Smith’s Sirens: Can Trump Be Convicted for the Lure of Bad Lawyering?

Below is my column in The Messenger on the emerging controversy in the Trump prosecutions over the testimony of former counsel to the former president. Various lawyers have now accepted plea bargains. However, Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County District Attorney appear to be arguing that, while Trump was assured of these claims by counsel, he should never have listened to them. It is a type of “Siren’s Call” theory of criminality.

Here is the column:

In Homer’s “Odyssey,” Odysseus faces one of his most fearsome threats — the three Sirens, beautiful sea creatures who lure sailors to their ruin with their seductive songs.

Special Counsel Jack Smith and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis have offered a modern version of the Sirens in the lure of bad lawyering. Three lawyers have recently pleaded guilty in Georgia, and they may join other former counsel in testifying against their former client.

What is novel is the criminal “Siren’s call” theory of these cases. Former President Donald Trump is being prosecuted for following the advice of his counsel, who are now effectively saying that he should not have believed what they were telling him.

This is not to say that Trump is an unwitting victim of bad legal advice. He steadfastly ignored the overwhelming advice of lawyers in the White House and many of us in the media. He pushed for counsel who would support these claims. Indeed, some of the lawyers sound like they were lured by the Siren call of Trump, led astray from their better legal judgment.

Kenneth Chesebro’s attorney, Scott Grubman, says that “Mr. Chesebro never believed in ‘the Big Lie’” and believes that Biden won the election.

Likewise, Sidney Powell  has argued that “no reasonable person would conclude that my statements were truly statements of fact” as opposed to opinions.

Jenna Ellis recently stated “Why I have chosen to distance is because of that frankly malignant narcissistic tendency to simply say that he’s never done anything wrong.”

However, the question is whether a client should be subject to criminal prosecution in following such advice. These lawyers were not just confident but enthusiastic after the election in pursuing the claims they now repudiate. Moreover, their plea agreements had a number of notable omissions. First, none pleaded guilty to a conspiracy with Trump or to racketeering. Second, none will face jail time, and the prosecution has agreed that they did not commit crimes of moral turpitude. All three could keep their licenses.

It is also not clear that these attorneys would implicate Trump if called. They could prove more damaging to other defendants such as Rudy Giuliani, or they could still prove harmful to the prosecution’s overall theory. They secured no jail deals, but only agreed to testify truthfully. Some, like Ellis, may now have animus but lack evidence against Trump in establishing a conspiracy or racketeering claim.

Both the federal and state prosecutions are premised on the claim that Trump never believed what he was saying about a stolen election. If Trump actually did believe he had viable claims in the courts or Congress, the prosecutions would collapse. Even Smith admits that Trump’s early election claims were protected political speech, but at some point became a criminal conspiracy when Trump had to know that his claims were baseless.

The most dangerous aspect to the federal indictment is that Smith leaves the line entirely undefined for future cases. If Trump crossed the Rubicon into criminal conduct in his election claims, Smith should be able to point to the river on the map. Instead, Smith offers no limiting principle on when election claims move from the sensational to the criminal.

That is particularly concerning, since many election claims in the courts or Congress have been unfounded. For example, Marc Elias, who served as general counsel to Hillary Clinton’s campaign and played a key role in its secret funding of the infamous Steele dossier, challenged past elections on such grounds. After the 2020 election, he challenged a New York election by claiming that voting machines had flipped the results in favor of the Republicans through mistabulations.

Likewise, leading Democrats such as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sought to block certification of Donald Trump’s 2106 election victory despite lacking any evidence of fraud or legal or factual basis. None of these challenges were raised as potential crimes or even considered unethical.

Smith and Willis are seeking to use Trump’s own counsel to prove that he eventually knew that the election claims were bogus. This remains uncharted territory. Presidents often make unconstitutional claims.

Indeed, President Joe Biden admitted that, in seeking to reinstate the flagrantly unconstitutional national eviction moratorium, his White House counsel and every other lawyer told him that it violated the Constitution. He admitted that he was able to find only one lawyer — Harvard Professor Larry Tribe — who told him that he could do it. He went ahead, and it was found unconstitutional. It did not matter that Tribe has often been proven wrong on such claims or that Biden appeared to have doubts himself. It was enough that he thought it might have a slight chance of success to, according to Biden, get some relief before any injunction.

Many of us disagreed with Trump’s election claims and the theories put forward by this legal team. Indeed, I criticized Trump’s Jan. 6 speech as he was still giving it. Moreover, Trump clearly evinced impatience and even anger with those (like Attorney General Bill Barr) who dismissed the claims. Finally, there is no question that clients often look for lawyers who will tell them what they want to hear. However, it is also clear that Trump found such lawyers.

