January 6th Committee Hearings Thread of Dominance

[ChiTownDoc 21154]

46 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

Because she calls out the R establishment for their bullshittery?  She has a very strong conservative track record, but doesn't play ball according to Trump's edicts.  I applaud her.  But she is far from a democrat policy-wise.

None of that…because when it’s time to bury the other side she says shit like "Prepared to contemplate a subpoena"…

[Sbbruin 21856]

18 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

None of that…because when it’s time to bury the other side she says shit like "Prepared to contemplate a subpoena"…

[bolverk 29683]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

 

My gawd, these people.

Full article:

Spoiler

‘Kind of Wild/Creative’: Emails Shed Light on Trump Fake Electors Plan
Previously undisclosed communications among Trump campaign aides and outside advisers provide new insight into their efforts to overturn the election in the weeks leading to Jan. 6.

Previously undisclosed emails provide an inside look at the increasingly desperate and often slapdash efforts by advisers to President Donald J. Trump to reverse his election defeat in the weeks before the Jan. 6 attack, including acknowledgments that a key element of their plan was of dubious legality and lived up to its billing as “fake.”

The dozens of emails among people connected to the Trump campaign, outside advisers and close associates of Mr. Trump show a particular focus on assembling lists of people who would claim — with no basis — to be Electoral College electors on his behalf in battleground states that he had lost.

In emails reviewed by The New York Times and authenticated by people who had worked with the Trump campaign at the time, one lawyer involved in the detailed discussions repeatedly used the word “fake” to refer to the so-called electors, who were intended to provide Vice President Mike Pence and Mr. Trump’s allies in Congress a rationale for derailing the congressional process of certifying the outcome. And lawyers working on the proposal made clear they knew that the pro-Trump electors they were putting forward might not hold up to legal scrutiny.

“We would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted,” Jack Wilenchik, a Phoenix-based lawyer who helped organize the pro-Trump electors in Arizona, wrote in a Dec. 8, 2020, email to Boris Epshteyn, a strategic adviser for the Trump campaign.

In a follow-up email, Mr. Wilenchik wrote that “‘alternative’ votes is probably a better term than ‘fake’ votes,” adding a smiley face emoji.

The emails provide new details of how a wing of the Trump campaign worked with outside lawyers and advisers to organize the elector plan and pursue a range of other options, often with little thought to their practicality. One email showed that many of Mr. Trump’s top advisers were informed of problems naming Trump electors in Michigan — a state he had lost — because pandemic rules had closed the state Capitol building where the so-called electors had to gather.

The emails show that participants in the discussions reported details of their activities to Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, and in at least one case to Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff. Around the same time, according to the House committee investigating Jan. 6, Mr. Meadows emailed another campaign adviser saying, “We just need to have someone coordinating the electors for states.”

Many of the emails went to Mr. Epshteyn, who was acting as a coordinator for people inside and outside the Trump campaign and the White House and remains a close aide to Mr. Trump.

Mr. Epshteyn, the emails show, was a regular point of contact for John Eastman, the lawyer whose plan for derailing congressional certification of the Electoral College result on Jan. 6, 2021, was embraced by Mr. Trump.

Mr. Epshteyn not only fielded and passed along to Mr. Giuliani the detailed proposal for Jan. 6 prepared by Mr. Eastman, he also handled questions about how to pay Mr. Eastman and made the arrangements for him to visit the White House on Jan. 4, 2021, the emails show.

That was the day of the Oval Office meeting in which Mr. Trump and Mr. Eastman unsuccessfully pressured Mr. Pence to adopt the plan — an exchange witnessed by Mr. Pence’s two top aides, Marc Short and Greg Jacob, both of whom testified last week to the federal grand jury investigating the assault on the Capitol and what led to it.

The emails highlight how much of the legwork of finding ways to challenge Mr. Trump’s losses in the battleground states was done by Mike Roman, director of Election Day operations for Mr. Trump’s campaign.

Mr. Epshteyn and Mr. Roman, the emails show, coordinated with others who played roles in advising Mr. Trump. Among them were the lawyers Jenna Ellis and Bruce Marks; Gary Michael Brown, who served as the deputy director of Election Day operations for Mr. Trump’s campaign; and Christina Bobb, who at the time worked for One America News Network and now works with Mr. Trump’s PAC.

The emails were apparently not shared with lawyers in the White House Counsel’s Office, who advised that the “fake electors” plan was not legally sound, or other lawyers on the campaign.

Some of the participants also expressed approval in the emails for keeping some of their activities out of the public eye.

For instance, after Mr. Trump hosted Pennsylvania state legislators at the White House in late November to discuss reversing the election outcome, Mr. Epshteyn celebrated when news of the meeting didn’t quickly leak. “The WH meeting hasn’t been made public, which is both shocking and great,” he wrote to Ms. Ellis.

On Dec. 8, 2020, Mr. Wilenchik wrote that Kelli Ward, one of the Republicans in Arizona participating in the fake electors plan, recommended trying “to keep it under wraps until Congress counts the vote Jan. 6th (so we can try to ‘surprise’ the Dems and media with it) — I tend to agree with her.”

Mr. Epshteyn, Mr. Wilenchik, Mr. Roman, Mr. Eastman, Ms. Bobb and James Troupis, another lawyer involved in the plan, either declined to comment or did not respond to emails or calls seeking comment.

Mr. Marks, in an email, disputed that there was anything inappropriate or improper at work.

“I do not believe there was anything ‘fake’ or illegal about the alternate slates of delegates, and particularly Pennsylvania,” he said. “There was a history of alternate slates from Hawaii in 1960. Nothing was secret about this — they were provided to the National Archives, as I understand the procedure, and then it was up to Congress to decide what to do.”

Mr. Marks added: “I had no involvement with Professor Eastman’s advice regarding the vice president’s role, which I only learned about after the fact, and do not support.”

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol has produced evidence that Mr. Trump was aware of the electors plan. Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, said in a deposition to the panel that Mr. Trump had called her and put Mr. Eastman on the phone “to talk about the importance of the R.N.C. helping the campaign gather these contingent electors.”

