Trump supporters and conspiracy theory - Part 2

[Rick Plant]

'A perverted view of justice': How Bill Barr exposed himself after the Durham investigation flop



In a biting column for the Washington Post, political analyst Dana Milbank claimed an interview given by former attorney general Bill Barr after the John Durham case against an attorney associated with Hillary Clinton flopped with jurors, is a sign that Donald Trump's former AG is not a man who should be trusted or taken seriously.

The case that Durham pursued for three years against campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann went down in flames in just six hours, yet Barr asserted afterward that it was stiil an important pursuit.

As Milbank wrote, Barr pursued the case based on "innuendo" despite members of his own DOJ telling him there was no there there.

"The day after these twin repudiations of Barr’s fantasies, the hoaxster explained himself on Fox News — by arguing that Durham’s failure in court was in fact a triumph. 'While he did not succeed in getting a conviction from the D.C. jury,' Barr said, 'I think he accomplished something far more important,'" Milbank wrote before sarcastically adding, "This is about as convincing as the Washington Nationals saying, 'While we did not succeed in scoring a run for 27 innings, we think we accomplished something far more important.' In a courtroom, a prosecutor either wins or loses."

According to the columnist, Barr's comments exposed him as a partisan fraud.

"Durham didn’t 'crystallize' or 'expose' anything. He packed his court filings with innuendo, and the jury decided he hadn’t made his case," he wrote. "But Barr’s argument, that the innuendo Durham spread is 'far more important' than proving actual wrongdoing, unmasks Barr’s perverted view of justice."

"Running Trump’s DOJ, Barr was all about telling stories rather than prosecuting wrongdoing. He sat on the Mueller report of the original Russia investigation, instead releasing his own purported summary that gave a misleading impression of Mueller’s findings," Milbank accused before adding, "Barr was giving Justice cover to the reckless allegations being made by Trump and his allies. Barr made sure the lies had a lengthy head start to leave lasting impressions before any corrective could be issued."

Writing that Barr has "unmasked" himself with his latest Durham comments, Millbank concluded, "now, Barr is trying to discredit the centuries-old American jury system. It’s just one more 'story' he tells to replace the rule of law with the reign of innuendo."

Read more here: 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/03/barr-unmasking-durham-probes-bogus/

[Rick Plant]

'Misinforms people at an industrial level': Steve Schmidt slams Fox News -- but is still hopeful about America's future



Longtime political consultant Steve Schmidt gave a hopeful lesson on U.S. history during a Saturday interview by CNN's Jim Acosta.

Acosta asked about the upcoming public hearings by the House Select Committee Investigating the Jan 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The host wondered how Fox News would cover the hearings.

"How is it going to play in conservative media? What are Trump folks going to do to distract everybody? There's reporting that the Trump people are going to distract from the hearings," Acosta said. "It reminds me of if a tree falls in the forest, does anybody hear it, does it make a sound? In MAGA world, if they're distracted by the shiny objects, is it going to sink in, have the same effects the Watergate hearings had 50 years ago and so on?"

"I think the communications that exist in the world today are different than 50 years ago," Schmidt replied.

"The reality is that there's a sophisticated, complex, interconnected, global misinformation network, dubbed as 'Fox News' in this country, that misinforms people at an industrial level," he explained. "Now 25% of the country is completely supportive of the MAGA movement, of Trump, I suppose of the insurrection."

"The reality is though the overwhelming majority of the country is opposed to it. And I think the country will tune in here to the facts. The simple fact is that we live in a constitutional republic, it is the oldest in the world. That republic requires citizens who have a sense of both obligation and responsibility," he continued. "A republic doesn't function without informed citizens and so, the choices ahead, the facts that will be laid out, are important or significant, and the country will be exposed to them."

"And at the end of the day, the facts are the facts. They will be overwhelming, the evidence will be laid out, my view is that the American people -- we're not passive about the future of the country. You can look at the 1930s — took a long time for people in the United States to awaken to the threat. You can look at the 1850s. you can look at other comparable periods of time before the progressive era, the beginning of the 20th century. When people awaken to a threat, they awaken," he explained.

