Rep. Chip Roy tears into Jack Smith over Arctic Frost subpoenas: 'Did you target my records?'
Category: News & Politics
Via: vic-eldred • 10 months ago • 144 commentsBy: Story by Josh Christenson
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
WASHINGTON — A Texas Republican congressman tore into former special counsel Jack Smith during a Wednesday hearing after learning that his phone records were among more than a dozen seized amid the Trump prosecutor’s probe of 2020 election interference.
Smith maintained over the course of the more than five-hour House Judiciary Committee hearing that he pursued his investigation without “partisan loyalties” or “regrets” about the first prosecution of a former US president.
Follow The Post’s live coverage of President Trump and national politics for the latest news and analysis
Few new details emerged from the ex-special counsel’s testimony, but the venue provided an opportunity for Judiciary Republicans to interrogate Smith about his decision to obtain sitting lawmakers’ phone metadata without their knowledge.
“Did you target my records and subpoena my phone?” Rep. Chip Roy fumed at Smith, brandishing a poster board behind him of at least 14 Republicans who also had their call logs subpoenaed.
“My understanding is your records were subpoenaed by prosecutors before I became special counsel,” Smith responded to Roy, while elsewhere in his testimony acknowledging that others, including House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), were targeted.
“I learned for the first time a few weeks ago that my phone records were indeed targeted,” Roy revealed, displaying an internal government email on a TV in the hearing room.
“We called AT&T, and we’ve learned they were given to the Department of Justice, as this email indicates, because I’ve been in communication with [Rep.] Scott Perry [R-Pa.],” he noted, referencing one of the 14 lawmakers whom The Post previously reported had also been secretly surveilled by the FBI .
The FBI’s Arctic Frost probe began the process of looking into the Republicans more than a year after the Capitol riot — but Smith’s team took over and sought more phone records in May 2023 .
Smith said in his testimony that the records were for calls between Jan. 4 and 7 of 2021 to see who Trump’s then-personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani had contacted Republicans “to try to further delay” the certification of Joe Biden’s victory.
“We had evidence that the president had directed Rudy Giuliani, one of his co-conspirators, to contact members of Congress to try to further delay the proceedings and exploit the violence that happened in the Capitol,” Smith added.
At least four ex-cops who defended the Capitol amid the January 2021 riot confronted GOPers at Thursday’s hearing — including former Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone who forced a cough to mutter under his breath “go f–k yourself” at Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas).
Roy erupted that his records were sought in May 2022 and he “couldn’t object because I didn’t know — I didn’t know until about three weeks ago.”
Smith told lawmakers the subpoenas were “consistent with department policy,” but acknowledged at other points in his testimony that the “policy has since changed.”
Democrats rejected their GOP colleagues’ claims that the subpoenas were unlawful, with Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) blaming the Senate for not taking up bills authored in the Judiciary Committee to “limit” the power in the past.
The debate took place on the same day that the House voted unanimously to block the US senators from being able to sue the Department of Justice from doing so in the future for up to $500,000.
Judiciary panel members also debated in the hearing why the National Guard wasn’t deployed quickly to stop the riot, alleged political pressure from the Biden administration to prosecute Trump and other unusual prosecutorial steps taken by Smith.
He couldn’t “recall” who administered his oath of office — with his appointment later being ruled unlawful by a federal judge — and he defended gag orders against Trump even amid the 2024 campaign.
The former Trump prosecutor also noted at least twice that his 2020 election interference indictment against the sitting president could be refiled in the future since it was dismissed by a judge without prejudice.
The president fired back on his Truth Social “there is no question that Deranged Jack Smith should be prosecuted for his actions” following the testimony in the Judiciary Committee.
“He destroyed the lives of many innocent people, which has been his history as a prosecutor,” Trump said, before adding: “At a minimum, he committed large scale perjury!”
In the hearing, Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) and others drew attention to the Supreme Court’s overturning of bribery charges brought by Smith against former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican.
