Election 2020

The House Freedom Caucus Just Trashed What Little Credibility It Had Left

More than 100 members of Congress signed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the presidential election, including several prominent members of the group founded to protect "the rule of law."

|

When the House Freedom Caucus was formed in January 2015, co-founder Rep. Jim Jordan (R–Ohio) said that the unofficial congressional club would "support open, accountable and limited government, the Constitution, and the rule of law."

On Thursday, roughly two-thirds of the House Freedom Caucus, including Jordan, signed an amicus brief in support of President Donald Trump's longshot bid to have the U.S. Supreme Court overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, which Trump plainly lost.

The amicus brief will likely have little bearing on the outcome of the case, which hinges on the unprecedented claim that one state should be allowed to challenge how other states handle elections. In a more serious amicus brief also filed on Thursday, a group of conservative legal scholars described the underlying lawsuit as making "a mockery of federalism and separation of powers."

The amicus brief filed by 106 members of Congress—all Republicans, naturally—isn't a serious legal document so much as an oath of loyalty to Trump. It is a convenient list of the members of Congress who chose unconditional fealty to a president's bizarre, flailing attempt to hold onto power for its own sake over the Constitution and rule of the law.

Don't heap all your scorn on Jordan. He has plenty of company. Current House Freedom Caucus Chairman Rep. Andy Biggs (R–Ariz.) also signed the amicus brief.

By my unofficial count, there are 20 current House Freedom Caucus members—the group does not disclose an official list of members, so I used Ballotpedia's list—whose names appear on the brief. In addition to Biggs and Jordan, they are Rep. Mo Brooks (R–Ala.), Rep. Ken Buck (R–Colo.), Rep. Ted Budd (R–N.C.), Rep. Ben Cline (R–Va.), Rep. Michael Cloud (R–Texas), Rep. Russ Fulcher (R–Idaho), Rep. Matt Gaetz (R–Fla.), Rep. Louie Gohmert (R–Texas), Rep. Mark Green (R–Ariz.), Rep. Andrew Harris (R–Md.), Rep. Debbie Lesko (R–Ariz.), Rep. Alex Mooney (R–W.Va.), Rep. Ralph Norman (R–S.C.), Rep. Gary Palmer (R–Ala.), Rep. Scott Perry (R–Pa.), Rep. Randy Weber (R–Texas), Rep. Ron Wright (R–Texas), and Rep. Ted Yoho (R–Fla.).

It is not breaking news that the House Freedom Caucus, once considered the closest thing Congress had to a libertarian club, has become an appendage of the Trump White House. More than two years ago, Reason's Matt Welch noted that the group had seemingly lost interest in the gadfly role it had so eagerly adopted during President Barack Obama's two terms in office.

Since then, the group's credibility has only fallen further. Members of the House Freedom Caucus led the campaign to banish Rep. Justin Amash (L–Mich.), a co-founder of the group, from the Republican Party after he had the temerity to suggest that Trump should be impeached. The Wall Street Journal described the (now Amash-less) group as "Trump's de facto defense team" during the impeachment hearing.

That so many of its members signed onto an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to throw out the election results is a new low for the House Freedom Caucus as an entity. For the individual members of Congress who signed it, the amicus brief should stand as a permanent reminder that they have no principles beyond doing what Trump asks.

"It's disappointing to me that so many members of Congress who professed to 'support open, accountable and limited government, the Constitution and the rule of law' have become nothing more than a Praetorian Guard for Trump, who supports none of those things," David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute, and a longtime observer of libertarian politics, told Reason in response to a question about House Freedom Caucus members endorsing the amicus brief. "Those members of Congress who should have been the most committed to free markets, limited government, and American values have sadly been the most enthusiastic about following him down that destructive path."

The next time Jordan or Biggs or Gaetz or any of the other signatories listed above talks about the value of limited government, the importance of the constitution, or the primacy of the rule of law, they will perhaps be right in the way that a stuck clock is right twice a day. But they are demonstrating right now that Trump's interests come before all of that.

NEXT: New Hampshire Lawmaker Blames Colleagues for House Speaker's COVID-19 Death

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Shame on Trump for pursuing legal means to investigate an election which is, shall we say, a bit ‘fragrant’.
    Unfortunately, there seems to be no vaccine for TDS…

    1. Trump has gone way past “legal means” when he tried to bully three different state legislators to throw out the votes of their states.

      1. “Trump has gone way past “legal means” when he tried to bully three different state legislators to throw out the votes of their states.”

        Define “bullying”, you lying piece of lefty shit.

        1. He probably tweeted something mean.

          1. You people have really given away the projection game.

            You no longer get to call other people weak snowflakes. We’re done with that.

            1. Like contesting an election is the same as not using a person’s preferred pronouns. GFY.

              1. They are the same. They are both you being pathetic psychologically stunted weaklings, just as I said.

                There’s no excuse for rudeness, and there’s no excuse for treason.

                1. They’re nothing alike and the only traitors are the Dems selling us out to the Chinese. Swalwell was banging a Chinese spy for gods sake!

                  1. Yes, tasting that sweet sweet Chinese honey!

                    1. I quit working at shop rite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier. Here’s what I do… USA ONLINE JOBS

                    2. Aside from Swalwell's chinese creampies in exchange for US secrets, Boehm is wrong about this topic:

                      The amicus brief filed by 106 members of Congress—all Republicans, naturally—isn’t a serious legal document so much as an oath of loyalty to Trump. It is a convenient list of the members of Congress who chose unconditional fealty to a president’s bizarre, flailing attempt to hold onto power for its own sake over the Constitution and rule of the law.

                      Boehm seems to be new to politics, or simply doesn't understand how politics works. If Trump is indeed departing - why would they show loyalty to him now? For political reasons that's why, not for "loyalty" reasons.

                2. Oh yes there are excuses for treason, unless you’re some sort of nationalist fuckhead.

                  1. JOIN PART TIME JOBS
                    Google pays for every Person every hour online working from home job. I have received $23K in this month easily and I earns every weeks $5K to 8$K on the internet. Amj Every Person join this working easily by just just open this website and follow instructions
                    COPY This Website OPEN HERE….. Visit Here

                  1. Poor lefties dont see what is coming.

                    Alito aligned with thomas.

                    1. JOIN PART TIME JOBS
                      Google pays for every Person every hour online working from home job. I have received $23K in this month easily and I earns every weeks $5K to 8$K on the internet. Anh Every Person join this working easily by just just open this website and follow instructions
                      COPY This Website OPEN HERE….. Visit Here

                  2. The tears are less for Trump not winning, but more for the ushering in by the left wing media and big tech candidate, whom they orchestrated his popularity and thus voter base, of commie pinko Harris and the senile puppet - Biden. Biden is so far out there, that he will be managed by his campaign. He simply cannot be trusted to make a decision or write his own speech. Everything will be done for him by the establishment left wing swamp, and he need only do what they say for as long as he is able. Then commie pinko Harris and her commie pinko equity dogma can be ushered in. All the while, reason.com, it's staff, and most of the readers of which, will get their legalized drugs and hoes and thus celebrate.

            2. I have yet to find a single thing that snowflake conservatives accuse progressives of that they, the conservatives, are not guilty of in spades. They truly are the masters of projection.

              1. Swalwell “Trump is Russian agent.”
                Swalwell “I’m banging a Chinese spy.”
                GTFO

            3. Quiet, weak snowflake.

            4. You no longer get to call other people weak snowflakes. We’re done with that.

              Snowflakes were for lefttard man-bun rainbow unicorns that couldn't handle a debate or even talk about a subject. That is where that term came from. They would try to shut down university talks or events, rather than debate or discuss. So... no. We aren't done with it. And we have no problem discussing and debating merits of subjects with you, or destroying your unreasonable crap here on ironically, reason.com.

        2. Define “fragrant” first. Your God won by a landslide, and everybody knows it, right?

      2. No he didn’t.

      3. Good point, Molly. Microaggressions, hurtful words, and an inability to defer to judicial authority are major GOP threats to America’s civil society.

        1. Did he have a private phone call with the head of the IRS who then, completely coincidentally, started an investigation in those legislatures tax returns?

          Did he meet with them on the airport tarmac when his private plane coincidentally happened to land at the same time as theirs and then had a chat about their ‘grandchildren’?

          1. Well, someone handed him a ‘dossier’ which claimed one of the officials got peed-upon by a hooker, and therefore he got the FBI to get a warrant to investigate everything that official did for the last 50 years and anyone who ever knew him besides, so there’s that.

      4. poor unreason. They support the Party of slavery.

        The Commies that staff unreason hate the Constitution and its limitations that hurt Democrats at every turn.

        12th Amendment here we come!

        1. For someone named “loveconstitution1789” you sure seem to hate Federalism.

          1. The Constitution strictly limits Federalism.

            1. Are you sure you understand the definition of Federalism?

              1. New unreason bots are so funny.

      5. It’s in the Constitution that legislatures appoint the electors.

        1. That’s not what the constitution says.

          1. Poor lefties. MSM forgot to dover what republican state legislatures are up to.

            The MSM missed the texas filing.

    2. TDS

      Is there a pithy name for people who believe President T can do no wrong? “MAGAtard” is rather juvenile…

    3. PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple NCE work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    4. Shame on you, Sevo, for being so far up Trump’s ass that you smell like poorly digested Big Macs.

  2. Is this the best you’ve got reason?

    1. unreason tried ignoring any news about Democrat election fraud and unconstitutional election changes because of Kungflu.

      I warned these unreason staff dipshits that Republicans were not giving up and Trump won the legal vote total in states that mattered.

      MAGA!

      1. Biden underperformed Hillary everywhere except Philly, Detroit, Milwaukee and Atlanta but that’s just a coincidence.

        1. “Biden underperformed Hillary everywhere except Philly, Detroit, Milwaukee and Atlanta but that’s just a coincidence.”

          Define under-performed. He had a higher turnout in absolute numbers and garnered a larger percentage of the vote ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. In most major urban areas, other than Miami, he saw more voters and a higher margin of victory. That includes, New York, Los Angeles, Orange County, CA, Dallas-Ft Worth.

          Even in states that Trump won handily, Trump’s margin of victory in 2020 slipped vs his 2016 margin. In fact, other than NY State, FL, Hawaii, the split between Trump and Biden was either the same or slanted 1 – 3 points in Biden’s favor.

          1. The presidency is worth trillions of dollars and absolute power to certain parties who have been demonstrating their fanaticism and by-any-means-necessary commitment to seizing that power, who have egregiously and knowingly lied to the public in attempts to frame a new administration and destroy the lives of tens of millions of people.

            Election results – 83% of counties, 17/18 “bellwether” counties, Ohio+Florida+Iowa, 27/27 “toss up” house seats, incumbent gain of 10 million votes going Trump’s way – are internally inconsistent with a Biden victory. Inexplicable counting stoppages in the middle of the night, as Trump was ahead big, in only a few locations followed by massive spikes in favor of Biden are suspicious. Expulsion of poll watchers, refusal to audit software or signatures, censorship by mass media and tech justified as maintaining trust in elections is counterintuitive.