"People who first awaken look at dismay at others. The story is clear, when the American people are confronted overwhelmingly with facts they react to it, particularly when it speaks to the threat that faces a country that contains their children and their futures," he concluded.

Watch:

[Rick Plant]

Paul Ryan is a coward as well. He spent his time as Speaker being a Trump sycophant and now after Donnie is about to go down for treason, Paul Ryan is pointing his finger at other Republicans calling them gutless. They are all gutless, including Paul Ryan, because they were all afraid of doing their job which was to remove a deranged lunatic from power via the 25th Amendment. And the GOP had two opportunities to impeach and convict Criminal Donald and they refused to do their jobs on both occasions. 

Paul Ryan admits a 'lot' of GOP lawmakers were in favor of impeaching Trump but 'didn't have the guts'



Former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) recently admitted that while many Republicans were in favor of impeaching former President Donald Trump, many “didn’t have the guts” to do so.

On Wednesday, June 1, Ryan appeared at an event in Florence, S.C., where he reiterated his support for Rep. Tom Rice (R-S.C.), whom he has also endorsed, HuffPost reports.

Ryan also commended the lawmaker for having the courage to cast a vote in favor of Trump's impeachment. Rice was one of only 10 Republican lawmakers to vote with Democrats to impeach Trump after the insurrection on the U.S. Capitol. Their unprecedented votes ultimately led to Trump being the only twice-impeached president in U.S. history.

Because of his vote, he also became one of the Republican lawmakers Trump is determined to defeat. Now, he is embroiled in a heated election battle with Trump-endorsed candidate, State Rep. Russell Fry (R-S.C.). However, Ryan still believes Rice is the right man for the job.

“There were a lot of people who wanted to vote like Tom but who just didn’t have the guts to do it,” said Ryan, according to The Myrtle Beach Sun News.

“There are a lot of people who say they’re going to vote their conscious, they’re going to vote for the Constitution, they’re going to vote for their convictions, but when it gets hard to do that, they don’t do it,” he said, adding, “Tom Rice is a man of conviction."

Although Ryan is fond of Rice, the South Carolina lawmaker has made it clear where he stands on politics. Per The Sun: "Rice has argued that Republicans ought to stick with Trump’s policy ideas but abandon the man. He called his House reelection bid a battle between “nerds” like himself and Ryan, who aim to enact conservative policy, and “flamethrowers” who put allegiance to Trump over all else."

Ryan's latest remarks come just days after he criticized what he describes as "entertainer" lawmakers who, according to HuffPost, are more focused on building "a noticeable 'brand' rather than work with colleagues to pass legislation."

At the time, Ryan said, “If you are going to entertain, if you are going to try to show that you’re better than everyone else within your own ecosystem,” it makes compromise more difficult to achieve and ultimately “divides us."

https://www.alternet.org/2022/06/paul-ryan/

[Rick Plant]

White Christian nationalism is at the heart of 'the most radical fringe groups' working hand in hand with some GOPers: researchers



Hot on the heels of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene posting an extended video praising Christian nationalism (which can be seen below) and promising it is not “something to be scared of," two researchers whose book "The Flag and the Cross" is just about to be published, disputed her claim and said the movement is highly dangerous and a "threat to democracy."

In an interview with Intelligencer, sociologists Samuel L. Perry of the University of Oklahoma and Philip S. Gorski of Yale University, issued a warning that the belief is at the heart of "some of the most radical fringe groups" in the U.S. which are finding support from a smattering of elected Republican lawmakers and some hoping to be on the ballot in November.

Speaking with Sarah Jones, the two academics explained that it is important that the term "white Christian nationalism" be used to put a name on the threat to get the attention of the public.

"I think because it identifies one of the deepest and most powerful currents in American political culture, one that has been invisible to most folks outside of that culture and even, in a way, to a lot of people inside of that culture because it’s the water they swim in and the air they breathe," Gorski explained with his co-author noting the connection to former president Donald Trump.

