Below is my column in USA Today on the escalating rhetoric over the imminent demise of democracy in the United States and how, as repeatedly claimed by President Joe Biden, “democracy is on the ballot.” There appears no limit to the level of growing hysteria. On the ABC’s The View, host Whoopi Goldberg warned journalists and “gay folk” that Trump is planning to round them up and “disappear you.” Putting aside the assumption that the executive branch would go along with the massive purge, the suggestion is that neither the Congress nor the courts would move to stop the killing or confinement of all reporters and LGBTQ citizens. Whether cynical or hysterical, this political narrative is being replicated across the Internet despite its utter lack of foundation or basis.
Here is the column:
“It may well be the last real vote you ever get to cast.” Those words from former Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., capture the mantra of this election season from politicians and pundits. It is narrative that preys on the fear of Americans that our constitutional system is on the verge of collapse.
Yet, it is untrue and ironically shows the lack of faith in our democratic systems that many of these figures ascribe to others.
If one briefly surfs cable news, you would think that this election is the only thing that stands between democracy and tyranny. On MSNBC, hosts like Joe Scarborough have repeatedly told viewers that former President Donald Trump will “throw away” democracy if elected.
President Joe Biden himself has taken up this claim. In his speech Friday near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, Biden insisted that “democracy itself is on the ballot” and said that this election would determine if democracy can survive in the United States.
This campaign tactic holds obvious advantages for a candidate who has the lowest polling numbers of the past seven presidents at the same point in their first term in office. Biden and others are calling for citizens to vote not for Biden, but for democracy itself.
The pitch would be more compelling if Democratic activists were not trying to remove Trump from 2024 ballots and Democratic leaders in Florida, North Carolina and other states are refusing to allow other candidates to run against Biden in the primary. In those states, the primary ballots themselves might not be very democratic.
Trump’s rhetoric helps fuel fears of what he might do
Trump helps to fuel such dire predictions with his reckless rhetoric. After the Supreme Court accepted review of his disqualification from the ballot in Colorado, he said at an Iowa rally, “I just hope we get fair treatment. Because if we don’t, our country’s in big, big trouble. Does everybody understand what I’m saying?”
The answer is that it depends on whom you ask. For Democrats, the comment seemed to threaten more violence like the kind we witnessed during the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, especially given Trump’s pledge to pardon rioters.
For Republicans, it was a frank acknowledgement of the deepening anger and divisions in the country.
Those divisions are manifest in a new Gallup poll showing that only 28% of U.S. adults are satisfied with the way democracy is working in the country. It’s down from 61% in 1984. Only 17% of Republicans and 38% of Democrats are satisfied with our current state of democracy.
While I do not believe that the Jan. 6 riot was a true insurrection, I immediately denounced it as a desecration of our constitutional system. I criticized Trump’s speech that day as he was giving it. I also supported Vice President Mike Pence’s actions at the Capitol and rejected the legal basis for opposing the certification of the election.
Jan. 6 was many things, and all of them bad − save for one vital thing: Our system worked.
The Capitol riot was only the latest stress test for a system that has survived wars, economic collapse and social divisions. Despite an assault inside our Capitol, the system held and functioned as it was designed. And despite the claims of some partisans, we were never “dangerously close to losing it all.”
It was a desecration of our system but also the triumph of that system. Members of both parties quickly reassembled to carry out their constitutional functions. Our nation’s vice president held firm despite pressure from the president and threats from an angry mob against his very life to certify the election.
As the legislative branch fulfilled its constitutional duties, the judiciary did the same. Trump-appointed judges and justices voted against the incumbent president’s claims and cleared the path for the Biden inauguration.
We can recognize the gravity of that riot without engaging in the type of hyperbole that is now being bantered about in the campaign.
Once again, Trump has stoked such claims with comments like saying that if he were reelected, he’d “want to be a dictator for one day.” The former president stressed that he was speaking of ordering the building of the border wall and drilling for oil − unilateral actions that the host of the interview, Sean Hannity, immediately noted would not make Trump a dictator. However, Trump did not take the helpful nudge to clarify his words.
Yet, even if Trump did mean that he would attempt to be a dictator (and to do so past the first day), it is not up to him. For more than two centuries, presidents have sought to act unilaterally or assume extraconstitutional powers only to be checked by the legislative and judicial branches.
To suggest that this may be our last democratic election is to suggest that both branches (and the population at large) would stand idly by as a president assumed tyrannical powers. That did not occur, even when this country was united by wars and national emergencies. With the nation now divided right down the middle, it is even less likely.
That is why the “democracy is on the ballot” claims border on defamation against our Constitution. We have the most successful and stable democratic system in history. The success of that system is not measured by those who would riot or challenge our values. It is measured by how the system responds. Our system works because it was not only written for times of relative unity and calm, it also was written for times like these.
What remains is a crisis of faith for some and a preying on of those fears by others. Our Constitution ultimately is a leap of faith, not only in government but also in one another. This faith should be strong in a system that has met every challenge, including Jan. 6.
Many things will be on the ballot in 2024, but democracy is not one of them.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley
Trump tried to stay in power after loosing the last election, He tried putting together a mob of people to “persuade” congress to not count Biden votes, he tried to get fake electors from states he lost, he tried to get states to change the vote to make him the winner, he tried to get the military to confiscate voting machines and have a do over with him controlling all voting places. He has vowed to do all this and more if elected again.
How is trump not a threat to democracy?
Bob, Obama, Hilary and Biden concocted wild conspiracies to attack candidate and then president Trump while using the intelligence agencies to assist them. How is this not an insurrection?
How is using the CIA, FBI, DOJ, the media and tech companies to unseat a president not an insurrection?
How is using mail in ballots in a system never used before, not allowing voter IDs, not checking signatures, not using dates mailed, using state courts to change rules when state legislatures should be in charge all not insurrectiony?
None of these fit the definition of insurrection.
They were wrong, they were immoral. theey will continue to do lasting damage to the United States, and they entitle Trump to give payback.
Trump tried to stay in power LEGALLY and CONSTITUTIONALLY after the most lawless, rigged, and fraudulent election since the 19th century.
When he exhausted all legal and constitutional options – he LEFT.
Congress does not count ballots. They count electors. The constitution requires electors to be appointed by the state legislature.
More than a century ago the federal courts determined that th eState legislature can not challenge a presidential election in Court.
What they CAN do is select alternate electors and in that way raise the issue with Congress.
This is constitutional. It is also very similar to what Hillary tried to do in 2016. She definitely tried – and in a few cases succeeded in getting some electors to change their votes.
Whether you like this or not it is legal and constitutional.
Your military argument is garbage – that never happened – or more accurately that did not happen in 2020.
It DID however happen in 1872 – When President Grant sent the military to suprevise elections in the south.
