Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I’m Mercutio Now… Except for Dan Crenshaw. I Love Me Some Dan.
Perhaps I’m beating a broken drum here, but I will not be sad to see President Trump go even though I voted for him in November. For me, the final straw came before the riot. I was tired of him by mid-December actually, but the camel’s back broke when I saw him taking actions that I felt would sabotage the Georgia run-offs. My instincts weren’t wrong, and I absolutely blame him for losing the Senate. Then he just kept going by channeling Marc Antony at Caesar’s funeral and blowing up what remained of his legacy.
That said, I’ll beat a different broken drum because I finally listened to the President-elect on Thursday as well, and I’m afraid “Pop” either has no interest in unity or simply doesn’t understand the deep resentment Republicans feel for a Democratic Party that makes absolutely everything about racism. His speech actually made me nauseous.
There are many explanations for why the Capitol Police couldn’t adequately protect the building in their charge from frenzied rioters in Viking hats. Perhaps the staff charged with protecting Congress wasn’t adequately prepared with the appropriate riot gear to quell the crowd at first. Maybe they simply did not have an effective plan in place to counter a large-scale attack. When confronted with one, perhaps they did not want to fuel a problem they had not anticipated.
After all, they seem to have engaged in some of the thinking that has led riots in various cities in the past to be “contained” rather than “shut down” quickly. That approach goes all the way back to Baltimore, which was set on fire during the Obama administration.
In line with that theory, the now-ousted chief said that a decision was made to “prioritize lives over property,” which is a very familiar refrain at this point when it comes to violence in the streets. And an unarmed woman was still shot and killed in the melee. A police officer tragically died from his injuries today as well.
However, Joe Biden did not consider any of this. Instead, he chose to play to a Democrat-base grievance about disparate treatment of mobs based on race, which doesn’t even seem to be defendable upon examination, when there was just so much more he could have said that would have been better for the country at large.
I also don’t believe even for a second that he really thinks the biggest take away from this episode has something to do with Black Lives Matter. These wounds have been pressed so often now on the body politic that they are starting to go gangrene. Seeing him twist a race-baiting knife some more into what I believe can become a fatal fester, I can only conclude he has learned nothing good in his many decades in DC.
So this morning, I am Mercutio. A pox on both their houses! I don’t want to listen to anyone anymore.
Well … except Dan Crenshaw.
The congressman from Texas wrote a thoughtful critique in the Wall Street Journal today about how the Electoral College actually works and why the people who rioted were misled when thinking they were doing anything that could result in anything but anarchy. Crenshaw references to the Federalist Papers, basic civics, and history.
Good gosh, man!!!
He appeals to reason. He makes me want to move to Houston just so I could vote for him.
But I can’t, so I sit here in my house in a different district and think about how I’m turning into a grave woman, at least when talking about my dying interests in these same old politics. At least for the next two years. At least until there is someone out there who actually inspires me again.
Maybe I’ll read more Shakespeare.
Published in General
Dan Crenshaw is better than most in Congress, but he is kind of d-bag like Ben Sasse. His manner is smarmy and condescending. I am glad he figured out that *every* person to protest a slate of electors the past 150 years was out of order. Nobody else in Congress seemed to notice in the past. Weird. Too bad he didn’t notice earlier, when it would have helped. A real leader would have taken the blame for not knowing earlier and speaking out earlier. Instead he blames the rubes looking to be heard. I’ll note that he calls us a “democracy”. Genius.
Thank you That was very helpful.
It’s funny how people read people so differently because “smarmy and condescending” are not words I’d have ever applied to him, but okay. If I were you, I’d definitely not vote for Crenshaw!!!
Then again… I’ve often applied those adjectives to Cruz, and I still voted for him when he was running for the Senate. I would have crawled over broken glass, actually, after the SCOTUS hearings….
Hmmm….
Maybe this is a more total Mercutio moment???
Regardless, I believe Crenshaw’s main objection was that there are politicians who were busily leading voters to believe protesting a slate of electors during the ceremonial casting of votes does a jack-doodle for them. He points out this was bad for Democrat voters, too, when Democrat politicians did the exact same thing to Bush, which I recall thinking back then was also stupid and divisive.
Seemed a valid point to me.
If you want to dig deeper into problems in the state Republican Party, you could look at issues connected to David Ralston, the Speaker of the House and make up your own mind. He’s got some ethics problems that make his continued position of power in the state turn off a lot of people who truly pay attention and who get frustrated about “swampy” dealings. Also, just my opinion, but there you go.
Fun fact for all the Texans out there since I brought him up though….
Ralston represents in part Fannin County.
Who is that named after???
James Fannin, of course!!!!
He died at the Goliad Massacre, which created another rallying cry during the Texas Revolution. (“Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad!”)
