January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[Farfromgeneva]

Serious question, why is it disingenuous for the last administration to ask a few states to double check their counts before conceding? Ignore that it was Trump b/c that taints your view. And suppose they found errors that flipped a state(s)....how would you then argue your point?

That's honestly a "Serious question"? Anyway, I'll answer.

It's not disingenuous if the last administration asked a few states to double check their counts before conceding.

But the last administration didn't do that. They yelled and screamed at the top of their lungs about widespread fraud and rigging and never conceded. They even tried to overturn the actual results. The election was secure and fair and their claims got smacked down and disproven again and again.

And they didn't find errors that flipped states, so asking your followup question is completely moot. He wouldn't be arguing his current point.

And now a majority of Republicans think our elections are rigged.

What a coincidence, a majority of Democrats think most black Americans can't figure out how to vote in an election.

Just feeling like arguing today eh? Regardless of, like facts or logic?

No argument, I think black Americans are way smart enough and dedicated to casting their vote that right and privilege will never be denied. My question stands to you, can you name a single eligible voter who was denied the right to vote? If that is true that person has remained anonymous.

Please share the study that demonstrates that a majority of Democrats think most black Americans can’t figure out how to vote.

Do you now need a study to understand common sense? What your implying is black Americans and hell every voter for that matter can't figure out what they need to do to cast a vote. It pretty clear the average Democrat hasn't figured that out yet.

How soon you forget I went to college and therefor and dumb and have no common sense. I do know what the concepts of “moral relativism” and “false equivalencies” are.

I'm aware you're very well educated. To my knowledge common sense is not on the curriculum at any college or university. You either have it or you don't. I'm am of the belief that people are smart enough to understand the voting rules where they live. I'm also of the belief that no outside power can prevent them from voting if they wish . You live in Georgia, do you think the new voting laws will stop anybody you know from voting? They have had a good amount of time to figure it all out.

I think that various pressure and other activities can inflict psychological toll on a group of individuals that have their own legacy baggage from centuries of repression, abuse and treatment as chattel that comes down from older generations and when they see it I wouldn’t presume to pretend to know if that influences their decision making, but bet it does for some and one is too many. We’re all equal on this planet. Those folks just generally are better endowed than me and people that look like me…

But for me? I can ask around. I know the level of legitimate distrust of white people in power absolutely influences important decisions that some make every day of their lives. Atlanta has a f’ed up history and we’re talking well into the 90s the stuff you think hasn’t happened since Pre 1960 was going on 20-25yrs ago

I did basic and jump school at Benning in 1979. You don't have to convince me of some of the neanderthals that reside there. I thought things had changed quite a bit. A coworker of mine at Coca cola moved his family there about 8 years ago. They absolutely love Atlanta.

Glad to hear about your friend. I find it pretty sterile, the real good times were late 90s -2010 it appears. Then the mayor threw resources into The Shoppes At Buckhead to make it the “rodeo drive” of Atlanta, they started building ground up loft apartments in a very geographically horizontally spread out city and pumped $1Bn of ARRA into a 1mi above ground rail that doesn’t serve Jack-ish while it has one of the most ineffective and useless rail lines of any top ten city in the country. It’s like the 30-35yr old kind of doing well who has no social awareness and is trying to play up to elite rich people. Sold out its character. My little neighborhood is one of the few that’s retained any sense of character.

But more importantly Benning isn’t Atlanta. Within the perimeter of the city there’s a vast difference between Atlanta and even most of its close in suburbs.

Hbo did a multi part special on Atlanta’s history and it’s not a good look. So if you’re a beaten down 40yr old or 50yr old the impact of some of these actions could easily lead someone to feel like they can’t or shouldn’t vote who are otherwise thoughtful and intelligent people. That’s quite different than “Democrats don’t think Blake people are smart enough to figure out how to vote”

[old salt]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/politics ... index.html

"Federal prosecutors are reviewing fake Electoral College certifications that declared former President Donald Trump the winner of states that he lost, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNN on Tuesday.

"We've received those referrals. Our prosecutors are looking at those and I can't say anything more on ongoing investigations," Monaco said in an exclusive interview."

