Lighten up on our United States Attorney General Merrick Garland.
He is fully engaged in the appropriate investigative imperatives that will surly bring all criminal perpetrators to the full consequences of their chosen misdeeds.
His patriotism's love of America will be honored by all who seek justice and restoration of America's Democratic ideals!
Agreed. Also, Garland, and the DOJ generally, are facing a Catch-22, IMO. Even if it's determined that prosecuting a former president is doable, the DOJ will face charges of 'partisanship', 'political bias', etc., due to the fact that a Democrat is in the White House. You needn't be omniscient to know that there would be NO prosecution with a Republican POTUS, so Garland's choices, it seems to me, are to prosecute and devil take the hindmost, or not prosecute and let a seriously dangerous cancer continue to metastasize in the body politic.
If Ford hadn't pardoned Nixon, I think we'd be in a different place now. I feel that all should be accountable under the Law. I am glad Garland is being cautious and it might be better if a prosecution of tRump, Giuliana and Meadows happens in a few months, closer to the midterms (?)
I absolutely agree about the Nixon pardon. It was a grave error.
I just want the prosecutions to be well done and success ful, and before it is too late! The crimes are on-going, and the longer they simmer the harder to squelch them.
The mid-terms are FOUR MONTHS away. Likelier they will happen before a trial. ItтАЩs voting that we have to count on and with DeJoy and his moles still in the USPS, preferably voting in person. Which leads us to how to protect voters, election judges, and voters, particularly in vulnerable districts.
An indictment that comes after Labor Day will give Republicans even more excuse to claim that itтАЩs all politics persecutionтАФus, I know, they will anyway. So an indictment needs to come down right after these hearings conclude (within a couple of weeks, I hope). That is the cost of DOJтАЩs initial slowness in moving the investigation.
Elie Honig from Cafe wrote a timeline article back in May. His Bio: Elie Honig served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York for 8.5 years and as the Director of the Division of Criminal Justice at the Office of Attorney General for the State of New Jersey for 5.5 years. He is currently a legal Analyst for CNN and Executive Director at Rutgers Institute for Secure Communities. Here is his timeline (all below is an exact quote):
This is not another piece on the likelihood that Merrick Garland will eventually indict Donald Trump. The arguments are familiar by now, both ways, and whatever will be will be.
Today, weтАЩre asking this: when?
No matter where you might fall on the тАЬwill-he-or-wonтАЩt-he?тАЭ spectrum, we can all agree that the clock matters, and itтАЩs ticking. Every day that passes makes a potential federal prosecution of Trump less likely to happen, and more fraught for the Justice Department if it does.
ItтАЩs now early May тАУ sixteen months since the January 6th attack, and fourteen months since Garland took office. ThereтАЩs no technical reason DOJ needs to indict anytime soon тАФ the federal crimes in play here typically carry five-year statutes of limitations тАФ but the DepartmentтАЩs pace conveys a lack of urgency that is ill-matched to the gravity of the potential crimes. Put it this way: if Trump did commit a crime relating to the coup attempt, itтАЩs the most serious political crime in our countryтАЩs history. Yet the Justice Department is going to wait a year and change (and counting) to do anything about it?
I know, I know: these things take time, and they want their case to be perfect. ThatтАЩs an easy refrain, but I reject it in these circumstances. During my fourteen years as a prosecutor, I saw law enforcement move with astonishing speed when circumstances demanded it. As attorney general, Garland has the full resources of the Justice Department, including the FBI, at his disposal. If ever a case required urgency, this is it. Yes, as a prosecutor you want your case to be strong and well-supported. But you donтАЩt spend over a year fretting over whether your proof is absolutely flawless, particularly when thereтАЩs already ample evidence in plain public view.
LetтАЩs flip ahead on the calendar. Midterm elections are on November 8th. The Justice Department has a longstanding policy against announcing new criminal charges or taking overt investigative steps (such as executing a search warrant) shortly before an election. ThereтАЩs no formal provision on the books, but AGs of both parties over the past several administrations have issued Department-wide memos reminding prosecutors to abide by this blackout practice, which applies either 60 days or 90 days before an election, depending who you ask. (I always understood the blackout period to be 60 days, but other DOJ alums place the line of demarcation 90 days out.)
Knowing GarlandтАЩs tendencies, heтАЩll err on the side of caution. So counting back 90 days from November 8th puts us in early August. That means either (1) weтАЩll see a federal indictment of Trump by late summer, or (2) we wonтАЩt see one until at least the end of 2022, if ever. (The same applies, by the way, to other pending DOJ investigations with obvious political implications: Matt Gaetz, Hunter Biden, Rudy Giuliani.)
So unless you genuinely expect to see United States v. Donald J. Trump sometime within the next three months or so, then weтАЩre talking about DOJ allowing nearly two years to pass between commission of a crime that threatened our democracy, and criminal consequences. ThatтАЩs tough to envision and, if a charge does happen, the delay will be difficult for Garland to justify.
Of course, the political world will change after midterms. History tells us the Democrats are virtually certain to lose control of the House, and potentially the Senate too. In six of the past seven midterms following election of a new president, that presidentтАЩs party has gotten crushed in the House (the lone exception being 2002, when George W. Bush was still riding a post-9/11 wave of popularity). Senate results also have been grim for new presidents, though not as drastic. Given DemocratsтАЩ current razor-thin margins in the House and Senate, and President BidenтАЩs low approval ratings, theyтАЩll likely lose one or both houses of Congress.
A Republican-controlled Congress can make life miserable for DOJ. DonтАЩt get me wrong: Congress should remain entirely hands-off when it comes to the Justice DepartmentтАЩs prosecutorial function. But do you trust a newly-empowered Republican House majority, led by Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan and Louie Gohmert and Lauren Boebert, to do the right thing here?
A new Congress might call hearings and demand answers from DOJ officials about the investigation and its underpinnings. The Justice Department would be right to resist and potentially even refuse, but itтАЩll be an ugly sideshow. Congress could tinker with DOJтАЩs funding, or threaten to do so, as a retributive measure. Do you put it past the current slate of prominent House Republicans? Or, at an extreme, a Republican-controlled House could bring impeachment proceedings. Think thatтАЩs a bit much? Well, Axios recently reported that тАЬThe largest body of conservative House members тАФ the Republican Study Committee, which represents more than 150 members тАФ is laying the groundwork to push for the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.тАЭ They could just as easily turn their sights on Garland, if sufficient political motivation arose. Again: do you trust McCarthy and company to show restraint with their newfound power?
Further complicating matters, once the 2022 midterms end, the 2024 presidential election cycle begins. Trump might announce his candidacy immediately and, even if he doesnтАЩt, he will be the prohibitive Republican frontrunner unless and until he formally declares that heтАЩs out. So now, consider this: can you really see Merrick Garland authorizing the first-ever indictment of a former president, who also happens to be the active presidential nominee, or presumptive nominee, of the opposing political party? And can you see that happening two years (or more) after the events at issue, just as the next election hits the political radar?
ItтАЩs possible, sure. But a post-midterm indictment would lend ammunition to the inevitable cries by Trump and his allies that any prosecution is a politically-driven witch hunt. ItтАЩs already tough enough, politically, to indict a former president. ItтАЩs even more fraught to take down the other partyтАЩs presumptive nominee after the new election season has begun.
Finally, letтАЩs consider this reality: if Garland does charge Trump, thereтАЩs going to be an actual case to prosecute. Trump will surely seek to have it dismissed based on selective prosecution (meaning he was singled out for political reasons) or some version of presidential immunity doctrine. Those arguments are questionable, legally, but Trump will duke them out in the federal courts, and thatтАЩll take time. And if Trump loses those arguments, weтАЩre going to have an actual trial, folks. When exactly is U.S. v. Trump supposed to be tried? In late 2023 or early 2024, with elections right around the corner? ItтАЩs tough to imagine that the politics-averse Garland would sign on to that.
The debate surely will rage on about whether Garland has meaningfully and pragmatically set his sights on Trump. Someday, weтАЩll find out. No matter what happens, the delay in reaching a resolution is counterproductive and inexcusable.
