Trump/Republican Coup Thread

[Ralin]

He's right. Whether it works or not is in a lot of ways secondary to how important it is to scream from the rooftops as loudly and in as many ways as possible that this wasn't okay or acceptable. Shit, as long as there are enough members in the House this should be repeatedly literally every time they procedurally can. Full trial and testimony each time. Complete with subpoenas for Trump and anyone else relevant. Constantly shove the Republicans face into this and make them, personally, sit through it over and over again.

Showing your voters that you're fighting tooth and nail is worth it even the only practical result is making the other side less comfortable because it's not nothing.

[LaCroix]

Just asking - how many times did they investigate Benghazi?

[Khaat]

Ten investigations were conducted into the 2012 Benghazi attack, six of these by Republican-controlled House committees. Problems were identified with security measures at the Benghazi facilities, due to poor decisions made by employees of the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and specifically its director Eric Boswell, who resigned under pressure in December 2012. Despite numerous allegations against Obama administration officials of scandal, cover-up and lying regarding the Benghazi attack and its aftermath, none of the ten investigations found any evidence to support those allegations. The last of the investigation committees issued its final report and shut down in December 2016, one month after the 2016 presidential election.

- Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
- Five House Committees
- State Department Accountability Review Board
- Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
- House Select Committee
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigat ... azi_attack

[bilateralrope]

GOP Reps. Gohmert and Clyde fined $5K for bypassing House metal detectors

Under new House rules, the first offense for bypassing security screening protocols is a $5,000 fine and the second is $10,000.
Feb. 6, 2021, 11:12 AM NZDT / Updated Feb. 7, 2021, 3:53 AM NZDT
By Dartunorro Clark, Alex Moe and Haley Talbot

GOP Reps. Louie Gohmert and Andrew Clyde were fined $5,000 for bypassing newly-installed metal detectors as they entered the House floor, a senior Democratic aide told NBC News on Friday.

The lawmakers are the first members of Congress that have been fined for not following the added security measures put in place by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., following the violent Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol, which led to fives deaths during the attack and in the immediate aftermath.

"I’m going to fight it. I’m going to appeal it, and them I’m going to take them to court, because this is unconstitutional," Clyde, of Georgia, said to Fox News' Laura Ingraham on Friday, claiming the metal detectors "are there to detain us."

"I think I have already done it at least a couple of times. That fine was for a couple days ago. I have had a couple of fines since then I think. I am probably up to $25,000 by now," he said.

Representatives for Gohmert, of Texas, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Gohmert was one of the members seen bypassing the detectors when they were first put in place last month.

Earlier this week, the House voted on a rules change mandating fines for members if they refuse to follow the new security screening protocols. The first offense is a $5,000 fine and the second is $10,000. The fines are deducted directly from their salaries by the Chief Administrative Officer.

The new security measures have created tension between some members and Capitol police officers. Several Republican members of Congress have complained in recent weeks about going through the metal detectors to enter the House floor. Many were also seen not complying with police at checkpoints and bypass the metal detectors.

Hopefully they don't have any plan beyond "fuck the rules".

[Solauren]

I'm amazed they didn't have metal detectors BEFORE the insurrection.

Every exclusively government building I've been in, that has public access, has metal detectors in them.
It's only the ones without public access that didn't/don't have them. (They also don't have signs on them advertising they are government offices).
Hell, to get into Immigration Canada's office in one building, including the courtroom new citizens were sworn into, you had to go through a metal detector.

The 'elected representatives' that are bypassing everything are just trying to bury their heads in the sands over what happened last month. Like alot of government officials in the United States are.

Newsflash to them: Doing that after the US Civil War lead to stuff like the K.K.K, and massive racial problems in the Southern states.
What do you think not securing and then stamping out the causes of a insurrection/coup attempt/near civil war start is going to lead to?

Home of the brave my ass.

[LadyTevar]

If I have to go through a metal detector to get into my County Courthouse, or my State Courthouse, or into the State Capitol Building, THEN THEY CAN TOO. Hell, some SCHOOLS require it for Staff and Students!

And if they wanna cry "UnConstitutional", then get rid of EVERY SINGLE METAL DETECTOR in EVERY SINGLE BUILDING.
Or, just do like the rest of us peons and suck it up.

[Gandalf]

If I have to go through a metal detector to get into my County Courthouse, or my State Courthouse, or into the State Capitol Building, THEN THEY CAN TOO. Hell, some SCHOOLS require it for Staff and Students!

