[Discussion] Impeachment, Legacy, and Discussion of Individual 45

Though noted as discussion, news, debate, and all things related to events that occurred during the Tr*mp administration can go here. The scope of this thread is specific to the former administration and it's hangers-on in the aftermath of the shift in power for the United States and impacted areas worldwide.

Natus wrote:
Keldar wrote:
fangblackbone wrote:
...and could probably get all kinds of concessions for their state from the Dems.

I don't understand why this isn't promoted more? Why do the likes of Romney, Sasse and more bow to McConnell when their states would get many extremely popular things?

Because those things could also potentially help non-white people, and passing anything that could potentially help non-white people means you automatically lose a primary challenge.

Infrastructure/healthcare/public education = helping non-white people, which is why Republicans hate them.

Isn't this a messaging problem? Wouldn't a targeted strategy that got people to think, "people like me benefit from this" counter the narrative that only "those people" benefit? I mean, just counter the dang Southern Strategy.

It's hard, for all the cultural/historical reasons we all know, but that doesn't mean it's not doable.

I'm not aware of the Left even trying. Or am I just living in my disconnected Left Coast bubble?

You would think the answer to it would help brown people wouldn't be to say nothing to counter it. I do believe you could sway a lot of people by drowning out the brown people stuff with what they will get: roads, jobs, and broadband.

Like Top_Shelf said, no messaging enables and validates the other side's (racist) messaging. Even if they are racist, tell the what's behind door number two instead of calling them racist.

Robear wrote:

Dejanzie, there is one issue that prevents “moderates” like Collins and Murkowski from jumping parties.

Abortion.

Collins isn't anti-abortion exactly, despite her more recent voting record. At least, I don't see that being a sticking point for her at all. I think it's mostly just intransigence and greed. She's mad at the democrats for actually putting a lot of effort into unseating her this time, and she has raised more money than ever since shedding her bipartisan facade.

fangblackbone wrote:

You would think the answer to it would help brown people wouldn't be to say nothing to counter it. I do believe you could sway a lot of people by drowning out the brown people stuff with what they will get: roads, jobs, and broadband.

These people have been told for decades that private industry will always provide these things better, faster, and cheaper, and that if there were a real "need" for them, the invisible hand would magically fill it without getting "more government." They want good things, but think government is always the wrong way to get them. It's insane, but that's what they think.

But Biden is actually gaining traction that government can do good things and provide what the people need in an orderly and timely fashion. If he started touting "Church Sunday" voting, he doesn't need to eradicate the "yeah but brown people" mantra, he just needs to start chipping away at it.

I don't see how it isn't a win to say that southern states just voted that taking grandma to the polls is a felony.

Top_Shelf wrote:

Isn't this a messaging problem? Wouldn't a targeted strategy that got people to think, "people like me benefit from this" counter the narrative that only "those people" benefit? I mean, just counter the dang Southern Strategy.

White people are entirely fine with receiving benefits from the government. Even more, they feel they have a god-given right to those benefits because they are such a good and true patriotic Americans and paid taxes at one point in the lives.

Those white people are also much more likely to think that non-whites who receive those same benefits are freeloaders and fraudsters who are ripping off Uncle Sam and, more importantly, stealing their hard-earned tax dollars. After all, they remember that one time they were at the check out at the grocery store and saw one of those people had the audacity to buy a steak with an EBT card and then get into a car in the parking lot that wasn't an absolute beater so that can only mean that those people are abusing the system/ripping them off and the government is clearly incompetent and doesn't know how to manage any benefits program, which are all clearly swimming in fraud.

Considering about a dozen states are pushing to outright ban the teaching of critical race theory as well as anything from the NYT's 1619 Project--in a year where millions of Americans just found out about the Tulsa massacre because of shows on HBO--we are, as a country, a long-ass ways away from a place where we could "just counter the Southern Strategy." There's generations and generations of hate behind that strategy and conservatives are still stoking that fire today.

Top_Shelf wrote:
Natus wrote:
Keldar wrote:
fangblackbone wrote:
...and could probably get all kinds of concessions for their state from the Dems.

I don't understand why this isn't promoted more? Why do the likes of Romney, Sasse and more bow to McConnell when their states would get many extremely popular things?

Because those things could also potentially help non-white people, and passing anything that could potentially help non-white people means you automatically lose a primary challenge.

Infrastructure/healthcare/public education = helping non-white people, which is why Republicans hate them.

