Thursday 7th of July 2022

stunning pile of speculative crap from the new republic….

Will Merrick Garland Defend Democracy?

He came in wanting to depoliticize the Justice Department. But does that mean letting an ex-president get away with subverting democracy?

 

Eric Holder, the former frontline prosecutor and local judge who served as Barack Obama’s first attorney general, was never a fan of Donald Trump, but he responded cautiously in 2019 when asked whether Trump should face prosecution even after he left office. “I think there is a potential cost to the nation by putting on trial a former president, and that ought to at least be a part of the calculus that goes into the determination that has to be made by the next attorney general,” Holder told David Axelrod in a CNN interview. But in the wake of the January 6 riot and related investigations, Holder’s view appears to have significantly hardened. Appearing in early May on CBS News’ Face the Nation, Holder offered a tougher assessment: “At some point, people at the Justice Department, perhaps that prosecutor in Atlanta, are going to have to make a determination about whether or not they want to indict Donald Trump.” Asked by interviewer Margaret Brennan if he would issue such a criminal indictment, Holder said he thought available evidence would justify that. “My initial thought was not to indict the former president out of concern of what—how divisive it would be. But given what we have learned, I think that he probably has to be held accountable.”

 

By Mark Hosenball

Many Trump opponents, including key Democratic politicians, have for months been calling for the Justice Department, under the leadership of Attorney General and former federal appeals court judge Merrick Garland, not only to file harsher charges against a wider range of alleged January 6 riot participants but to prosecute reputed riot organizers. Possible targets range, Trump critics and some legal experts say, from internet activist Ali Alexander and veteran Republican operative Roger Stone to right-wing law professor John Eastman, author of the infamous memo laying out how Republicans could overturn the presidential election results, to Trump White House aides to, most notably, Trump himself. Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows is of particular interest. Some witnesses are known to have testified to the House committee investigating the January 6 riot that he was directly warned about possible violence. Cassidy Hutchinson, a Trump White House assistant, said that in early January 2021 “there were concerns brought forward to Mr. Meadows” indicating “that there could be violence,” but added that it was unclear to her if Meadows “perceived them as genuine concerns.” Rolling Stone reported that two anonymous sources told its reporter about how they had participated in “dozens” of briefings in the days before pro-Trump rioters attacked the Capitol. One source told the magazine that Meadows was totally clued in on such discussions. “Meadows was 100 percent made aware of what was going on,” the source said.

How much Trump himself knew remains unclear. At the “Stop the Steal” rally near the White House not long before the start of the riot, Trump told the crowd: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.” Some information about what he was up to privately, on January 6 and before, has been leaked, including the rather stunning revelation by The New York Times in late May that he reacted approvingly as he watched the rioters chant “Hang Mike Pence!” but not enough to draw firm conclusions on whether he committed crimes.

 

Jonathan Winer, a former congressional investigator and State Department official, said in an interview that evidence is building that the Trump White House discussed calling out the National Guard to back Trump and his supporters as they sought to prevent the certification of the election for Joe Biden. In January, Winer wrote a widely circulated article laying out the case for prosecuting Trump, citing specific sections of the U.S. Code under which a prosecution could potentially be made (18 U.S. Code § 242, “deprivation of rights under color of law”). In Winer’s view, the riot and efforts by Trump and his entourage to manipulate politics and the law to keep Trump in office “were inextricably linked.” There was a “plot by Trump and Meadows to overturn the election,” he said. At present, however, Winer and other current and former officials following investigations acknowledge, Justice Department interest in these issues is unclear at best.