He and most of his men were from the Peach State. In fact, many of the people who put GTT on their doors in the early 1800s were from Georgia. The two states have some strong ties…. :)
In a nutshell, The Georgia Republicans are essentially prostitutes for corporate donors, and the latter didn’t like the threat of boycotts over accusations of ‘voter suppression’.
I voted for Trump as well, because he had done a lot of good things in office and I wanted that to continue. However, his actions since the election were The Worst. It’s one thing to ask for investigations and to let the legal game play out. It’s quite another thing to behave as he has for the last two months – insisting on things that didn’t actually happen; choosing a team of people like Giuliani and Sidney Whatshername; and just being all-round obnoxious, embarrassing creep.
If the Republicans had had an ounce of sense, they would have been prepared for the shenanigans that went on during the election; would have had plans for election day; would have had teams of actual lawyers, not a group of publicity hounds; and perhaps Trump would have won.
The sad thing is that the good things that he did will all be rescinded by the Democrats – especially because they now have the majority in both houses and there is nothing to check their excesses. The debacle of the Georgia senate race can be laid directly at Trump’s door. If he could have kept his mouth shut and stayed out of Georgia and the senate race, it is very probable we would have had a victory.
His legacy will not be the last four years of generally good progress, but the last few months where he justified all the criticisms that have been leveled at him.
I agree that Trump made it more complicated for them and that Trump’s message of “I was cheated” above all else didn’t help at all. Where I disagree with you is putting it all down to Trump.
As for the $2,000, it could have helped the Georgia candidates, which was my point. And that Trump came up with it – well, isn’t that to his credit? The $2,000 is definitely coming now that McConnell isn’t Majority Leader. So same outcome on the $2,000, but with a very bad twist that is partly to McConnell’s fault.
I have no problem disagreeing with me either as long as it’s not cant. And in no way do I think your argument was cant.
Yes, but before Trump, they were a very different state as you pointed out in your post above. I don’t know Georgia politics well and the person I know well who is involved in Georgia politics is rejoicing at the 2020 results and works in a law firm that will probably provide several positions in the Biden administration.
Questionable.
As for your comments on Britain and the monarchy, I came away after living there for several years with a transition from admiration to wondering why they put up with that worthless lot. Use cardboard cutouts with a waving hand for the tourists. Probably satisfy them.
I agree. With all of it. We could play Bunco together. Except… of course… I hate Bunco. But still. Totally on the same page. :)
There’s no reason a properly ordered constitutional monarchy could not take this approach too, or maybe use figureheads. It worked for Zaphod Beeblebrox after all.
The population shift is certainly ongoing, but this is not a blue state in culture. I know the difference. While I’ve lived all over the place, I know Georgia very well. If it was blue, the state government itself would look different now. While the names you know weren’t running ,there were plenty of state seats on the ballot. And these people outperformed Trump.
There are a lot of very progressive progressives in Georgia, but there are a lot of very conservative conservatives, too. I have both in my friend group. We have to work harder to actually persuade Democrats that a party that says a-woman is not a party that coincides with their values. I don’t know how this is done, but I believe it is easiest at the local level where politicians can actually know their constituents.
For example, one of my neighbors was a super hardcore Democrat, but she had a Johnny Isakson yard sign one election. I was like, “Why?” She said, “He’s not a frothing at the mouth type… Plus I know him.” Yep.
This is disappointing from Rep. Crenshaw. I like him quite a bit.
He is not a lawyer. Perhaps this is a problem in the present circumstances. He is incorrect.
His WSJ article claims:
He is correct that the Constitution does not say “object if you disagree.” It also does not say that there can be no objections. The Constitution is simply silent on this issue.
So, as Rep. Crenshaw correctly states, Congress passed a law following the debacle of the 1876 election. The operative statute (on objections) is 3 USC 15 (here).
Rep. Crenshaw is completely wrong in claiming that this statute does not apply except where there are competing slates of electors. The statute states, in pertinent part (emphasis added):
Thus, the two Houses concurrently may reject electoral votes when they agree, even if only one return has been received.
Rep. Crenshaw is plainly wrong about this.
Indeed!
But @hangon, I would say it’s @Skipsul who wants the constitutional monarchy!!! I’m fine with having kicked out George III!
I just loved visiting their homes and looking at their clothes. And I really do love hats. I would get so excited when invited to a wedding! (Just the commoner sort, mind, but they wore hats, too.)
Anyway, I definitely would not want my tax dollars going to maintaining a monarchy, but maybe they bring in more money than is dished out on their behalf???? I really don’t know, but Buckingham Palaces sells a ton o’ tea towels!!!! :)
Also, you wouldn’t tear down the castles, even if you didn’t have the pretty dress up dolls to live within them. That’s the real pound drain. It’s expensive to maintain hedge mazes….
