W. Niederhut

Ben, Thanks for your comical "update" on the J6 hearings, as perceived by people living in the MAGA-verse. I can, certainly, understand why you guys would want Hutchinson's firsthand witness testimony to be "inadmissible." It's quite damning. But, I must give you credit for providing some daily comic relief here, and a valuable perspective on how Trumplicans view the Congressional J6 hearings that they have so assiduously refrained from watching. 🤥 So, Hutchinson wasn't "vetted," eh? Did you hear that flamer from Glenn Greenwald or Tucker Carlson? And she wasn't a firsthand witness of the activities and conversations of Trump and Meadows, (Ornato, Cipollone, Engel, et.al.) who had a White House office nearly adjacent to the Oval Office? Did you read that silly spin at Breitbart or the Gateway Pundit? "Cheney-crats" and monkeymen in the trees? Matt was kind enough to provide documentation about the Trump mob guns on the Washington Mall, and you promptly changed the subject. Now you dismiss those Trumplicans with guns are mere "monkeymen in trees?" (BTW, do you really think Trumplicans are any less tribal and homicidal than other simians?) As for Liz Cheney, she has done an admirable job investigating Trump's serious crimes against the United States. I never thought I would approve of a Cheney, but she deserves her Profile in Courage Award.

Tony Ornato has some serious 'splainin' to do about what happened at the White House on January 6th. So does Mark Meadows. My hunch is that any testimony from them will be limited to; 1) misleading statements denying Trump's misconduct -- not made under oath-- leaked to the right wing media, 2) perjury, or, 3) pleading the 5th.

Geez, Robert. Surely, you aren't clueless enough to deny Trump's longstanding enmeshment with Putin's oligarchs. https://www.amazon.com/Putins-People-Took-Back-Russia-ebook/dp/B07VMZYK13 Do you also believe that Putin and the GRU didn't conspire to put Trump in the White House in 2016-- trolling social media and hacking multiple voter registration databases throughout the U.S.-- as the Republican-controlled Senate Intel Committee confirmed? https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume1.pdf https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf That Paul Manafort wasn't a long-term Kremlin employee prior to 2016? That Manafort didn't repeatedly lie about his 2016 campaign contacts with GRU asset Konstantin Kilimnik-- even after he agreed to cooperate with Mueller's investigation? That Michael Flynn didn't lie about his 2016 efforts to sabotage U.S. sanctions imposed against Russia for meddling in our election? That Trump didn't fire James Comey to shut down the FBI investigation of Flynn's Russia contacts, as Trump told Lavrov afterwards?

Well, I suppose that we should respect people's First Amendment right to post disinformation. But let's not indulge in the prevalent modern fallacies of "both sider-ism" and false equivalence when it comes to the Warren Commission's Lone Nut narrative. Does anyone here really doubt that the WCR Lone Nut narrative has been thoroughly and definitively debunked? Must we endlessly beat that dead horse on this forum? Sisyphus comes to mind.

Question. Did Bobby Engel drive the Secret Service vehicle that Mike Pence refused to enter at the Capitol on January 6th?

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. In the same post where Ben admits that he never actually read the Mueller Report, he insists that Mueller, "did not have anything on Trump..." Huh? What about multiple counts of obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and stonewalling of critical evidence by key witnesses? Ben's concepts of both Russiagate and Trump's January 6th coup attempt seem to come not from primary sources, but from Trumplican pundits and propagandists in the right wing media. Surely, Mueller was Deep State, MIC player. But why did Mueller never subpoena Donald Trump, Don, Jr., Ivanka, or Kushner? IMO, he wasn't persecuting Trump, as Ben erroneously theorizes. He was landing the Republican Russiagate plane, with Rosenstein and Barr as co-pilots.

Interesting video commentary today by author Carol Leonnig about Tony Ornato, the Secret Service, and the possible Trump/Secret Service plot to remove Mike Pence from the Capitol on January 6th. Trump's Secret Service Detail 'Cheered on the Insurrection'—Carol Leonnig (msn.com)

IMO, something about Tony Ornato doesn't pass the sniff test. From what I can find on-line, he's a highly political former Secret Service agent who managed security for Trump's political stunts, including his Lafayette Square tear gas/Bible photo op and Trump's super spreader COVID rallies in 2020. I wonder if Vince Palamara has an opinion about Ornato and Brian Engel.