While Sam Bankman-Fried insisted that he relied on the advice of counsel for his decisions as head of FTX, he could not recall any specific instances of such advice. That is not a problem for Trump, since his counsel was speaking in public on an almost daily basis as to the legal and factual foundations for his claims. They would have to now argue that, despite all the assurances they gave, Trump would have been a fool to believe them.

Yet, accounts from inside the Oval Office show that Trump’s lawyers are going head to head with other lawyers in making the case that their theories could prevail in court. It appears that they were saying privately exactly what they were saying publicly.

The question is how far this Siren’s theory of criminality will go. It is not uncommon for campaigns to seek novel or low-likelihood claims in court. Moreover, since when are clients criminally culpable for following the advice of a team of lawyers?

To resist the Sirens, Odysseus forced his crew to lash him to the mast and fill their own ears with wax, because the “high, thrilling song of the Sirens will transfix him.” Short of lashing a president to his chair in the Oval Office, the question is when the lure of lawyers can lead to actual prison time. For as Homer warned, “those creatures…spellbind any man alive.”

Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.


272 thoughts on “Smith’s Sirens: Can Trump Be Convicted for the Lure of Bad Lawyering?”

  1. Sidney Powell prevented national security adviser Michael Flynn from a taking a long vacation in prison as she fought against our judiciary’s efforts to destroy him. Don’t underestimate what she will do to vindicate herself and Trump.

  2. Serious question. Everyone can see what these leftists in power are doing to Trump, his family, his businesses, and to Trump MAGA supporters.

    This is not justice. This is not equal justice under law. This is lawlessness. This is election interference. This is abuse of power. This is exactly the corruption of banana republics and 3rd world dictatorships! Why are we allowing this? It must be stopped and not tolerated another day!

    How does Letitia James get stopped? How does SHE get prosecuted for abuse of power? For wasting taxpayer money on political vendettas? How is this allowed to continue? Judge Engoron is allowing this to continue in his courtoom? It’s outrageous!

    How do we stop the corrupt leftist judges allowing this fraud to continue? This IS the Democrat strategy to “win” in 2024 and Republicans are passively allowing it? My God they are a disgrace. Get loud and call it out!

    Where are the Republicans in Congress? Where is Mitch McConnell? I don’t hear any of them shouting from their pulpits, or all over TV, in protest and with absolute outrage at what the Democrats and their operatives are doing. Where are they?? My God, their silence is a disgrace.

    We have no Rule of Law! Innocent people are being politically targeted and persecuted BY this lawless Justice Department! Criminals are given a pass!

    Are these “lawmakers” — both GOP & Democrats — just going to be silent and LET it continue because they don’t want Trump reelected either? My God, the GOP needs to be called out and shamed for their complicity in this lawlessness. Impeach Merrick Garland for starters. Impeach Chris Wray! DO something. Where are the ground troops? This lawlessness must be stopped! It’s outrageous.

  3. Trump lost, knew he lost, and insisted on listening to his crazy lawyers over his sane ones. Full stop. He’s the definition of the type of character the founders truly feared. Indeed, they put protections in against such a character…, but they didn’t forsee having an entire political party (and their legal consultants such as Turley) run interference for a scoundrel.

  4. “. . . the federal and state prosecutions . . .”

    Both of those cases are absurd and their intent is obvious.

    Trump used facts and legal theories the Left doesn’t like. Dissent is a crime — if your name is Trump and you are the leading opposition candidate.

    The Left, of course, doesn’t admit the obvious. Instead, it obfuscates with scary sounding words like “conspiracy,” “racketeering,” “fraud.” But, then, since when has the Left been honest about its policies and motivations?

    Don’t tell me to “read the indictment,” and its footnotes and the entirety of the literature referenced in the footnotes. If I want fiction, I’ll read Agatha Christie.

  5. Prof. Turley;

    You are way too far to the left on this.

    The Election was PROVEN fraudlent when it was established that numerous agencies of the Federal Government pushed social media to censor political expression they did not like.

    That is unconstitutional, that is immoral, That is a violation of the core principles of this country.

    The moment that was exposed – everyone claiming that Trump’s election claims were unfounded should have hidden in shame.

    While the censorship went well beyond federal agencies – and while private censorship is legal and constitutional – it STILL remains immoral and unethical and it is election fraud.

    But more importantly Those whose respect for the constitution, the rule of law, and individual rights is so poor that they will censor others – or worse still use government to censor others – can not be trusted in ANYTHING else.

    Falsus in unum falsus in omnibus.

    You have repeatedly argued that the claims of 2020 election fraud were never credible.

    Yet, just recently a CT judge found that as much as 37% of the absentee (mailin) ballots in the Bridgeport conneticut Mayoral primay may have been fraudulent.