I have to think DOJ has already been examining the committeeтАЩs work. They were on Jeffrey Clark when he was the topic du jour, and shortly after that got hands on EastmanтАЩs phone. Are there rules prohibiting them from consulting with J6 on work in progress?
Garland should look then to HutchinsonтАЩs example. She has done the (belated) right thing under great pressure to stay тАЬloyalтАЭ. Her decision to тАЬdo the right thing and show up under oath and state the truthтАЭ is the road-map. Gop does not want justice. Ford took the easy way out and allowed Nixon to go unpunished setting up the downward slide of тАЬjustice for allтАЭ. Garland has enough leads to make the case. I donтАЩt mind if he works to make it air-tight, but for AmericaтАЩs Sake, show us тАЬJustice for AllтАЭ! Otherwise, we have to accept that POWER is the only game. And the gop are saying to us тАЬbend overтАЭ.
I was in my 20's in the Watergate days. At that time, there was pretty much unanimity that it was better for our politically torn country to just let Tricky Dick slither on home; beat his poor wife Pat with ever greater frequency (the whole thing was her fault, after all); and die disrespected and forgotten. He didn't try to stage a violent coup anything like the Orange Sadist's nearly successful attempt. Then again, he WAS responsible for the deaths of 2,000,000 Vietnamese people and 58,000 US troops. But of course, that was war so it doesn't count. (Sarcasm)
I'm tired and a little outraged at media and public figures warning of future complaints by Republicans, of political bias in any attempts by law enforcement officials to hold Traitor Trump and his minions accountable under our currently beleaguered rule of law. The idea that the criminal, anti-democracy, fascist Republican party and any of its followers might say a DOJ prosecution of Trump or any of his henchmen is partisan or biased is irrelevant. And if it were not such a serious matter, it would also be laughable. They are traitors! Many, many of them are criminals! They lie as easily as they breathe. They have no shame, no morality and no concern for the preservation of our United States of America. Their word or their opinion is less than worthless. They will criticize any and all attempts to hold them accountable. And if the news media reports their criticisms, it is shoddy, irresponsible journalism not to include in that report what the Republican party or in some instances, what that politician or henchman, did to contribute to the attempted overturning of our presidential election and/or our democracy. We've seen what Republican opinions do to our country and we've had MORE than enough of that poison.
I share your frustration with the possibility of GOP blowback from a Trump prosecution, but I would say this: if Trump is not held accountable for this undeniably treasonous act, our democracy is toast. This, any potential negative consequences of prosecution are of little to no concern.
I may not have been clear enough, Frank. I'm not concerned about Republicans complaining about a Trump prosecution. That's a given. These days they live to complain and rage. I'm annoyed with the media and non-Republican figures who don't like Trump, but who keep warning about Republicans accusing prosecutors of political bias. Who cares? What Attorney General is going to forgo prosecuting a former president who plotted to overthrow our government and who has committed more federal crimes than most mob bosses, just because it will upset that former president's followers? We all know if our rule of law is not upheld, we will have no democracy. So the media needs to stop wringing it's hands about whether it's okay to prosecute a criminal repeat offender like Trump. We have no choice if we want to protect America from future criminals trying to destroy our country.
Thank you for the clarification. I did misinterpret your post. I agree: credible media, in an attempt to appear non-partisan and balanced, have failed in their duty to report the facts, and the fact is that Trump committed unpardonable (word carefully chosen) acts that must be prosecuted. We're on the same page.
Optics! The so-called security decision makers were worried about the optics if more security personnel were at the Capitol! Optics, what trump has done is criminal and partisan concerns or optics are in the words of the flunky Bill Barr, our b.s.
This is the conversation I had last week with my good friend who used to live in DC and protest at the Capitol on a regular basis (she was one of the first AIDS protesters in DC in the early 80's). After the debacle of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs appearing with the President and the clearing of the mall by the police during a George Floyd murder protests where TFG made his "Bible Photo-Op" there had to be conversation among the several agencies about "managing the optics". I can certainly understand the premise of that, but in the face of what had to be considerable intel from various agencies about the plans of the insurrection, the utter lack of adequate law enforcement presence and apparent command and control failure is incomprehensible, at least to me.
Yes, the picture is coming into greater and greater focus, isn't it?
Lots of intentionality it seems. So very, very disturbing. People DID die and I am sure that Pence and Pelosi would have been seriously hurt if not killed that day. Hate to think that but nothing is out of realm of possibilty at this point. I hope they gave Cassidy some protection but not sure who is trustworthy anymore.
If optics were the main concern, I donтАЩt understand why the DC National Guard couldnтАЩt have been deployed inside the Capitol building, out of sight from the outside. Since the Capitol was closed to the public, it wouldnтАЩt have been obvious, but they would have been readily available to reinforce the Capitol police. Of course, Jim Jordan, MTG, et al would have been aware of their presence and notified the White House gang. Then there was the unconscionable delay in mobilizing the Guard after the assault began. So it seems like the bottom line is that the people in charge wanted the assault to succeed.
Click on the picture to get an enlarged view of the Ellipse and surrounding land. I can't get an answer to whether the folks hanging out in the trees were on Federal land, but I suspect so. Being Federal land would mean it's the jurisdiction of the Park Service, which would mean the feds were in control of what authority would intervene to de-weaponize those in that space beyond the Ellipse. This would mean, like at the Capitol, local police would not have jurisdiction to intervene. Nor did the DC National Guard have authority to intervene.
From my DC friend, Capitol, Metro, and Park police have concurrent jurisdictions and frequently offer mutual aid to one another. Other Federal agencies (FBI, DHS, ATF, Treasury all have a police function response protocol.
She disagrees that this was a command and control failure, but perhaps simply a badly managed one. I completely disagree.
Agree Ally, why wasn't there more preparation as there were plenty of warnings that she testified to yesterday before the 6th from agencies who would know. It made me think that the lack was deliberate.
We're at a stage that if DOJ chose not to prosecute, that would be a political decision тАФ driven by fear of MAGA's reaction. Garland, in the face so much evidence of a Trump-orchestrated coup, is duty bound to seek charges. And it's clear that he is.
There will be fallout, even violence. But that's a small price to pay for preserving the rule of law. Holding the insurrectionists accountable is essential to preventing or at least stalling future assaults.
I agree with all that you said except for "that's a small price to pay" about violence. It's a price, a large price but I think of our men and women who go to war courageously!
I feel very strongly that if Trump is not prosecuted, our democracy is toast. Thus, any potential negative consequences of a prosecution are of little concern.
Worst thing that can happen is an indictment and trial of the defeated former president for his seditious acts, after which he is acquitted. It will be just another lost cause like the Mueller investigation or the two House impeachments. The AG knows the bar is set much higher for evidence in a courtroom than in a Congressional hearing room or in the 'court of public opinion.' The DOJ is waiting for those who had direct contact, one on one, with the likely defendant to 'flip.' The increasing threat of their own imprisonment might cause such witnesses to do exactly that, as Chairman Thompson requests at the close of each Committee session.
The threat of federal criminal charges will surely persuade some with key information to flip to avoid prison. Mark Meadows, Jeffrey Clark, and John Eastman appear to be likely high-level candidates.
Others who likely haven't broken any laws but have refused to testify to the J6 Committee will be forced to appear before federal grand juries and reveal inside information. Pat Cipollone is a sure bet.
Agree, Jack..."waiting for those who had direct contact." I am hopeful that what Heather and others have seen/heard from Ms. Hutchinson will be enough, but I was concerned about the hearsay statements not being the evidence that Garland/DOJ needs.
George, I totally agree with you. If the Attorney General does not have every i dotted and t crossed, TrumpтАЩs army of well paid lawyers will begin to pull threads and in the minds of some, the entire prosecution will unravel.There is no room for even the smallest misstatement or misstep.
TrumpтАЩs attorneys will attack every piece of evidence, thatтАЩs true. But Trump does not pay his attorneys and he gets what he pays for. Remember the obscure personal injury lawyer who defended the second impeachment trial in the senate? I just had to point this out!
The problem with the Justice Department is that they don't attract the brightest and best. How many of Bush's Liberty University hires are still there?
They need to be super careful because a loss would be humiliating.
