Newsmax Meltdown: Host Leaves Set As “My Pillow” CEO Lindell Continues To Argue Election Fraud

We have previously discussed the unhinged and unsupported claims of “My Pillow” CEO Mike Lindell. However, an interview on Newsmax shows just how out of control this debate has become as a host tried to stop Lindell from making unsupported claims. Eventually Anchor Bob Sellers walked off the set in what was a live meltdown on national television.

Anchor Bob Sellers quickly interrupted Lindell as he was getting into his claims that the voting machines in the election were rigged.

Within a few days of the election, most of us stated that there was not evidence of systemic fraud and became increasingly critical of the Trump team for failing to put forward evidence of such fraud with the use of these machines. As we covered the unfolding challenges, it was clear that irregularities cited in the use of the Dominion computers were attributed to human error and not the computers themselves. We have not seen compelling evidence to change that view.

I have been highly critical of Lindell and his statements since the election. Indeed, I would still like to see a commission to finally and conclusively put to rest all of these claims in the minds of many who still harbor doubts.  There are clearly many like Lindell who hold such views and believe the evidence exists.  Fine. I would be happy to review it just as we were happy to review such evidence in the post-election coverage. Why not let them present any such evidence in an open and transparent commission? Many will not accept any contrary conclusions on both sides but I believe the majority would do so.  Otherwise, this conversation on Newsmax will be repeated endlessly for years. Moreover, a commission just might help us better prepare for the next election if we will be relying so heavily on mail-in voting in the future.

Newsmax was apparently seeking an interview on the free speech concerns raised by barring individuals or groups. As many on this blog know, I do not support censorship of such views or the banning of people like Lindell or his counterparts on the left.  Sellers just showed how such statements can be addressed with counter statements. False statements can be rebutted by true statements. That is the beauty of free speech. As with the outrageous speech of some on the left, I believe that it is better to protect free speech for individuals like Lindell rather than slide down the slippery slope of censorship.  We can all contest such statements through the use of free speech.

Lindell should have used the interview to defend his free speech, not make the case for tampered or rigged computers. That was the reason for the segment. The interview quickly went from bad to worst:

 

It was a scene that perfectly captures an age of rage in which reason is now a stranger.

373 thoughts on “Newsmax Meltdown: Host Leaves Set As “My Pillow” CEO Lindell Continues To Argue Election Fraud”

  1. I have a huge problem with Reps who say there was no fraud. Or not enough fraud to change the election. There IS EVIDENCE of fraud by election officials and cheating by big tech! It is the death by a thousand cuts. Not one fraudulent scheme changed the election but the whole.
    Having said that, I believe the biggest damage was done through the machines and some bogus ballots. Here’s the big question. Millions feel that fraud changed the election! Why won’t these counties who claim innocence of fraud, why won’t they allow auditing of machines and examination of the ballots? It’s that damn easy to prove one way or another. Yet they not only refuse to turn them over but actually fight having to do so! WHY???? It ain’t rocket science damn it.

  2. ‘Unnamed former President’: “How can you believe this corrupt election result? On what grounds?”
    ‘Swampers All Across the Land’: “I’m shocked, shocked to find that election fraud allegation is going on in here!” [a croupier hands “Swampers All Across the Land” a sizeable pile of money]
    ‘Main Stream Media”: “Your winnings, sir(s).”
    “Swampers All Across the Land’: “Oh, thank you very much.”

    Just kidding, of course. Of course, if we are proper Amerikans we must accept, without question, all things we are supposed to accept without question. It would be unseemly not to do so, eh?

    1. Olesmithy, my knowledge of what happened and the data created is limited. It is hard to know what should be said. According to the numbers, Biden won 64 million votes and Trump 80 million. That is not counting the ballot fraud that reduces the Biden count further.

      One has to accept data of this nature as raw and untested. Therefore I couldn’t draw any firm conclusions. There has not been an adequate attempt made by the other side to demonstrate this evidence as false. That is problematic.

      A serious investigation is needed to prove or disprove its validity. Whether legally won or not hinges on such findings. That means this is an open case where Democrats are obstructing justice by trying to shut down questions regarding the election.

