This week the January 6th Committee voted to make criminal referrals to the Justice Department, including the proposed indictment of former President Donald Trump. However, the Committee’s splashy finale lacked any substantial new evidence to make a compelling criminal case against former President Donald Trump. The Committee repackaged largely the same evidence that it has previously put forward over the past year. That is not enough. Indeed, the reliance on a new videotape of former Trump aide Hope Hicks seems a case of putting “hope over experience” in the criminal Justice system.
While still based largely on the failure to act, Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) insisted that “if that’s not criminal, nothing is.” The opposite may be true from a First Amendment perspective. If the failure to act is criminal, it is hard to see what would not be criminal under this standard.
After members like Schiff, again, promised new evidence to support criminal charges, the Committee continued its pattern of rehashing previously known evidence with network-quality videotapes.
The failure of the Committee to offer any new and direct evidence of criminal conduct was obvious at the outset. Vice Chair Liz Cheney began her remarks by again detailing what Trump failed to do. It was a repeat of the prior hearings and for some likely left the impression of actors who are refusing to leave the stage long after the audience departed.
The one new piece of evidence was largely duplicative. It shows former aide Hope Hicks saying that she also called upon Trump to make a public statement calling for peace and telling him that there is no evidence of systemic fraud. Nevertheless, the videotape has been heralded by figures like former acting Solicitor General Neil Katyal on MSNBC as “evidence I’ve never seen before from Hope Hicks.” Katyal bizarrely claims “I think that tells you all you need to know about premeditation. Call it criminal intent. The House committees evidence here is very strong.”
So all you need for premeditation is the failure to accept the weight of evidence or to act promptly after the start of a riot. Katyal might “call it criminal intent” but many judges would likely call it something else.
The fact is that the J6 Committee failed to change many minds largely because of what was on display in the final public meeting. It was the same highly scripted, one-sided account repeated mantra-like for months. There is justifiable anger over these accounts, but this hearing was billed as presenting the case for criminal charges. It missed that mark by a considerable measure.
Of course, to raise obvious legal barriers to prosecution today is to invite an Internet flash mob accusing you for being an insurrectionist or fellow traveler. Major media from the Washington Post to National Public Radio routinely refer to the riot as an insurrection despite a deep disagreement over the characterization of the criminal conduct. The media unrelentingly echoes this one view despite polls showing most citizens view that day as a reprehensible “riot” motivated by loyalty to Trump.
The media also downplayed the glaring failure of the J6 Committee to produce what it described as bombshell evidence of a criminal conspiracy by Trump. Members like Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Ca.) repeatedly promised that the next hearing would reveal such direct evidence only to have the same rehashing of the prior claims for prosecution.
The Committee was playing to the same audience and knew that they did not have to produce such evidence to make their case. Experts like Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe have previously declared Trump’s felonies were shown “without any doubt, beyond a reasonable doubt, beyond any doubt, and the crimes are obvious.” That included what Tribe suggested was a clear case of attempted murder of former Vice President Pence.
Likewise, experts like legal analyst and Michigan Law Professor Barbara McQuade told MSNBC viewers that Trump could be charged with manslaughter over the riot.
The problem is that crimes actually require satisfaction of underlying elements and cannot be proven by soundbite or desire alone.
Instead, much of the evidence cited what an official failed to do. Yet the last hearing seemed to focus on a number of things that did not occur, from a draft tweet that was not sent to an executive order that was never signed. There were discussions of appointing Trump attorney Sidney Powell as a special counsel, seizing voting machines or replacing the Justice Department’s leadership. It is a chilling list, but it is also notable in that no final action was taken on such proposals.
That is a far cry from evidence showing mens rea — “guilty mind.” However, crimes generally require both guilty minds and guilty acts. Building a criminal case on the failure to act to stop the violence is a notoriously difficult case to make.
The most damning evidence concerns what Trump failed to do in those 187 minutes.
However, while repeatedly omitted by the Committee, Trump told his supporters to go to the Capitol “peacefully” to support Republicans challenging the election. At 1:11 p.m., Trump concluded his speech. Around 2:10 p.m., people surged up the Capitol steps. At 4:17 p.m., Trump made his statement to stop — roughly an hour and a half later.
That speech appears protected by the First Amendment and existing Supreme Court precedent. In Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that even calling for violence is protected under the First Amendment unless there is a threat of “imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” The Trump speech, in my view, falls well below that standard for criminalization.
Repetition of the same earlier points does little to strengthen the case for prosecution. The Committee has presented a powerful record of Trump’s failures on that day, including his reckless rhetoric and lack of response. Trump may be guilty of all of these failings, but that does not mean that he is a criminal actor. The reason that Mar-a-Lago presents a greater threat to Trump is that it is based on his actions, not inaction, in retaining classified material.
It is a disappointing end for the J6 Committee, which could have been so much more than it was. Both sides have pointed fingers at each other for the failure to have a single member nominated by the Republican party. However, even after that breakdown, the Committee could have strived to create greater balance by discussing alternative interpretations of key actions or statements. It could have allowed for greater public examination of witnesses rather than the tightly scripted accounts used in the hearings. It could have explored other issues in public hearings, including the failure of the Congress to adequately prepare for the riot despite prior warnings.
While some Democrats have asserted an almost proprietary claim to the January 6th riot, this was a desecration of our constitutional process that harmed us all. Indeed some of us were critical of Trump’s speech as he was giving it. At a minimum, that day was a failure of leadership — but that does not mean it was a violation of the criminal code.
While the members assured each other that history would honor their efforts, the judgment is likely to be more mixed. It is not a criticism of what they became as much as what they could have become in investigating the tragedy of January 6th.
Despite the broad condemnation of Trump for his speech and conduct on that day, there is a difference between what is viewed as reprehensible and what is chargeable as criminal conduct.
but the Committee asked Trump to appear to give his side of the story and he declined.
You don’t even understand that Congress has no constitutional power to investigate crime. Yet that is all the Jan6 committee has done. The have made a bunch of criminal referrals, but offered no legislative fixes to the problem. Legislating, not criminal investigation being their only power, as enumerated in the Constitution.
You’re lying.
And you know that you’re lying, because it’s been repeatedly pointed out to you that Congress can investigate anything related to legislation — including the Electoral Count Act and the attempt to disrupt it.
Congress can hold hearings on the Electoral count act.
The can hold oversight hearings on the Executive branch.
The can not investigate the acts of private persons.
“The can not investigate the acts of private persons.”
That is exactly right. And it is why the Founders created the separation of powers. That kangaroo court usurped the powers of the judiciary, and swerved into a bill of attainder.
Congress can and has investigated the acts of private persons when it’s relevant to legislation.
Your personal opinion does not change that fact.
Not using the powers like supeona’s
that would violate the 4th amendment.
To be clear I am aware that congress has done as you say. That does not make it constitutional.
I would further note even the investigating people for the purpose of legislating is very weak.
The federal government has no general police power. That should have precluded most legislation regarding the conduct of individuals.
Finally, they is little doubt this is not what our founders intended, nor is it moral.
They went to a great deal of trouble in the constitution to preclude congress targeting enemies. Such as bill of attainder provisions.
No matter, enjoy the incoming congress. As the new head of the HPSCI has said – the J6 committee has afforded him vastly more power than in the past with a wide array of precidents and even court decisions.
Turn about is fair play.
You can take the constitution as it is, or no one will listen to your cry’s as your bent version is used to target you.
As someone else here noted – we can agree to disarm, or we can seek mutually assured destruction – your choice ?
“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have.”You can learn that only limited government is moral, justified and functional by study of history, and philosphy and government, or you can learn by being the victim of big government – your choice ?
ATS is a fascist.
https://media.defense.gov/2021/Jan/11/2002563151/-1/-1/0/PLANNING-AND-EXECUTION-TIMELINE-FOR-THE-NATIONAL-GUARDS-INVOLVEMENT-IN-THE-JANUARY-6-2021-VIOLENT-ATTACK-AT-THE-US-CAPITOL.PDF
Please note the third dot under the entry for Sunday, January 3, to wit:
.
“Sunday, January 3, 2021
• DoD confirms with U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) that there is no request for DoD support.
• A/SD meets with select Cabinet Members to discuss DoD support to law enforcement
agencies and potential requirements for DoD support.
• A/SD and CJCS meet with the President. President concurs in activation of the DCNG to
support law enforcement.”
lin: the insurrection is not the fault of the National Guard–this is a Republican false flag. Trump is the cause–the Big Lie, based on the big ego–his refusal to accept the will of the American people. But for his lying, the faithful would not have descended on Washington on Jan 6th. They were there to stop Pence from accepting the certified votes, something he had no authority to do–another big lie.
Gigi: Well thank you for educating me on this. But for your thoughtful correction, I would have had no idea.
I guess I thought I was showing DOD’s report indicating that Trump –three days before January 6—did indeed agree to deployment of National Guard troops to DC if needed (contrary to your previous comments and other media news).
Thank you for keeping me in line….How could I have gotten it so wrong….
(p.s. just a small note, I neither said nor implied that ‘the insurrection [was] the fault of the National Guard.” Maybe my alter-gender said it.)
The National Guard would not have been needed BUT FOR the BIG LIE–a point none of you Trumpsters seeems capable of grasping. WHY did they go to DC–because, according to Trump, Pence refused “to do the right thing”–i.e., refuse to accept certified vote totals favoring Biden–which he had no authority to do. WHO promised them it would be “wild” and to “fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”? Why didn’t Trump proceed with deploying the National Guard, and who had more authority than he to deploy them? Trump WANTED them to invade the Capitol and to stop Pence from accepting the certified vote totals after trying to bully him failed. The Proud Boys did a reconnaissance before Jan 6th to find the most-vulnerable point of entry into the Capitol, they plotted on how to distract the Capitol Police away from one POE so they could enter at another POE, military style, wearing flak gear, and conspired to do this with members of Trump’s campaign. This was not, as Karen S. tries to claim, a protest march that got out of control–it was a planned operation to prevent Biden from being certified as the winner of the election, all based on the Big Lie, and an effort to try to throw the election to state legislatures, all to defeat the will of the American people. Stop trying to shift blame away from where it belongs–there would have been no insurrection but for the Big Lie.
The national guard was not needed at all.
Had the capital doors been opened and the CP queing and searching people for weapons – of which there were none,
Everything would have been fine.
Pelosi created a Right by depriving protestors of their constitutional right to petition government.
The “Big Lie” is that we had free and fair elections in 2020.
The 7th installment of the twitter files is now available and exposes that the FBI new that Guliani had the Hunter Biden HD – because they were spying on him.
Knew that he was providing it to the media,
And prepped social media months in advance for the LIE that it was “Russian Disinformation”.
This series of reporting makes it clear that there was a conspiracy between the FBI and CIA and former intel officials to Dupe Social Media into beleiving that the Biden laptop Dump – which the FBI was well aware of, and Well aware was legitimate was actually some kind of Russian Election interferance.
There were actively priming Social Media months in advance, knowing this was coming, and knowing what was coming.
They were also constantly badgering Social Media about Russian Election interferance – Interferance that the FBI itself has testified to Congress they KNEW was not occuring, and yet they were deliberately ratchetting up perceptions of a Russian Threat in the months before the election.
Despite both the FBI and Twitter KNOWING there was no Russian Election interferance. Yoel Roth has actually spoken Publicly saying that when the NY Post story broke, He immediately connected that to the warnings the FBI had given him and was sure it was Russian Hacked material.
Those of you on the left do not seem to grasp – this is election interferance by the US government.
You can rant and rave about Foreign election interferance, But that is not inherently a real problem.
Despite the lefts concerns, there is little difference between a foreign government and a US citizen voicing oppinions on US elections.
But It is absolutely immoral and illegal for any government to interfere in its own elections.
WE can not have free and fair elections if our own government is acting behind the scenes to influence the outcome.
The phrase “worse than watergate” is loosing power – as we have seen SO MUCH in the past 6 years that is WORSE THAN WATERGATE.
An awful lot of it coming from the FBI.
These people MUST GO. They are a threat to the nation.