His DOJ does not leak and there is a reason for that. They don't want to alert those that they may strike next. Also prosecutors like air tight cases, so that greasy types like death star and some of his minions cannot slither out of things.
Garland seems to be a measured, thoughtful person, who thoughts and deeds are well reasoned and appropriate. In my opinion he will do a job that reflects those qualities. I feel very pleased that he is at the helm.
Repent, apologize, and see the error of your ways, Magats and right wing Christians! If, following yesterdayтАЩs hearing, any doubters remain, the only solution for them is for lightning to strike. They should have already been hit by radical atonement тАФ metanoia, in Greek! A very young woman has revealed the face and spirit of honor, morality, and love of a democratic nation above all else.
At my assisted living dining hall, the four women at the next table bragged that they couldnтАЩt be bothered to watch. Foxers all IтАЩm sure. Wonder what Tucker blathered about last night. Will Rupert ever feel the heat? He could be burning in hell and feel right at home, IтАЩll wagerтАж.
This is what they are getting. ItтАЩs time to save oneтАЩs ass. As in, the rats are not scurrying, they are jumping ship knowing the cold sea is a better option than the hell on board the ship.
Rupert is one of the architects and the original megaphone of this debacle, beginning in the 90s. He wasnтАЩt allowed to openly lie in the UK or Australia so he set up shop in the US. His entire brazen operation was conducted in plain sight. And we continue to allow it.
If they watched and had any sense of decency, they could no longer hang on to their thinking that death star is great and isn't as he has been portrayed in these hearings....vulgar, immature, traitorous.
Brett Bair was abruptly stopped after stating тАЬcompelling testimonyтАЭ, noting trumpтАЩs immediate response as тАжMs. Hutchinson was under oath, the former President is notтАжтАж
IтАЩm curious now. IтАЩm still surprised that they showed the hearing. They are $$-drivenтАжand DeSantis could entertain their demographics. Good thought, Kathy.
That they have corrupted what Christ taught appears, to me, to be both obvious and completely in line with what Christians have done throughout the centuries. I understand the danger of painting everyone with the same brush, but Christianity has also cast me, and people like me, out for simply being different.
I appreciate your sentiment, as I know some fine, upstanding people who really do good works and are open and affirming, but others who will love me but hate my "sin"; Christianity does not get a free pass from me.
I believe that the problem arises when some so called Christians use a corrupted version of Christianity (but we could use any other misguided religion) to support their politics. It is no less dangerous now than it was two thousand years ago. I have a segment of my family who has disowned me because I donтАЩt support their Fundamentalist religion (especially the Rapture). One member of that group is extremely sick with Covid and hospitalized. I have cousins who were the joy of my childhood who have gone astray having been radicalized by their church and their churchтАЩs support of Donald Trump. It is both sad and frightening at the same time.
I totally get that and do not blame you at all. It is my personal choice to stay and resist. Fortunately, my church community is small and so far is not tainted .
Nor from me. I know too much of the history. When religion is in service of the state, corrupt power hungry individuals, the envious, the hateful, we have seen what has and is still happening.
Rs are calling it hearsay even though the witness was present at some of what she described and obviously was someone all the people in the hallway talked to and trusted. I noticed that she often called them by their first names. Last night on NBC news there was a mention that the driver of the limo and someone else are saying that death star didn't lunge at anyone. While bleating in public, some of these people have to be worried.
This is precisely the problem with faith it doesnтАЩt require evidence. The best we can hope for is Republicans like Cassidy Hutchinson and enough independents To keep our country together because I do believe Trump will be prosecuted, assuming somehow he canтАЩt pardon himself or I mean didnтАЩt pardon himself, and there will surely be a great upheaval in this country not so different from a second civil war in some respects.
I think it worth noting that the Jan 6 committee referred Meadows to the DOJ for contempt of Congress. The DOJ did not act on that as it did with Bannon. Could it be that they were already building a bigger case against Meadows and the contempt issue would have been just a nuisance? I find it hard to believe that what was revealed yesterday is completely "new news" to Garland. Just my hopeful speculation, of course.
At any rate, hats off to a 25 year old "executive assistant" who was disgusted and angry enough to summon the courage to testify. Imagine the pressure she felt. She did so well. Imagine the fear she will feel for years to come.
And "ketchup on the wall" will become the stuff of legend and perhaps a SNL skit. Ford's tripping, Biden's bike accident, and TFG throwing plates.
Perhaps if it could be proven that it was, Pennsylvanians would wake up to their responsibilities to vote blue. There are some really demented members of the legislature.
Exactly! I keep hearing that Putin is ill (in addition to mentally.) If these two narcissistic, pathological excuses for world leaders go down, I will believe in divine justice after all. Just imagine the "New World Order!"
I just had a friend comment that "my" side (in this case, BLM protesters) "burned whole cities" while his MAGAt side "only had one tiny violent riot" on January 6.
They did not burn whole cites ever and that is hyperbole. That being said, I wish the fools in Portland would stop using every protest as a reason for vandalism. I also noticed that one of the people tossing Molotov cocktails in Portland in the protests around George Floyd and burning things has been sentenced to prison.
The anarchist movement thrives on that kind of тАЬprotestтАЭ.
We had an event in Eugene after the Dobbs decision came out; I only know the snippets IтАЩve read, but EPD had a massive tactical response to тАЬmenacingтАЭ protesters; IтАЩve seen daytime videos of non-violent protests. I think there is something very fishy that surrounds this event. IтАЩll try and find links.
Not equating. For sure. Just images that tend to last. But the first two are mishaps that are attacked as weaknesses. The last IS a weakness...of character.
But when President BidenтАЩs bike тАЬaccidentтАЭ is described, I think of how the press never mentioned FDRтАЩs crutches. Compare the riderтАЩs condition to the general overweight of his critics. How many 70+ riders of bicycles are there in America?
I am 77 and still cycle regularly. I can not count the number of times I have fallen/crashed - often when catching feet in pedals when dismounting. ЁЯЪ┤ЁЯП╜тАНтЩАя╕ПЁЯТеЁЯе┤
Bravi to all us ancients who are still exercising regularly. We are an endangered species. Our country needs us as examples for the younger sedentary. Add to that, we have lived some useful history.
Memes appeared about ketchup within the hour and lots of jokes about ketchup on threads. Also I think they are building a larger case against Meadows and do not want a contempt charge to get in the way.
For me, the news is that Merrick Garland and his DOJ no longer seem to be comatose and MIA. The seizure of John EastmanтАЩs electronic devices is big news.
The publicly known evidence of this Jan. 6 criminal conspiracy around Trump is becoming a flood. (Lord knows how much evidence is still under wraps)
The question is no longer, тАЬWas there a wide-ranging criminal conspiracy in the West Wing and in Congress to block BidenтАЩs victory and retain Dumpster as President,тАЭ because that question is answered. All thatтАЩs left is for the legal beagles to do their work. The only real question which remains: тАЬIs Merrick GarlandтАЩs DOJ going to do its job and indict these jokers.тАЭ
This committee is serving up evidence on a plate to the DOJ. That appears to be because the DOJ wasted an eternity in the first year+. Garland and his army of lawyers decided to handle this most singular event in the way Mob cases are worked - by working from the bottom up. This led them through a swamp of hundreds and hundreds of investigations, requiring tens of thousands of hours of sifting and discerning evidence. Only now have they arrived, blinking in the bright light, at the much more serious side of the case.
We know this because Garland piously and patiently explained this to us in a rare public appearance.
We know this because had they opened any investigation into the people at the locus of the plot, a grand jury would have been convened. I donтАЩt disagree that the DOJ would have remained deathly silent throughout, but at least some of the subjects subpoenaed to come in would have been found later on Fox News working the refs by setting up a witch hunt narrative about тАЬBidenтАЩs DOJтАЭ. We would have been Hunter BidenтАЩd to death.
This case should have broken precedent with the holy writ on Mob cases. Two investigations should have been run in tandem - one into the thug idiots and one into the idiots in suits and ties who worshipped at the altar of power.
