Donald Trump attempted to overthrow the government of the United States 

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  john-russell  •  4 weeks ago  •  125 comments

Donald Trump attempted to overthrow the government of the United States 
One reason for this is that there’s no category in the American news media ecosystem for “attempts to overthrow the American government by the sitting president.” That would be a coup, and it’s well understood that coups don’t happen in America (we have the Constitution you know), so there can’t be a news story about something that it is already known cannot happen. This sounds facetious, but it’s simply a literal description of what is still happening right now.

A Trump lawyer wrote an instruction manual for a coup. Why haven’t you seen it on the news?


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Donald Trump attempted to overthrow the government of the United States

Neither he nor any of his many many co-conspirators throughout the national and state Republican parties have suffered any legal consequences for this. One reason is that the details of this story, which are still emerging nine months later, are not currently being treated as an actual news story by the news media:

There have not been a lot of attempts to depose elected American presidents in my lifetime, though I’m only 34. Not knowing for sure what happens when you dissociate “peaceful transfer of power” from “a society entirely predicated on it,” I sort of think this is a pretty big deal. This is a break-the-glass moment, as some have said, only someone else already broke the glass and took the axe and is running around with it.

It is a little weird to read all these months later about something that was also plain as day at the time. Thursday marked the one-year anniversary of a Barton Gellman article in The Atlantic that laid out the strategy that Trump, with Eastman and others’ help, would pursue. Mother Jones and others covered closely the efforts from the Trump campaign to throw out votes in courts and disenfranchise entire states. My colleague Becca Andrews was even in Atlanta on December 14 when Georgia Republicans showed up at the Capitol to endorse their own pretend slate of Trump electors—a bizarre sideshow that was nonetheless part of a scattershot, collective pretext for the strategy Eastman spelled out. January 6 happened on live TV. But what was described on those couple of pages is what all the stunts and subterfuge were building up to—notes, as it were, on a criminal fucking conspiracy. But it is not such a big deal, apparently, if you watch network TV news. On Wednesday, Media Matters’ Matt Gertz reported that the total number of minutes devoted to the story on either the morning or evening editions of ABC, NBC, or CBS News in the first two days after the [Eastman] memo was published was zero. “In fact,” Gertz wrote, “the only national network broadcasts to mention Trump’s coup memo were the late-night variety shows hosted by Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, and Seth Meyers.”

One reason for this is that there’s no category in the American news media ecosystem for “attempts to overthrow the American government by the sitting president.” That would be a coup, and it’s well understood that coups don’t happen in America (we have the Constitution you know), so there can’t be a news story about something that it is already known cannot happen.

This sounds facetious, but it’s simply a literal description of what is still happening right now.

They did it, they got away with it, and therefore they’re going to do it again.

Speaking of which, another thing that seems like it would count as news is the news that Merrick Garland’s DOJ doesn’t seem to be prosecuting anybody above the street level on this. But there are no stories on that either.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago

www.washingtonpost.com   /lifestyle/media/sullivan-eastman-memo/2021/09/29/68d93000-211f-11ec-9309-b743b79abc59_story.html

A Trump lawyer wrote an instruction manual for a coup. Why haven’t you seen it on the news?

Margaret Sullivan 6-8 minutes   9/29/2021


In a normal world, the “Eastman memo” would be infamous by now, the way “Access Hollywood” became the popular shorthand in 2016 for the damning recording of Donald Trump’s bragging about groping women.

But it’s a good bet that most people have never even heard of the Eastman memo.

That says something troubling about how blasé the mainstream press has become about the attempted coup in the aftermath of the 2020 election — and how easily a coup could succeed next time.

The   memo,   unearthed in Bob Woodward and Robert Costa’s   new book , is a stunner. Written by Trump legal adviser John Eastman — a serious Establishment Type with Federalist Society cred and a law school deanship under his belt — it offered Mike Pence, then in his final days as vice president, a detailed plan to declare the 2020 election invalid and give the presidency to Trump.

In other words, how to run a coup in six easy steps.

Pretty huge stuff, right? You’d think so, but the mainstream press has largely looked the other way. Immediately after the memo was revealed, according to   a study by left-leaning Media Matters for America , there was no on-air news coverage — literally zero on the three major broadcast networks: ABC, NBC and CBS. Not on the evening newscasts watched by more than 20 million Americans, far greater than the audience for cable news. Not on the morning shows the next day. And when Sunday rolled around, NBC’s “Meet the Press” was the only broadcast network show that bothered to mention it. (Some late-night hosts did manage to play it for laughs.)

