Spell out for me exactly how this happens. By “Congress,” do we mean BOTH houses? Everyone convenes in person? Aren’t they on Christmas break then? When, how, voice vote, roll call-- how does it play out?
Damn, I long for the days when this shit just happened as a matter of course instead of us sweating out every little logistical play-by-play detail. 
There’s been a lot of conversation about the process in this and other threads, you might start here for some discussion of the joint session.
It’s a joint session of Congress presided over by the Vice President. It is here where they can object to any state’s certification of electoral votes. In 2000, many House members objected to certification of Florida (but no Senators) and Vice President Gore shut them down quickly.
Here are some clips from Jan 6, 2001: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D00MmTuja8
Ok, thanks for those links, y’all.
Do we REALLY believe this certification process is going to go off without a hitch? Doesn’t seem likely…
There will be an objection to electors in the House by House members who look into 2021 and realize that Trump will have an impact on fundraising. Remember: House reps never stop running for re-election; they are permanently campaigning, so they are most sensitive to the MAGA fundraising and propaganda machine. It’ll be up to House dems to kill it in committee.
Now, consider what would happen if Republicans controlled the House.
Waitaminit I thought that conservatives believed that stopping traffic was the worst thing since equal rights.
Correct. But, I’m pretty sure in Trump’s mind that isn’t the end of it. It may also take longer than one day for them to complete the process this time.
An objection to electors may only be considered by Congress in the joint session if it is submitted in writing and signed by at least one Representative and one Senator. You can always find a Representative willing to go along with this, but in the past Senators have been less willing to compromise their integrity.
I don’t imagine that will be a problem this time – I fully expect a Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley or Tom Cotton to go along with objecting to electors from GA, PA, WI, MI, and AZ.
It is also the Republicans who are preventing the Heroes act, which includes updated guidance to the IRS on how to treat forgiven PPP loans.
The forgiveness amount itself is not taxed, but the expenses that a business used it for will no longer be deductible, which for all intents and purposes means that the forgiveness amount is taxed.
Whole lotta small businesses that are going to be hurting if that is not updated. There is a greater proportion of Republicans and right leaning folk who own small businesses than Democrats, so the Republicans are just hurting themselves here.
The AP reports that two rallies supporting Trump are supposed to happen today in Washington, DC; do we have any reports on the status of those rallies?
The concept of zero-sum is not a uniquely American thing - it’s a human one and it’s very hard to educate out of people. It’s always lurking in us and all nations must be on guard for its corrosive effects on politics and the social contract.
Still gives Trump a few weeks to give martial law a crack.
Can we discuss this scenario a bit more? Do I understand this correctly? A joint session of Congress will convene on Jan 6, sitting shoulder-to-shoulder, lots of masks on the Dem side, a few on the Pub side (worn by those who don’t mind being ridiculed by their colleagues).
This video from 2001 shows a little bit of a flap developing, which Al Gore gaveled into submission. Will Pence do the same thing? (Thx @Monocracy.)
I do not see this event being carried out smoothly. I expect there to be demonstrators on the steps of the building, and I expect multiple attempts from attendees to derail the process, which will not succeed, but which will slow it down and embarrass them (though they won’t notice).
Because:
The comments section on the OAN website are insane. According to them, the Supreme Court was paid off.
There’s a very in depth Congressional Research Service (CRS) overview of the topic available online. To very briefly summarize the process for the joint session:
All the members of the House and Senate will sit together in one joint meeting presided over by the Vice President.
The Vice President is required to open the certificate of electors (or any document purporting to be a certificate of electors) received from each state. A slate of electors certified by the state prior to the “safe harbor” date is presumed to be that state’s electors.
At least one Senator joined by at least one Representative may submit an objection in writing to the counting of any state’s electors. If such should happen, the two chambers separate and vote independently whether to sustain the objection. Both chambers must vote to sustain the objection for the electors to be overturned.
The role of the Vice President in this is constrained. He has some authority to rule on procedural motions, but no ability to refuse to recognize electors submitted by a state or to rule on the validity of an objection.
The relevant statute also has several provision to keep the process from dragging out. Objections may be considered for no more than two hours each, and the body is prohibited from adjourning until the count is completed.
Who’s going to stop him?
Probably not, but I seem to recall that house reps try to object to slates of electors every single election. Democratic reps objected to Trump ( Biden was VP and eventually shut it down). Republican reps objected to Obama. It’s grandstanding and no one expects it to go anywhere.
It’s just that it used to be a thing that was mostly meaningless and didn’t draw much attention.
It’s happening on January 6th, though. I think it would be way worse, and I’d be more concerned - if it happened on January 4th. Just because the Georgia election is on the 5th. They need to make Trump think he has a chance until the polls close on the 5th, then it becomes much less important.
Absolutely correct.
I think the zero-sum mentality goes hand-in-hand with the perception of relative deprivation. Objectively, the status of, say, white Americans is that they are still the politically, socially, and economically the dominant group in the US. But any sharing or redistribution of that power can be perceived as a loss, and a ‘loss’ can lead to a sense of perceived threat.
There is also the notion of perceived scarcity. Despite the fact that many right wing conservatives swallow in whole the capitalist propaganda that the free market inevitably grows the size of the economic pie (which it does in fact do in many regards), many of these same folks can turn right around and make (or buy into) arguments that resources are scarce and the size of the economic pie is limited.
It doesn’t take too much, then, to go from that place of scarcity, to justifying violence and oppression. All that is required is to embrace the view that human nature is inevitably tribal, and that we are inexorably living a jungle-like existence in which we cannot possibly be trusted to cooperate or tolerate the existence of the other, and that ruthless competition is our natural state, and that you are either a predator or prey.
During times in which liberalism gains greater acceptance, ideas of scarcity and competition recede, as does the idea that we are hopelessly, instinctively competitive and not cooperative. But when liberalism retreats, as it has done over the last 40 or so years owing largely to growing pessimism of global trade, then we see what we’re seeing now – which is what we saw during the period from about 1870 until 1945. Not just in America, but globally, we are entering an extremely dangerous time, I am afraid.
Okay. That makes me feel better.
It’s just that stuff that was pro forma in the past these days can turn into a volcanic eruption.
I still don’t like the joint session, seated closely, with a lot of people not wearing masks. Has anyone addressed that?
