Just months after a judge dismissed Nina Jankowicz’s much-hyped defamation lawsuit against Fox, a federal district court judge in Delaware, Judge Jennifer L. Hall, has dismissed Ray Epps’s defamation lawsuit. The Jan. 6 rioter said the network falsely identified him as an FBI informant.
U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer L. Hall granted Fox News’ motion to dismiss the suit.
In the original complaint, Epps made a defamation per se claim and a false light claim.
Epps and his wife have clearly been through a nightmare of threats and innuendo. However, this public controversy was discussed by various networks and the Jan. 6th Committee. It was also a matter of legitimate public debate and commentary, with people on both sides expressing their views on the evidence and underlying allegations.
The problem for the court was trying to draw a line when coverage and commentary becomes defamation on such subjects. The chilling effect on free speech can be immense. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. The Court sought to create “breathing space” for the media by articulating that standard that now applies to both public officials and public figures. The status imposes the higher standard first imposed in New York Times v. Sullivan for public officials, requiring a showing of “actual malice” where media had actual knowledge of the falsity of a statement or showed reckless disregard whether it was true or false.
Now based in Utah, Epps alleged his life was upended after former Fox host Tucker Carlson repeatedly described him as a federal agent who helped instigate the attack on the Capitol, which was an attempt to stop the certification of the election of Joe Biden.
The breathing space cuts both ways. In reporting on the dismissal of the Epps lawsuit, it is notable that the Associated Press is still referring to Jan. 6 as an “insurrection” rather than a riot. Curiously, when you hit the link on “insurrection,” it goes to an article on the dropping of the Smith case, which notably did not charge Trump or anyone else with insurrection or even incitement. Yet, the AP is still reporting “the insurrection” as a fact.
The dismissal of Jankowicz directly addressed the dangers of using the courts to try to silence your critics. The case backfired on Jankowicz in prompting a court to expressly state that what she has been advocating is censorship. After holding that people are allowed to criticize Jankowicz as protected opinion, the court added:
“I agree that Jankowicz has not pleaded facts from which it could plausibly be inferred that the challenged statements regarding intended censorship by Jankowicz are not substantially true. On the contrary … censorship is commonly understood to encompass efforts to scrutinize and examine speech in order to suppress certain communications.
“The Disinformation Governance Board was formed precisely to examine citizens’ speech and, in coordination with the private sector, identify ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation,’ and ‘malinformation.’ … that objective is fairly characterized as a form of censorship.”
Jankowicz previously solicited significant contributions on the promise of this ill-conceived lawsuit. Nevertheless, Jankowicz is still being touted as a hero and enlisted to explain how to combat “disinformation.”
The calls for greater censorship are likely to only increase after the election. However, we have seen figures like Hillary Clinton call on Europeans to force the censorship of Americans.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Were not done with you yet Epps….you can play the old leftist ‘best defense is a good offense’ game and play the victim, but there can be little if any question you were an instigator. And because you were on countless videos doing the instigating, and you got off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist….you were a paid iinsider, probably paid by the FBI. You are a treasonous POS.
Turley: no matter how many times you try to ignore facts and promote the lie that January 6th was anything other than an insurrection, only the MAGAs believe you. In fact, just look at some of the delusional comments on this blog–they think Nancy Pelosi organized January 6th, that Epps really WAS an FBI informant and that the Democrats organized the insurrection to make Trump look bad. They believe anything spoon-fed to them by MAGA media, of which you, Turley, choose to be a part and to help spread disinformation.
WHY were the people who climbed the walls of the Capitol, smashed doors and windows, battered police officers and ransacked the Capitol there in the first place? If it was a mere protest, WHY was it necessary for them to enter the building, and WHY were they willing to batter police officers and smash doors and windows to gain access? WHY was there a reconnaissance mission conducted before January 6th, to come up with the most-vulnerable points of entry, so the Proud Boys could create a distraction to deflect Capitol Police away from these points of entry and break through to get into the building? These facts were disclosed by the British reporter who was embedded with the Proud Boys. WHY were some of the insurrectionists dressed in flak gear, complete with helmets and bulletproof vests? WHY was there a cache of weapons stored in a hotel room in Virginia, across the Potomac? WHAT WAS THEIR AIM? MERE PROTEST? IF IT WAS MERE PROTEST, then they had no reason to break past the police barricades and storm the building. WHO were they after? The answer is Mike Pence. WHY did they want Pence? WHY did they have a noose, and WHY were they shouting “Hang Mike Pence”? It is because Trump lied to them, saying Pence wouldn’t “do the right thing”, which was rig the election by refusing certified vote totals from the various states–something he had no power to do. The plot, concocted by Trump lawyers, was for Pence to refuse the votes, for Congress to declare that a winner couldn’t be determined, and then throw the election back to the state legislatures where they believed that Republicans would ignore the popular vote and award Trump the presidency. Part of the plot was the falsification of Electoral College documents–these were submitted to the National Archives. Some of those who signed these false documents under oath are being prosecuted. In the end, Pence wouldn’t leave the Capitol complex, but Trump waited over 3 hours before calling off his fans, telling them he “loved them”. Pence was determined to stay until he finished what he had started. If Trump and his conduct isn’t sick, I don’t know what counts.
The answer to all of this is Trump, his ego, his narcissism, his sociopathy and the gullibility of his fans. Trump had done a terrible job pretending to be president. The economy was in shambles, COVID was out of control, businesses, schools, restaurants were closed. There was no leisure travel. Unemployment was high. Trump kept lying about the seriousness of COVID, lied that anytime someone died, health officials called it “COVID” just to make him look bad. He spread lies and disinformation, including quack cures like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, because he has no leadership abilities and everything, including COVID, was always all about him and his ego.
Trump traveled around the country on “Stop the Steal” tours where his faithful fans listened to and believed his lies that he really won “in a landslide”. He got them all jazzed up to come to Washington, promising “it will be wild”.
January 6th was Trump’s Last Stand–after 60+ lawsuits failed for lack of evidence of any widespread fraud. January 6th will forever be a day of infamy and a stain on US history. Turley should be ashmed to be a part of it.
WHY was it necessary to burn down a federal courthouse to create the summer of love? WHY is it necessary to use uppercase letters to write the word why?
Turley: no matter how many times you try to ignore facts and promote the lie that January 6th was anything other than an insurrection
Gigi, why are you here insulting your host, and us, with your trolling lies to get your pathetic sexual gratification?
Is that vast left wing collection of dildos of yours all faking dead batteries once again in hopes of avoiding any contact with you?
And why would you think either Professor Turley and the rest of us who are also his guests want to be the focus of your attempts at self-gratification?
That cakehole in the middle of your feral face spews so much shyte your anus gets jealous.
WHAT did I lie about? List something along with proof.
WHAT did I lie about? List something along with proof.
Gigi, you attempted that question in your attempts to defend your lies yesterday. I provided TWO of your lies in response. At which point you ran away to hide with your dear close friend Dennis.
Would you like another shot at defending your lie that Biden didn’t deliberately steal boxes of classified information over his decades as a senator? He didn’t deliberately steal boxes of classified information during his eight years as Vice President?
Gigi, you’re at the point where YOU’RE the one who has to provide proof you aren’t lying.
This one of the many beds you’ve made and are working overtime in plying your trade, you political whore.
If you hope to be credible, it’s up to you to prove you’re worth being treated other than as a vicious, hate spewing liar.
Keep posting here as you do, and I and others will respond to you exactly in the manner that your posts show you should be responded to.
PROVE that Biden KNOWINGLY stole classified documents. You can’t. And, yesterday I cited a piece from the Brennan Center For Justice that said that it is necessary to prove mens rea in order to convict someone of a crime for possessing classified documents— contrary to your claim that mere possession is a criminal offense.
The number of classified materials discovered across various locations and time frames is proof the mishandling was not accidental.
The repeated presence of such documents provides proof of disregard for proper protocols and the way they were stored (garage )is a violation of security protocols. He was made aware of the illegalities every time he went to his car making him even guiltier.
Biden has provided no statement that can explain the patterns of guilt.
Trying to reason with a MAGA is engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Facts and reality cannot penetrate their brains, but know this: Trump deliberately stole classified documents that the NARA missed and promptly notified him were missing. He refused to return them after multiple polite requests. He returned some and lied by saying all had been returned, and then had Walt Nauta and another man move boxes around to keep his attorney from returning the rest. His attorney at the time had agreed to search for and return the rest. Then, he started the usual lying, amplified by MAGA media, that he “mentally declassified” the documents–something which cannot be done mentally–but you MAGAs believe the MAGA media lie that Trump could just take any classified documents, share them with anyone and otherwise do as he pleased with them. Neither Biden nor Pence did any of these things, and when the issue of Trump’s theft was publicized, both voluntarily searched for and returned documents in their possession containing classified markings. Many of the papers that Biden had were already declassified, and there’s no proof that he intended to steal them.