Had that happened, we could reasonably expected indictments this summer. Look at the mountain of evidence a Committee with *no* prosecutorial power has uncovered in a short time. There is no gain saying it - this DOJ came to the party late, and not fashionably so. Now they are rushing to catch up, begging evidence of the committee. It is a disgrace.
And please - none of the тАЬdotting the тАШiтАЩsтАЩ and crossing the тАШtтАЩsтАЭ defense of the DOJ. One or two more witnesses - Meadows for sure and Cipillone or Pence or Ivanka could put a bow on this case enough to bring it forward.
I wouldnтАЩt place a bet on any size on Trump being convicted. The evidence is incredibly strong, but it still seems to lack a smoking gun - the incontestable evidence that Trump knew he lost. It would come down to the concept of тАЬwillful blindnessтАЭ legally and an army of lawyers would seed enough doubt to convince at least one juror. But a trial, and a second one in Georgia would accomplish two things - it would keep Trump off the ballot in 2024, and more importantly, millions of voters who supported the Trump regime would quit it in disgust. Some would refuse to vote in future elections, but enough would go to the Democratic side to ensure a Republican loss and a subsequent remake of the party in an acceptably legal form. The nightmare would be over.
Exactly right I would say. Fearing looking like a partisan investigation, they may allow these slippery eels a chance to escape. There is much more at risk than the next two elections. Or is it that Garland makes a better judge than a prosecutor?
Exactly. Putin is loving all of this. CINOs and White supremacists lined up behind a puppet who has fostered toxic polarity for six years. Jackpot for Putin. UnlessтАж
тАж I, too, love RowshanтАЩs comment, тАЬ A very young woman has revealed the face and spirit of honor, morality, and love of a democratic nation above all else.тАЭ
I think of her courage and the courage of the other women who have testified: Ruby Freeman, Shaye Moss and the young Capitol Hill police officer, Caroline Edwards. These women are working to save democracy from the likes of TFG and Co. Women, especially Black women, have saved our butts by speaking truth to power. Getting the vote out. They deserve tremendous gratitude. This young lady? I hope she sees the terror of her ways in having hung in a den of delusional terrorists.
IтАЩve said it for years: Putin and Trump likely have adjoining underground bunkers near the Baltic Sea. We better grab DJT while we can.
I can see fireworks over the hill from my house. A parent from Landmark College must have a pyrotechnic businessтАФ the exhorbitant display is stunning for our little, rural village.
This weekend may have many of us in deep pondering about our history and where we are in this current Constitutional Crisis and the steps each of us needs to commit to taking. My friend and I are meeting tonight to create a blueprint for writing letters to editors, online, social media (she does it, I am not adept) and elected officials. I encourage everyone to take a little breather this holiday and get ready for two years of intense work to save this democracy which is being celebrated this weekend. Let's KEEP IT and MAKE IT STRONGER! Each of us is a little drop of water flowing into stream and then the ocean. We area THE WAVE. Correction, let's make it A TSUNAMI!
Do you know Greg Olear's substack? A few weeks ago he speculated that Trump has long been a special kind of informant....I forget the exact title....who has been given immunity. Trump's run with bad apples all his life. People around him, like Epstein, Manafort, et all have fallen, but not him. I keep remembering his statement, "I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue..." (and get away with it.) It's not that he's noble by any means, it's that he had a choice to save his ass by pointing out the big criminals. I wonder, I wonder.
Are you thinking of an informant? I never thought of that, I have very definite suspicions of him being an operative with putin and other dictators, with Melania's support and Russian translations. I surmise that Putin is a big faker in that he cannot speak English. As a member of the KGB, I bet he had to know English....he just wants time to think of his responses. Or he is embarrassed that he speaks poorly.
Definitely Putin speaks English. I've thought of his imperious behavior as part of his delusion of Russian supremacy...just as English is the "international" language, he wants all things Russian to prevail. Rachel Maddow was one of the earliest to connect Trump and Putin as criminal oligarchs who have each other's back, and has a book, which of course, I cannot remember now. But if Trump is a protected informant it would also explain how Comey and Mueller could not "catch" Trump despite his clear complicity.
(The type of informant that Greg Olear mentioned is so "deep state" that very few know about it, even people within the same agency.)
Your move, Garland.
Hey guys!
Please!
Lighten up on our United States Attorney General Merrick Garland.
He is fully engaged in the appropriate investigative imperatives that will surly bring all criminal perpetrators to the full consequences of their chosen misdeeds.
His patriotism's love of America will be honored by all who seek justice and restoration of America's Democratic ideals!
Agreed. Also, Garland, and the DOJ generally, are facing a Catch-22, IMO. Even if it's determined that prosecuting a former president is doable, the DOJ will face charges of 'partisanship', 'political bias', etc., due to the fact that a Democrat is in the White House. You needn't be omniscient to know that there would be NO prosecution with a Republican POTUS, so Garland's choices, it seems to me, are to prosecute and devil take the hindmost, or not prosecute and let a seriously dangerous cancer continue to metastasize in the body politic.
If Ford hadn't pardoned Nixon, I think we'd be in a different place now. I feel that all should be accountable under the Law. I am glad Garland is being cautious and it might be better if a prosecution of tRump, Giuliana and Meadows happens in a few months, closer to the midterms (?)
I absolutely agree about the Nixon pardon. It was a grave error.
I just want the prosecutions to be well done and success ful, and before it is too late! The crimes are on-going, and the longer they simmer the harder to squelch them.
How are we defining "prosecution," and where does that fit in with "indict" and "convict"? Which leads me to ask what body does the conviction?
Prosecution means indictment by federal grand juries (already empaneled) and trials in federal courts for those who plead innocent.
The mid-terms are FOUR MONTHS away. Likelier they will happen before a trial. ItтАЩs voting that we have to count on and with DeJoy and his moles still in the USPS, preferably voting in person. Which leads us to how to protect voters, election judges, and voters, particularly in vulnerable districts.
Want to help with voter protection? Volunteer with VoPro Mobilize- they are doing vital work to keep our elections working properly.
An indictment that comes after Labor Day will give Republicans even more excuse to claim that itтАЩs all politics persecutionтАФus, I know, they will anyway. So an indictment needs to come down right after these hearings conclude (within a couple of weeks, I hope). That is the cost of DOJтАЩs initial slowness in moving the investigation.
Wow!
"...slowness..."
Stop and consider the mountain of evidence that must be managed in a way that proves a just and convincing determination.
Elie Honig from Cafe wrote a timeline article back in May. His Bio: Elie Honig served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York for 8.5 years and as the Director of the Division of Criminal Justice at the Office of Attorney General for the State of New Jersey for 5.5 years. He is currently a legal Analyst for CNN and Executive Director at Rutgers Institute for Secure Communities. Here is his timeline (all below is an exact quote):
This is not another piece on the likelihood that Merrick Garland will eventually indict Donald Trump. The arguments are familiar by now, both ways, and whatever will be will be.
Today, weтАЩre asking this: when?
No matter where you might fall on the тАЬwill-he-or-wonтАЩt-he?тАЭ spectrum, we can all agree that the clock matters, and itтАЩs ticking. Every day that passes makes a potential federal prosecution of Trump less likely to happen, and more fraught for the Justice Department if it does.
ItтАЩs now early May тАУ sixteen months since the January 6th attack, and fourteen months since Garland took office. ThereтАЩs no technical reason DOJ needs to indict anytime soon тАФ the federal crimes in play here typically carry five-year statutes of limitations тАФ but the DepartmentтАЩs pace conveys a lack of urgency that is ill-matched to the gravity of the potential crimes. Put it this way: if Trump did commit a crime relating to the coup attempt, itтАЩs the most serious political crime in our countryтАЩs history. Yet the Justice Department is going to wait a year and change (and counting) to do anything about it?
I know, I know: these things take time, and they want their case to be perfect. ThatтАЩs an easy refrain, but I reject it in these circumstances. During my fourteen years as a prosecutor, I saw law enforcement move with astonishing speed when circumstances demanded it. As attorney general, Garland has the full resources of the Justice Department, including the FBI, at his disposal. If ever a case required urgency, this is it. Yes, as a prosecutor you want your case to be strong and well-supported. But you donтАЩt spend over a year fretting over whether your proof is absolutely flawless, particularly when thereтАЩs already ample evidence in plain public view.