            But there’s no reason to doubt results?

            Do we have a new, never before seen (except in dictatorships) paradigm of voting? Will candidates who campaign tirelessly now lose to those who appear frail and hide away from the public and press? Will we now see all losing candidates appear to win by the end of election night only to lose in the days that follow, while the media holds out on calling states won by several points by the eventual losing candidate and proves prescient by calling, immediately after their polls close, states won by a fraction of a percent? Will all campaign money now be spent in just Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, and maybe Arizona?

            1. ctrl+v this post a couple more times, maybe that will change the fact that SCOTUS just rejected Paxton’s attempt to grovel for a pardon, aka the Texas suit.

              He’ll probably still get the pardon though.

              Gotta love an AG under indictment pulling this shit. It just so perfectly encapsulates Trumpworld.

              Gonna be interesting to see Trumpworld turn on SCOTUS and in particular the new appointees.

            2. This, exactly. It’s not because we believe our institutions are corrupt because a man with a history [of being accused of] telling whoppers said so. It’s plainly evident that there has been huge voter fraud. We’re in a weird kind of Emperor’s New Clothes situation where the fraud is plainly obvious to anyone, but where everyone pretends not to see it because they don’t want to be on the side of the kooky people who get math and don’t agree that “orange man bad” means the ends justify the means.

              We knew the political institutions were horribly, massively corrupt already. It’s what Trump called “the swamp,” and they very much object to having it drained. We know Democrats have long used voter fraud as an electoral tool, from their theft of the presidency for Kennedy to their theft of the senator’s seat for Franken to the theft of the representative seat in Orange County for Loretta Sanchez. Rod Blagojevich (D-IL) commented that voter fraud was a time-honored tradition in Dem politics, a subject he knows well, as a former federal inmate for his corruption.

              It’s not a secret that Dems do this. It’s why they insist on laws that make fraud easy, whether through the normal legislative process or legislation from the bench, as we saw in PA before the election. It’s why that pollster commented that Trump would need to win PA by at least 5% to overcome the voter fraud– which he did, so they stopped the counting, sent the poll watchers home, and when the watchers came back, Biden suddenly had 150,000 more votes, which is quite a lot when you’re not actually counting. Somehow, a ratio of 100:1 for Biden:Trump for that “dump” was kosher, even though it had to happen in the dark of night after they lied and said there would be no more counting until morning. In multiple states, all of which had Trump way ahead, and all of which Biden needed to win. The ratio of votes just before the dump favored Trump by several percent, and so did the ratio afterward. But in the middle, 99% Biden, 1% Trump. Statisically impossible, yet it happened 4 times in one election, and all in those important states Biden needed.

              Seems legit. Biden ended up “winning” the mail-in vote with a total of votes that exceeded the total number of mail-in ballots that had been returned by half a million. Mail-in ballots without folds (they are folded for mailing both ways), with only one candidate marked, very neatly laser printed onto the ballot, with strings of 18,000 where every vote was for Biden, which never happens in actual elections that are not frauds.

              And we’re supposed to trust this was fair because Trump has a habit of sales-puffing bluster (which does not even come close to the kinds of lies Biden told, like how he did not say he wanted to end fracking or fossil fuels, that he did not support the green new deal, that Trump built the cages that the Obama admin he was a part of had built, and that Obama handed Trump a great economy that he trashed). Obama made fun of Trump for promising >3% growth, which Obama never managed, but Trump did. Then COVID came and the Dem governors shut everything down, and accused Trump of only caring about money when he tried to get the economy going. Then they blamed him for the damage they did!

              That’s not “reason” in any manner.

        2. Right, and this is how it was done. The foundations backed by Zuckerberg and others gave very large donations (some in the millions) to election boards in “Hilliary” districts. These were called “safe and secure” and “Count every vote” grants. 99.6 percent of those grants were placed in Hilliary country. As a result, 9 of 10 eligible voter voted. Marvelous and highly unlikely unless there was enough money in certain districts to buy every vote. Which there was.

  3. Meanwhile Biteme’s family is under investigation for fraud corruption tax evasion you name it. Unreported here.

    A member of congress on the intelligence committee was subverted by a Chinese spy. Unreported here.

    GFY

    1. What is really amazing is class shown by Hunter Biden. He did whine or go to court to protect his taxes from review. No, he just stated that he is confident that his taxes are in order and that the government will not find any significant problems. Trump could learn some things from that young man.

      1. “…Trump could learn some things from that young man.”
        1) How to sell political access to the higest bidder
        2) Arranging lines of coke on a hooker’s ass.
        3) Running out on child-support payments.
        I’m sure you could add to the list, M4e; your TDS will help you here.

        1. Nothing wrong with hookers and blow you square! You’ve probably never done come because you’re an inbred square.

          If you have tried it it was probably mostly meth because you live in such a shithole. That’s why you felt addled.

      2. Trump doesn’t have any protection from the state. Biden does.

        1. Trump probably can’t pardon himself. Hunter expects his dad will be president in 6 weeks. He has an almost literal ‘get out of jail free card’ as long as his probably dying soon father doesn’t abandon him.

          1. “Hunter expects his dad will be president in 6 weeks”

            And president FOR 6 weeks, coincidentally.

            1. Biden will never be president but he is rocking that president-elect position.

          2. Trump can resign Jan 19 and have Pence pardon him.

      3. He did whine or go to court to protect his taxes from review.

        Trump’s taxes have been in a perpetual state of “review” by the IRS for the past 10 years. He went to court to keep the IRS from disclosing that information to a state attorney general with no basis for having them.

        Maybe if Trump smoked some crack, fucked some underage girls, spied on the Biden campaign, and used a billion dollars in federal funding to get an investigation of his kid shut down he’d be more respectable, right kiddie fucker shreeky?

    2. Conservatives can not comment on Hunter’s taxes, because if they admit that tax fraud is a crime that should be investigated, then they must admit that Trump can not escape scrutiny also. And it is far more likely that Trump committed tax fraud then Biden.

      As for me, I say investigate them both and follow only the law and the facts.

      1. “Conservatives can not comment on Hunter’s taxes, because if they admit that tax fraud is a crime that should be investigated, then they must admit that Trump can not escape scrutiny also…”

        Trump’s taxes have been examined by just about everyone, and the worst anyone found had to do with him as a RE developer OWED MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!
        Fuck off and die, you lying piece of lefty shit.

        1. Trump’s taxes have not been examined at all because so far they have not been released to anyone (other then the IRS). He stopped the House from getting them, and he has so far stopped New York from getting them, and he has not released them publicly.

          1. Why is is that lying lefty shits lie so transparently?

            “New York Times publishes details of Donald Trump’s tax returns”
            https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/27/new-york-times-publishes-donald-trumps-tax-returns-election

            1. Those were not his tax returns, they were some details from the tax returns. The actual tax returns have not been seen.

              1. I thought some Democrats released Trump’s tax records?

                Trump has a team of professionals do his taxes. Democrats wont find any wrongdoing because there is none.

                NY corrupt prosecutors will have to wait until Trump ends his second term as President in 2025 to pursue these tax allegations.

              2. “Those were not his tax returns, they were some details from the tax returns.”
                I see your claims are always backed by credible cites, lefty shit:
                “…It is even easier to think that the case no longer matters since an anonymous leaker provided the New York Times with the tax returns sought by New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance, and the Times is sharing that information with the public…”
                https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/10/19/trumps-tax-returns-why-the-supreme-court-should-end-things-now/

                1. Maybe the NYTimes does have the taxes, but they have not been released yet, and thus there has not been a full examination of them.

                  1. Or maybe you are a lying ignoramus. One of these possibilities has been proven and it has nothing to do with the NYT.

                  2. So you are going to claim that the governmental agency in charge of reviewing tax returns for accuracy, has had Trumps returns since they were filed, claims that they have been under audit, but yet in some way have never had a full examination???

                    This is trump we are talking about. The man who sold self brand steaks and other goods. Runs casinos, etc. that you are claiming that his tax returns have never been examined……really? Are you an actual moron?

                    1. Full public examination. That has always been the expectation.

                    2. Trump won in 2016 without public release of his taxes and he won the legal vote on 2020 too.

                    3. @MG – do you realize tax information, like health information, is private and skyline never be subjected to a full public review? This is true of both Biden and Trump you idiot.

                      Though if you truly disagree with every cell in your body, feel free to lead the way by publishing all of your tax information on the Internet to ensure the public can give it the full accounting you believe is so richly deserved.

          2. Trump does not do his own taxes, you moron. The likelihood that he ever gets convicted of a tax crime is precisely 0%.

            1. Leonna Helmsley didn’t do her own taxes, either. Her accountants were coerced by threatening to super-audit all of their other clients and tell said clients that it was because they were the clients of said accountants – unless said accountants rolled over on Helmsley.

          3. Trump’s taxes have not been examined at all because so far they have not been released to anyone (other then the IRS).

            LMAO! ‘Aside from being fully disclosed to the largest tax-investigational service in world history for review, they’ve never been reviewed.’

            You realize this undermines your ‘nothing to be investigated’ narrative about the election, right?

            1. Being submitted to the IRS does not mean reviewed. Trump has said they are under audit, but we do not know that for sure.

              1. Poor lefties. 4 years to find something criminal on Trump and lefties are 0-100.

      2. Trump has already been scrutinized. Many times. Even by the public – remember the leaked returns, what? last year? Where no one could find any malfeasance – despite the desperate attempts to?

    3. The same old trump sycophant refrain: “watabout watabout watabout”

      What about the Texas AG’s indictments? What about seven (7!!) of his aides making whistle-blower complaints alleging very specific and serious corruption?

      That is your new chosen protector of daddy Trump , err, I mean FREEDOM! Makes sense.

      1. “What about the Texas AG’s indictments? What about seven (7!!) of his aides making whistle-blower complaints alleging very specific and serious corruption?”

        The same old TDS-infected lefty shits refrain: “watabout watabout watabout”

      2. Hey shreek, remember when you told us that Trump was facing 10 counts of obstruction as a result of the Mueller report that you never actually read when that was a total and complete lie and the report said exactly the opposite?

        1. Yeah, but they got eleventy-seven indictments, a couple of which were not late book returns or unpaid-parking tickets and at least one or two involved people who knew Trump at one time or another!
          I mean how much more ‘evidence’ of Trump’s corruption do you need?

        2. https://apnews.com/article/e0d125d737be4a21a81bec3d9f1dffd8

          Pages 15 to 156 are entirely about obstruction by the president.

          You are lying.

        3. https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

          Pages 15 to 156. Read ’em.