    Of course one of the reasons for suspending all our election rules in 2020, was because in a democratic primary in may in Newark NJ a Judge found over 250,000 mailin ballots highly suspect – I beleive fraud prosecutions are ongoing in that primary.

    The FACT is there has been plenty of EVIDENCE of Fraud int eh 2020 election.

    What is True is that the left, democrats, the media, social media – and unfortunately you – can recognize Election Fraud when Democrats do it to other democrats. But when we see the Same thing being done by democrats to republicans – you ignore it.
    There is geofencing data that shows people going from ballot box to ballot box – as many as 10 differnt ballot boxes in one night in each of the 6 key cities in each of the 6 swing states in 2020 – an estimated 800,000 to 2M illegally harvested ballots. Ballot harvesting was illegal in every state in the US except California in 2020. It also violates the states constitution in each of the 38 US states that have constituional provisions requiring a secret ballot.

    But in additon to the geofencing data, and coroborating it is the video of unattended ballot drop boxes in 5 of the 6 key cities in the 6 swing states – showing EXACTLY what the CT judge saw – except on a far larger scale.

    Political operatives repeatedly going to multiple ballot boxes and depositing as many as 20 ballots at a time – over and over and over.

    The FACT is the 2020 election was RIGGED. It was Stolen. That is at this point beyond a doubt.

    What is unanswered right now is exactly how many different kinds of election fraud were committed.

    Regardless, there is no difference except scale between the bridgeport CT, Democratic Mayoral primary and the 2020 presidential election in GA, AZ, MI, PA, NV, and WI.

    1. “Prof. Turley;
      You are way too far to the left on this.”

      This idea is one of Professor Turley’s biggest failures. He is either too naive or too protective. 2000 Mules should have opened his and the eyes of many others. All the inconsistencies and unexplained events should tell us this was likely a stolen election through fraud and deceit.

      Honesty demands that we return to a proper election process of voting on one day and all the other things frequently mentioned. But honesty is not what we hear from the left, where power is considered more important than life itself.

      1. Seth,

        I didn’t see 2000 Mules. But I can tell you that there are enough anomalies that were ignored during the election that caused concern.
        Want to steal an election?

        First you need Motor Voter laws where anyone who goes to get a drivers license can get registered to vote. (Think about that when you have a line of illegal aliens who get drivers licenses in those states that allow it.

        Now you have extra bodies on the roll.

        Using ERIC, you can see the voter registrations and who is likely or unlikely to cast a vote.
        Taking those who are unlikely to vote but are registered, you now have a population of potential fraudulent votes.

        Update their address to get a mail in ballot out to them… send it to that address, then either revert the rolls or not.
        Now the ballots are out there. Do what you want.

        Downgrade the requirements on mail in ballots and signature matching.
        Most of the drones will not stop the ballot.

        Now that’s the basic part.

        The more complicated part is changing the law so that if the ballot was ‘postmarked’ or dropped off by election day, it still has to count.
        (You can guess how to rig that part)

        But you still need to see Eric data. So you know how many votes to manufacture.
        Dominion data from real time monitoring of votes was being shared w the Democrats in some areas.

        All that said… in Michigan, an investigation was underway due to the massive irregularities in signature and absentee voter information.
        FBI sat on it.

        So yes, you can steal an election. Very simple if you have access to data, and people willing to break the law(s).

        1. I like watching criminals on video stuffing ballot boxes 10 times in a night. This was criminal behavior by the Democrat Party that was not prosecuted.

          The video is fascinating and all the significant negative statements about it were debunked. This proves one can perform a criminal act on camera, repeat it and still get away.

  6. Alan, please provide a link describing those”18″ court victories you think Trump’s campaign won. And show us what bearing those cases had on the final election results.

    Because if there was “18” victories by Trump’s campaign, that information was only released to obscure rightwing sources that most Americans never heard of.

      1. For about 2+ years, the issue that Trump lost all 60 cases repeatedly arose. We heard the left’s screams and saw their links, which proved they were ignorant of the facts.

        ATS, Gigi, Sammy, Svelaz, and all the anonymous commentators chimed in, proving their ignorance.

        ATS wanted proof and asked me for some cases. If you remember, I provided one and then another, but did he provide proof for his side of the argument? No. He could only furnish his usual unhelpful rhetoric, lies, and links. They are all liars and ignorant.

        I have had the same lists for these 2+ years but enjoyed listening to their idiocy while I had all the cases and all the links.

        Do those guys now feel stupid? No, they are too ignorant and have too much of a Borg mindset to have regrets. Any argument with them is a one-way argument. Provide proof, and they run away only to return by spouting the same nonsense.