LetтАЩs flip ahead on the calendar. Midterm elections are on November 8th. The Justice Department has a longstanding policy against announcing new criminal charges or taking overt investigative steps (such as executing a search warrant) shortly before an election. ThereтАЩs no formal provision on the books, but AGs of both parties over the past several administrations have issued Department-wide memos reminding prosecutors to abide by this blackout practice, which applies either 60 days or 90 days before an election, depending who you ask. (I always understood the blackout period to be 60 days, but other DOJ alums place the line of demarcation 90 days out.)
Knowing GarlandтАЩs tendencies, heтАЩll err on the side of caution. So counting back 90 days from November 8th puts us in early August. That means either (1) weтАЩll see a federal indictment of Trump by late summer, or (2) we wonтАЩt see one until at least the end of 2022, if ever. (The same applies, by the way, to other pending DOJ investigations with obvious political implications: Matt Gaetz, Hunter Biden, Rudy Giuliani.)
So unless you genuinely expect to see United States v. Donald J. Trump sometime within the next three months or so, then weтАЩre talking about DOJ allowing nearly two years to pass between commission of a crime that threatened our democracy, and criminal consequences. ThatтАЩs tough to envision and, if a charge does happen, the delay will be difficult for Garland to justify.
Of course, the political world will change after midterms. History tells us the Democrats are virtually certain to lose control of the House, and potentially the Senate too. In six of the past seven midterms following election of a new president, that presidentтАЩs party has gotten crushed in the House (the lone exception being 2002, when George W. Bush was still riding a post-9/11 wave of popularity). Senate results also have been grim for new presidents, though not as drastic. Given DemocratsтАЩ current razor-thin margins in the House and Senate, and President BidenтАЩs low approval ratings, theyтАЩll likely lose one or both houses of Congress.
A Republican-controlled Congress can make life miserable for DOJ. DonтАЩt get me wrong: Congress should remain entirely hands-off when it comes to the Justice DepartmentтАЩs prosecutorial function. But do you trust a newly-empowered Republican House majority, led by Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan and Louie Gohmert and Lauren Boebert, to do the right thing here?
A new Congress might call hearings and demand answers from DOJ officials about the investigation and its underpinnings. The Justice Department would be right to resist and potentially even refuse, but itтАЩll be an ugly sideshow. Congress could tinker with DOJтАЩs funding, or threaten to do so, as a retributive measure. Do you put it past the current slate of prominent House Republicans? Or, at an extreme, a Republican-controlled House could bring impeachment proceedings. Think thatтАЩs a bit much? Well, Axios recently reported that тАЬThe largest body of conservative House members тАФ the Republican Study Committee, which represents more than 150 members тАФ is laying the groundwork to push for the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.тАЭ They could just as easily turn their sights on Garland, if sufficient political motivation arose. Again: do you trust McCarthy and company to show restraint with their newfound power?
Further complicating matters, once the 2022 midterms end, the 2024 presidential election cycle begins. Trump might announce his candidacy immediately and, even if he doesnтАЩt, he will be the prohibitive Republican frontrunner unless and until he formally declares that heтАЩs out. So now, consider this: can you really see Merrick Garland authorizing the first-ever indictment of a former president, who also happens to be the active presidential nominee, or presumptive nominee, of the opposing political party? And can you see that happening two years (or more) after the events at issue, just as the next election hits the political radar?
ItтАЩs possible, sure. But a post-midterm indictment would lend ammunition to the inevitable cries by Trump and his allies that any prosecution is a politically-driven witch hunt. ItтАЩs already tough enough, politically, to indict a former president. ItтАЩs even more fraught to take down the other partyтАЩs presumptive nominee after the new election season has begun.
Finally, letтАЩs consider this reality: if Garland does charge Trump, thereтАЩs going to be an actual case to prosecute. Trump will surely seek to have it dismissed based on selective prosecution (meaning he was singled out for political reasons) or some version of presidential immunity doctrine. Those arguments are questionable, legally, but Trump will duke them out in the federal courts, and thatтАЩll take time. And if Trump loses those arguments, weтАЩre going to have an actual trial, folks. When exactly is U.S. v. Trump supposed to be tried? In late 2023 or early 2024, with elections right around the corner? ItтАЩs tough to imagine that the politics-averse Garland would sign on to that.
The debate surely will rage on about whether Garland has meaningfully and pragmatically set his sights on Trump. Someday, weтАЩll find out. No matter what happens, the delay in reaching a resolution is counterproductive and inexcusable.
Stay Informed,
Elie
I have to think DOJ has already been examining the committeeтАЩs work. They were on Jeffrey Clark when he was the topic du jour, and shortly after that got hands on EastmanтАЩs phone. Are there rules prohibiting them from consulting with J6 on work in progress?
"...I saw law enforcement move with astonishing speed when circumstances demanded it..."
Yes you may indeed witness astonishing speed, BUT, never on this massive of scale or importance!
You should have been much more supportive than you chose to be, shame on you!
We don't know what the DOJ has been doing. And I agree with George....mountains of evidence and uncharted territory, so they want to get it right.
Yesterday someone--I think Joyce Vance, set out the factors to establish why this case is so much worse than Nixon. And merits prosecution.
Nixon's break-in and cover up of Watergate looks like literal child's play compared to the attempted overthrow of our Democracy!!!
Garland should look then to HutchinsonтАЩs example. She has done the (belated) right thing under great pressure to stay тАЬloyalтАЭ. Her decision to тАЬdo the right thing and show up under oath and state the truthтАЭ is the road-map. Gop does not want justice. Ford took the easy way out and allowed Nixon to go unpunished setting up the downward slide of тАЬjustice for allтАЭ. Garland has enough leads to make the case. I donтАЩt mind if he works to make it air-tight, but for AmericaтАЩs Sake, show us тАЬJustice for AllтАЭ! Otherwise, we have to accept that POWER is the only game. And the gop are saying to us тАЬbend overтАЭ.
I was in my 20's in the Watergate days. At that time, there was pretty much unanimity that it was better for our politically torn country to just let Tricky Dick slither on home; beat his poor wife Pat with ever greater frequency (the whole thing was her fault, after all); and die disrespected and forgotten. He didn't try to stage a violent coup anything like the Orange Sadist's nearly successful attempt. Then again, he WAS responsible for the deaths of 2,000,000 Vietnamese people and 58,000 US troops. But of course, that was war so it doesn't count. (Sarcasm)
And lots of blood on several others Presidents' hands, as well.
I'm tired and a little outraged at media and public figures warning of future complaints by Republicans, of political bias in any attempts by law enforcement officials to hold Traitor Trump and his minions accountable under our currently beleaguered rule of law. The idea that the criminal, anti-democracy, fascist Republican party and any of its followers might say a DOJ prosecution of Trump or any of his henchmen is partisan or biased is irrelevant. And if it were not such a serious matter, it would also be laughable. They are traitors! Many, many of them are criminals! They lie as easily as they breathe. They have no shame, no morality and no concern for the preservation of our United States of America. Their word or their opinion is less than worthless. They will criticize any and all attempts to hold them accountable. And if the news media reports their criticisms, it is shoddy, irresponsible journalism not to include in that report what the Republican party or in some instances, what that politician or henchman, did to contribute to the attempted overturning of our presidential election and/or our democracy. We've seen what Republican opinions do to our country and we've had MORE than enough of that poison.
I share your frustration with the possibility of GOP blowback from a Trump prosecution, but I would say this: if Trump is not held accountable for this undeniably treasonous act, our democracy is toast. This, any potential negative consequences of prosecution are of little to no concern.
I may not have been clear enough, Frank. I'm not concerned about Republicans complaining about a Trump prosecution. That's a given. These days they live to complain and rage. I'm annoyed with the media and non-Republican figures who don't like Trump, but who keep warning about Republicans accusing prosecutors of political bias. Who cares? What Attorney General is going to forgo prosecuting a former president who plotted to overthrow our government and who has committed more federal crimes than most mob bosses, just because it will upset that former president's followers? We all know if our rule of law is not upheld, we will have no democracy. So the media needs to stop wringing it's hands about whether it's okay to prosecute a criminal repeat offender like Trump. We have no choice if we want to protect America from future criminals trying to destroy our country.