The political calendar is inexorably moving forward. If Republicans, still under strong Trump influence, recapture control of the House in this year’s congressional elections, they will likely shut down the January 6 investigation committee. Instead, a Republican House majority would almost certainly redirect investigative resources and attention to scandals they believe could damage Democrats in general and the presidential family in particular, such as the dubious business dealings of Hunter Biden. The possibility, if not likelihood, of a Republican takeover in the House—and maybe the Senate, too—has already fueled speculation inside law enforcement and political circles that any potential move by Garland’s Justice Department to file January 6–related criminal charges against Trump himself and/or his family and top aides would have to be undertaken before the end of 2022. Some recent public statements and news revelations suggest that the department has definitely begun to look into issues such as the inspiration and origins of the January 6 riots and into alleged efforts in multiple states by Trump supporters to replace legitimate Biden electors with fraudulent pro-Trump electoral slates. But such investigations appear to be in relatively early stages, and it is unclear how advanced they will be by the November elections.

In this evolving drama, the individual who will be principal screenwriter and director is Merrick Garland. Officials and legal experts observing how the investigation is unfolding are wondering how dramatic the final act will be. Maybe Garland and his team are moving forward toward Trump and other prominent possible targets with “exceptional secrecy,” said Andrew Kent, a national security expert at Fordham University School of Law. But at present, Kent said, “I’m reading the absence of tea leaves” regarding how high up the investigation will go. A former senior Justice Department official said that until recent news reports suggested a significant widening of the department’s investigation, “I thought they had decided not to go after Trump.” The former official said that if prosecutors were really seriously going after Trump, there ought to be more public indication they were calling relevant witnesses before grand juries.

A former U.S. official in close contact with key Trump critics in Congress said that the possibility of criminal charges against Trump cannot be ruled out. “But on the other hand, we don’t know,” the former official said. “It’s a black box.” This source also told TNR that top legal aides in the House had spoken of “a priestlike vow of silence” Garland had imposed on the department, telling employees not to reveal any details of its actions to House staff. That is, the department—both “Main Justice,” as the department is referred to by insiders, and all U.S. attorney’s offices—receives evidence from House investigators, but it tells them nothing about its activities. The source added, by the way, that this is probably a good thing, because it protects the department from charges of politicization.

It is this last point, the depoliticization of the department, that has been a key Garland priority. After what Bill Barr and Donald Trump did to Justice, it’s hard to blame him, and it’s an admirable position. But given that a prosecution of Trump will be instantly politicized by the right, does that mean that Garland could back away from such a move, even if justified by the facts, because it would seem “political”? Garland could find himself restoring independence and integrity to the Justice Department—while simultaneously allowing the subversion of democracy by a former president.

Laying the Groundwork

The case for the possible prosecution of Trump and top aides can be traced back to the days shortly after the riot. Congressional committees began serious investigations of the January 6 events and the background to them at that time. In a report issued in June 2021, two (Democrat-led) Senate panels, the Rules and Administration and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committees, said they found “critical breakdowns” in intelligence operations, including information collection and sharing, by the Department of Homeland Security and FBI. The committees found that spy agencies underestimated the seriousness and nature of the threat to the Capitol on January 6, and that the FBI did not share relevant information it had with police guarding the Capitol.

A report by the Senate Judiciary Committee published last October widened the focus to Trump and his political allies—and directly raised the issue of whether Trump himself violated laws. The committee found that the country was “only a half-step away from a full-blown constitutional crisis” when Trump and his entourage “threatened a wholesale takeover of the Department of Justice.” The Judiciary report included an account of how Jeffrey Clark, acting head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division, whom Trump at one critical point tried to install as acting attorney general, tried to pressure other DOJ officials to overturn the election results. A principal Judiciary Committee finding was that Trump repeatedly pressured DOJ leadership “to endorse his false claims that the election was stolen and to assist his efforts to overturn the election results.”