The FBI should not be interfering in US elections. This was an obviously carefully planned operation
Once Again Gigi, “The Big Lie” is that 2020 was in anyway a free and fair election.
I doubt that Joe Biden or the DNC was involved or aware of the FBI’s election interferance operation.
But if he was – He should be impeached immediately Tried, convicted and jailed.
Gigi – your mind reading of Trump is stupid and contradicted by the FACTS.
Trump WANTED the National Guard at the Capitol.
He tried for days in advance to get them there.
Your claim that Trump wanted violence contradicts his own plan to overturn the election.
Trump wanted thousands of supporters marching continuously and peacefully through the capitol on J6
Trump wanted the National Guard their – because he did not Trust Pelosi and the Capitol Police not to start something – obviously an intelligent view AS that is exactly what they did. There was no violence at J6 until the CP fired rubber bullets and teargas at peaceful protestors in the West Tunnel. That is what triggered the “riot”. This is on video and covered by any accurate timeline.
It is my hope that House republicans will order ALL the J6 security video and Body Cam video released as they take power.
Then You, and others right and left can go though it all, you can crowd source looking for Evil MAGA people, and the right can crowdsource searching for FBI agents, and Antifa. We can all look at what happened where and when
Maybe that will FINALLY put to rest your feces and Urine long ago debunked nonsense.
Contra the nonsense from the left – these protestors beleived this was THEIR HOUSE and they were taking it back.
The left Rants about J6 – but everywhere you went through the Summer of 2020 the left was burning looting and rioting.
The Federal Courthouse in Portland was attacked every night for 100 straight nights A riot was declared every night for 100 straight nights.
There was arson their – meaning the courthouse was lit afire on atleast 2 separate occasions. There were dangerous fireworks and rockets used every night. There were many nights were lasers were used to blind federal agents defending the courthouse.
There is absolutely no reason for anyone to want in a federal courthouse at 9pm at night.
Conversely the Capital is open to over 10,000 visitors every single day that congress is in session – EXCEPT January 6, 2020.
John Say: Excellent post! And you are correct. (Guess “Gigi” did not discern my sarcasm in my 4:37 post (above).
I really hope that the House puts All the J6 video out there for the public to review.
Let the chips fall where they may.
I do not KNOW what that will prove.
But I have a very good guess.
My bet is we have seen every single second of bad footage that there is – possibly even doctored.
And there are 14,000 hours of pretty boring video of people marching arround in the capitol.
I have repeatedly made the point that it was a violation of the 1st amendment to lock down the capital while it was in session.
No one else seems to back that obvious point.
But that point has other implications. Trump did not lock down the capitol. He would have wanted his followers marching through while congress was voting. If Trump had any power over the capitol – it would have been opened.
The president has ZERO authority on the capitol grounds. It is one of very few federal property that is not controlled by the executive.
Trump did not lock down the capitol and could not order it opened – or he would have.
Trump did not order the Guard to the capital – Because he Can’t. If he could have he would have days earlier.
I am speculating when I say Trump would have opened the capitol if he could – but that is very reasonable speculation consistent with his other remarks.
There is ZERO speculation that Trump would have ordered th e NG to the capital if he could have.
He tried. It is well documented. Trump wanted the guard present to protect his followers. He did not trust Pelosi or the Capitol police.
Your proud boys stuff is BS.
The expectation of protestors was that the capitol would be open – as it usually is and they would be allowed to march through – as protestors normally are.
None of the buildings in the Capitol Complex had been open since the pandemic started. Not Congress, not the Supreme Court, not the Library of Congress, not the Botanical Gardens. They remained closed to the public until sometime in 2022.
Bunk, Even the J6 committee has released video and photos of people in the capital purportedly doing recon on J5 or before.
The capitol complex is enormous. modern, the visitor center alone can handle 10,000 people at one time.
We conducted the Revolutionary war in the midst of a small pox outbreak. Congress did not close down.
Our rights – including the first amendment are not subject to the whim of the fascists who run congress.
The people there on J5 were there with the permission of an individual member of Congress. The Capitol Complex was not open to random members of the public to just walk in for about two years, due to the pandemic. Not the Capitol bldgs, not the Supreme Court bldg, not the Library of Congress, …
The first amendment Trumps all of that.
Congress can conduct its business in public, or not at all.
The first amendment does not say – you can petition government but not during a pandemic.
What we saw and continue to see is why that is so.
We now have Biden simultaneously trying to claim the pandemic is over, so he can end title 42 and that it is not over so that he can continue to suspend student loan payments.
Legitimate emergencies that permit temporary suspension of constitutional rights last days – until congress is in session.
It MUST be that way – otherwise we get even worse than we see today – government will always find an emergency so that it can ignore pesky constitutional rights.
No judge who has ruled on this has agreed with you.
And you wonder what so many complaints about judges ?
The role of judges is to apply the actual law and constitution.
If they do not do so, ultimately we fail.
It is unimportant whether they distort the law right or left.
Our law and constitution are not perfect, but it is the domain of legislators to repair them when broken.
Not the judiciary.
In fact your point regarding judges examplifies the much broader failure of our courts.
A major reason for the courts to stick to the actual law and constitution is that the courts more than any other part of government exist to protect our rights. That is best done by keeping government confined to the constitution.
Something they have failed to do.
I guess I mistook you for someone smart enough to understand why if what I said is not the case you lose self government.
You seem to think that truth is decided by authority, or consensus or some other arbitrary measure.
It isn’t.
ATS makes a statement and then backpedals. He makes things up. The essential building was open for the Congressional hearings. But, even when buildings are closed supporters of Democrats go there and when thrown out they go back in illegally. Do they get into trouble?No.
Can’t trust you ATS.
It is absolutely True that Trump and protestors sought to prevent Congress from Certifying Biden as president.
That is perfectly legal and constitutional, if highly unlikely. Further it has happened before if very similar condictions – where there were allegations of fraud.
You constantly forget how close the 2020 election was.
22,000 votes would have tied the electoral college, 45,000 votes would have flipped the election to Trump.
100,000 votes would have given Republicans control of the Presidency, the house and the Senate.
The AZ audit found almost 50,000 ballots, that came from only 13,000 voters.
It found just under half of all ballots had errors that should not have occured.
And about 300,000 that should not have been counted by law.
We KNOW that the normal rejection rate for mailin ballots – from states that have been doing mailin voting for decades,
is about 6%. In NJ during the democratic primary 200,000 mailin ballots were rejected in a court challenge.
Democrats had no problems accusing other democrats of mailin voting fraud in the 2020 primaries.
Problems with the NY Mayors race in 2021 required removing 145,000 votes from the tallies.
We just saw the mess Hobbs made of the AZ election.
The WI supreme court found Twice that all mailin ballots in 2020 were illegally cast, Mailin voting is unconstitutional in WI
But they found that after the fact there was no remedy
Once ballots were removed from envelopes it is not possible to tell mailin ballots from legal ballots.
And on and on.
You can beleive there was no fraud in 2020.
But others have plenty of reason to beleive differently.
consistently since Nov 2020 Polls have found approx 59% of people beleive that it is somewhat likely that the 2020 election involved cheating that flipped the results.
Those of you on the left do not seem to grasp that people do not think the same as you do.
And that is perfectly OK.
You beleive the 2020 Election was free from fraud and on the up and up. You are allowed to beleive that.
I think you are deluded, but buying “the Big Lie” that 2020 was a clean election – does not make you a criminal or treasonous.
Just wrong.
There was no insurrection.
Had Trump protesters come for an actual insurrection, they would have come with guns,
and Congress would have certified Trump.
Constantly repeating stupid does not make it true.
Please explain the difference between protestors on J6,
Protestors in Iran – another county where government riggs elections
Protestors in China – again rigged elections.
Protestors in hong kong – again rigged elections.
Portestors in Brazil – possibly rigged elections.
I would venture that you support most of these protests.
In all cases protests became violent as a result of government.
John (and maybe some others), you might be interested in this.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/video-experts-unravel-what-just-happened-in-the-election/
I was not impressed with what I read – though the date was new the analysis seemed old.
Some things I did not see addressed:
Mailin voting and GOTV efforts can not legally go together.
If ballots are mailed to people – that is their polling place and you can not campaign in a polling place.
That means you can not send GOTV workers to a person who has received a mailin ballot.
I would note this also violated ballot secrecy laws.
Mailin voting has almost infinite legal problems.
There is a reason that pretty much nowhere else in the world does mailin voting.
We just want to repeat the mess of the 19th century.
You are doing what the left does toward Turley, basing your comments on what you want to hear. The panelists were not dealing with the mechanics involved with corruption etc. They were dealing with preparation for voting and the failure of Republicans. Yes, knowing these people they want the corruption to end, but they also want the Republican Party to prepare for elections better than they did. That was the point of the discussion. The other point was left for other discussions.
Again the date was new, but most of the information old.
No I am not doing what the left does.
The election tactics of the left are immoral and illegal.
I do not want republicans repeating them.
I want them ended.
The simplest way is to get rid of mailin voting.
But if that can not be done, then while ballots are in the mail political campaigns can not approach people at their home.
You can not have blank ballots and political campaign workers in the same place at the same time.
Say what you wish. The panel discussed the failures of the Republican’s pre-election activities and provided suggestions for what to do in the future.
This discussion was not news, so timeliness is not a factor. Despite what you suggest, the purpose was not for Republicans to duplicate Democrat criminality. You are missing the point of the discussion analyzing what went wrong with the Republican vote drive and what is possible in the future.
You are doing what the left does on the blog. You are telling the panelists what to discuss. In this case, you want them to discuss the criminality, but that was not their expertise.
Badly on incomplete data.
I was mostly not impressed.
John, I was hoping you would add your data to what they missed, but only on the subject matter of discussion. They weren’t discussing the criminality that occurred.
I think they did a good job and made things more understandable. I heard your additions, but they were all off-topic. If you have additions or corrections to what they said and were talking about, I am interested. No one discussion will cover everything.
I listened to the tail end of the Lake hearing yesterday.
What little I heard went incredibly well for Lake.
The lawyers commenting suggested the rest was as good.
Takeaways:
The Elephant in the room is that though the actual legal burden on Lake is quite low – preponderance of evidence and no requirement for malice or fraud. The Reality is it is really really really hard to get a judge to toss a statewide election.
The expectation of the legal commentors is that it was currently 50:50. With the choices, being the Judge excoriates Maricopa county but leaves the election stand, or he excoriates maricopa county and gives Lake a new election.
Lakes lawyers were good – but not great. Hobbs had Perkins Coi/ Marc Elias lawyers – surprising they were horrible. It did not appear any of them had ever conducted a hearing before. The most damning testimony came when Hobb’s lawyers were cross examing lakes witnesses.
The commentors were saying – STOP NOW, you are just making things worse, but they continued. They were really bad.
Even I knew they would have been better with no cross.
Aparently Lake has only 5hrs to make her case. She can have whatever witnesses she wants, though she is nearly done.
All afadavits get accepted as evidence and witnesses are used as representative of the afadavits.
What got in ?
The Ballot printer problems were major. These were likely at over 50% of the polls.
The big printer reveal was that the printers had been messed with. I missed that testimony but aparently there were two BIG reveals.
The first is that witnesses saw election officials messing with the toner in the printers.
A big problem was the printing was too light.
The other issue was aparently the printers had a scaling feature i.e they could print at 100% or 105% or … and that setting was not 100% of many faulty printers. This was causing registration problems with the tabulators because the ballot was slightly out of scale and would get rejected by the scanner.
The next big issue was that the Maricopa County report on the election was repeatedly described by witnesses as fraudulent. What they reported was just not true. This is one of the points that got worse on Cross.
Aparently Richter testified – Via Zoom, from Bahama’s in a T-Shirt – he is aparently the big kahuna in the Maricopa county EB.
I missed his testimony but it purportedly did not go well for Hobbs.
The next big issue was people who walked away from the polls. The observers testified the numbers were large. The one observer testified that at his polling place alone enough people went home to flip the election.