As Perry explained, "I think 'Christian right' is shorthand for people who hold the ideology that we’re talking about. Since Trump came into office, the narrative was constantly about white Evangelicals, white Evangelicals, white Evangelicals, and why they stick with Trump. What we’ve tried to do is to steer away from that white Evangelical conversation to talk about the underlying ideology called white Christian nationalism that drives that support for Trumpism, his brand of politics, and all these other authoritarian and anti-democratic things."

The authors note that the movement has a view of history that is unsupported as they try to turn the U.S. into the country they believe it once was.

"If you’re a white Christian, it doesn’t matter when you showed up in the United States; you have a kind of a birthright," Gorski stated.

Asked who is pushing the belief that the authors wrote is “entangled with the holy trinity of racial order, Christian freedom, and male violence,” Perry immediately pointed to Donald Trump and those in his orbit.

"I think anybody who subscribes to Trumpism and ultimately the political figures who advocate for it," he explained. "You see this in Marjorie Taylor Greene; you see this in Wendy Rogers. Josh Mandel. I think J.D. Vance more and more. Elise Stefanik. Anything that appeals to white Christian ethno-culture — not Christianity. I mean, sometimes you get it couched in vague language about returning to God. But it’s also combined with a worship of gun culture, a worship of capitalism as opposed to woke leftists or a socialist agenda."

Marjorie Taylor Greene has leaned fully into nationalism:

“Nationalism is a good thing.”

“We should be proud of an America First nationalism.”

“Christian nationalism” is not “something to be scared of.”

Watch: https://twitter.com/i/status/1532688897867763713

Read more here:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/06/white-christian-nationalism-is-a-threat-to-democracy.html

[Rick Plant]

Trump allies wanted armed private contractors and U.S. Marshals to seize voting machines after 2020 election: report

The extent of the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 presidential election is coming into sharper focus due to a new document obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

"Supporters on the fringes of former President Trump’s circle explored seeking sweeping authority after the 2020 election to enlist armed private contractors to seize and inspect voting machines and election data with the assistance of U.S. Marshals, according to a draft letter asking the president to grant them permission," the newspaper reported. "The previously undisclosed 'authorizing letter' and accompanying emails were sent on Nov. 21, 2020, from a person involved in efforts to find evidence of fraud in the election that year. The documents, which were reviewed by The Times, are believed to be among those in the possession of the House Select Jan. 6 committee, which is scheduled to begin public hearings Thursday."

The newspaper reports the letter appears to be an early iteration of a draft executive order presented to Trump on Dec. 18, 2020 by lawyer Sidney Powell and former national security advisor Michael Flynn. Patrick Byrne, the former Overstock.com CEO who was funding election denying efforts, was also in attendance.

The two were led into the Oval Office by Garrett Ziegler, an aide to Peter Navarro who on Friday said he expects to be indicted.

"The email and attached draft letter were sent to Cyber Ninjas CEO Doug Logan and cybersecurity expert Jim Penrose by Andrew Whitney, a British technology entrepreneur who made his way inside Trump’s circle in 2020 after he sought the president’s support for Oleandrin, a toxic botanical extract Whitney claimed was a miracle cure for COVID-19. Logan, who went on to conduct an audit of election results in Maricopa County, Ariz., and Penrose worked for weeks after the 2020 election with a group including Powell, Flynn and Byrne that sought access to voting machines in an attempt to find proof of election fraud," the newspaper reported.

In February, Politico obtained emails showing Flynn and retired Army Col. Phil Waldron workshopping memos to seize voting machines.

"The Dec. 16 version of the order would have tasked the Pentagon with seizing voting machines, rather than private companies. The draft dated the following day gave the U.S. Department of Homeland Security responsibility for taking possession of the machines and data," the LA Times reported. "Neither of those versions of the draft order would have given private companies the authority to seize or examine the machines, or allowed their workers to be armed during the process, though the drafts did call for the assistance of the National Guard."

Read the full report:

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2022-06-04/trump-allies-proposed-order-to-seize-voting-machines-gave-authority-to-armed-private-contractors

[Rick Plant]

Peter Navarro's abrupt arrest was meant as a 'hard message' to Trump's inner circle: legal expert



Appearing on CNN early Saturday morning, noted defense attorney Shan Wu suggested that the abrupt arrest and jailing of former Donald Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro on Friday was designed by the DOJ as a message to other members of the Trump administration who are being scrutinized.

