****1/6 Committee Hearings Day 3, thread TWO****

[Scrivener7]

Come on in!



(Here's the link to thread ONE if you need to refer back: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216807952)

[nolabear]

1. Is there a bit of dissent between Luttig and Jacob?

[Marthe48]

2. Seems so

Kind of a lawyerly splitting of hairs?

[crickets]

3. I'm starting to like Luttig.

He refused to let Counsel reword what he'd so thoughtfully expressed. Bless.

[dweller]

12. He did not want his words

to Congress (record) to be interpreted in that way …

He’s speaking carefully for a reason


✌🏻

[crickets]

15. Exactly. He picked those words carefully and wanted them to stand. nt

[Scrivener7]

4. So in the end, Jacobs cleans up his statement and says it is unambiguous

that the VP has no right to reject electors

[crickets]

13. He's very forceful about this as well.

Points to the irregularities and debates of 2000, 2004, and 2016.

Jacob's testimony seems to muddy things a bit instead of underlining the point that these 'irregularities' could and perhaps should be seen as a symptom of bad faith rather than a lack of clarity in Congressional norms re presidential elections.

[cbabe]

5. If I'm allowed: wish Chairman would refer to

Rep. Cheney by her title, not as ‘young woman’.

[demtenjeep]

119. he is saying The Gentle Woman from WY

likewise he would be called The Gentleman from

[cbabe]

120. Ah. Thanks. Audio not clear on the radio.

[Mersky]

6. Jacob: There's just no way the founders (who had broken away from George III)...

… would have put the power to overturn the election in the hands of one man.

[livetohike]

7. Playing video of other advisors to Pence testifying. N/t

[Marthe48]

8. Luttig is a hanging judge

He's hanging on every word! lol

[Scrivener7]

9. DemocratIC lawyers, buddy. Don't be a shitheel right now, please.

[asiliveandbreathe]

93. You picked up on that too...Jacobs is not a friend of these hearings..imho..

Stick it jacobs...

[Lars39]

10. "They thought he (Eastman) was crazy"

[Whiskeytide]

40. Lol. Those smart lawyers figured that all on their own, huh? n/t

[Scrivener7]

11. Jason Miller: Eastman's theory was crazy and he had been told that before 1/6.

Eric Herschmann: Are you out of your effing mind (when Eastman told him the VP could decide the winner)

WHOA!! And Eastman said, essentially, if it causes a revolt it won't be the first time violence has happened. (Like, so what?)

ETA: Herschmann on Giuliani: Giuliani agreed that the Eastman plan was not legal. But then he said the opposite to the 1/6 crowd.

[crickets]

22. They wanted a coup *so* badly.

Some of them just didn't care whether it made sense or not, they just wanted to get their way. Scary nuts.

[livetohike]

14. Aguilar saying that there was a risk that everyone in

the White House counsel might resign in protest.

[livetohike]

16. Playing video clip of Gulliani speaking at the rally.

Gulliani saying it was “perfectly legal” for the VP to interfere with the vote count.

[BumRushDaShow]

17. There was complete fiction that came out of Ghouliani's mouth

[Mersky]

18. Texts shown from Hannity to Meadows (Dec. 31 & Jan 5)

Space holder — will add clip from cspan

[Novara]

19. point that was made:

If the VP could declare a winner, the Al Gore could have declared himself the winner in 2000.

Yeah, duh.

[Marthe48]

24. Good point

n/t

[Lars39]

20. Eastman knew his theory was illegal

[Scrivener7]

21. Even Eastman said his plan would be shot down unanimously by the Supreme Court.

So he definitely knew his plan was bullshit.

[crickets]

31. Notice the poor man questioning Herschmann at that time

sits openmouthed while listening to his answers. Yep, the rest of us understand exactly how you feel, buddy. Wow.

[livetohike]

23. Why is Gulliani not in prison for inciting a riot? Eastman

as well.

[oswaldactedalone]

25. Luttig is a disaster.

BORING.

[Scrivener7]

28. And not very comprehensible.

[nolabear]

29. This isn't supposed to be entertaining.

I get it though. There’s a lot of emphasis in his delivery on social media. But I’m warming to him.

[crickets]

37. I'm warming to him, too.

It seems he is viscerally affected by what happened and the import of his testimony.

[nolabear]

26. Wrapped around the axle?

[Lars39]

33. Translate: screwed up, messed up?

[ReluctanceTango]

121. It's an East Texas turn of phrase

It means something that gets moving parts so tangled up in junk that they can't move anymore. Happens up there if you drive off road and get caught in a patch of vines or briers.

IOW: A complete mess that can be a pain/timeconsuming to set right again. If it can be.

[Mersky]

27. Woah! Eastman's October 11, 2020 email

Clearly acknowledged that the President of The Senate doesn’t have the power to change the election

[txwhitedove]

39. I caught that too! Eastman knew better.

[Mersky]

43. I was shocked by the date!

October 2020

[txwhitedove]

72. Yep, planning ahead of time. Just caught the part where Eastman admitted

his hope of sending Electorates back to their states would seem more "politically palatable". Uh, politically palatable still does NOT equal legal.

[Mersky]

96. "Palatable" ha! blech

That really got at me… and the “Chicago chickens” quip in regards to how he was trying to sell it. So slimy.

[BumRushDaShow]

30. Luttig - "I would have laid my body across the road" (re: to advise a VP to overturn an election)

[oswaldactedalone]

32. What historical precedent

is Luttig referring to?

[dweller]

34. Wrapped around the wheel

Every word following that is the crux … and he would have laid his body across the road to stop it

b o o m


✌🏻

[Scrivener7]

35. I don't know what he is saying. If an old VP did what tfg wanted Pence to do he

would still have objected on the basis of a historical precedent?

But there was no historical precedent, so what are we talking about?

This guy is not helping. He's too convoluted. We get you're a scholar. Just spit it out.

[nolabear]

36. Wait, his metaphor is losing me.

Driving the precedent up under what?

[3catwoman3]

38. Luttig seems to be warming to his tail.

The pacing of his words has picked up.

[Scrivener7]

46. But I couldn't make heads or tails of what his point was.

[crickets]

52. Text might be easier to follow.

Again, Wonkette is doing a great job at typing out the Luttig's longer, harder to follow points.

2:10 Oh, dear. Rep. Aguilar has asked Luttig a specific question, and Judge Luttig said he'd like to take a more expansive approach to his answer.

"All the players, led by Mr. Eastman, got wrapped around the axel by the historical evidence claim by Mr. Eastman. Let me explain very simply. ... In short, if I had been advising the vice president on Jan. 6, and even if then vice president Jefferson, and even then vice president John Adams, and even then vice president Richard Nixon, had done exactly what the president of the United States wanted his vice president do to do, i would have laid my body across the road before I'd have let the vice president overturn the 2020 election on the basis of that historical precedent. But what this body needs to know and now America needs to know, is that that was the centerpiece of the plan to overturn the 2020 election it was the historical precedent in the years and with the vice presidents that I named. As Congressman Raskin understands well. The effort by Mr. Eastman was to drive the historical precedent under that single pristine sentence in the 12th Amendment to the US Constitution, taking advantage of, if you will, what many have said is the 'inartful wording' of that sentence in the 12th Amendment."

"This is constitutional mischief."

[Scrivener7]

56. Thank you for that. But I'm not clearer. There is no historical precedent.

He is suggesting there is when he says "it was historical precedent in the years and with the vice presidents that I named."

I don't get it. Nixon did not declare himself President when he ran against Kennedy. Nixon did not decide that election.

[crickets]

67. I'm not entirely clear on that either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson#Election_of_1796_and_vice_presidency

In the presidential campaign of 1796, Jefferson lost the electoral college vote to Federalist John Adams by 71–68 and was thus elected vice president. As presiding officer of the Senate, he assumed a more passive role than his predecessor John Adams. He allowed the Senate to freely conduct debates and confined his participation to procedural issues, which he called an "honorable and easy" role.[140] Jefferson had previously studied parliamentary law and procedure for 40 years, making him unusually well qualified to serve as presiding officer. In 1800, he published his assembled notes on Senate procedure as A Manual of Parliamentary Practice.[141]

The 1800 election ended up being 'interesting' as well. Since then, Prez and VP are on the same ticket and the rules have been made clearer.

1960 Election / Kennedy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#1960_and_1962_elections;_wilderness_years

Nixon narrowly lost the election, with Kennedy winning the popular vote by only 112,827 votes (0.2 percent).[102]

There were charges of voter fraud in Texas and Illinois, both states won by Kennedy. Nixon refused to consider contesting the election, feeling a lengthy controversy would diminish the United States in the eyes of the world and the uncertainty would hurt U.S. interests.[106]

I'm wikifumbling here, and hoping that later news coverage will explain more thoroughly. Also will look at HC Richardson's tweets for more context.

[Scrivener7]

59. Icy Peas has tweets from Heather Cox Richardson below that make it a little clearer.

[crickets]

68. Thanks!

[Scrivener7]

41. I really don't like that we are even having this long and scholarly discussion about

whether a VP can choose a President.