      If I were to look at this election blindly, not knowing the details, with everything that is said, one would have to conclude that it appeared Democrats were hiding something very significant.

      Just looking at the first five minutes of the last 25 is enough for any fair mind to want more explanation and proof along with additional discussion. If things of this nature are proven, then one must consider what the Democrats will do to maintain power in the future.

  3. i think it has been proven now. The military conducts cyberwarfare and it their job to monitor who is tampering with our elections. Checkmate fellas. You’re screwed. Time for prison or even worse. Hope it isn’t suicide weekend that we have been talking about.

  4. So long as there is no serious inquiry into election fraud we are going to continue to have this fight.

    And sorry JT and those of you on the left – but YOU are wrong.

    Has election fraud been proven ? No!

    Has it been disproven ? No!.

    Most of our elections are conducted poorly. But 2020 was conducted disasterously bad.

    The fact that a plurality of people beleive there was fraud is not due to their delusions.
    It is due to YOUR unwillingness to get your head out of the sand.

    It is possible that serious inquiry will not found consequential election fraud.

    It is also possible that pigs fly.

    Regardless, there has been no serious inquiry.

    In instance after instance voters have been lied to.

    They were promised recounts and audits and real examination – and they did not get it.

    Worse this was all down after 4 years of constant lies by the press, the left, courts, and governments.

    It is no wonder that people beleive there is massive fraud.

    They are used to being lied to big time.

    I recall you JT telling us that you supported the Mueller inquiry and that Mueller shoudl be trusted and allowed to do his job.

    What did we find ?

    The whole mess was a politically corrupt setup from the start. That there never was a basis to appoint Mueller dog catcher, that he turned out to be a bully and a hack. And that the actual malfeasance was all done by those in government – or the Clinton campaign.

    So why is it that we should beleive many of the same actors now ?

    It is not like the courts handled the Collusion delusion well.

    When you brun trust in government to the ground – while the left lead the charge to do that – our institutions all too happily participated in their own self immolation.

    You wonder why we are teetering on the edge of political violence ?
    That is where we end up when our institutions fail.

    One of the things that I would hope that YOU are starting to glean – is that government is inherently NOT self certifying.

    As the declaration of independence notes – the legitimacy of government comes from the people.

    When courts are not constantly acting outside the law and the constitution – they mostly have our trust and we tolerate occasional deviations. We give the courts the benefit of the doubt and defer to them.

    When what we see is near constant failure bias, lawlessness – all with the impramatur of the courts – we lose trust in the courts.

    As you noted early on – the way to put this election behind us was for Biden to call for a real investigation back in November.

    Instead this became a massive court battle – a legal conflict.

    We have the ballots, we have the mailin ballot envolopes.

    It is not actually that hard to establish the scale of election fraud – all elections have some fraud.

    Yet, a real examination has been fought tooth and nail.

    Most of the processes that should be used to veryify this election, should have been used to verify ALL elections.

    The legitimacy of government requires not merely that we conduct elections, but that we do so such that people can be sure that they can trust the results.

    Trust in government is not accomplished by meeting YOUR standards of trust. It is accomplished by meeting nearly everyone’s standard.

      1. I agree. The refusal to turn over evidence for further examination shows that there is things that they wish not to be exposed. Biden could not have won this election honestly.

    1. John Say,

      “ The fact that a plurality of people beleive there was fraud is not due to their delusions.
      It is due to YOUR unwillingness to get your head out of the sand.”

      The only reason there’s a plurality of people who believe there was fraud is because the president has been perpetrating false clams of voter fraud for months prior to the election. Public opinion is not proof that fraud pervasive enough to affect the election was committed.

      Lawsuits have been brought before the courts with evidence of said fraud. Upon scrutiny of the provided evidence or lack of it. It was shown the claims had no merit.

      Courts who “refused to hear evidence” did not actually refuse. Plaintiffs making the claims had no standing, meaning they were not being directly harmed or affected by the claims.

      Lack of evidence is not evidence in itself.

      “ In instance after instance voters have been lied to.