Thank you for the clarification. I did misinterpret your post. I agree: credible media, in an attempt to appear non-partisan and balanced, have failed in their duty to report the facts, and the fact is that Trump committed unpardonable (word carefully chosen) acts that must be prosecuted. We're on the same page.
Exactly! Thanks, C C.
I totally agree. I had no intention of saying that accusations of partisanship would be warrented, just that they would be leveled.
Hear hear!
Bravo or Brava CC!
Thank you, Louis.
Optics! The so-called security decision makers were worried about the optics if more security personnel were at the Capitol! Optics, what trump has done is criminal and partisan concerns or optics are in the words of the flunky Bill Barr, our b.s.
Guys in the trees with AR-15's and that didn't trigger immediate police response??
Ketchup on the wall and that didn't trigger a mental health evaluation?
I think they were on Federal land? Hence no police response; just federal response. And who had power over the "feds"?
Sounds about white
This is the conversation I had last week with my good friend who used to live in DC and protest at the Capitol on a regular basis (she was one of the first AIDS protesters in DC in the early 80's). After the debacle of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs appearing with the President and the clearing of the mall by the police during a George Floyd murder protests where TFG made his "Bible Photo-Op" there had to be conversation among the several agencies about "managing the optics". I can certainly understand the premise of that, but in the face of what had to be considerable intel from various agencies about the plans of the insurrection, the utter lack of adequate law enforcement presence and apparent command and control failure is incomprehensible, at least to me.
While we haven't seen all the evidence yet, it's reasonable to suspect that the lack of preparation was intentional by some federal officials.
As for the Capitol police, it may have been more a case of ineptness.
Yes, the picture is coming into greater and greater focus, isn't it?
Lots of intentionality it seems. So very, very disturbing. People DID die and I am sure that Pence and Pelosi would have been seriously hurt if not killed that day. Hate to think that but nothing is out of realm of possibilty at this point. I hope they gave Cassidy some protection but not sure who is trustworthy anymore.
If optics were the main concern, I donтАЩt understand why the DC National Guard couldnтАЩt have been deployed inside the Capitol building, out of sight from the outside. Since the Capitol was closed to the public, it wouldnтАЩt have been obvious, but they would have been readily available to reinforce the Capitol police. Of course, Jim Jordan, MTG, et al would have been aware of their presence and notified the White House gang. Then there was the unconscionable delay in mobilizing the Guard after the assault began. So it seems like the bottom line is that the people in charge wanted the assault to succeed.
Didn't Michael Flynn's brother play a significant role in refusing to allow the Guard to be present? that's my recollection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ellipse
Click on the picture to get an enlarged view of the Ellipse and surrounding land. I can't get an answer to whether the folks hanging out in the trees were on Federal land, but I suspect so. Being Federal land would mean it's the jurisdiction of the Park Service, which would mean the feds were in control of what authority would intervene to de-weaponize those in that space beyond the Ellipse. This would mean, like at the Capitol, local police would not have jurisdiction to intervene. Nor did the DC National Guard have authority to intervene.
From yesterdayтАЩs audio this stuck in my head :тАЬ AR 15тАЩs at 14th and IndependenceтАЭ
From my DC friend, Capitol, Metro, and Park police have concurrent jurisdictions and frequently offer mutual aid to one another. Other Federal agencies (FBI, DHS, ATF, Treasury all have a police function response protocol.
She disagrees that this was a command and control failure, but perhaps simply a badly managed one. I completely disagree.
Agree Ally, why wasn't there more preparation as there were plenty of warnings that she testified to yesterday before the 6th from agencies who would know. It made me think that the lack was deliberate.
Exactly my question, Ally. If they all knew about it why was everything left to an easily overwhelmed Capitol Police force? Who had to make the call?
I donтАЩt know.
We're at a stage that if DOJ chose not to prosecute, that would be a political decision тАФ driven by fear of MAGA's reaction. Garland, in the face so much evidence of a Trump-orchestrated coup, is duty bound to seek charges. And it's clear that he is.
There will be fallout, even violence. But that's a small price to pay for preserving the rule of law. Holding the insurrectionists accountable is essential to preventing or at least stalling future assaults.
I agree with all that you said except for "that's a small price to pay" about violence. It's a price, a large price but I think of our men and women who go to war courageously!
Good point.
No one said it would be easy, or should be.
I feel very strongly that if Trump is not prosecuted, our democracy is toast. Thus, any potential negative consequences of a prosecution are of little concern.
Worst thing that can happen is an indictment and trial of the defeated former president for his seditious acts, after which he is acquitted. It will be just another lost cause like the Mueller investigation or the two House impeachments. The AG knows the bar is set much higher for evidence in a courtroom than in a Congressional hearing room or in the 'court of public opinion.' The DOJ is waiting for those who had direct contact, one on one, with the likely defendant to 'flip.' The increasing threat of their own imprisonment might cause such witnesses to do exactly that, as Chairman Thompson requests at the close of each Committee session.
The threat of federal criminal charges will surely persuade some with key information to flip to avoid prison. Mark Meadows, Jeffrey Clark, and John Eastman appear to be likely high-level candidates.
Others who likely haven't broken any laws but have refused to testify to the J6 Committee will be forced to appear before federal grand juries and reveal inside information. Pat Cipollone is a sure bet.
Sort of like some of the versions of the nursery rhyme, 'Ten Little Indians,' ... ending with 'and then there was one.' One guess.
Agree, Jack..."waiting for those who had direct contact." I am hopeful that what Heather and others have seen/heard from Ms. Hutchinson will be enough, but I was concerned about the hearsay statements not being the evidence that Garland/DOJ needs.
George, I totally agree with you. If the Attorney General does not have every i dotted and t crossed, TrumpтАЩs army of well paid lawyers will begin to pull threads and in the minds of some, the entire prosecution will unravel.There is no room for even the smallest misstatement or misstep.
TrumpтАЩs attorneys will attack every piece of evidence, thatтАЩs true. But Trump does not pay his attorneys and he gets what he pays for. Remember the obscure personal injury lawyer who defended the second impeachment trial in the senate? I just had to point this out!
I was thinking the exact same thing!!! NO lawyers will work for the cheap-o Orange Sadist any more. LOL
Barbara, I would love it if he couldnтАЩt find any decent lawyers to defend him, but it seems like he always manages to pull a rabbit out of a hat.
Remember the Bundy debacle!
The problem with the Justice Department is that they don't attract the brightest and best. How many of Bush's Liberty University hires are still there?
They need to be super careful because a loss would be humiliating.
Thank you Sara T
His DOJ does not leak and there is a reason for that. They don't want to alert those that they may strike next. Also prosecutors like air tight cases, so that greasy types like death star and some of his minions cannot slither out of things.
Garland needs to move now while we all can see the obvious.
Garland seems to be a measured, thoughtful person, who thoughts and deeds are well reasoned and appropriate. In my opinion he will do a job that reflects those qualities. I feel very pleased that he is at the helm.
Well, so we all hope and pray, Mr. Dobbs!!!!
T L Mills:
Prayer has always worked for me and all my Loved ones
I wish we knew this for certain.
Repent, apologize, and see the error of your ways, Magats and right wing Christians! If, following yesterdayтАЩs hearing, any doubters remain, the only solution for them is for lightning to strike. They should have already been hit by radical atonement тАФ metanoia, in Greek! A very young woman has revealed the face and spirit of honor, morality, and love of a democratic nation above all else.
At my assisted living dining hall, the four women at the next table bragged that they couldnтАЩt be bothered to watch. Foxers all IтАЩm sure. Wonder what Tucker blathered about last night. Will Rupert ever feel the heat? He could be burning in hell and feel right at home, IтАЩll wagerтАж.
I am trying to imagine a brawl at an all women's assisted living uinit.
I am betting on you Jeri!!
I wish, but my demented husband is my second concern, my first is the world my daughter and grand girls will inherit.
Be positive. They will be OK.
