insomnia65
Well-Known Member
I think it's probably 25% but below hopefully) 30%. A lot of people will not admit to being for Trump, the last two elections I think show this.
January 6th, 2021
- Thread starter Jimdamick
- Start date
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
But at least they are sane enough not to admit it.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Steve Schmidt Says January 6 Will Start Destructive 'Civil War' in the GOP
Schmidt, a GOP strategist who co-founded the Lincoln Project, says the Republican Party will divide into "irreconcilable factions" when Congress meets on Wednesday to certify Joe Biden's victory in 2020 election.
www.newsweek.com
Steve Schmidt Says January 6 Will Start Destructive 'Civil War' in the GOP
A"civil war" inside the Republican Party will commence on January 6, according to Steve Schmidt, a GOP strategist who co-founded the Lincoln Project.
In a lengthy thread on Twitter Sunday, Schmidt said the Republican Party will divide into "irreconcilable factions" when Congress meets on Wednesday to certify Joe Biden's victory in 2020 election.
A growing number of Republican lawmakers have announced their intention to oppose the Electoral College certification, backing President Donald Trump's ongoing effort to overturn the election result.
Trump has continued to allege his defeat was due to widespread voter fraud, despite election officials concluding there were no irregularities that would have affected the outcome of the vote.
Trump and the GOP lawmakers' efforts are expected to do little to stop Biden from being inaugurated on January 20—but Schmidt believes their actions will have a catastrophic impact on the Republican Party going forward.
"The die is cast for the Republican Party. It will be destroyed on January 6th in much the same way the Whig party was destroyed by the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854," he tweeted.
"The act unraveled the Missouri compromise and allowed for the westward expansion of slavery. The party could not survive its factionalism. There could be no more accommodation, compromise and partnership between pro-slavery and anti-slavery Whigs."
Schmidt explained that as a result, a "new political party was born, the Republican Party" and "that party will divide into irreconcilable factions on January 6th."
That date "will commence a political civil war inside the GOP," he continued.
"The autocratic side will roll over the pro-democracy remnant of the GOP like the Wehrmacht did the Belgian Army in 1940. The '22 GOP primary season will be a blood letting. The 6th will be a loyalty test. The purge will follow."
Schmidt went on: "The poisonous fruit from four years of collaboration and complicity with Trumps insanity, illiberalism and incompetence are ready for harvest. It will kill the GOP because it's Pro Democracy faction and Autocratic factions can no more exist together then [sic] could the Whig Party hold together the abolitionist with the Slave master. It won't happen over night but the destination is clear. The Conservative party in America is dead. It may continue to bear the name "Republican" but it will be no such thing."
Schmidt's tweets became more ominous as he continued.
"Fascism has indeed come to America and as was once predicted it is wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross. This movement must be defeated. It cannot be appeased, accommodated or negotiated with. It must be recognized for what it is and we must all recognize the new age of American politics it has wrought," he wrote.
"There are only two sides in American politics now. There is the American side and the Autocratic side. May God help us all if we falter, flag or fail in defense of American democracy."
Talk of "civil war" broke out among Trump supporters on the Parler social media platform after the Republican senators announced their plans to challenge Biden's Electoral College certification.
Thousands of Trump supporters are expected to head to Washington, D.C. on January 6 to join protests after being urged to do so by the president. Members of the Proud Boys, a far-right group known to incite violence, are also expected to attend in large numbers.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Let's talk about Trump's Georgia call and accountability....
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
George Conway: Trump's Georgia Call 'Shocking But Not Surprising'
President Trump begged Georgia's secretary of state to overturn the election results in a phone call obtained Sunday by NBC News, and attorney George Conway joins Morning Joe to discuss.
President Trump begged Georgia's secretary of state to overturn the election results in a phone call obtained Sunday by NBC News, and attorney George Conway joins Morning Joe to discuss.
Sofa King Smoooth
Well-Known Member
Biden doesn't have a hair on his nuts if he doesn't dress like that for Halloween
dandyrandy
Well-Known Member
Trump Tried to Call Raffensperger 18 Times Before Chat: NBC
Trump finally made contact on Saturday after 18 unsuccessful attempts—and then went on to urge Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to overturn his election defeat.
