In the communications between the insurrectionists at all levels in the weeks leading up to the J6 insurrection, the insurrections believed, and were counting on, antiFA showing up in large numbers to physically battle the insurrectionists.

But the didn't happen because antiFA was told to stay away, per PBS' Frontline. Because antiFA did not show, this threw everything off for the Patriot Boys/Oath Keepers/Three Percenters.

Additionally, there was always a plan for post-insurrection disinformation and this was compartmentalized.

What was supposed to happen is, Trump was to get his heavily armed followers riled-up at the Eclipse, he was going lead the charge into the Capitol, which is why Trump said, "it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we're going to walk down, and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down, we're going to walk down."

Once inside the Capitol, the plan included a clash between antiFA and Proud Boys/Oath Keepers/Three Percenters and the plan was to kill Pence, and Pelosi, and 12 Democrats under the cover of rioting dust-up with antiFA, and then the assassins would clear out while Trump called in the National Guard to arrest antiFA for the murders.

Then Congress would reconvene and with enough Democrats killed to shift power to the Republicans in the House, they would vote to throw out the electoral votes and send the election to the House, where Trump would win.

Post-insurrection Rightwing disinformation would turn into a rampant jailing campaign against leftists, journalists, Democrats etc. Because Fox News' Laura Ingraham's opinion show was being taped during the insurrection, Laura did not have the information that antiFA did not show up, told her audience that anitFA was heavily involved in what took place at the Capitol on J6.

Trump was supposed to declare Martial Law and the Proud Boys/Oath Keepers/Three Percenters would keep order and take direction only from Trump, and Mike Flynn's brother was supposed to be second in charge..

But when the Secret Service would not take Trump to the Capitol citing many in the crowd had circumvented the metal detectors, that's when Trump told the Secret Service that crowd would not harm him and why Trump had a hissy fit when he couldn't get to the Capitol. Trump had to get to the Capitol to announce the new order of Presidential succession due to the assassination of Pence and Pelosi. That's how coups work: They're violent, quick, and then you have the pronouncement of the new order right-away.

When it was realized that antiFA did not show up, the back-up plan was to wisk Mike Pence away from the Capitol and let Chuck Grassley take-over for Mike Pence certifying the electors where Grassley was to reject the electors and insert the fake electors. Chuck Grassley on January 5th, the day before the certification of the votes, was already making comments that Mike Pence would not be certifying the votes. There are many Republican Congress people involved in the failed coup attempt.

That all follows pretty closely with the QAnon conspiracy that led up to the event. Though embellished far better than the conspiracy ever was.

But that's the trouble with conspiracy theories.

Antifa had no reason to show up because no "demonstration" was planned or announced...just another Trump speech.

Trump was NEVER going to be allowed to join the armed crowd. And he was aware that Antifa was not in attendance because he knew the crowd was friendly.

So the smokescreen and the mighty leader were missing from the rebellion. It was little more than another seed of chaos planted by a cowardly leader.

Trump could have called in the troops(declared Martial Law) at any point. If he had even a hundred loyal troops to send to the Capital, they could have taken control, assassinated the necessary Democrats and Vice President Pence and some general would announce that Trump was the lawful president.

But there was only conspiring and never really any planning...and it was doomed from the start.

Republicans made absolute fools of themselves.

Yeah…just discount ALL the supporting links of the post to back-up the claims in the post and what we know to be true about that day, Greger. Perhaps you’re just too lazy to click the links, I don’t know.

That assertion is in conflict with the reality of the video that is linked above of Trump having a hissy fit inside the presidential SUV. Trump was expecting to be taken to the Capitol.

Tony Ornato, Secret Service agent was also Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff - something never done before. Trump had inside Secret Service loyalists.

Trump was expecting to win the election too.

He was expecting to hang Mike Pence, declare himself president for life and stroll back to the WH like nothing ever happened.

When in reality...nothing ever happened but a riot.

Yes, but what happened is not what was planned. What was planned is the issue.

What you're suggesting is that if a a bank robbery is not successful, the participants should never be tried for attempting to rob a bank. We both know that dog won't hunt.

Trump was told in September 2020 that he was not going to win the election. Several staff members are on record telling Trump this. Trump has never been told no in his life and we saw the results of this during his presidency. Plus Kellyanne Conway quit the campaign in August of 2020, as a professional pollster, she knew Trump was going to lose in August.

Rick, I assume the links you post back up what you say. Why else would you post them?

I'm not here to moderate other websites and spend my time online reading things that you found interesting, or to consider the opinions of journalists at your favorite websites.

I'm only interested in what YOU say HERE.

And what you just typed was just about exactly what my QAnon weirdo friend told me was gonna go down on Jan 6.

Trump knew about it too and was glued to his television waiting for it all to happen...


Democrats are now glued to their televisions waiting for him to be hung for treason.

I'm munching on caramel corn and having a coffee.

The participants have been or are now being investigated and tried, and I've never suggested anywhere that they shouldn't be.

Is that a strawman I see there? Are you putting words in my fingers that I never typed?

Are you putting thoughts in my head that I never thunk?

All I have ever suggested is that there could be some political blowback. Like Biden being successfully impeached and removed from office...or DeSantis winning in 2024.

Your dismissal of the planning lead me to conclude what I typed.

What High Crime or Misdemeanor has POTUS Biden committed?

Trump brought back the firing squad. Why? Who knows.

I'd much prefer Trump receive THAT punishment for his High Crimes and Misdemeanors than some lousy haging. Plus the firing squad would be ironic given Trump brought it back. I love irony.

Sounds like you think that PsOTUS are above law and bygones should be bygones.

I think the political blowback of locking up Trump might not be worth the satisfaction.

Hold it close to your heart because it might be the last happy thing to happen to Democrats in a long time.

Google Pyrrhic Victory.

I say try him and convict him and sentence him to a lifetime of house arrest. Because that would lead to the least political blowback and a more secure future for the Democratic Party.

Lifetime of house arrest at a sweltering summer heated bed bug infested “resort” is something I am willing to reconsider in lieu of a firing squad - especially since Melania has taken up with Hank Siemers and Don will be all alone. I will also add, no more business being conducted at the sweltering compound or visitors, ever. No Trump Org staff - only certified federal prison staff.

I thought of no tv...but there are cruel and unusual punishment laws...

You don't appreciate me, Rick. The good of the Democratic party is all I ever think about.

They are the future of socialism in America.

***Gives skeptical look***

We didn't lock up Nixon for the Watergate Affair.

We never locked up Reagan for the Iran Contra Affair.

We didn't lock up Bush for war crimes.

Do you see a pattern emerging here...? Is it by design or a strange flukey coincidence?

Knowingly or unknowingly, you just cited three Republicans who have committed crimes while presidenting. Trump will be a fourth. Yes! I do see a pattern!

Republicans are criminals.

There certainly IS a recurring pattern, and that's that Presidents can commit any crime they like with no repercussions. That's a very bad precedent. It all starts with that Justice Department memo that says you can't indict a sitting President. Not a law or Supreme Court ruling. Just a memo. That has to go. All it should take is another memo.

And hanging Trump would be a very bad idea, but it does have the benefit of no future President being able to pardon him. I would be happy with him being confined to the Mar-A-Lago federal prison, after the government confiscates all his ill-gotten gains past and future including that property. Then any future "contributions" would go right in the federal treasury. He should be permitted visitations by his immediate family members and that's it. No communications. But just confiscating all his money and invoking the 14th amendment so he can never run would be enough.

Yes, I'm familiar with who they are and their party affiliations.


Gays are pedophiles.

Once again Greger, your dog doesn't hunt. Per PubMed.gov
For every eleven of you str8 kid diddlers, there is one gay one. Science says that kid diddlers tend to be heterosexual.

Hey lecher, leave those kids alone! Ok, groomer?

During the 2013 season of the Wendi Williams Show, Wendi had Ivanka and Donald Trump on her show. Wendi asked Ivanka and Donald what they had in common:

Ivanka: Either real estate or golf

Donald. Sex

Are you trying to convince us that Donald Trump is a complete idiot, possibly a pervert, and a generally unsavory character....?

We know...even without your efforts we have managed to glean enough information about him to hate him from the very marrow of our bones.

Are you sure this fascination with all things Donald Trump is healthy?

Developments in Georgia, concerning Trump. Good read, if nothing else, Georgia may have Trump and some of his cohorts for election interference among other charges. But it will take time to get it altogether.

Georgia subpoenaing Giuliani, Graham in Trump election probe

https://www.yahoo.com/news/giuliani-graham-testimony-sought-trump-181256370.html

Ya’ think?!? Thanks to a Grand Jury impaneled by Fani Willis.


What are you talking about?!? The Grand Jury has been seated since May 2, 2022. Today's subpoenas are indicative of how things are rolling along quite nicely.

Lately, you have been coming off as seriously obtruse. I just want to ensure that you're getting the full picture.

This is a special grand jury, first they must hear from all those subpoenaed which probably takes a couple of months. When its investigation is complete, the special grand jury will issue a final report, recommend action if the special grand jury deems it appropriate. Then up to the district attorney to decide whether to ask a regular grand jury for an indictment. Which the regular grand jury must be impaneled and come to a decision. Then if the regular grand jury decides the evidence is there to charge Trump, then the DA can do so. Most likely, you’re still talking months if not possibly another year before a trial could begin.

obtuse

lacking sharpness or quickness of sensibility or intellect : insensitive, stupid He is too obtuse to take a hint. b : difficult to comprehend : not clear or precise in thought or expression It is also, unfortunately, ill-written, and at times obtuse and often trivial.—

Rick, I try to be very clear. I double space to make it simpler for you to get my point.

Yet you seldom do.

I'm a moderator here. You use this place as a hate blog. Every post is an expression of hatred. You read the news, it triggers you and you come here and shout about how stupid everyone else is but you.

You wanna change the world? Run for office. You seem to have all the answers.

Respect, Rick. It's part of our guidelines. Whether it's part of American politics or not.

No...I got it right = Obtruse

To thrust (something) forward or upon a person, especially without warrant or invitation: to obtrude one's opinions upon others.

A couple of things from this new poll:

Half of GOP Voters Ready to Leave Trump Behind, Poll Finds

https://www.yahoo.com/news/half-gop-voters-ready-leave-113731959.html

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/us0722-crosstabs-nyt071222/0f9f399b059138f9/full.pdf

From the poll and article on the poll, although there is much more in this poll, article than just these 2 points.

1. As Donald Trump weighs whether to open an unusually early White House campaign, a New York Times/Siena College poll shows that his post-presidential quest to consolidate his support within the Republican Party has instead left him weakened, with nearly half the party’s primary voters seeking someone different for president in 2024 and a significant number vowing to abandon him if he wins the nomination.

By focusing on political payback inside his party instead of tending to wounds opened by his alarming attempts to cling to power after his 2020 defeat, Trump appears to have only deepened fault lines among Republicans during his yearlong revenge tour. A clear majority of primary voters younger than 35, 64%, as well as 65% of those with at least a college degree — a leading indicator of political preferences inside the donor class — told pollsters they would vote against Trump in a presidential primary.

2. 20% of all registered voters said they didn’t like neither Biden nor Trump and didn’t want neither one to become the next president in 2024. That is close to the 25% of all Americans who disliked both major party candidates in 2016 and didn’t want neither Trump nor Clinton as their next president.

https://news.gallup.com/opinion/pol...ans-dislike-presidential-candidates.aspx

On top of that, one in 5 volunteered to pollsters that they would sit out such an election, although that option had not been offered to them.

Which brings me back to what the Democrats need in 2024 is a fresh, young face. Not these old foggies like Biden, Warren, Sanders etc.

Rick, I am a moderator. We have rules about civility and respect. Nothing you post anymore even borders on civility or respect.

There are dozens and dozens of posts which are nothing but insults with as many demeaning adjectives as you can think of strung together. I've tried and tried to hint that you have gone over the top and you need to tone back the hateful rhetoric.

But maybe sharing your hate here is cathartic...therapeutic...maybe it keeps you from being the first openly gay mass killer...

So I'm not going to bother you about it anymore and will simply delete the ones that don't add anything of substance to a thread.

Boomers are fighting to stay in power like Trump fought the election results.

Ron DeSantis is 45. A fresh young face. A successful governor, a Republican phoenix, rising from the ashes of Trump.

If Dems continue their current course he will be our next president. And they seem more stubbornly set in their ways than ever.

A lot of Dems are saying that. In fact, 66% I read somewhere recently.

2 things, here’s the latest polling on the GOP nominations. This far out, meaningless, but my love of numbers…

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...blican_presidential_nomination-7548.html

Then here, in the last 3 polls taken in May, has DeSantis up by one and down by 1 and 2 in the others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Florida_gubernatorial_election#General_election

As long as I’ve been following polls, I never have heard of these 3 polling firms. What’s worst is 538 which provides pollsters ratings, hasn’t either. They have no history. Even RCP doesn’t include them in their average. Who are they, what are they, who’s conducting them, who’s paying for them is a complete mystery? No one I know has ever heard of these polling firms. Trust factor as far as I’m concerned is zero.

Here's RCP averages, but they haven’t included any new polls since February. But these pollsters are nationally known, creditable and reliable.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...ida_governor_desantis_vs_crist-7324.html

Democrats, they ran the right candidate to beat Trump, no doubt about that. He’s done his job, mission accomplished. Biden needs to disappear from any consideration for 2024. I think Sanders, Warren also need to disappear along with Harris. That is if the Democrats want to win instead of just making a statement. You do have the midterms to get into the books. If Tim Ryan upsets Vance in Ohio, there’s a presidential candidate for you. If Fetterman wins in Pennsylvania maybe another. I’ve been keen on a Duckworth/Fetterman ticket. I haven’t been following the governor races, but you could have one or two more potential Democratic nominees there.

The thing is, it is my opinion that the Democrats need a fresh, young face. If from flyover country, so much the better. Remember Bill Clinton and Obama? No old hats in the ring candidates. Choose an old foggie or an old hat in the ring candidate, they’ll probably lose. Bottom line, run a candidate attractive to independents, making up 43% of the electorate, they’ll decide who wins or loses. Not either party’s base.

The choice is up to Biden, and I imagine he will announce his retirement soon after the midterms to give potential primary candidates time to prepare. It's too early now and no one should expect him to throw in the towel yet.

