Madison Cawthorn couldn't gulp down the Kool-Aid fast enough. He touts the sanctity of marriage yet divorces his new wife in less than a year to put his cockamamie politics first. Another power-driven newbie bully joins the group.
I wish we, the people, could all sue tRump and his cronies for the prolonged torture, stress, and agony their Big Lie perpetuation and criminal insurrections have put our country through. I am sick of them all.
Yes, I am with you there. Everyone excepting the cult knows that Trump was responsible for the insurrection. The organizing and coordinating was done by Bannon or other Trump lackey. Use the legal system and try those who are responsible. I, for one, am sick of Trump's bombast and egomaniacal need for attention and the longer that this thing is played out, the more attention he is getting. Enough.
The cult knows Trump was responsible and exactly who all his ringleaders are. They refuse to admit it because that would mean accountability and they are just as guilty for letting it happen. Everyone of them that remains quiet is culpable because they facilitated it and continue to do so.
I think it all boils down to 1) was he campaigning the days before and the day of the insurrection, or 2) was in he the role of president doing acts of harm on the United States? The first is not protected speech or actions. That latter can be used to imply immunity to anything he does. The fact that he applies to run for the next election the week after his inauguration says a lot.
Mr. Cawthorn is, as I understand it, a high school graduate whose only other job was at Chik-Fil-A, has a record of lying, talking out of both sides of his mouth, making ridiculous statements (e.g., telling mothers to raise their male children to be "monsters"), already has an ethics complaint filed against him, and his peers from college days offer a history of misogyny as evidenced by unwanted sexual aggression.
Until today, until just now, I’d never heard of Senator Mike Rounds, a brave man, in a time when few are to be found.
He told the truth. A free and fair election was lost by the lead candidate from his party, his clan. One man, his candidate lost, he admitted the loss, said they lost, fair and square. Simple truth.
And that is where hope begins. Simple truth. Good faith. Country before clan. The whole is more important than - the one, any one.
Thank you Sir, for standing up for truth, standing up for your country, standing up for democracy.
We don’t have to agree on everything. We can agree to disagree. We can compromise and work together. That is the way - Forward, the way to - Better.
It is interesting, is it not, when "he told the truth" is such an amazing event that we all feel awe inspired when it occurs in the US. Almost like that person did something special.
Really, we are so far from the America of John Adams, who only ever uttered his perception of reality, that is mind boggling. Really
Yet, Scott is right to commend him, I believe, because obviously the pressure and enticement to promote the Big Lie is powerful, and telling the truth if you’re a Republican can be the end of your political career and may bring death threats as well. It’s easy to think we would all tell the truth in their shoes. I hope I would.
Thank you, Senator Rounds, for risking your career and safety by telling the truth.
Rounds (R) IS NOT BRAVE! He's my senator. It took him a year to speak out. He won reelection and is in the senate for another 5 years and probably won't run again. He was a horrible govenor that had a factually corrupt administration that was swept under the rug. I'm happy he finally spoke out but don't be taken in by his statements. He's a corrupt politician with no scruples.
Furthermore, if Rounds were a decent human being, he would get on board with the voting rights act, including changes in the filibuster to make it possible for the Senate to pass it. Same goes for Romney, Murkowski, and all the other Republican scumbags (pardon the redundancy) in the Senate.
I’m reading this after responding to the criticism of earlier responders to Scott. I didn’t realize that Rounds had just won reelection so he doesn’t have that much to lose. Still, I welcome any Republican willing to buck Trump at this point.
Thank you, Scott. Reading your comment hours ago, pushed me to spend the early morning reflecting on the pain of lies, which darkened our days and hearts for the past six years. You said the word 'truth', so missing and longed for as a foundation of our land. We have learned a good deal more about the lies encompassing the USA and in hiding long before Trump and his crew took center stage. Maya Angelou, knew it well.
A BRAVE AND STARTLING
TRUTH
by Maya Angelou
We, this people, on a small and lonely planet
Traveling through casual space
Past aloof stars, across the way of indifferent suns
To a destination where all signs tell us
It is possible and imperative that we learn
A brave and startling truth
And when we come to it
To the day of peacemaking
When we release our fingers
From fists of hostility
And allow the pure air to cool our palms
When we come to it
When the curtain falls on the minstrel show of hate
And faces sooted with scorn are scrubbed clean
When battlefields and coliseum
No longer rake our unique and particular sons and daughters
Up with the bruised and bloody grass
To lie in identical plots in foreign soil
When the rapacious storming of the churches
The screaming racket in the temples have ceased
When the pennants are waving gaily
When the banners of the world tremble
Stoutly in the good, clean breeze
When we come to it
When we let the rifles fall from our shoulders
And children dress their dolls in flags of truce
When land mines of death have been removed
And the aged can walk into evenings of peace
When religious ritual is not perfumed
By the incense of burning flesh
And childhood dreams are not kicked awake
By nightmares of abuse
When we come to it
Then we will confess that not the Pyramids
With their stones set in mysterious perfection
Nor the Gardens of Babylon
Hanging as eternal beauty
In our collective memory
Not the Grand Canyon
Kindled into delicious color
By Western sunsets
Nor the Danube, flowing its blue soul into Europe
Not the sacred peak of Mount Fuji
Stretching to the Rising Sun
Neither Father Amazon nor Mother Mississippi who, without favor,
Nurture all creatures in the depths and on the shores
These are not the only wonders of the world
When we come to it
We, this people, on this minuscule and kithless globe
Who reach daily for the bomb, the blade and the dagger
Yet who petition in the dark for tokens of peace
We, this people on this mote of matter
In whose mouths abide cankerous words
Which challenge our very existence
Yet out of those same mouths
Come songs of such exquisite sweetness
That the heart falters in its labor
And the body is quieted into awe
We, this people, on this small and drifting planet
Whose hands can strike with such abandon
That in a twinkling, life is sapped from the living
Yet those same hands can touch with such healing, irresistible tenderness
That the haughty neck is happy to bow
And the proud back is glad to bend
Out of such chaos, of such contradiction
We learn that we are neither devils nor divines
When we come to it
We, this people, on this wayward, floating body
Created on this earth, of this earth
Have the power to fashion for this earth
A climate where every man and every woman
Can live freely without sanctimonious piety
Without crippling fear
When we come to it
We must confess that we are the possible
We are the miraculous, the true wonder of this world
That is when, and only when
We come to it.
Maya Angelou delivered it in June 1995, at the 50th anniversary commemoration of the United Nations.
Thank you Fern, for sharing this powerful poem and message. “We are the miraculous, the true wonder of this world
That is when, and only when
We come to it.”
I think some readers object because telling the truth in political speak often is a way to excuse or deflect. Or gaslight. It’s hard for us to believe when history tells us to look back or ask more. Still we can hope. Change must come and time will tell Truth from lies.
And Senator Cruz told the truth and was publicly drawn and quartered on Fox. Telling the truth can exact a heavy price. That’s why few are willing to do so.
Senator Rounds isn’t up for re-election until 2026. It’s easier to be brave when nothing is at risk.
Which means that Senator Rounds was last elected in 2020, on the same ballot that had the former guy losing. I’m just amazed at the many Republicans who are questioning the integrity of the ballots in an election where they themselves won. Do they not see the irony in this?
You have my sympathy with the Gnome. One of our relatives disses her on a regular basis and keeps us informed of her latest dog and pony show doings and lies while showing the count of South Dakotans who have died of COVID.
Perhaps not irony instead total hypocrisy. And sort of an IQ test. If you can't see the logic flaw then you are too stupid to be in a position of power. And if you do understand but persevere with The Big Lie, then you don't care about truth or ethics, just winning.
Cruz made a half-hearted attempt to tell the truth, and then scurried under a rock when Tucker Carlson attacked him. What would have been admirable (a word that is hard to apply to Cruz) would have been Cruz telling Carlson to shut up and stop spreading lies. The price Cruz was unwilling to pay was being honest and risking the loss of support of Carlson's viewers. Cruz showed himself to be a spineless coward, who test-marketed the truth and found it had few buyers on Fox News, so withdrew the product.
Look what happened to Bill O’Reilly. Roger Ailes. Every top male Fox Noise host, and some execs and producers, likely has legal exposure due to some kind of misconduct. White supremacy and its primary propaganda outlet is not where integrity flourishes.
You may joke, but his advertising is all over the Willamette Weekly this morning. Not sure if it will come up for you, but I found it quite odd. There were 3 on the same web page.
Then I come on LFAA and read the comments as I do and I see yours, SLWeston, and it makes me wonder.. with all the talking up of the dictators and despots. Will he make a play for his chance to join the ranks?
I think you are on to something here, I have to think that Mitch is behind this. He has decided that TFG will cost more votes than he can bring in, especially with his legal problems
The turtle will put his head up and then dash our hopes as he signals with his tail the different view which is actually his. Testing the waters or seeing whether he gets some excitement from our team?
Let's not get misty-eyed about this. Mike Rounds also said he'd vote for the Republican nominee for President, which right now could be Trump. You can't have it both ways.
Arthur, Did you consider Mike Rounds, practically alone, in the toxic ferment of the USA coming forward to tell the truth? Did he do the country some good? Might he have opened a crack for a few more to walk through? Perhaps, he spurred some minds to question the lie. Did you make a negative remark as many did when learning that Dan Quayle advised Mike Pence to conduct himself according to the Constitution? As you were a lawyer, I hoped that you wouldn't find this series of questions annoying. Lastly, would you have appreciated Mike Rounds more if he was your client? He is a person with faults, perhaps, not an admirable politician, and, yet, Mike Rounds did a very good deed.
I did, but as Michael Steele noted two nights ago, Mike Rounds hemmed, hawed, shucked and jived over whether Rounds would vote for Trump in the next Republican primary. Rounds wants to have it both ways, suddenly being seen as a courageous truth teller with people who don't necessarily follow this stuff closely, and trying to remain on Trump's good side by suggesting strongly that if Trump's the Republican nominee, Rounds would still vote for him. Rounds is a hypocrite, like all of his brethren in Congress and in Statehouses elsewhere. He's like the drunk, claiming he's reformed, but with a bottle of hooch in his side pocket. These people are completely untrustworthy, and liars to boot.
I see, Michael Steele, expressed your judgment to a T. He is a likeable pol. Steele doesn't usually proclaim opinions in a high and mighty way and may have refrained from that in this case, too; maybe a bit of contempt for Rounds was mixed in.
A well-earned contempt, I would say. Michael Steele is a plain spoken guy who calls it as he sees it. And I generally agree with him, because he speaks to my concerns, and we share common values.
Christi, It took some time before I thought that whatever the faults of Mike Rounds (R-SD), he told the truth about the presidential election at this toxic time. He served the cause of honesty and provided a small opening through which others may come. Rounds not only told the truth, so urgent for us, he raised doubt about the lie. Mike served the country. Thanking him serves the truth. What benefit is it now cast aspersions on him?
I grasp for straws, looking for hope, a turning point, a slight change of course, anything. I look forward to reading what you write. Please take a look at what I wrote today, if you have a chance. Walls / Bridges...
The United States Constitution, Article II, section 1 clause 7 requires the President to take the following Oath or Affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Donald J. Trump took that Oath of Office on January 20, 2016; during that Insurrection on January 6, 2020, Trump was still legally bound by the terms set forth in the Oath. "Preserve, protect and defend…" are affirmative duties that the President must fulfill to secure the Constitution against diminution or despoliation. Donald J Trump failed in that duty by his repeated refusals to respond to the mob attack on the Capitol for a period of time amounting to 187 minutes, or approximately three hours, slightly more. During those three hours Trump was besieged with requests from his political allies in the Congress, from Fox News, and his aides and advisors with him in the White House. All that time, Trump was following the progress of the assault with rapt attention. He knew exactly what was going on, and it was his intent to disrupt the counting of the presidential ballots cast by each State's Electors in the Electoral College. He was outraged that Vice President Mike Pence had earlier refused Trump's repeated demands that Pence reject the electoral count by in certain contested States, to the end that Joe Biden would lose his electoral majority, and the election would be thrown into the House of Representatives. Trump was counting on the disruption caused by several thousand of his followers into the Capitol to put a halt to the vote count, and it was only after the efforts failed that Trump reluctantly send his followers home.
