400
Saved you a click:
Retired federal appeals court Judge J. Michael Luttig.
retired
😐
It’s always the retired ones that find any courage
Read the article. This guy tried to save us in 2020.
Not tried. Did. He absolutely did. There's an expose on this. If it wasn't for that judge's strong condemnation of trump trying to overturn the election when talking to Pence, Pence might have voted to overturn.
Pence didn’t get a vote, he had to do his job or not do his job. His decision was not a vote, he chose to do his job instead of not doing his job
They are relatively immune to reprisal. Imagine how weak and scared so many unretired Republicans are to only find their spine when there is no personal cost.
This guy helped save us in 2020 by working to convince Pence to defy Trump and to certify the election. If you are going to save us a click at least read the article and allow us to give the guy an ounce of credit.
MVP
Too many people in this thread are shitting on this guy without having read the article.
Luttig played a [now famous role](https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/28/politics/jackson-luttig-endorsement/index.html) in persuading then-Vice President Mike Pence to defy Trump and certify the 2020 presidential election. In a series of tweets drafted at the request of Pence’s attorney, Luttig spelled out in stark terms the legal rationale for Pence to reject the former president’s attempt to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.
Extremely important point here. Lots of repubs have stuck their neck out to stop Trump, and they only last the one time. They get swapped with spineless weenies, and lose their jobs.
Good. Keep 'em comin'.
Luttig played a [now famous role](https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/28/politics/jackson-luttig-endorsement/index.html) in persuading then-Vice President Mike Pence to defy Trump and certify the 2020 presidential election. In a series of tweets drafted at the request of Pence’s attorney, Luttig spelled out in stark terms the legal rationale for Pence to reject the former president’s attempt to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.
Good to see this from the Republican.
Especially one that saved us in 2020 by working to convince Pence to defy Trump and to certify the 2020 election.
It means a lot less when it's coming from retired, or retiring, Republicans. It's practically meaningless.
Especially when it's a judge, who isn't supposed to be politically aligned in the first place.
Shhh
It's a rare spined Republican, showing hints of balls.
CNN - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for CNN:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/19/politics/conservative-republican-endorses-harris-calls-trump-a-threat-to-democracy/index.html
yea, now these fucking spineless goons are starting to see what the table's going to look like when all the chips are down, and are trying to make sure they end up on the right side of history. too little too late. fuck this guy.
You might want to go back and read the article. He is not exactly spineless and you might want to consider thanking him for actually having one following the 2020 election.
Luttig played a now famous role in persuading then-Vice President Mike Pence to defy Trump and certify the 2020 presidential election. In a series of tweets drafted at the request of Pence’s attorney, Luttig spelled out in stark terms the legal rationale for Pence to reject the former president’s attempt to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.
Luttig also came out strongly on the 14th amendment barring Trump from holding office in future.
Great add!
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
400 points (97.2% liked)
politics
18966 readers
3485 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS