Things seem to be unfolding rather quickly. Former White House aides and advisors are scrambling to cover themselves as they receive subpoenas to appear and produce documents.
It’s rare when lawyers — as opposed to their clients — take the Fifth Amendment. But Jeffrey Clark, the former Justice Department lawyer who reportedly tried to help Donald Trump overturn the 2020 presidential election, is now claiming the privilege against self-incrimination to avoid testifying before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. He has just been joined in that posture by one of Trump’s main outside legal advisers, John Eastman.
The lawsuit comes after the committee signaled it would pursue a criminal contempt referral against Meadows because of his refusal to sit for a deposition in the investigation into the Capitol riot. Meadows alleges that the subpoenas are "overly broad and unduly burdensome," while claiming that the committee "lacks lawful authority to seek and to obtain" the information requested.
And apparently Mark Meadows had a power point outlining how to overturn election results.
The 38-page presentation, entitled "Election Fraud, Foreign Interference & Options for 6 Jan," is dated one day before the Capitol riot. It's believed to have been submitted by Meadows after he was subpoenaed by the panel in connection with the insurrection.
They opine that Trump was not the architect of trying to overturn the election (and I agree, he's not smart enough) and the groundwork was laid over several months.
I agree that we should stop talking about Trump, but I do think the attempt to overturn the election must be investigated.
Regarding the Oath Keepers, I suspect Steve Bannon and Roger Stone likely have connections to that mess.
The idiot seditionists appear to have left a huge digital footprint. My fear is that SCOTUS won't care about what these guys did and might possibly, even support them.
The idiot seditionists appear to have left a huge digital footprint. My fear is that SCOTUS won't care about what these guys did and might possibly, even support them.
Sedition is hard to prove. Some say it is an attempt to charge them or someone at least because one of the renouding ideas is that the Jan 6 committee did not charge anyone with insurrection/sedition until now. It is their answer to that criticism.
It does seem convenient of the timing but perhaps it just a coincidence that they charged them at this time because of the process involved getting to that point in which they could charge them.
The digital footprint print could be a curse or a blessing,depending on how you look at it.
I had mentioned previously about the Oath Keepers comments related to what Mr. Trump was doing,or more of what he was not doing. An idea of "straight out of the seditionist's mouth".
Oh and the field day if they do secure a conviction! I could hear something like," the only people charged/convicted of sedition said out of their own mouth that Mr. Trump was not doing anything"! So how could he have incited them?
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.
4 minutes ago, LTC Advocate said:
Sedition is hard to prove. Some say it is an attempt to change them or someone at least because one of the renouding ideas is that the Jan 6 committee did not charge anyone with insurrection/sedition until now. It is their answer to that criticism.
It does seem convenient of the timing but perhaps it just a coincidence that they charged them at this time because of the process involved getting to that point in which they could change them.
The Jan 6 committee didn't charge the Oath Keepers. That is not the purpose of the committee. The Justice Department charged them, and I would disagree that sedition is hard to prove.
I suppose one would see "convenient timing" if they thought the Select Committee had a political motivation. From my point of view, anyone who believes the events involving the attack on our democratic institutions that day shouldn't be investigated is under the influence of an entrenched poltical belief system themselves.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
3 hours ago, LTC Advocate said:
I think the the majority of people do not trust the government. Either Democrat or republican. Each side thinks that there is baloney abound. It's because we are not unable to relate to each other and accept our different opinions anymore. It's the fist time I've seen it in my life time to this extent. It's is heartbreaking.
I also think the majority of Mr.Trump supporters do not think the election was stolen in a way with fraud and evil voting machines,I think they think that the mail in voting changes for COVID were grossly taken advantage of. And that the pandemic was exploited to get rid of Mr. Trump. I think there is a number of democrats that think the same but look the other way because its more acceptable to get rid of Mr.Trump. This is only my opinion but I present a friendly and open disposition and find that I can converse with both sides of the equation. Which I have. This is not to say I think these things, it's just some anecdotal information I would like to share with my fellow Nurses. I think sitting and listening to each other we might be able to unite as Americans again.