And if they wanna cry "UnConstitutional", then get rid of EVERY SINGLE METAL DETECTOR in EVERY SINGLE BUILDING.
Or, just do like the rest of us peons and suck it up.

No. Laws are for little people. You will learn your place.

[Zaune]

There was a time when I would have said that subjecting elected members of Congress to metal detector sweeps was probably unnecessary, because surely we could trust them not to try and smuggle a concealed weapon onto the floor of the House with intent to brandish it or worse when debate got a bit lively?

I'm not so sure of that these days.

[Broomstick]

Really?

Because I always assumed a certain number of them were walking around armed. Probably even with legal license to carry concealed. Guns really do saturate our society, even if most Americans don't own one.

[Zaune]

I dare say. Emphasis on the second part of that sentence, "with intent to brandish it or worse when debate got a bit lively": There might or might not be an actual rule against carrying a weapon into the chamber, but for the most part it would be utterly unthinkable for a member of Congress to consider drawing it no matter how heated the arguments became... or at least it was until the GOP had its own Beer Hall Putsch moment, which several of them were known to be somewhat aligned with.

[LaCroix]

Unthinkable to have violence between members of Congress?
You know, it's not as if JUST THAT hadn't happened, before...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislati ... ted_States

[Zaune]

I didn't say that, exactly. But you must admit they've generally kept it down to the level of harsh language and occasionally shaking each other by the lapels rather than trying to kill each other since the Civil War.

[Solauren]

I didn't say that, exactly. But you must admit they've generally kept it down to the level of harsh language and occasionally shaking each other by the lapels rather than trying to kill each other since the Civil War.

That's like saying 'Civil Rights are generally better since the Civil War'.

[Broomstick]

Watching some of those videos in the Senate trial (I'm home today so I have pretty much seen the whole thing up until this point) I'm surprised more people weren't trampled to death.

[LadyTevar]

Watching some of those videos in the Senate trial (I'm home today so I have pretty much seen the whole thing up until this point) I'm surprised more people weren't trampled to death.

I'm surprised more weren't killed

[Crossroads Inc.]

Shocked on my end. All it needed was two or three people tripping and causing a larger amount to fall during one of the "crushes" when they were pushing inside.

Either way current impeachment is almost over and predicted results are expected. Republicans are in full blown "LA LA LA LA HE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG" or just flat out not even showing up and ignoring the trial.

[Ralin]

I remember once seeing an episode of the old Adam West Batman series where they showed the Joker or whoever being put on trial after Batman foiled his latest plan. The prosecutor presented an air-tight case, but the jury voted to convict. Then Batman and Robin recognized several of the jurors and realized they were all supervillain henchmen. Batman objected to the verdict on the grounds that the jury was biased (the Gotham legal system gives Batman standing to do that. The jury foreman basically told Batman and the judge to go fuck themselves.

This used to seem very unrealistic. Now that's the US Congress in a nutshell, minus the part where Batman and Robin respond by beating the shit out of them.

[Crossroads Inc.]

I remember once seeing an episode of the old Adam West Batman series where they showed the Joker or whoever being put on trial after Batman foiled his latest plan. The prosecutor presented an air-tight case, but the jury voted to convict. Then Batman and Robin recognized several of the jurors and realized they were all supervillain henchmen. Batman objected to the verdict on the grounds that the jury was biased (the Gotham legal system gives Batman standing to do that. The jury foreman basically told Batman and the judge to go fuck themselves.

This used to seem very unrealistic. Now that's the US Congress in a nutshell, minus the part where Batman and Robin respond by beating the shit out of them.

I Agree, it is clear we have passed the point were 'internal' checks on the president are broken due to partisanship. The idea that the Senate could be a "jury" is clearly no longer functional. It makes me wonder if it actually WAS treated more like a criminal case, with a "jury of peers" and a Judge who presided over things and could throw people out for grand standing and not providing proof... well... that would make some difference.

[bilateralrope]

Well, we might get to see how Trump gets treated in a criminal trial relating to the election:

Georgia Prosecutors Open Criminal Inquiry Into Trump’s Efforts to Subvert Election

State officials are being instructed to preserve documents related to “attempts to influence” the Georgia election, just weeks after former President Donald J. Trump asked an elections official to “find” votes.

