A Trump bombshell quietly dropped last week. And it should shock us all
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A Trump bombshell quietly dropped last week. And it should shock us all
Robert Reich Tue, August 3, 2021, 6:20 AM We’ve become so inured to Donald Trump’s proto-fascism that we barely blink an eye when we learn that he tried to manipulate the 2020 election. Yet the most recent revelation should frighten every American to their core.
Related: Republicans will defend their Caesar but new revelations show Trump’s true threat | Lloyd Green
On Friday, the House oversight committeereleasednotes of a 27 December telephone call from Trump to then acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen, in which Trump told Rosen: “Just say the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R congressmen.” The notes were taken by Richard Donoghue, Rosen’s deputy, who was also on the call.
The release of these notes has barely made a stir. The weekend news was filled with more immediate things – infrastructure! The Delta strain! Inflation! Wildfires! In light of everything else going on, Trump’s bizarre efforts in the last weeks of his presidency seem wearily irrelevant. Didn’t we already know how desperate he was?
In a word, no. This revelation is hugely important.
Rosen obviously rejected Trump’s request. But what if Rosen had obeyed Trump and said to the American public that the election was corrupt – and then “left the rest” to Trump and the Republican congressmen? What would Trump’s and the Republicans’ next moves have been? And which Republican congressmen were in cahoots with Trump in this attempted coup d’état?
Make no mistake: this was an attempted coup.
Trump knew it. Just weeks earlier, then attorney general William Barr said the justice department had found no evidence of widespread fraud that could have overturned the results.
And a few days after Trump’s call to Rosen – on 2 January – Trump told Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state, to “find” votes to change the election outcome. He berated Raffensperger for not doing more to overturn the election.
Emails released last month also show that Trump and his allies in the last weeks of his presidency pressured the justice department to investigate totally unsubstantiated claims of widespread election fraud – forwarding them conspiracy theories and even a draft legal brief they hoped would be filed with the supreme court.
Some people, especially Republican officeholders, believe we should simply forget these sordid details. We must not.
For the first time in the history of the United States we did not have a peaceful transition of power. For the first time in American history, a president refused – still refuses – to concede, and continues to claim, with no basis in fact, that the election was “stolen” from him. For the first time in history, a president actively plotted a coup.
It would have been bad enough were Trump a mere crackpot acting on his own pathetic stage – a would-be dictator who accidentally became president and then, when he lost re-election, went bonkers – after which he was swept into the dustbin of history.
We might then merely regret this temporary lapse in American presidential history. At best, Trump would be seen as a fool and the whole affair an embarrassment to the country.
But Trump was no accident and he’s not in any dustbin. He has turned one of America’s two major parties into his own cult. He has cast the major political division in the US as a clash between those who believe him about the 2020 election and those who do not. He has emboldened state Republicans to execute the most brazen attack on voting rights since Jim Crow. Most Republican senators and representatives dare not cross him. Some of his followers continue to threaten violence against the government. By all accounts, he is running for president again in 2024.
Donald Trump’s proto-fascism poses the largest internal threat to American democracy since the civil war.
What to do about it? Fight it, and the sooner the better.
This final revelation – Trump’s 27 December call to the acting attorney general in which he pleads “Just say the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me” – should trigger section 3 of the 14th amendment, which bars anyone from holding office who “engaged in insurrection” against the US. The current attorney general of the United States, Merrick Garland, should issue an advisory opinion clearly stating this. If Trump wants to take it to the supreme court, fine.
-
Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author ofSaving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the FewandThe Common Good. His new book,The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a columnist for The Guardian US
Tags
Who is online
41 visitors
"On Friday, the House oversight committee released notes of a 27 December telephone call from Trump to then acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen, in which Trump told Rosen: “Just say the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R congressmen.” The notes were taken by Richard Donoghue, Rosen’s deputy, who was also on the call."
a rwnj scumbag desperate to avoid prosecution...
Someone should ask Trump if he is ready for a subpoena, but he would think it is a sandwich from Subway and ask for double mayo.
And double meat
I'm having trouble finding this quote in the article. It doesn't appear to be there. Where did you get it?
I don't know how the hell you missed it. It's the third paragraph down. You must not have read it.
I 'got it' from the article.
Now go read the third paragraph down and get back to me, okey dokey?
Here it is again for the reading impaired:
On Friday, the House oversight committee released notes of a 27 December telephone call from Trump to then acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen, in which Trump told Rosen: “Just say the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R congressmen.” The notes were taken by Richard Donoghue, Rosen’s deputy, who was also on the call.