        You released an excellent source (updated from when I last looked) that should put the 60 court cases argument to rest, but it won’t because we can remind them how, for 2+ years, they spouted their nonsense and only provided their ignorance.

    1. Anonymous – While I am not interested in a debate over the courts – the Courts failed the American people before, during and after the 2020 election.

      But your argument is ludicrously stupid. You seem to think that it matters where FACTS are reported.

      I have little trust for the MSM anymore – because so much of their reporting has proven false.
      But the FACT that the MSM is drowning in political bias, does not mean that when they choose to report FACTS that those facts are in error.

      If Der Sturmer reports something that is actually a fact, it does not become false, because it is being reported by a Neo-Nazi Press organ.

      Regardless, we are WELL PAST the need to establish that the 2020 election was rigged anymore. The only outstanding question regarding election fraud in 2020 is how many MORE allegations of election fraud are true.

  7. More Than 50 Courts Rejected Trump’s Claims

    State and federal judges dismissed more than 50 lawsuits presented by then President Donald Trump and his allies challenging the election or its outcome.

    For some reason Professor Turley saw no reason to mention all these courts. But they certainly lend context to the issue at hand. If your case keeps getting rejected, it’s probably full of holes; regardless of what any lawyer tells you.

    1. Courts that didn’t see the evidence. In the courts where evidence made it through the standing phase the results are much different.

        1. Typical leftist response, a link. Why don’t you guys start using fact. Provide the court cases and the results.

          Over and over again you guys provide links without evidence.

            1. “For some reason Professor Turley saw no reason to mention all these courts.”

              Then copy the cases and provide them instead of linking and saying they exist. Then you can separate the 60 plus cases into cases heard, won by Trump/ GOP and won by the opposition.

              The proportions will be about the same. Trump/ GOP won 2-3X more cases than the opposition.

              In any case, thank you for linking proving that all you have are links without proof.

              1. You’re quoting the Anonymous who wrote the 8:47 PM comment, but you’re responding to me, a different Anonymous. I’m not responsible for the other Anonymous’s claim.

                The report already does what you demand. It was written by conservatives, including two former judges, one of whom was Mike Pence’s legal counsel. If you’re unwilling to read it the report, fine. I don’t care. It’s there for anyone who’s interested, which apparently doesn’t include you. And now I’ll go back to doing what I normally do with you: ignoring you entirely.

                1. “I’m not responsible for the other Anonymous’s claim.”

                  Yes, you are.

                  It is your choice to hide yourself among other anonymous figures and maintain deniability. By doing so, you force yourself to accept responsibility for what they say. Therefore, ATS, you carry the blame for what other anonymous figures of your persuasion say unless they sign a name.

                  You dislike this lack of distinction, as demonstrated by your complaint. Only you control the identity you post under.

                  You are a known liar about your identity and other things you said in the past. Why should anyone trust the liar, you, who carries an anonymous name?

                  Take note how many people consider you a liar. Check out John Say’s comment at November 7, 2023 at 3:19 AM

            2. Anonymous – you do not seem to grasp – few people trust you. You have lied so many times about so many things and been caught
              I would not even follow a link of yours anymore.

              Long ago – I would have followed your link and noted each instance that you misrepresented the article, as well as how the reporter conflated spin with facts, and disected the whole thing line by line.

              I am passed that now.

              Real debate and argument is for those who do not lie constantly about everything.

              You also seem to think those you are arguing with – are trapped int he same bubble you are.

              That is false. SM and I and many others are well aware of many – though not all of the myriads of instances exposing 2020 election fraud.

              Has fraud on the scale of 10’s of millions of votes been established ? Nope.

              But the 2020 presidential election hinged on 44,000 ballots in 3 states. The SMALLEST estimate of illegal ballot harvesting in the 6 swing states is about 800,000 illegal ballots. The largest estimate is over 2M.
              If the smallest estimate is off by a factor of just less than 20 – Trump would still have won.

              Numerous polls after the election have found that 6-20% of democrats would have voted differently had they been aware of the Hunter Biden laptop story. Though that does make you wonder what rock democrats live under.

              But it would not have required 20% of democrats, or 6%, or even 0.6%. merely 0.25% in 3 states would have flipped the election.
              Nor would these democrats have had to vote for Trump – all that is needed is that they do not vote for Biden.

              Trump is currently leading Biden in 5 of the 6 swing states – by as much as 10%. This is likely to increase over time.

              Democrats have thrown everything including the kitchen sink at Trump and outside the left voters do not care.

              Most of us expect there will be large scale fraud in 2024 Also. But Democrats have a problem. The scale of the fraud in 2020 is about as large as under optimal circumstances with fawning courts and a fawning press and social media censorship – democrats could get away with. And in 2024 – more fraud will be required, and that is not possibble without getting caught.

