DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus GOP leadership rejects resolution acknowledging Biden as President-elect

Congressional Republican leaders rejected a resolution that asserted that Joe Biden is president-elect, the latest effort by the Hill GOP to refuse to accept the election results even though it's been clear for weeks that President Donald Trump lost.

The rejection came Tuesday in a private meeting after House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer offered a motion to affirm that it is preparing for the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Rules Committee Chairman Roy Blunt of Missouri voted with House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy in blocking the motion, effectively preventing the inaugural committee from publicly accepting that the upcoming inauguration will be for Biden. Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, the ranking Democrat on the Rules Committee, voted with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Hoyer voting in favor.

"The extent to which Republicans are refusing to accept the outcome of the election and recognize Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as our next President and Vice President is astounding," Hoyer said in a statement. "Their continued deference to President Trump's post-election temper tantrums threatens our democracy and undermines faith in our system of elections ... Republicans are refusing even to allow (Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies) to say that President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris will be inaugurated on January 20, even when there is no serious dispute over that fact."

The vote comes as Republicans on Capitol Hill have repeatedly refused to recognize that the next President of the United States will be Biden. Hoyer told reporters he could not speculate why Republicans voted against the measure, however.

"You'll have to ask them, you'll have to ask them," Hoyer said when pressed on if Republicans voted against the motion because it recognized Biden as President-elect.
Blunt responded to criticism that Republicans would not approve Hoyer's motion to recognize Biden as the President-elect.

"It is not the job of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies to get ahead of the electoral process and decide who we are inaugurating. The JCCIC is facing the challenge of planning safe Inaugural Ceremonies during a global pandemic. I would hope that, going forward, the members of the JCCIC would adhere to the committee's long-standing tradition of bipartisan cooperation and focus on the task at hand," Blunt said in a statement.

This marks the latest attempt by Democratic leadership to proceed with transitioning Biden to the White House, with Hill Republicans throwing hurdles in the process.
For weeks, Hill Republicans have denied Biden has won the presidency, multiple lawmakers telling reporters they will wait until the Electoral College formally votes on December 14.

In fact, many conservative House Republicans have argued next week will not mark the end of Trump's desperate efforts to overturn the election results. Some, like Rep. Jim Jordan, are encouraging not to concede next Monday.
When asked if Trump should concede, Jordan said bluntly: "No. No way, no way, no way."

It's not clear if any Senate Republicans will join their House colleagues to lodge an objection that would spark a formal debate, though several have entertained Trump's false claims of widespread voter fraud.

And top Senate Republicans have repeatedly pointed to December 14 as the end of the elections as they've sought to give Trump space to mount his legal battles and refused to recognize Biden as President-elect.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/08/politics/gop-leadership-congress-biden-president-elect/index.html?

The stupidity involved here is beyond belief.

Wait until December 14, when the electorial college voting is finalized.

End of subject, they will have their justification.

Until then, expect every Republican to hold the line and support Trump.

Any fool that thinks the Election was stolen from Trump is in need of mental care/help. Politicians that are simply playing politics - should be held accountable for undermining the validity and faith in our electoral process.

SCOTUS hits trump with the death blow and denies the PA to hold up State Certifications And they are all in today. It’s over. Biden won for the 12th time. Trump needs to concede. It’s only hurting the GOP’s reputation with their own base now.

Apparently not - clearly there are a lot more complete, total asshats than we had realized.

I agree, today is something known as Safe Harbor Day, but the final acknowledgment buy Congress is on the 14th.

Disagree on this one specific point.

There is zero measurable, verifiable evidence that the GOP is losing ANY support, so long as they make a show of supporting The Lamest Duck In Chief.

On the contrary, his cult is as much in his tank as they've ever been- and politicians who understand the mathematics of Primary Season are keenly aware of this. These politicians know that they can still enjoy a cushy 1st round advantage if they puff out whiffs of that sweet, sweet Trump aroma. As long as there is a motivated core of voters for that sort of lowbrow politics, there will always be sharks attracted to the chum.

What you assert may become true in 3-4 years, but for now- Donald Trump wields as much influence over the GOP as he has since he won the nomination in 2016.

Trust that the next 4-12 years of politics will still be dealing with this thing that displays Donald Trump as its face.

Because it's not really about Donald Trump.
It's about what Donald Trump represents.