I suspect a proper review of the history will show that some major components of the legal team were scared off shortly before (?) Election Day. At least that is what I seem to remember.
He’s not in my district, but I did send him a check.
Cruz is not condescending, but he is off-putting to people that don’t know him. I love his podcast.
My point was that his point would have been helpful *beforehand*. If he just found out, then he should not lecture. If he new before and didn’t say so, that is lack of leadership. For some reason, Dan was unable to convince Cruz (former Solicitor General) or Josh Hawley (former AG) that objections were not allowed and yet he blames the rubes for being duped. Shouldn’t he first blame Cruz, Hawley, and the 50 Democrats that have objected electors since 2001? I follow Crenshaw on social media and didn’t see anything before this.
I think most people want what Cruz promised. An official discussion of election grievances. That didn’t happen and won’t happen now. It will just be memory-holed with all the other corruption of the last decade.
Okay.
Thanks for adding some expertise to the conversation!
This makes me immediately think of two things.
First. Georgia originally outlawed lawyers from settling in the colony when its charter was established in 1732. These people are too bothersome to live with, said James Oglethorpe, Georgia’s founder. They like to start too many arguments. (True story. That’s really in the original charter. No lawyers.)
Second. Did the conditions needed actually exist to reject electoral votes? In 2021? In 2001? In 2005? In 2017? (All these years had these sorts of objections raised, which is why I’m not really bothered by the show, though I don’t think it’s helpful. I’m more bothered by–and I think Crenshaw’s point is related to–inflated expectations of what was happening when objections were made.)
I’m not a lawyer, but my immediate question is this: Were two Houses ever going to concurrently reject electoral votes on Wednesday?
If not, then….
It’s not really a job requirement, but it probably is an election requirement.
I need to listen to his podcast. You’re not the first person I’ve heard who has said it’s great.
Fair enough
I think you’re right here. I do think that it all could have been rolled out differently, and I also think that there were people who were doing exactly as Crenshaw said… not making this point but planting a false hope.
Cruz actually very clearly stated that what he was doing was not trying to change the election result… unless my memory is messed up. This is why I say in my response to @arizonapatriot that I don’t object to the “show.” If a discussion of election grievances was the goal, I totally think that would have been fine, too.
While I am pretty done with Trump, I don’t feel the same way about Cruz and Hawley. I mean… I just don’t know what I think there. That seemed more normal politics to me. I can’t say I like “normal politics,” but they don’t make me as angry.
I don’t know if I’m rationalizing?
Bless.
I haven’t worked it all out in my mind quite yet.
Exactly. Who says taxes are necessary to prop them up?
Neither was Virginia; the state government looks as it does now because a.) the tipping point has only just been reached and b.) Democrats concentrate themselves in overwhelmingly blue urban areas, while Republicans live in spread out, less overwhelmingly red areas. Georgia is a purple state trending blue.
Relatively soon, Georgia Republicans will likewise lose their control of state government, and Georgia conservatives will face the same persecution as Virginian conservatives in their ancestral lands.
Get thee to a nunnery.
(Almost 50 comments in, and I didn’t get beat to that line. Tickled me.)
Then Republicans need to work harder and smarter. I don’t buy that demographics = destiny.
And this is why you’re the cleverest, Boss!
I’ll start packing my habits….
And not nominate loonies.
Then the non-loonies need to stand up for the people who vote for them.
Nothing is destiny, but some things are far more likely than others.
The Lincoln Project (those asshoes again) went after Jones Day and another law firm, threatening boycotts of their other clients (such as GM) if they dared continue working for the President.
It’s shameful behavior from The Lincoln Project, and makes me wonder if they could be brought up on RICO charges.
I would love to see that.
The Lincoln Project was forged in the fires of hell, and is run by demonic people.
Not to mention supported.
We lawyers are often on the receiving end of this sort of thing. It’s a bit hard to run a proper government without lawyers, who are the experts in laws and due process. I am in good company — Adams, Jefferson, Madison, John Marshall, Quincy Adams, Daniel Webster, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, just to name a few. Justice Joseph Story belongs on that list, too, though he is not as well-known as he should be.
About the reasons to reject the electoral votes: there is no specific criteria stated in the statute. It is perfectly legitimate to object, provided that — as required by other portions of the statute — the objection is in writing and signed by both a Representative and a Senator. The House and the Senate can then decide the issue as they see fit.
Here, there was little chance that any objection would be sustained. It is useful for the objections to have been aired, and but for the riot, it could have been useful to highlight the need for reforms aimed at greater election integrity.
I cant add anything. Agree with you completely
I wouldn’t go to war on this, but the buck stops with the candidates. My preference would have been for Trump to stay out of things, but ultimately it’s on Loeffler and Perdue. They were weak candidates and it showed. To a lesser extent Loeffler should probably not even have been given the seat.