The panel has also heard testimony from Mr. Jacob, who was Mr. Pence’s counsel in the White House, that Mr. Eastman admitted in the Jan. 4 Oval Office meeting — with Mr. Trump present — that his plan to have Mr. Pence obstruct the electoral certification violated the Electoral Count Act.

The emails show less than lawyerly precision at times. Mr. Marks repeatedly referred to Cleta Mitchell, another lawyer helping Mr. Trump, as “Clita” and “Clavita,” prompting Mr. Epshteyn to reply: “It’s Cleta, not Clavita.”

Another time, Mr. Epshteyn wrote to Mr. Marks: “Do you mean Arizona when you say Nevada???”

By early December, Mr. Epshteyn was seemingly helping to coordinate the efforts, conferring repeatedly with Mr. Marks and others. Mr. Wilenchik told his fellow lawyers he had been discussing an idea proposed by still another lawyer working with the campaign, Kenneth Chesebro, an ally of Mr. Eastman’s, to submit slates of electors loyal to Mr. Trump.

“His idea is basically that all of us (GA, WI, AZ, PA, etc.) have our electors send in their votes (even though the votes aren’t legal under federal law — because they’re not signed by the Governor); so that members of Congress can fight about whether they should be counted on January 6th,” Mr. Wilenchik wrote in the email on Dec. 8, 2020, to Mr. Epshteyn and half a dozen other people.

“Kind of wild/creative — I’m happy to discuss,” Mr. Wilenchik continued. “My comment to him was that I guess there’s no harm in it, (legally at least) — i.e. we would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted.”

As they organized the fake elector scheme, lawyers appointed a “point person” in seven states to help organize those electors who were willing to sign their names to false documents. In Pennsylvania, that point person was Douglas V. Mastriano, a proponent of Mr. Trump’s lies of a stolen election who is now the Republican nominee for governor.

But even Mr. Mastriano needed assurances to go along with a plan other Republicans were telling him was “illegal,” according to a Dec. 12 email sent by Ms. Bobb that also referred to Mr. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City.

“Mastriano needs a call from the mayor. This needs to be done. Talk to him about legalities of what they are doing,” she wrote, adding: “Electors want to be reassured that the process is * legal * essential for greater strategy.”

The emails showed the group initially hoped to get Republican state legislatures or governors to join their plans and give them the imprimatur of legitimacy. But by December, it was clear no authorities would agree to go along, so the Trump lawyers set their sights on pressuring Mr. Pence, who was scheduled to preside over a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6.

On Dec. 7, Mr. Troupis, who worked for the Trump campaign in Wisconsin, wrote to Mr. Epshteyn that there was “no need for the legislators to act.” He cited Mr. Chesebro’s legal analysis that the key to Mr. Trump’s hopes was not blocking state certification of the electors on Dec. 14, but creating a reason for Mr. Pence to block or delay congressional certification of the Electoral College results on Jan. 6.

“The second slate just shows up at noon on Monday and votes and then transmits the results,” Mr. Troupis wrote of organizing Republican slates of electors to cast ballots for Mr. Trump on Dec. 14. “It is up to Pence on Jan 6 to open them. Our strategy, which we believe is replicable in all 6 contested states, is for the electors to meet and vote so that an interim decision by a Court to certify Trump the winner can be executed on by the Court ordering the Governor to issue whatever is required to name the electors. The key nationally would be for all six states to do it so the election remains in doubt until January.”

The documents also demonstrated the legal team had relied on widely debunked information to point to broad claims of election fraud. On Dec. 17, Mr. Epshteyn wrote to Mr. Giuliani that a document on election fraud created by Mr. Trump’s trade adviser, Peter Navarro — which has been discredited in public reporting, by state officials and courts — “appears to be the most comprehensive summary of voter fraud from this election season.”

The lawyers were aware their legal efforts were being ridiculed. On Dec. 23, Mr. Marks wrote: “You folks are getting killed in the media on litigation strategy, even on Fox and among conservatives.”

But they were undeterred.

By Christmas Eve, Mr. Eastman seemed to want to harness the power of Mr. Trump’s millions of supporters.

At 8:04 p.m. that night, Mr. Eastman sent Mr. Epshteyn an email that he had received in which a woman implored him to ask Mr. Trump “to put out what he would like his 74 million followers to do to help.” She added: “We need to be one voice, with laser focus, SPEAKING AS 74 MILLION STRONG.”

In his email to Mr. Epshteyn, Mr. Eastman wrote, “Thought I’d forward this. 74 Million strong. Let’s figure out a targeted way to deploy them. Rolling thunder? One legislature at a time? The others can see it coming.”

Days earlier, Mr. Trump had told his supporters to descend on Washington on Jan. 6 for a “protest” that he promised would “be wild.”

On Dec. 27, Mr. Epshteyn wrote that Mr. Trump “liked” an aggressive approach being proposed by the lawyers, and that Mr. Eastman would be the “face of the media strategy” along with Mr. Giuliani.

“We need one voice out there,” Mr. Epshteyn wrote of Mr. Eastman, saying he’s “already been out/liked by POTUS.”

Jan. 6 was just days away.

 

[TwiceHorn 31482]

23 minutes ago, bolverk said:

My gawd, these people.

Full article:

  Reveal hidden contents

‘Kind of Wild/Creative’: Emails Shed Light on Trump Fake Electors Plan
Previously undisclosed communications among Trump campaign aides and outside advisers provide new insight into their efforts to overturn the election in the weeks leading to Jan. 6.

Previously undisclosed emails provide an inside look at the increasingly desperate and often slapdash efforts by advisers to President Donald J. Trump to reverse his election defeat in the weeks before the Jan. 6 attack, including acknowledgments that a key element of their plan was of dubious legality and lived up to its billing as “fake.”

The dozens of emails among people connected to the Trump campaign, outside advisers and close associates of Mr. Trump show a particular focus on assembling lists of people who would claim — with no basis — to be Electoral College electors on his behalf in battleground states that he had lost.

