Trump impeached for second time - what's next?

808 posts / 0 new
Last post
NDPP

[quote=Michael Moriarity]

Here's a pretty solid refutation of Dershowitz's contention. It gives historical precedent from the time of the drafting of the constitution, as well as later in U.S. history. It is ever more clear that NDPP has become an unapologetic purveyor of right wing lies on any subject relating to U.S. politics. Shame on him.

[quote=NDPP]

Turley: The Trial of Citizen Trump Would Raise Serious Constitutional Questions

https://www.informationclearinghouse.info/56200.htm

"...With the second impeachment of President Donald Trump, the Congress is set for one of the most bizarre moments in constitutional history: The removal of someone who had already left office. The retroactive removal would be a testament to the timeliness of rage. While it is not without precedent, it is without logic..."

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University.

NorthReport
JKR

NDPP, why are you opposed to the upcoming trial of Trump in the Senate? Why should Trump not be held accountable for his actions when the people who followed him will be sentenced to heavy jail time? Why should Trump be irreproachable? Should Biden also be irreproachable?

NDPP

Read Turley.

JKR

NDPP, what will you say if the trial in the Senate goes ahead?

JKR

DP

NorthReport

Critical thinking education has to become available for all and throughout their lives paid for through general taxation, and they have to stop the preaching of hatred and intentional misinformation by all media

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/fox-news-impeachment-capitol...

NorthReport
josh

Even Turley concedes there is precedent.  Although it's certainly counterintuitive.  But not when you consider the punishment phase-potentially being barred from ever again holding high office.  

NorthReport

Impeachment

Senate Impeachment Trials

NamePositionDate of Final Senate ActionResult

William BlountSenatorJan 11, 1799Expelled, charges dismissed

John PickeringJudgeMar 12, 1804Guilty, removed from office

Samuel ChaseJusticeMar 1, 1805Not guilty

James H. PeckJudgeJan 31, 1831Not guilty

West H. HumphreysJudgeJun 26, 1862Guilty

Andrew JohnsonPresidentMay 15/26, 1868Not guilty

Mark H. DelahayJudgeFeb 28, 18731Resigned

William BelknapSecretary of WarAug 1, 1876Not guilty

Charles SwayneJudgeFeb 27, 1905Not guilty

Robert ArchbaldJudgeJan 13, 1913Guilty, removed

George W. EnglishJudgeDec 13, 1926Resigned, charges dismissed

Harold LouderbackJudgeMay 24, 1933Not guilty

Halstead RitterJudgeApr 17, 1936Guilty, removed from office

Harry E. ClaiborneJudgeOct 9, 1986Guilty, removed from office

Alcee HastingsJudgeOct 20, 1989Guilty, removed from office

Walter NixonJudgeNov 3, 1989Guilty, removed from office

William J. ClintonPresidentFeb 12, 1999Not guilty

Samuel B. KentJudgeJul 22, 2009Resigned, case dismissed

G. Thomas Porteous, Jr.JudgeDec 8, 2010Guilty, removed from office 

Donald J. TrumpPresidentFeb 5, 2020Not guilty 

1. Date of impeachment; No Senate action taken due to Delahay's resignation on December 12, 1873.

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Senate_Impe...

----------------

This is significant.

Mitch McConnell: Capitol Hill mob was 'provoked' by Trump

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/19/politics/mitch-mcconnell-rioters-provoked...

------

Pence could be put on the spot to kill any chance Trump may have of running again: report

https://www.rawstory.com/mike-pence-2650024543/

kropotkin1951

It seems to me in this constitutional matter of whether or not the Senate can try an ex-President the precedents are not definitive. Trying to say that someone supports Trump because they think one set of precedents will win a legal case compared to the counter argument is disingenuous partisanship not good political studies or legal analysis.