I agree, Chris. My wife and I really enjoyed touring Skye and the Scottish Highlands. I was merely joking about Mary McLeod's homeland, based on Trump's habit of disparaging emigres from "sh*thole" countries who come to the U.S. and have "anchor babies," as Mary McLeod did in the case of Donald's older siblings. 🤥

Joe, My hunch is that Trump's love of McDonald's has to do with his immense love for his first name and his ancestry in the Outer Hebrides. My wife and I toured the Isle of Skye many years ago, and almost everyone there is either a McDonald or a McLeod. I believe the same thing is true on the neighboring Isle of Lewis, where Trump's mother, Mary McLeod, was born and raised. As for the cuisine, when I eat at McDonald's I usually feel slightly dyspeptic and dysphoric, as if I had just mistakenly consumed too much grease. The Isle of Lewis: Did Donald Trump's Mother Emigrate From a Sh*thole Country? 🤥

Ben has been chugging the red Trump kool aid for years, while incessantly accusing others of imbibing. And he still won't answer the questions about whether he watched the Congressional J6 hearings. The fact is that Cassidy Hutchinson was a highly credible witness who was intimately involved in Trump and Meadow's affairs. IMO, Ornato and Engel are lying about the limo story to cover Trump's ass.

And let's not forget that Michael Flynn's brother, General Charles Flynn, blatantly lied about his role in delaying the deployment of National Guard troops to the Capitol on January 6th.

Ben, A number of us have explained to you, repeatedly during the past year, that the Capitol Police were too overwhelmed by the violent, bear-spraying mob to arrest or search the rioters for weapons on January 6th. What is it about our repeated explanations of that basic fact that you still don't understand? Most of what we learned about guns at the Capitol only came to light in the subsequent investigations of the rioters. The police reports of Glocks and AR-15s were shared with Trump and Meadows on the morning of January 6th. It's news to us today, but it isn't news to Trump, Meadows, Hutchinson, and the security people in the loop on J6. If you had watched the hearing today, you would know that Trump acknowledged that his mob had guns, but he said that he didn't care, because "they weren't there to attack him." You've been dead wrong about the guns and the details of the coup attempt for the past 18 months. Man up and admit it, instead of cluttering the board with repeated denials.

Kirk, That was the most shocking revelation, IMO, from today's testimony-- that Trump and Meadows were briefed at 10:00 AM on January 6th about the fact that the MAGA mob was armed with Glocks and AR-15s !! So much for Ben's oft-repeated claim that the Capitol attackers weren't armed... 🤥 Trump wasn't merely inciting a riot. He was inciting potential homicides. Is there a statutory definition for that crime?

Geez... It's not just about Trump's historic sedition, Ben. It's about numerous Republican officials, including members of Congress and state legislatures, (and the media) who were accomplices in Trump's crimes, and in his ongoing cover up. The Trumplican Party is rotten to the core. And, sadly, the few Republicans who refused to participate in his sedition and coverup have been ostracized and threatened by the Trumplican Crime Party. You, yourself, have repeatedly attacked Liz Cheney for her involvement in the investigation of Trump's serious crimes. I'd ask you some questions, as a rebuttal, but you ducked the last questions I asked you, (yesterday) and promptly changed the subject of our debate about J6.

And, in fact, Trump's flying monkey, Christopher Wray, is still in charge of the FBI. Talk about yer Deep State conspiracy to get Trump... 🤥 Meanwhile, someone over at the Democratic Underground thinks the mystery witness is Jeffrey Clark's (and Eastman's) associate Ken Klukowski. Here's a recent WaPo excerpt on Klukowski,* (re-printed for non-subscribers.) Jan. 6 committee connects two strands of Trump’s effort to retain power www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/23/jan-6-committee-connects-two-strands-trumps-effort-retain-power/ June 23, 2022 *...Shortly before the committee went into a brief recess on Thursday, Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) revealed that connection. “The committee has also learned that Mr. Clark was working with another attorney at the department named Ken Klukowski, who drafted this letter to Georgia with Mr. Clark,” Cheney said. Klukowski, she said, had started work at the department Dec. 15, just over a month before Trump’s administration would end. There, Klukowski was assigned to work under Clark. But “Mr. Klukowski also worked with John Eastman,” Cheney said, describing the attorney as “one of the primary architects of President Trump’s scheme to overturn the election.” Cheney pointed to elements of the letter to Georgia that echoed Eastman’s plan for state legislators. To wit: “[T]he Department recommends that the Georgia General Assembly should convene in special session so that its legislators are in a position to take additional testimony, receive new evidence, and deliberate on the matter consistent with its duties under the U.S. Constitution. Time is of the essence, as the U.S. Constitution tasks Congress with convening in joint session to count Electoral College certificates … on January 6, 2021, with the Vice President presiding over the session as President of the Senate.” The letter continued, pointing to the alternate sets of electors “in Georgia and several other States.” It made three recommendations: evaluate the purported (and unfounded) irregularities, determine if those might change the election results and then “take whatever action is necessary to ensure that one of the slates of Electors cast on December 14 will be accepted by Congress on January 6.” That is: to potentially sign off on the Trump slate. Cheney also presented an email sent after Klukowski had joined the Justice Department by Trump ally Ken Cuccinelli, at the time acting deputy secretary of homeland security. It suggested Eastman and Klukowski brief Vice President Mike Pence on the plan to upend the election results. In the message, there’s even a reference to the sensitivity of including Klukowski, given his new position at the department. “This email suggests that Mr. Klukowski was simultaneously working with Jeffrey Clark to draft the proposed letter to Georgia officials to overturn their certified election,” Cheney concluded, “and working with Dr. Eastman to help pressure the vice president to overturn the election.” In other words, Klukowski appears to draw two different parts of Trump’s effort to retain power — overhaul the Justice Department to focus on claims of fraud and get legislatures to sign off on alternate slates of electors — into one unified plot. It wasn’t just Clark hoping to publicly elevate the idea that something sketchy happened in Georgia. It may, instead, have been that Clark’s letter was an attempt to use the Justice Department to force Georgia’s legislature into enacting Eastman’s scheme.