              1. “And in 2024 – more fraud will be required, and that is not possibble without getting caught.” They know that, John. They simply won’t care when caught since Media and Courts will ignore or otherwise refuse to investigate. That’s a problem that is far more difficult to overcome.

        2. No Anonymous – the courts did NOT see the evidence. Absolutely courts CLAIMED to rule on the merits – but the legal basis they chose for decisions – mootness, laches, ripeness, standing. … all haveNOTHING to do with merits, and all occured BEFORE any hearings on the merits, any discovery.

          The courts straight through the supreme court did an excellent job of covering up after the fact for their unconscionable decions that allowed the fraud to occur before the fact.

        3. The fact that the election was stolen is established beyond any doubt by the undeniable PROOF that federal government agencies engaged in mass political censorship during the 2020 election.

          The only unanswered question today is how many other forms of election fraud were there ?

          Those who would violate the constitution, the law, ethics and morality to win an election by censorship, can be assumed to engage in all kinds of other election fraud.

    2. “For some reason Professor Turley saw no reason to mention all these courts.”

      Because you don’t understand what the subject matter is all about. If a judge doesn’t hear a case for many reasons, that doesn’t mean anyone won or lost based on the merits.

      Based on the merits Trump / GOP won 18 times and lost 7. ~75 weren’t decided on the merits.

      If you can’t learn that the fact checks you quote are spin machines, then you will remain ignorant.

      1. I would also note that the evidence of large scale ballot harvesting was NOT available in 2020.

        One of the huge problems we have with election fraud is that the legal standards are screwed up.

        A candidate in an election has at most 2 months to find the evidence of fraud, present it in court, and they must do so without subpeona power.

        The standard for an election MUST be – WAS THE LAW FOLLOWED. Not can you prove large scale fraud.
        There is not time nor the legal power to do that in the time frame available.

        The reason that “WAS THE LAW FOLLOWED” is critical is because it is what we can determine objectively and quickly.

        If those conducting the election did not follow the law, proof of fraud should not be required.
        The purpose of election laws is to prevent fraud. When the law is not followed – fraud must be assumed.

        Otherwise we should not have election laws if we are not going to follow them.

    3. Sure, let’s listen to corrupt courts.

      The abjectly corrupt Supreme Court of 1973 “decided” (i.e. lied) that abortion was a constitutional right; nothing could have been further from the truth.

      “Crazy Abe” Lincoln conducted a wholly unconstitutional “Reign of Terror” through his illicit and unconstitutional denial of fully constitutional secession.

      Supreme Courts, since 1860, have not supported the Constitution and found that the entire American welfare state is unconstitutional – Social Security and Medicare are not “general Welfare” and Congress cannot tax for them.

      Obama and Camala will never be eligible and will never be “natural born citizens” – per the legal text and reference of the era, The Law of Nations.

    4. So ? Not a single one actually had hearings on the merits, not a single one allowed discovery.

      Just recently the Democratic Mayoral primary in Bridgeport CT was overturned because there was evidence of over 37% fraud in absentee(mailin) ballots. The evidence presented in court was frankly SMALL compared tot he evidence of Exactly the same kind of Fraud found in 2020.

      The courts failed, before, during and after the election to protect the integrity and trustworthyness of the election.
      Why is it that I should trust courts that had the oportunity to stop election fraud before it happened – and allowed it anyway ?

    5. “If your case keeps getting rejected, it’s probably full of holes;”

      Nice try, deceptive one.

      Some *50 different* lawsuits. That means that your words “case” (singular) and “it’s” are lies.

      Or are you able to prove that *every* case had the identical facts and law? And that the Georgia claims are identical to the other 50?

    6. And the vast majority (almost all) were rejected on procedural grounds – a lack of standing or latches, rather than being rejected on the merits of the case. The rejection proved nothing, other than the partisanship of the judiciary.

  8. Look, I’ll make it simple. America is Dr. Donald Shirley. Trump is Tony Lip. Gruff, uncouth, but highly effective as driver and bodyguard. Hence, Dr. Shirley chose him in spite of the culture clash.

          1. Footbal games are not won by time of posession, or yards gained. If they were teams would play the game differently.
            A major faction in Hillaries 2016 loss was that she wasted enormous resources trying to drive up the popular vote in California, rather than getting a few thousand more votes in the rust belt.

            As to the electoral college – 3 states that would have flipped the election were decided by a total of 44,000 votes.
            There were MORE fraudulent votes counted in Just AZ than that. AZ according to the audit have almost 50,000 ballots counted from only 13,000 people.

