JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial

[CU88]

British tourists in 1812, most of them were generally peaceful...


https://www.whitehousehistory.org/the-b ... washington


https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/on- ... ington-d-c

[Typical Lax Dad]

British tourists in 1812, most of them were generally peaceful...


https://www.whitehousehistory.org/the-b ... washington


https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/on- ... ington-d-c

Folks just proud of their heritage.

[CU88]

British tourists in 1812, most of them were generally peaceful...


https://www.whitehousehistory.org/the-b ... washington


https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/on- ... ington-d-c

Folks just proud of their heritage.

r's would disavow Mom, baseball and apple pie if 2x impotus o d told them to do so...

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://twitter.com/rexchapman/status/1 ... 19716?s=21

[MDlaxfan76]

https://twitter.com/rexchapman/status/1 ... 19716?s=21

[CU88]

Saw this the other day, "If a coup attempt goes unpunished, it's a training exercise."

[CU88]

Trump Is Marching Down the Road to Political Violence
The Republican Party must counteract lies rather than indulge them.

By Peter Wehner

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ce/618929/


"Hear me, Republicans, when I say that many on the American right are growing more and more comfortable with violence as an instrument of politics, as a means to achieve their goals, as a way to defeat their perceived enemies."

[old salt]

Ted Cruz is being accused of denigrating the US military & praising the Russian military for making fun of the new woke Army recruiting commercial.

When I first saw the ad, I thought it was a parody by The Duffle Blog (the military equivalent of The Onion).

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/cultur ... -vd825258f

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/gender-rev ... nces-navys

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/officer-le ... industrial

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/dod-adopts ... everything

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/pentagon-t ... remists-by

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/army-manda ... ont-invade

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/capitol-ri ... y-discount

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/southern-p ... classifies

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/dc-nationa ... t-extended

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/us-navy-gl ... oat-heck

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/white-hous ... over-major

[PizzaSnake]

Ted Cruz is being accused of denigrating the US military & praising the Russian military for making fun of the new woke Army recruiting commercial.

When I first saw the ad, I thought it was a parody by The Duffle Blog (the military equivalent of The Onion).

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/cultur ... -vd825258f

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/gender-rev ... nces-navys

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/officer-le ... industrial

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/dod-adopts ... everything

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/pentagon-t ... remists-by

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/army-manda ... ont-invade

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/capitol-ri ... y-discount

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/southern-p ... classifies

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/dc-nationa ... t-extended

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/heck

https://www.duffelblog.com/p/white-hous ... over-major

“Ted Cruz thinks people don't have a right to "stimulate their genitals." I was his college roommate. This would be a new belief of his.

— Craig Mazin (@clmazin) April 13, 2016”

https://newrepublic.com/article/132655/ ... -haunt-him

Little jerk-off tw$t. And a sanctimonious hypocrite to boot.

[CU88]

May 21, 2021
Heather Cox Richardson
May 22

Tonight, in Fulton County, Georgia, a judge allowed 9 Georgia voters and their experts to inspect copies of the 147,000 mail-in ballots cast in that county to make sure that officials did not accept counterfeit ballots. Georgia officials have already done three separate audits of the ballots from the 2020 vote, including a hand recount, and found no widespread fraud. But supporters of former president Trump insist that he actually won the 2020 election and that it was stolen from him by fraud.

It is this same belief that led to the private “audit” of ballots in Maricopa County, Arizona, where Republican state senators made election officials give both ballots and election equipment to a private company, Cyber Ninjas, to recount and examine. The Cyber Ninjas had no experience doing such an audit and the process has been widely discredited, but they accused election officials of deleting databases, accusations picked up by Trump loyalists like Representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), and Paul Gosar (R-AZ).

Today, attorneys for Maricopa County and those election officials warned the Republican Arizona Senators to preserve all evidence surrounding this “audit” for future lawsuits.

Despite the Arizona debacle, Trump supporters all over the country are demanding recounts like the one in Maricopa County. They say their only goal is to make sure that machines are accurate and the count is fair, but they are echoing Trump, who continues to insist he won the 2020 election.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if they found thousands and thousands and thousands of votes,” he said recently at Mar-a-Lago. “So we’re going to watch that very closely. And after that, you’ll watch Pennsylvania and you’ll watch Georgia and you’re going to watch Michigan and Wisconsin. You’re watching New Hampshire. Because this was a rigged election. Everybody knows it.”

It was not a rigged election. Democrats Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won by more than 7 million votes with more than 51% of the popular vote to Trump and Mike Pence’s 46.8%. The Democrats won in the Electoral College by a vote of 306 to 232. Trump lost more than 60 lawsuits over the election, and recounts turned up no evidence of widespread fraud.

