As promised during the campaign, President Donald Trump pardoned most of the rioters from January 6th soon after taking office. The scope of the pardon was greater than expected. Indeed, many of us opposed the inclusion of those who were convicted of violent crimes against police officers. However, one recipient quickly stood out in the group for her refusal to accept the pardon: Pamela Hemphill. The right to refuse a pardon is found not in the Constitution but in a curious line of case law treating the executive action as an offer requiring acceptance.
Ironically, Hemphill (called the “MAGA granny”) was the prototypical case cited by critics of what one of the leading Justice officials called the “shock and awe” campaign against those involved in the riot. Like many, she was convicted only of a misdemeanor for parading, demonstrating or picketing in the Capitol building. (Three other misdemeanors were dropped as part of a plea bargain).
She was still sentenced to two months in jail, three years of probation and a $500 fine to be paid into a fund.
Prosecutors cited her rhetoric in postings before January 6th and a picture holding a gun. She later said that a therapist changed her mind and she became a supporter of Kamala Harris.
Hemphill said that she viewed the pardon as belittling the attack and rewriting history.
Even those of us who expressed concerns over the handling of these cases agree with Hemphill that January 6th was a desecration of our constitutional process.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
However, the question is whether this sweeping power can be refused by the recipient. In my view, there is a strong basis for treating pardons as a one-way street. You do not have to agree with the pardon for a president to grant you the benefit of it. Pardons are a final failsafe in the criminal justice system, allowing presidents to correct what they view as a wrong in the treatment of individuals or groups. This view treats a pardon as an act in the public welfare or good, a view that I tend to favor.
Yet, in 1833, in the case of United States v. Wilson, Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that this private act of grace
is a deed” which requires “delivery” and “delivery is not complete, without acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered; and if it be rejected, we have discovered no power in a court to force it on him.
The Court stressed that our pardon jurisprudence rests on English common law because the “[pardon] power had been exercised from time immemorial by the executive of [England] . . . [,] to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance.” In England, it was treated as a private agreement or act with the King. However, many have suggested that our rejection of a monarchy should militate in favor of a public purpose or public welfare view of the authority. Nevertheless, Marshall suggested that even a condemned person could refuse a pardon if it were conditional. In other words, a person could find that the “condition may be more objectionable than the punishment inflicted by the judgment.”
The Court reaffirmed Wilson in Burdick v. United States after President Woodrow Wilson pardoned a newspaper editor, George Burdick, who had refused to testify by invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Wilson wanted Burdick to testify in a case and hoped that the pardon would bar the use of the privilege against self-incrimination.
Justice Joseph McKenna wrote the opinion that found that Burdick was entitled to reject the pardon for a number of reasons. In dicta, McKenna noted that a pardon is an implicit admission of guilt — a view that I have always rejected as fundamentally wrong. However, the Court emphasized that the Burdick pardon would have resulted in losing his right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. That condition seemed to drive the decision.
The Court then muddled this area even further with a seemingly conflicting result a few years later in Biddle v. Perovich. In that case, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote for a unanimous Court that there was no consent required in commuting a death sentence to life imprisonment.
President Taft had reduced Vuco Perovich’s death sentence to life in prison. Perovich wanted a full pardon and challenged the change. The Court found that the president had the authority regardless of his opposition. The decision clearly rejects the view of Wilson in holding that a pardon is not a private act of grace.
I fall obviously closer to Biddle and view both Wilson and Burdick as deeply flawed, particularly the latter’s suggestion of implied guilt from a pardon.
Ironically, the implied guilt issue came up in another Trump pardon involving Clint Lorance who was convicted in the killing of two Afghan civilians. After Trump pardoned Lorance, he sought to continue to seek relief in challenging his conviction but the district court found, ala Burdick, that the pardon was an admission of guilt. The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit correctly reversed the trial court and found no such admission.
Hemphill raises the reverse image of Lorance. She opposes the pardon because she feels that it removes or expunges her guilt.
The Hemphill pardon does not contain any conditions. However, this was not a commutation but a full pardon. It could be cited as a problem in refusing to testify on the underlying criminal acts (though Hemphill appears eager to discuss those acts). It does not appear to implicate other constitutional rights. (Notably, individuals are routinely compelled to testify with the grant of immunity).
I remain skeptical of the private act model in such cases. Yet, it is not a matter likely to be litigated. It is unlikely to arise without a fight over the privilege against self-incrimination. Frankly, I wish we could see a test case to allow the Court to revisit the underlying authority.
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.”
Lest we forget…
Trump has pardoned all the men who attacked the U.S. Capitol on his behalf on January 6, 2021. Trump says they were not violent and did not have weapons — but the world saw their violence; they were also caught on video. Nearly 175 used dangerous or deadly weapons, according to prosecutors.
They also threw Nazi salutes, posted they intended to start a civil war, vowed “there will be blood,” and called for the lynching of Democratic lawmakers.
They attacked police with flag poles, bear spray, and a metal whip. They choked officers with their bare hands. They were convicted for, among other things, “hurling officers down a flight of stairs and plotting to kill FBI agents investigating the attacks.”
A video shows them attacking Officer Michael Fanone, who suffered a heart attack and traumatic brain injury that day. Later he and his family received death threats after he testified in Congress on the incident. They beat Police Officer Daniel Hodges and crushed him in a door, his mouth filled with blood while he cried out for help.
Lest we forget… the world saw their violence
This cowardly Anonymous Democrat tries to pretend it’s concerned when political protests become violent.
The world had already seen what cowardly Anonymous Democrats deny happened: the MONTHS of rampaging murderous Democrat street thugs in Black Liars & Marxists and Antifa.
Murdering police officers and civilians, occupying entire blocks of cities by force of arms, occupying federal buildings and city police stations, rioting, pillaging, arson and murder in their 2020 Election Season Months Of Mostly Peaceful Insurrection.
570+ separate but coordinated riots of insurrection across the country. Tens of thousands of federal felonies committed. Thousands of police officers wounded. Thousands of innocent citizens wounded by Democrat street thugs in Black Liars & Marxists and Antifa. Over 30 innocent citizens murdered by the Democrat street thug insurrectionists.
Damage totaling more than Hurricane Katrina. Entire blocks of dozens of cities destroyed by the invading Democrat street thug hordes.
And Attorney General Merrick Garland and his federal prosecutors refused to give even ONE of these murderous Democrat insurrectionists “the J6 shock and awe treatment”.
The response of cowardly Anonymous Democrat posting here who are Anonymous veterans of the 2020 Mostly Peaceful Election Season Insurrection?
Please Believe Us; Nothing To See Here, Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes™
Old Airborne Dog
“It is unlikely to arise without a fight over the privilege against self-incrimination. Frankly, I wish we could see a test case to allow the Court to revisit the underlying authority.” Sir, I suspect that given the enormous crop of recently-issued pardons by the previous Administration, and the likelihood that some of those pardon recipients will be called before Congress to testify, that you will be granted your wish. I do not anticipate all of the Bidens, the original J6 Committee members, and/or Dr Fauci willingly telling Congress the truth about their actions. I wish that when the case(s) come before the Supreme Court, that the justices would put aside political biases, examine the history of the pardoning power honestly, and issue a majority opinion in accordance thereof. Unlike our current Chief Justice, however, I believe there are “conservative justices” and “liberal justices.” I further believe that a large portion of judicial opinions are fashioned based on biases rather than on the law and the faces. As the comedian Stephen Crowder says, “prove me wrong.”
Jonathan: DJT is hardly out of the gate and is already having big problems in implementing his agenda. In Seattle US District Judge John Coughenour, a GOP Reagan appointee, just issued a preliminary nationwide injunction against DJT’s EO rescinding birthright citizenship.
In a blistering order Coughenour said: “I’ve been on the bench for over four decades, I can’t remember another case where the question presented is as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order. There are other times in world history where we look back and people of goodwill can say where were the judges, where were the lawyers?” Coughenour made it clear he was not a judge who would rubberstamp DJT’s illegal order.
Even before DJT’s quickly appointed attorney Brett Shumate, who have been brought out of private practice to represent the the DOJ, could complete his first sentence Coughenour interrupted and asked: “In your opinion is this executive order constitutional?” Shumate said “It absolutely is”. To which the judge responded “Frankly, I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar could state unequivocally that this is a constitutional order. It just boggles my mind”.
In 14 days the Washington state AG, Nick Brown, will ask Judge Coughenour for preliminary and permanent injunctions against DJT’s EO. They will no doubt will be granted. DJT vows to appeal. But his first stop is the 9th Circuit that will likely affirm the injunction. From there DJT will appeal to the US SC where he expects to get a more sympathetic audience. Here’s where I will make a prediction–something I am inclined not to do in other cases. I doubt even CJ Roberts or Amy Coney-Barret will easily overturn the plain language of the 14th Amendment and a hundred years of precedent granting US citizenship to every person born here.
Bank Of America Torched After Claiming They Don’t Discriminate Against Conservatives
President Trump to Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan: “I hope you’re going to open your banks to conservatives because what you’re doing is WRONG.” pic.twitter.com/Ob3pwN9cAm
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) January 23, 2025
“Bloomberg referred to this as “an unsubstantiated right-wing conspiracy theory,” while the bank itself issued a statement hours later insisting that “we welcome conservatives,” and “would never close accounts for political reasons and don’t have a political litmus test.”
This is total bull$h**. My wife and I lost our accounts with the Bank of Un-America. In nearly 30 years, never missed a mortgage payment, near perfect credit score, always paid my bills…they dropped us without warning. Strongest recommendation, dump them and use a credit union… https://t.co/e6PLYKcJUM
— General Mike Flynn (@GenFlynn) January 23, 2025
So why, pray tell, did you cancel my and my wife’s accounts after I had been a customer for nearly 40 years? And why did you refuse to tell me why? Here’s the cancellation letter: https://t.co/nyfa4sSDYA t.co/YTKZUXAg6c
— John Eastman (@DrJohnEastman) January 24, 2025
LISTEN: Bank of America tells John Eastman, in a recording obtained by @DailyCaller, that they will not tell him why his bank account was shut down without warning.
The full story on USAA and Bank of America “debanking” Eastman ⬇️⬇️ t.co/t0ALTDL37Y pic.twitter.com/LE9S5dzf0x
— Reagan Reese (@reaganreese_) January 23, 2025
The nation’s second largest bank has denied services to gun manufacturers, fossil fuel producers, and contractors for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It also canceled the accounts of Christian ministry groups, saying one such group that trains pastors is “operating a…
— MostlyHarmless (@harmless_human) January 24, 2025
De-banking is another weapon used to silence anyone who exposes corruption and publishes truth against false narratives.
Hundreds of individuals like you have been de-banked the past couple of years.
Billionaire Marc Andreesen was de-banked, he explains this form of lawfare…
— J Kerner (@JKernerOT) January 24, 2025
Bank of America’s problem is they have a Religion and Gun store problem.
They closed the accounts of Christian Organizations and Gun Stores. t.co/tG7X8qwooC
— Wendy Patterson (@wendyp4545) January 23, 2025
“My wife and I lost our accounts…”
That can happen when you and your wife are pedophiles preying on disabled children.
Ex-Politico Reporters Were Told ‘Don’t Write About’ Hunter Biden Laptop
“Politico did that terrible, ill-fated headline: 51 intelligence agents, or former intelligence agents, say that the Hunter Biden laptop was disinformation, or bore the hallmarks of disinformation. Turns out that story was closer to disinformation because the Hunter Biden laptop appeared to be true,” he observed.
“But then Facebook also pulled all stories down about the Hunter Biden laptop, and I think Twitter did at the same time, too,” jumped in Palmeri.
“Correct, they punished The New York Post, that didn’t help. I mean, Politico, my former employer and I knew at the time, didn’t do itself any favors,” said Caputo. “I was covering Biden at the time, and I remember coming to my editor and saying, ‘Hey, we need to write about the Hunter Biden laptop.’ And I was told this came from on high at Politico: Don’t write about the laptop, don’t talk about the laptop, don’t tweet about the laptop. And the only thing Politico wound up writing was that piece that called it disinformation, which charitably could be called misinformation, at the least.”
https://www.mediaite.com/news/dont-write-about-the-laptop-dont-talk-about-the-laptop-ace-reporters-claim-politico-killed-negative-biden-stories/
You are probably right, and it will probably lose. Not that it should. Personally, I do not think “subject to the jurisdiction” applies to the children of people here illegally, and in contravention of U. S. Law. Wong Kim Ark Court noted that his parents were lawful residents of the US, and domiciled here. But no one on this side ever thought it would be a slam dunk.
NOT Off Topic. Not really, when therapists are involved.
“We examined the genitals of slightly less than 10,000 dogs -”
Ms. Smith: Your honor, the closely contested question in this matter concerns the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment, and in particular, the phrase, “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” We are here to debate its meaning. We say it means X, but opposing counsel, Mr. Jones, says it means Y.
The Court: How do you plan to demonstrate it means X?
Ms. Smith: Your honor, we have judicial writings from the 19th Century and the 20th Century, as well as historical documents relating to the debates that were held before ratification. We also have scholarly works devoted to discerning its meaning.
The Court: Mr. Jones, you are opposing counsel. How are you planning to show that it means Y?
Mr. Jones: I plan to show that if this honorable court agrees with my friend, Ms. Smith, that it means X, then such an interpretation would have had an adverse impact upon Senator Rubio’s status and his parents’ status as immigrants.
The Court: What does that have to do with the meaning of the text?
Mr. Jones: Nothing your honor, but I am basing my entire case on it.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Born in and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Illegal aliens from foreign countries are subject to the jurisdiction of those countries.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Merriam-Webster
jurisdiction
noun
ju·ris·dic·tion ˌju̇r-əs-ˈdik-shən
1: the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law
a matter that falls within the court’s jurisdiction
2
a: the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate
b: the power or right to exercise authority : control
3: the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised
“Born in and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. ”
Pretty good in depth discussion of this issue here.
The case for ending birthright citizenship The history of the law is misunderstood
https://unherd.com/2025/01/the-case-for-ending-birthright-citizenship/
Thank you so much for that link!! I have added it to my Natural Born Citizen file.
Has Joe Biden unwittingly provided a pathway for the justice department to investigate his involvement in his extended family’s dubious businesses while VP and beyond?
By pardoning his family members for crimes they may or may not have committed, they can now be compelled to testify against him without fear of prosecution. Any attempt to invoke 5th Amendment protection against self incrimination would be pierced by the blanket pardons they were granted.
Maybe Joe should have thought more carefully about granting himself a pardon.
Observer in the peanut gallery,
Interesting observation. But as Hur noted, Biden is not fit to stand trial. As the WSJ and recently the NYT have reported, there were many people working in coordination to cover up his mental decline.
If he wasn’t fit to stand trial then how could he be fit to issue pardons? One or the other but not both!
HUR is not a physician. His ability to rule that a person is unfit for trial is not valid. Biden would require a consultation and examination by a Board Certified Neurologist / Psychiatrist, possibly with additional training and experience in adult dementia (desired but not required)
So then he should be prosecuted by Hurs own report once discarding his kindly old numbnuts BS?! He’s as crooked as a pigs dik.
VDH wrote a great article:
Donald Trump won the 2024 election in part because the left’s hysterical style of attacking Trump no longer worked.
After a decade of this unhinged furor, it proved worthless in winning public support… and for two simple reasons.
One, after years of Russian collusion hoaxes, the laptop disinformation farce, and the warped lies about the “suckers” and “fine people on both sides”—the shrill left became predictable.
So, the bored public began tuning them out, switching channels, hitting the mute button, and pulling the plug.
Like the deleterious effects of inflation that eventually render a currency worthless, nonstop hectoring, hysterics, pontification, and distortion finally made all such criticisms of Trump mostly as valueless as 1930s German marks.
Second, the wearied public never heard reasoned counterarguments from the likes of a Rachel Maddow. Instead, on spec, she kept mouthing, “The walls are closing in” on Trump.
Joe Biden did not explain why his open border was a better idea than Trump’s closed one. He preferred mumbling about “semi-fascists!” and “ultra-MAGA!”
The Never Trumpers did not critique the Trump deficits. Instead, they hammered away that Trump was Hitler, or Mussolini, or Putin—or just a dangerous dictator or autocrat.
Angry retired generals never demonstrated why Trump was, in their view, an existential threat to democracy. Instead, they shouted nonstop in op-eds and interviews that he was a fascist, Nazi-like, no different from the guards at Auschwitz, a pathological liar, and should be summarily removed.
Worn-out voters began to understand these psychodramas were substitutes for substantive criticism or occasions for legitimate debate.
Indeed, the exhausted public finally concluded that the hysterics increased in direct proportion to the poverty of the charges.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/vdh-addicted-petty-and-hysterical-left
Floyd: Trump “won” because he LIED about immediately bringing down the cost of groceries. I’ve posed excerpts of polls that prove this. He did not even obtain half of the popular vote and his margin of “victory” was 1.48%–among the lowest in recent history. Trump’s campaign did receive help from Russian hackers–a REPUBLICAN Senate Committee report proves this–I’ve cited that over and over again. We didn’t have “open borders” either–another MAGA lie. Last year, Joe Biden deported more people than Trump did. Trump IS an existential threat to democracy–he just can’t stop lying; that massive ego of his drives him to try to singlehandedly overturn the Constitution. His lawyers got reprimanded by that Reagan-appointed judge who couldn’t believe that a licensed attorney would make the frivolous arguments that an Executive Order can rescind the Constitution. Another reason he is a threat–he just pardoned his private army of thugs, low-lives, racist losers who assaulted police officers, trashed the Capitol and planned to kill Pence–they are still “standing by”. He has sent the clear message that even savagely beating up cops is OK, so long as it is done in Trump’s name and at his command. So, even our sworn officers of the law aren’t safe–and that’s not OK. Neither are clergy–just look at how MAGA media, especially the Fox propaganda channel went after Bishop Budde who had the temerity to ask for mercy for hardworking people just looking for a better life. Look at the ad hominem attacks launched by Gutfeld and that ugly bottle blondie Ingraham. Mike Johnson even questioned her office as bishop. And, Trump IS a pathological liar–proven over and over again.
What MAGA media lied to you about the public being “exhausted”?
GiGi,
Go to youtube.
Type “woke doctor disfigures wheelchair”
Watch the video.
Then, come back and tell me that you are kewl with it.
Thx!
Floyd
Oh, Floyd, I cried. That poor girl.
ICE arrests over 530 illegal migrants, including sex traffickers and gang members: report
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/ice-arrests-over-530-illegal-migrants-including-sex-traffickers-and
Deportation flights have begun.
President Trump is sending a strong and clear message to the entire world: if you illegally enter the United States of America, you will face severe consequences. pic.twitter.com/CTlG8MRcY1
— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) January 24, 2025
Border Czar Tom Homan announced on Thursday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and cooperating law enforcement officers had already made some 1300 arrests through deportation operations since President Donald Trump’s inauguration.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/homan-ice-has-made-1300-arrests-including-pedophiles-gang-members-and-at-least-1-terrorist?topStoryPosition=3
Just the beginning. This is what American’s voted for. More MAGA winning!!
Sounds like a single sweep of a Home Depo(r)t and Lowes just in a average single small town. Hit a $10 all u can eat Chinese buffet at lunchtime and you will find a mecca of illegal interlopers. People don’t understand the impact they have had on the construction industry over AMERICAN tradesman. It use to be a great career being a journeyman tradesman now it’s just work brokering to Mexicans, the illegal workers appearance has destroyed the desire of American tradesman worker. Illegal labor has destroyed the opportunity for the less educated yet skilled workers to have a chance of success in the workplace, not everyone is capable of a professional career. Depressed wages, unfair competition, insurance fraud and often sub par work, it is illegal yet every national home builder employs them. Trump is going to have to wean America away from the growth and development economy. Hard for a Developer to fathom.
My experience with a couple of Guatemalan illegals was NOT shoddy work. These guys worked hard and did a great job for me. One of my clients who owned a farmed let me hire them for a few days. But, this was back in 2006/2007. I liked them, and even cooked Christmas Dinner for them at my home. Yes, there were jalapeño peppers. They would have made great American citizens. I believe you when you say the current work is more shoddy.
BUT, the fact that they were forced to work cheaply (for the farm), by an oversupply of available cheap labor, hurt the economy at large. Assuming that you could even find white boys willing to do roofing work nowadays, they sure could not live on $200 per week, with zero benefits. And, that is hard work. I know this personally, because I hired out to do it once for extra money when my first kid was born. The availability of cheap labor has kept wages down, and permitted Americans to not face reality.
For example, if houses were being built by expensive labor, by the “real” cost of American labor, the white flight to the suburbs might not have been as easy. Which would have meant dealing with the realities of urban crime, urban p!ss-poor education, and the whole generational welfare issue, and affirmative action. We might not have been able to pretend it away, by moving away from it.
Perhaps we would have had to face the consequences of deficit spending, environmental regulations, and catch and release criminal justice. And drug use.
Slavery was NOT free labor. It was cheap labor. And look what slavery brought us.
And, we got the same cheap labor thing happening when we import stuff from China. It destroys jobs here.
Floyd,
Great economic analysis. The Free Press did an article about how all of Biden’s illegal aliens have forced the cost of labor so far down, even green card holders where complaining they could not get work or what work they could get had to be at much lower pay then during the Trump admin.
Maybe if the white flight stopped running away and instead addressed the problem they could stay living in the Cities their fathers built.
Sort of the same thing happened in Rome. The backbone of the Roman Republic were the small farmers and tradesman who tilled the fields and made the products and were called to the colors (legions in time of war). As the Republic grew in power and slaves appeared in force the small farmers and tradesman suffered and disappeared and flocked to to Rome. Large estates of the Rich appeared in the countryside and tended by slaves. Large numbers of unemployed in Rome filled the private armies of politicians and politics grew more violent from about 140-130 BC and on with a succession of generals taking power or having dictatorship voted on to them. Marius-Cinna-Sulla- Julius Caesar-Mark Antony then lastly Augustus and the Republic disappeared.
ICE arrests over 530 illegal migrants, including sex traffickers and gang members.
Deportation flights have begun.
____________________________________
Great!
Only 79,999,470 illegal aliens to go.
Flight Data Shows Guatemala Received Trump’s First Jumbo Jet Load Of Illegals
Early this morning the Department of Defense assisted ICE with deporting 80 Guatemalan nationals from Biggs Army Airfield in my district. #TX23 has been ground zero for the border crisis and will be ground zero for DEPORTATION operations. In 4 days President Trump has done more… pic.twitter.com/SigNPqjaq5
— Tony Gonzales (@TonyGonzales4TX) January 24, 2025
According to a U.S. Defense Official, 2 C-17 Military Transports departed last night from Biggs Army Airfield in El Paso, Texas and Tucson International Airport in Arizona, each loaded with 80 Illegal Aliens from Guatemala, eventually landing in Guatemala City. pic.twitter.com/nsojHW1pye
— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) January 24, 2025
USAF C-17A 06-6163 #AE1461 as RCH149 returning to El Paso from Guatemala City (arrival time ~0630z). This was the 1st USMIL deportation flight.@sipjack1776 @houstonairw @toystark6886 pic.twitter.com/0B4TiWeXvN
— Johnny Gemini (@Borrowed7Time) January 24, 2025
This is what Americans voted for. More MAGA winning!!!!
Putin Ready To Meet ‘Smart, Pragmatic’ Trump To ‘Talk Calmly’ On Oil, Energy, Ukraine
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-24/putin-reiterates-readiness-to-meet-with-trump-about-ukraine
Trump makes progress where Biden failed. Trump wants peace where Biden brought us and the whole world to the brink of WWIII. More MAGA winning!!!
Floyd,
VDH pretty much nailed it. That is why so many people are switching MSM off. I read CNN came in behind the Food Network, Sponge Bob on Nick at Night and the Hallmark channel during the 8-11pm time slot. It is like the Musk Nazi salute garbage they are spewing. Only the truly delusional would believe any of it or of them.
U F – I assumed that everyone watched Sponge Bob. He’s funnier than Jimmy Kimmel, and he knows how to drive cars under water.
Well said.
Seems to me that the rationale behind prospective pardons is that the acceptance of a pardon proves there is an offense to pardon. If that is not the case, and there is no offense, then a prospective pardon is not a pardon at all. It’s immunity from prosecution for offenses yet undiscovered, a power which the Constitution categorically does not grant the President.
There’s one thing missing from Maga Grandma’s change of heart. Any compassion for other peoples lives that have been destroyed for being encouraged by the Capitol police to walk around the building. I suspect family pressure.
When people go woke, they give up a large part of their humanity and common sense. It’s all law and no grace. Any apology* is met with more law and, again, no grace. Compassion goes out the window completely.
*Groveling apologies by people who did no wrong amount to bowing down in supplication before a monster. The monster is never placated by such gestures.
* it’s 4 years later. Granny has aged and feels guilty because Ashley Babbitt was murdered. It’s nothing more than a public confession and has no bearing on the pardon.
End of story
* MAGA gramps come forward and confess the contents of heart. Granny and gramps step forward. Any gramps arrested at abortion clinics?
Professor, I don’t think that the pardon power is as unfettered as you often suggest. There will be several challenges to Biden’s blanket, non-specific pardons. Wise men always point to Ford’s preliminary pardon of Nixon to show that it can be done. Yet there was a good deal of argument at the time over it, from the other side of the aisle, and Ford endured endless abuse over it. And even then, there was no doubt about what specific actions Nixon had been involved in when Ford shielded him from prosecution. Conversely, Biden’s grants of immunity — because they are not pardons — also provide immunity for undetected crimes. Say, for the purpose of argument, that it became known that Milley was guilty of gross acts of inarguable, indefensible treason (worse than is already known)– would the generic “pardon” granted by Biden the Beneficent shield him from justice?
PARDON POWER IS UNFETTERED
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the—if he—if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement. … Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”
– William Jefferson Clinton
______________________________
The Article states that the president has the power to pardon; it enumerates two qualifications or restrictions; time is not one of them.
It makes no sense to “interpret” language that all are capable of reading with comprehension.
“The President shall…have Power to grant…Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”
The president has the absolute power to pardon except in cases against states and municipalities and of impeachment.
The only qualifications or restrictions in the Article are clear and express:
– The president has no power to pardon for offenses against the United States.
– The president has no power to pardon in cases of impeachment.
The president has the power, without limitation, to pardon in any and all other ways, shapes, and forms, certainly past, present, and future.
The president has the power, without limitation, to pardon in any and all other ways, shapes, and forms, certainly past, present, and future.
This is incorrect and I posted several comments to you laying out why.
Since you haven’t answered, I’m guessing you haven’t seen those comments or you just haven’t had a chance to reply.
I am looking forward to your rebuttals.
Jonathan: Pamela Hemphill is not the only one refusing DJT’s pardon. Others who participated in the events of Jan. 6, especially those who didn’t engage in violence, have apologized, accepted their punishment, and say their participation was wrong. That’s not the case for those who led the insurrection. Stuart Rhodes, the leader of the Oathkeepers, is unrepentant after his release from prison. He accepted DJT’s commutation and met with MAGA lawmakers on Wednesday. He wants a full investigation of Jan 6 which he falsely claims will exonerate him. He wants retribution against those who prosecuted him. And Rhodes is not the only one.
MAGA House Speaker Mike Johnson has just announced the creation of a new select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 Select Committee’s findings and its report. It’s all about attempting a revisionist rewriting of what Americans saw in real time on TV. Johnson said: “House Republicans are proud of our work so far in exposing the false narrative peddled by the politically January 6 Select Committee during the 117th Congress, but there is still more work to be done”.
And to head that investigation Johnson named Rep. Barry Laudermilk to chair the investigation. Why Laudermilk? It’s because DJT backs Laudermilk’s investigation. It should be recalled that the day before the insurrection Laudermilk gave a tour of the Capitol for those who participated in the attack on the Capitol. They took photos of the building to help prepare for the attack. Last year Laudermilk conducted his own investigation of J. 6 and demanded that Cassidy Hutchison produce her communications with Liz Cheney. He threatened a subpoena. It never came.
Now, as Chair of the new select committee Laudermilk wants to subpoena Hutchinson to testify. Her attorney says his client will voluntarily testify. There is only one little problem. Johnson opposes that. Why? According to a WP report Johnson is concerned about potential embarrassing disclosure of “sexual texts from members {of the House] who were trying to engage in sexual favors” from Hutchinson. Woops!
The Q is whether the American people want the MAGA House to waste taxpayer money try to rewrite the history of Jan. 6 that they witnessed in real time on their TVs? The polls show most Americans want the House to concentrate on bread and butter issues. But Laudermilk and Johnson are on a mission to try to satisfy DJT’s attempts at retribution. The public be damned!
GooGoo watch…10..9..8…..
Did I call it or what?!
And Jonathan: expect to see DJT’s MAGA supporters pointing out that not a single Biden or Democrat politician, bureaucrat, or Death Row inmate has never similarly refused their pardon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFVIIdkekjE&t=64s
“In a segment of their discussion focusing on Trump’s election victory, former Defense Department official Graham Allison, now a professor at Harvard, remarked “We shouldn’t normalize Trump. Trump has done something no person in the world has ever done before. A dead man, a dead politician, has risen.”
“This is the greatest comeback in political history for a politician, and therefore he thinks he can do anything. There’s a supreme confidence now about that,” Allison continued.
“This is a phenomenon we shouldn’t try to understand only in the terms we traditionally accept. We should say something strange, new, and amazing is happening here, and we should study it,” Allison further urged.
Yale University Professor Walter Reed emphasised “I think we need to also factor in not only who has won (Trump) but also who has lost, which is to say us.”
“By ‘us,’ I mean the general intellectual, professional, managerial people who believed history was over, and we were merely administering and managing things according to clear and known rules,” Reed explained.
“Something new, not necessarily better, but new, is moving into the center,” he added.
Ian Bremmer, president of political consulting firm Eurasia Group remarked:
“Anti-establishment forces in the United States are growing, and their momentum is undeniable.”
Trump himself addressed the globalists at Davos today by video link and put them on blast that America is back.
“I’m pleased to report that America is a free nation once again,” Trump announced, adding “On day one, I signed an executive order to stop all government censorship.”
“No longer will our government label the speech of our own citizens as misinformation or disinformation, which are the favorite words of censors and those who wish to stop the free exchange of ideas and, frankly, progress,” Trump asserted, adding “We have saved free speech in America, and we’ve saved it strongly.”
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/watch-davos-globalists-admit-we-have-lost-trump
Floyd – the remarks by Professor Reed from Yale exemplify the lack of self-awareness among academics. They really think that, because they landed a job in academia, they should be in charge of the nation. They don’t realize how a majority of Americans believe that their holding such a position implies they are unqualified to run the nation.
I remember, in this regard, watching Nightline back in the day, and Ted Koppel – who understood this point – made a remark along the lines of, “If you want most Americans to oppose something, get a professor on the show to promote it.” At the time I was young and green and thought that was odd, but the reality of it eventually sunk in. Some time later I heard about Bill Buckley saying that he’d rather be governed by the first 1,000 names in the Cambridge, MA phone book than by the Harvard faculty. By that time, I understood exactly what he was talking about.
Well put and still true, only worse.
Trump made a fool of himself, as usual, in his stupid address to Davos–he claimed that countries that export goods to this country will be paying tariffs. Everyone who saw that sad, arrogant performance of a stupid, ill-informed old man knew better–tariffs are collected at the point of entry when the imported goods arrive at the US. Tariffs are paid by the party who ordered the goods–Target, Best Buy, Wal-Mart, whatever. The party who ordered the goods and paid the tariff will simply pass along the increased cost to their customers. This is how tariffs work, which is why they will drive up inflation. None of the retailers who order goods is going to take a 20%, 30%, 50% or whatever percent hit–their customers will pay because they will simply raise prices. Trump either lied or displayed his massive stupidity by claiming that the exporting country or the exporting party pays the tariffs. Everyone at Davos knew that, and they also knew that Trump doesn’t know WTF he’s talking about. That’s one of the issues with Trump–something sticks in his sick mind and nothing will shake it–nothing! No facts, nor counter-logic–nothing gets a notion out of his thick skull. That’s where the “deep state” crap comes from. Trump has some dumb idea and career civil servants explain that it is illegal–so they must be part of some “deep state” out to thwart his agenda. They have to go because they are “against” him–that’s because he can never be wrong. It’s just like his stupid effort to end birthright citizenship. Even the Reagan–appointed judge couldn’t believe that licensed attorneys would appear in court and try to defend his effort to rescind a clearly-worded provision in the Constitution. Trump sees tariffs as a way to raise revenue–which it will–but the party who pays will be the American consumer. The increased prices for all sorts of goods will drive up inflation–and that hurts all of us. Trump can’t get it through his thick skull that this is how tariffs work.
“America is back”–another WTF moment. Back from what? Prosperity created by Biden from the ashes of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, caused by Trump’s utter stupidity and arrogance? The “government” never engaged in “censorship”, either–another MAGA lie. The rest of the world knows that Trump is nothing but a fat, blowhard, arrogant fool who can’t stop lying. It’s tragic that he manages to get so many Americans to fall for his BS. He is an embarrassment to this country.
Biden’s Blemish: Wages Haven’t Kept Up With Inflation
https://www.statista.com/chart/33790/nominal-and-real-wage-growth-in-the-united-states/
Say hello to reality. Now, the question is, can Trump fix all of Biden’s failed economic policies? As I have stated here before, I think it will take years if not a decade to fix Biden’s failed economic policies.