The President's duty to preserve, protect and defend brooks no exceptions. Trump was fully aware of the consequences of the attack on the Capitol, and what would happen if the attack succeeded. By a razor-thin margin, the attack failed.
The President's duty required him to take affirmative steps to make the preservation, protection and defense of the Constitution effective. The obligations embodied in the Oath of Office are not self-enforcing. The President, any President, is required to take affirmative steps to fulfill his obligation under the Constitution. Donald J Trump, by his failure to act, was allowing the coup d'état attempt that he himself had inspired and inferentially directed to go forward. That attempt was thwarted by the Capitol Police, and Members of Congress and the Senate were able to either find safety from the mob, protect the original state ballots from the Electoral College, and with the help of the Capitol Police, resist the mob from getting further into the Capitol than they already had done. This was a complete and thorough dereliction of duty on the part of President Donald J Trump.
United States District Judge Amit Mehta got it right the first time. President Trump, in refusing to send law enforcement and military assistance to the Capitol then under siege, willfully violated his Oath of Office, thus exposing Members of Congress and Senators to irreparable harm, along with every Capitol employee and civil servant then present in the Capitol building. The Ku Klux Klan Act makes such refusal to act in the performance of a constitutional duty actionable by any person injured thereby. By no stretch of the imagination could the president's inaction, coupled with his encouragement to his supporters earlier in the day to walk down to the Capitol and, in Trump's words, "fight like hell" be construed as the president's lawful performance of his official functions. Trump's speech to his followers on the morning of January 6 could not, in the light of what followed, be construed as anything but an encouragement to attack the Capitol in order to disrupt the vote count that was to occur in the same afternoon. Nothing that Trump said could be interpreted as anything relating to the public policy of the United States. It was all about saving Donald J Trump from the electoral defeat that he suffered at the polls the previous November 3. Consequently, no official privilege attached to Trump's words. By definition, Trump's advocacy, coupled with his refusal to act for more than three hours, constituted unlawful conduct. A president's constitutional duty to take affirmative steps to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution is utterly incompatible with Trump's willful and malicious behavior on January 6 towards everyone present in the Capitol building. Trump had no discretion whatsoever under the Constitution to act as he did; and therefore, Trump's behavior in dereliction of that duty by refusing to respond to the attack, and by justifying his actions to allies of his, both in the Capitol, and elsewhere, clearly evidence a malignant mind and unlawful intent. I clearly foresee Judge Mehta ruling against Trump, and for the plaintiffs in their civil suit under the KKK Act.
Thank you Arthur for that thorough description of how Trump violated his oath of office. The violent failed coup attempt is turning out to be a gift to those trying to preserve our constitutional republic, as these 'anti-republicans' tipped their hand and further exposed Trump for the would-be autocrat that he is.
The precedent the Republicans set by having Hillary Clinton testify before the Benghazi committee may also turn out to be a gift for the 1/6/21 committee (and by extension, the whole republic). In any contest such as this, there is nothing more effective than using your opponent's own words/actions to hold them accountable.
Oh, to see donald testify for 11 hours under oath before the congressional committee! Maybe, just maybe, it will be clear to all the world that that emperor has no clothes.
1. Can anyone of sound mind believe anything he says, given his ongoing lying for 4 years in office? and 2. I think he'd melt down within 2 hours and go into a tirade. He's unable and unstable.
‘ will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’ It could be argued that he did the best of his ability. Please note the tongue firmly planted in my cheek.
He's pretty good, lifetime of practice, at dodging and changing the subject. I'm thinking of some interviews on TV where he is one on one with someone. I don't know how this would go but it would certainly be very interesting to watch. The thing is that he is so absolutely right in his own mind, he is in his own little world of reality. The questioners would really have to be prepared and practice for his weird mind. Stay focused, not get derailed, keep it simple, get the answer. Like a boxing match.
The people that trump allows to interview him are sycophants who have no interest in challenging his lies. Many congresspersons are former prosecutors (Adam Schiff, for example) and trump’s interrogator will not be distracted!!
Hillary testified on Benghazi for over 11 hours with nary a false statement.. Trump testifying under oath would be like an alcoholic at an open bar. They both would be lying—one from his mouth, the other stone drunk on the floor.
What comes after "I plead the 5th"? Thank you, that's it, go home and enjoy the rest of your life! No, but what? They plead the 5th to avoid self-incrimination. Basically, saying I'm guilty of something connected to what you're asking me. What happens next?
If one exercises their right against self-incrimination while under oath as a privilege under the 5th Amendment, the inquiring body may offer a pardon to those activities in order to get the information that the person has to offer. (I know this happens on rare occasions in the state level criminal cases that I have been involved with; I suspect it could happen in this level of investigation.)
Yes. Best of all, once that pardon is issued, the witness is compelled to answer or risk being thrown in jail for contempt. If the witness lies, same deal: jail. Trump's Choice.
I don’t believe he would take the 5th. He doesn’t want to “look guilty” and he doesn’t think he is guilty. That’s his delusion. He thinks he won “by a landslide” and if he had to appear, he would say that again and again. His adoring horde invoked the same wishful thinking as gospel truth and drank that kool-aid right into storming the Capitol. Listening to their walkie talkie conversations with each other is chilling.
I don't believe he would take the 5th either, Maureen. I also don't believe he sees it as a matter of him being guilty or not guilty, because he doesn't play by the Rule of Law rules. So whatever comes out of his mouth will be whatever he wants to say which will not directly address any question that is asked of him.
Jeb McGruder, after getting out of jail and embarking on his ministry, visited ex-President Nixon. Nixon asked McGruder if he should have pleaded guilty. McGruder replied “Only if you believe you were guilty.” Nixon’s response: “I don’t.” Trump hasn’t an honest bone in his body that would let him acknowledge that he was guilty of anything. This has been demonstrated in his settling suits in which he was guilty as hell. Trump will go to his grave claiming that, as president, he was permitted to do the same as an 18th century French king. “L’etat est moi.”
This is so true. When asked a question about his words inciting violence he will bring up Maxine Waters. He will do this for every kind of question and then he will accuse them constantly of a witch hunt, tell them they don’t have the right to ask that question, etc. he was well-trained from a young age and has been honing that training for over 50 years.
But they will excuse it all as a witch hunt and cheer him on for being rude, uncouth and angry. They will praise him for everything he does and condemn every question as unfair. We’ve seen this already in the debates; soft questions to Biden, hard questions to Trump. The base will remain loyal at the risk of their own lives.
Trump will never rpt never testify before a congressional committee. In several civil suits he was compelled to testify under oath. He looked like a blithering idiot. I will only witness this in my dreams.
“But his deposition did reveal startling gaps in the memory of the 79-year-old former president. In all, Reagan said ''I don`t recall'' or ''I can`t remember'' 88 times in the eight hours of testimony taken Feb. 16-17 in Los Angeles.
At one point, Reagan said he could not identify Gen. John Vessey, who served for more than three years as his chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. At other times, he said he could not identify a picture of contra leader Adolfo Calero, could not recall a shipment of Hawk missiles to Iran in November 1985, had no memory of signing one presidential finding relating to the shipment of weapons to Iran and had only the slightest recollection of signing a second such finding.”
The law can require a person to appear at a certain time in a certain place but it cannot require anyone to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
“I don’t recall” will be the approach of anyone forced to testify.
He was officially diagnosed with Alzheimer's in 1994, but it has been contended that he suffered from the disease well before that time. Nothing can be done about that now.
However, maybe we should have all prospective witnesses tested for any sign of dementia, Alzheimer's or mental "defect" before being called to testify before J6 committee?
By their refusal to impeach Trump and subsequent activities to justify his every action, did not the Republican Senators become accessories after the fact?
But that’s just it Lisa. He was more than Able and Capable on June 1St when there were George Floyd Protesters in front of the WH.By showing favoritism and not Immediately sending help is what makes him Guilty.
And when the Judge rules agains the defeated former president, exactly how will he respond? And what, if that response amounts to, "Okay, so what are you going to do about it?," what exactly ARE we going to do about it?
Which is why was such a complete farce for Trump to run to 'serve' as President having 0 ability for any kind of altruism or standing to honor any other outside his own interest.
The public hasn’t caught up to the notion that the office of President of the United States might require more than a stint on TV and years of swindling the public with real estate deals, the Art. Isn’t it about time we had more specific qualifications for this office? Most jobs from menial to professional, have basic requirements beyond age and country of birth. Like experience, education, references and maybe a trial period, hopefully less than four years.
Thank you, Arthur. Clarity and explanation, even the public should understand. Maybe not TFG and his minions, but the public? If Judge Mehta rules against T, can this end up in the Supreme Court?
"In North Carolina today, eleven voters filed a challenge with the State Board of Elections to Madison Cawthorn as a candidate for reelection on the grounds that he is disqualified by the third section of the Fourteenth Amendment..." –HCR
I’ve read the DOJ is giving info to the Committee. But yea I’m having a hard time understanding why the DOJ isn’t rounding them all up ? It isn’t due to lack of Authority. I don’t know anyone who has ever gotten a Fed Subpoena and said “ No, I don’t want to play “. What’s the holdup ?
We must recognize that they are willing to break the law, ignore subpoenas, disobey court decisions and then ask us, "So what are you going to do about it?" Attorney General Garland and the DOJ are on the right track, but the train may have already left the station.
I agree with this re 1/6, but what about all the, what, hundreds of crimes they committed before 1/6? Where is the DoJ on that? Does 1/6 make all other crimes ok??
There are a large number of attorneys waiting to be confirmed for AG positions. I feel like I read 88. One that was recently confirmed for DC would be part of these cases. Republicans are working on stopping the wheels of justice by blocking confirmations.
“We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore… After this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. … We’re going to walk down to the Capitol … because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength. … We're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue … and we're going to the Capitol.” And then the crowd stormed the Capitol, fought like hell, blood was shed, barriers were breached, police were injured, people died, democracy was halted.
Ah, the bone spurs, that ruined the military career which entitled him to salute so indiscriminately! Yes, it was always so touching, to see him obliged to ride a golf buggy round the course. Does he still spend as much time on the golf course, now that he doesn't have a job to pretend to be doing? Not that it interests me.
On the golf course is where he committed some of his greatest crimes. “Playing golf“ is a cover for private one-on-one conversations of the mob boss. Coercion. Blackmail. Bribery. That’s where Lindsey Graham was when he flipped into being a Trump sycophant: on the golf course with Trump (information is courtesy Greg Olear).
Trump even drove his golf cart on to the putting green which, as a non golfer, I gather is verboten. Of course with bone spurs (he can’t recall on which ankle) he should be entitled to a Djokovic medical exemption.
And chump was ensconced in the WH, safe from any harm, but directing nonetheless. He tried to keep just enough distance to have no responsibility or liability. Let others shoulder the blame. Something he has never done. May his continuous instigation of violence, from his first campaign speech, be his Achilles heel.
And all because he was there, with them, not sitting at home watching their progress on television, refusing to interrupt them. Quite a feat of remote control.
Little miscommunication notwithstanding, “stool pigeons” is also apropos, because DJT is an informant for the govt. in NYC mob activities, per Greg Olear
These stoolies are Trump’s stools. When our cess pool overflowed, we called in an excrement remover. This is the smelly task of the House 1/6 Committee and the Department of Justice.
