"The panel is... expected to vote on referring Mr. Trump to the Justice Department on charges of insurrection, obstruction of an official proceeding of Congress and conspiracy to defraud the United States....
Referrals against Mr. Trump would not carry any legal weight or compel the Justice Department to take any action, but they would send a powerful signal....
In a statement, Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, dismissed the committee’s planned actions on Monday as those of a 'kangaroo court' that held 'show trials by Never Trump partisans who are a stain on this country’s history.'...
'I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws,' Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and a member of the committee, said on CNN’s 'State of the Union' on Sunday. 'And I think you have to be treated like any other American who breaks the law, and that is, you have to be prosecuted.... In terms of the criminal statute, if you can prove that someone incited an insurrection — that is, they incited violence against the government, or they gave aid and comfort to those who did — that violates that law.... And if you look at Donald Trump’s acts, and you match them up against the statute, it’s a pretty good match. I realize that statute hasn’t been used in a long time. But, then, when have we had a president essentially incite an attack on his own government?'"
Schiff thinks that "any other American" would be prosecuted for making statements with the level of incitement to violence found in Trump's January 6th speech? If that were not so plainly ludicrous it would be scary as hell.
Schiff's words betray his awareness that he is lying. He trips all over himself:
... if you can prove that someone incited an insurrection — that is, they incited violence against the government, or they gave aid and comfort to those who did...
Who did what?
And if you look at Donald Trump’s acts, and you match them up against the statute, it’s a pretty good match.
A pretty good match? That's the standard that's used against "any other American"?
I realize that statute hasn’t been used in a long time.
So then you're not talking about the way we treat "any other American"?
But, then, when have we had a president essentially incite an attack on his own government?
He retreats to a rhetorical question, but he's obviously admitting that he's not talking about how we treat "any other American." And — this is not a rhetorical question — when did Trump "incite an attack on his own government"? Schiff has to waffle with "essentially." Trump did something else but it's pretty much the same thing — a pretty good match.
Could the NYT find someone more convincing than Adam Schiff to justify referring Trump to the Justice Department on charges of insurrection?
Posts
131 comments:
It doesn't matter. It's DC, which means they could get a conviction and death penalty from a jury even if Jesus himself came down from Heaven and told them, "Trump is innocent."
"If that were not so plainly ludicrous it would be scary as hell."
The fact that he says that, and that Democrats agree with him, and they're going to prosecute Trump in a public show-trial, where he won't even have a lawyer, and they're going to win, and he's going to go to prison for the rest of his life along with all the other J6 political prisoners many of whom are still in jail without trial ... that is what should be scaring the hell out of you, Ann.
You now live in the United States of Nazi. You should be mortally terrified and organizing a resistance.
[Sheds tear]
So much for 'Biden their time'...
Next year, next year
Nothin's gonna happen
This year, this year
We'll just keep on nappin'
I'm not quite certain if the Democrats think that Trump is such a danger that he must be destroyed by any means necessary, or that keeping him in the news is likely to destroy the GOP.
Not that the two are mutually exclusive objectives for different people.
Trump will be indicted and convicted. The whole point of the process is to give it an air of legality and respectability so that the people who oppose Trump can believe that what's happening is wonderful. "That awful Trump is getting what he deserves!" And if there is violence, well Trump supporters are insurgents after all.
The only "powerful signal" this sends is that the Democratic leadership is not composed of serious people.
Adam Schiff sends his own signals, but apparently the Times can't do any better.
Gee golly - we wonder what the Schitt-Cheney-Kinzinger Panel will do?
It's for NYT readers. They pay for it. Schiff has it as his brand.
Not for nothing, but for me the highlight would be to import a person from the streets of San Francisco to go in there, squat down and do that thing that the City by the Bay has become best known for in the 2020's.
They could consider it a gift from the American people.
So they will write a criminal referral for the things for the things that Trump was already impeached. So the dirty compromised Justice Department can help gin up a case. Great use of their time! Sex trafficking has never been better at the border and we’re drowning in fentanyl but Trump! Trump is what all the law enforcement resources should be concentrated on.
put Trump in charge of Twitter for the time being
i need to see some liberal tears, my mug is running dry.
Could the NYT find someone more convincing than Adam Schiff to justify referring Trump to the Justice Department on charges of insurrection?
Liz Cheney.
Mitt Romney.