While Trump did not do that – it is inarguably constitutional. It is not illegal.
More importantly, it is fully within the constitutional powers of the President.
In the DC court of appeals they are fighting over presidential immunity.
So that we are clear – there is zero doubt that judges, presidents, congressmen, FBI agents, and all those in government have immunity – either qualified or absolute for SOME actions they take.
In arguably the President has absolute immunity for official actions – actions taken within the domain of his constitutional powers, and withing the domain of the powers congress has delegated to the executive.
The courts have also found – with respect to judges, and presidents, and congressment and FBI agents, that they have immunity within those actions that are “necescary and proper” in order to perform constitutional or legally delegated acts.
Federal elections have shared responsibility between the federal government and state legislatures – read the constitution.
Whether you like it or not assuring that there is a free and fair election is within the official powers of the president.
That should be obvious by the fact that Grant sent the army into the south to run the elections in 1872.
The outcome of an election is determined by the LAWFULLY cast ballots. We tossed election laws to the winds in 2020, and have done little to fix that since. 38 US states including PA, GA, AZ, MI, and WI all have Secret ballot provisions in their state constitution.
DE does also, while DE was not a swing state the DE scupreme court in 2021 decided that becuase of the secret ballot provision in the DE constitution that mailin voting was unconstitutional. It should be barred everywhere. But it is constitutionally barred in 38 states.
Appriximately the same number of states have Voter ID laws. Those are not part of the constituton, but they are Binding state election laws.
No matter how you vote – you MUST provide a photo ID proving that you are who you claim to be and that you may legally vote in the precint you are attempting to vote in.
In 2020, in those states with voter ID – if you voted by mail – your vote was not legal.
In 2020 in those states with Secret Ballot constitutional requirements – if you voted by mail – your vote was neither legal nor constitutional.
In 2020 in those states (49) with ballot harvesting laws, if your ballot was not delivered by YOU or in SOME instances by immediate family where permitted by law – your vote was not legal.
You are free to vote however you please – as the memes in the 2016 election said – right and left,
You can vote by Text if you wish.
But your vote only counts if you vote lawfully.
We have these laws, and constitutional requirements because past experience proves that without them we get often massive election fraud.
Election fraud is NOT a problem, when one candidate is the clear winner. It is likely there was significant fraud in the Newsom recall election.
But there could not possibly have been enough fraud to effect the outcome.
There are states that have had mailin voting for decades – PROBABLY without a problem. Most of these states are deep blue, one or two are deep red. There is just not going to be much election fraud when most races are going to be 60:40.
You can not get away with 20% fraud. People will know.
But increasingly elections are closer and closer. Bush won in 2000 by a few hundred votes in Florida.
We have possibly 50 house seats in every election that hinge on 0.5% of the vote.
We have had atleast a dozen statewide elections in the past 2 decades where house, senate even presidential races have been decides by a few hunderd or thousand votes out of millions cast.
That is precisely when Fraud is most likely and most dangerous.
Poor bob, why do you care? You said trumps got no shot. So why the fvck are you here whining about him EVERY day?
The ballot is democracy, something that Trump would do way with on his “day one” of being a dictator. And you can be sure that’s after he “terminates the constitution”, and kills his political opponents. Project 2025 is well heeled and ready for another go, bet on it. But Turley says…nothing to see here, lets just move on.
When did he say that he would do way (sic) with the ballot on “day one”?
So, if you can see all that, what are the winning Powerball numbers?
Project 2525? Sounds like a Blue Anon conspiracy theory. Care to elaborate?
How exactly would he get rid of the ballot on day one, turd layer?
Oh, by having a SoS remove his rivals name???
What remains is a crisis of faith for some and a preying on of those fears by others. Our Constitution ultimately is a leap of faith, not only in government but also in one another. This faith should be strong in a system that has met every challenge, including Jan. 6.
I agree with those that suggest JT needs to get out into the heartland of America and start talking to average Americans. His beloved constitution and government is not what this country has lost faith in, at least at the “root cause” level. Our constitution is just words on paper. Our government is populated by men and women born with the same sinful nature as everyone else. The framers never designed this system for our citizens to have faith in anything other than God. In 1965, Paul Harvey made his If I Were The Devil warning on his radio broadcast. It’s 3:16 in length. Take a moment and listen to it. It’s as prescient as 1984.
https://youtu.be/4LWPcEo2gV0
Well said, OLLY, to borrow from Upstate Farmer. Today’s second reading in the Liturgy of the Hours, Office of the Readings, is from a discourse authored by an early Church Father, 4th Century, recognized by Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church. St Athanasius taught fervently against the pagan world of his time. For almost 2000 years most members of the Western Civilization worked towards the ends planted by Jesus Christ and many early church leaders in service to God. Thus it is not surprising that our civilization is now in a state of collapse because we forgot our historical roots, as tarnished and imperfect that they are, compared to the evils of the XX Century atheistic ideologies. So here we are, following the trajectory of Stalin, Mao, Castro and pagan culture. Its only a matter of time when Biden’s America makes the Incas and Aztecs look like amateurs with their sacrificial rituals of innocent people, e.g. children groomed by govt officers, bodily mutilation of children, killing of life in utero, and slaughtering families
St Athansius, St Augustine, St Cyprian, St Gregory of Nazianzus et al warned us
http://www.liturgies.net/Liturgies/Catholic/loh/week1fridayor.htm
From a Discourse Against the Pagans by Saint Athanasius, bishop
(Nn. 42-43: PG 25, 83-87)
The Word creates a divine harmony in creation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through him, and without him nothing was made. In these words John the theologian teaches that nothing exists or remains in being except in and through the Word.
Think of a musician tuning his lyre. By his skill he adjusts high notes to low and intermediate notes to the rest, and produces a series of harmonies. So too the wisdom of God holds the world like a lyre and joins things in the air to those on earth, and things in heaven to those in the air, and brings each part into harmony with the whole. By his decree and will he regulates them all to produce the beauty and harmony of a single, well-ordered universe. While remaining unchanged with his Father, he moves all creation by his unchanging nature, according to the Fathers will. To everything he gives existence and life in accordance with its nature, and so creates a wonderful and truly divine harmony.
To illustrate this profound mystery, let us take the example of a choir of many singers. A choir is composed of a variety of men, women and children, of both old and young. Under the direction of one conductor, each sings in the way that is natural for him: men with men’s voices, boys with boys’ voices, old people with old voices, young people with young voices Yet all of them produce a single harmony. Or consider the example of our soul. It moves our senses according to their several functions so that in the presence of a single object they all act simultaneously: the eye sees, the ear hears, the hand touches, the nose smells, the tongue tastes, and often the other parts of the body act as well as, for example, the feet may walk.