Observers call Trump’s insistence that he won the 2020 election the Big Lie.

It was this lie that led to the January 6 insurrection, when rioters stormed the Capitol to stop the counting of the electoral votes that would make Biden president. In case after case, the insurrectionists’ lawyers have claimed their clients believed that Trump won and the election was stolen from him. The lawyers have blamed the “propaganda” coming from the Fox News Channel and the former president for their clients’ actions.

According to “QAnon Shaman” Jacob Chansley, his lawyer wrote, if not “for the actions and the words of the President, he would not have appeared in Washington, DC to support the President and, but for the specific words of the then-President during his January 6, 2021 speech, the Defendant would not have walked down Pennsylvania Avenue and would not have gone into the U.S. Capitol Building.”

In an interview with Matt Shuham of Talking Points Memo, the lawyer added: “These aren’t bad people; they don’t have a prior criminal history. F**k, they were subjected to four-plus years of goddamn propaganda the likes of which the world has not seen since f**king Hitler.”

But here’s the rub: Last week, when they removed Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY) from party leadership, Republicans indicated they have now tied themselves to Trump, along with his eagerness to overturn elections unless he gets his way.

We are on a very dangerous path.

Republican lawmakers are downplaying the January 6 insurrection, rewriting our history to suggest that the assault on the heart of our democratic process was no big deal. Last week, Representative Andrew S. Clyde (R-GA) said the event was like a “normal tourist visit”—photos show him that day screaming and frantically barricading the doors to the House gallery—and Representative Ralph Norman (R-SC) questioned whether the rioters were Trump supporters, despite their Trump flags and MAGA hats, and the fact the former president told them he loved them. On the Fox News Channel this week, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) claimed the insurrection was largely a “peaceful protest.”

On Wednesday, the House passed a bill to set up a bipartisan independent commission to investigate the events of January 6. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) had set out conditions for the commission, apparently with the idea that Democrats would reject them, but in fact the Democrats agreed to his demands, leaving McCarthy scrambling to find a reason to oppose the commission. For oppose it he does, along with all but 35 Republicans (whom Trump promptly called “ineffective and weak”). Four fifths of the Republicans in the House oppose creating a bipartisan independent commission to figure out what happened on that hideous day.

They are opposed in part because they do not want voters to be reminded of their leader’s complicity in the event, driven as it was by the Big Lie, and also because a number of them would be witnesses, called to testify under oath. Cheney has repeatedly suggested that McCarthy himself, who had a heated telephone conversation with the former president during the riot, should testify voluntarily or, if necessary, under subpoena.

Yesterday, McCarthy pointedly refused to answer whether he was sure no members of his caucus had spoken with any of the rioters, bringing to mind the January 13 letter from 34 members of the House, including those with military training and former CIA agent Abigail Spanberger (D-VA), to request an immediate investigation into tours of the Capitol given on January 5. The letter reported that the number and nature of the tours were so concerning that members reported them to the Sergeant at Arms that day.

The bill now goes to the Senate, where Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has vowed to oppose it, calling it “slanted and unbalanced” in what seems to be a shout out to Fox News Channel viewers by playing on “fair and balanced.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will bring the bill to the floor, where Republicans are expected to filibuster it, meaning it will take 60 votes, rather than a simple majority of 51, to pass it. They are likely to block even a debate on it.

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), who has maintained he can work with the Republicans, commented: “So disheartening. It makes you really concerned about our country…. I’m still praying we’ve still got 10 good solid patriots within that conference.”

It seems to me that ship has sailed. Six months after the 2020 election, supporters of the former president are challenging vote counts all over the country as he continues to insist he won. His supporters stormed the Capitol to overturn our electoral process. And now our Republican lawmakers, who have taken an oath to defend the Constitution, are trying to protect their leader from accountability for inciting that insurrection.

[old salt]

The topic of this thread is National Securty issues. What do the opinions of Heather Cox Richardson on election laws have to do with that ?

Is she now consulting the US Army on their recruiting videos ?

SaltyRad's National Security thread over in the "Chatter" forum has died the lonely death of the neglected and poorly placed.

It may well find much more robust banter here where banter reigns supreme...

[old salt]

The House has passed an emergency supplemental bill to establish a permanent National Guard Quick Reaction Force for DC.
These articles explain the problems in militarizing this civilian law enforcement function in an area already policed by numerous well staffed but uncoordinated police forces.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/202 ... force.html
The proposal is not specific about what a quick reaction force would look like. National Guard troops have to maintain full-time civilian jobs and are not eligible for child care. For a QRF to work as intended, troops would likely need to be on standby either at a nearby base or on Capitol Hill.

