2020 Election Fallout 15: More Information Is Being Revealed About The Big Lie

[Howl]

Damn, and it's not even a Friday.  More Jan. 6th indictments raining down.

Proud Boys leader Tarrio, four others, charged with seditious conspiracy

This is a second, and much more serious round of charges for Tarrio et al.. 

Quote

All five men faced previous federal charges related to the insurrection. The latest two bring their tallies up to nine, according to the Justice Department. 

 

Edited June 6, 2022 by Howl

[47of74]

4 hours ago, Howl said:

Damn, and it's not even a Friday.  More Jan. 6th indictments raining down.

Proud Boys leader Tarrio, four others, charged with seditious conspiracy

This is a second, and much more serious round of charges for Tarrio et al.. 

 

Just coming here to remark on this development myself.  I wish these clowns would realize they are getting off quite lightly.  If it was up to me I'd charge every person who even touched the US Capital with violating 18 U.S. Code § 2381 and demand the maximum sentence. 

Edited June 7, 2022 by 47of74
fornicating autocorrect

[fraurosena]

This is going to be an interesting week...

This is one of those times I'm glad ofvthe time difference between Europe and the US. It's going to be an extremely busy time at work, but I can still watch most of the testimonies live after I get home. 

[Xan]

Any guesses on what Trump will do to try to distract us all from these hearings?  Will it be a big rally?  Maybe he'll find someone else to sue.  I notice that he's already sent out his minions to start claiming that this is just partisan politics.  Little Marco has already been trotted out to start circulating the message.

I just hope he doesn't have the Proud Boys or the Q contingent attack somewhere in order to deflect coverage.

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, Xan said:

Any guesses on what Trump will do to try to distract us all from these hearings?  Will it be a big rally?  Maybe he'll find someone else to sue.  I notice that he's already sent out his minions to start claiming that this is just partisan politics.  Little Marco has already been trotted out to start circulating the message.

I just hope he doesn't have the Proud Boys or the Q contingent attack somewhere in order to deflect coverage.

I don't think therebis anything that could actually distract from the hearings. Even if he has his militia attack, it would only serve to underline the importance of what is being said during the hearings.

No, the only thing left is to whine and moan about his victimhood, a witch hunt, a distraction from inflation, and other bla bla bla windbaggery.

[Howl]

 

 

[fraurosena]

I'd love to be a fly in the wall in the editting room at Fox. The desperation and frenzy as they frantically try to decide how to splice the footage in such a way as to not be damning to Trump (or Hannity, Tucker and Ingraham for that matter) will be a sight to behold.

[Alisamer]

2 hours ago, Howl said:

 

 

You'd hope that at least some of the rabid Faux News watchers would stop for a second and be like "Wait, do they think we're too dumb to follow the hearings on our own?"

Yes. Yes, they do think you are just that stupid. And they LIKE it that way. 

[Xan]

1 hour ago, Alisamer said:

You'd hope that at least some of the rabid Faux News watchers would stop for a second and be like "Wait, do they think we're too dumb to follow the hearings on our own?"

Yes. Yes, they do think you are just that stupid. And they LIKE it that way. 

I think it's a bit dicey for Fox to air the coverage.  After all, some of their own talking heads are implicated.  Hannity was advising Trump and Carlson is in this up to his armpits.  I think they're hoping that their own viewers will just think it's unimportant enough to skip and then they won't have to explain.

Personally, I'd like to see Rupert Murdoch charged with something.  Surely, encouraging sedition must be against some law...

[Howl]

So much crime-ing, plotting, complicity.  So...Eastman.  It seems in the last week or so, things are coming into much clearer focus.  Here's one example.  Unroll of thread is HERE. 

Fox has been doing a pretty gosh darn good job of ignoring things and pretending they aren't happening, or pretending they are the opposite of what's happening.  So...a lot of Tuckering and Hannity inanity.  It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.  Fox watchers have been brainwashed into believing that they are being deceived and lied to by the main stream press and all Democrats.  I don't think they'll be swayed away from that position by the hearings. 

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Howl

[Alisamer]

1 hour ago, Howl said:

Fox watchers have been brainwashed into believing that they are being deceived and lied to by the main stream press and all Democrats.  I don't think they'll be swayed away from that position by the hearings. 

This is sadly very true. My boss, who is actually intelligent generally, is a fiscally conservative republican. He is not "right wing" at all. However he's somehow been convinced that anyone speaking against "right wing" politics is speaking out against him and people like him. I can't do much to convince him otherwise (boss, and I don't want to go look for a new job), but I do whenever possible offer facts to counter things he says that are inaccurate. And I very much try to convince him to look at a variety of news sources, including those from outside the US.

In speaking to him I am baffled by the way some events are twisted into something that somehow makes sense in a sideways manner. There's always some "whatabout..." situation to explain anything "bad" a Republican does. It's insane. He's not a stupid person, but constantly hearing this stuff, he believes it. Even when headlines look like this:

CNN:  Republicans block funding to ease baby formula shortage
MSNBC: Republicans block funding for baby formula crisis
local news: Republicans block bill to help baby formula shortage
AP news articles: Republicans block funding for baby formula
All news networks outside the US: US Republican Politicians block bill to help relieve baby formula shortage

Fox News:  Republicans bravely prevent Democrats from starving American babies while feeding illegals!