We watched and heard his speech loud and clear live. Why is that not enough to put him in jail? Yet I, nor anyone, can falsely yell "Fire!" in a crowded building. He was not yelling "Fire!", he was lighting one!!!
He was/is indeed. The deference paid to him as president just took his narcissism to it’s zenith. He won’t come down off that perch without handcuffs and/or violence.
It speaks volumes of where we are when Trump's lawyer accuses the judge of holding the former president to a higher standard than the judge would for a Democrat. The lawyer is in open court preening for his corrupt client and perhaps auditioning for a Fox News appearance or interview with Steve Bannon. In the process, he hurts Trump's already weak case. He deserves a Bar review of his unethical conduct.
The attorney has an ethical obligation to provide his client with the best possible defense. This argument only shows he had nothing! I’m shocked anyone would represent TFG given his record of stiffing everyone who does work for him!
You must have missed it. The RNC is paying all TFG’s Legal Fee’s . Well their donors are. I’ve always wondered if that was the Deal that got him in the ‘Game ‘ in the first place ? Pay off his Debts and Back Tax’s so it wasn’t left to the kids or Mel. ? If you have known Trump for as long as a lot of us have. Rule # 1. “ What’s in it for me “.
Maybe President Biden's loud and clear condemnation of the former, and the lie, followed by D. Cheney, followed by Rove is evidence of that turning point. Bullies must be called out. McCarthy, Huey Long...someone shouts 'enough!' tells the truth, and the truth prevails, for a time...
Let’s pray that our legal system works properly to adjudicate the growing number of civil and criminal lawsuits against ex-President Trump. Also, that the US Supreme Court grants access to Trump’s official records to the House investigation committee to get to the bottom of his role in the events of Jan 6th 2021.
The chorus of Romney and Murkowski sounds pale, coming as it does from their shelter in the shadow of one voice raised to speak an indisputable fact.
We have sunk so low, that even the self-serving statement of a compromised politician is lauded as heroic. What will it take for the others to join in?
Avalanches start with a crack, a barely perceptible unsettling. Let the smothering begin.
“An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile—hoping it will eat him last,” wrote Winston Churchill. Indeed. We appeased Hitler, and that genocidal madman kept right on going." The politicians who purport to lead the Republican party should take heed. They ARE feeding the crocodile and it is a policy fraught with peril.
As with any issue of bias and discrimination based on race, gender, sexual preference, religion, age, able-bodiedness, etc., we cannot walk in someone else's shoes to fully know the experiences of less-than, oppression, and injustice. Racism is particularly heinous as it is rooted in the socio-economic institution of slavery with all its horrors and ongoing expressions. The color of our skin, for starters, typically puts us in one category or another and is unchangeable--hence the factor of racism being inherent. But we can do our work to build our understanding and empathy, grow our racial/cultural literacy so as not to perpetuate presumptions of privilege, micro-aggressions, hurtfulness as best as we can (and own it when we mess up), while being authentic.
You are fortunate, Gailee. My maternal family, Florida Crackers all to this day, are as racist as humanly possible. I'm practically an anomaly within the entire clan. If anyone wants to know where the term Cracker comes from I'll gladly tell you.
My heart. More than anything, I wish my parents were still alive. Children during the depression - my mother would be awakened in the middle of the night to move. Each move was a move down. I grew up with books, music, never one racist, sexist, homophobic comment by either of my parents. There were books of all the religions of the world. We were given amazing educations and the opportunities to make our own decisions. My mother's father was French Catholic. Her mother was Protestant. The priest wouldn't recognize the marriage. I'm grateful that we were never brought up in a rigidly religious (or political) home. My mother began college my freshman year. You are a truly amazing being. I would love to meet you one day.
Yep. Eleanor too: "Mrs. Roosevelt described future Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter as “an interesting little man but very Jew." just to name a statement of hers.
So were so many others.....Founders of this country,FDR,Chamberlin, etc. Churchill did, however, increase the number of Jewish people who could enter Britain, unlike Chamberlin. And this thread was about the Holocaust, I think.
Yes, and the pleas of desperate Jewish passengers on the SS St Louis went unanswered by FDR and eventually returned to Europe. It would do well for people to understand the reasons we did not lend aid or enter WWII sooner than we did.
Yes. I am reading "Hitler's American Gamble" by Simms and Laderman. It's a long but fascinating slog that covers just five days - from Pearl Harbor until Hitler declared war ON US. Millions of Americans were adamantly opposed to helping the Jews (and Britain - all of Europe !) even as news of the slaughter was becoming common knowledge.
America is regarded as the savior of Europe. But it took us a very long time to get around to doing the right thing. FDR was dancing on eggshells and managing to pull off "Lend Lease" support while the "free world" of Europe was being overrun by brutal monsters.
Those 900 Jews on the boat ultimately met their death because Americans didn't want to get involved. They should have been welcomed, harbored, hugged. It was a tragedy that few reflect on. One of so many. The day that boat was forced from US shores was another "Day of Infamy".
Bill, I will add "Hitler's American Gamble" to my reading list. It's incomprehensible how we stood by for so long while Europe was being overtaken by Nazis, London was being bombed to smithereens and Jews were being rounded up and murdered by the millions. I cannot imagine what it must have been like begging day after day for help from America with none forthcoming.
Our historical reluctance to do the right thing shuts down the theory of America as a compassionate, freedom loving people. It makes for good poetry and song lyrics but our reality, both at home and abroad, is far from flattering.
I’m afraid that we are living in another such time. Winston was right, America does the right thing after trying everything else. Will history write that we waited too late.
In retrospect, it is easy to blame the people who collaborated with the Nazis. Those who didn't - like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and others within the so-called Confessing Church - met a nasty end: they were among the last to be executed as the regime fell.
Yes, Bonhoeffer and others met a nasty end for their long resistance to Hitler's National Church. It's sad to know that most Protestant clergy in Germany supported the National Church and were willing to accept the Aryan Paragraph. True Christians? Not so much.
Yes, that's right! I came here to Wiesbaden in 2013 as a "partnership" year-long exchange between the UCC-NY and the Ev. Churches in Hessen-Nassau, and landed in the only "Resistance church" in the entire area: the Ev. Bergkirche. I'm still here. The church council member, Hans Buttersack, died in Dachau for the crime of helping to protect the Jewish neighbors. The Pastor Franz von Bernus was such a national figure in the Confessing Church and so popular that he avoided being imprisoned for any long stretch of time and he, along with the congregation continued to "do Church" until the end of the war.Martin Niemöller spent his first night out of prison at the pastor's house next door. BTW, I did my theological Mdiv at Union Theological Seminary NYC, where Bonhoeffer spent a couple of years, the last before he returned to his fate.
No. No. Please, no. Living under enemy occupation is something else. I lived and worked in Paris for years. That rust stain is indelible. The shame and sorrow is memorialised in street names throughout the city (every street name has a little explanatory note on it). Every school has a memorial plaque above the door. The story of the Vel'd'Hiv is still a deep and painful scar. French families right across the country risked their lives by hiding Jews. Anyone who "happily participated" in that, or collaborated in any other way, paid the price when freedom came.
Anne-Louise I am not jumping on the bandwagon against the French, even the Vichy. My parents were born in Germany. Most of my relatives are German and Swiss. You can’t hold it against a people that they erred. The US was heavily racist, too, witness Japanese internment camps which have only been designated as historic sites in this century. Witness the atomic bomb drops, undoubtedly the single greatest war crime in history. That was the US. People in glass houses . . .
I think it was the French government at the time, and the French had had a long tradition of accepting refugees. In 1938, Eduardo Daladier saw the refugees as a national security threat. His order to not allow German refugees and to turn them back from the border left many German Jews remaining under Hitler's rule. The "rust stain" in France and Germany is history to be proud of, and some Americans keep looking for it here.
I read Rounds statement in sections where they only showed he said Biden won. And I saw Romney was agreeing with the statement Rounds made. Then later in the day I saw the entirety of his statement. His last paragraph shows he will not do anything noble or smart, he won’t support voting rights, or any of the other proposals by the Democratic Party that will move this country forward. It was a push to elect more conservations and a veiled way of saying to bury 1/6. They want to move on. The 1/6 committee is uncovering the awful truth they have been covering up or ignoring and they need to gain a lot of lost ground. They always make this first statement to say yes Biden won and follow it with words and actions that show they will continue their obstruction and damage to the country. But everyone is cheering them on for admitting a truth we didn’t need to hear from them. When they admit Trump and his cohorts are responsible for 1/6 and they’re willing to hold him accountable then they’ll have done something positive. When they pass Voting Rights then they can be applauded.
I have noticed similar sentiments of late. And, like an adolescent, they are admitting truth and desperately trying to avoid any punishments. "Don't look back. Look forward. Forget I did anything."
If she were inclined to support voting rights, she would have worked with Schumer to get it passed. She hasn’t done that, nor has any other Republican senator. It only takes one or two to get around the filibuster of the voting rights act and pass it. Nobody who fails to help can even be considered a decent human being, let alone some kind of hero.
Kathy, Murkowski is the one Republican who expressed support, and please note, not for the Freedom to Vote Act that Manchin helped draft, but only for VRAA, which is not preemptive and therefore cannot overturn state laws that already have passed. Conversely, the Freedom to Vote Act, whose provisions provide the necessary safeguards against both voter suppression and election subversion, would supersede state law in conflict with any of its stipulations. To clarify, unlike VRAA, the Freedom to Vote Act would overturn the voter restriction/ nullification bills that GOP controlled state legislatures unilaterally already have passed. As a final point, unlike some others on this thread, recently, I have come to believe that Manchin will agree to some version of filibuster reform that will allow for an up or down majority vote and, furthermore, that Sinema will follow.
Doesn’t matter though, her past behavior shows she’ll stick with other Rs and vote no on anything and everything.
If she was serious, they’d abandon Manchin (or Sinema), because he’s not needed. (They can’t alter the filibuster until they have 50 guaranteed to vote for it).
She’ll have NO problem voting against her own bill. None.
She has a much longer history of voting against. Many, many votes. And many of those were blatantly against the people, similar to voting rights.
She was right to vote as she did in your examples, and good for her, but those were only a two (or even a few) and one must also note that those were "safe" votes.
I would say she's one of the good republicans - the ones that believe in bipartisanship, etc and truly believe in democracy - but her votes just this year alone are in lock-step with those that wish to end our current form of government, and so I can't say that. That cannot be said of any current R. Senator.
Yes, but whennhe dropped thd ball, she didn’t say she’d go for change in the filibuster. To pass voting rights, at least two Republicans need to do agree to do that. None have.
That’s exactly what Manchin is telling us. He also worked on getting BBB to his exacting standards and now says he won’t support it. He’s playing games while he collect money for votes. He thinks people are going to feel entitled if we pay them their benefits they’ve paid into or help them out with healthcare. He knows he’s blocking massive voters by not doing everything he can to pass voting rights but maybe he’s afraid he’ll get voted out because his state is extremely unhappy with him for blocking BBB. He’ll need that Koch money to be re-elected.
Here’s a question: perhaps the lawsuit against Madison Cawthorn could be applied to other members of Congress in up coming elections for violating their oaths. Could there not be legal consequences for people in the military or former military or police or other public servants for violating their oaths? Maybe in terms of their pensions or being denied future employment?
