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

[Kismet]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

[MDlaxfan76]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

Yes, basic ethical standards.

[cradleandshoot]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

Yes, basic ethical standards.

If memory serves me correct when Nixon died the people that despised him treated his memory with a modicum of respect for the good things he did. He did for better or worse open the door to normal relations with the Chicoms. I despised Nixon because it was a family tradition. His paranoia allowed him to allow the band of bunglers to break into the Watergate. So he was worried about losing the election to George McGovern?? The 72 election redefined what a landslide victory was all about.

[CU88]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

[cradleandshoot]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

[Seacoaster(1)]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

Thanks for the predictable and irrelevant whataboutism, your specialty. I don't recall Clinton taking the Fifth hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and this report (below) doesn't suggest she said "I don't recall" or "I don't know" to any questions.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -committee

[MDlaxfan76]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

Thanks for the predictable and irrelevant whataboutism, your specialty. I don't recall Clinton taking the Fifth hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and this report (below) doesn't suggest she said "I don't recall" or "I don't know" to any questions.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -committee

To be fair to cradle, Clinton did say that 39 times when being interviewed about her server. She also answered many questions without such.

And, if I recall correctly, 13 hours of testimony in the House without resorting to that line.

These are not remotely close, but she did do a bit of it.

[Seacoaster(1)]

From the Elaine Chao J6 Committee transcript:

Q: We've heard from other Members of the Cabinet certain points in time when they came to believe President Trump had lost the election. Was there a point in time when you came to believe he lost?

Chao: Yes. November 3.

[cradleandshoot]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

Thanks for the predictable and irrelevant whataboutism, your specialty. I don't recall Clinton taking the Fifth hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and this report (below) doesn't suggest she said "I don't recall" or "I don't know" to any questions.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -committee

You don't have to take the 5th counselor when a poor memory achieves the same goal. Correct me if I'm wrong counselor but does pleading the 5th mean your guilty of anything? Your only using the right granted to you by the constitution about not having to incriminate yourself. Correct me again if I'm wrong counselor but isn't the 5th amendment used by Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives and even mob bosses and drug dealers? It wasn't that long ago Lois Lerner used the 5th amendment to protect herself from some scurrilous accusations. This ain't a one way street counselor. The constitution gave us the 5th amendment for a reason. Are you willing to move the goalposts and say that pleading the fifth is tantamount to admitting your guilty of something?

[Typical Lax Dad]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

Thanks for the predictable and irrelevant whataboutism, your specialty. I don't recall Clinton taking the Fifth hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and this report (below) doesn't suggest she said "I don't recall" or "I don't know" to any questions.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -committee

You don't have to take the 5th counselor when a poor memory achieves the same goal. Correct me if I'm wrong counselor but does pleading the 5th mean your guilty of anything? Your only using the right granted to you by the constitution about not having to incriminate yourself. Correct me again if I'm wrong counselor but isn't the 5th amendment used by Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives and even mob bosses and drug dealers? It wasn't that long ago Lois Lerner used the 5th amendment to protect herself from some scurrilous accusations. This ain't a one way street counselor. The constitution gave us the 5th amendment for a reason. Are you willing to move the goalposts and say that pleading the fifth is tantamount to admitting your guilty of something?

What up ‘Tron!

[Seacoaster(1)]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

Thanks for the predictable and irrelevant whataboutism, your specialty. I don't recall Clinton taking the Fifth hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and this report (below) doesn't suggest she said "I don't recall" or "I don't know" to any questions.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -committee

You don't have to take the 5th counselor when a poor memory achieves the same goal. Correct me if I'm wrong counselor but does pleading the 5th mean your guilty of anything? Your only using the right granted to you by the constitution about not having to incriminate yourself. Correct me again if I'm wrong counselor but isn't the 5th amendment used by Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives and even mob bosses and drug dealers? It wasn't that long ago Lois Lerner used the 5th amendment to protect herself from some scurrilous accusations. This ain't a one way street counselor. The constitution gave us the 5th amendment for a reason. Are you willing to move the goalposts and say that pleading the fifth is tantamount to admitting your guilty of something?

