ChrisWeigant.com

The House January 6th Select Committee Hearings [Episode 5]

[ Posted Thursday, June 23rd, 2022 – 18:56 UTC ]

Today saw the final June hearing of the House Select Committee on January 6th. Next week, Congress scarpers off on one of their many two-week holiday breaks, ostensibly for the July 4th holiday, so we won't be getting another of these hearings until the week of July 11th, at the earliest. But the committee does indeed plan to hold more public hearings, although they continue to hold their cards very close to the vest on exactly how many such hearings will take place, as well as the subject of any of the upcoming hearings. Perhaps this is done to build tension and interest among the public, or perhaps it is just because they are now reportedly being flooded with new information and new testimony, all offered up since the beginning of the public hearings earlier this month.

This is an ongoing investigation. It is in no way complete. There are also parallel investigations -- of a criminal nature -- being undertaken by the Department of Justice. Today it was revealed that yesterday, not only did the F.B.I. search the houses of several of those instrumental in organizing the "fake electors" in seven states, but also that Jeffrey Clark's house was also searched. Clark is a central figure in today's hearing, as he was the one Trump tried to install as acting attorney general, solely on the strength of Clark's willingness to promote any absurd conspiracy theory bouncing around the internet as being enough to overturn a free and fair election. Much of today's hearing deals with this attempt by Trump to install what would have been the third acting attorney general within the space of two weeks, which reached a climax on January 3rd, in an Oval Office meeting.

Also, Representative Mo Brooks, fresh off a primary runoff election defeat and still stung by Trump's endorsement and then subsequent "un-endorsement," is now considering complying with a subpoena from the House Select Committee. Brooks was in this whole scheme up to his eyeballs, and even roused the rabble himself during the January 6th rally at the Ellipse. It has been hinted that Brooks may even have some things to say about the coordination between the right-wing groups like the Proud Boys in the days leading up to January 6th, so that would indeed be interesting testimony for the committee to hear.

More broadly, today's hearing dealt with two main subjects: Trump and his henchmen's pressure campaign on the Department of Justice to just somehow introduce some official-sounding doubt into the results of the elections, which would have given cover for the attempts at the state level to blatantly overturn the will of the voters (and have legislatures just outright steal the election for Donald Trump). Thankfully, Trump was finally convinced not to name Clark as acting attorney general, but if he had, this scheme would have gone forward and as Bill Barr (the attorney general who resigned rather than back Trump's lunatic theories) said, if that had happened: "I'm not sure if we would have had a transition [of power to Joe Biden] at all."

That's how close we came, in other words, to constitutional chaos.

 

Public Hearings of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol [Episode 5]

Today's hearing began later than the other midday hearings, starting at 3:00 P.M. Eastern time (which is also why this column was posted a bit later than normal). As has become the norm, most of the questioning was handled by one of the committee members, and today it was Republican Adam Kinzinger's turn to do so. Kinzinger, of course, has been just as adamant and just as vocal as Liz Cheney about the wrongness of Trump's actions -- and the cowardice of his fellow Republicans not to testify or admit what they did -- but he has gotten less media attention than she has, probably because Kinzinger has already bowed to the inevitable and decided not to run for re-election. But today, he certainly lived up to the oath of office he swore as he put country over party.

There were only three witnesses today, who sat for the entire hearing. We heard from: Jeffrey Rosen, who became acting attorney general after Bill Barr resigned; Richard Donoghue, who was acting deputy attorney general at the time (and who also spent 20 years in the military, in both the 82nd Airborne Division and as an Army lawyer); and Steven A. Engel, who was assistant attorney general in charge of the department's legal counsel at the time. All three were appointed by Donald Trump, and all three are Republicans.

Committee Chair Bennie Thompson began with a short rundown of what we were all going to hear today about Trump's pressure campaign towards high-ranking officials at the Department of Justice. He then passed the microphone to Liz Cheney, who (as usual) gave a more detailed rundown of what we could all expect. She unveiled that clip of Barr saying: "I'm not sure if we would have had a transition at all," and tossed out a very large tease -- that the hearing would end by naming the names of the members of Congress who had approached Trump or the White House for blanket pardons: "At the close of today's hearing, we will see video testimony by three members of Donald Trump's White House staff. They will identify certain of the members of Congress who contacted the White House after January 6th to seek presidential pardons for their conduct."

With this tantalizing foreshadowing, Cheney passed the baton to Kinzinger. Kinzinger began with a personal note, relating his own overseas military experience and how it had inspired him to run for office when he returned to civilian life.

Kinzinger introduced a clip of four former attorneys general (Jeff Sessions, Eric Holder, Michael Mukasey, and Loretta Lynch), all testifying to the idea that the Department of Justice must remain independent of the president's political goals and the White House in general. This series of clips ended with Eric Herschmann lapsing into profanity to describe the horrors of Jeffrey Clark ever actually trying to lead the Justice Department.

We heard videotaped testimony from several people describing how patently unqualified Jeffrey Clark was to step into the attorney general's job, which included Donoghue's Oval Office putdown of Clark, which was spoken to his face in the January 3rd meeting: "You're an environmental lawyer. How about you go back to your office, and we'll call you when there's an oil spill?" We also heard Eric Herschmann call the plan "nuts" as well as what he said to Clark: "The best I can tell is the only thing you know about environmental and election challenges is they both start with 'E'. And based on your answers tonight, I'm not even certain you know that." Herschmann also testified he told Clark: "Congratulations. You just admitted your first step or act that you take as attorney general would be committing a felony.... You're clearly the right candidate for this job." Pretty scathing stuff, in other words. Not exactly a vote of confidence.

This segment of the testimony ended with clips of the rioters passing by the Department of Justice while on their way to the Capitol, chanting "Do your job! Do your job!" after being egged on by Trump and his cronies.

Although the president and the White House are not supposed to involve themselves in the Justice Department's handling of criminal cases, Rosen began his live testimony by stating that he had heard personally from Trump between December 23rd (when Barr left and Rosen became acting attorney general) and January 3rd "every day" with one or two exceptions (such as Christmas day). Trump wanted a special counsel appointed to look into the non-existent election fraud, he wanted Rosen to meet with Rudy Giuliani so Rudy could rant and rave about conspiracy theories to the acting attorney general, and he wanted the Justice Department to file a lawsuit directly in the Supreme Court, "on the behalf of the American people," which is not what the Justice Department actually does in court cases ("The one and only client of the Justice Department is the United States government") in front of any court, much less the Supreme Court. Rosen responded: "The Justice Department declined all of those requests... we did not think they were appropriate according to the facts and the law as we understood them."

Trump, during this period, was telling Fox News how disappointed he was that the Justice Department wouldn't just make laws up out of thin air to satisfy him: "[The Department of Justice is] missing in action. Can't tell you where they are."