In emails reviewed by The New York Times and authenticated by people who had worked with the Trump campaign at the time, one lawyer involved in the detailed discussions repeatedly used the word “fake” to refer to the so-called electors, who were intended to provide Vice President Mike Pence and Mr. Trump’s allies in Congress a rationale for derailing the congressional process of certifying the outcome. And lawyers working on the proposal made clear they knew that the pro-Trump electors they were putting forward might not hold up to legal scrutiny.

“We would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted,” Jack Wilenchik, a Phoenix-based lawyer who helped organize the pro-Trump electors in Arizona, wrote in a Dec. 8, 2020, email to Boris Epshteyn, a strategic adviser for the Trump campaign.

In a follow-up email, Mr. Wilenchik wrote that “‘alternative’ votes is probably a better term than ‘fake’ votes,” adding a smiley face emoji.

The emails provide new details of how a wing of the Trump campaign worked with outside lawyers and advisers to organize the elector plan and pursue a range of other options, often with little thought to their practicality. One email showed that many of Mr. Trump’s top advisers were informed of problems naming Trump electors in Michigan — a state he had lost — because pandemic rules had closed the state Capitol building where the so-called electors had to gather.

The emails show that participants in the discussions reported details of their activities to Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, and in at least one case to Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff. Around the same time, according to the House committee investigating Jan. 6, Mr. Meadows emailed another campaign adviser saying, “We just need to have someone coordinating the electors for states.”

Many of the emails went to Mr. Epshteyn, who was acting as a coordinator for people inside and outside the Trump campaign and the White House and remains a close aide to Mr. Trump.

Mr. Epshteyn, the emails show, was a regular point of contact for John Eastman, the lawyer whose plan for derailing congressional certification of the Electoral College result on Jan. 6, 2021, was embraced by Mr. Trump.

Mr. Epshteyn not only fielded and passed along to Mr. Giuliani the detailed proposal for Jan. 6 prepared by Mr. Eastman, he also handled questions about how to pay Mr. Eastman and made the arrangements for him to visit the White House on Jan. 4, 2021, the emails show.

That was the day of the Oval Office meeting in which Mr. Trump and Mr. Eastman unsuccessfully pressured Mr. Pence to adopt the plan — an exchange witnessed by Mr. Pence’s two top aides, Marc Short and Greg Jacob, both of whom testified last week to the federal grand jury investigating the assault on the Capitol and what led to it.

The emails highlight how much of the legwork of finding ways to challenge Mr. Trump’s losses in the battleground states was done by Mike Roman, director of Election Day operations for Mr. Trump’s campaign.

Mr. Epshteyn and Mr. Roman, the emails show, coordinated with others who played roles in advising Mr. Trump. Among them were the lawyers Jenna Ellis and Bruce Marks; Gary Michael Brown, who served as the deputy director of Election Day operations for Mr. Trump’s campaign; and Christina Bobb, who at the time worked for One America News Network and now works with Mr. Trump’s PAC.

The emails were apparently not shared with lawyers in the White House Counsel’s Office, who advised that the “fake electors” plan was not legally sound, or other lawyers on the campaign.

Some of the participants also expressed approval in the emails for keeping some of their activities out of the public eye.

For instance, after Mr. Trump hosted Pennsylvania state legislators at the White House in late November to discuss reversing the election outcome, Mr. Epshteyn celebrated when news of the meeting didn’t quickly leak. “The WH meeting hasn’t been made public, which is both shocking and great,” he wrote to Ms. Ellis.

On Dec. 8, 2020, Mr. Wilenchik wrote that Kelli Ward, one of the Republicans in Arizona participating in the fake electors plan, recommended trying “to keep it under wraps until Congress counts the vote Jan. 6th (so we can try to ‘surprise’ the Dems and media with it) — I tend to agree with her.”

Mr. Epshteyn, Mr. Wilenchik, Mr. Roman, Mr. Eastman, Ms. Bobb and James Troupis, another lawyer involved in the plan, either declined to comment or did not respond to emails or calls seeking comment.

Mr. Marks, in an email, disputed that there was anything inappropriate or improper at work.

“I do not believe there was anything ‘fake’ or illegal about the alternate slates of delegates, and particularly Pennsylvania,” he said. “There was a history of alternate slates from Hawaii in 1960. Nothing was secret about this — they were provided to the National Archives, as I understand the procedure, and then it was up to Congress to decide what to do.”

Mr. Marks added: “I had no involvement with Professor Eastman’s advice regarding the vice president’s role, which I only learned about after the fact, and do not support.”

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol has produced evidence that Mr. Trump was aware of the electors plan. Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, said in a deposition to the panel that Mr. Trump had called her and put Mr. Eastman on the phone “to talk about the importance of the R.N.C. helping the campaign gather these contingent electors.”

The panel has also heard testimony from Mr. Jacob, who was Mr. Pence’s counsel in the White House, that Mr. Eastman admitted in the Jan. 4 Oval Office meeting — with Mr. Trump present — that his plan to have Mr. Pence obstruct the electoral certification violated the Electoral Count Act.

The emails show less than lawyerly precision at times. Mr. Marks repeatedly referred to Cleta Mitchell, another lawyer helping Mr. Trump, as “Clita” and “Clavita,” prompting Mr. Epshteyn to reply: “It’s Cleta, not Clavita.”

Another time, Mr. Epshteyn wrote to Mr. Marks: “Do you mean Arizona when you say Nevada???”

By early December, Mr. Epshteyn was seemingly helping to coordinate the efforts, conferring repeatedly with Mr. Marks and others. Mr. Wilenchik told his fellow lawyers he had been discussing an idea proposed by still another lawyer working with the campaign, Kenneth Chesebro, an ally of Mr. Eastman’s, to submit slates of electors loyal to Mr. Trump.

“His idea is basically that all of us (GA, WI, AZ, PA, etc.) have our electors send in their votes (even though the votes aren’t legal under federal law — because they’re not signed by the Governor); so that members of Congress can fight about whether they should be counted on January 6th,” Mr. Wilenchik wrote in the email on Dec. 8, 2020, to Mr. Epshteyn and half a dozen other people.