Next was the Ballots without chain of custody. I did not hear anything about that – except that the lack of chain of custody on almost 300K ballts was entered into evidence, and there did not appear to be any challenge to the lack of chain of custody.
If the lack of chain of custody is un challenged evidence this should be over.
You can not count ballots without a chain of custody.
I did not hear this at the hearing, but purportedly Maricopa county contracts with a third party to do alot of their ballot scanning. I beleive all mailin ballots. This alone violates AZ law. Regardless, Maricopa collects the ballots sends them to the 3rd party, they scan and count them, then the ballots are returned to Maricopa – and there is no chain of custody or oversight of any of this.
There purportedly is testimony or affadavits that the friends and family of people who work at the private ballote processor, have been known to bring ballots directly to the processing center and add them to the ballots to be scanned.
This is illegal.
One of the lawyers commented that regardless of whether Lake wins or not, this hearing was damning.
Further this hearing is exactly why the courts would not allow Trump to have a hearing in 2020.
They all would have been variations of this.
Contra the left there was ZERO review of Trump claims on the merits.
In every state the law requires complete chain of custody for all ballots.
There is not a state that Trump challenged were there were not atleast 100K ballots missing chain of custody.
I would note that Chain of custody is one problem that actually has a remedy, you can remove any ballots (usually batches) that do not have chain of custody and recount. Most other problems have no fix. Signature problems with mailin ballots can not be corrected after the ballots are separated.
To the extent I have seen any new data, the gist is the same.
A spike in single women,
Democrats won under 30 – but by less than they did in 2020, and 2018, and if that trend continues they are in trouble.
Republicans won every other age group.
They did not gain as much with minorities as predicted – but the trend is still towards republicans.
Ruy Tiexeria the guy who told democrats that demographics assured them of a permanent majority is not telling them that if they do not become more moderate they are doomed.
His data and analysis was excellent. But I think he is wrong.
Both republicans and democrats have a version of the same problem. The most reliable voters – their base is on “the extreme”.
And in both cases these are people who will not vote if they do not get what they want.
I have said this regarding Trump. Unless DeSantis – and I think he is the only possibility, can get the votes of nearly all Trump base voters, he can not do better than Trump. And more “moderate” choices will lose 6-8M Trump voters, making that up in the middle is near impossible.
For democrats it is worse. Their extreme block of voters is further to the extreme, more hard core, and deeply alienating moderates.
If the democratic party gets more moderate they will lose. If they do not they will lose.
They are surviving through various forms of election rigging.
Mailin voting – which is an increase for D’s but not a tend, there are NOT new mailin voters to get.
News supression.
Histrionically painting Republicans as Hitler adjacent.
These can not continue to work.
Interesting data in both postings.
I am not happy for two reasons,
1) Republicans should do better than they do. They do not know how to market themselves. Trump knows a lot about marketing. The Republicans have been shooting themselves in the foot.
2) Let’s assume Republican’s win. Do we need more Mitch McConnell’s? 11 Republicans voted for the Omnibus bill giving it credence. There will be a Republican Congress in a few weeks. Couldn’t they wait? No. We are not voting in the right Republicans. Trump was there at the right time and place.
3) It is easier to give money than take it away. That means the flow of money will always be in the wrong direction. Do Republicans understand that?
“Do Republicans understand that?” Quite simply, yes, they do understand. They just don’t care.
Voting for the Omnibus was stupid, for many reasons.
Let the new congress fix this.
It is near certain the omnibus has massive amounts of stupid shit in it.
There is also a huge problem with Moderate republicans suddenly voting for stupid things in lame duck sessions.
I loath politicians like McConnell, but there can be zero doubt he is responsible for the 6:3 SCOTUS and that is huge.
SCOTUS is not going to do what I want. But they could be the last backstop against tyranny for several years.
I think it is time for McConnell to retire, But I would not start a holy war with him if he wont.
That would be my big message to Republicans – Sort all this out NOW. No holly wars in the next 2 years.
Get your act together and focus on the job – electing a president and taking back the Senate by the largest margin possible.
My message to the GOP members voting for the omnibus – is WHAT KIND OF FOOL ARE YOU ?
If you are so stupid that you must fund government for an entire year – pas a year long Continuing resolution.
One thing that worked during Obama that Republicans flushed down the drain was the sequester.
No budget agreement – Fine things continue exactly as before – no increases.
If GOP moderates do not want this war on RINO’s to continue, they need to quit this assininity of funding democrat garbage.
As you will have noted before I am NOT a fan of compromise. It is rarely a good idea.
I have no problem with long government shutdowns.
Frankly I think they are good for the country.
Regardless the only budget deal the GOP should have agreed to is short term with no change.
Basically a continuing resolution.
I do not think Trump is a brilliant marketer – But he is better than your average republican.
And the GOP will have a far harder time winning in 2024 if Trump is on the sidelines.
That is why the GOP must come to terms with Trump for 2024.
I have no problems with DeSantis 2024. But I think DeSantis will not win all the Trump only Trump voters.
And that causes a problem. Republicans will need every single vote they can get to overcome the election rigging of democrats.
I think a Trump/DeSantis ticket would be great. But Trump has other excellent choices for VP. He needed Pence in 2016.
Pence is not a real player today.
If not that then the GOP needs a female VP.
The GOP and the DNC are in the opposite position – Republicans have far too many good candidates.
Democrats have NONE.
It is also wrong for Republicans to try to replicate what democrats have done.
There are massive differences between the parties structurally.
The GOP has an army of unpaid volunteers.
The DNC has massive amounts of money and Pays all campaign workers.
This results in significant balance between GOP and DNC despite the DNC money advantage.
But it also alters what you can do.
Volunteers can only be made to do what they want to do.
People who are paid are more willing to take orders.
Republicans have to find the strategy that works for them.
Trump also has another major advantage over other Republicans.
He can get appearances on the MSM. They will all try to take him out.
But they are all chomping at the bit for the chance to.
Most republicans get ignored by the MSM.
The MSM is very important. It is the easiest way for Republicans to speak to democrats and independents.
Republicans are going to keep just falling short so long as the media is divided and Republicans can not get time on the MSM.
It is absolutely essential that Musk fix Twitter. That he create an unbiased public forum.
That is actually something that I think huge numbers of people crave.
If that is all twitter accomplishes that is a huge deal.
But it is likely that if Twitter succeeds it will losely tear down the balkanization of medai.
Repprters will quit being political shills and start being investigative journalists.
John, you make some reasonable points and some points on which we disagree. I will bring up one point.
“Get your act together and focus on the job – electing a president and taking back the Senate by the largest margin possible.”
That is correct, whether it be DeSantis, Trump, or someone else. The nation cannot tolerate more from the left. The basis of our existence as a nation is already crumbling.
Therefore, everyone recognizing how fascist and anti-American leftists are should vote straight Republican preventing another four years of abuse. We have discussed this many times, and you have poo-pooed what I have said. My answer remains the same. I understand the reasons for showing disapproval by throwing away a vote. That can provide a useful warning to those running for office. However, this is not the time for such actions. Today one should be voting against a party that has wreaked hell on America by voting for the only other party that can win. Suck it in, or do you still think things aren’t bad enough?
Like you always remind us, I will remind you. I am not a Republican. I am an American who believes in freedom and recognizes that what happened in the past two years and four years before Trump is catastrophic and likely not completely reversible. Entropy moves in the opposite direction from freedom.
Please pardon the interruption, S.Meyer, but even having Republican majorities in Congress and the White House makes but marginal-at-the-edges difference compared to Democrats in power (except for Supreme Court appointments). This is based on 50+ years of watching Team Red – especially leadership – fold quicker than a fitted bed sheet and vote in the affirmative for too many destructive policies put forward by the Blues. They just don’t know how to govern any better than the other Party. Today it seems the Parties exist only to out-do each other in accelerating the destruction of this Republic. 2016 saw an electorate that was sending a unified message; ENOUGH! and put a known playboy New York businessman, not a career politician, into the highest office of government – as just the first step. The People had decided to take a different direction than their so-called ‘betters’. But again, the elites in DC refused to listen and continue to fight tooth and nail against the overall well being of this nation, regardless of who’s ‘in charge’. The most recently-passed spending bill proves just that.
“Please pardon the interruption”
There is no need for a pardon. I thank you, JAFO, for your excellent comment.
“This is based on 50+ years of watching Team Red – especially leadership – fold quicker…”
You are correct, and I am glad you said it. The enemy of freedom is the ‘do-nothing’ Republicans that provide a sense of well-being so that we remain in the pot until we boil to death.
“ENOUGH! and put a known playboy New York businessman, not a career politician, into the highest office of government – as just the first step.”
I can’t agree more. Again, thank you for your additional and thoughtful comments. We agree.
I am not interested in reopening the discussion about my own votes or “wasting votes”.
I also sort of disagree with you regarding the crisis we face from the left.
In 2016 after 8 years of Obama the country wisely shifted away from Clinton who essentially ran on 4-8 more years of Obama.
That is not what people wanted. The vote against Clinton was NOT a massive change in directions, it was a demand to refocus on the economy, to get past 1.4% growth under Obama and to get some real growth started.
Ignoring the rhetoric Trump was NOT a radical right president.
He cut taxes – the tax cuts were excellent. He cut regulation quite effectively. These doubled growth – but still fell short of 20th century growth.
He proved a better president at foreign policy that I would have guessed. Frankly the best since Reagan or even Nixon.
Regardless, As I have said before, he was not a great president, just the best president of the 21st century.
But democrats instead of getting the message and moving Bill Clintons direction whigged out and shifted even farther left.
They were aided by the emergence into the market place of the Twitter Generation right smack int he middle of Trump’s presidency.
Our Colleges saw this tsunami of left wing nut intolerance hit in late 2013. But by 2017 these people were in businesses and in th media and destroying institutions all over the place.
The Trump presidency was a mess, because these students now young adults rapidly gained disproportionate power – particularly in the democratic party, and even as our economy improved, our foreign policy improved and the country got the mild improvement from Obama it needed. All hell broke loose in our media, in institutions that suddenly were taken over by left wing nut woke idiots who were going to war against what they painted as a radical bomb throwing Trump.
Ultimately – and illegitimately these same left wing nut jobs took over government. What we have is far worse than Obama.
But unlike you I do not see it as an existential crisis.
What we have is simple – how far left are we willing to go ? How much ruin are we willing to tolerate before there is massive pushback ?
It would have been nice if 2022 was a red Tsunami – that would have ended this nonsense for the moment.
That is past – thought 2022 still should be a huge warnign to democrats. The difference between winning and obliteration in 2020 was very small – less than 100K votes nationwide.
Dozens of things had to go right for Democrats to win. Not ONE could go the wrong way or they were SOL.
2022 is more of the same. Democrats are better at rigging elections, they are batter at a long list of things.
They MUST be. Because anything less than perfection and they will get obliterated.
I do not know that 2024 is the year of obliteration – but that year is coming.
The Left has been fighting valiantly and incredibly successfully at holding back the pendulum since Clinton lost.
But we are in the midst of something like the Battle of the Bulge or operation Barbarosa. Democrats may appear to be winning.
But they are not sustainable.
One of the biggest problems the left has is that winning is ultimately losing. When they get to do as they please, they make more of a mess.
So the only question is what is the tipping point ? How much ruin can the american people take ?
2022 ? 2024 ? …. eventually we get there. But the longer it takes they worse things will be when others step in to clean up the mess democrats have made.
“I also sort of disagree with you regarding the crisis we face”
It sounds like you think time is on the side of individual freedoms. Did you ever talk to millennials and discover how today, many more agree with socialism than in the past? Doesn’t that sound like a greater acceptance of statism? I won’t even mention the various other crises we have faced and discussed in just two years. (censorship, budgets, CRT, academic freedom, etc.) All lead to a breakdown in our society which is the goal of the different types of Marxist revolutionaries. After the destruction, they can rebuild the nation of their dream.
You may not realize it, but we are moving in the wrong direction. Respectfully, even you sometimes sound like you have a bit of acceptance for Obama. Obama belonged to the church of the Reverend Wright, better known as God damn America, and Hope and change, or should we say Hope and the Redistribution of wealth, something Obama wanted. I don’t think Marxism, communism, socialism, and fascism are arms of Libertarians.