            So NO you did not win the electoral college.

            Based on the smallest estimate of ballot harvesting in 2020 – Trump won 5 of the 6 swing states.

      1. We did choose him in 2016 and we might choose him again, but anyways you kinda miss the point.

        1. The EC chose him in 2016, but the people did not. He lost the popular vote in 2016 too.

          You’re trying to draw an analogy, but your analogy fails.

          1. UGH you totally missed the point. He was the right man for the job just as Tony Lip was, in spite of his gruffness.

            (Anyway your reference to the popular vote is as irrelevant as it is predictable. Both candidates designed their campaigns around one thing and one thing only: maximizing electoral votes. If we chose presidents by popular vote the campaigns would have been entirely different, and nobody knows how *that* contest would have turned out.)

            1. Whether he was the right person is a matter of opinion. You think he was the right person. I don’t. People often have different opinions.

              1. Yup, I write my opinions on here just as you do.

                To support my opinion in this particular instance, below I provided a long list of the ways Trump improved our economy, physical security, and energy independence, to name just a few … and the ways we as a nation are worse off as a result of Biden’s policies.

          2. You unintentionally make a good point harmful to your argument.

            We follow the rules. We do so -because for many things – like elections, there is no objectively correct way to do things.
            You as an example appear to think that the more democratic our government is the better, but in FACT little can be farther from the truth. As JS Mill observes in “On Liberty” – no totalitarian ruler is capable of infringing on the liberties of citizens to a fraction of the extent that a democracy will. There is no limit to the extent to which many of us are willing to dictate how our neighbors must live.

            The wise among us understand that the US government is far from perfect. Though we also understand no other nation can justifiably claim to do near as well.
            Perfection in not acheivable, and doing batter than the US has in the past is extremely hard.

            Regardless, the US has a set of rules for elections – some specified byt he constitution, some by federal law, and some by state law and constitutions.

            The rule of law REQUIRES that we follow those rules – in 2020 we not only did not, but we violated them more egregiously than anytime in my lifetime. When the rules are violated – we do not trust the results.

            If you do not like the rules – change them.

            Regardless, the rules in 38 states (those with secret ballot constitutional provisions) required inperson elections – not mailin.
            That is actually a wise rule that has been in place for more than a century – because of the fraud we had in the 19th century.
            That rule and numerous others were violated in 2020. Therefore the election itself was not legitimate.

            The constitution bars government from engaging in censorship – anykind, but especially political censorship.
            Yet in 2020 our government engaged in political censorship to get rid of Trump. That is election fraud.

            I have no interest in the popular vote – neither the democratic party, nor the republicans are campaigning to win the popular vote.

            There is a reason this country would not exist and would have come apart long ago but for the electoral college. But if you wish to risk changing that – go ahead – Try. Regardless, just as fotball is won by touchdowns … not yards, and teams focus on scoring, not maximizing time of posession, elections are won by the electoral college.

            Biden’s Electoral college victory was smaller than any other in US history except 2000 – 3 states and 44,000 votes were the difference.

            And there is more than enough proof of over 44,000 total fraudulent ballots in those 3 states.

            1. It isn’t. It was purposefully designed not to be the people. It weights votes differently by state.

      2. You chose Biden. You do not speak for america, and whether you like it or not the election results are not trustworthy.
        So we do not know what america chose.

        Except we DO know that they did not choose the Biden they got.

  9. What bothers me most is how educated people such as yourself refuse to admit that the 2020 election was in fact stolen from President Trump. The evidence is overwhelming, and supported by the very concerted effort to deny anyone the ability — or the RIGHT — to discuss it. Just because you and all the other cowards refuse to call it out, doesn’t mean that MILLIONS of us are wrong. We know we’re right, and so do the putrid cabal of traitors; hence their unwavering efforts to control what we can read, hear, and see.
    The 2020 election was stolen. We The People see you all, and we are coming for all of you. Which side will you stand with, Jonathan?

      1. 37 counties in GA could not produce chain of custody documents. At least two counties destroyed election records in violation of Federal Law. Certified investigators showed Dominion machines could be hacked. One county elections supervisor testified to the Legislation that she personally witnessed a Dominion rech rep remotely fix a problem with their machines – which supposedly were not connected to the internet. The Fulton County Elections Supervisor sent observers home for the night then continued to count ballotsnin violati

      2. And the hunter biden laptop is russian disinformation.
        and the collusion dellusion wasn’t a hoax.

        Do you understand you have no credibility ?
        There is no reason to trust people who tell bald faced lies and get caught repeatedly.