The consequences for active duty personnel, whether military or law enforcement are different for those retired from (and pensioned by) those professions. I know that my retirement ID card (indicating that I am an honorably retired law enforcement professional) lists an expiration date on 12-31-2099. My friend's (fully disabled veteran who served in the USCG for 8 years) military ID lists no expiration. I will have to check with my either career retired or enlistment expired (i.e. full 20+ years of service or 1-4 hitches encompassing not a military retirement) ID's say. I know that my contractor who served 4 years in the Navy gets his 10% discount at several home improvement stores, and that my college roommate was subject to recall for a period of time following her 8 year Air Force enlistments, but I don't know what the continuing commitment and obligations are for them.
Long way to say, I really don't know how much of a hold there could be on a pension earned by honorable service when the person then engages in dishonorable (up to and including criminal) conduct. I do know that there were jail inmates who had been convicted of crimes who still received military benefits.
This letter made my heart lift! I think “the unraveling” IS true! Even if I was frustrated with these Republicans before, I am grateful for any voices now speaking sanely from the right. We need them. We may need a couple of them to help pass the Voting Rights Act.
Judge Amit Mehta was appointed to the US Court of the District of Columbia by Obama in 2014. In 2021, John Roberts appointed him to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. This judge is no slouch and his questions to TFG’s lawyers are complete and accurate. It’s very interesting to see that TFG may be shaking in his boots right now. Also, the other Congressional inciters are trying to ride on TFG’s coattails which I feel with spell doomsday for all of them. I can tell you that I have to say I am enjoying this “witch hunt”. What goes around, comes around. I want to be front and center to witness justice finally taking place.
A massive difference between Watergate and the BIG LIE/1/6 Capitol Building insurrection was that, in Watergate, several of the principals knew, early on, that they were on the hook for criminal activities. James McCord, in his 50s, was one of the five Watergate burglars facing a stiff sentence from Judge Sirica. A former FBI professional who thought he had been serving his president as head of security at the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREP), he spilled the beans because he didn’t want to spend many years in the slammer.
John Dean, as White House Counsel, was being set up as the Watergate fall guy by President Nixon. As a lawyer, he came to realize that he was personally involved in a criminal conspiracy of which Nixon and his henchmen were guilty as hell. Dean went to Sam Dash and spilled the beans—an astonishing story that was later confirmed by the Watergate tapes. Jeb McGruder, once hearing that Dean was singing, went down to Dash to lessen his criminal punishment. Neither Dean nor McGruder thought that their future was tied to then-President Nixon.
In sharp contrast, ex-President Trump is currently the king pin in Republican politics. Many political careers are tied to being a chapter-and-verse Trumpite. This involves publicly accepting the Trump mantra on the BIG LIE and the 1/6 Capitol Building insurrection. AT PRESENT NO ONE IN THE INNER TRUMP ENTOURAGE IS CERTAIN THAT THEY WILL BE INVOLVED IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. Steve Bannon and a few others may be facing charges for ignoring a Congressional subpoena. Some other perpetrators are hiding behind the Fifth Amendment. However, these slimy fish probably expect that they can drag out these issues until the 2022 elections, when there could be a new political ballgame.
The big unknown is whether Department of Justice criminal charges will flow from what the House 1/6 Committee has been uncovering in a treasure trove of documents and from over 300 witnesses so far. Such criminal charges would become almost certain, were several of the insiders to conclude it ‘prudent’ to lessen their likely prison time by singing like a canary. To date no such star singer has appeared.
Ex-Vice President Mike Pence has been waltzing with the House 1/6 committee. He certainly has first-hand info on what Trump sought to orchestrate regarding certification of the Electoral College results. Moreover, on 1/6 Trump seemed willing to throw Pence to a ‘Hang Mike Pence’ mob. Pence does not seem inclined to throw Trump under the bus. Laughably, he may think that this could harm his non-existent chances of being the 2024 presidential candidate.
The prospect of one or more of Trump’s castrati singing may well turn on the Department of Justice (Attorney General Garland) filing criminal charges by late Spring, 2022. Once initiated, such charges would not be affected by the results of the 2022 elections. Under President Biden’s attorney general these criminal proceedings would continue to their conclusion. I would expect that there then would be several McCord/Dean/McGruder types who would seek a life boat from a sinking ship.
Pence’s staff are singing freely. Question from some MSNBC personalities over the weekend to some J6 committee members was when will they seek to question Pence himself. I expect Pence listens to good legal counsel. He’s not much, but he’s not the thug that TFG is, for sure.
Christy Some of Pence’s (and Melania’s) staff are singing, but they are simply the chorus without the soloist. I saw yesterday an account that Pence’s lawyer has been waltzing with the 1/6 House committee for months and that Pence has shown increasingly reluctance to testify voluntarily, if at all. Would you give a farthing for Pence’s completeness in describing Trump’s role in the “Hang Mike Pence’ saga?
Hahaha! I’m not sure where to find a farthing, but if I could I would definitely give a number of them. Trump couldn’t be more transparent, but Pence is less so, or is it because I can wrap my brain around thugs more easily then I can the so super moral as to be immoral crowd? I would like to hear a lot more from him and I have a few pennies to spare!
Yes, but the Pence's and the McCarthy's of the world operate in the open, oblivious to the peons they order around for typing and coffee, and those people saw and heard everything. You do not need to be a vocalist if you are at the rehearsal, to hear the tune.
Your’s is my take on how this is so dependent upon the DOJ involvement. As you pointed out, until DJT’s supporters realize that their legal liability far exceeds the benefits they derive from maintaining their loyalty to the Trump program, they’ll stay the course. They have no downside yet. Once the DOJ enters, the plea deals will begin, and so will the retirements to "spend more time with my family…." The rest of the analysis is just wishful speculation without the DOJ in the picture.
Your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs lay out a fascinating comparison of where the Nixon and tRump conduct differs, particularly from those "down stream" from the oval office. It will be intriguing to see what happens when (speaks the eternal optimist still residing in my head, albeit with the rent raised) criminal charges are filed on those involved (thinking Flynn, Meadows, Bannon, and Miller) and what they actually do when confronted with their culpability.
Barr, who had, in an earlier administration, been a pretty good Attorney General, had egregiously served Trump rather than the Constitution, in his reprise role. He knew that there was no fraud (except Republican) in the 2020 election. His resignation was a personal effort to salvage his tattered reputation. Too little, too late.
Former Attorney General John Mitchell testified before the Erwin Senate Watergate hearing. Why shouldn’t Barr be required to testify before the 1/6 committee?
off topic, but... I was lucky enough to marry a man whose approach to life was cooperation and making things easier whenever possible. I was best friends with a woman whose whole family was the definition of competition. different worlds, as she often opined.
Madison Cawthorn couldn't gulp down the Kool-Aid fast enough. He touts the sanctity of marriage yet divorces his new wife in less than a year to put his cockamamie politics first. Another power-driven newbie bully joins the group.
I wish we, the people, could all sue tRump and his cronies for the prolonged torture, stress, and agony their Big Lie perpetuation and criminal insurrections have put our country through. I am sick of them all.
My husband and I often speak about suing Congress for dereliction of duty. I love that this is happening and look forward to the other cases.
I'll take a piece of that class action lawsuit
Yes, I am with you there. Everyone excepting the cult knows that Trump was responsible for the insurrection. The organizing and coordinating was done by Bannon or other Trump lackey. Use the legal system and try those who are responsible. I, for one, am sick of Trump's bombast and egomaniacal need for attention and the longer that this thing is played out, the more attention he is getting. Enough.
The cult knows Trump was responsible and exactly who all his ringleaders are. They refuse to admit it because that would mean accountability and they are just as guilty for letting it happen. Everyone of them that remains quiet is culpable because they facilitated it and continue to do so.
I think it all boils down to 1) was he campaigning the days before and the day of the insurrection, or 2) was in he the role of president doing acts of harm on the United States? The first is not protected speech or actions. That latter can be used to imply immunity to anything he does. The fact that he applies to run for the next election the week after his inauguration says a lot.
Why can’t we ? I’ve thought that also.
Mr. Cawthorn is, as I understand it, a high school graduate whose only other job was at Chik-Fil-A, has a record of lying, talking out of both sides of his mouth, making ridiculous statements (e.g., telling mothers to raise their male children to be "monsters"), already has an ethics complaint filed against him, and his peers from college days offer a history of misogyny as evidenced by unwanted sexual aggression.
Western NC certainly has better to offer.
A class action suit. . . . ?
Can we throw in there Covid deaths as a result of their continued denial and lies?
Until today, until just now, I’d never heard of Senator Mike Rounds, a brave man, in a time when few are to be found.
He told the truth. A free and fair election was lost by the lead candidate from his party, his clan. One man, his candidate lost, he admitted the loss, said they lost, fair and square. Simple truth.
And that is where hope begins. Simple truth. Good faith. Country before clan. The whole is more important than - the one, any one.
Thank you Sir, for standing up for truth, standing up for your country, standing up for democracy.
We don’t have to agree on everything. We can agree to disagree. We can compromise and work together. That is the way - Forward, the way to - Better.
But we must begin by standing up for truth.
"He told the truth". (!!!!)
It is interesting, is it not, when "he told the truth" is such an amazing event that we all feel awe inspired when it occurs in the US. Almost like that person did something special.
Really, we are so far from the America of John Adams, who only ever uttered his perception of reality, that is mind boggling. Really
Exactly.
Slow news day.
Yet, Scott is right to commend him, I believe, because obviously the pressure and enticement to promote the Big Lie is powerful, and telling the truth if you’re a Republican can be the end of your political career and may bring death threats as well. It’s easy to think we would all tell the truth in their shoes. I hope I would.
Thank you, Senator Rounds, for risking your career and safety by telling the truth.
Rounds (R) IS NOT BRAVE! He's my senator. It took him a year to speak out. He won reelection and is in the senate for another 5 years and probably won't run again. He was a horrible govenor that had a factually corrupt administration that was swept under the rug. I'm happy he finally spoke out but don't be taken in by his statements. He's a corrupt politician with no scruples.
Furthermore, if Rounds were a decent human being, he would get on board with the voting rights act, including changes in the filibuster to make it possible for the Senate to pass it. Same goes for Romney, Murkowski, and all the other Republican scumbags (pardon the redundancy) in the Senate.
Peri,
Are you sure? A politician corrupt? Naw.....can't be....
:-)
I’m reading this after responding to the criticism of earlier responders to Scott. I didn’t realize that Rounds had just won reelection so he doesn’t have that much to lose. Still, I welcome any Republican willing to buck Trump at this point.
Thank you, Scott. Reading your comment hours ago, pushed me to spend the early morning reflecting on the pain of lies, which darkened our days and hearts for the past six years. You said the word 'truth', so missing and longed for as a foundation of our land. We have learned a good deal more about the lies encompassing the USA and in hiding long before Trump and his crew took center stage. Maya Angelou, knew it well.