I am going to predict that the Democratic MSM will scream about this case being open and shut but in the end the Republican dominated SCOTUS will have the last say. It seems to me that impeachment is a toll to remove someone from office and that is its primary purpose. From a legal perspective I would far rather see Trump charged with criminal offenses instead of having another show trial in the US Congress. I find the persistent partisan show trials to be largely farcical events. When you know the outcome because it is a partisan ritual it is hardly what any jurist would call a trial.

Mobo2000

Yes, agreed.  I have nothing to add to your comment, krop, but I wanted to say something before it is buried underneath a shit ton of posts containing links to cnn and slate.com articles.

NDPP

Trump impeached amid efforts to silence him

https://twitter.com/johnpilger/status/1349675799276892160

"To make sense of the circus events in the United States, I recommend taking the time to read this incisive piece by Joe Lauria. It's rare journalism."

JKR
kropotkin1951

A noose is a symbol of white supremacy not justice.

JKR

That noose was erected by Trump's white supremist mob that stormed the Capitol. Trump's mob will face justice. They will serve very long sentences in prison. Their leader, Heir Trump, will try to throw them all under the bus. That's Trump's idea of justice.

JKR

Why should Trump's loyal naive followers go to prison and serve lengthy sentences while Trump? their leader, remains unpunished?

NDPP

"Watching this again, I can't help but conclude that they were seconds away from *literally* overthrowing the government and conducting mass executions..."

https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1351551958033838083

JKR

Watching this again I can't help but conclude that  Trump is a fascist:

https://youtu.be/UBp42536IhE

Mobo2000

The article linked at post 164 is excellent.   It also provides the transcript of the speech Trump gave to the 30,000 people gathered.   A few parts I think relevant to this thread:

On Trump's incitement to violence:

Are these words by Trump “strongly corroborative” of an “intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony,” an intent that “… solicits, commands, induces, or otherwise endeavors to persuade such other person to engage in such conduct?”? 

Or were these just the fighting words of a politician, directed almost entirely at fellow Republicans?  He said: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” [Emphasis added.]

When he said the Democrats were “ruthless” and “it’s time that somebody did something about it” he was referring to Pence and the Republicans sending the electoral college votes back to key states. That is the entire context of his more than one hour speech.  When he said “you have to get your people to fight,” he meant Republican representatives who would have to be primaried.

With no proof so far that Trump had prior knowledge of the plan to take over the Capitol, or evidence of direct instructions from him to do so, it would seem difficult to convict him in a court of law, but maybe not in a political trial in the Senate. 

On insurrection:

The U.S. law against insurrection is exceedingly broad. 18 U.S. Code § 2383 – “Rebellion or insurrection” reads:

“Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

What happened at the Capitol could qualify under the broadest phrase “any rebellion.” But the Cambridge Dictionary definition of “insurrection” would exclude what happened last week: “an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence.”

It was an attempt to take control of the Capitol, not the country. Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection.

On terrorism:

Defining terrorism has been immensely controversial, with the UN General Assembly failing to agree on its meaning. A working definition is violent acts by non-state actors against civilian targets for political aims.  The FBI’s definition of domestic terrorism is broader: 

“Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

Under these broad terms the protestors who used violence “to intimidate” government could conceivably be indicted on a terrorism charge.  Biden, the author of the Patriot Act, has promised new domestic terrorism laws.

bekayne

Mobo2000 wrote:

The article linked at post 164 is excellent.   It also provides the transcript of the speech Trump gave to the 30,000 people gathered.   

It wasn't one speech. There had been incitement since November.

NorthReport

Democrats moment of schadenfreude:

Trump's plan all along for election nite was, when he had the lead, to claim victory and steal the election. Fox News screwed him by their early call for the Democrats in Arizona. As a result several Fox employees were fired. 

 

josh

bekayne wrote:

Mobo2000 wrote:

The article linked at post 164 is excellent.   It also provides the transcript of the speech Trump gave to the 30,000 people gathered.   

It wasn't one speech. There had been incitement since November.

Exactly.  It was a 2 month campaign of lies and incitement.

