesn't show sedition, that required specific intents formed in advance. 

Now that said, it is certainly possible that for some of those involved, sedition is going to be appropriate and provable.  That would be the subset for whom the government can establish communication before the riot that planned specifically to use violence (i.e., ringleaders, if they had a plan in advance to storm the capital), expressly to stop Joe Biden from becoming President.  It's weak sauce to argue that "stopping" a ceremonial step was as relevant (and if you consider it so, you've got a lot of explaining to do about literally thousands of other federal laws that protesters have routinely violated with violence over the years).  It's hard to even explain how stopping that ceremonial step accomplishes anything.  Most likely, those charges are going to fail on appeal (I'll grant a DC jury, which is where they'll try to bring charges and is 90% Democrat, will vote to hang any Republican even before they hear the case) unless there is something far worse that was discussed in private.  And if there was no prior coordination about using violence to stop the counting of the votes, they shouldn't even get a conviction in DC.

Relatedly, you're not going to find any real evidence that everyone or even that many of the people involved, even in the riot and certainly not in the larger group that were at the Capital building, had any plan at all.  Most of them clearly didn't, as you can tell from their various selfies and  general tourist like wandering the halls with surprised and stunned expressions on their faces.  They got into the capital, they largely had free rein, and they did what exactly to "overthrow" the government or to implement a plan to stop the vote?  Nothing. 

99% of your belief about what they were doing is based on the choices of how that information is being presented to you.  Historically, sedition is something that government has abused to prevent and punish criticism of itself.  That is actually a large part of what is happening here.  The desire to punish Trump supporters and those that oppose progressives on the left and to appear tough and to separate from Trump on the right are both aligning to push for sedition charges that there is not any fair or reasonable argument for being appropriate here based on the pubic record.

For reference, this is the general statute on sedition:

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

In short, you have to have a (1) conspiracy to (2) use force to (3) to conduct one of a host of horribles of which most clearly don't apply.  The lowest bars - which are the only ones that could even remotely apply here - are to "hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States."  Putting someone in jail for "delaying" a largely ceremonial step is pretty extreme.

To even do it, would require establishing that the charged individuals believed they could in fact through violence somehow prevent or even delay the certification of Biden.  Not clear how that would work (and going to be impossible to demonstrate it could have worked, maybe even to demonstrate a belief that it could have worked) because at best they were stopping a ceremonial act and it is actually pretty unbelievable that even taking Congress hostage would have stopped it.  But if they have communications from before the rally perhaps a case could be made.  It's a stretch though.  The way the media/DNC is hard selling the story is actually going to damage the case.  The DNC/media can't help itself, they want to declare the rally itself, which is clearly protected political speech, as somehow itself inherently illegal sedition or insurrection.  The larger that gets, the more skeptical the court is going to become about charges for sedition related to the same event.

Basing it on theft of property in the capital is a truly weak sauce position, and one that is grossly abusive.  Those crimes should be charged under applicable law on theft.

For insurrection:

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

I don't believe the terms insurrection or rebellion are actually defined in US law.  The typical thought among legal scholars has been it requires a full on rebellion with an actual intent to over throw the government and significant violence.  That's not what happened here, not even close.  Not aware that anyone denied the authority of the United States government.  In fact, they were pretty clearly trying to influence the use of the authority of the United States government.  Insurrection is much closer to what happened with the CHAZ/CHOP.  There you had an area that purported to not be subject to the authority of the US, violently seized.  We know they considered insurrection charges there and declined to bring them.

So yes, bringing this a sedition and insurrection is flimsy.  There may be evidence that comes to light that makes sedition plausible for some people.  However, a big part of the reason for wanting to bring those charges is to predicate an impeachment of Trump for inspiring them.  If a few citizens have to be crushed along the way, so be it, they should have known better than to support the other side.

[rightleft22]

Trumps followers should have know better then to Trust a man with a history of throwing those that associate with him under the bus.

[Seriati]

Serati
...
And are you still on the voter fraud thing?  Where is your proof of massive voter fraud?
...

Haven't you been paying attention lack of evidence of fraud just shows how pervasive and easy it is to get away with massive voting fraud. Its impossible to find, even with half a billion dollars in funds you can never find evidence of fraud. Its the perfect crime, the democrats are so efficient and good there isn't even any evidence there was a crime much less enough evidence to find someone guilty of it. 