But the economy is probably going to improve and he may be tempted to believe he had something to do with it and so deserves another term to secure his legacy in American history...

It is along that path where DeSantis will win the race.

DeSantis will be much stronger candidate than Trump, have no doubts about that. Especially among independents. Remember, both Bill Clinton and Obama rebounded from horrible job approval ratings and losses in congress their first midterms to basically win fairly easy reelections. A lot can change in 2 years. This is why I say we need to get the midterms in the books before worrying about 2024. They’ll have a direct effect on the presidential race 2 years from now.

But we already know what the likeliest outcome of the midterms will be. We know what the likeliest actions of a Republican house is gonna be.

We know who the likeliest Republican candidate is gonna be.

We know the economy is likely to improve, as will Joe Biden's numbers when it does.

And we know that currently Joe Biden plans to run for re-election with VP Harris.

You don't need to put the whole puzzle together before you begin to see the picture.

Yeah, we know the likely outcome in general for this year’s midterms. The GOP retakes control of the house, the Democrats most likely will retain the senate in some form, 50-50 or 51-49. With 4 months to go, a lot can change though. We still don’t know all the candidates, many states still have their primaries this month, in August and into September. Your man DeSantis should win Florida’s governorship, Fetterman PA’s senate race.

Kelly, AZ, Cortez-Masto, NV, Hassan, NH, Warnock GA, all have an advantage today as do Republican Budd in NC, Johnson in WI. Ryan trails Vance in Ohio by 3 points, but that’s within the margin of error. Ohio being a tossup? Who would have figured?

Trump has helped out the Democrats in GA and PA with poor candidates for the General Election. He could do the same in AZ and NH when their primaries roll around. We’ll see.

Helloooooo...

I think Fetterman is fairly doubtful in the near term. He looks to me like he's gonna try to be the best Senator he can be for his state before he jumps to the head of the class. I would admire him more for that than using a senate win as a springboard to leadership of the free world. Before he understands how the game is played.

I'm fond of Buttigieg right now. He's run a presidential primary campaign and served in a cabinet position where he could learn the ropes firsthand. I'm thinking his queerness could work to his advantage.

I'd vote for either or both...but that might be putting the cart before the horse...some new players might emerge during the midterms...some old players might become new again.

Give Fetterman 2 years as PA’s senator, then the number 2 slot with Tammy Duckworth at the top of the ticket. I’d advise keep an eye on the Ohio senate race for a dark horse for 2024. Ryan has a 1.8 point lead over Vance per 538 weighted averages.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/ohio/

Remember Ryan did challenge Pelosi for Speaker a few years ago. A win for Ryan would place him in the pact if he is interested in running. That’s the thing, usually those best qualified who have the charisma to win aren’t interested. I don’t blame them, I’d never want to go through what is dished out.

Circling-back to the original post that started this thread...

Oath Keeper members brought explosives to DC area around January 6 and had a 'death list,'

Today's revelations of Bannon's planning session and another Trump witless effort at witness tampering, and I think it's going to be hard to avoid prosecution. He's practically insisting on it.

Bannon's Contempt of Congress trial begins on Monday, July 18th - so that is good. Peter Navaro is heading down the same path.

Here’s something that should make your day here.

Exclusive: Fulton County DA sends 'target' letters to Trump allies in Georgia investigation

https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusiv...-in-georgia-investigation-152517469.html

It always makes my day when bad people get their comeuppance.

Two MAGAts were sentenced yesterday for their role in J6. The judge said the two were no patriots. In fact, no patriots participated in J6 that day.

During a sentencing hearing yesterday, Judege Howell read text messages obtained by the FBI showed that Mattice and Mault planned for violence on Jan. 6, initially expecting resistance from antifa. They texted family members during the mayhem, and then congratulated each other in the days after the riot, which temporarily halted the certification of the presidential election.

My Navy wife gets furious when she reads stories about people who wore the uniform doing stuff like this.
According to her, the Uniform Code of Military Justice specifies "Big Chicken Dinners" (bad conduct discharges) whenever
any active duty or former military commits acts like these.
Once you've sworn that oath, it's for life.

I'm still waiting for them to reinstate General Flynn to active duty just long enough to court martial his traitorous ass.

The pace of developments is getting faster. John Eastman loses emergency request to protect his phone data from DOJ investigators(CNN); ‘Game over’: Steve Bannon audio reveals Trump planned to claim early victory (Guardian); Secret Service under pressure over erased texts and Jan. 6 actions (The Hill); Justice Dept. backs House over Jan. 6 subpoena to Meadows (Politico); 'Target letters' sent to Republicans involved in Georgia fake elector scheme(MSNBC).

That's all within the last 24 hours.

Prosecutors are discussing why Merrick Garland Should Investigate ...emes as a ‘Hub and Spoke’ Conspiracy (NYT)
[video:youtube][/video]

I read the term "prosecute as hub and spoke" last week, somewhere. When I clicked the NYT story, the date was July 11, 2022 - so last week.

Many decent people are frustrated at the slow, methodical, flipping of others on the food chain up to get at Donald Trump

Yesterday, Letitia James was supposed to put the entire Trump crime family cabal under oath in depositions, but that was postponed due to the death of Ivana Trump, Donald's first wife and mother to their three demon spawn that was to be deposed yesterday as well.

Yesterday, former Federal Prosecutor Glenn Kirschner said "Merrick Garland is not doing his damn job" after initially giving Merrick Garland the benefit of the doubt about turning people up towards Donald Trump.


I believe not prosecuting someone because they are a former president is wrong-headed and very bad precedent for our country. Mueller left it up to congress to prosecute, as if trusting any modern majority Republican political body would do the right thing when its their guy - instead of Mueller drawing up charges himself. All the Republican acquittal did was embolden the criminal POTUS.

Rick, at least, will remember the graphic I created earlier outlining the multiple "lines of effort" moving toward the insurrection. The same analysis describes the "hub and spoke" conspiracy Andrew Weissmann and Glenn Kirschner are discussing. Trump and his "Conduct the Steal" conspiracy are the hub.

Surrounding that, multiple lines of effort were directed by different conspirators - Roger Stone's Proud Boys and Oath Breakers to break into the Capitol; Rudy Giuliani's Kraken Krackpots; Eastman directed (with Giuliani) both the Fake Elector Plot and the Corrupt Congress Plot, with aid from Brooks, Johnson, Cruz, Hawley and other insiders; Jeffrey Clark honchoed the Depraved Justice Move; and Trump himself organized the Threaten State Officers, Co-Opt Mike Pence, and March on the Capitol efforts.

Reposting NW_Ps chart here:

Thanks, Rick.

The conspirators, in each effort, had the same goal. All of them knew that once the Electoral Vote was certified, the game was over. So, the goal was to prevent certification.

But the reality was, the game was over December 14, when the votes were taken and verified at the State level. Everything after that was illegal - that is, "without legal authority". In many cases they rose to the level of criminality.

None of these people truly understands how our government works. Seems to be a common theme with certain groups of people.

As soon as the votes were all counted, they knew they would need a coup to keep Trump in power. It was always going to be sedition. They just wanted to inject enough confusion so they could make some excuses. I think it really threw a monkey wrench in their plans when ANTIFA didn't show up on January 6th. Trump could not declare martial law, when the only rioters were his crew.

The fact that Pence refused to leave the Capital screwed their plan as well. The funny thing is that numerous Republican lawmakers seemed to be in on the plan, because they kept on insisting the riot was all ANTIFA members, and there was a lot of talk about Somebody Else running the certification after Pence was presumable evacuated to Alaska.

I assume it's all documented in those "missing" Secret Service texts and the several hour gap in the White House recordings.

I wrote this in another post, Fox News' Laura Ingraham was taping during the J6 insurrection, and she said it was antiFA that was the cause of the insurrection at the Capitol. She didn't have the up-to-date intel to know NOT to say that. Clearly that was to be the talking point that many Rwingers pre-agreed upon.

I agree, Republicans were absolutely in on the planned outcome of keeping Trump in power.

Legal Expert Predicts Trump Indictment Will Come From Georgia Investigation Before DOJ

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/legal-expert-predicts-trump-indictment-165000206.html

From the article

Given the scope of what the Justice Department has to prove in court, Tribe believes there is wrongdoing, but not enough evidence to prove wrongdoing “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Attorney Norman Eisen echoed Tribe’s claims because there are clear examples of violations of Georgia state election law on the books.

“I do believe that the great likelihood is that he’s heading towards an indictment,” Eisen told the Times, referring to Trump. “There is powerful proof of violations of Georgia law in the form of the smoking gun tape of him demanding 11,780 votes, when it is perfectly clear from that tape that he knows those votes do not exist,” the legal expert explained.

Bannon found guilty. Will that influence other hold outs?

Except the judge in the case said she'll not release the findings if the findings come within 60 days before the election.

You mean Peter Navarro? Doubtful. Also Peter is acting as his own attorney. You know what they say about a person who represents himself at trial: "He has a fool for a client."

I wonder what those jurors did for three hours? Maybe they just wanted a free lunch out of the deal? Awfully simple case: He got a subpoena. He failed to show up, and went on TV over and over to brag about it. No defense in court. Slam-dunk guilty.

That's an impossible to win case with a jury trial. Everybody in the jury got a summons and they all showed up. Why should Mister Bigshot not have to appear when he gets one?

Here is a terrific summary of what went down on J6. Click the link and read the article.

It is interesting to see the Jan 6 investigation and the DoJ investigation converging. O watched some of the Lester Holt interview. Garland is now referring to it as "the effort to prevent the lawful transfer of power". That's significant.

It's going to be very satisfying if all of the fake electors get indicted for fraud. The interesting thing is the fraud occurred in Washington DC, when they submitted their phony elector lists. So they might be tried by a DC jury instead of their home state jury. Much less chance of jury nullification in DC.

Those convictions would be the perfect thing to prevent anybody from trying that in the future.

This has gotta be fake news or liberal alternative facts.

There is no way any red blooded American would ever try to overthrow the government. Never been done .... never will be done.

The 2020 was obviously stolen. Consider the real facts. Cemeteries full of Dead people voting. You would rebut by saying, it was investigated and the allegation was found to be false. Not so fast. Just because you can't find evidence doesn't mean it's not true. Now I can go on and on about how all the so-called investigations were merely coverups for those who stole the election .... I mean everyone is in on it except me .... and I know the truth.

Look .... when you can't find the real evidence, all it means is, space aliens did it .... and you know that can't be proven. So speaketh The Donald.

I have now seen a number of the righteous right proudly state that "I have no facts to back me up but this is what I believe." The thing is that they seem to be winning their primaries. this, I guess, is because voters have the same belief or they just don't care?

just pointing out the obvious arguments these deluded folks will use to believe whatever the Donald tells them to believe.

O and don't believe the polls which say the Donald is losing support ... when he speaks the deluded deplorables respond with songs of praise

The Plan:

I think it was Rabbie Burns who said...

“The best laid schemes o' mice an' men gang aft a-gley.”

"hub and spoke"

I'm pretty sure the "response to ANTIFA by proclaiming martial law" thingie was one of the plans that got circulated before January 6th. And the people who knew about that plan in advance, outed themselves by trying to blame ANTIFA for the insurrection. All DOJ has to do is look at public statements during and after the insurrection to find a whole bunch of co-conspirators. Knowing about the plans for a crime but failing to report it is the very definition of conspiracy.

I’ve been making exactly that statement for awhile now.

I’ve written that Laura Ingraham was taping her show during the Rwing siege on the Capitol, with Laura telling her audience that antiFA was responsible for attacking the US Capital. Her information had not been updated, because Laura and her show staff did not know that antiFA did not show up.

I'm not sure what the timeline is for when the Rwingers realized that antiFA did not show.

The bottom line is that the J6 attack was absolutely coordinated by Rwingers including their media.

Ex-White House counsel subpoenaed by federal grand jury investigating Jan. 6 attack


Trump hasn't been shooting his big mouth off lately, hmm...

Once again, Rick, you beat me to the punch. This is big. It doesn't mean Trump is about to be indicted, but it does show that DoJ is pounding on the door and testing the locks.

Don't go betting the ranch on Trump being indicted much less convicted.

While any reasonable person would conclude upon seeing so much smoke, there may be a fire creating the smoke, it may not be possible to connect Trump as the person who threw the matches on the tinder. I suspect there will be a lot of 5ths being passed around, which will not produce the evidence necessary to indict. Example would be the clown anarchist Bannon. Indicted, convicted, appealed, probably conviction will be sustained, appeal to the Trump court which may or may not sustain or even hear case, but ultimately all we will get from him is the 5th from what is his name to did he participate in overthrowing the government.

I am hoping my prediction from a while back will not come to bear, that Trump will be the first candidate to run from prison and may be the first to win while in prison , pardon himself, and then conduct a vengeance campaign against everyone who can't say MAGA. But beware .... there are no limits to what Trump will do ... remember Benedict Arnold .... a real amateur when compared to Trump.

Hear me now o lord and savior Trump .... you are the greatest, you are blah blah blah

I have to rebut that.

For anyone to use the military to solidify a coup, it would take significant logistical deployment prior to the event. This would take a lot of planning with troops mobilized and on standby, but that was not the case. There were no federal troops ready to do anything but stand by.

The first part is an ok start. Mob the capitol, which would pause on the proceedings. If the riot was able to sustain itself for more than 3 hours without intervention from NG or DCPD, elected officials would have to be removed from premises (if possible). This would allow Trump the time necessary for him to declare a national emergency and proclaim himself acting president until all the claims could be resolved to him winning, at which time he would anoint himself Emperor of the Universe. That is the time he would obilize the military. Since there are no protocols for not ending an election, he could appeal to his court while waiting the results from Trump loyalists in the swing states which voted for Biden. Remember he told Gov Kemp, find me the votes. He would make same appeal to all those states, until they found him the votes.

Some say it couldn't happen in America because .... ahhh .... we are America. Wake up and open your eyes. Phase one has already happened .... phase two .... the completion phase.

Praise the great Trump

The danger is that next time we could have a seditious President who happened to be competent. Trump's saving grace was that he's not. All his "plans" were fantasies that included a "then a miracle happens" step, or even multiple such steps. He believed his own propaganda, so naturally his coup attempt would deliver a great outcry for Emperor Trump forever. You could see it coming when his PR people started talking about "alternate facts".