A BRAVE AND STARTLING
TRUTH
by Maya Angelou
We, this people, on a small and lonely planet
Traveling through casual space
Past aloof stars, across the way of indifferent suns
To a destination where all signs tell us
It is possible and imperative that we learn
A brave and startling truth
And when we come to it
To the day of peacemaking
When we release our fingers
From fists of hostility
And allow the pure air to cool our palms
When we come to it
When the curtain falls on the minstrel show of hate
And faces sooted with scorn are scrubbed clean
When battlefields and coliseum
No longer rake our unique and particular sons and daughters
Up with the bruised and bloody grass
To lie in identical plots in foreign soil
When the rapacious storming of the churches
The screaming racket in the temples have ceased
When the pennants are waving gaily
When the banners of the world tremble
Stoutly in the good, clean breeze
When we come to it
When we let the rifles fall from our shoulders
And children dress their dolls in flags of truce
When land mines of death have been removed
And the aged can walk into evenings of peace
When religious ritual is not perfumed
By the incense of burning flesh
And childhood dreams are not kicked awake
By nightmares of abuse
When we come to it
Then we will confess that not the Pyramids
With their stones set in mysterious perfection
Nor the Gardens of Babylon
Hanging as eternal beauty
In our collective memory
Not the Grand Canyon
Kindled into delicious color
By Western sunsets
Nor the Danube, flowing its blue soul into Europe
Not the sacred peak of Mount Fuji
Stretching to the Rising Sun
Neither Father Amazon nor Mother Mississippi who, without favor,
Nurture all creatures in the depths and on the shores
These are not the only wonders of the world
When we come to it
We, this people, on this minuscule and kithless globe
Who reach daily for the bomb, the blade and the dagger
Yet who petition in the dark for tokens of peace
We, this people on this mote of matter
In whose mouths abide cankerous words
Which challenge our very existence
Yet out of those same mouths
Come songs of such exquisite sweetness
That the heart falters in its labor
And the body is quieted into awe
We, this people, on this small and drifting planet
Whose hands can strike with such abandon
That in a twinkling, life is sapped from the living
Yet those same hands can touch with such healing, irresistible tenderness
That the haughty neck is happy to bow
And the proud back is glad to bend
Out of such chaos, of such contradiction
We learn that we are neither devils nor divines
When we come to it
We, this people, on this wayward, floating body
Created on this earth, of this earth
Have the power to fashion for this earth
A climate where every man and every woman
Can live freely without sanctimonious piety
Without crippling fear
When we come to it
We must confess that we are the possible
We are the miraculous, the true wonder of this world
That is when, and only when
We come to it.
Maya Angelou delivered it in June 1995, at the 50th anniversary commemoration of the United Nations.
Absolutely stunning. A prayer to be recited each morning as the sun rises.
Thank you, Fern.
Nancy, That is how I feel when reading it.
As usual, Fern, your choice to quote the magnificent Maya Angelou, helps our mornings out.
Thank you Fern, for sharing this powerful poem and message. “We are the miraculous, the true wonder of this world
That is when, and only when
We come to it.”
I think some readers object because telling the truth in political speak often is a way to excuse or deflect. Or gaslight. It’s hard for us to believe when history tells us to look back or ask more. Still we can hope. Change must come and time will tell Truth from lies.
Beautiful Fern. And, Beautiful, Fern. I love her on the new quarter also.
United!
❤️
Thank you, Fern. I think we all need that lovely poem.
Maya just got minted on a coin! First ever...
Fern this is gorgeous, thank you
This is profound. I love this. Thanks so much for sharing it.
Thank you, Fern. This is powerful truth.
Thanks for posting this
Tears of appreciation! Thank you.
Gratitude, Fern, for this gift.
And Senator Cruz told the truth and was publicly drawn and quartered on Fox. Telling the truth can exact a heavy price. That’s why few are willing to do so.
Senator Rounds isn’t up for re-election until 2026. It’s easier to be brave when nothing is at risk.
Which means that Senator Rounds was last elected in 2020, on the same ballot that had the former guy losing. I’m just amazed at the many Republicans who are questioning the integrity of the ballots in an election where they themselves won. Do they not see the irony in this?
To be blunt, no they don't. At. All.
Our whole state is republican. Look at our govenor, Kristi (Gnome) Noem.
But not you, Peri! There must be other POIs (Person of Integrity) in SD.
There are. Thousands. Believe it.
I know some.
Kristi is not a pretty site, especially when she opens her mouth.
She has a real problem keeping it closed.
You have my sympathy with the Gnome. One of our relatives disses her on a regular basis and keeps us informed of her latest dog and pony show doings and lies while showing the count of South Dakotans who have died of COVID.
I'd rather not!
Perhaps not irony instead total hypocrisy. And sort of an IQ test. If you can't see the logic flaw then you are too stupid to be in a position of power. And if you do understand but persevere with The Big Lie, then you don't care about truth or ethics, just winning.
Cruz made a half-hearted attempt to tell the truth, and then scurried under a rock when Tucker Carlson attacked him. What would have been admirable (a word that is hard to apply to Cruz) would have been Cruz telling Carlson to shut up and stop spreading lies. The price Cruz was unwilling to pay was being honest and risking the loss of support of Carlson's viewers. Cruz showed himself to be a spineless coward, who test-marketed the truth and found it had few buyers on Fox News, so withdrew the product.
Cruz stayed in character
Is it time to dig up that goofy, wacky, joke-of-a-notion from not that long ago?
“President Tuckerton T. Carlson”
Look what happened to Bill O’Reilly. Roger Ailes. Every top male Fox Noise host, and some execs and producers, likely has legal exposure due to some kind of misconduct. White supremacy and its primary propaganda outlet is not where integrity flourishes.
You may joke, but his advertising is all over the Willamette Weekly this morning. Not sure if it will come up for you, but I found it quite odd. There were 3 on the same web page.
Then I come on LFAA and read the comments as I do and I see yours, SLWeston, and it makes me wonder.. with all the talking up of the dictators and despots. Will he make a play for his chance to join the ranks?
Yuck, that thought makes me sick.
https://www.wweek.com/news/2022/01/10/the-flying-lark-a-grants-pass-gambling-outpost-warns-of-layoffs-absent-racing-commission-approval/?mc_cid=c3a90327d4&mc_eid=3d016508e2
Don’t even suggest that as a joke. Can you imagine?
Only in a tweet did Mitt agree, but he mentioned other rethuglicans who are quietly stepping on board. Maybe....
Interesting that this is happening only now, at the beginning of an election year.
Whatever it takes.
I’d have liked to have been in the room when he was tapped to go on TV and carry this message
I think you are on to something here, I have to think that Mitch is behind this. He has decided that TFG will cost more votes than he can bring in, especially with his legal problems
Always conniving; that is McConnell.
The turtle will put his head up and then dash our hopes as he signals with his tail the different view which is actually his. Testing the waters or seeing whether he gets some excitement from our team?
Being "brave" these days sure has a low bar, doesnt it?
Let's not get misty-eyed about this. Mike Rounds also said he'd vote for the Republican nominee for President, which right now could be Trump. You can't have it both ways.
Arthur, Did you consider Mike Rounds, practically alone, in the toxic ferment of the USA coming forward to tell the truth? Did he do the country some good? Might he have opened a crack for a few more to walk through? Perhaps, he spurred some minds to question the lie. Did you make a negative remark as many did when learning that Dan Quayle advised Mike Pence to conduct himself according to the Constitution? As you were a lawyer, I hoped that you wouldn't find this series of questions annoying. Lastly, would you have appreciated Mike Rounds more if he was your client? He is a person with faults, perhaps, not an admirable politician, and, yet, Mike Rounds did a very good deed.
I did, but as Michael Steele noted two nights ago, Mike Rounds hemmed, hawed, shucked and jived over whether Rounds would vote for Trump in the next Republican primary. Rounds wants to have it both ways, suddenly being seen as a courageous truth teller with people who don't necessarily follow this stuff closely, and trying to remain on Trump's good side by suggesting strongly that if Trump's the Republican nominee, Rounds would still vote for him. Rounds is a hypocrite, like all of his brethren in Congress and in Statehouses elsewhere. He's like the drunk, claiming he's reformed, but with a bottle of hooch in his side pocket. These people are completely untrustworthy, and liars to boot.
I see, Michael Steele, expressed your judgment to a T. He is a likeable pol. Steele doesn't usually proclaim opinions in a high and mighty way and may have refrained from that in this case, too; maybe a bit of contempt for Rounds was mixed in.
A well-earned contempt, I would say. Michael Steele is a plain spoken guy who calls it as he sees it. And I generally agree with him, because he speaks to my concerns, and we share common values.
Don't think you are praising the right person, Scott.
Christi, It took some time before I thought that whatever the faults of Mike Rounds (R-SD), he told the truth about the presidential election at this toxic time. He served the cause of honesty and provided a small opening through which others may come. Rounds not only told the truth, so urgent for us, he raised doubt about the lie. Mike served the country. Thanking him serves the truth. What benefit is it now cast aspersions on him?
I grasp for straws, looking for hope, a turning point, a slight change of course, anything. I look forward to reading what you write. Please take a look at what I wrote today, if you have a chance. Walls / Bridges...
The United States Constitution, Article II, section 1 clause 7 requires the President to take the following Oath or Affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Donald J. Trump took that Oath of Office on January 20, 2016; during that Insurrection on January 6, 2020, Trump was still legally bound by the terms set forth in the Oath. "Preserve, protect and defend…" are affirmative duties that the President must fulfill to secure the Constitution against diminution or despoliation. Donald J Trump failed in that duty by his repeated refusals to respond to the mob attack on the Capitol for a period of time amounting to 187 minutes, or approximately three hours, slightly more. During those three hours Trump was besieged with requests from his political allies in the Congress, from Fox News, and his aides and advisors with him in the White House. All that time, Trump was following the progress of the assault with rapt attention. He knew exactly what was going on, and it was his intent to disrupt the counting of the presidential ballots cast by each State's Electors in the Electoral College. He was outraged that Vice President Mike Pence had earlier refused Trump's repeated demands that Pence reject the electoral count by in certain contested States, to the end that Joe Biden would lose his electoral majority, and the election would be thrown into the House of Representatives. Trump was counting on the disruption caused by several thousand of his followers into the Capitol to put a halt to the vote count, and it was only after the efforts failed that Trump reluctantly send his followers home.
The President's duty to preserve, protect and defend brooks no exceptions. Trump was fully aware of the consequences of the attack on the Capitol, and what would happen if the attack succeeded. By a razor-thin margin, the attack failed.
The President's duty required him to take affirmative steps to make the preservation, protection and defense of the Constitution effective. The obligations embodied in the Oath of Office are not self-enforcing. The President, any President, is required to take affirmative steps to fulfill his obligation under the Constitution. Donald J Trump, by his failure to act, was allowing the coup d'état attempt that he himself had inspired and inferentially directed to go forward. That attempt was thwarted by the Capitol Police, and Members of Congress and the Senate were able to either find safety from the mob, protect the original state ballots from the Electoral College, and with the help of the Capitol Police, resist the mob from getting further into the Capitol than they already had done. This was a complete and thorough dereliction of duty on the part of President Donald J Trump.
United States District Judge Amit Mehta got it right the first time. President Trump, in refusing to send law enforcement and military assistance to the Capitol then under siege, willfully violated his Oath of Office, thus exposing Members of Congress and Senators to irreparable harm, along with every Capitol employee and civil servant then present in the Capitol building. The Ku Klux Klan Act makes such refusal to act in the performance of a constitutional duty actionable by any person injured thereby. By no stretch of the imagination could the president's inaction, coupled with his encouragement to his supporters earlier in the day to walk down to the Capitol and, in Trump's words, "fight like hell" be construed as the president's lawful performance of his official functions. Trump's speech to his followers on the morning of January 6 could not, in the light of what followed, be construed as anything but an encouragement to attack the Capitol in order to disrupt the vote count that was to occur in the same afternoon. Nothing that Trump said could be interpreted as anything relating to the public policy of the United States. It was all about saving Donald J Trump from the electoral defeat that he suffered at the polls the previous November 3. Consequently, no official privilege attached to Trump's words. By definition, Trump's advocacy, coupled with his refusal to act for more than three hours, constituted unlawful conduct. A president's constitutional duty to take affirmative steps to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution is utterly incompatible with Trump's willful and malicious behavior on January 6 towards everyone present in the Capitol building. Trump had no discretion whatsoever under the Constitution to act as he did; and therefore, Trump's behavior in dereliction of that duty by refusing to respond to the attack, and by justifying his actions to allies of his, both in the Capitol, and elsewhere, clearly evidence a malignant mind and unlawful intent. I clearly foresee Judge Mehta ruling against Trump, and for the plaintiffs in their civil suit under the KKK Act.