There's zero question that voting rules were changed.  That results in illegal votes being counted, or it results in a "new" rule set where election laws can be changed without regard to whether it results in material changes to the results.  I've only been complaining for what 10 years -on here- that there is no way to catch fraud in an election at scale.  Previously, it required a complete boneheaded screw up to catch it (and was still caught occasionally), but after the round of DNC inspired changes its virtually impossible even if there were complete bone headed screw ups. 

That said, there is a quite a good bit of direct fraud evidence and even more indirect and circumstantial evidence of the same.  The very fact that the DNC left has done everything in its power to prevent open and transparent investigation, after doing everything in their power to create the circumstances for more fraud, says to me that they either participate in fraud on a massive scale or expect to benefit from any fraud that does occur.  The savvy ones qualify their statements on "provable fraud" quite specifically with a phrase you've probably seen hundreds of times "at a scale that could overturn the election."  Quite literally, they don't say fraud didn't occur, only that it has not (not can not) been proven at a scale to overturn the election - of course, they say that knowing that to prove requires access to records that won't be granted, because the same people that control the records would be the ones going to jail if fraud was shown.  Shocker there.  Bet you can't guess a number I'm thinking  of between 1 and 2.  I promise not to cheat (but won't take a picture of the number, or record it any way, or tell a third party about it before hand), but I will promise to recount as many times as you need me to in order to accept you lost...  I mean to accept the result if you lost.

[Seriati]

Trumps followers should have know better then to Trust a man with a history of throwing those that associate with him under the bus.

Those who work for Trump certainly should have.  I can't imagine anyone wanting to work for him at a personal level.  Kind of like Darth Vader being in charge of HR.

[Aris Katsaris]

To even do it, would require establishing that the charged individuals believed they could in fact through violence somehow prevent or even delay the certification of Biden.

LOL. It's actually quite self-evident that it is what they believed.

Not clear how that would work (and going to be impossible to demonstrate it could have worked, maybe even to demonstrate a belief that it could have worked) because at best they were stopping a ceremonial act and it is actually pretty unbelievable that even taking Congress hostage would have stopped it.

Trump told them it wasn't a ceremonial act. Trump told them that Pence had the power to stop it, and he told them that the Congressmen likewise had the power to stop it.

So, if Pence got killed ("Hang Mike Pence" many of them shouted, and Lin Wood, Trump's attorney, posted on Parler that Pence would be the first in front of the firing squad) & Trump appointed a new vice president, why wouldn't they believe that the new VP would have had the power to stop it?

Actually, if even a single congressperson got killed, even without Pence being among the victims, I doubt the certification would have happened on the same day.

[TheDeamon]

For reference, this is the general statute on sedition:

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

In short, you have to have a (1) conspiracy to (2) use force to (3) to conduct one of a host of horribles of which most clearly don't apply.  The lowest bars - which are the only ones that could even remotely apply here - are to "hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States."  Putting someone in jail for "delaying" a largely ceremonial step is pretty extreme.

There is court precedence for restricting the statute far more than the text itself reads but is kind of funny that you can produce this reading from it:

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof [of the Government of the United States], or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

So Portland protesters at the Federal building are guilty of sedition?

Of course, I guess this comes down to the definition of "force" but if what happened on Capitol Hill meets that criteria, then Portland exceeds it in spades.

[Wayward Son]

Serati
...
And are you still on the voter fraud thing?  Where is your proof of massive voter fraud?
...

Haven't you been paying attention lack of evidence of fraud just shows how pervasive and easy it is to get away with massive voting fraud. Its impossible to find, even with half a billion dollars in funds you can never find evidence of fraud. Its the perfect crime, the democrats are so efficient and good there isn't even any evidence there was a crime much less enough evidence to find someone guilty of it. 

I keep remembering a scene from an old B&W movie I once saw.  A forgery expert is looking at some counterfeit bills, with a cop hanging over his shoulder.

Expert: It's almost perfect.

Cop: You mean it isn't perfect?

Expert: If it were perfect, it would be real.

At first I laughed, but when I thought about it, I realized how true it was.

If there is no way to tell the difference between a counterfeit and a real item, then the item is real.  That is the only conclusion you can have.  If there is nothing to distinguish it from the original--no extra or missing line, no duplicate serial numbers, no unissued serial number, no history, no paperwork, no flaw, no error--then for all extents and purposes, it's the real thing.