Beginning on December 14, the day former Attorney General William Barr announced his resignation, and continuing almost until the January 6 insurrection, Trump directly and repeatedly asked DOJ’s acting leadership to initiate investigations, file lawsuits on his behalf, and publicly declare the 2020 election “corrupt,” the committee said. Documents and testimony confirmed that Jeffrey Rosen, Barr’s successor as acting attorney general, and in some cases other senior DOJ leaders participated in several calls and meetings where Trump directly raised discredited claims of election fraud and asked why DOJ was not doing more to address them. The committee said these contacts included multiple calls between Trump and Rosen and Trump and Richard Donoghue, an associate deputy attorney general, and Oval Office meetings that included Rosen and Donoghue on December 31 and January 3. The committee declared, “In attempting to enlist DOJ for personal, political purposes in an effort to maintain his hold on the White House, Trump grossly abused the power of the presidency.”

According to the committee the House set up to investigate the insurrection and its origins, Trump engaged in detailed discussions with Pence and others about what powers the vice president might have to alter the election results. The committee notes that at 1:00 a.m. on January 6, Trump tweeted: “If Vice President @Mike_Pence comes through for us, we will win the Presidency.... Mike can send it back.” Seven hours later, Trump tweeted: “States want to correct their votes ... All Mike Pence has to do is send them back to the States, and we win. Do it Mike, this is a time for extreme courage!” The committee said Trump called Pence personally to pressure him to act.

“It’s clear there was a coordinated attempt to weaponize the Justice Department to subvert the election. Investigators need to examine every aspect of that effort, from pressuring Georgia legislators and election officials to scheming to install Jeffrey Clark as Attorney General. This has to be a top priority,” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, the Rhode Island Democrat who is a senior Judiciary Committee member, said in an email.

The Judiciary Committee’s report didn’t aim only at Trump. It found that “Meadows asked acting Attorney General Rosen to initiate election fraud investigations on multiple occasions, violating long standing restrictions on White House-DOJ communications about specific” cases under investigation. The committee said “Meadows asked Rosen to have DOJ investigate at least four categories of false election fraud claims that Trump and his allies were pushing.” Meadows asked Rosen to have the DOJ look into “various discredited claims of election fraud in Georgia that the Trump campaign was simultaneously advancing in a lawsuit that the Georgia Supreme Court had refused to hear on an expedited basis.” Meadows also asked the DOJ to “investigate a series of claims of election fraud in New Mexico that had been widely refuted,” including a claim that machines built by Dominion Voting Systems produced late-night “vote dumps” for Democratic candidates.

Meanwhile, in contrast to the Judiciary report, for months after the riot, FBI and prosecutors’ analyses of what happened on January 6 focused almost exclusively on the riot and its direct participants. In a story that attracted angry responses from some Trump critics, a colleague and I reported for Reuters on August 20 of last year that five current and former law enforcement officials—very well placed—told us that FBI investigators at that point had found “scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result.” The FBI still believed the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups like the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and Three Percenters, or by prominent Trump aides or supporters.

However aggressively congressional investigations proceed, most notably by the House select committee, it remains unclear how closely Garland’s Justice Department will follow. Recent developments indicate that the department has significantly widened the scope of January 6–related investigations and is examining issues beyond the riot itself. One key move earlier this year signaling that Justice was toughening its approach was a federal grand jury indictment issued on January 12 featuring “seditious conspiracy” charges against Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers, and 10 other members of the group. The first seditious conspiracy charges were filed a few months after Matthew Olsen, a former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, was confirmed as assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. (It is not clear what role Olsen might have played in determining how the Oath Keepers case should move forward; Olsen did not respond to requests for comment.)

Another signal of the department’s seriousness came in late January, shortly after the seditious conspiracy indictment was issued, when Lisa Monaco, Garland’s deputy attorney general, confirmed in a CNN interview that the Justice Department was investigating slates of electors assembled by Trump supporters that declared Trump the winner in seven key states whose governments had already certified Biden as winner of their electoral votes. Recent federal court rulings also appeared to openly encourage a possible prosecution of Trump. In late February, Amit Mehta, one of the D.C. federal judges hearing January 6 cases, ruled that Trump could be held civilly liable for egging on participants in the Capitol riot. Then, in an explosive late March opinion ordering Eastman to turn over key emails to House investigators, David Carter, a federal judge in California, found that Trump “more likely than not ... corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.” He wrote: “The illegality of the plan was obvious.”