Rut Roh

OS sure to be posting daily updates here...

No chance. Distracted by what is happening in the real world. Troll (by name) someone else.

Interesting that OS doesn't care about Vote Fraud when r's are caught...

Not surprising I guess, they are all white guys doing it so it must be OK?

Election law & the Electoral College are incredibly complicated subjects.
I do not yet know enough (or care enough) to intelligently opine or comment ...but don't let that stop you.
The degree of my knowledge, concern & alarm on this subject will rise or subside as the legal process plays out.
Right now, so far, to me, this is just more political white noise.
Let us know if & when someone is convicted.

You might want to report the guy who has been posting under your account over on the Voting Rights topic!

This is not Voting Rights. It's either fraud or it is not. Who can appoint electors & how.
It has nothing to with who can vote & how. Tweaking the ECA could remove this as a potential future possibility.

I thought you didn't know enough, or care enough, to opine?

I'm not opining. I still don't consider this potential voter fraud. I consider it certification of election results.
It's my understanding that the votes were already cast, counted & certified before the electors were designated.
If that's wrong, the legal process will educate me.
I still don't know if these attempts to designate alternate electors are unlawful & constitute fraud.
I'm still happy to let the legal process work & educate me.
Keep trolling me if you wish, but I won't be taking the bait.

[seacoaster]

Pretty interesting post by Empty Wheel concerning the hunt for communications from the lawyers supporting the conspiracy to impede the certification of electoral votes and seating the President in accordance with the vote tallies, the Electoral College and the will of 81,000,000 people:

https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/02/02/w ... nications/

Excerpt:

"Any emails obtained with a non-public warrant would be sent to a taint team that would review Sidney Powell’s privilege claims independently. Of particular interest, after Trump claimed Powell represented him on November 15, 2020, Rudy stated as clearly as he can manage on November 22 that, “Sidney Powell is practicing law on her own. She is not a member of the Trump Legal Team. She is also not a lawyer for the President in his personal capacity.”

With that statement, Rudy effectively waived privilege for any communications implicating both of them from that date forward, long in advance of that December 18 meeting at which Powell purportedly told him about all the communications she sent him in the interim.

Similarly, most of these events post-date the time, November 25, when Powell can credibly claim to be representing Mike Flynn in an effort to nullify the consequences of his lies and foreign agent work, because that’s when Trump pardoned Flynn. So she may want to claim privilege, but after November 25, all visible basis for that claim was affirmatively gone, and for anything seized from her email provider, she’s likely not going to be involved in making that claim anyway."

[MDlaxfan76]

Former President Donald Trump questions the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. For half the country, this makes him a “sore loser” who promotes “conspiracy theories” and pushes “The Big Lie.” But when President Joe Biden in his recent press conference preemptively questions the legitimacy of the 2022 midterm elections, nine months before they even occur, suddenly the analysis changes:

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnis ... on-results

Interesting article, but do you not agree that making up entirely false claims of fraudulent votes eg. dead people, Chavez controlled election machines, and organizing an effort to ignore the actual vote count, and encouraging a riot when that doesn't work and the VP won't go along with breaking the law...that's quite a bit more than a "sore loser"...and quite a bit different from warning about rules that make it harder to cast a ballot (suppression) and rules that allow the rule makers (GOP) to ignore the actual vote count and simply declare a winner (subversion)...? Not really the same, right?

Serious question, why is it disingenuous for the last administration to ask a few states to double check their counts before conceding? Ignore that it was Trump b/c that taints your view. And suppose they found errors that flipped a state(s)....how would you then argue your point?

"disingenuous"????

The states did "check", they ran audits, and came up the same...right away. No need to continue the charade that there were issues to consider after that was done. Note that it was further bolstered as credible that several were done so by elected folks from the same party as was making the request. That shouldn't matter, but it certainly was further credibility. Likewise, the chief official at the federal level, appointed by the same person as was raising the concerns, the POTUS, said that the election was the safest and most secure in US history after his team's own review. Not long after that the US AG, who had otherwise been considered a loyalist to that same POTUS, did his own investigation and found the same thing, no reason to further question the outcome, minor arguable issues, but nothing remotely close to swinging any of the states' overall counts being questioned.