          1. Yep, shame on him for trying to end a corrupt investigation.
            I’m sure YOU”RE convinced!

    4. “Meanwhile Biteme’s family is under investigation for fraud corruption tax evasion ”

      Uh, trump himself is under investigation for the same thing…

    5. Why do you think we care about Swalwell, much less Hunter Biden? Almost everyone here aren’t Democrats, except for Tony. Do you think you’re winning political points by trying to make us defend whatever you think Swalwell and Hunter did?

      Did it never cross your brain that one can dislike Trump and also not support Democrats at the same time? I will be first in line to criticize bad Democrat policies, and if there was corruption it should be prosecuted.

      Biden being the clear lesser of two evils is an indictment on just how bad Trump is. I never felt like it mattered which major party candidate won before this year, where Trump has so trampled the rule of law, limits on executive power, the minimum expectations of competency and leadership and the Constitution that a run of the mill establishment scumbag looks superior.

      1. Believing that Biden is the clear lesser of two evils is an indictment on just how ignorant you can be.

        Biden has promised to take away guns, raise taxes, increase regulation and impose numerous bad policies. Trump did none of those.

        1. And Biden would certainly expand all of the wars the US is involved with. And he’d never, EVER nominate a gold standard person to the Fed board.

          I vote a straight Libertarian ticket. If I were king, I’d put every ex or current president except Carter in jail for the rest of their lives for war crimes. But when I see someone – on a libertarian comment board, no less – say that any establishment politician is better than Orange Man, I just lose my shit.

  4. Oh boy, Reason criticized Republicans. Cue up the hate machine….

    1. You think that’s new?

      1. Which? The criticism of politicians who ignore libertarian principles, or the Conservative Hate Brigade?

        1. Reason criticizing Republicans–you think that’s new or unusual?

          1. No, it’s not. They criticize Democrats too. They even give Trump credit from time to time, and yes on the rare occasions Democrats accidentally do libertarianish stuff they give them credit too. What’s your point?

            1. “They even give Trump credit from time to time, ”

              I agree that they do this…from time to time- even if it is in a “even a blind squirrel gets a nut” manner.

              But their silence on the Abraham Accords is pretty fucking blatant. Extremely blatant. You cannot deny that.

              1. They aren’t covering something you feel to be important, therefore they really believe [insert straw man here].

                You’re sounding a lot like John when he gets a broom up his ass.

                1. The middle east peace deals under any other administration would be the story of the decade and get the president man of the Year on Time magazine’s cover and a Nobel peace Prize.

          2. Just because you guys ignore the articles that are critical of Democrats or give Trump credit when credit is due, it doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

            1. Link one you drunken piece of shit child rapist. What’s it like sticking your cock inside your own daughter you fucking sick piece of shit?

              1. Sounds like someone is projecting. Isn’t that what Trump wanted to do to Ivanka?

    2. The Rs fully deserve it. What they are doing is shameful.

      1. Agreed! Republicans like McCain and Romney knew they lost and graceful gave up after they were nominated to be the Republican presidential candidate. I wish we could return to the old days of the GOP.

      2. Yes, the corruption of the electoral process by the Democrats is shameful.

    3. Just plain broken. Get well man, think you fell off the wagon again.

      1. Yet you still can’t come up with a single post of mine that supports your broken-record claim that I wanted Biden to win the election.

        1. I linked to over a dozen of them about a week ago. You said “Nuh uh, I was being le funny man!” Which would be a great excuse if you were ever funny.

    4. Oh boy, unreason sends in the bots and apologists now that Biden lost.

      If only unreason had opened their eyes to reality, Trump’s second term would have been so easier to swallow.

  5. I honestly do not know how this effort to throw out the votes of millions of Americans does not disturb the hell out of everyone. Even if the legal claims in the Texas briefs are correct (which I am sure they are not), those votes were cast in good faith according to the law that was in place at the time and their intentions were clear. Also these suits were focused only on four states that went Biden but have Republican legislators, but many other states (including Texas) did the same thing that Texas is now claiming is unconstitutional.

    This is an utterly shameful and dark period in American history.

    1. This is what happens when you left TDS run your life; don’t let it happen to you!

      1. The more you know….

        1. In the case of unreason bots, it’s the “Less you know….”

      2. Yea you say that, but it’s pretty clear the derangement syndrome is actually affecting you and all the other dumbfuck fascists who somehow believe everything that comes out of Trump’s mouth.

    2. Thanks, MollyGodiva, for a voice of reason! Currently, large numbers of “R” folks are turning into fascists… They will NOT be content until we have a 1-party “R” state! All of history (and all of current international comparisons) SCREAM at us, that 1-party states do NOT work as well as multi-party states! But try and explain that to hyper-partisan “R” types!

      1. That’s some impressive projection.

    3. throw out the votes of millions of imaginary Americans.

      1. No. They want to throw out votes from real American citizens who voted according the the state law that was considered valid at the time.

        1. Your citations fell off. Illegal ballots are not counted.

          Millions of mail-in ballots are going to be tossed. I told you dum- dums already.

          1. “Millions of mail-in ballots are going to be tossed.”

            Lmao

          2. One of the factors to be considered on an application for injunction is the public interest. That should take into account the reliance interest of those who voted according to the laws and regulations then in place. SCOTUS is unlikely to disenfranchise millions who voted under presumptively valid rules.

            1. Hahha. you funny. No citations for you opinions.

              The scotus ignoring massive election fraud because democrats said they would commit election fraud is not the kind of reliance on “valid” rules we want.

              Alito signaled alignment with thomas. Thats bad for democrats.

        2. “They want to take away the money that Bernie Madoff made under SEC rules that were considered valid at the time…”

        3. It was never considered valid. The dems just didnt think anyone would point it out. Thank god for responsible Texans willing to uphold the constitution.

          1. Ken Paxton is throwing a hail mary because he is a corrupt piece of shit about to get fucked for being corrupt.

            If you want a pardon from Trump, make sure you bring the fireworks when you glom onto his glans.

            1. Poor unreason. Breaking out all the bots who never cite.

              1. Wait…you’re still here? And STILL going on about this like you didn’t just get absolutely, punishingly, convincingly, and unambiguously smoked?

                I’ve been reading every comment on this site for days straight and you were by far the most consistent poster in terms of insisting SCOTUS was going to go for this suit, and that this suit was the big one, the key to victory, etc. and now after this result, delivered as it was, you’re still going to try singing your one-note song?

      2. Still waiting on that evidence.

        1. Trump lost, what other evidence do you need?

        2. poor unreason bots. Only Democrats can give convincing evidence.

          12th Amendment here we come!

        3. Hey shreek, remember yesterday when you said that Vinneman’s sworn testimony in a legal affidavit was not hearsay evidence, but the 3800 and counting affidavits attesting to election fraud were hearsay?

          1. Yes I do.

            You are just pointing out that you don’t know what hearsay means.

            1. Legal affidavits amount to direct testimony which is NOT equivalent to hearsay and you’re an idiot to keep repeating it.

    4. I do not know how not knowing if the election even happened for millions of Americans does not disturb you.

      Sure, they cast their ballots – but were those ballots counted? We don’t know. We can’t know. The voting software was designed to not allow you to know.

      1. Only eight states use electronic voting machines that don’t produce an auditable paper trail. They are TX, LA, TN, MS, KS, IN, KY, and NJ. All but NJ voted for Trump.

        https://ballotpedia.org/Voting_methods_and_equipment_by_state

        So it should be possible to determine if there are millions of votes that were not counted by voting software. It would be time consuming, but you could tally the auditable paper trail by hand.

        1. Indiana DOES have an auditable paper trail.

        2. Except for those 8 states.

          I do not care about who won them. This is not about Trump or Biden.

          It is about the election.

          And there are 8 states where we do not even know if an election was held.

        3. Not everyone in Georgia used the electronic voting machines with paper backups.

          Millions voted by mailin absentee ballot and hundred of thousands voted by paper ballots.

    5. >>cast in good faith

      lol

    6. It was Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s last wish that illegal ballots cast in contravention of state law and the US constitution be counted, after all.

    7. Which is why the entire election should be thrown out and the question sent to the House.

    8. Casting votes in good faith does not by itself make those votes legal or valid. “Effort to throw out the votes of millions of Americans ” is not the narrative here, it is an objection to the clear possibility that vast numbers of votes were “cast” by election workers using names and addresses of dead people, people who had already voted, people who had not actually voted, people who were non-citizens, and many others who were conjured out of thin air. They were not valid votes by well-meaning people. And if genuine votes by well-meaning people in a state where their manner of voting was illegal due to unconstitutional changes made days before the election, that is not on the GOP, it is the fault of cheaters in charge of the election in their state.

      1. There has been no credible evidence produced of any significant voter fraud.

        1. That is a lie, and you are a liar.

        2. The state has the burden that elections follow established constitutional rules and state and federal laws.

          1. Sorry, but the state, in this case being the defendant, has the presumption of innocence like any other defendant as it’s impossible to prove a negative.

            And I say all of this while still believing knowing Trump was a better choice for President than Biden in every conceivable way.

    9. MollyGodiva:: Casting votes in good faith does not by itself make those votes legal or valid. “Effort to throw out the votes of millions of Americans ” is not the narrative here, it is an objection to the clear possibility that vast numbers of votes were “cast” by election workers using names and addresses of dead people, people who had already voted, people who had not actually voted, people who were non-citizens, and many others who were conjured out of thin air. They were not valid votes by well-meaning people. And if genuine votes by well-meaning people in a state where their manner of voting was illegal due to unconstitutional changes made days before the election, that is not on the GOP, it is the fault of cheaters in charge of the election in their state.

    10. Idiot. Those “votes” were NOT cast in good faith, and NOT according to the law/constitution that was in place at the time – that’s the whole point of the suit.

  6. However small the level of credibility that the House Freedom Caucus enjoys, Boehm’s credibility is even lower.

    1. Same as it ever was.

    2. Yup. Unreason staffers were liars before election 2020 and still are.

  7. This is a story about the Republican Party. It isn’t a story about Donald Trump. That horse left the barn 4 years ago.

    Trump is a con-man. Period. Always has been, always will be. What’s new is one of our major parties, the GOP, has embraced all the authoritarian impulses that Trump displays. They said nothing when children were separated from parents, they were mute when Trump instructed his AG to arrest and prosecute his political rivals, they looked the other way when Trump cozied up to every authoritarian leader the world over. And now, when Trump is actively looking to abolish every vote that wasn’t for him, the GOP actually supports the effort.

    So, Boehm, if you’re concerned about all those characteristics a fascist like Trump displays, well, you should know that since it’s been accepted by the entire GOP, it’s here to stay. For the next 4 years, every time Trump screams that the GOP needs to jump, they’ll ask how high. McConnell, Rubio, Cruz, Pompeo, Haley, all of them.

    You actually believed the Freedom Caucus were principled? They’re Republicans, part of the cult.

    1. “This is a story about the Republican Party. It isn’t a story about Donald Trump. That horse left the barn 4 years ago.”

      Jackass is here to prove once again what lying lefty shits believe.