We then got a short interlude showing the most deranged of Trump's sycophants in the House of Representatives, all spreading complete horse manure about the election on television during the same period. This ended with the clip of Mo Brooks telling the January 6th rally: "Today is the day when American patriots start taking down names and kicking ass."

All of today's witnesses described, in very similar terms, how they had investigated all the claims that were brought to them, had found each and every one of them to be completely baseless, and how they informed Trump that none of the allegations were credible, over and over again.

We got several excerpts of notes Richard Donoghue took while on the phone with Trump, where he had transcribed exactly what Trump was saying. The most damning of these was when Trump begged: "Just say the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R[epublican] congressmen."

In other words, just introduce some semblance of official doubt on the entire election process, and Trump and his accomplices would do the rest, on a political level.

We learned that one of those aiders and abettors was Representative Scott Perry, who appeared to be instrumental in bringing Jeffrey Clark to Trump's attention. Perry introduced the two, in a meeting that was not sanctioned or approved by anyone else at the Justice Department (although, by standing policy, it should have been). When Rosen asked Clark about the meeting, Clark tried to pass it off as somehow a big surprise to him, that he had been asked to a generic meeting at the White House and had no idea it would be with the president. Rosen then gave Clark a direct order to always clear such meetings before they happened with him, and to always inform him if any such meeting were even to be proposed. Clark swore to Rosen he would do so, but then subsequently met with Trump afterwards and never bothered to mention it to any of his superiors at the Justice Department -- a blatant act of insubordination.

From within the White House, Trump's own counsel told him to stop meeting with Clark as it violated White House policy, but Trump also ignored this advice.

The day after Christmas, Perry started pushing Trump's chief of staff, Mark Meadows, to get Trump to name Clark acting attorney general, because Clark apparently didn't have the authority to order the F.B.I. to open investigations into the bogus election fraud and conspiracy theories and all the other poppycock and lunacy to be found on the internet. Apparently, between December 26th and January 3rd, Trump became convinced this was the right course of action, so Perry was assumably persuasive.

Liz Cheney briefly took over the questioning here, one hour into the hearing, and talked about the draft letter Clark was heavily pushing, which would have been sent to Georgia state officials from the Justice Department, and would have falsely claimed there were some sort of believable irregularities with the election in their state (that the Justice Department had "identified significant concerns" and that the state should just consider sending "a separate slate of electors supporting Donald J. Trump" to Congress). This email was described as having the power to "have spun us into a constitutional crisis" -- White House Counsel Pat Cipollone even told Trump it was the equivalent of a "murder/suicide pact" -- so Rosen met with Clark again to explain all this to him. Clark had been "calling witnesses and conducting investigations on his own," despite having no orders and no authority to do so (more blatant insubordination on Clark's part, in other words).

Clark was working with an even lower-level (and very recent) appointee to the Justice Department, Ken Klukowski (who had previously worked as a legal analyst to the right-wing website Breitbart), to draft the Georgia letter. The letter was full of the same sort of claptrap theories that John Eastman was trying to push, which isn't really a surprise since Klukowski has direct ties to Eastman and was essentially working as Eastman's political mole within the department.

Cheney then showed a clip of Clark "testifying" before the committee by repeating the word "fifth" ad nauseam, just a few of the more than 100 times he stood on his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself. We then got the usual mid-hearing recess.

A little over 10 minutes later, the hearing was reconvened.

Kinzinger took over the questioning once again, turning to Steven Engel, who explained he was the guy at the Justice Department who actually oversaw all the investigations into all these claims of voter fraud.

Engel testified that he got an email from the White House proposing filing a suit directly with the Supreme Court, as an "original jurisdiction" matter. Engels responded to this by telling the White House: "There is no legal basis to bring this lawsuit.... The person who drafted this lawsuit didn't really understand the law."

The White House also apparently requested that the state attorney general of Louisiana be appointed a special counsel to look into all the fraudulent claims of election fraud, but after Engel looked into the matter, he determined that by Louisiana state law, this was impossible -- he was "not legally available" to do so.

We then got a truly frightening bit of testimony from Sidney Powell -- a lawyer so unhinged that even Trump himself eventually kicked her off his legal team for spouting patent gibberish to the public. Powell said that at one point Trump asked her if she'd be willing to be appointed special counsel -- which would have sent everything completely through the looking glass (remember: she was so crazy that even Trump had to distance himself from her and throw her under his bus).

Trump returned from vacation at his Florida resort early, on December 31st. He called a meeting where he asked the Justice Department to "seize voting machines." Those present told him that wasn't even legally possible, it would be a job for Homeland Security. So Trump immediately got his head of the Department of Homeland Security on the phone and just lied to his face (or, more correctly, "lied right into the phone to him"). Trump said that the Department of Justice had just told him it was the job of D.H.S. to seize the election machines, which was absolutely not true at all.

We then heard a bit about how far down the rabbit hole Mark Meadows had gone during all of this, by asking the Justice Department to send Clark down to Fulton County, Georgia and to New Mexico to somehow magically root out some evidence of the non-existent voter fraud. Meadows was also pushing the insane theory championed by former C.I.A. employee Bradley Johnson that somehow Italy had managed to use "satellites" to flip the votes on voting machines from Trump to Biden -- a combined operation of Britain's MI6, the CIA, something called "the Leonardo group"... and, perhaps, Keyser Söze (OK, to be honest, I made that last one up, but it wouldn't have surprised me in the least to find Söze on that list). Richard Donoghue's reaction to this was to call it "pure insanity" and "patently absurd," which seemed to be putting it rather mildly.

Meadows also called Rosen and asked him to meet with Johnson, who was working with Rudy Giuliani. Rosen's response: there was "no way on Earth" he was going to set up such a meeting. Rosen politely suggested that Rudy could walk into any F.B.I. field office in the country and hand them whatever "evidence" he thought he had. Rudy, according to a later call by Meadows, was offended at the suggestion that he should do so. Meadows continued pushing the Italian-connection idiocy, and even got the Pentagon to inquire in Italy about it.

A Trump tweet was unveiled that is a perfect encapsulation of his mindset at this point: "You guys may not be following the internet the way I do." Truer words were perhaps never uttered by Donald Trump.

The questioning moved on to a Rosen meeting with Clark on January 3rd, where Rosen dressed him down for continuing to talk directly with Trump and the White House without informing or getting the permission from any of his superiors at the Justice Department. This was when Clark told Rosen that he had been offered the job of acting attorney general. Clark then offered a quid pro quo to Rosen: if Rosen would just sign the Georgia letter, then Clark would refuse the appointment to become acting attorney general. Rosen responded: "I did not accept that offer," and then actually laughed out loud at it (one of the few moments of levity in all of these hearings).