Never mind. I see it. Have they released the notes to the public? That is, can we see the notes for ourselves?
Next time, try reading the article before you say "I'm having trouble finding this quote in the article. It doesn't appear to be there. Where did you get it?"
Link to the actual notes if anyone is interested. Pretty hard to read. The relevant quote is on page 5
I'm sure it wasn't deliberate.
Did it seem like I needed help?
Rosen obviously rejected Trump’s request. But what if Rosen had obeyed Trump and said to the American public that the election was corrupt – and then “left the rest” to Trump and the Republican congressmen? What would Trump’s and the Republicans’ next moves have been? And which Republican congressmen were in cahoots with Trump in this attempted coup d’état?
Make no mistake: this was an attempted coup.
Pelosi contacting the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to see what could be done about restricting Trump's access to the nuclear launch codes came a lot closer to the definition of "coup" than anything that happened on 6 Jan.
I actually agree with that, no matter who is president. A lot of power in too few hands.
Would you want trmp to have access to the launch codes? That kinda shit keeps me awake at night
Trump only has to be wrong once, the people trying to stop him from launching nuclear weapons had to be right every day for four years. He's mentally unbalanced. Who knows when he could have gone off?
Irrelevant to the point about coups, unless you are arguing for "legitimate" coups? What would be the criteria for those, if so?
Legitimate coup? Criteria? How about the POTUS is nucking futz and wants to launch a nuke at Iran because they looked at him funny?
Well, his love letters to little fat Kim were a little disconcerting...
Since you don't want to address the point... The president can't just launch missiles on a whim. Say, North Korea pisses him off or something. He could issue an order to launch but they almost certainly wouldn't be obeyed. The people at the Pentagon are not robots. The NSA aren't robots. They would be asking why are we launching missiles at North Korea. Trump (or any other President) telling them that he's going to teach them a lesson wouldn't be good enough. The order has to be lawful and Trump simply being President and telling them to isn't sufficient enough reason to be lawful. The people at the higher launch chain of command would have to know the reason why they are launching. They won't launch without question.
This explains it pretty well. Lots of hurdles.................
You agree with the Speaker of the House attempting to usurp or, at least, unconstitutionally restricting the lawful power of the President?
Some power should be restricted.
Nonsense regarding your 'coup' whataboutism
WTF now Drak is arguing what is a legitimate coup? Oh FFS. And what #45 did isn't??????????????????????????
Never thought that whataboutism regarding a failed insurrection/coup would come to this JFC
Unfreaking real!
Unfreakingbelieveable!
Okay. How would you restrict it? Who or what do you think should be the authority to launch?
What point would that be?????????????
What you just pulled out of thin air?
Sounds more like projection, deflection and denial of what happened on 1/6.
Get back on topic which is not whether or not it was a legitimate coup FFS
I am not arguing what makes a coup legitimate. I asked Sandy if she intended to do so.
It's all stupid nonsense
Stop deflecting and get back on topic.
Stop it now. Stop deflecting.
I am not the one who got this off topic. My comment was that Pelosi came closer to an actual coup than Trump did. That is relevant to the topic, unless this is simply an echo chamber. Are you only allowing points of view that agree with yours?
How could she do so?
Enough is enough. Stop deflecting
Yes, you are. And it is complete and utter bullshit to say Pelosi came closer to a coup than the Turd Reich who actually did incite a coup/failed insurrection
Enough.
Your comment seems to refute your claim that Pelosi's contacting the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 'came a lot closer to the definition of a coup'.
Well, just to spit ball here, suppose she called the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and, I dunno, wanted to be assured that no one would listen to the President if he tried to launch missiles or something like that. You know, pretty much what she actually did.
It isn't a deflection, and insisting that it is just won't work. Maybe if you worked in "Turd Reich" in there somewhere? Maybe that would do it. In any case, you want everyone in the world to believe Jan 6th was a coup attempt but it wasn't. The rioters, which is what you call people in a riot, had no chance whatsoever of taking control of the government. 95% of those rioters were hopped up on mutually supporting emotions that made them think they were "Doing Something", even though most of them didn't have any real idea what they intended to do. Even these idiots knew you don't try a coup with just pepper spray, a few baseball bats and some flag poles.
See, the thing is, coups come mostly from within the government. It's leader may come from outside the government but without support from elements within the government, like from the military or some faction already a part of the legitimate government or both, there isn't going to be a coup.