The sane and normal traditional Democrats want you off their side and out of their party. You are making them look stupid and crazy and they want no part of you. As long as you keep up with the stupid and crazy, they will continue to lose elections. Dont believe me? Bill Maher has been calling you out for years now.
GooGoo
Biden made a german spectacle of himself. He actually thought he was running Rock Ridge, while everyone knew that the evil Sheriff Barrack Obama was a (fill in the blank), authentic western gibberish required.
Back from What you ask, seriously? How about the abyss of endless wars and nuclear destruction or Chicks with Dix nite at the Elementary School? Back from insanity GooGoo but only the sane would understand that.
* It’s a different Trump this time after 8 years of beatings, floggings,, lawfare and a bullet to the head he’s realized the malignancy out there. He’s all business this time and isn’t joking at all.
Let’s see.
Beatings, floggings, “lawfare”–because he was charged with crimes that he DID commit? Trump IS the malignancy–arrogance, narcissism, racism, xenophobia–it’s on display for the world to see, and it is sick.
Some believe that hell is a personalized experience, tailored to the sins that a person committed and for which they have no remorse and have not tried to make right–“an eye for an eye” as it were. If that’s true, then Trump, for all eternity, will be beaten, pepper-sprayed, crushed in a door, stabbed with improvised weapons, suffer a heart attack, strokes, have fingers cut off, an eye gouged out, called every filthy name in the book, be given COVID, and himself and family harassed–over and over and over again.
My my my, and I thought Ray Bradberry was a good fiction author….ohhhh, the horror, the horror of it all!
You complete me with your absurdity, that was awesome!
Oh, y’all have me in stitches tonight.
Stomach muscles hurt from laughing.
Floyd,
I thought it was rather telling they admitted they lost, Trump won. But their arrogance still shines through. And who believes history to be over? The so called clear and known rules? Surprise there buddy, but you tried to change the rules to ones you made up and we rejected them and you. As it should be.
Jonathan,
If you refrain from ‘confronting’ the Government (e.g.: The January 6th Riot’, How and What do you do when it really truly becomes time for an overthrow?
Shall we rely on the Military, well no, that’s a Coup or Junta.
Should we count on our Politicians, well no, that’s just more of the same Government.
Shall we rely on the 4th or 5th Estate to establish a New Government, well no that’s just putting it the hands of a new Regime.
Should we make a Declaration of Independence and deliver it to the Hill, well no that just invites Military suppression and War(s) beyond that.
So Jonathan, what it is the proper prescription for overturning the corrupt established Government and founding a new Government?
Sans an “Age of Rage”, a J6 Riot, a Demonstration, an Act, a “Reformation”.
What Se Ye? your collection of missives (blog) fails to address this.
Your ‘suggestions’ are and will be exempt of contempt under the standing of Free Speech, by your own admission and position.
(Post an Editorial piece on the subject matter)
I’ll go first: Perhaps a New “Bible” (Theology), a New Socio Economic Calculus based on sustainability, viability, efficacy, and equitable distribution. etc..
Albeit it avaunt guard, Perhaps all New Born, shall be separated from their parents and sent to a New World with a New Government that is designed with New Structures and socio systems.
(as I write this, I’m experiencing a reflection of my own Childhood, as we (kids in the U.S. circa 60-70s) were taken to a new place (away from home and indoctrination into a System (a,k,a, K-12 Grade).
One thing that has become glaringly obvious is that. ‘One-Size doesn’t fit All’ (in terms of the current Constitutional status quo), as the world becomes increasingly smaller with each new birth. A multitude of diversity are necessary, Shoes [K] of different sizes are required so that All may find one that fits and ‘Walk the path of Life’ in their respective equilibrium.
Not a monumental task to achieve, but it will require not just One reformation but a Multitude of individual reformations to achieve this goal.
This suggest that Unification (Melting Pot theology under our current [K]) but an Amalgamation of individual [K]s would be closer to the Balance.
We have 50 states in Our Union, however their individual [k]s are modeled upon the Nations [K]. Creating a systemic problem with while trying to ‘uniform’ the entire field. (Uniform = One size fits All).
It is possible, and has been done (Here in the US) fr short periods of time. I recall in my life time when the Students in Ann Arbor Michigan (U of M) took over the Local Government by voting themselves into the City Counsel and proceeded to pass the Laws that were important to Them.
They enacted change but it was short lived because the design of the Framework, that they utilized to work along with, was the same (again) as used to ‘take over’ the establishment to begin with, thus in time the establishment reclaimed it’s dominance. The Students failed to change the ‘framework’ to their demise.
So when I suggest making these [K] changes, they must be at the Root of the System (the Kernel). Maybe A.I. will come to this conclusion and help Us Humans out of our repetitive insanity (Insane Human Condition)
[ “insanity is doing something over and over and expecting different results” Albert Einstein ] War is not an answer, it is a symptom, that somethings wrong.
Jonathan:
What will it take to form a new Government without having all the ‘rage’, consternation, violence, and division?
Your not offering any answers, nor opinion as to ‘How’ to approach this without relying on old tools (Case Law and previous versions of Social Contracts (e.g.: [K]).
You can get a Democrat working in the political arena to stop mentioning he’s a Democrat. But you’ll never get that Democrat to purge himself of the hypocritical double standards that are the soul the corrupt Democrat political beast.
The REAL desecration of our Constitutional process has been the EIGHT YEARS that Democrat presidents and their Democrat Washington DC lawyers in their administration have used their public office in the Department of Justice, FBI, State Department, CIA, State and other positions attacking and attempting to destroy Americans they see as their enemies. Doing so while concealing felonies involving other Democrats in the political arena.
Democrat police state fascism carried out through repeated felonies and removal of Americans’ civil rights through color of law, directed from the political offices they hold. How would this be described by Professor Turley if identical actions had happened under Trump, his Attorney Generals, his FBI Directors, State Department, CIA, etc?
The focus is always on Trump – no consideration for the THOUSANDS of Americans who were deprived of what Professor Turley calls their “Indispensable Rights” by being corruptly hunted, harassed, and illegally spied on by these Democrat Washington DC lawyers.
Professor Turley doesn’t see that Democrat massive corruption of the political power they were entrusted in as a similar or worse “desecration of our Constitutional process”. Nope.
That’s Democrat Double Standards Different. Years of committing crimes in federal public office to jail innocent people is nowhere near as horrendous as a three hour riot.
That’s just poor decision making by his fellow Washington DC lawyers in dutifully carrying out their duties. And besides… Merrick Garland, James Comey, Jack Smith, Loretta Lynch, etc – he rubs shoulders with them in the cabal that is the Washington DC Bar Association. Known and rubbed shoulders with them for YEARS. Merrick Garland is a personal friend who he told us he admires on his appointment as Attorney General.