After this meeting, Rosen sprang into action when he heard this, setting up a meeting with Trump "in two hours" and calling in legal reinforcements who could explain to Trump what a bad move this would be. He called Pat Cipollone, Steven Engel, and others, and put together all the heavy legal weight he could.

Rosen then met with Donoghue and Engel. He told Donoghue to contact all the assistant attorneys general and let them know what was going on, to gauge their reaction to the news. All of them immediately said they would never serve under Clark, and they all then said they would "resign en masse" instead.

A White House call log was shown, at this point, which identified many calls (they were in "constant communication" all day) between Trump and Clark on January 3rd, one of which identified him as "Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Clark" -- which clearly showed that not only had Trump decided he was going to make the change, but that the White House already considered him to be in charge of the Justice Department.

The January 3rd meeting was then discussed in detail. Trump confirms with Rosen that Rosen doesn't agree with any of the election fraud claims and won't do anything (since no proof existed for any of them). Clark explained his reaction to this:

And then I said: "Well, Mr. President, you're right that I'm not going to allow the Justice Department to do anything to try to overturn the election. That's true. But the reason for that is because that's what's consistent with the facts and the law and that's what's required under the Constitution. So that's the right answer and a good thing for the country. And therefore, I submit, it's the right thing for you, Mr. President."

Trump then moved on to considering the possibility of appointing Clark acting attorney general (thus ousting Rosen from the job). He started this conversation by asking: "What have I got to lose?"

Everyone in the meeting (with the exception of Clark himself, of course) then proceeded to tell Trump -- in great detail -- what he would have to lose. Not only would all the top Justice Department officials resign, but it would quite likely set off a outward ripple of others (all the United States attorneys across the country, etc.) also handing in their resignations -- a number which could easily grown to "hundreds and hundreds" within a few days' time. Cipollone called appointing Clark and sending out the Georgia letter a "murder/suicide pact." Donoghue told Trump that Clark "will be left leading a graveyard" at the Justice Department. Everyone also pointed out to Trump how Clark simply was not qualified to run the department.

Eventually, after two hours of this, they all finally convinced Trump how damaging it would be for him politically to appoint Clark. Trump then (in one of the rare instances where Trump has shown any interest in anyone's wellbeing other than his own) asked if Clark would be fired for this whole scheme. Donoghue replied that he didn't have the power to fire Clark, as his was a Senate-confirmed position, and thus only Trump had that power. Trump seemed mollified by this, and said he wouldn't fire Clark and that "you should all go back to work."

We then got some brief videos showing how Donoghue visited the Capitol on the evening of January 6th after it was retaken by federal forces, and helped get Congress back in session to complete their constitutional duties. All three witnesses were asked whether they heard from Trump at all on January 6th, to which they all replied that they hadn't.

 

Another sordid conclusion

Many of these hearings have been designed to unveil a big reveal at the very end. This is a very dramatic way to introduce new facts to the public, and today was no different. Just as Liz Cheney promised, we saw footage from three White House staffers who detailed their personal knowledge of Republican House members asking for unbelievably sweeping pre-emptive "general (all purpose) pardons" (as Mo Brooks put it, in an email), before Trump left office. These pardons would have (as one witness put it) covered everything "from the beginning of time up until this day -- a pardon for any and all things."

The list of Republicans who thought getting such a "get out of jail free card" would be a prudent idea: Andy Biggs, Mo Brooks, Matt Gaetz, Louie Gohmert, and Scott Perry. Not as directly implicated were: Marjorie Taylor Greene and Jim Jordan (who apparently just sort of generally asked about whether the White House would indeed be issuing any sort of blanket pre-emptive pardons, but without personally requesting one himself).

Adam Kinzinger closed this portion of the hearing out with a scathing reality: "The only reason I know to ask for a pardon because you think you've committed a crime."

In Bennie Thompson's closing remarks, he quoted the famous line: "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing," which seemed entirely appropriate.

Here is some more of what Thompson had to say in closing:

Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. Top officials knew he lost, and told him he lost. Trump knew he lost.... They were lying in 2020, they were lying in 2021, and indeed they are lying today.... Trump lost in court, dozens and dozens of times [because] there was no evidence.... All he had were theories, not evidence.... That's the end of the line [when all the courts rule against you], but it wasn't the end of the line [for Trump], not even close.... He continued to lie, and he went in search of anyone who would go along with his scheme.

Liz Cheney, however, had the most memorable line during her closing remarks, as she made a heartfelt plea to those Republicans who have believed Trump's Big Lie up until this point, which is where I will end this commentary:

It can be difficult to accept that President Trump abused your trust, that he deceived you. Many will invent excuses to ignore that fact -- but that is a fact. I wish it weren't true, but it is.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

115 Comments on “The House January 6th Select Committee Hearings [Episode 5]”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Damn. You left out the bit about Italy! I watched some of this for the first time today and learned that the acting SecDef actually called the Italians to ask about satellites changing votes from Biden to Trump.

    How embarrassing that must be for Americans to hear.

    And, then after the Jan 3 WH meeting Trump had the nerve to call Rosen a couple hours after that outrageous meeting to ask outrageously about a truck full of ballots that some nameless ICE agent found. Rosen just directed him to DHS. Ha!

    Satellite - PRiSM

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Okay, so I read through this summary too fast - you did write about Italy.

    So, how embarrassing was that testimony to listen to? I won't be watching any more of them...too painful for this fan of America. :(

  3. [3] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    ... and, perhaps, Keyser Söze (OK, to be honest, I made that last one up, but it wouldn't have surprised me in the least to find Söze on that list).

    I'm not sure I'm comfortable with this insensitive Söze-shaming.

  4. [4] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Yes, Elizabeth I've watched them all and this is whacko embarrassing stuff. But remember that Trump has been shaming America from Day One.

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    What, Caddy, no choice words for me this evening?

  6. [6] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    Gotta say, it was nice to finally have a hearing without anyone doing Shatner-length pauses.

  7. [7] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    How effective have these hearing been? We've seen many takes incl the McCarthy blame.

    Here's what I didn't see coming: Fox News.
    Last week, MacCallum called out the stunning lack of evidence (like, it was the first time she considered it).

    But today, Brent Baier. He said the US never came close to losing our republic. Why? b/c, look at all these Republicans who stood up to the President to do the right thing.

    Whoa, wait a minute. It's small, but is Fox moving to toss the LOLPE under a bus, find the next iteration.

    Maybe, maybe not. It may even depend on the news, incl how the July hearings go. They're definitely setting themselves up, if they need to go that route.

  8. [8] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Fox may flirt with throwing Donald under the bus, but they won't. His supporters make them too much pie.

  9. [9] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    Not full on, nypoet22, but are they flirting? I think they might be ensuring they are good (earning wealth) in any case.

