The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Matt Allison]

well now, what do we have here? Grab the popcorn, folks

 

[Douglas Caddy]

 

Clarence Thomas Says He Would Hear ‘Hate Group’ Appeal, Revisit Libel Law (msn.com)

[W. Niederhut]

3 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

well now, what do we have here? Grab the popcorn, folks

 

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.

[Matt Allison]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Could it be White House counsel Pat Cipollone?

 

Jon Karl from from ABCNews says it is not Cipollone...

[Matt Allison]

My goodness, the pace of things is really becoming rather rapid isn't it? 

 

 

[Douglas Caddy]

 

[Matt Allison]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Any guesses about who the surprise witness will be?

My first guess was Mo Brooks.

There are now rumblings about Ali Alexander, which if true, could be genuinely explosive.

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

well now, what do we have here? Grab the popcorn, folks

 

The drama! A surprise sequel? A plot turn? Stay tuned! 

[Benjamin Cole]

8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

I don't know about the feet of clay thing. But Justice Alito had to resort to the writings of a 17th century American jurist by the name of Matthew Hale for his justification in overturning Roe vs. Wade. Hale is a man who famously argued that the existence of laws against witches proves that witches exist.

Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas opines that the next steps in their quest of stripping Americans of their modern-day rights should be to reverse the Court's rulings on birth control and gay marriage. Interestingly, he stopped short of including interracial marriage. (Gee, I wonder why.)

 

 

There are 140 million Americans who identify as being pro choice. What percentage of those actually became violent in the protests? I'm guessing on the order of 0.0001%. (One in a million.)

But if the violence becomes more widespread, I won't blame them. Four of the five Supreme Court justices told bold-faced lies in their hearings... the one thing a legitimate judge would never, ever do. And these so-called judges are pushing their religious beliefs upon everybody else, something nobody should ever do.

The Supreme Court as it stands now is a corrupt, vile institution. Thanks a lot George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump. Thanks a lot.

 

But if the violence becomes more widespread, I won't blame them. ---SL

An unfortunate sentiment. 

I hope pro-abortionists make sure to vote, and compel state government to allow abortions. 

The anti-abortionists should also proceed peacefully, and are entitled to their views and respect.

In any event, abortion is diversionary, divisive issue. I expected the M$M to play it up big, and I was not disappointed. 

Ordinary Americans are being set against each other by a media that highlights abortion, guns, ID politics. Both sides consider the other craven on these issues. 

We see the results....otherwise sane people cavalierly discussing a civil war. 

The $1.4 trillion sucked into "national defense" every year...never an issue. 

Drink that red or blue kool-aid, friends. 

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

The drama! A surprise sequel? A plot turn? Stay tuned! 

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.

[Matt Allison]

One thing I find very interesting is that today we learned that the evidence seizures conducted on Jeffrey Clark and John Eastman were not done by the FBI. They were conducted by the office of the Inspector General of the DOJ.

Now, as someone that enjoys speculating on strange and mysterious things, I can't help but wonder if the FBI is not 100% trusted in parts of this investigation due to the rumored continued presence of MAGA types within the FBI, and that a higher level of secrecy had to be held for this aspect of DOJ's investigation.

Just spitballin here

[W. Niederhut]

30 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

One thing I find very interesting is that today we learned that the evidence seizures conducted on Jeffrey Clark and John Eastman were not done by the FBI. They were conducted by the office of the Inspector General of the DOJ.

Now, as someone that enjoys speculating on strange and mysterious things, I can't help but wonder if the FBI is not 100% trusted in parts of this investigation due to the rumored continued presence of MAGA types within the FBI, and that a higher level of secrecy had to be held for this aspect of DOJ's investigation.

Just spitballin here

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.

[Benjamin Cole]

41 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

One thing I find very interesting is that today we learned that the evidence seizures conducted on Jeffrey Clark and John Eastman were not done by the FBI. They were conducted by the office of the Inspector General of the DOJ.

Now, as someone that enjoys speculating on strange and mysterious things, I can't help but wonder if the FBI is not 100% trusted in parts of this investigation due to the rumored continued presence of MAGA types within the FBI, and that a higher level of secrecy had to be held for this aspect of DOJ's investigation.

Just spitballin here

This is curious.

As when the CIA became deeply involved in the investigation of Flight 800, the airliner possibly shot down by a missile near NYC in 1996. 

Are the actions of the Inspector General a move to assert partisan control over what otherwise would be a civil-service controlled investigation? 

Let's be honest: When the Donks want to do and end-around the bureaucracy, or the 'Phants want to do the end-around...are virtue and principles and truth-hunting in the picture? 

First, suspect partisan motives from partisan actors. 

 

 

[Matt Allison]

Witness is supposedly Cassidy Hutchinson, which opens up all sorts of questions, mainly about why now and why the sudden urgency.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

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.

Right. All serious investigations are conducted through weekly TV shows...scripted by a professional producer....