I feel the same way about the ballots.

If there is no way to distinguish counterfeit ballots from legitimate ones--no bad paperwork, no fictional people, no flaw, no error--then it is real.  You have to accept it as real.

So until someone can show the flaws, we have to accept them as real.

If it's perfect, it's real.

[DonaldD]

A failed coup is still an attempted coup.  If only successful coups were considered coups, then there would be no need for laws against sedition - there would certainly not need to be identified punishments for such.

[yossarian22c]

Trumps followers should have know better then to Trust a man with a history of throwing those that associate with him under the bus.

Those who work for Trump certainly should have.  I can't imagine anyone wanting to work for him at a personal level.  Kind of like Darth Vader being in charge of HR.

How can you have that clear a view of the evil nature of this man and still think he should be President?

[Seriati]

Well Wayward, that's what I've always believed about the left.  They don't care whether or not there was fraud, only whether it can be proven.

It leaves out the outstated second premise.  It doesn't matter if fraud is real or not if the Democrats win.

But that's only part of the consideration

To even do it, would require establishing that the charged individuals believed they could in fact through violence somehow prevent or even delay the certification of Biden.

LOL. It's actually quite self-evident that it is what they believed.

Ahh... the "self-evident" standard.  In good faith, how many people went to the protest with the intent to take Congress by force?  That's the total subset for whom sedition is possible.

Not clear how that would work (and going to be impossible to demonstrate it could have worked, maybe even to demonstrate a belief that it could have worked) because at best they were stopping a ceremonial act and it is actually pretty unbelievable that even taking Congress hostage would have stopped it.

Trump told them it wasn't a ceremonial act. Trump told them that Pence had the power to stop it, and he told them that the Congressmen likewise had the power to stop it.

So what?

So, if Pence got killed ("Hang Mike Pence" many of them shouted, and Lin Wood, Trump's attorney, posted on Parler that Pence would be the first in front of the firing squad) & Trump appointed a new vice president, why wouldn't they believe that the new VP would have had the power to stop it?

Actually, if even a single congressperson got killed, even without Pence being among the victims, I doubt the certification would have happened on the same day.

If even one Congressperson got killed you'd have a real case.  I don't even find it credible that any Congress person's life was in danger.  There were 5 deaths total involved.  Only one at the hands of the rioters.  A police officer killed by being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during a melee.  Who ever did that committed murder and should be held accountable.

The other 4?  All Trump supporters.  One had a heart attack and one a stroke.  Circumstances have not - to my knowledge - been disclosed.  Is it likely/possible they died because of crowd control measures?  Sure, but we'll have to see.  One shot by the capital police, and so far as I can tell, no one has come out with that having been a necessary kill.  I don't think anyone would consider charges on an officer in that circumstance (they would in fact consider, if not demand charges, if this were a leftist protest instead).  And the last, apparently crushed by the crowd at some point.  That's the exactly the kind of thing that used to happen at concerts.  Surely terrible. 

But it's incredibly odd the way its described in the media as 4 (or 5) people killed in the riot.  Lethal force was intentionally used twice, once by a murderer killing an officer and once by an officer defending himself and others.

It took less than 3 hours for the capital to be cleared of rioters, and that seems to have been accomplished without having to use lethal force.  They used smoke grenades and teargas, which it never seems to have occurred to the "hard bitten" insurrectionists might happen, almost like they weren't planning on an armed a confrontation with the police.   

But without the riot, it's virtually certain that the required debate timing would have delayed the certification by more than it ultimately was delayed.  Oddly, the riot almost certainly sped up the certification.  One or more deaths of elected representatives would in fact justify the very charges that you seem to want to bring.  That's literally what they're for, not what they're being used for.

The riot should never have happened, and Trump should have called for calm immediately when it did start.  Whether or not he thought it was justified, that should have been the contrast with the DNC politicians that have endorsed political violence all year.  Instead he waited too long before he called for calm and deployed more security.  He should never have made the mistake of believing he was operating under the same rules as his opponents.  And he should have known, no matter what else, that a riot was the fastest way to let the media pretend the DNC has the high ground on political violence.

[Seriati]

Trumps followers should have know better then to Trust a man with a history of throwing those that associate with him under the bus.