Thank you Arthur for that thorough description of how Trump violated his oath of office. The violent failed coup attempt is turning out to be a gift to those trying to preserve our constitutional republic, as these 'anti-republicans' tipped their hand and further exposed Trump for the would-be autocrat that he is.
The precedent the Republicans set by having Hillary Clinton testify before the Benghazi committee may also turn out to be a gift for the 1/6/21 committee (and by extension, the whole republic). In any contest such as this, there is nothing more effective than using your opponent's own words/actions to hold them accountable.
Oh, to see donald testify for 11 hours under oath before the congressional committee! Maybe, just maybe, it will be clear to all the world that that emperor has no clothes.
1. Can anyone of sound mind believe anything he says, given his ongoing lying for 4 years in office? and 2. I think he'd melt down within 2 hours and go into a tirade. He's unable and unstable.
‘ will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’ It could be argued that he did the best of his ability. Please note the tongue firmly planted in my cheek.
I was thinking the same. Insanity plea would be the only defense since ignorance isn't a defense.
I'd like to see that
For this exact reason the orange puff wouldn't make it to even a couple of hours. He'd become enraged and attack and then leave.
Unable and unstable, but hopefully (wishing) in front of the public.
I dare any of the trump followers to testify for 12 hours and speak the truth the whole time!
He's pretty good, lifetime of practice, at dodging and changing the subject. I'm thinking of some interviews on TV where he is one on one with someone. I don't know how this would go but it would certainly be very interesting to watch. The thing is that he is so absolutely right in his own mind, he is in his own little world of reality. The questioners would really have to be prepared and practice for his weird mind. Stay focused, not get derailed, keep it simple, get the answer. Like a boxing match.
Imagine how a parade of 5th takers would appear/play during public hearings.
The people that trump allows to interview him are sycophants who have no interest in challenging his lies. Many congresspersons are former prosecutors (Adam Schiff, for example) and trump’s interrogator will not be distracted!!
I agree Barbara, and for the most part that was true. But one with Lesley Stahl sticks out in my mind. Choosing the right person is essential.
"It is what it is" resounded with voters.
That was on my mind, too. It shows what he does when challenged!
Harris vs tRump
Fight of the century.
No wait, that was Ali and Frazier
A fight I do not want to see. How about two different boxers?
Hillary testified on Benghazi for over 11 hours with nary a false statement.. Trump testifying under oath would be like an alcoholic at an open bar. They both would be lying—one from his mouth, the other stone drunk on the floor.
Any Republican at this point for 3 hours testifying under oath with nary a false statement would be a miracle
The 5th Amendment will save him.
What comes after "I plead the 5th"? Thank you, that's it, go home and enjoy the rest of your life! No, but what? They plead the 5th to avoid self-incrimination. Basically, saying I'm guilty of something connected to what you're asking me. What happens next?
If one exercises their right against self-incrimination while under oath as a privilege under the 5th Amendment, the inquiring body may offer a pardon to those activities in order to get the information that the person has to offer. (I know this happens on rare occasions in the state level criminal cases that I have been involved with; I suspect it could happen in this level of investigation.)
Yes. Best of all, once that pardon is issued, the witness is compelled to answer or risk being thrown in jail for contempt. If the witness lies, same deal: jail. Trump's Choice.
Thank you, Ally.
That has been my question all along...
Good question!
Watching him take the 5th on every question, in person, not on some “take home written test” will be must watch tv
What did he say about folks invoking the 5th? "Makes them look guilty"?
I don’t believe he would take the 5th. He doesn’t want to “look guilty” and he doesn’t think he is guilty. That’s his delusion. He thinks he won “by a landslide” and if he had to appear, he would say that again and again. His adoring horde invoked the same wishful thinking as gospel truth and drank that kool-aid right into storming the Capitol. Listening to their walkie talkie conversations with each other is chilling.
He won’t appear in person. Perjury awaits
I don't believe he would take the 5th either, Maureen. I also don't believe he sees it as a matter of him being guilty or not guilty, because he doesn't play by the Rule of Law rules. So whatever comes out of his mouth will be whatever he wants to say which will not directly address any question that is asked of him.
Jeb McGruder, after getting out of jail and embarking on his ministry, visited ex-President Nixon. Nixon asked McGruder if he should have pleaded guilty. McGruder replied “Only if you believe you were guilty.” Nixon’s response: “I don’t.” Trump hasn’t an honest bone in his body that would let him acknowledge that he was guilty of anything. This has been demonstrated in his settling suits in which he was guilty as hell. Trump will go to his grave claiming that, as president, he was permitted to do the same as an 18th century French king. “L’etat est moi.”
This is so true. When asked a question about his words inciting violence he will bring up Maxine Waters. He will do this for every kind of question and then he will accuse them constantly of a witch hunt, tell them they don’t have the right to ask that question, etc. he was well-trained from a young age and has been honing that training for over 50 years.
But they will excuse it all as a witch hunt and cheer him on for being rude, uncouth and angry. They will praise him for everything he does and condemn every question as unfair. We’ve seen this already in the debates; soft questions to Biden, hard questions to Trump. The base will remain loyal at the risk of their own lives.
Trump will never rpt never testify before a congressional committee. In several civil suits he was compelled to testify under oath. He looked like a blithering idiot. I will only witness this in my dreams.
It would seem so, wouldn’t it? But they look at themselves speaking and say “I didn’t say that.” Such cowards.
As a young woman, when I watched the Watergate hearings, I was struck by how many said "I do not recall". Mass amnesia!
The new phrase will become, “I don’t recall…..at the moment”
From the Reagan deposition about Iran/Contra
“But his deposition did reveal startling gaps in the memory of the 79-year-old former president. In all, Reagan said ''I don`t recall'' or ''I can`t remember'' 88 times in the eight hours of testimony taken Feb. 16-17 in Los Angeles.
At one point, Reagan said he could not identify Gen. John Vessey, who served for more than three years as his chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. At other times, he said he could not identify a picture of contra leader Adolfo Calero, could not recall a shipment of Hawk missiles to Iran in November 1985, had no memory of signing one presidential finding relating to the shipment of weapons to Iran and had only the slightest recollection of signing a second such finding.”
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1990-02-23-9001160156-story.html
The law can require a person to appear at a certain time in a certain place but it cannot require anyone to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
“I don’t recall” will be the approach of anyone forced to testify.
He was officially diagnosed with Alzheimer's in 1994, but it has been contended that he suffered from the disease well before that time. Nothing can be done about that now.
However, maybe we should have all prospective witnesses tested for any sign of dementia, Alzheimer's or mental "defect" before being called to testify before J6 committee?
Maybe they should have deposed Nancy Reagan.
They may not recall but hopefully other witnesses have already told what they DO recall!
By their refusal to impeach Trump and subsequent activities to justify his every action, did not the Republican Senators become accessories after the fact?
To my way of thinking, they are as guilty as the former guy is. They, too, refused to defend the constitution to the best of their ability.
“to the best of his ability” Therein lies the rub…
But that’s just it Lisa. He was more than Able and Capable on June 1St when there were George Floyd Protesters in front of the WH.By showing favoritism and not Immediately sending help is what makes him Guilty.
He is able when it suits him. Don’t forget his mental conditions
Able, but a malignant narcissist. Only able for himself, period
And when the Judge rules agains the defeated former president, exactly how will he respond? And what, if that response amounts to, "Okay, so what are you going to do about it?," what exactly ARE we going to do about it?
Thank you, Arthur. Sounds like you've just compiled our class action lawsuit against Donald J. Trump and his dereliction of duty. Where do I sign?!
Which is why was such a complete farce for Trump to run to 'serve' as President having 0 ability for any kind of altruism or standing to honor any other outside his own interest.
The public hasn’t caught up to the notion that the office of President of the United States might require more than a stint on TV and years of swindling the public with real estate deals, the Art. Isn’t it about time we had more specific qualifications for this office? Most jobs from menial to professional, have basic requirements beyond age and country of birth. Like experience, education, references and maybe a trial period, hopefully less than four years.
The reason was power and money. That's it.
Can I copy?
Feel free to do so.
Ka-Pow! Thank you Arthur!
Thank you, Arthur. Clarity and explanation, even the public should understand. Maybe not TFG and his minions, but the public? If Judge Mehta rules against T, can this end up in the Supreme Court?
Not likely.
"In North Carolina today, eleven voters filed a challenge with the State Board of Elections to Madison Cawthorn as a candidate for reelection on the grounds that he is disqualified by the third section of the Fourteenth Amendment..." –HCR
Well, glory hallelujah! It's about time!
The people go where it seems the DOJ fears to tread!
I’ve read the DOJ is giving info to the Committee. But yea I’m having a hard time understanding why the DOJ isn’t rounding them all up ? It isn’t due to lack of Authority. I don’t know anyone who has ever gotten a Fed Subpoena and said “ No, I don’t want to play “. What’s the holdup ?
Merrick Garland on Capitol attack: 'The actions we have taken thus far will not be our last
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/05/politics/merrick-garland-january-6-anniversary-speech/index.html
_______
Merrick Garland, Rule of Law– and Hannity’s dilemma.
https://terikanefield.com/merrick-garland-rule-of-law-and-hannitys-dilemma/
Good sources Kathleen, Thank You.Saw the mistake. Love this Edit feature.
We must recognize that they are willing to break the law, ignore subpoenas, disobey court decisions and then ask us, "So what are you going to do about it?" Attorney General Garland and the DOJ are on the right track, but the train may have already left the station.
HCR has mentioned that she is positive that the DOJ is working hard behind the scenes. We just don't know about it yet.
I don't doubt that they are working behind the scenes, but when will the show open?
I agree with this re 1/6, but what about all the, what, hundreds of crimes they committed before 1/6? Where is the DoJ on that? Does 1/6 make all other crimes ok??
There are a large number of attorneys waiting to be confirmed for AG positions. I feel like I read 88. One that was recently confirmed for DC would be part of these cases. Republicans are working on stopping the wheels of justice by blocking confirmations.
More of their evil. Chump just put his evil in, no confirmation needed
Reporting that would have been effort for me, the rest of the news were bonuses
“We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore… After this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. … We’re going to walk down to the Capitol … because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength. … We're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue … and we're going to the Capitol.” And then the crowd stormed the Capitol, fought like hell, blood was shed, barriers were breached, police were injured, people died, democracy was halted.
2+2=?
Hard to make it to the Capitol with your buds when your bone spurs are acting up again
Ah, the bone spurs, that ruined the military career which entitled him to salute so indiscriminately! Yes, it was always so touching, to see him obliged to ride a golf buggy round the course. Does he still spend as much time on the golf course, now that he doesn't have a job to pretend to be doing? Not that it interests me.
He certainly has the time to play golf ... tearing down democracy is just a part-time job, a few critical posts a day and the occasional MAGA rally.
On the golf course is where he committed some of his greatest crimes. “Playing golf“ is a cover for private one-on-one conversations of the mob boss. Coercion. Blackmail. Bribery. That’s where Lindsey Graham was when he flipped into being a Trump sycophant: on the golf course with Trump (information is courtesy Greg Olear).
Trump even drove his golf cart on to the putting green which, as a non golfer, I gather is verboten. Of course with bone spurs (he can’t recall on which ankle) he should be entitled to a Djokovic medical exemption.
They are bone spurs of opportunity.
That 60k dead soldiers never got.
😂 And as I stated at the time the Safest person in America.
🤣😂🤗
That's too funny!
Your comment brought a chuckle out of me...
Thanks for a good chuckle this morning! 😂
And chump was ensconced in the WH, safe from any harm, but directing nonetheless. He tried to keep just enough distance to have no responsibility or liability. Let others shoulder the blame. Something he has never done. May his continuous instigation of violence, from his first campaign speech, be his Achilles heel.