      1. That an article about Republicans is an article about Republicans?

    2. “…They said nothing when children were separated from parents,..”
      Even less when Obama did.

      “…they were mute when Trump instructed his AG to arrest and prosecute his political rivals,..”
      Your lies are lacking cites

      “…they looked the other way when Trump cozied up to every authoritarian leader the world over…”
      You mean when he did statecraft, jackass?

      “…And now, when Trump is actively looking to abolish every vote that wasn’t for him, the GOP actually supports the effort…”
      More lies, same number of cites: Zero.
      Fuck off and die.

    3. Lefties always want to tell Republicans how their party should be.

      For some reason Democrats always think the GOP should give into Democrat violence, corruption, election fraud, voter fraud….

      Poor Lefties. They lost 12+ seats in the House, cant win a majority in the US Senate, and Trump has a second term as President.

    4. >>embraced all the authoritarian impulses

      it’s not even parody.

    5. What made you break out all these ancient socks, shreek? This one, Dajjal. You haven’t used them in years until the election results broke. Did you think everyone had forgotten that dozens of times you outed yourself?

  8. Were there states that used executive fiat to alter election processes that did not swing Biden? I know several states had some sort of change to their process, but I haven’t heard of any that actually swung to or in the very least increased vote tallies in favor of Trump…

    1. Yeah, Texas.

      1. No, see, he was asking about things that actually happened, not your psychotic fever dreams, shreek.

        1. I’m not replying to you, because you are insane. This is for everyone else who might still be rational.

          https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10/08/texas-voting-laws-coronavirus-pandemic/

          1. It doesnt say Texan violated its elections laws. What is your point?

            The issue isnt a change in voting practice, its the direct violation of written election law. Like how WI election law specifically requires vote-drop stations to be monitored, but the election office put up illegal unsecured drop boxes in blue areas. Like how PA law requires signature verification for all ballots, and just before election day the dems declared that ballots could not be rejected for a signature mismatch.

            Really dont know why you raging lefties cant understand the basic facts about why the election stinks.

  9. Reason’s writers are in no place to discuss credibility.

    1. I mean even Robbie faltered yesterday claiming ENB didn’t project victimhood.

    2. Ironic.

      1. “No u”

        HOLY SHIT GOTTEM

  10. I don’t see where the conflict in principles lies. Supporting a judicial review of election results is consistent with a belief in accountable and limited government. Those with libertarian sensibilities should embrace the increasing distrust in federal institutions and the increasing use of checks and balances that is a direct result of that.

    1. “…Supporting a judicial review of election results is consistent with a belief in accountable and limited government…”

      Except when it’s TRUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    2. This is not about judicial review, this is about attacking the credibility of elections. Never in US history has any election had even close to as many suits as this one, and they have been thrown out almost as fast as they are filed.

      1. “This is not about judicial review, this is about attacking the credibility of elections…”

        The left has done a good job of that already.

        1. The left has only wanted all eligible voters to vote. It is the Rs who have had a campaign of disenfranchisement and now a campaign to lie about the last election.

          1. You’re auditioning for a stand-up spot, right?

            1. Wow, a somewhat witty and funny response from Sevo. And without ending it with “Fuck off and die, you lying piece of lefty shit”. Perhaps it is always implied even if not explicitly stated?

              1. It’s always implied. It’s too bad there aren’t any left-leaning sites with un-moderated comment sections. I imagine this place would be a bit quieter if they could go yell at Democrats with the language they use here. They just can’t get that cathartic release without the combination of both Democrats and snarling vitriol, so on it goes at Reason.com.

          2. Even the dead ones.

      2. Other than 2000.

        Also, never in US history has any election had 100% mail in ballots dictated by executive fiat in contravention of the US constitution and state law.

        1. or 2018…or any other time Democrats claimed problems with elections.

      3. Just because the suits have lost so far, doesn’t mean they didn’t have merit.

        “attacking the credibility of elections” hahahahah.

        Does anyone really say that with a straight face?

        1. Obamacare will forever be a SCOTuS where the highest court was 100% wrong on constitutional authority.

          Here is zero authority for government to force an american to buy something,

          If we cant even agree on that basic protection from government overreach we are nearing the end of this Republics life.

  11. “70 percent of Republicans now say they don’t believe the 2020 election was free and fair, a stark rise from the 35 percent of GOP voters who held similar beliefs before the election . . . . Among those who believed that the election wasn’t free and fair, 78 percent believed that mail-in voting led to widespread voter fraud”

    Maybe we should be asking ourselves whether it’s appropriate for House members to reflect the opinions of their constituents in a democracy.

    How credible are representatives who discard and ignore the views of the people they represent?

    I know progressives see politicians as proper elitists whose job it is to inflict policies and opinions on the unwashed masses, but we’re not progressives. There is an appropriate place for democracy in this country, and those who reflect the views of the people they represent probably aren’t in danger of losing their credibility. It’s those who hold the views of the people they represent in contempt that are in danger of losing their credibility.

    Sometimes I wonder how people who loathe democracy in its proper purview can really be pro-market solutions libertarians. After all, the problem with representative democracy is that it’s insufficiently representative and insufficiently democratic. One of the reasons markets are superior is because we can each represent ourselves in a market. If you hold representatives in contempt because they reflect the views of their constituents, how can you claim to be a pro-market solutions libertarian? Market solutions are like representative democracy if it were functioning perfectly.

    1. Here’s the link to that quote:

      “70 percent of Republicans now say they don’t believe the 2020 election was free and fair, a stark rise from the 35 percent of GOP voters who held similar beliefs before the election . . . . Among those who believed that the election wasn’t free and fair, 78 percent believed that mail-in voting led to widespread voter fraud”

      —-Politico

      https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/09/republicans-free-fair-elections-435488

    2. The only reason the 70% believe the election was rigged is because Trump, his cronies, and conservative media has been bombarding them with lies for months. For those same people to now turn around and say that they must follow the beliefs of their constituents is very self-serving. It is the responsibility of elected representatives to be honest to their constituents, and this is where they have failed.

      1. “The only reason the 70% believe the election was rigged is because Trump,..”

        That’s your TDS ranting again, lefty shit. Trump doesn’t have magic powers.

        1. No, but there are tens of millions of Americans who believe anything and everything that Trump says. That is the key to understanding them, once you put that in place, everything else they do follows logically (according to their logic).

          1. So, it’s not his magic, it’s his magic, did I get that right?

          2. Tell us more about Russian collusion and the Mueller indictments, shreek.

          3. You poor delusional pos

          4. You might be an idiot if you believe tens of millions of people can be systematically brainwashed by occasional tweets.

            Do you even fully think through your beliefs before announcing them to others or does your arrogance make you think even fleeting beliefs in your brain to be 100% accurate and always the Truth (TM)?

        2. What ailment is it to be deranged about the prevalence of TDS? DATDS?

      2. I even pointed this out to them before the fucking election. This exact case was predicted by basically every reporter covering the election.

        It is called priming, and it is part of a psy ops campaign.

        DeJoy purposefully slowing the mailed ballots was the operational part of the scheme. Trump’s pre-cognitive claims of future fraud was the messaging.

        What’s hilarious is how transparent the timing of this Texas lawsuit is. Just as Trump’s final lawsuits run out, just as the Kraken disappears under the sea of hair dye and flatulence, a new suit emerges.

        Gotta keep the rube cash flowing. Gotta keep the loyalty pledges current. Must drive out those who are not purely loyal to Trump.

        1. “…It is called priming, and it is part of a psy ops campaign…”

          Still not over the hag losing, right you pathetic piece of lefty shit?

          1. Yeah, calling things a psy ops campaign doesn’t really lend itself to credibility–and, once again, it exposes someone’s contempt for average people and their opinions.

            If House members are reflecting the opinions of their constituents, in a letter that isn’t likely to have any bearing on the outcome of this election, that’s probably an example of democracy in its proper place–regardless of whether this guy holds the opinions of average people in such contempt that he imagines they should be ignored as the outcome of a psy-ops campaign.

            1. Trump has contempt for your intelligence.

              He is a lifelong conman, and you all are his current marks. This is obvious. Just as it is obvious that Heaven’s Gate did not go to a UFO after drinking their flavor aid, it is obvious that Trump has no actual claim to fraud, an does desperately need your cash.

              1. De Oppresso Liber
                December.11.2020 at 1:01 pm
                “…This is obvious…”

                Post bullshit, claim ‘everybody knows it’; a proggy’s best attempt at ‘argument’.
                Are you surprised to find you get laughed at?

        2. Tell us more about Russian collusion and the Mueller indictments, shreek.

        3. “Trump is going to win big on election day, but don’t worry: the next few days enough votes for Biden will be found for him to win.”
          -every msm outlet and dnc politician

          Totes not priming…

        4. Far more likely that Trumps lawyers knew damn well that the Texas suit was coming and Guliani was out in the public eye trying to buy time and delay what certifications they could.

        5. Poor lefties got caught trying to steal an election and thank god for the constitution.

          12th amendment here we come!

      3. “The only reason the 70% believe the election was rigged is because Trump, his cronies, and conservative media has been bombarding them with lies for months.”

        I don’t know how you can claim this without exposing your contempt of average people and their opinions, but I’m willing to listen if you can make a reasonable argument–that it’s possible to be both contemptuous of ordinary people and how they form their opinions and to value their opinions within the proper purview of democracy.

        1. How is it contemptuous of ordinary people to argue they have been lied to and deceived into believing something that simply wasn’t factually true? Has this not happened countless times throughout history?

          In the day and age where we can pick our own echo chamber to reflect the reality we want to believe, it’s not a leap to suggest that grasps of basic reality will start diverging.

          Are not those who accuse people reading and believing the mainstream media of being “sheep” also “contemptuous of average people and their opinions”? They believe they have been graced with the truth and the rest of us are fed lies by some Leftist conspiracy intent on misleading us to buying into their world domination schemes. I’m sorry, but that’s just as condescending.

          1. “How is it contemptuous of ordinary people to argue they have been lied to and deceived into believing something that simply wasn’t factually true?”

            You’re making some big assumptions there.

            The main reason people are so reluctant to accept Biden’s victory is because they’re scared to death of all the terrible things Biden has promised to do to them if he wins. Considering all the awful things Biden has promised to do, they would irrational not to try every avenue to avoid his awful policies.

            Incidentally, the reason people are reluctant to accept the science of AGW is because they’re afraid the solutions Democrats will implement will destroy their standard of living. Once again, under those circumstances, it’s also entirely rational to ignore the science, encourage other people to reject it, and resist the Green New Deal by all available means.

            The idea that people should just bend over and present themselves, their rights, and their standard of living for fucking by Biden’s horrible policies because he won an election is irrational. What they should be doing is attacking his legitimacy at every turn. If Biden didn’t want that, then he shouldn’t have advocated the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and a war on guns like we’ve never seen before.