This should make everyone's day.

Exclusive: Trump allies launch effort to recall Fulton County DA Fani Willis

https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusiv...willis-224315547.html?.tsrc=bell-brknews

Evidence has now come to light that at least some of the lawsuits brought against the election outcome were themselves knowingly fraudulent. Not just flimsy. It seems that Kelli Ward had misgivings about committing treason when there was no legal basis for signing on as a fake elector, so they filed a suit/appeal to give her cover. That ties two of the portions of the conspiracy together neatly. Arizona Officials Warned Fake Electors Plan Could ‘Appear Treasonous' (NYT)

Not if it adds up to something absurd like 30 days in the county lockup.

It is the conviction that matters.

The irony is, these people can never vote again.

For me, the thought of spending time in the pokey doesn't bother me, but not being able to vote ever again - is enough to keep me on the straight and arrow.

A lot of states restore felon's voting rights after some time period. Others do it via board or governor action. The real benefit is that a lot of the convicted insurrectionists lose their right to own guns! And for some of those folks, that's like castrating them.

Exclusive: Trump lawyers in talks with Justice Department about Jan. 6 criminal probe (CNN).

In addition to seeking to protect conversations (probably a lost cause), this is an opportunity to suss out what the prosecution already has. Given the skill the DoJ has exhibited so far, not likely they will give much away.

The only thing the DoJ lawyers should be discussing with Trump’s lawyers is where and when will Trump turn himself in.

https://twitter.com/davidhogg111/status/1557082797499637764


https://irp.fas.org/cia/product/insurgency.pdf

How the FBI knew what to search for at Mar-a-Lago (Yahoo)

The Timeline Leading Up to the F.B.I.’s Search of Mar-a-Lago (NYT)

How are you guys no different from the 'lock her up crowd'?

Don't get me wrong. I think most of the political class are criminals and all of the presidents past and present going all the way back to Truman. War crimes being the chief offenses, criminal negligence a close second.

But rilly, what are differences that you would draw between yourselves and the other political camp braying to lock up their perceived political enemies?

Just substitute "fascist" for the word "gay".

The primary difference given has been that one side actually broke the law.

It's more than that though...it's more like dehumanizing the enemy to make it easier to kill them.

Justin Rosario:

"I'm old enough to remember Glenn Greenwald saying that anyone being investigated by the FBI should not be allowed to run for president.
I'm -really- looking forward to the mental gymnastics required for him to explain why that applied to Hillary but now Trump is immune."

"You see, Tucker, Trump has a penis and Hillary was a xhore with a vagina." - Glenn Greenwald

Remember when I posted with numbers that showed the 1-6 hearings didn’t or wasn't effectingt the midterms or public opinion, that the hearings failed to move the needle. Here’s the latest on this if one is interested in how all of America view the 1-6 hearings or if one just wants to remain in their own cocoon. Trump will get what is coming to him sooner or later, I have no doubt about that.

Jan. 6 Hearings Have No Impact on Opinion
4 in 10 would back a Trump presidential bid in 2024

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_080922/

The hearings might have little impact on opinions, but they will have an impact on getting Democrats and democrat leaners to the polls.

Fuel prices are dropping, other prices will fall soon. It's a perfect storm to counteract any red wave that may have formed up. Biden's numbers are about to start rising...Trump's numbers, on the other hand, will never rise. Republicans still trust him, but America does not and will never elect him. Keeping Trump in the public eye as a reminder of his corruption will play well for Democrats in the end.

We could be heading back toward a ten seat loss in the house....

So far the 18-20 seat house lost seems pretty firm. The red wave was always in some Republican’s imagination who was living in some fantasy land. I’d say gas prices falling helps the Democrats much more than the 1-6 hearings, abortion or anything else. At least among independents. Trump was always in the back of the minds of independents, hence, their reluctance to vote for Republicans although historical standard state they should be in droves. Trump changes the dynamics of this election tremendously. Not the 1-6 hearings. Then there’s the lousy, very poor general election candidates Trump backed, and the Republicans nominated to add to the dislike of Trump. Trump is a gift that keeps right on giving to the Democrats.

Getting folks to the polls, the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago does the same. A bunch of incentives on both sides of the aisle. The Republicans still lead in enthusiasm to go vote this midterm. But that is normal for the party out of power, they’ve always had more enthusiasm to go vote than the party that holds power.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/33oc20o9t6/econTabReport.pdf

I’m still going with 18-20 GOP pickup in the House, a 1 seat gain for the Democrats in the senate and a 3-governorships gain for the Democrats. Strange as it may be, event after event, happening after happening, 1-6 hearings, overturning Roe, war in the Ukraine, etc. these numbers have seen steady for the last six months.

We'll see...

Your polling is worthless.

I have been saying it for a long time Trump will run in 24. Despite all the polling which says his support is waning, I guarantee once he declares, there will be renewed energy and his support will increase.

Get it through ya'lls heads .... he is their God .... he is their voice .... he is the sword of vengeance they have been waiting on ....

Heileman said yesterday people need to get their head around the probability that Trump may run as an indicted person and win GOP nomination. Well he has not really wrapped his head around it ....

Wrap your head around this ..... Trump will run .... he may be indicted by the time he wins GOP nomination .... he may be convicted by time he wins the general .... he may have to take oath of office while incarcerated ... his first act as president will be to pardon himself ..... his second act will be to round up everyone who opposed him, or impeached him, or prosecuted him, etc

You say it can't happen in America .... Trump has broken every rule you say can't happen in America.

If you think it is too hard t comprehend .... then you don't know Trump at all and of what depths of depravity he is capable

I don’t worry about Trump because even if he avoids conviction and does win the Republican nomination in 2024, he’ll lose the independent vote and thus the election. That is unless the Democrats do the stupid by nominating someone who’s disliked more by independents than Trump, ALA Clinton in 2016. 70% of independents had an unfavorable view of Clinton vs. 57% of Trump. Questions 10 and 11.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/l37rosbwjp/econTabReport_lv.pdf

and this to show how much America as a whole disliked both Trump and Clinton in 2016 and didn’t want neither one to become their next president

https://news.gallup.com/opinion/pol...ans-dislike-presidential-candidates.aspx

But with the Democrats nominating Biden in 2020, I think they learned their lesson from 2016. The Democrats nominated someone who was attractive to independents. Whereas the GOP by staying with Trump, they remain with a candidate that can’t attract independents. Even when Trump won the independent vote in 2016, it was by a 46-42 margin over Hillary with 12% of independents voting against both Hillary and Trump. In other words, even in 2016 54% of independents voted against Trump. Hillary’s 42% along with the 12% who voted third party against both Trump and Clinton. Trump was even worse in 2020 winning but 41% of independents with 59% voting against him. Biden’s 54% with 5% voting against both Biden and Trump.

This midterm, you have independent very reluctant to vote for a party of Trump led candidates due to their dislike of Trump. Trump is saving the Democrats from a red wave. Trump is helping the Democrats retain control of the senate and gaining 3 or 4 governorships. The GOP must be the stupidest, dumbest party around not to recognize they must win independents or lose. The Democrats learned from 2016, the Republican are trying to repeat their same mistakes with the same losing results.

Unless the Democrats get a case of dumb butt and nominate another Hillary Clinton, like Harris, they have nothing to worry about in 2024. The worst thing that could happen to the Democrats for 2024 is Trump is no longer around for independents to dislike and refuse to vote for Trump led Republican candidates.

True, it's not after Labor Day yet.

Of course an indicted criminal can win the GOP nom. It's who the GOP have become.

and that statement demonstrates just how stupid the electorate is. It doesn't matter what the favorability polling results are, what mattered was whether one of those people was competent. Clearly Trump was incompetent and everyone (except the Republican Base) knew it.

What are elections? To quite a lot of folks they’re beauty contests, personality contests, popularity contests. You have 60% of the electorate who will vote for the letter behind a candidate name regardless of who that candidate is. The letter is all that matters, not the candidate. These are your Republican and Democratic base. Then there’s independents who make up roughly 40% of the electorate. Of course, you divide independents into leans, those who lean Democratic, those who lean Republican and those with no leans, what I call pure or true independents.

This last group has a long history of usually voting for the most charismatic or likable candidate. They also decide who wins and who loses at least with presidential elections. Not neither party’s base. Biden was more likeable than Trump, Biden won. Obama had a ton of charisma; he beat both McCain and Romney who weren’t at all charismatic. G.W. Bush wasn’t that charismatic, but he was a down home boy, he won over two statues in Gore and Kerry. Bill Clinton was another top charismatic guy, he won twice over G.H.W. Bush and a dour Dole. Reagan was another charismatic fellow, Carter and Mondale didn’t stand a chance. Carter in 1976 was another down-home boy, likeable, he won over a very uncharismatic, perhaps even dour Ford, etc. etc.

This reminds me what a friend of mine said about the 2016 election. People were tired of business as usual. So, they voted for Trump, a complete unknown, a businessman and reality TV show host. No one knew how he would govern. Clinton on the other hand was well known, perhaps too well known. Everyone knew exactly how she’d govern. More business as usual. Neither candidate was liked nor wanted. While independents wanted both to lose, they went with the candidate they wanted to lose the least. 54% of independents disliked both Clinton and Trump, to them the choice was between two dregs from the bottom of the barrel.

Which brings me back to elections being beauty contests, personality contest. Obnoxious, rude, uncouth won over elitist, aloof, know it all in 2016. Then an old man, dull, boring, uninspiring, no charisma whatsoever. Heck, no personality won over the obnoxious, rude uncouth candidate. But Biden came across as the adult in the room, came across as a candidate who behaved presidential, a likeable chap.

Bottom line, competency means nothing if one can’t win an election, a beauty contest, a personality contest. Which brings me to another question. Why do the Democrats want more and more people to vote when they will be voting more on personality, charisma, like and dislike that stances on the issues or even competency? These people don’t care who wins and they don’t follow politics.

How nervous is Rudy Giuliani about testifying in front of the Georgia grand jury?

Nervous enough that his lawyers tell the grand jury that he can't possibly talk to them because of a recent heart artery procedure and can't fly to Georgia. But somehow the Fulton County DA found out that Rudy purchased plane tickets to Switzerland and Italy after his procedure to travel there at the end of July.

In an effort to help Rudy out, the Fulton Country DA offered to pay for Rudy's trip to Georgia on a train or bus. Rudy Giuliani on Greyhound? As if!

And I have been saying he won't. I've also been saying that he won't go to jail.

Now, you can believe he might run, or you can believe he might go to jail. But you can't believe both.

I'm willing to place a small bet on either of those things.

Donald Trump might be the "god" of the republican party but he is surprisingly mortal and nearing the end of his life. Republicans alone can't elect him. He needs more independent support than he will ever be able to regain.

You need to set your sights on DeSantis and forget about Trump. Trump is a dead horse and no amount of beating is gonna bring him back to life.

I believe you will be proved wrong on both accounts. Although I would modify that to say, he will run, but still be prosecuted. I'm not sure he'll survive the prosecution process.

You are right, though, that DeSantis is a greater national risk right now - unless Trump does run. Then there may be a battle royale after all.

Only because DeSantis is smarter and more conniving than Trump.

Trump might be able to run in 2024. He might be disqualified.

He might mount a primary campaign against DeSantis, Pence, and all other comers.

And IF he survives the courts, and a contentious primary election to become the Republican nominee...He will still lose in the general because independents still hate him.

He's a terrible choice. He'll only be able to serve one term even if elected...and his only goal is revenge against any and all who wronged him in his first term.

There are simply too many negatives to list. The chances of Trump running or winning in 2024 were vanishingly small from the start and have continued to shrink. Even his family seems to have deserted him.

Jan. 6 Grand Jury Has Subpoenaed White House Documents (NYT)
Grand jury subpoenas Trump White House lawyers for Jan. 6 probe (PBS)
This is what happens when a serious investigation is nearing the finish line. I think the investigations are merging as well.

via The Washington Post
Clearly, fighting and kicking (...and scratching) NOT to give witness testimony is something that people on the up and up do all of the time. No, not really.

When you don't want to testify, it means one thing: you don't want to be forced to tell the truth. You are basically trying to get away with something, and hiding the truth.

Fulton County DA Fanni Willis ought to move Graham out of the witness column and over to the target column because Lindsey did make calls to have mail-in ballots removed from the totals.

The appeals court has sent the federal court's ruling back for consideration if Miss Lindsey's Senate position makes him exempt from questioning. But the strange thing is the original court ruling already did consider that, and said quite clearly that trying to overturn a state's vote count is NOT a protected "legislative act". It's actually a crime. So I'm not sure what the judge is supposed to "reconsider". I guess the DA should just indict him.

That’s a good plan. Lady G obviously went judge shopping and found one to do her bidding. These Republicans are too much.

Lady G will pro’lly come down with a case of the vapors when she gets indicted - the poor dear. Her 18 year old Rent Boy will need to comfort her on the fainting couch.

I think his vapors will be less "gas-like", and more "brick-like".

Lady G's little dog and pony show is on a very short leash:

Judge sets expedited schedule for Lindsey Graham testimony to ensure he can't stall for months

District Court Judge Leigh Martin May ruled tha Lindsey Graham has until 9am this Wednesday to file a Motion as to exactly as to which questions and/or categories he is requesting the Court to address in an Order to partially quash the subpoena. Fulton County DA's Office will have until next Monday to respond, after which Graham must respond by Wednesday, August 31, 2022.

So, what's this all about?

In November 2020, after the November 3rd election, Lindsey Graham got on the phone with GOP Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and his deputy Gabriel Sterling, and was just curious if maybe Georgia could throw out ALL THE LEGALLY CAST MAIL-IN VOTES in counties that have higher rates of signature mismatches on ballots.

Per The Atlanta Journal-Constitution over the 4th of July 2022 weekend Rudy Giuliani, Lindsey Graham, and John Eastman received subpoenas to testify in the Fulton County Grand Jury investigation of Trump and his lackeys trying to overturn the results of the Georgia vote in Trump's favor.