      They were promised recounts and audits and real examination – and they did not get it.”

      That’s false. Recounts were conducted at the request of the president’s campaign. Two hand recounts were conducted plus an audit of the voting machines was done by comparing the paper trail with the tabulated results of the machines. It was found to be correct. They did get it, multiple times.

      The rest if your diatribe is a tangent of irrelevant arguments.

      No commission will satisfy your need for proof. It is clear you will find something else to use to continue your denial of the facts.

      President Trump’s own commission on voter fraud led by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach found no mass voter fraud Trump claimed.

      What has been clear is that Trump continued to make false claims in order to sow distrust of government for his own benefit. That’s the source of the distrust you mention.

      1. “The only reason there’s a plurality of people who believe there was fraud is because the president has been perpetrating false clams of voter fraud for months prior to the election.”

        The only reason? Right off the bat you have proven you don’t know what you are talking about.

  5. Turley; “It was a scene that perfectly captures an age of rage in which reason is now a stranger.”

    It is ironic that Turley laments the age of rage when he works for Trump TV which champions more rage-filled opinion hosts than any other network save Infowars. Pirro, Mark Levin, Gutfield, Hannity, Carlson and Bongino. It is utterly shameful that Turley will not hold his own colleagues to the same standard of reason and good faith that he demands of everyone BUT his Trump TV colleagues.

    One of these days, he will answer for this hypocrisy. Even when he departs that network, his association with those liars will haunt him and forever be a cloud over his legacy.

    This country is as polarized as it has been since the Vietnam War. Yet Turley counsels good speech as a cure for bad speech. How’s that working out?

    1. There is a fine difference between “rage” and “outrage”. rage could be characterized as action, for instance the storming of the Capitol by some, while outrage was a reaction to it. Maxine Walter’s accusing Trump of premeditated murder, or the Democrats accusing Republicans of being complicit in an “insurrection”, are so extreme as to generate outrage on the part of the conservative constituency. In such a case outrage is a valid human emotion whether as a consequent to the storming of the Capitol or the baseless statements of the far left democrats. It seems that is the game in play for the political agendas of today because the object is not for reasoned discourse but to be as incendiary as possible. It really didn’t take much effort on the part of the My Pillow Guy to provoke Sellers into behaving unprofessionally, although just watching his commercials can be rather irritating.

    2. I’m tired of all the endless fighting and arguing with no resolution, other than we keep accelerating toward Western (or even Eastern) European style socialism. Wouldn’t you be happier in the utopian socialist Blue States of America? I would be happier in the freedom loving Red “Trump” States of America. How about a peaceful separation into two separate nations? The Soviet Union was able to do it. I’m worried that we’re headed toward “The Troubles” like Northern Ireland or even worse, Yugoslavia. Better to do it now while it’s still somewhat peaceful? To sweeten the deal, we’ll let you have all of our RINOs to do with as you please …

  6. Covey’s Second Habit of Highly Effective Commissions- Begin with the end in mind:

    “Indeed, I would still like to see a commission to finally and conclusively put to rest all of these claims in the minds of many who still harbor doubts.” -JT

    Well!

    1. JT, forgets that there was already a commission on fraud. President Trump’s voter fraud commission headed by Kris Kobach of Kansas was created to investigate Trump’s own claim that millions of illegal voters were illegally voting. It was a bipartisan commission. They found zero proof of such a claim. No matter how hard they tried.

      No commission is going to satisfy those who believe the “election was stolen”. Zealots are never satisfied until their precious preconceptions are finally verified with the slimmest of evidence.

      As soon as it becomes clear a commission isn’t going to find what they want they will seek to shift focus on another issue a call for yet another commission to investigate that. You can have a dozen commissions and the zealots would still not be convinced. It’s a waste of time.

      1. @Svelaz. So, like, I know this dude. His name is Duane. Duane know these people, and they looked into it. Everything’s cool. Everybody just needs to chill out.

        1. If Duane’s people say everything’s cool, then everything’s cool. Chill out.

      2. Love that the trumpers won’t even acknowledge the Kobach commission. Fits right in with only wanting to investigate states, or counties, where trump lost.