Judiciary Democrats requested at the close of the hearing for the former special counsel to be brought back for testimony about his other indictment involving the alleged retention of classified documents at the president’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
The former special counsel’s subpoenas — which Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has likened to a “fishing expedition” — were hidden because Smith filed them under a non-disclosure order.
Grassley first obtained files from whistleblowers in October — revealing the investigative steps that became “the vehicle by which FBI agents and DOJ prosecutors could improperly investigate the entire Republican political apparatus.”
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Iowa), one of the more than dozen lawmakers targeted, has dubbed the disclosures “Joe Biden’s Watergate” and called for the impeachment of judges who signed off on the orders keeping them under wraps.
On Thursday, several House Republicans accused Smith of violating the Constitution’s Speech and Debate clause by seeking the information, which would have included other phones contacted by the lawmakers.
Many of the subpoenas sought contact information between Jan. 4 and 7 of 2021, the days immediately before and after the Capitol was breached by a mob of Trump’s supporters, halting the 2020 election’s certification.
“Was there any limits to your investigation or the investigation that preceded you, Mr. Smith?” asked Roy during his line of questioning.
“Because as egregious as a violation of separation of powers this is, as egregious as an abuse of power it is,” the Texas rep added. “It’s far more concerning you were clearly targeting American citizens for merely being conservative or supporting the president.”
Judiciary chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) didn’t immediately object to the notion of holding a second hearing with Smith, while highlighting in other rounds of questioning how his team had uncovered evidence the special counsel paid $20,000 to a confidential informant.
Tags
Who is online
105 visitors
At least somebody took on this scumbag:
“It’s far more concerning you were clearly targeting American citizens for merely being conservative or supporting the president.”
gee, it looks like traitorous members of the organ donor party directly involved with the attempted J6 insurrection have a little more than 9 months to liquidate their assets and escape to a country that has no extradition treaty with the US ...
And you like Smith have zero evidence.
That's called "lawfare."
Yeah despite all their planning, the Democrat's "insurrection" really fell through didn't it.
No matter how hard they try they can't fool the American people.
Yesterday a poll came out showing Trump badly underwater on virtually every major issue of the day. Trump's response was to say he was going to sue the pollsters.
Your hero is not of sound mind.
I'll look at polls after people get their tax returns. We can discuss that in June.
Right now, I'm interested in the lawfare of Jack Smith.
One would think they would learn from their multitude of mistakes.
And ANOTHER sad distraction from the lawfare carried out by Smith and the Democrats. Not to mention there is no link backing up your claim. Although I'm not surprised in the least.
You should try to keep up with the news better
New poll shows stunning numbers on No. 1 issue Trump promised to …
1 day ago · President Donald Trump’s approval rating is underwater on nearly every issue, according to a new poll. The New York Times/Siena College poll, released Thursday, showed Trump with an overall
Oh I do. Just don't get your panties in a wad because I see things differently than you.
And I still don't see a link to ANYTHING you referenced. Didn't you just try to get me in a meta article for doing EXACTLY what you are doing?
So why not put that in your original comment?
THAT is your "gotcha" moment? LMAO.
You are my gotcha moment. Always.
Naw, that would assume some rational behavior which is lacking in many.
States a seriously fooled American (i presume) person
Kamala is that you? That word salad sounds just like her
He tried to shame me for bringing up Biden in another seed the other day.
Holy shitload of projection, Batman
That's usually what they do when conversations start going south on them.
And that projection usually leads to a rant about Trump
I'm going to ask you a point blank question where the only answers are yes or no.
Is Donald Trump a scumbag ?
Are you sure you have permission to comment on my article?
If you dont think I have delete my question. I'll just make my own article and direct it to all the right wingers here.
Are you afraid to answer the question?
You call people like Jack Smith scumbags here every day. I just want to see how wide your eyes are open.
I'm not sure what Karen # 2's orders were.
Donald Trump is a national hero.
Now back to topic. Was Jack Smith not a hired gun to destroy the Trump candidacy?
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. You seem to have things floating around in your head that no one else can see.
One of the things I have floating in my head is that Jack Smith was never able to charge Trump with "insurrection?"
Why is that?