“Kind of wild/creative — I’m happy to discuss,” Mr. Wilenchik continued. “My comment to him was that I guess there’s no harm in it, (legally at least) — i.e. we would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted.”

As they organized the fake elector scheme, lawyers appointed a “point person” in seven states to help organize those electors who were willing to sign their names to false documents. In Pennsylvania, that point person was Douglas V. Mastriano, a proponent of Mr. Trump’s lies of a stolen election who is now the Republican nominee for governor.

But even Mr. Mastriano needed assurances to go along with a plan other Republicans were telling him was “illegal,” according to a Dec. 12 email sent by Ms. Bobb that also referred to Mr. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City.

“Mastriano needs a call from the mayor. This needs to be done. Talk to him about legalities of what they are doing,” she wrote, adding: “Electors want to be reassured that the process is * legal * essential for greater strategy.”

The emails showed the group initially hoped to get Republican state legislatures or governors to join their plans and give them the imprimatur of legitimacy. But by December, it was clear no authorities would agree to go along, so the Trump lawyers set their sights on pressuring Mr. Pence, who was scheduled to preside over a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6.

On Dec. 7, Mr. Troupis, who worked for the Trump campaign in Wisconsin, wrote to Mr. Epshteyn that there was “no need for the legislators to act.” He cited Mr. Chesebro’s legal analysis that the key to Mr. Trump’s hopes was not blocking state certification of the electors on Dec. 14, but creating a reason for Mr. Pence to block or delay congressional certification of the Electoral College results on Jan. 6.

“The second slate just shows up at noon on Monday and votes and then transmits the results,” Mr. Troupis wrote of organizing Republican slates of electors to cast ballots for Mr. Trump on Dec. 14. “It is up to Pence on Jan 6 to open them. Our strategy, which we believe is replicable in all 6 contested states, is for the electors to meet and vote so that an interim decision by a Court to certify Trump the winner can be executed on by the Court ordering the Governor to issue whatever is required to name the electors. The key nationally would be for all six states to do it so the election remains in doubt until January.”

The documents also demonstrated the legal team had relied on widely debunked information to point to broad claims of election fraud. On Dec. 17, Mr. Epshteyn wrote to Mr. Giuliani that a document on election fraud created by Mr. Trump’s trade adviser, Peter Navarro — which has been discredited in public reporting, by state officials and courts — “appears to be the most comprehensive summary of voter fraud from this election season.”

The lawyers were aware their legal efforts were being ridiculed. On Dec. 23, Mr. Marks wrote: “You folks are getting killed in the media on litigation strategy, even on Fox and among conservatives.”

But they were undeterred.

By Christmas Eve, Mr. Eastman seemed to want to harness the power of Mr. Trump’s millions of supporters.

At 8:04 p.m. that night, Mr. Eastman sent Mr. Epshteyn an email that he had received in which a woman implored him to ask Mr. Trump “to put out what he would like his 74 million followers to do to help.” She added: “We need to be one voice, with laser focus, SPEAKING AS 74 MILLION STRONG.”

In his email to Mr. Epshteyn, Mr. Eastman wrote, “Thought I’d forward this. 74 Million strong. Let’s figure out a targeted way to deploy them. Rolling thunder? One legislature at a time? The others can see it coming.”

Days earlier, Mr. Trump had told his supporters to descend on Washington on Jan. 6 for a “protest” that he promised would “be wild.”

On Dec. 27, Mr. Epshteyn wrote that Mr. Trump “liked” an aggressive approach being proposed by the lawyers, and that Mr. Eastman would be the “face of the media strategy” along with Mr. Giuliani.

“We need one voice out there,” Mr. Epshteyn wrote of Mr. Eastman, saying he’s “already been out/liked by POTUS.”

Jan. 6 was just days away.

 

The desperation of these people would be comical  . . . . .

[WhatTheBuck 28783]

1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

None of that…because when it’s time to bury the other side she says shit like "Prepared to contemplate a subpoena"…

It’s not like Bennie and Liz decide on their own whom to subpoena. They have to take a vote. She probably doesn’t want to suggest that the result of that vote is a foregone conclusion. Maybe she was just choosing her words carefully. 

[Beau Vine 54230]

I still don't understand how Jenna Ellis went from being an assistant traffic lawyer who got fired to advising the President.

[WhatTheBuck 28783]

2 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I still don't understand how Jenna Ellis went from being an assistant traffic lawyer who got fired to advising the President.

Did she ever appear on Fox News or does she look a little like Ivanka?

[ChiTownDoc 21154]

52 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

It’s not like Bennie and Liz decide on their own whom to subpoena. They have to take a vote. She probably doesn’t want to suggest that the result of that vote is a foregone conclusion. Maybe she was just choosing her words carefully. 

I’m prepared to consider possibly replying to you…It just gets to the point they’re too fucking nice.  Throw the god damn book at the swamp creatures.  The odds are good nothing sticks anyway but make them sweat like the pigs they are.  Fuck all this kid gloves bullshit.  

[F250 28777]

24 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I still don't understand how Jenna Ellis went from being an assistant traffic lawyer who got fired to advising the President.

Same with Gorka. It seems just declaring oneself an expert and telling Trump what he wanted to hear was the key to success.

[Sbbruin 21856]

7 minutes ago, F250 said:

Same with Gorka. It seems just declaring oneself an expert and telling Trump what he wanted to hear was the key to success.

Yep, that's why his final inner circle was Rudy, Powell, Ellis, and My Pillow.  Real Mensa Society there.  So comical that he would rather listen to them than rational people.

[HenryJames 66064]

 

[Surly Bevo 24917]

Same with Gorka. It seems just declaring oneself an expert and telling Trump what he wanted to hear was the key to success.

Well yea. Narcissist out front should have told you

[Biff Tannen 45690]

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

I don't even want to respond to this.  So I'm not gonna.

[Willfully Horn 8017]

19 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I don't even want to respond to this.  So I'm not gonna.

I erased my initial response. Dead horses deserve respect.

[ohchaucer 1443]

I want to believe .gif

[troph 24806]

I think it’s going to happen but I think it ain’t over until SCOTUS takes a look.  