Like a mob boss
... like ...?
And all because he was there, with them, not sitting at home watching their progress on television, refusing to interrupt them. Quite a feat of remote control.
Exactly, he has always done his dirty deeds by remote control. No fingerprints, just “stoolies.”
Stooges. Stoolies are stool pigeons, tattle tales, stooges do the dirty work (and sometimes become stoolies, too).
Thank you, I was thinking of decoys. Stooges more on target, but both will do
Ah, got it. Sorry!
Little miscommunication notwithstanding, “stool pigeons” is also apropos, because DJT is an informant for the govt. in NYC mob activities, per Greg Olear
These stoolies are Trump’s stools. When our cess pool overflowed, we called in an excrement remover. This is the smelly task of the House 1/6 Committee and the Department of Justice.
Good one, Daria.
We watched and heard his speech loud and clear live. Why is that not enough to put him in jail? Yet I, nor anyone, can falsely yell "Fire!" in a crowded building. He was not yelling "Fire!", he was lighting one!!!
Using a flamethrower
He was/is indeed. The deference paid to him as president just took his narcissism to it’s zenith. He won’t come down off that perch without handcuffs and/or violence.
It speaks volumes of where we are when Trump's lawyer accuses the judge of holding the former president to a higher standard than the judge would for a Democrat. The lawyer is in open court preening for his corrupt client and perhaps auditioning for a Fox News appearance or interview with Steve Bannon. In the process, he hurts Trump's already weak case. He deserves a Bar review of his unethical conduct.
That Judge should take that as a personal attack upon him and his court. Throw the bums out !
The attorney has an ethical obligation to provide his client with the best possible defense. This argument only shows he had nothing! I’m shocked anyone would represent TFG given his record of stiffing everyone who does work for him!
You must have missed it. The RNC is paying all TFG’s Legal Fee’s . Well their donors are. I’ve always wondered if that was the Deal that got him in the ‘Game ‘ in the first place ? Pay off his Debts and Back Tax’s so it wasn’t left to the kids or Mel. ? If you have known Trump for as long as a lot of us have. Rule # 1. “ What’s in it for me “.
"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." ~ Leonard Cohen, "Anthem"
Is the House of Cards beginning to tumble? Hear our prayers higher power!!!
The work to tumble them has been in motion for awhile now...the results are starting to play out.
Maybe President Biden's loud and clear condemnation of the former, and the lie, followed by D. Cheney, followed by Rove is evidence of that turning point. Bullies must be called out. McCarthy, Huey Long...someone shouts 'enough!' tells the truth, and the truth prevails, for a time...
Let’s pray that our legal system works properly to adjudicate the growing number of civil and criminal lawsuits against ex-President Trump. Also, that the US Supreme Court grants access to Trump’s official records to the House investigation committee to get to the bottom of his role in the events of Jan 6th 2021.
I no longer trust SCOTUS
Me either
Me either. But they are reacting to the public pressure. It’s getting to them.
I’m dreaming too.
The unraveling, oh, but that it were true.
The chorus of Romney and Murkowski sounds pale, coming as it does from their shelter in the shadow of one voice raised to speak an indisputable fact.
We have sunk so low, that even the self-serving statement of a compromised politician is lauded as heroic. What will it take for the others to join in?
Avalanches start with a crack, a barely perceptible unsettling. Let the smothering begin.
Heroes are hard to find, any squeak from the republican silence is welcome.
“An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile—hoping it will eat him last,” wrote Winston Churchill. Indeed. We appeased Hitler, and that genocidal madman kept right on going." The politicians who purport to lead the Republican party should take heed. They ARE feeding the crocodile and it is a policy fraught with peril.
Thank goodness for Churchill, and all the others who refused to compromise or appease. And I blame the French, a little.
Do you know that Churchill was a racist?
Yes, so was Lincoln. but they both did the right thing when it mattered. you have to honor the good. while rejecting the bad from the same people.
"Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.” — #MayaAngelou
Perfect. No one can change the past and we all need the grace to learn and evolve.
And in Lincoln‘s era, slavery was normal. Being alive in the 1800s in America meant accepting slavery as a fact of life.
What white person in 1938 was not racist on planet earth? The list will be quite short indeed.
Being white means being inherently racist, including today. Some work to be anti-racist.
Thank you for writing that being white means being racist. It stretches me, but you’re probably right.
As with any issue of bias and discrimination based on race, gender, sexual preference, religion, age, able-bodiedness, etc., we cannot walk in someone else's shoes to fully know the experiences of less-than, oppression, and injustice. Racism is particularly heinous as it is rooted in the socio-economic institution of slavery with all its horrors and ongoing expressions. The color of our skin, for starters, typically puts us in one category or another and is unchangeable--hence the factor of racism being inherent. But we can do our work to build our understanding and empathy, grow our racial/cultural literacy so as not to perpetuate presumptions of privilege, micro-aggressions, hurtfulness as best as we can (and own it when we mess up), while being authentic.
Good reading:
How to be an Anti-Racist by Ibram Kendi
White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo
Eleanor
My parents
You are fortunate, Gailee. My maternal family, Florida Crackers all to this day, are as racist as humanly possible. I'm practically an anomaly within the entire clan. If anyone wants to know where the term Cracker comes from I'll gladly tell you.
Rosalind, do tell! I’m curious.
My heart. More than anything, I wish my parents were still alive. Children during the depression - my mother would be awakened in the middle of the night to move. Each move was a move down. I grew up with books, music, never one racist, sexist, homophobic comment by either of my parents. There were books of all the religions of the world. We were given amazing educations and the opportunities to make our own decisions. My mother's father was French Catholic. Her mother was Protestant. The priest wouldn't recognize the marriage. I'm grateful that we were never brought up in a rigidly religious (or political) home. My mother began college my freshman year. You are a truly amazing being. I would love to meet you one day.
As was FDR.
But not Eleanor,
Definitely not Eleanor.
Look - Eleanor was a product of her time. She reluctantly said that it might be a good idea to "lift the Jews and the coloreds up."
yes, Eleanor.
Yep. Eleanor too: "Mrs. Roosevelt described future Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter as “an interesting little man but very Jew." just to name a statement of hers.
Maybe it was a compliment, Jews do have admirable qualities. But she was the best I have run across from that era, except maybe Frances Perkins.
That was written in 1918, prior to her becoming more "enlightened".
Wish that for all of us
Yes I knew, imperfect by any measure, but he fought on against the tide of evil. Wish all our heroes didn’t have a dark side.
Everyone has a dark side. Perfection is our North Star, not our destination.
just wish dark sides didn't have so much power
So do I. I'm a romantic idealist
As was I, many moons ago
I still am. When it comes to the trajectory of society as a whole, and when it comes to individual people, I can see the potential.
So am I.
So were so many others.....Founders of this country,FDR,Chamberlin, etc. Churchill did, however, increase the number of Jewish people who could enter Britain, unlike Chamberlin. And this thread was about the Holocaust, I think.
Yes, and the pleas of desperate Jewish passengers on the SS St Louis went unanswered by FDR and eventually returned to Europe. It would do well for people to understand the reasons we did not lend aid or enter WWII sooner than we did.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27373131
https://archives.jdc.org/topic-guides/the-story-of-the-s-s-st-louis/
Yes. I am reading "Hitler's American Gamble" by Simms and Laderman. It's a long but fascinating slog that covers just five days - from Pearl Harbor until Hitler declared war ON US. Millions of Americans were adamantly opposed to helping the Jews (and Britain - all of Europe !) even as news of the slaughter was becoming common knowledge.
America is regarded as the savior of Europe. But it took us a very long time to get around to doing the right thing. FDR was dancing on eggshells and managing to pull off "Lend Lease" support while the "free world" of Europe was being overrun by brutal monsters.
Those 900 Jews on the boat ultimately met their death because Americans didn't want to get involved. They should have been welcomed, harbored, hugged. It was a tragedy that few reflect on. One of so many. The day that boat was forced from US shores was another "Day of Infamy".
Bill, I will add "Hitler's American Gamble" to my reading list. It's incomprehensible how we stood by for so long while Europe was being overtaken by Nazis, London was being bombed to smithereens and Jews were being rounded up and murdered by the millions. I cannot imagine what it must have been like begging day after day for help from America with none forthcoming.
Our historical reluctance to do the right thing shuts down the theory of America as a compassionate, freedom loving people. It makes for good poetry and song lyrics but our reality, both at home and abroad, is far from flattering.
I’m afraid that we are living in another such time. Winston was right, America does the right thing after trying everything else. Will history write that we waited too late.
It took Japan for FDR to be able to declare war. The First America crowd never let up til that day which still lives in infamy.
Exactly. The holocaust meant relatively nothing to the US leadership. It was the attack on a US colonial holding that did the trick.
Of course he was.
All paid dearly
Oh, I blame the French alot.
In retrospect, it is easy to blame the people who collaborated with the Nazis. Those who didn't - like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and others within the so-called Confessing Church - met a nasty end: they were among the last to be executed as the regime fell.
Yes, Bonhoeffer and others met a nasty end for their long resistance to Hitler's National Church. It's sad to know that most Protestant clergy in Germany supported the National Church and were willing to accept the Aryan Paragraph. True Christians? Not so much.
Yes, that's right! I came here to Wiesbaden in 2013 as a "partnership" year-long exchange between the UCC-NY and the Ev. Churches in Hessen-Nassau, and landed in the only "Resistance church" in the entire area: the Ev. Bergkirche. I'm still here. The church council member, Hans Buttersack, died in Dachau for the crime of helping to protect the Jewish neighbors. The Pastor Franz von Bernus was such a national figure in the Confessing Church and so popular that he avoided being imprisoned for any long stretch of time and he, along with the congregation continued to "do Church" until the end of the war.Martin Niemöller spent his first night out of prison at the pastor's house next door. BTW, I did my theological Mdiv at Union Theological Seminary NYC, where Bonhoeffer spent a couple of years, the last before he returned to his fate.
You have incredible access and attachments to something very few people in the US are aware of. Bonhoeffer must have been an amazingly courageous man.
Wow
Yes, the French happily participated in Jewish removal.
No. No. Please, no. Living under enemy occupation is something else. I lived and worked in Paris for years. That rust stain is indelible. The shame and sorrow is memorialised in street names throughout the city (every street name has a little explanatory note on it). Every school has a memorial plaque above the door. The story of the Vel'd'Hiv is still a deep and painful scar. French families right across the country risked their lives by hiding Jews. Anyone who "happily participated" in that, or collaborated in any other way, paid the price when freedom came.
Thank you for allowing us to understand
Anne-Louise I am not jumping on the bandwagon against the French, even the Vichy. My parents were born in Germany. Most of my relatives are German and Swiss. You can’t hold it against a people that they erred. The US was heavily racist, too, witness Japanese internment camps which have only been designated as historic sites in this century. Witness the atomic bomb drops, undoubtedly the single greatest war crime in history. That was the US. People in glass houses . . .
understand and noted I've learned there are always different sides to everything and being from the US I've seen those glass houses.......
Thank you, Roland.
I think it was the French government at the time, and the French had had a long tradition of accepting refugees. In 1938, Eduardo Daladier saw the refugees as a national security threat. His order to not allow German refugees and to turn them back from the border left many German Jews remaining under Hitler's rule. The "rust stain" in France and Germany is history to be proud of, and some Americans keep looking for it here.
