2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

[Typical Lax Dad]

From our friends:

https://www.rt.com/usa/511939-capitol-r ... -benghazi/

[old salt]

Evidence uncovered so far, including weapons and tactics seen on surveillance video, suggests a level of planning that has led investigators to believe the attack on the US Capitol was not just a protest that spiraled out of control, a federal law enforcement official says.

Like I said, this is worse than Benghazi. Let’s get to the bottom of it. All roads lead to Trump.

This is all the FBI has said so far. Note the cautionary tone. Don't raise expectations that might not prove out.

https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-of ... tol-011221

The FBI receives enormous amounts of information and intelligence... We have to separate the aspirational from the intentional and determine which of the individuals saying despicable things on the internet are just practicing keyboard bravado or they actually have the intent to do harm.

My fault friend... This “could be” worse than Benghazi. Let’s find out who knew what and when...

I'm interested to know who brought the rope & ladder Comey referenced & if they tool it to the Capitol or left it in their truck, like the 70 year old grandpa from AL who left his AR, handgun, armor piercing ammo & molotov cocktails (some reported as homebrew napalm) in his truck.

The social media posting that the Norfolk field office flagged & shotgunned. Did the poster go to DC & go to the Capitol ? Did they get inside ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Evidence uncovered so far, including weapons and tactics seen on surveillance video, suggests a level of planning that has led investigators to believe the attack on the US Capitol was not just a protest that spiraled out of control, a federal law enforcement official says.

Like I said, this is worse than Benghazi. Let’s get to the bottom of it. All roads lead to Trump.

This is all the FBI has said so far. Note the cautionary tone. Don't raise expectations that might not prove out.

https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-of ... tol-011221

The FBI receives enormous amounts of information and intelligence... We have to separate the aspirational from the intentional and determine which of the individuals saying despicable things on the internet are just practicing keyboard bravado or they actually have the intent to do harm.

My fault friend... This “could be” worse than Benghazi. Let’s find out who knew what and when...

I'm interested to know who brought the rope & ladder Comey referenced & if they tool it to the Capitol or left it in their truck, like the 70 year old grandpa from AL who left his AR, handgun, armor piercing ammo & molotov cocktails (some reported as homebrew napalm) in his truck.

The social media posting the Norfolk field office flagged & shotgunned. Did the poster go to DC & go to the Capitol ? Did they get inside ?

I don’t know friend. We will see if anything comes of it. Hoping its just a misunderstanding buddy.

[holmes435]

Well, the one thing that we'll find out in the Senate is: do they embrace actual Conservatism? Or are they going to double down on TeamTinFoilHat?

It will be a crystal clear answer from the Republicans. Because if they don't impeach him? The first thing Trump will do, is work to keep himself in the limelight. And the obvious way to do that is, to declare his 2024 candidacy, and start campaigning right now.

He does that? He'll suck all the air out of the R party for four full years. The only question is, is McConnell smart enough to understand this?

One of McConnell's biggest strengths is understanding of power dynamics. He's rarely lost, and if he thinks he can jettison Trump for someone better, he'll pull the trigger on the 19th.

But I'm betting that he waits and lets the "D" senate plus a few R's do his dirty work and convict Trump after the transition. He hates Trump with his guts, and may even vote to convict, but he will hide that vote behind three or four other "legitimate" reasons, saying his hand was forced. He then gets to blame the Democrats, stoke anger and fear, take the house and/or Senate back in two years to re-initiate gridlock and have an argument for pushing for an R president in '24 after we clean up the R's mess of the past four years, especially if D's run someone to the left of Biden.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

[njbill]

We'll find out if the Republican Borg has become self aware at the impeachment vote.

Maybe not quite woken up yet.

Mike Huckabee on Ingraham tonight:

Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer got more due process today than Donald Trump. It is the logic of lynching. What we witnessed today was the lynching of Donald Trump.

Glad to see that FNC is doing its part to unify and heal!

And to educate.

Huckleberry is a hayseed, but Ingraham knows better. The impeachment vote is the equivalent of an indictment. Putting aside the fact that T**** has no constitutional right to due process in an impeachment proceeding, the Senate will give him due process at his trial.

