What happens to the Republican Party now? (3 Viewers)

[MT15]

This election nonsense by Trump may end up splitting up the Republican Party. I just don’t see how the one third (?) who are principled conservatives can stay in the same party with Trump sycophants who are willing to sign onto the TX Supreme Court case.

We also saw the alt right types chanting “destroy the GOP” in Washington today because they didn’t keep Trump in power. I think the Q types will also hold the same ill will toward the traditional Republican Party. In fact its quite possible that all the voters who are really in a Trump personality cult will also blame the GOP for his loss. It’s only a matter of time IMO before Trump himself gets around to blaming the GOP.

There is some discussion of this on Twitter. What do you all think?

 

[MT15]

Flynn ushering in some Taliban-level crazy:

 

[MT15]

At least one arrest for death threats, it’s a start:

New York man arrested after death threat to GOP congressman

LAKE RONKONKOMA, N.Y. (AP) — A Long Island man has been arrested for making a death threat against a Republican congressman who voted for the $1 trillion infrastructure package, police said.

apnews.com

 

[insidejob]

At least one arrest for death threats, it’s a start:

New York man arrested after death threat to GOP congressman

LAKE RONKONKOMA, N.Y. (AP) — A Long Island man has been arrested for making a death threat against a Republican congressman who voted for the $1 trillion infrastructure package, police said.

apnews.com

I've never really understood the "I'm going to send my Congressmen death threats to show my disapproval" crowd.

Seems like a message calling them a poopy head would be just as effective and wouldn't come with possible prison time.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

I've never really understood the "I'm going to send my Congressmen death threats to show my disapproval" crowd.

Seems like a message calling them a poopy head would be just as effective and wouldn't come with possible prison time.

Death threats because his congressman supported a bill that will improve infrastructure and create new jobs in his community, the only sin being that Biden and the Democrats championed the bill.

What's wrong with these people? It's obvious that the GOP position now is that Republicans must not support ANYTHING when Democrats are in charge. No matter how common sense the legislation is.

You know, it's kind of fun sometimes to talk about how crazy the Republican Party has become. But in all seriousness, the country is not going to survive this.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Flynn ushering in some Taliban-level crazy:

Why is it the ones who are first to bring the constituion up in every situations are the first to ignore it?
But that is the GOP way..

 

[MT15]

Teri Kanefield is a great person to follow on Twitter if you want level-headed legal interpretations. There are definitely some legal analysts who are talking up things that are never going to happen.

For example: did Trump‘s actions around dealing with the pandemic cost untold thousands of lives, possibly six figures of unnecessary deaths? Yes, it’s really not all that debatable.

Is that a crime that he will go to prison for? Most probably not, and shouldn’t. Policy errors are not criminal. I don’t think we would actually like to live in a society where they were.

I don’t always like what Teri says, but when I think about it she is most often right.

 

[Optimus Prime]

This isn't just a technical violation of the Logan Act, it is a blatant and intentional violation.

He is daring the DOJ to arrest him, and will call it a witch hunt if Garland ever finds the balls to do his job.

Article from a few days ago basically saying ”cut Garland some slack and give him some time”
=================================

At Attorney General Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearing, he testified that he wanted to restore the public’s faith in the Justice Department and “turn down the volume” on the public dialogue surrounding it.

If only the armchair quarterbacks on the left would let him.
Garland’s critics are increasingly exasperated over what they see as his failures to act in matters related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

They can’t believe Stephen K. Bannon, whom the House voted to hold in contempt of Congress three weeks ago, hasn’t been indicted already. They lament the failure to prosecute any of the supposed masterminds behind the insurrection.

Elie Mystal of the Nation accused Garland of “cowardice.” Journalist Steven Beschloss argued that if Garland can’t “step up” and pursue these cases, “then President Biden should find an attorney general who can.”

Cable pundits have begun “indictment watch” clocks, counting the days that have passed without criminal charges. The hashtag #WhereIsMerrickGarland has been trending on Twitter.

The volume on these complaints is cranked way up — and it needs to stop.
One of the many hangovers from the Donald Trump years is that some now view the Justice Department criminal division as just another political wing of an administration.