    Do they support the LOLPE or the next iteration (DeSantis?). In 2024, we know they'll be all in for the nominee so it may be a matter of greasing the slide, if necessary.

  10. [10] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    Like I said, I was surprised.

    When I tried to explain it to myself, the best I came up with was that of course they're not all in (out?), but they may be hedging their bets.

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Of course there were no actual FACTS to support ANY of the claims..

    Funny how that is ALWAYS the case, eh???

    Two Democrat Congressmen are on record as stating "The American people don't give a bleep about Jan 6.."

    That is on the record..

    And they are completely and factually accurate..

    The polls CLEARLY show that the majority of Americans want to move on from 6 Jan...

    All that needs to be know about the 6JC is that it's brought to you by the EXACT same people who brought us The Russia Collusion Delusion and impeachments where Democrats had to actually MAKE UP CRIMES to impeach over..

    That's the ONLY salient fact about the 6JC that Americans care about..

    Now... The largest PRO GUN ruling in almost FIFETEEN YEARS!

    *THAT* is something that is newsworthy and worthy of discussion..

    Of course THAT is ignored because it goes against the Democrat Party agenda.. :^/

    An agenda that has done down in flames *EVERY TIME* it tried to assert itself.. :D

    Now THAT'S funny... :D

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    How embarrassing that must be for Americans to hear.

    Not really, Liz..

    REAL Americans.. Patriotic Americans know that it's all BS and that it never really happened..

    Patriotic Americans are smarter than Trump/America haters give them credit for..

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://a57.foxnews.com/hp.foxnews.com/images/2022/06/1280/533/2242e92f0f6057c6637f1b440f033af6.jpg?tl=1&ve=1

    How sad that Biden's senility and dementia reduces the Americans presidency to this..

    :eyeroll:

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    NY Times, MSNBC, CNN, others float Democrats' concerns about Biden’s age, question if he will run in 2024
    Biden will turn 82 in 2024 and is already the oldest president to ever hold office

    Even the devoted water carriers are starting to question the mental faculties of Biden...

    Ya KNOW yer in trouble when your own propaganda outlets start turning on ya...

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think today might be the day... :D

    https://www.scotusblog.com/

    A Friday release to throw Roe V Wade and Democrat Eugenics V Casey on the trash heap of history makes a LOT of sense...

    There are 13 opinions that remain to be released...

    Since production value is all the rage these days (what with the Hollywood fiction "blockbuster" the 6JC) then it makes the most sense to release Dobbs today...

    I am hoping that the Chief Justice releases the opinion. That would mean that he has joined the majority in throwing RvW and DEvC on the trash heap of history...

    It's going to be exciting.. :D

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Left Goes to War with Itself
    A fierce conflict is brewing among progressives over how best to effect change.

    Just what the Democrats need.. A Civil War right before the mid-terms!! :D

    And this actually comes from Politico a huge Democrat water carrier. So the facts it relays can be relied upon..

    It's AMAZING how many factions there are within the Democrat Party that fight each other..

    This particular civil war is within the Progressive faction.. The Lumpers and the Splitters..

    The Lumpers want big grandiose laws that encompass all of America... Think Build Back Broke or other Democrat Wet Dreams like gun legislation.. Laws that have absolutely ZERO CHANCE of passing...

    The Splitters want small incremental laws.. Break up (split up.. Get it?? Split up?? Splitters?? Get it??.... :^/... wow.. tough room.. :D )

    Anyways.. Bust up the huge bills into smaller components.. Pass the ones that are ACTUALLY popular with the American people and jettison the ones that America hates..

    The Splitters have the more logical and rational position... The Lumpers are just plain flat out crazy and live in their own fantasy world...

    The Lumpers are winning... Which is why the Democrat Party is so much in the shitter.. :D

    And in 136 days, it's all coming down for Democrats.. :D

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Ukraine war response is fast becoming Biden’s second blunder

    MC, yesterday you commented about Ukraine becoming a candidate for EU Membership..

    You remember my response??

    EU membership don't mean squat unless the EU is going to step up with troops and equipment against the Russians..

    We now know that the EU Candidate presser was simply a window-dressing press conference for the masses..

    Behind close doors EU and NATO members France, Germany, Italy and Romania told Zelensky that Ukraine will NOT be getting any more heavy weapons and equipment.. The EU/NATO leaders ALSO told Zelensky that EU troops are 1000% "out of the question"...

    EU and NATO are following Biden's Handlers' lead..

    And THAT path takes us down the road to the exact same (except 20x worse) debacle that was Biden's Handlers' Afghanistan plan..

    So, in less than a years time, we have TWO military debacles that Biden, Biden's Handlers and Democrats have steered us into..

    Lump all those horrendous deadly mistakes into the current debacle of the 6JC that ONLY Democrats and Trump/America haters care about??

    Well.. Ya'all can see why Democrats are heading for an uber, nuclear BIBLICAL shellacking in 136 days...

    It's fitting.. Democrats have not EARNED THE RIGHT to govern since they have proven beyond ANY doubt that they are incompetent at it..

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes, Biden Is Hiding His Plan To Rig The 2022 Midterm Elections

    The White House is refusing to share details about its coordinated efforts to engage in a federal takeover of election administration.

    And the FACTS continue to pile up that Democrats are going to try and cheat in 2022 just like they did in 2020...

    They won't have Zuckerbucks to use this time, so Democrats are just going to use taxpayer money...

    But it will all be for naught..

    If Democrats try anything again, they American people won't stand for it..

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Regarding the baby killing issue..

    I am betting that MANY Democrats are secretly glad that Roe V Wade and Democrat Eugenics V Casey are being thrown on the trash heap of history...

    Those Democrats are clinging to the hope that the baby-killing issue will be enough to turn the tide of the Red Tsunami that is coming..

    It's a useless hope.. The vast majority of Americans are concerned with the economy.. Democrat culpability on inflation is the source of Democrat destruction...

    Not J Edgar Hoover.. Not the StayPuft Marshmallow Man....

    Democrats are the source of their own destruction..

    Baby killing?? That rates in the single digits, as far as concerns of the American people..

    But take heart.. It's higher than Global Warming.. American's concerns about Global Warming is in the toilet..

    So, no matter how ya'all wanna slice it..

    Democrats are toast... :D

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ron Perlman slammed for deleted tweet saying Supreme Court gun decision 'for whites only'

    Twitter users were quick to point out that the Supreme Court's ruling was led by Justice Clarence Thomas, who is Black

    And, of course, once the SCOTUS ruled on the 2nd, the racist Democrats (I know... Redundant) couldn't WAIT to come out of the woodwork??

    Yunno, I have to say...

    I really feel sorry for those Democrats who view EVERY ASPECT of their existence thru the prism of race...