My response really says none of the things you have worked yourself up to attribute to me here. It's actually a little bizarre.

[Kismet]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

Thanks for the predictable and irrelevant whataboutism, your specialty. I don't recall Clinton taking the Fifth hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and this report (below) doesn't suggest she said "I don't recall" or "I don't know" to any questions.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -committee

You don't have to take the 5th counselor when a poor memory achieves the same goal. Correct me if I'm wrong counselor but does pleading the 5th mean your guilty of anything? Your only using the right granted to you by the constitution about not having to incriminate yourself. Correct me again if I'm wrong counselor but isn't the 5th amendment used by Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives and even mob bosses and drug dealers? It wasn't that long ago Lois Lerner used the 5th amendment to protect herself from some scurrilous accusations. This ain't a one way street counselor. The constitution gave us the 5th amendment for a reason. Are you willing to move the goalposts and say that pleading the fifth is tantamount to admitting your guilty of something?

My response really says none of the things you have worked yourself up to attribute to me here. It's actually a little bizarre.

Cradle would have been better off commenting on your response by taking the 5th.

Reminds me of the famous quote

“Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” ― Carl Sagan

[Brooklyn]

this fully illustrates the republiCON view of Jan 6:



https://assets.amuniversal.com/eac67dd0 ... a9545d.png

[CU88]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.

No chance that DOJ proceeds on this case with just the speech text as evidence. They need to prove INTENT beyond a reasonable doubt - a very high threshold. They will never go to insurrection. Best shot is likely obstruction of a federal proceeding. This will depend on how many and which folks can be flipped to incriminate Orange Cheato. Witnesses confirming that they saw Meadows routinely burn documents in his office fireplace is significant for him.

FYI, Nixon tried to take his papers out of the WH and the truck was stopped by Ford Administration. Tricky Dick claimed the materials were HIS (sound familiar?).
Legislation was then introduced and passed that governs Presidential Records to this day. The records belong to the GOVERNMENT not to any individual.

Great piece by Yale prof Timothy Snyder on January 6 entitled "The Facts of January 6
https://snyder.substack.com/p/january-6 ... paign=post

Imagine how the report would have read if those who took the 5th or said "I don't recall" actually told the truth.

Same thing for the Mueller Report. I chuckle at the idiots who declare that these reports exonerate the DEPLORABLES.

We only know "half the facts".

Maybe they took a page out of the HRC playbook. She was the poster child when it came to " not recalling" anything. There is one thing I do know, not recalling anything is one method to be implemented to avoid lying under oath.
It would be much simpler to define whatever these people may or may not know as an example of them being " extremely careless"

Thanks for the predictable and irrelevant whataboutism, your specialty. I don't recall Clinton taking the Fifth hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and this report (below) doesn't suggest she said "I don't recall" or "I don't know" to any questions.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -committee

You don't have to take the 5th counselor when a poor memory achieves the same goal. Correct me if I'm wrong counselor but does pleading the 5th mean your guilty of anything? Your only using the right granted to you by the constitution about not having to incriminate yourself. Correct me again if I'm wrong counselor but isn't the 5th amendment used by Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives and even mob bosses and drug dealers? It wasn't that long ago Lois Lerner used the 5th amendment to protect herself from some scurrilous accusations. This ain't a one way street counselor. The constitution gave us the 5th amendment for a reason. Are you willing to move the goalposts and say that pleading the fifth is tantamount to admitting your guilty of something?

My response really says none of the things you have worked yourself up to attribute to me here. It's actually a little bizarre.

Cradle would have been better off commenting on your response by taking the 5th.