And that's why Pelosi comes closer than the riots concerning coups. She was already in the government. She contacted the highest person there is in the military and sought assurances from the man that Trump would be ignored or denied launch codes. Now, do I think she was attempting a coup? No. I think she did it for propaganda purposes. But it doesn't matter. It still was still the behavior of someone contemplating a coup.
Of course, none of this matters to you. All you want to hear is the riot was a coupy insurrectionist thingy and you won't stand for anything else.
Have a nice day : )
Care to share how it does so?
disingenuous nonsense.
Nancy Pelosi's contacting General Milley occurred 2 days after the Jan 6th insurrection , an insurrection of which President Trump said, to the rioters, "remember this day forever". Trump's mental stability at that point was widely believed to be on a razors edge. It was prudent for someone in the upper echelon of the government to see what the procedure was for disarming a lunatic president.
Would Pelosi have sought reassurances from Milley if Trump had acted like a normal human being from Nov 9 until January 8 ? I dont think so, but Trump had been acting for 2 months like someone who was reaching peak desperation. Does that mean he was going to blow the world up? No it doesnt, but caution was in order.
Correction. Trump's mental stability was speculation brought up by the Dems and the media and they ran with it because it sounded nice and desperate.
Just knew someone was going to say this. So, what you're saying is we are expected to believe that the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who is second in the line of succession for the Presidency should anything happen to him and has something like 33 years in office, is unclear about what the procedure is for "disarming" a "lunatic" president is? Apparently, you don't know yourself or you wouldn't have said this.
The actual answer to what to do about a President deemed mentally unfit for continuing in office is not found at the Pentagon, it's found in the 25th Amendment. While I believe what Pelosi did was most probably done for propaganda purposes, what she actually did, whether she realizes it or not, is go behind the Constitution to try to influence the highest ranking military officer there as to what should be done in case the President tried to launch missiles, which is a ludicrous worry in the first place.
Now this! This is nonsense. This was all just pure propaganda. I listened and watched the news and it was one speculation, one conjecture after another and none of it based on a shred of evidence whatsoever.
I already block quoted the pertinent part of your statement.
That being true, Pelosi's inquiry lead to nothing more than the Chairman assuring her of that fact.
In FACT, the spokesman for the Chairman said as much...
It was a coup despite all your nonsense and deflections and projection.
It's fucking nonsense
And that somehow explains how I refuted my own argument?
Or this? In FACT, if Pelosi wanted to be reassured about procedure she has a staffer call a staffer at the Pentagon and get the information, which she should already know because, since she served as Speaker of the House before, she's second in the line of succession. In FACT, what she did was, as Speaker of the House, contact the Chairman for the Joint Chiefs about a subject she had no authority to stick her nose into. If she was seriously concerned about Trump's mental state she has no legal Constitutional authority whatsoever to do anything at all at the Pentagon, period. She does it through the 25th amendment.
If Pelosi, or anyone else was unable to secure the cabinet support needed to demobilize the president through the 25th amendment , what should they do then, throw up their hands and say "I tried" ?
As for your true nonsense that
have you read any of the three books that have recently come out about the last weeks and days of the Trump White House?
I'm glad that Nancy Pelosi was thinking ahead and securing agreement from the Joint Chiefs Of Staff to disobey any Trump orders to start a war. It was the right thing to do.
Um, no. Because it was all completely unnecessary. The concern was a complete fabrication for the consumption of the Dem base. Those gullible enough for such things, anyway. Know why I know that? Because Trump's White House may as well have been broadcasting live 24/7 for all the leaks it had in it. Was there ever anything about how he wanted to press the button? Was there anything about how he was just kidding about bringing our troops home? Now, why would he do that if he wanted to start some sort of war?
Super! Glad to know that you feel it's okay to ignore the Constitution if you just really really believe it doesn't count in this situation. Or the next. Or the next. But, I suppose that is what you get from a party that thinks the Constitution is a living document, which is super convenient, because then you can get the constitution to roll over, play dead, play fetch and anything else you want it to do.
I don't read tabloids. I'll wait a few years for an actual historian to come out with something.
This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. You speak of this as if this actually happened. That Trump was actually looking to push the button and people were constantly having to restrain him or something. Like he would get up in the middle of the night, go to the Presidential kitchen to get a cookie and some milk and, "Hey! Since I'm up, why don't I push this big red button?" Or maybe he called the Pentagon every day and said "Please? Just one?"
Nope. Save your fear tactics for someone else. It doesn't work on me.
Like I said, he only had to be wrong once. I am glad someone was watching him.
Yes.
Your claim didn't mention 'procedure'.