          2. How is it contemptuous of ordinary people to argue they have been lied to and deceived into believing something that simply wasn’t factually true?

            You’re positing 7/10 Rs can be easily deceived by lawsuits they never read and the occasional tweet, yet you don’t understand how that holds those people’s beliefs in contempt?

            Wow

      4. “The only reason the 70% believe the election was rigged is because Trump”

        Unverified mail in votes were counted in secret. That is enough.

    3. I know progressives see politicians as proper elitists whose job it is to inflict policies and opinions on the unwashed masses,

      this is the best one-sentence description of progressives I’ve ever read

    4. Maybe we should be asking ourselves whether it’s appropriate for House members to reflect the opinions of their constituents in a democracy.

      We are a democratic republic. We use democratic processes to select legislatures, executives, and in some states judges and prosecutors, and then we delegate the functions of government to them, within the bounds of the Constitution (sometime there are also direct referendums). We expect that they’ll govern in a way consistent with what they said while campaigning, but I at least don’t expect them to govern based solely upon the latest opinion poll. If that were the case, we’d be living in a direct democracy by proxy. Rather, I expect them to take the time I don’t have to consider information that I may not have access to, and then make decisions consistent with the Constitution and personal principles that I hopefully agree with. If they don’t, I vote against them.

      1. Do you see the idea that elected representatives should reflect the ideas of their constituents anywhere in Boehm’s piece?

        If instead you see a total disregard of the idea, is it reasonable to suspect the idea never even crossed Boehm’s mind?

        Is disregarding the ideas of your constituents Boehm’s idea of “credibility”? Is elitists inflicting their opinions on the rest of us Boehm’s idea of “democracy”?

        1. I was responding to your question of “whether it’s appropriate for House members to reflect the opinions of their constituents in a democracy”.

          1. Generally speaking, within the proper purview of democracy, it is perfectly appropriate for members of the House of Representatives to reflect the views of their constituents–and yet doing so is considered by Boehm to destroy the last of their “credibility”? Not even a mention of the concept?

            The First Amendment begins, “Congress shall make no law”, and issues of religion, speech, etc. are outside the proper purview of democracy. Issues like taxes, treaties, naturalization policies, and declaring wars have no business being inflicted on the American people without the consent of the their representatives, which is why those powers are both enumerated to Congress and well within the proper purview of democracy. The idea that members of the House of Representatives should hold the views of their constituents in contempt on such matters is odd given that they’re within the proper purview of democracy sand that the purpose of representatives is to represent the voters.

            IF IF IF you believe that House members urging the Supreme Court to do something that reflects the ideas of their constituents is outside the proper purview of democracy or that reflecting the views of the voters by itself means that House representatives have lost the last of their credibility, then you need to make that case–rather than steal a base like Boehm appears to have done.

            A House member urging government officials to do something on behalf of their constituents appears to be well within the purview of democracy–even if you disagree with what a group of representatives’ constituents want. If you disagree with those representatives’ constituents, then the appropriate course of action is persuasion–not denigrating the credibility of representatives for reflecting their constituents’ views. There is no place for elitist authoritarianism in American libertarianism.

            1. I certainly don’t think it’s inappropriate for elected representatives to reflect the views of their constituents (with an exception I’ll get to shortly), and I expect that they will most of the time. I also don’t think it’s inappropriate for elected representatives to not reflect the views of their constituents. Ultimately, I think representatives views’ should reflect their sincerely held beliefs given what they know about a given situation, though they are constrained on acting on their views by the Constitution. Elections should lead to alignment between those sincerely held beliefs of elected officials and the beliefs of a majority of their electorate most of the time. But I am firm in my belief that elected officials should not simply bow to the desires of their constituents simply for the sake of being aligned with the latest polls — again, that’s just direct democracy by proxy.

              The one caveat I alluded to above is when their constituents have views that run counter to the Constitution.

              Is that the case here? It’s debatable. That’s why it’s been referred to SCOUTS.

              If you disagree with those representatives’ constituents, then the appropriate course of action is persuasion–not denigrating the credibility of representatives for reflecting their constituents’ views

              That’s the whole reason I’m here 🙂

              1. I would suggest to you being in Congress is a job and if 7/10 of the people who hired you believe one thing, but you choose to ignore it, you will likely be out of said job at the next possible oppurtunity.

  12. This again is a demonstration of Trump’s real super power, he can corrupt. When we look back on the four years of this administration, how many people will have been corrupted. The Freedom Caucus members will be in good company. How many people knew the President was wrong but simple could not or would not tell him he was wrong. They simple gave in to him.

    1. “This again is a demonstration of Trump’s real super power, he can corrupt…”

      A SCOTUS appeal is ‘corruption’, according to M4e.

      1. Obergefell was tyranny!

      2. These Lefty lunatics are calling judicial review INSURRECTION!

        HAHA.

        The reason that Lefty propaganda outlets had to keep quiet for the last few weeks about election fraud is because they were going to say insane things like this. Now that Trump didnt concede like Lefties wanted and the SCOTUS will decide on Democrat election fraud, the MSM is trying to burn it all to the ground.

        Democrats did the same thing after they lost the election of 1860.

  13. Yea, we went from #Resist and #NotMyPresident and #RussianAgent to “we Democrats totally accepted the legitimacy of Trump’s win in 2016 without question” gaslighting.

    Remember the attempts to get Trump’s electors to vote for Hillary? I do.

    PA Sec of State wants Cruz literally thrown in jail for sedition for, get this friends of “limited government”, being involved in a court case.

    This is why Reason must die.

    1. If journalism can be automated so articles are randomly generated with libertarian buzzwords, I’m sure the Koch’s trust fund can keep Reason afloat ad infinitum

    2. Good… Good… Let the hate flow through you…

      1. Gee, when TDS-infected shits are called on their bullshit it’s HATE, right?

        1. I’d say “This is why Reason must die” qualifies as hate. Wouldn’t you?

          1. Hey remember yesterday when you said the Republican party must die?

          2. “…Wouldn’t you?”
            No.
            Criticizing journalism, even suggesting that the journal go out of business is “hate” only to those hoping someone will buy that as support for their bullshit.

            1. Criticism is one thing. Wishing that people would die is quite another.

              1. Reason is a person? Dear god you are stupid today, or are you reading in a few extra words to build a strawman to argue against?

                1. If Reason isn’t a person, neither are corporations

                  1. In the context of “Reason must die”, Reason is a media company, not a person or persons facing execution.

                    In this context it can also be noted that this has zero impact on how corporations areally treated in a court of law.

                    Conflating the two is purposely obtuse. Or maybe you’re just stupid. Possibly a bit of both.

                    In any case, your comment is both off topic and legally inaccurate.

      2. Coming from the sockpuppeting piece of subhuman shit alcoholic who sticks his dick inside his own daughter and spends 16 hours a day raging impotently at Reason.com about the Trumpistas hiding under his bed while he cuts a hole in his face diaper just big enough to allow him to lick Democrat jackboots.

    3. If you don’t like libertarian opinions, why are you wasting your time here?

      And what does whatever the Democrats believe or not have to do with Reason? Reason laughed at Democrats claiming the Trump victory was a Russian conspiracy: https://reason.com/2019/07/31/the-puny-reality-of-russian-election-meddling/

  14. You know, when you find yourself in disagreement with someone whose opinions you value, a little humility might lead you to question your own beliefs rather than simply assuming your faith in them was misplaced all along. It may be that the Freedom Caucus is more pragmatic than you are, that they realize the choice isn’t between supporting Trump and supporting Jesus Christ and All The Angels Of Heaven, but that the choice is between supporting Trump or sitting by and allowing the Democrats to win.

    1. Or they may be representing the views of the people they represent.

      Meanwhile, there is virtually no chance that their petition will actually overturn the election results.

    2. ” a little humility” would allow them to write headlines not oozing with either sneering contempt(i.e. Trumps judicial humiliation) one day and then immediately pivot to hysterical screaming the next day (i.e. trashed what little credibility they had left)

      Its exhausting, although still preferable to how the media will be for the next Democrat administration

    3. Trump already lost the election. Their choice is between supporting Trump and supporting the Constitution. And they made their choice and the Constitution lost. Overturning an election is about as un-American as it gets.

      1. Supporting the constitution kinda requires punitive action against the states who blatantly violated the constitution by making election rules outside of the legislature as the constitution requires, shreeky.

      2. “…Their choice is between supporting Trump and supporting the Constitution…”

        Baseless lefty assertions; between those and outright lies, it’s all MG has.

    4. Sitting by and allowing the Democrats to win is exactly what they should be doing. They should respect the will of the people who voted for the Democratic candidate. Trying to overturn election results because you don’t like them isn’t democracy, it’s fascism.

      1. “…Trying to overturn election results because you don’t like them isn’t democracy, it’s fascism.”

        Yes, and when someone does that, please left us know.

        1. Ok. THEY ARE DOING IT NOW!!!!!!!

          1. Hint to lying lefty shits:

            “THEY ARE DOING IT NOW!!!!!!!”

            Assertions from lying lefty shits =/= argument nor evidence, and as I look back up thread, every one of your lies has been demolished by evidence.
            So when your mommy says you have credibility, she’s lying just like you.

            1. Given the importance you place on evidence I am assuming you will admit the lack of evidence of voter fraud means we had a clean election.

              1. Hint to lying lefty shits:
                Assertions from lying lefty shits =/= argument nor evidence, and as I look back up thread, every one of your lies has been demolished by evidence.
                So when your mommy says you have credibility, she’s lying just like you.

          2. No, they are not shreeky.

            Remember the time you posted kiddie porn and welched on your bet?

      2. Name checks out

      3. Contesting the unconstitutional actions of states who violated their own election laws and the US constitution is fascism. We must studiously respect the results of the election that were fabricated on the basis of those unconstitutional actions.

        Kill yourself you mindless cunt.

    5. The choice is to support Trump, or to support republican government with democratically elected representatives.

      They picked Trump over liberty.

      1. Hint to lying lefty shits:
        Assertions from lying lefty shits =/= argument nor evidence, and as I look back up thread, every one of your lies has been demolished by evidence.
        So when your mommy says you have credibility, she’s lying just like you.

      2. Hey shreeky, remember when the Democrats passed around these talking points 2 weeks before the election took place and now you regurgitate them 50 times a day here despite your claim that you only stop by a couple of times a month?

    6. “allowing the Democrats to win” = “letting the people pick their own president as the Constitution lays out.”

      If there was outcome-determinative fraud, the burden of proof is on the GOP, which the last I checked, was getting laughed out of even conservative courts.

      Oh but tell me more about how the Georgia Trump-supporting Secretary of State was all in on the conspiracy to help Biden win Georgia and let fraud go unpunished…

  15. The literal stupidity of this screed is astounding. Members of Congress are free to express their political opinions. They are within their rights to ask for a review of their states election laws and procedures. They are representing their constituents. Making some dumbass claim that it’s a loyalty pledge to Trump without evidence is ludicrous.

