January 6th Committee Broadcast

[iNow]

1 hour ago, toucana said:

So - Liz Cheney the Deputy Chair of the Jan 6 Committee just used the very same Steve Bannon video clip posted by MotherJones

Yes, and the committee had already shared the clip in their hearings last week BEFORE you saw it on MotherJones and started this thread. 

When it got shared again tonight, it wasn’t the first time. MJ got it from the committee, not the other way around.

So to repeat… so what? This isn’t a blog and you have yet to raise even a single discussion point… AND there’s already a thread dedicated to the Jan6 hearings. 

Edited July 22, 2022 by iNow

[iNow]

If this is to be a "news" thread, then perhaps a better focus is how very capable, very well funded, very organized Trump supporters are actively planning to radically reshape the US Government if he takes power again.

Changing policies, appointing high level lieutenants who will nod yes to any command even if it goes against our constitution and is illegal, thinning out multiple layers at the justice department, and installing more federal judges to make it so enforcement action against these insults would be nearly impossible.

They're also building databases and enemies lists, and planning to pull back worker protections so they can more easily remove opponents (read: tens upon tens of thousands of federal workers) from key positions currently protected by law. 

From Axios:https://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-2025-radical-plan-second-term

Quote

Former President Trump's top allies are preparing to radically reshape the federal government if he is re-elected... They want to purge potentially thousands of civil servants, and fill career posts with loyalists to him...The preparations are far more advanced and ambitious than previously reported. What is happening now is an inversion of the slapdash and virtually non-existent infrastructure surrounding Trump ahead of his 2017 presidential transition.

Trump allies are working on plans that would potentially strip layers at the Justice Department — including the FBI, and reaching into national security, intelligence, the State Department and the Pentagon, sources close to the former president say.

Trump's groups are operating on multiple fronts: shaping policies, identifying top lieutenants, curating an alternative labor force of unprecedented scale and preparing for legal challenges and defenses that might go before Trump-friendly judges, all the way to a 6-3 Supreme Court...

The heart of Trump's new plans derives from an executive order, "Schedule F," developed and refined in secret over most of the second half of Trump's term, and launched 13 days before the 2020 election.

Trump insiders intend to stack thousands of mid-level staff jobs. Well-funded groups are already developing lists of candidates selected often for their animus against the system — in line with Trump's long-running obsession with draining "the swamp." This includes building extensive databases of people vetted as being committed to Trump and his agenda.

"This isn't a bunch of fringe characters blowing hot air. It's well-funded groups run by former top Trump administration officials, working with Trump’s blessing — and, in some cases, direct financial support."

But again... what shall we discuss? Only you can make clear the intent of the thread. 

Edited July 22, 2022 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

Sounds like "drain the swamp...dredge...build sewage lagoon"

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Sounds like "drain the swamp...dredge...build sewage lagoon"

Drain the swamp in order to make it several orders or magnitude bigger and toxic and more disgusting. Exactly

[Phi for All]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

Drain the swamp in order to make it several orders or magnitude bigger and toxic and more disgusting. Exactly

Make the Swamp Great Again!

[TheVat]

On 7/15/2022 at 8:23 AM, toucana said:

I posted this for additional context. I always think it is useful to know to whom remarks of this type were being addressed, and what sort of political  affiliations and backgrounds are involved.

You say that "nothing about this is really new" - Well I'd say that unless you are unusually well informed about the involvement of Bannon and other right-wing US political extremists with Far Eastern disinformation networks like G News, then you almost certainly don't know the full extent of the pernicious role these  groups have played (and continue to play)  in US politics, especially their role in pushing scientific falsehoods about COVID-19 during the pandemic.

My background is in Far Eastern Studies so I tend to take an interest in the activities of individuals like Guo Wengui.

Excellent contribution, which added to my knowledge of Bannon connections and role in all this.   Not being an international affairs scholar like some of our members, I found the context useful.

[iNow]

Thanks for the neg rep Vat. Glad you're voicing your scholarly thoughts that way

Clearly, the issue here is the OP just blogging and not setting up discussion... no problem with sharing the link... again. 

