“So What?”
[guest post by Dana]
From Jack Smith’s election case filing. When the vice-president was in peril on Jan. 6:
It was at that point—alone, watching news in real time, and with knowledge that rioters had breached the Capitol building—that the defendant issued the 2:24 p.m. Tweet attacking Pence for refusing the defendant’s entreaties to join the conspiracy and help overturn the results of the election.©’ One minute later, the Secret Service was forced to evacuate Pence to a secure location in the Capitol.°* This was roughly ninety minutes after Pence had announced publicly that he would not act unlawfully to overturn the election;°” the certification proceeding was underway; and the first breach of the Capitol building had occurred minutes before, at 2:12 p.m.%! At that point, the defendant’s only hope to disrupt the certification proceeding and retain power was through his angry supporters. The defendant further revealed the private nature of his desperate conduct as a candidate, rather than a President, in an exchange (that the Government does not plan to use at trial) he had with aide shortly after the 2:24 p.m. Tweet. Upon receiving a phone call alerting him that Pence had been taken to a secure location, rushed to the dining room to inform the defendant in hopes that the defendant would take action to ensure Pence’s safety. Instead, after RI delivered the news, the defendant looked at him and said only, “So what?”°”
Clearly the former president didn’t care about his vice-president and the danger he faced. He also had no respect for Mike Pence as evidenced by his pressuring him to not certify the election results. With that, what makes any voter think that he cares about them, their lives, or even the country at large? Sure, he cares about their vote, but it stops there. To Trump, the voters and his vice-president were simply a means to an end. And that end was the consolidation of power. Make no mistake, Trump continues to live for himself and what benefits the Trump Brand. He is the same as he has always been. Probably worse. After all, he has had 4 years of nursing his delusions regarding his 2020 election loss.
Another snippet demonstrating that Trump doesn’t care about the rule of the law, the voters, or anyone but himself:
Privately, the defendant told advisors—including | PO | Campaign personnel, P| (a White House staffer and Campaign volunteer), and | PB (the Vice President’s Chief of Staff}—that in such a scenario, he would simply declare victory before all the ballots were counted and any winner was projected.* Publicly, the defendant began to plant the seeds for that false declaration. In the months leading up to the election, he refused to say whether he would accept the election results, insisted that he could lose the election only because of fraud, falsely claimed that mail-in ballots were inherently fraudulent, and asserted that only votes counted by election day were valid.
…
By October 2020, | PL | a private political advisor who had worked for the defendant’s 2016 presidential campaign, began to assist with the defendant’s re-election effort. Three days before election day, described the defendant’s plan to a private gathering of supporters: “And what Trump’s going to do is just declare victory. Right? He’s going to declare victory. That doesn’t mean he’s the winner, he’s just going to say he’s the winner.” !! After explaining that Biden’s supporters favored voting by mail, stated further, “And so they’re going to have a natural disadvantage and Trump’s going to take advantage of it—that’s our strategy. He’s going to declare himself a winner.”
And that is just what he did: slap the voters in the face.
We know that Trump is willing to trash the Constitution and attempt to overturn an election if it doesn’t go his way. And we just saw his running mate J.D. Vance refuse to say on the debate stage whether Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. With an opportunity to reassure voters of his integrity, he refused:
TW: I would just ask that. Did he lose the 2020 election?
JDV: Tim, I’m focused on the future. Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 COVID situation?
TW: That is a damning. That is a damning non answer.
It certainly is [damning]. In a second Trump administration, Vance’s opinions about tariffs, abortion, health care, and other issues probably wouldn’t matter. Trump would make those calls. But when the time comes to certify an election, Vance’s opinions and decisions would be crucial. He believes that he and Trump could push constitutional boundaries to overturn the results. And on the debate stage, facing two audiences—the people of the United States on one hand, and Trump on the other—Vance refused to acknowledge that Trump lost.
That moment tells you the most important thing about Vance: When democracy is in peril, he will bow to Trump, not to the people or the Constitution. He must never be given that chance.
There is video of J.D. Vance saying that Donald Trump won the election:
.@jasonselvig: “Who won the 2020 election?… Did Donald Trump win?”
JD Vance: “Yes.”
This is disqualifying.pic.twitter.com/imAdjx1PZj
— Republican Voters Against Trump (@AccountableGOP) October 3, 2024
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (c70362) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:28 amMany of Trump’s voters think there was something wrong in the 2020 election. Attacking Trump on this issue will not change their minds, and in fact will reinforce their decision to back Trump.
These are people who believe that the Establishment has been lying to them for decades, the cause of their misfortunes and profiting off of them. They don’t trust the same people any further than they can throw them.
Trump is merely a symptom here of a deep discontent and alienation. Whether Trump wins or loses will not change that. Even if Trump wins and they finally come to see that he really doesn’t care, their alienation will only increase.
Really the answer is to address the alienation, not to hit them with sticks.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:52 amMissing from above, at the end or the second paragraph:
Trump leverages this distrust by attacking the way the Establishment conducted the election.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:54 amYou can’t say with any certainty what will or won’t change the mind of voters. Additionally, if you follow Sarah Longwell at Republican Voters Against Trump, there is an increasing number of Republican voters who have given testimony to why they are voting for Harris this time around. I think it’s significant that so many have seen Trump with clearer eyes and say they have no choice but to vote for Harris.
Dana (9d0730) — 10/3/2024 @ 11:22 amVance is officially on board with Trump’s Big Lie. At least we got an answer instead of another evasion. Beyond pathetic.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 11:51 amHeh. I’ve just posted that clip.
Dana (76091b) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:00 pmDang, Dana, you quick!
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:12 pmSurprise! It’s October.
lloyd (bdd854) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:16 pm@2
Nope. NeverTrumpers and Democrats (but I repeat myself) would rather ostracize then to do the hard work to convince these people.
whembly (477db6) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:19 pmA prosecutor’s filing is not fact. That’s why we have trials and appeals. (Ask Mike Nifong.) But, I guess election meddling is okay when your side does it.
lloyd (bdd854) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:23 pmLloyd,
Some of us have done what you refer to as the “hard work”. Yet you would rather use a gross generalization that smears those who will not vote for Trump. And let me assure you, that does not mean that those voters are necessarily Democrats.