Isn't this a messaging problem? Wouldn't a targeted strategy that got people to think, "people like me benefit from this" counter the narrative that only "those people" benefit? I mean, just counter the dang Southern Strategy.

It's hard, for all the cultural/historical reasons we all know, but that doesn't mean it's not doable.

I'm not aware of the Left even trying. Or am I just living in my disconnected Left Coast bubble?

The MAGAS don't care. They would rather be without broadband, healthcare, clean air and water if it means that any PoC benefit. Look at them...it's why they are the way they are, sociologically and culturally. You can't "message" that. We couldn't even get the inbred f*ckwits to wear masks!

What a farce

Sources tell CNN that in order for this report, which was compiled by the Senate Homeland Security and Rules committees, to have support from both parties, the language had to be carefully crafted, and that included excluding the word "insurrection," which notably does not appear outside of witness quotes and footnotes.
There are also several glaring omissions in the report including any examination of Donald Trump's role in the riots

Senate investigators ran into institutional hurdles -- including from the House sergeant-at-arms, which did not provide information to the panels because "the House is sort of responsible for its own affairs, and the Senate is responsible for its own affairs," an aide said.

Aides were pressed on why, despite mounting evidence there were plans to attack the Capitol, law enforcement seemed to rely on past-MAGA marches that remained largely non-violent. The aides said the law enforcement intelligence focused on clashes between groups rather than violence toward a building.
Aides also steered clear of language that could turn off some Republicans, including not referring to the attack as an "insurrection."
"The language that was chosen was purposeful -- and represents the consensus of the four members and their respective staffs," a Senate committee aide said. "We did our very best to stick of the facts as we understood them and leave characterizations in quotes where there were characterizations."

It really shouldn't be this hard to handle, they shouldn't even be trying to give Republicans a say in how the investigation happens until they've cleared them from being part of the insurrection.

Have the DoJ, FBI, or DHS investigate which members of congress should be considered accomplices to the 6th attack, either by suppoeting or planning it or having knowledge of it being planned and not reporting it.

Take a vote in their respective houses on using the 14th amendment to expel them. The accused themselves will not be allowed to vote and the 2/3rds requirement will be based on how many people are still allowed to vote, not the total number of members. Letting them be on their own jury is ridiculous.

Stengah wrote:

Take a vote in their respective houses on using the 14th amendment to expel them. The accused themselves will not be allowed to vote and the 2/3rds requirement will be based on how many people are still allowed to vote, not the total number of members. Letting them be on their own jury is ridiculous.

A: You know how this'll go. It'll be a "witch hunt" and get not a single GOP vote to expel.

B: Your solution is also "letting them be their own jury", just on a party level.

Jonman wrote:

A: You know how this'll go. It'll be a "witch hunt" and get not a single GOP vote to expel.

Without being flippant - so what? Republicans will make, and do make claims like this about everything. They cannot be brought along or gotten on board. It is not about getting them to be involved. It is getting those who are not involved (by voting) to become part of the system.

Outside of any congressional investigations and their probable lack of teeth, am I naive in still hoping that the criminal investigations will eventually ensnare any staffers or actual congresscritters that participated in Jan. 6?

I'm thinking in particular of the reports of "tours" as well as the maps and knowledge of security protocols some of the insurrections had. My assumption is that law enforcement is working the case, and will get the "outside" people to roll on the "inside" people and that these things just take time.

Badferret wrote:

Outside of any congressional investigations and their probable lack of teeth, am I naive in still hoping that the criminal investigations will eventually ensnare any staffers or actual congresscritters that participated in Jan. 6?

I'm thinking in particular of the reports of "tours" as well as the maps and knowledge of security protocols some of the insurrections had. My assumption is that law enforcement is working the case, and will get the "outside" people to roll on the "inside" people and that these things just take time.

I share your hope. Bonus hope: that the extra time it takes puts this front and center before the people at the peak of the 2022 election cycle.

Bring Your Guns': Probe Uncovers More Alarming Intelligence Before The Capitol Riot

Among new public details, the panels say Capitol Police had seen information from a pro-Trump website that included comments about the Capitol's tunnel system and that encouraged demonstrators to bring weapons to subdue members of Congress and police and reverse the presidential election's results.

"This is do or die. Bring your guns," one comment read in part, the report said.