    What a sad and sorry excuse of human beings they must be..

    I am glad that we don't have any Weigantians who are like that.. :D

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just when you thought Democrats couldn't sink ANY lower on the intelligence scale???

    Oregon 'BIPOC' teachers claims eye-rolling is an example of a 'harmful practice rooted in White supremacy'

    :eyeroll:

    Like I said above.. I really feel sorry for those Left Wingers whose entire existence revolves around race...

    It's like that FAMILY TIES episode where Jennifer goes all Left Wingery..

    At first her parents, Steven & Elyse are thrilled..

    Then, as Jennifer sinks lower and lower on the intelligence scale, Steve & Elyse are like, "Whooaa, slow down girl.. Yer approaching Moronsville now..."

    :eyeroll:

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    So many off-topic comments already and not one about the headlining piece. What gives?

    Thank the gods for the many Republicans who have come forward to tell the truth. Which is a notion that many Americans - millions of them, in fact, including those who say they have no political afiliation - have forgotten how to wrap their minds around, collectively and otherwise, obviously.

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    So many off-topic comments already and not one about the headlining piece. What gives?

    Actually, I covered the current commentary in comment #11 and I addressed YOUR comment regarding the current commentary in comment #12.

    There really isn't much to say about the 6JC...

    The overriding thing that ANYONE needs to know about the 6JC is that it's brought to you by the same people who gave us the Russia Collusion Delusion and 2 bullshit impeachment trials..

    What is there left to say???

    That's why I branched out into REALLY important stuff that's happening...

    But it's going against Democrats so it doesn't merit a mention by TPTB...

    And how was YOUR night?? :D

    Thank the gods for the many Republicans who have come forward to tell the truth.

    Yes, the Trump/America haters have told the "truth"..

    THEIR truth...

    But they have stayed far far away from the FACTS..

    And even you and JL concede that President Trump is not behind the 6 Jan riot..

    At WORST President Trump is guilty of the same things Odumbo was guilty of..

    Not responding forcefully enough to violent riots on federal property...

    In President Trump's case, even if there WAS a failing, it was over a few hours..

    Odumbo's failure lasted YEARS....

    So, we're simply arguing over distinctions in style as far as the office of the President is concerned..

    Not any REAL criminal activities...

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    And even you and JL concede that President Trump is not behind the 6 Jan riot..

    At WORST President Trump is guilty of the same things Odumbo was guilty of..

    Not responding forcefully enough to violent riots on federal property...

    I can even point to Biden's Handlers and their failure to enforce federal law in regards to protesting at SCOTUS Justice's residencies..

    That's the same thing as what ya'all are accusing President Trump of..

    But it's coming from a Democrat so it's acceptable..

    See the point??

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:


    END OF WATCH

    Detention Officer Jeremiah Story
    Perry County Sheriff's Office, Arkansas
    End of Watch: Wednesday, June 22, 2022


    And remind the few...
    When ill of us they speak..
    That we are all that stands between..
    The monsters and the weak...

  26. [26] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    REAL Americans.. Patriotic Americans know that it's all BS and that it never really happened..

    I consider myself a real and patriotic American, and I'm quite certain it happened. it happened, is still happening, and could well happen again soon. As to whether president trump is legally culpable, who the frank knows.

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    MAKING AMERICA SAFER?
    15 GOP senators join Dems to pass first gun control bill in decades as Second Amendment debate rages

    While it's a decent start, I don't think one can make the case that the new soon-to-be-law is making the country any safer..

    The good thing coming out of the legislation is that Democrats are finally waking up to the fact that it's Mental Health laws that will prevent or help prevent mass shootings...

    Anti gun laws have shot their wad.. The cupboard is bare when it comes to gun control laws that are allowable under the 2nd Amendment..

    Especially in light of the Bruen ruling by the SCOTUS...

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    I consider myself a real and patriotic American, and I'm quite certain it happened. it happened, is still happening, and could well happen again soon.

    Which 'it' are you referring to??

    As to whether president trump is legally culpable, who the frank knows.

    I assume you mean 'Who the FRAK knows?'....

    I mean, why pick on poor Frank and drag him into it??

    "Al?? What are you doing?? Why are you dragging me into this??"
    -Genie, ALADDIN

    :D

    And, just for the record.. I consider yourself a real and patriotic American as well..

    You are the exception that emphasizes the rule.. :D

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    There are six other states, Bret, that have the same sort of regime about issuing permits that New York state does - a regime that was struck down as unconstitutional under the plain language of the Second Amendment today. Justice Alito - he wrote a concurring opinion - six justices agreed. And Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion. But Justice Alito said, "Look, what we're deciding today is, very simply put, Americans have the right to go out of their house and carry their weapon in self-defense. They don't have to beg a bureaucrat to get that permit." And 43 states already agree with that. The seven states who have "ask and we may give you the permit" regimes - their laws are unconstitutional. No one should be surprised by this. It's been ten years coming and being made explicit, but it's not a surprise.
    -Hugh Hewitt

    Seven states are going to have to change their gun laws and become, all things being equal, MUST or SHALL ISSUE states..

    That is all their is to it..

  30. [30] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You're asking me if I see the point you have been making for years? The only point you have really been making? You're primary raison d'etre in these parts?

    The problem is that you have been making the same point - to which there is, as often as not, some degree of truth - for so long that you may not even notice how asinine your "arguments" have become.

    And, you put words in my mouth that I would never even put in my mind let alone tap them out here!

    I can only speak for myself - I have never conceded that Trump was not behind the Jan 6 attack on your Capitol. It wouldn't have happened without him, in fact. Okay, it may eventually have happened in a similar fashion without him but not on Jan 6, 2021.

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Whether Trump is found to be legally responsible for the attack on your Capitol is not what patriotic Americans should be focused on.

    Americans who care about their democracy need to be concerned about the forces in their country who are still working to destroy your democracy.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    I can only speak for myself - I have never conceded that Trump was not behind the Jan 6 attack on your Capitol.

    You posted "What Joshua said" when JL claimed that he agrees that President Trump didn't mastermind the 6 Jan riot...

    If that is wrong, by all means, clarify...

    The point is, President Trump is not responsible for 6 Jan.. And the part of 6 Jan that Democrats CLAIM President Trump is responsible for, Odumbo and Biden's Handlers are ALSO guilty of...

    Democrats with their Trump/America hate share MORE blame for 6 Jan...

    OK, fine you disagree...

    But that's what the facts CLEARLY show..

    Democrats simply went bat-shit hysterical crazy when President Trump wiped the floor with Hillary... We saw that here in Weigantia with the demise of CW and the rise of the PTDS-infused Moderator...

    The Russia Collusion delusion.. The two bullshit impeachments based on MADE UP "crimes"... And this Cardassian tribunal that is the 6JC...