        Elvis Bug

        1. @Anon- If Duane’s people say everything’s cool, then everything’s cool. Chill out.

  7. Everyone has the right to say what ever he/she feels is important.
    I have the right to repose the statement.
    I think he is wrong.

  8. A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine for Prevention of Covid-19
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2021801

    RESULTS

    The analysis included 2314 healthy contacts of 672 index case patients with Covid-19 who were identified between March 17 and April 28, 2020. A total of 1116 contacts were randomly assigned to receive hydroxychloroquine and 1198 to receive usual care. Results were similar in the hydroxychloroquine and usual-care groups with respect to the incidence of PCR-confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 (5.7% and 6.2%, respectively; risk ratio, 0.86 [95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 1.42]). In addition, hydroxychloroquine was not associated with a lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission than usual care (18.7% and 17.8%, respectively). The incidence of adverse events was higher in the hydroxychloroquine group than in the usual-care group (56.1% vs. 5.9%), but no treatment-related serious adverse events were reported.

    CONCLUSIONS

    Postexposure therapy with hydroxychloroquine did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection or symptomatic Covid-19 in healthy persons exposed to a PCR-positive case patient. (Funded by the crowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono and others; BCN-PEP-CoV2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04304053.

    1. Estrovir,

      As I understand things that study doesn’t match other studies that claim the opposite.

      That as with epoxy cement component A doesn’t work without component B to become the cement.

      That this study didn’t use Zinc with HCQ is likely why it failed.

      Now I’m a bit unsure right here, that the Zinc has some sort of an electrical charge that is usefully to the cells to fight off viruses, but Zinc has trouble getting into the cells & that is why Zinc is claimed to work if it’s taken in the presence Vitamin A or the hard core hydroxychloroquine or another such agents, like say the Tonic as in Gin & Tonic.

      I remember years back of learning that the Zinc was said to help rebuild damaged respiratory tissue but it had to have Vit A to work as well. But now interested in that electrical charge stuff.

      I know from the long passed Iraqi War Nuke clean up guy that the depleted uranium pollution has an electrical charge of 10,000 volts that just fries human cells as it bounces around thought the body like a ping pong ball.

      Dr Doug Rokke believed it killed his whole outfit later & I quess later him.

      (Yea, Biden’s bring back more Nuke Power that’s much safer the a Banana powered Generator. sarc off)

      1. As I understand things that study doesn’t match other studies that claim the opposite.

        When it comes to clinical medicine, a single study impresses no one. Physicians are trained to digest data from their first year in medical school, and are shoveled heapings of data thereafter. In the grand scheme of things, the above study is an N of 1. It takes an aggregate of studies over several years to move physicians in one direction, and even then, it takes decades for paradigm shifts to occur. Atherosclerosis is mainly treated with a statin and aspirin first line, even if over a decade of studies have shown that atherosclerosis is an inflammatory condition. The big one dropped last night by Dr Peter Libby trying to nail that fact down firmly. It will take time to move physicians on this issue.

        Inflammation in Atherosclerosis—No Longer a Theory
        Peter Libby
        Clinical Chemistry, Volume 67, Issue 1, January 2021, Pages 131–142
        https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvaa275

        All of this is to say that the NEJM article is one piece of data. There likely exist other studies that agree and challenge the above NEJM study, but that’s the beauty of medicine. It is based on data but practiced as an art form. Opinions vary.

        1. Estovir,
          “It takes an aggregate of studies over several years to move physicians in one direction, and even then, it takes decades for paradigm shifts to occur.”

          I agree with this to some degree. There are some doctors that are on board with the importance of vitamins and minerals and others who are still sold on drugs. However, pharmaceutical companies probably aren’t keen on cheap drugs like HCQ and ivermectin being useful, or, worse, things that cannot be patented like zinc (God’s got the patent on elements). That doesn’t even get into insurance companies refusing to cover things like vitamin D tests at well-checks because they ‘aren’t diagnostic’?!