    I strongly suspect reasons editors are trying in vain to avoid being sent to the deplatform gulag after democrats take power.

    1. The only stupidity I see is people interpreting any and all criticism of Trump and/or Republicans as being communist in origin.

      1. “Everywhere I look I see exactly what I’m looking for!”

        Go fuck your daughter some more you sick alcoholic subhuman piece of shit. How does it actually feel sticking your fucking dick inside your own flesh and blood you psychopath?

        1. That’s what Trump wants to do?

    2. They are not looking for review of state election laws and procedures, they are looking to throw out the legal votes of tens of millions of voters.

      1. Cite missing. Again.

        1. Read the fucking filing.

          1. Fuck you.
            Back your claim.

          2. Lol. Shreeky forgets which sock he’s operating and replies as De Oppresso Liber instead of MollyGodiva.

  16. “The House Freedom Caucus Just Trashed What Little Credibility It Had Left”

    No. Eric Boehm and Reason trashed what little credibility they had left.

    The House Freedom Caucus is far more libertarian than Reason writers and editors.

    1. Exactly. Reason needs to be more like Fox News. We can’t have criticism of Republicans in this publication, it’s bad for America and Liberty.

      Only Democrats do unlibertarian things. Republicans used to, then they embraced Trump libertarianism.

      To criticize Trump is to criticize liberty. If you hate Trump, you can’t be a libertarian.

      Facts, not opinion.

      1. I hate the ‘no true Scotsman’ libertarians, but if you cannot see the good libertarian things Trump did, things Biden will make much, much worse, then you need to check your premises on being a libertarian.

        And as far as I’m aware, a bunch of Congress critters writing a strongly worded opinion paper, has zero impact on the overall functioning of government is mostly meaningless.

  17. . . . to overturn the presidential election

    Boehm, Dominion software is unauditable. We do not even know *if* we’ve actually had an election.

    I’d be saying this even if Trump won.

    The facts on the ground are that most Republicans and a significant majority of Democrats do not trust this election. Given that, the response should not be ‘sit the fuck down and shut up’. This is, after all, a democracy. Meaning you need to take into account the desires of the whole demos, not just run roughshod over them because they’re in your way.

    1. The Republican AG of Georgia said the election results are legitimate, same with the AG of Arizona and Trumps appointed AG said his department has not uncovered any evidence of widespread fraud.
      Biden won, fairly, acknowledge it.

      1. Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point I am making.

      2. James Clapper said there was no domestic spying program. The NSA does not spy on American citizens. Acknowledge it.

    2. Only eight states use electronic voting machines that don’t produce an auditable paper trail. They are TX, LA, TN, MS, KS, IN, KY, and NJ. All but NJ voted for Trump.

      https://ballotpedia.org/Voting_methods_and_equipment_by_state

      1. You are assuming the paper trail created by the electronic voting machines is accurate.

        1. I am not. Voters either fill out the paper ballots by hand themselves, or have an opportunity to verify the accuracy of the machine-printed ballots, before they are fed into the electronic scanners to be tabulated. So the voters themselves check the accuracy of the paper trail.

          1. Your ditations always fall off.

            Millions of georgians voted by mailin absentee ballots and hundreds of thousands voted on paper ballots without a machine.

      2. Indiana is incorrectly on your list.

      3. Your response ignores what I wrote.

    3. Maybe Republicans should have voted for voting machine integrity legislation when Democrats brought it up. Maybe they shouldn’t have put their grubby fingers all over the process in myriad efforts to cheat at every opportunity. Democrats have been trying to make elections more secure and more fair for years, and Republicans resist at every turn because they don’t want it secure or fair. This is not breaking news.

      Are you treasonous cunts whining so hard because of how certain you were that you cheated enough to win?

      Next time try someone not quite so revolting as Trump. Try someone who can manage not to get his entire family and administration infected with disease. All you have to do is win the electoral college. You don’t even have to get the most votes to do that.

      1. Poor lefties.

        12th amendment here we come.

  18. . . . which hinges on the unprecedented claim that one state should be allowed to challenge how other states handle elections.

    I mean, that’s one way to look at it.

    The other way is that its challenging state’s authority to change their elections in ways other than IAW their own laws. You know, that ‘rule of law’ stuff.

    And let’s not pretend that the states are autonomous units, completely independent of each other. Who that damn president is *matters* because of the constant shifting of power into that office. And the things he mandates or forbids are applied to the whole country. Its one thing if Pennsylvania wants to make some shitty rule to oppress its own people. Its another thing when Pennsylvania wants the federal government to make that rule – to ensure no one can get away from the oppression by moving.

  19. Usually the rats don’t clamber ON to the sinking ship.

  20. “Eric Boehm Just Trashed What Little Credibility He Had Left.” Fixed that for you.

  21. REASON IS LEFT WING PROPAGANDA!
    Stop pretending to be libertarians or journalists! You are neither!

    1. That’s funny. One of the CoFounders of the actual Libertarian Party comments over at Volokh. If anyone can be arbiter over a real libertarian tribunal, I’d think it would be him.

      Here’s his take on these lawsuits:

      https://reason.com/volokh/2020/12/10/are-some-of-the-state-attorneys-general-supporting-the-texas-election-suit-getting-cold-feet/#comment-8628936

      1. >>over a real libertarian tribunal, I’d think it would be him

        then why aren’t you there?

      2. “…If anyone can be arbiter over a real libertarian tribunal, I’d think it would be him…”

        Yep, appeal to authority is SOOOOOOOOOOO convincing.
        To lying lefty shits…

      3. The party that gave you Gary “What is a leppo” Johnson, who then endorsed gun confiscation, a national VAT, compulsory cake baking, “humanitarian” wars, and whose VP endorsed Hillary Clinton is certainly the final arbiter of libertarianism.

        Hey shreek, remember the time you posted kiddie porn here and got banned? That was a couple of years after you welched on your bet.

      4. You just do not understand what *libertarian* means, do you?

        1. It means anti-leftist

          1. When leftist includes Biden’s Green New Deal, gun confiscation, and many other decidedly anti-libertarian policies, then yes, it’s anti-leftist.

            Libertarian also meant anti-right when Bush pushed for multiple unending foreign wars, TARP, the Patriot Act, and other policies.

            That’s what it means to follow principles over princi pals .

  22. If the fraud occurred, then all these legislative and judicial actions are reasonable.

    1. But the fraud did not happen.

      1. Explained the troll

      2. That might be true, but none of us know that. That’s my point.

      3. The fraud claims are seriously troubling. Are they true? None of us can determine that from our living rooms reading the computer screen, but it’s possible these claims are true. It’s also possible they are all entirely fabricated, or exaggerated, or true but irrelevant, or just the result of confusion.

        however, if the fraud is real, then these actions are NOT an example of unconditional fealty to a president’s bizarre, flailing attempt to hold onto power for its own sake over the Constitution and rule of the law.

        1. Sullum knows. Totes. Root too. Boehm would bet the casa.

        2. How many times do their claims have to be dismissed in courts for lack of evidence before it’s OK to tell the American people who won the election? 50? 60?

          Defend extraordinary unprecedented interference in the transition of the presidency on its merits, whatever those might be. Don’t say we have no choice.

          1. >>How many times do their claims have to be dismissed in courts

            which courts have mattered yet?

          2. Not dismissed for lack of evidence – for lack of standing, a notoriously subjective quality which usually means that the judge is too lazy or chicken-shit to hear the case.

      4. When you wish upon a star…

      5. “But the fraud did not happen.”

        Ballots were not verified.
        Votes were counted in secret.

        Why do this if you are not doing something sneaky?
        Why the stonewalling of investigations if there was no fraud?

  23. Trumps best shot is AG lawsuit from what I can tell. Unfortunately for him he spent too much of his efforts on the likes of Guiliani and Powell who have been unpersuasive at best and down right clownish at worst.

    1. Or…perhaps guliani and powell were doing exactly what was needed. Attract the press focus, delay certifications as long as possible, build support, and rattled the trees for witnesses and whistleblowers, while the real lawsuit was being careful crafted.

      Does anyone really think trumps team didnt know about what Texas was working on? Lol

      1. I’m sure Paxton definitely want to Trump proposing to murder the last pretense of GOP Federalism in favor of a personal pardon for his criminal behavior.

    2. Guiliani oversaw the lawsuits in over 6 states that documented election fraud.

      Texas vs GA et al was not the 1 case the SCoTUS will hear but one of them is. Alito signaled alignment with thomas and alito was the only justice I was unsure about to decide against democrat election fraud.

  24. Anyone who doesn’t understand the legitimacy of the Texas suit simply doesn’t know what the word “integrity” means.

  25. After flagging everything by Tulpa and lc, the conversations become almost readable.

    1. “When I only talk to my sockpuppet accounts it’s much easier to read while I stick my dick in my daughter’s pussy after downing my 2nd quart of Jack Daniels before 10 AM”

    2. Real original too, after everyone has been saying the same thing about you and Mikey Sqrls for 2 months. Lol.

    3. It’s quite the job being that Tulpa drops turds like a deer.

    4. the judo plan.

    5. Poor sarcasmic. He cant stand the truth, so tries to censor my supported comments.

      Drunks tend to do that..ignore reality.

      Unreason staff are funny that way.

  26. Not sure how much credibility it had to begin with when the guy leading it is the one who stood idly by and let a rapist rape a bunch of kids.

    Called Gym Jordan for a reason. Scum of the earth.

    1. “Not sure how much credibility it had to begin with when the guy leading it is the one who stood idly by and let a rapist rape a bunch of kids.”

      Given that you are rarely other than a lying piece of lefty shit, I’ll assume this is a lie unless you provide some evidence.

  27. When you ask a progressive why the white, blue collar, middle class of the Midwest thinks the Democratic party hates them so much, the progressive in question will typically change the subject to why the white, blue collar middle class of the Midwest should be hated.

    Above, when I pointed out that Boehm, apologists for Biden, and the Democrats appear to be faulting these Republican representatives in the House for not holding the opinions of their constituents in contempt, the arguments coming back all seem to be about why the opinions of average people should be held in contempt.

    We probably shouldn’t be arguing with these people about the validity of the election if the ultimate source of their problem isn’t that they don’t understand the facts and what they mean (although that’s part of the problem). If the ultimate source of the problem is that they hold the opinions of their fellow Americans in contempt, then that’s probably what we should be addressing.

    And, yes, I hold the opinions of elitist progressives in contempt. Did you know that there isn’t an elitist progressive in the world who know more than the collective wisdom of average consumers reacting to market signals? It’s true! Their reluctance to accept the election results is also entirely rational–considering all the awful things Biden is promising to do to their rights and their standard of living once he becomes president.

    1. Despite what Fox news and talk radio claim, Obama’s presidency wasn’t the end of the world. Biden’s won’t be either. Take a sedative. It’s gonna be ok.