By Richard Fausset and Danny Hakim
Feb. 10, 2021

ATLANTA — Prosecutors in Georgia have started a criminal investigation into former President Donald J. Trump’s attempts to overturn Georgia’s election results, including a phone call he made to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Mr. Trump pressured him to “find” enough votes to help him reverse his loss.

On Wednesday, Fani T. Willis, the recently elected Democratic prosecutor in Fulton County, sent a letter to numerous officials in state government, including Mr. Raffensperger, requesting that they preserve documents related to “an investigation into attempts to influence” the state’s 2020 presidential election.

While the letter does not mention Mr. Trump by name, it is related to his efforts to change the outcome of Georgia’s election, according to a state official with knowledge of the matter. A copy of the letter was obtained by The New York Times.

Of particular note in Ms. Willis’s letter was the wider scope of the investigation. Potential violations of state law include “the solicitation of election fraud, the making of false statements to state and local governmental bodies, conspiracy, racketeering, violation of oath of office and any involvement in violence or threats related to the election’s administration,” the letter states.

The state official said that, in addition to the call to Mr. Raffensperger, Ms. Willis’s inquiry would encompass Mr. Trump’s outreach to other Georgia officials in an attempt to reverse his loss. These include a call to a top elections investigator in which Mr. Trump asked the official to “find the fraud”; a call in which Mr. Trump urged Gov. Brian Kemp to call a special session of the legislature to review the election results; and a conversation with the attorney general of Georgia, Chris Carr, in which Mr. Trump warned him not to interfere in a Texas lawsuit seeking to overturn the results in Georgia and other states.

The investigation will also look into the events surrounding the abrupt resignation in January of Atlanta’s federal prosecutor, Byung J. Pak, after Mr. Trump complained to Justice Department officials that Mr. Pak was not pursuing his claims of election fraud, the official said.

In the letter, Ms. Willis said that her office would request subpoenas “as necessary” when the next Fulton County grand jury convenes in March. In addition to Mr. Raffensperger, the letter was sent to Mr. Kemp, Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan and Mr. Carr, all of whom are Republicans.

“At this stage, we have no reason to believe that any Georgia official is a target of this investigation,” Ms. Willis wrote.

The investigation goes beyond Mr. Trump himself, and could touch on the conduct of his aides and allies. A spokesman for the district attorney’s office said that Mr. Duncan, the lieutenant governor, received one of the letters because he presides over the State Senate. In December, Rudolph W. Giuliani, one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, appeared before the Senate and advanced false claims that the election was stolen.

The inquiry comes as Mr. Trump faces a second impeachment trial in Washington this week, for his role in stirring up the mob that attacked the Capitol on Jan 6. The violence that day followed weeks of false claims by the former president that election fraud deprived him of victory, including in Georgia, where he lost by about 12,000 votes. Mr. Trump’s hourlong call to Mr. Raffensperger on Jan. 2 is cited by the House in its article of impeachment.

Jason Miller, a senior adviser to Mr. Trump, said in a statement on Wednesday that “the timing here is not accidental given today’s impeachment trial. This is simply the Democrats’ latest attempt to score political points by continuing their witch hunt against President Trump, and everybody sees through it.”

The inquiry makes Georgia the second state after New York where Mr. Trump faces a criminal investigation. And it comes in a jurisdiction where potential jurors are unlikely to be hospitable to the former president; Fulton County, the state’s most populous county, encompasses most of Atlanta and overwhelmingly supported Joseph R. Biden Jr. in the November election.Ms. Willis has been weighing for several weeks whether to open an inquiry, after Mr. Trump’s Jan. 2 phone call to Mr. Raffensperger alarmed election experts who called it an extraordinary intervention into a state’s electoral process. For two months after Mr. Biden was declared the winner, Mr. Trump relentlessly attacked state officials in Georgia, including Mr. Raffensperger and Mr. Kemp, claiming they were not doing enough to uncover instances of voting fraud that might change the outcome.

Former prosecutors had previously said Mr. Trump’s calls might run afoul of at least three state laws. One is criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, which can be either a felony or a misdemeanor; as a felony, it is punishable by at least a year in prison. There is also a related conspiracy charge, which can be prosecuted either as a misdemeanor or a felony. A third law, a misdemeanor offense, bars “intentional interference” with another person’s “performance of election duties.”

