Trump Coup Attempt

[Guy Chamberlin]

Seriously, the yahoos who invaded the Capitol on Jan 6 are the window dressing on the coup -- and the easiest to disavow. Democrats should set the inssurection aside. 

 

Everything else is textbook sedition. Dismantling the US Postal Service for political purposes alone. Directly asking secretaries of state to deliver votes that aren't there, alone. Strategy sessions for undermining the certification. Intimidation of the Vice-President. Rudy f#&%ing Guliani. Using the office to disseminate false information to discredit the electoral process. Any one of these would be among the worst threats to Democracy in our history. But you have all of them together, and the perpetrators barely deny them.

 

Only after you arrest them on at least a half-dozen charges do you even bring up incitement to riot. 

[Archy1221]

3 hours ago, admo said:

Wrong.  I am not voting for him again. I do believe neither will @Archy1221

 

Also I don't believe he would win the rep nomination for pres again.

I believe I have already posted that I won’t vote for him in primary or general.  I would just vote for everything but President in general if he were to win primary.  The original poster is wrong 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Those of you who voted for Trump either once or twice, why would you change your mind?

 

He was the same guy then as he is now.

 

 

[commando]

re reading the first 5 pages of this thread is interesting.  seeing what trump defenders were saying before jan. 6

[RedDenver]

3 hours ago, commando said:

re reading the first 5 pages of this thread is interesting.  seeing what trump defenders were saying before jan. 6

[admo]

5 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Those of you who voted for Trump either once or twice, why would you change your mind?

 

He was the same guy then as he is now.

 

 

I believe you meant to ask "why would you vote for a different republican candidate in the primaries"?  If so, the simple answer is turning the page and moving forward. 

 

When the time comes, there will be some good candidates and some not so good ones battling in the republican primaries. I'm sure it will be interesting.  And I look forward to the best candidate to win the party, and then the big task afterward, taking on Biden & Harris for the presidential election (assuming he doesn't replace her with a different Veep).  When the time comes, we'll be alright tho.   

[Guy Chamberlin]

11 hours ago, admo said:

I believe you meant to ask "why would you vote for a different republican candidate in the primaries"?  If so, the simple answer is turning the page and moving forward. 

 

When the time comes, there will be some good candidates and some not so good ones battling in the republican primaries. I'm sure it will be interesting.  And I look forward to the best candidate to win the party, and then the big task afterward, taking on Biden & Harris for the presidential election (assuming he doesn't replace her with a different Veep).  When the time comes, we'll be alright tho.   

 

Well yes and no. In 2016 it felt like there were plenty --- probably too many --- Republican primary candidates, and for most of the run-off it felt like Trump was a novelty with lots of name recognition. He said and did too many things wrong to actually secure the nomination, and while everyone was waiting for a more sane GOP alternative to rise up, Trump actually kept solidifying and growing his base. In the end it appeared that Republicans who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Trump were vastly outnumbered by people who didn't want to admit they were voting for Trump.

 

Worth noting: the only alternative candidate remotely close to Trump's numbers was Ted Cruz, possibly the only candidate worse than Trump.

 

In 2020 it would have been hard for a GOP insurgency to displace the incumbent, but even then the candidacies of less inflammatory Republicans got zero traction. In Trump's final debate performance just before the election he gave his Proud Boy shout-out "Stand back and stand by" and although Trump didn't win, he got 10 million more votes than he did in 2016, having fully displayed his worst qualities for four years.

 

He's still the preferred candidate for 2024, and in local elections across the country, GOP primary candidates are competing over which of them is more loyal to Donald Trump, not less. Republicans willing to publicly question Trump are publicly reprimanded by the Party and threatened by their own voters. 

 

So we keep hearing in this and other forums about Republicans who are ready to turn the page from Trump, but by all outward appearances they are afraid to speak out against the man they voted for, the same runaway train they didn't stop in 2016. 

[Scarlet]

 

[suh_fan93]

 

[TGHusker]

I think Trump will have  the greatest ever, nothing close to it,  Yugely very bad 2023.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/expert-trump-fighting-pence-testimony-because-he-may-have-revealed-his-criminal-state-of-mind/ar-AA19JtOd?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=033a673bc99c4555801fbd389c8d2dbc&ei=28

 

https://www.salon.com/2023/03/06/big-big-blow-legal-experts-say-ominous-doj-memo-could-pave-the-way-for-two-indictments/

Quote

 

Legal experts a recent Justice Department memo could open the door to a criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump for his role in the deadly Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

Following guidance from the District of Columbia's appellate court, the DOJ last week submitted a legal memo pertaining to a civil lawsuit filed by Capitol police officers injured on January 6, 2021, rejecting Trump's claim of presidential immunity against the complaints.