Here’s an ever better question to serve as a litmus test for maga disingenuousness: If someone came to DJT today with a surefire way to manipulate votes via voting machines without leaving tracks, do you think he would send them away in disgust or welcome them with open arms? Everyone knows the true answer to this question, but only maga will feign otherwise.
Best I can tell from his answers is that he determined it would be clearer to tie Trump to acts that he directly did rather than acts that were an indirect result of his inciting his supporters.
I think that all voting machines should be tested before being put into use.
How about you?
I bet you do, and that Trump’s crack team of IT professionals should do it as secretly as possible.
The "correspondent" for "Lindell TV" asked Trump the other day if now that Maduro is in a US jail if he will spill the beans on how he helped steal the election from Trump. Trump said he would let his lawyers take care of that, as if it is a real thing.
There is now a Lindell TV reporter in the White House press briefing room. Does that sound remotely normal to you?
... in Russia.
Donald Trump - despised in America, LOVED in Russia!
You deflected from the for you. Why was that?
You deflected from the for you. Why was that?
Come again? In English this time.
You deflected from the question asked of you in 1.2.9
Why is that?
They are. First by the developers (obviously). Next by the state.
To provide you the details, I gave your point rephrased as a question to ChatGPT:
Possibly because this is obvious.
That you would even ask this exposes your paranoia and gullibility over machines that are necessary for counting votes. There are extremely strict protocols for access to them. That’s not good enough for you? What is it that you think needs to be done?
Unless Trump wins it was rigged.
So you won't answer the question.
Somehow I am surprised s/
Voting machines are tested. How about you answer my question? What is it that you think needs to be done?
That is hilarious. I never said not enough was being done.
But if you insist, my answer is they should be tested by independent contractors with ideologues from all parties involved watching.
my answer is they should be tested by independent contractors with ideologues from all parties involved watching.
Yes, just the way Trump would want it. NOT. And you think “ideologues” from “all parties” should be watching? Do I need to point out the definition of ideologue?
an adherent of an ideology , especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic .
Gee, what could possibly go wrong using uncompromising dogmatic Trump ideologues who know how underwater Trump is and still have to answer to that delusional, senile, old narcissist.
Obviously you are not educated in the way of elections and ballot counting.
Election observers in ballot counting areas are ideologues from BOTH parties watching over the counting of the ballots. The only exception is in some democrat heavy areas that ban republicans from watching the counting. I think this is the "uncompromising" you whine about.
Wonder why that is? s/
[✘]
No. He wasn't. He was investigating the biggest scumbag in the USA for trying to overturn the normal processes of government to remain in power by several means, including publicly lying to the American people about fraud in the election.
So, Who do you think won the 2020 Presidential Election?
Who instigated the January 6 insurrection?
And why exactly is Smith a 'scumbag'?
Trump clearly tried to steal the 2020 election with coercion, lying, fraud, and incitement.
Trump clearly obstructed the return of classified documents.
Smith, though, is the 'scumbag' in your alternate reality.
To be exact:
‘12 Essential Facts’ About Jack Smith and the History of His Ploys to Get Trump
Basically, Smith was a hired gun to get Trump.
Got it?
what nonsense
Microsoft Copilot: Your AI companion
Donald Trump and his allies pushed a series of false claims to Republican electors in key swing states, primarily centered on the idea that the 2020 election had been stolen despite a lack of evidence. These claims were later described by senior Republicans as baseless and even “unnerving,” according to released grand jury testimony.
Key False Claims Presented to Electors
Assertions of widespread voter fraud Trump repeatedly insisted that massive fraud had occurred in states he lost, even though courts, audits, and state officials found no evidence supporting these allegations. Senior Republicans later testified that these claims had no factual basis.
Claims that he actually won swing states he lost Trump and his team told electors in states such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin that he had legitimately won, despite certified results showing otherwise. These claims were used to justify creating alternate slates of electors.
Promotion of “fake elector” certificates Trump’s allies encouraged electors to sign documents falsely asserting that he had won their states. These certificates were then sent to Congress and the National Archives in an attempt to overturn the election results.