Many have argued that President Donald Trump's efforts amounted to an attempted coup on Jan. 6. Was it? And why does that matter? (Monica Rodman, Sarah Hashemi/The Washington Post)

The Washington Post reviewed the memo that was obtained for the Woodward-Costa book and wrote about it in a broader   news story   about the book’s revelations and in a news analysis. CNN got a copy, too, and more than most, gave it its due.

But largely, it fell upon a handful of opinion writers to provide the appropriate outrage.

Some national newspapers paid attention, but not much.   USA Today   with a story; the New York Times with a few paragraphs dropped deep into a sweeping   news analysis .

For the most part, the memo slipped past the public — just another piece of flotsam from the wreckage of American society, drifting by unnoticed.

Why wasn’t the Eastman memo treated as what it is: a flashing red alert, signaling that Trump’s allies were (and almost certainly still are) plotting the end of free and fair elections in America?

“Trump and his ilk have flooded the zone with so many attacks on democracy that it’s paradoxically become less likely for journalists to focus on any specific case,” said Matthew Gertz, senior fellow at Media Matters.

But the former and current network executives I spoke with offered a different view — and largely agreed with decisions to downplay the memo.

For Tom Bettag, the document landed in his “shocked but not surprised” category. A former executive producer for “CBS Evening News” with stints at three other networks who now teaches at the University of Maryland, Bettag saw the story as merely “an unknown lawyer, who says he’s on the Trump legal team and had said Kamala Harris was   not a citizen , wrote a crazy memo.”

He echoed the view of one network representative who told me: “After all, it didn’t happen.” In Bettag’s words: “There’s no indication that Pence considered it seriously.”

Others pointed out that there’s so much other news to cover these days: the brewing government shutdown, the aftermath of the Afghanistan troop withdrawal, and of course, the audience-riveting case of Gabby Petito, the 22-year-old woman whose remains were found in Wyoming last week.

You’d think, though, that a few seconds of precious airtime might be given to something as startling as the Eastman memo. In   numbered steps   subtitled the “January 6 scenario,” it outlined how Pence, charged by the Constitution with counting electoral ballots from the 2020 election on that day, could have simply ignored results from seven states that tipped the presidency to Biden. Pence would effectively throw away millions of votes from Arizona, Pennsylvania and any other state where fraudulent groups of   “shadow electors ” had challenged Biden’s victory based on no valid legal principle whatsoever.

“The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission — either from a vote of the joint session [of Congress] or from the Court,” Eastman wrote.

The Post’s Philip Bump   summarized   Eastman’s endgame: “Predicting ‘howls’ from Democrats, Pence says, fine, let the House decide, as is procedure when there’s a tie in the electoral college. In that case, each state gets one vote and, given that Republicans controlled 26 states, Trump wins again.”

One way or the other, a no-lose proposition for Trump.

Yes, it’s downright bone-chilling to think that this   lawyer and legal scholar   who was enough of an insider to have a speaking role at Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, had gamed it out like this. (After protests by his colleagues at California’s Chapman University, where he once was the law school dean, Eastman retired.)

But the news coverage wasn’t nearly widespread or prominent enough to make “the Eastman memo” a household name or to strike that legitimate fear into the hearts of citizens. To raise that red alert.

It’s telling that we’ve become so inured to Trump’s flagrant disregard for the will of the electorate. As Robert Kagan wrote last week in a grim opinion piece that   did   seem to break through the noise, a   Trump-fueled constitutional crisis is already upon us,   although the warning signs “may be obscured by the distractions of politics, the pandemic, the economy and global crises, and by wishful thinking and denial.”

And still, some dismiss Eastman’s plan as not newsworthy. “After all, it didn’t happen.”

Well, no, it didn’t. But a riot at the Capitol did — on the same day, fueled by the same autocratic lust.

Eastman’s coup hasn’t happened yet. But given the media’s shrug-off, maybe all we have to do is wait.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2  Dulay    4 weeks ago

Giuliani's deposition goes into detail exactly what their thinking was and his ramblings closely follow the assertions of the Eastman memo. Ironically, Giuliani's rambling had nothing to do with the question he was asked...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Dulay @2    4 weeks ago

We all need to ask why this information  ( as revealed in the Woodward-Costa book) has not been the lead story on the national news. 

Trump tried to organize a coup and it hasnt even been denied in the specifics. I sure hope the Jan 6 committee in Congress is going to dive deep into this. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    4 weeks ago

Trump will litigate the fuck out of every step the Commission takes though I question the mental state of any lawyer that would represent Trump in those cases. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @2.1.1    3 weeks ago
He hired Giuliani because no one sane would represent him and then threw him under the bus and stiffed him for the bill.  