Trump has done many things that deserve condemnation, but as to the security of the United States, our allies, and our assets, both home and abroad, the theft of classified documents and his lying about them poses one of the greatest risks to our future security. Our allies have expresed concern about sources and methods having been compromised because the papers were left lying around unsecured where anyone who ever came to MAL could have gotten into them, copied or even stolen them. There are many parties, weddings and celebrations held at MAL, plus guests of people who pay for membership there and there’s lots of people who have worked there, none of whom were vetted before being allowed to enter or searched to see if they took the documents, microfilmed them or photoshot them to someone. The fact that, for now, he’s managed through dilatory tactics to avoid prosecution, plus the nomination of Tulsi Gabbard to helm our intelligence services, someone who has no experience in running a complex agency, much less any knowledge of the intel service, who has openly advocated for both Russia and Syria, will make our allies very wary about sharing sensitive information in the future. Putin is infamous for killing spies and those he perceives to be enemies, including killing them in other countries. No one can blame our allies if they don’t share information about future threats that they come across for fear of being exposed. That means that if there’s another 911 in the works, we wouldn’t be forewarned. That risk should worry everyone because this business about classified documents and our national secrets is as serious as it gets. Our security depends on our allies being reassured that there is no risk of exposure for sharing highly sensitive information–not just about threats, but insider information about those who might want to harm us. That trust has eroded, and Trump is the cause.
When discussing the evidence against Biden, Gigi says: “Facts and reality cannot penetrate their brains, but know this: Trump deliberately stole classified documents”
What does Trump have to do with Biden’s criminality?
“plus the nomination of Tulsi Gabbard to helm our intel…Putin is infamous for killing spies…”
What does Tulsi or Putin have to do with Biden’s criminality?
“Trying to reason with a MAGA is engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed person. ”
Gigi, based on your inability to defend Biden from the evidence, we can recognize the feebleness of a mind that lacks not only wits but also critical thinking skills. The only one who thinks what you say has merit is yourself. The rest realize your inability to converse rationally.
“Facts and reality cannot penetrate”
Whose brain is impenetrable to facts? Gigi. Soon another lie will be completed by Biden. He said he wouldn’t do it, but lied again.
“Joe Biden to pardon son Hunter in shocking reversal as lame-duck prez winds down term: report”
PROVE that Biden KNOWINGLY stole classified documents. You can’t.
YOU’RE the one that needs you have to prove you aren’t a pathological liar, Gigi. Not me.
Y’know, some people were dropped on their heads by their parents when they were babies. In your case, your mom grabbed you by the ankles and used you as a club to bet the rando who was your father senseless.
But go ahead Gigi, tell us how Biden graduated with two degrees – at the head of his class – but didn’t know what the classified markings on those files meant – even after all those security lectures he got regularly.
Tell everybody that Biden innocently and inadvertently left those classified reading rooms with his hands full of folders marked secret – and the guards controllng acess to the room and that material never ONCE noticed he had docs with classified markings all over them.
You’re the poorest quality liar that’s been sent here to insult Professor Turley.
“PROVE that Biden KNOWINGLY stole classified documents. You can’t.”
Of course I can. Senators do NOT have personal access to classified documents – they can only review classified documents in the Capitol SCIF.
They can not take anything in. They can not take anything out.
Any senator in posession of a classified document outside of a SCIF had to have STOLEN it – he had to have illegally removed it from a SCIF.
“And, yesterday I cited a piece from the Brennan Center For Justice that said that it is necessary to prove mens rea in order to convict someone of a crime for possessing classified documents— contrary to your claim that mere possession is a criminal offense.”
Possesion is NOT a crime. Mishandling is. Brenan center is full of schiff – as they often are. They are NOT the supreme court and SCOTUS has ruled on this issue.
I have no idea what you think Mens Rea is.
But in the real world – negligent or reckless conduct meets the requirement for mens rea.
But that does not matter – because the Espionage act EXPLICITLY specifies that you can meet the requirements of SOME of the crimes in the espionage by reckless or negligent conduct.
This was covered in great detail on this blog during the Clinton Classified documents fiasco.
Further John Deutch – Bill Clinton’s CIA director took a laptop containing classified information home by accident, he returned it the next day.
He was convicted and would have gone to jail except that Bill Clinton pardoned him on the way out the door.
Further at approximately the time of the Clinton classified dosuments mess there was a Case involving a Navy Cheif who used a cell phone to take a picture of the nuclear reactor room of the sub that he was responsible for. He shared that picture with fellow chiefs all of whom had security clearances.
He was court marshalled, demoted and went to prison.
There was no criminal intent in this case. He created a classified document by photographing something he was not allowed to photograph.
The photo was obviously not marked classified – but taking the photo and sharing it – even with people who were cleared to access classified information was still a crime.
Will Gigi remember these points? No. Will she debate them? No. Does any corrective element exist within Gigi? No. What she will do is repeat her nonsense even after she is proven wrong.
That is why Gigi is ignorant..
S. Meyer,
She is ignorant because she watches and believes everything MSM tells her. She lamented she has a relative who criticizes MSM. Sounds like he is the only one in her family with a degree of critical thinking and common sense.
John, Kristian Saucier was not a navy chief. He was a machinist’s mate.
He was not discovered by sharing that picture with fellow chiefs all of whom had security clearances.” He was discovered because he left his phone somewhere, and a supervisor found and reported it.
And he definitely did have criminal intent. That was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Milhouse – he was a petty officer at the time of his arrest
Regardless of how he was discovered – the picture was shared with other seaman.
Please identify what you mean by Criminal intent ?
He did not intend to share the picture with the Russians or chinese.
I am not arguing whether he was or was not guilty.
Crimes of recklessness and negligence, do NOT require the intent to commit a specific crime.
They require a level of recklessness or negligence that displays that you do not care if your conduct might cause serious harm.
Gigi,
I want to be clear – possession of classified documents is NOT a crime.
Possession is usually part of the evidence of the crime of mishandling.
The crime is HOW you came into possession of the documents.
Washington post and NYT were NOT guilty of violating the espionage act in the Pentagon papers case.
Daniel Elsberg was. WaPo and NY not only posessed classified documents but they published them – and the courts allowed them to publish classified documets that came into their possession through he crime of others – even docs that had not yet been published.
With a few exceptions only people with a security clearance can violate the espionage act – the exceptions would be those like Johnny Walker who bribed or blackmailed others into illegally obtaining classified documents.
As in the pentagon papers – there is no duty to return classified documents UNLESS you had already committed a crime to obtain them.
This is highly relevant to the MAL classified documents case – where Smith conceded that the classified documents at MAL arrived there LEGALLY.
Senator Biden was allowed access to some Classified documents – in the Senate SCIF. He was not allowed to remove them from the SCIF – doing so under most circumstances is a crime. There are specific circumstances under which classified documents can be removed from a SCIF – you have to have a need to do so,
Senators do not ever. You must sign those documents out with the SCIF FSOm you then take them to your office – where anytime you are not in your office or someone else is in your office they must be locked up in an approved safe. You can not take them home – ever.
You can not ever leave them in your garage. You can not ever have them in piles on your coffee table. you can not ever have them in closets in your offices when you have left govenrment in a private office building in chinatown.
The crime is NOT posession – it is mishandling.
There are some unique3 provisions of the executive order on classified documents that give Vice Presidents – NOT Senators some additional privileges.
There are also providions that give expresidents and ex vice presidents some additional priviledges.
But there are absolutely totally completely no limits at all on what presidents can do with classified documents. Nor can their be constitutionally.
You’re right. No one knows if Biden “stole” classified documents. And I’m not even sure that any “serious” observers have claimed that. Moreover, it doesn’t matter if he “stole” them. He was in violation of the law simply by having them in his possession. As VP he had no legitimate claim to sole-possession of any “official” document — at least Trump had a working defense theory vis-à-vis is constitutional prerogative as President.
“WHAT did I lie about? List something along with proof.”
Pretty much everything as always.
Regardless, YOU are accusing people of crimes the burden of proof in the US is on YOU.
YOU say there was an insurrection – fine it is up to YOU to explain why J6 was an insurrection – using actual US laws,
and why myriads of other political and election protests were NOT.
While your claims are pretty much always deeply flawed and absurd – ONE of the many obvious flaws, is that you NEVER treat similar fact patterns the same with respect to the law, and you never both to consider historical precedents.