Encouragement of belief in extreme or fantastical explanations According to testimony, Trump was willing to believe virtually any explanation that supported the idea of a stolen election. One Republican senator testified that if someone told Trump “Martians came and stole votes,” he would be inclined to believe it.
That is the basis of the RICO Act. I always wondered about the constitutionality of that.
Microsoft Copilot: Your AI companion
Trump’s requests to Pence
Pressure to reject electoral votes : Mike Pence has publicly stated that Trump and his advisers asked him to “literally reject votes” during the Jan. 6 certification.
Efforts to return votes to states : Testimony and documents presented to the Jan. 6 Committee show Trump pushed a plan in which Pence would send Biden‑won states’ electors back to state legislatures, creating an opening to replace them with pro‑Trump electors.
Pressure campaign before Jan. 6 : The House Jan. 6 Committee detailed a sustained effort by Trump to convince Pence he had unilateral authority to alter the outcome.
Was there a specific “plan” Pence was told to follow?
Memos from Trump‑aligned lawyers : Several memos—most notably from attorney John Eastman—outlined steps for Pence to overturn or delay certification. These were not official government plans but proposals circulated among Trump’s team.
Trump’s stance : According to witness testimony, Trump embraced these ideas and urged Pence to act on them, even after being told they were unconstitutional.
Never mind fucking "co-pilot."
Were there any abnormalities in the 2020 election?
Or was it just the best damn election ever conducted?
What I understand is that you have created an alternate reality where Trump is innocent and any attempt at normal justice is viewed as 'a hired gun to get Trump'.
Fact-checking the content of your link by ChatGPT:
As with Trump, this is all a show. There is no substance. Smith did nothing wrong.
They even tried to twist the fact that Smith recognized that Hutchinson's testimony was hearsay and had not decided to use her as a witness merely because he had not excluded the possibility of using her. Feeble, pathetic dishonesty.
Eastman memos - Wikipedia
The memo then laid out a six-step plan for Pence to overturn Biden's election:
"At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States."
Back on earth one there were no states where there were disputes. All 50 states had certified the election results, some of them after numerous recounts.
No election is perfect.
Do you actually hold that Trump won the 2020 election and that Biden only became PotUS through fraud?
Really?
(deleted)
Prior to the 2020 election even happening Trump had determined that if he lost he was going to claim the election was stolen from him.
Executive summary There is substantial contemporaneous reporting showing Donald Trump repeatedly warned of a “rigged” 2020 election before and during the campaign and primed audiences to expect fraud if he lost, and extensive post‑election actions—lawsuits, pressure on officials and repeated public declarations—underscore that narrative [1] [2] [3] . At the same time, courts, election officials and academic studies found no evidence of widespread fraud, and available sources cannot read private intent beyond public statements and later testimony [4] [5] [6] .
All that does is make a liberal hero out of him.
All because But truuuuuuuuump
[✘] Opinions are a great thing - everyone has at least one. But, that is everyone's bag to carry which may be their reality - because it is THEIR opinion - not yours.[✘]
Would that make me a member of the mile-high club? Seriously though, you might want to pay closer attention to the facts presented, because they line up far better with reality than your commentary does.
Any? Sure. There always are. But nothing remotely close to what would change the outcome.
What was abnormal was a sitting president calling Georgia officials and pressuring them to “find” votes. That is not a routine dispute over election administration. It is an attempt to interfere with a lawful election. Fortunately, those officials took their oaths more seriously than the mob-boss president leaning on them.
The little “war room” set up to coordinate the abridgment of constitutional processes was abnormal too. In fact, most of what Trump said and did after losing the election was abnormal in a society that is supposed to be governed by law, moral restraint, and good-faith actors. None of those descriptions fit Trump or his cohort.
Jack Smith, from a process and procedure standpoint, followed the law and long-standing DOJ and congressional precedent. His mandate existed because the election itself was legitimate, but the president’s bad-faith reaction to losing was not.
As usual, Trump chose to lie frequently and without restraint, creating a space where “alternate facts” could live and grow, polluting the country’s civic dialogue. That contamination persists to this day.