I have no issue with the normal process of confirming accuracy. It can be done rather swiftly, and that was completed well within the timeline required to certify electors.

But we cannot give the former POTUS and his allies any benefit of the doubt beyond the initial challenges and audits. None.

[MDlaxfan76]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/politics ... index.html

"Federal prosecutors are reviewing fake Electoral College certifications that declared former President Donald Trump the winner of states that he lost, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNN on Tuesday.

"We've received those referrals. Our prosecutors are looking at those and I can't say anything more on ongoing investigations," Monaco said in an exclusive interview."

Rut Roh

OS sure to be posting daily updates here...

No chance. Distracted by what is happening in the real world. Troll (by name) someone else.

Interesting that OS doesn't care about Vote Fraud when r's are caught...

Not surprising I guess, they are all white guys doing it so it must be OK?

Election law & the Electoral College are incredibly complicated subjects.
I do not yet know enough (or care enough) to intelligently opine or comment ...but don't let that stop you.
The degree of my knowledge, concern & alarm on this subject will rise or subside as the legal process plays out.
Right now, so far, to me, this is just more political white noise.
Let us know if & when someone is convicted.

You might want to report the guy who has been posting under your account over on the Voting Rights topic!

This is not Voting Rights. It's either fraud or it is not. Who can appoint electors & how.
It has nothing to with who can vote & how. Tweaking the ECA could remove this as a potential future possibility.

I thought you didn't know enough, or care enough, to opine?

I'm not opining. I still don't consider this potential voter fraud. I consider it certification of election results.
It's my understanding that the votes were already cast, counted & certified before the electors were designated.
If that's wrong, the legal process will educate me.
I still don't know if these attempts to designate alternate electors are unlawful & constitute fraud.
I'm still happy to let the legal process work & educate me.
Keep trolling me if you wish, but I won't be taking the bait.

"trolling"? I asked a simple question...you said you don't know enough or care enough to opine, then turned around and made a declarative statement about ECA...if you don't know enough or care enough then why the certainty that ECA would accomplish anything worthwhile? Sure sounds like opining to me.

ok, "fraud". How does pretending to be the certified electors and creating a document claiming such and sending that in as if the actual document from the state not constitute fraud? At a minimum in the sense that a non lawyer would comprehend? I think the couple that caveated their submission with a note saying that this document should only be considered an alternative should the original true one be reversed may have a defense. There was no plausible way that the true certified slate could be reversed, but at least there was an acknowledgment that the document was not purporting to be the correct one otherwise. But those who sent them in as a claim to be the actual certified electors were 100% fraudulent. A lie. And they knew it was a lie.

[PizzaSnake]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/politics ... index.html

"Federal prosecutors are reviewing fake Electoral College certifications that declared former President Donald Trump the winner of states that he lost, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNN on Tuesday.

"We've received those referrals. Our prosecutors are looking at those and I can't say anything more on ongoing investigations," Monaco said in an exclusive interview."

Rut Roh

OS sure to be posting daily updates here...

No chance. Distracted by what is happening in the real world. Troll (by name) someone else.

Interesting that OS doesn't care about Vote Fraud when r's are caught...

Not surprising I guess, they are all white guys doing it so it must be OK?

Election law & the Electoral College are incredibly complicated subjects.
I do not yet know enough (or care enough) to intelligently opine or comment ...but don't let that stop you.
The degree of my knowledge, concern & alarm on this subject will rise or subside as the legal process plays out.
Right now, so far, to me, this is just more political white noise.
Let us know if & when someone is convicted.

You might want to report the guy who has been posting under your account over on the Voting Rights topic!

This is not Voting Rights. It's either fraud or it is not. Who can appoint electors & how.
It has nothing to with who can vote & how. Tweaking the ECA could remove this as a potential future possibility.

I thought you didn't know enough, or care enough, to opine?

I'm not opining. I still don't consider this potential voter fraud. I consider it certification of election results.
It's my understanding that the votes were already cast, counted & certified before the electors were designated.
If that's wrong, the legal process will educate me.
I still don't know if these attempts to designate alternate electors are unlawful & constitute fraud.
I'm still happy to let the legal process work & educate me.
Keep trolling me if you wish, but I won't be taking the bait.

