As best I can tell, while Trump is morally responsible for the recent riot he is not legally responsible, since everything he did that contributed to it was something he had a legal right to do. But requirements for impeachment, other than a majority vote in the House to impeach and two-thirds in the Senate to convict, are unclear, so that is not, in my view, the fundamental issue.
Michael Sherwin, Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said Friday that there is no “direct evidence” to suggest rioters planned to capture or assassinate lawmakers during last week’s deadly siege of the U.S. Capitol.
“We don’t have any direct evidence of kill capture teams,” Sherwin told reporters during a press briefing.
The comments by Acting U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin appeared to be an effort to walk back claims federal prosecutors in Arizona had made in a court filing late on Thursday, in which they alleged there was evidence that rioters intended “to capture and assassinate elected officials.” […] [F]ederal prosecutors had made sweeping claims about the ongoing investigation in a filing as they asked a judge to detain Jacob Chansley, an Arizona man and QAnon conspiracy theorist photographed wearing horns as he stood at the desk of Vice President Mike Pence in the chamber of the U.S. Senate.
The pointless disruptions have done nothing to damage the prestige of government in this neck of the woods – or in much of the nation. Instead, many Americans feel entitled to denounce anyone not complying with the latest edict as if they had been caught planting a pipe bomb under a school bus. Governments have encouraged people to become vigilantes, setting snitch lines that have been flooded with reports of people failing to obey the latest revised social distancing and “stepping outside your damn house” mandates.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
… Luntz’s focus group found that more than 91% of Trump’s supporters would vote for him again (we think that number is much higher). In addition, Luntz said that 78% of Trump voters believe that the election was stolen (as they should).
“91% of those who voted for Donald Trump on Election Day would vote for him again. This is a poll that was done on Monday, just 48 hours ago,” Luntz began with a depressed look on his face.
“And it’s astounding. And only 5% would switch their votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. And I’ve got two more numbers for you. 67% believe that if the votes were counted accurately and fairly, Donald Trump would have won. And the most staggering of all, 78% believed that the election was rigged and stolen. So you’ve got a large segment of the American people who do not trust our electoral process,” he concluded.
The attempt to “persuade” Trump voters that the election was on the up and up has totally failed. The “Shut up” chorus is not working.
Whitehouse.gov. has a comprehensive list of accomplishments that is much too long for a blog post but well worth your time as a reminder of the significant good things the President was responsible for. The willful blindness of the Democrats and their media cohorts should not be allowed to hide these accomplishments.
Unprecedented Economic Boom
Tax Relief for the Middle Class
Fair and Reciprocal Trade
American Energy Independence
Investing in America’s Workers and Families
Great Healthcare for Americans
Remaking the Federal Judiciary
Achieving a Secure Border
Restoring American Leadership Abroad
Colossal Rebuilding of the Military
Serving and Protecting Our Veterans
Making Communities Safer
Cherishing Life and Religious Liberty
Safeguarding the Environment
Expanding Educational Opportunity
Combatting the Opioid Crisis
It’ll be interesting to see how long this link is good.
Anyone reading this blog knows that I am a strong proponent of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, among other things for the defense of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In particular, when it comes to liberty, as, in the final extreme, as a defense against government tyranny. I have also written, […]
Recently, in Insurrection? I made these observations, based solely on my viewing of photos and videos from the January 6th Capital Hill event: Once inside, virtually all of the “domestic terrorists” politely kept within the velvet ropes, stopped to view the paintings and statutes, to take the occasional photo or selfie, and to enjoy the […]
Yesterday, Scott recommended a column by William Voegeli called “About ‘Whataboutism.’” I read that column and join Scott in recommending it.
In our current discourse, whataboutism is used by Democrats/leftists to counter conservatives who, when discussing questionable actions by Donald Trump or violent conduct by a pro-Trump mob (for example), point to similar behavior by others that Democrats/leftists did not condemn. Those of us who point to the double standard are accused of whataboutism.
The charge is an evasion — an attempt to duck the fact that Democrats are employing a double standard. Accepting the evasion means accepting unprincipled discourse, which is what the left desires. They insist on an exemption from normal rules of argument.
Whataboutism is essentially a demand that similar situations and similarly situated people be treated similarly. Thus, if not abused, whataboutism is an essential element of justice.
In law, if a Black plaintiff who was fired for being tardy twice for work points to a white co-worker who was tardy twice but not fired, his allegations make out of prima facie case of discrimination. His argument boils down to whataboutism, but it can’t be dismissed on that basis.
Democrats are making extraordinary efforts to suppress all discussion of whether Joe Biden actually won the 2020 presidential election. In fact, they go even farther: they want to suppress all discussion of the extent to which voter fraud occurred. That naturally makes me want to write about voter fraud, and who really won the election.
First, this question: why are the Democrats so hysterical in their insistence that fraud not be mentioned? One reason is obvious. Joe Biden will take office under a cloud, since close to half of all Americans doubt that he really won the election. The Democrats want to stamp out such doubts to preserve Biden’s authority as president.
But there is a second reason that may be more important. The Democrats want the lax voting procedures that prevailed in 2020 to continue in the future. They know that efforts will be made in many states to improve ballot integrity, and they want those efforts to fail. By rendering all discussion of voter fraud out of bounds, they hope to forestall reforms that would make it harder for them to cheat, or enable cheating, in the future.
One of the first memories I have of news and people discussing news is of my parents trying to figure out whether the president was dead. This is because in Portugal in the early sixties, the news of course couldn’t publish anything that the regime disapproved of. When they announced Salazar was dead, and who […]