Sofa King Smoooth
Well-Known Member
New phone. Who dis?Trump Tried to Call Raffensperger 18 Times Before Chat: NBC
Trump finally made contact on Saturday after 18 unsuccessful attempts—and then went on to urge Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to overturn his election defeat.www.thedailybeast.com
Jimdamick
Well-Known Member
This is a very well written piece
Some Republicans Have Finally Found a Line They Won’t Cross (msn.com)
Some Republicans Have Finally Found a Line They Won’t Cross (msn.com)
Bagginski
Well-Known Member
Nixon was VP 1953-61. Was in the House 1947-50, then senator.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
What was reported on Fox news?
Here's an example:
www.foxnews.com
The video in that link contains commentary from three analysts, two of whom were saying this Trump is hurting himself and the country with his actions and the third, Gayle Trotter, was downright adamant that Trump was right for "going to the mat for the 70 million people who voted for him" and descended into a diatribe against the socialist Democrats. She had no problem with Trump fighting to overturn our Democracy in order for Trump to win.
“The voters who wanted President Trump to have a second term voted for him because he’s a fighter. He’s a man who fights"
The 70 million voters who entrusted him to fight back and this is another opportunity where he understands the radical leftist agenda that Joe Biden and his administration want to push, particularly the radical list of judges that they want to put on the bench that are politicians with robes and don't want to interpret the law but want to enact a liberal wish list into policy through the courts and so President Trump understands the stakes of this election", blah, blah radical socialism Biden, "I can tell you that President Trump's supporters are glad that he is continuing the fight".
Basically, she said: Trump is right to fight to overturn the election because Biden is a radical socialist.
Here's an example:
Trump urged Georgia election official to 'find' votes in phone call, insisting he won: report
President Trump insisted that he won the state of Georgia in the 2020 presidential race during a phone call with Georgia’s Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger over the weekend, reportedly urging him to “find” enough votes to reverse the state’s results.
The video in that link contains commentary from three analysts, two of whom were saying this Trump is hurting himself and the country with his actions and the third, Gayle Trotter, was downright adamant that Trump was right for "going to the mat for the 70 million people who voted for him" and descended into a diatribe against the socialist Democrats. She had no problem with Trump fighting to overturn our Democracy in order for Trump to win.
“The voters who wanted President Trump to have a second term voted for him because he’s a fighter. He’s a man who fights"
The 70 million voters who entrusted him to fight back and this is another opportunity where he understands the radical leftist agenda that Joe Biden and his administration want to push, particularly the radical list of judges that they want to put on the bench that are politicians with robes and don't want to interpret the law but want to enact a liberal wish list into policy through the courts and so President Trump understands the stakes of this election", blah, blah radical socialism Biden, "I can tell you that President Trump's supporters are glad that he is continuing the fight".
Basically, she said: Trump is right to fight to overturn the election because Biden is a radical socialist.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Did I get it wrong? Was Nixon not elected president?
Bagginski
Well-Known Member
How to explain the profusion of “conservative” disinformation channels? There’s money in it.
Those behind Trump *and* McConnell are happy to pour money into their brainwashing media, just as they’re pouring money into their agents in government and on the periphery of government: it keeps their congressional dominance strong, has rolled back much of the last century in terms of pro-citizen legislation, and is currently a hair’s-breadth from overthrowing the Constitution (they’ve all sworn to uphold and defend) on their behalf.
They’ve had their eyes on drastically remaking the nation with a wealth-and-business-centered constitution for a long time, with us divided up into masters and servants - and servants won’t get to vote in that NewSA.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
i agree but that doesn't explain why there are none (or very few) liberal disinformation channels. if it makes money and keeps GOP in power then there should be just as many pundits/channels for the other side of the coin.
printer
Well-Known Member
Two House Democrats ask Wray to open 'immediate criminal investigation' into Trump
"Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.) called on FBI Director Christopher Wray to open a criminal probe into President Trump after the release of a recording of his Saturday call demanding Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) “find” additional votes for him. The two said that the substance of the call should trigger a full criminal investigation.