  10. Rightwing Media Created Trump, And The Need To Maintain Him

    Mr. Rauch’s book “The Constitution of Knowledge” examined the collapse of shared standards of truth. He suggested that the incentive structure on the right has played an indispensable role in its epistemic crisis. Right-wing media discovered that spreading lies, inflaming resentments and stoking nihilism were extremely profitable because there was an enormous audience for it. Republican politicians similarly found they could energize their base by doing the same. Initially, the media and politicians cynically exploited these tactics; soon they became dependent on them. “They got high on their own supply and couldn’t stop using without infuriating the base,” as Mr. Rauch put it. There was nothing they would not defend, no exit ramp they would take.


    Long before Trump became the Republican nominee, rightwing media kept constantly demonizing government and so-called ‘coastal elites’. These narratives, over time, created demand for a wrecking ball of a president who would demolish our institutions.

    And when that president failed to get reelected, his followers felt an existential crisis existed where everything they believed in was threatened. Therefore any means was justified to keep that president in power. Consequently, the election results had to be dismissed by ‘well-intentioned lies’.


        This post was by Estovir the closeted puppet master of these threads.

        Estovir is also Thinkthrough, James, Upstate Farmer, Iowa 2, Ralph Chappell, Ralph DeMimus, J. Feldman, Guy Ventner, N.N., dogsnowden, Old Man From Kansas and countless other names.

        Estovir imagines everyone is gay because that’s where his head is at.

      2. That’s worth a transcript:

        Has anyone told the gays for Palestine that Hamas bans homosexual activity and Israel is the most respectful of gay rights of any society in the Middle East? I guess not, because they want to bulldoze the Jewish state out of existence and put in its place an authority that would happily oppress them. Behold the stupidity.


        If someone’s posting stupid, gay-themed junk, you can be sure it’s Estovir.

        Estovir is the creepy nerd who writes most of the comments here on any given day.

        Estovir is also Edward Mahl, Thinkthrough, James, Upstate Farmer, Old Man From Kansas, Iowa 2, Ralph DeMimus, Ralph Chappell, Guy Ventner and many, many more.

        Estovir is obsessed with gays, because that’s where his head is at.

            1. Nashville Mayor Furious Over Leak of Transgender Shooter’s Manifesto, Demands Investigation

              On a page dated Feb. 3, 2023, Hale wrote: “Wanna kill all you little crackers!!! Bunch of little f*gg*ts w/ your white privlages [sic].”

              That Trans chic sure was a homophobe. What is it with the Trans psychos little f*gg*ts w/ your white privlages speech?

            1. I was called “Little Ricky” in college because students and faculty in a Jesuit college in the Deep South, all lily white, told me I spoke funny. They reminded me daily. My Academic Dean, an Irishman, called me “Super Spic” in front of a group of students. Not batting an eye, I called him “Super Mick” and everyone gasped including the Dean. He and I became friends thereon. When I graduated from college, with my non-English speaking family attending, Super Mick embraced me and told my parents that I had been an inspiration to him.

              Discrimination and prejudicial behavior can either cause someone to collapse or push them to do better than their accusers. Today, I speak English better than Americans thanks in part to Super Mick and those students who mocked me.

    1. Democrats invented and propagated the greatest political hoax of all time: Trump-Putin collusion. Naturally, you want to blame Republicans for the decline in the respect for truth.

    2. What you call “right wing media” does not exist in a vacuum.

      Just like the left wing nut MSM the “right wing media” exists to fill a vacuum – because there are over 100m people in the US who do not share your views.

      What you call right wing media is a reflection fo the values of the people who it serves – not the other way arround – just as the left wing nut media is a reflection of those it serves.

      And like McDonalds each strives to make a profit by giving its consumers what THEY want.

      Trump is not a creation of the right wing media. He is a reflection of what over 100m people in this country want.

      I would further note that as republicans go – Trump is mostly pretty centrist. He is multiply divorced, not especially religious.
      He is closer to the center on most cultural issues than most republicans.

  11. Trump’s lawyers were at the White House Counsel. He ignored them and decided to follow these nuts. That is on him 100%.

    1. This is a bizare argument – the WH counsel advises the president as president. They have absolutely no role in advising the Trump as a presidential candidate and are barred by law from doing do.

      As to “these nuts” – one of those is Rudy Guilliani – who has an incredible track record as a US Attorney (as BTW did several other Trump lawyers). Before becoming NYC’s mayor. I would fruther Note that Guilliani was one of the leads in the Biden Corruption investigation.
      Where Guilliani has been PROVEN correct.

      The Biden’s ARE cporrupt. They WERE engaged in bribery influence pedalling and public corruption.

      So your Argument is that Guliani is “nuts” because he has a long long long track record of being RIGHT – through to today.

      But your OPINION on ONE issue is at odds with his – so Gulliani is “nuts” ?