Trumps poisonous and dishonest mental state has infected his underlings in government, who lie more openly and brazenly every day.
Exactly, the level of blatant, unabashed lying in politics has exploded with Trump.
In a Dec. 31 text, Roy said to Meadows, “The President should call everyone off. It's the only path. If we substitute the will of states through electors with a vote by Congress every 4 years... we have destroyed the electoral college... Respectfully.”
And by Jan. 6, Roy was one of the many GOP members furiously texting Meadows, “This is a sh*tshow” and “fix this now,” according to CNN .
Eventually, Roy went on to call Trump out on the House floor that night.
“Madam speaker, today the people's house was attacked – which is an attack on the republic itself. There is no excuse for it. A woman died. And people need to go to jail,” Roy said on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. “And the President should have never spun up certain Americans to believe something that simply cannot be.”
Gee, Chip. Change of heart?
What does Roy's feeling on Jan 6th have to do with Jack Smith investigating Republican members of congress?
And Jack Smith spied on him...
Yes, that does tend to piss decent human beings off!
Bullshit. Knowing who called who on a range of dates is not the same as listening to those calls.
... then why are trump supporters so mad?
Spying on who you are talking to is still spying.
Remember when Democrats at least pretended to care about civil liberties? Good times. That ended when Obama became President.
This guy is rabid maga. He actually looks very much like a guy I sat near at a dueling pianos bar near DC just prior to J6. The guy was drunk and screaming TRUMP!! TRUMP!! TRUMP!! and had to be removed by the bouncers. Everyone was staring at this deranged lunatic who was acting like he wanted someone to confront him so he could slam a chair over their head. I would not be surprised if it was him in town for political reasons, hanging out incognito under a red MAGA hat. But he also looks like damn near every redneck north of there in Hagerstown MD, home of the Freedumb Convoy, so who knows.
I just want them mad enough to vote
Do you live near DC?
You do know that federal employees tend to be a bit squeamish about living there. Thus, so many of them polluted norther Virginia.
Close enough, but this was in National Harbor.
Sorry, Your Honor. The jury can't find me guilty of bank robbery, because the cops obtained the evidence from 'spying' on my phone records...
Good point. Congressmen from the opposing political party are just like bank robbers. No difference there.
Guess Trump is entitled to every Democrat in America's phone records then.
As long as he has probable cause and proper warrants have at it.
... how many times, each?
Sure, just look how progressives react to deporting criminals with deportation orders. I'm sure they'll be fine with it.
Moving the goalpost again, but I'll bite because this one is simple... populism runs on feelings and not logic no matter which wing it comes from.
Remember when Democrats at least pretended to care about civil liberties?
Donald Trump is a criminal. Nobody deserves to be surveiled, to have their door bashed in, and be dragged into the street half naked than him.
Wrong.... LOL
I didn't watch the whole thing but seems Smith couldn't answer a significant number fo questions and he was stuttering and scrambling to cover his ass.
That alone puts everything Smith found as inadmissible.
And yet the Democrats continue. So who is the "Threat to Democracy"?
It was probably one of the worst testimonies I've ever seen. A lot of "I don't recall" s, and he needed a lot of propping up from democrats who were kissing his rotten ass.
And yet the Democrats continue. So who is the "Threat to Democracy"?
The threat is them and we need to remember every time we vote.
Trump is, IMO, the worst PotUS in our history. By far. Yet look at the vitriol from you against Smith simply because he did his job to try to hold Trump accountable for his attempt to steal the 2020 election and obstructing the return of classified documents.
He was trying to kill Trump's candidacy. It is not a crime for Trump to believe the 2020 election was stollen. It is not as if that election was in any way a normal election.
That is ridiculous. Smith followed the book. His job was to hold Trump accountable for his crimes. He determined based on overwhelming evidence that Trump's actions warranted indictment and that a jury would almost certainly find him guilty.
This is the rule of law, Vic, and Trump is not above the law.
