Hey Charlie, Ken White makes a really good point about "potential max sentences". Like every other defendant, Trump will be sentenced in accordance with the Guidelines, and I'll own a motel on the moon before Trump is sentenced to 600 years. Better, I think, to focus on the Guidelines, which would still result in a significant sentence.
I’m responding here to Laura Field’s excellent article on “Overtime” which I thought was part of Bulwark but evidently isn’t.
In this article she quotes John Eastman.
“We’re not talking about, you know, handing over to John Kennedy, instead of Richard Nixon, who’s gonna deal with the Cold War. We’re talking about whether we are going to, as a nation, completely repudiate every one of our founding principles, which is what the modern left wing which is in control of the Democrat party believes—that we are the root of all evil in the world and we have to be eradicated.
This is an existential threat to the very survivability, not just of our nation, but of the example that our nation, properly understood, provides to the world. That’s the stakes.”
I would like to press this issue more broadly to Republicans including the never-Trumpers here.
Is this what you believe? Do you believe that the “modern left wing” is in control of the Democratic Party and believes that the USA is the root of all evil in the world? Do you believe that Democrats pose an existential threat to the world?
If you do, then why are you doing all this? If you don’t, which is what I presume, shouldn’t you be explicitly saying that you don’t question the Democratic Party’s legitimacy, even if you do disagree with some or even many of its positions?
It seems to me sometimes that Red Menace thinking in the GOP remains alive and well. The Menace in GOP thinking has simply been transferred whole from the Communist Party to the Democratic Party.
I don’t see how you are able to take on the Trumps and Eastmans of this world without being willing to discuss this.
Does “Overtime” which comes to me through a subscription to Bulwark require a separate fee? That’s what it seems to be telling me. I won’t pay if that’s the case.
"The proposal would have required a 60 percent supermajority to pass amendments, instead of a simple majority."
Notice that the proponents of this proposal did not include a provision saying that this proposal itself needed 60% to pass, showing that they think that a simple majority is enough for big changes.
Hey Steve Bannon: too late, motherfucker! You were more than happy to have these anti-abortion fanatics on your side. They were your base. Any GOP who said anything bad about them was a RINO. Your guy, the former guy, is still talking on the campaign trail about the wonderful justices HE appointed and the wonderful Dobbs prize they gave us.
Now, if you turn against the anti-abortion fanatics, the rifts in your coalition will make Hillary-Bernie look like a puddle. My liberal Democrat friends are salivating.
Why weren’t any Republicans wise enough after Dobbs to say, “we just ended Roe. We got what we wanted. Abortion is now an issue left to the states. Let’s let it sit there for awhile before we try to make it a Federal issue the other way.” That would have been the smart thing to do.
But you guys are too arrogant and stupid to have seen that. Sucks to be you.
So I know Facebook is passé and I myself barely use it but they introduced a feature recently that allows you to choose different backgrounds for shorter posts.
And I know this is completely irrelevant and unimportant but I find it weird/interesting/mildly amusing that Robertson decided to add backgrounds to his posts about killing Biden. Like at some point, he must have thought to himself “Does the pastel background match the whole ‘Presidential assassination thing’ or would brighter colors give off more of the Oswaldian vibe I’m going for?”
Really interesting Maryah, and absolutely fascinating that he had to think and make a choice for his posts. Makes you wonder if mass-killers etc make decisions about what font they want in their manifestos? Do they prefer Time New Roman, Lucida Blackletter (for that gothic feel), or maybe Comic Sans for the LOLs. Makes you wonder...
Honestly, why don't people learn that everything Trump touches die? His latest attorney is happily going on TV and venting TFG's talking points. With a line of lawyers in hot water because of TFG, what is this latest guy learned? Absolutely nothing. That is a special kind of stupid IMHO.
"In Atlanta, a local prosecutor takes on murder, street gangs, and a president" - NY TImes
"Atlanta's first black female District Attorney is at the center of America's converging crisis." - Time
In my opinion, it is no exaggeration to say she might save the Republic. She is a smart cookie, thank goodness. I wish she had acted more quickly, but the main thing is to nail Trump. Unfortunately, the charges she and the other DAs have brought against Trump would not preclude him from running for president. He could run even if he is guilty and imprisoned, although I doubt he could win. A large percent of GOP voters say they will not vote for him if he is in the pokey. I think the only crime that blocks running for president is insurrection, and none of the DAs have charged Trump with that.