      Sorry – wise people will take Gulliani over you and your ilk all the time.

      1. Trump is claiming that his actions were done as his duties as president. Thus the White House Counsel office would have been the correct lawyers to use.

  12. It’s ironic that using the personal “Trump Brand” to inflate the value of his real estate holdings is an indictable offense, but using the personal “Biden Brand” to sell political influence to foreign, often hostile, actors to the United States is a non-issue. Now which “Brand” had the potential to do serious harm to our national security?

    1. If anybody should be charged with felonies and giving an account for his evil deeds as US President is Barack Obama. Im not an attorney so I lack the knowledge and clearly the finesse to sugar coat his despicable, reprehensible behaviors, foreign and domestic. Nothing short of leg irons and placing him in pillory would be a good start. Trump is a clown. Obama is the mastermind of the current woes in America and in Israel.

      Obama, Hamas and ‘Complicity’
      The former president seeks to shift the blame for the attack on Israel. He ought to look in the mirror.

      Mr. Obama sent Iran $1.7 billion in cash, released some $100 billion in frozen assets and unshackled Iranian industry. His plan to extricate the U.S. from the Middle East was suitably complex: find a rapprochement with Iran that would empower it to stabilize the region for us. Predictably, Tehran used the money to build up each front—Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank, Syria, Iraq and Yemen—in today’s war on Israel.

      The rest of Mr. Obama’s policy paved the way. In August 2012, he drew a “red line.” The U.S. would respond militarily if Syria used chemical weapons. When it did a year later, Mr. Obama blinked and then let Russia bail him out by pretending to remove all the chemical weapons. Russia never left Syria, and propping up Bashar al-Assad solidified its alliance with Iran. The Journal reports that Russia plans to give Hezbollah better air defenses in Lebanon, and Syria is a key Hezbollah staging ground and transit point for Iranian weapons.

      Israel had an early chance to destroy Hamas in the 2008-09 Gaza war, but the incoming Obama administration signaled its displeasure. Israel stopped short, declaring a unilateral cease-fire. That only prepared the next war, in 2014, but overthrowing Hamas wasn’t even on the table with Mr. Obama in the White House.

      The Obama strategy of pressuring Israel and indulging the Palestinians made no progress toward peace. A 2009-10 Israeli settlement freeze was shrugged off. John Kerry shuttled around, banging his head against the wall called the “peace process.” Mr. Obama’s parting shiv—enabling a United Nations Security Council resolution that condemned the Jewish state and undermined its claim to Jerusalem—did nothing for Palestinians but indulge the fantasy that U.S. pressure on Israel will obviate the need for them to compromise.

      If everyone is responsible for this war, as Mr. Obama says, then Hamas becomes only one guilty party among many, and Oct. 7 a mere link in a long causal chain. Blame shifts to Israel. As the U.N. secretary-general put it, “the attacks by Hamas did not happen in a vacuum.” But if anyone has been complicit in enabling Hamas’s atrocities, Barack Obama has.

      Wall Street Journal

      1. You somehow attempted to summarize Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East without once mentioning ISIS.

        Think about that for a second, and then ask yourself whether the picture you’ve painted could, in any way, be a reasonable description of foreign policy from 2009-2017 without even a brief mention of the most acute issue in that region from 2013 – 2017.

        The fact that you’ve likely forgotten about ISIS is proof that Obama’s efforts to neutralize it, in partnership with others in the Combined Joint Task Force, were successful.

        1. Except that was not the case.
          ISIS was neutralized – but not under Obama.

          The mideast was MORE violent under Obama – not less.

          Prior to Obama – ISIS was an inconsequential faction within Al Queda.
          During Obama, they became a force on the ground capable of setting up a country in significant parts of syria, Iraq, Turkey, and Lebanon.

          Obrama’s foreign policy was disasterous – possibly as bad as Bush’s.
          Certainly not even close to Trump’s.

          And ISIS is an example of Obama’s failure.

      2. ” Trump is a clown.”

        Based on performance, I will take the clown. If one voted for someone other than Trump either time, one should be proud to have Biden as their President or recognize their mistake. Obama’s first term let us know the direction the Democrats were drifting toward. How many more times does that need to hit one on the head?

  13. I feel that the Marxists looked at Trump like the second coming and knew they had encountered a man who could not be bought or scared off. The only path for them was satanic, to ruin him with falsehoods for years and try to get him removed with false, phony impeachments which did not work. So as far as I am concerned the election was stolen from him by this means and thus, he is correct in his assertions. The state I reside in is currently trying to prevent voters from voting for him by removing him from our ballot. If that happens, I will reside in a new state that believes in our founding principles by election time.

Leave a Reply