Sounds like he may be having trouble finding a lawyer. Reports are he isn’t paying Rudy’s bills. Gee, and I thought $20,000 per day was a bargain.

Heard a report tonight that T**** wanted to go down to the House to try to persuade the lawmakers today. Staff talked him out of it. That would’ve made for some good old television.

[seacoaster]

Looks like GOP chickensh*ts will coalesce around the notion that there is, constitutionally, no post-office impeachment. This is the reason Luttig put the piece in the WaPo: so "conservatives" had a creditable position to avoid an impeachment trial, asserting the Senate no longer "has jurisdiction" over Trump after 1/20@12:01.

Clever and, predictably, wrong on the Constitution again.

[MDlaxfan76]

We'll find out if the Republican Borg has become self aware at the impeachment vote.

Maybe not quite woken up yet.

Mike Huckabee on Ingraham tonight:

Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer got more due process today than Donald Trump. It is the logic of lynching. What we witnessed today was the lynching of Donald Trump.

Glad to see that FNC is doing its part to unify and heal!

And to educate.

Huckleberry is a hayseed, but Ingraham knows better. The impeachment vote is the equivalent of an indictment. Putting aside the fact that T**** has no constitutional right to due process in an impeachment proceeding, the Senate will give him due process at his trial.

Sounds like he may be having trouble finding a lawyer. Reports are he isn’t paying Rudy’s bills. Gee, and I thought $20,000 per day was a bargain.

Heard a report tonight that T**** wanted to go down to the House to try to persuade the lawmakers today. Staff talked him out of it. That would’ve made for some good old television.

Well, post leaving office, a subpoena to appear would not be as simple to avoid...legal folks, what say you on this?

[MDlaxfan76]

Looks like GOP chickensh*ts will coalesce around the notion that there is, constitutionally, no post-office impeachment. This is the reason Luttig put the piece in the WaPo: so "conservatives" had a creditable position to avoid an impeachment trial, asserting the Senate no longer "has jurisdiction" over Trump after 1/20@12:01.

Clever and, predictably, wrong on the Constitution again.

Caught Maddow's opening last night on the precedent of an impeachment post resignation, post leaving office. Been done.

[cradleandshoot]

We'll find out if the Republican Borg has become self aware at the impeachment vote.

Maybe not quite woken up yet.

Mike Huckabee on Ingraham tonight:

Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer got more due process today than Donald Trump. It is the logic of lynching. What we witnessed today was the lynching of Donald Trump.

Glad to see that FNC is doing its part to unify and heal!

And to educate.

Huckleberry is a hayseed, but Ingraham knows better. The impeachment vote is the equivalent of an indictment. Putting aside the fact that T**** has no constitutional right to due process in an impeachment proceeding, the Senate will give him due process at his trial.

Sounds like he may be having trouble finding a lawyer. Reports are he isn’t paying Rudy’s bills. Gee, and I thought $20,000 per day was a bargain.

Heard a report tonight that T**** wanted to go down to the House to try to persuade the lawmakers today. Staff talked him out of it. That would’ve made for some good old television.

Well, post leaving office, a subpoena to appear would not be as simple to avoid...legal folks, what say you on this?

That is probably why he will pardon himself. Dump will be dead and gone before the Dingle berries in DC sort out that legal question. It also gives our FLP friends on this forum a new untapped well of more stuff to b***h about for days on end. Dump is like a bad case of the clap. He is the gift that keeps on giving.

[MDlaxfan76]

We'll find out if the Republican Borg has become self aware at the impeachment vote.

Maybe not quite woken up yet.

Mike Huckabee on Ingraham tonight:

Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer got more due process today than Donald Trump. It is the logic of lynching. What we witnessed today was the lynching of Donald Trump.

Glad to see that FNC is doing its part to unify and heal!

And to educate.

Huckleberry is a hayseed, but Ingraham knows better. The impeachment vote is the equivalent of an indictment. Putting aside the fact that T**** has no constitutional right to due process in an impeachment proceeding, the Senate will give him due process at his trial.