Why are we giving this serious consideration? Just because they dreamed it up does not mean that we need to take it seriously?

[Marthe48]

53. We keep deferring to r idiocy

We need to stop legitimizing any of their nonsense

[demmiblue]

42. Twelfth Amendment (and the sentence that they are talking about):

Twelfth Amendment

The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;–the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;–The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.–]The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-12/

[Scrivener7]

44. Eastman said that Kamala should not be able to do it in 24, Gore should not

have been able to do it in 2000, but Pence should do it for tfg.

Not unlike McConnell's bogus reasons why they can choose SC judges and we can't.

[Novara]

45. somebody needs a good fucking defense lawyer

Link to tweet

[Scrivener7]

47. Eastman will be a fall guy.

[Novara]

48. They'll ALL throw him under the bus trying to save their own asses

[Scrivener7]

50. Tfg will say, "What did I know? This smart guy told me it was legal."

[Whiskeytide]

84. He crawled under the bus himself. n/t

[livetohike]

49. Aguilar: Trump engaged in a multi week campaign to

pressure Pence to overturn the election results.

[IcyPeas]

51. Heather Cox Richardson is live tweeting.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[OneGrassRoot]

60. Thx! n/t

[Scrivener7]

62. That makes his point a little clearer. Thanks.

[IcyPeas]

65. it's easier (for my brain) to read what he said rather than listen to him

my mind starts wandering when he talks.

[livetohike]

54. Video of Trump at rally in Georgia on Jan 4. n/t

[livetohike]

55. Reading tweet Trump made stating that the VP could

overturn the election results.

[crickets]

57. Ivan Raiklin

https://world-wire.com/ivan-raiklin-bio-career-education-and-more/

Ivan Raiklin is an American politician of the Republican party. He ran for U.S Senate elections representing the state of Virginia in 2018. He has also previously served in the U.S Army. Raiklin currently commands a National Guard special forces unit in Texas.

The military-intelligence veterans who helped lead Trump’s campaign of disinformation
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-election-military/
https://archive.ph/cDaav

After Donald Trump lost the White House, ex-National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and three other current and former U.S. Army officers challenged the vote’s legitimacy and pushed baseless conspiracy claims. Military ethicists say their actions threaten to weaken the public’s faith in democracy. [snip]

One Army Reserve officer working with Flynn, Lieutenant Colonel Ivan Raiklin, is now facing an internal Army Reserve investigation over whether he violated Reserve rules against partisan political activity, a military official told Reuters. In an election forum last month in New Hampshire, Raiklin touted his military experience – Special Forces commander, deployments battling the Taliban and the MS-13 gang – to say he has the intelligence wherewithal to find fraud. “So I have a little bit of experience looking at threats, right?” he said.
Raiklin declined to be interviewed. [more]

ETA
https://www.worldtribune.com/constitutional-lawyer-vice-president-has-power-to-overturn-fraudulent-election/

Constitutional lawyer Ivan Raiklin on Dec. 22 sent out a tweet urging Vice President Mike Pence to inform the secretaries of state in six contested states that he cannot accept their certified electors because they were not legally appointed due to overwhelming evidence of election fraud.

Raiklin contends that the U.S. Constitution grants the Vice President the power to overturn a manifestly fraudulent election.

🙄

[livetohike]

58. Eastman under the bus. n/t

[BumRushDaShow]

61. Jacob - what Ghouliani said was essentially (my words) BULLSHIT

"No historic" record of Jefferson overturning anything.

[Lars39]

63. My thoughts here...So even after Jacob walked thru the procedure

Pence still felt the need to call Quayle?

[Scrivener7]

64. I fear this discussion will give republiQans ideas of how to do it better next time.

[BumRushDaShow]

66. Jacob: "Will have to 'work it out in the streets'" if this rejection of electors were to happen

Would lose in the SCOTUS 9-0.

[livetohike]

69. Trump said to Pence "I don't want to be your friend anymore

if you don’t do this.”

[Scrivener7]

71. That could be construed as incentive NOT to do it, though. That will be a

tough one if it ever comes to a jury.

[Marthe48]

73. As kids

my brothers and sister, and I would say that to get one of the others to do something. Gave it up before 10 years of age. Normal egos know it won't work. Healthy egos won't take it seriously.

[crickets]

74. "Wouldn't it almost be cool to have that power?" Gawd. nt

[TwilightZone]

75. I'd heard that reported before.

It's a good synopsis of Trump's mentality on pretty much everything. He's a spoiled child.

[nolabear]

85. Or your godfather.

[demmiblue]

70. I don't want to be your friend anymore if you don't do this.

Good lawd.