Those who work for Trump certainly should have.  I can't imagine anyone wanting to work for him at a personal level.  Kind of like Darth Vader being in charge of HR.

How can you have that clear a view of the evil nature of this man and still think he should be President?

Because a cartoon analogy about HR being run by Darth Vader has little to do with the big picture.  Trump is like Darth Vader in that they both terminate people (Trump figuratively, Vader literally) for failing and very much have "what have you done for me lately" attitudes.  Saying that Nancy Pelosi has the same color hair as Mother Theresa (no idea if that's true by the way) doesn't mean that Nancy Pelosi has the same qualities as Mother Theresa, in fact it most likely means the opposite.

As far as other lines of comparison?  Trump is hardly like Vader.

[Wayward Son]

Well Wayward, that's what I've always believed about the left.  They don't care whether or not there was fraud, only whether it can be proven.

And you're proving what I've always believed about the Right.  That they don't care whether or not there was fraud, they just want to say there was.  So they don't care that there is no proof. 

[Seriati]

Well Wayward, that's what I've always believed about the left.  They don't care whether or not there was fraud, only whether it can be proven.

And you're proving what I've always believed about the Right.  That they don't care whether or not there was fraud, they just want to say there was.  So they don't care that there is no proof. 

Oh you're wrong there.  I really do care that there isn't any proof.  It means that I do have uncertainty, maybe Biden did really win and the fraud made no difference.  Biden will take the oath of office because of that fact.  I think I said that in my first comment on the election, that it would never be possible to find proof of fraud significant enough to over turn the results.  That's as true if 20 million votes for Biden were the result of fraud, as it is if only 20 thousand vote are the result of fraud.

What I most care about is that our systems are better designed to prevent there being  proof of fraud, than they are designed to prevent fraud, and that's repugnant.  Unless you think it's better this way that even a significant percentage of Democrats believe that fraud probably influenced the election, I can't fathom why you would want this state of events.   Why not have certainty that fraud didn't occur and couldn't be done systemically?  As far as I'm aware you've never raised a reasonable objection to fraud controls that I haven't been willing to address.

In this case, I'd like to have seen 2 things.  Between I think they could have convincingly settled the debate.  First, I'd like to have seen an audit with direct observation by the public of the signatures on the mail in votes in GA's largest counties and how they would have faired if the the actual law requiring 3 signature verification had been applied as written.  That would have given us a reasonable appreciation of the impact of one of the single most impactful changes that applied and provided actual valid statistical data directly relevant to the question of illegal votes.  Second, I would like to have seen the SC take up and settle the issue of manipulation of voting rules through late court actions and administrative actions.  Everything that has and is happening is still have the feet of the SC.  They could have settled the very issue at the heart of the challenges to the ballots of certain states in a way that the right would have accepted (the left would only have accepted it if it ruled in their favor).

[Wayward Son]

Hey, I'm not against preventing fraud.  If Biden won by fraud, I would want Trump to be President. (Gakk!)  After all, Democrats and Liberals just spent four years living with Trump as President.

So if you can find a good way to prevent the fraud that has been found from occurring again, I'm all for it!
 
Just two things.

Just make sure it actually prevents actual fraud.  No "there's been a billion fraudulent mail-in ballots, so let's ban all mail-in ballots (except for old Republicans)" as some in the media have advocated.

And just make sure it doesn't disenfranchise more legitimate voters than it stops fraud.  Any proposal that keeps 10,000 legitimate votes from being cast in order to prevent 10 fraudulent votes is just an excuse to disenfranchise legitimate voters.  And you know which voters those will be! 

I want fair and transparent elections.  But those saying Biden won by fraud are committing a fraud themselves, because there is no proof of significant fraud.  Certainly not enough to have swung the election.  To state otherwise is wishful thinking.

Heck, even your suggestion about the signatures needs a caveat.  If a signature is challenged, then the state must reach out to the voter and verify that is the voter's current signature or not.  Otherwise, it would just be an excuse to prevent legitimate votes at the observer's whim.

Prevent fraud, not votes.

[TheDrake]

Seriati, you want to redesign the system, that's fine. Basically it will always be up to each individual state, though. And many states are not willing to make voting onerous, or in this year dangerous, just to satisfy your wild eyed concerns that millions of secret fraudulent votes are being thrown around without anyone getting wind of it.