NDPP

The Navarro Report

https://twitter.com/RealPNavarro/status/1349732930587774982

"Navarro Report, Volume 3, provides a scholarly rendering of the potential number of illegal votes in the 2020 election. We welcome any who dispute its findings because that is the nature of scholarly discourse." Links to Vols 1, 2 included also.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

bekayne wrote:

Mobo2000 wrote:

The article linked at post 164 is excellent.   It also provides the transcript of the speech Trump gave to the 30,000 people gathered.   

It wasn't one speech. There had been incitement since November.

You also need to take into account that many in the audience were QAnon followers, who believed that Trump was commanding them to start the events that would lead to the end of rule by the pedophile cannibals of the international elite. It was even reported that many of those who made it into the Capitol were expecting to get further instructions from Trump once they broke in. Trump has been asked about QAnon many times, and all he ever says is that they hate pedophiles, and he thinks that is peachy. In my opinion, whaterver the legalities may be, Trump intended those people to conduct a violent, riotous protest and he couldn't have cared less about the consequences (until later in the day, when his staff forced him to call off the dogs).

josh

NDPP wrote:

The Navarro Report

https://twitter.com/RealPNavarro/status/1349732930587774982

"Navarro Report, Volume 3, provides a scholarly rendering of the potential number of illegal votes in the 2020 election. We welcome any who dispute its findings because that is the nature of scholarly discourse." Links to Vols 1, 2 included also.

There were 74 million potentially illegal votes for Trump.

kropotkin1951

JKR wrote:

Watching this again I can't help but conclude that  Trump is a fascist:

https://youtu.be/UBp42536IhE

Was that Hong Kong or Washington? Fascists storming legislatures are hard to tell apart.

kropotkin1951

JKR wrote:

That noose was erected by Trump's white supremist mob that stormed the Capitol. Trump's mob will face justice. They will serve very long sentences in prison. Their leader, Heir Trump, will try to throw them all under the bus. That's Trump's idea of justice.

Why repost it. It is gross and disgusting and racist. What was your fucking point in reprinting racism.

kropotkin1951

The American election was not a democratic election by any international standard. The oligarchy with its unlimited buying of votes stole the election from any citizen initiative that one could dream about for America. The farce that is a US Presidential campaign is not democracy so please stop pretending it is. Its time for regime change and a new constitution.

NorthReport

The trial will begin very soon. 

Pelosi will send the details to the Senate this week and the trial will start the following weekday.

JKR

kropotkin1951 wrote:

JKR wrote:

That noose was erected by Trump's white supremist mob that stormed the Capitol. Trump's mob will face justice. They will serve very long sentences in prison. Their leader, Heir Trump, will try to throw them all under the bus. That's Trump's idea of justice.

Why repost it. It is gross and disgusting and racist. What was your fucking point in reprinting racism.

My point was to illustrate the racism of Trump's  mob that stormed the Capitol. I agree that the gallows erected in front of the Capitol  by Trump's mob was gross and disgusting so I have removed the picture.

kropotkin1951

JKR wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

JKR wrote:

That noose was erected by Trump's white supremist mob that stormed the Capitol. Trump's mob will face justice. They will serve very long sentences in prison. Their leader, Heir Trump, will try to throw them all under the bus. That's Trump's idea of justice.

Why repost it. It is gross and disgusting and racist. What was your fucking point in reprinting racism.

My point was to illustrate the racism of Trump's  mob that stormed the Capitol. I agree that the gallows erected in front of the Capitol  by Trump's mob was gross and disgusting so I have removed the picture.

Thank you.

JKR

kropotkin1951 wrote:

The American election was not a democratic election by any international standard. The oligarchy with its unlimited buying of votes stole the election from any citizen initiative that one could dream about for America. The farce that is a US Presidential campaign is not democracy so please stop pretending it is. Its time for regime change and a new constitution.