It is unclear whether a quick reaction mission would solely rely on the D.C. National Guard or if the mission would need to rotate other states in, putting a new deployment in the list of activations the Guard is juggling, which includes places like Iraq and the Horn of Africa.

The president would essentially need to declare a permanent state of emergency in D.C. in order for Guardsmen to earn federal benefits such as the GI Bill if they stay on Title 32 orders. Under Title 32, the federal government picks up the tab, though the troops still fall under command of their respective states. If not, Guardsmen would likely need to deploy on Title 10 orders, usually reserved for deployments abroad and the southern border, which would grant them full pay and benefits.

The mission on Capitol Hill has grown increasingly unpopular on both sides of the political aisle. Even Gen. Daniel Hokanson, the Guard's leader, suggested in a memo that the mission is stretching the force too thin, given the lack of specific threats.

President Joe Biden's nominee to be the next secretary of the Army believes that the National Guard may be stretched too thin and nearing the breaking point after a year of nonstop activations.

"I am concerned about the possibility of unreasonable demands [on] the Guard. I would want to look closely on how that strain is manifesting," Christine Wormuth told senators at her confirmation hearing Thursday.

Wormuth's concerns mirror comments made last week by Army Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville when he told lawmakers that a combination of two decades of war and activations at home might be too much.

"Our force has been heavily committed over the past 20 years in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and around the world," he said during a House Appropriations Committee hearing on the service's budget. "My concern is we want to make sure we reduce the op tempo of our troops, including the National Guard who have been heavily employed, whether that's home or overseas."

https://www.military.com/daily-news/202 ... ct-dc.html
A QRF is a standard military security element meant to provide swift reinforcements.

"This could be done by mobilizing military police from Guard elements across the U.S. on rotations of three to six months," the task force's report states. "Another option would be to create a QRF that permanently resides within the D.C. Guard by reestablishing a military police battalion and staffing it with active Guard reserve troops who live in or near the city year-round, perpetually on active duty."

The proposal notes that military forces should be a supplement to a law enforcement QRF. Establishing a permanent National Guard presence could be a costly measure for the military, especially if states must continue to rotate troops and equipment in and out. Basic Allowance for Housing for an Army specialist, the most common rank in the force, is $2,520 per month in the D.C. area without dependents. That is on top of standard pay.

National Guard troops also must maintain civilian jobs, which could be a challenge. Guard troops would have to stay activated under federal orders for legal protections from employer retaliation.

Troops, if serving under Title 32 federal orders under a presidential emergency declaration, would also accrue benefits under the Department of Veterans Affairs, such as qualifying for the Post-9/11 GI Bill. The VA spends an average of $17,400 per GI Bill beneficiary, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Under the current law, the president would have to declare a constant state of emergency for Guard troops to accrue federal benefits.

To combat the slow military response, the task force report makes an unprecedented request to give the commander for the D.C. Guard the authority to deploy troops without the president's permission under extreme circumstances -- something that could raise significant questions on the integrity of civilian control of the military.

"We recommend … the commanding general of the D.C. National Guard shall retain 'emergency authority' ... in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected ‘civil disturbances’ when necessary 'to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and proper order,'" the report states.

[old salt]

A lesson on ransomware from our Founding Fathers

[Typical Lax Dad]

A lesson on ransomware from our Founding Fathers

Change your password

[old salt]

Cognitive dissonance & deploying the DC National Guard.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... re/174413/

[PizzaSnake]

Cognitive dissonance & deploying the DC National Guard.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... re/174413/

What could go wrong with the rules as they stand?

"Nonetheless, Barr claimed that a law permitting National Guard units to operate in “hybrid status”—namely, carrying out federal missions while remaining under state command and control—allows governors to deploy their Guard forces out of state even if the host state or territory objects.

This unprecedented interpretation not only threatens state sovereignty; it further undermines the principle of posse comitatus. In hybrid status, Guard units are exempt from the Posse Comitatus Act because they are operating under state command. A key element of state command is the governor’s ability to decline a given federal mission. If, however, any governor can send Guard forces into any other jurisdiction, the right to refuse becomes illusory. All the president would need is one willing governor in order to use Guard forces as a domestic police force anywhere in the country. Last June, President Trump found eleven."

So what's next, Tejas deploying troops to states where the results are not to the liking of the Tejas governor?

Get ready for the Second Civil War, folks.

[MDlaxfan76]

Cognitive dissonance & deploying the DC National Guard.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... re/174413/

What do you mean on "cognitive dissonance"? Seems to me that this article makes sound sense on all three points. Absolutely nuts that a Governor can send troops over the objection the local authorities.

The other post on a quick response force, does seem to me to be an interesting question as to why that should reside in the National Guard versus within a well-funded DC police capability.