Dana (203568) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:27 pmThis is what can happen if you swallow Trump’s Big Lie so completely that you’ll break the law by tampering with voting equipment. What an obnoxious piece o’ work.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:31 pmWow, she really is a piece of work, Paul.
Dana (52f4e1) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:34 pm@11 That wasn’t me, but whembly. But, sure I’ll co-sign.
lloyd (bdd854) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:37 pmAndrew McCarthy:
lloyd (bdd854) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:41 pm@11
“gross generalization”?
Really?
Have you not mocked those who takes the position that the 2020 elections were really unique and hinky?
Have you not asserted that you know, in your hearts-of-hearts, that Trump lied about his belief that the election was stolen from him?
Not sorry… voting for Harris makes you a defacto Democrat, as you are effectively voting for the insane leftist-Marxist policies.
whembly (477db6) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:45 pm“Attacking Trump on this issue will not change their minds, and in fact will reinforce their decision to back Trump.”
Politics is certainly about persuasion….but the reality is that we are now in the realm of propaganda and sophisticated misinformation. It’s unclear what message would have any chance of breaking through tribal bubbles, especially when any attack against Trump is seen as unfair and aiding the enemy (the Democrats/liberals). So, why then must the truth suffer? It’s the same with J6 and the documents case. Humoring election denialism will just get us more denialism.
“Really the answer is to address the alienation, not to hit them with sticks.”
A “new” GOP must address the alienation, but without the conspiracies, fearmongering, and coordinated propaganda. Yes, immigration needs to be substantively addressed (say with Lankford’s negotiated bill?) as well as China and slave-labor competition (unwinding globalism probably isn’t practical, so we need retraining, revised unemployment insurance, and things like portable health insurance). But we have to start with abandoning the toxic us-vs-them politics that ensures nothing ever gets done, except for making people more and more angry. The future of a sustainable GOP cannot be populism, protectionism, anti-elitism, conspiracy-fetishism, and hyper-nativism. This just means the parties invert. And that is what Trump represents. It’s unsustainable and, worse yet, self-defeating. The ideas aren’t anchored in anything real. The GOP must lose again before Trumpism bleeds enough supporters to compel a different direction.
AJ_Liberty (5f05c3) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:45 pmIf what Andy McCarthy said is true, then why is the Trump legal team asking to delay their response until after the election? Why not make a vigorous defense in response?
Rip Murdock (1fe61e) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:53 pm👍
Rip Murdock (1fe61e) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:55 pmIn 2022, Trump referred to Ms. Peters as a “rock star”.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:59 pmToday, she’s breaking rocks in the hot sun, so to speak.
“The GOP must lose again before Trumpism bleeds enough supporters to compel a different direction.”
AJ_Liberty (5f05c3) — 10/3/2024 @ 12:45 pm
The beatings will continue until morale improves. You’re just proving whembly’s point. This is the “hard work”? The GOP has been losing consistently since W’s Great Recession, except for 2016. But here’s a solution: bleed voters. This is so mind-boggling insane that only Nevertrump could come up with it.
lloyd (bdd854) — 10/3/2024 @ 1:06 pm@20 Paul, I’m happy she didn’t get the bend over backwards leniency Kevin Clinesmith got.
lloyd (bdd854) — 10/3/2024 @ 1:08 pmClinesmith admitted guilt, because he was guilty.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 1:10 pmPeters was completely unrepentant for her crimes. She got the sentence she deserved.
Ad hominem, insulting, and delusional. No one can seriously believe that Dick Cheney, Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, Chris Christie, or any of the myriad other NeverTrump Republicans, some of whom are voting for Harris, some for a third party or write in, are Democrats.
lurker (c23034) — 10/3/2024 @ 1:45 pmhttps://www.yahoo.com/news/at-georgia-rally-pence-says-america-will-hear-the-evidence-of-election-fraud-on-jan-6-193148658.html
Hadn’t Trump already lost 4,000 plus court cases by the time Pence incited people at that rally?
BuDuh (79e4a7) — 10/3/2024 @ 2:18 pm@24 What is insulting is the idea that voting for Democrat policies and saying that they don’t share the burden of advancing such policies because you’re traditionally a Republican.
Sure, vote 3rd party or write-in whomever you want.
But you don’t get to shield yourself the Democrat policies that you’ve effectively acquiesced to.
whembly (477db6) — 10/3/2024 @ 2:23 pmPence changed his mind, and it was the right call.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 2:25 pmDid Pence encourage or stir up (violent or unlawful behavior) at that rally?
I also “advance” higher food prices by shopping at Jewel instead of picking up a dead possum off the roadway.
nk (42ebe2) — 10/3/2024 @ 2:34 pmYou mean like Ray Epps?
BuDuh (79e4a7) — 10/3/2024 @ 3:04 pmBut you don’t get to shield yourself the Democrat policies that you’ve effectively acquiesced to.
Someone comes at puts a gun to your head. Then they say “Either I will shoot you, or I will shoot tht dog over there.” You say “Shoot the dog” and he does and goes away.
Does this mean you advocate shooting dogs?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/3/2024 @ 3:11 pm#30
False equivalence.
You presented only two options.
Voting, you can vote GOP/Dems/3rd Party/Not vote.
Try again.
whembly (477db6) — 10/3/2024 @ 3:15 pmWell, since Trump has the gun, not Trump.
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 10/3/2024 @ 3:18 pmhttps://nypost.com/2024/10/03/us-news/feds-say-theres-no-money-left-to-respond-to-hurricanes-after-fema-used-640-9m-this-year-on-migrants/
NJRob (9a7859) — 10/3/2024 @ 3:31 pmVoting for leftist policies has consequences.
I also “advance” higher food prices by shopping at Jewel instead of picking up a dead possum off the roadway.
nk (42ebe2) — 10/3/2024 @ 2:34 pm
😂
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 3:51 pmOooh, I’ll try!
Someone comes at puts a gun to your head. Then they say “Either I will shoot you, or I will shoot that dog over there.” You can choose which or you can vote 3rd party (which won’t change the outcome) or not vote, and let other people decide. You say “Shoot the dog” and he does and goes away.