Smith wasn't even legally appointed. He tried to prove that Trump knew the election of 2020 was fair and that he encouraged Jan 6th. And he did it during an election cycle.
All of which is highly debatable. One thing is for sure: If Trump hadn't decided to run again, none of those lawfare cases would have happened.
It is now time for Jack Smith to face the music, just like when the Supreme Court slapped him down.
Feeble.
You cannot find anything of substance that Smith did wrong.
Nowhere has Smith violated normal practices and engaged in dishonesty or illegal/unethical acts.
Trump is the bad guy, he is the criminal, he is the traitor, get a grip.
You clearly did not watch because Smith was calm and gave clear answers to the questions.
He was calm because democrats had his back. They acted as his defense team.
He was likely calm because he knew that he has truth on his side.
None of them had truth on their side. Not Smith, nor Willis, nor Bragg, nor Letitia James (whom Cohen now says forced him to testify against Trump).
No TiG, TRUTH is what caught up with them!
Your nuh-uh response is pathetic.
Were you sitting in my living room as I watched it or did AI tell you that? Don't try to pathetically tell me what I saw and what i didn't.
What you think you saw is irrelevant. What is relevant are the facts.
And you quoted Vic, not me. I did not write what you have shown as a quote.
yes the facts. Not that nonsense you tried to gaslight everybody with.
The level of projection in your comment is staggering. Your comment itself is a fucking joke.
gee, go figure. issa is just another trump ass licker with a felony conviction in his past ...
You may be rid of him. California just redistricted again and this time Republicans may be down to one district.
cali will be fine and I'm busy helping make my state a very uncomfortable place for maga and thumpers ...
That's one too many.
“I'm busy helping make my state a very uncomfortable place for maga and thumpers ...”
Lol, i haven’t noticed.
You might want to tell your state this because they have absolutely no idea.
Thank God.
But to them it is republicans that are doing all the gerrymandering s/
I think that, ultimately, this hearing was a failure for Smith and the Democrats. They werent able to focus the testimony on the evidence that damns Donald Trump. There was no reason for Smith to be on the defensive.
I watched the whole thing and can only recall one Republican that actually asked questions about evidence in the case. All of the rest were focused solely on process.
The objective, no surprise to anyone, was to discredit Smith and paint an alternative reality where Trump is the good guy.
I do not recognize the GoP today. Looks to me that it has transformed into a cult.
I have a bigger problem with the political party that was taken over by the far left.
Back to the nonsense of the boogeyman 'far left'. Everything to your left seems to be 'far left'.
Far left refers to the extreme of left ideology. It is irrational to view everything to your left as the extreme.
The 'far left' refers to an ideology that, briefly, seeks to replace capitalism with an extremely egalitarian collective society. Only through a highly distorted, cloudy lens could one see this as taking over the Ds.
The Ds are to your left, but you need to throttle back your exaggeration of reality.
As I watch what we are going through to remove the millions let into the country. Yup, there is no far left / S.
The 'far left' refers to an ideology that, briefly, seeks to replace capitalism with an extremely egalitarian collective society. Only through a highly distorted, cloudy lens could one see this as taking over the Ds.
Oh ya / S. I think Franco had the right idea.
The Ds are to your left,
The old Ds are now Independents because they agree with me.
That is both non-sequitur and irrational.
Sounds like another fantasy. And the old Rs who are independents are what in your little fantasy?
No, the old Rs are still a part of the GOP, just less significant.
Agree, Personally I wish the GOP was headed more toward the center than it seems they are going just as I wish the far left was not in the process of heading farther left.
IMO the exodus from the center is why there is very little compromise and not helpful for the country.
There can never be a reconciliation of our political differences until Trump is gone. It is impossible.
My point exactly. And Vance will be the next excuse for the far left that does not want any compromise in any circumstance.
The 'far left'? You think that the Ds are the 'far left'??
What, in your strange view, are the defining characteristics of the 'far left' vs. the 'left'?
Try again without the condescension if you really want an answer/discussion or come back with the usual accusations of deflection, defending Trump, not answering because I can't etc, etc, etc.