Outstanding use of the thoroughly discredited liar Schiff. I’m sure he lends credibility in the NYT’s estimation.
Althouse said...
"Could the NYT find someone more convincing than Adam Schiff to justify referring Trump to the Justice Department on charges of insurrection?"
Did Althouse do Sunday's NYT crossword puzzle?
Ryan McCarty, a principal consulting manager from Washington, D.C., who has made 22 other puzzles for the publication, came up with the concept for Sunday’s puzzle titled “Some Theme’s Missing,” and it was edited by Will Shortz.
'Disgusting!' Donald Trump Jr. joins hundreds of readers slamming New York Times after their crossword puzzle published on first day of Hanukkah is shaped like a swastika
“One day after its editorial board published an OP-ED attacking Israel, this was today’s [New York Times] crossword puzzle,” wrote Israel National News, the largest news conglomerate in the Jewish world. On Thursday, NYT’s Thomas Friedman wrote an opinion piece calling Israel “a cauldron of instability and a source of anxiety for the U.S. government.”
Swallwell and his girlfriend Fang Fang could make a joint statement that could be convincing.
I swing between the cynic thinking, "they won't indict Trump because it would be a shitshow; instead, they'll simply let this hang over his head to try and scare away normie voters," and the pessimist saying, "they're nuts and will indict him because the base wants blood, and the GOP establishment wants to use any weapon to push Trump, and Trumpism, out of the party."
All the Republicans that voted to impeach Trump got maxed out contributions from Sam Bankman Fried.
They would be convincing.
They could hire SBF as their official spokesmen. The leftists found that guy extremely convincing for a decade until the industry called out his corruption.
"...they would send a powerful signal..."
Of what?
Impeaching Biden would make 2023 great again. Too bad the Republicans can't all get on the same page like the Dems.
If you want to convince people of a person's guilt in a crime, you need to both establish the crime is real and provide evidence supporting the guilt.
"Referrals against Mr. Trump would not carry any legal weight or compel the Justice Department to take any action, but they would send a powerful signal.... "
You mean like the insider games of the Mueller Investigation, Impeachment #1, Impeachment #2, plus the inflatable "baby Trump" balloon dragged from protest to protest? All of those were meant to send powerful signals too, and all revealed more about those pushing the message than they did about Trump. Trump was always transparent.
"Out, out, damned spot" muttered the Democratic Party as it sleepwalked for 5+ years in failing to process the widespread rejection of their vision and assumed truths.
---
Anyone is more credible than Schiff. Anyone. Stacey Abrams, yep. Diane Feinstein in her muddled haze. Yep. Joe Biden in his muddled haze. Yep. That homeless guy living under the bridge who babbles endlessly. Yep. Schiff was put out to lead by very confused and ineffective people -- he was their strongest weapon. Let that sink in.
Ann:
Trump will be indicted and convicted. But President DeSantis will pardon him on Day One. Our long national nightmare will be over.
"Could the NYT find someone more convincing than Adam Schiff...".
Could they find anyone, based on his history, LESS convincing?
At least, as you point out, he uses weasel words in his statement. That's better, one supposes, than his oft repeated I-have-proof of Russian collusion. But the faithful from the Church of Orange Man Bad will read this as Schiff intended.
… the hysterical significance of which…
Charge Trump. Try Trump. If convicted, sentence Trump. Then do Schiff, Hillary, Corey, Brennan, and Strzok. Let's have rule of law. Good and hard.
and fuck these people…
Schiff has seen convincing evidence that Trump colluded with Russian Intelligence to steal the 2016 Presidential election. Schiff has said so many times on television.
Send a powerful statement?? The only statement this committee is capable of is on of excess TDS!
Send a powerful statement?? The only statement this committee is capable of is on of excess TDS!
Every member of the committee bears a strong personal and/or political hostility towards Donald Trump. The show trial and ultimate vote for referral is the conclusion they were always going to reach. No one will be fooled who doesn’t desperately want to be fooled.
Althouse asks whether the NYT could find someone more convincing than Adam Schiff to justify referring Trump to the Justice Department on charges of insurrection. When the entire committee consists of fools, idiots, and third rate jerks, one idiot is as good as another.
I would seriously like to know if anyone on this blog (hosts or commenters) would dispute Mr. Cheung's characterization of these congressional investigations as a "kangaroo court" acting as a "show trial". It seems to me that the fatal flaw here for anyone still claiming that it has been a necessary process to hold the President to account is how relentlessly one-sided it has been and how totally lacking in constitutional protections for the accused it has been.
