Capitol Hill Blue
This morning I had the TV on for a few hours. It was the live broadcast of the House investigation into the riot of 1/6 and it was very strange. They had all the guys in charge (maybe) that quit after it happened. There were, amongst others, two police chiefs as well as other. Throughout the questioning not one of the politicians asking the questions never asked a simple question which may have answered all the others. The question goes something like; "Was there anybody in charge?"

Amazing! Not once! After a couple of hours of that I just turned it off. It became pretty obvious, early on, that NOBODY was in charge! There was a plethora of bosses - but nobody was in charge! There was a lot of stuff like who told who what, when and how and they couldn't even get that one right! What gets even more interesting is that apparently everybody seemed to keep phone records and even recordings if this and that but - NOBODY WAS IN CHARGE! They spent hours explaining stuff but NOBODY WAS IN CHARGE!

On reflection I suspect this is the way we run our government - NOBODY IS IN CHARGE! Its REALLY time for a new Hoover commission! There are OVER 141,000 members of the civil service in Washington, D.C. I am beginning to wonder if anybody is really in charge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Commission
I watched as much as I could, in the background, until Josh Hawley. His aggressive arrogant hypocrisy was astounding, in an age where we are resistant to it and thought it couldn't get any worse. He is extremely dangerous! We can only hope that his performances will end up being political suicide!

Ron Johnson had trouble just not breaking into Russian as usual, and Cruz of course. I cannot understand how they let them continue to commit contempt of congress!

TAT
I have wondered about that myself. They are, however, 50% of the congress (or very close to that). I don't think that one side can remove the other! There are also rules (I think, have no idea what they might be though).

That being said, those knowingly supporting The Big Lie, I think, can't possibly be allowable as the big lie is the antithesis of this nation's constitution, I think (election denial). Basically, if you support the big lie then you are a traitor to the nation.
I doubt just voting to not certify the electors of a state constitutes "aid or comfort" to insurrectionists. But there certainly were congress members who incited the insurrection along with Trump, or gave tours to people with full knowledge of their plans.

I bet when these things get into the courts, they end up being booted out of elected politics for life. That's going to make supporting Trump's stolen election lies less popular. But don't count on congress to do anything like that. Congress is not a court. And judges really HATE perjury, Clarence Thomas excepted.

The fact that Thomas was the only SC Justice to write a dissent supporting Trump's election lies is telling, when Trump nominated so many Justices.
Trump has been acquitted on the incitement charge. No one else is likely to be charged. Trump is speaking at CPAC today in Orlando to an admiring audience who plan to see him re-elected in 2024.

Nobody is getting locked up and no one's political career will be adversely affected. Republican voters are entirely on board with carrying the MAGAverse into the next election cycle to reclaim the House and the Senate.

In a sane world you'd be absolutely correct.

Rational thought leads us to these predictions of rational results arrived at by rational men meeting and agreeing on the most rational course of action as per laws and traditions and resulting in rational conclusions.

Abstract thought, on the other hand, takes into account the variables like a complete lack of rationality in the Republican Party and a world turned topsy-turvy by a godlike authoritarian leader.
Jash hawley posed with closed fist waving in encouragement! That, I think, makes him responsible and should get his. Same with all the other elected who have, right out loud (one way or another) supported anti democratic, racist, stuff have the opportunity to stand up and defend themselves. I can only wonder how Josh explains the waving fist of support for all to see. Its a little like the idiot who stole the Pelosi reading thing (forget the name) and then made sure that the TV camera got his smiling picture of the theft. These people are not real bright!

It might be a thought for the Democrats to find those willing to go after those who claim to represent them whilst toothing the Trump horn as the whole damned bunch of them are anti-constitution folk, who are constantly claiming righteousness whilst attacking the nation. Being represented by such would not make me happy and, I suspect, there are many in that same camp.

Its kinda interesting. The Republicans are stressing how evil and bad the Democrats are and ignore most policies, etc. The Democrats, on the other hand, tend to stress policies and stuff. This dawned on me just the other night for no reason but it seems to be how things are. I have friends who are Trump true believers. When they claim something I now ask them what the basis for the thought is. My Trumpist friends no longer make claims around me.
Quote:
Jash hawley posed with closed fist waving in encouragement! That, I think, makes him responsible and should get his.


There is no law against pumping your fist. The people who voted for him are proud of him and stand behind his actions and his agreement that the election was stolen. He's a freshman senator and will be in office at least six more years. His fist pump will be long forgotten by then.
FrankenHawley is on the loose.Danforth's warning.
Senator John Danforth was my favorite living Republican, and seeing him so tainted by his support of Hawley is saddening. But as we know, everything Rump touches dies. Danforth is very apologetic of his strong support for the totally unapologetic Hawley. I hope Danforth lives long enough to try to regain a shred of his honor and reputation by actively turning the Missouri GOP to take out Hawley, hopfully by recall or resignation. 2024 is too long to have Hawley around!
One of the Capital invaders appeared before a judge the other day as his prosecution began, and his lawyers claimed he was just following the President's orders. The judge shut down that excuse immediately. He told the moron that HE was responsible for his criminal actions. Sounds like somebody is going to jail to me!