Professor Turley also doesn’t see how hypocritical his refusal to condemn his fellow Washington DC Democrat lawyers’ police state fascism with language similar to his condemnation of J6 trespassers and rioters shows him to be.
The unethical and often felonious Democrat Washington DC Bar Association lawyers… Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes, Nothing To See Here; Please Move On™
Old Airborne Dog
Thank you for posting that.
Isn’t this like Marbury v. Madison? If there’d been video cameras in 1801, they would’ve captured Pres. Adams signing a batch of appointment letters at 11:45 am on Inauguration Day. Then at 2:00 pm, Pres. Jefferson apprehended a stack of unsent mail and decided it was scratch paper. So any of Pres. Biden’s pardons which were unacknowledged or unaccepted by noon on Monday are inoperative.
“I would fix that within 24 hours, and if I win, before I get into the office, I will have that war settled. 100% sure,” Trump said on Fox News in March 2024
Is the war over yet?
^ amusing crocodile tears from paid DNC troll ^^
You must be happy since you belong to the warmongering party. Just curious, how will you celebrate the continued death and destruction and the lining of your pockets with blood money?
I’m pretty sure it was Russia that invaded Ukraine.
Get a life, open your eyes. trump is dumb as sh!t and he has put incompetent people in charge of everything so he can look like the smartest guy in the room.
I hate war, I am not a member of any war mongering party.
trump promised to end it before he was sworn in. Why hasn’t he? Perhaps he’s not as smart as he says he is.
Wake up, trump is dumb as a rock.
He’s been in office four days. Putin and Zelensky both want to meet with him and reach a deal. Trump wants that too. Let’s see what happens.
Trump is obviously highly intelligent. Only someone blinded by partisan hatred or propaganda would say he’s dumb as a rock. If you want to criticize him, fine, but at least make your criticism credible. Otherwise you undermine everything else you say.
Old Man: No–Trump is obviously VERY ignorant–his pathetic teleprompter-read performance for the audience at Davos proves that. Everyone there KNEW he’s either stupid or a liar when he claimed that exporting countries and/or exporting companies pay tariffs. Tariffs are collected at the point of entry when the goods arrive in the US–and are paid by the party who ordered the goods before the goods are handed over to them. Ordering parties would be entities like Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Target, and so forth. They simply pass along the increased cost to their customers—you and I–and that will drive up inflation. Everyone at Davos knows that and also knows that Trump doesn’t know WTF he’s talking about.
“Get a life, open your eyes. trump is dumb as sh!t”
What does that make Biden, Harris, and the Democrat cabal who attempted and failed to impeach him, use the courts to keep him off the ballot, jail him… and when all that failed, beat him in the last election? Dumb as sh!t LOSERS?
Our resident cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat Useful Idiot Thugs aren’t as smart as they Anonymously post to pose and flex that they are.
This is why these cowards will NEVER attach an identifying username to their posts.
Old Airborne Dog
Would America allow Russia or China through proxy to place weapons of mass destruction on our borders?
Would America allow Russia or China to place biological weapons laboratories on our borders?
What does 100% mean to you?
Yea, maybe kinda might get it done?
>”Is the war over yet?”
Yes.
It’s just a matter of how many more people are going to die before the U.S(now Trump), Nato and, their proxy in Ukraine, Zelenski, agree:
1. Ukraine military neutrality (non-Nato)
2. Withdrawal of Ukraine forces from eastern Ukraine and/or Resolution of the civil war in eastern Ukraine (see eg.g 2015 Minsk accords, etc.)
1. Ukraine military neutrality (non-Nato)
Amen and hallelujah to that. If the neocons pulling the strings of the “Joe Biden” puppet would have just guaranteed that in advance, Putin would not have invaded, and all this loss of life and destruction of cities could have been avoided.
Some argue that the presidential power to pardon is a vestige of the monarchy and an insult to jury rule, i.e., that there should be no such power.
You might want to wrestle with Hamilton’s argument (in Fed. 74) for that power. In essence, he cites two reasons: 1) to counter Draconian laws, and 2) as a check on mob rule.
“He is also to be authorized to grant “reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, EXCEPT IN CASES OF IMPEACHMENT.” Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed. The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel. As the sense of responsibility is always strongest, in proportion as it is undivided, it may be inferred that a single man would be most ready to attend to the force of those motives which might plead for a mitigation of the rigor of the law, and least apt to yield to considerations which were calculated to shelter a fit object of its vengeance. The reflection that the fate of a fellow-creature depended on his sole fiat, would naturally inspire scrupulousness and caution; the dread of being accused of weakness or connivance, would beget equal circumspection, though of a different kind. On the other hand, as men generally derive confidence from their numbers, they might often encourage each other in an act of obduracy, and might be less sensible to the apprehension of suspicion or censure for an injudicious or affected clemency. On these accounts, one man appears to be a more eligible dispenser of the mercy of government, than a body of men.”
The president is not a king, he’s an elected official; his pardon is not a private act but an official public act; the “act of grace” itself is not private, it’s public – here, righting mistakes, righting injustice, merely an attempt to shore up our judicial system, a public act. An act of goodwill, a “deed,” does it require delivery? Well, did we personally delivery the statute, our laws, as well? What is the difference?
Be it noted also, there was a judiciary, as those who sat in judgement to resolve community dispute, long before the advent of English common law. This becomes very evident at later points in our American history. But goodwill has long been central to the concept of a judiciary. And this is a public effort.
. . . it is not a matter likely to be litigated.
Who would have standing to challenge a pardon refusal? For similar reasons, it does not seem like a very important issue because how are anyone’s rights being violated by letting people refuse a pardon?
. . . agree with Hemphill that January 6th was a desecration of our constitutional process.
You miss the point: the over-the-top authoritarian, draconian, dictatorial, downright evil approach of Garland and the Biden DOJ was so much more of a desecration of our constitutional process that nothing but a full pardon for everyone could restore public trust in the American system of justice.
Quite the opposite. The American people saw an attempted coup and only the pawns got prosecuted, the ringleaders did not, all that and for the ringleader to pardon the paws seriously hurts the trust in the Justice system.
The American people saw the attempted coup in the 2020 Election Season Insurrection Of Mostly Peaceful Rioting, Arson, Pillaging, Looting and Murder.
After the ringleaders of that Insurrection won the 2020 election using that fraud… Americans saw that to.
They threw the ringleaders out of the White House and returned the president it was aimed at to the White House.
One get swept away with the emotions of an election and it is understandable with the news media so against Trump that the emotions were very high after Trump’s defeat. This is one reason we need voter IDs so that we know our elections are fair and expressly the wishes of the American people.