Go look up the election of 1876.
There were allegations of election fraud in multiple states, congress had to sort between competing slates of electors from states where fraud was alleged.
Congress did NOT vertify the election on J6 but instead kicked the entire mess to a “bipartisan commission” that was supposed to sort out the competing claims of fraud.
Ultimately there was a backroom congressional deal. Harrison – who was not the EC winner from the electors submitted by the States executives, was certified as president after congress picked and choose which slates of electors to accept. But the real deal was that democrats agreed to allow Harrison the Republican to be president if Union Troops were withdrawn from the south. There was a great deal of pressure to remove those troops as keeping them in the south was expensive and deprivng the north of a large body of able bodied workers.
What happened in 1876 was very similar to Trump’s Eastman plan which was Cribbed from Lawrence Tribes plan for a CLinton challenge with she only partly went through with.
Whether you like it or not the 1876 election establishes as an ACTUAL FACT, that Congress has the final say in elections – not the EC, Not voters.
And that they can pretty much do as they please.
Pence’s claim that Trump’s plan was “unconstitutional” was completely absurd – no court found what congress did in 1876 unconstitutional – bhecause it was not, and they were free to do that in 2020.
Pence was free to put each states slates of electors to congress to accept or reject – as he placed.
He was free to ask for the certification of the State executive specified electors.
He was free to ask for the certification of the alternate electors.
Congress was free to accept or reject either slate as they pleased.
Or neither.
Further thought what Trump sought – and what accurally occured in 1876 was both constitutional and legal, there is a completely different issue.
Pelosi and democrats post the 2020 election changed the election law to make a repeat of what ocvcured in 1876 and what Tried in 2020 illegal.
Only there is a huge problem – Congress can not do so. No congress has the power to legally constrain the actions of a future congress – really with respect to anything, but especially with respect to its own rules and procedures. The congress explicitly says that each chamber of congress gets to make its own rules and set its own procedures.
It is common for changes to be rare – we have managed to mostly hold onto the filibuster for a long time.
But past tradition (or even law) is not binding on future congresses.
And BTW SCOTUS has actually ruled on that repeatedly – Republicans and even bipartisan republicans/democrats have passed laws that have required congress to do things like cut spending pass a budget, sequester funds. SCOTUS has routinely ruled that congress can CHOOSE to follow the constraint that prior congresses passed as laws,
But it is not REQUIRED to do so.
The final acceptance or rejection of the EC vote is done by congress. That is NOT ceremonial, it is NOT proforma.
While deviating from what people expect is very dangerous and likely has serious consequences for congressmen in the next election. Ultimately Congress decides who won the election and outside a FEW things specified int eh constitution they ca do that however they please.
The point of the above is that if Congress can do pretty much as it pleases – then it can not be a crime to ASK congress to act in a specific way.
Trump and his supportrs loudly demanded that congress do something that it had the power to do and had done before in the past.
But were highly unlikely to do in 2020.
That is not even CLOSE to an insurrection.
YOU are trying to manufacture a crime from thin air from unusual requests in an unusual election.
Challenging elections is NOT a crime, it is NOT an insurection. Doing so Right up to the vote of congress to certify or not and election is the RIGHT of protestors.
I would note that even after congress certifies the election – protestors can STILL protest – say at the inauguration. And that would not be an insurection either.
Actually interfering with the inauguration would be a crime – but ieven that would NOT be an insurection.
You do not get to change the law by applying your own pretend meaning for words.
John Say,
Epic take down of the known liar, Gigi!
John, none of what you wrote is supported by anything in the constitution. The constitution gives neither Congress nor the VP any power to decide which votes should be counted and which shouldn’t be. Nor is there anything in there about a vote to “certify” the result. That is just pure invention. All the constitution says is that the votes “shall be counted” by some unspecified person or people, in the presence of Congress and the VP. Both Congress and the VP are merely witnesses, and have no role to play in the count or the aftermath.
The result in 1877 was a compromise that the courts never got to examine, because no one challenged it. Both parties agreed, so they just did it. Courts can’t act unless someone brings a case before them.
So what should happen if there is a dispute over the votes? The constitution is completely silent, and Congress had no authority to pass the Electoral Count Act. An amendment is needed to fix the mess that the 12th amendment’s authors created.
I don’t want to speak for John, since he is amply capable of doing that himself. But is seems to me you may be contradicting yourself. If indeed “the constitution says is that the votes “shall be counted” by some unspecified person or people” then, backroom shenanigans or not, the “compromise that the courts never got to examine, because no one challenged it” was engaged in by the suitable “unspecified person or people”. And since the Constitution does give the Congress the right to make decisions on behalf of the people then because the outcome wasn’t challenged by “the people,” or anyone else, in court then it was an outcome consistent with the constitution.
You are correct, but the 1877 compromise was not challenged – bacause the constitution denys the courts jurisdiction over the procedures of congress.
Except you have to substitute congress for the president – this is litterally Marbury Vs. Madison – the single most fundimental SCOTUS decision EVER.
“John, none of what you wrote is supported by anything in the constitution. ”
False
“The constitution gives neither Congress nor the VP any power to decide which votes should be counted and which shouldn’t be. ”
It gives congress the power to count them. There is nothing in the constitution about state SoS’s certifying elections either.
Congresses constitutional power regarding elections – including counting and certifying – or NOT certifying
comes from 3 sources.
The text of the elections clauses in the constitution.
The necescary and proper clause which specified that If the constitution gives a power to government, that it also gives the powers necescary to fullfill that power.
And finally the FACT that there are no “cerimonial” powers in the constitution.
The constitution says that the President of the Senate (the Vice President) shall open all the electoral college votes and that congress shall then count them.
Again – there are no pro forma clauses in the constitution. Counting includes deciding which to count and which not to count.
“Nor is there anything in there about a vote to “certify” the result.”
Not so – the constitution specifies that congress shall make its own rules as to how it conducts its business.
Whether you like it or not congress can cant the votes.
It can choose which votes to count,
It can devise its own procedures for counting.
It can devise its own criteria for what can be counted.
And if neither candidate is awarded a majority of the electoral votes, it can move on to electing the president in the manner specified by the constitution.
You do not like the word certify – fine, I do not care – does DECIDE work better ?
Congress decides whether the electoral votes that IT decides are legitimate constitute a majority.
If it does not decide they do, then it moves on to the terms of the clause where CONGRESS elects they president.
“That is just pure invention.”
No it is the natural requirements of the text.
” All the constitution says is that the votes “shall be counted” by some unspecified person or people, in the presence of Congress and the VP. Both Congress and the VP are merely witnesses, and have no role to play in the count or the aftermath.”
That is a piss poor argument – As YOU are claiming – the constitution requires the votes to be counted by magic.
Further YOUR version would require the congress to count whatever certificates are presented in Congress on J6.
The certificates could be forged, or some missing, or extras present.
My point is that when the constitution says Congress has the power to do something – Say count the electoral college vote, that INHERENTLY means it has the power to judge the validity of the electoral college vote. I doubt even you would claim that congress can not reject forged certificates from the state electors. But that is NOT in the text of the constitution. When the constitution gives the government the power to do something, it nearly always gives the power to NOT do it.
It also gives the power to decide how to do it – so long as individual rights are not infringed.
“The result in 1877 was a compromise that the courts never got to examine, because no one challenged it. Both parties agreed, so they just did it. Courts can’t act unless someone brings a case before them.”
So ?
Though I would note you are incorrect – a case COULD have be brought to the courts.
Had it been it would have been dismissed.
The courts have REPEATEDLY refused to accept jurisdiction over the way that congress goes about performing its constitutional powers.
When the constitution gives a power to congress or the executive – it gives the powers necescary to effecturate that power,
and it denies the courts authority to review that – you are literally on the wrong side of Marbury vs. Madison.
Regardless i the 1876 election, Congress refused to certify on the day required. Delayed, followed a procedure of its own making that resulted in recommendations back to congress for how the EV votes should ACTUALLY be counted – which was differnet from the official state tallies in many states and required accepting “alternate electors”.
Was it a compromise ? So ? Give it wany name you want – congress reused to treat the power to count the EC vote as pro forma, and chose to do so in its own way.
You say that was not challenged – you have proof of that ?
Regardless, it is highly unlikely the courts would have intervened.
Just as they do not intervene in impeachments.
For years I would have been with Turley that the plain text of the constitution limits the reasons that the house can impeach.
But ultimately though I still concluded the Trump impeachments were a mistake and lawfare. The constitution does not empower the courts or anyone else to review the impeachment choices of congress to assure that they conform to the text of the constitution.
