They will go after some of them, the fake electors and white house crowd, however the congressmen and senators are best left to an independent special counsel. That is why the law was created, we are talking Ken Starr superpowers here, applied to GOP senators and congressmen! It is not just used against philandering presidents who get blowjobs in the oval office from ambitious interns, how quaint!
They want Donald running around for as long as they can, he is a nightmare for the GOP, especially when they spook him into announcing and holding rallies like a fake candidate who is 2 years out from being a real one. Georgia will get him first for a TV trial that should cause him to turn on the republicans. We will see, but winning in November is far more important than timely justice for Donald, though that will come.
Yeah but I thought (I heard Kirschner say) that witness tampering is one of those act-at-once things. How long does it take to get an arrest warrant for such a serious crime (from a judge not appointed by a suspect)?!
my concern is that if the republicans get a majority in one or both houses this November, which is up in the air as far as i can tell, then they will do everything they can possibly do to scuttle the whole j6 investigation, they will try to impeach Biden, they will carry out as many revenge investigations as they can, they will do everything they can do to make sure the democrats never get back in power.
A great deal can happen to hurt the GOP brand between now and November. Currently they’re about even, and the attention from the hearings (of which I wager there will be more) is a negative for the GOP, a party already driven to crime to retain voters.
It is a sure sign they are holding back for a reason and I figure they want him tried on TV in Georgia first, most likely indicted before the election at least. He knows the republicans who will be testifying against him at his trial, they will have been through a grand jury or two already. If the prosecution does not complain the judge probably won't gag him, unless the witnesses complain and if he doesn't STFU he goes to jail.
I think that the need to deal positively and quickly with threats to witnesses overrides all this tactical musing.
I dunno the reasons, I'm just trying to make sense of it all using the simplest explanation that fits the facts, Occam's razor stuff. I figure they are being pragmatic, not moral and are bending ethics a bit, but not the law trying to keep the house and get an effective majority in the senate. Once that happens (if), it will be a whole new ballgame and a nightmare for the GOP.
thehill.com
Failure to faithfully execute the oath of office…over, and over, and….Retired generals, admirals in op-ed: Trump’s Jan. 6 actions were ‘dereliction of duty’
Former President Trump’s actions during the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection constituted a “dereliction of duty” that endangered American democracy, a group of seven retired four-star generals and admirals said in a New York Times op-ed Thursday.
“When a mob attacked the Capitol, the commander in chief failed to act to restore order and even encouraged the rioters,” the former military leaders, who served Democratic and Republican presidents, wrote.
In the op-ed, retired four-star Gens. Peter Chiarelli, John Jumper and Johnnie Wilson and retired Adms. James Loy, John Nathman, William Owens and Steve Abbot called out Trump for his inaction on Jan. 6 and consideration of using the military in schemes leading up to that day.
Ahead of Jan. 6, the op-ed authors wrote, Trump’s allies “urged him to hold on to power by unlawfully ordering the military to seize voting machines and supervise a do-over of the election,” flouting the balance of civilian control of the military.
When Trump did not call the National Guard to respond with the Capitol under siege, he ignored an “urgent need” for his intervention, the retired generals and admirals argued.
“The president and commander in chief, Donald Trump, abdicated his duty to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution,” they wrote. And in doing so, he “tested the integrity” of civilian control of the military “as never before, endangering American lives and our democracy.”
The group called on military leaders to enhance training on the chain of command and civilian-military leadership balance. They also implored civilian leaders, “including, most important, the commander in chief,” to be committed to those principles.
“The lesson of that day is clear. Our democracy is not a given. To preserve it, Americans must demand nothing less from their leaders than an unassailable commitment to country over party — and to their oaths above all.”
Wilson was commanding general of the U.S. Army Materiel Command, and Owens was vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under former President Clinton.
Chiarelli was vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army under former President Obama. Nathman was head of U.S. Fleet Forces Command under Bush and worked with Obama on his 2008 campaign. He has spoken out against Trump before.
Retired generals, admirals in op-ed: Trump’s Jan. 6 actions were ‘dereliction of duty’
Former President Trump’s actions during the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection constituted a “dereliction of duty” that endangered American democracy, a group of seven retired four-star generals and admira…
shame we cannot court-martial national command authority.Retired generals, admirals in op-ed: Trump’s Jan. 6 actions were ‘dereliction of duty’
Former President Trump’s actions during the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection constituted a “dereliction of duty” that endangered American democracy, a group of seven retired four-star generals and admirals said in a New York Times op-ed Thursday.
“When a mob attacked the Capitol, the commander in chief failed to act to restore order and even encouraged the rioters,” the former military leaders, who served Democratic and Republican presidents, wrote.
In the op-ed, retired four-star Gens. Peter Chiarelli, John Jumper and Johnnie Wilson and retired Adms. James Loy, John Nathman, William Owens and Steve Abbot called out Trump for his inaction on Jan. 6 and consideration of using the military in schemes leading up to that day.
Ahead of Jan. 6, the op-ed authors wrote, Trump’s allies “urged him to hold on to power by unlawfully ordering the military to seize voting machines and supervise a do-over of the election,” flouting the balance of civilian control of the military.
When Trump did not call the National Guard to respond with the Capitol under siege, he ignored an “urgent need” for his intervention, the retired generals and admirals argued.
“The president and commander in chief, Donald Trump, abdicated his duty to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution,” they wrote. And in doing so, he “tested the integrity” of civilian control of the military “as never before, endangering American lives and our democracy.”
The group called on military leaders to enhance training on the chain of command and civilian-military leadership balance. They also implored civilian leaders, “including, most important, the commander in chief,” to be committed to those principles.
“The lesson of that day is clear. Our democracy is not a given. To preserve it, Americans must demand nothing less from their leaders than an unassailable commitment to country over party — and to their oaths above all.”
Wilson was commanding general of the U.S. Army Materiel Command, and Owens was vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under former President Clinton.
Chiarelli was vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army under former President Obama. Nathman was head of U.S. Fleet Forces Command under Bush and worked with Obama on his 2008 campaign. He has spoken out against Trump before.
Retired generals, admirals in op-ed: Trump’s Jan. 6 actions were ‘dereliction of duty’
Former President Trump’s actions during the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection constituted a “dereliction of duty” that endangered American democracy, a group of seven retired four-star generals and admira…
www.rawstory.com