I read Rounds statement in sections where they only showed he said Biden won. And I saw Romney was agreeing with the statement Rounds made. Then later in the day I saw the entirety of his statement. His last paragraph shows he will not do anything noble or smart, he won’t support voting rights, or any of the other proposals by the Democratic Party that will move this country forward. It was a push to elect more conservations and a veiled way of saying to bury 1/6. They want to move on. The 1/6 committee is uncovering the awful truth they have been covering up or ignoring and they need to gain a lot of lost ground. They always make this first statement to say yes Biden won and follow it with words and actions that show they will continue their obstruction and damage to the country. But everyone is cheering them on for admitting a truth we didn’t need to hear from them. When they admit Trump and his cohorts are responsible for 1/6 and they’re willing to hold him accountable then they’ll have done something positive. When they pass Voting Rights then they can be applauded.
I have noticed similar sentiments of late. And, like an adolescent, they are admitting truth and desperately trying to avoid any punishments. "Don't look back. Look forward. Forget I did anything."
Lisa Murkowski might want to hold folks accountable.
But will she support voting rights?
If she were inclined to support voting rights, she would have worked with Schumer to get it passed. She hasn’t done that, nor has any other Republican senator. It only takes one or two to get around the filibuster of the voting rights act and pass it. Nobody who fails to help can even be considered a decent human being, let alone some kind of hero.
I thought Murkowski worked with Manchin on his voting rights bill in the Senate.
Kathy, Murkowski is the one Republican who expressed support, and please note, not for the Freedom to Vote Act that Manchin helped draft, but only for VRAA, which is not preemptive and therefore cannot overturn state laws that already have passed. Conversely, the Freedom to Vote Act, whose provisions provide the necessary safeguards against both voter suppression and election subversion, would supersede state law in conflict with any of its stipulations. To clarify, unlike VRAA, the Freedom to Vote Act would overturn the voter restriction/ nullification bills that GOP controlled state legislatures unilaterally already have passed. As a final point, unlike some others on this thread, recently, I have come to believe that Manchin will agree to some version of filibuster reform that will allow for an up or down majority vote and, furthermore, that Sinema will follow.
Doesn’t matter though, her past behavior shows she’ll stick with other Rs and vote no on anything and everything.
If she was serious, they’d abandon Manchin (or Sinema), because he’s not needed. (They can’t alter the filibuster until they have 50 guaranteed to vote for it).
She’ll have NO problem voting against her own bill. None.
To determine her past behavior, look at her votes. She was the only Republican to vote to open debate on voting rights. Did she vote to impeach Trump?
She has a much longer history of voting against. Many, many votes. And many of those were blatantly against the people, similar to voting rights.
She was right to vote as she did in your examples, and good for her, but those were only a two (or even a few) and one must also note that those were "safe" votes.
I would say she's one of the good republicans - the ones that believe in bipartisanship, etc and truly believe in democracy - but her votes just this year alone are in lock-step with those that wish to end our current form of government, and so I can't say that. That cannot be said of any current R. Senator.
Yes, but whennhe dropped thd ball, she didn’t say she’d go for change in the filibuster. To pass voting rights, at least two Republicans need to do agree to do that. None have.
And neither one will vote Yes on it. Manchin is delaying to help the Republicans and get more money from donors.
Are you saying Manchin will walk away from his own bill?
That’s exactly what Manchin is telling us. He also worked on getting BBB to his exacting standards and now says he won’t support it. He’s playing games while he collect money for votes. He thinks people are going to feel entitled if we pay them their benefits they’ve paid into or help them out with healthcare. He knows he’s blocking massive voters by not doing everything he can to pass voting rights but maybe he’s afraid he’ll get voted out because his state is extremely unhappy with him for blocking BBB. He’ll need that Koch money to be re-elected.
Oh! You are so right.
Here’s a question: perhaps the lawsuit against Madison Cawthorn could be applied to other members of Congress in up coming elections for violating their oaths. Could there not be legal consequences for people in the military or former military or police or other public servants for violating their oaths? Maybe in terms of their pensions or being denied future employment?
The consequences for active duty personnel, whether military or law enforcement are different for those retired from (and pensioned by) those professions. I know that my retirement ID card (indicating that I am an honorably retired law enforcement professional) lists an expiration date on 12-31-2099. My friend's (fully disabled veteran who served in the USCG for 8 years) military ID lists no expiration. I will have to check with my either career retired or enlistment expired (i.e. full 20+ years of service or 1-4 hitches encompassing not a military retirement) ID's say. I know that my contractor who served 4 years in the Navy gets his 10% discount at several home improvement stores, and that my college roommate was subject to recall for a period of time following her 8 year Air Force enlistments, but I don't know what the continuing commitment and obligations are for them.
Long way to say, I really don't know how much of a hold there could be on a pension earned by honorable service when the person then engages in dishonorable (up to and including criminal) conduct. I do know that there were jail inmates who had been convicted of crimes who still received military benefits.
Olympic Peninsula
Nice. Beautiful country up thataway.
Flynn still has his pension! Our rule of law isn’t “apples to apples” when applied to “All the Presidents Cronies” and we common citizens I fear.
Great idea, Bruce. Where do we start?
This letter made my heart lift! I think “the unraveling” IS true! Even if I was frustrated with these Republicans before, I am grateful for any voices now speaking sanely from the right. We need them. We may need a couple of them to help pass the Voting Rights Act.
I am seeing glimpses of the unraveling locally and at state level. Testing the waters by whispering "moderate Republican."
Judge Amit Mehta was appointed to the US Court of the District of Columbia by Obama in 2014. In 2021, John Roberts appointed him to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. This judge is no slouch and his questions to TFG’s lawyers are complete and accurate. It’s very interesting to see that TFG may be shaking in his boots right now. Also, the other Congressional inciters are trying to ride on TFG’s coattails which I feel with spell doomsday for all of them. I can tell you that I have to say I am enjoying this “witch hunt”. What goes around, comes around. I want to be front and center to witness justice finally taking place.
SC can undo it all, sorry but true.
...and likely will. One has to wonder how much of Leonard Leo's dark money slides into their pockets...other than the Liberals on SCOTUS.
A massive difference between Watergate and the BIG LIE/1/6 Capitol Building insurrection was that, in Watergate, several of the principals knew, early on, that they were on the hook for criminal activities. James McCord, in his 50s, was one of the five Watergate burglars facing a stiff sentence from Judge Sirica. A former FBI professional who thought he had been serving his president as head of security at the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREP), he spilled the beans because he didn’t want to spend many years in the slammer.
John Dean, as White House Counsel, was being set up as the Watergate fall guy by President Nixon. As a lawyer, he came to realize that he was personally involved in a criminal conspiracy of which Nixon and his henchmen were guilty as hell. Dean went to Sam Dash and spilled the beans—an astonishing story that was later confirmed by the Watergate tapes. Jeb McGruder, once hearing that Dean was singing, went down to Dash to lessen his criminal punishment. Neither Dean nor McGruder thought that their future was tied to then-President Nixon.
In sharp contrast, ex-President Trump is currently the king pin in Republican politics. Many political careers are tied to being a chapter-and-verse Trumpite. This involves publicly accepting the Trump mantra on the BIG LIE and the 1/6 Capitol Building insurrection. AT PRESENT NO ONE IN THE INNER TRUMP ENTOURAGE IS CERTAIN THAT THEY WILL BE INVOLVED IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. Steve Bannon and a few others may be facing charges for ignoring a Congressional subpoena. Some other perpetrators are hiding behind the Fifth Amendment. However, these slimy fish probably expect that they can drag out these issues until the 2022 elections, when there could be a new political ballgame.
The big unknown is whether Department of Justice criminal charges will flow from what the House 1/6 Committee has been uncovering in a treasure trove of documents and from over 300 witnesses so far. Such criminal charges would become almost certain, were several of the insiders to conclude it ‘prudent’ to lessen their likely prison time by singing like a canary. To date no such star singer has appeared.
Ex-Vice President Mike Pence has been waltzing with the House 1/6 committee. He certainly has first-hand info on what Trump sought to orchestrate regarding certification of the Electoral College results. Moreover, on 1/6 Trump seemed willing to throw Pence to a ‘Hang Mike Pence’ mob. Pence does not seem inclined to throw Trump under the bus. Laughably, he may think that this could harm his non-existent chances of being the 2024 presidential candidate.
The prospect of one or more of Trump’s castrati singing may well turn on the Department of Justice (Attorney General Garland) filing criminal charges by late Spring, 2022. Once initiated, such charges would not be affected by the results of the 2022 elections. Under President Biden’s attorney general these criminal proceedings would continue to their conclusion. I would expect that there then would be several McCord/Dean/McGruder types who would seek a life boat from a sinking ship.
Pence’s staff are singing freely. Question from some MSNBC personalities over the weekend to some J6 committee members was when will they seek to question Pence himself. I expect Pence listens to good legal counsel. He’s not much, but he’s not the thug that TFG is, for sure.
But from the Info so far it appears Pence was looking for a way to serve ‘Dear Leader ‘. That makes him a “ Thug “ in my book.
Christy Some of Pence’s (and Melania’s) staff are singing, but they are simply the chorus without the soloist. I saw yesterday an account that Pence’s lawyer has been waltzing with the 1/6 House committee for months and that Pence has shown increasingly reluctance to testify voluntarily, if at all. Would you give a farthing for Pence’s completeness in describing Trump’s role in the “Hang Mike Pence’ saga?
Hahaha! I’m not sure where to find a farthing, but if I could I would definitely give a number of them. Trump couldn’t be more transparent, but Pence is less so, or is it because I can wrap my brain around thugs more easily then I can the so super moral as to be immoral crowd? I would like to hear a lot more from him and I have a few pennies to spare!
Yes, but the Pence's and the McCarthy's of the world operate in the open, oblivious to the peons they order around for typing and coffee, and those people saw and heard everything. You do not need to be a vocalist if you are at the rehearsal, to hear the tune.
Mr. Wheelock,
Your’s is my take on how this is so dependent upon the DOJ involvement. As you pointed out, until DJT’s supporters realize that their legal liability far exceeds the benefits they derive from maintaining their loyalty to the Trump program, they’ll stay the course. They have no downside yet. Once the DOJ enters, the plea deals will begin, and so will the retirements to "spend more time with my family…." The rest of the analysis is just wishful speculation without the DOJ in the picture.
J. P. To paraphrase Churchill ‘The hangman’s noose focuses the mind sharply.’ Keith
Plea Deals have already started. Reducing a lot of Ppl’s to Misdemeanor's. Wrist Slapping teaches nothing !
Your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs lay out a fascinating comparison of where the Nixon and tRump conduct differs, particularly from those "down stream" from the oval office. It will be intriguing to see what happens when (speaks the eternal optimist still residing in my head, albeit with the rent raised) criminal charges are filed on those involved (thinking Flynn, Meadows, Bannon, and Miller) and what they actually do when confronted with their culpability.
Do you think Barr knew and that’s why he resigned when he did ?
Barr, who had, in an earlier administration, been a pretty good Attorney General, had egregiously served Trump rather than the Constitution, in his reprise role. He knew that there was no fraud (except Republican) in the 2020 election. His resignation was a personal effort to salvage his tattered reputation. Too little, too late.
So is he spared from testifying to any Authorities ?
Former Attorney General John Mitchell testified before the Erwin Senate Watergate hearing. Why shouldn’t Barr be required to testify before the 1/6 committee?
Exactly ! 👍
I don't think so. There is precedent for it, and his choice to resign rather than be complicit seems to speak in his favor.
Perhaps there is a glimmer of hope that we will have a legitimate opposition party.
And oppose is what they do best.
... is there any room for hope of transcendence from a paradigm of opposition/conflict to one of consensus/co-operation ...?
off topic, but... I was lucky enough to marry a man whose approach to life was cooperation and making things easier whenever possible. I was best friends with a woman whose whole family was the definition of competition. different worlds, as she often opined.
All hope rests on it. The clock is ticking.