Put differently the impeachment power of the house has no checks and balances.
If the president can not challenge an impeachment in court – then the only check/balance on the impeachment power is whether the senate goes along.
As to presidential elections – it is inarguable that the plain text of the constitution leave CONGRESS with the final decision on presidential elections.
The plain Text tells congress the power belongs to Congress. The constitution explicitly states that the Process that congress uses to conduct its business, is up to congress.
“So what should happen if there is a dispute over the votes?”
There is no “should” there is only what DOES.
And the answer is trivial – that is up to congress – the power was given to congress and outside the very limited constraints owithin the constitution – the constitution delegates POWER, it does NOT typically dictate PROCESS.
“The constitution is completely silent”
-The constitution allows the congress to excercise the powers delegated to it in accordance with its own rules – the constitution is NOT silent.
“Congress had no authority to pass the Electoral Count Act.”
Congress has the authority to pass the electoral count act.
But the electoral count act is nothing but guidance to a future congress.
This issue has been devided repeatedly by SCOTUS – a past congress can not pass laws or rules that bind a future congress.
This is why Grahm Ruddman and the sequester both died – though there are other examples.
“An amendment is needed to fix the mess that the 12th amendment’s authors created.”
If you beleive that – then amend the constitution.
In the mean time – whether you like it or not – Congress can pass all the electoral cont acts it pleases, and the next congress can ignore them.
And congress can count the votes however they please answerable only to voters.
If you tried to challenge this before SCOTUS now – you would get a 9-0 decision that congress can do pretty much whatever it pleases in terms of process,
so long is has not going beyond its constitutional powers.
Gigi, you will never have the legal expertise or insight of Prof. Turley. You should read more and write less.
It’s all about the lying accusations, not about any attempt at expertise.
Gigi does not have the legal expertise of an ordinary HS student.
You said, “The plot, concocted by Trump lawyers, was for Pence to refuse the votes, for Congress to declare that a winner couldn’t be determined, and then throw the election back to the state legislatures where they believed that Republicans would ignore the popular vote and award Trump the presidency. ”
Hmmm. Even if true, wouldn’t that just be a form of “lawfare???” Which, Democrats seem pretty kewl with lawfare.
That was not simply a “form of lawfare (i.e. usurpation and abuse of power),” it was the constitutional procedure for election corruption. But one example is the fact that multiple states violated their own election laws and constitutions.
______________________________________________________________
AG Paxton Sues Battleground States for Unconstitutional Changes to 2020 Election Laws
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton today filed a lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in the United States Supreme Court. The four states exploited the COVID-19 pandemic to justify ignoring federal and state election laws and unlawfully enacting last-minute changes, thus skewing the results of the 2020 General Election. The battleground states flooded their people with unlawful ballot applications and ballots while ignoring statutory requirements as to how they were received, evaluated and counted.
“Trust in the integrity of our election processes is sacrosanct and binds our citizenry and the States in this Union together. Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin destroyed that trust and compromised the security and integrity of the 2020 election. The states violated statutes enacted by their duly elected legislatures, thereby violating the Constitution. By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but of Texas and every other state that held lawful elections,” said Attorney General Paxton. “Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election. We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error.”
Elections for federal office must comport with federal constitutional standards. For presidential elections, each state must appoint its electors to the electoral college in a manner that complies with the Constitution. The Electors Clause requirement that only state legislatures may set the rules governing the appointment of electors and elections and cannot be delegated to local officials. The majority of the rushed decisions, made by local officials, were not approved by the state legislatures, thereby circumventing the Constitution.
– https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton-sues-battleground-states-unconstitutional-changes-2020-election-laws
Supreme Court said no: https://www.texastribune.org/2020/12/11/texas-lawsuit-supreme-court-election-results/
Correct.
And the Supreme Court of 1973, in similar fashion, corruptly “decided” that abortion was a constitutional right based on the 14th Amendment.
It is also NOT true.
The “Plot” was concocted by Hillaries lawyers – specifically Lawrence Tribe based on the handling of the election of 1876 and cribbed from Tribe By eastman.
The “plan” was made public when eastman’s emails were made public.
In the emails he explains step by step with options based on what occured at each step as well as the constitutional and legal justification for eact step.
Regardless the “plot” had three fundimental possibilities.
Pence was to present the Alternate slates of electors to congress to accept or reject FIRST, rather than those certified by the state executiive.
Congress had the choice of – accepting each states alternate electors votes – they did that eventually in 1876. The Executive electors, or rejecting both.
Depending on how congress voted on each states electors Biden could end up with 270EC votes or Trump could end up with 270 EC votes and be declaeed the winner.
Or no one could get 270 EC votes in which case CONGRESS votes to determine the presidnet based on rules in the constitution – which happened in the election of Jefferson – taking 76 votes.
Congress also had the option of NOT certifying on the 6th, conducting some inquiry intot he election and based on the results of that inquiry voting on electors at a later time.
That is what occured in 1876.
Cruz as an example was trying to get congress to direct that the National Gaurd be sent to the 6 wing states to manually recount the ballots.
and then have congress decide he outcome based on the results reported by the NG.
The constitution has no provisions to send presidential elections back to state legislators.
Or no one could get 270 EC votes in which case CONGRESS votes to determine the presidnet based on rules in the constitution
Not true. There is no need for 270 votes. What’s needed is a majority of votes cast. If some votes are not counted then the number needed for a majority becomes smaller.
But there’s no provision for not counting votes, nor is there any provision whatsoever for Congress to “certify” anything.
You can believe what you wish to, but your belief is not reality under the law. An objective view of the law is dispassionate and not affected by political bias.
Girly Girl, you’re absolutely correct that Trump supporters are mean, nasty, hateful and irrational.
By the way, have you shaved your head yet?
Just to clarify:
1) IVM and HCQ are NOT ‘quack cures”. They work. The ‘quackery’ was the cov-19 ‘thing,’ developed in order for the totalitarian NWO crowd to introduce their genetic modifier of a bioweapon in the form of the mRNA injection, which is causing havoc in the bodies of those who took it, as studies attest to.
2) There is plenty of evidence that there were agents provocateur in the crowd, egging them on. That is entrapment. The whole legal case falls on that basis alone. All the J6ers need to be freed immediately.
Gigi,
There was no insurection.
Trying to claim there was is the same stupid lawfare nonsense that those of you on the left engage in constantly.
You can not have a working legal system unless government powers are read narrowly and specifically and individual rights are read broadly.
When The minutemen of Lexington and concorde took up arms to stop british soldiers from confiscating there weapons at the lexington green – THAT was an insurrection.
When heavily armed confederate forces stormed form Sumter that was an insurection.
The violent protests in front of the WH are not insurrections.
The Portland riots attempting to take over the federal courthouse were not insurrection.
The armed BLM rioters taking over parts of central Seattle and bombing the police station – was not an insurrection.
The kavanaugh protests trying to in some cases violently prevent senators from confirming Kavanaugh – those were not insurrection.
Something is not an insurrection – just becaue you do not like it.
Why were people at the capitol – to protest a incredibly corrupt election and to demand that congress which had the power to do so act to correct that.
It was the RIGHT of those protestors to demand that.
Just as it was the RIGHT of BLM protestors to deman defunding the police,
or the right of the clinton pussy hat protestors to demand that Trump not be inaugurated in 2017.
Or any of a long list of other left wing not protests that got out of hand.
I know this is hard for you to grasp – but the left is NOT the only people in this country free to protest.
John Say,
Well said and spot on!!!
The Portland riots attempting to take over the federal courthouse were not insurrection.
The armed BLM rioters taking over parts of central Seattle and bombing the police station – was not an insurrection.
Yes, both of those were insurrections. They were attempts to overthrow the government of the USA, at least on a small patch of ground. The other examples, including the Capitol riot, were not insurrections.
Gigi
J6 was NOT an insurection – it was not even much of a riot compared to say any night in Portland during the summer of 2020.
It was a “last ditch effort” by Trump and supporters – a LEGAL and CONSTITUTIONAL one – again see the election of 1876.
It was NOT going to succeed, and those doing it KNEW that.
But it WAS their right to protest – in the capitol, to assemble, and to petition congress and to demand that they refuse to certify one of the more corrupt elections in US history.
You can rant and rave about court cases etc. But you can not argue that massive amounts of illegal ballot harvesting occured.
The PA supreme court just told Sen. Casey that NO illegal ballots can not be counted in 2024 – But tens of thousands of them were in 2020 – in PA and many other states.
In 2020 courts all over the country allowed violations of the election laws they did not allow in 2024. and even in 2024 they allowed many that they should not have.