The FBI is spending a huge amount of time and money, for something that is not going to send anybody to jail. Maybe under Bill Barr, but there's a new sheriff in town. And yes, even White, rich people go to prison for stuff like tax fraud, loan fraud, fraudulent college admission schemes, etc.

Hawley's voters may support him, but they are not judges or juries. Last time I checked voter popularity in Missouri had no effect on a Washington DC federal jury. BTW, DC has more Black people than White people. 76% of the registered voters are Democrats. So juries are not likely to be favorable to Republican extremists who came from other states and try to disrupt the government.
Even as I comment on the subject, the voices in my head are reminding that Trumpism is a mass insanity event, and there is no rational explanation or cure, I’m still compulsed to wonder what those wacko Capitol Building rioters thought would happen next, after they “took” the building? A magical new era of government “of the creeple, by the creeple, and for the creeple”, following the Constitutional Principles of anarchy, violence, and chaos?

Or is the mass delusion really that humanity is capable of rising above mass delusion?

Give me ‘Weird Psychology’ for $1,000, Alex.
In past decades many of us have wondered why Hitler was so effective in spite of many who could see where he was heading. Why didst more sane people oppose his rise? Now I feel that we are in a situation where we should be doing more, but what to do other than encourage criminal prosecution of the entire, he who was before, crime family with RICO laws and confiscating ill gotten assets. I will stipulate the early evocation of Godwin's law as reductio ad Hitlerum is now moot!
TAT

Quote:
Godwin's law, short for Godwin's law (or rule) of Nazi analogies,[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that "as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1".[2][3] That is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Adolf Hitler or his deeds, the point at which effectively the discussion or thread ends.

Promulgated by the American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990,[2] Godwin's law originally referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions.[4] He stated that he introduced Godwin's law in 1990 as an experiment in memetics.[2] It is now applied to any threaded online discussion, such as Internet forums, chat rooms, and comment threads, as well as to speeches, articles, and other rhetoric[5][6] where reductio ad Hitlerum occurs.
Here is a little Youtube (I love the picture) about an idea called “waking sleep” - might be an explanation for mass delusion.

The narrator may induce you into a state of sleeping sleep, if you are not on guard - fair warning...

Originally Posted By: logtroll
I’m still compulsed to wonder what those wacko Capitol Building rioters thought would happen next, after they “took” the building?

I don’t know what the morons in the cop killing MAGA mob thought would happen, but I’m pretty sure the Orange One was hoping for a couple of deaths (preferably Pelosi and Pence among them) whereupon he’d declare martial law and take complete control of the government “until we can figure this all out”; which, of course, would take at least as long as it took to figure out whatever it was we were supposed to figure out while the Muslim ban was in effect.
Quote:
Hawley's voters may support him, but they are not judges or juries.

As far as I know he has committed no crimes.
Well, France has just proven again that a Democracy can prosecute and convict a past president and survive the process.

Former French president Sarkozy sentenced to jail from MSNBC. Now why con't we?
You are right - no problem in raising your fist - UNLESS you are encouraging a bunch of traitors. Then, perhaps, there is a little problem?

The people who voted for him either don't understand that he is a traitor or they need to be educated?
As I pointed out earlier, it does not matter a bit how his constituents feel about his actions, until 2022 when they vote again. What matters is how the AG of the US, federal prosecutors, and possibly jurors in a DC federal grand jury feel. And I kind of doubt any of those are big Hawley fans.

And Trump has not been "acquitted" for any crime. Impeachment is a political matter: You can be convicted or not convicted. But that has no bearing on a later criminal prosecution. The constitution is very specific about that. Even Mitch McConnell suggested that a criminal proceeding was appropriate for Trump. In a criminal court, he can be convicted or acquitted. That hasn't happened yet.
Originally Posted By: jgw
You are right - no problem in raising your fist - UNLESS you are encouraging a bunch of traitors. Then, perhaps, there is a little problem?

The people who voted for him either don't understand that he is a traitor or they need to be educated?


Shall we send them off to re-education camps? Gulag them until they learn the error of their ways? Exterminate them if they refuse to comply?

Are they traitors or are they patriots? Terrorists or freedom fighters?

Republicans see this through an entirely different filter and they still control half the government so your chances of locking anybody up for anything are fairly slim.
There is no statue which covers what he did as a crime. What he did was to support, condone, encourage statements which had no basis in factual validity. Had he reviewed all the real evidence (recounts & audits, and court cases) he would have concluded, had he been objective and honest, with just a smidgen of integrity, he would have told all those Trump supporters he had found no evidence to support their belief the election was stolen. Because he did not, he is part and parcel of their delusion and actually promoted the march to the Capitol.