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
2.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.2    3 weeks ago

In Rudy's case, Trump was right not to pay him.  He is totally incompetent and I would not have paid him either.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Dulay @2    4 weeks ago

Ironically, Giuliani's rambling had nothing to do with the question he was asked...

Both Giuliani and Trump are known for incriminating themselves when they go off script.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.2.1  Dulay  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2    4 weeks ago
Both Giuliani and Trump are known for incriminating themselves when they go off script.

Which is why I laughed when I heard that Trump was suing his niece. I can't wait for his deposition in that case!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Dulay @2.2.1    4 weeks ago
I can't wait for his deposition in that case!

You know that won't happen.  Trump will go to any extreme whatsoever to not be put under oath.  Not sure he has the ability to recognize the truth anymore.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.2.3  Dulay  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2.2    4 weeks ago

Oh but he HAS been deposed multiple times Ozz and some of them are available online. My favorite is the one where he admits he doesn't have anything to do with negotiating contracts and doesn't read what he signs. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.2.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Dulay @2.2.3    4 weeks ago

When Trump was suing the writer Tim O'Brien for what he said about Trump in O'Briens book at the time, Trump was deposed. It is estimated that he lied 35 times during that under oath deposition. There is a web page out there that catalogues all the lies. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.4    3 weeks ago

He lied but was not charged with perjury?  Or is the POTUS immune from such charges?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.2.6  Dulay  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.2.5    3 weeks ago

It was in a civil case [Trump suing O'Brien] and in a deposition. So I guess they'd have to sue him for lying, if that's possible. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2.7  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Dulay @2.2.6    3 weeks ago

They would have to prove injury (could be physical or emotional) or actual damages, I suppose, to have a case.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
2.2.8  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dulay @2.2.1    3 weeks ago

If he does in the off chance win the lawsuit, I hope he receives what he did in another multi million law suit that he actually won......one dollar.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @2    3 weeks ago

"Giuliani's deposition goes into detail exactly what their thinking was and his ramblings closely follow the assertions of the Eastman memo. Ironically, Giuliani's rambling had nothing to do with the question he was asked...

Speaking of which

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3  Paula Bartholomew    4 weeks ago

We knew that on 6 Jan, so this is not news.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    4 weeks ago

Gotta disagree with you this time Paula. The Eastman memo is a smoking gun. Both the text of it and the fact that Trump approved it. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.1  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    4 weeks ago

I don't think it's the smoking gun you want it to be. It lays out a proposed scenaro, it doesn't explicitly say to do it and it wasn't acted on.  I don't know that it will amount to much in the courts, but of course I would expect the Jan 6th investigation to attempt to make hay with it as IMO the investigation is more for the 2022 election cycle than anything else.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.1    4 weeks ago

Just one more smoking gun, eh?

I think we have heard enough of these claims of smoking guns--enough to outfit an entire army if you have read the pablum spewed here daily.

SOSDD

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.1    4 weeks ago

I disagree that it is not specific. I think it is quite specific. We know that Trump approved of it because he met with Eastman in the oval office to discuss it and afterwards told Pence to listen to Eastman explain it to him. 

This all appears in the Woodward book and neither Trump or Eastman have denied the existence of this memo. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.2    4 weeks ago

Once again, unlike many people here , you cannot come close to addressing the issue. Just more peanut gallery bullshit from you. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.5  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

It's specific in detail, but there's nothing there to indicate that Pence was ordered to follow it.  The memo laid out a plan. Trump may even have stated how much he liked it. But unless there is hard evidence that it was the ordered plan of attack I have a hard time seeing it go far. I expect it to be used during the 22 election cycle and if Trump does run to also be used heavily in the 24 election cycle. But I don't think it will amount to much legally.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.6  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.1    4 weeks ago
it wasn't acted on. 

Had Mike Pence been more like Donald Trump and John Eastman it would have been acted on. The fact that is wasnt acted on may be a legal defense, but it certainly isnt a moral one. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.7  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.5    4 weeks ago

Woodward says Trump told Pence to listen to John Eastman. 

Trump has not denied this, probably because he said many other times as well that he wanted Pence to prevent the counting of the electoral votes on Jan 6. 

If Mike Pence had followed Eastman's plan Trump would have been the happiest person on earth. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    4 weeks ago

Here, JR, just for you:

“In fact,” Gertz wrote, “the only national network broadcasts to mention Trump’s coup memo were the late-night variety shows hosted by Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, and Seth Meyers.”

