The GOP is trying to run away from this US Code:

[Eyeball_Kid]

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

They can't really escape. Even the DOJ must know. And that's likely why they've been so silent. Because the implications are catastrophic for the GOP. Hundreds of GOPers are implicit in the violation of this US Code. All of those who voted to deny the certification of the 2020 vote can be ineligible to hold office, according to this code. IF ENFORCED, the GOP would be decimated.

So why isn't the DOJ enforcing its own federal code? Is it due to the enormity of the consequences of enforcing the code?

My answer to that question is: YES.

Comments?

[triron]

4. Mostly agree.

I am frustrated and despondent even that there are even DUers still defending the Garland DOJ.
Something is very wrong and if nothing is done then democracy is surely done in the US (unless some liberal
states split off and form a new one).

[dem4decades]

2. How can you run away from something that isn't pursuing you?

[ShazamIam]

3. My comment is the media is trying to bury it and as a nation the leadership and population is in no

way ready to discuss the reality that the Republican political party has morphed itself into, an updated version of the Confederacy and are engaged in a rebellion against the U.S. Constitution and the Nation so governed.

We need a way to bring the rebels to justice free of an actual shooting war.

The reality is barely mentioned and the focus is kept on personalities and re-direction of the narrative.

[triron]

5. Yep burying their collective heads in the sand (like 1930s Germans).

[Traildogbob]

11. Bury your head in the sand.....

Your asshole becomes an easy bulls eye. And those looking to fuck over the country, are on the hunt for easy targets.

[lame54]

7. We have to overcome the fear of what they'll think...

It's holding us hostage as they slowly advance

[Sympthsical]

9. Objecting to the certification isn't anywhere close to this code

It's a right they have. The reason we see it so rarely is because most Congresses accept elections, and the acceptance of that election is one of those "more a formality" things we do to reinforce democracy in tradition and institutions.

However.

The power to object to certification is there in case there really is some crazy, corrupt situation in a state where the electoral votes are suspect. It's intended to be a safeguard rarely used.

Here, they used it for political opportunism. It's a complete misuse of the power, but it's not rebellion or insurrection.

If it were this heinous, unconstitutional thing, why weren't the Democrats who objected to Ohio in 2004 hauled off to jail?

[Justice matters.]

10. The peaceful transfer of power.

1- When a candidate loses, he/she accepts the will of the voters, concedes and tries again next election cycle.

2- If suspicions of irregularities in the results come up, he/she addresses them through the courts up to the SC based on credible evidence.

3- After all the court cases have been judged moot (but one pertaining to the distance of observers), discarded by the SC and the EC certified the winner, he/she must concede and try to appeal to voters again next election cycle.

All the criminal activity that follows those 3-point route should be codified and enforced to save Democracy.

[Sympthsical]

12. But that's not what the OP is about

They seem to think objecting to certification is criminal rebellion or insurrection.

If that were so, why not the Democrats after the 2004 election?

[rgbecker]

15. Do I need to underline the part? " Gives aid or comfort"

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; ?and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Those who spoke at the Rally before the riot at the Capital fall into this category in my opinion.

[onenote]

19. Voting against certification is a statutorily protected act.

DOJ isn't going to treat it as giving "aid or comfort" to insurrection.

[Sympthsical]

20. Internet lawyer is not an actual degree

A congressional power is not rebellion or insurrection.

The end.

[Eyeball_Kid]

23. Yes. Well phrased.

It was and is political opportunism and a misuse of power.

And because it's a complete misuse of power, it is anti-Constitutional.

Does it matter if the flooding of states' (administration of) elections positions with known insurrectionists is "legal"?

[flying_wahini]

13. Yes, the DOJ must be worried about starting a new assault.

The GOP knows it better than anyone.
The DOJ had had enough proof and now looks like they won’t push for arrests for those failing to report EVEN after defying subpoenas. ?

This is why the first Insurrectionists should have been punished more severely.
Now they will think it’s no biggie if the GOP will cover for them.
We are in deep trouble.

[lambchopp59]

14. GOP, thug gangs...

The biggest ever assembled.

[praxEs]

16. My answer is that

the investigations necessary to bring such charges are clearly underway. Whether there is sufficient evidence under the law to convict remains to be seen because the details are not now entirely public, except for places like Emptywheel and Above the Law.

[NullTuples]

17. They don't need to run away from it if none are actually charged with it.

[Eyeball_Kid]

24. There's plenty of legal expertise among those in the GOP.

They know the law. Their concern is to stay clear of any demand by the press or any other segment of society that highlights this statute and prods the DOJ into doing something about it. Prosecutorial strategies would include an alleged violaton of this statute. If that were to happen the "dominoes" are set in motion.

[NotHardly]

18. Unless Garland grows a pair of balls, unless Trumpers are kicked from the DOJ...

... DOJ and the AG will continue to carry water for Trump by continuing these obstructionist bullshit, mealy mouthed, whining lies.

Biden needs to tell the AG to act like a damn AG for the country and its citizens instead of Trump apologists.

[Ponietz]

21. Feels like 1935 all over again

But for the virulent racism here, the situation resembles the conditions of Spain prior to its Civil War. Flynn and Franco have much in common, but Flynn doesn’t measure up. General Milley’s unequivocal statement was reassuring.

[Igel]

22. Don't like (D)?

https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/06/politics/electoral-college-vote-count-objections/index.html

[Eyeball_Kid]

25. That was amazing. n/t

[Eyeball_Kid]

26. I forgot about posting this thread until today.

I'm relieved to know that there are a handful of folks who expressed similar concerns.

But I'm also gratified that the post was viewed by over 2800. The US Code that was cited should be (and has been) read by more than 2800. It's a good start.

[kentuck]

27. I think we have to deal with reality.

We cannot go after a national political Party and expect to succeed.

We have to go after them one at a time. (Perhaps starting with Steve Bannon)

[Bucky]

28. "sets on foot" -- in other words, what Trump did