Let me add that if Trump is found guilty of the charges Willis brings, he cannot pardon himself. These would Georgia's jurisdiction. A president can only pardon federal crimes.
As an Ohio native in New Hampshire, I followed this election more closely than I might have otherwise. I was ambivalent, because the idea that 50%+1 can change the state constitution is ludicrous--it's Brexit in miniature. There really ought to be a higher bar to amend such a document. So it struck me as a reasonable idea proposed with ill intent, hence I'm glad that it failed.
It does seem like a constitution ought to have a higher bar to change than a statute law, or else what's the point of constitutions? The other way to do it, that doesn't allow a potential minority veto, is to require that it be approved in two separate consecutive cycles.
Have you watched Congress recently and how they abuse the 2/3rds majority rule? There is no guarantee that letting the 41% decide for the 59% that the outcome will be better.
The hypocrisy *never* fails to astound me. Every other day another Christian youth leader, or elected R, or other consevatives of various stripes are convicted of child porn or grooming or fondling or downright rape. Never ever a trans person, a gay person or an effen Drag Queen.
Last November, Kentuckians denied our GOP legislators the ability to enshrine anti-choice laws. Losing that vote hasn't fazed them or slowed them down.
It's bittersweet to see pro choice groups celebrate Ohio's "win": sweet, because sure, they won the vote; bitter, because it won't stop the state GOP.
Eastman's attitude toward the election sounds like the ideological extension of Trump's narcissism: The real issue was not whether the election was actually legitimate. It was that the wrong people won. Trump's ego could not tolerate a loss. Eastman's ideology would not accept that people he disagreed with would be making decisions for a few years. The claims of fraud were fundamentally a means to address those issues.
My comment is directed to the cruelty at the the border . Greg Abbott should be charged with Crimes Against Humanity .
Hey Charlie, Ken White makes a really good point about "potential max sentences". Like every other defendant, Trump will be sentenced in accordance with the Guidelines, and I'll own a motel on the moon before Trump is sentenced to 600 years. Better, I think, to focus on the Guidelines, which would still result in a significant sentence.
I’m responding here to Laura Field’s excellent article on “Overtime” which I thought was part of Bulwark but evidently isn’t.
In this article she quotes John Eastman.
“We’re not talking about, you know, handing over to John Kennedy, instead of Richard Nixon, who’s gonna deal with the Cold War. We’re talking about whether we are going to, as a nation, completely repudiate every one of our founding principles, which is what the modern left wing which is in control of the Democrat party believes—that we are the root of all evil in the world and we have to be eradicated.
This is an existential threat to the very survivability, not just of our nation, but of the example that our nation, properly understood, provides to the world. That’s the stakes.”
I would like to press this issue more broadly to Republicans including the never-Trumpers here.
Is this what you believe? Do you believe that the “modern left wing” is in control of the Democratic Party and believes that the USA is the root of all evil in the world? Do you believe that Democrats pose an existential threat to the world?
If you do, then why are you doing all this? If you don’t, which is what I presume, shouldn’t you be explicitly saying that you don’t question the Democratic Party’s legitimacy, even if you do disagree with some or even many of its positions?
It seems to me sometimes that Red Menace thinking in the GOP remains alive and well. The Menace in GOP thinking has simply been transferred whole from the Communist Party to the Democratic Party.
I don’t see how you are able to take on the Trumps and Eastmans of this world without being willing to discuss this.
Does “Overtime” which comes to me through a subscription to Bulwark require a separate fee? That’s what it seems to be telling me. I won’t pay if that’s the case.
"The proposal would have required a 60 percent supermajority to pass amendments, instead of a simple majority."
Notice that the proponents of this proposal did not include a provision saying that this proposal itself needed 60% to pass, showing that they think that a simple majority is enough for big changes.
MmmMmm. Such a bounty of delicious maga self destruction. Keep it coming Charlie.
All I can say is the Repubs went too far with their agenda. People of both parties said No.!
Hey Steve Bannon: too late, motherfucker! You were more than happy to have these anti-abortion fanatics on your side. They were your base. Any GOP who said anything bad about them was a RINO. Your guy, the former guy, is still talking on the campaign trail about the wonderful justices HE appointed and the wonderful Dobbs prize they gave us.