The department asserted that a president cannot be wholly absolved for a speech on a matter of public concern if the speech is found to have incited violence. Additionally, the department clarified that his inflammatory speech was not protected by his own free speech rights under the First Amendment. "No part of a president's official responsibilities includes the incitement of imminent private violence," the DOJ said in a friend-of-a-court brief.

Former prosecutor Charles Coleman Jr. called the DOJ memo a "blockbuster" that could open the door to a flurry of civil lawsuits against the former president. 

"This is a big, big blow to Donald Trump and significant news. Because it opens the proverbial floodgates for lawsuits," Coleman told MSNBC. "Now, the downside to this is, while there may be a significant political strain that comes from this, and also the stain on reputation that does further damage to Donald Trump, I don't necessarily know that a victory in court is going to yield much money in terms of them being able to collect whatever judgment they will ultimately be able to get."

But beyond just potential lawsuits, legal experts say the memo could also help lay the groundwork for a criminal indictment against Trump.

"If they took the position that the president was absolutely immune, then they wouldn't be able to bring a criminal prosecution," a source familiar with the DOJ investigation told The Daily Beast.

"Had DOJ concluded that incitement unprotected by the First Amendment could nevertheless be within the president's official functions, that could conceivably have impacted criminal charging decisions related to the same speech," former federal prosecutor Mary McCord, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, told the outlet. 

The DOJ stressed in its memo that it "expresses no view on that conclusion, or on the truth of the allegations in plaintiffs' complaints" but legal experts say the memo leaves Trump defenseless.

"If they're saying it's outside the scope of immunity of civil suits, and outside the scope of protected speech, there really isn't anything else out there protecting Trump," one unnamed attorney told The Daily Beast. 

The DOJ memo could also aid Fulton County, Ga. District Attorney Fani Willis, who is leading an investigation into Trump's efforts to overturn his loss in the state. By stating that some actions by a sitting president fall outside of legal behavior, the DOJ memo could help strengthen Willis' case if she indicts Trump.

"It has profound implications for the Georgia case, and they are ominous for Trump," attorney Norm Eisen, who served as Democratic co-counsel during Trump's first impeachment, told The Daily Beast.

"Indeed, the Georgia conduct may be even more outrageous and unrelated to his official duties or his First Amendment rights than giving a speech on the Ellipse," he said. "This brief is going to be utilized by the Fulton County prosecutor because it is so powerfully indicative of the only possible logical conclusion here: that an attempted coup cannot be part of the job description of a president under the United States Constitution."

 

 

[commando]

On 1/31/2022 at 11:55 PM, admo said:

I believe you meant to ask "why would you vote for a different republican candidate in the primaries"?  If so, the simple answer is turning the page and moving forward. 

 

When the time comes, there will be some good candidates and some not so good ones battling in the republican primaries. I'm sure it will be interesting.  And I look forward to the best candidate to win the party, and then the big task afterward, taking on Biden & Harris for the presidential election (assuming he doesn't replace her with a different Veep).  When the time comes, we'll be alright tho.   

so far i am not seeing any good ones.    maybe later?

[Scarlet]

Turns out the correct answers were yes, no, yes

 

 

[Moiraine]

Among those people central to the inquiry were Rudolph W. Giuliani, a lawyer who oversaw Mr. Trump’s attempts to claim the election was marred by widespread fraud; John Eastman, a law professor who provided the legal basis to overturn the election by manipulating the count of electors to the Electoral College; Sidney Powell, a lawyer who pushed Mr. Trump to use the military to seize voting machines and rerun the election; Jeffrey Clark, a Justice Department official at the time; and Kenneth Chesebro and James Troupis, lawyers who helped flesh out the plan to use fake electors pledged to Mr. Trump in states that were won by President Biden.

[Goal-line]

On 1/31/2022 at 11:55 PM, admo said:

I believe you meant to ask "why would you vote for a different republican candidate in the primaries"?  If so, the simple answer is turning the page and moving forward. 

 

When the time comes, there will be some good candidates and some not so good ones battling in the republican primaries. I'm sure it will be interesting.  And I look forward to the best candidate to win the party, and then the big task afterward, taking on Biden & Harris for the presidential election (assuming he doesn't replace her with a different Veep).  When the time comes, we'll be alright tho.   

It will take decades for the Republican Party to cleanse itself from the spineless sycophants of Trump.  Nebraska voters will stand in line to vote for their deranged political conservative politicians.  

[ZRod]

2 hours ago, Goal-line said:

It will take decades for the Republican Party to cleanse itself from the spineless sycophants of Trump.  Nebraska voters will stand in line to vote for their deranged political conservative politicians.  

We've been saying this for the better part of a decade now, and it's only gotten worse...