“ I still don't consider this potential voter fraud. I consider it certification of election results.
It's my understanding that the votes were already cast, counted & certified before the electors were designated.
If that's wrong, the legal process will educate me.”

What is the meaning of “is”?

[old salt]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/politics ... index.html

"Federal prosecutors are reviewing fake Electoral College certifications that declared former President Donald Trump the winner of states that he lost, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNN on Tuesday.

"We've received those referrals. Our prosecutors are looking at those and I can't say anything more on ongoing investigations," Monaco said in an exclusive interview."

Rut Roh

OS sure to be posting daily updates here...

No chance. Distracted by what is happening in the real world. Troll (by name) someone else.

Interesting that OS doesn't care about Vote Fraud when r's are caught...

Not surprising I guess, they are all white guys doing it so it must be OK?

Election law & the Electoral College are incredibly complicated subjects.
I do not yet know enough (or care enough) to intelligently opine or comment ...but don't let that stop you.
The degree of my knowledge, concern & alarm on this subject will rise or subside as the legal process plays out.
Right now, so far, to me, this is just more political white noise.
Let us know if & when someone is convicted.

You might want to report the guy who has been posting under your account over on the Voting Rights topic!

This is not Voting Rights. It's either fraud or it is not. Who can appoint electors & how.
It has nothing to with who can vote & how. Tweaking the ECA could remove this as a potential future possibility.

I thought you didn't know enough, or care enough, to opine?

I'm not opining. I still don't consider this potential voter fraud. I consider it certification of election results.
It's my understanding that the votes were already cast, counted & certified before the electors were designated.
If that's wrong, the legal process will educate me.
I still don't know if these attempts to designate alternate electors are unlawful & constitute fraud.
I'm still happy to let the legal process work & educate me.
Keep trolling me if you wish, but I won't be taking the bait.

"trolling"? I asked a simple question...you said you don't know enough or care enough to opine, then turned around and made a declarative statement about ECA...if you don't know enough or care enough then why the certainty that ECA would accomplish anything worthwhile? Sure sounds like opining to me.

ok, "fraud". How does pretending to be the certified electors and creating a document claiming such and sending that in as if the actual document from the state not constitute fraud? At a minimum in the sense that a non lawyer would comprehend? I think the couple that caveated their submission with a note saying that this document should only be considered an alternative should the original true one be reversed may have a defense. There was no plausible way that the true certified slate could be reversed, but at least there was an acknowledgment that the document was not purporting to be the correct one otherwise. But those who sent them in as a claim to be the actual certified electors were 100% fraudulent. A lie. And they knew it was a lie.

Blah, blah, blah.
You trolls are wasting your time & bandwidth. I'm not going to play.
So far, these are just referrals to the DoJ by opposition politicians.
I'm waiting for a "speaking" indictment to tell me if there is any there, there, & what it is.

[seacoaster]

"Trolling" is disagreeing with the Apologist.

[MDlaxfan76]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/politics ... index.html

"Federal prosecutors are reviewing fake Electoral College certifications that declared former President Donald Trump the winner of states that he lost, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNN on Tuesday.

"We've received those referrals. Our prosecutors are looking at those and I can't say anything more on ongoing investigations," Monaco said in an exclusive interview."

Rut Roh

OS sure to be posting daily updates here...

No chance. Distracted by what is happening in the real world. Troll (by name) someone else.

Interesting that OS doesn't care about Vote Fraud when r's are caught...

Not surprising I guess, they are all white guys doing it so it must be OK?

Election law & the Electoral College are incredibly complicated subjects.
I do not yet know enough (or care enough) to intelligently opine or comment ...but don't let that stop you.
The degree of my knowledge, concern & alarm on this subject will rise or subside as the legal process plays out.
Right now, so far, to me, this is just more political white noise.
Let us know if & when someone is convicted.

You might want to report the guy who has been posting under your account over on the Voting Rights topic!

This is not Voting Rights. It's either fraud or it is not. Who can appoint electors & how.
It has nothing to with who can vote & how. Tweaking the ECA could remove this as a potential future possibility.