Jonman wrote:
Stengah wrote:

Take a vote in their respective houses on using the 14th amendment to expel them. The accused themselves will not be allowed to vote and the 2/3rds requirement will be based on how many people are still allowed to vote, not the total number of members. Letting them be on their own jury is ridiculous.

A: You know how this'll go. It'll be a "witch hunt" and get not a single GOP vote to expel.

B: Your solution is also "letting them be their own jury", just on a party level.

Only if there are enough Republicans who weren't involved or didn't have knowledge of it to keep the Democrats from having an automatic 2/3rds majority. Also, I think having explicit and detailed proof of their colleagues helping to plan the attack would prompt more of the innocent ones to vote against them. And if they do have enough votes to keep the 14th from being used against them, they can still be arrested and tried for their part in a domestic terror attack.
Even if the votes ultimately fails, it'll be another thing to push the anti-trump Republicans closer to leaving the party.

Stengah wrote:

Even if the votes ultimately fails, it'll be another thing to push the anti-trump Republicans closer to leaving the party.

I do not believe there are any "anti-trump" republicans out there. Sure, there are a few who made some noise but have you really seen anyone actually leave the party? The whole party is comprised of Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski-ish people. "We're very concerned" but never do anything about it and in the end fall in line with the rest of the republicans. If you're all on the crazy bus, it doesn't matter if you're sitting in the front, back, or driving the damn thing. You're still on the crazy bus.

JC wrote:

I do not believe there are any "anti-trump" republicans out there. Sure, there are a few who made some noise but have you really seen anyone actually leave the party? The whole party is comprised of Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski-ish people. "We're very concerned" but never do anything about it and in the end fall in line with the rest of the republicans. If you're all on the crazy bus, it doesn't matter if you're sitting in the front, back, or driving the damn thing. You're still on the crazy bus.

Liz Cheney has been trying to stop the bus.

I mean, they ended up running her over and now they're just ignoring her, but at least she's trying.

Keldar wrote:

Liz Cheney has been trying to stop the bus.

I mean, they ended up running her over and now they're just ignoring her, but at least she's trying.

I don't see much trying other than doing the media circuit. If she had truly had enough she would have left the republican party, full stop. She may not have been driving the crazy bus but she was ok with the speed and direction given her voting record. She voted in support of the republican agenda almost 93% of the time.

A new Morning Consult/Politico poll shows that 29% of Republicans--and 25% of people who identify as Conservative, 28% of people who voted for Trump in 2020, and 28% of people who voted for Trump in 2016--think that it's very or somewhat likely that Trump is going to reinstated as president sometime this year.

FWIW there is absolutely no process, mechanism, law, or secret clause in the Constitution that allows for the candidate who lost the election to be instated or reinstated.

The same poll showed that 59% of Republicans--and 53% of people who identify as Conservative, 44% of evangelicals, 34% of white people, 58% of people who voted for Trump in 2020, and 54% of people who voted for Trump in 2016--think that Trump should play a major role in the Republican party.

21% of Republicans thought Trump should play a minor role in the GOP and only 11% thought he should no longer have a role at all.

So, like, 1-in-10 Americans think he might be back this Summer?

JC wrote:
Stengah wrote:

Even if the votes ultimately fails, it'll be another thing to push the anti-trump Republicans closer to leaving the party.

I do not believe there are any "anti-trump" republicans out there. Sure, there are a few who made some noise but have you really seen anyone actually leave the party? The whole party is comprised of Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski-ish people. "We're very concerned" but never do anything about it and in the end fall in line with the rest of the republicans. If you're all on the crazy bus, it doesn't matter if you're sitting in the front, back, or driving the damn thing. You're still on the crazy bus.

I think there still are some, but most are too cowardly to do anything themselves and are all waiting for someone high up to make that first step. Some low-level politicians have already left the party, as have numerous voters, but it'll take big names to really start things, if it's going to happen at all.

Top_Shelf wrote:

So, like, 1-in-10 Americans think he might be back this Summer?

19% of registered voters.

Right. And only like half of Americans are registered right?

Reuters estimates 206mm registered voters (source.

So, 19% of 206 = 39mm, or 11.8% of 331mm Americans.

I'm not too freaked by the percentages. The other 90% of us need to be pushing back.

I'm basing this on my recollection of stuff I've heard about other things we believe in. Like witches (21%), haunted houses (37%) or possession by other spirits (9%). Americans are cuckoo for cocoa puffs and we always have been.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/16915/t...