Although this is only a poor comparison, it gives some idea of how the whole universe is governed. The Word of God has but to give a gesture of command and everything falls into place; each creature performs its own proper function, and all together constitute one single harmonious order
Bravo to both you and UpstateFarmer! 👏
So here we are, following the trajectory of Stalin, Mao, Castro and pagan culture. Its only a matter of time when Biden’s America makes the Incas and Aztecs look like amateurs with their sacrificial rituals of innocent people, e.g. children groomed by govt officers, bodily mutilation of children, killing of life in utero, and slaughtering families
To be honest Estovir, while Biden didn’t create this America, he’s certainly doing everything he can to finish it.
“Thus it is not surprising that our civilization is now in a state of collapse because we forgot our historical roots”
I think Estovir is correct. Our Western roots are very much from the Greeks and Judea Christian ideas.
“In the beginning was the Word…”
The Torah of over 3,500 years says:
1In the beginning of God’s creation of the heavens and the earth.
2Now the earth was astonishingly empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the water.
3And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light….
31And God saw all that He had made, and behold it was very good, and it was evening and it was morning, the sixth day.
Societies build on one another. We are astounded at the technology but need to remember the advances in society that led to things like the Ten Commandments.
Estovir, OLLY, S. Meyer,
Faith, historical roots, traditions, societal norms all things that make a nation.
Seems to me, our leftist friends are trying to tear all those things down to re-make the nation into their own image, as grotesque as that may be.
Yes sir!
Yes, Upstate, you are right. I think religion provides a moral foundation and extends to those not overtly religious. I don’t know enough about Christianity, but it springs from the Old Testament, and much of the Catholic teachings can be seen in some form in the Old Testament. I know a lot of people who claim to lack religion but are scrupulous in following much of what the Old Testament advocates.
Faith in something other than the state interferes with political despots. America’s founding and success is very much due to religion.
“[O]ur civilization is now in a state of collapse . . .”
Look on the bright side. That collapse is good for sales.
Though there’s something perverse about an ideology that feeds on sores.
Considering my belief that the only way to save the nation at this point is not merely different leadership, but to figuratively burn Washington to the ground on an institutional level, particularly the career bureaucracy manning every Department. Until I see someone from completely outside the system who I think would be a better agent of destruction than Trump, I’ll stick with the person I think most likely to disrupt everything.
I’ll know we are on the right track when the unemployment rate doubles or even triples and is made up of government employees and the industries completely dependent on them.
“President Donald Trump will “throw away” democracy if elected.”
Let’s see:
An Atlanta DA hires her lover, pays him some $700,000, some of which pays for their lavish vacations. *Both* then collude with the White House (and other D politicians) to criminalize and jail the leading opposition candidate.
A DA in NYC prosecutes Trump for “crimes” that aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.
An AG in NY who ran a campaign of “get Trump,” pushes the government to confiscate Trump’s wealth, make him toxic with swing voters, and give the MSM sound bites.
Then you have a Special Counsel with a history of using the law to target conservatives — using the same Stalinist tactics.
Colorado policy “judges” (all D’s) remove Trump from the ballot. A D bureaucrat in Maine does the same.
Remind me, again, who’s doing the throwing. And what they’re throwing in our eyes.
Sam,
Well said.
Last month,, the Special Counsel indicted Hunter Biden on 9 felony tax evasion charges. The Biden DOJ indicted Democratic Senator Menendez & his wife. Andrew Cuomo was forced to resign after Latitia James’ investigation found he sexually harassed multiple women.
Yep, defintely a weaponization of the legal system against political opponents, Sam.
“Last month . . .”
Isn’t that cute. The Deceptive One feels that what it wrote disputes the points I made.
Really? You know the only reason Hunter was indicted was the fact that Biden’s corrupt DOJ got embarrassed by federal judge. Biden’s DOJ allowed worst tax charges to expire (2014 & 2015), for no reason other than to help Hunter and Joe. Joe will pardon Hunter and James, but not their co-conspirators. Joe and Hunter were alleged to have received $5M bribe each, but NO investigation. Definitely there exists a two-tiered system.of justice in this country, one for President Trump and Republicans, and one for Biden’s, Clinton’s and radical left wing protestors.
Trump’s campaign manager, Manafort, was convicted of 8 counts of tax fraud, bank fraud & failure to report tens of millions of dollars in foreign bank accounts. Manafort pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the US, lying to federal investigators & witness tampering. Manafort was convicted & sentenced when Trump was President. Yep, definitely a two-tiered system of justice in this country.
Some might say Lincoln assumed dictatorial power and jailed those who opposed his actions. During the Civil War, there was no civil disobedience or even vocal objection to Lincoln’s actions allowed in the Northern states. So to say dictator behavior would never be tolerated depends on your view of Lincoln’s conduct during the Civil War. He didn’t defenestrate his opponents like Putin does, he just suspended habeas corpus and threw folks in jail, even Northern legislators on occasion.
Liz Cheney isn’t the only one who believes democracy in on the ballot, Professor. So do Trump White House insiders who witnessed his Oval Office actions on a daily basis:
Trump’s Defense Secretary, Mark Esper: “I do regard him as a threat to our democracy, our institutions, our political culture–all those things that make America great.”
Trump’s White House Director of Strategic Communications, Allysa Farah Griffin: “Fundamentally, a second Trump term could mean the end of American democracy as we know it. And I don’t say that lightly. We all witnessed him try to steal a democratic election before & going to historic & unconstitutional lengths to do so. And that shows he’s willing to break every barrier to get into power & stay into power.”
Trump’s Chief of Staff, General John Kelly: “He’s a person that has no idea what America stands for and has no idea what America is all about. A person that has nothing but contempt for our democratic institutions, our Constitution & the rule of law.”
Trump’s Attorney General, Bill Barr: “Unless the rest of the party goes along with him, he will burn the whole house down…Trump’s willingness to destroy the party if he does not get his way is not based on principle, but on his own supreme narcissism.”
10 House Republicans & 7 Senate Republicans voted to convict Trump of inciting an insurrection in the second impeachment trial. Romney said a number of his fellow Republican Senators told him they wanted to vote to convict, but feared it would put the safety of their families at risk.
Professor Turley would presumably characterize these Trump White House insiders & Congressional Republicans as preying on the fear of Americans that our constitutional system is on the verge of collapse. But it’s unprecedented in US history to have so many of a former President’s own hand-picked confidants conclude that he IS a threat to democracy, JT.
Yes we all understand. President Trump is a direct threat to the institutional grift in Washington DC. Those not befitting by direct payments, are dependent in the jobs provided from those getting direct payments.
The idiots insisting ONLY registered democrats are against Trump, are stupid, blind, or just silly trolls in mommies basement.
You can deny that. But Trump might just take up the cause to start to deconstruct the DoJ corruption.