I thought you didn't know enough, or care enough, to opine?

I'm not opining. I still don't consider this potential voter fraud. I consider it certification of election results.
It's my understanding that the votes were already cast, counted & certified before the electors were designated.
If that's wrong, the legal process will educate me.
I still don't know if these attempts to designate alternate electors are unlawful & constitute fraud.
I'm still happy to let the legal process work & educate me.
Keep trolling me if you wish, but I won't be taking the bait.

"trolling"? I asked a simple question...you said you don't know enough or care enough to opine, then turned around and made a declarative statement about ECA...if you don't know enough or care enough then why the certainty that ECA would accomplish anything worthwhile? Sure sounds like opining to me.

ok, "fraud". How does pretending to be the certified electors and creating a document claiming such and sending that in as if the actual document from the state not constitute fraud? At a minimum in the sense that a non lawyer would comprehend? I think the couple that caveated their submission with a note saying that this document should only be considered an alternative should the original true one be reversed may have a defense. There was no plausible way that the true certified slate could be reversed, but at least there was an acknowledgment that the document was not purporting to be the correct one otherwise. But those who sent them in as a claim to be the actual certified electors were 100% fraudulent. A lie. And they knew it was a lie.

Blah, blah, blah.
You trolls are wasting your time & bandwidth. I'm not going to play.
So far, these are just referrals to the DoJ by opposition politicians.
I'm waiting for a "speaking" indictment to tell me if there is any there, there, & what it is.

ok, so don't answer simple questions. But also don't expect not to be challenged when you claim (German accent implied) "I know nothing, I see nothing... and then turn around and declare something that would require quite a lot of actual knowledge.

I agree with you that we don't really know that there's a provable case of "fraud" under legal definitions...but based on the information we do know there sure seems to be both the production of false documents with the intent to pass them off as valid. In some cases the use of the actual seal of the state, in others simply the declaration of authenticity as the valid certified electors...which they most certainly were not. By any layman's definition those are fraudulent...again, there may be a defense about intent for those that specifically said they were not the actual certified electors, but would be if the real ones somehow could be rejected (which they couldn't be legally). My own opinion is the latter defense should fail, but hey it might not.

What's far more interesting than throwing these jerks who signed these things (note, some of the actual Trump electors on the ballot refused to be used on the false certification documents) is the conspiracy behind this apparently coordinated effort.

I think these people thought the heck with the law, we need to do everything we can to retain Trump in power...no matter what. It's that important to the country. "Patriots"! But believing that you have a righteous cause is not a valid defense.

[ggait]

Just about any lawyer would tell you that the shirt Trump & Co. pulled after the election qualifies as criminal under the law.

Any lawyer would also tell you that Trump will never be convicted -- although he deserves to be.

There's tens of millions of people in the country who apparently actually believe that Trump won the election. So what's the likelihood of getting not one single one of those folks on a jury?

The jury pool has been so polluted by disinformation and right wing media, it is hard to see how you could ever get 12 guilty votes against Trump.

Trump's demise ultimately will have to be political not legal. Unless NY prosecutors get him for business fraud stuff unrelated to his presidential actions.

I also think the private lawsuits brought by Dominion and Smartmatic are the ones that will hold the conspirators accountable.

[old salt]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

[MDlaxfan76]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

So, just say that you believe he's guilty as sin of a whole slew of crimes, but that he's likely to get off with it because he's so polluted the jury pool.

And should never, ever be POTUS again.

You don't need to "debate" the minutiae.

[old salt]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

So, just say that you believe he's guilty as sin of a whole slew of crimes, but that he's likely to get off with it because he's so polluted the jury pool.

And should never, ever be POTUS again.

You don't need to "debate" the minutiae.

I've already said that I disapprove of everything Trump did post-election & (imo) that should disqualify him from ever serving again.
I've also said it would not bother me to see him go away by natural causes, the sooner the better.
I'm not interested in extending the discussion on Trump & wallowing in his shortcomings. I'm happy to move on.
I will still defend the things he accomplished & his decisions & policies of which I approved.
I'm just sick of Trump, weary of hearing about him & just want him & his family to go away, asap, one way or the other.
I'm amazed that he still remains so popular, but I was equally amazed that he was nominated then elected.
Maybe that popularity & support is due to the prospect of more of the opposition in power, then & now.