    ALL of those prove beyond ANY doubt that PTDS, President Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and well in the Democrat Party and in Weigantia...

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain 'Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Whether Trump is found to be legally responsible for the attack on your Capitol is not what patriotic Americans should be focused on.

    I completely agree..

    Patriotic Americans are focused on the complete and utter incompetence of the Biden's Handlers' administration and the train wreck that is the US economy...

    The vast majority of Americans don't CARE about 6 Jan...

    Americans who care about their democracy need to be concerned about the forces in their country who are still working to destroy your democracy.

    Not to worry.. They will be voted out of office en masse on 8 Nov 2022... :D

    With Liz Cheney headlining the LUSER brigade.. :D

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    For the record, there are 9 opinions left to be released by the SCOTUS..

    https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/06/announcement-of-opinions-for-friday-june-24/

    So, it's POSSIBLE that the SCOTUS could just run the board today...

    We'll know for sure in about 2 hours...

  35. [35] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I have never conceded that Trump was not behind the Jan 6 attack on your Capitol.

    me neither. i've conceded that donald's legal culpability will most likely be limited. that's a far cry from accepting the insane notion that the chain of events leading to the terrorist plot against our government were somehow not his responsibility.

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    There’s a queasy sense of crisis. Are things all that bad? What does it add up to? Is the country merely traveling over a bad stretch of road? It has happened before, in the second half of the 1960s, for example. Is it too much to say that this moment feels like the 1850s? It was in 1856 that Rep. Preston Brooks, a pro-slavery South Carolina Democrat, caned the abolitionist Republican Sen. Charles Sumner almost to death on the floor of the Senate. It took Sumner three years to recover.

    Apparently, Democrats haven't changed much from 1856, eh?? :eyeroll:

  37. [37] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    if there's one thing that these hearings prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, donald was neck deep in the clown car of insane opportunists, many of whom broke the law in an attempt to keep him in office.

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    There you go, again ... putting words in my mouth that you KNOW don't belong there AND quoting me and others here out of context AND saying that we agree when we obviously do not.

    I'm getting real tired of it.

    Point out the hypocrisy in politics all you want and many of us will engage - but, only if you cease with your incessantly disingenuous schtick.

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    me neither. i've conceded that donald's legal culpability will most likely be limited. that's a far cry from accepting the insane notion that the chain of events leading to the terrorist plot against our government were somehow not his responsibility.

    Using that reasoning, President Trump's parents are responsible because they gave birth to President..

    The ONLY thing President Trump is guilty of is wiping the floor with Hillary Clinton in 2016 and then being the best American POTUS since Saint Ronald Reagan..

    That's what the FACTS clearly prove beyond ANY doubt.

    There is no difference between the 6JC and the Russia Collusion delusion...

    Both are nothing but political farces that use/used hearsay, innuendo, rumor and outright BS to make their respective cases..

    History has already spoken on the Russia Collusion Delusion and confirmed it for the political farce it really was..

    That's the same conclusion that future history will show the 6JC to be...

    Nothing will come of it with regards to it's primary and sole goal...

    Imprisoning President Trump and/or preventing him from running in 2024...

    You yourself have conceded this as the likely outcome..

    It won't matter one bit with regards to President Trump's ability to run in 2024 and his eventual victory..

    Like the Russia Collusion Delusion, it will be a colossal waste of time and money..

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    There you go, again ... putting words in my mouth that you KNOW don't belong there AND quoting me and others here out of context AND saying that we agree when we obviously do not.

    I can't address it if you don't point out exactly where it's happening..

  41. [41] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    if there's one thing that these hearings prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, donald was neck deep in the clown car of insane opportunists, many of whom broke the law in an attempt to keep him in office.

    Donald was the chauffeur and owner of the clown car. All because he knew he lost and he had to find a way, any way, to obliterate that truth.

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    if there's one thing that these hearings prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, donald was neck deep in the clown car of insane opportunists, many of whom broke the law in an attempt to keep him in office.

    Even if that were factually accurate, that's on them and not on President Trump..

    I can easily point to the clown car that Odumbo was neck deep in during all the BLM and AntiFa riots and attacks on HUNDREDS of government buildings...

    Would you give any credence to those claims??

    Of course you wouldn't..

    So why should you expect that I would give credence to your claims???

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    . All because he knew he lost and he had to find a way, any way, to obliterate that truth.

    Just like Hillary and Democrats did with the Russia Collusion delusion??

    Was is THIS a problem and THAT wasn't??

  44. [44] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Having said that, I think that if there are NO legal consequences for Trump based on his actions since the 2020 presidential election, then that does not bode well for the future of America.

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Put it another way....

    I view the Russia Collusion Delusion the exact same way that ya'all view 6 Jan..

    I view the attempted assassination of a SCOTUS Justice the exact same way ya'all view 6 Jan...

    I view 22+ years (collectively) of BLM and AntiFa riots and attacks on HUNDREDS of government buildings all over the country the same way ya'all view 6 Jan...

    What makes ya'all right and me wrong???

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    False equivalency arguments are not the way you should be proceeding here. You make it sound like you don't care about anything. Which inhibits cogent discussion.

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Having said that, I think that if there are NO legal consequences for Trump based on his actions since the 2020 presidential election, then that does not bode well for the future of America.

    Well, ya better get yer boding on.. :D

    Because there will be NO CONSEQUENCES from the 6JC except BAD consequences for Democrats and Trump/America haters..

    JUST LIKE with the Russia Collusion Delusion...

  48. [48] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    We're not all right and you all wrong. That's a really bad premise to start with.

  49. [49] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I can easily point to the clown car that Odumbo was neck deep in during all the BLM and AntiFa ...

    Would you give any credence to those claims??

    i would if obama had tried to appoint alicia garza as acting attorney general and nicole armbruster as white house chief of staff.

    but he didn't, so i don't.

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    False equivalency arguments are not the way you should be proceeding here.

    Except they are NOT false equivalency arguments..

    That's just an ad hoc reaction because ya'all don't have any facts to support the false equivalency claim...

    I asked what makes ya'all right and me wrong??

    You respond with another fact-less BS claim..

    Which kinda proves my point, eh? :D

  51. [51] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Because there will be NO CONSEQUENCES from the 6JC except BAD consequences for Democrats and Trump/America haters..

    You may be right about that, sadly.

    And, are you now calling the Republicans who have supported Trump through thick and thin - like former acting AG Rosen and many others - Trump/America haters?

    Do you see how unhinged that kind of thinking appears?

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    i would if obama had tried to appoint alicia garza as acting attorney general and nicole armbruster as white house chief of staff.

    Distinctions not differences..