In 2016, a significant number of Americans chose Donald (wthfkn) Trump over a 17-member slate of candidates. In 2020, >70M Americans were still more comfortable with Donald (wthfkn) Trump than they were with any other alternative to him. ANY. OTHER. ALTERNATIVE.

To Donald (wthfkn) Trump.
After 4 years of empirical, in-your-face daily evidence about who and what he truly is/was...

...they were still more OK with that.

In America.
The land of Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Lincoln....

they are down for:




Donald Trump.
[insert mental image here]

Tomorrow is a long slog away from today.

This lawsuit is Huge.

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/SCOTUSFiling.pdf

This lawsuit is D.O.A.!

I read through about a quarter of that pdf. I assume the remainder is similar to what I read, in that it runs very close to all the other lawsuits. Overall, a baseless accusation that won't stand up to the least bit of scrutiny. As with the other lawsuits, there are many accusations, but little substance behind any of them. While there are shreds of truth to each accusation (there are potential weaknesses in the Dominion system, there are onesy-twosy voting irregularities), saying that is evidence of a widespread fraud is a jump in logic that reminds me of that one scene in the Matrix where Neo is in training and tries to jump from one building to the other, but it's just too far and he splats on the concrete 100 stories below.

Copied this from a friend on FB, lol:

"BREAKING...The Supreme Court just Awarded the state of Denial and its ZERO electoral votes to Trump. This means Trump still lost and Joe Biden will be sworn in as our 46th president on January 20th."

It seems typical for Trump and his cronies to put their faith in this guy.....

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was indicted 5 years ago. He still hasn't gone to trial.

Read our timeline covering delays and side battles in the long-running securities fraud case against Paxton.

July 2020 marks five years since Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was indicted on felony securities fraud charges. The criminal case against him has been a cloud over his head during nearly all of his time in statewide office, including a narrow reelection win in 2018.

The indictments are now old enough, as progressive groups have cheekily noted, to attend kindergarten.

Paxton is accused of persuading investors to buy stock in a technology firm without disclosing that he would be compensated for it. He has maintained his innocence and criticized the prosecution as politically motivated.

Why is it taking so long to take the state’s top lawyer to trial? Since the case began, it has been delayed by side battle after side battle, including a still-unresolved dispute over how much to pay the special prosecutors handling the case and a yearslong dispute over where Paxton should be tried. Paxton’s case has bounced from trial courts in North Texas, all the way up to the state’s highest court for criminal matters, back down to a trial court in Harris County — and it may go back to his home in Collin County again before the issues are resolved.

Check out our timeline below of the case’s twists and turns. We’ll update it with new stories from The Texas Tribune and other outlets as the legal battle proceeds.

First signs of trouble

In April, during Paxton’s bid to become the Republican nominee for attorney general, The Texas Tribune obtains documents showing he was not registered with the state board while he was being paid to solicit clients for a North Texas financial services firm. Paxton’s campaign launches an internal review to determine whether he had broken any laws. Soon after, the Texas State Securities Board reprimands Paxton for soliciting investment clients without being registered. He is fined $1,000 and signs a disciplinary order without disputing its findings.

Criminal case emerges

After Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis recuses himself from the investigation because he knows Paxton, a GOP judge appoints special prosecutors Brian Wice and Kent Schaffer and agrees to pay them $300 per hour. Prosecutors begin to build their case against Paxton, now sworn in as attorney general. News breaks that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Servergy, a McKinney tech firm Paxton had invested in. In July, Paxton is indicted by a Collin County grand jury. In late August, Paxton pleads not guilty.

December 2015
Special prosecutor pay dispute begins

In December, Paxton donor Jeff Blackard sues, arguing that the county is paying the special prosecutors too much.

Early 2016
Cost disputes continue

In February, the Texas Ethics Commission rules that Paxton may not accept out-of-state donations to fund his legal defense. Because the charges are unrelated to his public office, Paxton also cannot use campaign funds. Questions emerge about how he is funding his top-dollar legal defense.

Spring 2016
Federal charges emerge

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission files civil charges against Paxton for allegedly misleading investors in a technology company. Paxton releases a video defending himself and calling the state’s prosecution political. In June, he fails to get the state’s criminal charges against him dismissed by an appeals court.

July 2016
Friends fund Paxton’s defense

Financial disclosure statements reveal that Paxton accepted more than $329,000 in gifts from wealthy donors and “family friends” to fund his legal defense. Paxton will maintain this strategy.