I agree that the U.S. needs to greatly amend or even replace their constitution. Biden and the Democrats support a constitutional amendment to repair the great damage to American democracy caused by the Supreme Court's horrible Citizens United decision. The Citizens United decision was established by the Republican appointed justices and is currently supported by Republicans including disgraced ex-president Trump.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

I agree that the Citizens United decision makes the U.S. essentially not a democracy. That terrible decision enabled Trump to attain power.

Mobo2000

RE: Michael's comments at 176, I don't think I need to take the state of mind of some of his Qanon followers into account at all.   There were 30,ooo people at the protest, there to protest what they saw as an illegitimate election.   I think you are overgeneralizing and caricaturing Trump voters, there are many varieties.  

A more reasonable reading of Trump's intent is presented in the article I quoted.   It has the advantage of coinciding with what he actually said.   Trump's intent was to have a big crowd to protest the electoral college votes, to pressure Republicans to refuse to certify. 

I disagree with the comments from Josh and Bekayne that his comments prior amounted to incitement, and if you think they are, please quote something he said that actually meets the criteria:

To convict Trump, the Senate trial, if it were not a completely political exercise, should have to determine if his words at the rally on Wednesday broke federal law, which states in 18 U.S. Code § 373 – “Solicitation to commit a crime of violence”:

“Whoever, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against property or against the person of another in violation of the laws of the United States, and under circumstances strongly corroborative of that intent, solicits, commands, induces, or otherwise endeavors to persuade such other person to engage in such conduct, shall be imprisoned…”

I have not seen any persuasive evidence that the election was stolen from Trump.   However there was every incentive to do so, and conspiratorially minded Trump supporters have plenty of reasons to be suspicious.   Trump has every right to challenge the election results, and every right to ask other Republicans to join him in this.   

The over-reaction by the MSM and democrats on this is just political opportunism and there is nothing for progressives to gain here.   They want to ram through social media censorship, cripple the republicans and ensure Trump cannot legally run again.     It is curious to me that there is so much elite concern about the possibility he may be in a position to run again.   That a 2nd rate TV and real estate huckster could throw them into such a panic... mind boggling.

Mobo2000

More on incitement:

Here is the lead from the article of impeachment:

“President Trump repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the Presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by State or Federal officials.

Shortly before the Joint Session commenced, President Trump addressed a crowd at the Ellipse in Washington, DC. There, he reiterated false claims that ‘we won this election, and we won it by a landslide.’

He also willfully made statements that, in context, encouraged—and foreseeably resulted in—lawless action at the Capitol, such as: ‘if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.’

Thus incited by President Trump, members of the crowd he had addressed, in an attempt to, among other objectives, interfere with the Joint Session’s solemn constitutional duty to certify the results of the 2020 Presidential election, unlawfully breached and vandalized the Capitol, injured and killed law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Congress, the Vice President, and Congressional personnel, and engaged in other violent, deadly, destructive, and seditious acts.”

Josh and Bekayne, you cool with that?   Sound good to you?

JKR

I think the Citizens United decision coupled with  big tech social media may doom the U.S. to have a civil war. Having an unrepresentative Senate is also playing a role.

NDPP

Glenn Greenwald writes on the dangerous Democrat incitement to political witch-hunting, censorship and a war on 'domestic terrorism.' Unfortunately, as usual, some babblers seem eager to urge on just such reactionary 'friendly fascist' repression.

Greenwald: The New Domestic War on Terror is Coming

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-new-domestic-war-on-terror-is-

'No speculation is needed. Those who wield power are demanding it. The only question is how much opposition they will encounter'  **Must Read**

"...An entire book could- and probably should - be written on why all this is so concerning. For the moment, two points are vital to emphasize. First, much of the alarmism and fear-mongering is being driven by a deliberate distortion of what it means for speech to 'incite violence'. The bastardization of this phrase was the basis for President Trump's rushed impeachment last week. It is also what is driving calls for dozens of members of Congress to be expelled and even prosecuted on 'sedition' charges for having objected to the Electoral College certification, and is also at the heart of the spate of censorship actions already undertaken and further repressive measures being urged.