They want to see quick prosecutions that align with their beliefs or fit their timetables. But of course that’s not how the Justice Department is supposed to operate — as many of those attacking Garland used to recognize back when Trump and former attorney general William P. Barr were in charge.

The facts don’t support Garland’s critics. Regarding the Jan. 6 investigation, we first have to recognize how much we don’t know about what is going on. It’s true that if senior Trump officials were already being subpoenaed to the grand jury, word of that most likely would have leaked.

But there is a great deal of investigative and legal work that typically would not become public. When it comes to criminal investigations, the absence of public action does not mean the absence of any action at all……

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/10/merrick-garland-capitol-riot-justice-department-pundits/

 

[Optimus Prime]

Not sure what thread to put this in.

I know some think that widespread violence is inevitable, including some posters here

Some are worried about it

Others are eagerly awaiting it

Definitely a lot of dangerous rhetoric out there
========================

A disturbing question now hangs over the conduct of American politics. “At this point,” said an audience member at a recent pro-Trump event, “we’re living under corporate and medical fascism. This is tyranny. When do we get to use the guns?”

As the crowd applauded, the man persisted: “No, and I’m not — that’s not a joke. I’m not saying it like that. I mean, literally, where’s the line? How many elections are they going to steal before we kill these people?”


The question is important, not only for the depth of its extremism, but for the clarity of its logic. For years, many on the right have defended the Second Amendment with the “in case of emergency break glass” doctrine.

Maintaining armed forces outside the U.S. government, in this view, is necessary for opposing the government if it grows tyrannical. A significant number of Americans have armed, trained and organized themselves with this possibility in mind.


At the same time, a former president and other leaders on the right are urging their followers to believe that they are living under despotic rule. How else could you describe an illegitimate regime enforcing medical fascism through needle jabs mandated like the mark of the beast?


The political syllogism is unavoidable: If citizens are armed against the advance of tyranny, and tyranny is advancing apace, then violence is justified, even if it is not currently advisable.


This is what Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) was referring to when she recently said, “If you think about what our Declaration of Independence says, it says to overthrow tyrants.”

A significant portion of our political community is turning to the Declaration, not for inspiration about human dignity, but for a right to revolution……..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/15/trump-supporters-political-violence-deadly/

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Article from a few days ago basically saying ”cut Garland some slack and give him some time”
=================================

At Attorney General Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearing, he testified that he wanted to restore the public’s faith in the Justice Department and “turn down the volume” on the public dialogue surrounding it.

If only the armchair quarterbacks on the left would let him.
Garland’s critics are increasingly exasperated over what they see as his failures to act in matters related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

They can’t believe Stephen K. Bannon, whom the House voted to hold in contempt of Congress three weeks ago, hasn’t been indicted already. They lament the failure to prosecute any of the supposed masterminds behind the insurrection.

Elie Mystal of the Nation accused Garland of “cowardice.” Journalist Steven Beschloss argued that if Garland can’t “step up” and pursue these cases, “then President Biden should find an attorney general who can.”

Cable pundits have begun “indictment watch” clocks, counting the days that have passed without criminal charges. The hashtag #WhereIsMerrickGarland has been trending on Twitter.

The volume on these complaints is cranked way up — and it needs to stop.
One of the many hangovers from the Donald Trump years is that some now view the Justice Department criminal division as just another political wing of an administration.

They want to see quick prosecutions that align with their beliefs or fit their timetables. But of course that’s not how the Justice Department is supposed to operate — as many of those attacking Garland used to recognize back when Trump and former attorney general William P. Barr were in charge.

The facts don’t support Garland’s critics. Regarding the Jan. 6 investigation, we first have to recognize how much we don’t know about what is going on. It’s true that if senior Trump officials were already being subpoenaed to the grand jury, word of that most likely would have leaked.

But there is a great deal of investigative and legal work that typically would not become public. When it comes to criminal investigations, the absence of public action does not mean the absence of any action at all……

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/10/merrick-garland-capitol-riot-justice-department-pundits/

I agree that a lot of this criticism of Garland is over the top.