LOL

+1

[Kismet]

Link to the entire Select Committee Report

https://house.devindc.com/

[Seacoaster(1)]

Anniversary present:

https://www.freep.com/story/news/politi ... 785142007/

"Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced Friday her decision to reopen a criminal investigation into a group of Republicans who she says inappropriately attempted to award the state's electoral votes to ex-President Donald Trump following the 2020 presidential contest.

The decision is a reversal — Nessel previously said she had enough evidence to charge the so-called "fake electors," but instead wanted federal authorities to pursue a broader probe. But Friday, during a news media call with the Democratic Attorneys General Association, she appeared to show she'd lost her patience with federal prosecutors.

"Quite candidly, yes, we are reopening our investigation, because I don't know what the federal government plans to do," Nessel said.

"Perhaps they are going to move forward, and I hope that they do. But I think that it is important that ... a couple years later, that there be some accountability. Let's be clear about what this was: It was an effort to overturn a lawful election. And I think that that type of activity can't go without any consequences."

The fact Nessel announced her decision on the two-year anniversary of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol is not an accident. She has repeatedly argued the effort of the so-called "fake electors" in late 2020 was part of a much broader scheme to overturn President Joe Biden's lawful victory.

In the midst of swirling conspiracies following the 2020 presidential election, some Trump supporters in Michigan and elsewhere attempted to offer alternative slates of electoral delegates. The Trump campaign and others falsely suggested Michigan could lawfully proffer a separate, GOP slate of delegates and Congress could accept those delegates, despite President Joe Biden winning Michigan by more than 154,000 votes.

That led to 16 Trump supporters signing a document indicating they were legitimate Electoral College delegates for Michigan and sending it to the office of Vice President Mike Pence, the Michigan Secretary of State, the National Archivist and the chief judge of the western district of Michigan.

In January 2022, Nessel confirmed she was investigating these 16 people for possible election fraud, forgery or other charges. But at the time, she said it made more sense to refer all the evidence she had to federal authorities.

"Seemingly there's a conspiracy that occurred between multiple states. So if what your ultimate goal is, is not just to prosecute these 16 individuals, but to find out who put them up to this, is this part of a bigger conspiracy at play in order to undermine the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election, not just in Michigan but nationally? ... It creates jurisdictional issues," Nessel said last year.

"I feel confident we have enough evidence to charge if we decide to pursue that. Again, I want to make it clear, I haven't ruled it out. But for all the reasons I stated, I think that it's a better idea for the feds to pursue this."

It's unclear when exactly she reopened the case. At one point during the call she seemed to indicate it was already opened, but later said she would reopen it. A spokesperson with Nessel's office confirmed the investigation is open again but declined further comment.

In a statement, a spokesperson for the Michigan Republican Party blasted Nessel's decision.

"Once again Dana Nessel has proven that she is both incompetent and incapable at performing her job on the taxpayer dime," said Elizabeth Stoddart, MIGOP communications director.

"Michiganders deserve better than a law enforcement official who is using taxpayer dollars to perpetually persecute her political enemies as opposed to prosecuting criminals and making Michigan a safer place to live."

During the call Friday, Nessel said she thought additional information released publicly by the U.S. House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack showed again why charges were needed. Multiple fake electors were subpoenaed by the committee, as was former Michigan Republican Party Chair Laura Cox.

The fact this information didn't prompt federal action — at least yet — makes her nervous.

"I'll be blunt about it: yes, I'm a little worried that over a year has passed," Nessel said, referencing when she sent her evidence to federal prosecutors.

"I thought there was already a substantial amount of evidence in that case, but now there is just clear evidence to support charges against those 16 false electors, at least in our state."

Nessel said she expects her investigation could run in parallel to any federal inquiry that may or may not be underway.

In September, Nessel told the Detroit Free Press editorial board she had hoped the feds would have "worked a little quicker" but thought there was a chance some charges could come before the midterm election. Pushed for more details, she declined to provide additional information at the time.