Sadly, Ms. Hemphill seems to be a woman of extremes because going from Trump to Harris is a big swing so it sounds like mind-bending not therapy. I can understand not accepting a pardon for her time/penalty but I wonder if she would have felt that way for a 22 year sentence. Seems there are so many more issues regarding her decision that just principle, And compound this to all the missing committee documents and we know that there was more amiss than just the protestors. As to the law, the scholars will have to decide. The 1500 pardoned for minor drug offenses by Biden seems not to questioned. We have no idea if any of those 1500 just might have stolen, beaten police, or done bodily harm to others in committing their ‘minor’ offenses. Hearing stories of many convicted of crimes on Jan 6th leaves a great deal of speculation as to whom the blame belongs. The scales of justice are far from balanced and we live with the consequences of imperfect people and imperfect decisions-making.
Anonymous: PLEASE STOP repeating the lie that J6 Committee records are missing. This is a lie from MAGA media that has spread via social media–but it is still a LIE. From “USA Today”:
“The claim: Jan. 6 House committee was caught destroying records
An Aug. 9 Facebook post (direct link, archive link) shows clips of several members of the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
“Now that the J6 Unselect Committee has been caught destroying their records, let’s see what they said in their own words about destroying evidence during their made-for-TV show trial of President Trump,” reads part of the post.
It was shared more than 300 times in 12 days. Similar versions of the claim have been shared on other social media platforms by former President Donald Trump and by Rep. Lauren Boebert, a Colorado Republican.
Our rating: False
The Republican congressman overseeing the investigation into the committee’s work has not said any records were destroyed, and there have been no reputable reports of such destruction. What Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia did say is that some video recordings are missing, and he does not know what happened to them.
Committee provided transcripts of some interviews, depositions
The issue centers on the whereabouts of some video recordings of interviews and depositions from the committee’s investigation into the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The committee issued its final report in December 2022 before it disbanded.
Loudermilk and Rep. Bennie Thompson, the Mississippi Democrat who chaired the Jan. 6 committee, traded letters in June and July.
Loudermilk wrote that some recordings were not archived or transferred to the Committee on House Administration. Written transcripts of them were provided, however.
House Rule VII outlines the requirements for preserving House records at the end of each two-year term, and a footnote to Thompson’s response to Loudermilk outlines why Thompson says those written transcripts comply with that rule.
The committee was not obligated to archive all video recordings of interviews or depositions that were transcribed, he wrote. He cited guidance from the House clerk’s office that says the information contained in a document – and not necessarily that document’s format – make it a permanent record.
Because those interviews and depositions were transcribed by “nonpartisan, professional official reporters” and were reviewed for errors by both the witnesses and committee staff, those transcripts qualify as the official, permanent records and follow House rules for record-keeping, he wrote.
Fact check: Debunking false narratives about the Jan. 6 Capitol riot two years later
Nowhere in the letter does Loudermilk say the recordings were destroyed. There are no reputable news reports that he made that claim and no evidence of the destruction of the records.
“Whether the missing information has been destroyed, was sent to other entities or is still in the possession of members of Congress from the select committee is uncertain at this time,” Loudermilk said in an emailed statement to USA TODAY.
Adam Comis, a spokesperson for the Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee, called the claim in question “very much false.” Thompson is the ranking member of that panel.”
“News media” were not “against Trump”–they called out the Big Lie for being what it was–a LIE. Trump lost. He got people to commit crimes in his name based on the Big Lie.
Anonymous: PLEASE STOP repeating the lie that J6 Committee records are missing. From “USA Today”:
Gigi’s Rule: It’s Not A Felony When Democrat Politicians Do It.
Gigi’s Corollary Rule: It’s Not Lying when Joe Biden and I Do it.
USA Today, Gigi’s wonderfully unbiased credible news source which has NEVER apologized or corrected their repeated lie that the ILLEGAL Clinton/Obama/Biden/DNC “Trump-Russia Dossier” was all US intelligence agency evidence.
AND 100% verified before Obama sent his Attorney Generals and FBI Directors to perjure themselves to the courts with that political fraud to obtain spy warrants to deprive Americans of their civil rights through color of law.
USA Today; also purveyers of The Big Democrat Lie “That isn’t the Biden Bribery Laptop – that’s just Putin’s election disinformation”! Don’t expect an apology from USA Today for that lie anytime soon either.
Who has less credibility? Gigi or her reliable sources like USA Today, CNN, etc?
Old Airborne Dog
Trump did collude with Russian hackers–Republicans who ran a Senate Committee investigating this said so. The “dossier” had nothing to do with the Mueller investigation. Repeating this lie doesn’t change the fact that it IS a lie. NO ONE cares about the laptop–NO ONE. I never said anything about it being Russian disinformation. And, NO ONE destroyed any J6 evidence either. Another MAGA lie. USA Today is QUOTING actual people. The depositions were all transcribed and recorded–saving videos and audio tapes is not required. NO ONE was hiding anything–ANOTHER MAGA LIE.
Trump did collude with Russian hackers
Gigi lies and denies that Obama, Clinton, Obama, DNC President Donna Brazil and their lawyer Marc Elias committed felonies by illegally hiring one of Putin’s spies to write their illegal “Trump Russia Dossier”.
Despite the fact that they got off with a slap on the wrist fine – rather than criminal indictments from Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith
Gigi… you’ll never be more than the Democrat Fire Hoe Of Lies.
Old Airborne Dog
Like other trolls, Gigi says: “Trump did collude with Russian hackers–Republicans who ran a Senate Committee investigating this said so”. I note that “she” does not state exactly the nature of this collusion. It was based on the fact that Paul Manafort, formerly associated with Trump, gave public polling information to a former business associate, Konstantin Kalimnik, showing that Trump had a good chance to win the 2016 election. This is hardly evidence of anything.
When the Senate Intelligence Committee finished its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, they issued a report which concluded;
“Miami, FL — U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Acting Chairman Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-VA) released the fifth and final volume of the Committee’s bipartisan Russia investigation titled, “Volume 5: Counterintelligence Threats and Vulnerabilities,” which examines Russia’s attempts to gain influence in the American political system during the 2016 elections.
Rubio released the following statement and a video message, which is available for download here:
“Over the last three years, the Senate Intelligence Committee conducted a bipartisan and thorough investigation into Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election and undermine our democracy. We interviewed over 200 witnesses and reviewed over one million pages of documents. No probe into this matter has been more exhaustive.
“We can say, without any hesitation, that the Committee found absolutely no evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election.”
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/rubio-statement-senate-intel-release-volume-5-bipartisan-russia-report
It would be pleasant to suppose our infested trolls would drop references to the Manafort-Kalimnik connection, but that would be hoping for too much. They are out of ammunition.
That was beautiful, thank you.
* The right to speak or not to speak rests with the individual and nothing can be used as a coercive force to remove it.
Grace is not a weapon. To be or not to be … testimony is not a derivative of grace.
A correct response to Ms Hemphill might be , thank you for your uncoerced confession and see your therapist for further punishment.