Otherwise I won't waste my time.
Your non-serious answer is not desired nor expected.
My point was made: you do not distinguish between the ‘left’ and the ‘far left’.
Nice try except I specified far left. No surprise my stipulation was too much
Oh, so you are concerned that the 'far left' (aka the fringe) is where the power is and 'the left' in general is smaller and less influential?
If so, then you believe that the Ds and Is are primarily 'far left'. And that is pretty much what I would expect if you were offering an honest answer.
Wow, it honestly seems like you are having a conversation with yourself and it has absolutely nothing to do with what I said or what I believe.
Enjoy since it is obvious you don't need me to have a conversation with me.
As usual, you evade a direct question and then play games.
Does not matter; my point was made.
Here is a little hint: the 'far left' is a small bloc in the USA. It has a voice but has limited power.
Unless, of course, one redefines 'far left' to be something like 'anything left of my ideology'.
Assuming without any doubt that you are referring to Francisco Franco, he was a fascist/authoritarian dictator supported by Hitler. So, no surprise.
WRONG!
Donald Trump's approval drops among independents
IMO, supported by cold hard facts of reality, it is irrational, irresponsible, and unpatriotic to approve of Trump as PotUS.
There never was any evidence. Trump believed the election was stolen and that is not a crime.
... wtf? ... is that you, trump?
No, it's a German sweat bread that we only eat at Christmas.
Trump was not indicted because of what he believed. The Jan 6 indictment was based on his words and deeds.
Stop with the gaslighting. Trump is the bad guy here. He is an unpatriotic, dishonest, con-man; the only PotUS in US history who has attempted to steal a presidential election with fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement. He is an abysmally flawed human being who has demonstrated his sick character in spades over the past 12 months.
There is no rational defense for this guy.
"GO PEACEFULLY"
And again, nobody was charged with "insurrection."
Stop with the gaslighting. Trump is the bad guy here. He is an unpatriotic, dishonest, con-man; the only PotUS in US history who has attempted to steal a presidential election with fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement. He is an abysmally flawed human being who has demonstrated his sick character in spades over the past 12 months.
"Sticks and stones" ...
Back to Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene II:
Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonorable graves.
There is no rational defense for this guy.
Um-hum.
If Trump had not been lying about the election for the 60 days prior to Jan 6th there would have been no one there that day. He inflamed these people and called them to Washington to help him stay in office. Trump wanted them to do whatever necessary to help him "stop the steal". He may have preferred it be accomplished peacefully, but he really didnt care as long as they got it done. That is exactly why he didnt call in the national guard or immediately tell them to stop even though he was watching the melee on tv. He wanted it to succeed.
You run back to extreme cherry-picking.
Of course, you have no defense for the incendiary rhetoric of Trump. You ignore months of raising the ire of his supporters, claiming they were disenfranchised, the election was rigged, fight for your country, etc. and try to wash it all away because he stated, "peacefully and patriotically", during his rally prior to the breaking and entering of the Capitol building by the supporters he had encouraged to come and had fired up with his rhetoric.
Trump immediately claimed the election was stolen from him, literally on election night when the tide started turning against him. From election day until Jan 6th barely an hour went by that he didnt claim he had been robbed. Two months of this shit, and his most fervent supporters were primed to go to the capitol and raise hell.
He claimed that before election day. He always claims that the only way he would lose is if the election were rigged.
His playbook is obvious. He is a simpleton who has an acutely tuned skill at manipulating gullible people.
Bannon was podcasting daily about J6 leading up to it. Anyone claiming this wasn’t the plan is lying through their teeth.
... yuck.
Yet somehow the brilliant Jack Smith never indicted Bannon for inciting the riot despite you having proof of his guilt. Crazy.
Why go after the cheerleaders?
While the Senate GoP were playing circus monkeys, the House GoP were stabbing them in the back... LMAO!
uh oh, no traveling money to escape prosecution for complicity in the J6 insurrection ...
WTF??? $500,000???? What kinda phones do you have to have to get paid $500K.
Friggin' money grabbers - guess that's why they're in Congress.