"As members of Congress and former prosecutors, we believe Donald Trump engaged in solicitation of, or conspiracy to commit, a number of election crimes," Lieu and Rice wrote in a letter Monday. "We ask you to open an immediate criminal investigation into the president."“The evidence of election fraud by Mr. Trump is now in broad daylight. The prima facie elements of the above crimes have been met,” Lieu and Rice wrote. “Given the more than ample factual predicate, we are making a criminal referral to you to open an investigation into Mr. Trump. Thank you for your attention to this urgent request.”
thehill.com
Georgia district attorney says she will 'enforce the law without fear of favor' following Trump call
The district attorney overseeing Atlanta said Monday that she will “enforce the law without fear of favor” if a case is referred to her office regarding President Trump’s controversial phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R.)
In a statement obtained by local outlet WSBTV, Fulton District Attorney Fani Willis said she found news reports about the weekend phone call “disturbing.”
“Anyone who commits a felony violation of Georgia law in my jurisdiction will be held accountable,” Willis said. “Once the investigation is complete, this matter, like all matters, will be handled by our office based on the facts and the law.”
“It’s a crime to solicit election fraud, and asking the secretary to change the votes is a textbook definition of election fraud,” David Worley told The Washington Post, which first published the audio of Trump's call on Sunday.
Worley, in a letter to Raffensperger, said the call was “probable cause” for a probe into possible election code violations, citing a section of the state code criminalizing soliciting election fraud from someone else.
thehill.com
"Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.) called on FBI Director Christopher Wray to open a criminal probe into President Trump after the release of a recording of his Saturday call demanding Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) “find” additional votes for him. The two said that the substance of the call should trigger a full criminal investigation.
"As members of Congress and former prosecutors, we believe Donald Trump engaged in solicitation of, or conspiracy to commit, a number of election crimes," Lieu and Rice wrote in a letter Monday. "We ask you to open an immediate criminal investigation into the president."“The evidence of election fraud by Mr. Trump is now in broad daylight. The prima facie elements of the above crimes have been met,” Lieu and Rice wrote. “Given the more than ample factual predicate, we are making a criminal referral to you to open an investigation into Mr. Trump. Thank you for your attention to this urgent request.”
Two House Democrats ask Wray to open ‘immediate criminal investigation’ into Trump
Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.) called on FBI Director Christopher Wray to open a criminal probe into President Trump after the release of a recording of his Saturday call dema…
thehill.com
Georgia district attorney says she will 'enforce the law without fear of favor' following Trump call
The district attorney overseeing Atlanta said Monday that she will “enforce the law without fear of favor” if a case is referred to her office regarding President Trump’s controversial phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R.)
In a statement obtained by local outlet WSBTV, Fulton District Attorney Fani Willis said she found news reports about the weekend phone call “disturbing.”
“Anyone who commits a felony violation of Georgia law in my jurisdiction will be held accountable,” Willis said. “Once the investigation is complete, this matter, like all matters, will be handled by our office based on the facts and the law.”
“It’s a crime to solicit election fraud, and asking the secretary to change the votes is a textbook definition of election fraud,” David Worley told The Washington Post, which first published the audio of Trump's call on Sunday.
Worley, in a letter to Raffensperger, said the call was “probable cause” for a probe into possible election code violations, citing a section of the state code criminalizing soliciting election fraud from someone else.
Georgia district attorney says she will ‘enforce the law without fear or favor’ following Trump call
The district attorney overseeing Atlanta said Monday that she will “enforce the law without fear or favor” if a case is referred to her office regarding President Trump’s controversial phone call w…
thehill.com
Bagginski
Well-Known Member
A: we make it a holiday, and active voters get an extra 10% tax deduction
B: we make mail-in voting the standard. It has survived this trial by fire pretty effectively, and we’ve learned a lot about how to improve it recently (ditto election security in general). AND active voters get an extra 10% tax deduction.