Since an alarming number of progressives apparently get their news from late night comedians, this is not surprising.

Seems like this isn't some huge news scoop.

Not everyone in America is willing to go Chicken Little over every little thing.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.10  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.9    4 weeks ago

Not surprising that you consider a concrete plan to steal the election a "little thing". 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.11  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.7    4 weeks ago

The memo laid out what the Trump team and lawyers stated were constitutional grounds for Pence to push back on seven states which would then throw the electoral college votes for those states back to the House. As the Republicans had the advantage in those counts, a partisan House vote would hand those electoral college votes to Trump.  The memo to me does not lay out illegal acts, it reports that the lawyers on paper felt the action was legal and constitutional.  That's why I don't believe it will go far legally.

But I did have to chuckle at 3.1.6.  You've spent the better part of six years telling everybody who would listen just how bad/wrong/etc Trump was.  I don't think you ever implied he was moral...   

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.1.12  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    4 weeks ago

His rally that day was proof that he not only approved but encouraged it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.10    4 weeks ago

Jeez, give it a fucking rest. No one stole anything.

Biden won, remember?

Biden sits in the WH, remember?

And now we can hold Democrats responsible for all the Biden fuck-ups.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.14  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.13    4 weeks ago

Do you have an actual argument to make on this topic or are you just going to whine? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.14    4 weeks ago

I can't help it if you didn't read post 3.1.9.

Strange, because it LOOKS like you responded TO it.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
3.1.16  r.t..b...  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.11    4 weeks ago

“That's why I don't believe it will go far legally.” 

We can only hope.

That this is potentially going to the courts, and to courts that are appointed by those who have little consideration of Constitutional precedent, should give us all pause.

Our entire system of governance is being threatened by those that have no appreciation of what that means, what that requires, and what we all stand to lose. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.17  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.11    4 weeks ago
The memo laid out what the Trump team and lawyers stated were constitutional grounds for Pence to push back on seven states which would then throw the electoral college votes for those states back to the House.

Really? The memo instructs Pence to say that the results of certain swing states were "in dispute" and thus would not be counted. In dispute according to who? All of those states, like every other state,  had their results certified and ready to be counted. The fact that Trump disputed the results cuts no mustard. There was no actual basis for saying the results were "in dispute". That is why it would have been a coup. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
3.1.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.2    4 weeks ago

It is almost funny that for 4 years we heard these "smoking gun" claims and not a single one lead to anything of substance.  

It seems that, because of the number of posts by this person, somebody has an unhealthy obsession with Trump.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.19  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @3.1.18    4 weeks ago

I am not responsible for your delusions. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.20  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

More importantly, Republican legislatures have proceeded to pass laws that allow them to do exactly what Eastman's memo is predicated on, transmitting dual slates of electors. 

That predicate NEVER existed in 2020/2021. Not ONE state transmitted alternate electors to Pence. Yet now, multiple states legislatures have empowered themselves to do just that and in doing so, ignore the votes of their citizens, based solely on innuendo and unfounded assertions. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
3.1.21  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.10    4 weeks ago

The government was never in danger of being overthrown

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.22  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.17    4 weeks ago

The memo also says why they felt Pence could say this.  You are pushing hard to make this the missing piece for locking Trump away. I don't believe it is. I feel this  is much more likely to be used during the 2022 (and potentially 2024) election cycles but will have rather little impact in the legal system. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
3.1.23  r.t..b...  replied to  Dulay @3.1.20    4 weeks ago

“…ignore the votes of their citizens…”

…frightening enough in thought, the very end of our democracy in intended application. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
3.1.24  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.1    4 weeks ago
it wasn't acted on

Just because it wasn't successful doesn't mean it wasn't acted on. It's clear that Trump and his cronies had a plan and exerted pressure on others in an effort to forward that plan. Just because other key players within the government like Pence chose not to be part of it which led to the plan crumbling doesn't mean Trump is cleared of any wrongdoing.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.25  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.22    4 weeks ago

Trump has devalued American national honor so severely that we end up having people dismiss the seriousness of all this. A sitting president INTENDED to stay in office by stealing the election he lost. Whether he succeed or not or whether it was carried out or not is hardly the point. It is what the then president of the United States wanted to happen. Previously to Trump, this sort of thing would have been considered the greatest scandal in the nation's history. 

America has changed for the worse, and it will get worse before it gets better. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.26  Dulay  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.11    4 weeks ago
The memo to me does not lay out illegal acts, it reports that the lawyers on paper felt the action was legal and constitutional.  That's why I don't believe it will go far legally.