Now, if you turn against the anti-abortion fanatics, the rifts in your coalition will make Hillary-Bernie look like a puddle. My liberal Democrat friends are salivating.
Why weren’t any Republicans wise enough after Dobbs to say, “we just ended Roe. We got what we wanted. Abortion is now an issue left to the states. Let’s let it sit there for awhile before we try to make it a Federal issue the other way.” That would have been the smart thing to do.
But you guys are too arrogant and stupid to have seen that. Sucks to be you.
So I know Facebook is passé and I myself barely use it but they introduced a feature recently that allows you to choose different backgrounds for shorter posts.
And I know this is completely irrelevant and unimportant but I find it weird/interesting/mildly amusing that Robertson decided to add backgrounds to his posts about killing Biden. Like at some point, he must have thought to himself “Does the pastel background match the whole ‘Presidential assassination thing’ or would brighter colors give off more of the Oswaldian vibe I’m going for?”
Really interesting Maryah, and absolutely fascinating that he had to think and make a choice for his posts. Makes you wonder if mass-killers etc make decisions about what font they want in their manifestos? Do they prefer Time New Roman, Lucida Blackletter (for that gothic feel), or maybe Comic Sans for the LOLs. Makes you wonder...
Matt Labash is still great!
Honestly, why don't people learn that everything Trump touches die? His latest attorney is happily going on TV and venting TFG's talking points. With a line of lawyers in hot water because of TFG, what is this latest guy learned? Absolutely nothing. That is a special kind of stupid IMHO.
In Georgia, DAs have to run for office. Fani Willis just set up her campaign website:
https://www.faniforda.com/
Press quotes:
"In Atlanta, a local prosecutor takes on murder, street gangs, and a president" - NY TImes
"Atlanta's first black female District Attorney is at the center of America's converging crisis." - Time
In my opinion, it is no exaggeration to say she might save the Republic. She is a smart cookie, thank goodness. I wish she had acted more quickly, but the main thing is to nail Trump. Unfortunately, the charges she and the other DAs have brought against Trump would not preclude him from running for president. He could run even if he is guilty and imprisoned, although I doubt he could win. A large percent of GOP voters say they will not vote for him if he is in the pokey. I think the only crime that blocks running for president is insurrection, and none of the DAs have charged Trump with that.
Let me add that if Trump is found guilty of the charges Willis brings, he cannot pardon himself. These would Georgia's jurisdiction. A president can only pardon federal crimes.
As an Ohio native in New Hampshire, I followed this election more closely than I might have otherwise. I was ambivalent, because the idea that 50%+1 can change the state constitution is ludicrous--it's Brexit in miniature. There really ought to be a higher bar to amend such a document. So it struck me as a reasonable idea proposed with ill intent, hence I'm glad that it failed.
It does seem like a constitution ought to have a higher bar to change than a statute law, or else what's the point of constitutions? The other way to do it, that doesn't allow a potential minority veto, is to require that it be approved in two separate consecutive cycles.
Have you watched Congress recently and how they abuse the 2/3rds majority rule? There is no guarantee that letting the 41% decide for the 59% that the outcome will be better.
The hypocrisy *never* fails to astound me. Every other day another Christian youth leader, or elected R, or other consevatives of various stripes are convicted of child porn or grooming or fondling or downright rape. Never ever a trans person, a gay person or an effen Drag Queen.
I don't think hypocrisy is strictly a partisan characteristic, though it might take different forms.
I don't disagree about their hypocrisy, but I'd caution against 'never ever'.
True. But the way things have been going, other types would be a rarity .
Last November, Kentuckians denied our GOP legislators the ability to enshrine anti-choice laws. Losing that vote hasn't fazed them or slowed them down.
It's bittersweet to see pro choice groups celebrate Ohio's "win": sweet, because sure, they won the vote; bitter, because it won't stop the state GOP.
They don't respect majority opinion or its vote.
Eastman's attitude toward the election sounds like the ideological extension of Trump's narcissism: The real issue was not whether the election was actually legitimate. It was that the wrong people won. Trump's ego could not tolerate a loss. Eastman's ideology would not accept that people he disagreed with would be making decisions for a few years. The claims of fraud were fundamentally a means to address those issues.