Jeri, watch these stunning fox commentators react to Hutchinson--they used the words "compelling testimony."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqqgpK8QNdI
Thank you, if Rupert turns, chump is history, if not, Katie bar the doorтАж
Thank you for posting that link. At least some of them are getting it.
This is what they are getting. ItтАЩs time to save oneтАЩs ass. As in, the rats are not scurrying, they are jumping ship knowing the cold sea is a better option than the hell on board the ship.
Salud, Linda. ЁЯЧ╜
I was particularly encouraged to hear Bair say Hutchinson was providing her testimony under Oath, while Trump denied her statements on 'Truth Social.'
Wow, stunning, Pensa. Thanks.
Rupert is one of the architects and the original megaphone of this debacle, beginning in the 90s. He wasnтАЩt allowed to openly lie in the UK or Australia so he set up shop in the US. His entire brazen operation was conducted in plain sight. And we continue to allow it.
That man is a worldwide scourge. He makes WIlliam Randolph Hearst seem like Jim Anderson in "Father Knows Best!"
His "talent" are just awful!
If they watched and had any sense of decency, they could no longer hang on to their thinking that death star is great and isn't as he has been portrayed in these hearings....vulgar, immature, traitorous.
I understand that Fox carried it yesterday and the commentators were speechless at the end yesterday afternoon.
Brett Bair was abruptly stopped after stating тАЬcompelling testimonyтАЭ, noting trumpтАЩs immediate response as тАжMs. Hutchinson was under oath, the former President is notтАжтАж
Huh.
Do you think they will give up on Trump now and focus on supporting DeSantis? FOX.
IтАЩm curious now. IтАЩm still surprised that they showed the hearing. They are $$-drivenтАжand DeSantis could entertain their demographics. Good thought, Kathy.
Recall Fox wasn't running commercials, and losing millions in revenue, so fox drones wouldn't change the channel to the hearing instead of Tucker....
Rupert Murdoch is pure filth
Please consider using religionists in place of Christian when referring to a segment of his cult.
Another commenter (LFAA orRobert Hubbell's Today's Edition) came up w/ a new moniker for those folks-CINO (Christians In Name Only.)
I like thatтАж
Excellent, Barbara!
Oh, my first belly laugh today! Thank you, Barbara!!
We have a lot of those in my county!
CINO...Excellent, Barbara!
That they have corrupted what Christ taught appears, to me, to be both obvious and completely in line with what Christians have done throughout the centuries. I understand the danger of painting everyone with the same brush, but Christianity has also cast me, and people like me, out for simply being different.
I appreciate your sentiment, as I know some fine, upstanding people who really do good works and are open and affirming, but others who will love me but hate my "sin"; Christianity does not get a free pass from me.
I believe that the problem arises when some so called Christians use a corrupted version of Christianity (but we could use any other misguided religion) to support their politics. It is no less dangerous now than it was two thousand years ago. I have a segment of my family who has disowned me because I donтАЩt support their Fundamentalist religion (especially the Rapture). One member of that group is extremely sick with Covid and hospitalized. I have cousins who were the joy of my childhood who have gone astray having been radicalized by their church and their churchтАЩs support of Donald Trump. It is both sad and frightening at the same time.
I share your sadness, but I can no longer belong to the church I grew up in and it makes me angry that it has been taken over by cult Republicans.
I totally get that and do not blame you at all. It is my personal choice to stay and resist. Fortunately, my church community is small and so far is not tainted .
Nor me, ran for my life after Karl Rove made churches arms of Repub party in 2004
Nor from me. I know too much of the history. When religion is in service of the state, corrupt power hungry individuals, the envious, the hateful, we have seen what has and is still happening.
Love your ending sentence Rowshan.
Thank you, Sharon.
Rs are calling it hearsay even though the witness was present at some of what she described and obviously was someone all the people in the hallway talked to and trusted. I noticed that she often called them by their first names. Last night on NBC news there was a mention that the driver of the limo and someone else are saying that death star didn't lunge at anyone. While bleating in public, some of these people have to be worried.
Will they testify under oath? They are invited.
This is precisely the problem with faith it doesnтАЩt require evidence. The best we can hope for is Republicans like Cassidy Hutchinson and enough independents To keep our country together because I do believe Trump will be prosecuted, assuming somehow he canтАЩt pardon himself or I mean didnтАЩt pardon himself, and there will surely be a great upheaval in this country not so different from a second civil war in some respects.
That there is only one 'Truth' presents no problem whatsoever and is the very essence of 'Faith.' Nothing is more powerful.
I think it worth noting that the Jan 6 committee referred Meadows to the DOJ for contempt of Congress. The DOJ did not act on that as it did with Bannon. Could it be that they were already building a bigger case against Meadows and the contempt issue would have been just a nuisance? I find it hard to believe that what was revealed yesterday is completely "new news" to Garland. Just my hopeful speculation, of course.
At any rate, hats off to a 25 year old "executive assistant" who was disgusted and angry enough to summon the courage to testify. Imagine the pressure she felt. She did so well. Imagine the fear she will feel for years to come.
And "ketchup on the wall" will become the stuff of legend and perhaps a SNL skit. Ford's tripping, Biden's bike accident, and TFG throwing plates.
The Ketchup President. Always trying to ketchup with putin.
I just hope for the sake of all my Pittsburgh friends that it wasnтАЩt Heinz.
Perhaps if it could be proven that it was, Pennsylvanians would wake up to their responsibilities to vote blue. There are some really demented members of the legislature.
Agree. Good grief.
Exactly! I keep hearing that Putin is ill (in addition to mentally.) If these two narcissistic, pathological excuses for world leaders go down, I will believe in divine justice after all. Just imagine the "New World Order!"
I will breaking out a single malt neat.
I will be breaking out a Pearsecco! Neither one will be missed and the world will be a safer place.
Oh, Hahahahahaha. Love your wit, you know, Pensa.
LOL. The ketchup jokes keep coming.
Excellent. Good laugh. Execrable pun. Reminder of TrumpтАЩs terrible diet.
OK, that one is funny!!!
I just don't think equating Ford's and Biden's everyday kind of accidents with the rage of a demented seditionist is workable.
No, but it is how people are...
I just had a friend comment that "my" side (in this case, BLM protesters) "burned whole cities" while his MAGAt side "only had one tiny violent riot" on January 6.
They did not burn whole cites ever and that is hyperbole. That being said, I wish the fools in Portland would stop using every protest as a reason for vandalism. I also noticed that one of the people tossing Molotov cocktails in Portland in the protests around George Floyd and burning things has been sentenced to prison.
The anarchist movement thrives on that kind of тАЬprotestтАЭ.
We had an event in Eugene after the Dobbs decision came out; I only know the snippets IтАЩve read, but EPD had a massive tactical response to тАЬmenacingтАЭ protesters; IтАЩve seen daytime videos of non-violent protests. I think there is something very fishy that surrounds this event. IтАЩll try and find links.
Hmmm, I've seen some videos of similar police vs. Dobbs protestors elsewhere. Do you suppose it's been pre-organized? Now I am getting so paranoid.
FoxтАЩs version of events. Heard that tripe from ex-MAGAt friend.
"No, but it is how people are...."
Then we need to continue to call them out.
Frustrating. Sorry about you hearing this from a friend.
Not equating. For sure. Just images that tend to last. But the first two are mishaps that are attacked as weaknesses. The last IS a weakness...of character.
Has anyone seen Trump ride a bicycle? Can you imagine him getting up after a fall off his bike and getting back on to continue his ride?
Speaking of weakness, Mark Meadows in yesterdayтАЩs testimony came across to me as a pitifully weak man.
But when President BidenтАЩs bike тАЬaccidentтАЭ is described, I think of how the press never mentioned FDRтАЩs crutches. Compare the riderтАЩs condition to the general overweight of his critics. How many 70+ riders of bicycles are there in America?
me!