[fraurosena]

 

[fraurosena]

Who's ready for tomorrow's hearings? 

Here's something to whet your appetites: the Court orders from Eastman's case against the Committee. Eastman wanted to withhold documents from the Committee. The judge thought otherwise. 

I've copied the text from p23 onwards under the spoiler, and bolded the most relevant parts.

Quote

However, the Court’s review reveals that the other ten of the thirty documents are more closely tied to the Select Committee’s investigation and present a closer question. All of these documents relate to three meetings in the first two weeks of December 2020, which all included presentations on topics related to the election and the group’s broader interests.

Four documents pertain to a meeting on December 8, 2020: two emails are the group’s high-profile leader inviting Dr. Eastman to speak at the meeting, and two contain the meeting’s agenda. Based on the agenda, Dr. Eastman discussed “State legislative actions that can reverse the media-called election for Joe Biden.” Another speaker gave an “update on [state] legislature actions regarding electoral votes.”

Five documents include the agenda for a meeting on December 9, 2020.  The agenda included a section entitled “GROUND GAME following Nov 4 Election Results,” during which a sitting Member of Congress discussed a “[p]lan to challenge the electors in the House of Representatives.”

One document contains the agenda for a meeting on December 16, 2020. This meeting similarly had a section on the “GROUND GAME following Nov 4 Election Results.” In this segment, an elector for President Trump analyzed “The Constitutional implications of the Electoral College Meeting and What Comes Next.”

The Select Committee has a substantial interest in these three meetings because the presentations furthered a critical objective of the January 6 plan: to have contested states certify alternate slates of electors for President Trump. The week before these meetings, Dr. Eastman sent memos to high-level White House staff explaining that the January 6 plan required legislators “to determine the manner of choosing electors, even to the point of adopting a slate of electors themselves.” In the same two week period, Dr. Eastman reached out to sympathetic state legislators in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona, urging them to decertify Biden electors and certify alternate Trump electors. Just three days after the third meeting, Dr. Eastman admitted that his January 6 plan hinged on “electors get[ting] a certification from their State Legislators”—without it, the dueling slates would be “dead on arrival in Congress.” Dr. Eastman’s actions in these few weeks indicate that his and President Trump’s pressure campaign to stop the electoral count did not end with Vice President Pence— it targeted every tier of federal and state elected officials. Convincing state legislatures to certify competing electors was essential to stop the count and ensure President Trump’s reelection.

Dr. Eastman argues that the Select Committee’s interests are weak, but his claims are unconvincing with respect to these ten documents. He contends that the documents do not further the Committee’s investigation as they “predate January 6 and do not discuss demonstrations at the Capitol on that or any other day.” But Dr. Eastman incorrectly limits the Select Committee’s mandate, which extends to the “facts, circumstances, and causes relating to the January 6, 2021, domestic terrorist attack . . . [and] the interference with the peaceful transfer of power.”159

The Court now considers whether the Select Committee’s interests outweigh the associational interests of the participants. Several courts have suggested that the First Amendment bars disclosure when it results in “extensive interference with political groups’ internal operations and with their effectiveness.”160 For example, the Supreme Court found that NAACP members facing “economic reprisal, loss of employment, [and] threat of physical coercion” outweighed the government’s need for disclosure of membership lists.161 On the other hand, another district court recently found that the Select Committee’s interest outweighed “the subpoena’s interference with the [Republican National Committee’s] ability to pursue political goals such as winning elections and advocating for its policies.”162

Here, Dr. Eastman argues that the risks of disclosure outweigh the Select Committee’s interest. Dr. Eastman warns that group members risk being “subject to congressional subpoena,” “forced to suffer unwanted public exposure,” and “chill[ed]” from engaging in further discussion with other members. Dr. Eastman contends that his concerns are compounded when “a politically misaligned congressional committee” has engaged in leaks and publication of private documents.

While Dr. Eastman has legitimate concerns, they are not as weighty as either the RNC’s fears or those of NAACP members. First, the risk of third parties receiving future subpoenas cannot be sufficient to justify noncompliance with an existing subpoena. Second, disclosing the documents would not reveal a full membership list of the group; the emails blind copied all recipients, so their information is not accessible. Eight of the ten documents are meeting agendas, so group members’ names only appear if they were scheduled to speak. To mitigate any chilling effect, the Court can order redaction of the names of presenters on topics unrelated to the January 6 plan. Third, although the Court “must presume that the committees of Congress will exercise their powers responsibly and with due regard for the rights of affected parties,” there have been leaks and public disclosures from the Select Committee in this case already. But as the RNC court found, the balancing still tips in the Select Committee’s favor, even when the Court considers the likelihood of disclosure to the public.

Having considered the parties’ arguments, the Court finds that disclosure of these ten key documents is “narrowly tailored to the government’s asserted interest.”