[MDlaxfan76]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

So, just say that you believe he's guilty as sin of a whole slew of crimes, but that he's likely to get off with it because he's so polluted the jury pool.

And should never, ever be POTUS again.

You don't need to "debate" the minutiae.

I've already said that I disapprove of everything Trump did post-election & (imo) that should disqualify him from ever serving again.
I've also said it would not bother me to see him go away by natural causes, the sooner the better.
I'm not interested in extending the discussion on Trump & wallowing in his shortcomings. I'm happy to move on.
I will still defend the things he accomplished & his decisions & policies of which I approved.
I'm just sick of Trump, weary of hearing about him & just want him & his family to go away, asap, one way or the other.
I'm amazed that he still remains so popular, but I was equally amazed that he was nominated then elected.
Maybe that popularity & support is due to the prospect of more of the opposition in power, then & now.

Great; the next step is to see that Trump and Trumpism is more than a single individual or family, but rather a whole cohort of those who have chosen to abandon the rule of law in their efforts to support him...and/or to defeat the "opposition". I quite agree that the latter objective was/is very likely a motivation for many, as was/is the seeking of personal power, influence and $ though Trump and through the movement he rode and unleashed.

In my view, the entire cohort of those who abandoned the rule of law need to held to full account, and the sooner the better. The entire philosophy of power by any means necessary needs to excised from our political assumptions. That's what was faced down in Watergate and it needs to happen again. The problem, right now, is that it's a very large cohort...but all the more important.

I have no objection to your or anyone else favoring policies which were aligned with what you think Trump wanted or did or accomplished. Policy differences are an entirely different discussion than the topic of this thread...we can and should debate those separately. We can vigorously disagree. But power at any cost is what we're addressing here, not policy preferences.

This topic thread is specifically about the insurrection and, I'd suggest, what should be done to excise the philosophy of power at any cost.

And it's in that context that I'd argue that reforming ECA is quite insufficient. It shouldn't be presented as actually getting to the core problem of what is being done (currently by the GOP, but expect turnabout) to make possible election outcomes being ignored, authoritarianism to ascend instead of democracy. No objection to ECA reform, but only valuable as part of much more important reforms.

[old salt]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

So, just say that you believe he's guilty as sin of a whole slew of crimes, but that he's likely to get off with it because he's so polluted the jury pool.

And should never, ever be POTUS again.

You don't need to "debate" the minutiae.

I've already said that I disapprove of everything Trump did post-election & (imo) that should disqualify him from ever serving again.
I've also said it would not bother me to see him go away by natural causes, the sooner the better.
I'm not interested in extending the discussion on Trump & wallowing in his shortcomings. I'm happy to move on.
I will still defend the things he accomplished & his decisions & policies of which I approved.
I'm just sick of Trump, weary of hearing about him & just want him & his family to go away, asap, one way or the other.
I'm amazed that he still remains so popular, but I was equally amazed that he was nominated then elected.
Maybe that popularity & support is due to the prospect of more of the opposition in power, then & now.

Great; the next step is to see that Trump and Trumpism is more than a single individual or family, but rather a whole cohort of those who have chosen to abandon the rule of law in their efforts to support him...and/or to defeat the "opposition".

I have no objection to your or anyone else favoring policies which were aligned with what you think Trump wanted or did or accomplished. Policy differences are an entirely different discussion than the topic of this thread...

This topic thread is specifically about the insurrection and, I'd suggest, what should be done to excise the philosophy of power at any cost.

I'm happy to leave the exorcism to you.

[MDlaxfan76]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

So, just say that you believe he's guilty as sin of a whole slew of crimes, but that he's likely to get off with it because he's so polluted the jury pool.

And should never, ever be POTUS again.

You don't need to "debate" the minutiae.