My only pushback would be that Trump should have already been charged for certain crimes by now. For example, when he called the GA Secretary of State Raffensperger about a year ago and tried to pressure him to give him 11,500 votes in Georgia, or whatever the exact total of votes was. This conversation is recorded. Election interference doesn't get any more blatant than that.

I agree that more time may be needed to build the proper case regarding the Jan 6 insurrection. However, Trump's crimes go way beyond that. And I don't know what Garland is waiting for, such as the Raffensperger phone call that I cited above.

Trump violated both GA state laws and a federal law when he made that phone call, as this article explains:

The phone call was a “flagrant federal criminal violation,” said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School in California, adding that it appeared that Trump was using threats to push Raffensperger to alter a legitimate vote count.

Explainer: Did Trump break the law by pressuring a Georgia election official to 'find' votes?

President Donald Trump may have broken a U.S. federal law and a Georgia law against election tampering by pressuring the state's top election official to "find" enough votes to overturn his loss to President-elect Joe Biden in the state, according to some legal experts.

www.reuters.com

 

[MT15]

There is a GA state investigation over Trump’s attempted interference in that election. I read just the other day that it was close to the grand jury phase. Not sure that DOJ needs to be involved at this point. Don’t really know, but it’s not like nothing is happening about GA.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

There is a GA state investigation over Trump’s attempted interference in that election. I read just the other day that it was close to the grand jury phase. Not sure that DOJ needs to be involved at this point. Don’t really know, but it’s not like nothing is happening about GA.

I'm aware of that investigation, we'll see what happens. My main point is that I think Garland should be more aggressive in prosecuting Trump. I'm glad that GA is taking action on the case, because I don't think the DOJ would do anything about it otherwise.

Trump committed an endless string of crimes and I think he is probably going to get away with the vast majority of them.

 

[Taurus]

Article from a few days ago basically saying ”cut Garland some slack and give him some time”
=================================

At Attorney General Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearing, he testified that he wanted to restore the public’s faith in the Justice Department and “turn down the volume” on the public dialogue surrounding it.

If only the armchair quarterbacks on the left would let him.
Garland’s critics are increasingly exasperated over what they see as his failures to act in matters related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

They can’t believe Stephen K. Bannon, whom the House voted to hold in contempt of Congress three weeks ago, hasn’t been indicted already. They lament the failure to prosecute any of the supposed masterminds behind the insurrection.

Elie Mystal of the Nation accused Garland of “cowardice.” Journalist Steven Beschloss argued that if Garland can’t “step up” and pursue these cases, “then President Biden should find an attorney general who can.”

Cable pundits have begun “indictment watch” clocks, counting the days that have passed without criminal charges. The hashtag #WhereIsMerrickGarland has been trending on Twitter.

The volume on these complaints is cranked way up — and it needs to stop.
One of the many hangovers from the Donald Trump years is that some now view the Justice Department criminal division as just another political wing of an administration.

They want to see quick prosecutions that align with their beliefs or fit their timetables. But of course that’s not how the Justice Department is supposed to operate — as many of those attacking Garland used to recognize back when Trump and former attorney general William P. Barr were in charge.

The facts don’t support Garland’s critics. Regarding the Jan. 6 investigation, we first have to recognize how much we don’t know about what is going on. It’s true that if senior Trump officials were already being subpoenaed to the grand jury, word of that most likely would have leaked.

But there is a great deal of investigative and legal work that typically would not become public. When it comes to criminal investigations, the absence of public action does not mean the absence of any action at all……

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/10/merrick-garland-capitol-riot-justice-department-pundits/

Surely the writer understands that we have until Nov. 2022 to put Trump on trial. The Dems are going to lose the House and Senate, it's inevitable. With Congress in the hands of a GOP that's out and proud about its willingness to do anything to obtain and hold power, Trump will get off scot-free forever.

 

[bird]

Not sure what thread to put this in.

I know some think that widespread violence is inevitable, including some posters here

Some are worried about it

Others are eagerly awaiting it

Definitely a lot of dangerous rhetoric out there
========================

A disturbing question now hangs over the conduct of American politics. “At this point,” said an audience member at a recent pro-Trump event, “we’re living under corporate and medical fascism. This is tyranny. When do we get to use the guns?”