Who can seriously accept the legitimacy of any finding here if the process itself has been so indefensible?
One more sign that you are living in a shithole, third-world country.
Ron Winkleheimer said...
The whole point of the process is to give it an air of legality and respectability so that the people who oppose Trump can believe that what's happening is wonderful. "That awful Trump is getting what he deserves!" And if there is violence, well Trump supporters are insurgents after all.
Word. Although I think that's their best-case scenario.
Progressives are the authoritarians the left have been waiting for.
Every single critter in Congress needs to be tarred and feathered....
"Did Althouse do Sunday's NYT crossword puzzle?"
Yes, and it didn't look like a swastika to me. Then I looked at it again when I heard people were saying that and it still did not look like a swastika. People are losing their mind.
"If that were not so plainly ludicrous it would be scary as hell."
Being plainly ludicrous makes it less scary?
The striking thing here is the sheer shamelessness in their ludicrousness, the very Schifftiness of Schiff, the notion that Schiff should be quoted on anything. Only under prog rule.
A D.C. jury will convict Trump. Bet on it.
People are losing their mind.
In using the singular, you must be referring to the leftist hive mind.
The conservatives/libertarians on this site are clearly of different minds when it comes to some issues, to the delight of the lefties here.
Meanwhile our current President is attempting to spin yarns about his family history (and their heritage) and can't even remember what decade he's in.
This is fine.
Ann Althouse said..."Did Althouse do Sunday's NYT crossword puzzle?"
Yes, and it didn't look like a swastika to me.
I may have been primed to see a swastica by being told before I looked, but I saw a swastica.
hmmm. I'm not in agreement with most of the commenters here. I think an indictment would be disastrous for the JD, as we would get discovery, witnesses, exculpatory evidence and cross examinations - something we obviously don't have with this committee. They might not really want that, and/or may arrange for a guilty plea with a minor sentence of some sort.
I mean the committee had the cast of Hamilton perform in one of their meetings, so you know they're totally serious and definitely the protagonists.
8:47
Mike S. - heh.
That Trump colluded with the Russians is old news. It never happened - but we can wash that down the memory hole now.
That Hillary used her private server to fill her coffers with Russian cash - never got the reporting it deserved.
"A powerful signal." More powerful than spending 24 months conducting a half-assed investigation that should have been competently completed in 12?
Gunner said...
Impeaching Biden would make 2023 great again. Too bad the Republicans can't all get on the same page like the Dems.
A bunch of Republicans are on the same page with the Dems.
The corrupt Left impeached Trump for asking about Biden's illegal Ukrainian grifting corruption.
That's how the left rolls.
¡¡This is it!! Finally Trump will take a fall that he can't possibly recover from. Andrew Schiff's going down as the modern day Robespierre to Trump's Marie Antoinette. Bailiff, whack his pee pee.
I hope the Rs continue the committee and subpoena all of Pelosis emails (public and private), her phone records, and anything else they can.
Sauce for the goose...
Brylinski: "A D.C. jury will convict Trump. Bet on it."
Correct.
Although, interestingly, we have been reassured by some GOPe-ers on this very blog that the dems are so desperate to get Trump back in as the nominee that they were going to treat Trump with kid gloves and never do anything that might harm Trump's chances of being the nominee.
It's pretty clear just how dumb that "hot take" happens to be.
I don't know how you could MISS the swastika in the crossword. It glares at you. Must be one of those things where it is obvious to some and others are blind to it.
Dan from Madison said...
It's a Soviet dog and pony show. The only witnesses allowed will be those that reinforce the tribunals narrative.
jim5301 said...
""A powerful signal." More powerful than spending 24 months conducting a half-assed investigation that should have been competently completed in 12?"
A couple of hours would have done it if we were dealing with honest people. But we're not. You. The left. Have to keep the narrative amped up. Keep people like on edge in a constant state of hate. We live in a time where reason is no longer needed for discourse. Something about the worst being filled with passionate intensity?
'Kangaroo court' is what it is... and soon to say, was.
Pathetic bunch of politicians.
Whenever Schiffty Schiff takes center stage his "Lifelong Republican" (wink wink) acolytes are never far behind....as we see on this thread.