We are a nation of laws – not men. That is what the rule of law means.
As I have said repeatedly – that means we follow the law read NARROWLY regarding govenrment power and broadly regarding individual rights. The more you diverge from that – the more chaos and lawlesness you will have and the less people will trust govenrment and the greater the odds of an ACTUAL insurrection are.
So that we are clear – J6 was NOT an insurrection
BUT
“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
Declaration of Independence 1776
There does come a time when the lawlessness of government justifies an actual insurrection.
We are NOT there – but those like YOU keep trying to drag us there.
I constantly say – if you do not like the law or constitution change them. That is how lawful govenrment works.
You are NOT free to change the law or constitution – RESTRICTING individual rights by playing games with the meaning of words.
You are not free to do so by appoint judges that are willing to stretch the law to suit your ideology.
ALL judges are REQUIRED to be “conservative” – otherwise we are not governable.
That does not mean they are required to support Republican policies.
Judges should not EVER makes decisions based on what policies they prefer.
They are required to be conservative – meaning – they are required to follow the narrow reading of the text of the law and constitution with regard to government powers and to read it broadly regarding individual rights. ALWAYS.
I noted that election laws were not even close to followed in 2020 – that ALONE is reason that Trump and his supporters were justified in demanding that Congress refuse to certify the election.
If you want people to trust elections – follow the election laws.
If you do not like those laws – and I do not like some of them – then get them changed.
But ALWAYS government – executives, governors, presidents seretaries of state, …. are OBLIGATED to follow the law as written. Not as they wish it was.
It is because the courts and executives follow the law as written that YOU can trust that if you are able to change that – future executives will ALSO follow the law as written.
The left – the “resistance” is planning to fight Trump tooth and nail in his efforts to impliment the platform he was elected to perform.
To the extent that platform actually requires changing the law – I expect the courts to thwart Trump in unilaterally doing what he promised.
But I expected exactly the same of democrats.
I expected election laws to be followed – they STILL are not followed.
Mailin elections are unconstitutional in 38 US states – and we still have them.
Voter ID is REQUIRED in the majority of states – and it is still being ignored.
Many other election laws are being ignored by democratic executives, and by left leaning courts.
That is wrong, that is lawless. Continued long enough that IS justification for insurection.
I do not like the current immigration laws. But the executive is REQUIRED to follow them.
Mayorkas was impeached for failing to do so. He should have been tried and removed.
Democrats are ranting and racing over mass deportations.
I expect Homan, DHS, ICE and CBP to follow the law.
If we do not like out immigration law – we change it.
If you crossed the border illegally – i.e. not at a checkpoint, not at a port of entry.
Then you are guilty of a crime and can be deported without hearing any claim for asylum or any other argument as to why you should be allowed to remain.
If you are caught within 100miles of the border – CBP can schedule a hearing before an ALJ and deport you after you are convicted of illegal border crossing.
When you are convicted you will not be allowed to apply for asylum for many years.
That is our law. If you do not like it CHANGE it.
If you want asylum you must:
Apply for it at a US consulate or embassy – the first that you encounter after removing yourself from the danger that is driving you to request asylum.
Asylum is limited to people who have a legitimate reason to fear death from the government of the country they are from.
There is no asylum from criminal gangs, from lawless anti-government forces or from government economic failures.
Normally only about 20,000 people are granted asylum each year.
US immigration law has a lottery system that allows about one MILLION legal immigrants each year. Anyone can try to immigrate to the US using that legal lottery system – but there are far more applicants than we will grant. If you want to increase those numbers change the law.
My point over and over and over is FOLLOW the law.
Democrats do not do that.
Why would you expect Trump to ?
You refused to allow the trial and removal of Mayorkas for deliberately refusing to follow US immigration law.
Why should the people expect that Trump must follow the law ?
Regardless, I will support efforts by “the resistance” to require that Trump and his appointees “follow the law” – whatever that law is
until they can get it changed. I will support requiring that state and federal executives FOLLOW THE LAW – even laws I do not like.
until they can be changed.
Gigi,
It is so far beyond despute at this point that Trump directed DoD to make the DC NG available to protect the capitol AND THE PROTESTORS on J6 it is not funny.
Those J6 protestors who damaged property or attacked the capitol police are guilty of crimes – they are guilty even if there were no capitol police present on J6.
Protestors are not allowed to committ real crimes – just because there is no law enforcement to stop them.
HOWEVER, there is a duty of law enforcement to do their jobs. On J6 the Capitol police failed.
Just ot be clear – the JOB of the CP is NOT merely to “protect the capitol” – it is also to endure that the constitutional rights of protesters are protected.
The CP can not fixate on protecting the capitol at the expense of the rights of protestors.
Regardless inarguably the CP failed on J6.
Inarguably Trump made available to the CP all the resources that they could possibly have needed to have a safe protest at the capitol.
Yet those resources were NOT available. WHY ?
When government fails we look at WHY.
When we determine why failure occured – we impose consequences.
That is how we assure that failure will not occur again.
So why were the NG not deployed at 7am on J6.
They answer to that is easy – Speaker of the house Pelosi.
There is no crime that I am aware of in her failure,
and she can not be fired.
But she should be censured.
There was a riot at the capitol on J6 because speaker peolosi failed to do her job.
As to the presence of Antifa at J6,
or the presence of FBI informants
or assets.
Again – that MUST be thoroughly investigated,
Which it HAS NOT BEEN.
There were atleast some Antifa present – that is an established fact.
The video of Alishi Babbit getting murdered is by an Antifa member.
regardless we need to determine the role antifa played in j6.
I do not personally think they are a significant factor – but their role still must be investigated.
The same is true of FBI agents and FBI informants.
I am substantially more concerned about FBI informants – we KNOW from many many other incidents over decades that FBI informants – and more rarely agents
ACTIVELY push others into committing crimes.
That is NOT legitimate conduct on the part of the FBI.
It needs to be investigated and punished.
I do not KNOW that Epps was an FBI informant.
I do KNOW that Epps acted to ACTUALLY incite violence and that the DOJ and FBI studiously protected him for 4 years.
It sure SEEMS like he was an FBI informant.
If Epps was an informant AND he was inciting violence – the latter has been proven,
Then there are not only consequences for Epps but also for the FBI.
The FBI may NOT push people to committ crimes – it is called entrapment and it is illegal.
You are correct that outside of ardent Trump supporters – most people do not care.
The FACT is that most people do NOT buy the left wing nut claim this was an insurrection that you and democrats keep shilling.
But they also see it as something that is over and that they want to forget.
I strongly suspect most people will be fine with Trump pardoning all but serious offenses and commuting sentences for most of those.
To the more extreme of Trump supporters – J6 defendants are hero’s and patriots and martyrs .
To those on the left they are domestic terrorists and insurrectionists.
BOTH are wrong.
Most americans want to forget J6 – it was NOT pearl harbor.
Nor was it lexington and concord.
“WHY were the people who climbed the walls of the Capitol, smashed doors and windows, battered police officers and ransacked the Capitol there in the first place?”
To protest a fraudulent election.
“If it was a mere protest, WHY was it necessary for them to enter the building”
Because they were there to petition govenrment to NOT certify a fraudulent election – and the people who had the power to refuse to certify were inside the capitol.
This is no different from every other group of protestors such as Kavanaugh protestors that protested inside the capitol.
“WHY were they willing to batter police officers and smash doors and windows to gain access?”
Because they were being denied their right to free speech, assembly, and petition govenrment at the pre-eminent free speech forum in the world.
Gigi, the courts have already decided this issue – Governmet can not limit the first amendment by using place and time restrictions in a fashion to bar SPECIFIC view points.
Kavanaugh protestors – as all other protestors were allowed in the capitol. So were Trump protestors.
Govenrment can not manufacture an emergency as a means to take away peoples rights – you can not use covid as the means to rig elections.
you can not use it to thwart protests.
Those of you on the left PROPERLY understood that lockdown and other covid regulations did NOY apply to BLM protestors
They did not apply at the US capitol on J6 either.
But the capitol is even worse. The courts long ago established that when govenrment CREATES a public forum for free speech.
It can not then limit which voices get to be heard.
The govenrment can not say – the KKK can protest on the Mall – but not MLK.
It can not allow KAvanaugh protests in the capitol and deny 2020 election fraud protestors.
” WHY was there a reconnaissance mission conducted before January 6th”
Hoax alert. please learn the facts.
This is a completely stupid claim.
The plans for the capitol are available ONLINE – there is no need for “Reconasance.
“to come up with the most-vulnerable points of entry, so the Proud Boys could create a distraction to deflect Capitol Police away from these points of entry and break through to get into the building? These facts were disclosed by the British reporter who was embedded with the Proud Boys.”