Moving the new FBI headquarters to Cincinnati would be a big step in cleaning up that den of iniquity. Trust me, the DoJ would not stand for the move. all the secret communications done in person would end and all other communication is easily tracked.
BUT Clinton showed the way. Just set up your own e mail server, and the law cant touch you. I’ll bet there are 100’s of DC swampers with private servers.
“But it’s unprecedented in US history to have so many of a former President’s own hand-picked confidants conclude that he IS a threat to democracy, JT.”
John, it is significant to note that selection played a part in the anti-Trump attitudes held by many of his “hand-picked confidents.” Many were Bush loyalists. Many should recognize that Bush was a globalist and pushed the Patriot Act and Homeland Security without adequate time limitations or protection for the privacy rights of American citizens. At the same time, FISA misuse was expanding. Bush’s affection for the Clintons at times appears closer than to the Republican Party.
He was an inadequate President. Retrospectively, one can see how he vastly complicated the Middle East by mishandling Iraq and giving power to the Iranians.
Loyal Bushites are frequent haters of Trump, but Trump had no Rolodex and appointments to these positions have to be approved by Congress. Congress doesn’t like outsiders that disrupt the status quo while returning power to the people. Trump was forced to hire people tied into the bureaucracy he wished to destroy. The bureaucracy protects one another regardless of Party affiliation. We need it broken down.
As Commander-in-Chief, Trump was forced to hire people? You wouldn’t know it by the glowing tributes Trump gave when Esper & Kelly joined his White House team:
Trump: “I’m honored to be here today for the swearing-in of our new Secretary of Defense, Mark T. Esper. There is no one more qualified to lead the Department of Defense than Mark Esper. A West Point graduate — great student, actually — Secretary Esper served our military for 21 years, including in the Gulf War.”
Trump; “I am pleased to inform you that I have just named General John F Kelly as White House Chief of Staff. He is a Great American … and a Great Leader. John has also done a spectacular job at Homeland Security. He has been a true star of my Administration.”
Doesn’t sound like a President who had a gun to his head when he selected the Americans he most trusted to work with him day-in & day-out in the White House.
“As Commander-in-Chief, Trump was forced to hire people? You wouldn’t know it by the glowing tributes Trump gave when Esper & Kelly joined his White House team:”
Are you stupid? Was Trump supposed to say, look at the crap I have to deal with? Do you think he knew these people? You are an idiot. Then again, what should one expect from Anonymous the Stupid?
S. Meyer, thanks for clarifying that no one in his right mind should believe a word Trump says when he calls a press conference & publicly declares that John Kelly is “a true star of my Administration” or “no one is more qualified to lead the Dept of Defence than Mark Esper.” Really appreciate you pointing that out.
All you are doing is proving that you are more stupid now than you were before. The chances are Trump knew little about most of these people, relying on those who were not the most loving of Trump fans. As President, he must be diplomatic at times and not appear weak. You wouldn’t know these things because you are ignorant, and your critical thinking skills are absent.
What we now have in the White House, supported by treasonous Democrats, is a weak President who barely knows where he is. He is not even informed when his Secretary of Defense is out of commission. He provides money to our enemies while destroying our economy and killing tens of thousands of Americans.
There is no point in discussing such things with a dope who is unable to converse with knowledge. I think it is time for you to sober up.
Professor Turley,
The United States is experiencing two major forms of democratic erosion (also known as “backsliding”) in its governing institutions:
1) Strategic manipulation of elections. Distinct from “voter fraud”, election manipulation as become increasingly common and increasingly extreme. Examples include election procedures that make it harder to vote (like inadequate polling facilities) or that reduce the opposing party’s representation (like gerrymandering).
2) Executive aggrandizement. Even a legitimately elected leader can undermine democracy if they eliminate governmental “checks and balances” or consolidate power in unaccountable institutions. The US has seen substantial expansions of executive power and serious efforts to erode the independence of the civil service. In addition, there are serious questions about the impartiality of the judiciary.
While some of these issues are bipartisan (i.e., gerrymandering; increased executive control), the GOP – at this time – is certainly increasing the rate of backsliding more than the Democratic Party. This backsliding is certain to continue for as long as Trump continues to erode our institutions.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/understanding-democratic-decline-in-the-united-states/
I do not think it is that much of a stretch to claim that democracy is on the ballot.
You said it with a Link: 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬.edu/articles/understanding-democratic-decline-in-the-united-states/ …
𝐁𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 and a host of other 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐓𝐚𝐧𝐤s are on the Ballot, Not Democracy[.]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_think_tanks_in_the_United_States
There’s more than democracy on the ballot. Besides, the bellowing bleeding crowd majority never ‘have right on their side’ ~ they could all be wrong. Dead wrong.
[For example, if all these nimrods in congress send another $100 billion to the most corrupt, ruthless, vicious and duplicitous Zelenskiy regime uber-nationalist neo-Nazis on the planet to launch HIMARS 155m precision guided missiles at Russian ICBM missile sites .. . well, there’s no telling what might happen!]
We haven’t had ‘democracy’ since VP Cheney ‘took the gloves off’ and ‘we tortured some folks’. We invaded, and occupied, the whole sovereign nation of Afghanistan to get OBL and few Saudi nationals who were later assassinated in Pakistan. Neither Pakistan or Afghanistan people had anything to do with ‘9/11/. .. and they don’t call Afghanistan the ‘graveyard of empires’ for nothing.
The ‘war on terror’ will end like the war on drugs and war on poverty (Americas longest war) .. . more terror, more drugs and more poverty.
These are ‘intellectual’ (aka ‘spiritual’) battles that can only be ‘won’ through rational and authoritative argument (i.e. ‘hearts and minds’), not fear and intimidation. A 1,000+ forward-deployed U.S. military bases around the world is the epitome of ‘aggression’ and is not going to engender much ‘democracy’ or freedom.
Dear Prof Turley has lost his mind if he thinks we ‘are the most successful, stable democracy on the planet’. That ship sailed with JFK. Most of the world looks upon us today with fear, dread and revulsion. (see e.g. UN International Court Justice opening statements yesterday)
No one could confuse that with a ‘shining light on a hill’.
*and for good reason, we’re an out-of-control raging bull in a fine-china shop .. . probably the greatest threat to ‘democracy’ in the world today.
DItto
Trump’s attorney, then supported by Trump himself, made a great point in court the other day.
Perfectly legal, Biden could order the intelligence community to “covertly” enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment – without any violence and without any death happening – simply to honor his Oath of Office.
The CIA, DIA, NSA and the intelligence community swear supreme loyalty to uphold their constitutional Oath of Office. Biden would be on solid legal ground.