[jcgoldie]

79. He's got the brain of a 6 year old.

[BumRushDaShow]

76. ***10 MINUTE RECESS***

[livetohike]

77. Short talked to Pence's Secret Service detail on Jan 6 because he was

afraid that Trump would lash out.

[livetohike]

95. DOJ requested copies of transcripts of all interviews! n/t

[malaise]

78. Recess

Fascinating

[Scrivener7]

80. *** 10 MINUTE RECESS****

[txwhitedove]

83. On a powerful last note, the Vice President was in danger!

[Mersky]

81. "Just between us Chicago chickens..." we'll know that the underlying legal theory is flawed

Eastman knew that whether the VP outright rejected the electoral votes or took the “more palatable” or procedural tack of sending the votes back to the states, that the legal underpinning was questionable.

The Chicago chickens comment was a reference to how law graduates from University of Chicago (like Eastman and Jacob are) would understand they were the same.

[nolabear]

82. Here's Luttig on Bill Kristol's show a month ago. He doesn't speak that way at ALL.

[Scrivener7]

86. I wonder what that's about, then. That answer about the historical precedent

seemed intentionally convoluted.

[meadowlander]

87. Slow down the hearings and make people turn them off.

[Scrivener7]

92. That was my first thought. Also, what will many people be talking about

tomorrow, the facts elicited or the guy who talked weird?

[nolabear]

88. He's very different isn't he? It can't be an accident.

I don’t really think he’s got a medical issue though MAN his aspect was weird.

[catbyte]

91. I'm taking it as he is being EXTREMELY careful not to misspeak. He's under oath

in front of a Congressional committee investigating the greatest threat to this country since the Civil War and he is clearly appalled at lawyers he knew and worked with that would do this.

That's my take on it but YMMV.

[nolabear]

94. You may well be right.

[crickets]

101. +1

[MN2theMax]

98. He did, several times appear to have a stutter

Perhaps that is why he is speaking in such a measured way before the committee?

[ancianita]

89. Now Merrick Garland has all the evidence he needs to indict Trump.

[crickets]

90. Given how long it took Luttig to answer some of these questions,

the hearing is going to run way over time. I wonder how they'll handle that.

[Scrivener7]

97. I hope they just keep going.

The Founding Fathers hashed this thing out in a closed room in Philadelphia in the summer without air conditioning! We can deal with a slow-talker.

[Scrivener7]

99. THEY'RE BACK!

[Lars39]

100. They're back!

[livetohike]

102. Morning of Jan 6 Trump called Pence and Pence stepped

out of the room and took the call alone.

[Lars39]

103. Herschman testifying family was in Oval

Office when Trump called Pence.

[Lars39]

104. Phone call became heated

[livetohike]

105. Playing video clips of people testifying about that

call. Trump called Pence a wimp. (Is this 5th grade?)

[durablend]

109. "You're not my friend anymore"

Of course it's the playground

[livetohike]

112. Kindergarten! I've taught both K and 5th grade. n/t

[BumRushDaShow]

106. Invanka's Chief of Staff - 45 called Pence "The P-word"

[Scrivener7]

108. Among so much that's horrifying, I am horrified by the fact that Ivanka

thought she needed a chief of staff.

I guess she needed someone to make the champagne pops.

[Scrivener7]

107. Early drafts of 1/6 speech had no mention of Pence. After the phone call,

the whole speech put Pence under the bus if he didn't break the law.

[crickets]

110. After that speech, Pence was a marked man.

tfg's speech was calculated and deliberate, and the fallout was all that he was hoping for. Fortunately, the crowd never found Pence.

[Scrivener7]

111. **** LET'S GO TO THREAD #3 . HERE'S THE LINK: ****

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216808940

[BumRushDaShow]

113. Per confidential source - "Proud Boys would have killed Mike Pence if given the chance"

[BumRushDaShow]

114. OMG - Pence was hiding in what looks like a garage in the bowels of the Capitol

[Mersky]

115. Aguilar described how the crowd started chanting, "Hang Mike Pence!" after

Pence released a letter on Twitter at noon on 1/6. Then would go on to breach the Capitol doors at 2:13 pm.

At 2:24 tRump tweeted, “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution,” Trump wrote in his tweet.“

They played a clip of Ivanka saying her father was “pouring gasoline on the fire.”

[BumRushDaShow]

116. Jacob - Pence didn't want the world to see the VP "fleeing the Capitol".

[TygrBright]

117. Eastman is TOAST. n/t

[Scrivener7]

118. **** LET'S GO TO THREAD #3 . HERE'S THE LINK: ****

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216808940#post27