    The fact is, Odumbo did NOTHING to quell or stop all the HUNDREDS of riots and attacks on HUNDREDS of government buildings all over the country..

    That is inherently and factually MORE serious than the claims against President Trump..

    But I understand why you don't see that..

    PTDS and all... :D

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, are you now calling the Republicans who have supported Trump through thick and thin - like former acting AG Rosen and many others - Trump/America haters?

    Do you see how unhinged that kind of thinking appears?

    Just as YOU are calling them "Brave Republicans" for going against President Trump.

    Do YOU see how unhinged that kind of thinking appears??

    Look at the facts, Liz..

    Democrats bent the knee and kissed the ring of Dick DARTH VADER Cheney...

    That's a DICTIONARY DEFINITION of "unhinged"...

    Yet, it's perfectly acceptable to you...

    Can you explain that???

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats bent the knee and kissed the ring of Dick DARTH VADER Cheney...

    That's a DICTIONARY DEFINITION of "unhinged"...

    In other words, ya'all are doing the EXACT same thing ya'all accuse me of...

    So, again, the question must be asked..

    What makes ya'all right and me wrong???

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Supreme Court’s new gun ruling means virtually no gun regulation is safe
    New York State Rifle v. Bruen is poorly reasoned. But its implications are potentially catastrophic.

    For once, I completely agree with VOX...

    Hysterical Democrat fact-less gun laws are on the chopping block..

    HUZZZAH!!! :D

  56. [56] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Just as YOU are calling them "Brave Republicans" for going against President Trump.

    I said no such thing.

    STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH!

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Democrats bent the knee and kissed the ring of Dick DARTH VADER Cheney...That's a DICTIONARY DEFINITION of "unhinged"...Yet, it's perfectly acceptable to you...
    Can you explain that???

    I probably could explain it if I understood wtf you are talking about.

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Democrats bent the knee and kissed the ring of Dick DARTH VADER Cheney...That's a DICTIONARY DEFINITION of "unhinged"...Yet, it's perfectly acceptable to you...
    Can you explain that???

    I probably could explain it if I understood wtf you are talking about.

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    From VOX:

    The Second Amendment states that “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Thus, it is the rare constitutional provision that not only declares the existence of a right, but also states the reason why this right exists. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect “a well regulated Militia.” That’s what the plain text of the Constitution provides.

    The 2nd states *A* reason why the 2nd exists.. It's not the ONLY reason why the 2nd exists..

    Being that self-defence and defence of the innocent are inalienable human rights, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    That says the same thing and has the same impact as the current 2nd...

    Yesterday's ruling is in keeping with THAT ^^^ text of the 2nd Amendment...

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    I probably could explain it if I understood wtf you are talking about.

    Give me a few to find the reference..

  61. [61] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Take your time ... I'm off to work.

  62. [62] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why do you need to find "the reference". Just explain wtf you mean!!!

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    I couldn't do what you requested without a link.. :D

    Democrats Honor Dick Cheney
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/01/06/dick-cheney-surprise-visit-capitol-jan-6-riot/9122457002/

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and members of both parties shook hands with Dick Cheney; it was a startling sign of how much American politics has changed since Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016.

    Talk about unhinged...

  65. [65] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Good God.

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    I know, right!!??

    Dick Frakin' Cheney and Democrats swoon!!!

    UNHINGED!!

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    The end is nigh!! :D

    1000hrs approaches... :D

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Brace for impact....

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    We have the first case, and it is Becerra.

    It is by Justice Kagan, and the vote is 5-4.

    Interesting lineup: Thomas, Breyer, Sotomayor and Barrett join the Kagan opinion.

    This is a case about how the Department of Health and Human Services calculates special Medicare payments to hospitals that serve a high percentage of low-income patients. And in particular, the case is a challenge to HHS’s interpretation of the phrases “entitled to” and “eligible for” to mean all patients who qualify for Medicare or Medicaid, even if those programs did not pay the patients’ hospital bills.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1312_j42l.pdf

  70. [70] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    geez.

  71. [71] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @m,

    looks like you were right about roberts.

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    HOLY FRAK!!!!

    Roe V Wade and Democrat Eugenics v Casey is toast!!!!

    6-3 Roberts joined the majority..

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf

    The right to kill babies is NOT CONSTITUTIONAL!!!

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    looks like you were right about roberts.

    Yea... I had hoped... But to see it actually come true..

    WOW...

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    WOW....

    It's a whole new world, now people...

  75. [75] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    negative outcome, not good.

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    They did it!!!

    Son of a bitch, they did it!!!

  77. [77] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's being reported that the released opinion is virtually identical to the draft opinion that was leaked..

    The only difference is that Roberts joined the majority..

    THE ISHMAEL EFFECT strikes Democrats again!!!

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    Drudge is reporting a 5-4 decision..

    But it's a 6-3 decision...

  79. [79] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    roberts concurred narrowly about the specific law, but disagreed with the scope of the ruling.

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ahhh OK I can see how they would spin it the way they did...

    Drudge is notoriously anti-American...

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya wanna know the WORST thing a computer tech wants to hear???

    "Lemme tell you the story behind this computer..."

    No, no no... Don't want know the story... :^/

  82. [82] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    Speak, this oldie has no idea what LOLPE stands for. Would you explain? (If it's been made clear some time in the past, I simply can't remember.)

  83. [83] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think today might be the day... :D

    Well... I had to be right eventually!!! :D

  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, will Dobbs and Bruen eclipse the 6JC????

    It's gonna be interesting to see if that actually happens.. :D

  85. [85] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    the two issues aren't entirely unrelated, so it might all coalesce into one massive tsunami of rage.

    that someone somewhere won't try to do something incredibly stupid about it may be too much to hope for, but god willing it won't result in anyone being permanently harmed.

  86. [86] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    y'know, beyond all the women who will be sent to jail for ending their pregnancies.

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    y'know, beyond all the women who will be sent to jail for ending their pregnancies.

    You mean beyond a woman like Casey Anthony sent to jail???

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:

    There is no moral or ethical difference between a woman ending a baby's life a week before birth and ending a baby's life a week after birth..

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2022/06/720/405/Image-from-iOS-10.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

    Condemnation from the Left???

    Non existent...

    And you people complain about 6 Jan??

    :eyeroll:

  90. [90] 
    Michale wrote:

    The funny thing is, if Ginsburg had lived to see this, she would have concurred with the Majority...

    Funny, eh? :^/

  91. [91] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Condemnation from the Left???

    Oh, I totally condemn the fact you posted a picture without any context...

  92. [92] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    So, the supreme court "originalists" completely ignore the first amendment and start to establish a state religion...

    At least once the pendulum swings the other way, most these decisions will be overturned. Live by ignoring precedent, have all your work over turned by ignoring your precedent...