Also in late March, reports began to surface that the Justice Department focus had expanded to include persons around Trump, and possibly even Trump himself. The Washington Post reported that the criminal investigation had expanded to examine “preparations” for January 6, including the issuing of subpoenas to unidentified “officials in former President Donald Trump’s orbit” who assisted in planning, funding, and executing the rally that preceded the Capitol riot. The New York Times also reported that the expanded Justice Department investigation included the involvement of government officials in efforts by Trump to “obstruct the certification of President Biden’s Electoral College victory” as well as alleged efforts by Trump supporters to put forward bogus slates of electors. The Times also said it had seen a subpoena indicating prosecutors were seeking information on people “classified as VIP attendees” who were present at Trump’s pre-riot rally. Then, in early May, the Times reported that the Justice Department had opened a grand jury investigation into possible mishandling of classified documents by Trump as he brought boxes of official materials with him when he left the White House for Mar-a-Lago.

 

But Was It Illegal?

But egregious as Trump’s behavior was, the question remains whether it was illegal—especially given that Trump was president at the time, and U.S. jurisprudence is ambiguous at best on how strictly laws apply to sitting presidents. A story involving the Oath Keepers’ Rhodes, the hard-right anti-government figure who wrote after Biden’s victory that the United States now faced “a moment of peril as great, or greater, as what General Washington and his men faced in 1776,” provides a tentative window on White House contacts with rioters.

 

READ MORE WAFFLE AND BULLSHIT:

https://newrepublic.com/article/166734/merrick-garland-january-6-trump-defend-democracy

 

.... the United States now faced “a moment of peril as great, or greater, as what General Washington and his men faced in 1776,” WHAT A LOT OF CODSWALLOP!!!!!!! Read the effin US history effin again.....

 

 

Time to read Sir Henry Bolte again:

"I feel we did take some risks in that by-election by leaving the results to the electors."

 

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.......

They’re all crooks……

They’re all crooks……

 

Often I hear from someone decent that Donald trump was and is a crook… I say nothing: of course Biden is made of angelic dust.

 

My sarcasm about the US presidents since the assassination of JFK has found no bound. I hate sarcasm. It’s a low form of loathing with a smirk. But the US presidents demand no less than a bucket of sarcastic shit on their head, including Carter who had the vilest advisor on his side, Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzeziński…

 

Take Bush Senior for example. The USSR self-immolated in front of him after having made a deal with Reagan — another deceitful moron in the “contra-affair" and who made bad Russian jokes behind Gorbachev’s back.

 

Bush Senior could not tell Gorbachev that the agreement about NATO not moving east was a lot of codswallop, could he? That would have been an instant mega-foul, leading to a few atom bombs falling on the Pentagon. Deceit is tortuous and demand non-genuine pat on the back of the vanquished adversary, with some clever patience, as the war stick is passed to the next president — while fiddling in the Middle East to control the oil flow. “Saddam, you can invade Kuwait, but then you cannot.” 

 

As mentioned, the aim of the greater game is to destroy Russia (and China), but Russia still had a few bastions on the chess board, despite having willingly self-declared that Russia had lost the game.

 

The US president had to minimise chest-beating, in order to appear magnanimous in cold war victory, and not be vengeful (yet), knowing well that even disbanded, the USSR could still sting the Western world with nukes, should this “democratically fascist” part of the planet do a wrong move. Meanwhile the US financiers, helped by the CIA, were getting in on the raping of the Russian carcass, by handing Yeltsin, the brothel manager, cash up-front under the table.