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Dr. Eastman to disclose those ten documents.

 

[Dandruff]

4 hours ago, Alisamer said:

In speaking to him I am baffled by the way some events are twisted into something that somehow makes sense in a sideways manner. There's always some "whatabout..." situation to explain anything "bad" a Republican does. It's insane. He's not a stupid person, but constantly hearing this stuff, he believes it.

I have a bright, educated, Republican friend who does the same thing.  When I make a solid point she tends to deflect.  She'll make an emphatic statement that goes a bit off-topic or will "whatabout".  Fortunately, our friendship (which began years before we were eligible to vote) has managed to endure through Trump and the aftermath, though not without bumps.  We can now agree that we'll never fully agree on some things and move on.  I lost another friendship before the 2020 election because she decided she cared more about my vote than my friendship and I wasn't budging.

The people I know on the far-left don't try to change my mind but the Rs do.  It's interesting.  Not sure whether the far-left folks simply respect my choices, are intelligent enough to realize that my middle-ish views are decision vs. indecision, or are just better at separating friendship from political alliance (or non-alliance).

[Alisamer]

32 minutes ago, Dandruff said:

The people I know on the far-left don't try to change my mind but the Rs do.  It's interesting.  Not sure whether the far-left folks simply respect my choices, are intelligent enough to realize that my middle-ish views are decision vs. indecision, or are just better at separating friendship from political alliance (or non-alliance).

It's probably a combo of things, TBH. People on the left seem to be more educated generally. But also, it's a generalization but the way I personally see things is that Republicans care all about your freedom to do exactly what they want in the way they want it, while Democrats care about your freedom to make your own choices, even if they think you are making bad choices. 

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, Alisamer said:

It's probably a combo of things, TBH. People on the left seem to be more educated generally. But also, it's a generalization but the way I personally see things is that Republicans care all about your freedom to do exactly what they want in the way they want it, while Democrats care about your freedom to make your own choices, even if they think you are making bad choices. 

It all boils down to one thing: respect.

Either you respect someone else’s views, or you don’t— and want to shove your views down everyone else’s throats.

Generally, those on the far left fall into the first category, and those on the far right into the second.

[Dandruff]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

It all boils down to one thing: respect.

I agree there's some lack of respect, but also believe that the Rs have been drawn into a very narrow mindset.  They've been trained to obediently line up behind the person/concept in power, which means stifling any internal dissent they may have.  Many others reinforce their behavior by doing and believing the same.  They've learned who they're supposed to listen to and who they're supposed to watch.  The highly religious among them had a head start by demonstrating faith in a (supposed) deity and its dictates, which I believe helped them transfer some loyalty to Trump and his minions.  They trust their leaders to define what's true and what's right.

This could be why some Rs have such a hard time accepting when people close to them disagree and aren't afraid to say so.  It's an affront to their accepted power base and its associated beliefs.  They like being sure and you're trying to make them unsure.  They'd prefer to have you see things their way to grow their ranks and reinforce their "rightness", but if they can't get you to agree they'll still try to discourage you from siding with the opposition.

Don't know how many non-Rs are willing to be chiseled down, but I won't be one of them.

[Xan]

I'm not sure where to put this but I have trouble with the story coming out now about someone planning to assassinate Brett Kavanaugh.  I know it's cynical of me and possibly straying over into conspiracy theory territory.  It's just that the rightwingers really need a diversion now and the front page of a lot of news sources and news blogs now sport this story.  Does anyone else feel that this is just a little too convenient?  And they guy was after him because of the possible vote on Roe v. Wade and was also about gun control.  

It's possible I'm entirely wrong about this.  It just feels hinky to me.

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, Xan said:

I'm not sure where to put this but I have trouble with the story coming out now about someone planning to assassinate Brett Kavanaugh.  I know it's cynical of me and possibly straying over into conspiracy theory territory.  It's just that the rightwingers really need a diversion now and the front page of a lot of news sources and news blogs now sport this story.  Does anyone else feel that this is just a little too convenient?  And they guy was after him because of the possible vote on Roe v. Wade and was also about gun control.  

It's possible I'm entirely wrong about this.  It just feels hinky to me.

This was my first reaction too! I'm glad I'm not the only one.

Just as you say, we could be entirely wrong, and it could be we're too cynical, but the timing is just a little too conveniently close to the Committee hearings.

 

[fraurosena]

Here's an example of why @Xan and I have these sentiments about the whole thing:

 

[fraurosena]

It's all he has, a loud mouth, no substance, and a whole lot of fear.

 

[fraurosena]

Trump, as is his want, putting his foot in it yet again. He really can't help himself and always manages to make things worse for him. And here he not only shoots himself in said foot by further implicating himself,  but at the same time expertly focuses the attention of his followers on the hearings... something the GOP wants to avoid as much as possible. 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

36 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

It's all he has, a loud mouth, no substance, and a whole lot of fear.

 

That’s pretty much a description of all GQPers. 

[GreyhoundFan]

This is a surprising clip:

 

[GreyhoundFan]