It is unclear what actions might have violated state racketeering law. Clark D. Cunningham, a law professor at Georgia State University, said that Georgia, like many other states, has a statute similar to the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO. Like the federal statute, the state law is meant to target organized criminal enterprises and prohibit patterns of crimes that seek to further those enterprises’ illegal aim.

Mr. Cunningham said this could include trying to change the election results in Georgia. He also noted that the Georgia statute specifically covers false statements and writings made to state officials.

In one of her best-known cases as an assistant district attorney, Ms. Willis in 2014 accused a number of Atlanta public school teachers and administrators of violating the state RICO statute when they took part in a standardized test cheating scandal.

In the Wednesday letter, Ms. Willis also argues that her office was the one agency in Georgia with jurisdiction that was not hobbled by a conflict of interest, because it was not a “witness to the conduct’’ that is being investigated. She notes that unnamed “subjects of the investigation” had made contact with the secretary of state, the attorney general and the U.S. attorney’s office in Atlanta.

The letter did not go into detail about the contact that was made. But Mr. Trump’s acting deputy attorney general, Richard Donoghue, relayed to Mr. Pak, the former U.S. attorney for the Atlanta area, that Mr. Trump was dissatisfied with his efforts to investigate the president’s claims of election fraud. Mr. Donoghue did so in a phone call shortly before Jan. 4, the day Mr. Pak resigned.

Ms. Willis’s office also suggested that the inquiry would look at the actions of others who might have sought to undermine the election results. Jeff DiSantis, a spokesman for Ms. Willis, noted Mr. Duncan’s role in presiding over the State Senate, saying that the Senate “may have evidence of efforts to interfere with the proper administration of the election.”

Anyone who participated in those efforts, he said, “is potentially a subject of this investigation, and that would include a variety of people.”

During appearances before state legislative committees on Dec. 3 and Dec. 10, Mr. Giuliani — who spent weeks peddling Mr. Trump’s conspiracy theories about election fraud — aired a series of false and sometimes outlandish claims that angered state election officials and Mr. Kemp. In a recent interview, Gabriel Sterling, a top aide to Mr. Raffensperger, said that he was in a legislative hearing room on a different floor during one of Mr. Giuliani’s appearances, trying to set the record straight.

“I literally was refuting everything one story down,” he said.
The Georgia investigation comes as Mr. Trump is also facing an ongoing criminal fraud inquiry into his finances by the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., and a civil fraud inquiry by the New York attorney general, Letitia James. Separately, the attorney general in the District of Columbia, Karl Racine, has said Mr. Trump could face a misdemeanor charge there for his role in inciting the mob violence at the Capitol; his office said Wednesday that it was still examining potential charges for inciting the rioting on Jan. 6.

The Georgia inquiry will be a test for Fulton’s new district attorney, who took office last month.

“Just because they start an investigation doesn’t mean that D.A. Willis is going to take it to a grand jury,” said Joshua Morrison, a former senior assistant district attorney in Fulton County who once worked closely with Ms. Willis. He expected a lengthy inquiry, given the stakes. “Look at the impeachment trial,” he added. “With this, he’s facing prison time. They’re going to throw everything they have at the wall.”

If Mr. Trump were to be convicted of a state crime in New York or Georgia, a federal pardon would not be applicable. In Georgia, Mr. Trump cannot look to Mr. Kemp for a state pardon, and not just because the two have a fractured relationship. In Georgia, pardons are granted only by the state board of pardons and paroles.

Trump's coup attempt is bound to at least be evidence of his intent.

[Mr Bean]

Stats are out, the House Managers spent nine and a half hours on the prosecution, they failed to call any witnesses such as, any of the capital police, any of organizers of the January 6th march that ended as the attempted insurrection. Any of those said insurrectionists, any of the capital staff, Mike Pence, his staff, Donald Trump, his staff, his family, his families staff, his advisors, literally anyone.

From the start it's been clear the Demoratic party leadership has little interest in a conviction, they would love one but are not willing to invest the time or capital to remind Republican Senators there's a part of their own party they are pissing off. Impeachments are political operations at the end of the day and the Democratic party is now official just going through the motions.

Had the Democratic party been willing to spent roughly 1/25th the effort on the January 6th insurrection as the Republicans spent on Benghazi we might see a clear vote to convict. Get Trump on the mic and make him admit (Would likely deny) he lose the 2020 election. When President Biden was elected, former President Trump lost all of his special Presidential protections against lawsuits and subpoenas. All that's protecting him is rich white guy privilege now.