      1. Did you have a point regarding the issue, or just asinine claim to cultural superiority?

        1. Yeah. The sky isn’t falling. Chill out Mr. Little.

          1. If the Democrats win both races in Georgia, you don’t think they’ll pursue their agenda to the best of their ability?

            Didn’t you admit that the Democrats will bail out the states if they can just this morning?

            1. Obamacare wasn’t permanent. Marijuana will be coming off Schedule I within a decade. Settle down. It’s not the end of the world.

              1. are those the only things that you care about?

              2. Obamacare wasn’t permanent because of the Republicans.

                1. What’s your point?

                  1. The idea that it doesn’t matter whether the Democrats or the Republicans are in charge is not well supported by the observation that the Republicans undermined ObamaCare.

                    P.S. The expansion of Medicaid, which was probably the worst thing about ObamaCare, remains in place–and will probably never go away.

                    1. Sarcasmic’s point is that neither party’s control of government is so solid that they can make drastic and irreversible changes, because the other party will undermine them.

                    2. And yet the Republicans failed to kill the Medicaid expansion that was the biggest part of ObamaCare.

                      P.S. Sarcasmic’s comments on this subject aren’t limited to what he’s said today in this thread.

      2. Whether or not it will be ok does not matter; the people of the fruited plain chose a man who will be 80 halfway into his first (hopefully last) term . It certainly won’t be good; it’s probably going to be ok. He’s an old man with little political capital, and the President is not a God-King.

        In a rational world, or a normal election year, Biden had no chance of becoming president. Except he had the good fortune to run against Trump, as Trump had to good fortune to run against Clinton. Maybe in 2024 one of the parties will put forth a candidate someone has some enthusiasm for.

        1. Trump lost because of the pandemic and the lockdowns.

          1. Trump lost because he is Trump, same reason Hillary Clinton lost. They’re unlikeable, unsympathetic people. Clintons great sin is abuse of power; Trumps is being a crude, ignorant man. Both show contempt for the Constitution.

            1. No, any incumbent with the country closely divided could’ve lost because of the pandemic and lockdowns. The president got the blame for things that were done either stupidly or spitefully by governors of the opposite party. People out of work blame the president. Ken Schultz 10 months ago said the virus was the only thing that could unseat Trump.

              1. There has never been a time when more Americans have lost more jobs over a shorter period of time than what happened in 2020. It is unreasonable to expect a sitting president to keep his seat under those circumstances. That Trump did as well as he did is amazing considering that.

                1. It’s perfectly reasonable when it’s Donald Trump, the greatest President we’ve had for decades.

                  Your pushing the narrative that Trump legit lost the election. You have no idea how suspicious that makes you sound.

          2. He didn’t lose. He won.

            Everybody is just pretending he lost, from the courts on down.

            Funny, you seemed like a smart commentator to me until you made that remark.

    2. Ken, I never need to read far into your exhaustive essays to find a bad assumption upon which you rest your entire fallacy.

      “Above, when I pointed out that Boehm, apologists for Biden, and the Democrats appear to be faulting these Republican representatives in the House for not holding the opinions of their constituents in contempt, the arguments coming back all seem to be about why the opinions of average people should be held in contempt.”

      Those fly over state opinions which freedom-loving americans are so derisive of were not arrived at independently. They were led to that conclusion by Trump and the gang.

      To put into terms the trump fans will understand: Trump farts, then suggests the smell must be that democrats have taken a shit.

      Again, I pointed out the priming well before the election. How else do you explain Trump’s crystal ball prediction of wide spread fraud? Especially since it turns out he has no evidence of that.

      Or why he and his attorneys spout off about fraud in front of reporters, but quietly assert that their cases are not fraud complaints in front of judges?

      Enjoy being psy op’ed, I guess.

      1. The same reason sleepy Joe said they had the biggest vote fraud team in place?

      2. But you don’t know that. You can’t know that.

        The fraud claims are there. Maybe these things happened, maybe they didn’t.

        But YOU certainly have no idea whether they did or not. None whatsoever.

      3. Most people in all states don’t watch a great deal of news, don’t spend hours daily on twitter, and certainly don’t know the last few things uttered by President Trump or even who the new SCOTUS justice is….yet you believe 7/10 Rs have been brainwashed.

        That’s honestly laugh out loud funny if it weren’t for the fact it proves you’re delusional.

    3. It’s those mean elitist progressives’ fault that Republican congressmen have to lie to their constituents about who won the presidential election!

      They have no rational choice but to fuel sedition and distrust in government, liberal elites differed in opinion from them! It’s not fair!

      You’re so goddamn weak it makes me sad. You said it yourself pretty much. You aren’t against elites. You are here absurdly worshiping at the feet of a man with gold toilets for god’s sake. When you say elite you mean educated. That’s what this is all about. People who can’t keep up with modernity lashing out.

      If you can’t handle a normal transition of power, as is essential to a functioning free society, then you can take all your projection and sad cultural anxieties and stew in them from inside a cage. Republicans are trying to destroy the United States. I’m terribly sorry liberals are smarter than you. Try less whining and more reading.

      1. >>normal transition of power, as is essential to a functioning free society

        cute.

      2. Smarter? LOL! You’re definitely more ignorant. The presidential election isn’t until the 14th. No one votes for the President except the electors. The vote on the 3rd was to choose those electors. What an ignoramus.

        1. I’ve been gaslit by far better than you. Why are you normalizing completely abnormal and unprecedented behavior? Is it because you were born yesterday and don’t realize that the election is always decided when the votes are counted? Do you think Election Day is a frivolous waste of time?

          I get that you’re implying a threat that the election could still be stolen by some legal shenanigans or another, but is the real point so that you can just do it all over again next time, hopefully with less of an obvious outcome? That in addition to the affirmative action the Electoral College gives Republicans, they also deserve to win close elections that can be more or less plausibly rigged on the back end?

          Stop cheating and stealing.

      3. If you can’t handle a normal transition of power, as is essential to a functioning free society…

        Apologies if you have proof you’ve already shared, but can you please share who is taking what concrete steps to prevent Biden from taking office (with the understanding that having beliefs and sharing them with others doesn’t constitute a concrete step unless the ideas being shared have something to do with violent armed offensives)?

  28. if the GOP wants to ever be taken seriously by those not worshiping at the alter, this is 106 people you need to kick off the ballot in the primaries in 2 yrs……….

    1. Assertions from TDS-infected shits =/= evidence or argument.

      1. PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple HGF work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…. Visit Here

      2. be a brain dead lemming all you want……. these people are supporting an open attempt to overturn a legal election….. if that becomes what your party stands for, you are fucked.

        1. They don’t believe it was a legal election.
          Half the country doesn’t believe it was a legal election.
          That is the point they’re making.
          And your responses to questions of whether it was a legal election indicate that it was not.

          1. Doesn’t matter if it was legal or not.

            What matters is stopping Biden from getting the White House.

            I’m perfectly willing to back a coup to keep that from happening.

            The ends justify the means.

            1. How can one make this comment and then be taken seriously in any discussion about fairness or about who cheats?

        2. We get it you are a worshiper of Beiging Biden or whatever face the Demovrats shove in front of you. You are the one in support of open corruption and fraud but we should just accept your propaganda as truth. Fuck off, eat a bullet you evil piece of shit.

        3. >>a legal election

          lolnope

        4. A legal attempt to overturn an election.
          FIFY

    2. lol – I doubt they’ll face any such challenges if they continue to support what 7/10 of their party voters want.

      Damn you’re dumb.

  29. I wonder if Nixon and Gingrich and Ailes and Murdoch and Rove and all the ratfucking psychopaths behind the annihilation of the Republican party realized what they were creating, specifically. Did they unite evangelicals, militia terrorists, corporate money, libertarians, and white supremacists without wondering if some day from that crucible would come a fairly standard, if vast, fascist cult movement?

    Nixon consolidated the racists to oppose civil rights, a power calculus that paid dividends for more generations than even anticipated. They’re still running against the welfare queens, after two near-depressions. That’s thanks to the other wildly successful power center of FOX News, which by now can tell people there are unicorns on Uranus and the sheep automatically believe it. Pity about the election. They couldn’t lie about that. Well, not the news department.

    Gingrich decided that the best way to govern was to seek power at all costs and destroy the opposition not just at the ballot box but to mash their faces in the dust, and forget about policy in favor of power. Now Republicans have power and not even a policy platform. You can’t write this.

    No way they predicted Trump. They might have thought a strongman would come along to take advantage of this perfect storm of faith-based anti-democratic constituents, rightwing propaganda, and corporate money. That it would end up being Trump is the absurdist cherry on top of this pointless and destructive exercise in power. America will be gone if Republicans ever win again, and it was all for extraction industry profits. And now Mr. Koch is saying oops. Fuck me.

    1. >>Nixon consolidated the racists to oppose civil rights

      lolwut? did you misspell Strom Thurmond?

    2. America will be gone if Republicans ever win again

      The office of President is not a Kingship, Tony. Time to take your chill pills.

      1. Yet…

        An outgoing president spied on his successor and tried to frame him for completely fictional crimes.
        He stayed in DC and continued directing his party and media organs. He orchestrated the nomination of his former Vice President to oust the successor he’d been thus far unsuccessful in stopping, then hand picked “the nominee’s” choice for running mate – a woman who’d previously implied that candidate was a racist rapist.
        His associates in government, tech, and media worldwide fomented viral hysteria through misinformation, racial tension/grievance, and suppression of dissenting voices.
        Through massive funding, mass message coordination, and fundamental changes to the electoral process, not to mention the possibility of targeted or widespread fraud, his former VP and chosen candidate looks poised to be installed in power – and is filling his presumptive administration with the former president’s mandarins and minions.

        It will be, already is to a degree (as can be seen in election data and coverage/response), dictatorship… but not Kamala’s.
        She is simply an instrument – one might say: a mask.

    3. Tony, fat drunk and stupid is not a good way to go through life, we’ve told you this before. Also your new sock below is tedious.

    4. How pathetic is your life that you spend so much time commenting on a site you don’t even like.

    5. Corporate money? How do the Democrats continue to get funded 2 or 3 to one by special interest wall street corporate money and the left’s ally the fake news media still convince a lefty Republicans are taking corporate money? Why are lefty’s so angry all the time? More then likely it is the result of doublethink. Doublethink is a process of indoctrination whereby the subject is expected to accept as true that which is clearly false, or to simultaneously accept two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in contravention to one’s own memories or sense of reality.
      In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values; or participates in an action that goes against one of these three, and experiences psychological stress because of that.
      Stop clinging to the propaganda you have been indoctrinated with and just accept the truth you see and know.

  30. Hey trump humpers, buy a MyPillow, it’s best at absorbing excess tears!

    1. “trump deserves a day in court” – Letitia James

    2. So you’re saying you cry into your pillow at night?

      Anyway nice sock there Tony.