Are you saying that he should leave being shot in the head to other people or else he’s advocating the shooting of dogs?
Nate (cfb326) — 10/3/2024 @ 3:56 pmIn this election, like with the last election, there are voters pulling the lever for the Democrat nominee and there are others voting against Trump by voting for Biden and Kamala. The latter aren’t voting for Dem policies, they’re voting against Trump and the brain damage he brings with him.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:07 pmThen we agree, neither incited, you were just making sh-t up that Pence did so.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:15 pmThis lifelong Republican has voted for a Democrat only once. It was Cisco Aguilar, the Nevada Secretary of State. I had to vote for him because his Republican opponent was election-denying, false-slate-of-electors-member Jim Marchant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/14/us/politics/jim-marchant-nevada-secretary-of-state.html#:~:text=Jim%20Marchant,%20a%20Trump%20loyalist,%20is%20G.O.P.%20voters%E2%80%99%20choice%20to
Next month I will cast my second vote for a Democrat–Kamala Harris, even though I don’t like many of her policies. Why?Because Trump is heinous. He’s an authoritarian, a psycho, and a fraud.
He is in favor of terminating the Constitution (he actually said so), and will force Ukraine to cede Russia territory (even though Russia had the largest land mass of any country on earth even prior to the invasion).
His tariffs will kneecap the American economy. Read up on the Smoot-Hawley tariffs, and how they exacerbated the Great Depression.
I believe I am objective when it comes to Trump, because I actually voted for him in 2016.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:15 pmI miss the seal team six analogies
lloyd (1edddc) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:15 pmNorth Carolina Asks Zelensky For $100 Billion In U.S. Funding.
lloyd (1edddc) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:17 pmI agree that Trump supporters are immune to the facts regarding the 2020 election, but that doesn’t mean the facts are unimportant and should be ignored.
Rip Murdock (1fe61e) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:26 pmNorth Carolina Asks Zelensky For $100 Billion In U.S. Funding.
lloyd (1edddc) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:17 pm
I laugh at many of the Bee’s headlines, but this one strikes me as tone-deaf. Ukraine is in a fight for its life with the world’s biggest thug.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:29 pmThese are people who believe that the Establishment has been lying to them for decades, the cause of their misfortunes and profiting off of them. They don’t trust the same people any further than they can throw them.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:52 am
Are those beliefs accurate? If so, how? If not, well, there are people who believe the earth is flat.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:31 pm#38 norcal I am not a life-long Republican, but voted for Republican presidential nominees (and most Republicans lower on the ticket) from 1976 until 2016. (I voted for Republicans for president in 2016 and 2020, but as write-ins.)
In 2016, I said (on a personal web site) that conservatives should vote for Trump if social issues were the most important to them — because of Supreme Court control — for Clinton if foreign policy was most important — because she had figured out by then that Putin was not our friend — and for a Libertarian if economic issues were the most important to them, since neither Trump nor Clinton understood economic policy.
I was then expecting becoming president would, to some extent, sober the Loser, and that his followers would, to some extent — hold him in check. (We all make mistakes, but I freely admit those were whoppers. I had underestimated how badly trbalism had damaged our politics, as had others.)
Jim Miller (5b7bec) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:47 pmWas Trump charged with incitement?
BuDuh (79e4a7) — 10/3/2024 @ 5:03 pmThe latest George Will column reminds us that, as in 2016, neither candidate has good economic policies.
So, on economic policies, we have a choice between incoherence, and actively bad policies. (The Loser lies so compulsively that it is a bit of a surprise to see that — apparently — he actually believes in discredited mercantilist policies.)
Jim Miller (5b7bec) — 10/3/2024 @ 5:04 pmIf only Trump himself would stop bringing it up.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 10/3/2024 @ 5:24 pmBreaking–
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 10/3/2024 @ 5:52 pmIt boils down to: those of us who will not vote for Trump believe him a very real threat to democracy because he has demonstrated that he is willing to subvert the Constitution overthrow elections that don’t go his way, and use the power of the presidency for his personal gain. I believe his lack of fealty to the Constitution poses a far greater threat to the nation than living with Democratic policies for four years. It’s as simple as that . Harris’s policies can be undone (with the right candidate in 2028), but demolishing our institutions and putting oneself before the Constitution is a far worse scenario. I believe in country before political party, and loyalty to the Constitution .
Dana (8c0b03) — 10/3/2024 @ 6:34 pmHear, hear!
Rip Murdock (1fe61e) — 10/3/2024 @ 6:48 pmHear, hear.
If people like me are de facto Democrats for voting for the lesser of two evils…
…then those who vote for Trump the would-be subverter are de facto un-American.
As someone said above, Not Sorry.
Demosthenes (d15992) — 10/3/2024 @ 6:50 pmThe Boss is both for Kamala and against Trump.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 6:50 pm@49 “Harris’s policies can be undone (with the right candidate in 2028)”
Horse hockey. See Obamacare. Judges appointed will serve decades. Migrants let in under bogus asylum claims are here for good. Americans killed in wars aren’t going to rise from the dead. Billions handed to the mullahs isn’t going to be returned. That’s just for starters.
The “right candidate”? Who is that exactly?
lloyd (376756) — 10/3/2024 @ 6:56 pm@52 In other news, the Pope is for Catholicism.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:00 pmOh, I don’t know. Jared Kushner is always looking for new hedge fund investors. The Saudis can only do so much.
And perhaps the mullahs might consider investing in Truth Social stock…
Demosthenes (4c70f0) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:01 pm@55 What about whatabouts? Good point.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:04 pm@56: Hey, I’m just asking questions…
Demosthenes (5d93a8) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:08 pmAh, clown nose on. Got it. BTW, congrats on winning the Most Pretentious Handle award.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:11 pm@58: Thank you! I was actually going for the Cry Hard and Try Hard double, but the Trump/Vance ticket seems to have lapped me several times over…
Demosthenes (58b574) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:16 pmHello Demosthenes.