I've already said that I disapprove of everything Trump did post-election & (imo) that should disqualify him from ever serving again.
I've also said it would not bother me to see him go away by natural causes, the sooner the better.
I'm not interested in extending the discussion on Trump & wallowing in his shortcomings. I'm happy to move on.
I will still defend the things he accomplished & his decisions & policies of which I approved.
I'm just sick of Trump, weary of hearing about him & just want him & his family to go away, asap, one way or the other.
I'm amazed that he still remains so popular, but I was equally amazed that he was nominated then elected.
Maybe that popularity & support is due to the prospect of more of the opposition in power, then & now.

Great; the next step is to see that Trump and Trumpism is more than a single individual or family, but rather a whole cohort of those who have chosen to abandon the rule of law in their efforts to support him...and/or to defeat the "opposition".

I have no objection to your or anyone else favoring policies which were aligned with what you think Trump wanted or did or accomplished. Policy differences are an entirely different discussion than the topic of this thread...

This topic thread is specifically about the insurrection and, I'd suggest, what should be done to excise the philosophy of power at any cost.

I'm happy to leave the exorcism to you.

"exorcism" appears to make lite of the issue.
Which makes you and those who think like you to be much more complicit than perhaps you intend.

It's important. And those of us who would actually like to have vigorous policy debates in which the best policies emerge and who have typically aligned with the GOP have a special responsibility because it's currently our party that has so wholesale abandoned the rule of law and respect for democracy.

And it's in that context that I'd argue that reforming ECA is quite insufficient. It shouldn't be presented as actually getting to the core problem of what is being done (currently by the GOP, but expect turnabout) to make possible election outcomes being ignored, authoritarianism to ascend instead of democracy. No objection to ECA reform, but only valuable as part of much more important reforms.

[old salt]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

So, just say that you believe he's guilty as sin of a whole slew of crimes, but that he's likely to get off with it because he's so polluted the jury pool.

And should never, ever be POTUS again.

You don't need to "debate" the minutiae.

I've already said that I disapprove of everything Trump did post-election & (imo) that should disqualify him from ever serving again.
I've also said it would not bother me to see him go away by natural causes, the sooner the better.
I'm not interested in extending the discussion on Trump & wallowing in his shortcomings. I'm happy to move on.
I will still defend the things he accomplished & his decisions & policies of which I approved.
I'm just sick of Trump, weary of hearing about him & just want him & his family to go away, asap, one way or the other.
I'm amazed that he still remains so popular, but I was equally amazed that he was nominated then elected.
Maybe that popularity & support is due to the prospect of more of the opposition in power, then & now.

Great; the next step is to see that Trump and Trumpism is more than a single individual or family, but rather a whole cohort of those who have chosen to abandon the rule of law in their efforts to support him...and/or to defeat the "opposition".

I have no objection to your or anyone else favoring policies which were aligned with what you think Trump wanted or did or accomplished. Policy differences are an entirely different discussion than the topic of this thread...

This topic thread is specifically about the insurrection and, I'd suggest, what should be done to excise the philosophy of power at any cost.

I'm happy to leave the exorcism to you.

"exorcism" appears to make lite of the issue.
Which makes you and those who think like you to be much more complicit than perhaps you intend.

It's important. And those of us who would actually like to have vigorous policy debates in which the best policies emerge and who have typically aligned with the GOP have a special responsibility because it's currently our party that has so wholesale abandoned the rule of law and respect for democracy.

And it's in that context that I'd argue that reforming ECA is quite insufficient. It shouldn't be presented as actually getting to the core problem of what is being done (currently by the GOP, but expect turnabout) to make possible election outcomes being ignored, authoritarianism to ascend instead of democracy. No objection to ECA reform, but only valuable as part of much more important reforms.

We need GOP re-education camps. Is the Greenbrier available ?

[MDlaxfan76]

I agree with gg. That's why I'm not interested in debating the legal minutiae.
Trump's been accused of so many things, none have yet to stick.
This is just more fodder to fill air time on MSNBC/CNN & to stoke outrage on social media.

So, just say that you believe he's guilty as sin of a whole slew of crimes, but that he's likely to get off with it because he's so polluted the jury pool.

And should never, ever be POTUS again.

You don't need to "debate" the minutiae.