    3. Poor unreason bots. They give me more tears since they represent unreason staffs tears too.

      I have to filter out the unreason pants shitting that took place over the last four days,

  31. This is like complaining about the refs when your favorite football team just lost 49-10. Even if there were a few irregularities, Biden OBVIOUSLY won the election. This Kabuki theater will hurt the GOP in the long run.

    1. I just looked at the statistics of the election and can’t figure out how it was like a 49 to 10 football game or obvious Biden won. The popular vote is skewed because Biden won over 5 million more votes in California. The other million is from NYC and a few other leftist enclaves in big cities. It would have only taken reducing ten thousand vote for Trump and adding 10 thousand for Biden in Wisconsin out of 3.3 million votes cast, about 5 thousand each out of over 3 million in Arizona, about 5 thousand each out of over 5 million cast in Georgia. In Nebraska Biden won one electoral vote by getting more votes then Trump in the 2nd congressional district even though the Republican, Rep. Bacon, won it big. Winning by less then 30 thousand votes out of over 150 million votes nation wide is not a 49-10 win but more like a win by field goal in overtime. Biden was losing until after election night.

  32. Thought Exercise:

    Suppose you’re a libertarian, and you believe that a particular legal challenge to the actions of a powerful government dedicated to “progressivism” lacks merit. How do you respond?

    A. Say nothing.
    B. Talk about a different subject, such as the merits of libertarianism, the problems with progressivism, or the danger of the state having so much power.
    C. Repeatedly write articles defending the great and noble integrity of the powerful government and praise the “progressives” as holders of a moral high ground.

  33. This made me laught. The idiots that filed the motion in Texas can’t even spell the word ‘Temproary’ Fucking idiots.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163367/20201210142206254_Pennsylvania%20Opp%20to%20Bill%20of%20Complaint%20v.FINAL.pdf

    1. *laugh. Damn missing edit button

    2. What is really a joke is you think the people filing the claim wrote it and not a clerk. If I wrote what you did I would be embarrassed and feel like what you called them.

      1. What is really a joke is that the attorneys that filed the motion couldn’t even be bothered to read the first page and notice a glaring typo, regardless of who typed it. They should be embarrassed to send something like that to SCOTUS. I make typos all the time here, but it’s just idiots like you that reads them, so who gives a fuck?

        1. Lefties try to deflect that alito signaled alignment with thomas by harping on typos? Gonna be more unreason pants shitting these next 5 weeks.

  34. I have no idea who Eric Boehm, the author of this article is but I have to wonder how much evidence he has actually looked at. Apparently these Republicans believe they are following the law as do the 18 states signing on to the case. Upholding the law is making sure if this election was fraudulent if nothing else enough pressure will be put on the Democrats to prevent a future repeat. If President Trump did win enough legal votes to be elected again that is what the Supreme Court should decide. If there are illegal ballots that have been counted there needs to be some recourse and rewarding the Democrats with a win is not it. Saying members of Congress who can challenge the Electoral College votes have no say in the election is ridiculous. If a state is found to be cheating during an election of course it affects all other states and nullifies the legal votes of the states citizens. Anything that changes the outcome of federal elections affects all states. It is possible Democrats did not cheat in this election but it is not probable. For Joe Biden to win in just the counties he needed to and President Trump to do better then he did in 2016 in all other counties is not logical. I am still stuck on the idea President Trump won more votes by far then any other candidate in history and Biden won 6 million more. If an election is going to be fraudulent it takes a lot of illegal ballots in just the right counties to pull it off and that appears to be what occurred in this election. Using the popular vote to convince anyone Biden won is asinine. He won over 5 million more votes in California.

    1. What do we get to do to prevent Republicans from attempting a coup again? Why are Republicans the only ones allowed to cheat?

      1. Democrats can try to coup president trump during his second term as president. That worked so well for democrats before.

  35. Looks like the lizard people got to the Supreme Court. Texas has no standing to tell other states how to conduct their elections? What sort of twisted legal mumbo jumbo is this?

    What’s next? Is this just another move in ACB’s eleventy dimensional chess game? Or is it time to stand back and stand by for orders from Il Douchey?

    I’m usually mild mannered and favor calm negotiations, but I am behind the move not to seat any of the congressmen who signed off on this. The constitution compels it. You don’t let children get away with treason and then keep playing their X Box like nothing happened.

  36. What if Eric Boehm is wrong?

    1. Eric is a dumdum so he is always wrong.

      1. You can generally assume that about anyone who dislikes the Republican Party, the party of the good guys

  37. I really can’t understand why any of these people are staying loyal to Trump when it’s clear that the voters have rejected him. You’d think they would be looking to distance themselves from this disaster of a president.

  38. I didn’t vote for Trump, but anyone who claims there aren’t MAJOR problems with this election has surrendered his credibility. No person honest with himself could accept that Biden win this election “fair and square.”

    1. I find it hard to believe that so many people could vote for Trump given what a historical shitshow his reign of terror was. And Republicans cheat at elections flagrantly and openly. So how about we let them keep their house seats and we’ll call it yet another fair deal in which Republicans get all the affirmative action.

      People who get an electoral college bias don’t get to whine about cheating unless they have evidence.

      1. Tony always has citations fall off.

  39. I remember a time when Reason wrote mostly about issues of government interfering in our lives – and this usually addressed the social conservative tendencies of the right, the progressive/socialist tendencies of the left and the war mongering of both.

    Now it seems that Reason is largely a vehicle for trump derangement syndrome – so much so that gone are Trump’s accomplishments, such as ending wars, peace in the middle east, and gone are most criticisms of what the Democrats want to do to our country.

    Like or hate Trump, anyone who doesn’t think this election stinks is blind. Reason used to support the concept of verification of identity when voting, but now it is apparently okay to mail ballots in with little or no verification. Reason has definitively changed. I’m guessing that it will take a year or two of the US being royally screwed by the Democrats for reason to return to reason.

    1. Speculation has it that a big donor paid them to take a sharp left turn.

      “We did not create the tea party. We shared their concern about unsustainable government spending, and we supported some tea-party groups on that issue,” Mr. Koch wrote in an email . . .

      Mr. Koch said he has since come to regret his partisanship, which he says badly deepened divisions. “Boy, did we screw up!” he writes in his new book. “What a mess!”

      Mr. Koch is now trying to work together with Democrats and liberals on issues such as immigration, criminal-justice reform and limiting U.S. intervention abroad, where he thinks common ground can be found. He has partnered with organizations including the LeBron James Family Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union and even a handful of Democratic state legislative campaigns.

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/charles-koch-says-his-partisanship-was-a-mistake-11605286893

      1. Or maybe listen to the point the Randian superhero is trying to make.

      2. My hope is now that is looks like Biden will be president (the oddsmakers give Biden 93% likelihood to be the new president) Reason will return to libertarianism instead of TDS.

        As for Mr. Koch, if he’s thinking “his partisanship was a mistake” that “badly deepened divisions”, he seems to be forgetting that it takes two to tango, and the political establishment has been deepening divisions for decades by imposing more government upon us and blaming the other party. You don’t get rid of the school bully by giving him your lunch money today, because he’ll also expect your lunch money tomorrow.

      3. “immigration, criminal-justice reform and limiting U.S. intervention abroad”

        Mr Koch is an enemy of liberty. He has always been an enemy of liberty.

        Immigration threatens liberty. Fact.

        Criminal-justice reform threatens liberty. Fact.

        Limiting US intervention abroad threatens liberty. Fact.

        1. None of the things you mentioned are a threat to liberty. In fact, all are useful for liberty as has been plainly obvious in US history.

          1. The problem is that we hear some of these terms and we imagine they mean what we want them to mean.

            In California, “criminal justice reform” means refusing to prosecute violent threats, shoplifting under $950, disturbing the peace, and trespassing.

            To the Democrats, “immigration” means violating the separation of powers with executive orders, and that isn’t any more libertarian than the president declaring wars.

            Limiting U.S. intervention abroad might seem like a good thing–except they think it means refusing to let our allies purchase weapons from our defense contractors–so that we’re no longer the guarantors of peace in the Middle East, and they can defend themselves against Iranian aggression, etc.

            It’s just like the term hate speech, which used to mean racial slurs, but now means opposition to gay marriage, opposition to affirmative action and BLM, and support for a border wall. Even if Mr. Koch is perfectly sincere, these terms don’t mean what libertarians want them to mean to the left.

  40. Uhoh reason. Lawsuits filed in key states claiming same things as texas action but have standing now before SCOTUS.

  41. “The amicus brief filed by 106 members of Congress—all Republicans, naturally—isn’t a serious legal document so much as an oath of loyalty to Trump. It is a convenient list of the members of Congress who chose unconditional fealty to a president’s bizarre, flailing attempt to hold onto power for its own sake over the Constitution and rule of the law.”

    Apparently Reason believes anyone bringing up issues of cheating in the election is reason enough to claim they have no credibility, without examining the merits of the evidence. And that doing so is displaying “unconditional fealty” to Trump rather than to the Constitution and rule of law.

    Further, I read the linked Welch article, and I find it unpersuasive. Welch focuses on holding Trump accountable, and focuses on a question to Jim Jordan asking about Trump lying, as if that’s for what Trump need to held accountable.

    Can anyone give me a meaningful lie by Trump???? The best I’ve seen is his belief that his inaugural crowd was bigger than Obama’s, but that matters not. Second best are the claims that Trump is lying when he claims he’s going to do something, which he doesn’t accomplish because of Congress or the courts. But again, that’s more of a marketing boast and merely a promise to work to achieve that something. Heck, read the WaPo piece on Trump’s 20,000 lies, and what you’ll find are 20,000 WaPo lies.

    Meanwhile, most everyone seems to be fine with “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” when one might be blackmailed for adulterous sex, and “You can keep your plan, your doctor and you’ll save $2500/yr”.

    I’ll say that spending is an issue, but Trump and the Freedom Caucus know they can’t outvote the Democrats and RINOs. It’s a battle they can’t win. Yet look what Trump did, he got the Democrats to say Trump wants to spend too much. That’s a miracle.

  42. Would someone please create a magazine for libertarians and independents that has some intellectual integrity. I really do have to stop checking back here to see if the staff has stopped being Democrats.

  43. If Boehm could find the time to stop sucking Communist cock long enough to explain where in the Constitution it’s decreed that nobody is allowed to contest obviously fraudulent elections if it hurts the Democrat Party’s feewings, that’d be great.

  44. I cannot envision how any real libertarian (or other objective or rational person) could have voted for Biden/Harris.

  45. Rule of Law. Yes. The Laws should must Rule, and be obeyed. That is the foundation of a proper liberal republic. I’d like to see Reason speak up for the Rule of Law in the matter of illegal immigration, like enforcing border control, and the mass punishment and deportation of those civilian invaders who have violated the Law. Change the Law if you will, but in the meantime the Law must Rule. Or stop with the hypocrisy and admit that you pick and choose which laws to enforce, which make you no better than the Leftists.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.