First of all, we do NOT treat the POTUS like "any other American". He's the commander-in-chief, and head of the executive branch. And he's allowed to see any document that's "classified".
Second, only Congress can ratify the results of the election. So, if Trump, as the sitting president, wants alternative electors considered how is that an insurrection.
Third, Adam Shithead is a liar, He knows, the libtards know it, we know it. He lies and lies and no expects him to tell the truth, or deal fairly with anyone who is not his friend or a Democrat. He's filth.
Fourth, Liz Cheney and Kingzinger are the villians in this. They gave Pelosi cover for this Demcorat, partisan, showtrial. The Cheney family showed what liars they are. Supporting Biden in 2020, supporting impeachment, supporting this showtrial. Look for "Liz" to become a Democrat. She lied about being a loyal Republican and a conservative, and she's been exposed for the fraud she it. Dick Cheney too.
“Could the NYT find someone more convincing than Adam Schiff to justify referring Trump to the Justice Department on charges of insurrection?”
The case against Trump is so weak they Can’t even find an anti Trump law professor to make the case?
You know how many anti Trump law professors are out there?
They couldn’t find one.
“ In using the singular, you must be referring to the leftist hive mind”
No. I am using correct English, as it was taught to me in high school. Each person has one mind to lose. I follow this approach consistently on this blog. There are many examples.
Shiff said repeatedly that there is irrefutable evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians. Hmm.
Was there a moment's doubt about how this would go? Did anyone think it would be a fair presentation? It was a clown show from day one. The Watergate committee gave at least the appearance of fairness. We now know that Judge Sirica was having private meetings with the prosecutors but it was not a clown show like this. Insane behavior seems to be the norm for Congress, not just Democrats although they set the tone. Looking back, this was once a serious country. I'm old enough to remember. The visible deterioration seemed to begin with Clinton. Trump seems to have smoked out the crazies and they are running things now.
Ann Althouse said...
"Did Althouse do Sunday's NYT crossword puzzle?"
Yes, and it didn't look like a swastika to me. Then I looked at it again when I heard people were saying that and it still did not look like a swastika. People are losing their mind.
I actually laughed.
You have to try to not see it. Good grief.
Whatever it takes I guess.
Wow, really?
Each angled blade of the symbol is uniformly two diagonal boxes thick.
And each blade has a one box gap (6 outside, 5 inside) forming the inner cross, two diagonal boxes thick, connecting the four blades.
All in perfect alignment with each other?
Care to speculate on the random probabilities here?
I’m embarrassed by the focus of the US government.
Of the people, for the people, by the people….
It’s been hijacked.
Be best.
America last.
Dave Begley said...
Ann:
Trump will be indicted and convicted. But President DeSantis will pardon him on Day One. Our long national nightmare will be over.
A Republican that is on the same page as the democrats.
If Trump is "convicted" of anything and Trump is not the Nominee then fuck the Republican party.
I will not allow the Democrats to determine who the Republican nominee is using a kangaroo court.
I will not support a Republican party with Mitch McConnell in it.
If you want to lose 45+ states go with this plan. Desantis would be stupid or bought and paid for to run against Trump in this situation.
Eric Swalwell has stated that Trump is facing a "legal crescendo". So, a increasing volume until a dramatic peak. Usually followed by a period of low intensity calm.
What is really amusing is that it is speculated that Biden will beat Trump and so a good bet for 2024, but what if the Democrat functionaries in the DOJ "get" Trump, say by this time next year? How would Biden fair against a rising DeSantis? Younger, fitter, able to set a campaign pace of high intensity. Will another basement campaign work?
Leland wrote: If you want to convince people of a person's guilt in a crime, you need to both establish the crime is real and provide evidence supporting the guilt.
That's not what they want, Leland.
The Democrats want you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It is their final, most essential command - to quote Orwell.
The Democrats want you to know that Trump is innocent and that he's still going to prison. They want you to know that they can conduct Soviet-era style show trials and get away with it. They want you to know they can convict innocent people and imprison innocent people. Forever. It's important that you understand their power because then you will fear them.
Psychopaths and sociopaths now run the United States. It is over for America. The country is lost forever.
It sounds crazy, but I think the United Nations and foreign heads of state would be far more likely to give a fair determination than this Commission and a DC jury.
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
I think the president has violated multiple criminal laws
My stars! It's one thing to violate the law, but to violate criminal law...! (Where is my fainting couch...?!)