That is his "crime".
Quote:
I’m still compulsed to wonder what those wacko Capitol Building rioters thought would happen next, after they “took” the building?


LOL

Let me answer that with a freebie.

The expectation was Mr Trump would emerge from a cloud on high, riding down the golden escalator, and proclaim himself as not only savior of America but the actual and real president, as he waved his arms to vanquish the false president and the anti-God, anti-Trump baby eating, Democrat minions of Satan. And the songs will ring throughout the land ... for his has arisen

Praise the Lord ... praise Trump

Why would you expect something different from cult members???
It may be of passing interest that Josh Hawley was Missouri Attorney General (2017–2019). Given that, and the fact that he was well educated one can only wonder. I guess he is now working at being the leader of all?
Didja see Josh Hawley's name on the straw ballot at CPAC?

Nope.

Ron DeSantis was next behind Trump. While the junior senator from bumfu*k did not commit a crime when he pumped that fist it may have still been a mistake as far as his future in politics. Depending on which way the political wind blows...we are not out of the woods yet.
See Pecker poles

Since Gov Abbot doesnt even get a point, he is opening up Texas covid precautions, to take the story off of his disastrous leadership on energy. I guess he hopes this will make him look like a strong MAGA Gov like DeSantis, who is doing well in the polls.
Tat
There's a rumor that Cullen DeHurd is the current leader of the GOP.
Do they shearum before they cullum?
They pull the wool over their eyes and fleece ‘em...
He was a sitting senator giving encouragement to a bunch of looters. Seems to me that is on a par with somebody cheering on a rapist? I am not convinced that is not illegal. If not illegal is surely wasn't right?

I REALLY want those jerks dealt with!

Oh, I know, wishful thinking doesn't really work......
Quote:
If not illegal is surely wasn't right?

Depends on whose eyes you're looking through.
Racheal Maddow had the transcript of the proceedings on that guy who had his feet up on Pelosi's desk during the insurrection. He was complaining about still being in custody when others are bailing out. The judge asked the prosecutor about his charges in reference to making a plea deal. His hardest count has a 20 year sentence and a $250,000 fine! Even with a plea deal, I bet he does 5.

Everybody is treating the insurrection as a party that went a bit far, but over a hundred police officers were injured and people died. Most of them are going to prison, and that's going to change a lot of folks attitude about it.
Republican senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Mike Lee of Utah, Ted Cruz of Texas, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, Josh Hawley of Missouri, John Kennedy of Louisiana and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee have all said they will block Merrick Garland’s nomination as AG. You bet they are opposed! As soon as the Justice Department has an AG, the shiz hits the fan. None of them has any immunity from prosecution, and Garland has already said the insurrection investigation will go where the facts lead it. If a law has been broken, his Justice Department will pursue it. Fortunately, they can only block his confirmation for one week. It takes just 51 votes to confirm him, and all the Democrats, the VP, as well as Mitch McConnell have said they will vote for him.
Of all crimes, sedition should include exclusion from society. One can hardly declare them outlaw*, there being no uncharted country whither the criminals might flee. So, prison is the only option.

*Outlaw in Germanic common law meaning: An outlaw’s property and self could be taken by anyone without recourse.
I have noticed that when female Democrats are being interviewed they all tend to be nervous about their fellow representative, on the Republican side as well as the possibility of another riot.

A story. About 20 years ago we were in India at some kind kind of meeting and I was wandering around looking at stuff. I noticed a guy next to me and then noticed he was accompanied by a child and a bodyguard with a machine gun. I asked him about that. He told me he was a member of the Indian legislator and that they all had a bodyguard when they went out in public. From what I can tell we are headed in that direction. Its unfortunate. There are over 600 members of congress. I wonder how much its gonna cost us to give every one of them a 24 hour bodyguard.

Hopefully we will not need that. This means, however, that we are going to have to start paying attention to the FBI (their warnings about American terrorists have been duly ignored for years). I remember when the communist party was being dealt with. When that one ended it turned out that something like half the remaining Communists were members of the FBI (which always amused me). Was also a time when Trotsky folk owned the American Worker's Party (still out there). At the time they were very close to taking over the Seattle branch of the Democratic party but the FBI took care of that one.
The House passed a bill yesterday to award medals to the Capital Police that were heroes on January 6th. 12 House Republicans voted against the bill. The reason they gave was because the bill referred to it as an "insurrection". I think everybody else voted for it. More than one of them said they feared prosecutors could use the fact that "resurrection" was used in a bill that is sure to pass in the Senate unchanged, and be signed into law by the President.

Their fear is reasonable:
Quote:
18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

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.


The Supreme Court could not declare this statute unconstitutional because the 14th Amendment also contains much of the same language and disqualification from office.

Their careers in politics are at stake, if not their freedom for the next 10 years.
Gosh, that would be a terrible shame! Are you saying that those who ignored the constitution and are against our democracy might be at risk? Really?

Their efforts to entertain us just goes on and on!
© ReaderRant