January 2017
Trial set for May

After Paxton fails to get the state’s criminal charges against him dismissed, his trial is set for May 2017.

March 2017
Paxton cleared of SEC charges; state criminal trial moved, delayed

In Paxton’s biggest win yet, a federal judge throws out the federal securities fraud case against him.

May 2017
Collin County halts prosecutors’ payments

The Collin County Commissioners Court votes to cease payments to the special prosecutors working on the Paxton case.

August 2017
Court voids payment to prosecutors

The Dallas Court of Appeals voids a six-figure payment to the special prosecutors, threatening the future of the case.

October 2017
Trial delayed again

A new judge, Robert Johnson of Harris County, agrees to delay the trial for the third time as prosecutors argue they should not have to go to court before they collect a paycheck.

December 2017
With pay dispute pending, trial remains delayed

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, agrees to hear the pay dispute. The long-delayed trial is put off indefinitely as attorneys await a decision.

Fall-Winter 2018
Paxton wins reelection; pay ruling imperils case against him

Paxton runs for reelection against Democrat Justin Nelson, a formidable opponent who centers his campaign on the indictment. Weeks after Paxton narrowly wins a second term, the Court of Criminal Appeals sides against the prosecutors in the pay dispute, ruling that the six-figure payments they had expected fell outside legal limits. The prosecutors ask the high court to reconsider its decision to ensure the court’s proceedings “appear fair to all who observe them.”

June 2019
Court upholds ruling against Paxton prosecutors

After sitting on the motion for six months, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals declines to reconsider its ruling, leaving the future of the prosecution in question.

July 2019
Paxton’s defense team asks to move case back to Collin County

Paxton’s defense attorneys ask a Harris County trial judge to move the case back to his hometown of Collin County. Meanwhile, the prosecutors keep the pay dispute running, asking the judge for a private hearing on the pay issue.

June-July 2020
Uncertainty over venue changes; a new judge

After a hearing in December 2019, Judge Robert Johnson spends six months considering the motion to move Paxton’s trial, then returns the case to Collin County — but that June ruling is quickly put on hold by a Houston appeals court. Johnson recuses himself from the case because the Texas Attorney General’s Office is defending him and more than 20 other Harris County judges in an unrelated lawsuit over the county’s bail practices. The case is reassigned to Harris County District Judge Jason Luong.

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/06/19/...-general-fraud/

Why am I not surprised you're depending on yet another criminal to save you?

Yeah, this is "the one". I mean since over 40 so far weren't the one. Don't you mean "the only one you have left"?

So what were the first 40 for? Building the drama?

These flawed attempts by Trump and his supporters to steal this election has shown us the very definition of throwing crap against the wall in hopes that something sticks.

Wonder if any of them actually believe the crapolla they are spewing? I doubt it.

There's a very sad reality that underlies all of this.

We all know that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 elections through false information in a concerted effort to undermine America's confidence in our democratic process.

Trump and his supporters have accomplished the very same goals Russia was out to accomplish at a level Russia could never have dreamed of doing. They have done Russia's job for them.

trump doesnt its just about ego and money. And he doesnt care what any of them think as long as they do what he says.

ironic as hell that you can mock the idea of Russian interference in 2016 despite mountains of - you know - actual - evidence ... yet you want to try to push an agenda that Trump had the 2020 election stolen from him - despite, you know - no evidence!

Intelligence Director Says Agencies Agree on Russian Meddling

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/int...eddling-n785481

Yes, 17 intelligence agencies really did say Russia was behind hacking

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli...cking/92514592/

Senate panel backs assessment that Russia interfered in 2016

https://apnews.com/article/d094918c0421b872eac7dc4b16e613c7

There's a difference between playing the fool and being a fool. Hopefully you're just playing.

UPDATE: As of Wednesday afternoon, the most current list of states that have signed on to the Texas litigation says that, in addition to Missouri (represented by state AG Eric Schmitt), 16 other states have joined the case:

Schmitt’s brief was joined by 16 other states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/12/the_texas_lawsuit_in_the_supreme_court_is_huge.html

Led by a crook to stoke a crook's ego.....and all the eager beaver toadies chimed in. Disgusting...

There is nothing in this suit that hasn't been rejected by the lower courts repeatedly. No matter how many people sign on to it, these cases have been rejected 50 times now. Claiming some last ditch effort is going to help you high jack an election is desperation, not reality. If the SCOTUS even decides to hear the case.

They know that.