As for the Meuler Report. People will dismiss this because there were no charges. Not for Trump anyway. Not to mention the soft ball relations with Russian by the Biden administration now. Doesn't instill trust. Even in criminal trials, when a person gets off of a charge or isn't charged at all, allot of people will feel the person is still guilty. However they place their trust in the legal system and usually move on. There have been a few legal trials I've been personally invested in. They did not go the way that I liked. However I was able to find peace because I understood that even if our justice system fails to convict 10 guilty people, but that process prevents 1 innocent person from going to jail, then I know our system has worked,even if I disagree with the conclusion. Trump supporters will not accept the Meuller report because nothing came of it. Would a Democrat suddenly stop supporting President Biden in a report that said some unsavory possible illegal things about him? Probably not. And they should not because he was not held legally accountable. Not enough evidence to charge him? No, of course they would not accept it.
We have to let that one go in my opinion. Mr.Trump is no longer the President of the United States and probably will not be ever again. The constant Trump fixation will only continue to divide our beautiful country. Remember approximately half the people voted for him, not all can be evil seditionist. The democrats have who they want,stop giving Mr. Trump attention. If anything it only feeds his ego. Or could convince more to vote for him in 2024 if he runs. I'm going out on a limb here but I think the majority people on this thread will not want that! Just a hunch (wink,wink).
Why do you think that the majority of people don't trust the government? Do you think that they trust businesses to protect their interests more than government? Again, why? Do you think that businesses have as their priority "we the people"? I think that our government was designed to further the interests of "we the people" and that we should work to make that a shared vision.
Most people don't have a problem accepting other opinion but some opinion isn't based in reality or facts and they challenge the content of those opinions. Other opinions simply concern different interpretations of shared facts and evidence. Yes, I agree that we should be able to discuss and consider other opinions. I ask questions so that everyone can understand the fundamentals of the beliefs described in the discussion.
"I think they think that the mail in voting changes for COVID were grossly taken advantage of."
Those people were victims of propaganda. What other explanation do you have for so many people believing something that isn't true and had no evidentiary basis?
How do you think that Democrats exploited the pandemic for political gain? Is there some evidence that democrats are especially popular during this pandemic? Please help me understand why you think this way.
There's a specific reason that Trump was not referred for criminal obstruction following Mueller's investigating and that was all related to the internal DOJ memo prohibiting presidential criminal indictment. There is no current reason, not even that contrived notion of immunity, that Trump cannot be indicted on those instances of obstruction as well as other crimes.
As for whether Democrats would abandon Biden if the sort of evidence existed about him as exists for Trump, the answer is an emphatic YES. Liberal and progressive voters are not shy about punishing or removing political leadership for moral and ethical misconduct.
It's counter productive to represent these conversations here as if any of us besides you are describing all Trump supporters as evil seditionists. None of the comments here nor the linked content makes that claim or are written from that perspective.
Here's the thing...people like me would LOVE to stop talking about Trump. We could if he wasn't such a huge and influential figure in national republican and conservative circles. We could if Trump wasn't leading those people down a pathway to a fascist regime that is being defended by everyday Americans who have been deeply misled by their media choices and our intentional defunding of public education over your entire lifetime. Trump and his ideology represent a clear and present danger to our republic and democracy.
The majority of Americans should not want a second Trump term. The majority said they didn't want him to have a second term when they voted in 2020.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
52 minutes ago, LTC Advocate said:
Sedition is hard to prove. Some say it is an attempt to charge them or someone at least because one of the renouding ideas is that the Jan 6 committee did not charge anyone with insurrection/sedition until now. It is their answer to that criticism.
It does seem convenient of the timing but perhaps it just a coincidence that they charged them at this time because of the process involved getting to that point in which they could charge them.