  93. [93] 
    Michale wrote:

    ‘What Is Happening Here?!?’ Emotional Pelosi Slashes At Trump And The Republicans Over ‘Cruel’ Roe v. Wade Decision

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0a/fc/2d/0afc2d379b2deab6b5c4dc5dae95df43.jpg

    "The butthurt is strong with this one..."

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    Justice will be served and the battle will rage...
    This big dog will fight when you rattle his cage...
    You'll be sorry that you messed with the U S OF A..
    Cause we'll put a boot in your ass, it's the American way..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc&list=RDMM&index=7

  95. [95] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Michale,

    Memes? Really? Going full Facebook?

    There's a subreddit dedicated to this silliness: /r/RightCantMeme

  96. [96] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bashi,

    Oh, I totally condemn the fact you posted a picture without any context...

    Context is simple for those who view the pic..

    It threatens political violence..

    Ya'all are hysterical about political violence... When it comes from the Right Wing..

    So, where is the condemnation of THIS threatened political violence??

    Memes? Really? Going full Facebook?

    ONE meme in almost a hundred comments and YOU scream FACEBOOK!!???

    Hysterical much???

    At least once the pendulum swings the other way, most these decisions will be overturned. Live by ignoring precedent, have all your work over turned by ignoring your precedent...

    So.. You believe that Plessy v Ferguson should be re-instated????

    Funny how you LIKE IT when the SCOTUS overturns precedent...

    As long as you agree with it..

    :eyeroll:
    ^^^^
    NOT White Supremacy no matter WHAT Democrat morons claim...

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    'The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them'
    -Democrat Mad Maxine Waters

    WOW...

    Your Democrats are sounding a bit inserructiony, ain'tcha??

    :eyeroll:

  98. [98] 
    Michale wrote:
  99. [99] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Context is simple for those who view the pic..

    Is it? What year was it taken? Is it a false flag to drum up support? Where was it taken? The URL is from Fox news, is it from an article? It's half assed. If you need to post, why not the article?

    ONE meme in almost a hundred comments and YOU scream FACEBOOK!!???

    You are increasingly posting them. Where ever memes show up the quality dialog drops noticeably...

    So.. You believe that Plessy v Ferguson should be re-instated????

    No, but I'm guessing you are lusting over the concept since you brought it up...

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    Is it? What year was it taken?

    2022

    The URL is from Fox news, is it from an article? It's half assed. If you need to post, why not the article?

    Because some people don't like it when I post the facts they don't agree with.. :D

    Where you been??

    You are increasingly posting them.

    For example...?????

    No, but I'm guessing you are lusting over the concept since you brought it up...

    In response to YOUR claim that it's BAD for SCOTUS to overrule it's own precedents..

    Obviously not all the time, as Plessy v Ferguson proves beyond any doubt..

    And I noticed you ignored the FACT that Justice Ginsburg, had she lived to see it, would have voted with the Majority... Ginsburg was on record as stating that Roe V Wade was bad law and bad precedent..

    So, no matter how ya wanna spin it.. Yer wrong.. :D

  101. [101] 
    Michale wrote:

    "This is not over"
    -Joe Biden

    Hmmmmmm Looks like it's over to me.. :D

    Wait a tic.. Didn't Joe say the exact same thing when his Build Back Broke went down in flames???

    I do believe he did.. :D

    "It's over.. Go home..."
    -Ferris Beuhler

    :D

  102. [102] 
    Michale wrote:

    Speaking of Ginsburg....

    Roe v. Wade overturned: Liberal journalists rage at Ruth Bader Ginsburg for not retiring

    'Thanks especially to RBG today for making this possible' one writer tweeted about the Supreme Court decision

    How quickly Democrats turn on their own, eh??

    :eyeroll:

  103. [103] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Because some people don't like it when I post the facts they don't agree with.. :D

    Where you been??

    How would this link, from fox news, not be exactly the same? If you are going to talk smack and not back any of it up, then you are basically Don 2.0...

  104. [104] 
    Michale wrote:

    How would this link, from fox news, not be exactly the same? If you are going to talk smack and not back any of it up, then you are basically Don 2.0...

    You'll have to deal with the Warden Of Weigantia on that..

    Irregardless, the picture and the facts speak for themselves...

    You just want to weasel out of having to condemn political violence that you actually AGREE with.. :D

    Like your silence on the attempted assassination of a SCOTUS Justice..

    Your so transparent..

  105. [105] 
    Michale wrote:

    Wait a damn minute!!!

    It was established in STAR WARS Episode V THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK that Obi Wan Kenobi was trained by Master Yoda....

    Yet, in the prequels, it was Qui Gon Jinn who trained Obi Wan Kenobi..

    What the hell!!!????

  106. [106] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    yoda trained the younglings. presumably qui-gon didn't get obi wan until he made padawan.

  107. [107] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Continuity is not strong with the force...

  108. [108] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just finished the OBI WAN KENOBI series..

    A definite MUST SEE for ya'all....

  109. [109] 
    Michale wrote:

    Continuity is not strong with the force...

    hehe.. Now THAT was funny!! :D

  110. [110] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Dreamwhile in MichaleWorld...

    [79]

    WOW....

    It's a whole new world, now people...

    Oh, HELL yeah! Welcome to a brand new electoral environment!

    Thank you, SCOTUS. Your gun and abortion rulings did more to juice turnout for the midterms than the Dems ever could hope to.

  111. [111] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh, HELL yeah! Welcome to a brand new electoral environment!

    Thank you, SCOTUS. Your gun and abortion rulings did more to juice turnout for the midterms than the Dems ever could hope to.

    NOT...

    Guns and baby killing are way way WAY down on Americans' priorities, MC...

    These last 2 rulings won't help Democrats in the mid-terms one iota...

    But they ARE a real shot in the arm for patriotic Americans.. :D

  112. [112] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    K, we'll see.;)

  113. [113] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yep, we will..

    Check ALL the polls..

    You can't find a single poll that says baby killing or guns will help Democrats in the mid-terms..

    And THAT really says something because you can usually find a poll that supports ANY cause..

    But every poll available puts the economy as numero uno and baby killing and guns way way WAY down on the priority for Americans..

  114. [114] 
    Michale wrote:

    And in other news..

    Twitter gives Elon Musk more data amid spam, fake account dispute: report
    Musk has disputed Twitter's internal estimate that spam, fake accounts make up less than 5% of users

    Twitter caves to Elon! :D

    This is shaping up to be a helluva good week, eh?!? :D

  115. [115] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    You mean Musk is still trying to get out of the deal? It isn't 5% of users, it's less than 5% of monthly ad clicks are bots. Much more difficult to prove one way or the other and Twitter seems to be intent on holding Musk to the signed offer purchase price...

Leave a Reply

[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]

You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.

[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]