There isn’t much of an ideological difference between Obama and Clinton, better known as ‘it takes a village’.
“I am not interested in reopening the discussion about my own votes or “wasting votes”.
Then stop telling us you didn’t vote for Trump. Generally, my comments about wasted votes are for the consideration of others, not you. I am using you as a vehicle to promote my thoughts.
“Ignoring the rhetoric Trump was NOT a radical right president.”
I believe Trump was originally a Democrat and came into office as a populist. He learned in office and moved further to the conservative/libertarian position. He governed well, and considering the flack, he got from Democrats and
Republicans, he did a tremendous job. You provided him with an A for his foreign policy. Foreign policy is almost the exclusive domain of the President. On domestic issues, you ranked him lower, but I give him an A because he didn’t have as much power. One can see what I am talking about when one notes that in the Senate eleven Senators voted for the Omnibus Bill because they wouldn’t fight to give the next Republican House a chance to make their mark in a couple of weeks. That shows how difficult Trump’s position was and makes him deserving of that A for domestic policy.
When you say, “he was not a great president”, I understand. Trump wasn’t a Libertarian. If a Libertarian won the election he would have fared far worse than Trump with the opposition out there.
“But we are in the midst of something like the Battle of the Bulge or operation Barbarosa. Democrats may appear to be winning. But they are not sustainable.”
It is more like the Battle of London, but Londoners then had grit. Today’s Londoner would collapse.
The left doesn’t have to be sustainable because they are creating a new type of America where all citizens are beholden to the government. That is a cycle hard to break.
“So the only question is what is the tipping point ? How much ruin can the american people take ? 2022 ? 2024 ? …. eventually we get there”
I think and stated the tipping point was Obama’s second term. We had a short reprieve with Trump, but one could see the handwriting on the wall when Trump lost.
Maintaining a free Republic where the individual is supreme takes considerable energy. We are moving toward the average, authoritarian in nature. My long-term view is that though America will continue to be a powerhouse until at least mid-century, we will never regain the freedom and individuality we had before.
“It sounds like you think time is on the side of individual freedoms.”
Always.
The core question is how bad will it get before things reverse.
Absolutely we have a generation that is thoroughly F’d up.
But two things remain true – all age cohorts shift more conservative as they age.
We are already seeing that. I belive I linked to a Tiexiera peice that says the examination of under 30 voting from 2018 to 2020, to 2022 should scare the hell out of democrats. While they still hold majorities of millenials, they are losing ground.
It is likely this broken generation will percolate through our voting throughout their lives. Some, many, maybe most will never abandon their nutcase views. But all will be less committed with age.
Next the generation following seems to be one of the most conservative youth cohorts ever.
Just to be cleat I am not betting the farm on either.
But it has always been true and is increasingly obvious to even dullards that leftism requires massive amounts of force to be sustained.
I have noted repeatedly All big government fails – not just socialism.
But socialism requires big govenrment. That automatically means it is less efficient.
People chaffe at big government – the bigger the more chaffing.
The only question is WHEN and HOW the chaffing overturns the government.
I agree with your principles, and hopes, unfortunately that’s not what I read in the Scriptures about America at the End Times, and what the fulfillment of prophecies are showing me every day.
America, and it’s formidable and way ahead of its time Constitution, as it was founded and written by patriots since 1776, is dying. Not because as the results of an all war against foreign enemies but as a consequence of us falling to a deception. Politics and financial matters are important but we ignored the spiritual side of this war, and we paid dearly for that mistake. We lost America the Beautiful, because we failed to understand that beyond ideologies, there was an invisible old spiritual war going on.
Brace yourselves my friends, the powerful hold the Holy Spirit had on the planet, buying some time for us to wake up to the coming storm, is letting go.
This is going to be a very wild ride from now on!
Ultimately totalitarian regimes fail.
The left will fail too. It might fail from ideological opposition,
It it does not, it will fail under its own growing weight.
The big issue is that the quicker it falls the less harm is done.
I expect to live several more decades. I do nto want that to be in this declining leftist mess.
My Children have another 3/4 of a century left. I would prefer they were less than 50 before they see freedom again.
The USSR fell, the CCP transformed itself into something capitalist for about 40 years, but is no headed for failure again.
Pol Pot Failed.
Cuba still exists, but is a miserable failure.
As is venezeula.
A significant portion if “illegal immigrants are from Venezeula or other countries that have seen the results of where we are heading.
While I oppose the chaos at our borders, the left should consider who they are letting in ?
The masses who are fleeing what they seek to recreate.
Every minority group in the country is moving right.
The GOP was suposed to fail because it was the party of rich white elites – which party is that today ?
I am very worried about the entire world.
We know little of what is going on in China – but what we know is bad.
Ignoring the probability of revolution and regime change China has a debt bubble that is bursting that is 16-28T in size.
I have heard estimates that China’s economy is actually only 1/3 of what is reported. I think that is wrong. but I have no doubt China’s economy is over reported in size and strenght.
Regardless, one of the largest economies in the world may be going down Hard.
China is facing the possibility of significant deflation at a time the rest of the world is facing inflation.
Low rates of deflation are good, but high rates of deflation make high inflation look happy.
Japan has a massive monetary crisis with no end in sight. As US Interest rates rise the Value of Japanese currency tanks. Amd there is nothing they can do. Ultimately this will likely trigger recession and inflation. They have one of the oldest populations in the world, and they have mind boggling debt, combined with no growth in over 3 decades.
The last time something like this happened in Japan had this problem it too all of Asia with it.
The economic problems of Europe make what we are seeing in the US look like a boom. There were headed for recession BEFORE the Ukraine war, More people will die from cold in Europe this winter than typically die in the world in a year.
Europe will survive the winter. But High energy prices are going to murder their economy.
South America has a resurgence of leftist governments that have failed in the past, and will do the same today.
Food insecurity has increased dramatically accross the world as a result of high energy prices and constricted food supplies as the output of the Ukraine bread basket is reduced.
And the US is going into recession. The BEST predictions I have seen is 3 qtr of mild recession followed by a weak recovery with inflation still at 5-6%. Everyone else is predicting worse. We Just learned that BLS has over estimated employement by 1M people – so the Fed was wrong – we did not have inflation without job losses. And we were likely in recession in Q2+3 of 2022 – and probably Q4 when the data comes in.
>>“It sounds like you think time is on the side of individual freedoms.”
>Always.”
That is the crux of our disagreements. You are too sure of yourself.
“The core question is how bad will it get before things reverse.”
You think in terms of a sine curve cycle based on rigid principles that are interfered with by human emotions and interactions. You believe that the direction of the sine curve will be an upward improvement. You base that on theory without any proven example that it works. Erratic human actions destroy brilliant theorization.
I believe the sine curve likely will descend toward the average. The United States Constitution, the nation of freedom, is an aberration. Therefore, I think the sine curve is in a downward direction and requires tremendous energy to maintain its present position and even more to bend the curve upward.
“But two things remain true – all age cohorts shift more conservative as they age.”
That is true in limited circumstances making your statement false. We tend to follow many of Britain’s mistakes. Look at Britain today. It is no longer Great Britain. The word ‘Great’, needs exclusion from the title as the police arrest for thought crimes.
“the examination of under 30 voting from 2018 to 2020, to 2022 should scare the hell out of democrats. ”
Unfortunately, their acceptance of more freedom doesn’t seem to coincide with a will to expend energy. If you were correct in all your theories, Biden would have lost even with all the cheating. Americans, on average, have a declining interest in freedom and a greater interest in cradle-to-grave care. I believe your eyes are closed, and that lack of recognition of existing danger leads to destroyed nations.
It is more likely a continued downward sine curve will be in our future.
“Next the generation following seems to be one of the most conservative youth cohorts ever.”
…and the sine curve will likely continue its decline. Reversal requires tremendous effort with a Regean or Trump revolution followed by years of correction.
You are equating Democrat v Republican results as a metric for victory where the sine curve rises with a shift in politics. I am sorry, that is delusional. Without tremendous effort, not presently seen from our youth, my predictions are grim. Change can occur, but it requires a radical change in our education system. That will take a long time.
“I have noted repeatedly All big government fails – not just socialism.”
That is correct. After failure, there is more or less despotism Scrutinize the EU. It looks like a small USSR.
How many members of the EU moved the sine curve upward away from the averages? None from the western portion. Those former parts of the USSR show an upward curve, but they have to climb much higher before they reach the freedoms and economic success we have here. That climb will level out. The United States’ aberration has not been duplicated.
“You think in terms of a sine curve cycle ”
No, multiple factors are involved concurrently.
In the US there is NORMALLY a slow cycle between right and left.
NORMALLY there are two consequences of that cycle:
Government inexorably grows slowly.
But Freedom near universally expands.
That is because rising standard of living affords us more freedom that we lose to slowly growing government.
That is the NORM.
That is NOT what has been happening since 2016 – or possibly before.
The Woke Generation hit colleges in late 2013. While Teachers and professors are atleast partly responsible for creating these people – so is social media. Wherever this generation landed was Disaster. Colleges absolutely leaned left BEFORE this. But not in the absolutely insane way the woke do. Go back to 2014 and look at what was happening on campuses – and has been since.
The left wing nut administrators and professors are being attacked by their own students for not being woke enough.
Old Marxist were being publicly shamed but the young woke warriers – in ways reminiscent of the Cultural revolution.
This is all happening Paralell to the country as a whole slowly swinging right and seeking to modify the Excess of the Obama years.
In 2016 the country elected Trump basically as a correction to Obama. In a normal world Trump would have served 8 years.
Democrats would have moved to the center in 2017 and in 2024 A Bill Clinton democrat would have replaced Trump.
But that is not what happened. In 2017 The Woke tsunami left College and hit the real world.
The norm is that the real world hits left wing nuts in the face and makes them less radical.
What actually happened is they overran the institutions they moved into. Mostly they moved into already left leaning institutions – like the media. ACLU, …
But they did to these exactly what they did to colleges 4 years earlier. They revolted against the old school left that ran these institutions – again running through them like the cultural revolution. And moving these institutions far away from any connection at all to truth and morality – values that the left USED to actually value.
This tidal way also hit the Democratic party, which has always been depending on the under 30 crowd as its foot soldiers.
The really big deal about this young woke wave is that in the left leaning institutions they hit – They change the institutions, not the other way arround which has been the norm for centuries.
This is driving the Democratic Party ever further to the left.
Does anyone in their right mind beleive Joe Biden on his own would impliment the policies he has done as president ?
Historically Biden has been towards the right side of the democratic Party. He is a drug warrior, a big anti-Crime senator.
He is not and never has been on the left of his party.
But as it became obvious that Biden was not going to win the nomination, and that no other democrat stood a snowballs chance in h311 of defeating Trump, the Democrat powers that be and the Woke left came to an agreement. Biden would be the candidate, but when elected the Woke would get what they wanted. That and myriads of other measures enabled Democrats to rigg the 2020 election and defeat Trump.
I would note absolutely EVERYTHING had to go right for Biden to win. The Censorship of Social media – and not just the NY Post story was REQUIRED. Covid was REQUIRED, The lock downs that destroyed the economy were required. The shift to mailin elections was required, conducting them lawlessly was required, supressing the NY Post story was required. Massive ballot harvesting was Required. Destorying the norms of elections was required. The massive pre and post election lawfare was required. On and on.
Even one little glitch and not only would Biden lose, but democrats accross the board would lose.
The FACT is this country is currently moving RIGHT, not left.
I hope it is moving libertarian – though it is more libertarianish.
Even amoung the young there are some indications that the generation following the Woke is MORE conservative than any generation prior.
I would like more data on that. But atleast some sources are claiming that.
Further the 2018, 2020, and 2022 elections are showing that every single demographic – including under 30 are moving RIGHT.
But those under 300 are still strongly left, even if that strength is declining with each election.
the 2022 election – just like the 2020 Election required EVERYTHING to go Democrats way or they would lose.