The RW is proud that Trump doesn't follow the rules. Milley placed himself between a rock and a hard place by taking a walk with Trump last year.
As Speaker of the House, Pelosi sure as hell DOES have the authority to make a personal inquiry of the Chairman. In FACT, anyone in Congress may do so.
WHAT are you claiming that Pelosi did at the Pentagon?
Nothing about The Turd Reich is a fabrication. He's mentally unstable, a socio/psychopath/malignant narcissist and those that don't believe so support him and make up nonsense about 'legitimate coups'. And are deaf, dumb, and blind to the truth of what happened. And make up bullshit scenarios pulled out of thin air.
And those same folks just have to get in the last word no matter how freaking wrong and stupid they are.
You talk about the Constitution? The Turd Reich wiped his big fat ass with it.
As far as I have read, the president does have access to the nuclear launch codes in the form of the proverbial "nuclear football" briefcase that accompanies them wherever they go. Trump had access for the four years he was in office just as President Biden does now. The codes are totally changed with each new administration so Trump no longer has any access.
Thank Christ!
But doesn't someone else have to co-authorize a nuke launch?
Thanks. Jim. That answers my question. I would hope there would be no hesitancy on anyone's part if nukes have been launched against us.
Doesn't matter. I put him on ignore. His long winded responses hurt my head
I don't blame you - it's all deflection, projection, denial, and whataboutism. Tiresome, beyond tiresome.
No, it doesn't. I was responding to what you said, hence the quote.
Not sure what rules you are referring to so this is a nothing statement. As far as Milley is concerned, he serves at the President's pleasure so he didn't place himself anywhere.
Um, no, they don't. The entirety of the military falls under the Executive branch of government. It has what is called a "chain of command" with the President at the top of that chain. The Speaker of the House has as much authority to involve itself in that chain of command as the President has in interfering with Congressional concerns. Zero. Nada. None whatsoever. If you think that is wrong, please provide the section of the Constitution or other relevant legislation to prove it wrong.
Go back and re read it if you need to.
Nope. Your reply wasn't to what I said, it was to another member and it did NOT mention procedure.
EVERY rule.
The Chairman may serve at the pleasure of the President but HE made the terrible decision to take that walk with Trump and admits that it was inappropriate for him to do so.
You may want to read up on the National Guard in your spare time...
I agree with most of your statement. Unfortunately for YOU, it's irrelevant.
Pelosi made an INQUIRY. You're trying to pretend that she gave an ORDER.
Why?
Oh and BTFW, the POTUS has the authority to 'interfer' with Congress by having control over when they are in session AND when they recess.
No need. Now answer my question.
If I wasn't replying to what you said, why did I quote you?
Um, yeah....
Doesn't matter. You go where you're told to go when you're commander tells you to. You don't have to say anything you don't want to but the rest isn't optional.
Which National Guard? Oh, you mean the one's that get deployed overseas at the needs of the Pentagon? Or do you think it's states that deploy them?
Untrue. If you think I did so, quote me. What I said was 1. This was most likely done for the propaganda value and 2. She wasn't making an inquiry. She was seeking assurances that Trump would not be allowed to use the launch codes.
In other words, by her own authority, backed by nothing at all, she attempted to subvert the authority of a sitting President. This was done in order to continue the propaganda generated purely out of political avarice and not actual fact that Trump was planning not to leave office and that he was dangerously unhinged. There was no basis for either except a diagnosis of TDS. In my opinion, she committed a crime and should have been prosecuted. Being Speaker of the House does not imbue her with constitutional powers to unilaterally take away constitutionally granted powers of the President.
Apparently, there is a need, if you want it answered. Duh!
Are you seriously asking ME to explain YOUR motivations?
So your posit is that Trump ORDERED Gen. Milley to take that walk? That's utter bullshit. Gen. Milley made the call and he admitted that it was a MISTAKE. Here is the video he released:
Oh but we aren't talking about overseas deployments, ARE WE? You know there are different rules for military action on US soil RIGHT?
Right here:
Next?
AGAIN, Pelosi made an INQUIRY. You're trying to pretend that she gave an ORDER. Why?
Meanwhile, here on Earth 1, many members here have read about Trump instructing Acting AG Rosen and his Assistant to say that the election was 'corrupt' and when they refused, Trump threatened to install Clark, his hand picked lackey.
I'm not surprised that those facts haven't made a dent in the sycophancy of Trump's faithful.
You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how unfounded.