This phrase - 'inciting violence' - was also what drove many of the worst War on Terror abuses. It is vital to ask what it means for speech to constitute 'incitement to violence' to the point that it can be banned or criminalized. The expression of any political viewpoint, especially one passionately expressed, has the potential to 'incite' someone else to get so riled up that they engage in violence.

If you claim that George W Bush stole the 2000 and/or 2004 elections - as many Democrats, including members of Congress did - you may inspire civic unrest or violence against Bush and his supporters. The same is true if you claim the 2016 or 2020 elections were fraudulent or illegitimate. If you rage against the racist brutality of the police, people may go burn down buildings in protest - or murder randomly selected police officers whom they have become convinced are agents of a racist genocidal state.

The Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer and hard-core Democrat partisan, James Hodgkinson, who went to a softball field in June, 2017 to murder Republican Congress members - and almost succeeded in fatally shooting Rep Steve Scalise (R-LA) - had spent months listening to radical Sanders supporters and participating in Facebook groups with names like 'Terminate the Republic Party' and 'Trump is a traitor.' As CNN reported, 'his favorite television shows were listed as Real Time with Bill Maher,' 'The Rachel Maddow Show,' 'Democracy Now' and other left-leaning programs.'

Despite the potential of all of these views to motivate others to commit violence in their name - potential that has sometimes been realized - none of the people expressing these views, no matter how passionately, can be validly characterized as 'inciting violence' either legally or ethically. That is because all of this speech is protected legimate speech..."

josh

Mobo2000 wrote:

More on incitement:

Here is the lead from the article of impeachment:

“President Trump repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the Presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by State or Federal officials.

Shortly before the Joint Session commenced, President Trump addressed a crowd at the Ellipse in Washington, DC. There, he reiterated false claims that ‘we won this election, and we won it by a landslide.’

He also willfully made statements that, in context, encouraged—and foreseeably resulted in—lawless action at the Capitol, such as: ‘if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.’

Thus incited by President Trump, members of the crowd he had addressed, in an attempt to, among other objectives, interfere with the Joint Session’s solemn constitutional duty to certify the results of the 2020 Presidential election, unlawfully breached and vandalized the Capitol, injured and killed law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Congress, the Vice President, and Congressional personnel, and engaged in other violent, deadly, destructive, and seditious acts.”

Josh and Bekayne, you cool with that?   Sound good to you?

Sounds good to me.  You do not need to establish a criminal violation to impeach and convict a president.

NDPP

Especially if you have a majority.

JKR

The Senate trial is a completely political excercise. That's how the U.S. Constitution set it up. Unfortunately, while in office the president of the U.S. is essentially above the law as long as they can maintain over 1/3rd support in the Senate! Trump's term in office has made this abundantly clear. Unfortunately for Trump he is now out of office and may now face many legal obstacles.

josh

NDPP wrote:

Glenn Greenwald writes on the dangerous Democrat incitement to political witch-hunting, censorship and a war on 'domestic terrorism.' Unfortunately, as usual, some babblers seem eager to urge on just such reactionary 'friendly fascist' repression.

Greenwald: The New Domestic War on Terror is Coming

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-new-domestic-war-on-terror-is-

'No speculation is needed. Those who wield power are demanding it. The only question is how much opposition they will encounter'  **Must Read**

"...An entire book could- and probably should - be written on why all this is so concerning. For the moment, two points are vital to emphasize. First, much of the alarmism and fear-mongering is being driven by a deliberate distortion of what it means for speech to 'incite violence'. The bastardization of this phrase was the basis for President Trump's rushed impeachment last week. It is also what is driving calls for dozens of members of Congress to be expelled and even prosecuted on 'sedition' charges for having objected to the Electoral College certification, and is also at the heart of the spate of censorship actions already undertaken and further repressive measures being urged.