Remember all of those "perfect calls?" There's Trump's perfect call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, where he begged Raffensperger to "find" him 11,780 votes so he could win Georgia. There's Trump's perfect call with Frances Watson, the lead investigator in Raffensperger's office, where Trump nudged her like a common mob boss in the direction of the county where Trump wanted them to "find" him all these votes. There's Lindsey Graham's perfect call to Raffensperger not long after the election. There's the very abrupt quit-firing of former US Attorney Byung J. "Bjay" Pak, apparently for his refusal to find Trump some imaginary voter fraud.

According to Raffensperger, Graham asked him, in essence, to "look hard and see how many ballots you could throw out." Lindsey Graham was looking for ways to throw legal ballots in the trash - ballots where voters had chosen Joe Biden.

Lindsey has denied any impropriety, naturally, but he's never been able to explain why he called Brad Raffensperger in the first place, and saying he just wanted to understand how ballot verification works does not pass the smell test. He also has not offered a good explanation for why also called the elections officials in Arizona and Nevada, which just happen to be two more of the states Joe Biden flipped to win the election in a landslide.


At first, Graham's attorneys insisted that Miss Lindsey doesn't have to comply with the subpoena, because Lady G doesn't think Fulton County DA Fani Willis's investigation is legitimate.

Then, Miss Lindsey argued that he was just doing his job as a senator and thus can't be investigated for it under the Speech or Debate clause.

Fulton County Superior Judge Robert McBurney then ordered Graham to knock off the shenanigans and testify, writing that the "court finds that Lindsey Graham is a necessary and material witness" in the grand jury's investigation.

Graham then moved the case to federal court and tried to get the subpoena quashed based on the Speech or Debate clause, arguing that he was just doing his legislative duty to ensure that the ballots were correctly tabulated.

US District Judge Leigh Martin May ordered Graham to get his skinny ass to Atlanta and start talking for the grand jury empaneled by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, and told Lady G that that's now how speech or debate works. (more or less, I'm paraphrasing )

I hope this post has gotten you up to speed of an honest Republican Senator avoiding a subpoena that is simply asking him to be a witness (for now).

Willis should just indict him. There is already adequate evidence to convict him. It would be a good example for others to comply with legitimate subpoenas. He's had his chance to cooperate and maybe get a deal for testimony, and he's effectively turned that down.

Agreed. Lindsey Graham needs to be held accountable for his part in trying to overturn an election. Else what the Republicans try to pull next time will be far worse.

Last night, 60 Minutes interviewed Ex-Congressman Denver Riggleman, who was a supporting Member of the J6 Committee as Senior Technical Advisor. Not only is Riggleman an Ex-Congressman, he's a former ex-military intelligence officer, and ran a data-driven operation pursuing phone records and other digital clues of the J6 attack. Riggleman's Committee job was to analyze text messages and phone records tied to the J6 attack. Analysis shows that the now infamous alternative slate of electors to keep Trump in power, began two days after the November 2020 election in a text message from Don Trump Jr to Mark Meadows. Analysis also shows that Supreme Justice Clarence Thomas' wife, Ginny, was heavily involved in the overturning of the election.

Ginny Thomas agreed last week to talk to the J6 Committee.

I think it is a race, now, between the Jan 6 grand jury, the Georgia grand jury, and the Mar-a-Law-go grand jury to see who indicts first. Of course, Letitia James struck first with the NY lawsuit, but she's only tying up the money. Any dark horses I missed?

Seems like I'm seeing more headlines about the rape trial...

Those sound almost identical to the arguments used in 2016 and guess what happened.

Trump got the documents case before a loyal judge, Cannon, and see what happened. She ruled in his favor on everything to the point of obviously disregarding the law. What would you think would happen in a state where the election board was led by a loyal Trump supporter, one who has publicly stated they would overturn elections if they thought fraud was involved. All Trump has to do is say fraud and they will overturn the election.

So simply saying there are all kinds of reasons why Trump couldn't get elected, I say there are all kinds of reason why even if he loses, he can still win. And it gets worse.

Obviously his opponent would not concede based on an overturned election and would immediately file for expedited hearings from the courts. If they get before a Trump loyalist court, they will rule in Trump's favor, and then it is taken to the supremes. You may think and believe the SC will rule by the law but we have already seen what a Trump court thinks about precedents. I think it's a 50-50 proposition whether they will show fealty or rule by the law. Now if they do rule it is illegal to overturn an election, who will enforce the ruling?

You think or believe a Trump loyalist election board would even think any court not ruling in Trumps favor would be a legitimate court? There is no way of legally enforcing a court order. Oh you think the court will order the arrest of the offender. And who will arrest the election board? Trump loyalist sheriffs?

So despite Trump being not qualified to be a dog catcher, and not actually winning the vote, he still has a chance of winning by having rigged the system in his favor. I know ... can't happen in America

So...what if it happens? Will Trump be President for Life like some African dictator? He'll be 78 in 2024 and 82 when his second term ends (if he chooses to let it end).

The American people of course will no longer have a say in anything...voting will be abolished, elections ended, Armed Republicans will patrol the streets shooting POCs and Democrats on sight.

You and I survived the first four years of Trump and I suspect we'd survive four more.

you missed the point. People survive all kinds of detestable dictators ... you can name them. The point is he may very well destroy the Democracy which was created by the Constitution.

The question would be what would replace it? Permanent Republican dictators? Take a peek at what Gov De Santis has done and expand that to include any one he dislikes either politically or personally, or what about ethnics of any persuasion except white, etc. Should it continue, at what point will you have crossed the line and become an enemy of the state or maybe you will kneel and kiss the ring.

There is DNA on E Jean Carroll's dress from the alleged rape incident at Bergdorf Goodman. Trump claims she isn't "his type." Fine, allow your DNA to be sampled and compared, Donald.

I am going to hazard a guess that Trump's DNA samples already exist.
How can one become President and NOT HAVE DNA samples archived?
Is that even possible these days?

This issue is the E Jean Carroll's team does not have access to Trump's DNA sample. If he's so innocent, why doesn't he simply allow his DNA to be analyzed by Carroll's team?

As an aside and somewhat related...

If Trump claims that the FBI planted docs in MAL, why doesn't he name the docs that were planted, or tell us how he "declassified" docs instead of his legal team fighting the Special Master who set a deadline for Trump's disclosure?

The reason for all of the above is simple: Donald J Trump is a complete and utter bullshyte artist - and that would be the nice and generous explanation. The more scientific and probably more accurate explanation is that Trump is a pathological lying sociopath.

The fact that Carroll's splooge stains have never been matched is nothing new. There are thousands of rape kits in evidence lockers that have never been processed. The DNA labs can find almost anyone, through looking at their relative's sequences. I find it hard to believe that none of his relatives have ever been sequenced. Of course they just might find that his model wives' kids are not his! That's happening more than you think, now.

There's a legal doohickey known as "malicious or vexatious prosecution" but I don't know much beyond the notion that judges can label persons as such and thus bar them from further filings.
At some point....SOME POINT in TIME, do WE THE PEOPLE finally get to encourage the courts to label Donald Trump as a vexatious litigant or are we required to let him run out the clock until the justice system is to totally overwhelmed that he wins by attrition and is finally truly ABOVE the law?

That's a good point. I'm sure Mary Trump would offer a DNA sample.

Barron looks like Trump...Don Jr not so much. Eric looks like a splitting image of Gary Busey.

Eric looks like Butthead from Beavis and Butthead.
Strangely enough so does Matt Gaetz.

I'm sure at least some sex was in Melania's contract. Can you imagine that level of sacrifice? That's like digging a hole into the sewer system, ala Shawshank Redemption.

Melania obviously did it for the money. Except NY AG Letitia James will most likely make Trump's fraudulent Trump Org go away. Trump is highly leveraged and has no real money save for $100M in liquid assets per James.

So, I am dying to know how other people saw the last January 6 hearing, and no one has said anything...

As for me, I think the videos of Pelosi and Schumer trying to get help to the Capitol may have been the most damning.

Thoughts?

We all know what the thoughts are already.
At least one or maybe two here think it's no big deal, and most everyone else knows it's a damning piece of evidence, but I suspect everyone is sitting on their hands waiting to see if DoJ is finally going to make a move.

After over a YEAR of hearing Trumpers browbeat everyone,

"So how come Pelosi didn't try to call in reinforcements, huh, huh HUH?????"

we now have proof that's exactly what she DID try to do, only to get short shrift from Chief Insurrectionist enabler & Acting SecDef Christopher Miller.
Why all these people still walk free is beyond me.

So what IS there to say except "FFS drop the other shoe already" ...

It was my first day back to work and I did not see/follow the hearings live.

The fact that Pelosi and Schumer tried to get help to the Capitol defeats the Trump/MAGAt narrative that Pelosi DID NOT do anything to help the situation by calling in the National Guard.

J6: Putting it all together

• Donald Trump planned to falsely declare that he won the 2020 election months before Election Day
• As the votes were still being counted on Nov. 3, 2020, Trump held a rally in New York City, where he asserted without evidence that he had defeated Joe Biden
• President Trump allegedly conspired with key influential conservative activists, as early as July, to claim victory and declare that the election was stolen
• Steve Bannon audio reveals Trump planned to claim early victory
• Trump's premeditated plan was to declare victory no matter what the actual result was. He made a plan to stay in office before Election Day
• Trump's plan was concocted in advance
• Steve Bannon: What Trump is going to do is just declare victory, right? He’s going to declare victory. That doesn’t mean he’s the winner. He’s just going to say he’s the winner
• Roger Stone: The key thing to do is to claim victory. Possession is nine-tenths of the law
• GOP lawmakers and news pundits pre-planned tactics with a narrative before elections in July started and executed the plan when Trump did lose
• Trump's conspired with lawyer, John Eastman, and the chairs of state Republican parties around the country to submit slates of fake electors
• When Trump's attempted to appoint DOJ underling Jeffrey Clark as acting attorney general effort ended after other officials at Justice and Trump's White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, threatened to resign in protest
• Trump's planned weeks before Jan. 6, to send an angry mob to the Capitol after his speech on the Ellipse.
• Trump knew the mob would be armed and equipped with military equipment such as Kevlar vests, tactical helmets, riot shields, handguns and rifles
• The Trump White House and Secret Service knew the mob would be armed
• Knowing that his term was coming to an end, Trump signed a memo on Nov. 11 ordering an immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Somalia discounting the Rwing narrative that Joe Biden withdrew from Afghanistan hastily
• National security and military leaders warned the Trump Administration that the order would have catastrophic consequences

Don't forget

[*]Roger Stone: "F*** the voting, let's get to the violence!"

Are those still going on? I didn't need to be convinced of his guilt so I haven't watched any of them.

Has ANY evidence been presented that might point to his innocence? Does any such evidence exist? Is there any chance he is innocent of anything? Any question of his guilt??

I eagerly await the results but don't expect them to be earth-shattering in their scope. Sort of a rescinsion of the participation trophy he was awarded for not actually winning an election.

I expect their final report will come out on Jan 6 and that it will be damning. And I expect they will dump that hot potato in the laps of the next House and its new leadership after making their recommendations.

It will be one more opportunity for Republicans everywhere to debase themselves before the Golden Calf. To make themselves look like fools in the eyes of most of the world and future American voters.

And they'll take it....nice. An ironic ending. And a damning beginning for the next House.

And that's the way the next season of US Congress Shenanigans will begin...

That FBI documents case is criminal and it's got teeth. If anything is liable to go anywhere, it's that one.

Please don't be offended when I tell you that if you haven't even bothered to watch any of the hearings, that it explains a lot of your "What, Me Worry?" outlook.
Sorry Greger, if you didn't follow the hearings AT ALL, and you're here on CHB laughing at folks and casting aspersions at their concerns and implying that they might be a tad hysterical, in reality you don't have any frame of reference, sir.

Trump's guilt is part of what went down at the hearings but the hearings covered a mountain of stuff APART from the simple matter of his guilt or innocence.

Now at least I understand why you've been chuckling and muttering "What's all the hubbub about, where's the fire, it's business as usual, nothing to see here, move along, stay off my lawn."

Yes, or as I called it, "THE BROW BEATING" ....

It was like being verbally waterboarded for over a year, a constant din:

"Huh? Huh?? HUH??? Why dintcher precious Pelosi DO SUMPIN bout it??"

Jeffery, all I care about is how this sh*t turns out. I watched the Jan 6 riot just like everyone else. The hearings have revealed nothing we didn't already know or suspect.

I read the news, I don't need to stay glued to the screen, He's guilty of everything.

Just as we already knew or suspected.

He'll probably skate just in the manner I've predicted above.

Nothing more than a clear concise evaluation of events as I see them rolling along.

Perhaps you think things will turn out differently? How? Do you think they'll be able to resist releasing the final report on Jan 6?

The House is about to change hands, this investigation is over.

The issue Greger, is that J6 was not just about Trump. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of Americans who supported the J6 effort. THAT is the problem - there are other Americans who think just like him. Thinking like Trump is a problem for American democracy.

Heck, we even have a federal "judge' in Florida doing Trump's bidding to delay the FBI investigation into this obvious espionage.

If Trump "skates" that will definitely have a negative effect on our democracy. I don't see Trump skating.

Of course a Republican House will want the investigation to be over. They're not honest about what happened on J6 - 2/3rds over American voting Republicans think that J6 is no big deal or it didn't happen the way the J6 Committee says it did. THAT's a problem.

Survive is a loaded term because living things can survive all kinds of disasters but societies and civilizations, not so much.
Rod Serling put it best.



If you're nonchalant about America becoming a mob, foaming at the mouth and giving itself license to its basemost instincts and spreading that evangel to the world at large, I just have no idea what to say to you about that, but I guarantee you that the damage will be permanent and long after we're all in the ground, our children and their children will curse the folks who thought that way.

It almost sounds like you don't really place all that much value on the ideas that made America possible in the first place.
To put it bluntly, sounds like "you just don't give a s*** anymore", and that's sad.
Nobody can MAKE you give a s***, and I realize that.
Most of us still do though.

I agree. And to actually see the republicans and democrats working together for a cause was refreshing - although it's a shame they can only do it when their own safety is in question!

I did like the vote at the end to subpoena Mr. Trump. And since it will expire at the end of the congressional term, nothing will come of it.

And sorry Rick, but Mr. Trump will skate (no serious personal consequences) on everything.