BLS rigged employment numbers by 1M fake jobs – otherwise Biden would have to admit this summer we were in Recession.
I personally though the Biden Reichstag nonsense was going to blow up in his face. But among the voters they democrats needed this tactic worked. And on and on.
This everything going your way stuff that has allowed Democrats to continue to win can not continue indefinitely.
Democrats are – thus far successfully holding back a rising tide.
But they can not do that forever.
Add to this their policies are inherently destructive. Nothing creates republicans faster than democrats actually getting what they want.
Anyway we are not dealing with a sine wave – we are way past that. But we are dealing with a situation were the current is flowing one way.
but the institutional power is holding it back. That can not continue for ever.
And I have barely touched on the economic mess the left has made.
>>“The core question is how bad will it get before things reverse.”
>>“You think in terms of a sine curve cycle ”
>No”
Ok. I will accept you don’t think of it (bad and good) as a sine curve. What do you think the plot looks like? A straight line, a circle … you tell me?
“In the US there is NORMALLY a slow cycle between right and left.”
Would you like to plot that line as well? Is it a straight line, a circle … you tell me?
“In the US there is NORMALLY a slow cycle between right and left.”
You are changing the subject. Go back to, “The core question is how bad will it get before things reverse.”
So far, everything points to a sine curve. The debate is whether it is moving up, down, or staying level.
Sine waves are regular and mathematical.
I am not sure that human nature requires a periodic swing from left to right and back.
But required or not it is common.
Maybe a more accurate description would be that things naturally tend to regress towards the norm.
The regression towards the norm is driven by the failures of whatever position we currently are in.
As an example Trump’s immigration policies were driven by the Failure of Obama’s.
Given the failure of Biden’s we might see a 100m high wall in 2025.
Regardless, when we fail in one extreme we tend to overshoot the other.
There are not sign waves, they are not even regular oscillations.
If some policy changes actually work – or the harm they create is small, there is not regression to the mean – normally
Bush’s presidency was a failure – Obama was the byproduct. Bush was not a huge failure and absent the financial crisis McCain likely would have won. Regardless, Obama did not fix the Bush problems he promised to, and then made more problems. Trump was the result.
Democrats should have regressed to the norm. They did not.
Despite the histrionics of his presidency – Trump was a regression to the norm.
Biden is sort of a doubling down on Obama – but actually worse. Biden is tiding on the Woke wave that emerged in about 2013.
Obama was elected on a traditional democratic base Plus backlash against the Financial crisis. These are not the same.
Though they head loosely in the same direction.
The 2022 election was a somewhat successful effort to hold back a tidal wave. But it was essentially a cobbled together dam, not the actual elimination of that wave.
That wave is still present – even if it was kept from bursting through by a jury rigged dam.
That pressure will build going into 2024 – Unless by some miracle Biden manages to succeed.
That means that in 2024 one of two things will happen. The Damn will burst, or even more force will be necescary to hold it back.
Given how close the 2022 Wave came to materializing and the massive effort necescary to hold it back, that means 2024 will require much more force.
We either devolve to a totalitarian state – because that is what is necessary to suppress rising opposition, and even that eventually collapse under its own failure. Or the wave breaks through.
“Maybe a more accurate description would be that things naturally tend to regress towards the norm.”
The sine curve is regular and mathematical, but I was describing how the changes would appear by adding an irregular and random pattern with a slope telling the reader that the comment was descriptive, not scientific.
The regression to the norm contrasted with yours because mine was downhill toward the average as no country advanced so far in individual freedoms (speech etc.), prosperity, etc.
When speaking about the norm, I used the terms good and bad, which might be subjective, but I think simple enough for an understandable discussion.
My regression to the norm model is a trend toward bad. Yours is otherwise. With time things become better for everyone, so for simplicity and clarity, I excluded that variable using a relative, good and bad, in the context of my original statement. You are shifting the discussion and the variables to meet your discussion points rather than dealing with what I said.
The pannelists are free to discuss whatever they want.
First, I have no problem with analysis I do not like that conforms to the data.
This did not.
I want good data – this had some but it was old.
There is a difference between “Your Wrong” and “Shut Up”
The FBI and Twitter forced people to shut up.
“First, I have no problem with analysis I do not like that conforms to the data.”
What analysis didn’t conform to the data? They purposely left out your favored (and perhaps mine) topic of criminality and limited their topic. What are you talking about?
“I want good data – this had some but it was old. ”
Some data might have been old, or they might have disagreed with you about the data. But the data wasn’t the discussion. The important data was that the Republicans lost or were perceived to have lost.
Yes, I know about the total vote count, and so do they, but high totals in a place one wins doesn’t help elsewhere where the vote was close. They discussed why they didn’t get those needed votes, and the Democrats did. I’m sorry, but I think you missed the entire point of the discussion.
“There is a difference between “Your Wrong” and “Shut Up” The FBI and Twitter forced people to shut up.”
Again you are dealing with things that border on criminality. That was not the topic under discussion.
I have an interest in figuring out this election. It matters for the future, and the future of the country.
I am sorry, I reject the “Trump candidate quality argument”
What I find more accurate is the media did to Trump candidates what they did to Trump – and painted him/them as toxic.
Just as they have done with Musk.
If Musk can be painted as a radical right wing nazi – anyone can.
Nor do I see this clear Trump candidates lose pattern.
J.D. Vance won strongly.
While Technically DeSantis is not a “trump candidate” – the differences between the two are tiny. And DeSantis certainly attracts his share of hatred.
Several of the winning democratic candidates are much worse than the losing republicans.
Fetterman ? Really ? Hobbs ? Really ? Laxault and Cortes-Mateo are closer – she was not as bad as Hobbs or Fetterman. and he was not as Trumpian, and he lost.
Regardless, I do not accept the Trump is toxic or Trump candidates were poor argument – There were few truly good democrats.
Hoschul sucked, whitmer sucked, hobbs sucked, Hassan and Cortes-Mateo and Kelley were not as bad as the others but they were beatable.
Fundimentally, the big distinction is that losing republicans were either given the Trump treatment by the media or ignored.
I think the Twitter files are a really big deal. One of the things they make clear is that it is critical for democrats to protect there media propoganda bubble. If the MSM and social media are not in the tank for democrats, Democrats will lose their voters.
I do not think that is sustainable.
It is increasingly obvious that abortion was a bigger factor than anticipated. While nearly all the electorate had locked in their position and abortion did not change their vote. A sufficient portion of young single women voted.
There is also a large male/female voting swing in all age groups.
Young voters were crucial for democrats – BUT their voting rates are declining, and even though democrats win under 30 the margin is dropping.
” I reject the “Trump candidate quality argument”
Who made that argument and what is it? Where was that said?
“Regardless, I do not accept the Trump is toxic or Trump candidates were poor argument “
If I understand you correctly, I agree and have previously made the argument myself numerous times, sometimes mentioning GWB and the Democrat signs saying “Kill Bush”
“I think the Twitter files are a really big deal.”
They are a major turning point.
“It is increasingly obvious that abortion was a bigger factor than anticipated. “
That was mentioned by the panelists. Maybe you didn’t notice.
“Richard Baehr: Well, I think each side has their issues, and they care a lot about their issues. So our issues were the economy, inflation, rising interest rates, immigration, crime. Democrats had their issues: abortion , guns, abortion — did I mention that already — climate change, abortion . And the threat to democracy. Those were kind of the Democratic issues. And they are just as attached to their set as we are to our set.”
Take not of what you are saying. That is why I referred you to the video. You are saying a lot of what they said and they added more.
Only abortion was an issue that had outsized impotance in 2022.
Nothing else brought new voters to the table or caused someone to vote differently than in 2016
If that’s the best the Queen of Hearts can do, Trump is walking – no – running into a second term.
Naw… there’s this guy named DeSantis…
Naw….there’s this sinister Republican establishment plan to DIVIDE the base….
Has anyone else noticed that Turley doesn’t seem to know English grammar? This last post gets him close to a career world and Olympic record for dangling modifiers.
robert weisberg:
“Has anyone else noticed that Turley doesn’t seem to know English grammar? This last post gets him close to a career world and Olympic record for dangling modifiers.”
*************************************
Part of grammar is formal semantics or the logic of your words. Saying someone doesn’t “know” English grammar is worlds apart from saying someone doesn’t “practice” English grammar as the last notion doesn’t necessarily imply the first.
So I say: Grammarian heal thyself. Or as my friend Gerry Spence would say “Remember that when you point the accusing finger, most people will notice that three others are pointing back at you.”
The charges that the J6C proposes for Trump:
1. Obstruction of an official proceeding (18 U.S.C. § 1512(c))
2. Conspiracy to defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
3. Conspiracy to make a false statement to the United States (18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1001)
4. Assisting / giving aid and comfort to a rebellion/insurrection (18 U.S.C. § 2383)
Apparently Turley can’t bring himself to address the actual alleged crimes and what evidence exists for them.
Why should Turley address conclusions drawn from a panel that was totally biased, and scripted their performance? They played only those parts they wanted you to hear, and even used their own words instead of in context quotes.
Now that you understand, you realize your statement against Turley was completely out of line.
S. Meyer: Turley’s a joke–not just because he ignores Trump’s brazen criminal behaivor based on a lie that EVERYONE except Giuliani told him was a lie, and spins the facts, but because he purports to have the authority to speak to the reaction of most people to the Committee’s work–to-wit: “The fact is that the J6 Committee failed to change many minds largely because of what was on display in the final public meeting.” How does Turley know how many “minds” were changed, much less to claim it is a “fact” that the Committee “failed” in some respect to make a substantial impact? More Fox discipleship rhetoric–just ignore those Dems and RINOS because they’re partisan, they’re biased, the entire process is unfair because we don’t have that ludicrous clown known as “Jim Jordan” there gumming up the works and turning the process into a sh(t show, and, anyway, no one believes them– “nothing to see here”.
Turley tries, once again, to defend the fat orange one by stating that he said to “peacefully” protest, all the while ignoring the fact that as of Jan 6th, he had lied over and over again, knowing that the the Big Lie was untrue–“frankly, we DID win”. How many Trump insiders TOLD him he really DID lose?–Hope Hicks testified that she also told him he lost and that he was motivated to keep lying about losing because he feared he wouldn’t have a “legacy”–once again, the massive ego at work. How many times did he go on “Stop the Steal” rallies knowing he had lost, and told his fans to “fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”? The “peacefully” comment was thrown in as a defense to what he knew the Proud Boys, the 3 percenters and White Supremacists had been planning to do. Explain to me just HOW someone can “peacefully….fight like hell”. Explain to me just WHAT there was to protest–the fact that Trump lost? There wasn’t, and still isn’t, any evidence of widespread voter fraud. Then, there’s Guilfoyle’s comment about “protest by combat”. Trump watched, for over 3 hours, while his devoted fans who believed his lies attacked Capitol Police Officers, broke into the Capitol, urinated and defecated all over the place, broke into offices, rifled desks and papers, smashed doors and windows, defaced the John Lewis Memorial, and tried to get to the floor of the House to stop Pence from accepting the certified vote totals. They were planning to lynch Pence if they could have gotten to him, all stirred up by Trump, who KNEW he lost. Think of it–Trump would have allowed his VP to be manhandled, beaten, kidnapped and maybe even killed–all for the sake of his massive ego because he just couldn’t accept the fact that the majority of Americans had rejected him. The J6 Committee did a fabulous job of proving that Trump KNEW he lost, but mounted the insurrection anyway. He watched this carnage unfold for over 3 hours, all the while ignoring pleas to call off the fans who believed his lies. His ego reveled in the glory of his power and the adulation of his gulllible followers who believed his lies. Defending this is pure BS, and beneath the stature of someone claiming to be a law professor.