I've already said that I disapprove of everything Trump did post-election & (imo) that should disqualify him from ever serving again.
I've also said it would not bother me to see him go away by natural causes, the sooner the better.
I'm not interested in extending the discussion on Trump & wallowing in his shortcomings. I'm happy to move on.
I will still defend the things he accomplished & his decisions & policies of which I approved.
I'm just sick of Trump, weary of hearing about him & just want him & his family to go away, asap, one way or the other.
I'm amazed that he still remains so popular, but I was equally amazed that he was nominated then elected.
Maybe that popularity & support is due to the prospect of more of the opposition in power, then & now.

Great; the next step is to see that Trump and Trumpism is more than a single individual or family, but rather a whole cohort of those who have chosen to abandon the rule of law in their efforts to support him...and/or to defeat the "opposition".

I have no objection to your or anyone else favoring policies which were aligned with what you think Trump wanted or did or accomplished. Policy differences are an entirely different discussion than the topic of this thread...

This topic thread is specifically about the insurrection and, I'd suggest, what should be done to excise the philosophy of power at any cost.

I'm happy to leave the exorcism to you.

"exorcism" appears to make lite of the issue.
Which makes you and those who think like you to be much more complicit than perhaps you intend.

It's important. And those of us who would actually like to have vigorous policy debates in which the best policies emerge and who have typically aligned with the GOP have a special responsibility because it's currently our party that has so wholesale abandoned the rule of law and respect for democracy.

And it's in that context that I'd argue that reforming ECA is quite insufficient. It shouldn't be presented as actually getting to the core problem of what is being done (currently by the GOP, but expect turnabout) to make possible election outcomes being ignored, authoritarianism to ascend instead of democracy. No objection to ECA reform, but only valuable as part of much more important reforms.

We need GOP re-education camps. Is the Greenbrier available ?

I’d sign up…

[Farfromgeneva]

Greenbriar is (or was if he’s lost it by now) Jim Justice. Businessman and governor whos jammed up creditors for years. Only good thing to come out of there was back when Steve Raichlen shot his show BBQ U from there 15yrs ago.

https://www.pbs.org/food/shows/barbecue ... -raichlen/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christophe ... 31ec932acc

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... -debt/amp/

[dislaxxic]

TRUMP’S COUP ATTEMPTS: A TALE OF FIVE PARDON DANGLES

It is the case that Trump has now dangled pardons at a time he doesn’t have the power to grant them. Even that is not new, though, given that Roger Stone was brokering a Julian Assange pardon no later than November 15, 2016 and probably starting even before the election, in October 2016.

This latest dangle is more newsworthy, though — and for reporters who don’t want to enable Trump’s authoritarian power, ought to be reported as — an attempt to reclaim power he already lost after reneging on promises of pardons made while he still had the power to grant them.

It is not news that Trump used pardon dangles as one tool to attempt a coup on January 6. At least five people directly involved in the coup attempt benefitted from pardons, some awarded at key times in the planning process, with Steve Bannon’s issued at the last possible moment.

It is not news that Trump is making pardon dangles publicly to try to bend the will and buy the silence of others. This latest pardon dangle comes in the wake of five events, all of which pose a direct threat to Trump:

December 15: The Select Committee contempt referral for Mark Meadows that puts him at risk of Presidential Records Act and obstruction prosecution
January 12: The indictment on sedition charges of the Oath Keepers whose testimony could most directly damage Trump
January 19: SCOTUS’ refusal to reverse the DC Circuit order allowing the Archives to share Trump records
January 19: The delivery to prosecutors, on January 19, of a large number of texts and messages from Rudy Giuliani’s phones
January 20: The Select Committee request for Ivanka’s testimony, which strongly suggested she has violated the Presidential Records Act
January 21: The report from Sidney Powell’s attorney that she is “cooperating” in her own prosecution and the Select Committee
What’s newsworthy is that Trump is trying this tack after reneging on promises to three of the people involved (during the last days of his Administration, there were reports that Meadows, Rudy, and Ivanka all might receive pardons) that Trump made in the course of planning for the coup.

So I’d like to tell the story of five pardons — three granted, and two withheld — in the context of Trump’s attempted coup on January 6.

Make popcorn. Read on.

..