  9. Me Turley, you are correct that this controversy will continue for years. I do not believe you or anyone else can say that there’s no evidence of fraud in the 2020 election because no one has actually looked at the evidence. Sidney Powell published a 270 page document on how dominion machines were manipulated. There have been many mathematical experts who have confirmed that there is no way the election results were accurate. In addition to that numerous illegal votes were counted as valid and there is much evidence that people voted more than once due to recieving multiple mail in ballots. I could go on but you get the point. Can you prove these things didn’t happen? You would have to actually look at the evidence in order to say that, and you have not. One thing I agree with you on is that we should all have the right to freely express our viewpoints on these matters regardless of how “offensive” the other side views it. I just find it particularly odd that leftists are so threatened by the possibility of actually looking at evidence in order to truly settle the matter. Don’t you find that odd too?

    1. 400 ex-intel officers investigating 2020 election
      Robert Caron, who began his career with the CIA, told the Epoch Times, the network includes 400 intelligence officers, analysts and operatives in the military, law enforcement and judiciary from the FBI, CIA, military intelligence, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and other agencies.
      “The fraud was so massive and so blatant, despite what the mainstream media and Democrats have said!! That’s why more and more people from the intelligence community and law enforcement are coming out, which is unheard of.” Each member of the network has seen obvious election fraud based on their own observations, Caron said.
      If these Intelligence Officer’s say there was Massive Fraud, there was Massive Fraud!!!

    2. Diane, they keep saying they have looked at the evidence. But never actually present it. Tucker Carlson couldn’t get access to the “evidence” Sidney Powell claimed to have. To present to his audience. He never got it. Because there IS no evidence.

      Lindell keeps claiming he has evidence, but never produces it. Nothing stops him from publishing it online for everyone to see. Everyone recognizes when someone is full of sh?t when they keep making claims they can prove when they are constantly avoiding showing the proof.

      News Max and Fox News recognized that and it became very real to them when they got sued for defamation by dominion.

      1. Actually I have archived a copy of the 270 page report of evidence from Sidney Powell. I have seen a military person who is a statistician present evidence via graphs and mathematical analysis. It’s not hard to find. Look it up.

          1. My my, you certainly appear to be lazy. If you truly want the truth, search for it. It’s easily accessible. Perhaps you feel “entitled” and want it to be served to you on a silver platter? I won’t be the one to do that for you. You really want truth or are you just being insincere? I suspect you don’t want to look at the truth because it would upset your applecart, so to speak.

            1. I’m not lazy.

              I understand that the person who makes the claim has the burden of proof to substantiate it.

              If you’re not willing to provide evidence for your claim, fine by me, and I’ll simply ignore it.

              You’re the one saying it’s the truth, but you can’t be bothered to back up your own claim. My my, you certainly appear to be lazy.

              1. This forum is not a court of law. You have the ability to look this up easily. It’s clear that you have no desire to do so.

        1. Might as well claim they took twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was to be used as evidence …

        2. Anonymous,

          “ Actually I have archived a copy of the 270 page report of evidence from Sidney Powell. I have seen a military person who is a statistician present evidence via graphs and mathematical analysis. It’s not hard to find. Look it up”

          That “report” turned out to be a farce. It was a bunch of anecdotal evidence that had no real evidence. Just as you just did anecdotal claims are not evidence.

          You said you had it, present it. Can’t? Well that’s because you either are lying or don’t really have it. See how that is a problem? Claims of “seeing it” and actually presenting it are two very different things.

          1. “That “report” turned out to be a farce.”

            I don’t know enough about that “report” so I am waiting for your proof.

            1. Allan wouldn’t know real proof it it bit him in the butt. He’s incapable of separating the garbage from the respected and peer reviewed.

              1. Anonymous the Stupid, so far on this blog we have had many interactions where you have failed to demonstrate that you know anything much less can prove anything. Yes, you can link but all too frequently your link proves someone else’s case not yours. I have a pretty good track record of providing proof.

      2. Watch Lidell’s latest film & you will see some of his proof. It only takes an open mind to see what happened. I could go on & on but it is out there to be seen. Liberalism is a mental disorder no matter who has it!