Did you happen to see Biden and DeSantis put aside their differences during the hurricane aftermath? The way real leaders do when their countrymen are suffering or in danger?

The documents case might still have some teeth, it's my last hope.
It's really the job of Republicans to police themselves, in failing to do so they diminish themselves.

The biggest fear here seems to be that their failure to police themselves will bring them ever greater power. That the more corrupt they become, the more powerful they will become!
The more they steal, the more they'll get away with it. The more they kill the easier it will become until they are nothing but wild dogs running rampant over innocent Democrats.

Laughing in the streets as they kill anyone they think might think differently from them.

Old liberals like me will be thrown from my wheelchair and kicked to death. It will be a bloodbath...

Or else...life will go on pretty much like it always has. For me and for Mr. Trump.

I did see that. And it was a glimmer of hope, no matter how short-lived.

Come on now. I didn't say all that - nor have I implied it.

What does scare me though, is that enough anti-democratic republicans will get elected to the individual states, making it legal - yes legal - that state legislators will decide on who their state elects for president. The result of which, someone getting "voted" into the Presidency by state legislatures, instead of by we the people!!

It's a legitimate fear, but I just don't see it as a "likely outcome". Any state that might pass that law is so red that the issue would be moot. No Democrats are likely to be elected there anyway...

Much like here in Floriduh! Nobody I ever vote for wins. It's Republican Democracy.

It's not really as bad as they make it out to be. There are a f*ck ton of Democrats and left-leaners here. Not quite enough to win elections except in the urban districts.

But plenty enough that we won't sit still for too many shenanigans. We're a handful of votes away from being a blue state...DeSantis won by 32,000 votes. He'll probably do better this time because he reacted well to the hurricane, as did President Biden.

I don't fear DeSantis. He's a prick and I hate that he might be the next president, but he's also a lawyer and a veteran. He has made public service his life. He has no ties to Trump.

Unless Democrats do something remarkable in their primaries I've got a C-note says DeSantis for the win and TWO terms. Because he's a decent administrator.

And I expect him to be replaced by a Democrat ten years from now. Because he's an assh*le,

It's not going to be a great time for progressives...but when has it ever been a great time for progressives...? We'll muddle through and the Union will survive.

That's my long-term prognostication and it's pretty lame next to these end-of-democracy laments. Elections and democracy will remain intact for the near term, Democrats will not maintain control but will win it back.

We'll have plenty to talk about here over the next decade, but not much of it will be about Trump.

I will be curious and doing my research to see how the hurricane and its aftermath affects the voting in Florida. So many displaced people.

Mostly Republican Boomers and mostly in heavily red districts that will still go as heavily red as ever.

Greger, we have this habit of electing a Democratic president followed by a Republican followed by a Democrat followed by a Republican etc. We’ve done this since Truman to IKE to JFK/LBJ to Nixon/Ford to Carter to Reagan etc. With the only exception was Reagan followed by the elder Bush who promptly lost to Bill Clinton. Clinton was replaced by Bush the younger, then Obama, then Trump, now Biden. So, DeSantis seem logical. Now if the Republicans run Trump in 2024, we’ll probably get another exception to the R-D-R-D etc. habit. 2/3rds of all Americans don’t want another Trump vs. Biden matchup in 2024. The question is - will the two major parties pay attention?

Pisses me off, the way "fighting words" do, the way intimidation does, the way domestic terrorism does.
Apparently not everyone thinks it's a big deal but to paraphrase Joe Biden, "This is a big ****ing deal", perhaps one of the biggest of deals.

Ya know, Iran runs all candidates by a "panel of experts" who block anyone that they don't like.
That's how they "preserve and defend" their walled garden.
What we're watching happen right now is almost an equivalent. Thus if it comes to pass, our elections will be no more founded in solid ethics than Iran's. We might as well just "vote for the Trumper of your choice" even after Trump is long dead, because once our own "panel of experts" is in place, it will create a PERMANENT DEAR LEADER system, a permanent Ayatollah environment, a potemkin democracy for show only.

If we're not allowed to have our vote represent the will of the people, democracy is toast because it's really the only part of democracy specifically laid out in the Constitution and our founders stupidly believed that state legislatures would remain honorably committed to ethical foundations that preserve the stability of the republic.

It seems like they collectively agreed that "No one would DARE to take things to the bottom" but as it turns out, a significant portion of our representatives HAVE no bottom anymore.

And an even larger portion of us just don't give a damn...unless something happens that directly attacks their personal well being. If it affects their neighbor, doesn't matter.

And the largest portion simply refuses to believe it could happen.
"It can't happen here."

Wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.

You still think today's GOP is still just a bunch of ordinary Republicans.
Remarkable.

To the point where one more "exception" and suddenly your "rule" is no longer a rule anymore.
By the way, if enough state houses grant themselves the power to just overturn state vote tallies on a whim, there won't BE two major parties anymore.

I guess you're just focused on the horse race aspects of it and not the consequences of a series of failed constitutional crises.

I was on another site, after stating the 1-6 hearings hadn’t change anyone’s mind as to who they planned on voting for along with only Democrats and a few other anti-Trumpers paying attention to them. The response given to me was, “As far as changing many minds, it is true the 1-6 hearings have not tipped the scales much.

As far as discovering the details what caused 1-6, they have been spot on. And the main audience is the DOJ, not the public. The public is not very well informed, anyway.”

Now that made perfect sense to me. I had never thought of the 1-6 hearings in that light. Only from an election standpoint which is pretty much how I view everything political anyway. Hence, I placed the 1-6 hearings along with abortion into the irrelevant column since they failed to move the needle on who folks planned on voting for. Then it was on to the next issue or event that might move the needle or make some folks change their minds as to who they planned on voting for in the coming midterm.

That was an excellent response which I thought needs sharing.

So should I conclude you are OK with losing our Democracy to the fascist Trump gangsters. or did you think and continue to believe they are simply another brand of Republicans who are not out to damage Democracy?

Electorate not well informed? I use the word stupid.

None of the major issues matter if we lose our Democracy to fascist gangsterism.

Of course not. These traitors are completely fine with the Republican march to fascism. These people want white patriarchal, Christian rule.

Frankly, I find people like this are as useful at being American and human beings as teats on a boar.

Pero just told you:

Everything will work out fine. If the GOP retakes control of the house, nothing more than gridlock will happen. Trump doesn’t worry me, he’s a has been who doesn’t know it yet. Trump will get what’s coming to him sooner or later. No need to worry about that or him either.

Until I see states start passing laws to have state legislatures award electoral votes instead of awarding their electoral votes via the popular vote, I’m not going to worry about that either. There’s been so much talk and no action. Life will go on whether it’s the Democrats or the Republicans in charge of government. I take it you think people are stupid if they don’t have the same political ideology and beliefs as you. That’s your prerogative. You don’t preserve democracy by not allowing stupid people and those with different beliefs and political ideology to vote. Perhaps a majority of the people want this country to take a different track than it is on now? Only 26.1% of all Americans think this country is on the right track, headed in the right direction today vs. 66.9% who think this country is headed in the wrong direction, on the wrong track.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html

Perhaps the people want a change in hopes that the change they make will help change the direction this country is on today. It never works out that way, but staying with what is isn’t working or getting this country on the right track isn’t going to change the direction this country is headed. Why not try something else?

That's because you seemingly don't have a full appreciation of the issue. The ISSUE IS there are other GOP'ers that think just like Trump. They are in government RIGHT NOW. There are Trump sycophants running for office RIGHT NOW. There are GOP voters who think like Trump. The J6 rioters are all GOP Trump voters. All of this said, these people ARE a problem - its just not Trump.

Do you think when Trump "goes away," that the end of it? No way, Jose! Ron DeSantis is Trump 2.0 - and Ron is WAY SMARTER than Trump. These people will glum onto DeSantis and Trumpsim will continue. THAT is a problem.

I agree with you on DeSantis. He doesn’t have Trump’s baggage, DeSantis has a pleasant personality, he’s not an obnoxious, uncouth, rude oaf. He is Trump 2.0 but with much more charisma and charm. Smooth perhaps and most important, much more political savvy. If you go back through history, beginning with IKE, you’ll find independents voted for the more charismatic candidate or the down-home boy in Carter’s and G.W. Bush are examples of the down home boy. Bill Clinton, Obama, Reagan had charisma up the ying yang. They won twice. Gore and Kerry were statues. Dukakis looked like an idiot in that tank. Carter the down-home boy was defeated by the charismatic Reagan. The stoic Ford lost to down home Carter. McCain fell into that category vs. Obama Etc.

What are elections other than beauty contests, popularity contests? People who take avid stances on the issues are already Republicans and Democrats. It’s those who are not affiliated and less to non-partisans that hold the decisive vote. Their finicky and at time wishy washy. As Greger calls them, the unwashed couch potatoes. 43% of the electorate fall into the non-affiliated group usually called independents. They’re a plurality of the electorate. To win elections, one needs to recognize that fact and play to them, try to attract their vote instead of just concentrating on one’s base.

Talking midterms, independents gave the Republicans the congress in 1994, they gave congress back to the democrats in 2006. Then turned around and gave the GOP the house in 2010 and then the senate in 2014. In 2018, independents switched to voting democratic as the Democrats took back the house. This year if the polls are correct, independents are going to give the house back to the republicans and maybe the senate to boot. It’s possible. Although I think a 50-50 tie is more likely.

You don’t have to convince me Rick. It’s all of America you must convince. Come to think of it, you’re not going to convince Republicans, but independents are open. Only independents see inflation, a thinning to flat wallet as this nation’s most important problem today. I just point this out.

Agreed. Republican voters and polticians are already quite satisfied with the GOPs march to white patriarchal, Christian national, Fascism. THAT is what "Make America Great Again" means.

...and I'm saying, if we want America to remain a democratic republic where EVERYONE participates, the people above can't win elections - but they're trying everything they can to put roadblocks in place to free and fair elections so that they do win - and they're doing it legislatively on the state level and on the federal level via the SCOTUS.

Then the party in power must govern for all the people and not just their base. By all I mean in referencing the Democrats is to govern in a way to also make independents happy with the way things are going, not just the democratic base. You’re then talking about 70% plus or minus a few points of everyone in the country. You’re not going to convince Republicans, forget about them. If one governs in a way independents are happy with your party being in power, they’ll continue to vote for your party. If you govern in a way that makes independents unhappy, disgusted with your party, they’ll vote for the alternative, the party out of power. That is how our two-party system works.

You’re living in an era where independents, the non-affiliated, the less to non-partisans make up 40% plus of the electorate. Where the two major parties now hover around 30% each. This isn’t a past era where the Democrats dominated the electorate anymore. Where the Democrats had around a 20-point advantage over the Republicans which led to the democrats controlling the house for 58 out of 62 years including 40 straight years. FDR through Bill Clinton. An era where independents made up 20% of the electorate, not 40% plus. A party can’t govern for just their base anymore, although both major parties still do. This is why we’ve had 4 changes in the control of the house over last the last 7 midterm elections vs. only 2 out of the 31 midterms previously.

And what have Republicans BEEN doing for decades?

Clearly you have failed to comprehend anything I have typed.

So let's start with the definition from Cambridge: "showing poor judgment or little intelligence". The first thing you should notice is there is no reference to politics. Ignorance. Read my signature .... ignorance is the enemy. Yes people have a choice. They can remain ignorant i.e. show poor judgment, and therefore be stupid or they can educate themselves and elevate themselves from ignorance. Again notice nothing about my beliefs or politics.

So my stand by worn out claim is 60% of the electorate is stupid. Notice 60% is a far larger number than Trump's 30% - 45%, so it is not about who agrees with me, but who chooses to remain ignorant. Ignorance has no boundaries. It infects peoples of all criteria. It is democratic in that respect.

The second thing to note is people say things out of their ignorance. These folks are stupid. First for remaining ignorant and second for saying anything based on their ignorance.

Why do you never look at the crosstabs on the polling??? It's always the single bottom line result. It not worth anything unless you analyze the crosstabs. 70% of both D's and R's think the country is going in the wrong direction. How could that possibly be? Unless you look at the crosstabs and learn the reason are different for both groups. It's like the result 25% of each party thinks the other is destroying America. You think that is partisan whining. I say look at the reasons and learn Republicans think it's about policies, while Democrats think it's about actual destruction of Democratic institutions. We can disagree about policies but we can't disagree about the institutions upon which Democracy is founded.

You can stick your head in the sand and hope everything will be fine, or ensure Democracy is saved. You apparently believe this is all about policies. Nothing can be further from the truth. We are in a death match for the continuance of Democracy. Trumpists are banning books, burning books, writing legislation to disenfranchise people's rights, to disenfranchise voters, to stack election boards with people who are willing to ensure only Trumpists win elections, to call into question every democratic institution as unfaithful to Trump and therefore must be changed, etc.

While it may be true and valid there will be gridlock as never before seen in Washington, the real battle is in the states. If a significant number of states becomes more Trumpist, you can be assured only Trump loyalist Republicans can ever be elected or outright steal an election. The courts will become safe havens for Trump loyalists, morality police will become the norm, the FBI will be stacked with Trump loyalist who will be hell bent on revenge, etc. POlicy issues???? So should you type .... I never thought it could happen in America (how many times you gonna type that) .... remember you had a chance to analyze the events

Let me paraphrase .... the party in power always wants to pass into law their agenda. For the party in power to govern, they must compromise.

Newt Gingrich said it best ... frak the dems .... it's my way or no way

And after that, no Democrats were ever elected again...!

And I've heard here and elsewhere that what really needs to happen is that the Reeps need to get frakked...it's the Democrat way or no way!

And as it turns out, I agree with the latter. Implementing that plan has proven to be problematic since roughly half of America disagrees with me, the stupid ones that is...smart people almost always agree with me.

I think you have misinterpreted what people are saying. I think what people are saying is, whoever is in power, compromise, to govern for ALL people.

Democrats in recent years have demonstrated their willingness to compromise on many occasions on major legislation. Republicans apparently are unwilling to listen to any Democrat ideas.

I only speak for myself, so I don't care if anyone agrees with me. But I do like to expose ignorance .... hoping it is the 2x4 which opens people up to at least consider getting educated.

Rs don’t listen to Ds because the Ds proposals have nothing to do with or promote total R dominance - which us what the Rs want.

Here you go rporter314:

The 18% who think leaders should stick to their principles is a new low
28% take a neutral position on the issue
44% of Republicans and 62% of Democrats favor compromise

https://news.gallup.com/poll/220265/americans-favor-compromise-things-done-washington.aspx

There’s no doubt democrats have been more willing to compromise than Republicans. But compromise is what the people are looking for. Especially independents. They want the two major parties to work together, when they don’t, they kick out the party in power and replace them in hopes that the former out of power party will try to compromise. It never works out that way.

Now think back, what if both parties had different leaders who were willing to compromise. You’d have a deal like Daschle and Lott came up for a previous 50-50 divided senate. Not where one party tries to push their entire agenda through by the vote of the VP. Something like this is what should have happened this time around. It might of if we hadn’t entered today’s modern political era of polarization, the great divide along with the super, mega, ultra-high partisanship.

https://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/05/senate.powershare/index.html

I don't want either of those options.
I don't WANT people to "frak" the system and I don't want the system frakking me.
I'd be happy to even go back to where the two parties played the cat and dog fights all day long for the cameras and then went in the back room with the whisky and cigars to hammer out a deal with each other.

The trial of the Oath Keepers is showing how the Oath Keepers, The Proud Boys, Trump’s Secret Service team, and Roger Stone back at the Willard hotel - the J6 command center - all communicated on J6 on Signal - an untraceable private message phone app. THAT is why the Secret Service phones were erased back to factory settings to rid the phones of the Signal application. The FBI has seized phones from other J6 participants like head Oath Keeper Stuart Rhodes who still had Signal in their phones that showed a chat group called FoS (Friends of Roger Stone) that included Roger Stone, Stewart Rhodes, Proud Boy leader Enrique Tarro, Trump’s Secret Service team head Anthony Ornato, and Alex Jones - yes THAT Alex Jones.

The J6 Committee has subpoenaed Trump to speak to them. The Subpoena requires Trump to turn over all Signal communications by November 4, 2022 and to speak to the Committee on or around November 14, 2022.

The subpoena mentions Signal at least 13 times - which strongly suggests that Trump was in direct communication with some of the coup plotters via the mobile app.

The Trump associates named in the subpoena include:

• Roger Stone
• Steve Bannon
• Mike Flynn
• Jeffrey Clark
• Sydney Powell
• Boris Epshteyn
• Christina Bobb
• John Eastman
• Rudy Guiliani
• Jenna Ellis
• Cleta Mitchell
• Patrick Bynre

The subpoena even asks him for communications involving the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, “or any other similar militia group or its members” from September 1, 2020 to the present.

Don't hold your breath...

Care to comment on their Signal requested documents from Trump?

Don't hold your breath.

This investigation is at its end.

It will be over come 4 Jan 2023 when the Republican controlled house begins the new session. Anything the 1-6 committee will do better get done by then.

So the J6 Committee can refer Trump's direct communications with militia groups and other J6 coup planners to the DoJ. Cool.

I'm sure everyone in the DoJ will be just as curious why Trump communicated on Signal - an untraceable phone app, and circumvented communicating out in the open as POTUS are required to do.

They can recommend whatever they wish to whomever they wish.

The DOJ already knows everything about everyone.

Whenever the final report drops, the ball bounces into Merrick Garland's jurisdiction and it's up to him what to do with it.

Your blasé attitude about J6 is interesting. It’s almost as if you couldn’t give a rat’s ass about American democracy.

I don't give a rat's ass about American Democrats.

They are the lesser of two evils in my book.

The J6 investigation is nearing its end. The House is about to change hands, Merrick Garland will announce his decision about March 15th...

The Ides of March.

Sorry not to be in a constant panic over things I can't control...I trust Garland to make the right decision. Everything else is just drama for the partisan llamas.

If exit polls are to be believed, a quarter of all voters vote for the lesser of two evils, for the least worse candidate or party, for the candidate or party they want to lose the least. I call these voters anti-voters. They never vote for a candidate or party, just against one they disliked the most or see as the most evil although if given a viable third choice, they’d take that viable third choice in a heartbeat. Biden is president because of the anti-vote who voted against Trump, but not necessarily for Biden as he was the lesser of two evils.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results

I agree with Greger, in the era of Trump the democratic party is the lesser of two evils. Once Trump is gone, it’ll be time to recalibrate. Like Greger, I too don’t worry over things I can’t control or help. As for American democracy, looking at the polls, different articles, folks on one side think voting Republican is the only way to save it, folks on the other side think one must vote democratic to save it. Those in the middle, swing voting independents, they don’t think about it. Just their thinning to flat wallets. They think about meeting theirs and their family’s need today and if they may be able to meet them tomorrow. What may or may not happen in the future is irrelevant to them. It’s today they’re trying to make it through. They’ll worry about tomorrow when it comes. Today takes precedence.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/8-10-democrats-republicans-opposition-171414953.html

NO DEMOCRAT COLLUDED OR CONSPIRED to end democracy on J6 and keep Trump in power for forever. Weird how you never call-out what Republicans did on J6 - very telling, and very Trumpian to call-out the side NOT doing those things.

They're the only legislators at the Capitol who give a rat's ass about democracy aside from two soon-to-be unemployed traditional conservative Republicans. When the new House session begins, those two will no longer be around and the entire Republican House will consist of pro-fascism insurrection supporters.

Assuming the worst, House AND Senate swept by Trump Republicans, what do you think the chances are for
Insurrection 2.0 in the coming two years?
I'd say the chances will be far greater than 65% and this next time around, all or nearly all of them will be heavily armed.

According to Democrats that's absolutely true.

According to Republicans, it's absolutely false.

According to independents..."Meh, they both suck."

Assuming the worst, and that the bastards take the Senate too...

I don't think they will have any reason for further insurrectional activities.

If they mind their Ps and Qs they'll also take the presidency in 2024.

And it will be Democrats storming the Capital and claiming the election was stolen.

Maybe they'll be right. And you and I will cheer them on...

And support the insurrectionists.

This is what happens when you turn every regularly scheduled election into a war instead of a meeting of minds and a search for consensus.

Exactly right on independents. Only 6% of independents have a very favorable view of the Democratic Party, 21% somewhat favorable for a total 27% favorable while 35% of independents have a very unfavorable view of the Democratic Party, 18% somewhat unfavorable for a total 53%.

5% of independents have a very favorable view of the Republican Party, 22% somewhat favorable for a total of 27% favorable. 31% of independents view the GOP very unfavorable, 19% somewhat unfavorable for a total 50% unfavorable.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/sp4h6s0adp/econTabReport.pdf

There’s no love there from independents for either party, but that’s why they’re independents. If they liked one or the other party, they’d become a Republican and or a Democrat. When it comes to elections, independents will vote for the party’s candidates they want to lose the least, not win, but to lose the least. This is what our elections and politic have come down to. Voting for the least worse party’s candidates only because you dislike the other party and its candidate a bit more than you dislike the party and its candidates you vote for.

Perhaps this will help.

They won't need to do that. Kamala Harris will just declare Joe Biden the winner, like all the MAGA folks claim Pence could do. Then in 2028, she will declare herself the winner. What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. Democrats could actually pull that off, because they have the advantage of being competent.

Indeed.

I give short-shrift to the term "independent" voter. These people are partisans like everyone else, but are too cowardly to state openly their political affiliation. I challenge the notion that there are voters who vote for both parties consistently.

You mean those "Schrodinger's" Democrats?
The ones who despise guns and abhor violence, and view insurrections as attacks on democracy?
Those Democrats?

MANDATORY BOTHSIDERISM CHANT:
both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides both sides nam yo ho reng ke kyo

Oh there are indeed independents but from personal experience the real independents don't make a big deal of it.
And in the pre-Trump years there was a tacit acknowledgment that more independents were sorely needed.

What the amateur* pundits and railbirds don't seem to realize yet is just how much of an impact January 6th made on the voting public, and I don't mean in the polls, I mean in the national consciousness.
We have crossed a kind of rubicon where elections cannot be trusted anymore and where the basic concept of the rule of law doesn't carry any weight like it used to.

We are in a kind of pre-Joni Mitchell moment where we really DON'T know what we've got till it's gone.
*(by amateur I simply mean those who are not currently employed by a news media outlet or professional polling organization)

Several politically aware people that I work with are speechless about the J6 subpoena that Trump received.

They had no idea what that meant.

I explained to them that the subpoena mentions Signal 13 times - that Trump, Roger Stone, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, Trump's Secret Service team ALL communicated on J6 via Signal.

They were shocked that AND dismayed that the media hasn't gotten this information out.

The short history of the independent vote, make up your own mind.

2000 independents voted for G.W. Bush 47-46 over Gore, independents voted for Republican congressional candidates 50-47 over Democratic congressional candidates.

2002 independents voted for Republican congressional candidates 51-45 over Democratic congressional candidates.

2004 independents voted for Bush by a 49-48 margin over Kerry. Independents voted for Republican congressional candidates by a 50-46 margin over Democratic congressional candidates.

2006 independents voted Democratic by a margin of 57-39 over Republicans.

2008 independents voted for Obama by a 52-44 margin over McCain. Independents voted 52-45 for Democratic congressional candidates.

2010 independents voted 56-37 Republican over Democrat

2012 independents voted for Romney by a 50-48 margin. Independents voted 50-49 for Republican congressional candidates.

2014 independents voted 54-42 for Republican congressional candidates.

2016 Independents voted for Trump 46-42 with 12% voting third party. In congressional election independents voted Republican 51-47.

2018 Independents voted for the Democratic congressional candidates by a 54-42 margin.

2020 Independents voted for Biden 54-41 with 5% voting third party. In Congressional elections independents voted Democratic 49-48.

Of note it that independents voted for the Democrats by a 57-39 margin in 2006, then 4 years later voted for Republicans by a 56-37 margin in 2010. From a plus 18 for the democrats in 2006 to a minus 19 in 2020. A swing of 37 points. Independent ticket splitting in presidential years was small from 2000-2016. But was large in 2020. Independents went for Biden by 13 points, but for Democratic congressional candidates by a single point. A 12-point ticket split between presidential and congressional. That’s a lot of people who voted for Biden, then Republican down ballot.

The switch or ticket splitting doesn’t occur that much in the same election, but the switch from party to party does occur quite often by independents from election to election. It seems independents like divided government. Independents voted for divided government in 1994 Bill Clinton, 2006 G.W. Bush, 2010 Obama and seems will do so again in 2022 Biden.

They also seem to like complaining about how Congress can't get anything done while enabling candidates who take pride in preventing anything from getting done.

Yeah...no sh!t.

That depends on what independents want done. Independents support the Republicans on some issue, oppose them on others, the same with the Democrats. They’ll support the democrats on some while opposing them on other issues. They don’t fall in line or lock step with either party as each party thinks they ought to. Contrary to what most partisan loyalist believe, independents aren’t all moderates or centrist who fall ideological wise in-between the ideologies of both parties. Some are way to the left of the Democratic Party and some way to the right of the GOP. What most independents have in common is their dislike of both major parties. Only 24% of independents have a favorable view of the Democratic Party, 25% a favorable view of the Republican Party. Most independents don’t complain about getting things done. They do complain when the party in power does something they don’t like or want. Most independents are indifferent to quite a lot of issues that get both major parties heated and hot, at each other’s throat.

Here's a couple of interesting stats regarding the independents and the midterms. 32% of all independents said Trump was a major factor in determining their vote. This group broke for voting Democratic by a 62-38 margin. As I have said numerous times, Trump was the biggest asset the Democrats had going for them this midterm. I think the above proves that.

That doesn't answer any questions.
If I had a dime for every instance of you patiently explaining that "independents don't like either party" and another dime for every time you call folks partisans, I'd be rich beyond the dreams of avarice.
In other words, WE KNOW this, but it's empty proselytizing with a broad brush chaser.

I'm not quite what you'd call a partisan.
I almost voted for McCain back in 2008 because I hadn't been paying much attention to anything but work back then and the black guy I knew nothing about with a name vaguely reminiscent of folks who crashed into the WTC struck my anemic knowledge base as a sure loser.
---NOBODY in their right mind would vote for a guy named "Hussein" in post 9/11 America or so I thought.
Sarah Palin's mindless babbling steered me away from McCain.
I almost decided to just stay home.

What DO independents want done?
No one knows because they want it done by PFM, "pure ****ing magic".
They want things done by a divided Congress half of whom were inspired by Newt Gingrich's bomb throwing war on lawmaking disguised as a "Contract for America".
They want things done by a wave of a magic wand.
Some of them want things done by royal decree, it seems.

In a legislative environment dominated by think tanks and lobby groups, SuperPACs and dark money donors, the only things that get done are those things that please the money people, who are more than happy to craft a narrative that blames everyone else, like Democrats, for instance, for important stuff NOT getting done for the American people.

Frank Luntz still has a job, you know.
But Luntz doesn't harbor any illusions about independents being some precious magical group of people.
He's just in it for the money.

I'm not buying what you're selling.

What's left of the Dems? Communists
What's right of Repubs? Fascists

I don't believe that independents who decide our elections are Communists or Fascists. I believe the independents are moderate populists who are fluid and are able to vote for both parties depending on which way the populist winds are blowing at the moment.

...and notoriety.

LOL

Somehow voodoo communications over long distances, reminiscent of quantum mechanics, between independents must be happening to ensure divided government, or it could simply be the result of disparate interests in disparate states, which upon tabulation, simply conclude in a divided government.

Yeah pundits like to say it, but I suspect they are trying hard to make sense of why one time its heads, the next time its tails. So yeah I do think such comments are a bit humorous no matter who says or types them.

It's populism. Independents are populists - they go with how the populist winds blow.

¯\_: / )_/¯

I heard a good quote tonight on PBS:

"People may not like a Party that doesn't know what they are doing, but that's a lot better than a Party that's lost their minds."

In ordinary circumstances divided government translates into increased compromise and can be a very good thing but it's disingenuous to ignore the fact that one specific half OF a divided government is hell bent on destroying government altogether.

I'm not sure that the Republicans are continuing to want to destroy our existing government. I am basing that on who won as Republicans and many seem to not be buying into that anymore. I think things may be changing a bit.

Once everything gets done and legislation begins we will get a better picture of just what is going on. Its also interesting that some are no longer buying into the Trump stuff as well. Trump had the support of the party as long as they won. They are no longer winning.

