[dpbriggs]

It wasn't even close. Life isn't a movie or a video game; if you take over a building, you don't take over the government.

Even if it escalated past that point (i.e. Trump messing around) there wasn't key buy-in from several necessary parties. How in the world was it "close"?

[ModernMech]

I urge you to please watch the hearings. What has been learned in the intervening months since the coup attempt is that it was premeditated, and the insurrection at the capitol was only one facet in a multifaceted plan to end democracy in America. The narratives that have been established by pro-insurrectionists -- that it was peaceful, that is wasn't a big deal, that it was spontaneous, that it wasn't planned, that the White House wasn't involved, that there were no guns, that it couldn't have ended democracy even in the worst case -- have all been shown by the committee to be false.

How in the world was it close? You answered the question yourself: all that was missing was key buy-in from several necessary parties. Namely: Pence, several low-level elections clerks, and several secretaries of state. Republicans have been working to replace these individuals with insurrectionist since 2020, and to also change laws where they were thwarted before (see the Georgia GOP's new ability to completely take over and throw out independent county elections where they don't like the results.)

The plan would have most certainly worked if Pence had left the Capitol on Jan 6. Grassley would have taken over Pence's duties, and he would have refused to certify the election. At that point, the vote would have eventually ended up at the House, with one vote allocated per state delegation. With Republicans in the majority of delegations, they would have installed Trump as president against the will of the people, thereby ending 200+ years of American democracy.

The plan was very complex, it was thought of by very smart and powerful people, it was executed with the explicit intention of ending democracy in America by people at the highest level of government, and thankfully it ultimately failed. Yet, it almost succeeded and we must take note that they only had 2 months to prepare. Next time they will have had 4 years. So please, for the love of country, watch every second of the 1/6 committee hearings. Please.

[dpbriggs]

Thank you for acknowledging that it wasn't close. It's awful what's transpired but unnecessary and breathless rhetoric will do us a disservice when the next, worse event occurs.

Even if the vote was delayed the legal system isn't an ethereum smart contract. Congress and presumably the supreme court would get involved to reverse the decision, or worse, have something similar to a civil war.

[ModernMech]

What legal theory exactly would lead to the outcome you describe. After the Congress certifies the vote, that’s it. Constitutionally, the process is done. The Congress can’t reverse it because they are the ones who would have made it happen. How would congress undo that? By taking it to court? Well that’s a separation of powers issue. Even if they were to overturn the result, well now SCOTUS is accused of interfering with the election as they did in 2000. I mean… no matter how you slice it, such an event would destroy democracy. How do you have another free and fair election after that?

At the point where 50% of the Congress is voting against democracy, and the people are assaulting the Capitol, it strikes me as naive to expect institutions like scotus to save us at long last.

If you value American democracy, 2024 is the last stand. Sorry you feel this perspective is breathless, but also you don’t seem to have a grasp of the severity of what happened. Which is why I’m imploring you to watch.

[dpbriggs]

If you're telling me there's no recourse through congress or the supreme court around a delayed vote that's a serious flaw in the system. If course I'm not claiming the system is without flaws.

Even then, what occurs four years later? Or even a few months later? He wouldn't have enough leverage to translate that into continued (real) power.

I'll guess we'll see what happens in a few years.

[ModernMech]

It’s not just a delayed vote, it’s there is no recourse to a certified election. Once a president elect is certified, they are as good as inaugurated. That’s why 1/6 was so important.

The plan was to use the delay to kick the process into something favorable for Republicans, and to use fraudulent slates of electors to do so.

A certified presidential election has no review for good reason. The certification is in fact the election review process. All grievances are supposed to be settled by the Congress at that time. SCOTUS has no say over this process because if they did, that would take power away from the Congress, which would be unconstitutional.

As to what happens after that? See Hungary. See Russia. See any other country that has transitioned from democracy to autocracy. Elections will be held, it the results will be known ahead of time.

> I'll guess we'll see what happens in a few years.

No, the time to shape what happens in 2024 is now. This is why I am imploring you to pay close attention to the hearings. Action in 2024 will be too late.

[farmerstan]

The idea that Trump could have successfully usurped power is truly deranged. He couldn’t. Period.

January 6th was terrible but it was in no way anywhere close to being a real threat to democracy. To insist that it was is delusional.

[krapp]

Ah yes, the airtight "it could never happen here," argument.

[farmerstan]

It would take more than invading a building to take over the US. Give me a break. So much delusional thinking. You probably thought all that be about Trump and Russia was true as well even though it was proven to be all fake.

[devchix]

> The plan was very complex, it was thought of by very smart and powerful people

I watched the hearing, I mostly agree with you except for this part. It seems to me there were a confluence of factors colliding. The plan was not thought of by very smart and powerful people, it was a cockamamie legal spiel on the fringe cooked up by one law prof. The former president, true to his method of decision making, said essentially, Yeah, let's go with that, why not?

Meanwhile, there exists pockets of hard right militias, members of which have para-social relationship with Mr. Trump's twitter feed. They thought he was asking, ordering, them to come to the Capitol. It was "planned" like, "she was definitely winking at me, she wants me to ask her to the prom".

I keep in perspective a sense of skepticism, this is a trial with no advocate for the other side. Mr. Trump cannot be at the same time a clownish buffoon as well as an evil genius. But, the opportunity makes the man.