Since Trump advocated war crimes, Biden would be completely safe doing this – since Trump himself advocated far worse authority. Trump says presidents have complete immunity;)
How does one “covertly” enforce 14A s3?
Never belonged to any secret groups myself, but in past decades federal agencies were pretty effective destroying the wrong people.
Here with January 6 coup sympathizers example, we have legitimate “constitutional-subversives” that attempted to subvert the American form of government.
You might want to read “Prelude to McCarythism…the making of a blacklist” published in 2006 by the National Archives written by Robert Justin Goldstein.
Back then the DOJ, FBI and the entire federal government targeted people like Christian minister Martin Luther King, Jr. MLM was following the constitutional rule of law system to overturn constitutionally-subversive Jim Crow laws and practices. Then FBI Director J Edgar was simply a devout racist that was disloyal to his constitutional Oath of Office.
The National Archives article is primarily about targeting the wrong people that were in no way constitutionally-subversive. The January 6 coup sympathizers are legitimate constitutional-subversive.
Maybe the federal government can get it right this time? Coup supporters are legitimate targets.
None of which constitute enforcing 14A s3 at all, much less secretly.
Ask J.F.K
Yes. Please. Put the explanation in print.
Noting that the left slides neatly into matching up their desires with actions.
Trump said he would like to be Dictator for 1 day and then stipulates if he was he would “drill, baby, drill” and close the border and build the wall. Both are steps he would legally have anyway with executive orders. Basically to revoke the executive orders of Joe Biden. Also he did not say he would be dictator, he said he would like to be for 1 day. There was a riot on J6 but no insurrection and Trump turned over power just as he was obligated to do and did it peacefully. There was no attempted coup on J6 but there was a riot. The attempted coups started in 2015 to try to block Trump from getting nominated , then elected, and they all emanated from the prior Obama administration which with the Hilary campaign perpetrated the false Russia collusion and then ongoing with FISA court false statements and executive dept employees committing mutiny, and the institution of “an insurance policy” to undue Trump. The full force of the Obama Intelligence apparatus was used to bring down the duly elected president.
Frankly the American people are smarter than Washington DC. They now see who the real fascists are and the anti democracy people. Those are the ones supporting Hamas against a democratic government, promoting anti semitism, preaching hate for all other groups except their favored few, teaching children false and anti democratic history, overriding parents and secretly leading children astray secretly while not answering to parents, poisoning the educational system, disparaging merit, supporting a mass invasion of the United through the Southern border that destabilizes the country, floods the welfare rolls and denies present American citizens of their own services that they worked and paid for. The more they preach their hysterics the further Biden sinks in the polls.
If their is any coup to be afraid of it is the left wing overthrowing the government and our democracy in order to save it from the people who would vote the real fascists and authoritarians out of office.
There was an attempted autogolpe on J6 — an attempt to keep pressure Congress into overturning the EC vote to illegally keep Trump in power.
overturning the EC vote to illegally keep Trump in power.
The constitution outlines the procedure. the Legal procedure. The House would have elected a President, and the Representatives would have been held accountable for their votes. Even if I, or you, disagree, We each have the power to hold our Representative accountable. That’s by design.
Not a violation of any law
The attempt to pressure Congress with violence, which is what I was talking about, is absolute illegal, which is why over 1000 of the insurrectionists have been prosecuted so far.
But still the only two people killed were killing by the govt. when no life was in danger
Secret Service moved Pence because his life was in danger from the people chanting “Hang Mike Pence.” Pence said he believed his life was in danger. The USCP evacuated the House chamber to the extend it could, and the Senate chamber completely, because they thought the Members of Congress lives were in danger. No reason to think the many violent people, some with weapons, wouldn’t have killed some of them if they’d caught them. So don’t pretend that you know better than they do that “no life was in danger.” Their lives were in danger and they were protected effectively. One person was killed by USCP, when she was trying to enter the Speaker’s Lobby while some House members and staff were still in the chamber.
What people believe is meaningless. Pence is part of the institutional GOPe. the ones that would rather be the minority, than lead.
Thats where all the Trump supporters come from, We come from being lied to by Republicans like Pence, and McConnell. The Republicans that refuse to stand up for what is right. Republicans that ignore their own party platform.
But idiots like you focus all your hate on Trump. Because you’re too intellectual lazy to see the real reasons. Because all you capable of doing is playing the role your tribe assigns you. All you care about is the power. Not the Nation.
BS.
Which one of them was prosecuted for insurrection?
A bunch were prosecuted for seditious conspiracy, which overlaps with insurrection.
18 U.S. Code § 2384 – Seditious conspiracy
“If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.”
GEB,
Well said.
As we see all of Putin’s political opponents falling out of the window, one by one, mysteriously, and then think it could not happen here. Dissent is criminalized.
Then Trump’s lawyer goes to court and says, of course Trump could assassinate his political opponents and not be held criminally liable, unless he is first impeached (which he would never be by a Republican Congress scared of him or in his cult). Trump too goes after anyone – public servants, etc., trying to hold him accountable, saying they should be imprisoned or worse.
Yes it could happen here. And Turley will not be among those trying to stop it.
Curt, why are so alarmed about a hypothetical . . . asked by the Judge, and not really answered with lots of legal qualificagtions by the lawyer representing President Trump. So stop pretending you are quoting President Trump.
But I wonder why the Hypothetical alarms you?
President Obama actually targeted and Killed an American Citizen. Yes on foreign soil. Does that mean you would be fine if Trump as President killed his political rival, as long as they would be on foreign soil? But WAIT! there is more. Obama (not his lawyer) stated he had the power to kill even if the man was in the United States.
Do you feel better now? Knowing Obama is a Professor of Constitutional law, and as the President, Obama stated he can in fact order a person killed without due process.
“Curt, why are so alarmed about a hypothetical . . . asked by the Judge, and not really answered with lots of legal qualificagtions by the lawyer representing President Trump. So stop pretending you are quoting President Trump.”
First of all, Trump’s lawyer, Sauer, absolutely answered it without qualifications:
Judge Pan: Can I explore the implications of what you’re arguing? I understand your position to be that a President is immune from criminal prosecution for any official act that he takes as President, even if that action is taken for an unlawful or unconstitutional purpose. Is that correct?
Sauer: With an important exception, which is that if the President is impeached and convicted by the United States Senate in a proceeding that reflects widespread political consensus, that would authorize the prosecution under the plain language of the impeachment judgment clause. So yes, with that exception.
…
Pan: Could a president order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival? That’s an official act, an order to Seal Team Six.
Sauer: He would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution.
Pan: But if he weren’t, there would be no criminal prosecution, no criminal liability for that?
Sauer: Chief Justice’s opinion in Marbury against Madison and our Constitution, and the plain language of the impeachment judgment clause all clearly presuppose that what the Founders were concerned about was not —
Pan: I asked you a yes/no, yes or no question. Could a president who ordered Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?