Things, I suspect, are changing and actually and hopefully, for the better. We will eventually see if folks are starting to talk to each other instead of all the fear, distrust and just plain old hate (on both sides).

2020 election denial certainly is a losing strategy. They're still trying to do that at this moment in Arizona - Lake is losing.

"I think, frankly, when a candidate screams vote fraud, it ought to be considered the equivalent of a concession speech," Sabato said.

https://www.rawstory.com/political-...al-for-evaluating-claims-of-voter-fraud/

I am going to be interested in somebody who makes a claim of fraud and then gets elected to be in charge. This person is now in charge. What if that person actually believes that to be true but is also is honest and finds no problem with an election. Do they then say it was and isn't any longer? Do they try and bring in so-called experts to find what he/she couldn't find?

I also suspect that there may have been some deniers that were elected before the last election. Haven't heard of any and, given the attendance of those with questions there have been few problems as far as I know. Wonder about that..............

The best part of appointing war crimes and public corruption prosecutor Jack Smith as Special Counsel to oversee the twin investigations into Donald Trump is that it will be a cinch, and it will allow the subpoena of Ginni Thomas to not look political.

Appointing a special council does have certain other advantages, other than making it easier to subpoena Ginni. It might even make it easy to subpoena Mike Pence. Having a special council will also make it very easy to refuse Jim Jordan’s demands for information about the investigation.

It will also ensure the continuity of any prosecution after 2025, no matter who is elected (neither hypothetical Trump prosecution - the stolen documents or the coup attempt - would be done by then, even if it were indicted on December 15, the earliest possible date for either).

Merrick Garland said there were recent developments, plural, that led to this decision. One could be the GOP taking over control of Congress. After all, Scott Perry, head of the Freedom Caucus, must be a subject of this investigation. But it’s not outside the realm of possibility that the incoming House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan is too. And depending on the final split in Congress, it’s also not outside the realm of possibility that enough members are under investigation - with Perry, Jim Jordan, Andy Biggs, Paul Gosar, Marjory Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, and Matt Gaetz - that it could, briefly anyway, alter the majority in Congress.

When Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith, Garland described the basis for the appointment not as a conflict (as Republicans and Trump are describing the investigation by a Biden appointee by his chief rival), but as an extraordinary circumstance.

If the assumption that everyone who has had their phone seized in that investigation is a subject of it, then Scott Perry, the Chair of the House Freedom Caucus, would also be included. Perry was the one who suggested that Trump replace Jeffrey Rosen with Jeffrey Clark so DOJ would endorse Trump’s challenges to the election outcome. He pushed a number of conspiracy theories at the White House and DOJ (including the whack Italian one). Along with Meadows and Rudy Giuliani, Perry was putting together plans for Trump to come to the Capitol on January 6. After one meeting with Perry, Meadows burned some papers.

if all the members of Congress who discussed or asked for pardons are included, the number grows longer, in addition to Perry, if the other politicos were included, that would include at least Matt Gaetz, Andy Biggs, Louie Gohmert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene. Jordan, Perry, Gaetz, Biggs, Gohmert, and Marge would amount to most of the probable seven person majority in the House.

Marge, as it turns out, is already dreaming up ways to defund this investigation (the means by which she wants to do this, the Holman Rule, probably wouldn’t work; I believe there’s a preauthorized fund from which Special Counsel expenses come from).

Given how close the majority in Congress is, any prosecution of a Republican member would threaten to disrupt that majority. Which means any investigation into Republican members of Congress would pose a more immediate threat to the current status quo than a Trump prosecution would.

That is some pretty disturbing analysis and reasoning indicative a very sick mind. Obviously the investigations into him were not over and it was weird of him to think that.

I think what you mean is rational Republicans don't want to burn it down. They want to go back to the days when they apologized for their base by protecting and lying to them for whom and what they are ... anti-government bigots.

Ahhh .... those were the days my friend when Republicans could say the Democrats were abusing the race card .... now we know the truth

The rational Republicans are largely homeless now.
Come on, almost every single Republican in the House or Senate who didn't bend over for Trump or didn't vigorously defend him got booted out this last election.
Well over 90 percent of the Republicans in both chambers are fervent Trumpers or will fall in love and fall in line if he gets the nomination, ergo they too are Trumpers.

Fact: Never-Trumpers are no longer considered Republicans just as my own no-Trump status means that I am no longer considered part of the family according to my only siblings, my two older brothers.
The rational Repubs have been disowned, I've been disowned, the way it works is simple.

So, what I'm getting at is, rational Republicans can say or think whatever they like but they're no longer CONSIDERED Republicans. To be a Republican today requires sworn loyalty to Trump...PERIOD.

I realize everyone wants to paint all Republicans as avid Trumpers which isn’t the case today. If you equate very favorable to avid Trumpers among Republicans, that’s 45% today. The problem is only 10% of Republicans view him very unfavorable which would be your never Trump republicans. The rest are somewhats either favorable or unfavorable. They go along with the majority which in this case is the 45% of avid Trumpers. Call the somewhats the sheep of the republican party.

Now DeSantis very favorable’s among the Republican Party is at 49%, higher than Trump’s and his ver unfavorable’s at 4% is lower.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/h45mt3xoby/econTabReport.pdf

The latest poll on the 2024 Republican primaries show Trump at 45% to DeSantis 30%.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000184-a2ea-d1d1-ad8d-affbe2e40000

That’s a change from Trump 49%, DeSantis 26% back on 1 Nov 2022. The forecaster in me says DeSantis in about time for the 2024 republican primaries will probably have taken the lead in the popularity polls over Trump. But as the article stated, it may be meaningless if Trumpers make the rules for the primary to favor Trump. One must remember Trump won the 2016 primary nomination by receiving only 35% of the entire Republican vote. Crowed field along with Trump winning enough winner take all state with a plurality of the vote enabled him to gain the nomination. The idea here is in states where DeSantis is more popular than Trump, you make the rules for a proportional distribution of the delegates. In states where Trump is more popular, you make those states winner take all.

Now why I’m dwelling on Republicans is beyond me. One other thing for 2024, only 26% of all Americans want Biden to run again in 2024 which includes but 14% of independents. Question 23. 30% want Trump to run again in 2024 which includes 22% of independents. Question 24.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/h45mt3xoby/econTabReport.pdf

Time for much younger, fresher faces to emerge in my opinion. Having another Biden vs. Trump election could result in another 2016 where a quarter of all Americans, 25% disliked both major party candidate including 54% of independents. These folks didn’t want neither one to become the next president. 2016 was the last election independents vote Republican.

https://news.gallup.com/opinion/pol...ans-dislike-presidential-candidates.aspx

I didn't say ALL Republicans, I said nearly all Republicans IN CONGRESS.
I can name the standard Republican congressmen and senators on ONE HAND.

147 Trumpers in Congress voted to overturn the election, and the rest all except five or six were willing to cooperate enough to serve on the J6 cmte but that got squashed and NO ONE tried to fight back.

Trumpism is to Congress what the NSDAP was to the Reichstag in the 1930's.
It doesn't MATTER what ordinary people think, because ordinary people aren't serving in our legislative branch.

You’re right about ordinary people not serving in congress, they’re almost all millionaires. That wasn’t what you meant, but it is also one big difference between those who serve in congress and ordinary people. I have no use for those who voted to overturn the election. But with the huge ideological divide in this country, you have way too many people who will vote for those candidates, not because they believe those candidates are good persons or even correct on thinking the election was stolen from Trump. They vote for them because of ideology, their ideology matches with those who voted to overturn the election. By ideology, I mean conservative vs. liberal or progressive, whatever you want to call it. They don’t care how bad a scumbag their candidate is, they only care on a political philosophy level. In today’s modern political era of polarization, the great divide, the super, mega, ultra-high partisanship, you won’t get a conservative to vote for a liberal or a liberal to vote for a conservative. The divide is too great. Recent history has shown that those who identify with either major party will vote for their party’s candidate 94% of the time regardless of who that candidate is, it could be Atilla the Hun, but the party Atilla belonged to would garner that party’s 94% of voters on average. That’s just the way it is today.

Would you ever vote for a Republican, I think not regardless of who your party’s candidate was.

Trump supporters have proven beyond even the shadow of a doubt that they are not conservative, sorry.


Well, go right on ahead and think what you want to think then.
Nobody ever changes their mind on debate forums.
If I still lived in Maryland and the Democratic candidate was a moron and Larry Hogan was still running I'd consider voting for him.
And as I said a month ago, right here on CHB, I had briefly considered voting for McCain, because in 2007 I was still working my tail off and I didn't know the first thing about that black guy named "Hussein" something and I figured it was some kind of sick joke in the post 9/11 era, Dems bringing some Muslim guy as a candidate.

Oh yeah, that's gonna fly about as well as a lead balloon, might as well vote for McCain...I says to myself, until I finally saw and heard the Hussein guy talking...and gaining traction.

So Pero, your hard-boiled assumption that everyone else here is excessively partisan just got blown up.
I just tend to gravitate more toward Dems because I want what most Dems want, that's all.
I wasn't living in California again in 2011, but I would have voted for Der Guvernator if I had because Cruz Bustamante was a dud from the word go and I knew Arnold was a decent man, even if I didn't agree with some of his views.

Why would ANYONE decent choose to vote for a person whose national party takes rights away and treats women and minorities like second class citizens, a party that makes it difficult for minorities to vote?

Why would ANYONE choose to vote for a person whose national party is gleeful when LGBTQ+ are murdered in their places of safety from the cruelty said party members foists upon the LGBTQ+ on a daily basis?

It's appalling that ANYONE would vote for a party member who belongs to a national party which does ANY of the above! Unless these voters support Fascism and White Christian Nationalism - then it makes sense.

Voting for today's version of Republicanism is NOT voting for decency, fairness, equity and justice for ALL.

Jeffrey, I never said Trump, nor his supporters were conservatives as I know conservatives to be. That isn’t to say that they. Trump and his supporters don’t consider themselves conservatives. They do. Almost all Democrats refer to them as conservatives. I said this many times, here and on the other site that the 7-time party switcher adopted the political philosophy of the party he belonged to at the time. Trump doesn’t have a political ideology of his own. That Trump is the true RINO. I consider myself more of a traditional conservative which has a lot in common with the classic liberal beliefs of our founding fatjers and framers. I’m way out of step with today’s neo, social, religious or any other type of conservatism. I also am out of step with today’s liberals and progressives. I fall through the crack. No political party to call home as is the case with 40% plus of the electorate who identify as independents. There’s nothing to be sorry about.

I do think Greger was a hard core progressive/socialist, but a political realist at the same time. I also think most on this site are way too crazy about Trump. I ignore most if not all of those posts. I voted for McCain. He was my type of candidate, more middle of the road and very willing to work across the aisle. This type of candidate is what I’m looking for. Not ideologues. I’m not an ideologue, never have been and never will be. Think about voting for a Republican is one thing, doing so is another. I’ve voted for both plus a bunch of third-party candidates in my lifetime, Third party when I dislike and distrust both major party candidates. Party means nothing to me. Usually, in any election I voted for all three depending on the candidates, I’m a A number one ticket splitter. One of the 5 million ticket splitters this year who voted against Trump endorsed chosen Republican candidates and then for non-Trump Republican candidates. R Kemp for governor, L Chase Oliver for Senate, D David Scott for congress and so on down the ballot.

You can consider me shot down, no problem. We all have our own likes and dislikes, what we believe in, what we think and feel. The important thing in my book is to respect those of different views and opinions. I also agree, no one is going to change anyone’s mind on a debate site. Outside of the fixation with Trump, I think we have more in common than not.

Republicans have an image problem and it starts with their national party. A snake rots from the head down. I don’t see any R disavowing their party’s national policies.

Rick, the Republicans won the congressional popular vote, Republicans 54,214,279, 50.7% to Democratic 51,066,093, 47.7%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections

Republicans also won the governor’s popular vote 42,887,294, 49.18 to the Democratic governor votes 42,845,018, 49.14%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_gubernatorial_elections

A lot of people that the Republicans were the better choice in 2022. Why? For Georgia, a good-sized majority thought Kemp was a good governor. Same up in New Hampshire with Sununu. Kemp’s finished 8 points higher than Walker. A lot of split ticketing. Same in New Hampshire, Sununu finished 13 point higher than Trump endorsed Bolduc for the senate. Ohio was the same, DeWine finished 10 points above another Trumper Vance although Vance did win Ohio’s senate seat.

The bottom line in states which comparisons were available, non-Trump Republican candidates averaged 10 points higher percentage wise than Trump chosen, endorsed candidates. Ticket splitters galore. Folks voting for non-Trump chosen candidates, then voting on the same ballot against Trump chosen candidate as was the case here in Georgia. Kemp, a Trump enemy received 200,000 more vote than Walker did, Trump chosen, and this carried out nationwide. Nationwide, in the end there were 5 million ticket splitters. Much like in 2020 when 7 million ticket splitters voted for Biden and then Republican down ballot enabling the GOP to gain 13 house seats.

Both 2020 and 2022 seems to be an election where candidates matter. Not so much on the Democratic side, but on the Republican side with Trump and his handpicked candidates. Bottom line, independents don’t like Trump and they aren’t going to vote for Trump or his chosen candidate. Without Trump, who the Democrats owe a debt of gratitude, the GOP would have had its red wave and been in control of both chambers of congress.

The bottom-line Rick, from my point of view. The Republicans need to realize they’re still the smaller of the two major parties. Hence, they must win the independent vote or lose the election. 2018, 2020, 2022 proved independents aren’t going to vote for Trump or his chosen candidates. The Republican Party needs to ditch Trump. The question is, can they? Keep Trump around for 2024, the Democrats will have a banner election. But they need a fresher, younger face at the top of the ticket, not Biden nor Harris. If that happens the democrats will not only win the presidency but recapture the house and probably add more senate seats. But unlike this year when the Republicans were defending 21 seats to the Democrats 14, 2024 will have the Democrats defending 23 seats to the Republicans 10. So adding more senate seats will be very difficult.

Nothing about voting for a Republican changes what I wrote above. How is any of THAT a "better choice?"

Kemp signed an extreme abortion bill which the GA State Supreme Court recently upheld. How is THAT a better choice?

