"Where the J** 6 c*******e failed"
Oct 20, 2022 07:11:25 #
"As the House select committee investigating the J*** 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol closed what is probably its last hearing with a v**e to subpoena former president Donald Trump, Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) declared, “He must be held accountable.”
But will he be?
The committee did an effective job, especially at last week’s session, proving the centrality of Trump’s role in sending a violent mob of his followers to the Capitol intent on overturning a l********e p*******tial e******n. It was striking how premeditated his plan was to create the conditions for an i**********n, not just in the marching order the president delivered that day to “fight like hell,” but also in the plot concocted before the first 2020 e******n b****t had been counted to preemptively — and, it turns out, falsely — declare victory. That lie was the original sin, not just of J*** 6, but of the undermining of democracy in which most of the Republican candidates for key offices this fall have been complicit.
And yet the early evidence shows that the committee’s probe, while important and even vital for establishing the t***h, does not seem to have mattered — at least not in the sense of crystallizing public understanding or changing people’s minds.
In a survey released Wednesday by Monmouth University’s reputable polling outfit, only 36 percent of respondents said they believed Trump was “directly responsible” for what happened on J*** 6, which is six points down from the response they got to that question shortly after the committee began its public hearings in June. It’s only slightly more than the 33 percent in the same survey who said they believe Trump did nothing wrong.
Democrats are no doubt disappointed that the committee’s revelations are not turning out to be the political blockbuster they had hoped, even after their sky-high expectations were dashed by the muted public reaction to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 e******n.
But they can at least take heart from the deflation of a probe over which Republicans have been panting: that of special counsel John Durham, who was appointed by Attorney General William P. Barr in 2019 to review the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign in 2016 and the origins of its Russia probe. Trump had claimed the “crime of the century” had happened within law enforcement, and proclaimed that Durham was “coming up with things far bigger than anybody thought possible.”
Now, it appears, not so much. On Tuesday, a Virginia jury acquitted Igor Danchenko, a private researcher who was a primary source for a 2016 dossier of allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia, finding him not guilty of lying to the FBI about where he got his information. The case was Durham’s second strikeout in two times at bat. Cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann, who also was accused by the special counsel of lying to the FBI, was found not guilty in May by a federal jury. The Post reported Danchenko’s trial might well be Durham’s last, though he will issue a report of his investigation.
We are no longer living in the years before and during Watergate when a high-profile investigation, warranted or not, could drive public opinion. The easiest conclusion to draw is that Americans are so siloed in their political views that it is impossible to budge them. But I think the problem is deeper than that — and it has been festering since long before the Trump presidency.
The vast majority of Americans believe that democracy is imperiled, but as the New York Times’s Nate Cohn pointed out while analyzing his newspaper’s most recent poll, they do not describe it in a way that “squares with discussion in mainstream media and among experts — with a focus on Republicans, Donald J. Trump, political violence, e******n denial, authoritarianism, and so on.” They believe the threat to democracy stems from corruption, and their view that government no longer works for all people.
The country can no longer be shocked because that would demand a baseline of idealism about what it can expect from those who claim to lead it.
Investigations such as the House J*** 6 select committee can still have enormous value. None of this takes away from the admiration we should have for those who seek the t***h — especially those two principled Republicans, Reps. Liz Cheney (Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), who were willing to set their political careers on fire in the quest.
Today’s v**ers might not demand accountability or even pay all that much attention. But history, we can still hope, will not look the other way."
Karen Tumulty
But will he be?
The committee did an effective job, especially at last week’s session, proving the centrality of Trump’s role in sending a violent mob of his followers to the Capitol intent on overturning a l********e p*******tial e******n. It was striking how premeditated his plan was to create the conditions for an i**********n, not just in the marching order the president delivered that day to “fight like hell,” but also in the plot concocted before the first 2020 e******n b****t had been counted to preemptively — and, it turns out, falsely — declare victory. That lie was the original sin, not just of J*** 6, but of the undermining of democracy in which most of the Republican candidates for key offices this fall have been complicit.
And yet the early evidence shows that the committee’s probe, while important and even vital for establishing the t***h, does not seem to have mattered — at least not in the sense of crystallizing public understanding or changing people’s minds.
In a survey released Wednesday by Monmouth University’s reputable polling outfit, only 36 percent of respondents said they believed Trump was “directly responsible” for what happened on J*** 6, which is six points down from the response they got to that question shortly after the committee began its public hearings in June. It’s only slightly more than the 33 percent in the same survey who said they believe Trump did nothing wrong.
Democrats are no doubt disappointed that the committee’s revelations are not turning out to be the political blockbuster they had hoped, even after their sky-high expectations were dashed by the muted public reaction to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 e******n.
But they can at least take heart from the deflation of a probe over which Republicans have been panting: that of special counsel John Durham, who was appointed by Attorney General William P. Barr in 2019 to review the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign in 2016 and the origins of its Russia probe. Trump had claimed the “crime of the century” had happened within law enforcement, and proclaimed that Durham was “coming up with things far bigger than anybody thought possible.”