77...group varies in size about 20-30 week-ends some as young as 55!
viral congestive heart failure
diabetic
40lbs overweight
200 miles a week, no steep endless hills anymore...just the level flat routes
8 hrs week aggressive to exhaustion aqua therapy
happy loving living life cooking, reading, Architecture, painting & surprising the one I love often
keeping it lively at HCR news letter
I am 77 and still cycle regularly. I can not count the number of times I have fallen/crashed - often when catching feet in pedals when dismounting. ЁЯЪ┤ЁЯП╜тАНтЩАя╕ПЁЯТеЁЯе┤
Yup!
Bravi to all us ancients who are still exercising regularly. We are an endangered species. Our country needs us as examples for the younger sedentary. Add to that, we have lived some useful history.
Me! Had one bad spill in Seattle riding someone else's bike ...........4 yrs ago.
Memes appeared about ketchup within the hour and lots of jokes about ketchup on threads. Also I think they are building a larger case against Meadows and do not want a contempt charge to get in the way.
We have been through such trauma, we need humor to undergird us...I love that about Americans in the middle of a gigantic crisis.
Obama's always perfectly timed dry wit with that impish grin....
And Trump is blaming Obama for this mess by saying it started when Obama roasted him at the Press Club dinner.
He hired over a hundred new lawyers and it is time to use them. I hope he does.
Trust me. He is using them.
This canтАЩt be an easy job for the DOJ even though we Lay Persons see it as a SLAM DUNK.
I find it hard to believe that there are 100 lawyers willing to work for him given his record of stiffing everyone including lawyers.
Thank you, Jim.
For me, the news is that Merrick Garland and his DOJ no longer seem to be comatose and MIA. The seizure of John EastmanтАЩs electronic devices is big news.
The publicly known evidence of this Jan. 6 criminal conspiracy around Trump is becoming a flood. (Lord knows how much evidence is still under wraps)
The question is no longer, тАЬWas there a wide-ranging criminal conspiracy in the West Wing and in Congress to block BidenтАЩs victory and retain Dumpster as President,тАЭ because that question is answered. All thatтАЩs left is for the legal beagles to do their work. The only real question which remains: тАЬIs Merrick GarlandтАЩs DOJ going to do its job and indict these jokers.тАЭ
I completely agree.
And itтАЩs an absurdity that we have to say that.
This committee is serving up evidence on a plate to the DOJ. That appears to be because the DOJ wasted an eternity in the first year+. Garland and his army of lawyers decided to handle this most singular event in the way Mob cases are worked - by working from the bottom up. This led them through a swamp of hundreds and hundreds of investigations, requiring tens of thousands of hours of sifting and discerning evidence. Only now have they arrived, blinking in the bright light, at the much more serious side of the case.
We know this because Garland piously and patiently explained this to us in a rare public appearance.
We know this because had they opened any investigation into the people at the locus of the plot, a grand jury would have been convened. I donтАЩt disagree that the DOJ would have remained deathly silent throughout, but at least some of the subjects subpoenaed to come in would have been found later on Fox News working the refs by setting up a witch hunt narrative about тАЬBidenтАЩs DOJтАЭ. We would have been Hunter BidenтАЩd to death.
This case should have broken precedent with the holy writ on Mob cases. Two investigations should have been run in tandem - one into the thug idiots and one into the idiots in suits and ties who worshipped at the altar of power.
Had that happened, we could reasonably expected indictments this summer. Look at the mountain of evidence a Committee with *no* prosecutorial power has uncovered in a short time. There is no gain saying it - this DOJ came to the party late, and not fashionably so. Now they are rushing to catch up, begging evidence of the committee. It is a disgrace.
And please - none of the тАЬdotting the тАШiтАЩsтАЩ and crossing the тАШtтАЩsтАЭ defense of the DOJ. One or two more witnesses - Meadows for sure and Cipillone or Pence or Ivanka could put a bow on this case enough to bring it forward.
I wouldnтАЩt place a bet on any size on Trump being convicted. The evidence is incredibly strong, but it still seems to lack a smoking gun - the incontestable evidence that Trump knew he lost. It would come down to the concept of тАЬwillful blindnessтАЭ legally and an army of lawyers would seed enough doubt to convince at least one juror. But a trial, and a second one in Georgia would accomplish two things - it would keep Trump off the ballot in 2024, and more importantly, millions of voters who supported the Trump regime would quit it in disgust. Some would refuse to vote in future elections, but enough would go to the Democratic side to ensure a Republican loss and a subsequent remake of the party in an acceptably legal form. The nightmare would be over.
Exactly right I would say. Fearing looking like a partisan investigation, they may allow these slippery eels a chance to escape. There is much more at risk than the next two elections. Or is it that Garland makes a better judge than a prosecutor?
I think if he hasnтАЩt moved by now he wonтАЩt. What REALLY bothers me is why?? Who is protecting who?
There is more to come---they have not gotten to the trump-putin axis. That will tie this up with a nice little red bow that cannot be undone.
Exactly. Putin is loving all of this. CINOs and White supremacists lined up behind a puppet who has fostered toxic polarity for six years. Jackpot for Putin. UnlessтАж
тАж I, too, love RowshanтАЩs comment, тАЬ A very young woman has revealed the face and spirit of honor, morality, and love of a democratic nation above all else.тАЭ
I think of her courage and the courage of the other women who have testified: Ruby Freeman, Shaye Moss and the young Capitol Hill police officer, Caroline Edwards. These women are working to save democracy from the likes of TFG and Co. Women, especially Black women, have saved our butts by speaking truth to power. Getting the vote out. They deserve tremendous gratitude. This young lady? I hope she sees the terror of her ways in having hung in a den of delusional terrorists.
IтАЩve said it for years: Putin and Trump likely have adjoining underground bunkers near the Baltic Sea. We better grab DJT while we can.
I DO love the CINOs and am wondering how to pronounce it so I can use it verbally. Any ideas?
I tend to go with an Italian version (Chino) merely because it includes "Ch" from Christian. But pronouncing it "See No" is so accurate as well!
Ha ha! I like "See no" as in "see no" fault in Trump and Thomas. See no science or logic. See no poverty or racism. See no compassion, on and on.
Happy Fourth, Pensa. I have a view of fireworks right from my window. I am so lucky to be in Vermont.!
So glad you really got it, Hope!
I can see fireworks over the hill from my house. A parent from Landmark College must have a pyrotechnic businessтАФ the exhorbitant display is stunning for our little, rural village.
This weekend may have many of us in deep pondering about our history and where we are in this current Constitutional Crisis and the steps each of us needs to commit to taking. My friend and I are meeting tonight to create a blueprint for writing letters to editors, online, social media (she does it, I am not adept) and elected officials. I encourage everyone to take a little breather this holiday and get ready for two years of intense work to save this democracy which is being celebrated this weekend. Let's KEEP IT and MAKE IT STRONGER! Each of us is a little drop of water flowing into stream and then the ocean. We area THE WAVE. Correction, let's make it A TSUNAMI!
Helsinki should be on the list of investigations, brought us to Ukraine today, in my viewтАж
Wake me if anything happens. I highly doubt it.
Do you know Greg Olear's substack? A few weeks ago he speculated that Trump has long been a special kind of informant....I forget the exact title....who has been given immunity. Trump's run with bad apples all his life. People around him, like Epstein, Manafort, et all have fallen, but not him. I keep remembering his statement, "I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue..." (and get away with it.) It's not that he's noble by any means, it's that he had a choice to save his ass by pointing out the big criminals. I wonder, I wonder.
Are you thinking of an informant? I never thought of that, I have very definite suspicions of him being an operative with putin and other dictators, with Melania's support and Russian translations. I surmise that Putin is a big faker in that he cannot speak English. As a member of the KGB, I bet he had to know English....he just wants time to think of his responses. Or he is embarrassed that he speaks poorly.
Definitely Putin speaks English. I've thought of his imperious behavior as part of his delusion of Russian supremacy...just as English is the "international" language, he wants all things Russian to prevail. Rachel Maddow was one of the earliest to connect Trump and Putin as criminal oligarchs who have each other's back, and has a book, which of course, I cannot remember now. But if Trump is a protected informant it would also explain how Comey and Mueller could not "catch" Trump despite his clear complicity.
(The type of informant that Greg Olear mentioned is so "deep state" that very few know about it, even people within the same agency.)
Sadly, I agree. Also - what happened when he was in Ukraine?