Too bad the enemy was Democracy.
Republicans have learned that Democracy gets in the way of their desire for total power. I’m not sure they ever had much interest in it anyway.
They’ve clearly decided that democracy will probably have to be sacrificed in order to save the country from ruinous liberalism.
More and more conservatives are saying it out loud and they’re getting little pushback from those on their side.
Realistically, the argument that China and Russia are making to the world is that democracy is destabilizing, fractious, and gives power to the Idiocracy.
I, personally, cannot rebut that argument.
On the other hand, the nation was purposefully set out to be a republic - not a democracy - and the framers of the Constitution argued that democracy was evil because it is destabilizing, fractious, and gives power to the Idiocracy. There is no need to defend democracy. We all need to accept that we’ve been letting the parties screw us over the last two hundred years, pushing populism as a social good, and claiming that the country was established as a democracy in order to get more votes out of the rabble. The voters like to think that the goal is to defer to their wisdom.
With that sort of consistent, multi-century propaganda, it is not surprising that we feel like we live in a democracy, are intended to live in one, and need to defend the practice everywhere. But that is false and it is not ambiguous that it is so, if you go back and read the thoughts of the founders of the nation.
The 2016 election in which Electoral College, intended to prevent the mass of voters from installing an incompetent demagogue, installed an incompetent demagogue rejected by the mass of voters, is more than sufficient rebuttal.
One of the advantages of having the Senate January 6th Committee do the investigation is, they can conduct their hearings in public when they’re ready to do that.
The Committee has all the same powers to conduct an investigation as the DOJ has, except the power to indict.
The FBI and DOJ can’t publicize their investigations. However, they can accept referrals for prosecution from the Committee if/when probable cause for crimes has been established.
I expect that to happen at some point. Hints are that public hearings will be conducted starting sometime in January.
I hope you’re right but I fear you’re not.
While the FBI and DOJ can’t publicize their investigations, I believe their targets can….and I don’t think it’s in the nature of these particular targets to keep quiet and let an investigation against them run its course.
Unless they don’t know, but they’ll know as soon as they receive subpoenas for documents or request for interviews or target letters. Which indicates to me that those things haven’t happened. Which indicates to me that there’s not much investigating going on, for a crime that was committed almost a year ago.
I hope I’m wrong, but I fear I’m not.
I am not ready to cease defending democracy as a nation’s best system for governance. Ours needs to be improved, not junked.
Why should the DOJ/FBI expend resources to duplicate a huge, wide-ranging investigation that’s already being done by the Senate January 6 Committee? We want the investigation to be public. It’s being done in public.
Committee members speak daily to the press – unlike what Mueller’s team was able to do. I believe that’s the main reason why the Senate January 6 Committee took the leadership role on this – so the opposition couldn’t shape the narrative in a vacuum of silence from the investigating body. Furthermore, it shields DOJ/FBI from outcries of partisanship.
Staying mum about ongoing investigations is a long-held practice at DOJ/FBI. Withholding comment is not something new and nefarious. The exception – and it was a wrong one – was what Comey did, holding a news conference to announce a non-prosecution against Hillary Clinton. He never should have done that. Huge mistake.
As for the “nature of these particular targets to keep quiet,” have you noticed what Steve Bannon and Roger Stone are loudly proclaiming? These are the people who have already been swept up in the investigation and yes, they’re trying to get their narrative out there. So is Mark Meadows. So is Ali Alexander.
But this time, the Committee can speak aloud and refute what they’re saying. Liz Cheney said yesterday, “Do not be misled: President Trump is trying to hide what happened on January 6th and to delay and obstruct. We will not let that happen.”
I think it’s all being handled in a very smart way. Wish it was faster, but unfortunately, slow and deliberate is the way it’s designed to be. I’m glad to see the courts are moving quick. Now we’ll soon see how far the extremely politicized SCOTUS is willing to go to shield traitorous insurrectionists.
Serious question: In what practical way would you propose that idiot voters lose their influence?
I fear that we’re very close to Trump insiders acknowledging every underhanded thing done on or before January 6 and justifying it on the grounds that “we knew the dirty Democrats had been cheating and it had to be stopped by any means possible.”
And the national media will most likely shrug in response. Remember when Donald justified asking the Ukrainian president to launch a smear campaign against his strongest political rival because of Hunter’s laptop? “It was a perfect call. Many people said this.”
David Frum told us how we would get there:
If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy.
Next time we create a Constitution, maybe we can do better than a unmoderated group assignment led by 27 year-olds focused on getting out of their wool suits.
It would benefit all if a proportionate representation was of the female persuasion. We know things. Useful things.
That too!
I would say around negative 11 months. I actually don’t see what new revelations are likely to turn up that are more damning that what is already known as public knowledge. Short of a smoking gun memo from Trump to the head of the proud boys promising a pardon in exchange for Nancy Pelosi meeting an untimely en, which is unlikely, we are just going to get more clear evidence of what we already know.
Everyone already knows that Trump and his cronies were doing everything in their power to pressure lawmakers into overturning the vote counts and handing the presidency to Trump by fiat. The only controversy is whether they did it because they are evil fascists trying to subvert Democracy or because they are fighters for Truth and the will of the people trying to expose massive election fraud and restore power it to the people.
As do the Russians, Chinese, North Koreans, Saudis…
I agree. Having representation is a key component of a Republic and what the Revolutionary war was fought over.
And, ideally, the people who most know useful things would be put into positions of power and freed to legislate rationally.
What’s controversial about that? Everyone knows it’s the first thing. Some people might not like that fact being mentioned out loud, but objectively, it is the fact.
Because right after the 2022 midterm elections, that Committee will disappear faster than an ice cube in the Sahara. And the documentation, evidence and testimony that the Committee had amassed will be… gone.
And the traitorous secessionists have already learned the Republican lesson well when it comes to rules: “What if we… don’t?” You have to show up if a Senate Committee issues you a supoena. “Well yes, but what if we… don’t?”
They’ve learned this lesson well.
You have to at least have a vote on a supreme court justice nominated by the president.
“Well yes, but what if we… don’t?”