You are blurring large numbers of hoaxes and bogus stories.
” WHY were some of the insurrectionists dressed in flak gear, complete with helmets and bulletproof vests?”
ROFL
There are 50,000 hours of government video of J6.
There must be thousands of hours of news video.
Please find us a company, a platooon, a squad of protestors dressed in “flak gear”, helmet and bullet proof vests ?
“WHY was there a cache of weapons stored in a hotel room in Virginia, across the Potomac?”
So among the possibly 100,000 people who showed up at the elipse,
the about 4,000 who marched down to the capitol, you found that a couple of protestors had less than half a dozen guns MILES away LEGALLY in their hotel room in Virginia ?
That is proof of WHAT ?
April 15, 1775 at Lexington and Concord was an actual insurrection. Approximately 1700 minuteman in total engaged an approximately equal number of British soldiers
ALL ARMED and there were about 75 casualties on either side, with the British being driven back into Boston.
That is what insurrection looks like.
Not a half a dozen guys leaving their personal weapons miles away in Virginia where they were legal, before going UNARMED to the capitol.
” WHAT WAS THEIR AIM? MERE PROTEST? IF IT WAS MERE PROTEST,”
Yes, if they intended insurrection they would have actually brought the guns.
“then they had no reason to break past the police barricades and storm the building.”
Of course they did – they are allowed to excercise their first amendment rights.
The police can not thwart petititoning govenrment by stopping you from getting anywhere near govenrment.
“WHO were they after?”
Congress – because congress had the power to act and refuse to certify a fraudulent election.
“The answer is Mike Pence.”
In part.
“WHY did they have a noose, and WHY were they shouting “Hang Mike Pence”?”
Why did the rickety gallows where that noose was held up by a finishing nail have a big sign on it that said “This is ART” ?
These protestors had no ability to ACTUALLY hang Pence or anyone else.
That appears to be lost on you.
“It is because Trump lied to them, saying Pence wouldn’t “do the right thing””
Except that was not a lie. Pence was free to present the alternate slates of electors and let congress vote on them -AGIAN see the election of 1876.
“which was rig the election by refusing certified vote totals from the various states–something he had no power to do. ”
Pence has no power to certify anything – he does not even have a vote in the certification process, but he IS the person who presents the various state results to congress for them to accept or reject and he is FREE to present the results of alternate electors, not only is this what happened in 1876, it is also what federal courts more than a century ago decided was the correct way for a candidate to challenge election fraud in congress.
“The plot, concocted by Trump lawyers,”
No it was concted by Lawrence Tribe – Clinton’s lawyer in 2016, based on federal election law and the election of 1876.
Eastman borrowed it.
“was for Pence to refuse the votes, for Congress to declare that a winner couldn’t be determined”
False the precise plan was publicly outlined by eastman before hand.
Further Sen Crus had a slightly different plan that he had gotten approximately a dozen republican senators to sponsor.
The first huge problem that you keep ducking is that Congress need NOT certify an election.
It was long ago decided that the constitution has no purely cerimonial directives.
If congress or the president is goven a power – they may excercise that power within the limits of the constitution.
Congress certifies elections. That means they are free to refuse to certify – and they have done so in the past.
” and then throw the election back to the state legislatures where they believed that Republicans would ignore the popular vote and award Trump the presidency.”
This is just entirely made up. While there are non-J6 related issues regarding the role of state legislatures in federal elections – the constitution says that power over elections belongs to congress and state legislatures – NOT the executive or courts.
Regardless, once the certification of an election is before congress it can NOT go back to state legislatures.
The final outcome of an election is ALWAYS decided by CONGRESS. Even today in 2024.
Rep Raskin claims he is going to challenge Trump on J6 as barred by the 14th amendment.
He is free to do so. He is highly unlikely to succeed, but he is free to do so.
” Part of the plot was the falsification of Electoral College documents–these were submitted to the National Archives. Some of those who signed these false documents under oath are being prosecuted. ”
and ultimately they will win – because there is no such thing as “fake electors” – they are alternate electors.
They are REQUIRED in order to successfully challenge certification of a states electors.
Let us presume that in some hypothetical future election there is overwhelming evidence of election fraud in key states.
But the courts claim to be barred from acting on that by Laches, Standing mootness, …. as they have in 2020.
Or the evidence of Fraud does not become available until just before congress sits to certify the election.
How do you see that electio being challenged ?
Lets assume that the election hinges on a single state – PA just to make the hypothetical cleaner.
There is massive self evident fraud – but the executive either wittingly or unwittingly has certified the election at the state,
and appointed electors and they have voted.
So what does congress do ?
Are they FORCED to accept the fraudulent electors vote ?
In 1876 congress decided NO they were not.
If they reject those electors do they just refuse to count that state ?
The constitution REQUIRES that they count the votes of ELECTORS.
If they reject the state executives electors – whose electors do they count ?
That is why Alternate electors exist.
They are NOT illegal or fraudlent.
This is just more left wing nut lawfare.
In 1876 congress did not certify on J6,
They set up a bipartisan committee to review the allegations of fraud.
Ultimately they accepted the votes of ALTERNATE electors and certified Harrison as the winner of the election.
Had they just rejected the fraudulent states electors neither candidate would have had enough EC votes and the election would have gone to the congress to decide – NOT the state legislatures.
” If Trump and his conduct isn’t sick, I don’t know what counts.”
That would be correct – you do not know what sick conduct is.
“The answer to all of this is Trump, his ego, his narcissism, his sociopathy and the gullibility of his fans.”
The answer to what ?
Your free to pretend that you know what is in other peoples heads.
But you do not.
No one knows what is in the mind of others – that is why we judge people based on their conduct.
“Trump had done a terrible job pretending to be president.”
ROFL
“The economy was in shambles”
False growth was about 6%, inflation was about 1.4%
The world was at peace,
The border was secure.
“COVID was out of control”
Covid was out of control to exactly the same extent it was everywhere else in the world.
Covid was out of control to the same extent it was during the biden administration.
3 times as many people died of Covid during Biden’s presidency as Trumps.
It is weird how you get everything backwards.
Biden inherited high growth, low inflation.
The covid Vaccine
A peacefull world.
A secure border.
“businesses, schools, restaurants were closed. There was no leisure travel. Unemployment was high.”
Not in most of the country – Blue State Governors did those things.
Businesses were open in most of the country, Restaurants were open in most of the country.
People traveled as they pleased. Unemployment was dropping rapidly.
Again Busineses were closed because YOU closed them – left wing nut public health officials lied to us and we closed businesses, and schoolsm adn ….
And the results were absolute disaster.
You say Trump lied about the seriousness of covid – that is stupid – Covid is what it is. people saw covid – they saw it in the US they saw it in the EU, they saw it everywhere.
And they saw that the policies of left wing nuts did nothing to reduce the harm of covid while destroying the economy and our mental health.
“lied that anytime someone died, health officials called it “COVID” just to make him look bad.”
There is lots of mislabeling of deaths in 2020.
” He spread lies and disinformation, including quack cures like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine,”
How so ? Do you know ANYTHING that was more effective than either ?
Besides exactly what is it you have against people making free choices to try something that may or may not work.
You want the right to kill a living fetus in your body – but you want to deny others the right to refuse an unprovenvaccine or to take safe OTC medications that might prevent or mitigate covid ?
In 2020 we should have been trying EVERYTHING that might improve the situation with Covid.
Instead YOU, the left only allowed people to try YOUR unproven nonsense – all of which failed.
And your angry at Trump ?
In 1864 Abraham Lincoln wrote the following to his secretary of war, Edwin Stanton, “Truth is generally the best vindication against slander.” Now it seems that certainly in the Jankowicz case as it also may be in the Epps’ case that if the “slander” in question is true, then there is no defense.
Perhaps Pam Bondi, if and when she gets confirmed as the Attorney General, can pry the truth from the Justice Department and the FBI about Epps, the number and role of informants, and the pipe bombs. If a large segment of people still think this was an insurrection while others think it was just a demonstration turned riot, then it is important for our republic that we the citizens know the truth of this affair. The absence of that truth leads people to speculate. Releasing the facts of what the FBI and other state agencies had or now have will likely minimize the slander on the subject. This knowledge may even point to solutions that in the long term strengthen the republic.
@Arnold Nordsieck: Your post had more thoughtful academic value than Professor Turley’s actual column did.
Well done sir!