If you want to convince people of a person's guilt in a crime, you need to both establish the crime is real and provide evidence supporting the guilt.
LOL since when? Progressives absolutely live on the mountains of myths they repeat to each other and allude to in every news story. If you are a rabid leftist (includes DC jury pool) you already believe:
- There WAS an insurrection and Trump caused it
- Trump is guilty of treason at least once or twice, probably many times: Russia, Ukraine, Emoluments Clause, Hatch Act, not folloeing Vindman's script for his phone calls, Alpha Bank, etc.
- Russia meddling in 2016 is the only reason this person-who-should-not-be-named got to sully the office of the POTUS in the first place
- Trump is the only politician to ever try and overturn an election, and of course he broke the law doing it
- Every court in the land ruled against Trump's election schemes
- Trump is an anti-vaxxer and responsible for more than half of all COVID deaths worldwide
- He's Putin's Puppet (duh!)
- Trump broke the border and Joe just hasn't been able to fix it yet
- White Supremacy is the biggest threat to Our Democracy and domestic tranquility and the Big Bad Orange Man is the leader of the whites
- Trump hates gays and Jews and Blacks and shithole countries which only consist of Muslim-dominated areas of the world because he's the biggest racist of all time and 75 million Americans who voted for him should be shot or deported or both
- Trump stole the nuclear codes
- Every single policy Trump had was wrong and thank Gaia Biden had the big balls to reverse 100% of Trump's EOs on day 1...except maybe TikTok, which I might have doubts about
Yes absolutely yes yes yes. The rethuglickins need to Keep up the congressional investigations to the max, bigly. Gridlock works best if you have show trials and tribulations up the Ying yang and out the wazoo. It keeps the talking heads busy as maggots at a rendering plant. This will leave Biden to rule as he pleasures himself with executive orders.
I doubt it was intentional, but the center of the puzzle clearly forms a swastika.
A D.C. jury will convict Trump. Bet on it.
Can they? Does a president have immunity for presidential acts committed while in office? Their whole insurrection case is based on statements Trump made to the American people while acting as president. We're not talking about directing the FBI against american citizens. We're not talking about ordering the destruction of materials. Or even witness intimidation. (They tried to make that inference during the hearings, but it wasn't Trump that was saying anything)
The office of the President has an entire quasi-judicial process surrounding him, namely impeachment. Trump was impeached on the January 6th incident and acquitted. Certainly there is a double jeopardy argument in play.
The classified documents case seems to be the only act that seems to have happened after his term of office ended. And that happened in Florida. The documents were transferred while still President. You don't get to put that in a D.C. jury "just because".
He won't be indicted on insurrection.
The funny thing is that Schiff, et. al. think this hurts Trump. He doesn't care about "strong messages". People who vote for him don't care about "strong messages" from Schiff.
It probably makes Trump stronger. Follow DeSantis lead. Ignore him.
"Yes, and it didn't look like a swastika to me. Then I looked at it again when I heard people were saying that and it still did not look like a swastika. People are losing their mind."
LMAO! It probably wasn't meant to be a swastika, but it is exactly what a swastika in a crossword puzzle would look like.
Dan from Madison wrote:
"hmmm. I'm not in agreement with most of the commenters here. I think an indictment would be disastrous for the JD, as we would get discovery, witnesses, exculpatory evidence and cross examinations - something we obviously don't have with this committee. They might not really want that, and/or may arrange for a guilty plea with a minor sentence of some sort"
Wow. What in the world makes you think Trump would get discovery, witnesses, and freedom for his lawyers to do cross examinations? He wouldn't even be allowed to mount a defense is the way to bet on an actual trial in D.C. You are no longer living in that America, if it ever actually existed.
Journalists' stylebook should require that any reference to Adam Schiff should include "the thoroughly discredited, lying congressman who knowingly perpetuated the absolute lie about Trump Russian collusion".....
Now that a strong majority of Americans do not trust major media, this abuse of the legal system will lead to the majority of Americans not trusting the legal system. The Left is tearing down every norm and pillar of the American system.
