Trump supporters and conspiracy theory - Part 2

[Rick Plant]

Some people want to look at our current situation with rose colored glasses while being oblivious to reality. Our Capitol was attacked by Trump's anti American cult members who tried to overthrow the US Government. Their goal was to stop the certification of President Biden's victory so they could illegally install Trump. Trump's "Big Lie" of voter fraud is proven to be the scam that it is each time one of his right wing groups conducts their phony election "audits" in the select states they choose. After the phony audit is completed, no evidence of "voter fraud" is ever found, but the right wing group always recommends that voter restriction laws need to be implemented. Then right on cue, the GOP controlled legislatures in these states immediately draft voter restriction laws aimed at voter suppression which benefits the GOP. The question you need to ask yourself is, since no voter fraud exists, why does the GOP need to enact voter restrictive laws making it harder to vote? There is no fraud but the GOP implements these laws anyway because that is there entire goal. Their goal is to create doubt in people's mind that our election system is "rigged" and that the way we hold elections "doesn't work" anymore and we need to use another method instead. This is a clear and blatant attack on our democracy and it's what countries do who are shifting towards authoritarian governments. We hear these same words coming directly from the radical right each day and their goal is to end our democracy.

Voting should be made easy for everybody. When it's easier to vote, more people partake in the process. The most patriotic thing you can do is cast a vote and the GOP is making it harder for Americans to do that. Not only are the GOP implementing laws making it harder to vote, they are installing their own cronies in key positions as officials. So, when the GOP loses an election, they can immediately claim there's "voter fraud", even though none exists, and since they are in charge of these positions they can reject the election results and overturn it in their own favor. This is totally unconstitutional and illegal but they are making this law based on the "Big Lie" of non existent voter fraud. It's all about them being in control and having power as a minority party.   

We see neo nazi hate groups marching in DC and giving their full support to Donald Trump. Violent right wing militia groups are taking up arms wanting a Civil War. Republican members of Congress incite violence towards Democratic members of Congress. Some GOP members are supporters of these white nationalists. Others like Marco Rubio are cozying up to authoritarian dictators. Qanon conspiracy cultists stormed the Capitol beating cops. Their philosophy is to use violence as a means for their radical evangelical religion which is exactly what ISIS does. They infiltrate and attack school board members at meetings and are now running for school board committees so they can control school boards to push anti mask and vaccine mandates. This is extremely dangerous and these are the radicals who are so blood thirsty to control our government wanting to end our democracy and implement their own radical form of government. Meanwhile, the people with their rose colored glasses don't see this happening in America each day. We simply cannot allow these fascists to be in power or democracy will be over as we know it.           

Trump's attack on democracy is 'gaining momentum' as even impeachment-backing Republicans feel intimidated: reporter
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-coup-2655951289/

[Rick Plant]

Meadows text messages reveal he secretly chatted with GOP members about an election overthrow plot



Mark Meadows shared some of the contacts he had in or around Jan. 6 involving the White House's attempts to stop the certification of the 2020 election, according to a letter from the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol and what led to it.

According to the Committee's Chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Meadows had a conversation with a member of Congress who suggested an alternative slate of electors. The member confessed that the idea would be a "highly controversial" one, but Meadows still said, "I love it."

"The text messages you did produce include a Nov. 6, 2020, text exchange with a Member of Congress apparently about appointing alternate electors in certain states as part of a plan that the Member acknowledged would be 'highly controversial' and to which Mr. Meadows apparently said, 'I love it'; an early Jan. 2021 text message exchange between Mr. Meadows and an organizer of the Jan. 6 rally on the Ellipse' and text messages about the need for the former President to issue a public statement that could have stopped the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol," an excerpt of the letter from Thompson to Meadows' lawyer says.

The messages were from Meadows' personal cell phone, which don't appear to have been turned over to the National Archives, in violation of the Presidential Records Act.


Mark Meadows turned over a 38-page PowerPoint called 'Options for 6 JAN' to the Capitol riot committee

Former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows decided abruptly to withdraw his cooperation with the Jan. 6 House Select Committee on Tuesday, after working with the committee and providing evidence.