[TheVat]

You bloody well deserved it.  In the guise of championing relevance, you were incredibly rude to a new member who brings a lot to this forum.  This thread helps connect some dots in the Trump strategies to Bannon, and is quite helpful.  Like the OP mentioned pigeon, you seem to be crapping all over things, with petty complaints that you're not getting a precise roadmap for discussion.  Complaints that turned to bullying.  Completely unnecessary. 

 

[toucana]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

If this is to be a "news" thread, then perhaps a better focus is how very capable, very well funded, very organized Trump supporters are actively planning to radically reshape the US Government if he takes power again.

Changing policies, appointing high level lieutenants who will nod yes to any command even if it goes against our constitution and is illegal, thinning out multiple layers at the justice department, and installing more federal judges to make it so enforcement action against these insults would be nearly impossible.

They're also building databases and enemies lists, and planning to pull back worker protections so they can more easily remove opponents (read: tens upon tens of thousands of federal workers) from key positions currently protected by law. 

From Axios:https://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-2025-radical-plan-second-term

"This isn't a bunch of fringe characters blowing hot air. It's well-funded groups run by former top Trump administration officials, working with Trump’s blessing — and, in some cases, direct financial support."

But again... what shall we discuss? Only you can make clear the intent of the thread. 

There were actually three substantial talking points raised by Liz Cheney on the basis of that video which I flagged up in my last post. Probably the most interesting one was the third one, which raises the question of whether people who effectively take up arms against the constitution - as well as the truth - can be successfully excluded from ever running for public office again ?

The most promising legal avenue would appear to be Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment 1868 which is discussed in some detail in this Lawfareblog`:

post.https://www.lawfareblog.com/disqualifying-insurrectionists-and-rebels-how-guide

Suffice to say, there appears to be some unexpected wiggle-room here, because a few lawmakers have apparently argued that the president is not an ”Officer of the United States”, which neatly evades the conditions relating to ‘triggering offices’ as set out in the Enforcement Act of 1870. (Trump quite uniquely never held any sworn Federal or State level public office prior to being elected president )

You might then say, OK let’s arrest, indict and convict 45 and send him off to prison to ensure he never runs for president again. The problem here is that there is no stipulation in the US Constitution to say that a presidential candidate cannot be a prisoner - in fact they don’t even need to be registered to vote.

https://prisoninsight.com/can-you-run-for-president-in-prison/

Two men have actually run for the US presidency while imprisoned  - Eugene V. Debs (1920) and Lyndon Larouche (1992) - nothing prevented either of them from doing so.

[iNow]

30 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Completely unnecessary. 

Your opinion is duly noted

19 minutes ago, toucana said:

can be successfully excluded from ever running for public office again ?

Yes, via impeachment, but that ship has sailed. Another possibility is some sort treason conviction, but that too seems beyond unlikely. 

Edited July 22, 2022 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 hours ago, iNow said:

Drain the swamp in order to make it several orders or magnitude bigger and toxic and more disgusting. Exactly

Pigeons Unlimited.

[CharonY]

!

Moderator Note

Similar threads have been merged.

 

[StringJunky]

@iNow I denegged that post then removed it, seeing as VAT's serious.  Regarding the meeting last night, I must say these WH staffers are something else when it comes to professional protocol. Are these staffers like our UK civil service; somewhat outwardly apolitical?

Edited July 22, 2022 by StringJunky

[Peterkin]

The proceedings last night were not concentrated on inciting to violence; that had already been covered. They were focused on dereliction of duty. 

Quote

“The commander in chief is the only person in the Constitution whose duty is explicitly laid out to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. I look at it as a dereliction of duty. (Trump) didn’t act. He had a duty to act.” Elaine Luria

They made the case very well; I thought Kinziger's summation was particularly effective.

The DoJ won't act on any case that it's not sure of winning, so the evidence has to be complete, impeccably presented, perfectly packaged and tied up with big pink bow. 

I think the committee is covering each and every aspect of his wrongdoing, one session at a time. 

[geordief]

8 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

The proceedings last night were not concentrated on inciting to violence; that had already been covered. They were focused on dereliction of duty. 