They just want to create the illusion for Cult of Trump that Trump had the election stolen. Hate is a strong emotion ... they want Cult of Trump to hold on to that emotion and have it fester so they come out in force in 2 years time and in 4 years time.

Let me give you some examples as to why this lawsuit is flawed.

Article II, Section 4 of the constitution states that Congress can choose the day the electors meet to vote but that it also says the day "shall be the same throughout the United States." This year, it's Dec. 14, five days from now.

Delaying the vote in certain states is against the constitution.

One state has no legal standing to challenge how another state conducts its elections. There are 50 separate elections among the 50 different states. The rules and guidelines are decided by each individual state. Texas can no more question the rules of another state than it can tell Ohio how it can conduct its elections to elect its senators.

The suit even has obvious flaws in its writings. It claims the four states have 72 combined electoral votes when in fact they only have 62.

There are many more than that but that's enough to chew on for a minute.

FWIW, they're not challenging the election rules themselves of the defending states, but how the rules were followed in the defendant states.

trump can say he took it all the way to the supreme court!!!!
Maybe this is just to appease donors? So they dont sue him for their money back, saying he did nothing?

Ohio AG Dave Yost files brief criticizing Texas’ lawsuit challenging Biden win

COLUMBUS, Ohio—Attorney General Dave Yost on Thursday filed a legal brief with the U.S. Supreme Court opposing a Texas lawsuit seeking to effectively delay the Electoral College from voting Joe Biden the next U.S. president.

Yost, a Columbus Republican, stated in the brief that the Supreme Court lacks authority to order state legislatures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to appoint presidential electors. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s lawsuit argues such a move is needed because coronavirus-related changes to election rules in those states opened the door to unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud.

“The relief that Texas seeks would undermine a foundational premise of our federalist system: the idea that the States are sovereigns, free to govern themselves,” Yost stated in the brief, adding later: “The courts have no more business ordering the People’s representatives how to choose electors than they do ordering the People themselves how to choose their dinners.”

However, while Yost disagreed with Texas’ call to hold up the Electoral College vote on Dec. 14, he encouraged the Supreme Court to rule on whether the election changes made by the states are unconstitutional.

“It is not unreasonable to wonder -- and many millions of Americans do -- whether those hastily implemented changes exposed the election systems to vulnerabilities,” Yost wrote.

“It may prove difficult at this late date to fashion a remedy that does not create equal or greater harms,” he stated further in the brief. “But there will be an election in 2024, another four years after that, and so on.”

Yost’s reasoning is consistent with a legal brief he filed last month asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that ordered elections officials there to continue accepting absentee ballots that arrived within three days following Election Day.

“State legislatures, not state courts, set the rules for picking presidential electors,” Yost stated in that brief, though the Supreme Court ultimately upheld the Pennsylvania ruling.

Yost is opposing the lawsuit even though more than 40 Ohio Republican lawmakers wrote him asking him to have Ohio join Texas’ suit, which is supported by 17 other state AGs and President Donald Trump.

“We have seen irregularities in the vote count, unexplained statistical anomalies, as well as grave allegations of irregularities and misconduct” in the four states named in the lawsuit, the Ohio lawmakers stated in their letter.

https://www.cleveland.com/open/2020/12/o...m_medium=social

I have not been following this closely because I refuse to get distracted by Trump's latest diversion ... but it seems to me:

1. There is no mass voter fraud anywhere that swung the election.
2. The legal challenges hinge on reversing (and rejecting any votes that were cast this way) changes to state voting regulations that were put in place due to CV-19. . . . . the voting regulation changes were NOT challenged before the election but the GOP waited for the result - didn't like it THEN sought to throw out mainly Democratic votes that were all cast legally per the states.

And Trump of Cult is buying into this bull crap.

If there is more - please educate me with facts absent of speculation and opinion.

"I don't make the news, I just report it".

I quickly read the first 5-10 pages of the lawsuit... so if my understanding is correct, the lawsuit is trying to throw out the election results in the named states because they (allegedly) did not follow their own voting rules.

... and yes... if this were actually as issue, as it's presented here, then you would've absolutely been hearing about this before/during the election vs a month after.

1-41, here we come.

Not to nitpick, but that count has reached more than 50 post election lawsuits.

Trump And The GOP Have Now Lost More Than 50 Post-Election Lawsuits

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurke...sh=69f0d1e22960

I was sincerely hoping someone would update the growing total. Thank you for the correction.