Syag, I did say, “They should investigate the BLM actions if they think there was a coordinated plot beyond violently venting anger, or if there are security lapses that they could fix to prevent in the future.” Even still, Jan 6 is a bigger deal.
Gefilte: “There were people who felt that there were still constitutional mechanisms which could reverse the vote and wanted to pressure Pence to do so.”
Today’s hearing made clear: White House counsel said this move is illegal, and conveyed to Trump. Trump’s personal lawyer even requested a PARDON! Whether the VP has power to not certify isn’t a matter of legal interpretation. Read the Constitution. And see the Electoral Count Act saying VP has no ability to change the outcome.
“They were wrong and acted improperly, based on a (probably) false narrative they believed.”
Today’s hearing convincingly establishes that Trump was told it was false. And he told his followers to believe it anyway.
“And this would then have gone to the supreme court who would have rejected it.”
Who knows what Trump would have done when losing in supreme court? He lost 60 other court cases then and it didn’t respect him. I underdtand (but seen no evidence yet) he was considering invoking martial law.
Seems I can’t stop talking about Trump here, but if any of you have been following the hearings, you’ll see that yes, this itself makes this more hearing-worthy than BLM. Glad to find some agreement with many of you (Syag), I think we can see by now how we all fall out on this comparison.