Meadows said that they decided to withdraw after it was discovered the House Committee subpoenaed phone records, which is generally done to understand the questions to ask the witness to clarify.

The Guardian's congressional reporter, Hugo Lowell, tweeted that chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) revealed a 38-page PowerPoint presentation titled "Options for 6 JAN." At the same time, the committee also discovered "certain text messages from his personal cellphone he relinquished after Jan. 6."

According to Thompson's statement Tuesday, Meadows agreed to waive executive privilege on the PowerPoint and the text messages.

In the letter to Meadows' lawyer, Thompson explained that on Nov. 26, 2021, "Mr. Meadows provided to the Select Committee certain documents that you obtained from Mr. Meadows' personal email account and determined were responsive to the Select Committee's subpoena. In doing so, you also provided a privilege log indicating that you withheld several hundred additional documents from Mr. Meadows' personal email account based on claims of executive, attorney-client, or other privilege. Despite your very broad claims of privilege, Mr. Meadows has also produced documents that you apparently agree are relevant and not protected by any privilege at all. Those documents include: a Nov. 7, 2020, email discussing the appointment of alternate slates of electors as part of a 'direct and collateral attack' after the election; a Jan. 5 2021, email regarding a 38-page PowerPoint briefing titled "Election Fraud, Foreign Interference & Options for 6 JAN" that was to be provided 'on the hill'; and among others, a Jan. 5 2021, email about having the National Guard on standby."

The letter goes on to say that Meadows held back over 1,000 text messages from his cell phone that he handed over to his cell phone provider after Jan. 6, 2021.

"The text messages you did produce include a Nov. 6, 2020, text exchange with a Member of Congress apparently about appointing alternate electors in certain states as part of a plan that the Member acknowledged would be 'highly controversial' and to which Mr. Meadows apparently said, 'I love it'; an early Jan. 2021 text message exchange between Mr. Meadows and an organizer of the Jan. 6 rally on the Ellipse' and text messages about the need for the former President to issue a public statement that could have stopped the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol," the letter also says.

The letter goes on to say that Meadows' recent claims that the committee doesn't respect former President Donald Trump's privilege is outright false.

"Mr. Meadows' refusal to appear is motivated by, among other things, the documents the Select Committee staff provided to you in advance, pursuant to your request for an accommodation. You go on to suggest that those documents somehow indicate that the "Select Committee has no intention of respecting boundaries concerning Executive Privilege." That assertion runs counter to the stated purpose of the Dec. 8, 2021, deposition, which was to give Mr. Meadows a chance to answer the Select Committee's questions or assert and articulate a specific privilege he believes protects that information from disclosure," the letter says.

The letter explains to Meadows lawyer that they tried to identify the areas of inquiry that Meadows believed were protected but neither he nor his lawyers could provide that information. So, Thompson said that he would ask Meadows about those claims on a "question-by-question basis."

Thompson wrote, "That is not a lack of respect for the boundaries of executive privilege but rather an appreciation for the proper process for asserting any protective privilege."

'Even as we litigate privilege issues, the Select Committee has numerous questions for Mr. Meadows about records he has turned over to the Committee with no claim of privilege, which includes real-time communications with many individuals as the events of January 6th unfolded. We also need to hear from him about voluminous official records stored in his personal phone and email accounts, which were required to be turned over to the National Archives in accordance with the Presidential Records Act," said Thompson's statement.

Thompson also said that if Meadows is claiming executive privilege on emails and text messages from his personal cell phone and personal email, then it means he didn't comply with the Presidential Records Act, which mandates that all records be turned over regardless of their privilege level. Those records would then be controlled by the National Archives. It's the same complaint that Republicans had about Hillary Clinton's personal email server, they said should have been turned over to investigators.

The law, passed in 1978, "Codifies the process by which former and incumbent Presidents conduct reviews for executive privilege prior to [the] public release of records by NARA (which had formerly been governed by Executive order 13489).

This is one of many reasons that the committee explained it has no choice but to hold Meadows in contempt of Congress. He appears to be picking and choosing which things on which he'll wave executive privilege.

