9 Comments

I wonder if it’s possible to tally up all the money sent to the convict by gullible anti-Americans so that he could pay his lawyers to defend against his crimes against America.

I guess it’ll all come out when he releases his tax returns, ey?

Expand full comment

"Coup d'état"

A coup d'état, or simply a coup, is typically an illegal and overt attempt by a military organization or other government elites to unseat an incumbent leadership. A self-coup is when a leader, having come to power through legal means, tries to stay in power through illegal means.

Surely a move like this cannot be considered part of the "official duties" of a US President.

[ h/t Noah Smith https://x.com/Noahpinion/status/1841735633951457405 ]

Expand full comment

I'm about 30 minutes south of where the really serious damage occurred in western NC. We had a lot of damage here, too, -- flooding, trees down, no power for a while and we still don't have internet. I'm seeing SO many videos on social media, both from reliable sources like local TV stations and from various local folks posting. The very first post on nearly all of them is always that we need to stop sending money to Ukraine. The BOTS are all over the place but many are from real people, locals. (It doesn't help that I'm in Trump country.) I don't watch Fox News or listen to right wing talk radio, (I have a brain,) but I bet I know what they are saying. It's absolute madness.

Expand full comment

I am in North Carolina, but further east. I’m not seeing much from local friends, but the amount of misinformation and outrage I’m saying from people out of state is insane. And, unfortunately, most of them have no idea what it’s like to have a hurricane or what, these mountainous areas are actually like. I think both of those things make it easier for some people to onto the fake outrage.

Expand full comment

Jamie, your January 6 coverage has been phenomenal, and I'm so grateful.

I didn't have time to read the whole document from Jack Smith yesterday. Did he take out everything related to Jeffrey Clark and Trump's efforts to get the DOJ to overturn the election, on the grounds that those would have been official acts by the president?

If so, I don't understand how (in light of the SCOTUS ruling) all of these conversations with Pence can be introduced as evidence supporting the indictment. Isn't every conversation between a president and VP an official act? I get that certifying the electoral college count is a legislative function of the VP but it seems like this document includes a lot of supporting evidence that could be construed as an official act by Trump.

Expand full comment
author

Hi Laura. Thanks for your note. You are correct, everything related to Jeffrey Clark was taken out of the revised indictment. I also am not convinced that the Trump-Pence conversations will be allowed as evidence under the Supreme Court's immunity ruling - which I should parenthetically note is a real travesty. I don't think Nixon could have been investigated for Watergate using this ruling.

Expand full comment

Maybe Jack Smith knows the judge will rule many of the Pence details were official acts, but he wanted to get the information into the public domain before the election.

Expand full comment

Agree, it is a travesty and contrary to a plain reading of the Constitution. The framers included legislative immunity and certainly could have spelled out immunity for the president if they had wanted to do so.

Expand full comment

I live in Florida, my property insurance is triple since DeSantis took office. It takes years to settle any claim with insurance companies. So, yes, Republicans have done nothing, but to sleep with the enemy.

Expand full comment