Edited July 27, 2022 by troph

[TwiceHorn 31482]

Garland's getting noisier too.  Given that that is clearly not his style, I think it's meaningful.

[Bullneck 19097]

4 hours ago, bolverk said:

My gawd, these people.

Full article:

  Hide contents

‘Kind of Wild/Creative’: Emails Shed Light on Trump Fake Electors Plan
Previously undisclosed communications among Trump campaign aides and outside advisers provide new insight into their efforts to overturn the election in the weeks leading to Jan. 6.

Previously undisclosed emails provide an inside look at the increasingly desperate and often slapdash efforts by advisers to President Donald J. Trump to reverse his election defeat in the weeks before the Jan. 6 attack, including acknowledgments that a key element of their plan was of dubious legality and lived up to its billing as “fake.”

The dozens of emails among people connected to the Trump campaign, outside advisers and close associates of Mr. Trump show a particular focus on assembling lists of people who would claim — with no basis — to be Electoral College electors on his behalf in battleground states that he had lost.

In emails reviewed by The New York Times and authenticated by people who had worked with the Trump campaign at the time, one lawyer involved in the detailed discussions repeatedly used the word “fake” to refer to the so-called electors, who were intended to provide Vice President Mike Pence and Mr. Trump’s allies in Congress a rationale for derailing the congressional process of certifying the outcome. And lawyers working on the proposal made clear they knew that the pro-Trump electors they were putting forward might not hold up to legal scrutiny.

“We would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted,” Jack Wilenchik, a Phoenix-based lawyer who helped organize the pro-Trump electors in Arizona, wrote in a Dec. 8, 2020, email to Boris Epshteyn, a strategic adviser for the Trump campaign.

In a follow-up email, Mr. Wilenchik wrote that “‘alternative’ votes is probably a better term than ‘fake’ votes,” adding a smiley face emoji.

The emails provide new details of how a wing of the Trump campaign worked with outside lawyers and advisers to organize the elector plan and pursue a range of other options, often with little thought to their practicality. One email showed that many of Mr. Trump’s top advisers were informed of problems naming Trump electors in Michigan — a state he had lost — because pandemic rules had closed the state Capitol building where the so-called electors had to gather.

The emails show that participants in the discussions reported details of their activities to Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, and in at least one case to Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff. Around the same time, according to the House committee investigating Jan. 6, Mr. Meadows emailed another campaign adviser saying, “We just need to have someone coordinating the electors for states.”

Many of the emails went to Mr. Epshteyn, who was acting as a coordinator for people inside and outside the Trump campaign and the White House and remains a close aide to Mr. Trump.

Mr. Epshteyn, the emails show, was a regular point of contact for John Eastman, the lawyer whose plan for derailing congressional certification of the Electoral College result on Jan. 6, 2021, was embraced by Mr. Trump.

Mr. Epshteyn not only fielded and passed along to Mr. Giuliani the detailed proposal for Jan. 6 prepared by Mr. Eastman, he also handled questions about how to pay Mr. Eastman and made the arrangements for him to visit the White House on Jan. 4, 2021, the emails show.

That was the day of the Oval Office meeting in which Mr. Trump and Mr. Eastman unsuccessfully pressured Mr. Pence to adopt the plan — an exchange witnessed by Mr. Pence’s two top aides, Marc Short and Greg Jacob, both of whom testified last week to the federal grand jury investigating the assault on the Capitol and what led to it.

The emails highlight how much of the legwork of finding ways to challenge Mr. Trump’s losses in the battleground states was done by Mike Roman, director of Election Day operations for Mr. Trump’s campaign.

Mr. Epshteyn and Mr. Roman, the emails show, coordinated with others who played roles in advising Mr. Trump. Among them were the lawyers Jenna Ellis and Bruce Marks; Gary Michael Brown, who served as the deputy director of Election Day operations for Mr. Trump’s campaign; and Christina Bobb, who at the time worked for One America News Network and now works with Mr. Trump’s PAC.

The emails were apparently not shared with lawyers in the White House Counsel’s Office, who advised that the “fake electors” plan was not legally sound, or other lawyers on the campaign.

Some of the participants also expressed approval in the emails for keeping some of their activities out of the public eye.

For instance, after Mr. Trump hosted Pennsylvania state legislators at the White House in late November to discuss reversing the election outcome, Mr. Epshteyn celebrated when news of the meeting didn’t quickly leak. “The WH meeting hasn’t been made public, which is both shocking and great,” he wrote to Ms. Ellis.

On Dec. 8, 2020, Mr. Wilenchik wrote that Kelli Ward, one of the Republicans in Arizona participating in the fake electors plan, recommended trying “to keep it under wraps until Congress counts the vote Jan. 6th (so we can try to ‘surprise’ the Dems and media with it) — I tend to agree with her.”

Mr. Epshteyn, Mr. Wilenchik, Mr. Roman, Mr. Eastman, Ms. Bobb and James Troupis, another lawyer involved in the plan, either declined to comment or did not respond to emails or calls seeking comment.

Mr. Marks, in an email, disputed that there was anything inappropriate or improper at work.

“I do not believe there was anything ‘fake’ or illegal about the alternate slates of delegates, and particularly Pennsylvania,” he said. “There was a history of alternate slates from Hawaii in 1960. Nothing was secret about this — they were provided to the National Archives, as I understand the procedure, and then it was up to Congress to decide what to do.”

Mr. Marks added: “I had no involvement with Professor Eastman’s advice regarding the vice president’s role, which I only learned about after the fact, and do not support.”

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol has produced evidence that Mr. Trump was aware of the electors plan. Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, said in a deposition to the panel that Mr. Trump had called her and put Mr. Eastman on the phone “to talk about the importance of the R.N.C. helping the campaign gather these contingent electors.”

The panel has also heard testimony from Mr. Jacob, who was Mr. Pence’s counsel in the White House, that Mr. Eastman admitted in the Jan. 4 Oval Office meeting — with Mr. Trump present — that his plan to have Mr. Pence obstruct the electoral certification violated the Electoral Count Act.