I don’t think this referral will have any effect at all on DOJ’s decision whether or not to prosecute Trump. My prediction is that DOJ will not prosecute him for any January 6-related offense, because the law with respect thereto is muddy and the facts are weak, but it will prosecute him for obstruction of justice based on his hiding documents and lying to avoid turning over documents called for by the grand jury subpoena. That’s a straightforward case. The subpoena called for all documents that were marked “classified.” It doesn’t matter whether they were properly classified or subsequently declassified. If they had that marking, they were required to be turned over. Trump either hid some responsive documents and/or lied about not having any, or instructed his minions to hide or lie for him.
" Each person has one mind to lose. I follow this approach consistently on this blog. "
So, to date I make the score to be 23 out of 410.
Referrals against Mr. Trump would not carry any legal weight or compel the Justice Department to take any action
I believe the technical term of art for the act of producing words that carry no weight is bloviating.
Can they? Does a president have immunity for presidential acts committed while in office? Their whole insurrection case is based on statements Trump made to the American people while acting as president. We're not talking about directing the FBI against american citizens. We're not talking about ordering the destruction of materials. Or even witness intimidation. (They tried to make that inference during the hearings, but it wasn't Trump that was saying anything)
The office of the President has an entire quasi-judicial process surrounding him, namely impeachment. Trump was impeached on the January 6th incident and acquitted. Certainly there is a double jeopardy argument in play.
The process is the punishment. They indict, get a conviction, and then it spends a couple years winding through the court system until SCOTUS slaps it down. By that point, however, the 2024 election is over, and Trump has been denied the nomination and any chance for vindication.
Any rational person would ask two questions before even convening this fiasco. 1. Did Trump request National Guard troops in advance of Jan. 6? Did the person in charge of capitol security reject the request?
What is really amusing is that it is speculated that Biden will beat Trump and so a good bet for 2024, but what if the Democrat functionaries in the DOJ "get" Trump, say by this time next year? How would Biden fair against a rising DeSantis? Younger, fitter, able to set a campaign pace of high intensity. Will another basement campaign work?
Any speculation about Biden beating Trump is wishful thinking. The circumstances of 2020 won't be in play in '24. COVID was an unknown disease that they could use to induce panic in the population, and no matter what Trump did he could be castigated as failing to handle it. Meanwhile, Biden was portrayed as the elderly statesman. Paw-Paw, who would restore dignity and competence to the WH. That only worked because social media was in the tank for Biden, working to keep any competing narratives about COVID or the Biden family corruption out of the mainstream.
Yes, and it didn't look like a swastika to me. Then I looked at it again when I heard people were saying that and it still did not look like a swastika. People are losing their mind.
I actually laughed.
You have to try to not see it. Good grief.
Yup. I looked at it on Insty and it looked just like a swastika. Somebody is losing her mind but it isn't me.
The Walls are Closing in on Trump! Oh No!
It's a swastika at the end of a back...black hole... whore h/t NAACP. The plausibilities are diverse.
'You have to try to not see it. Good grief.'
Well, some people are colorblind and can't see the various dots on the test.
Maybe AA is Naziblind : )
Dan from Madison said...
hmmm. I'm not in agreement with most of the commenters here. I think an indictment would be disastrous for the JD, as we would get discovery, witnesses, exculpatory evidence and cross examinations - something we obviously don't have with this committee. They might not really want that, and/or may arrange for a guilty plea with a minor sentence of some sort.
Everyone on this board that spends their time in the political sphere as much as we do needs to understand how many people in this country are this oblivious to what is going on.
"Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol"
Pelosi's penumbras. That aid, a rug extended, then pulled surreptitiously, a riot forced. An unarmed woman shot in cold blood. An unarmed woman kicked until she was no longer viable. Several hundred people... persons held indefinitely, denied civil rights. Grannies subject to Capitol hill molestation. The Biden/Handmade/American Spring.
"Ann Althouse said...
"Did Althouse do Sunday's NYT crossword puzzle?"
Yes, and it didn't look like a swastika to me. Then I looked at it again when I heard people were saying that and it still did not look like a swastika. People are losing their mind."
Yes, people are losing their mind. The people who refuse to see the fact in front of them, because it would tarnish their choice of news outlet. Breitbart is too crass for Ann, but the Gestapo Times is just fine.
but they would send a powerful signal....
Like a dog whistle?
It's strange how no one specifically orders anyone to do things, and yet everyone seems to know exactly what to do...
He'll be indicted and convicted in DC. It's corrupt. Remember when the DoJ lawyers withdrew their case against Flynn, but the DC judge insisted on the case going ahead?