It's one thing to want the DC Guard to be responsible directly to the DC Mayor so as to not need federal approval to move when called in an emergency, just as the Guard is to Governors, it's another to have them be considered a primary response. Yes, they should have been able to respond more swiftly on Jan 6, but IMO a beefed up Capitol police capability would likely make more sense.

BTW, perhaps the inability of the DC Mayor to actually direct the Guard the way a Governor could, and the experience of the Lafayette Square's misuse of the Guard over the Mayor's objections led to the reluctance to stand up a request in advance of Jan 6...'would the President misuse the Guard again?' may well have been going through their minds...but when called, it took too long. Do need a better answer.

Is it a funding issue and that DC has a whole bunch of federal targets to protect, none of which pay real estate taxes? If so, solve it with funding.

[SCLaxAttack]

Cognitive dissonance & deploying the DC National Guard.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... re/174413/

What do you mean on "cognitive dissonance"? Seems to me that this article makes sound sense on all three points. Absolutely nuts that a Governor can send troops over the objection the local authorities.

The other post on a quick response force, does seem to me to be an interesting question as to why that should reside in the National Guard versus within a well-funded DC police capability.

It's one thing to want the DC Guard to be responsible directly to the DC Mayor so as to not need federal approval to move when called in an emergency, just as the Guard is to Governors, it's another to have them be considered a primary response. Yes, they should have been able to respond more swiftly on Jan 6, but IMO a beefed up Capitol police capability would likely make more sense.

BTW, perhaps the inability of the DC Mayor to actually direct the Guard the way a Governor could, and the experience of the Lafayette Square's misuse of the Guard over the Mayor's objections led to the reluctance to stand up a request in advance of Jan 6...'would the President misuse the Guard again?' may well have been going through their minds...but when called, it took too long. Do need a better answer.

Is it a funding issue and that DC has a whole bunch of federal targets to protect, none of which pay real estate taxes? If so, solve it with funding.

Here's a solution. Give the Governor of a 51st state the power the 50 governors have.

[MDlaxfan76]

Cognitive dissonance & deploying the DC National Guard.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... re/174413/

What do you mean on "cognitive dissonance"? Seems to me that this article makes sound sense on all three points. Absolutely nuts that a Governor can send troops over the objection the local authorities.

The other post on a quick response force, does seem to me to be an interesting question as to why that should reside in the National Guard versus within a well-funded DC police capability.

It's one thing to want the DC Guard to be responsible directly to the DC Mayor so as to not need federal approval to move when called in an emergency, just as the Guard is to Governors, it's another to have them be considered a primary response. Yes, they should have been able to respond more swiftly on Jan 6, but IMO a beefed up Capitol police capability would likely make more sense.

BTW, perhaps the inability of the DC Mayor to actually direct the Guard the way a Governor could, and the experience of the Lafayette Square's misuse of the Guard over the Mayor's objections led to the reluctance to stand up a request in advance of Jan 6...'would the President misuse the Guard again?' may well have been going through their minds...but when called, it took too long. Do need a better answer.

Is it a funding issue and that DC has a whole bunch of federal targets to protect, none of which pay real estate taxes? If so, solve it with funding.

Here's a solution. Give the Governor of a 51st state the power the 50 governors have.

Yup.

[youthathletics]

Cognitive dissonance & deploying the DC National Guard.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... re/174413/

What do you mean on "cognitive dissonance"? Seems to me that this article makes sound sense on all three points. Absolutely nuts that a Governor can send troops over the objection the local authorities.

The other post on a quick response force, does seem to me to be an interesting question as to why that should reside in the National Guard versus within a well-funded DC police capability.

It's one thing to want the DC Guard to be responsible directly to the DC Mayor so as to not need federal approval to move when called in an emergency, just as the Guard is to Governors, it's another to have them be considered a primary response. Yes, they should have been able to respond more swiftly on Jan 6, but IMO a beefed up Capitol police capability would likely make more sense.

BTW, perhaps the inability of the DC Mayor to actually direct the Guard the way a Governor could, and the experience of the Lafayette Square's misuse of the Guard over the Mayor's objections led to the reluctance to stand up a request in advance of Jan 6...'would the President misuse the Guard again?' may well have been going through their minds...but when called, it took too long. Do need a better answer.

Is it a funding issue and that DC has a whole bunch of federal targets to protect, none of which pay real estate taxes? If so, solve it with funding.

Here's a solution. Give the Governor of a 51st state the power the 50 governors have.

That solves very little. There are Federal property boundaries and current City (or New Columbia State proposed) boundaries. Bottom line, the jurisdictional aspect is what is in the way.