A bit of an eye opener from Reuters this morning...

Trump-inspired death threats are terrorizing election workers

Reuters wrote:

Late on the night of April 24, the wife of Georgia’s top election official got a chilling text message: “You and your family will be killed very slowly.”

A week earlier, Tricia Raffensperger, wife of Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, had received another anonymous text: “We plan for the death of you and your family every day.”

That followed an April 5 text warning. A family member, the texter told her, was “going to have a very unfortunate incident.”

Those messages, which have not been previously reported, illustrate the continuing barrage of threats and intimidation against election officials and their families months after former U.S. President Donald Trump’s November election defeat. While reports of threats against Georgia officials emerged in the heated weeks after the voting, Reuters interviews with more than a dozen election workers and top officials – and a review of disturbing texts, voicemails and emails that they and their families received – reveal the previously hidden breadth and severity of the menacing tactics.

Trump’s relentless false claims that the vote was “rigged” against him sparked a campaign to terrorize election officials nationwide – from senior officials such as Raffensperger to the lowest-level local election workers. The intimidation has been particularly severe in Georgia, where Raffensperger and other Republican election officials refuted Trump’s stolen-election claims. The ongoing harassment could have far-reaching implications for future elections by making the already difficult task of recruiting staff and poll workers much harder, election officials say.

In an exclusive interview, Tricia Raffensperger spoke publicly for the first time about the threats of violence to her family and shared the menacing text messages with Reuters.

The Raffenspergers – Tricia, 65, and Brad, 66 – began receiving death threats almost immediately after Trump’s surprise loss in Georgia, long a Republican bastion. Tricia Raffensperger started taking precautions. She canceled regular weekly visits in her home with two grandchildren, ages 3 and 5 – the children of her eldest son, Brenton, who died from a drug overdose in 2018.

“I couldn’t have them come to my house anymore,” she said. “You don’t know if these people are actually going to act on this stuff.”

In late November, the family went into hiding for nearly a week after intruders broke into the home of the Raffenspergers’ widowed daughter-in-law, an incident the family believed was intended to intimidate them. That evening, people who identified themselves to police as Oath Keepers – a far-right militia group that has supported Trump’s bid to overturn the election – were found outside the Raffenspergers’ home, according to Tricia Raffensperger and two sources with direct knowledge of the family’s ordeal. Neither incident has been previously reported.

“Brad and I didn’t feel like we could protect ourselves,” she said, explaining the decision to flee their home.

Brad Raffensperger told Reuters in a statement that “vitriol and threats are an unfortunate, but expected, part of public service. But my family should be left alone.”

Trump’s baseless voter-fraud accusations have had dark consequences for U.S. election leaders and workers, especially in contested states such as Georgia, Arizona and Michigan. Some have faced protests at their homes or been followed in their cars. Many have received death threats.

Some, like Raffensperger, are senior officials who publicly refused to bow to Trump’s demands to alter the election outcome. In Georgia, people went into hiding in at least three cases, including the Raffenspergers. Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, told Reuters she continues to receive death threats. Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson – a Democrat who faced armed protesters outside her home in December – is also still getting threats, her spokesperson said, declining to elaborate.

But many others whose lives have been threatened were low- or mid-level workers, just doing their jobs. Trump’s incendiary rhetoric could reverberate into the 2022 midterm congressional elections and the 2024 presidential vote by making election workers targets of threatened or actual violence. Many election offices will lose critical employees with years or decades of experience, predicts David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation and Research.

“This is deeply troubling,” Becker said.

Carlos Nelson, elections supervisor for Ware County in southeastern Georgia, shares that fear. “These are people who work for little or no money, 12 to 14 hours a day on Election Day,” Nelson said. “If we lose good poll workers, that’s when we’re going to lose democracy.”

In Georgia, Trump faces an investigation into alleged election interference, the only known criminal inquiry into his attempts to overturn the 2020 vote.

Trump spokesman Jason Miller did not respond to Reuters’ questions about the ongoing harassment of election workers, including why Trump has not forcefully denounced the torrent of threats being made in his name.

The intimidation in Georgia has gone well beyond Raffensperger and his family. Election workers - from local volunteers to senior administrators - continue enduring regular harassing phone calls and emails, according to interviews with election workers and the Reuters review of texts, emails and audio files provided by Georgia officials.