This phrase - 'inciting violence' - was also what drove many of the worst War on Terror abuses. It is vital to ask what it means for speech to constitute 'incitement to violence' to the point that it can be banned or criminalized. The expression of any political viewpoint, especially one passionately expressed, has the potential to 'incite' someone else to get so riled up that they engage in violence.

If you claim that George W Bush stole the 2000 and/or 2004 elections - as many Democrats, including members of Congress did - you may inspire civic unrest or violence against Bush and his supporters. The same is true if you claim the 2016 or 2020 elections were fraudulent or illegitimate. If you rage against the racist brutality of the police, people may go burn down buildings in protest - or murder randomly selected police officers whom they have become convinced are agents of a racist genocidal state.

The Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer and hard-core Democrat partisan, James Hodgkinson, who went to a softball field in June, 2017 to murder Republican Congress members - and almost succeeded in fatally shooting Rep Steve Scalise (R-LA) - had spent months listening to radical Sanders supporters and participating in Facebook groups with names like 'Terminate the Republic Party' and 'Trump is a traitor.' As CNN reported, 'his favorite television shows were listed as Real Time with Bill Maher,' 'The Rachel Maddow Show,' 'Democracy Now' and other left-leaning programs.'

Despite the potential of all of these views to motivate others to commit violence in their name - potential that has sometimes been realized - none of the people expressing these views, no matter how passionately, can be validly characterized as 'inciting violence' either legally or ethically. That is because all of this speech is protected legimate speech..."

Incitement is clearly defined in the law as creating the imminent threat of violence.   But for impeachment purposes, incitement is an abuse of power, and a violation of a president's oath of office.

NorthReport
NDPP

Trump as Othello in a Corporate Theater

https://www.blackagendareport.com/trump-othello-corporate-theater

"Donald Trump has slunk off the national stage for the time being, but we must remember who made him a contender for president in the first place: The Democrats and their corporate media. As Wikileaks revealed, the Clinton campaign encouraged friendly media to boost Trump's Republican primary prospects, hoping to set up a straw man that could be easily knocked down in November, 2016. By Election Day, the corporate press had lavished $5 billion on free media on Trump - more than Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and all of Trump's presidential competitors combined. If you are desperate to wash the stink of 4 years of Trump out of your brain, remember who put it there.

The only way the corporate Democrats can mobilize their base to eke out slim national victories while keeping Joe Biden's  promise to the rich that 'nothing would fundamentally change', is to position themselves as the sole defense against the racist hordes. The corporate Democrat/racist Republican symbiosis is simple, obvious and naked - yet it works every time, as the Democratic Party's base with Blacks at the core - allows its own aspirations to be sacrificed in the interest of turning back the threat from the White Man's Party (GOP).

If I have repeated myself over the years in these pages, it is because the oligarchy keeps using the same formula to defeat every popular revolt against the corporate Race to the Bottom and endless Imperial wars. The dictatorship of the rich grows deeper, even as last summer saw the greatest popular mobilization in the history of the United States, under the Black Lives Matter banner. What should have been a re-emergence of an independent, people's mass street politics outside the corporate kill-zone of the Democratic Party, was once again devoured by the duopoly.

Joe Biden's call for 'unity' is even emptier than Barack Obama's 'hope and change'. In response to the Trump inspired racial hooliganism at the US Capitol, we are expected to unify behind a 9/11 type expansion of the police state whose main mission has always been to repress non-Whites and the left, while forgoing creation of a truly public health system and any respite from the accelerating Race to the Bottom - all because 'Joe', the Great Incarcerator, corporate stooge and warmonger 'saved' us from Trump. Too late for Hillary Clinton, but just in time for the equally loathsome Joe Biden, Trump the strawman has finally been knocked down, giving the Democrats a victory that costs their corporate masters nothing.