Sounds like he may be having trouble finding a lawyer. Reports are he isn’t paying Rudy’s bills. Gee, and I thought $20,000 per day was a bargain.

Heard a report tonight that T**** wanted to go down to the House to try to persuade the lawmakers today. Staff talked him out of it. That would’ve made for some good old television.

Well, post leaving office, a subpoena to appear would not be as simple to avoid...legal folks, what say you on this?

That is probably why he will pardon himself. Dump will be dead and gone before the Dingle berries in DC sort out that legal question. It also gives our FLP friends on this forum a new untapped well of more stuff to b***h about for days on end. Dump is like a bad case of the clap. He is the gift that keeps on giving.

Ensuring conviction by the Senate.

Of course, there's also the catch-22 that you can't use the 5th when required to testify, if you are actually immune...of course, that too is enormously questionable, very likely will just invite criminal charges to test.

[SCLaxAttack]

We'll find out if the Republican Borg has become self aware at the impeachment vote.

Maybe not quite woken up yet.

Mike Huckabee on Ingraham tonight:

Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer got more due process today than Donald Trump. It is the logic of lynching. What we witnessed today was the lynching of Donald Trump.

Glad to see that FNC is doing its part to unify and heal!

And to educate.

Huckleberry is a hayseed, but Ingraham knows better. The impeachment vote is the equivalent of an indictment. Putting aside the fact that T**** has no constitutional right to due process in an impeachment proceeding, the Senate will give him due process at his trial.

Sounds like he may be having trouble finding a lawyer. Reports are he isn’t paying Rudy’s bills. Gee, and I thought $20,000 per day was a bargain.

Heard a report tonight that T**** wanted to go down to the House to try to persuade the lawmakers today. Staff talked him out of it. That would’ve made for some good old television.

Well, post leaving office, a subpoena to appear would not be as simple to avoid...legal folks, what say you on this?

That is probably why he will pardon himself. Dump will be dead and gone before the Dingle berries in DC sort out that legal question. It also gives our FLP friends on this forum a new untapped well of more stuff to b***h about for days on end. Dump is like a bad case of the clap. He is the gift that keeps on giving.

Ensuring conviction by the Senate.

Of course, there's also the catch-22 that you can't use the 5th when required to testify, if you are actually immune...of course, that too is enormously questionable, very likely will just invite criminal charges to test.

Now THAT would be the gift that keeps on giving. Load Trump up with legal fees to bury him. US>Trump deep pockets will be fun to see after the strategy of filing lawsuits this piece of scum has constantly used against others throughout his lifetime.

[seacoaster]

Looks like GOP chickensh*ts will coalesce around the notion that there is, constitutionally, no post-office impeachment. This is the reason Luttig put the piece in the WaPo: so "conservatives" had a creditable position to avoid an impeachment trial, asserting the Senate no longer "has jurisdiction" over Trump after 1/20@12:01.

Clever and, predictably, wrong on the Constitution again.

Caught Maddow's opening last night on the precedent of an impeachment post resignation, post leaving office. Been done.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/14/opin ... enate.html

"Yesterday’s vote by the House of Representatives to impeach President Trump (again) came notwithstanding objections from Republicans that such a move is unnecessary. Because Mr. Trump’s term ends at noon on Jan. 20, the argument goes, there is little point in expending energy to reinforce what is already, despite Mr. Trump’s best efforts, a legal inevitability.

But some commentators have gone further — arguing not only that Congress should not impeach and remove Mr. Trump but also that come Jan. 20, it cannot do so, because the Constitution doesn’t allow for the impeachment and removal of “former” officers. This argument is wrong as a matter of text, structure, historical practice and common sense. And Mr. Trump is the poster child for why, even after he leaves office, such accountability is not just constitutionally permissible but necessary.

With the Senate not expected to reconvene until next Tuesday, Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial could not begin until Wednesday afternoon at the earliest — after the inauguration of his successor. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution provides that the “President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” If that were all that the Constitution said about impeachment, there might be something to the argument that once the individual no longer holds the office, the impeachment power becomes defunct.

But Article I, Section 3 says more. In describing the powers of the Senate to conduct an impeachment trial, it provides that “Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States” (emphasis added).