The emails show less than lawyerly precision at times. Mr. Marks repeatedly referred to Cleta Mitchell, another lawyer helping Mr. Trump, as “Clita” and “Clavita,” prompting Mr. Epshteyn to reply: “It’s Cleta, not Clavita.”

Another time, Mr. Epshteyn wrote to Mr. Marks: “Do you mean Arizona when you say Nevada???”

By early December, Mr. Epshteyn was seemingly helping to coordinate the efforts, conferring repeatedly with Mr. Marks and others. Mr. Wilenchik told his fellow lawyers he had been discussing an idea proposed by still another lawyer working with the campaign, Kenneth Chesebro, an ally of Mr. Eastman’s, to submit slates of electors loyal to Mr. Trump.

“His idea is basically that all of us (GA, WI, AZ, PA, etc.) have our electors send in their votes (even though the votes aren’t legal under federal law — because they’re not signed by the Governor); so that members of Congress can fight about whether they should be counted on January 6th,” Mr. Wilenchik wrote in the email on Dec. 8, 2020, to Mr. Epshteyn and half a dozen other people.

“Kind of wild/creative — I’m happy to discuss,” Mr. Wilenchik continued. “My comment to him was that I guess there’s no harm in it, (legally at least) — i.e. we would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted.”

As they organized the fake elector scheme, lawyers appointed a “point person” in seven states to help organize those electors who were willing to sign their names to false documents. In Pennsylvania, that point person was Douglas V. Mastriano, a proponent of Mr. Trump’s lies of a stolen election who is now the Republican nominee for governor.

But even Mr. Mastriano needed assurances to go along with a plan other Republicans were telling him was “illegal,” according to a Dec. 12 email sent by Ms. Bobb that also referred to Mr. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City.

“Mastriano needs a call from the mayor. This needs to be done. Talk to him about legalities of what they are doing,” she wrote, adding: “Electors want to be reassured that the process is * legal * essential for greater strategy.”

The emails showed the group initially hoped to get Republican state legislatures or governors to join their plans and give them the imprimatur of legitimacy. But by December, it was clear no authorities would agree to go along, so the Trump lawyers set their sights on pressuring Mr. Pence, who was scheduled to preside over a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6.

On Dec. 7, Mr. Troupis, who worked for the Trump campaign in Wisconsin, wrote to Mr. Epshteyn that there was “no need for the legislators to act.” He cited Mr. Chesebro’s legal analysis that the key to Mr. Trump’s hopes was not blocking state certification of the electors on Dec. 14, but creating a reason for Mr. Pence to block or delay congressional certification of the Electoral College results on Jan. 6.

“The second slate just shows up at noon on Monday and votes and then transmits the results,” Mr. Troupis wrote of organizing Republican slates of electors to cast ballots for Mr. Trump on Dec. 14. “It is up to Pence on Jan 6 to open them. Our strategy, which we believe is replicable in all 6 contested states, is for the electors to meet and vote so that an interim decision by a Court to certify Trump the winner can be executed on by the Court ordering the Governor to issue whatever is required to name the electors. The key nationally would be for all six states to do it so the election remains in doubt until January.”

The documents also demonstrated the legal team had relied on widely debunked information to point to broad claims of election fraud. On Dec. 17, Mr. Epshteyn wrote to Mr. Giuliani that a document on election fraud created by Mr. Trump’s trade adviser, Peter Navarro — which has been discredited in public reporting, by state officials and courts — “appears to be the most comprehensive summary of voter fraud from this election season.”

The lawyers were aware their legal efforts were being ridiculed. On Dec. 23, Mr. Marks wrote: “You folks are getting killed in the media on litigation strategy, even on Fox and among conservatives.”

But they were undeterred.

By Christmas Eve, Mr. Eastman seemed to want to harness the power of Mr. Trump’s millions of supporters.

At 8:04 p.m. that night, Mr. Eastman sent Mr. Epshteyn an email that he had received in which a woman implored him to ask Mr. Trump “to put out what he would like his 74 million followers to do to help.” She added: “We need to be one voice, with laser focus, SPEAKING AS 74 MILLION STRONG.”

In his email to Mr. Epshteyn, Mr. Eastman wrote, “Thought I’d forward this. 74 Million strong. Let’s figure out a targeted way to deploy them. Rolling thunder? One legislature at a time? The others can see it coming.”

Days earlier, Mr. Trump had told his supporters to descend on Washington on Jan. 6 for a “protest” that he promised would “be wild.”

On Dec. 27, Mr. Epshteyn wrote that Mr. Trump “liked” an aggressive approach being proposed by the lawyers, and that Mr. Eastman would be the “face of the media strategy” along with Mr. Giuliani.

“We need one voice out there,” Mr. Epshteyn wrote of Mr. Eastman, saying he’s “already been out/liked by POTUS.”

Jan. 6 was just days away.

 

Everyone mentioned in this article should die in prison.

[jimmyjazz 45958]

37 minutes ago, troph said:

I think it’s going to happen but I think it ain’t over until SCOTUS takes a look.  

Good one.

[Hagbard Celine 10866]

nbc garland exclusive

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/ag-garland-pressed-on-trump-and-jan-6-we-pursue-justice-without-fear-or-favor-144834629918

[TwiceHorn 31482]

10 hours ago, troph said:

I think it’s going to happen but I think it ain’t over until SCOTUS takes a look.  

Well, the same court, despite Dobbs, poured out all of tfg's other executive privilege claims, and all the fraud garbage.  One vulnerabllity may be the district courts' interpretation of 18 USC 1512 not to require violent obstruction or that it be intended.

I think the real problem is that Trump will try to interlocutory appeal (before final judgment) every adverse decision of the trial judge, and the DC Circuit will likely shut him down and then a cert petition.  So even if he gets shut down at every turn, it's gonna take a while.

[Restless Native 315]

16 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

I’m prepared to consider possibly replying to you…It just gets to the point they’re too fucking nice.  Throw the god damn book at the swamp creatures.  The odds are good nothing sticks anyway but make them sweat like the pigs they are.  Fuck all this kid gloves bullshit.  

Am I really about to suggest that a filthy sooner be the author of a new surly motto? I guess I am. Goddammit.