The assent and subsequent dismantling of Trump, largely engineered at all stages by corporate Democrats and their media, created an alternative, artificial and mainly 'fake' political landscape in which 'the Russians' teamed up with white nationalists to undermine 'America' at home and abroad, only to be thwarted by an aroused electorate, with Black voters at the phalanx. In reality, Black voters have 'saved' the corporate duopoly that has nullified and coopted every popular movement of the past 3 generations...

NorthReport

Anyway you slice it, big problems ahead for the former president.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-criminal-rig-georgia-election/

JKR

NDPP wrote:

Is that the new term for everyone opposing election-rigging by Democrats?

People who were duped into thinking the election was rigged are waking up now to the fact that they were horribly manipulated:

We really are the cucks’: QAnon adrift after Trump ‘fails to ascend as God Emperor'

------------
"In the weeks leading up to Biden's inauguration, the worst elements of Trump's coalition— Nazis, white supremacists, Q-mesmerized "patriots," Proud Boys, Telegram lurkers, and all-purpose far-right sh*tlords—managed to hold out hope. On one website for Trump fans banished from Reddit, TheDonald.win, many users had assured one another that not only would Biden never take office, but that Trump, naturally, would never leave it," Vice explained. "Instead, they claimed to each other—in a refrain that was once ironic and seemed less so all the time—that he would ascend to the role of 'God Emperor.' On the morning of January 20, QAnon fans urged each other to 'Enjoy the show,' dotting their posts with popcorn emojis, meant to symbolize all of them sitting back and watching Armageddon rain down on the Satanic cabal they'd been led to believe rules the world."

"As new President Joseph R. Biden took his oath of office, his hand atop a massive family Bible, confusion, anger, and grief washed over some of the worst corners of the Internet," Vice reported. "Refugees from the QAnon conspiracy subreddit, now huddled together on a new website, took turns assuring each other that everything they were seeing was all part of the unfolding of the grand Plan they'd spent years breathlessly awaiting. 'I HAVE ZERO DOUBTS,' one wrote. But others weren't so sure. 'WTF?,' another wrote. 'He's being sworn in now.'"

------------

NorthReport

After Biden's impressive show today this must be a growing group

https://www.axios.com/republicans-trump-impeachment-conviction-a811503e-...

kropotkin1951

JKR wrote:

NDPP wrote:

Is that the new term for everyone opposing election-rigging by Democrats?

People who were duped into thinking the election was rigged are waking up now to the fact that they were horribly manipulated:

Tell me JKR do you really believe that in various states political operatives from both parties did not likely try every dirty trick in the book to win the election? The fact is that the Democrats say that the Republicans are white supremacist fascists and the Trumpites say that the Democrats are deep state fascist. Personally I tend to think they are both right.

 I have been following US politicians since I was a teenager in the late '60's when my US political heroes where Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin and Malcolm X. I remember Tricky Dicky and that was his nickname before he became President. The US political system has been a failed democracy for the fifty years I have followed it. I would be astounded if no political operative in the US tried to fix the election but that is just based on my "gut feeling."

NorthReport
NorthReport

Pelosi is ready, just waiting for Schumer and McConnell

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/21/pelosi-impeachment-articles-461085

kropotkin1951

kropotkin1951 wrote:

JKR wrote:

NDPP wrote:

Is that the new term for everyone opposing election-rigging by Democrats?

People who were duped into thinking the election was rigged are waking up now to the fact that they were horribly manipulated:

Tell me JKR do you really believe that in various states political operatives from both parties did not likely try every dirty trick in the book to win the election? The fact is that the Democrats say that the Republicans are white supremacist fascists and the Trumpites say that the Democrats are deep state fascist. Personally I tend to think they are both right.

 I have been following US politicians since I was a teenager in the late '60's when my US political heroes where Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin and Malcolm X. I remember Tricky Dicky and that was his nickname before he became President. The US political system has been a failed democracy for the fifty years I have followed it. I would be astounded if no political operative in the US tried to fix the election but that is just based on my "gut feeling."

Pages