Pay no heed to those who can’t discuss things in a civil manner.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:53 pmTo be fair, norcal, that’s me too sometimes…
Demosthenes (d13cfb) — 10/3/2024 @ 7:54 pmIt used to be me as well, Demosthenes. I’m happier since I dropped the snark.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:00 pm@60 norcal, serious attempts to engage begets serious engagement. Not complicated.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:17 pmHas somebody (you know who) ever mentioned that the “billions handed to the mullahs” is Iran’s money? Frozen by us and our allies? The last batch, I believe, South Korea?
No? Of course not. It kind of loses the fizz to uncap that we are ransoming hostages with the kidnappers’ own money.
nk (42ebe2) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:32 pmI probably would be too, norcal. But I am happy to see, at least, that lloyd understands why I did not engage with him seriously…and why no one should.
Demosthenes (cc9aae) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:33 pm@64 Isn’t possession 90% of ownership, or some such? Ransom is ransom, no matter the source of cash. The billions are being used to kill American soldiers and Israelis, but keep defending it.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:39 pmTerminating the Constitution is the ultimate devastation.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:49 pmAre those beliefs accurate? If so, how? If not, well, there are people who believe the earth is flat.
If you used to work at a cotton mill that was the main employer in your town and some rich gguy bought it and sent the equipment and contracts to China, then, yes, they have a valid complaint.
Heard a guy saying he never realized that things were supposed to “trickle down” to China, and he had had it up to here with folks talking about how all this trade is good.
But even if everything he has heard is lies, what matters is that about half the population believes it. Calling them “Cletus”, as Kevin Williamson thoughtlessly did today, isn’t going to get them to change their minds.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:55 pmGood, lloyd, good!
Now do the one where JD compared Trump to Hitler. That’s my favorite.
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:56 pmConstitutional dangers indeed:
https://reason.com/2024/10/03/tim-walz-jd-vance-free-speech-censorship-debate-veep/
Related:
https://reason.com/2024/10/03/judge-stops-california-law-targeting-election-misinformation/
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:00 pmIts like being back in college, toking and drinking, and listening to the highest person say the most incredible things.
18 Rip, to my left, adjusting his ascot, wants to know why Trump hasn’t responded to the latest inane charge by some lifer DC insider that just was just narcaned off “Russia Russia.” (Not unlike the media genius who criticized Trump in 2017 for not appointing people to his physical fitness Council immediately).
Gee, Rip– maybe because he has an election to deal with?
Or four “Trumped” up lawsuits to defend? (of course, its pure coincidence that an avalanche of criminal charges were filed against a Presidential candidate for the first time in 248 years.) (They have nothing to do with election suppression:–he’s the danger to the Constitution!). No more bourbon for you.
And 38: Norcal: left of Rip: (pass the joint, let me inhale and hold): You want to “save the Constitution” by voting for someone (1), who thinks the First Amdt needs a hate-speech and “disinformation” exception, (2), the 2d Amdt needs to be abolished, (3), the electoral college abolished, and (4), wants to pack the Court; and (5), has already abetted the abolition of what was our border. Right on man!
And you object to Trump’s tariffs–the ones Biden kept in place! THOSE tariffs? Do you really think that ANY candidate is going to pass on tariffs? Did you go to REASON magazine summer camp?
But I have your coat of arms picked out: “With all my heart, I fought the syllogism.” Or “Substance is fine, but feelings are finer.”
Harcourt Fenton Mudd (ee6639) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:02 pmThat’s fair, Kevin. In the long run, free trade IS better for us. But in the short run, it hurts some folks terribly…and though many of them can recover and even increase their prosperity, some will not. We can advance policies those people would oppose and still not neglect or minimize their pain. Doing that is how demagogues like Trump find fertile soil in which to plant their lies…
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:03 pm@70 Right.
Vance got married and had kids. It’s called growing up.
Liz lost an election. It’s called being small.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:03 pm“Growing up” = “selling out everything you believed in.”
“Being small” = “doing the right and not counting the cost.”
Mmm…sorry, lloyd. I can only buy one dictionary this year…and if this is the best you got…
…well, YIKES, buddy!
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:07 pmIf you used to work at a cotton mill that was the main employer in your town and some rich gguy bought it and sent the equipment and contracts to China, then, yes, they have a valid complaint.
Heard a guy saying he never realized that things were supposed to “trickle down” to China, and he had had it up to here with folks talking about how all this trade is good.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/3/2024 @ 8:55 pm
It’s a complaint for sure, but it’s short-sighted. Virtually all economists agree that free trade makes everyone better off in the long run. If the U.S. were to attempt to make everything here, things would be crazy expensive, and people’s purchasing power would actually go down. It’s counterintuitive, which is why so many people fail to understand this aspect of economics.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:08 pm@75 nah, I’ll use your dictionary.
Bad Republican = Jared doing business with the Saudis
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:19 pmGood Republican = Bushes doing business and being besties with the Saudis
“doing the right and not counting the cost.”
Oh, is that what Liz did? She’s paying quite a cost LOL
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:26 pmMmm…the Saudis weren’t buying ballroom-and-bathroom access from the Bushes…
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:26 pm@79 Really? How many trips to Crawford did Prince Bandar make?
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:29 pmWell, she DID pay quite a cost, to be fair. Her seat in Congress, a bunch of post-politics jobs, a shot at being Spe.
It is easier for her, no doubt, than it would be for others. She is a multimillionaire with what I am assuming is a substantial acreage in Wyoming. Now, if she were a billionaire with a skyscraper in New York and golf courses in New Jersey, Florida, and Scotland, she would have no choice but to whine and moan about how badly she has been treated…like only the strongest and smartest and bestest people can do.
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:32 pmHarcourt Fenton Mudd (ee6639) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:02 pm
If and when you are able to discuss things civilly, I will engage with you. I’m not going to waste my time talking to people stuck on snark.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:32 pmIt is inconvenient, isn’t it, lloyd? People used to have to travel places to get secret documents. I wonder if Trump just took pictures of whatever the Saudis wanted on his phone, and then texted them. I wonder if Jack Smith has those pictures.
Food for thought. Again, just asking questions.
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:37 pm@81 Nice. You made the appeal to hardship, not me.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:38 pmWell, it would be harder for you to do. I was feeling charitable.
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:40 pmIt doesn’t sound like “growing up” to participate in a Big Lie. The phrase “selling out” comes to mind.