That latter clause is the key, because it drives home that the Senate has two decisions to make in impeachment cases: First, it must decide whether an officer should be removed. Then it must decide whether this person should be disqualified from holding any future federal office. Indeed, of the eight officers the Senate has ever voted to remove, it subsequently voted to disqualify only three of them — reinforcing that removal and disqualification are separate inquiries. And as this procedure and historical practice make clear, by the time the Senate votes on disqualification, the officer has already been removed. In other words, disqualification, at least, is itself necessarily a vote about a former (as opposed to current) officer.

More than that, the disqualification power is both the primary evidence of and the central reason the Constitution allows for the impeachment of former officers. Were it otherwise, an officer facing impeachment, or an officer who has already been impeached and is about to be removed, could also avoid disqualification simply by resigning. In 1876, disgraced Secretary of War William Belknap tried exactly that — resigning minutes before the House vote on his impeachment. The House impeached him anyway, concluding that his resignation did not defeat Congress’s impeachment power. And although some senators ultimately voted to acquit Belknap (who narrowly escaped a guilty verdict) because he was no longer in office, the Senate as a body first concluded that it had the power to try former officers, adopting a resolution that Belknap could be tried “for acts done as Secretary of War, notwithstanding his resignation of said office” before he was impeached.

The Belknap case cemented two precedents: Congress can impeach and remove former officers, but the fact that the defendant is no longer in office is one factor that senators may take into account in deciding whether to vote to convict. So, when President Richard Nixon resigned in August 1974 in an effort to forestall his seemingly inevitable impeachment and removal, that act did not deprive Congress of the constitutional power to still impeach, remove and disqualify him; it merely mitigated the perceived political expediency of doing so. By resigning, Mr. Nixon took at least some responsibility for his conduct. And the circumstances of his resignation left no reason to believe that he would ever again be a candidate for federal office.

But there is no indication that Mr. Trump plans to resign. His term ends next Wednesday only because Section 1 of the 20th Amendment says so. He is not going willingly. And he has made no secret of his interest in running for president again in 2024. What’s more, under the Former Presidents Act of 1958, he stands to receive significant financial and other tangible benefits, including a handsome annual stipend, funds for offices and a staff, and a pension. But that same statute denies such benefits to a former president who was removed “pursuant to Section 4 of Article II of the Constitution.” So whether Mr. Trump is impeached, convicted and disqualified determines not only whether he could ever again hold federal office but may also bear upon the extent to which federal taxpayers will be subsidizing his activities in the years to come.

The conservative argument would say that the Constitution leaves Congress powerless to deal with such a case — or with any scenario in which a president commits grossly impeachable acts in his final days in office. Not so. Whether he should be convicted and disqualified remains, under the Constitution, in the sole purview of the Senate.

And whereas the conservative argument against a post-Jan. 20 impeachment presupposes that the matter will inevitably end up in the courts (which may be sympathetic to Mr. Trump), that claim, too, is erroneous. In 1993, the Supreme Court held that it’s not for the courts to review the propriety of impeachments. As Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote, neither any extrinsic evidence from the Constitutional Convention nor contemporaneous commentary suggested that the founders even contemplated “the possibility of judicial review in the context of the impeachment powers.” It’s ultimately Congress’s call — for former officers as much as current ones."

Stephen I. Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) is a professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

[seacoaster]

Another:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... mp-leaves/

"The Senate appears unlikely to take up the article of impeachment against President Trump before his term ends next Wednesday. That does not require the end of proceedings against him. The Senate retains the constitutional authority — indeed, the constitutional duty — to conduct an impeachment trial against the soon-to-be-former president.

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4, provides that the president and other civil officers “shall be removed from Office” following impeachment and conviction by the Senate. Some scholars, most prominently former federal appeals court judge J. Michael Luttig, have argued that because Trump’s term will have already ended and he, by definition, cannot be removed, the impeachment power no longer applies.

With all respect, I disagree. The Constitution references impeachment in six places but nowhere answers that precise question. Article I, Section 3 comes closest to delineating the contours of the Impeachment Power, instructing that “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.”