The memo is predicated on a fantasy Snuffy. Note one state 'transmitted dual slates of electors'. It's utter BS which, if the book is to be believed, Trump fell for hook line and sinker and insisted that Pence sit through a briefing to walk him through the scenario.

The book also claims that Pence sought out Quayle to advise him on what to do. Allegedly, after much tooth gnashing and Pence hoping for a different answer, Quayle replied: "I do know the position you're in," Quayle responded. "I also know what the law is. You listen to the parliamentarian. That's all you do. You have no power."

In short. this was a close thing and the Congress needs to address the fact that we came too fucking close to a constitutional crisis because of a psychopathic narcissist and his minions. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1.27  Trout Giggles  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.25    4 weeks ago

IMO, it was a conspiracy to "overthrow" the government. There was intent, opportunity, and motive

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.28  Texan1211  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.21    4 weeks ago
The government was never in danger of being overthrown

Well, of course it wasn't.

[Deleted] people seem to believe that there was some attempt at a coup, and they insist on perpetuating the lie.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.29  Snuffy  replied to  Dulay @3.1.26    4 weeks ago
The memo is predicated on a fantasy Snuffy.

Of course it is. Doesn't mean it's going to amount to much legally. That's the line, what can be used legally. 

The biggest gain for Democrats IMO will be to add this to the wall to prevent Trump from getting back into the election in 24. And if he does run (and wins the primary) to use it against him like a great big hammer.  For myself I don't want him to run. I like some of his policies and actions while he was president but the last 4 - 6 months of his presidency are too much for me to want to vote for him again. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.30  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.29    4 weeks ago
That's the line, what can be used legally. 

No its not. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.31  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.27    4 weeks ago

You are 100% correct again  TG. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.45  Dulay  replied to    4 weeks ago

My link is from THIS seed and this thread. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.46  Dulay  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.29    2 weeks ago
That's the line, what can be used legally. 

Why is that the line? Understanding who advised Trump and what he was planning and why is important. Especially since he is still pulling the leavers of the GOP. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    3 weeks ago

As I can't reply to your comment as the mad locker has struck again, I will have to reply here JR.  I am referring to what we heard from Mo(ron) flack jacket Brooks, hand down his pants Rudy, and the orange toddler at the rally that day.  I also saw the riot unfold as did the rest of the world.  It was to overthrow and trash democracy pure and simple.  Of course we did not know of The Eastman memo on that day but we saw the results.  I should have been clearer in my original comment, apologies.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4  Jeremy Retired in NC    4 weeks ago
A Trump Lawyer Wrote An Instruction Manual For A Coup. Why Haven’t You Seen It On The News?

Could it be due to the claim, like all the other claims, this one is fiction?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4    4 weeks ago

No. 

Note that there hasn't been a denial from anyone that the memo is authentic. Also note that if someone DOES deny it's authentic, it opens Pence up to being deposed under oath. THAT is something I would love to see. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Dulay @4.1    4 weeks ago

They can't deny it because obviously Woodward and Costas have a "paper trail" of it through emails. 

They were given this information, probably by someone in the office of Sen Mike Lee, who was shown the memo by Trump forces in order to gauge his reaction. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.1    4 weeks ago

Were those emails between the parties in question...trmp and eastman?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.2    4 weeks ago

To my knowledge,  Eastman presented the plan to Trump in person, in the oval office. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.4  Dulay  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.2    4 weeks ago

Attorney-client privilege. Where they screwed up was sending it to Lee, who has no such claim. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @4.1.4    4 weeks ago

Ah. I got my juris doctorate from watching Law and Order...I should have known that

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @4.1.4    4 weeks ago

Eastman must have received F's in the Attorney-Client Privilege class

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.7  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Dulay @4.1.4    4 weeks ago

The most likely explanation is that neither Eastman nor Trump thought there was anything wrong with what they were planning to do. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.7    4 weeks ago

Of course they didn't! Trmp believes himself to be above the law

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.9  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.7    4 weeks ago

Or that Lee was a 'fellow traveler' and would fall on his sword for Trump. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.1.10  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.1    4 weeks ago
a "paper trail" of it through emails.

So let's see them.  Provide the emails instead of another hit piece.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.11  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.10    4 weeks ago

take your whining up with bob woodward , he says it went down and no one has disputed it. if you thinks he is making this up you are dreaming

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.12  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.10    4 weeks ago

Actually, there is no need for proof of emails. Sen. Lee, during a live town hall meeting on Jan, 27th told his constituents about the Eastman memo [without naming him], cited a brief summary, and stated that he called state officials in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona and they all denied Eastman's fantasy. 