Paul Montagu (759dc6) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:42 pmWell, she DID pay quite a cost, to be fair. Her seat in Congress, a bunch of post-politics jobs, a shot at being Spe.
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:32 pm
Yes. She could very well be the Speaker right now. All she had to do was go along with Trump’s Big Lie. It would have been so easy to do the cowardly thing the other Republicans were doing. She took a principled stand, knowing that Trump would be gunning for her, and she lost in the primary to someone willing to push Trump’s Big Lie.
She is even more courageous than Romney, who refuses to endorse Harris because he’s afraid of Trump supporters going after his children and grandchildren. I can’t really blame Romney for this, but I can praise Cheney, who also has children (and probably grandchildren by now).
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:42 pm@83 Oh, secret documents. The dark ages of the 2000s. Maybe you’re not leaving yourself enough time to conjure up something better.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:45 pm@87 Multi-Millionaire tears are flowing.
People are six feet under because of Liz’s WMD adventure.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:49 pmCome, though, Paul…those prepositional verbs all look so similar from a distance.
Exactly. And she has never complained. She knew what would happen, and she did it anyway. Contrast with Messr. Vance, who knowingly switched sides for power. Growing up is hard to do, I guess…
People are six feet under because of Trump telling them to drink bleach and shine a light down their throats, too…I guess he missed THAT collection of secret documents, anyway!
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 9:53 pmWell, as much fun as it has been allowing Quixote here to take a few tilts at me, I need to stop milling about in the comments and go to bed. I work two jobs so I can make my monthly contributions to installing a third gold-plated toilet at Bedminster.
It’s the only way to stop the Deep State, you guys…
Demosthenes (201e0e) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:01 pmNon unionized workers at plastic plant in tenn. told they could not evacuate plant from flood waters without permission of management. Two drowned other missing.
asset (0fc864) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:03 pm@90 “Contrast with Messr. Vance, who knowingly switched sides for power.”
Oh please. This is just too much. Liz has discovered it’s much more lucrative and personally rewarding to be a Democrat. She enjoys an adoration like she’s never thought possible, from a media that portrayed her as the wicked witch for years. If Vance and Trump were after adoration and material rewards, they clearly chose the wrong side.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:05 pmSee ya, Demosthenes. Come around more often. And thank you for the public service you do in one of your jobs. It can’t be easy these days.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:06 pmI was then expecting becoming president would, to some extent, sober the Loser, and that his followers would, to some extent — hold him in check. (We all make mistakes, but I freely admit those were whoppers. I had underestimated how badly trbalism had damaged our politics, as had others.)
Jim Miller (5b7bec) — 10/3/2024 @ 4:47 pm
Jim, part of the reason I voted for Trump in 2016 (not in the primary, mind you!) is that I thought he would clean up his act after getting elected. He didn’t. He got worse.
And he’ll be absolutely awful if he gets elected again. He was prevented or dissuaded from enacting his worst impulses during his first term. He learned from those experiences of being stymied, so all bets are off in a second term, especially because he’s going to surround himself with lickspittles this time.
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 10:45 pmGiven the fact that Trump isn’t a lawyer, I doubt he writes his own legal briefs.
You can have my bourbon, I don’t drink it.
Rip Murdock (1fe61e) — 10/3/2024 @ 11:05 pmYou can have my bourbon, I don’t drink it.
Rip Murdock (1fe61e) — 10/3/2024 @ 11:05 pm
I’ll take it! I love bourbon. It took me a while to appreciate it, but the phrase “acquired taste” exists for a reason.
I even thought of starting my own bourbon label called “Jack Mormon”! However, two problems sprang to mind. Number one, the Mormon church might sue me. Number two, people might think it’s a non-alcoholic whiskey. 😛
norcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 11:20 pmnorcal (2432ee) — 10/3/2024 @ 11:20 pm
Sue you for what? Can’t be defamation or copyright, so trademark? I’m not a trademark lawyer, and you should consult one before putting any money into it, but I’d be shocked if you had exposure, either from the LDS Church (virtually impossible, since for obvious reasons they have no trademarked use of “Mormon” in the sale or promotion of alcoholic beverages), or more likely though still far fetched, from Jack Daniels, since I seriously doubt there’s an actionable likelihood of confusion between their brand and yours. But like I said, I’m not a trademark lawyer. I’m just spewing 35 yr old cobwebbed law school recollections out my patuti.
lurker (c23034) — 10/4/2024 @ 12:30 amAs I told you last week, the “Kamala Harris is more radical left than Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren” is arrant bullsh1t, based on legislative scorecards which can be engineered to produce whatever result you’re looking for.
So one more time, here’s a Heritage Action legislative scorecard which purports to show that Lisa Murkowski is left of Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush, Pramila Jayapal, Rashida Tlaib and AOC — yes, the whole fricking Squad — plus, for good measure, genuine certified leftist loon Barbara Lee and, of course, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. For that matter, again according to Heritage, Mitch McConnell, John Thune, Chuck Grassley, Todd Young, Shelley Moore Capito and John Cornyn, are left of Bernie as well.
If you buy that, I have some Trump NFTs to sell you.
Apparently, left of Bernie Sanders ain’t what it used to be.
lurker (c23034) — 10/4/2024 @ 12:34 am*the “Kamala Harris is more radical left than Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren” meme is arrant bullsh1t*
lurker (c23034) — 10/4/2024 @ 12:35 am“Oh, please” yourself.
Whatever has come Cheney’s way, an occasional speaking slot on cable news and some nice press clippings do not compensate for losing your shot at being Speaker of the House. Nor were those things guaranteed to her.
Without his baptism in the Orange Sea, Vance never becomes a US Senator, let alone a credible vice-presidential nominee. (Well, “credible” might be stretching it…)
As for Trump…I mean, I already mentioned the two billion from the Saudis, and you know THAT didn’t come string-free. One wonders how many trips to the Mar-a-Lago Lending Library they purchased with that money. But how many hundreds of millions has he scammed from adoring John and Jane Q. MAGAs across America, who believe in his lies so much that they sacrifice their trips to McDonald’s so he can have his private plane? (On which he eats McDonald’s.) Between his grifts for “legal donations” and his HSN-style ability to market low-quality, no-value chintzy goods at outrageous markups to low-information buyers, he has proved how much financial value you can extract from people when your resume contains lines like “former President” and “current cult leader.”