Last night, Laurence O’Donnell interviewed presidential historian Michael Beshloss, who pointed out that Ford’s pardon of Nixon shouldn’t have happened because it emboldened Nixon. Ford thought that because Nixon had been humiliated by the threat of being impeached and convicted, that pardoning Nixon would allow him to maintain some semblance of dignity, and it did, but only for a while. He said that after Nixon slunk away and licked his wounds for a time, he got angrier and angrier and began claiming he was innocent, that he did nothing wrong, and that Presidents should have full immunity for whatever they do. He was especially upset over the fact that if one accepts a pardon, this is legally construed as an admission of guilt. Letting Nixon off the hook criminally was a mistake because it sent the wrong message, and that’s why it’s so important that Trump be held accountable for inciting Jan 6th, allowing the riot to continue while people, including Capitol Police, were injured and a Trump fan got killed, all while he basked in the glory of his fleeting power. No one is above the law, and that message has to be clear and unequivocal, because, if it isn’t, it could happen again, and probably will.
I think you have lost what little mind you have or you are a troll. No one with an ounce of common sense would fall for your baloney opinion
Gloriously missing the point about what Jonathon Turley is writing about, as usual. You seem to think that he’s defending Trump’s actions ; did you even bother to read it.
“Turley’s a joke”
Yet Turley’s little finger would make you look like an idiot.
“Trump’s brazen …”
Do you recognize the difference between an opinion and a fact. Of course not. Your mind is polluted with garbage. When you take the garbage out come back and try again. I didn’t bother to read further.
Carolyn, Paul, S. Meyer, et al: I’m just not smart enough to comprehend why Gigi/Natcha, Svelaz, Dennis McIntyre, Anonymous, et al, breathlessly await new postings from the good professor every day, –since he is such a “hopeless,” “disingenuous,” “hypocritical,” liar.
Melvin here has a possible explanation:
https://youtu.be/c-ecbGNxEHM?t=101
Great clip! As with most of Jack’s dialog in every film, it’s tough to know if it’s the written script or Jack’s personal touch reading the words that’s funnier. 😅
😎
I’ve yet to hear anything resembling a factual dispute about what I wrote–just the usual ad hominem attacks. As faithful disciples, you’ve been taught to simply disregard as untrue anything sounding like an attack against the one you worship. Everything I wrote about is a fact–provable by video evidence. If you have some contrary proof, then say what it is instead of insulting me.
The bottom line of the equation is: what was Congress supposed to do in the wake of the insurrection–ignore it as if it didn’t happen, pretend that it’s OK for the losing candidate to lie about losing, to upset his supporters by falsely claiming he really won when he not only didn’t–he knew he didn’t, but still wouldn’t stop lying, and then exhorting his followers to go to the Capitol to try to stop the winner’s victory from being certified? Was Congress supposed to put on the Committee Republicans like Jordan or Greene, both of whom not only supported the insurrection, but may have been involved? They both certainly defended it–why should they be allowed on the Committee? Then, there’s trying to blame Pence, falsely claiming that Pence had a choice, which he didn’t–Trump continues to tell that lie to this very day. How about trying to blame Nancy Pelosi for not calling up the National Guard when she had no power to do so? Then, there’s the 187 minutes of inaction during the chaos–defend that, if you can. Trump watched it on television, mesmerized by the adulation of his adoring fans while the Capitol Police were being beaten, the Capitol was being defaced with human waste and property damage and a Trump supporter was killed, all for the sake of an egomaniac who is also a sociopath. Nothing matters except his massive ego. We all saw it on television. This insult to our democracy must be redressed, or it will happen again. That was the mission of the J6 Committee, and they did an admirable job.
I’ve yet to hear anything resembling a factual dispute about what I wrote
You wouldn’t recognize a factual dispute if it hit you between the eyes. How do I know? If you would, you’d still be posting under the name Natacha.
The J6 Committee of liars and propagandists did MORE damage to this country than anything that may or may not have happened on J6.
You know who is disgusting?
The J6 Committee. All of them, disgusting lying filth.
Also….
Laurence (stop the hammering!) O’Donnell
Michael (I’m a total fraud) Beschloss
Joe Biden (disgusting piece of trash)
His wife (the shameless you will call me “dr” jill)
They are all pure filth. Democrats and their media propagandist and MOST of the Republican establishment are gutter dwelling lying filth. No one in this country should believe one word of the filth they and their state run media mouthpieces spew. They are ALL filthy disgusting frauds.
“I’m just not smart enough to comprehend why ”
Lin, you are very smart and not used to such shallow people who have nothing original to say. Maybe I am more accustomed to them. I think they want to feel important and get that feeling when they tear down someone of consequence like Turley. We look at their actions and cannot believe they are in that much need of approbation.
If no one is above the law, why is there immunity for legislators, judges, and other public officials
There’s only immunity for their official actions performed in compliance with the obligations of their office. For example, you can’t sue a judge because you don’t like their rulings, even if the rulings are reversed on appeal. Other than that, they are not above the law. Judges, mayors, city councilors and even police officers get arrested all of the time for criminal conduct outside the scope of their official duties.
Thank you Gigi for an accurate rundown of the issues. What is frightening to me regarding Trump is his followers, including educated people who ignore his seriously bad behavior as a CITIZEN much less as a person running for the office of the president. I know serious Republicans who are NOT supporting Trump because of his behavior. They respect the country and the need for a decent president, not an ego maniac who puts his personal interests ahead of the national interests. How can anyone not see this problem with Trump?
Laura: Many of us (including the good professor and me) were critical of Trump’s immaturity/impropriety/lack of decorum, etc. not comporting with that expected of a person occupying the Oval Office and representing the country.
But many of us (myself included) supported the platform and agenda which he presented as a candidate for the office. May I respectfully add that Gigi has spent most of her time (usually daily) flinging personal attacks at Trump (“the Orange fat man”) and engaging in name-calling and personal attacks against commenters– even when they were not even talking or mentioning Trump. Her immaturity clearly parallels that which she mocks.
I agree with your statement, “I know serious Republicans who are NOT supporting Trump because of his behavior.” I’m sure just as many Democrats were not fond of Clinton’s in-office sexual escapades and especially, a president lying under oath, -or Obama’s under-reported dalliances with a few unsavory friends as well (think of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright). But I vote for the platform, not the person. I wish for the future that we can find both in an acceptable form.
Laura, since you believe GIGI is accurate, explain this.
” How about trying to blame Nancy Pelosi for not calling up the National Guard when she had no power to do so? “
Documents from various sources including the Capitol Police prove that NG troops were authorized by Trump. The law requires Congress to activate them since there is a division of powers, and the Executive, Trump, cannot do that for Congress. Therefore Someone in Congress is the senior person to activate the NG. The job is divided up between Schumer and Pelosi. It was Pelosi’s week, so ultimately it was her responsibility.
If you can’t explain it then you have to accept that Gigi, formerly Natacha, is inaccurate and someone you would not wish to have your personal credibility depends on. She makes these errors all the time to such a degree that most of what she says can and has been proven wrong.
Do you wish to be known to be as crazy as Gigi, or perhaps revamp what you have to say?
While your point is correct, I beleive you are wrong on the details.
Trump can order the NG to go almost anywhere on almost all federal property. One of the few exceptions being the Capitol grounds – those are the exclusive domain of Congress. That is why they have their own police force.
I beleive that sending the NG from one state to another requires an order from the president AND a request from the governor.
The PROPER method for dealing with the capitol is for Pelosi or the CP to ask the president, and for the president to order.
Trump through an under Sec Def asked – Begged the CP to request the NG – they were going to. but then refused.
Eventually Trump ordered DoD to have the NG ready and authorized then to go as soon as hey were requested.
There was absolutely no need for Trump to say “go” – he had prior authorize the NG.
All that was necescary was for Pelosi to call up the comandant and say – get your ass to the Capitol.
Instead she is on cell talking to everyone EXCEPT the people who can give her what she wanted.
She called Northam and asked for the VA guard. A State NG can not cross state lines without presidential authorization.
The DC NG was already authorized and Pelosi knew it.
Much of J6 was political theater – narative construction NOT facts.
And filmed by Nancy’s daughter to be shown on HBO bragging about how great she thinks she is.
It is amazing today how much video we have of so many things, often by those on one side of an issue,
And then those same people in the videos make absurd claims that require none of us to have seen the video to beleive.
But it worked for GiGi.
“While your point is correct, I beleive you are wrong on the details.
Trump can order the NG to go almost anywhere on almost all federal property. One of the few exceptions being the Capitol grounds – those are the exclusive domain of Congress. That is why they have their own police force.
No. We know that the President can call up the NG but not activate them on capitol grounds. That had to be done by Congressional authority. The top authority that day was Nancy Pelosi.
Except possibly choice of words you are not disagreeing.
That can be said to anyone, yourself included. I stay away from that type of debate when discussing things with intelligent people.
” How does Turley know how many “minds” were changed, much less to claim it is a “fact” that the Committee “failed” in some respect to make a substantial impact? ”
Answer: “The fact is that the J6 Committee failed to change many minds largely because of what was on display in the final public meeting.”
More expansively:
They conducted a political show trial.
They did not follow their own rules.
They did not conduct hearings, they conducted scripted for televison events.
They confused style with substance.
There was a prosecution but no defense.
Truth is found by adversarial processes.
They discovered almost nothing that everyone did not know before they started.
The core of their conclusions is that Trump etc. are guilty of opposing us.
In the real world that is not a crime.
The J6 committee was exactly the politicization of our government and particularly law, that our founders were most affraid of.
The rule of law, means sticking to the law we have as written narrowly construed.
You can Deem all the events of J6 and the election challenges as deeply offensive.
You are entitled to believe that. But it is a belief. it is an opinion, a political on at that.
It is not truth. And offending you is not a crime – and NEVER should be.
An analogy – Biden’s conduct is corrupt. It is beyond any doubt that he made a small fortune off og public service
That he personally benefited from swilling at the public trough and from his use of public power.
He can be impeached for that – though I doubt he will. There would be far more substance than either of Trump’s impeachments.
But though there is a solid foundation to investigate Joe Biden’s conduct, none of it SO FAR has proven criminal.
It is possible – even likely that with the current laws regarding bribery and public corruption that nothing Joe Biden has done is criminal.
You can like or dislike Trump’s actions and words after the election.
But they were neither criminal, nor unconstitutional. Nor was anything he attempted criminal or unconstitutional.
There is not even anything he tried that has not actually happened in the past.
Much of what he tried democrats have tried in the past 2 decades.
“just ignore those Dems and RINOS because they’re partisan, they’re biased, the entire process is unfair because we don’t have that ludicrous clown known as “Jim Jordan” there gumming up the works and turning the process into a sh(t show, and, anyway, no one believes them– “nothing to see here”.”
That is correct. We do not have criminal trials without the defendant being allowed to put on their case and call their witnesses and cross examine them.
What you can a sh(t show, is the adversarial process, it is how we find truth.
The J6 committtee failed, because there was nothing to find and it went about finding it in the manner least likely to do so with any credibility.
And lo and behold at the end – nothing. Fizzle.
There is not “nothing to see” – because Turley or others say there is nothing to see, but because literally there is nothing to see.
There are no new revelations.
The J6 committee told us almost nothing nearly everyone did not know on J7.
“Trump insiders TOLD him he really DID lose”
It is things like this that are why the J6 committee failed.
You think that matters.
You think that because some people agree with you everyone must.
You are trying to criminalize rejecting what you claim is true.
You fixate on that as if it is important.
Since nov 2020. Rasmussen has been polling on the 2020 election and consistently 59% of Americans believe ot is somewhat likely that some form of cheating flipped the result.
That was true in Feb 2021, it is true today.
You can rant about Rassmussen – so say they are wrong and it is only 40% of americans.
It is still more than 100m americans.
So hope hicks is not one of those.
You seem to beleive it is a crime not to beleive what you beleive.
It is not.
The election of 2020 will be remembered forever as a messy disaster – YOU did that.
Democrats prevailed – in the sense that Biden became president.
But the results have significant doubt – deservedly, and that is YOUR fault.
You rail about the number of courts that refused to conduct inquiry as if that is proof of something.
What it proves is that everyone’s heads were in the sand.
If you wanted the election to be trusted
You should have followed the law. Not made it all up at the last minute.
You should not have used the power of media and social media to crush any negative stories about your candidate.
You should not have silenced the voices of conservatives on social media making all the platforms one sided.