Read the full letter below:





https://www.rawstory.com/mark-meadows-documents-jan6-committee/

[Rick Plant]

Need anymore evidence that Newsmax and these far right wing outlets are nothing but Russian disinformation? They put their hero on the cover of this month's issue of their magazine and call him "great". For anyone who thinks Newsmax is anything but Russian disinformation, here is the cover of Newsmax Magazine’s December issue. Hundreds of thousands of MAGAs get their "news" from Putin every day.

[Rick Plant]

These MAGA suckers never learn as these lying grifters are taking all their money based on a lie.   

Sidney Powell’s Group Raked in Nearly $15 Million in Donations Off Election Lies

Former executives of Defending the Republic have claimed that Powell hid the group’s finances from them, according to a new report from The Washington Post



Supporters of former President Donald Trump gave more than $14 million to a Sidney Powell-led group raising funds to dispute the 2020 presidential election results, The Washington Post reported on Monday after reviewing records from Powell’s group, Defending the Republic.

The Post’s report also reveals inner turmoil among the Defending the Republic’s leadership about how the money should be spent. The group is a target of federal prosecutors, who have subpoenaed financial records and other documents from it and a political action committee run by Powell with the same name. A source familiar with the Jan. 6 committee’s work told the paper that the panel is also interested in how much money the group brought in.

"Business is good and accountability is low, which means we’re just going to see continued use of this playbook,” former senior U.S. cybersecurity official Matt Masterson told the Post. “Well-meaning folks that have been told that the election was stolen are giving out money that they might not otherwise be able to give.”

According to public filings cited by the Post, Defending the Republic raised $14.9 million from Dec. 1, 2020, to July 31 of this year and spent over $5 million on legal fees as well as unspecified awards and grants. The group also gave than half a million dollars to the GOP-led Arizona ballot review. But, according to the paper, the group may have raised more than the paperwork suggests since Powell began raising money on Nov. 10, just a week after the election. At one point this past summer, Powell controlled some $9 million in funds.

In a statement to the Post, the group’s lawyer, Howard Kleinhendler, said: “Defending The Republic is pleased that its audited financials clearly refute and put to rest previously reported allegations of financial impropriety. Defending The Republic will continue to focus on its important work for #WeThePeople.”

But so far that work has not been successful, in that they have not secured any additional election victories for Trump. The group started to fracture in March and April, the Post reported, and a number of people resigned on April 9, including former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne, who served as Defending the Republic’s chief executive. Byrne said he decided to resign after Powell sent an email accusing him and others of being “panicked” and “immature” in their reaction to a filing she submitted to the court seeking to have a lawsuit dismissed that was brought against them by Dominion Voting Systems.

"The job that every American who has donated to our cause expects me to do is to get the truth out in our cases and hopefully win the litigation as I did in Flynn,” Powell wrote in the email. “I need and deserve the full team behind me on this. I MUST run the litigation. That is why I started all of this. We do not have time, money or energy to waste. Drama needs to go.”

The next day, Byrne and many others including the executive team and Powell’s former client, ex-Trump National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn, resigned from the group. According to Byrne, Powell “refused all oversight and would not answer questions about” how much money the group had raised and had on hand.

Lin Wood, a Trump attorney and ally, has also accused Powell of grifting and posted a recorded call between himself and Byrne. “I’m not sure where all this money is going, but I think somebody owes to the American public a full accounting,” Wood told Byrne on the call.

Byrne said that he hadn’t spoken to Powell since April 6 and “never will again.”

“I gave her a laundry list of things she had to clean up and told her she had to get an auditor … She refused to let me look at any — well, I can’t tell you more,” he said. “But we walked out after about 17 days there … You can infer what you want from that.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/sidney-powell-defending-republic-15-million-1267360/

[Rick Plant]

Court rules Trump cannot block release of documents to Capitol attack panel
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/09/donald-trump-capitol-attack-committee-documents

[Rick Plant]

These anti American seditious traitors are now openly talking about overthrowing the US Government

'Get them ready now': Matt Gaetz and Steve Bannon discuss plan to take over government with 'shock troops'



Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) on Thursday talked with conservative broadcaster Steve Bannon about a plan to use "4,000 shock troops" to take over the jobs of federal government employees.