BTW, here's the video, FF to 12:00 and then start at the beginning for the rest of his narrative. 

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
4.1.13  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    4 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.10    4 weeks ago

How'd you like the video Jeremy? 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.1.16  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @4.1.14    3 weeks ago

Still waiting for that proof.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.1.17  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @4.1.12    3 weeks ago
ctually, there is no need for proof of emails.

The claim is that there are emails.  The lack of the emails makes this as made up as a J. K. Rowling novel.  Forgive me if I'm not surprised about another cluster of BS.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.18  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.16    3 weeks ago

If you refuse to believe the statements of Sen. Lee, I can't help you Jeremy. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.19  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.17    3 weeks ago
The claim is that there are emails.  The lack of the emails makes this as made up as a J. K. Rowling novel.  Forgive me if I'm not surprised about another cluster of BS.

Do you think that Eastman went to Sen. Lee's office and handed the memo to him Jeremy? 

Oh and BTFW, kvetching about 'emails' is a sad attempt at deflecting from the FACT that Sen. Lee acknowledged the intent of the fabricated Eastman memo. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.1.20  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @4.1.18    3 weeks ago
If you refuse to believe the statements of Sen. Lee

They're no different than statements from you.  Nothing but speculation until proven otherwise.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.21  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.20    3 weeks ago

That is an utterly ridiculous statement Jeremy. Sen. Lee did a 15 minute narrative about the run up and the day of the Jan. 6th insurrection. Lee gains NOTHING by fabricating that narrative. 

Oh and BTFW emails can be fabricated too...

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.1.22  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @4.1.21    3 weeks ago
Oh and BTFW emails can be fabricated too..

You mean like charges of colluding with Russia.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.1.23  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.22    3 weeks ago

No. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4    3 weeks ago

The record of it may be sealed for now due to the investigation.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.2.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2    3 weeks ago
Lee did a 15 minute narrative about the run up and the day of the Jan. 6th insurrection. Lee gains NOTHING by fabricating that narrative. 

And that would be the 1st time the Democrats abide by that rule.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.2.2  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.2.1    3 weeks ago

That was MY comment Jeremy, but of course you KNOW that. 

Your comment is non-responsive. Try harder. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.2.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @4.2.2    3 weeks ago
That was MY comment Jeremy, 

You want a cookie?  

Your comment is non-responsive. 

My comment still stands despite your opinion.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.2.4  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.2.3    3 weeks ago
You want a cookie?  

No thanks. 

BTW, why blockquote MY comment and then fail to address it's topic? 

My comment still stands despite your opinion.

It's not an opinion Jeremy, it's a fact. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.2.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dulay @4.2.4    3 weeks ago
It's not an opinion Jeremy, it's a fact.

Until you back it up, it's opinion.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.2.6  Dulay  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.2.5    2 weeks ago
Until you back it up, it's opinion.

That's YOUR opinion Jeremy.

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
5  Ender    4 weeks ago

How is this not a big deal and being brushed aside. The president wanted to use unscrupulous tactics to change the results of an election.

And people just shrug their shoulders...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Ender @5    4 weeks ago

People are blase now about things like this. This is what happens when you let someone like Trump occupy the national political stage for years and years. The country's sense of outrage becomes degraded. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    4 weeks ago

Outrage became diluted after 5 years of being chicken littled by the left.

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
5.1.2  dennis smith  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.1    4 weeks ago

And still the same BS is spouted by the left. Some never realize they comment like cartoon figures.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.1.3  Dulay  replied to  dennis smith @5.1.2    4 weeks ago
Some never realize they comment like cartoon figures.

Get a mirror. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @5.1.3    4 weeks ago
Get a mirror. 

Silly response to someone who obviously has read the comments here.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.1.5  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dulay @5.1.3    3 weeks ago

Daffy Duck is outraged by his comment.  He may sue.jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
5.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ender @5    4 weeks ago
The president wanted

As my mother, rest her soul, used to say, "Want in one hand and shit in the other and see which one fills up first."

There was zero chance any attempt at this would have failed miserably. It needs to be shrugged off.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
5.2.1  Ender  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2    4 weeks ago

You say that now yet what if someone tries again. Hell they laid out a plan.

Are you going to tell me that if say Hillary had a plan to over throw an election, the right wouldn't be spitting blood.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ender @5.2.1    4 weeks ago

You know very well they would. And we don't even need to speculate on who would lead the parade here on NT

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Ender @5.2.1    4 weeks ago

They have absolutely nothing to counteract the truth. They just flail and pretend. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
5.2.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ender @5.2.1    4 weeks ago
Are you going to tell me that if say Hillary had a plan to over throw an election, the right wouldn't be spitting blood.