 

So the next murderous president, Bill Clinton, like the debonair cock-sucked moron he is, went and destroyed Yugoslavia under false pretences. The US are very clever at creating falsehoods about their intent. The Western media bought the line that Kosovo had to be saved and that Belgrade had to be bombed ASAP. This had nothing to do with protecting a few muslims in Yugoslavia but in bringing down the walls and filling in the moats around Russia. Then, Billy Clintonus the Turd (or first, who knows) decided as planned since the invention of NATO to push eastwards while no-one was paying attention and when Russia was in disarray, as Yeltsin was counting his fingers.

 

In the same breath, Clitoniatus released the US banks from the restraint of being responsible gamblers on the world derivative market. The inverted dollar pyramid grew at a speed of light, robbing all the countries of their hard-earned cash. By the end of his tenure, having had his cock sucked many times, the Clintonator passed the war stick to young stupid George W Bush, who straight away got a 9/11 situation (like a “2019” in Monsters inc) on his hands — a convenient excuse to go and invade Afghanistan and then go and bash the shit out of Iraq’s Saddam, all by telling porkies that the English speaking media bought and licked like ice-cream. Few outlets apologised….

 

All this war on Saddam and Afghanistan was part of the conquest of the “RIMLAND” that borders Russia and its friends including Iran, a country that had been a naughty boy for throwing out the US chosen despot, the Shah famously marrying Princess Farah Diba who had been living in poverty in Paris, since the Arab republicans had taken over Iran.  

 

In all these manipulations, one must be careful as a US president not to start WW3. It’s so easy…. So one has to destroy countries one at a time, according to a schedule planner that involved Admiral Cebrowski and Cheney (father of of that traitor dickhead Liz).

 

And the fucking American public reelected little Bushit to the job of fucking up the world some more… Yeepee!!!

 

By the end of his tenure, Bushit Junior should have ended up in prison for waging an illegal war with his mates, Blair the Weasel and John Howard Crappo.

 

So the fickle public of Americana voted for a sea change: OBAMA… HOPE and vague became the ideal driving this fake peaceful democrat. He’d been lucky he’d been born in Hawaii, just a couple of years after these islands had been declared the 51st State of the Union. 

 

Being “blackish” due to his mum being white, did not help him understand the racial tensions of Yamerika, nor of the importance of the drum of peace. Well, I mean here that Obama discovered that it’s less taxing on the US troops to bomb other countries from 20,000 feet with drones. Seven countries in five years sounds like a tourist brochure. 

 

In Libya, the best country in Africa then, Gaddafi had made noises about buying and selling stuff in his own currency — away from the US dollar. Sacrilegious! Another set of false excuses were devised for NATO to bomb the shit out of Libya in 2011, and since that day, Libya has been living in the stone and gun powder age.

 

All through the lives of the Presidents, the Western media have been more than compliant to the false narratives, writing some real doozies that would have put the disinformation unit at the CIA to shame.

 

But life goes on in the long game of destroying Russia (since 1917-1919)… There was the Georgia episode, the Chechen episode and a few more nefarious US inspired events in the mix. One where Russia said enough is enough, has been Syria. The US had sponsored some nasty Arab Muslims to destroy the Assad “regime” but these nasty characters started to believe in their own destiny, like bad genies out of the bottle. So the US had to let us know how bad Daesh was, without telling us the US had invented the caper. The Russians came in clinically with some newly developed expertise that surprised the West. Hum. 

 

Meanwhile Afghanistan, corrupt, drugged and doing well with the US occupation, was not doing well. The Taliban was holding back patiently, raising kids born under US occupation to hate US guts.

 

Trump the dork came to be elected. Phew. Gus says phew because had the other Clintonyte be elected, the world would have blown up within five minutes. Who knows… Clinton Hillarious was more devious than her sucked-cocked husband and this is hard to beat.