Bannon has previously said that the so-called "shock troops" need to be prepared prior to Republican control of the executive branch.

"People didn't like that Donald Trump raised his voice but sometimes you've got to raise your voice to raise a ruckus and to raise an army of patriots who love this country and will fight for her," Gaetz said on Bannon's War Room program. "We're going to operationalize the performance to go right after the people who are imposing the vaccine mandates, who are enriching themselves and who are selling out the country."

"Understand, this is a theory of governing," Bannon agreed. "It's fresh and it's new. This is Trumpism in power. That's when we went to the 4,000 shock troops we have to have that's going to man the government. Get them ready now. Right? We're going to hit the beach with the landing teams and the beachhead teams and all that nomenclature they use when President Trump wins in 2024 -- or before."

"You're going to have those as the 4,000 political appointees," he continued. "No more powderpuff derby. This is going to be hardcore accountability at every committee [in Congress]."

"Yes," Gaetz replied. "And we're going to go after this administrative state and we're going to start at the Department of Justice and the FBI. That's the job I want. You know, send me over to the Judiciary Committee and their sphincters will tighten because they have been doing a lot of corrupt things over there."

Gaetz went on to say that he is pushing to be named as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

"I don't need a new committee, I just need a gavel," he said.

Watch the video below from Real America's Voice.

[Rick Plant]

Only a guilty man would be fighting this hard to keep documents secret. An innocent man would have no trouble turning over documents because there would be nothing to see.

Appeals court: 'There is a direct linkage' between Trump and Capitol riots



The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has delivered a unanimous ruling rejecting former President Donald Trump's efforts to keep archived White House records away from the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th Capitol riots.

One particularly notable part of the ruling comes in the three-judge panel's explanation for why Congress is fully justified in seeking Trump's White House records, as the judges argue that Congress has a direct interest in investigating an attack launched against it.

"The January 6th Committee has also demonstrated a sound factual predicate for requesting these presidential documents specifically," the court writes. "There is a direct linkage between the former President and the events of the day."

The judges then explain how Trump's rhetoric incited supporters to commit acts of violence.

"Then-President Trump called for his supporters to gather in Washington, D.C. for a 'wild' response to what he had been alleging for months was a stolen election," the court argues. "On January 6th, President Trump directed his followers to go to the Capitol and 'fight' for their Country with the aim of preventing Congress’s certification of the electoral vote."

The court also argues that congressional investigators need information about what the White House knew about potential threat assessments leading up to the riot, as the White House serves as "the hub for intelligence about threats of violent action against the government, and the Executive Branch is in charge of federal law enforcement and mobilizing the National Guard to defend the Capitol."

Read the whole ruling here (PDF).
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-appeals-court-ruling/


'No basis': Appeals court unanimously rejects Trump effort to keep Jan. 6 documents secret

A federal appeals court has rejected former President Donald Trump's effort to block a House committee from obtaining his White House records related to Jan. 6.

"On the record before us, former President Trump has provided no basis for this court to override President Biden’s judgment and the agreement and accommodations worked out between the Political Branches over these documents," a three-judge panel of the appeals court wrote in a unanimous 68-page decision issued Thursday afternoon.

“Both Branches agree that there is a unique legislative need for these documents and that they are directly relevant to the Committee’s inquiry into an attack on the Legislative Branch and its constitutional role in the peaceful transfer of power," the panel wrote in an opinion drafted by Judge Patricia Millett.

Trump appealed a Nov. 9 decision by U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who rejected his claim that the records are protected by executive privilege.

“Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President,” Chutkan wrote.

After the House Select Committee investigating the insurrection requested the documents, Trump sued, demanding that hundreds of pages of his White House call and visitor logs, emails, draft speeches, and notes be kept secret.

Trump is expected to appeal Thursday's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Read the full 68-page decision from the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia here.

Watch below: