What we learned at Thursday's 1/6 hearing
Well all those people should feel absolutely safe now. That's a load off my mind. /s
Many people, it seems to me, tend to “see it when they believe it” — regardless of any empirical reality. And, after believing the Trump package of post election fabrications… folks became believers. And thus, their political reality became their reality.
It was a criminal conspiracy. In today’s Bulwark, Amanda Carpenter connects the dots:
(1) The only man at the Department of Justice willing to carry out Trump’s schemes—environmental lawyer Jeffrey Clark—had his home searched on Wednesday by the feds. Law enforcement won’t confirm the reason for the raid, but it is almost certainly connected to his efforts to alter the election results.
(2) The Jan. 6th Committee revealed yesterday that Republican members of Congress secretly sought pardons from Trump for their actions to help him overturn the election. As committee member Adam Kinzinger pointed out, “The only reason I know to ask for a pardon is because you think you’ve committed a crime.”
It sounds to me that the character and shape of the GOP are coming closer and closer to something the DOJ can exorcise through the focused use of RICO laws. If it worked for the likes of real mafiosos, it can certainly work for a lightweight wannabe and his coterie of opportunists and enablers.
Where will the weak-willed opportunists flock to when enabling election fraud and conspiring with a racketeering-influenced corrupt organization lead to hard time in a Federal corrections facility?
Right now, political cowards only have one source of pressure. It's time to even the score, for the good of the nation and the survival of the Republic.
The constitution is the problem. The EC and the follow up Electoral Count Act are the fat white underbellies of our system, ready to be harpooned by any Queequeg with a bone to pick. Any county official, state AG or election commission, any legislature or rogue House Representatives, fake electors etc, can kill our democracy by whim. As JVL said, 'There are no constitution police'.
(but the Democrats are talking about climate change)
I DO have to say that I got a real laugh out of Brent Orrell's article today, because the same people who were so gung ho about getting rid of abortion are also the same people who will vote down any social service programs that will increase their taxes or help those "other people."
As someone from the American Enterprise Institute, Orrell should be fully aware of that--which means he is either a hypocrite or so full of excrement his eyes should be solid brown.
That’s me, too. Have always been an Independent and voted for whoever I thought the best person (regardless of party). That has led me since 2016 to only vote D all down the ballot. There are no good Republicans. Even my very-nice-in-person congressman voted 90% Trump and never heard a peep from him no matter what antics the Rs were up to.
Given the recent apocalyptic triad of the concealed carry decision, the Thursday J6 evidence against Trump and the murder of Roe v Wade in 6-3 decision, my observation is seemingly small but, in my defence it is a consistent nit - and especially in light of Charlie’s insistence that words should mean what they say, I.e not “pregnant people”, please note the following: Trump referred to everyone in Congress as if none of them are women when he said “”R. Congressmen”. That is not unexpected in someone like Trump who is a chronic boor. But it should be surprising when Charlie wrote in the story above about “the Congressmen who asked for pardons.” One of them was Marjorie Taylor Greene. She is not a man.
I’ve been fighting this one since 1979 when I was introduced live into a news hit as a newsman. I’m a (retired) reporter, a journalist, even a newswoman. But like Eowyn, the sword maiden in Lord of the Rings, “I am no man.” Neither is Marjorie Taylor Greene. Or Nancy Pelosi.
The Jan 6th investigation is turning over a lot of stones all of which are aimed at Trumps noggin. With two recent Supreme Court decisions putting them on the line for the next bar argument the turns out a shooting death then they overturn Roe with the vaunted legal scholar Clarence Thomas insisting that abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution as a right and therefore it is not recognized as such. Can you imagine the bullshit that flies as dinner conversation with Thomas and his wife Ginni? I am thoroughly disgusted with both decisions. If the Dems don’t ride this and the Jan 6th investigation in the midterms they are nuts
Foster City CA
The prosecution of the former “president” (my alteration) is not only permissible but required for the sake of American democracy.