C: both A and B
Bagginski
Well-Known Member
No, Nixon *was* president, ‘68-‘74.
He was also Vice President two terms under Eisenhower, ran against Kennedy in ‘60.
Mostly what I was saying was that he was *on* HUAC, but only for a couple of years, then got elected senator. Did not *chair* the committee.
Bagginski
Well-Known Member
It doesn’t “make them money” in the profit-stream sense, it’s an investment in a federal government that does not tax the wealthy, and does not let the poor vote on anything important. Their payoff is down the road, in Oz.
OTOH, since it’s not a moneymaking stream in and of itself, who on “the left” would find it worth the billions gladly spent by the wealth party - especially for DISinformation? Cui Bono - who benefits from it? To my knowledge, there’s no equivalent even to RT on “the left” unless you want to count Lyndon LaRouche or the Revolutionary Communist Party (are they even still around?). There’s too little payoff, ever, but big expenses to play in that game.
I don’t count LaRouche or the RCP, BTW. Meaningless cranks.
THE CLOSEST we have to a commercial semi-centrist news organization is MSNBC. It stays afloat and maintains its character because there's a big enough market to support it. It is not run by wild-eyed socialists, they are deliberately riding and working a niche for profit. Next closest is CNN, which is IMO trying to occupy a pivot point, more than MSBC. I have doubts about just how ‘liberal’ any billionaire can be, you see. Both are owned by major corporations, and run for profit. Political agreeability seems to be more the hallmark of Fox, but maybe not primarily?
Last edited:
printer
Well-Known Member
Judge rejects effort to block Congress from counting electoral votes
In a seven-page decision, Judge James Boasberg denied the group's request for a preliminary injunction against Congress and Vice President Pence, in his capacity as president of the Senate, from certifying the results of the election.
Boasberg, an Obama appointee to the federal district court in D.C., tore into the plaintiffs in his decision, saying it was "not a stretch to find a serious lack of good faith here," and warning that they may be subject to sanctions from the court.
"Their failure to make any effort to serve or formally notify any Defendant ... renders it difficult to believe that the suit is meant seriously," the judge wrote. "Courts are not instruments through which parties engage in such gamesmanship or symbolic political gestures. As a result, at the conclusion of this litigation, the Court will determine whether to issue an order to show cause why this matter should not be referred to its Committee on Grievances for potential discipline of Plaintiffs’ counsel."
Boasberg on Monday showed little patience for their claims and said that the D.C. federal court had no jurisdiction over the many state officials listed as defendants in the case.
"Plaintiffs’ theory that all of these laws are unconstitutional and that the Court should instead require state legislatures themselves to certify every Presidential election lies somewhere between a willful misreading of the Constitution and fantasy," the judge wrote.
thehill.com
In a seven-page decision, Judge James Boasberg denied the group's request for a preliminary injunction against Congress and Vice President Pence, in his capacity as president of the Senate, from certifying the results of the election.
Boasberg, an Obama appointee to the federal district court in D.C., tore into the plaintiffs in his decision, saying it was "not a stretch to find a serious lack of good faith here," and warning that they may be subject to sanctions from the court.
"Their failure to make any effort to serve or formally notify any Defendant ... renders it difficult to believe that the suit is meant seriously," the judge wrote. "Courts are not instruments through which parties engage in such gamesmanship or symbolic political gestures. As a result, at the conclusion of this litigation, the Court will determine whether to issue an order to show cause why this matter should not be referred to its Committee on Grievances for potential discipline of Plaintiffs’ counsel."
Boasberg on Monday showed little patience for their claims and said that the D.C. federal court had no jurisdiction over the many state officials listed as defendants in the case.
"Plaintiffs’ theory that all of these laws are unconstitutional and that the Court should instead require state legislatures themselves to certify every Presidential election lies somewhere between a willful misreading of the Constitution and fantasy," the judge wrote.
Judge floats sanctions for attorneys who sought to block Congress from counting electoral votes
A federal judge on Monday rejected a legal effort from groups of Trump voters to block Congress from officially counting the Electoral College votes and suggested the attorneys involved may be subj…
thehill.com