Trump supporters and conspiracy theory - Part 2

[Rick Plant]

Reporter predicts 'bombshell' Jan. 6 committee hearing will show a split-screen of Trump vs. attackers



Speaking to MSNBC on Monday, Washington Post reporter Carol Leonnig explained the main ways the House Select Committee will do to show the alleged conspiracy and corruption of Donald Trump and his allies. Officials intend to show side-by-side examples of the violence at the U.S. Capitol and what was happening at the White House at the same time.

"I think, Nicolle, you are going to see some bombshells that day," Leonnig said. "I applaud my colleagues who have been reporting on this curtain-raiser for the hearings to come. The one that will be led and focused on Donald Trump, I understand, will have a lot of Donald Trump's own words as relayed by witnesses, as relayed by Donald Trump himself, people who were at his shoulder. And, so, you will see a kind of a split-screen. What was happening on the capitol at the same moment as what was happening inside the White House with Donald Trump."

She cited one of the scenes in her book co-written with Phil Rucker, when Trump felt "giddy" when he saw his supporters committing multiple felonies and trumping up the side of the hill with weaponry, flag poles, fire extinguishers, bear spray, and two-way radios as if they were in a paramilitary event.

"So, you will see this split screen of what was Donald Trump doing, what was he saying," Leonnig continued. "And then what was actually happening on the capitol. The violence and the mayhem and the terror that he could have stopped and chose not to. This goes to the heart of what Liz Cheney warned early on, the dereliction of duty. She has brought that up over and over again and I think that will be a big subtheme of that hearing."

Wallace agreed, recalling how Cheney has outlined where the dereliction of duty occurred.

See the conversation below:

[Rick Plant]

Fulton County grand jury investigating Donald Trump in session

Watch:

[Rick Plant]

Despicable Trump stooge Elise Stefanik is parroting the same bogus right wing talking points that every right winger is currently pushing. It's the same script they all use. They are terrified of the televised January 6th Committee Hearing on Thursday June 9th at 8pm Eastern Time. 

She calls a legitimate House investigation into the Capitol attack insurrection a "sham" and a "witch hunt" using the same words of Criminal Donald.

The fact is Criminal Donald, his administration, members of the Republican party, his supporters, and the right wing media all participated in a coup to steal the election from the American people. They attempted to overturn an election they lost fair and square because they did not like the results. After they lost in court over 60 times to overturn the election results, they tried to seize control of the government by violent force with their violent insurrection attack on the Capitol where 5 people died. Not only that, Trump and his cohorts tried to intimidate former Vice President Mike Pence into not certifying legitimate Electoral votes won by Joe Biden. From then on, Republicans have lied about "voter fraud" trying to delegitimize President Biden and our voting process. So, that is why Republicans are freaking out over the hearings because MANY of them are complicit in this coup.

Elise is lying because President Biden and Democrats have already addressed these issues.

Baby formula is now on the shelves thanks to President Biden invoking the Defense Production Act and also by importing baby formula from other countries.

Inflation and gas prices are sky high all around the world due to a global pandemic, Big Oil Price Gouging, and Putin's war in Ukraine.

President Biden is working on bringing inflation down.

Democrats put the "Big Oil and Gas Price Gouging Bill" on the House floor and Elise Stefanik and her right wing House Republicans voted against the bill. The bill passed because the House is controlled by Democrats. The bill is now sitting in the Senate currently being blocked by Republicans and they refuse to even vote on the bill for debate. Republicans want gas prices to stay high so they can keep falsely attacking Biden each day for political points. Gas prices would drop immediately if the Senate passed this bill because it will stop Big Oil from purposely gouging consumers at the pump. But Republicans would rather let you pay high gas prices because they think it will help them politically. Remember that in November. Republicans couldn't care less about high gas prices just the same way as they don't care about mass shootings since they still refuse to pass common sense gun reform. 

The GOP is despicable, the same treasonous traitors that tried to steal the election and install an orange lunatic as their wannabe dictator.

You can see the House vote on the "Big Oil and Gas Price Gouging Bill" under Stefanik's scripted talking points.                     
   