What happens after conviction? Is he jailed until his appeal is heard or what?
The apparent swastika is white, not black...for those who might not see it.
"Every one of these can be applied to multiple Dems after the 2016 election lmaooo"
https://twitter.com/assliken/status/1604919725732990976?
The Only Gary Johnson Stan
@colorblindk1d
If "conspiracy to make a false statement" and "obstruction of an official proceeding" were prosecutable crimes for politicians, we would have barely any Congressmen left.
2:18 PM · Dec 19, 2022
The Only Gary Johnson Stan
@colorblindk1d
If "obstruction of an official proceeding" becomes a commonly prosecuted offense, we will be throwing thousands of left-wing protesters in jail every year. Good luck with this.
2:20 PM · Dec 19, 2022
Adam Schiff? Really? Didn't He try to overturn a Presidential Election? Unreliable. Very unreliable. Or, in his mind, the Savior of American Democracy, giving us Joseph Robinette Biden.
Regards — Cliff
"The apparent swastika is white, not black...for those who might not see it."
I could "see" that the white channels between the black squares was what the swastika-seers where emoting about. But draw lines through the center of those channels and look at what you have. It's not a swastika. It might be reminiscent of a swastika. But if you actually care about Holocaust victims, it would be appropriate not to use this as an occasion for crying wolf.
Adam Schiff? Really? Didn't He try to overturn a Presidential Election? Unreliable. Very unreliable. Or, in his mind, the Savior of American Democracy, giving us Joseph Robinette Biden.
Regards — Cliff
It’s a crossword whistle.
That Adam Schiff is even ON any kind of tribunal shows how corrupt our corrupt our government has become and the democrat party in particular. He should be in jail.
What nation with 300 million legal firearms would allow these things to continue?
And if there is violence, well Trump supporters are insurgents after all.
And? So what? We didn't commit any violence before and we're called insurgents. And insurrectionists. And a whole bunch of other bullshit we didn't do.
At some point, people are going to figure they've got nothing left to lose.
James Woods discerning a pattern in the NYTs crossword puzzle.
"Oh-kay."
Of course it is Dems and Never Trumpers. Eff them all. If they all fell off a cliff tomorrow, i will pay more attention to polishing my shoes.
Why should anyone care if its swastika or not? Talk about a nazi in a teacup.
A conviction for inciting an insurrection, will never happen quick enough to bar Trump for running for office. That has always been the fever dream for Cheney. After the election when Trump wins, a conviction will be appealed. Eventually overturned by SCOTUS if it would make it that far.
No rational legal mind finds any substance to the committees claim...without evidence.
I could "see" that the white channels between the black squares was what the swastika-seers where emoting about.
AHA! I knew it...
EXACTLY what Jim @ 2:27 pm said.
“Yes, and it didn't look like a swastika to me. Then I looked at it again when I heard people were saying that and it still did not look like a swastika. People are losing their mind.”
—————————————————————
“I actually laughed.”
————————————————————-
Yes, me too, like a hyena at the rightists in theses threads. They see what they wish, they hear what they wish. How else could they have voted for Trump to begin with? How can some of them continue to support Trump, even now? It’s not that they’re losing their minds, it’s that they’ve already lost their minds for a few years now.
Inga is so gleeful. She needs a big mirror so she can see exactly what a fool she is.
Yes, me too, like a hyena
You keep referring to yourself as a laughing hyena. Have you ever seen what a hyena looks like? Have you ever heard its 'laugh?' They're ugly and their 'laugh' is hideous. And that's the image and sound you use to describe yourself?
You might as well admit your perfume smells like dogshit, too.
obstruction of an official proceeding of Congress
Unbelievable. As wendybar points out this has been an official tactic of the left for years. And everyone knows Hillary tried to change the votes of the electoral college. Insurrection? It is to laugh.
One thing I have noticed in my personal interactions with Democrat followers as well as lefty commenters on this and other blogs is they have fallen into a pattern as follows:
Me: What do you think of the SCOTUS decision on Roe?
Them: My body my choice.
Me: They didn't outlaw abortion, just turned it over to the states.
Them: My body my choice.
Me: Do you there are any moral considerations connected to abortion?
Them: My body my choice.
Me: Should there be any limits?
Them: My body my choice.
Me: (Literally any point or question)
Them: My body my choice.
OR
Them: Trump committed treason.