One email, sent on Jan. 2 to officials in nearly a dozen counties, threatened to bomb polling sites: “No one at these places will be spared unless and until Trump is guaranteed to be POTUS again.” The specific text of the threat has not been previously reported. The email, a state election official said, was forwarded to the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which declined to comment for this story.

In Georgia, threatening violence against a poll officer is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a maximum fine of $100,000. Making death threats is a separate crime carrying up to five years in prison and a $1,000 fine.

Criminal law specialists say the widespread threats could increase the legal jeopardy for Trump in the Georgia investigation. That inquiry is led by the top prosecutor in Fulton County, which includes Atlanta. District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat, is probing whether Trump illegally interfered with Georgia’s 2020 election.

...

Fulton County District Attorney spokesman Jeff DiSantis did not respond to requests for comment on the office’s inquiries into election-related threats of violence.

In April, two investigators from Willis’ office met with Fulton County’s elections director, Richard Barron, who oversaw elections in a region that overwhelmingly backed Biden for president. Trump frequently targeted the county, claiming without evidence that election workers there destroyed hundreds of thousands of ballots.

During the hour-long meeting, which has not been previously reported, investigators sought information on threats against Barron and his staff, Barron said. Barron’s office had saved every harassing message – hundreds of them – and shared them with investigators.

Barron said his staff is made up almost entirely of Black election workers. “The racial slurs were disturbing and sickening,” he said of the threats.

Among those targeted was Barron’s registration chief, Ralph Jones, 56, who oversaw the county’s mail-in ballot operation and has worked on Georgia elections for more than three decades, including senior roles.

Jones said callers left him death threats, including one shortly after the November election who called him a “n-----” who should be shot. Another threatened to kill him by dragging his body around with a truck. “It was unbelievable: your life being threatened just because you’re doing your job,” he said.

Jones, born and raised in Atlanta, said he had experienced racism – but nothing like this. He recalled how one night after the election, strangers showed up at his house. They identified themselves as new neighbors, he said. Jones knew no one had moved into the neighborhood and didn’t open the door. After that, he told his wife each morning to lock the door before he went to work. “My primary focus was to make sure that no harm came to my family and staff,” he said.

His boss, Barron, who is white, faced even more intimidation. At a Dec. 5 rally – ahead of a runoff election in Georgia that would determine control of the U.S. Senate – Trump showed a video clip of Barron and accused him and his staff of committing a “crime,” alleging they tampered with ballots. After the rally, Barron was bombarded with threats. “I underestimated how hard he was going to push that narrative and just keep pushing it,” Barron said of Trump.

Between Christmas and early January, Barron received nearly 150 hateful calls, many accusing him of treason or saying he should die, according to Barron and a Reuters review of some of the phone messages.

“You actually deserve to hang by your goddamn, soy boy, skinny-ass neck,” said a woman in one voicemail, using a slang term for an effeminate man. Another caller wanted him banished to China: “That’s where you belong, in communist China, because you’re a crook.”

Police were posted outside Barron’s house and office after he received a detailed threat in late December in which the caller said he would kill Barron by firing squad.

“It seemed like we were descending into this third-world mentality,” said Barron, 54, who has worked in elections for 22 years and volunteered as an election observer overseas. “I never expected that out of this country.

Barron’s office is bracing for more abuse during an upcoming audit of the county’s 147,000 absentee ballots cast in November. A judge on May 21 ordered the review, granting a request by plaintiffs claiming fraud in Fulton County. The details of the review are still being litigated, but it may be supervised by Barron’s office. It won’t change the results, which were certified months ago. But it reflects the lasting impact of Trump’s election falsehoods.

Fulton County recently sought a dismissal of the case. Trump responded in a May 28 statement with more baseless allegations of a conspiracy to steal the election, saying county officials are fighting the review “because they know the vote was corrupt and the audit will show it.”

Trump’s disinformation campaign also shook election workers in Paulding County, outside Atlanta. Deidre Holden, the county elections director, was finishing preparations ahead of Georgia’s January Senate runoffs when an email caught her eye. The subject line read: “F_UCKING HEAR THIS PAULDING COUNTY OR D!E.”

The message, reviewed by Reuters, threatened to blow up all of the county’s polling sites. At least 10 other counties received the same email. “We’ll make the Boston bombings look like child’s play,” the message said in an apparent reference to the 2013 extremist attack on the Boston Marathon that killed three and injured hundreds.