[Gandalf]

All that's protecting him is rich white guy privilege now.

That should hold for him.

[Broomstick]

From the start it's been clear the Demoratic party leadership has little interest in a conviction, they would love one but are not willing to invest the time or capital to remind Republican Senators there's a part of their own party they are pissing off. Impeachments are political operations at the end of the day and the Democratic party is now official just going through the motions.

I think you are neglecting to consider that likely 45 out of 50 Republican Senators are going to acquit no matter what evidence is presented.

These are 50 people who were there, who heard the mob breaking glass, battering down doors, and howling for blood. These are 50 people hustled away to a safer location. These are not people coming into a court room with no prior knowledge of the crime. They were people present when the crime was committed and under threat of harm themselves.

Trump himself could stand up in front of them, admit he planned the whole thing, and his only regret is that the mob didn't actually kill Pence, Pelosi, and more and fuckheads like Cruz would STILL vote to acquit him.

The problem is, most of that crowd are fucking scared - they have received death threats and they have received very convincing proof that there are Trump loyalists out there ready and willing to kill people in the pursuit of their goals. These toadies are ready to pay the Danegeld in the vain hope it will keep them and their families safe.

All of them except the toadies like Cruz who are hoping to ride Trump's coattails to power themselves and have no problem presenting any requested orifice for Trump to fuck.

You are correct that impeachments are political. Absolutely. However, there are TWO audiences for this circus. One audience is the Senate. The other is the public watching in. I think the Democrats are playing more to the court of public opinion than the Republican fuckheads. Is it going to work? Damn if I know. I always seem to zig when the rest of this nation zags, like the guy I vote for almost never is the winner, so my gut feeling is probably not the best guide.

Had the Democratic party been willing to spent roughly 1/25th the effort on the January 6th insurrection as the Republicans spent on Benghazi we might see a clear vote to convict.

We'd also get damn little done otherwise and there IS a genuine crisis going on. Actually, more than one, but they're all linked. How long are you willing to put the other business of government on the back burner?

Is a better strategy to start bringing criminal charges against Trump, as at least two state seem prepared to do? Also, DC is looking into it but not being a state there are, apparently, some issues with extradition from Florida.

Thank goodness Trump is such an idiot and so convinced he was going to win and still have Air Force One at his beck and call that his own airplane is currently missing an engine and mothballed. But if things get bad enough he might lower himself to charter a jet to get out of the country.

When President Biden was elected, former President Trump lost all of his special Presidential protections against lawsuits and subpoenas. All that's protecting him is rich white guy privilege now.

Unfortunately, in the US that sort of shield can be all too effective.

[Knife]

As I understand it, and I could be wrong, the time for 'witnesses' comes next week after a vote to 'allow witnesses'. I'm not sure they would have been allowed to call witnesses.

Now, I do agree they could have deposed witnesses and refer to that during their oratory case.

I also very much think they should call Trump up as a witness and MAKE him plead the 5th, or any other blabber that comes out of his mouth. Would love someone to ask him if he still think he is POTUS or a Former POTUS. lol.

[bilateralrope]

Thank goodness Trump is such an idiot and so convinced he was going to win and still have Air Force One at his beck and call that his own airplane is currently missing an engine and mothballed. But if things get bad enough he might lower himself to charter a jet to get out of the country.

Having Trump flee the country is still a win for me. Sure, we don't get the definitive outcome of a trial. But we also don't get a trial that will be a target for his mob. Plus facing criminal charges if he ever steps foot in the US is a big barrier to him running for president again.

Sure, I'd prefer a investigation, trial and jail time for him. But I'll settle for him running away and showing everyone he's a coward.

[Broomstick]

As I understand it, and I could be wrong, the time for 'witnesses' comes next week after a vote to 'allow witnesses'. I'm not sure they would have been allowed to call witnesses.

The witness issue came up today.

I'm not entirely pleased how they resolved it, but then, it's not up to me.

The Trumplicans also keep saying "there are other ways to hold him [Trump] accountable". Oh, really? Are you actually going to do that you chucklefucks?

I am so disgusted right now....

I don't know if it would do any good to contact my senators or not, as they seem to be guzzling Trump's cock-drippings. A pair of goat-felching fuckheads the two of 'em.