[Born to Run 6569]

Well, the same court, despite Dobbs, poured out all of tfg's other executive privilege claims, and all the fraud garbage.  One vulnerabllity may be the district courts' interpretation of 18 USC 1512 not to require violent obstruction or that it be intended.
I think the real problem is that Trump will try to interlocutory appeal (before final judgment) every adverse decision of the trial judge, and the DC Circuit will likely shut him down and then a cert petition.  So even if he gets shut down at every turn, it's gonna take a while.

It's been 4 years since the Parkland shooting, and that trial is not complete. Trump proceedings will take a decade. That no one is really screaming to correct our fucked, slow ass justice system is just fucking fucked. It's broken.

[Pig Bellmont 8719]

14 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Garland's getting noisier too.  Given that that is clearly not his style, I think it's meaningful.

I agree with this. He’s clearly pissed at the implication he’s doing nothing 

[RomaVicta 29908]

18 minutes ago, Born to Run said:

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, the same court, despite Dobbs, poured out all of tfg's other executive privilege claims, and all the fraud garbage.  One vulnerabllity may be the district courts' interpretation of 18 USC 1512 not to require violent obstruction or that it be intended.
I think the real problem is that Trump will try to interlocutory appeal (before final judgment) every adverse decision of the trial judge, and the DC Circuit will likely shut him down and then a cert petition.  So even if he gets shut down at every turn, it's gonna take a while.

It's been 4 years since the Parkland shooting, and that trial is not complete. Trump proceedings will take a decade. That no one is really screaming to correct our fucked, slow ass justice system is just fucking fucked. It's broken.

Indict this flight risk and remand him to Epstein's cell with no bail. Traitors are worse than murderers. Leaders of violent government overthrow should not be wandering around free while the issue plays out in the courts. He can play Monopoly with his corrupt Secret Service agents who can also be jailed along with him. 

But I agree about the lumbering criminal justice system. We should stop using it to keep black people down or pursuing the inane "war" on drugs. Maybe that would speed things up. Then the prisons need to be totally overhauled to make rape, brutality, and deprivation things of the past.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5112]

I'm on board with all of that, but I'm ok if the rape and brutality don't get fixed in time to save the Jan 6 participants from it.  Treasonous fuckers deserve worse than they are going to get from the justice system.

[DigglerontheHoof 21200]

6 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I'm on board with all of that, but I'm ok if the rape and brutality don't get fixed in time to save the Jan 6 participants from it.  Treasonous fuckers deserve worse than they are going to get from the justice system.

Everytime I think about becoming a kinder, gentler Diggler, I find myself reading a post like this and saying:

 

[TwiceHorn 31482]

1 hour ago, Born to Run said:

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, the same court, despite Dobbs, poured out all of tfg's other executive privilege claims, and all the fraud garbage.  One vulnerabllity may be the district courts' interpretation of 18 USC 1512 not to require violent obstruction or that it be intended.
I think the real problem is that Trump will try to interlocutory appeal (before final judgment) every adverse decision of the trial judge, and the DC Circuit will likely shut him down and then a cert petition.  So even if he gets shut down at every turn, it's gonna take a while.

It's been 4 years since the Parkland shooting, and that trial is not complete. Trump proceedings will take a decade. That no one is really screaming to correct our fucked, slow ass justice system is just fucking fucked. It's broken.

Well, Parkland is a death-penalty case, and that always adds some layers of complication.  But Cruz also pled guilty, which removes some, but not all, complications.

More than broken, it's simply overburdened.  And just about everything wrong with it can be traced to that fact.

I saw somewhere that there are more than 140 attorneys prosecuting the 1/6 rioters.  For comparison, the US Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, which encompasses more than 100 counties in Texas, has 250 attorneys and staff combined, for criminal and civil both, and I imagine the staff ratio is 2:1, at least.

Also notable, ND Tex filed nearly 1200 criminal cases in 2021, a rate nearly 2.5x every other US Attorney in the country.  The District of Columbia got 3/4 of that just out of 1/6.  https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/about

[RomaVicta 29908]

1 hour ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I'm on board with all of that, but I'm ok if the rape and brutality don't get fixed in time to save the Jan 6 participants from it.  Treasonous fuckers deserve worse than they are going to get from the justice system.

I get the sentiment, but I've developed kind of a thing about even joking about prison rape. Rape in any other context is taboo for joking about and for good reason. It should be the same no matter whom is being raped or where they are.

I'm opposed to the death penalty only because it's applied unequally and too often the juries are deceived by the police into wrongful conviction. In the case of treason, I'm fine with it. You don't get convicted of that without plenty of evidence and scrutiny.

I also believe public hanging should be the sentence for such vile characters working against the common good.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5112]

Well I'm not joking.  I don't want to see rape and brutality happening in our prison system, but I also don't mind that it happens, as long as it's just happening to the Jan 6 people.  They've earned it. 

There will be 0 death penalties.  There will be 0 hangings, public or otherwise.  There will be up to 5 years in prison max for any of these people.  That's not enough.  I want them to get brutalized and/or raped and then to talk about it in the media.  I want all the people thinking they may try this again to know what's waiting for them if they want to FAFO.  Fuck them.

[RomaVicta 29908]

3 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Well I'm not joking.  I don't want to see rape and brutality happening in our prison system, but I also don't mind that it happens, as long as it's just happening to the Jan 6 people.  They've earned it. 

There will be 0 death penalties.  There will be 0 hangings, public or otherwise.  There will be up to 5 years in prison max for any of these people.  That's not enough.  I want them to get brutalized and/or raped and then to talk about it in the media.  I want all the people thinking they may try this again to know what's waiting for them if they want to FAFO.  Fuck them.

It's not like I'm recommending lenience, my friend.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5112]

Yeah I know what you are recommending, but what you are recommending has a 0% chance of happening.  My approach has a greater than 0% chance of happening.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Those 5 year sentences will be the  max punishment administered regarding January 6th and its events and is only for the hoi polloi. The organizers and leaders will sleep soundly in their own beds ever after. It's a rum old world.