Today’s story of ‘As the United States Turns’ is same as the last version, just different Actors as the cast. Currently the directors and writers that have the podium are charlatans with a creepy bent towards a dream of socialism if not communism. Their actions of law-fare, demonization of others and a host of other behaviors come right from instructions in the booklet “How to Deceive Others”, where the fine print is only seen through Rose Colored Glasses. We currently live in a Bureau-racial Dynasty, with unelected overlords that come straight from the cast of ‘As the United States Turns’ who issue dictates, rules, and procedures all under the guise of laws they have written on the behest of elected representatives. The divisions of the elected government of ‘As the United States Turns’ (Executive, Legislative, and possibly Judicial) have surrendered authorities to the bureaucrats and allowed them to subvert the intents and laws that we have agreed upon. Hopefully this current saga will soon end with a new cast and a different story line.
May God help us All.
In a few months the real truth will come out about Ray Epps and his part in the January 6th Pelosi FBI inspired riot.
To the Associated Press.
I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Even my local rag stopped using AP as their source of their articles. Sadly they now use USA Today which is almost as bad.
PS. I only get the rag because I like the crossword puzzles.
Same here. $6 per month gets me the games section of the NYT. A few weeks ago, they gave me the option of getting the entire paper (online) for the same price for the next 12 months. I did it, but I seldom read there anymore, because they are so biased that it interferes with their function as an actual reliable news source.
Years ago, before I became a lonely, old, infirm, hermit shut-in codger, I used to hie myself down to Books a Million on Sunday morning, get a cup of coffee or two and buy the NYTs, sit there, and read thru it.
Floyd, I got my rag yo go down to $14 a month for daily online and Sunday delivery. It’s very aggravating reading the slanted coverage of anything political, but I need the Sunday NY Times crossword which my rag includes.
Fungible News Of The Incestuous Mainstream Media
Epps and his wife have clearly been through a nightmare of threats and innuendo.
Professor Turley, you are a master of understatement. Whether how you typify your fellow lawyers within the Attorney General’s office, the DoJ and FBI who engaged in serial felonies, or in this case Ray Epps.
We can all imagine, just as you do, the nightmare Epps has been forced to live through by the FBI allowing him to live free for almost four years until they were forced to slap him with a misdemeanor charge after the light was shining too brightly on their J6 parade.
Professor Turley, we feel you! How dare the FBI punish Epps in this way, rather than allowing him some relief by jailing him in solitary confinement and leave him awaiting trial for months – exactly like the relief they provided to dozens of other active J6 riot participants.
Let’s all share a tear with Professor Turley for Ray Epps, who has spent yet again another Thanksgiving free at home with his wife while after almost four years other J6 rioters are still in jail awaiting their trials or serving jail sentences.
Wildly overcharge some. Reluctantly undercharge others.
“For some according to their usefulness, to others according to our needs”
Democrats and FBI at work.
This man is working for someone – @ :32
FED, FED, FED, FED, FED!!!
This entirely scripted story will unravel in the next four years. I can’t wait to see the perp walks.
While this is a good discussion, the best part is at 10:40, where he discusses the underlying worldview difference between the Right and the Left. Think of this when you hear liberals speak –
@Floyd
Sorry, man, I don’t view human beings in those myopic terms, and it would likely behoove all of us to stop doing that. Politics were intended to be a tool, not a religion or sacrament. Note that those things are separate in our Constitution, because our founders were very smart regarding human nature and culture. And if you don’t think, not presuming anything, ‘Christian’ is just another religion to the secular that is allowed to be adopted and allowed to be expressed in our country; meanwhile, the rest of us are free to believe whatever the hey we want – you epically missed the point.
We are not a ‘Christian country’, never were, and never will be under our founding documents, and I am glad; that type of group think has not place in a free country, and *this* kind of thinking is really not useful. There is nothing wrong with being smart, well-read, educated, and that is not the exclusive province of a ‘side’. Conversely, neither is being a Christian. The separation of church and state (you are welcome to your church, but in 2024, most of us don’t want it; for those that do, you go) was the third most brilliant thing our founders did after 1A and 2A, IMO.
Pretty tired of this sheet. We can do better than this, and most of us are sick to death of the tribalism and pedantry. Stop it. The original viewpoint, barring the religion portion, is still not helping. 🤷🏻♂️ Viewpoints are nothing more than opinions based on personal experience which is myriad, especially with so many billions on the planet; our founders were wise enough to understand there is no universal measure for that and gave us the freedom to work within a larger context where no matter who we are, we are free to be ourselves while still holding true to fundamental ideals that work for most.
That the modern left seems to have forgotten that the dark ages ended centuries ago or that coexistence means living in harmony with other people that may not be like you is another matter. We are not a ‘village’. We are people coexisting that share a basic ideal, and that ideal in itself means we will not always see eye to eye depending on our personal life preferences. It is why communists hate us and want to destroy our Constitution. Marx did not have a big enough brain or deep enough soul to allow for any variation whatsoever such was his sophomoric understanding of human nature.
From the, “we have seen figures like Hillary Clinton call on Europeans to force the censorship of Americans.” link above:
“Whether it’s Facebook or Twitter or X or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don’t moderate and monitor the content we lose total control and it’s not just the social and psychological effects it’s real harm, it’s child porn and threats of violence, things that are terribly dangerous.”
Clinton continues to offer a textbook example of the anti-free speech narrative. While seeking sweeping censorship for anything deemed disinformation, Clinton cites specific examples that are already barred under federal law like child porn.”
If you are a Democrat, like DeMac, Gigi, George, fishwings, bad Anonymous, etc. – do any of you guys ever sit around and wonder why it is that your party is sooo intent on shutting the other side down speechwise??? Is it that your ideas can not prevail where there is open discussion?
Is that why POS like Jen Psaki keep calling for censorship:
The American Founders provided Freedom, including Free Enterprise (i.e. all platforms), Free Markets, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Thought, Freedom of the Press and other Freedoms that were provided by the 9th Amendment.
________________________________________________
9th Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then, and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
Jen Psaki and her communist (liberal, progressive, socialist, democrat, RINO, AINO) allies are antithetical, anti-American, communist insurrectionists whose intent is the extirpation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the overthrow of all constitutional government, and the forcible imposition of communist “dictatorship of the proletariat” by the communist Intelligentsia. The entire communist American welfare state is unconstitutional.
_______________________________________________________________________
Lincoln was a great president.
Proclamation 80—Calling Forth the Militia and Convening an Extra Session of Congress
“On April 15, 1861,…President Abraham Lincoln issued a proclamation calling forth the state militias, to the sum of 75,000 troops, in order to suppress the rebellion. He appealed ‘to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union.’”
Proclamation 92—Warning to Rebel Sympathizers
“[On] July 17, 1862,…I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby proclaim to and warn all persons within the contemplation of said sixth section to cease participating in, aiding, countenancing, or abetting the existing rebellion or any rebellion against the Government of the United States and to return to their proper allegiance to the United States on pain of the forfeitures and seizures as within and by said sixth section provided.”
__________________________________________________________________________________
Now President Donald J. Trump MUST pull a full “Lincoln” and close the border, impose martial law, prosecute a war against the communist rebellion without a formal declaration, shred the Communist Manifesto and irrevocably extirpate all principles of communism in America, implement the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution and Bill of Rights including absolute freedom, absolute free enterprise, absolute free markets, and absolute private property including a fully constitutional dearth of taxation and regulation, eliminate the Departments of Labor, Education, Agriculture, Energy, HUD, and EPA, issue the “Deportation Proclamation” deporting all illegal aliens, past and present, including those who illegally pursued citizenship as criminal border crossers and “asylum” seekers who all made false and fraudulent claims of phantom, nonexistent persecution as foreign citizens with no U.S. rights, establish coherent voter qualifications by State legislatures per the Constitution, declare English the sole official language of the United States, suspend habeas corpus, smash opposition printing presses, networks, podcasts, social media platforms, etc., and throw anyone and everyone who opposes him in prison to Save the Union until America is placed squarely back on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Hurrah. This is definitely a lingering thread that stinks to high heaven. Even if no one is truly held accountable for the dem’s farce regarding J6, at least their mentality that law is but a triviality is coming to light more and more. Bring on the scrutiny!
The hot mess of this chicanery (along with covid) should not be permitted to just slip into the time stream. No. We have NOT forgotten, and this whole damn thing was orchestrated, right up to and including the scripted reality show they referred to as a ‘hearing’; anyone with two brain cells can see it.
Only after we see the Epstein and Diddy lists will I even consider the “Jan 6 Insurrection” significant beyond being mostly prog/left propaganda. Let’s get some real data put out there about real criminals.