The digital footprint print could be a curse or a blessing,depending on how you look at it.
I had mentioned previously about the Oath Keepers comments related to what Mr. Trump was doing,or more of what he was not doing. An idea of "straight out of the seditionist's mouth".
Oh and the field day if they do secure a conviction! I could hear something like," the only people charged/convicted of sedition said out of their own mouth that Mr. Trump was not doing anything"! So how could he have incited them?
Such a convoluted topic if I say so myself! .
We all watched and heard the incitement. We are learning more about the planning and funding that was less public. I would say that some people want to make this situation seem cloudy, confused or convoluted. Instead this seems pretty clear cut on this level...Trump lost an election, convinced millions of his followers that the election was somehow stolen, Trump invited them to DC, Trump incited them in a "rally" to march to the Capitol to stop the steal. Violence followed. Insurrectionists may have been using the incited mob to breach the building and provide some chaotic cover for their more organized intentions. It sounds like we are going to learn more about that possibility.
Why do you think that the majority of people don't trust the government? Do you think that they trust businesses to protect their interests more than government? Again, why? Do you think that businesses have as their priority "we the people"? I think that our government was designed to further the interests of "we the people" and that we should work to make that a shared vision.
Most people don't have a problem accepting other opinion but some opinion isn't based in reality or facts and they challenge the content of those opinions. Other opinions simply concern different interpretations of shared facts and evidence. Yes, I agree that we should be able to discuss and consider other opinions. I ask questions so that everyone can understand the fundamentals of the beliefs described in the discussion.
"I think they think that the mail in voting changes for COVID were grossly taken advantage of."
Those people were victims of propaganda. What other explanation do you have for so many people believing something that isn't true and had no evidentiary basis?
How do you think that Democrats exploited the pandemic for political gain? Is there some evidence that democrats are especially popular during this pandemic? Please help me understand why you think this way.
There's a specific reason that Trump was not referred for criminal obstruction following Mueller's investigating and that was all related to the internal DOJ memo prohibiting presidential criminal indictment. There is no current reason, not even that contrived notion of immunity, that Trump cannot be indicted on those instances of obstruction as well as other crimes.
As for whether Democrats would abandon Biden if the sort of evidence existed about him as exists for Trump, the answer is an emphatic YES. Liberal and progressive voters are not shy about punishing or removing political leadership for moral and ethical misconduct.
It's counter productive to represent these conversations here as if any of us besides you are describing all Trump supporters as evil seditionists. None of the comments here nor the linked content makes that claim or are written from that perspective.
Here's the thing...people like me would LOVE to stop talking about Trump. We could if he wasn't such a huge and influential figure in national republican and conservative circles. We could if Trump wasn't leading those people down a pathway to a fascist regime that is being defended by everyday Americans who have been deeply misled by their media choices and our intentional defunding of public education over your entire lifetime. Trump and his ideology represent a clear and present danger to our republic and democracy.
The majority of Americans should not want a second Trump term. The majority said they didn't want him to have a second term when they voted in 2020.
I'm just offering information I have learned and general summary of what I think is happening based on conversations I have had and allot of reading. I have no concrete evidence or proof of any of the things I said I think people might be feeling.
As for democrats abandoning Biden if he was guilty of the things most democrats think of Trump? I would have to respectfully disagree. In my own conclusions from various sources of personal interactions and subjects I have read from an abundance of sources, I do not think a large group of democrats would abandon Biden. Just as the Trump supporters refuse to accept anything negative about Trump,I think there is a large number of democrats that would also deny and explain everything away.on the bases of anything to keep Trump away. Mostly the highly visible democrat politicians that careers depend on it. There is not much room for criticism of Biden and his policies in th Democrat party.
However,everyday people both Republican or Democrat probably are not that extreme and will conceded things they like and dislike of President Biden and Mr. Trump.