They made the case very well; I thought Kinziger's summation was particularly effective.

The DoJ won't act on any case that it's not sure of winning, so the evidence has to be complete, impeccably presented, perfectly packaged and tied up with big pink bow. 

I think the committee is covering each and every aspect of his wrongdoing, one session at a time. 

Can they impeach him a third time if the Repubs  indicate ahead of the procedure that they are  receptive to putting in the knife this time?

 

I get the feeling that he may escape prosecution otherwise

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, geordief said:

Can they impeach him a third time if the Repubs  indicate ahead of the procedure that they are  receptive to putting in the knife this time?

While by definition 'impeachment' can mean any sort of indictment, in the political arena, it's generally used to refer to a proceeding to show cause why an office-holder should be removed. So, that doesn't apply, unless Trump holds an elected office of which he is proven unworthy.  (And, obviously, if he were to attain that office again, there soon would be nobody left to impeach him.) So it has to be criminal charges that stand up in a court of law, just as with any other citizen. I don't know what the charges will be, but the statute of limitations normally begins at the completion of the crime and runs five years; that is, if prosecution is not begun within that period, it's too later to file charges. In this case, whatever the crimes listed in the indictment, I believe they must relate directly to the responsibilities of the office, and there must be conviction before the next election, to disqualify him. (Not sure about the last bit; US law is a bit fuzzy where it's founded in the constitution, rather than legal precedent.) 

Edited July 22, 2022 by Peterkin

[toucana]

It seems that yesterday's 'no-knock'  FBI search warrant at Mar-a-Lago could actually be the key to ensuring that 45 is never able to run for public office again

As this commentator points out, under 18 U.S. Code  § 2071  -  a conviction for concealment or removal , or mutilation of public records and documents disqualifies you from holding any other office under the United States.

[geordief]

51 minutes ago, toucana said:

It seems that yesterday's 'no-knock'  FBI search warrant at Mar-a-Lago could actually be the key to ensuring that 45 is never able to run for public office again

As this commentator points out, under 18 U.S. Code  § 2071  -  a conviction for concealment or removal , or mutilation of public records and documents disqualifies you from holding any other office under the United States.

Yes,I heard that last night too.

Other opinions(not that your reference is an "opinion ") are that if this warrant was not conducted properly, or is obviously trivial in nature then it hands the presidency to TLG on a plate.

 

I tend to disagree (rose tintedly?) and think he would still be beaten in a fair vote  -even then.

 

This is some mf of a clif hanger ,though I have to say.

 

Richard Nixon eat your heart out.(can't wait for the box set the way things are going)

 

 

Edited August 9, 2022 by geordief

[J.C.MacSwell]

Trump thought they would only search Mar-a-Lago...as a last resort...

[swansont]

The GOP's response is a little strange. I thought their very vocal position was that anyone who mishandles classified documents must be locked up. 

[iNow]

6 minutes ago, swansont said:

The GOP's response is a little strange. I thought their very vocal position was that anyone who mishandles classified documents must be locked up. 

As the obvious “law and order” party, they clearly only care when they can enforce the law via foreign adversaries hacking email systems. It’s a bit like how so many of them shout about the 2nd amendment being sacred but try to prevent BLM supporters from open carrying. 

[geordief]

46 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Trump thought they would only search Mar-a-Lago...as a last resort...

We have to up our humour content 

Reported.

[TheVat]

52 minutes ago, geordief said:

We have to up our humour content 

 

Well who doesn't get upset when their record collection is taken?

(sorry, short notice)

Actually, some humor to be found in Trump's reaction:

Quote

"These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents,” Trump wrote. “Nothing like this has ever happened to a President of the United States before.”

If you are raided and occupied, you cannot by definition be "currently under siege." 

 

[geordief]

11 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Well who doesn't get upset when their record collection is taken?

(sorry, short notice)

Actually, some humor to be found in Trump's reaction:

If you are raided and occupied, you cannot by definition be "currently under siege." 

 

Well he did say it had never happened before.(and we know he has record recollection)

[Phi for All]

Have you all thought about how much evidence was needed for a judge to sign off on a warrant like this?