Speaking with host Boris Sanchez, the attorney noted that -- surprisingly -- the combative Navarro was not given the opportunity to turn himself in after being indicted on two counts of criminal contempt and was instead nabbed before entering a plane and handcuffed.

That, in turn, led Navarro to complain that his arrest was unconstitutional, which attorney Wu just laughed off.

"I want to ask you about Peter Navarro's claims that his arrest was unconstitutional," host Sanchez prompted. "He said he wasn't allowed to make a call from jail, his attorneys weren't contacted. Was there any detail in his arrest that would lead you to believe that something improper took place?"

"No, absolutely not. I thought he was saying he was defending himself," Wu replied with a smirk. "So I'm not sure who they would have contacted in terms of his attorneys."

"It's a little unusual that in a white-collar case they wouldn't have allowed him to self-surrender," he added. "That could indicate, it was hard to reach him and he might flee, given he was representing himself. And two, [they] may have been trying to send a message."

"I don't think it's a coincidence of the timing that they announced a declination of [Dan] Scavino and [Mark] Meadow's cases and also, on the other hand, sending a hard message of arresting Navarro," he elaborated. "It may have been to make that point they're not fooling around that, when they indict, they're going to treat people quite seriously."

Watch below:

[Rick Plant]

Trump is 'the first seditious president in our history': Woodward and Bernstein



In a comprehensive piece for the Washington Post, legendary Watergate reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Berstein used their experiences covering the Senate hearings 50 years ago that eventually sent Richard Nixon packing, to the impending congressional hearings by a House select committee investigating the Jan 6th insurrection that will begin this Thursday, and claimed that what Nixon did pales in comparison to Donald Trump's attack on democracy

The two journalists whose steadfastness in reporting on the Watergate break-in led to Nixon's resignation and fall into disgrace, wrote for the Post that they have no doubt that the twice-impeached Trump is guilty of sedition by virtue of his conspiring with others to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Put more bluntly, they wrote that Trump's post-election actions made him the "first seditious president in our history."

According to their analysis, on Jan 6th, "driven by Trump’s rhetoric and his obvious approval, a mob descended on the Capitol and, in a stunning act of collective violence, broke through doors and windows and ransacked the House chamber, where the electoral votes were to be counted. The mob then went in search of Pence — all to prevent the certification of Joe Biden’s victory. Trump did nothing to restrain them."

As the journalist noted, unlike Nixon's "dirty tricks," Trump, "...accomplished his subversion largely in public. He pursued attacks on the legitimacy of the 2020 election process from campaign rally podiums, the White House and his popular Twitter feed. Nonetheless, he lost 61 of his court challenges, even from judges he had appointed," before adding, "After Election Day, Trump began another, more deadly assault on the electoral process."

After detailing Trump's efforts up to and after the Jan 6th riot, Woodward and Bernstein pointed out some similarities between the recently ousted president and Nixon who realized he had lost support in Congress making staying in office untenable.

"Both Nixon and Trump created a conspiratorial world in which the U.S. Constitution, laws and fragile democratic traditions were to be manipulated or ignored, political opponents and the media were 'enemies,' and there were few or no restraints on the powers entrusted to presidents," they wrote. "Trump’s claims have always been presented with unwavering, emotional consistency, revealing little or no self-doubt. As the 2024 election approaches, Trump seems on the verge of once again seeking the presidency."

Having written that, they added, "Both Nixon and Trump have been willing prisoners of their compulsions to dominate, and to gain and hold political power through virtually any means. In leaning so heavily on these dark impulses, they defined two of the most dangerous and troubling eras in American history, before warning, "As Washington warned in his Farewell Address more than 225 years ago, unprincipled leaders could create 'permanent despotism,' 'the ruins of public liberty,' and 'riot and insurrection.'"

You can read the highly comprehensive piece here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/06/05/woodward-bernstein-nixon-trump/