 

Trump decided to pack up the US military toys and bring soldiers back home, while reinforcing the need of Yamericka making stuff rather than buying cheap from China. This of course was part of the second prong against the HEARTLAND: annoy the Chinese to make them loose their footing, become aggressive — and prepare for war in the proximity facing 120 US bases, including Taiwan.

 

Meanwhile, Trump faked a withdrawal of US troops from Syria, while planning getting out of Afghanistan in order to prepare the next sting. Here many pundit in the media deplored the way Trump negotiated with the Taliban that only represented 15 per cent of the Afghanis, but about 90 per cent of the nasty warriors. 

 

By the time Trump got booted out unceremoniously (due mostly to his Covid “mismanagement” — question: was Covid designed to get rid of Trump?) and replaced by crooked Joe, the US hegemony was going to put back on track.

 

At all times, during all the US presidencies since Billy Clintonian, Ukraine was being groomed to become a prick in the Russian bear hide. The game of destroying Russia and China was being played around the clock — while avoiding a front-on conflict, which could have been disastrous for god-blessed America. 

 

Once again, we know all the US machinations, including Madam Cookie Nuland and her husband of the nefarious PNAC (The Project for the New American Century) or whatever. Joe Biden was on the take as well, in Ukraine and in China, through his son, Hunter.

 

By the beginning of this year, it became obvious to Putin — a short little guy who understand the world in eight languages and six dialects, that the USA were playing a MORE crooked game. The warmongers in Washington were using Biden’s teleprompter to make him go to war, without going to war. That is to say, push all the stops of Ukraine’s little dictator to annoy Russia beyond the ever mentioned RED LINES. 

 

We know the rest. Zelenskyyy-y is getting his arse whipped by Russia, but he can’t stop because the game is not about him, but about weakening Russia UNTIL IT IS DESTROYED

 

There again, we guess that Russia is not too worried… The sanctions imposed upon its economy, only reinforced its desire to become more self-sufficient. The more Russia becomes self-sufficient, the more the US hates Russia. 

 

Meanwhile, Europe has TOTALLY lost the plot. It has not understood the US game and has been used by Washington as a foil to carry the can… First all the refugees from Africa, then the refugees from Ukraine and now having to sustain energy loses and inflation becoming higher than Mount Everest.

 

So, where to from here? The US want the “war” in Ukraine to continue to the last Ukrainian — or until Russia tires of invading which it won’t. The war is already lost for Zelenskyyy-y, but he is not a clever man, despite being a shithead. He bombasts about regaining lost territories while these are already well and truly in RUSSIAN HANDS and not going back. More kids will die at the front. Soon, instead of guns and ammos, the Ukrainian military will have to send nappies to the receding front.

 

And the US Democrats still plan to present senile Biden to the next elections…. Let’s hope the moron does not fall asleep and hit the red button while thinking it’s the snooze on his deranged alarm clock. 

 

Good luck to us all…

 

 

GL.

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>!!!

USA's arseholes…...

"Few today remember or are even aware that leading members of America’s elite, Corporate America, were busily engaged in planning to overthrow the United States government in 1933."

David Turner, Corporate America's Failed Coup d'Etat, Jerusalem Post, June 17, 2017


"In the last few weeks of the committee's official life it received evidence showing that certain persons had made an attempt to establish a fascist organization in this country.  No evidence was presented and this committee had none to show a connection between this effort and any fascist activity of any European country.  There is no question that these attempts were discussed, were planned, and might have been placed in execution when and if the financial backers deemed it expedient.

MacGuire denied these allegations under oath, but your committee was able to verify all the pertinent statements made by General Butler, with the exception of the direct statement suggesting the creation of the organization.  This, however, was corroborated in the correspondence of MacGuire with his principal, Robert Sterling Clark, of New York City, while MacGuire was abroad studying the various forms of veterans organizations of Fascist character."

House of Representatives Report, 73d Congress, February 15, 1935.

 

 

READ MORE:

https://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

SEE ALSO: https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/35992

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW, MR BIDEN, PLEASE........