  10. Trumpers Share A Fear-Based Movement

    The Trump movement can be seen as populist, meaning that this movement espouses a worldview that sees society as a struggle between ‘the corrupt elites’ versus the people. This in and of itself predisposes people to conspiracy thinking. But there are also other factors. For instance, the Trump movement appears heavily fear-based, is highly nationalistic, and endorses relatively simple solutions for complex problems. All of these factors are known to feed into conspiracy thinking.

    The events of Jan. 6, underscore that conspiracy theories are not some “innocent” form of belief that people may have. They can inspire radical action, and indeed, a movement like QAnon can be a genuine liability for public safety. Voltaire once said: “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities” — and he was right.

    Edited From: “The QAnon Delusion Has Not Loosened Its Grip”

    Today’s New York Times

    1. The side that hyped a relatively benign virus (when complacent while Obama was literally flying Ebola into the country) to destroy the world’s greatest economy due to TDS so they could steal an election with fake paper and harvested ballots ca!!s the other side “fear based”. That’s rich. Fewer people died associated with the Capital rally than expected for 500,000+ gathered (3 of 5 from medical conditions, 1 murdered by trigger happy cop), yet everyone is supposed to be horrified that a few perps (some leftist, John Sullivan) broke some windows and trespassed during a historic flagrant coup.

      1. SARS-CoV-2 isn’t relatively benign (it has already killed over 1 out of every 750 people in the US and created longterm health problems for others), and the Trump Admin “was literally flying [it] into the country” too.

        The cop who killed Ashli Babbit hasn’t been charged with murder.

        Maybe you should read the full range of charges for the scores of “perps” who’ve already been charged –
        https://www.justice.gov/opa/investigations-regarding-violence-capitol
        You sound rather ignorant about all that occurred.

  11. Wisconsin’s ‘Indefinitely Confined’ Voter Status Excludes Requirement for Voter IDs – 265,000 Ballots Cast in 2020 Election

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/wisconsins-indefinitely-confined-voter-status-excludes-requirement-voter-ids-265000-ballots-cast-2020-election/

    After Weeks of Delays the Detroit TCF Center Turns Over Security Camera Footage of 3:30 AM Biden Ballot Dump to Gateway Pundit

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/weeks-delays-detroit-tcf-center-turns-requested-footage-330-biden-ballot-dump-gateway-pundit/

  12. Turley Forgets To Mention That Dominion Threatened To Sue Newsmax

    It’s peculiar that Turley, a law professor, fails to explain that Newsmax had previously given extensive coverage to Trump’s conspiracy theories regarding the election. As a result of that coverage, Newsmax was threatened with lawsuits that Dominion would apparently win based on their handling of this Lindell interview.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/02/02/newsmax-anchor-cuts-off-mike-lindell-as-network-braces-for-lawsuit-from-dominion/

    1. “They lie about what the president said and impeach him, again, this time like the last time for the real crime of not being an approved president”

      His last speech rather looks like a lay-up for an ‘insurrection’ to justify getting some more tyranny passed. I am doubtful he wasn’t ‘approved’.

      1. That article has it backwards. There is nothing in the Democratic party that would allow them to be compared to Sparta, favorably or not. They are totally beneath Sparta.
        I could also give reasons why Sparta was wise to take the money from Persia to fight Athens. That is too fine a detail for my point., But remember, it was Sparta that saved Greece from Persian conquest in the first place. 75 years before the wars between Athens and Sparta.

        Secondly, it was Athens that was a thallasocracy, a sea based trading empire, versus Sparta, which held power over the central grain producing area of the Peloponnese

        If anything it is the red states who more approximate the situation of Sparta

        And understand this., I have said it many times. Our strategic situation is more like that of the CCP in the Chinese Civil war than the KMT which was a coastal regime full of Chinese compradors who had grown rich trading with foreigners. The KMT was far more like the Democrat party, a coastal elite, grown fat on trading with foreigners, compradors of our own country.

        See also how Mao rallied his forces from the agricultural center of China, against that coastal elite, before he threw them off the continent and they ran away to Taiwan.