[RomaVicta 29908]

2 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Yeah I know what you are recommending, but what you are recommending has a 0% chance of happening.  My approach has a greater than 0% chance of happening.

And is criminal. 

[safe sex 11734]

Yeah but they're already in jail 🤷‍♀️

[brakeman 28369]

6 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I get the sentiment, but I've developed kind of a thing about even joking about prison rape. Rape in any other context is taboo for joking about and for good reason. It should be the same no matter whom is being raped or where they are.

I'm opposed to the death penalty only because it's applied unequally and too often the juries are deceived by the police into wrongful conviction. In the case of treason, I'm fine with it. You don't get convicted of that without plenty of evidence and scrutiny.

I also believe public hanging should be the sentence for such vile characters working against the common good.

I'm cool with tar and feathers for any of the treasonous fuck sticks.

[Pato del Muerto 52499]

I have an idea

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Born to Run 6569]

I'm on board with all of that, but I'm ok if the rape and brutality don't get fixed in time to save the Jan 6 participants from it.  Treasonous fuckers deserve worse than they are going to get from the justice system.

I'd be alright with proper time served, no Rape no matter the recipient.

[Born to Run 6569]

Well, Parkland is a death-penalty case, and that always adds some layers of complication.  But Cruz also pled guilty, which removes some, but not all, complications.
More than broken, it's simply overburdened.  And just about everything wrong with it can be traced to that fact.
I saw somewhere that there are more than 140 attorneys prosecuting the 1/6 rioters.  For comparison, the US Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, which encompasses more than 100 counties in Texas, has 250 attorneys and staff combined, for criminal and civil both, and I imagine the staff ratio is 2:1, at least.
Also notable, ND Tex filed nearly 1200 criminal cases in 2021, a rate nearly 2.5x every other US Attorney in the country.  The District of Columbia got 3/4 of that just out of 1/6.  https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/about

Sure, and I was hoping the pandemic and use of Zoom etc as a means to boost efficiency with courts, and speed things up. I would thing funding for swift justice would be an easy sell politically. I guess the donor base benefits from delayed justice so here we are.

[Beau Vine 54230]

 

[scottsins 1966]

Well, Parkland is a death-penalty case, and that always adds some layers of complication.  But Cruz also pled guilty, which removes some, but not all, complications.
More than broken, it's simply overburdened.  And just about everything wrong with it can be traced to that fact.
I saw somewhere that there are more than 140 attorneys prosecuting the 1/6 rioters.  For comparison, the US Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, which encompasses more than 100 counties in Texas, has 250 attorneys and staff combined, for criminal and civil both, and I imagine the staff ratio is 2:1, at least.
Also notable, ND Tex filed nearly 1200 criminal cases in 2021, a rate nearly 2.5x every other US Attorney in the country.  The District of Columbia got 3/4 of that just out of 1/6.  https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/about

Pffft…

My misdemeanor prosecutor caseload is…no bullshit…currently sitting at 1,837 cases and that’s not hyperbole. To be clear, I’m referring to the cases that I am solely responsible for. The entire system is fucked at every level and so far gone that “fixing it” is just not something I even give a thought to anymore.

[TwiceHorn 31482]

4 hours ago, scottsins said:

Pffft…

My misdemeanor prosecutor caseload is…no bullshit…currently sitting at 1,837 cases and that’s not hyperbole. To be clear, I’m referring to the cases that I am solely responsible for. The entire system is fucked at every level and so far gone that “fixing it” is just not something I even give a thought to anymore.

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that that was objectively huge.  It's all relative.  But of course, that's just cases filed in a year, as opposed to the actual pending.

Edited July 28, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

Keep in mind that our AG has been under indictment for so long we neither remember the year or the crime.  No one of importance will ever be punished. 

[6th Street 6409]

13 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

 

Sounds legit 

[The Original Greaser Bob 2834]

I want to be Agent Tree-Fiddy.

[Hookah Horns 3083]

On 7/27/2022 at 11:43 AM, RomaVicta said:

Indict this flight risk and remand him to Epstein's cell with no bail. Traitors are worse than murderers. Leaders of violent government overthrow should not be wandering around free while the issue plays out in the courts. He can play Monopoly with his corrupt Secret Service agents who can also be jailed along with him. 

But I agree about the lumbering criminal justice system. We should stop using it to keep black people down or pursuing the inane "war" on drugs. Maybe that would speed things up. Then the prisons need to be totally overhauled to make rape, brutality, and deprivation things of the past.

Did you know most Texas prisons aren't air conditioned? That blows my mind. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13512]

CNN reporting that the Jan 6 committee is looking into cabinet members discussing removing Trump due to the 25th amendment. That would be a beautiful moment (sad for the country) to have Trump's cabinet members point fingers at who wanted him removed. DeVos is on the record she spoke to Pence and other cabinet members. I believe her statements were that Pence disagreed which killed the conversation.

The 25th amendment is ~55 years old but I don't think it's been seriously discussed in terms of removing a President for incompetence. Another first for Trump. Winning bigly.

Edited July 28, 2022 by Nice Guy Eddie

[RomaVicta 29908]

51 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

Did you know most Texas prisons aren't air conditioned? That blows my mind. 

Cruelty is our brand.  I'm guessing the guys on Death Row are begging for execution after a long succession of 100 degree days.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

1 hour ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I want to be Agent Tree-Fiddy.

You know Agents 69 and 411 are seeing all the action tho.

[Captainant 27675]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The 25th amendment is ~55 years old but I don't think it's been seriously discussed in terms of removing a President for incompetence. Another first for Trump. Winning bigly.

I wouldn't classify weaponizing your political base to literally attack the democratic process as "incompetence". He very intentionally used the levers of government and power to destabilize our democracy and create the possibility for the coup.

A (normally tech) Taiwanese youtuber that I watch put out a video a while ago that compared and contrasted mao's cultural revolution to trump's MAGA revolution and walks through some interesting parallels in terms of how they weaponized norms and social pressure to affect a political outcome. It's a ~25m vid released on the 1yr anniversary of the attack and it's missing some of the evidence the committee has been releasing, but it's highly consistent with their narrative that they've demonstrated with evidence