Sauer: If he were impeached and convicted first.
Sauer is arguing that a president who ordered Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, and who was NOT impeached, could NOT be subject to criminal prosecution.
And when Trump himself was asked about it, he said that the President should be immune:
Reporter: “Do you agree with what your lawyers argued that you could not be prosecuted if you ordered Seal Team Six to kill your political opponent?”
Trump: “If a President of the United States does not have immunity, he’ll be totally ineffective.”
As for your claim that “Obama (not his lawyer) stated he had the power to kill even if the man was in the United States,” prove it. Quote him.
And recall that there was a court case about it. No one objected to al Aulaki’s family filing suit. It was dismissed.
You are leaving out a lot of cross talk. No surprise to anyone.
No, I didn’t leave out a lot of cross-talk. I left out a question about selling pardons and selling military secrets. Because we were discussing the example with Seal Team 6.
Since you want the entire exchange:
Judge Pan: Can I explore the implications of what you’re arguing? I understand your position to be that a President is immune from criminal prosecution for any official act that he takes as President, even if that action is taken for an unlawful or unconstitutional purpose. Is that correct?
Sauer: With an important exception, which is that if the President is impeached and convicted by the United States Senate in a proceeding that reflects widespread political consensus, that would authorize the prosecution under the plain language of the impeachment judgment clause. So yes, with that exception.
Pan: So it seems to me that there are a lot of things that might not go through that process because it’s quite a cumbersome process that requires the action of a whole branch of government that has a lot of different people involved. And so in your view, could a President sell pardons or sell military secrets? Those are official acts, right? It’s an official act to grant a pardon, it’s an official act to communicate with a foreign government. And such a President would not be subject to criminal prosecution?
Sauer: The sale of pardons example is an excellent example because there were allegations about a sale of a pardon essentially when it came to President Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich, and the U.S. DOJ carefully for the very reasons we have emphasized in our brief decided not to prosecute President Clinton with that because it raised concerns about whether or not a President could be prosecuted for his official acts, was an op-ed in the National Review.
Pan: Your position is that he can’t be prosecuted for that.
Sauer: As long as it’s an official act. In certain cases, purely private contact in Clinton against Jones, he would be subject to prosecution as long as he’s not in office.
Pan: Could a president order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival? That’s an official act, an order to Seal Team Six.
Sauer: He would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution.
Pan: But if her weren’t, there would be no criminal prosecution, no criminal liability for that?
Sauer: Chief Justice’s opinion in Marbury against Madison and our Constitution, and the plain language of the impeachment judgment clause all clearly presuppose that what the Founders were concerned about was not —
Pan: I asked you a yes/no, yes or no question. Could a president who ordered Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?
Sauer: If he were impeached and convicted first.
Notice that I actually back up my claims with quotes. Unlike you. Still waiting:
As for your claim that “Obama (not his lawyer) stated he had the power to kill even if the man was in the United States,” prove it. Quote him.
So the President can kill a US citizen without due process.
According to the court, yes, if that person is a terrorist fighting in a foreign country, as part of the President’s war powers.
Again: no objection from Obama or anyone else about the court case. If you don’t like the court’s ruling, OK. But the family chose not to appeal it, so the ruling stands.
, yes, if
The President, using plenary power makes that decision with no person have the power to challenge.
Like declassifying documents and possessing Personal documents he takes from the Whitehouse
He’s the former President, and there’s no evidence that he actually declassified them, and some of his briefs suggest the contrary.
no evidence that he actually declassified them,
Just like no evidence was needed for obama to kill a us citizen
You’re big on selective plenary power
There was evidence for Obama, both that al Awlaki was a terrorist and the long DOJ memo arguing that the killing was legal.
DOJ memo arguing that the killing was legal.
.
Evidence? nope. No public trial. All very secret. No due process. But the President has that Plenary (non-reviewable)Power. LIKE ALL PRESIDENTS
The lawsuit and court ruling were entirely public.
al Awlaki’s son wasn’t a terrorist…he was only 16 years old.
until subjected to the adversarial process, it is nothing but claims. lack of due process claim.
Mr. Turley, you are one of the few lawyers I respect. It amazes me that you and others who should know better keep bringing up “democracy”. The USA is not and has never been a democracy. We are and always have been a republic or as some prefer, a constitutional republic.
Referring to the USA as a democracy plays into the hands of those who want majority rules without protection for the minority.
We are a DEMOCRACY.
???????
“We are a DEMOCRACY.”
Right. A democracy is government by the people, whether exercised directly or through elected representatives.
No. Democracy is democracy.
NOT to be confused with a representative republic.
The important distinction revolves around the structure of the Federal Government. The People have zero actions they can take by majority power. Electing a single member of the House is NOT direct democracy, because a single member of congress has no power.
Our Constitution takes great pains to avoid the people exercising majority power. The election of the President is based more on State Power, and not the People. The People did not have the power to elect Senators. Beacuse the House was the Peoples House. The Senate represented the Interest of State. We are the UNITED STATES, not America. The Constitutional structure focuses on the balance of power between the States, and the newly formed federal govt. The people get very little attention, and then it is 2cnd place behind the States, in the 10th amendment.
Yes the people vote. but only for two people that represent them in Washington DC. That is far afield from describing a Democracy
Merriam-Webster: democracy, noun, ” a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections”
Encyclopedia Britannica: “Democracy is a system of government in which power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or through freely elected representatives.”
Cambridge: “Democracy is the belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power is either held by elected representatives or directly by the people themselves.”
Collins: “Democracy is a system of government in which people choose their rulers by voting for them in elections.”
We’re a representative democracy, whether you can admit it or not.
Merriam-Webster: democracy, noun
After the history lesson I gave you, you turn to a dictionary? Not the CONSTITUTION?
you are condemning your self to eternal ignorance, rather that understand simple concepts
You failed to find a single action the people of the United States are able to take by a popular vote of the People.
Until you do. The United States of Amercia is a Representative Republic.
Your “history lesson” is BS.
Pay attention to the Founders: https://reason.com/volokh/2022/01/19/the-u-s-is-both-a-republic-and-a-democracy/
Still waiting. When do the People of the United States set a govt policy by popular vote? You should be able to come up with one.
Retard, learn the difference between direct democracy and representative democracy. The Founders understood it. Why can’t you?
In a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person, while in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their representatives and agents1.
In a republic, laws are made by representatives chosen by the people and must comply with a constitution that specifically protects the rights of the minority from the will of the majority, while in a pure democracy, laws are made directly by the voting majority leaving the rights of the minority largely unprotected3.
A republic has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch, while a democracy is a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives4.
This explains the difference. And explains both. Which is the best match?
Wrong again.