And I really wanna know who keeps buying enough Truth Social stock to keep the value in the teens. Perhaps every time Trump says “Russia Russia Russia,” he’s just brain-glitching his way into revealing his investor list?
Demosthenes (3fd56e) — 10/4/2024 @ 4:40 amHow is she making money from this?
Paul Montagu (037e5c) — 10/4/2024 @ 4:45 amBack in 2018, she was worth $15 million, and there’s no doubt she’s worth more today, so it’s kinda silly to claim that she did this for the money, especially when there’s an established get-rich track for toeing the Trump party line. And last I heard, she didn’t switch parties, so you’re making sh-t up. Again.
The mobys are working overtime I see trying to rehabilitate Kamala after she said she’d terminate the 1st Amendment with some trumped up misinformation clause, the 2nd Amendment, the Supreme Court and so on.
Must be nice being a Moby and lying all the time. Don’t know how you can sleep at night though.
NJRob (eb56c3) — 10/4/2024 @ 4:50 amA lie is an intentional falsehood. Because I take the Commandment not to bear false witness seriously, I don’t call someone a liar unless I’m ready to show proof that what they said is false, and that they said it with intent to deceive. Since evidence of intent in cyberspace is usually unobtainable, you’ll rarely if ever see me call someone a liar. Obviously some have laxer standards. Still, it would be nice if they would ever provide even a spec of evidence to back up their name calling. I’m not expecting it to happen, but a man can dream.
lurker (c23034) — 10/4/2024 @ 6:24 amName calling got normalized here long enough ago that calling it out only now, when I suppose you perceive yourself as the target, is a bit disingenuous.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/4/2024 @ 6:31 amShow me where I’ve called you or anyone else a name.
lurker (c23034) — 10/4/2024 @ 6:37 amNice deflection. At no time did I accuse you of calling me or anyone a name. (I’d have to research it.). What I said is that this has been going on here quite awhile targeted mostly at a certain contingent and until now you’ve sat on your hands.
lloyd (83ca47) — 10/4/2024 @ 6:41 am@49
Tell me about repealing Obamacare. Since it’s so easy…
Tell me after the Senate nixes the filibuster (don’t give me crap about Dems likely won’t win Senate… you don’t know what the future holds in ’26).
With the filibuster gone and Dems having unified control, are you going to sit there and tell me they won’t pass horrendous, country-altering laws? Abortion on demand? DC & PR statehoods? Packing the Courts.
If the “right” candidate in 2028 somehow wins the Presidency after all that, how could he/she unwind this damage?
What Trump (and et el) did in 2020 is worthy of condemnation. But it amounted to nothing more than a childish temper tantrum that had zero threat to our constitutional order.
Neither you, nor Mr. Frey, nor the Dispatch, nor the Lincoln Project, nor NR, nor Democrats, nor anyone else that falls into that “N e v e r T r u m p” bucket has articulated HOW a second Trump administration is this “threat” to our constitutional order without resorting to outrageous “what ifs”…all the while ignoring policies that the progressive left are interested to advance (saying so LOUDLY at that).
Waving your hands at how Trump is this jerk man-baby isn’t making the case that he’s a “threat” to our constitutional order.
There are threats to our constitutional order… and it’s not Trump.
It’s progressive left, whom are mainstreamed in the Democrat Party. And *YOU* voting for them, somehow content in the belief that at some unknown future we can unwind horrible progressive policies ignores our history of how near impossible it is to do so.
Just look at Obamacare.
whembly (477db6) — 10/4/2024 @ 7:04 am@107. Rob has been calling me names for years. Commie, moby, liar… among others. I usually say nothing because life’s too short, but once in a while I do. If you haven’t seen them, that’s not my problem. I’m sorry if the infrequency of my comments about being insulted doesn’t meet with your approval. Actually, I’m not sorry. If you don’t like the rate of my replies, tell your buddy to be civil. Then I’ll have nothing to respond to, which should delight you.
lurker (c23034) — 10/4/2024 @ 7:07 amOne, Obamacare was landmark legislation, and Kamala won’t have the ability to do anything similar. Too much division.
The thing is, the only reason Trump couldn’t cancel Obamacare is because he lied about having a superior replacement, which he never had, even though he pledged that he had a better plan.
Also, Obama paid a political price for pushing Obamacare through, in 2010 when he lost the House and 2014 when he lost the Senate.
Two, there are enough institutionalists in the Senate, on both sides of the aisle, who won’t kill what’s left of the filibuster. The last thing they want is to be a smaller version of the House.
Paul Montagu (037e5c) — 10/4/2024 @ 7:21 amwhembly, Trump has a track record of undermining our democracy, and he’s said and done nothing since that would tell anyone he’d operate differently. This isn’t 2016, when we had no idea what he’d really do.
Paul Montagu (037e5c) — 10/4/2024 @ 7:23 am“If you used to work at a cotton mill that was the main employer in your town and some rich gguy bought it and sent the equipment and contracts to China, then, yes, they have a valid complaint.”
Yes, it’s tough and some companies create “poison pills” and local governments institute regulatory taxes to reduce corporate raiding profitability. As I said above, the federal government can also improve unemployment insurance, provide job retraining, and ensure health insurance portability to reduce the economic shock and ease the transition.
The question I have is what else is appropriate here? I’m sure some of those displaced employees would want the government to outlaw all trade with China. They might consider imposing 60% tariffs on all Chinese goods to be a great idea. But is it? We do get a lot of products from China and overnight all those goods would cost more. People either spend more money to get those goods or buy less of them. There will also be retaliatory tariffs on agriculture and maybe electronics, so those industries are hit. Government may be pressed more to then subsidize those industries.
Should we still do it because those displaced workers have a grievance? Should we abide tariffs because it makes those workers feel that government is doing something….even though in the aggregate it will create more problems? Trump says things about his tariff plan that are at odds with conventional wisdom.
AJ_Liberty (5f05c3) — 10/4/2024 @ 7:39 amStudies have shown that Americans pay the tariffs, not China. I get that there is a psychological element to politicking and economic uncertainty. I’m just not sure that we have to set aside our common sense to stay in good standing with a political tribe….