These “judgments” — removal and disqualification — are analytically distinct and linguistically divisible. Their divisibility was first established by the Senate during the 1862 trial of federal-turned-confederate Judge West Humphreys and reaffirmed by a parliamentary inquiry during the 1936 trial of impeached Judge Halsted Ritter. The only court to address the issue agreed with the Senate that an impeachment trial could proceed even after the individual was no longer in office.

To be sure, a former officer may no longer be “removed” even upon conviction by a two-thirds vote. But that has no bearing on whether such an ex-officer may be barred permanently from office upon being convicted. That separate judgment would require no more than a simple majority vote.

Concluding otherwise would all but erase the disqualification power from the Constitution’s text: If an impeachable officer became immune from trial and conviction upon leaving office, any official seeing conviction as imminent could easily remove the prospect of disqualification simply by resigning moments before the Senate’s anticipated verdict.

The clear weight of history, original understanding and congressional practice bolsters the case for concluding that the end of Donald Trump’s presidency would not end his Senate trial.

The impeachment power derives from the power of the British Parliament. One particular British impeachment featured prominently in the framers’ conception of the power: that of the former colonial governor of India, Warren Hastings. Led by Edmund Burke, the Hastings impeachment was repeatedly referenced during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia and, critically, was conducted entirely after Hastings had left office. Given the prominence of the Hastings’s impeachment to the framers, the absence of debate on the question at the federal or state ratifying conventions — not to mention the silence of the Constitution’s text on the point — speaks volumes.

So it’s unsurprising that Congress has throughout the nation’s history considered the power to try and judge impeachments to extend past an officeholder’s term. The question was first raised during the attempted 1797 impeachment of Sen. William Blount. One of the lead House prosecutors, Rep. James Bayard and Blount’s lawyer agreed that a civil officer could not escape impeachment through resignation. President John Adams concurred, declaring that “I hold myself, so long as I have the breath of life in my body, amenable to impeachment by this House for everything I did during the time I held any public office.”

Likewise, in 1876, Secretary of War William Belknap resigned minutes before the House was set to impeach him; the House still transmitted five articles of impeachment to the Senate. At Belknap’s trial, the Senate voted 37 to 29 that he was “amenable to trial by impeachment …notwithstanding his resignation of said office.” And the House and Senate rules have both long permitted the impeachment and trial of former officers for abuses committed while holding office.

Focusing on the purposes of the impeachment power yields the same conclusion. Its function is prospective rather than punitive: to prevent officers who have betrayed their oaths from committing further abuses and thereby inflicting future harm.

The need to protect the nation can sometimes be satisfied merely by removing a dangerous officer from power. Still, the inclusion of a separate power to disqualify is a clear recognition that removal might not always be sufficient. For such cases, the Constitution expressly provided the additional remedy of exclusion.

Disqualifying President Trump from ever again holding federal office is a particularly suitable remedy for fomenting and inciting insurrection. It is also fitting in stripping Trump of the very thing that motivated his impeachable offenses: the pursuit of future power.

To render this uniquely appropriate remedy unavailable simply because the gravest abuses of power were committed near the very end of a president’s term would be bizarre at best, self-sabotaging at worst. Nothing in the Constitution suggests that a president who has shown himself to be a deadly threat to our survival as a constitutional republic should be able to run out the clock on our ability to condemn his conduct and to ensure that it can never recur."

[cradleandshoot]

We'll find out if the Republican Borg has become self aware at the impeachment vote.

Maybe not quite woken up yet.

Mike Huckabee on Ingraham tonight:

Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer got more due process today than Donald Trump. It is the logic of lynching. What we witnessed today was the lynching of Donald Trump.

Glad to see that FNC is doing its part to unify and heal!

And to educate.

Huckleberry is a hayseed, but Ingraham knows better. The impeachment vote is the equivalent of an indictment. Putting aside the fact that T**** has no constitutional right to due process in an impeachment proceeding, the Senate will give him due process at his trial.

Sounds like he may be having trouble finding a lawyer. Reports are he isn’t paying Rudy’s bills. Gee, and I thought $20,000 per day was a bargain.