“We’re a representative democracy, whether you can admit it or not.”
Learn that we are a representative democracy only in part. It is the Constitution that protects the chicken from the two foxes voting to eat the chicken. If you don’t understand that, you are totally lost and know little about the nation you are a citizen of.
i2: “No. Democracy is democracy.
“NOT to be confused with a representative republic.”
A noble cause. But, as I’m sure you know, you’re not going to convince the willfully blind.
Some simply choose not to see the fundamental facts that distinguish a democracy (e.g., ancient Athens) from a constitutionally limited republic. Fortunately, the Founders grasped those distinctions.
The interesting question is: Why does the Left keep pushing this “America is a democracy” fantasy? What is its motivation? What is it after?
As with everything else Leftist, that fantasy is a means to an ends. Once you know their ends, their fantasy makes sense.
It’s not a fantasy. People like you suggest that only direct democracies count as democracies, and representative democracies aren’t. Too bad all of the dictionaries and encyclopedias disagree with you. Lawyer do too, even quoting some Founders: https://reason.com/volokh/2022/01/19/the-u-s-is-both-a-republic-and-a-democracy/
We are a “Constitutional Democratic Republic” but unlike other republics. Voters can ask their representatives for anything – unless it violates someone else’s constitutional rights.
“Pure Democracy” even in a republic, isn’t restrained by a constitution that protects individual rights and liberties.
For example: in the 1960’s some states, like Mississippi, were practicing Jim Crow laws (pure democracy). These states were illegally cherry-picking 10th Amendment rights (states’ rights) in order to violate the constitutional rights of African-Americans, Jewish-Americans and other minority groups.
The previous 9th Amendment (ignored by states like Mississippi) outlaws violating other people’s rights when appeasing voter demands.
A constitutional view of 10th Amendment (states’ rights) is Marijuana legalization. In this scenario a state is citing the 10th Amendment without violating rights.
For example: in the 1960’s some states, like Mississippi, were practicing Jim Crow laws (pure democracy)
Not pure democracy. There was never a vote of the entire population of the State. That would have been pure democracy.
Its no wonder you are so confused. Your vocabulary is atrocious.
We’re BOTH a constitutional republic AND a representative democracy.
How many actual dictators have said in a campaign speech “I want to be a dictator”. It seems the American public has completely lost the ability to understand figurative language. What Trump doesn’t understand is that you need to speak to American voters as though they were 8 year olds interpreting everything you say in the most concrete and literal of ways. Just another sad commentary on American education & culture over the past 20 years. And oh how the liberal leaders in government and media like to use that. They know perfectly well that it was figurative speech, but they are happy to use it against Trump in their search for power and money. As a lifelong (until circa 2014) liberal, I’m sickened by what I see on the left these days.
I will add that Biden most certainly was a “dictator” on day 1, issuing something like 27 executive orders which is basically what a dictator does. He just lacks the honesty & wit to refer to it thus.
To Prof Turley, I would say that Democracy IS on the Ballot is the Dems ever control the Congress and the White House……because they would proceed with Court Packing, and rewrite the Voter Laws for all…e.g. No I.D. req’d, ballot harvesting everywhere, mail in ballots for all. Then amnesty for illegals, allow them to vote along with felons. Goodbye Democracy.
When will JT accept that Trump’s statements reflect his actual goals? Why doesn’t JT take a more comprehensive look at what Trump is saying and not saying?
Some more examples that should have come after “Trump has stoked such claims”:
* “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude [his characterization of the 2020 election] allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”
* Reporter asks “Will you tell your supporters now, no matter what, no violence?” and Trump walks away without answering.
* “We are going to win four more years. And then after that, we’ll go for another four years because they spied on my campaign. We should get a redo of four years.” “we’re probably—based on the way we were treated—we are probably entitled to another four after that.”
* Trump’s dereliction of duty in waiting hours before telling his supporters to leave the Capitol on J6.
* He regularly praises dictators.
* Reporter: “Do you agree with what your lawyers argued that you could not be prosecuted if you ordered Seal Team Six to kill your political opponent?” Trump: “If a President of the United States does not have immunity, he’ll be totally ineffective.”
And these are examples that come immediately to mind.
“even if Trump did mean that he would attempt to be a dictator (and to do so past the first day), it is not up to him.”
That’s right. It’s up to us to keep him out of office because he’s a dangerous person.
Four years as President of the United States and you insist on using out of context words to lie about President Trump.
Obama and Biden took regular White House meetings with the FBI to get briefings about crossfire hurricane. A Counter Intel investigation that enlisted the FISA court, in the FBI and DoJ’s plan to interfer in the election.
Until you have something to rival such ACTIONS in office, you are an ignorant troll attempting to change the topic
FFS, the ACTIONS are the crimes he’s been indicted for!
What actions? He supported the People petitioning Congress for redress of grievances, That’s from the Constitution. Investigating Election protocols is will within the power of the Federal Government, thus the President.
All of course legal
But still does not answer your acceptance of the abuse of power taken by Obama AND Biden
Again: if you want to know the actions, read the indictment. What part of the indictment do you think is counterfactual?
And your characterization of what Obama and Biden did is inaccurate. CH was investigating whether Russia was trying to interfere in the election. Which it was. Only later did it start to look at the collusion between members of Trump’s campaign and representatives of Russia.
“Russia was trying to interfere in the election. Which it was.”
So scooping up all the communications of the people in the Trump campaign was investigating Russia spending $150,000 of facebook ads? FISA warrants that the FBI was forced to lie on was Russia interfering in the election? Putting paid informants in the Trump campaign was tracking Russias facebook use?
Tell your lies to those around you, Most of commenters here are too well informed to believe your lies.
They didn’t scoop up all of the communications of people in the Trump campaign, nor did they put paid informants in the Trump campaign, nor did Clinesmith have the mens rea to be lying to the FISA court; what he added was true, he just shouldn’t have added it.
Just keep lying.
Repeating facts for you is useless.
But that’s the big truth.
Your are fine murdering democracy as long as the right tribe is doing because you think eliminating the Constitution will expedite your agenda.
Exactly like FDR. FDR wanted to “pack the Court” because the “Court” kept tossing out his plans because they violated the Constitution. But violating the Constitution is your goal. Because it conflicts with your agenda
More BS. You want to believe that about me even though it’s false, because you can’t deal with a truthful discussion.
