2020 Election: Predictions, Results and Reactions

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As Rep. Zoe Lofgren put it in her opening statement: "The 'Big Lie' was also a big rip-off."

[RoseMorninStar]

As Rep. Zoe Lofgren put it in her opening statement: "The 'Big Lie' was also a big rip-off."

Yup. This alone should piss people off. Damn marketing scheme.

[River]

As Rep. Zoe Lofgren put it in her opening statement: "The 'Big Lie' was also a big rip-off."

Yup. This alone should piss people off. Damn marketing scheme.

This was painfully obvious to anyone who was both watching events unfold and not buying into the lie. Even so, it is good to have testimony and such.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Looks like the committee is imploding. First the Chairman, Bennie Thompson, inexplicably announced that they would not be making any criminal referrals of Trump or anyone else to the Justice Department. Then Liz Cheney, Adam Schiff, and others on the committee basically said "what the f are you talking about, we haven't decided that." Now the next hearing, scheduled for tomorrow, has been postponed with no reason given.

ETA: Apparently, this split is not new. I don't recall seeing it, but apparently the New York Times reported back in April that "The leaders of the House committee investigating the Capitol attack have grown divided over whether to make a criminal referral to the Justice Department of former President Donald J. Trump, even though they have concluded that they have enough evidence to do so, people involved in the discussions said."

[elengil]

Just to note, the article I've just read on CNN notes that it was delayed for technical reasons and is scheduled for Thursday instead.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/14/politics ... index.html

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The hearing on Thursday is one that was already scheduled for then and is a different topic. The one that was scheduled for tomorrow has not yet been rescheduled. And yes they say that it was rescheduled for technical reasons, but I do not believe that for a second.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[River]

What was tomorrow's topic supposed to be again?

[elengil]

The hearing on Thursday is one that was already scheduled for then and is a different topic. The one that was scheduled for tomorrow has not yet been rescheduled. And yes they say that it was rescheduled for technical reasons, but I do not believe that for a second.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

It's perfectly fair to say you absolutely do not believe the given reason, but seems disingenuous to state that there was no reason given when there was.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

You are right.i stand corrected.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[N.E. Brigand]

The hearing on Thursday is one that was already scheduled for then and is a different topic. The one that was scheduled for tomorrow has not yet been rescheduled. And yes they say that it was rescheduled for technical reasons, but I do not believe that for a second.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, who led most of yesterday's hearing, was asked about the postponement of tomorrow's hearing by MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes tonight:

Lofgren: "Well, we're constantly learning new things. But this is primarily logistical."

Hayes: "Primarily?"

Lofgren: "I'll just leave it at that."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

One reason that I don't believe the stated reason is that the staff was able at the last minute to pivot to using video testimony of Bill Stepian when his wife went into labor and he cancelled his live testimony. I am quite sure that they would have had problem coming up with the video testimony necessary for the hearing that was scheduled for tomorrow. So when Rep. Zoe Lofgren says "“It’s just technical issues,” she said. “You know the staff, putting together all the videos. You know doing, one, two, three, it was overwhelming. So we’re trying to give them a little room.”

x-posted with N.E.B. "Primarily," indeed.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Edit #2: Maggie Haberman of the New York Times says that both Miller and Stepien said this.

Apparently, it was actually just Miller who said it, but Giuliani believed that both of them did, and has gone on a rampage against them as a result.

Trump team descends into infighting over Jan. 6

Perhaps the most pronounced example came Tuesday morning, when Rudy Giuliani effectively accused two top Trump campaign aides, Jason Miller and Bill Stepien, of perjury. Miller had said under oath that Trump’s former attorney was “definitely intoxicated” on election night 2020. (Stepien didn’t say this, though Giuliani apparently believed he had.) Giuliani also suggested they might have taken bribes for testifying to that effect.

Giuliani later deleted the tweets. (Some had noted the accusations could be grounds for defamation lawsuits. And another former White House aide, Alyssa Farah Griffin, confirmed Tuesday that Giuliani “appeared inebriated" on election night.)

[N.E. Brigand]

Here's a letter that the January 6th Committee today sent to Representative Barry Loudermilk, Republican of Georgia, asking him to meet with them to discuss a tour that he led on January 5, 2021.

As the letter notes, Republicans on the Committee on House Administration -- which includes Loudermilk -- had previously put out a statement saying they had reviewed security footage from January 5 and determined that no members had led a tour that day.