Now, it appears, not so much. On Tuesday, a Virginia jury acquitted Igor Danchenko, a private researcher who was a primary source for a 2016 dossier of allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia, finding him not guilty of lying to the FBI about where he got his information. The case was Durham’s second strikeout in two times at bat. Cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann, who also was accused by the special counsel of lying to the FBI, was found not guilty in May by a federal jury. The Post reported Danchenko’s trial might well be Durham’s last, though he will issue a report of his investigation.
We are no longer living in the years before and during Watergate when a high-profile investigation, warranted or not, could drive public opinion. The easiest conclusion to draw is that Americans are so siloed in their political views that it is impossible to budge them. But I think the problem is deeper than that — and it has been festering since long before the Trump presidency.
The vast majority of Americans believe that democracy is imperiled, but as the New York Times’s Nate Cohn pointed out while analyzing his newspaper’s most recent poll, they do not describe it in a way that “squares with discussion in mainstream media and among experts — with a focus on Republicans, Donald J. Trump, political violence, e******n denial, authoritarianism, and so on.” They believe the threat to democracy stems from corruption, and their view that government no longer works for all people.
The country can no longer be shocked because that would demand a baseline of idealism about what it can expect from those who claim to lead it.
Investigations such as the House J*** 6 select committee can still have enormous value. None of this takes away from the admiration we should have for those who seek the t***h — especially those two principled Republicans, Reps. Liz Cheney (Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), who were willing to set their political careers on fire in the quest.
Today’s v**ers might not demand accountability or even pay all that much attention. But history, we can still hope, will not look the other way."
Karen Tumulty
Oct 21, 2022 11:06:02 #
Since when did Democrats ever check history especially of their own actions? Let's do a short review:
A Democratic myth has arisen that Donald Trump’s denial of the accuracy of the 2020 v**e was “unprecedented.”
Unfortunately, the history of U.S. e******ns is often a story of both legitimate and ill********e e******n denialism.
The 1800, 1824, 1876, and 1960 e******ns were all understandably questioned. In some of these cases, a partisan House of Representatives decided the winner.
P**********l candidate Al Gore in 2000 did not accept the popular v**e results in Florida. He spent five weeks futilely contesting the state’s tally—until recounts and the Supreme Court certified it. The ensuing charge that George W. Bush was “selected not elected” was the Democrats’ denialist mantra for years.
In 2004, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and 31 Democratic House members v**ed not to certify the Ohio e******n results in their unhinged efforts to overturn the e******n. Those denialists included the current sanctimonious chairman of the J****** 6 select committee, U.S. Representative Benny Thompson (D-Miss).
After 2016, crackpot Democratic orthodoxy for years insisted that Donald Trump had “colluded” with Russia to “steal” certain victory from Hillary Clinton.
Clinton herself claimed that Trump was not a “legitimate” president. No wonder she loudly joined #TheResistance to obstruct his presidency. The serial denialist Clinton later urged Joe Biden not to concede the 2020 e******n if he lost. VDH.
A Democratic myth has arisen that Donald Trump’s denial of the accuracy of the 2020 v**e was “unprecedented.”
Unfortunately, the history of U.S. e******ns is often a story of both legitimate and ill********e e******n denialism.
The 1800, 1824, 1876, and 1960 e******ns were all understandably questioned. In some of these cases, a partisan House of Representatives decided the winner.
P**********l candidate Al Gore in 2000 did not accept the popular v**e results in Florida. He spent five weeks futilely contesting the state’s tally—until recounts and the Supreme Court certified it. The ensuing charge that George W. Bush was “selected not elected” was the Democrats’ denialist mantra for years.
In 2004, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and 31 Democratic House members v**ed not to certify the Ohio e******n results in their unhinged efforts to overturn the e******n. Those denialists included the current sanctimonious chairman of the J****** 6 select committee, U.S. Representative Benny Thompson (D-Miss).
After 2016, crackpot Democratic orthodoxy for years insisted that Donald Trump had “colluded” with Russia to “steal” certain victory from Hillary Clinton.
Clinton herself claimed that Trump was not a “legitimate” president. No wonder she loudly joined #TheResistance to obstruct his presidency. The serial denialist Clinton later urged Joe Biden not to concede the 2020 e******n if he lost. VDH.
Oct 21, 2022 11:16:39 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
"As the House select committee investigating ... (show quote)
Instead of the Democrats shouting down all opposition with bankrupt cries of "e******n deniers", isn't it time for them to prove the 2020 e******n was fair and legitimate? To prove there was no fraud?
Thousands have sworn under oath and presented evidence of e******n illegalities and fraud without being proven wrong. Well, who are the ones who would swear it was fair and legitimate and can prove it?
Oct 21, 2022 17:42:37 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
"As the House select committee investigating ... (show quote)
36% is the number of i***ts who v**e D regardless of what is running.
1*6 clowns have been a complete embarrassment to the USA and the world laughs at us and do not take anything seriously, especially FJB.
Oct 21, 2022 21:16:07 #
Architect1776 wrote:
36% is the number of i***ts who v**e D regardless of what is running.
1*6 clowns have been a complete embarrassment to the USA and the world laughs at us and do not take anything seriously, especially FJB.
1*6 clowns have been a complete embarrassment to the USA and the world laughs at us and do not take anything seriously, especially FJB.
"D" is for dumb indeed.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.