I must confess that I experienced a similar dissonant vibe, Maestro Brancato.

The investigation of Trump's historic crimes is far more than a mere "drama," Ben. But how would you know? Did you ever finally get around to watching the Congressional J6 hearings about Trump's false elector scam, his pressure campaign to induce the DOJ to help overturn the 2020 election, and his involvement in promoting the violent J6 attack on the Vice President and U.S. Congress? What did you think of Rusty Bowers damning testimony? How about Brad Raffensperger's? Like many closeted Trumplicans, you appear to be sleepwalking through history, while trying to change the subject.

Any guesses about who the surprise witness will be? Al Franken just Tweeted that the witness's identity has been kept secret for security reasons. Could it be White House counsel Pat Cipollone? I wonder if Cipollone will be the John Dean of Trump's J6 coup plot.

Exactly. The slave owning Southern colonies/states had well-armed slave patrols/militias, and slave owning Founding Fathers (e.g., Washington, Jefferson, Madison, et.al.) wanted to protect the right of well-regulated state slave patrol/militias to bear arms. Five of America's first seven Presidents owned slaves (all except for John Adams and his son.) These "well-regulated" Southern slave patrol/militias became even more prominent after Nat Turner's 1831 slave rebellion in Virginia. In fact, Robert E. Lee led Virginia's slave patrol/militia to Harper's Ferry to promptly suppress John Brown's slave rebellion in 1859. The existence of "well-regulated" Southern slave patrol/militias was one important reason why the Union volunteer armies fared so poorly against the Confederacy in the first few years of the American Civil War.

Jack White Blasts Trump for “All the Abortions You Secretly Paid For” After Roe v. Wade Overturned https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jack-white-blasts-trump-abortions-182957879.html

Alito detailed long-term plan to overturn Roe v Wade in 1985 memowww.rawstory.com/samuel-alito/ June 26, 2022According to a report from the New York Times’ Charlie Savage, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has been making plans to overturn the 50-year-old Roe v Wade ruling based upon a memo that he wrote in 1985 where he counseled patience during the Ronald Reagan administration. Alito, who wrote Friday’s decision that overturned Row — and subsequently set off mass demonstrations across the country by effectively turning women into second-class citizens — reportedly “cautioned the Reagan administration against mounting a frontal assault on Roe v. Wade.”In his 1985 memo Alito, “advocated focusing on a more incremental argument: The court should uphold the regulations as reasonable. That strategy would ‘advance the goals of bringing about the eventual overruling of Roe v. Wade and, in the meantime, of mitigating its effects,” reports the Times Savage.“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences, he wrote. “And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.”According to the Times report, “In a memo on the cases, Mr. Alito displayed not only tactical acumen but personal passion, taking umbrage with a judge’s objection that forcing women to listen to details about fetal development before their abortions would cause ‘emotional distress, anxiety, guilt and in some cases increased physical pain,” with Alito dismissing their concerns by writing the such concerns “are part of the responsibility of moral choice.”The Times reports that during Senate hearings on his appointment to the highest court in the land, when the 1985 memo was brought up, he responded, “When someone becomes a judge, you really have to put aside the things that you did as a lawyer at prior points in your legal career and think about legal issues the way a judge thinks about legal issues.”

"The Donks don't have anything to do for the middle class," Ben? What planet are you living on? Which party has been cutting taxes for the wealthy, and undermining the unions that created the American middle class, for the past 40 years? But, more importantly, the main significance of this catastrophic SCOTUS Dobbs ruling isn't about mere partisan political expediency. You and Trump seem to be cynically focused on how this ruling will impact voting. The real significance is that this ruling undermines individual rights, and subjects individuals living in conservative red states to the tyranny of the majority. (It's formally similar to the 5-4 SCOTUS ruling in Shelby v. Holder-- undermining enforcement of the Voting Rights Act in red states.) What's next-- allowing red state legislatures to ban contraceptives and same sex marriages?