So, you can see with your own eyes that not one single Republican in the House voted to lower gas prices for American consumers just a couple of weeks ago. Republicans had a chance to lower gas prices, and they refused to help you, but they can't wait to go on Twitter and television to attack President Biden for high gas prices that he has no control over.

This bill will lower gas prices for American consumers which prevents Big Oil from artificially raising prices for big profit which they are currently doing. This bill passed only by Democrats in the House is currently sitting in the Senate being blocked by Republicans because they refuse to vote on it so gas prices can remain high. They want you to pay high gas prices because they think it will help then politically in November. Blocking, obstructing, and sabotage is all the GOP does. They do not care about you, if they did this bill would have passed unanimously in both chambers. Senate Republicans are blocking this bill because they don't want Biden to get credit for lowering gas prices for American consumers. So, they block the bill and gas prices remain high. The GOP has zero interest in helping Americans.           

[Rick Plant]

Former assistant contradicts Trump's sworn testimony in New York affidavit



On Monday, CBS News reported that a one-time executive assistant for former President Donald Trump has contradicted a key point he made in a sworn affidavit during his response to civil allegations in New York.

"Rhona Graff, who worked for years as executive assistant to Donald Trump, 'cast doubt on the completeness of' a sworn affidavit submitted by Trump in May in an effort to clear a judge's finding of contempt, according to a Monday filing by the New York Attorney General's Office," reported Graham Kates.

"Trump was held in contempt April 25 after claiming he had no documents demanded in a subpoena by investigators for New York Attorney General Letitia James. Her office sought records related to Trump's personal finances, as well as information related to the financing of several properties."

"As part of the former president's effort to clear the contempt ruling, Trump said in an affidavit that 'it has been my customary practice to delegate document handling and retention responsibilities to my executive assistants,'" the report continued. "But in her May 31 deposition, Graff, who worked for Trump for more than two decades, said that statement was 'very general. It doesn't mean (executive assistants) handled every document and maintained everything that came out of his office.' Trump 'had an inbox and an outbox,' Graff said. If material was sent to him in a folder, Graff 'didn't think it was my position to look inside,' she said, adding that Trump 'maybe on the outside would have said to return to so and so, whoever gave it to him.'"

Trump ultimately lost his bid to clear his contempt of court ruling, and at the end of last month, he paid $110,000 in fines to the court.

James is investigating whether the Trump organization lied about its finances by boosting the value of assets to qualify for loans while minimizing them to avoid paying taxes.

"Attorneys for James' office have repeatedly indicated recently that the investigation is nearing its conclusion, and that it may lead to an 'enforcement action in the near future.' They have not elaborated on what enforcement might be," the report noted. "But before that happens, a New York appeals court must decide if Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr. and his daughter Ivanka Trump must sit for depositions with James' investigations. The judge overseeing the investigation and a lower appeals court have both sided with James' office, ruling that a December subpoena seeking their testimony was valid."

Read more here:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-assistant-rhona-graff-deposition-new-york-attorney-general/

[Rick Plant]

Some Trump officials knew election scheme was 'improper if not illegal' -- and new emails prove it: CNN legal analyst

Reacting to a report from the Washington Post that a slate of fake electors in Georgia who were attempting to award the state's 16 Electoral College votes to Donald Trump were instructed to keep quiet about their work, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said it reeked of illegality.

According to the Post, an email went out to the conservatives hoping to assist Trump in his quest to win re-election that stated, "Your duties are imperative to ensure the end result — a win in Georgia for President Trump — but will be hampered unless we have complete secrecy and discretion. Please, at no point should you mention anything to do with Presidential Electors or speak to the media," with the secrecy portion bolded.

Speaking with "New Day" hosts Brianna Keilar and John Berman, political analyst Laura Jarrett prompted, "Georgia is the sleeper in this whole thing. It is because it's the -- it's where I think the most exposure is."

"It speaks to this whole issue of intent," she continued. "If this whole thing was on the up and up and you actually believed that Donald Trump was the rightful winner, why is all of this shrouded in secrecy? I think it speaks to the criminality of it, and it speaks to the potential criminal intent of the actors involved. Now what Trump knew, of course, all of that is going to remain to be seen. The fact that a member of the Trump campaign is on the record in an e-mail saying we have to do all this shrouded in secrecy is noteworthy."