You shoudl not have bought off the election boards in 6 pivotal cities to the tine of 400M dollars.
You should not have counted every ballot, but only the lawful ballots.
You should not have gamed the election every possible way you could.
You should not have slammed the door shut on all inquiry afterwards.
Trust is built by following the rules. But letting the sun in. but open inquiry.
The fact that you successfully fought all of that tooth and nail sows distrust not trust.
Who knows Biden might have won an honest election.
But we will never know. We did not have an honest election.
Who knows Biden might have won this election
But we will never know. We did not have actual inquiry into this election.
Not believing the results is not a crime.
And the J6 committee will never change the hearts and minds of people until you understand they do not beleive you and they do not trust you,
and they will not beleive or trust you until you start behaving like people who can be beleived and trusted.
Elswwhere I linked to an excellent article by Ruy Tiexiera that make 10 major arguments that Democrats must move to the center quickly or they are in serious trouble.
Ruy’s arguments are excellent, though I think he is wrong for one reason.
Ruy beleives that if democrats move to the center they will be perceived as the moderate party and moderates today are what wins elections.
The reason that he is wrong is because if democrats become more moderate. the lack of differences between the policies of moderate democrats and republicans will make it clear that there is not consequential extreme right.
All that said. Ruy is correct. Democrats are in trouble. They have been in trouble since they failed to grasp why they lost 2016.
They keep doubling down on the left, and as Ruy points out based on 2022,
Biden may be taking a victory lap, but the difference between democrat total dominance on 2020 and republican totoal dominance was less than 100,000 votes nationwide. The same is true of 2022 – except the trends are AWAYS from democrats.
Mailin voting saved democrats ass in 2020 and 2022. Democrats would have lost BOTH elections massively without mailin voting.
But the gains are not trends. Voting trends favor republicans.
It is only a question of time before the scales tip and when they do it will be drastic.
ruy’s shift to the center is democrats only hope, and even that is probably not enough.
“The “peacefully” comment was thrown in as a defense to what he knew the Proud Boys, the 3 percenters and White Supremacists had been planning to do.”
Not a single gun at the capitol on J6 – so what is it that all these evil groups were going to do ?
” Explain to me just HOW someone can “peacefully….fight like hell”. ”
Ever been to a football game ?
“attacked Capitol Police Officers,”
The violence was initiated by the capitol police – the video is available.
If this was a BLM protest in the summer – the CP would be on trial.
“broke into the Capitol”
Why was the capitol locked ?
“urinated and defecated all over the place”
Long ago debunked – did not happen.
“broke into offices, rifled desks and papers, smashed doors and windows,”
None of which would have happened had you done what the constitution requires and alowed them into the capitol to petition govenrment.
“defaced the John Lewis Memorial”
Evidence ?
“and tried to get to the floor of the House to stop Pence from accepting the certified vote totals.”
Just as Kavanaugh protestors tried to stop Kavanaugh.
“They were planning to lynch Pence”
Nope, political theater – democrats do that all the time.
The actual truth is so much less consequential.
This was very little different from the Kavanaugh protests.
“He was especially upset over the fact that if one accepts a pardon, this is legally construed as an admission of guilt.”
That is false as a matter of law and false as a matter of fact.
A pardon is a pardon. You do not get to accept or reject it.
Further it has no meaning regarding guilt or innocence.
Innocent people are pardoned all the time BECAUSE it is learned they are innocent.
Oddly long diatribe on Nixon.
What Nixon did was wrong.
It was also inconsequential compared to the abuses of power by the FBI, CIA, DHS, DOJ, all targeted at republicans in the past 6 years.
“No one is above the law,”
Absolutely Trump broke no laws.
Most of the protestors, including many who have been convicted – broke no laws except that of being republican and daring to do what democrats do all the time in a democrat city.
The capitol should have been opened to protests as it always is.
If necessary the NG should have been there before hand – they were not necessary.
Protesters should have been allowed to orderly march through the capital after being searched for weapons.
They should have been allowed to speak their minds. and leave so that other protesters could enter.
Lawrence O’Donnell?? Go back to sleep. No wonder why you are so confused. You like getting lied to.
Imagine being an adult and believing any of those allegations have merit.
Bunch of feckless sheep on the left. YAWN.
Neil: what did your lying eyes and ears tell you when you watched Trump tell his fans to “fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”, and the videos of Trump fans breaking into the Capitol, erecting a gallows with shouts of “Hang Mike Pence”, and trying to break into the Speaker’s Lobby? And, you’re calling other people “feckless sheep”? You don’t deserve to be called an “American”, if you think this is acceptable.
Then every Congress critter can be held to the same standards then, right???
I would welcome an analysis and discussion by Professor Turley of the specific criminal statutes in the referral. I think a criticism by Anonymous of JT not doing so in this post is an appropriate comment.
Apparently Turley can’t bring himself…
You first. list the required elements for each of those charges. Just the charges. Like making the claim = a conviction.
Here’s what my crystal ball is saying: The J6 circus is over and done with. The refferals will be rejected but the MAL case will proceed. Trump is still like by millions of people but even some of them would prefer that he pass the baton to DeSantis or Cruz. Trump proved a lot while he was president. In the coming year we no doubt will begin to see big changes at the CIA and FBI and much of this will be the result of Trump and his allies. As the Biden Crime Family is exposed, people will come to value once again honesty and integrity in government. We are on the mend. The J6 folks reminded us of what we must do to regain the beauty and power of America. By this time next year, we should have more facts about things the J6 people avoided intentionally as they rushed to judgment. The New Year will indeed be happy!
I wish I could be as optimistic as you. To me, nothing will happen to the CIA or FBI. You can’t even put people like Hillary in jail after being caught red handed, just how would there be any consequences for the CIA or FBI? Two years will pass and the dems will just steal another election. Nothing will change until a revolution or some sort of separation.
To me, nothing will happen to the CIA or FBI.
I agree Jim. There is an interesting article in The Federalist today and it’s the first time I’ve heard the term sheep-dipped. These agencies went rogue 60 years ago and today they are hiding in plain sight.
Based on what we know, there’s absolutely no reason not to assume that, of the numerous former FBI and CIA employees at Twitter, some weren’t either informally or directly working for intel agencies. Further, it is incredibly alarming that the watchdogs that are supposed to protect us from rogue government agencies eroding our rights can’t be bothered to investigate this.
For most of my life, the corporate media, and the activist left in particular, treated these agencies with extreme skepticism. Revelations such as these would formerly have set off klaxons in newsrooms.
https://thefederalist.com/2022/12/20/are-fbi-and-cia-agents-sheep-dipped-at-twitter-and-other-tech-companies/
1} “…but did not offer a substantive defense to the allegations”
The star chamber was ostensibly investigating for unspecified legislative purposes: They never made an allegation against which to defend.
2) “So it is a one-sided account because there really is not another side.”
It was billed as truth finding. Would they {or you} have held anything the Bad Orange Man (TM) said as truth?
While the star chamber did offer some items of fact, painting an authoritative picture of truth requires using all colors on the pallet. The faded, out-of-focus and heavily-copped daguerreotype the star chamber produced is woefully crude and inadequate for any practical purpose. Their patent, stringent, and pontifical omissions of that which ran counter to their foreordained (and comically-predictable) “referrals” are only revelatory to the same simpletons and rubes who *still* think Christopher Steele should write the next translation of the Bible.
The J6 committee only succeeded on one point: Having been shown shown the man they have found a crime (four, even!) even Lavrentiy Beria would describe as breathtakingly audacious. To consider their work as otherwise is the product of a reprobate mind.
Jonathan Turley wrote, “The J6 Referral Falls Short of a Credible Criminal Case”
Falls short is an gross understatement!!!
Alan Dershowitz, a life long Liberal Democrat, tells us the unbridled truth that what the committee did was not constitutional and he proves it.
@Steve,
You do realize this place is almost an echo chamber.
You provide a logical and decent references in support of Turley.
Most here agree and thus echo your belief.
Yet those who are constantly playing the part of the ‘troll’ clearly have no interest in any form of constructive dialog and will not watch the video, nor will they bother to even consider your viewpoint. In short… they are dead space and ignored.
So you can’t win even when you bring forth real talking points.
-G
Ian Michael Gumby wrote, “@Steve, You do realize this place is almost an echo chamber. You provide a logical and decent references in support of Turley. Most here agree and thus echo your belief. Yet those who are constantly playing the part of the ‘troll’ clearly have no interest in any form of constructive dialog and will not watch the video, nor will they bother to even consider your viewpoint. In short… they are dead space and ignored. So you can’t win even when you bring forth real talking points.”
Thanks but what are you suggesting, should I give up and not post anything because only the echo chamber people are going to read it?
Those that aren’t part of what you’re calling the echo chamber are the real target of the information I share and whether they choose to read it or not is their choice. I vote to continue to do my best.
The Salem witch trials were also unjust but they still burned a few witches. The power of the state ran amok then and has run amok now. And like today, they are getting away with it. For all their faults, Democrats get it: “There is more to life than law: Winning trumps law.”
Chuckiechan wrote, “The Salem witch trials were also unjust but they still burned a few witches.”
False. They burned a few innocent people.
Chuckiechan wrote, “For all their faults, Democrats get it: ‘There is more to life than law: Winning trumps law.’ “
Yup, that’s reasonably accurate.
I wrote the following a few days ago…
The Democratic Party appears to be on the verge of, or already past the threshold of, complete moral bankruptcy.
Just an FYI: if you’ve visited Salem, MA recently, you will know that the city has finally come to the realization that the “witch trials” were really about religious persection by the Puritans against those who were not part of their sect. The Puritans blamed everything from droughts, crop failures and cow miscarriages on so-called “witches”, most of whom were women, so misogyny was also at play. Some of the “witches” had mental health problems, too. The “witches” were just convenient scapegoats. Considering that this history of religious persection is nothing to be proud of or to celebrate, they try to downplay this aspect of the city’s heritage and to emphasize the colonial architecture and other aspects of their history.
It’s stunning to me that anyone could accuse Democrats of “complete moral bankruptcy” when the Republican party has as its titular head a pathological liar who is a malgnant narcissist who tried to foment an insurrection based on the fact that he can’t accept the will of the American people. The complaints you accuse the Democrats of in your flowery rhetoric are simply not true.
Gigi wrote, “It’s stunning to me that anyone could accuse Democrats of ‘complete moral bankruptcy’ when the Republican party has as its titular head a pathological liar who is a malgnant narcissist who tried to foment an insurrection based on the fact that he can’t accept the will of the American people.”
Are you really so ignorant to think that anything the Republicans do makes what I wrote not true? This isn’t a sophomoric battle of rationalizing whataboutisms Gigi, the facts remain the same and you’re welcome to your opinion about Republicans. Personally, I’m a life long Independent that has turned completely away from voting for any Democrats until they pull their immoral woke heads out of their rear ends, and no that doesn’t make me a Republican.
Gigi wrote, “The complaints you accuse the Democrats of in your flowery rhetoric are simply not true.”
Nothing I wrote is false Gigi, it’s all completely true, denial is not a river in Egypt. Your statement is signature significant of that moral bankruptcy that I mentioned, you’re either lying through your teeth or blindly ignorant and either way you’re wrong.
I don’t even know where to start with your BS. Democrats do not promote “free sex”. Democrats, and most Americans for that matter, believe that a woman has the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy up to the point of fetal viability, and that whether life protected under the Constitution begins when a sperm penetrates the outer wall of an egg cell is a matter of personal belief–Constitutional protections of liberty and privacy allow people to believe or not believe and to act accordingly up to the age of fetal viability–which was the law in the US for 50 years. Greiner’s sexual orientation has nothing to do with whether Biden made the right choice on the prisoner exchange–she is an American citizen who had been prescribed CBD for orthopaedic pain–the choice was to trade her for the Russian or no deal at all. He had already served something like 15 years in prison on a 25 year sentence. Mentioning her sexual orientation proves you are biased, but—you left out her race. Democrats do not “hate” the police–where is there any proof of this? They don’t support unarmed black people getting shot and killed by police officers, and most Americans agree. George Floyd’s murder was a flash point in this issue. Just more of your alt-right rhetoric, such as: “choosing to use pure innuendo filled and false propaganda instead of actual truth, etc., etc.” That’s exactly what you do.