Some may I suppose but I am not one of them. And she wouldn't get it done either.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.2.5  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.3    4 weeks ago

What's worse is the overt hypocrisy. They would be screaming their lungs out if a Democrat was revealed to have conspired to overturn the election. It wouldn't matter if it was a totally delusional conspiracy, they would be here posting seed after seed about it. 

 
 
 
Sister Moosh Noosh Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
5.2.6  Sister Moosh Noosh Ample Bottom  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2    4 weeks ago
There was zero chance any attempt at this would have failed miserably. It needs to be shrugged off.

The attempt itself was successful.  It was the follow-through that failed.  

Shrug this:

image.jpg

and this:

f4f1983b-eeb3-4909-b5b8-784d14d88a31_1140x641.jpg

and this:

AP21006757472396-1024x683.jpg

and this:

b92234f30c98a4cb0438e1a8ffbb38b9

and this:

R.8d8a5e7888b1cfbc49f1f32741087d5c?rik=TWNhoo67N5nzWQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.milwaukeeindependent.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2021%2f01%2f010821_MAGA-BLM_x02.jpg&ehk=19kZiiFkV42CaSvX9cj2B7JwvsfO8h85bUGlPeCdFEA%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

and this:

%E2%80%98Zip-tie-guy-at-Capitol-Riot-had-arsenal-of-weapons-including.jpg

People died.  Countless others were hurt.  In addition, these pricks caused $1.5 million in damage to my Capitol building.

That you think what happened needs to be shrugged off, then you are part of the problem. 

The only thing that needs to be shrugged off is this prick:

b805b5062de301a78b6ed7386084c7ad

Law Enforcement agents had to yank his silly behind out of his granny's closet.  In custody, he folded like a cheap suit.  One thing, though...How many people do you know who try to camouflage a deadly spear with an American flag?  Yep, just another ordinary tourist.

Yeah, so get to shruggin', Pappaw, and leave saving this country to those of us who give a damn about it.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
5.2.7  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2    4 weeks ago
It needs to be shrugged off.

512

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Principal
5.2.8  Raven Wing  replied to  Sister Moosh Noosh Ample Bottom @5.2.6    4 weeks ago
and leave saving this country to those of us who give a damn about it.

Right on Sister! Well said!

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
5.2.9  Ronin2  replied to  MrFrost @5.2.7    3 weeks ago

Great thing about stupid posts like this is that they can be so easily trashed.

Benghazi

  • Terrorists attack US government facility with RPG's, mortars, and AK 47's. Invades the compound and kills the US ambassador, 2 CIA operatives former navy seals, and an information officer. All worked for the US government.
  • Help was withheld when it was a short distance away. The two CIA operatives were painting targets; as there was supposed to be a drone in the area. No drone strikes occurred. They were a part of a CIA operation a short distance away (running guns to Syrian resistance groups through the compound in Benghazi). The rest of the operatives didn't go help.
  • There were warnings in advance of the terrorist attack- they were ignored.
  • The compound was destroyed.
  • Obama and Hillary lied about the reason behind the terrorist hit (in fact they denied it was a terrorist hit). They blamed a movie that no one had damn well ever heard of before.
  • The terrorists were "allies" we had supported in the overthrow of Qaddafi. 
  • Obama and Democrats obstruct the hell out of all of the investigations. 

Jan 6th

  • Unarmed mob attacks a US government building. No guns, no bombs, advanced weaponry of any type. No government officials killed only person killed is an unarmed rioter who had served in the military- shot at short range by a scared LEO, when 2 other LEO's in the immediate area took no action. LEO has been defended by the hypocritical left because white lives to not matter.  The other 4 deaths are lies from left wing idiots- none have been proven to be connected to Jan 6th.
  • Rioters dispersed on their own. No room to room fighting, no severe damage done to government building. The LEO's didn't need to retake anything. 
  • One thing in common- there were advanced warnings of an attack- but they were ignored. 
  • Several FBI operatives were a part of the rioters. But they did nothing to stop it.
  • Pelosi appoints two TDS driven lap dog Republicans to the commission to try and make the faux claim that it is bipartisan. Denies Republican appointed representatives 
  • TDS Democrats are desperate to pin something/anything on Trump. This has nothing to do with law, this has nothing to do with reality. This is all about their fear that Trump may run for president again- and after all of the BS they are pulling- may very well win. They will do anything to prevent that.
  • Democrats will never "move on"

As for the costs involved. Throw in the Mueller Report/Investigation; the two faux impeachments; and now this idiotic investigation after the FBI already stated Trump had nothing to do with the planning of Jan 6th- it was a few small far alt right groups; and lacked any organization- which is obvious to anyone that looks at Jan 6th objectively. They are all connected. The Democrats will never let the TDS die.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.2.10  Dulay  replied to  Ronin2 @5.2.9    3 weeks ago

Too much BS to address. 