I think allot of people didn't trust the government previously,not just now. Covid and all the events with mandating, masks,conflicting information(or interpreted conflicting information) has allot to do with it.
It should be "we the people" but it feels more like,"we the people,except you" type of atmosphere. This applying to both sides.
Mutal understanding and compromise seems to be lacking and unfortunately it is "we the people" the everyday people, that suffer the most.
We all watched and heard the incitement. We are learning more about the planning and funding that was less public. I would say that some people want to make this situation seem cloudy, confused or convoluted. Instead this seems pretty clear cut on this level...Trump lost an election, convinced millions of his followers that the election was somehow stolen, Trump invited them to DC, Trump incited them in a "rally" to march to the Capitol to stop the steal. Violence followed. Insurrectionists may have been using the incited mob to breach the building and provide some chaotic cover for their more organized intentions. It sounds like we are going to learn more about that possibility.
The Jan 6 committee didn't charge the Oath Keepers. That is not the purpose of the committee. The Justice Department charged them, and I would disagree that sedition is hard to prove.
I suppose one would see "convenient timing" if they thought the Select Committee had a political motivation. From my point of view, anyone who believes the events involving the attack on our democratic institutions that day shouldn't be investigated is under the influence of an entrenched poltical belief system themselves.
Yes you are correct,it was the DOJ,please accept my apology for my mistake.
Why do you think that the majority of people don't trust the government? Do you think that they trust businesses to protect their interests more than government? Again, why? Do you think that businesses have as their priority "we the people"? I think that our government was designed to further the interests of "we the people" and that we should work to make that a shared vision.
Most people don't have a problem accepting other opinion but some opinion isn't based in reality or facts and they challenge the content of those opinions. Other opinions simply concern different interpretations of shared facts and evidence. Yes, I agree that we should be able to discuss and consider other opinions. I ask questions so that everyone can understand the fundamentals of the beliefs described in the discussion.
"I think they think that the mail in voting changes for COVID were grossly taken advantage of."
Those people were victims of propaganda. What other explanation do you have for so many people believing something that isn't true and had no evidentiary basis?
How do you think that Democrats exploited the pandemic for political gain? Is there some evidence that democrats are especially popular during this pandemic? Please help me understand why you think this way.
There's a specific reason that Trump was not referred for criminal obstruction following Mueller's investigating and that was all related to the internal DOJ memo prohibiting presidential criminal indictment. There is no current reason, not even that contrived notion of immunity, that Trump cannot be indicted on those instances of obstruction as well as other crimes.
As for whether Democrats would abandon Biden if the sort of evidence existed about him as exists for Trump, the answer is an emphatic YES. Liberal and progressive voters are not shy about punishing or removing political leadership for moral and ethical misconduct.
It's counter productive to represent these conversations here as if any of us besides you are describing all Trump supporters as evil seditionists. None of the comments here nor the linked content makes that claim or are written from that perspective.
Here's the thing...people like me would LOVE to stop talking about Trump. We could if he wasn't such a huge and influential figure in national republican and conservative circles. We could if Trump wasn't leading those people down a pathway to a fascist regime that is being defended by everyday Americans who have been deeply misled by their media choices and our intentional defunding of public education over your entire lifetime. Trump and his ideology represent a clear and present danger to our republic and democracy.
The majority of Americans should not want a second Trump term. The majority said they didn't want him to have a second term when they voted in 2020.
Again I have to disagree. I do not think Mr.Trump is a fascist nor the millions of people who voted for him. In good continous I can not assign that to my fellow Americans. I know many who did vote for him and they are not fascist. If this the way you think,what would you propose be done about it? All the eople you say have been convinced into fascist? People can and will think what they like.
Why is it they have not charged him by now? If there is no current reason not to? I don't understand.
I think I referred to the voting machines being evil.