Indeed. We can’t have people threatening to terminate the Constitution piecemeal. If you want Rob’s vote, you have to terminate the whole thing. Still baby still!
Jack Smith seems to have done quite a thorough job of describing how what you dismiss as a “childish temper tantrum” was actually a months-long series of attempts to subvert our constitutional order by stealing a second term in office. And of course, the aftershocks of that attempt are still being stirred up by Trump years later, as he continues to lie about the 2020 election…in the hopes of hoodwinking enough Americans into giving him now what he couldn’t steal then.
January 6 itself, and the events and actions leading up to it, is Exhibit A in the answer to your disingenuous challenge. There does not need to be an Exhibit B. He will be a threat to the Constitution because he already has been, and is still being, a threat to the Constitution. Fish gonna swim, birds gonna fly, Trump gonna Trump. And yes, I use the word “disingenuous” in its full and accurate meaning…because you are quite obviously too smart for your comment to be based in stupidity, and quite obviously too well-informed for your comment to be based in ignorance.
I said it before, and I will say it again. At this point, with all that we know and all that we have seen, an intelligent and well-informed person who chooses to vote for Donald Trump is committing a plainly un-American act.
Demosthenes (ac6f09) — 10/4/2024 @ 7:53 am“Tell me about repealing Obamacare. Since it’s so easy…”
Obamacare is difficult to repeal…root and branch…because it was passed with a filibuster-proof super-majority. It also does not help that the GOP has not come up with a true alternative, though Trump claims to have an outline. But he claims lots of things.
Harris is NOW on record in this campaign walking away from many of her more progressive stances that she held as a senator from liberal California. It’s not a guarantee…because there’s no such thing in politics. But Harris does need independents and disaffected Republicans to put her over the top. If she turns and reneges on those “promises”, she will suffer the consequences in the midterms…and with her ability to operate in a narrow Congress. That’s the other reality that our hooting choir just ignores. The Senate will have a razor thin margin, with the betting odds being that the GOP should control it. How does that enable all of this progressive agenda to get through?
The abolition of the filibuster is also over-played. Anyone with sense in Congress understands that what they can force through today by suspending the filibuster rule will come back to bite them the moment they fall into the minority. It’s mutual assured destruction and no one here has made the persuasive argument that it no longer holds. Heck, we got 3 conservative justices and the fall of Roe precisely because the Democrats gambled with removing the filibuster for such appointments.
Some liberals might rant about stacking the Court, but again, it would be a nuclear option that will justifiably lead to a reprisal the second that public opinion would produce negative feedback. Some here will tell us that the Left is crazy enough to do it….yet it’s only been Trump to put forward hair-brained electoral vote certification schemes. As is increasingly common, radicals on the Right are using scare tactics to then justify their own over-reaches. How about just dialing it back….
AJ_Liberty (5f05c3) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:00 amAJ, did you ever figure out what you meant by saying you were “not a prophecy guy?”
BuDuh (79e4a7) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:05 amHas anyone figured out the pipe bomb aspect of that terrible day?
BuDuh (79e4a7) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:07 amA. Obamacare’s difficult repeal has nothing to do with the super majority. (The only reason the supermajority came into play is that the plan was so radical they couldn’t get a single Republican to sign on.) It has everything to do with Dem’s ability to demagogue on an existing entitlement and John McCain’s cowardice.
B. A GOP Senate (and/or a rajor thin margin for Dems) is no match for the “pen and phone” of Executive Orders. Even if (like Student Loans), it eventually gets smacked down by SCOTUS (more on that in a minute), that’s a couple of years down the line and by that point, it’s old news.
C. The “mutually assured destruction” of the filibuster matters if there’s a chance the GOP returns to take the Senate. If you eliminate the filibuster, then use it to pass unlimited Illegal voting, make DC/PR states, eliminate the Electoral College, and stack SCOTUS with 15 more liberal justices, then the GOP will never hold the Senate or 1600 again.
D. Trump is not the only one to put forward hair-brained electoral vote certification schemes. In 2004, various House members tried to deny Ohio’s votes. And in 2016…
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/electoral-college-rogues-trump-clinton-232195
SaveFarris (79ab12) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:13 amWordle in 2.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:20 amA. Obamacare’s difficult repeal has nothing to do with the super majority. (The only reason the supermajority came into play is that the plan was so radical they couldn’t get a single Republican to sign on.) It has everything to do with Dem’s ability to demagogue on an existing entitlement and John McCain’s cowardice.
The difficulty with Obamacare’s repeal was that so much damage had been done (terminating almost all existing individual policies) that a flat repeal would have left Obamacare’s victims (those whose former policies had been terminated) victimized AGAIN since many of them had long since developed medical conditions that were grandfathered in under the old policies but would preclude them from getting new ones.
This wasn’t “demagoging” and those — responsible, long insured — folks were pretty vocal about not being cast into the outer darkness just so some folks could wage ideological battles.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:25 am“The only reason the supermajority came into play is that the plan was so radical they couldn’t get a single Republican to sign on.”
You should expound more on this. I’m not sure what you mean.
AJ_Liberty (5f05c3) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:26 amIf you eliminate the filibuster, then use it to pass unlimited Illegal voting, make DC/PR states, eliminate the Electoral College, and stack SCOTUS with 15 more liberal justices, then the GOP will never hold the Senate or 1600 again.
Pretty much what is happening in Mexico.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:27 amConsider the possibility that the threat to the Constitution is not Trump or Harris, but the insane power that has accreted to the Presidency over the last century. Many have warned of this, and called for serious reform, but *crickets*. Let’s list the worst of these:
1) Plenary control of nuclear weapons.
2) The Administrative State and the emasculation of Congress due to the loss of the Legislative Veto.
3) Plenary powers in foreign trade.
4) CinC of a large standing military sufficient to conquer most countries in short order.
5) Domestic emergency powers in multiple areas (pandemics, civil disorder, declaring insurrections)
This is not an exhaustive list, but all of the above are either creations of Congress or (e.g. 4) enhanced by acts of Congress.