You are clearly an hysteric with no sense of humor and no ability to discern sarcasm, bluster and puffery. Your entire case that the man who has already been President and has already left office would be a dictator this time is based entirely on things he has said, or in some cases not said. We have a track record. If you want to make a case, it is time to start listing the dictatorial things he has actually done. He did NOT declare martial law and seize voting machines, for example. Also, he did not send flying robots with Hellfire missiles out to murder American citizens without the benefit of a trial. That was Obama. He did not turn the vast American spying apparatus built to defend this nation from foreign adversaries against its own citizens. That was Obama. He did not break Presidential tradition and stay in DC after leaving office. That was Obama. When this country backslides into dictatorship it will be to a smooth talking SOB. Check back with me after the conventions when Biden withdraws to spend more time with his ice cream cones and the Dem leaders select Michele as their replacement candidate and Barack speaks eloquently about the virtues of his wife and the media in unison give hosannas about the return to Camelot.
We do have a track record. He engaged in an attempted coup. That is dictatorial. To this day Trump continues to lie about the election.
There was no attempted coup.
Only in your TDS fevered mind.
Professor Turley states, “Trump helps to fuel such dire predictions with his reckless rhetoric.”
There is no denying that Trump’s rhetoric is often equivocal, ambiguous.
But what is meant by equivocal or ambiguous speech, (to wit, what did Trump actually mean to say?) is mostly determined NOT by its speaker, but by the MEDIA that publishes it, along with fiery headlines, like “Trump Lashes Out at Judge.” (Google those words, you will see a majority of news sources using that click-bait headline. –Then actually watch Trump speak to the judge, his tone, his non-fiery voice, his addressing the judge as “Sir,” in his closing statement.)
I am not defending Trump; I am criticizing agenda-driven media.
Trump DOES need to develop The Art of the Rhetoric.
(Some of the smoothest rhetoric came from Obama, who knew exactly how to use certain words/messaging to reach those he intended to reach, while not alienating the remainder.)
“Then actually watch Trump speak to the judge, his tone, his non-fiery voice, his addressing the judge as “Sir,” in his closing statement.”
AFAIK, what Trump said to Judge Engoron wasn’t videotaped. Please do share the tape if you know of one. Trump was asked to obey the rules that lawyers have to obey in closing arguments, and he started speaking without agreeing, and then he said things that were explicitly disallowed. And that was after there was an email exchange between Engoron and Kise about Trump’s desire to speak during the closing, where Trump also refused to agree to the standard rules for closing arguments. (Let me know if you want to read that email exchange, as it was made public.)
Yes, I should say ‘read’ or ‘listen to,’ thanks
You can’t tell “his tone, his non-fiery voice” if you read it, and I can only find audio of his statement outside the court afterwards. I’d appreciate your sharing the audio from his closing argument.
To her point, why don’t YOU show us how Trump “LASHED OUT” at the judge in court!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I never said he did. I said “Trump was asked to obey the rules that lawyers have to obey in closing arguments, and he started speaking without agreeing, and then he said things that were explicitly disallowed. And that was after there was an email exchange between Engoron and Kise about Trump’s desire to speak during the closing, where Trump also refused to agree to the standard rules for closing arguments.”
Live tweeting of the first: https://nitter.net/lawofruby/status/1745504676513014081
And here are the emails: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24356800-emails-between-judge-engoron-and-trump-attorneys
Great column professor. Well said.
One reform that may prevent Trump from perpetrating another coup attempt would be to place the Capitol Police (protectors of the Legislative Branch) solely under the control of the Legislative Branch, instead of the Executive Branch U.S. Department of Justice.
Same for the U.S. Marshall’s Service that protects Judicial Branch judges and the U.S. Supreme Court. Remove that control from a future Trump Justice Department (Executive Branch) and give sole control to the Judicial Branch.
In that scenario Trump couldn’t emulate Mussolini or Hitler – his apparent role models.
There is zero evidence Trump is more dangerous than any other President, throughout history.
Wild eyed haters like you are the target audience of Govt sponsored misinformation.
The attempted coup is solid evidence that Trump is more dangerous.
Except there was no coup.
Is there another term you prefer for an illegal coordinated, weeks long effort to disregard the results of an election and stay in power?
That only happened in your TDS fevered mind.
We all kinda saw it happen on TV. The House Report details the actions. And Trump does not deny any of the facts.
Following the advice of incompetent lawyers?
The White House Office of Legal Counsel and Department of Justice gave Trump reliable advice. He chose to ignore it and listen to crackpots who told him what he wanted to hear.
So what?
A former president attempted to steal the votes of the “majority” of all American voters to illegally grab power – to subvert the democratic and constitutional process.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment mandates (by law) that such a person with a proven track record of disloyalty to America is disqualified for future office – unless forgiven by Congress at some future date.
How is this not about democracy?
Ah, the January 6 insurrection. Turley says he ihas denounced it but ultimately cannot think of a consequence Trump should suffer for it in any forum ever. He should not be impeached for it. He should not be criminally prosecuted for it. Trump has been living his whole life not following norms and suffering no consequences for it, or committing fraud and then paying a fine which does not cover his profits from the fraud.
Okay, if Trump is President again, what is the next thing Trump is going to do if he is President again that Turley will say he is denouncing but then say Trump should suffer no consequences for it ever? Then the question is, what institution is going to stop him? I mean, if any institution tries to stop him, Turley will be there to say why they should not or cannot.
but ultimately cannot think of a consequence Trump should suffer for it in any forum ever
The Constitution provides.
Voters get to choose.
Then the House and Senate, subjecting their actions to review by voters, can remove the individual.
And the DOJ can prosecute crimes after he’s out of office. Which is what they’re doing.
Except the crimes part
That will be determined in court. He’s been indicted for crimes, no matter how many times you deny it.
Which is what they’re doing.,
Strangely, not for insurrection. It’s like maybe the lawyers at the DoJ aren’t eager to go into court prosecuting a crime where the elements of the crime are absent.
That’s what the ConFraudUS charge is: for conspiring to create and support the insurrection.
14A3S is also in the Constitution and provides consequences for these types of situations. Trump is not eligible for any office, no different then if he was over 35.
.
Biden was a dictator on day 1, issuing something like 27 executive orders which is what a dictator does. He just didn’t have the modesty or honesty to call it that. Trump errs by being too smart, too honest, and too figurative in his speech. He’s miles above the average American these days. Many liberals know this quite well but they fear what Trump will do to their own money tree of grift, so they cynically push the narrative.
Too honest?!? LOL. Trump’s a pathological liar.
Wrong. Your fingers must’ve slipped as you typed “Biden”. Biden was forced out of a presidential run in 1988 for proven lying. Liar then, liar now. That’s 30+ years of lying to the American public. Jeez man learn some history.
For over 20 years – Congress “has not moved” to hold torture and blacklisting accountable – of over 1 million persons never even charged with a crime. Only courts do this – not Congress and politicians trying to win votes!
It’s been more than 20 years now, what’s are they waiting for?
The above article is a false premise – yes Congress will let that happen! They instead try to erase it with an Orwellian “Memory Hole”. War crime victims never forget, this won’t go away!