If your interpretation the Constitution doesn't force you to do something you wouldn't otherwise do, your oath to uphold it is meaningless.
Oaths are not for when times are easy and things are going your way.
They are for when things do not go your way.
They are for serious men and women.
Pence is one.
Trump is not.
Oaths are there to keep the moral compass externalized. As you look throughout history, especially at people in power and high places. Namely, royalty, warlords, chiefs and aristocrats. Much of them operate well beyond and around that compass and they hold themselves accountable to nobody outside of their own greed and family for legacy sake.
This is deeply rooted in virtually every major sector in the public eye and public dependency arena. Government, Law Enforcement, Medical, Military, etc. It's all tainted to some extent. People suck.
I wonder how Trump supporters would feel if Trump wins the 2024 election and Kamala Harris refuses to certify it.
(07-06-2023, 02:54 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder how Trump supporters would feel if Trump wins the 2024 election and Kamala Harris refuses to certify it.
We'll see ANTIFA copy the January 6th coup this time.
I'm most certain that dimwit still went home believing what she originally thought coming into that town hall meeting.
(07-06-2023, 03:08 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]I'm most certain that dimwit still went home believing what she originally thought coming into that town hall meeting.
More than likely. He had a moral obligation to do what he did. Whether anybody likes it or not, doesn't matter. He did what was right in his mind. Good for him. Not very many politicians can say that. At least not in the modern era. The idea that his actions in particular were the catalyst as to why Biden ultimately "won" though is laughable.
Listen, Biden was getting in one way or another. The establishment made damn sure of that across the country. I still refuse to believe that Biden, Sleepy [BLEEP] Joe Biden, out of all the modern candidates that ran for president. Somehow ends up having the highest vote count of all time. There's no [BLEEP] way.
We had our first black president run twice and win twice in Obummer. We had a few female candidates run. Including Hilary "The Hitman [bleep]" Clinton. Bushwhack royalty also ran and won post 9/11. I just don't see Biden having that kind of pull. He certainly won't have it going into 2024. That's for damn sure. There's nothing the establishment can do there to fix that nor prop that up. If he "wins" again? This country is going to [BLEEP] implode across BOTH parties having had enough of this nonsense since 2020.
(07-06-2023, 03:16 PM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2023, 03:08 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]I'm most certain that dimwit still went home believing what she originally thought coming into that town hall meeting.
More than likely. He had a moral obligation to do what he did. Whether anybody likes it or not, doesn't matter. He did what was right in his mind. Good for him. Not very many politicians can say that. At least not in the modern era. The idea that his actions in particular were the catalyst as to why Biden ultimately "won" though is laughable.
Listen, Biden was getting in one way or another. The establishment made damn sure of that across the country. I still refuse to believe that Biden, Sleepy [BLEEP] Joe Biden, out of all the modern candidates that ran for president. Somehow ends up having the highest vote count of all time. There's no [BLEEP] way.
We had our first black president run twice and win twice in Obummer. We had a few female candidates run. Including Hilary "The Hitman [bleep]" Clinton. Bushwhack royalty also ran and won post 9/11. I just don't see Biden having that kind of pull. He certainly won't have it going into 2024. That's for damn sure. There's nothing the establishment can do there to fix that nor prop that up. If he "wins" again? This country is going to [BLEEP] implode across BOTH parties having had enough of this nonsense since 2020.
It wasn't Biden that caused Biden to get that many votes. It was Trump. Biden got that many votes because he wasn't Trump.
Only in swing counties, right? Lol
(07-06-2023, 03:40 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2023, 03:16 PM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ]More than likely. He had a moral obligation to do what he did. Whether anybody likes it or not, doesn't matter. He did what was right in his mind. Good for him. Not very many politicians can say that. At least not in the modern era. The idea that his actions in particular were the catalyst as to why Biden ultimately "won" though is laughable.
Listen, Biden was getting in one way or another. The establishment made damn sure of that across the country. I still refuse to believe that Biden, Sleepy [BLEEP] Joe Biden, out of all the modern candidates that ran for president. Somehow ends up having the highest vote count of all time. There's no [BLEEP] way.