“This sh_t is rigged,” the email said. “Until Trump is guaranteed to be POTUS until 2024 like he should be, we will bring death and destruction to defend this country if needed and get our voices heard.”

Holden forwarded the message to local police and contacted the state elections director in Raffensperger’s office. Officials at the FBI and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation were also alerted. “I’ve never had to deal with anything like this,” said Holden, who’s served as elections supervisor for 14 years. “It was frightening.”

As Georgia girds for elections in 2022 – including votes for governor and the secretary of state – election supervisors say they fear high numbers of the temporary workers who staff polling sites won’t return for future votes because they want to avoid harassment.

Vanessa Montgomery, 58, is among those who may not come back. In the Jan. 5 Georgia runoffs for two U.S. Senate seats, Montgomery was a polling manager in the city of Taylorsville. The stakes were huge: Both seats were won by Democrats, giving the party control of the Senate.

When polls closed that night, she set off to deliver ballots to an elections office in Bartow County, a predominantly white, Republican district in northwestern Georgia. Montgomery, who is Black, was traveling with her daughter, also a poll worker hired temporarily for the election.

On a dark, rural two-lane road, they noticed they were being followed by an SUV.

“I was trying to stay calm because I wanted to make sure we both were safe,” she recalled in an interview. “What were they trying to do, actually? Were they trying to hit us and take the information and destroy the ballots?”

Montgomery called 911 as her daughter sped towards town with the SUV nearly running them off the road, she said. They were followed for about 25 minutes. The dispatcher helped guide them to a parking lot, where officers met and escorted them to the election office. She declined to file a police report, and the incident was not investigated.

She said the scare triggered a panic attack, her first since serving as a U.S. Army officer decades ago in Bosnia, where she witnessed people killed by exploding landmines. Months later, Montgomery says she still suffers panic attacks from the incident and may stop working elections altogether.

Her manager, Joseph Kirk, the Bartow County elections supervisor, said Montgomery is one of his most reliable poll workers. Kirk now worries that the ugly reaction to Trump’s loss will make it harder to retain and hire the staff needed to run elections smoothly across America.

“I’m very concerned, after what we saw last year, we’re going to lose a lot of institutional knowledge nationwide,” he said.

For Georgia’s top election officials, the intimidation has been especially personal and pointed.

In early May, Gabriel Sterling’s phone buzzed at 2:36 a.m. Five months had passed since the Georgia election office that he helps to lead had declared Biden the winner. The caller ranted that Sterling, the chief operating officer for Secretary of State Raffensperger, should go to prison for “rigging” the election against Trump.

“This stuff has continued,” said Sterling, 50, a Republican who drew national attention in December by denouncing Trump’s voter-fraud claims as false and dangerous. “It’s continued for all of us.”

Raffensperger’s deputy, Jordan Fuchs, says she has faced frequent death threats since November. Her personal and work cell phone numbers have been posted online by a Trump supporter who encourages people to harass her, she said. In April, she received a vulgar photo of a male body part.

“I don’t think any of us anticipated this level of nastiness,” said Fuchs, 31, who grew up in a conservative Christian family and has worked for years to help elect Republicans.

In an interview, she said the most alarming threats came in late November when Trump called Raffensperger an “enemy of the people.” Death threats started pouring in, some calling for public hangings. Some of the threats were so detailed, the FBI began monitoring a list of people who were suspected of making them, said a source with direct knowledge of the matter.

In mid-December, a website titled “Enemies of the People” appeared online, posting the personal information of Raffensperger, Fuchs and Sterling, including home addresses. Crosshairs were superimposed over their photos. The FBI on Dec. 23 linked the website to Iran, citing “highly credible information indicating Iranian cyber actors” were responsible for the site. A spokesperson for Iran’s mission to the United Nations called the FBI’s claim “baseless” and “politically motivated.”

Police parked an empty cruiser outside Sterling’s house to deter attackers, Sterling said. Fuchs said she stayed at friends’ houses as a precaution.

Sterling publicly rebuked Trump, pleading with the former president to stop attacking Georgia’s election process. “Someone’s going to get killed,” he said as he gripped the podium during an emotional Dec. 1 news conference.

A month later, five people died and more than a hundred police officers were injured when a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, demanding that Congress overturn the election.

While details about the DOJ’s (almost definitely highly illegal) Investigations during the last administration are still developing, I’m beyond annoyed that the headlines are “Trump” when they should instead say, “Republican.” Trump doesn’t, and has never had, the intelligence to orchestrate any of this sh*t.