Heard a report tonight that T**** wanted to go down to the House to try to persuade the lawmakers today. Staff talked him out of it. That would’ve made for some good old television.

Well, post leaving office, a subpoena to appear would not be as simple to avoid...legal folks, what say you on this?

That is probably why he will pardon himself. Dump will be dead and gone before the Dingle berries in DC sort out that legal question. It also gives our FLP friends on this forum a new untapped well of more stuff to b***h about for days on end. Dump is like a bad case of the clap. He is the gift that keeps on giving.

Ensuring conviction by the Senate.

Of course, there's also the catch-22 that you can't use the 5th when required to testify, if you are actually immune...of course, that too is enormously questionable, very likely will just invite criminal charges to test.

Now THAT would be the gift that keeps on giving. Load Trump up with legal fees to bury him. US>Trump deep pockets will be fun to see after the strategy of filing lawsuits this piece of scum has constantly used against others throughout his lifetime.

I like it, a slow death by a 1000 cuts. Dump can bleed out slowly.

[RedFromMI]

Trump is already in a world of hurt financially - in reality most of his physical assets (Mar A Lago, Trump Tower, etc) are pledged indirectly through his personal guarantee of ~400 million dollars of loans from DB alone.

His leased hotel in DC is going to be hurting more when it is clear that companies don't need to suck up to him out of office and with the pandemic still raging on. His golf courses are in even more pain from the PGA dumping him. Could lead to many of these properties going bankrupt...

His most moneymaking things have been his name brand plastered on buildings/hotels, now hurt badly by his greatly stained reputation, and the ability to essentially money launder for foreign billionaires. The latter should be great fodder for investigation, and out of the presidency he will have little ability to keep both his taxes and business records secret (new language in the defense bill specifically makes exposure of owners of shell companies a requirement).

Even though he raised somewhere like 400 million in his campaign to overturn the election (and most of which just went to a generic campaign account) he might be needing that as a ton of people/companies will be smelling the blood in the water...

[cradleandshoot]

Trump is already in a world of hurt financially - in reality most of his physical assets (Mar A Lago, Trump Tower, etc) are pledged indirectly through his personal guarantee of ~400 million dollars of loans from DB alone.

His leased hotel in DC is going to be hurting more when it is clear that companies don't need to suck up to him out of office and with the pandemic still raging on. His golf courses are in even more pain from the PGA dumping him. Could lead to many of these properties going bankrupt...

His most moneymaking things have been his name brand plastered on buildings/hotels, now hurt badly by his greatly stained reputation, and the ability to essentially money launder for foreign billionaires. The latter should be great fodder for investigation, and out of the presidency he will have little ability to keep both his taxes and business records secret (new language in the defense bill specifically makes exposure of owners of shell companies a requirement).

Even though he raised somewhere like 400 million in his campaign to overturn the election (and most of which just went to a generic campaign account) he might be needing that as a ton of people/companies will be smelling the blood in the water...

What goes around comes around. Dump will get exactly what he deserves. It may not as fast as some of you like. The water torture eventually drives the victim insane...one drop at a time.

[seacoaster]

Nice compilation of traitors' statements to activate and incite their foot soldiers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz-zWeq ... TrevorNoah

[runrussellrun]

Nice compilation of traitors' statements to activate and incite their foot soldiers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz-zWeq ... TrevorNoah

got distracted by the angie harmon on conan video on the right, and well, ....

Literally one of the most gorgeous woman on the planet. Physically anyway



....and while they are at it, get the useless Sgt. at Arms to arrest tRump for refusing to comply with the law. The law states that POTUSA has to hand over their taxes. Congress got the ball rolling....and bam......the taats wheel chuck was placed.

Trump should have been arrested when he refused, illegaly, to hand over his tax returns. Nancy P. has been speaker for 2 years, why the wait?

[RedFromMI]

Nice compilation of traitors' statements to activate and incite their foot soldiers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz-zWeq ... TrevorNoah

Makes it quite clear that Trump was not the only actor here...just the lead one...

[RedFromMI]

Correction of the day (showed up on my twitter feed):