THE PROSECUTION OF THE FORMER “PRESIDENT” IS NOT ONLY PERMISSIBLE BUT REQUIRED FOR THE SAKE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY.
Two words: Supreme Court.
Since the moment in gradeschool I learned about how the Electoral College worked I believed it was a weird way to elect a leader. As I grew older and learned more about how archaic, weak, and frankly undemocratic that system is (weak as in having vague procedures that could be exploited by malign actors) I believed that the next time a POTUS was elected by the EC but lost the popular vote the nation would be so abhorred that the EC would be put to pasture. Mind you, this is my high school brain thinking this. Then the 2000 election happened, SCOTUS winds up selecting POTUS in a 5-4 ruling, yet no such reform occurred in the aftermath.
Flash forward 16 years and lightning strikes twice, HRC wins popular vote by nearly 3 million votes (Trump's fake votes claim notwithstanding) but loses by Trump basically drawing an EC inside straight. Our current landscape is basically shaped by 5-6 swing states with vote margins of less than 100,000 votes. Any future GOP POTUS that wins the EC will almost certainly lose the popular vote by millions. This dynamic probably won't change for the foreseeable future.
Flash forward 4 more years and we arrive where we're at in 2020. An incumbent President who lost a fair election yet wielded every lever of power he had in an attempt to stay in power. Multiple schemes were hatched to use the ECs weaknesses to subvert the will of the people and install an illegitimate leader. A mob attacked the Capitol on January 6 in a attempt to stop Congress from fulfilling it's duty in formalizing the election. The mob was actually successful for several hours. None of the EC schemes hatched by Trump worked, not because the system was strong or the guardrails held, but because a few people reached red lines they were unwilling to cross (eg, Bowers, Pence). These people might not be there next time. Alas, this is the ridiculous end that we've arrived at.
I guess my whole point is that despite Trump's rank awfulness the real elephant in the room is the Electoral College. There was even a Veep plotline exposing it's ridiculousness. Thanks to Trump we should now have abundant evidence that the Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. Yet I have no illusions that it will be abolished. The Wyomings and Dakotas of the Union would never wittingly give up their outsized power in this process, and I hardly blame them. That doesn't make it right though. My only hope is that one of the things that the January 6 Committee recommends at the conclusion of all of this is that Congress act on some Electoral College reforms that close as many of the loopholes and vagaries in the Electoral College that currently exist. If we're stuck with this system then we should at least make it bulletproof.
What about rational exuberance?
Keep your meteorology antennae on alert. Next up...massive flood.
You wrote: "As you know, Morning Shots has strong immunity against irrational exuberance. But after Thursday’s hearing, we are willing to entertain the idea that Donald J. Trump will actually face criminal charges."
Suppose he not only faces charges, but he is convicted. Nothing in the Constitution would bar him from office. Eugene Debbs ran for president from prison in 1920, and got a million votes (3.4%). Trump could serve as president while he serves time in prison.
That sounds preposterous, but Trump will cross any line, and his supporters will vote for him no matter what he does. He said he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue. We have seen that he could -- and he would -- do more than that. His rioters wanted to hang Pence, and they would have shot dozens of police and Members of Congress if they could have brought weapons into the Capital. Does anyone doubt that? If Trump is reelected, it would not surprise me if he acts like Stalin, lining up and shooting his political opponents. Don't think for one second he is not capable of that, or that the GOP Members of Congress would stop him.
The evangelical churches are going to be sooooo lit this Sunday post-SCOTUS rulings
Great analysis by Will Saletan of trump's serial use of the Hillary smear play. That fateful personal decision by James Comey to announce a reopening of the Clinton email investigation reverberates tragically down the years. Watching yesterday's hearing with its focus on Jeffrey Clark, I was mindful of Hannah Arendt's insight on the banality of evil. I would never claim any equivalence between Clark and Eichmann, but Clark did come within a hair's breadth of destroying a 200-year-old democracy.