Me: (Any point or counter arguement)
Them: Trump committed treason.
...And on and on and on.
The left is a joke. They are incapable of logical rational discussion on any topic of a political nature no matter how you try to draw them in. All you ever get back is talking points over and over. Half of their statements are self contradictory (see the obstruction charge above), and most of them are one line talking points they are just parroting. You people have a brain. Use it. If you have a point to make use facts and figures to make it. You hurt my feelings is not an argument. Cause that's what I think is not an argument. Trump is yukky is not an argument. You can do better.
Yes, me too, like a hyena at the rightists in theses threads. They see what they wish, they hear what they wish. How else could they have voted for Trump to begin with? How can some of them continue to support Trump, even now? It’s not that they’re losing their minds, it’s that they’ve already lost their minds for a few years now.
How so Inga? Why wouldn't I want to vote for a President who had good economic growth, pushed back on unfair trading practices, disavowed new wars, put controlled immigration on the table (you as a regular reader know the rest of the list)? Why in the hell wouldn't I like to see more of that? Can you make a logical argument against it? HONEST reasoning please.
The resident dullard has weighed in with a stupid opinion. The crossword puzzle, which did have a swastika in the middle, has nothing to do with Trump but she has to get one little hate in to let us know he is still living in her head. Plenty of room there.
It's actually a स्वस्तिक
Ann Althouse said...
"The apparent swastika is white, not black...for those who might not see it."
I could "see" that the white channels between the black squares was what the swastika-seers where emoting about. But draw lines through the center of those channels and look at what you have. It's not a swastika. It might be reminiscent of a swastika. But if you actually care about Holocaust victims, it would be appropriate not to use this as an occasion for crying wolf.
If you want to make Ann mad and completely detach from any rational cognitive process just point out what the people that work at the NYT's and the WAPO really are.
She just cannot abide by attacks on her tribe.
My challenge to you Ann would be to draw a more obvious swastika in a crossword puzzle.
But whatever you gotta do to feel superior to the people who deign to read things outside your favored propaganda.
You really need to ask yourself why you are willing to look this silly to defend the NYT's.
Senile ass Michael K quoted a “foreign service officer” named Lewis Amselem the other day claiming he had the scoop on the “Covid hoax”. No attribution but another commenter linked to this foreign service officer’s blog. It turns out that the guy the senile coot quoted was the very same guy who emailed Clinton to tell her he was going to “sacrifice a chicken to Moloch in his backyard”. Also he is the guy who lied and smeared an American nun who was gang raped and tortured by American backed Guatemalan Security Forces. That’s the kind of guy senile coot Michael K looks up to and quotes.
Hillary Aide Talks About Animal Sacrifice to Demon Moloch in WikiLeaks Email
The name of the nun is Dianna Ortiz. This incident happened in 1989 when the senile coots’s foreign service officer, C Lewis Amselem was there as part of the OAS. He smeared an American nun, that’s the kind of guy the senile coot quotes as if the guy speaks truth.
Lewis Amselem, Friend of Rapists, Scum
“Inga is so gleeful. She needs a big mirror so she can see exactly what a fool she is.”
Wendy, you really are not aware of how you sound to most normal people, do you? You sound as extreme as Achilles and possibly as demented as Michael K.
Ryan McCarty, the puzzle's constructor, said in the Times that he was "thrilled" to have his first Sunday crossword in the publication. "This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I've made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!"
You loons seriously need to calm down and quit imagining conspiracy theories about publications/ entities you don’t like. Next you’ll be seeing swastikas in the swirl of a peppermint Christmas candy. Or maybe see Jesus on your toast.
“The crossword puzzle, which did have a swastika in the middle, has nothing to do with Trump…”
To the senile coot, I am drawing attention to the similarity of nutters like you, who see swastikas in NYT crossword puzzles, to the nutters who support Trump. It’s a nutter mindset and you have it.
Russis Collusion Truther and Hillary/FBI Hoax Dossier Dead Ender Inga: "You loons seriously need to calm down and quit imagining conspiracy theories about publications/ entities you don’t like."
Tell us more about garage door pull handles, Jussie Smollett "encounters" and hawaiian shirts.
Inga: "Yes, me too, like a hyena at the rightists in theses threads. They see what they wish, they hear what they wish."
Do you still believe the Hillary/FBI Hoax Dossier was "verified" and "mostly proven true"?
LOL
Post a Comment