"Criminal intent is always the hardest thing to prove in a white-collar case," Toobin offered. "Donald Trump will say, 'Look, I was doing this in the open, working with a lawyer, John Eastman, a Supreme Court law clerk, what -- where is the secrecy here?"

"That e-mail suggests that they were operating in secret which suggests that they knew they were doing something wrong," Toobin continued. "In fairness, we need to point out the person who sent that e-mail appears to be a fairly low-level person. Where he got the instruction to act in secrecy, that's something people want to know. But it's a suggestion that at least some people in the Trump orbit knew that this was an improper, if not an illegal, operation."

Watch:

[Rick Plant]

GOP will be left 'defending the indefensible' in justifying Trump's 'autocratic power grab': analysis



The Republican strategy for defending Donald Trump against the House Select Committee hearings could lead the GOP even further into extremism.

Pro-Trump lawmakers are planning a media blitz to distract from the public hearings on the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election to keep the former president in power, and CNN political analyst Stephen Collinson warned that could set the GOP onto a dark path.

"There are potential pitfalls for Republicans who stand with Trump as the lurid tale of violence, lies and autocratic power grabs is told again for the American people and for the benefit of history," Collinson wrote. "The evidence could be so damning that those who seek to discredit the hearings will find themselves defending the indefensible -- a dark moment of the American story that is so heinous it will live in infamy."

It's not clear what political impact the evidence will have, and most voters have already made up their minds about Trump after his four years in the White House, but the GOP's willingness to defend the former president to the bitter end shows that he maintains his grip on the party and its core voters.

"Republicans have a much clearer route to power five months before the midterm elections than yet again appeasing Trump's autocracy," Collinson wrote. "They can simply blame President Joe Biden for the ills afflicting the country, given the disastrous political environment for Democrats as gasoline prices hit record highs and the cost of living soars."

"Anything that deflects from that goal seems unwise," he added. "There's also a risk that standing with Trump will brand the GOP all over again with the stain of defending a strongman who tried to overthrow a democratic election. That vision repeatedly punished the party when Trump was in power. And defending him could remind critical suburban voters all over again of just how extreme their party has become."

https://www.rawstory.com/jan-6-hearings-2657468410/

[Rick Plant]

GOP lawmaker still 'livid' over Jan. 6, calls Trump a 'narcissist' who is 'driven by revenge'
https://www.rawstory.com/gop-lawmaker-still-livid-over-jan-6-calls-trump-a-narcissist-who-is-driven-by-revenge/

[Rick Plant]

Trump likely hoped to create enough chaos on Jan 6th that he could invoke martial law: former DHS official



Two days before the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6th insurrection begins televised hearings and testimony on the attack on the nation's Capitol that followed Donald Trump's appearance at a "Stop the Steal" rally, a former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official suggested the former president may have hoped he could declare martial law in the aftermath.

Taking to Twitter, former DHS chief of staff Miles Taylor speculated that Trump possibly saw a way to remain in power if enough chaos was created then he could have declared martial law and halted all the proceedings of the day.

According to Taylor, who authored an anonymous New York Times op-ed in 2018 asserting there was a "resistance" effort within Trump's White House, "I believe Trump intended to incite an insurrection as a pretext for declaring some form of marshal (sic) law. He mused about invoking the Insurrection Act YEARS before Jan 6 — calling it a 'magic power' — in convos I witnessed & was briefed on," later correcting "marshal" to "martial."

By way of explanation about what martial law would have entailed, Yahoo reported, "The Insurrection Act of 1807 gives the president broad powers to deploy the military domestically in response to what he or she deems to be emergency situations."

The Washington Post previously reported that "Three days before Joe Biden’s inauguration, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene texted White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. She told him that some Republican members of Congress believed the only path for President Donald Trump to change the outcome of the 2020 election and stay in power was for him to declare martial law."

Yahoo adds, "Legal experts say using the Insurrection Act to contest an election would a gross violation of precedent, and that the law needs sharpening to prevent abuse."

You can read more here:

https://twitter.com/MilesTaylorUSA/status/1533867378555199489