As the crowd applauded, the man persisted: “No, and I’m not — that’s not a joke. I’m not saying it like that. I mean, literally, where’s the line? How many elections are they going to steal before we kill these people?”


The question is important, not only for the depth of its extremism, but for the clarity of its logic. For years, many on the right have defended the Second Amendment with the “in case of emergency break glass” doctrine.

Maintaining armed forces outside the U.S. government, in this view, is necessary for opposing the government if it grows tyrannical. A significant number of Americans have armed, trained and organized themselves with this possibility in mind.


At the same time, a former president and other leaders on the right are urging their followers to believe that they are living under despotic rule. How else could you describe an illegitimate regime enforcing medical fascism through needle jabs mandated like the mark of the beast?


The political syllogism is unavoidable: If citizens are armed against the advance of tyranny, and tyranny is advancing apace, then violence is justified, even if it is not currently advisable.


This is what Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) was referring to when she recently said, “If you think about what our Declaration of Independence says, it says to overthrow tyrants.”

A significant portion of our political community is turning to the Declaration, not for inspiration about human dignity, but for a right to revolution……..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/15/trump-supporters-political-violence-deadly/

This underscores the urges to violence and authoritarianism that lie beneath a very thin veneer of civilization and civility/courtesy. I would add in tribalism as well. People seek out groups because we fight an ongoing battle in our minds between knowing we are completely solitary and unable to actually know what others think and the fact that humans are social animals. We seek groups that mirror our belief structures. We fear change and “the other”. We can accept change when it is not too unpalatable but react, often violentry, when we deem it a threat to ourselves or our group. Jefferson’s rhetoric was agitprop aimed at a government far away to rally support for separation from that government. Jefferson would absolutely not have supported overthrowing the government established by the constitution despite, imo, his being quoted that a revolution every 20 years would be good. A revolution every 20 years would absolutely, again, imo, have prevented the US from becoming the nation we became. Evolution is a much more important process.

One political party attempting to harness the urge to violence and authoritarianism is dangerous in the extreme. Nothing good can come of it in the long run.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Surely the writer understands that we have until Nov. 2022 to put Trump on trial. The Dems are going to lose the House and Senate, it's inevitable. With Congress in the hands of a GOP that's out and proud about its willingness to do anything to obtain and hold power, Trump will get off scot-free forever.

Well said. The Republicans fully understand all of this and they are just trying to run out the clock. The Democrats just don't have the right mindset to deal with this crisis. There is not nearly enough urgency.

My only hope is that when the Jan 6 committee starts having a bunch of prime time testimony next summer (that's what I heard), maybe it will wake up and terrify enough Democratic and Independent voters to avert disaster in Nov 2022. However, the deck is obviously stacked against the Democrats.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Surely the writer understands that we have until Nov. 2022 to put Trump on trial. The Dems are going to lose the House and Senate, it's inevitable. With Congress in the hands of a GOP that's out and proud about its willingness to do anything to obtain and hold power, Trump will get off scot-free forever.

I hope the realize that and have a sense of urgency about getting this done right

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

The worse part is, no matter what truths come out, majority of the republicans will not believe a word of it, no matter the proof. They'll jump on thier conspiracy horses and double down, and i am not even talking about the Trump cultists, we fully expect them to do that.. But hopefully it will deter enough of the moderates who are the swing voters to get the point accross during elections.

 

[Taurus]

The worse part is, no matter what truths come out, majority of the republicans will not believe a word of it, no matter the proof. They'll jump on thier conspiracy horses and double down, and i am not even talking about the Trump cultists, we fully expect them to do that.. But hopefully it will deter enough of the moderates who are the swing voters to get the point accross during elections.

I give not fork one about what Republican voters believe, so long as Cheato Jesus is looking at them through prison bars.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

I give not fork one about what Republican voters believe, so long as Cheato Jesus is looking at them through prison bars.

as much as i would love for that to happen, I honestly don't thnk it will. I have no faith in our judical and legislative branches. He'll die of old age before that happens.