        We should be studying Mao and the CCP for their methods of organization and victory against the rich traitors of China who were at the time almost entirely on the side of the coastal KMT

        Being Republicans however, raised that way most of us, we are taught to hate communism as an ideology. That is fine but don’t make the mistake of failing to see that there are valid strategies which not only Mao used to win but also Ho Chi Minh for that matter.

        And others in Asia who used the name communist, but in reality, were quite simply just nationalists rallying the masses of the people against rich traitorous elites…. look for lessons where we have not dared to look before.

        Saloth Sar

        1. I have only read part of the article leaving the rest for a later time. I thank Prairie for the article that I think was excellent and for those on the left that read it with understanding, that they might better recognize why today’s divide between the left and the right exists. It’s freedom vs totalitarian government. It’s American exceptionalism and a high standard of living vs mediocrity for the masses with a lower standard of living.

          Sal, I think you read too much into the Greek comparison. I don’t think the author was doing a comparison rather the author used the Peloponnesian War and its players as a jumping off point. Of course remember I have yet to finish the article.

        2. Mao was a vicious, manipulative, conniving person.

          I don’t think it’s the Democrats being compared to Sparta–it’s China. And, this isn’t an R vs D issue; that’s a useful means of dividing and conquering. It’s the globalists, the statists who wish to retain power. There are such people in both parties to steer the ship–Gingrich on one hand and Clinton on the other, Biden on one hand and McCain on the other. It is liberty vs tyranny. Pol Pot, you are advocating some other tyranny.

  13. Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer, the democrats and RINOs have egregiously violated and taken the law into their own hands. America is lawless in a society of laws. A former president may not be impeached, convicted and/or disqualified, which is manifest and irrefutable in fundamental law. Will they next, in Lincolnesque fashion, suspend Habeas Corpus? Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer, the democrats and RINOs are without the law, having abused and usurped power, which is not prescribed by fundamental law. The judicial branch and Supreme Court are derelict, negligent and complicit having failed to strike down these acts of nullification, war and treason against the United States.

    1. Trump was impeached while he was still in office. If you’re going to discuss it, can’t you at least get basic facts right?

      1. Anonymous:

        The first part of the Impeachment was on January 13th 2021. However, it is an entire process. The House brings articles of impeachments, which are essentially charges. Their managers essentially prosecute the case before the Senate in the trial portion. The House has the power to bring an impeachment, while the Senate has the power to try it. Only the President, Vice President, and civil officers of the United States are subject to impeachment. Democrats in the House demand that a private citizen be subjected to an impeachment trial in the Senate, beginning in February, for his actions while in office.

        The House will try to bring the case, against a private citizen, that calling for “peaceful protest” is a high crime and misdemeanor. What will likely be pointed out is the contrast to Democrats’ own behavior, openly calling for “uprisings”, insurrections, making a crowd, making sure Trump officials are not welcome anywhere anymore. Honestly, it took some iron gonads to make such a claim, given their own conduct. They must feel safe because a Democrat House will never hold its own behavior accountable. Otherwise, there would be a flood of impeachments. They would be hard pressed to find a Democrat who could replace their impeached brethren who did not make similar impeachable comments calling for uprisings. No justice no peace, eh?

        The House of Representatives brought charges against a President in his last week of office. If it goes forward, the Senate would hear the case against a private citizen.

        “In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.”

        https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Senate_Impeachment_Role.htm

          1. Another person insulted by Anonymous the Stupid and this person is always polite. What does Anonymous the Stupid add to the blog? Nothing unless someone is looking for Stupidity.

            1. Allan S. Meyer continues to resort to his favorite trolling strategies:
              Insults.
              Attributing his own failings to others.

              1. Anonymous the Stupid, let’s laugh at the fact that you think your insults are content. That way we can all be happy.

        1. As I said, he was impeached while he was in office. Impeachment occurs in the House. The trial in the Senate is not the impeachment. The trial would be for a private citizen, but the impeachment that already occurred was not for a private citizen. The Senate has already tried a private citizen, as Turley has pointed out more than once. Trump is free to challenge that at the trial.

Leave a Reply