You still haven't cited what you claim Pelosi DID at the Pentagon that constitutes a crime. You claim she committed a crime by 'discussing precautions'. Cite the statute.
Annnnnnd at this point I'm done. You aren't even remotely responding coherently to anything I've said. You just type crap and try to pass it off as an actual response to what I say. Not going to sit here and lead you by the hand as to why nothing you've said in this qualifies as responses to what I've actually said. Have a nice day : )
[Deleted]
Your posit was done the moment you posted it.
That's bullshit.
Your inability to cogently answer my questions and your refusal to acknowledge facts is on YOU. Own it.
No need Drakkonis, 'our readers' can see for themselves that your claim about my responses is bullshit.
He took his ball and went home since you proved him wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME.
BY THE WAY, ANY BLM PROTESTS OR ANTI-FA PROTESTS ARE OFF TOPIC.
But...but...but....
That's their favourite form of "DERAIL BY 'WHADDABOUDISM'".
Now what other sort of whataboutism derail tactics can they use?
Perhaps bring about something about Washington Crossing the Delaware?
Or perhaps Washington's Cherry Tree Chopping-down Brouhaha?
Or perhaps "The Battle of Tippicanoe'"?
(Maybe something about The Boer War??? That's always good for a giggle
)
You're always good for a giggle Krishna
Test
I'm doing the best I can!!!
study next time
I think I got a D-.
I'll let you cheat off me next time
Test
maybe something is buggy. I've watched 3 seeds I published and left unlocked a few days ago come back from the dead and end up in the top five a number of times after a single comment, and/or be displaced by a newer seed being published. bfd.
test
Testing works.
Still not on the front page.
I see my two comments on the front page. Funny I only clicked once, though.
Yes it is. Just not up with the five "Trending Articles" in the block. The article is in the Recent Article section with all of the others. Just scroll down.........................
Testing works.
At best we can say Trump was protected from his worst instincts by the people that worked for him. I would shudder to think who he would surround himself with during a second tour. Would he start firing generals and install puppets at the Pentagon? Would he put puppets at the Department of Justice? It looks like he was starting there in the DoJ for a while, so I wouldn't put it past him given some of the reports we've read.
Ever read The Dead Zone?
Several times.
At least Martin Sheen's character (Greg Stillson) did the right thing at the end.
I had to think for a minute...
Remember the scene where - didn't the trumpturdian like character - pull a kid in front of himself to avoid a bullet?
Actually it was a baby
"Johnny loads a rifle and takes aim at Stillson at a rally, with Sarah in the audience. His shot misses the target, but Stillson grabs Sarah's baby and holds him as a human shield. Johnny refuses to risk hitting the child. A photographer snaps a picture of Stillson holding the baby. Sarah retrieves her baby, but before Johnny attempts to fire again, he is shot by Stillson's bodyguard. Confronted by Stillson, Johnny grabs his hand and foresees Stillson's reputation and political ambitions being ruined; after the photograph of his cowardly act is published, Stillson will commit suicide. Johnny lies dying, satisfied that the holocaust has been averted. Sarah embraces Johnny and tells him that she loves him as he dies.
Only trumpturd would never kill himself
Saw the movie.
I never read the book but the movie was great.
book better than movie
There was also a six season TV series. I never watched it so I don't know if it was any good or not.
I started to watch it but couldn't get into it
They always are.
Did that show star Anthony Michael Hall who played Farmer Ted in 16 Candles?
That was a great movie! So funny.
Jake Ryan was named in polls as the perfect boyfriend.
They almost always are.
That's funny - didn't you say that in another seed - and I don't think I got it then but I get it now.
Remember that scene at the end when the bride to be was on muscle relaxers -
I can't seem to find the specific clip when Ginny says 'I feel funky!'
That is my fav scene. Although I thought Jake was a cool bf, I preferred the bf he played in a movie called Sylvester.
The only other movie I ever saw him in was called Wild Hearts Can't Be Broken - that was a good movie too.
The release of these notes has barely made a stir.
Allegations like these only make a stir in the real world when dealing with normal people. Donald Trump commits more acts of fraud, deceit, corruption and graft before breakfast than most corrupt politicians do over their careers.
That's certainly noteworthy.
But perhaps even more significant is the number of people who actually believe him!
Heinlein suggested believing 7 impossible things before breakfast.
The folk who now own RAHs boyhood home cooked me a great omelet once.
They have a very nice tiny breakfast nook.
Actually, it was originally quoted by Lewis Carroll in "Alice in Wonderland".
The real stir will be when he will be testifying about it and they bust his lying ass.