When the hell are democrats going to step up and get the narrative to accurately reflect what is happening?

So frustrating.

JC wrote:

While details about the DOJ’s (almost definitely highly illegal) Investigations during the last administration are still developing, I’m beyond annoyed that the headlines are “Trump” when they should instead say, “Republican.” Trump doesn’t, and has never had, the intelligence to orchestrate any of this sh*t.

When the hell are democrats going to step up and get the narrative to accurately reflect what is happening?

So frustrating.

Trump was the president. He didn't have to orchestrate anything.

Trump just had to pick up the phone and scream "do something about the leaks" at the Keebler elf who was desperate for his approval or the unqualified ladder climber he appointed as Acting Attorney General when the elf finally grew a spine.

Trump Pressed Official to Wield Justice Dept. to Back Election Claims

NYT wrote:

An hour before President Donald J. Trump announced in December that William P. Barr would step down as attorney general, the president began pressuring Mr. Barr’s eventual replacement to have the Justice Department take up his false claims of election fraud.

Mr. Trump sent an email via his assistant to Jeffrey A. Rosen, the incoming acting attorney general, that contained documents purporting to show evidence of election fraud in northern Michigan — the same claims that a federal judge had thrown out a week earlier in a lawsuit filed by one of Mr. Trump’s personal lawyers.

Another email from Mr. Trump to Mr. Rosen followed two weeks later, again via the president’s assistant, that included a draft of a brief that Mr. Trump wanted the Justice Department to file to the Supreme Court. It argued, among other things, that state officials had used the pandemic to weaken election security and pave the way for widespread election fraud.

The draft echoed claims in a lawsuit in Texas by the Trump-allied state attorney general that the justices had thrown out, and a lawyer who had helped on that effort later tried with increasing urgency to track down Mr. Rosen at the Justice Department, saying he had been dispatched by Mr. Trump to speak with him.

The emails, turned over by the Justice Department to investigators on the House Oversight Committee and obtained by The New York Times, show how Mr. Trump pressured Mr. Rosen to put the power of the Justice Department behind lawsuits that had already failed to try to prove his false claims that extensive voter fraud had affected the election results.

They are also the latest example of Mr. Trump’s frenzied drive to subvert the election results in the final weeks of his presidency, including ratcheting up pressure on the Justice Department. And they show that Mr. Trump flouted an established anticorruption norm that the Justice Department acts independently of the White House on criminal investigations or law enforcement actions, a gap that steadily eroded during Mr. Trump’s term.

The documents dovetail with emails around the same time from Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s chief of staff, asking Mr. Rosen to examine unfounded conspiracy theories about the election, including one that claimed people associated with an Italian defense contractor were able to use satellite technology to tamper with U.S. voting equipment from Europe.

Much of the correspondence also occurred during a tense week within the Justice Department, when Mr. Rosen and his top deputies realized that one of their peers had plotted with Mr. Trump to first oust Mr. Rosen and then to try to use federal law enforcement to force Georgia to overturn its election results. Mr. Trump nearly replaced Mr. Rosen with that colleague, Jeffrey Clark, then the acting head of the civil division.

Mr. Rosen made clear to his top deputy in one message that he would have nothing to do with the Italy conspiracy theory, arrange a meeting between the F.B.I. and one of the proponents of the conspiracy, Brad Johnson, or speak about it with Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer.

“I learned that Johnson is working with Rudy Giuliani, who regarded my comments as an ‘insult,’” Mr. Rosen wrote in the email. “Asked if I would reconsider, I flatly refused, said I would not be giving any special treatment to Giuliani or any of his ‘witnesses’, and reaffirmed yet again that I will not talk to Giuliani about any of this.”

Mr. Rosen declined to comment. A spokesman for Mr. Trump could not immediately be reached for comment.

The article notes Trump is going to try to tie Rosen up in the courts for years arguing that Rosen can't be interviewed or testify because of executive privilege. So now we have to hope that the case draws a non-Trump appointed federal judge who understands that attempting to execute a coup is not protected by executive privilege, but even then Trump's lawyers will drag this sh*t all the way to the Supreme Court.

This will likely become the second time that the former Trump administration used the slowness of the courts to run out the clock on a Congressional investigation.