"I will say this, I don't think that anyone should feel secure in the notion that they can violate our election laws and have there be no accountability," she said.

[Farfromgeneva]

We are just fashion leaders for the world!

Jair Bolsonaro Supporters Storm Brazil’s Congress Buildings

Many call for military intervention to remove leftist leader Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva

Samantha Pearson
Updated Jan. 8, 2023 3:43 pm ET

Newsletter Sign-up

What’s News

Catch up on the headlines, understand the news and make better decisions, free in your inbox every day.

An outspoken former army captain and friend of Donald Trump, Mr. Bolsonaro has yet to publicly concede he lost the election, which Mr. da Silva won in October with 51% of the vote.

Mr. Bolsonaro, whose unfounded claims of election fraud ahead of the vote polarized the country’s electorate, left Brazil for Orlando, Fla., shortly before Mr. da Silva was inaugurated on Jan. 1, refusing to hand over the presidential sash to his rival.

Ibaneis Rocha, governor of the federal district in which Brasília is located, called the protests an “antidemocratic riot,” writing on Twitter that he was taking all measures to contain the protesters and punish those responsible. He added that he had fired the federal district’s public security secretary, Anderson Torres, Mr. Bolsonaro’s former justice minister, who Brazilian press reported to be in the U.S. Sunday. Mr. Torres couldn’t be reached for comment.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

Television images showed police helicopters hovering over Brazil’s presidential palace as swarms of protesters gathered on the ramp to the building’s entrance, the same ramp that Mr. da Silva walked up a week ago—a symbolic act of his inauguration.

The presidential palace didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Updates to follow as news develops.


Protesters clashed with police in Brasília on Sunday.Photo: Eraldo Peres/Associated Press
Write to Samantha Pearson at [email protected]

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

[Typical Lax Dad]

We are just fashion leaders for the world!

Jair Bolsonaro Supporters Storm Brazil’s Congress Buildings

Many call for military intervention to remove leftist leader Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva

Samantha Pearson
Updated Jan. 8, 2023 3:43 pm ET

Newsletter Sign-up

What’s News

Catch up on the headlines, understand the news and make better decisions, free in your inbox every day.

An outspoken former army captain and friend of Donald Trump, Mr. Bolsonaro has yet to publicly concede he lost the election, which Mr. da Silva won in October with 51% of the vote.

Mr. Bolsonaro, whose unfounded claims of election fraud ahead of the vote polarized the country’s electorate, left Brazil for Orlando, Fla., shortly before Mr. da Silva was inaugurated on Jan. 1, refusing to hand over the presidential sash to his rival.

Ibaneis Rocha, governor of the federal district in which Brasília is located, called the protests an “antidemocratic riot,” writing on Twitter that he was taking all measures to contain the protesters and punish those responsible. He added that he had fired the federal district’s public security secretary, Anderson Torres, Mr. Bolsonaro’s former justice minister, who Brazilian press reported to be in the U.S. Sunday. Mr. Torres couldn’t be reached for comment.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

Television images showed police helicopters hovering over Brazil’s presidential palace as swarms of protesters gathered on the ramp to the building’s entrance, the same ramp that Mr. da Silva walked up a week ago—a symbolic act of his inauguration.

The presidential palace didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Updates to follow as news develops.


Protesters clashed with police in Brasília on Sunday.Photo: Eraldo Peres/Associated Press
Write to Samantha Pearson at [email protected]

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

Monkey see, monkey do… we set a fine example.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Monkey see, monkey do… we set a fine example.

Weren't there Republican advisors like Steve Bannon helping Bolsonaro. In the meantime he's chilling in Florida eating fried chicken

Brazil's Shaman. wonder if he's vegan too.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Monkey see, monkey do… we set a fine example.

Weren't there Republican advisors like Steve Bannon helping Bolsonaro. In the meantime he's chilling in Florida eating fried chicken

Brazil's Shaman. wonder if he's vegan too.