Real criminals
@whimsicalmama
Very much agreed. There has to be a reason so many among the prominent are leaving the country, and I don’t buy the, ‘Trump was elected.’, excuse – he served a full term last time, and none of them even changed zip codes within the States. Our memories are not that short, we are not that stupid, and no, we do not think that highly of any of them. Those lists – which are a new wrinkle – must be absolutely damning. It’s like Hugh Hefner stipulating in his will that all camera footage from his mansion needed to be tied to something heavy and dumped in the ocean.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6424255/Hugh-Hefner-dumped-casket-private-sex-tapes-SEA-passed-away.html
PS – Can you say, ‘Roman Polansky?’. Seems awfully similar to me.
Does anybody else remember a march of supposedly white-supremacists where all the marchers were fit men, and looked like they were law enforcement agent-types??? I can not find it on youtube, but it happened earlier this year IIRC. I think they were al wearing khaki cargo pants maybe.
Jimmy Dore did some stories about them, a couple of times.
Thanks! I found them!
These “patriot front” toads even had an FBI property marked bull horn at one of their fed fests.
“Wray refused to answer questions about why, despite the footage of Epps encouraging the Jan. 6 protesters, he has not faced the same consequences as others.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2584224/nine-takeaways-from-fbi-director-christopher-wrays-testimony/ [July 13, 2023]
It amazes me that none of our genius pundits has discovered the Ray Epps myth and what’s behind it. To begin with, Epps is not and never was an FBI informant. Let’s begin with that as a fact. According to videos of the J6 debacle, Epps facilitated and aided many of those who violated the law. By rights, Epps should have been hit with stiff charges for his actions.
So why did the FBI not charge Ray Epps? Simple. The FBI had their own informants and undercover agents inside the Capitol at the time. They had migrated over with the crowd from Trump’s rally on the mall. To protect their sources, the FBI needed to pick someone out of the crowd who: 1) was prominent and active in the riot; and had nothing to do with the FBI or any other law enforcement agency present at the Capitol.
Epps was a perfect foil, a Judas goat leading others to what would put them in prison while he was left alone and never prosecuted (until the last moment when his unwitting “immunity” was becoming a problem for the Bureau and he needed to be hit with a misdemeanor charge to keep the charade alive).
It was a brilliant scheme and for weeks and months, the media concluded – wrongly as we now know – that Epps was some sort of super FBI source. Meanwhile, the public’s attention was not focused on the real confidential human sources inside the Capitol on J6. Indeed, Epps himself never figured this out as he vigorously denied being an FBI informant and essentially eschewed his new-found celebrity – all courtesy of the FBI.
And now, you know the rest of the story.
“To begin with, Epps is not and never was an FBI informant.” You have absolutely no possible way of proving that. Menaing a schmuck like you has to have access to the FBI or DOJ records. Which I can say with absolute, 1000% you do not.
So please, refrain from such bombast. Go eat more turkey.
“To begin with, Epps is not and never was an FBI informant.”
Bold storytelling, but without proof, it’s just fiction. Facts matter—let’s keep the conversation grounded in evidence.
That may be true. On the other hand, there is no reason to believe anything the FBI and other agencies have said about their role in J6. Unless and until Trump appoints someone to head the FBI who will make public all the relevant information, the truth will not be known for sure. Ric Grenell would be a good choice, since he has been passed over for other positions. He did a good job in making information public as acting DNI.
Epps was in the thick of the riot… photographic, video evidence, yet he wasn’t indicted?
And you wrote “So why did the FBI not charge Ray Epps? Simple. The FBI had their own informants and undercover agents inside the Capitol at the time.’
“So why did the FBI not charge Ray Epps? Simple. The FBI had their own informants and undercover agents inside the Capitol at the time. They had migrated over with the crowd from Trump’s rally on the mall. To protect their sources, the FBI needed to pick someone out of the crowd who: 1) was prominent and active in the riot; and had nothing to do with the FBI or any other law enforcement agency present at the Capitol. ”
That is pure obfuscation. Your cited supporting evidence in no way leads inevitably (or, for me, even tentatively) to your stated conclusion. How would the FBI charging Epps have weakened the protection of their sources more than just naming him? Implicating other informants of whom Epps was aware would not even potentially happen until such time as Epps came to trial and his defense was permitted to present testimony naming them; knowledge that Epps would be exceedingly unlikely to be privy to unless he really was an informant with direct knowledge of others. In fact, if Epps was an FBI informant (which seems to be at least plausible), the FBI’s failure to charge him could easily have been a strategy specifically intended to not give Epps any incentive to implicate the others, or the FBI itself.
It amazes me that none of our genius pundits has discovered the Ray Epps myth and what’s behind it. To begin with, Epps is not and never was an FBI informant. Let’s begin with that as a fact
Let’s begin with the primary fact: you’re a cowardly Anonymous Democrat playing “Please believe me instead of your own lying eyes when I state as fact that Epps was not an informant”.
Yes, it’s just pure statistical chance: the FBI have been bragging they’re hunting down grannies who did nothing more than take a selfie on the lawn, while they swiftly removed Epps from their comprehensive J6 wanted list and then ignored Epps and his actions until pressure forced them to acknowledge his existence. He wasn’t working for the FBI – he was merely a handy Judas goat!
The only person prominent and active during the riot that qualified to be an FBI Judas goat was Epps! Nobody else was doing that!
The FBI’s agency rules also state that the FBI can only have a single Judas goat: having more than one is prohibited!
Did the FBI have more than one person on the payroll while J6 developed and inside after the riot began? Almost certainly yes. But that doesn’t make Epps actions and how he was dealt merely the lone, unwitting Judas goat.
Explain two odd coincidences 1) Pelosi made phone calls to Epps and vice versa…FACT. 2) Epp’s wife works for DOMINION, FACT. Some rather odd coincidences dont you think ?.
No, those are NOT facts. They are barefaced lies made up by liars such as the Hoft brothers, who unfortunately do much to discredit the right side of politics.
PS: I posted this a few minutes ago but it didn’t appear I don’t understand why, so I’m posting it again.
Call him what you want, Ray Epps was being instructed by someone in Government !!! The FBI denial reminds me of Dr. Fauci’s consistent lying about his participation in “Gain of Function Research” (which has been proven the Good Doctor was deeply involved in this Mess) !!!!
When the un informed MASSES realize that they and their family members are being screwed by a small group of COMMUNIST WHACKOS then you will ALWAYS have a political SLAUGHTER. I Don’t see the COMMUNIST gaining power again any time soon. Terrible people!
There’s little about Ray Epps’ account of himself on Jan. 5th and 6th that aligns with the external evidence, especially the videos. He is still a legitimate public figure and his actions deserve to be scrutinized.
Epps conduct on Capitol Hill needs public scrutiny. Now, maybe we’ll finally get it.
Diogenes-definitely agree. There are strange goings on and not fully explained. Anonymous-10:03 am’s explanation is not an explanation but more a wish list hoping that we will be misdirected. Strange that people who did far less caught so much more legal trouble than the unfortunate Mr Epps. There was a great deal that was strange about that day. I suspect all files will be “misplaced” or accidentally “corrupted”.
I suspect all files will be “misplaced” or accidentally “corrupted”.
GEB, are you remembering how all the Secret Service cellphone based comms from that maximum full court press effort that January 6th was accidentally “corrupted” because the Secret Service chose that very important day with so many of it’s agents involved to do a software platform upgrade?
Or are you remembering how Special Counsel Robert Mueller and every DoJ/FBI lawyer and FBI agent on his Mueller Trump-Russia Dossier Team “accidentally” erased the cellphones they used throughout that investigation after Republicans demanded the Inspector General search those phones. All on the same day. And every one of them inadvertently done in the exact same way?
They have so many statistical anomolies when it comes to losing their records that they should all be buying Powerball lottery tickets so they can live the life of multi-millionaires instead of having to show up to work for a living.
Gentlemen, the good news is that there will be consequences. I’ve been advocating for breaking up D.C. and shipping its detritus to various parts of the country. Apparently, others have been thinking along the same lines. This link shows Trump is darn serious about draining the swamp:
https://amgreatness.com/2024/11/29/a-top-priority-for-the-musk-ramaswamy-doge-commission-decentralizing-the-federal-government/
Gird your loins, fellas. The election was the easy part.
When are we going to learn the extent of Epps’ agitating and informing?
His and pelosi’s phones have taken calls from the other. Coincidence , Methinks not !.
No, they haven’t.
Epps, except he was a FBI informant. He incited people to break the law. Epps needs to watch his back he has many enemies.
Many enemies…..and rightly so!
“Epps needs to watch his back he has many enemies.”
He might want to watch his back even more diligently when his “friends” are around…