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.2.11  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ender @5.2.1    3 weeks ago

The mistake she made was not demanding an audit and recount.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.2.12  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Sister Moosh Noosh Ample Bottom @5.2.6    3 weeks ago

The LEO who shot the traitor did what we expect men to do.  He took out the trash.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.2.13  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  MrFrost @5.2.7    3 weeks ago

It should read 4 Americans and 1 seditious traitor.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.2.14  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ender @5.2.1    3 weeks ago

So many heads would explode that it would look like the remake of the movie Scanners.

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
5.2.15  dennis smith  replied to  Ronin2 @5.2.9    3 weeks ago

When facts get presented they are dismissed as BS by some on the left. Expect that reaction and you will not be disappointed

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
5.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Ender @5    4 weeks ago
And people just shrug their shoulders...

Because there are some Americans who are more loyal to their ideology and faith than they are to our constitution. If getting their ideology and/or faith into a position of absolute power means abandoning the constitution, I believe few right wing conservative Trump loyalists would even give it a second thought, constitution be damned, all hail Fuhrer Trump!

It shouldn't be surprising how callous many right wing conservatives are when faced with inconvenient facts, we've seen them shrugging their shoulders at numerous ethics violations, abuses of power, obstruction of justice, extortion of other governments for personal political gain, illegal use of campaign funds, campaign finance violations, retaliation against whistleblowers, dozens of accusations of sexual assault, none of it matters to many right wing conservatives because they were promised by Trump that he would appoint conservative justices who would overturn Roe v Wade and fight for the right of religious conservatives to continue discriminating against those their faith labels "sinners" and fight against the "brown wave" of immigrants from our Southern border who they see as a threat to their fantasy "white Christian culture".

So seeing them shrug their shoulders when faced with what is clearly an attempt to discard the free and fair election results for their personal political gain should be about as surprising as finding out bears shit in the woods.

 
 
 
Veronica
Junior Guide
5.3.1  Veronica  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.3    4 weeks ago

Your comment hits the points that need to be addressed, but are so often swept under the rug.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
Masters Participates
5.3.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.3    3 weeks ago
So seeing them shrug their shoulders when faced with what is clearly an attempt to discard the free and fair election results for their personal political gain should be about as surprising as finding out bears shit in the woods.

I can see their defense now, but, but, not the bears that are in the zoo, so it's not a 100% conclusive that Trump shit on our Constitution True, because of Zoo Keepers of the Pseudo Faith slappin the face of reason, cause they don't like what we all knows, so cut it off, and let it goes   Despite their spite, any thinking individual knows what is true and RIGHT, and it is not Trump or his facilitraitors , or the 'right' that incessantly see ONLY what they wish, cause they are all from the same school of phish, flipping the truth around and ignoring the reality, of what the rest of US All see clear asz day, but they say i am wrong, cause i wrote this in the night, and they would be wrong once again, cause wrote last night as in this mourning , but just hit send now, but innocent via technicality, so after reading their defenses of the indefensible, just wow, just wow.....

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.4  Tessylo  replied to  Ender @5    3 weeks ago
"Whether he succeed or not or whether it was carried out or not is hardly the point. It is what the then president of the United States wanted to happen."
I was unable to respond to this above - unfreakingbelieveable that for whatshisname to have the intent to do this but not actually able to carry it out - and therefore can't be charged or whatever for this crime.
Unfreakingbelieveable.  

Some folks are holding up Pence (no offense intended) like he did the right thing by not agreeing with whatshisname and Eastman - which he did, but he had to ask someone else - Quayle - what should he do?  NOT GO ALONG WITH EASTMAN AND WHATSHISNAME is what!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
6  Paula Bartholomew    4 weeks ago

WTF SP?  What is with locking all those comments?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @6    4 weeks ago
What is with locking all those comments?

i agree with you Paula

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    4 weeks ago

As do I. What is the reason for locking 4 hours worth of discussion and disappearing comments? 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

shona1
GregTx
CB
XXJefferson51
JohnRussell


45 visitors