Your comment is a fine example of a unethical rationalizations. The primary one is…
See if you can browse through the list of unethical rationalizations and figure out which other ones apply to things you wrote in your comment.
One specific thing; you wrote, “Mentioning her sexual orientation proves you are biased, but—you left out her race.”
That proves I actually wrote facts, the spin is your blatantly false smear. And by the way idiot; I did mention her race when I wrote, “popular LGBT black female sports player”, maybe you should read things thoroughly or choose not to lie when the facts are staring you in the face. Of course now that I proved that used the word “black” in there to describe her race are you lie to everyone and make up that I’m racist too?
OT but somewhat related, from economist and sometimes social commentator Charles H. Smith,
A Great Madness Sweeps The Land
“Those who see the madness for what it is have only one escape: go to ground, fade from public view, become self-reliant and weather the coming storm in the nooks and crannies.
A great madness sweeps the land. There are no limits on extremes in greed, credulity, convictions, inequality, bombast, recklessness, fraud, corruption, arrogance, hubris, pride, over-reach, self-righteousness and confidence in the rightness of one’s opinions. Extremes only become more extreme even as the folly of previous extremes wearies rationality.
Imaginary sins are conjured out of thin air to convict the innocent while those guilty of the most egregious fraud and corruption are lauded as saviors.”
The rest here: https://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2022/12/a-great-madness-sweeps-land.html
Before this sham proceeding disappears into history, we should consider how it resembled the Reichstag Fire.
In January 1933, Hitler had a problem. He had just been made Chancellor, but his party had underperformed in the November 1932 elections. New elections were scheduled for March 1933, and his political position could decline further. He had a limited window to destroy the Weimar Republic, but there was a path: 1) invocation by the President of Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution, which would allow the Chancellor to rule by decree during an emergency; and 2) consent by 2/3 of the deputies to suspend the Constitution. But the latter seemed impossible since the Communist Party had 81 deputies in the Reichstag. Fortune intervened, probably with Hitler’s help. On February 27, 1933, a Dutch communist laborer, van der Lubbe, apparently set fire to the Reichstag. Hitler immediately blamed the Communists. President Hindenburg invoked Article 48. Hindenburg then signed the Reichstag Fire Ordinance, which suspended civil liberties. Hitler arrested Communist deputies, and carried on a propaganda campaign warning of a Communist coup. Four Communist leaders, along with van der Lubbe, were put on trial in Dresden for the arson. (Fortunately for the leaders, Saxon justice was not as corrupt, and they were all acquitted.) But the NSDAP improved its position in the March elections, and March 23, 1933, the Reichstag passed “the Enabling Act”, which assigned all legislative power to Hitler and his ministers.
smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-reichstag-fire-and-nazis-rise-power-180962240: britannica.com/event/Reichstag-fire;history. com/ topics/germany/ reichstag -fire; dw.com /en/the-law-that-Enabled -hitlers- dictatorship/a-16689839; dw.com/en/ voting-in- the- midst-of-nazi-
terror/a-16646980 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Reichstag_ fire
In January 2021, Democrats also had a problem. They had just won a Presidential election by dubious means, and had actually lost an unexpected number of Congressional seats. Something had to be done to prevent loss of power. An issue to use against Republicans needed to be found. Again, Lady Luck (helped by the FBI) intervened. On January 6, 2021, some pro-Trump protestors entered the Capitol building without permission and played with Nancy Pelosi’s laptop. One of the demonstrators actually caused herself to be shot to death by a well-meaning member of the Capitol Police. What an outrage! What an opportunity! Democrats flew into action. Dozens of protesters were thrown into jail for long periods of time without bail and then sentenced to long prison terms. Insufficiently-repentant Republican leaders were accused by the MSM of “incitement”. Trump was impeached again. And the entire trespass en masse was called “an attack on Democracy”. A “reform bill” was drafted to prevent “insurrectional” Republicans from appearing on the ballot. The MSM called people who raised questions about the 2020 Presidential election “election deniers”. And, of course, this committee of partisan Democrats and two Republican turncoats was established as an open inquisition of Trump and Republicans generally. Indeed, their plan did have some success when many votes actually seemed to believe that “democracy” was on the ballot in the 2022 mid-terms. Fortunatly, they have not yet succeeeded making it impossible for Republicans to win control of government, but they will continue to pursue that goal.
To the Jan6th committee, we are tired of Trump in all aspects. We want to move on. He is not going to win the GOP primary. But you keep bringing him up again and again. By doing so, you keep him in the news. You make him seen. If you really want him to go away, ignore him.
They keep Trump in the “news” to ignore news
UpstateFarmer: The Democrats don’t want Trump to go away — he’s the only distraction they have against Biden’s crimes. Even if the DOJ knows it has no case whatsoever, it’ll begin the prosecution process just to keep the distraction theater going. We’re at the point in US history where political parties have ceased working for the people and now only work to keep themselves in power.
GioCon,
Good point.
I would only argue by keeping Trump in the news, Trump serves as a reminder of all the Biden failures i.e. the economy, inflation, an open border, fueling the proxy war against Russia etc.
You see the recent WH lie? The poorly done photoshop pic! And they thought we would be dumb enough not to see it!
“I would only argue by keeping Trump in the news, Trump serves as a reminder of all the Biden failures i.e. the economy, inflation, an open border, fueling the proxy war against Russia etc.”
He also keeps a lot of heat away from DeSantis and other Republicans. The left is spending their resources and credibility on Trump who I believe on his own accord will decide not to run or not to run too hard. Who knows. Right now the left is wasting their resources.
Trump will never go away as long as he’s alive. He’s a malignant narcissist who seeks attention every day.
If he committed crimes, he should be charged. No one, including a former president, should be above the law.
I suspect that he is more likely to be charged soon for his knowing failure to turn over government documents with classified markings despite being subpoenaed for them. The DOJ now has access to the full set of documents taken in the MaL search to use in their investigation. Presumably the fingerprints on the full set of documents will help them figure out who else they want to interview and what they want to ask.
If the “failure to act” is a crime, they should have locked up Biden two years ago for his crimes at the border.
Twitter Files 7 dropped around noon, when the committee met at 1:00 they knew the progressive “news” needed a Trump story to ignore the Twitter Files 7. Add in Redfield’s COVID comments – something “big” had to drop, regardless of merits.
It’s a rare opportunity to clearly, unambiguously, witness complicity, collusion, aiding criminal activity, misinformation by omission, EVERY DAY, on our TV and information feeds.
We all can watch as it happens, tell our grandchildren, remember – with every “news” show that does not mention anything about the #TwitterFiles.
Support these courageous journalists:
Bari Weiss @bariweiss, Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi,
Michael Shellenberger @shellenbergMD and Jonathan Turley too
Clay Goldstein,
Hear! Hear!
I reckon even young puppy dogs cannot be taught new tricks!
Did you actually read what the Professor had to say in this and all of the many other articles he has published on this matter?
When your opponent is committing ritual suicide you do not hinder him…..that is why Trump did not come before the Committee….he left them to craft their own defeat.
Which….just like other two Impeachments…..this being the un-official third attempt….the Democrats failed miserably with Schiff for Brains using the same old Playbook of Lie and Deny and promise the Moon to the Useful Idiots that fall for that hook, line, and sinker….and in this case without any bait involved.
The last desperate gasp of the prog/left now that the nation is beginning to understand the colluded nature of the 2020 election. All this public display of farce has done is cement opinions on both sides but prove nothing. Let the Twitter files expose the real truth.
So, did Trump’s failure to rely on the Insurrection Act to deploy the army to stop the George Floyd riots in mainly Democrat controlled cities amount to a crime?
I would say, yes, with a codicil that had he done so he would have been more severely criticized than that to which he is now being subjected by the fanatic prog/left. He was put, as he was many times by the media/education industries, into a no-win situation just as they wanted. He was the figure head of a movement that, having originated prior to his run for office, was willing to call the bluff on the unhinged left. He was their target at that point because they knew that if he succeeded, their domination of America was over.
Jim Jordan was actually asked to appear before the committee for a deposition and refused. He is one of the 4 House members who’ve been referred to the House Ethics Committee for refusing to appear for a deposition.
This was posted as a reply to Puppy Dog’s 10:06 AM comment but was dethreaded due to some tech glitch.
They asked many people to appear as trophies, not as witnesses. Of course they refer him to the house ethics committee, they are Democrats and they are unethical.
Jim Jordan was actually asked to appear before the committee for a deposition and refused.
Let’s first see of Pelosi comes in when Republicans have subpoena power.
And about 8 of her office staff. Not that the staff have an information. But its time Democrats are bankrupted by lawfare for political revenge. Mutual assured distruction is the only way to right this ship the Dems have allowed to rot.
“If the failure to act is criminal, it is hard to see what would not criminal under this standard.”
Failure to act can be criminal when the person has a legal duty to act. For example, if a parent fails to seek medical attention when a child is seriously ill and the child then dies, the parent can be charged with negligent homicide. Turley presumably understands this as a law professor, but is silent about it, as it undermines his desired argument. He should know that sometimes the failure to act is criminal, and he should also know that under that standard, it in NO way implies that everything will be criminal.
The J6 Committee referrals to the DOJ are politically significant but are likely legally insignificant — unless the J6C turns over evidence that is useful to the DOJ. The DOJ will make its own decisions about whether to charge any of these people and is already investigating them. None of us have seen all of the J6C evidence, as they haven’t released all of the depositions, emails, etc., and haven’t even made their full report public, only the Introductory Material:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23466415-introductory-material-to-the-final-report-of-the-select-committee
“Failure to act can be criminal “
Failure to act in this case isn’t criminal and Trump did act, so your claim is incorrect.
Another typical argument by anonymous that has no content, so he reverses the original argument once again. It’s time for new stuff.
“Failure to act in this case isn’t criminal and Trump did act, so your claim is incorrect.”
I believe testimony indicates you are incorrect. He did not act. McCarthy himself yelled at trump to send in help and trump refused.
Where do you get the idea the trump did act?
“Where do you get the idea the trump did act?”
“Trump made his statement to stop — roughly an hour and a half later.”_Turley
My answer was in response to ATS. He gave an example, “if a parent fails to seek medical attention when a child is seriously ill and the child then dies, the parent can be charged with negligent homicide.” Many parents don’t initially seek medical attention, but eventually most do. Are they charged with negligent homicide? Trump did act.
Oh, I dunno…maybe from reality”??? (also, the article to which you are “commenting”: “At 1:11 p.m., Trump concluded his speech. Around 2:10 p.m., people surged up the Capitol steps. At 4:17 p.m., Trump made his statement to stop — roughly an hour and a half later.”)
Granted, he didn’t run to the Capitol and start putting people in zip ties. Nor did he draw his rapier and physically defend the building (nay: defend The Very Core Essence Of Our Democracy (TM)). If that’s the standard then the entirety of congress, all members of the judiciary, and every element of Mr. Trump’s administration except law enforcement are guilty as well. Likewise, you, I, and the non-demonstrating populace are equally deserving of a traitor’s death for failing to fly/drive to DC to personally conduct citizen’s arrests in the name of Saving Our Democracy(TM)!!!
McCarthy himself yelled at trump to send in help and trump refused.
You are way out in front of your skis, knowledge wise.
The Office President, lacks constitutional power to “send” help. If you are speaking of the National Gaurd, understand the Office of Vice President has the exact same power. That is to say, none, until asked.
Turley may call it a one-sided account – but the Committee asked Trump to appear to give his side of the story and he declined. He was on truth social talking about this and calling people names but did not offer a substantive defense to the allegations.
So it is a one-sided account because there really is not another side. Sure, we did not get to hear Jim Jordan et al running interference, asking about Hunter Biden or Benghazi, but they really do not have a defense to the substance either.
The story may be boring and we heard all this before – but really the people who live in the Trump bubble have not.