Don’t like the threat posed by Trump (and/or Harris)? No one feared the power of the Presidency in 1920.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:41 amMAGAs have an odd concept of what bravery and cowardice are, because the cowards are the Lindsey Grahams and Ted Cruz’s and Marco Rubios of the world, who fell in line with Trump and became his chorus of sheep.
Paul Montagu (037e5c) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:43 amMcCain stood up to a bully, and he was scapegoated for not canceling Obamacare (even though it wasn’t just him), knowing full well that prior dissenters from Trump lost their careers (see Cantor, Flake, etc.).
Maybe we need to have a president abuse his powers before we see the light and reform the system.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:44 amIf refusing to acknowledge election results is disqualifying…
https://x.com/MattWolking/status/1842224034500526434
SaveFarris (79ab12) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:48 amMAGAs have an odd concept of what bravery and cowardice are
They like people who follow orders when it’s their leader giving them. Not so much when it’s someone else. The heirs to J6 seem to talk about Law & Order a lot.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:48 amTrump has clearly stated why he is a threat to the “constitutional order”; what ifs aren’t necessary. As the country’s chief law enforcement officer (and protected by the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling), he can order the FBI and DOJ to investigate his political enemies: he’s called for the prosecution of Google because he doesn’t like their search results; President Biden and VP Kamala Harris over immigration policy and his criminal prosecutions; Nancy Pelosi; members of the January 6th committee; Jack Smith; etc. This wouldn’t be the first time that Trump has tried to prosecute his enemies.
As President, he will be able to fire any recalcitrant officials (like the FBI director) and appoint compliant US Attorneys and DOJ officials. He will be in a position to abolish the rules limiting contacts between the White House and DOJ; and remove the career attorneys from the civil service. Even if there is no evidence of a crime, the investigation process is as much of a punishment as anything. Investigation targets need to spend hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars to defend themselves even if they are innocent and never indicted.
Rip Murdock (deb95b) — 10/4/2024 @ 8:58 amThat was tried after Nixon’s resignation; it resulted mostly in “pettifogging” ethics laws which apparently aren’t enforced enough.
Rip Murdock (deb95b) — 10/4/2024 @ 9:02 amIn addition to what Kevin M said at 8:25; things might have been different if Trump hadn’t treated McCain with such disrespect.
And he’s still doing it.
The other problem is that Obamacare grew more popular with each passing year.
Rip Murdock (deb95b) — 10/4/2024 @ 9:12 amFor example.
Rip Murdock (deb95b) — 10/4/2024 @ 9:15 amThis reminds me of the cowards of the Senate.
Paul Montagu (037e5c) — 10/4/2024 @ 9:29 amAgain, this is a fair perspective. though I would point out that these two things can be true at once, since there is no strict contradiction between them.
Demosthenes (cea886) — 10/4/2024 @ 9:50 amThat was tried after Nixon’s resignation; it resulted mostly in “pettifogging” ethics laws which apparently aren’t enforced enough.
They are enforced only when they have a target and need to accuse them of something. And still, the ethics laws are weak, misguided and aimed at encumbering businessmen and entrepreneurs. Amazingly ineffective against lawyers and bankers (see Maxine Waters).
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 10:48 am> Maybe we need to have a president abuse his powers before we see the light and reform the system.
A sufficiently bad level of abuse will create conditions in which it is impossible for the people to reform the system, and the Republic will fall.
aphrael (8c9441) — 10/4/2024 @ 10:52 amThat was tried after Nixon’s resignation; it resulted mostly in “pettifogging” ethics laws which apparently aren’t enforced enough.
Besides, nothing was done to limit presidential power other than the unconstitutional War Powers Act. And more powers were added wrt trade and the Administrative State. The Legislative Veto was struck down (but not the delegated legislative power that it was originally coupled with) in the 80s, leaving now-unfettered legislative power in the President’s hands.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 10:54 amA sufficiently bad level of abuse will create conditions in which it is impossible for the people to reform the system, and the Republic will fall.
Again, what is happening in Mexico, with legislative assist. What is your argument that Harris and the Democrats would not attempt to “reform” institutions to cement themselves in control? They’ve repeatedly tried or argued in favor of such.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 10:57 amYou focus on the abuse, I focus on the powers that have been left lying around for the inevitable abuser.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 10/4/2024 @ 10:58 amYou mean having one of your federal prosecutors “resigning” to then prosecute your political opponent in nyc or having one of your feds do an October surprise on your political opponent directly contradictory to the Supreme Court isn’t this corruption you speak of.
Funny how that works.
NJRob (21c30b) — 10/4/2024 @ 11:18 amAn astute observation, and also the answer for anyone who cares about campaign finance reform. The reason people and corporations spend ever-increasing oodles of money to affect elections is because election outcomes (and which party holds the levers) has become increasingly important. Back in the days when POTUS was (relatively) powerless, it didn’t matter who held the reigns of power: their effect on the commercial/regulatory environment was minimal.
Nowadays, it matters immensely who is in charge. Hence people’s intent to affect the outcome.
SaveFarris (79ab12) — 10/4/2024 @ 11:41 amThank you for confirming that McCain was a petty harpy who let personal pride get in the way of what was best for the country. And would never be mistaken for the bigger man.
SaveFarris (79ab12) — 10/4/2024 @ 11:43 amNo more than Trump, who still can’t get over losing the 2020 election.
Rip Murdock (deb95b) — 10/4/2024 @ 12:29 pmSo you equate McCain, a guy you worship whenever it suits you to attack republicans, as the same as Trump. Food for thought.
NJRob (eb56c3) — 10/4/2024 @ 6:46 pmI don’t “worship” any man, but I do respect McCain’s service to our country. Trump’s service not so much.
With thoughts like that you will starve.
Rip Murdock (deb95b) — 10/4/2024 @ 7:31 pmNot true.
Disrupting the certification through noon of January 20 would only have made House Speaker Nancy Pelosi acting President. And the military would have listened to her
Trump’s only hope of retaining power was to have Congress certify him as the winner – or, as an interim step, postpone it by ten days giving states a chance to replace their electoral Electors and Electoral votes as Giulini was promising him state legistors wanted to,
Sammy Finkelman (c2c77e) — 10/6/2024 @ 2:17 pm