We had our first black president run twice and win twice in Obummer. We had a few female candidates run. Including Hilary "The Hitman [bleep]" Clinton. Bushwhack royalty also ran and won post 9/11. I just don't see Biden having that kind of pull. He certainly won't have it going into 2024. That's for damn sure. There's nothing the establishment can do there to fix that nor prop that up. If he "wins" again? This country is going to [BLEEP] implode across BOTH parties having had enough of this nonsense since 2020.
It wasn't Biden that caused Biden to get that many votes. It was Trump. Biden got that many votes because he wasn't Trump.
That's speculative. I know in the history books it will say he won fair and square but deep down there has to be a severe case of buyer's remorse from the loyalists of the left. That was the best alternative? Really?
There was just too much going on in 2019 and 2020 to say this election was squeaky clean. There's a reason there's always been a majority that refuses to vote. Because that majority doesn't believe in our systems, it doesn't believe that it's valid. There's no way a massive corporation disguised as a country is going to leave it's wealth and greed up to chance on it's citizens, it's working class, it's ticks, it's leeches.
There's always been healthy skepticism preached amongst the lowest of lows and the highest of highs in the public eye. Biden got that many votes, and Trump lost votes, and a lot of those "votes" were racking up or going missing in a wide, wide variety of ways between ballots being destroyed, mailed in, harvested, machines acting screwy, etc., etc.
You cannot trust these politicians. Red tie. Blue tie. Green tie. They all get paid to act, speak and behave a certain way and they all get blatant favoritism as they go out of their way to pass laws. Career politicians are trash. Not a Trump supporter on my end. I just have a hard time buying into this system on my end, and yet, I do vote, I participate.
Biden got a lot of help, illegally and legally, and Trump got [BLEEP], illegally and legally. I don't see it any other way than just that. The table is rigged. It's been rigged, in my opinion, since at least 1916. When the Federal Reserve was introduced.
(07-06-2023, 03:40 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2023, 03:16 PM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ]More than likely. He had a moral obligation to do what he did. Whether anybody likes it or not, doesn't matter. He did what was right in his mind. Good for him. Not very many politicians can say that. At least not in the modern era. The idea that his actions in particular were the catalyst as to why Biden ultimately "won" though is laughable.
Listen, Biden was getting in one way or another. The establishment made damn sure of that across the country. I still refuse to believe that Biden, Sleepy [BLEEP] Joe Biden, out of all the modern candidates that ran for president. Somehow ends up having the highest vote count of all time. There's no [BLEEP] way.
We had our first black president run twice and win twice in Obummer. We had a few female candidates run. Including Hilary "The Hitman [bleep]" Clinton. Bushwhack royalty also ran and won post 9/11. I just don't see Biden having that kind of pull. He certainly won't have it going into 2024. That's for damn sure. There's nothing the establishment can do there to fix that nor prop that up. If he "wins" again? This country is going to [BLEEP] implode across BOTH parties having had enough of this nonsense since 2020.
It wasn't Biden that caused Biden to get that many votes. It was Trump. Biden got that many votes because he wasn't Trump.
Like yours, correct?
Plus the fact the MSM sat on the Hunter Biden laptop story which some voters say would have prevented them from voting for Biden had they known the truth.
(07-06-2023, 04:01 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2023, 03:40 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]It wasn't Biden that caused Biden to get that many votes. It was Trump. Biden got that many votes because he wasn't Trump.
Like yours, correct?
Plus the fact the MSM sat on the Hunter Biden laptop story which some voters say would have prevented them from voting for Biden had they known the truth.
Yes, I would normally vote Republican. But I did not vote for Trump. Maybe if he ran against AOC or Elizabeth Warren, I might think about voting for him. Maybe.
As for the Hunter Biden laptop story, when are all these Republican-led congressional investigations going to produce anything of substance, other than the fact that Joe Biden's son was a drug addict and a bull [BLEEP] artist? "I'm sitting right next to my dad and he wants to know when you're going to send the money." Suure you are, Hunter. HB, don't you think there was a real good possibility his dad wasn't even in the room?