Republicans want to take a woman's choice of her own body away from her and they're doing it, state-by-state. Republicans are coming for other rights and social programs next - like gay marriage, Social Security and Medicare.

Decent American recognize what Republicans want to do, the sheeple clearly do not.

The majority of Georgians disagree with you, it's that simple. You have your political beliefs, they had theirs. I happened to agree with the majority of Georgians and voted for Kemp. People all over the USA have different priorities and different views on things, also beliefs. But overall, most Georgians saw good governorship from Kemp and voted to keep him. what's important to you may not be to others or the importance isn't that high.

Apparently, abortion wasn't that important here. You don’t get an abortion every day, but you do go to the grocery store and fill up your car, do shopping much more than often than getting an abortion. 76% of Georgian’s rated the economy and rising prices as very important, 38% or important, 38% in deciding who to vote for. 53% said the abortion issues was very important, 29% or important, 14%. Gay marriage didn’t make the cut or the list of issues. People had heard for the last 60 years that the republicans were going to cut social security and Medicare, that didn’t make the cut either as it was totally ignored. Those cuts won’t happen for the next two years anyway, not with the democrats in control of the senate and Biden president. For that to happen, the GOP would have to have total control, House, senate, presidency and then do away with the filibuster. Doing away with the filibuster is something the democrats want to do, not the republicans.

The bottom line is different people have different thoughts, beliefs, view things differently and place higher and lower priorities on issues and the like that either of us. Abrams made her campaign all about abortion, the problem with that was it was a much lower priority to Georgians than rising prices and making ends meet. Kemp was seen as being a good governor, just like Sununu in New Hampshire and DeWine in Ohio and your nemeses, DeSantis in Florida.

Abortion is symptomatic of a lager picture of Republican fascism: Taking rights away and telling people how to live their lives and who they can love.

This bigger picture seems to escape many - clearly folks who are unable see the forest through the trees - which says a lot about their ability to think and reason.

There can be no “right” to hold beliefs over what people can do with their own bodies and how to live their lives. Then again Georgia was once a very proud slave having state and many of those former pro-slavery family members still reside in Georgia today. So telling people how to live their lives is nothing new for these people.

Good to know which Americans are for rights-taking and also which ones don’t condone it. This says a lot about each of their character and who they are human beings and which side of history they choose to be on.

The bottom line for me is individual freedom over one’s body and who they love, equality in every aspect of life, and justice for all is a higher priority and I align myself with like-thinking individuals. Those who don’t have these same values, tend to clash with me. And here we are.

DeSantis is much more smarter and more cunning and more conniving than Trump - those are the differences. Else, DeSantis and Trump are peas from the same pod. Anyone who can see the forest through the trees can see this.

"Good governors' don't sign bills taking established rights away.

...and for the record, my life is not predicated on a belief system, my life is predicated on a values-based system.

Do whatever a person wants with their own bodies, what your feelings about prostatution? It falls into the same category of a woman doing whatever she wants with her own body. Personally, I think both should be legal.

I have no problem with sex workers. My issue is that it be legalized so they don't have to look over their shoulder out of constant fear that they be arrested and that they have regular health checkups.

I don’t think one can determine whether a person is decent or not by his political beliefs. Actions with family, the neighborhood, community etc. in my opinion has more to do with being a decent person than being a republican or a democrat, conservative or liberal or one’s voting habits.

I also don’t have a problem with people trying to make ends meet, trying to get through today for voting for the party they think will help them make ends meet and for them to see tomorrow. I may need to put food on the table today, put clothes on the kids, gas in the car to go to work today, etc. Abortion may not be wanted for years into the future if it ever is. I think this was the thinking of many Georgians and Americans this midterm.

Agreed. Actions tells us the decency of an individual.

...and speaking of actions:

Agreed. However, the 2017 Republican tax cuts tells us everything we need to know about the Rs, and here's why: Eighty-seven percent of the 2017 tax cut went to the top 1% with thirteen percent going to 331M Americans to split.

Secondly, the 2017 tax cuts sunsets for everyone who is not a 1% in 2024. The 2017 Republican tax cut NEVER sunsets for the 1%.

Third, the 2017 favored "carry-overs' for the 1% in perpetuity. Prior to the 2017 Republican tax cut, carry-overs ended after seven years. A carry-over is provision that allows a taxpayer to move a tax loss to future years to offset a profit. (Golly! Who do you think THAT was for? If you guessed Trump - you'd be correct)

For the layperson to think that the Rs are on their side, they need a heavy dose of reality.

Here's the thing - a woman never knows when she'll be a victim of sexual assault. Be prepared is a good motto.

A CNN exit poll from the midterms showed that abortion was number two following inflation as number one.

I agree with you, mark that down on your calender. Here's something else. Not related to abortion, but to governing.

I mentioned that independents made up 40% plus of the electorate. Independents continue to grow, the two major parties continue to shrink. Why and what are these so-called independents, swing voters, the non-affiliated, less to non-partisan looking for? I think Alaska has provided the answer.

9 Democrats and 8 Republicans form bipartisan majority in Alaska Senate

https://www.yahoo.com/news/9-democrats-8-republicans-form-144900435.html

This is exactly what I been searching for, well, for a lifetime. The closest the senate in Washington came to this was back in 2001.

Senate approves 50-50 power-sharing plan

https://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/05/senate.powershare/index.html

Which shows it can be done. The only thing in my opinion stopping something like this from happening are the ideologues and the super, mega, ultra-high partisans of both parties.

Could you explain who they are, what makes them everything you said and why is what they believe everything you said?

Anthony Ornato in rebuttal to Cassidy Hutchinson stated he did not tell her that story about Trump. Now he claims he can't remember what he said. So I guess memory is one of those things you can recall under subpoena only when it is convenient .... good to know

these MAGA characters are slugs

How can he claim he didn't tell Cassidy that story if he can't remember? Seems this past Summer, Tony was going to counter what Cassidy said - now he can't remember?

Sounds like a dirty, filthy liar to me.

I think Tony Ornato should have stuck with his old pop trio act...Tony Ornato and Dawn, wasn't that it?

Droll, Jeff, very droll.

Per Politico, David Shafer, the chair of the Georgia Republican Party, has been identified as having a singularly significant role in the plot to overturn the results of the election in that state in 2020.

Judge Robert McBurney in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia wrote in his ruling:


In the wide-ranging case, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis opened a criminal probe last year, investigating 16 Georgia Republicans who were offered as fake electors for the state in the 2020 election. The fake electors signed certificates declaring Trump had won the presidential election and offering themselves as official electors in order to certify Georgia’s election results for the former president.

Trump and the GOP had help in all levels of government on J6.

Why didn't the federal police and military sound the alarm when they knew in advance that an armed mob was coming to the Capitol to try to overthrow our government, and that many within the mob were armed and willing to kill (and did) to try to accomplish their goal? The armed mob posted about it in the open on social media.

Why did the Secret Service and the Department of Defense wipe their phones so the data could never be retrieved?

Republican Ron Paul's former staffer Elmer Stewart Rhodes, leader of the Oathkeepers, should not be the only one convicted of seditious conspiracy.

This should come as NO surprise whatsoever because that is precisely the kind of "work" that was being done BY folks like Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon and their sycophants. Despite the two not getting along, the fact is, they both were in charge of supervising a significant amount of the massacres that retooled the approach TAKEN BY these branches.

They did not directly do the legwork, no...but they laid out how to go about it.
Christopher Miller, Trump's handpicked ACTING SecDef, penned a stand-down order for all DoD personnel, specifically in regards to J6.

Conclusions in the J6C report show that members of the Pentagon, FBI, Secret Service and CIA of having been involved or at least aware of the plot to overthrow the capitol and did not respond or actively conspired to allow it to take place.

At least two top Pentagon officials were called to request they send military to protect the capitol when the attacks started but they refused and instead sent additional police to protect the generals homes in DC.

We know from the convictions of the Oath Keepers that the FBI had infiltrated that group and had an agent in the group that was aware of their plot but it appears nothing was done to stop the planned attacks. That happened on Barr's watch.

We know that a "former" CIA operative that was part of some group that mapped out potential CIA scenarios for how the US government could be overthrown and passed a plan on to Tario and the Proud Boys in a thumb drive. There was rumors before the attack that Tario was working for the FBI in a deal he made on other charges.

We know that Pence did not trust the secret service and they lied about Trump trying to go to the capitol and then deleted all their communications. Biden has said he didn't trust his own SS because they are all southern white conservatives that were former cops.

Everything points to a serious problem in these departments that appear to have been infiltrated by far right extremists and coordinated with Trump's team or on their own to facilitate the coup and attacks on the capitol.

Garland has apparently flushed out and forced several members of the DOJ/FBI to resign or be fired but the Pentagon, CIA and Secret Service have their own chain of command and we don't know if they have investigated and cleaned out their ranks of these extremists.

There is no doubt, that given the opportunity that they will do it again. Special Prosecutor Smith certainly has his work cut out for him.

I think I typed of this very problem before the election, asking the question, what if Trump would not leave the WH. I was not the only one to ask the question. Apparently Gen Milley was concerned enough to ask the same question and it's extension, could the military be engaged in Trump maintaining control of the government if he lost. Some said no way could it happen in America. Yikes ... were they ever misguided.

I believe the assault to undermine Democracy continues today. Radicalization of military personnel, and law enforcement and the delusions Christian Nationalists, white supremacists, and plain old ignorant folk all contribute to a continuing threat to Democracy. I believe we are teetering on the precipice of failure of Democracy or the continuation of the experiment. I always remind myself, how Lenin led workers and the military in an insurrection. Could our government be overthrown by a select few? Key military leaders, a dedicated cadre of militias and MAGA-heads converging on the right inflection point at the right time, could easily overthrow the government. Had the ground forces of the insurrection been better managed, I suspect they would have been successful in not only thwarting the count, Trump would have declared martial law, and installed himself as de facto Pres.

The question is, who would have prevented it???? Not the Congress, they would be detained .... not the Courts .... they have no enforcement power .... not the military .... they rely on the Pres, and even if they believed it an illegal order, what would they do? nothing. Take a poll. It can't happen in America. It did but was unsuccessful.

Trump's failed coup timeline

The timeline extends beyond what is quoted here.

It has come to light that Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) gave a tour of the office buildings on Capitol Hill to individuals that were eventually involved in the attack on the Capitol. Security footage shows Loudermilk showing individuals the hallway that connects the Capitol and those office buildings. They were seen taking photos of such tunnels, stairwells, and the security desk. The committee investigating J6 never accused him of anything.

The committee wanted to ask him what happened, if he knew the man in the video. Loudermilk refused to cooperate. If he did nothing wrong, shouldn't be concerned about answering questions?

Just read this and wanted to share

Proud Boys Joe Biggs, Enrique Tarrio, Ethan Nordean, Zach Rehl found guilty of Seditious Conspiracy. Dominic Pezzola found guilty of obstructing the vote certification.

Joe Biggs' role was at the nexus between the mob that attacked Congress and those that orchestrated the mob, his prosecution is the most important case in the entire January 6 investigation.

This point was echoed by Tarrio during a Gateway Pundit appearance after closing arguments, in which he called himself, “the next stepping stone.” And in a comment during closing arguments for which prosecutors got a curative instruction, Norm Pattis (the lawyer Biggs shares with Alex Jones) said, “this case will have impact on [the government’s] charging decisions in other cases.”

A jury found Biggs and Tarrio guilty of all charges against them save two assaults charged under a co-conspirator liability theory: the one Dominic Pezzola committed in stealing the riot shield that he would then use to make the first breach of the building, and the one for throwing a water bottle for which Charles Donohoe, whose absence from the trial seems to have befuddled the jury, already pled guilty.

The sedition verdicts against Biggs, Tarrio, Ethan Nordean and Zach Rehl are the showy news result, but Pezzola’s fate may prove just as instructive for what this verdict means for others. In addition to charges for assaulting that cop, robbing his shield, and breaking the window, Pezzola was found guilty of obstructing the vote certification, but not conspiring with the others to do that (on which the jury hung) or to seditiously attack the government (on which the jury came back with a not guilty verdict).

According to this Vice News interview with one of the jurors, one reason they didn’t convict Pezzola on sedition is because he “may not have been bright enough to really know about the plan.”

Now on to the Oath Keepers...

The government has stated that neither the Proud Boys nor the Oath Keepers are militias. Both groups have been characterized as seditionists by the U.S. Government. It's the participants of these groups that think of themselves as militias. They are not.

i am uncomfortable with the use of the word "militia". I think the correct language should be "legal militia" (perhaps redundant considering the laws involved) as defined by the Dick Act of 1903 and all state laws which recognize organized groups outside of the Dick Act. There are still states which have artifacts of militias which date back to the Revolution. Groups such as the Proud Boys are not and have never been recognized as legal entities under state laws.

Regarding those few states which continue to recognize militias outside the Dick Act, it is those which I believe are supported by the 2nd Amendment precisely. Thus should those states not provide armaments for these legal groups, then the 2nd Amendment would provide the vehicle for individuals to procure armaments without infringement by government.

Stewart Rhodes just got sentenced to 18 years in prison, and the judge told him the day he gets released he will present great danger to America.

I suspect even as a prisoner he continues to be a clear and present danger to Democracy. His ideas and following with continue their campaign against Democracy.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has indicted fake electors for their part in the overall scheme to overthrow the government and overturn the 2020 election they lost. (For a quick refresher, Joe Biden beat Trump in Michigan by almost three full percentage points. It wasn’t close.)

Nessel is charging 16 Republicans, the youngest two of them are 55 - with felonies for going into the basement of the Michigan Republican Party and affirming multiple times on documents that they were “the duly elected and qualified electors for president and vice president of the United States of America for the state of Michigan.” These folks were not that.

These people then sent their lying forged docs to the U.S. Senate and to the National Archives, because they wanted then Vice-President Mike Pence to have the courage to use their fake elector certificates instead of the real ones from the real world, where Joe Biden kicked Donald Trump's ass in the election.

These are the first electors to be criminally indicted, and hopefully, not the last.

Republicans bill themselves as the party of law and order. They're more the party of cheat at any cost to steal elections.

I think when they bill themselves as "Law and Order" what they really mean is "we're a Law unto ourselves and we will Order you about."