And, as a minor note, Trump's spokesperson couldn't be immediately reached because he's no longer Trump's spokesperson. Last week it was announced that Jason Miller was moving on to become the CEO of an undisclosed social media start-up, one that was rumored to among the companies Trump looked at when he was trying to create a new social media platform a few months back. I can only assume we'll unfortunately hear from Miller as the 2024 election heats up.

Miller was replaced by Elizabeth Harrington, a former national spokesperson for the RNC and the editor-in-chief of the War Room, Steven Banner's (remember him?) right wing website and podcast.

Trump Executive Could Face Charges as Soon as This Summer

NYT wrote:

The Manhattan district attorney’s office appears to have entered the final stages of a criminal tax investigation into Donald J. Trump’s long-serving chief financial officer, Allen H. Weisselberg, setting up the possibility he could face charges this summer, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

In recent weeks, a grand jury has been hearing evidence about Mr. Weisselberg, who is facing intense scrutiny from prosecutors as they seek his cooperation with a broader investigation into Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization, the people with knowledge of the matter said. The prosecutors have obtained Mr. Weisselberg’s personal tax returns, the people said, providing the fullest picture yet of his finances.

Even as the investigation has heated up, it remains unclear whether the prosecutors will seek an indictment of Mr. Weisselberg, which would mark the first criminal charges stemming from the long-running financial fraud investigation into Mr. Trump and his family company.

The investigation into Mr. Weisselberg focuses partly on whether he failed to pay taxes on valuable benefits that Mr. Trump provided him and his family over the years, including apartments and leased cars as well as tens of thousands of dollars in private school tuition for at least one of his grandchildren. In general, those types of benefits are taxable, although there are some exceptions, and the rules can be murky.

For months, prosecutors working for District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr., a Democrat, have sought to pressure Mr. Weisselberg into cooperating with their investigation into Mr. Trump, and any deal could turn the trusted executive into a star witness against the former president. For now, Mr. Weisselberg appears to have rebuffed Mr. Vance’s office and continues to work at the Trump Organization.

The district attorney’s office recently questioned Mr. Weisselberg’s top lieutenant, Jeffrey S. McConney, before a special grand jury hearing evidence in the Trump inquiry, people with knowledge of the matter have said. The testimony was the first sign that the grand jury was hearing evidence about Mr. Weisselberg.

When hoping to turn an insider into a cooperating witness, prosecutors often seek leverage over the person, and then typically offer leniency in exchange for testimony or assistance.

The Trumps have long been able to count on Mr. Weisselberg’s fealty. After beginning his career working for Mr. Trump’s father, Mr. Weisselberg has served as the Trump Organization’s financial gatekeeper for more than two decades.

Even if Mr. Weisselberg chooses not to assist the investigation into his boss, charges against him could portend trouble for Mr. Trump, signaling that the prosecutors have identified what they believe is misconduct at his family business.

As part of the investigation into the fringe benefits Mr. Trump provided, Mr. Vance’s prosecutors have sought records for Mercedes-Benz cars leased for Mr. Weisselberg, his wife and other Trump Organization employees over the course of more than a decade, according to a person with knowledge of the matter.

The full scope of the investigation into Mr. Weisselberg, including whether prosecutors are considering other charges against him separate from the fringe benefits, could not be determined. It is rare for prosecutors to build a criminal case solely around a failure to pay taxes on fringe benefits.

Mr. Vance’s wider investigation into the Trump Organization has included scrutiny of whether Mr. Trump and the company manipulated property values to obtain certain loans and tax benefits, among other potential financial crimes.

This ongoing story is interesting if only because Trump showed how sh*tty he was as a leader, much preferring to play his lieutenants off on each other, turning on and abandoning people once they lost their immediate usefulness to him, and treating every relationship as purely transactional. And now we're finding out that he gave a few of his employees--specifically the ones who knew where the Trump organization buried all the financial bodies--what likely amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of fringe benefits and "gifts."

At this rate, I think there is a better chance that Trump dies before any of these court cases complete.

JC wrote:

At this rate, I think there is a better chance that Trump dies before any of these court cases complete.

One of the classic ways white men escape justice.

Any justice he will face will pale in comparison to the negative impact he had on the world stage.
He is Joseph McCarthy and Nixon combined and we will keep talking about the impact they had for centuries if we are still around.

So the only real comfort is how permanent the state of the inability to worsen the impacts is. He has been far beyond adequate justice for decades.

Here's a tip America: don't elect criminals to public office let alone president. Who knew?