The concern, of course, is that the January 6th insurrectionists may have been able to conduct reconnaissance before the attack, and may have had help from members of Congress. And whether or not that happened, it appears that some members have tried to cover up evidence, so if the tour was innocuous, to me the Republican statement appears to flirt with obstruction.

As for Loudermilk, he now admits to having led a tour that day. He says it was just a family from his district. Maybe it was! But why didn't he just admit that before?

All of the people at the Jan. 6 insurrection came from somewhere, even those who were violent. 'Just' a family from his district could be meaningless, or not. Cleveland Meredith, Jr, one of the most violent insurrectionists, was from Georgia, just one district over from Loudermilk's district.

Loudermilk has since updated his explanation. After this news broke on Thursday, he referred to the visitors as "a constituent family with young children meeting with their Member of Congress".

Yesterday he put out a video describing them he "took a family with young children and their guests to lunch in a cafeteria in one of the house office buildings" (emphasis added).

Still could be true. Still odd that he never thought to clear this up before.

Yesterday the Capitol Police issued a statement that many observers took to be an exoneration of Rep. Loudermilk's actions on January 5, 2021, even as it noted that he led a tour of 12-15 people that day. Loudermilk himself certainly read it that way. A few people yesterday pointed out that the statement didn't really clear the Congressman. And today the January 6th Committee has released more information, and it turns out that (1) Loudermilk's guests saw parts of the complex that many tourists do not; (2) they photographed or videotaped some locations that would not be of interest to ordinary tourists, including "hallways, staircases, and security checkpoints" (as well as the name plaque outside the door of Rep. Jerry Nadler and a poster that showed the pictures of the House leadership); and (3) one of them attended Trump's rally the next day, then participated in the unpermitted march from there to the Capitol, and then recorded himself near the Capitol saying: "There's no escape Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler: we're coming for you. We're coming in like white on rice, for Pelosi, Nadler, Schumer, even you, AOC: we're coming to take you out, we'll pull you out by your hair. How about that, Pelosi? You may as well make yourself another appointment: when I get done with you, you're going to need a shine up on top of that bald head."

In other words, it sure looks like a reconnaissance tour by some insurrectionists.

And remember, House Republicans on the Administration Committee had issued a statement saying "there were no tours, no large groups, no one with MAGA hats on" the day before the insurrection. The video shows that was a complete lie -- the "tourists" were even wearing MAGA hats!

So it looks very much like a cover-up.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Judge Carl Nichols has rejected Steve Bannon's motion to dismiss his contempt case, ruling that as a matter of law he cannot find that the Select Committee was illegally constituted. This is notable in part because, Nichols, who was appointed by Trump, has been known to reach decisions that are an outlier. In particular (as I'm sure N.E.B. knows as reader of the Empty Wheel), he is the one judge who has ruled that a 1/6 defendant could not be charged with obstructing Congress’s certification of the 2020 Presidential election without a showing that the defendant had tampered with official documents or records as part of the attack, contrary to those of all seven other U.S. District Court judges who had considered the same issue. So there was some question as to whether he would "go rogue" on this issue as well, but he has not, and the case against Bannon moves forward.

[Eldy]

The Loudermilk footage is disturbing. I'd really like to believe there will be meaningful consequences for him, but I have little faith Democrats would push for that, even if Republicans were unable to block it.

[elengil]

The Loudermilk footage is disturbing. I'd really like to believe there will be meaningful consequences for him, but I have little faith Democrats would push for that, even if Republicans were unable to block it.

exactly

We seem to have no stomach for holding politicians accountable - least of all politicians who don't want to be held accountable themselves!

[N.E. Brigand]

The "1776 Returns" plan for occupying buildings that connect to the Capitol (and some other locations), which was shared among some key members of the Proud Boys militia group ahead of the January 6th attack, has been made public in a court filing.

[Eldy]

The title of the first section of their plan—"Storm the Winter Palace"—reminds me of Steve Bannon (allegedly) describing himself as a "Leninist" who "want[s] to destroy the state." Not that I think Bannon or the 1/6 people were ideologically Communists, but that they see themselves as revolutionaries in the same mold. It's absurd, though I have no reason to doubt at least some of them are sincere in this self-perception. Of course, there are far more accurate early 20th century European analogues they could choose to invoke...

ETA: Christ, they try to appropriate the "No Justice, No Peace" slogan, too.

[Sunsilver]

OMG, you have GOT to listen to this interview! They have split it up into segments, but here's the link to the most important part the one that gives me some hope. The slogan of the Washington Post is 'Democracy Dies in Darkness', and oh, do WE NEED that right now!!