And as long as we're talking about corruption, how about that $2 billion Saudi Arabia gave Jared Kushner?
Further Evidence Emerges the Saudis Did Not Pay Jared Kushner Billions Because They Thought He Was an Investing Genius | Vanity Fair
(07-06-2023, 04:01 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2023, 03:40 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]It wasn't Biden that caused Biden to get that many votes. It was Trump. Biden got that many votes because he wasn't Trump.
Like yours, correct?
Plus the fact the MSM sat on the Hunter Biden laptop story which some voters say would have prevented them from voting for Biden had they known the truth.
Biden's kid's laptop was not going to stop the wave of voters who had realized Trump's incompetence from voting for whomever had the best chance of beating him.
It may be convenient to think that distraction (which still hasn't really amounted to a hill of beans) would have an impact - but it was a nothing burger compared to the mountain of more scandalous claims already in the open concerning Donald Trump. Those claims didn't stop his supporters from supporting him, just as this laptop story wouldn't have stopped those dead set against him from voting for whomever could beat him.
And he was indeed legitimately beaten. And that's why Pence said what he said in the interview above.
(07-06-2023, 03:48 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Only in swing counties, right? Lol
Even if you think enough votes were faked to change the election result, Pence still did what the law says he should have done.
The votes were opened.
The votes were counted.
The objections to the votes were heard.
The objections were voted on. There were not enough votes for the objectors. If more members of Congress saw credible evidence that there were millions of fake votes, those votes would have gone differently.
The end.
Pence presided over that process as the law required him to. He never had the power to change the outcome on his own.
I have no problem with what Pence did. I think Trump was an idiot for suggesting otherwise. That's not what I was replying to, was it?
(07-06-2023, 07:10 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2023, 03:48 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Only in swing counties, right? Lol
Even if you think enough votes were faked to change the election result, Pence still did what the law says he should have done.
The votes were opened.
The votes were counted.
The objections to the votes were heard.
The objections were voted on. There were not enough votes for the objectors. If more members of Congress saw credible evidence that there were millions of fake votes, those votes would have gone differently.
The end.
Pence presided over that process as the law required him to. He never had the power to change the outcome on his own.
Wrong ... Pence was the one that said he would send them back and the American people would hear the evidence.
He said exactly what he didn't do. He can't change history and pretend he didn't say it.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
(07-06-2023, 11:48 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I have no problem with what Pence did. I think Trump was an idiot for suggesting otherwise. That's not what I was replying to, was it?
Is there some reason you won't use the reply button? That would help.
Do you need a reply button to know that my post directly followed your post and was perfectly in context and doesn't make sense any other way? My response makes ZERO sense as a rebuttal to the original post.
I typically only hit reply if I'm responding to a poster and it doesn't naturally flow in the conversation, because I assume people can use their brain rationally. Why am I not surprised that you and Mikey struggle to understand context unless someone spells it out perfectly for you?
(07-07-2023, 04:35 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (07-06-2023, 07:10 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Even if you think enough votes were faked to change the election result, Pence still did what the law says he should have done.
The votes were opened.
The votes were counted.
The objections to the votes were heard.
The objections were voted on. There were not enough votes for the objectors. If more members of Congress saw credible evidence that there were millions of fake votes, those votes would have gone differently.
The end.
Pence presided over that process as the law required him to. He never had the power to change the outcome on his own.
Wrong ... Pence was the one that said he would send them back and the American people would hear the evidence.
He said exactly what he didn't do. He can't change history and pretend he didn't say it.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
That's not the process.
"Send them back" means the US senate and US house consider the claims separately. They consider one state at a time. If they agree about what the votes from that state should be, then it's done. They agreed. The House and Senate each agreed that the votes from AZ and PA were the right votes.
But if they don't agree, then the law says they have to call up the governor of that state and he or she decides.
The process does not call for any kind of trial where "the American people would hear the evidence".
Read title 3 of the United States Code. It's all there.