We all watched and heard the incitement. We are learning more about the planning and funding that was less public. I would say that some people want to make this situation seem cloudy, confused or convoluted. Instead this seems pretty clear cut on this level...Trump lost an election, convinced millions of his followers that the election was somehow stolen, Trump invited them to DC, Trump incited them in a "rally" to march to the Capitol to stop the steal. Violence followed. Insurrectionists may have been using the incited mob to breach the building and provide some chaotic cover for their more organized intentions. It sounds like we are going to learn more about that possibility.
Out of the source you linked,it says the following:
" First, incitement to violence requires proof that the defendant intended to incite violence or riot(whether or not it actually occurs). Careless conduct or "emotionally charged rhetoric" does not meet this standard. Second, the defendant must create a sort of roadmap for immediate harm—using general or vague references to some future act doesn't qualify as imminent lawless action. Finally, the defendant's words must be likely to persuade, provoke, or urge a crowd to violence. Profanity or offensive messaging alone isn't enough; the messaging must appeal to actions that lead to imminent violence.
With what we know so far, I would agree that Mr.Trumps rhetoric upto and on Jan.6 was careless and emotionally charged. And unless they uncover something,First, incitement to violence requires proof that the defendant intended to incite violence or riot (whether or not it actually occurs). Careless conduct or "emotionally charged rhetoric" does not meet this standard. Second, the defendant must create a sort of roadmap for immediate harm—using general or vague references to some future act doesn't qualify as imminent lawless action. Finally, the defendant's words must be likely to persuade, provoke, or urge a crowd to violence. Profanity or offensive messaging alone isn't enough; the messaging must appeal to actions that lead to imminent violence.there is nothing to suggest he planned the for what happened that day.(not yet) Both those points does not qualify as imminent lawless action. The point of, "likely to provoke or urge a crowd into violence" is subjective on the first 2 points.
Unless there is some drastic inflammatory information that comes up, I do not see any criminal charges being held against him. A whole lot of people will not be happy. I hope this won't cause more riots.
Again,this is not my personal opinion. I am making no statements to the point that Mr. Trump is guilty or innocent. I am just predicting what I think will not happen.
I think there are plenty of Democrats and Biden voters who would back some else in the next election. Most of the liberal-leaning posters here, including myself, have stated that Biden was not our first choice for candidate. Just this weekend its been reported that several prominent Democrats are unsatisfied with Biden's performance.
My state and a state next to ours has been voting by mail for years, without claims of fraud. Our system was devised and run by a Republican secretary of state, whom I voted for. I like voting by mail, although I usually drop it off in the ballot box on election day out of tradition. Yes, I did have to show ID when I registered, and my signature is on file to be matched to my ballot. Two of my children have been flagged for possible mismatched signature, so that assures me that the system works.
The only reason for anyone thinking that fraudulent mail ballots were cast was because of the former President predicting it throughout his campaign, and apparently continues to claim it.
As for democrats abandoning Biden if he was guilty of the things most democrats think of Trump? I would have to respectfully disagree. In my own conclusions from various sources of personal interactions and subjects I have read from an abundance of sources, I do not think a large group of democrats would abandon Biden. Just as the Trump supporters refuse to accept anything negative about Trump,I think there is a large number of democrats that would also deny and explain everything away.on the bases of anything to keep Trump away. Mostly the highly visible democrat politicians that careers depend on it. There is not much room for criticism of Biden and his policies in th Democrat party.
Of course they wouldn't abandon him. They voted for a already twice failed candidate. Once he dropped out for plagiarising, and has lied throughout his 50 years in DC. In 2016, with no backbone he stepped aside for Hilary. 2020 campaigned mostly from his basement. Now, he's a senile shell of his formal self, with dismal ratings, and seemingly without a clue about what's important to Americans, or for that matter that he's the potus, not "President Harris".
subee, MSN, CRNA
1 Article; 6,118 Posts
The idiot seditionists appear to have left a huge digital footprint. My fear is that SCOTUS won't care about what these guys did and might possibly, even support them.