January 6th Hearing-Adjacent Discussion Thread

Politics & Elections
81

Since the main J6 thread is closed for the moment, best place to share this

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/13/politics/trump-contact-white-house-support-staffer-january-6-committee/index.html

Former President Donald Trump tried to call a member of the White House support staff who was talking to the House select committee investigating January 6, 2021, two sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.

The support staffer was not someone who routinely communicated with the former President and was concerned about the contact, according to the sources, and informed their attorney.

Quote for those for whom the one box doesn’t load. So, while not named, the possible/probable attempted witness tampering was with a member of WH support staff - although what they heard is still grounds for a lot of speculation.

82

Cults. All these people are willing to believe this stupid stuff because they are in a cult, or cults.

That’s why there’s no reasonable discussion anymore - the Republicans/Conservatives don’t have policies anymore. They don’t have discussions. The winning Republican Senate candidate from my state (NC) refused to debate before the primary, and I suspect that happened elsewhere as well. Discourse has been replaced by propaganda slogans and though-terminating cliches. Cancel Culture Radical Socialist Fake News Make America Great Again. There are no debates because questioning the cult and its leaders is considered disrespectful at best, blasphemous at worst.

Some of these people are in QANON and the Trump Cult, and others were in cults long before Trump came around.

And cult leaders thrive on persecution. It strengthens the bonds within the group and drastically increases the distrust and suspicion of outsiders that serves to keep the group isolated in its own informational ecosystem.

It’s not just “the cult of Trump”, there are existing cults across the country, groups with the control mechanisms in place, that have embraced conservative politics in general and Trump in particular, from groups like the Moonies, fundamentalist and evangelical religious cults, prosperity megachurchs, and economic cults like Amway (which is owned by Betsy DeVos’s husband, BTW).

Belief in the infallibility of the cult leader is hard to break away from. I’ve read dozens of stories of people who’ve left Warren Jeff’s FLDS cult, the cult he is running from federal prison, and 90% + of those people still believe he’s God’s prophet on Earth and was unfairly persecuted for crimes he didn’t commit. Again, these are the people that left their families and the only lives they’ve ever known and left the group. It takes years for them to undo that programming.

Nothing that happens to Trump will break that spell. It’s possible, I guess, that Trump himself could do something that might alienate his followers, but I can’t fathom what that might be, he already threw them all under the bus for January 6th by not pardoning them all, and they don’t seem to care.

83

I have no doubt that Trump has been working the phones constantly to try to influence witness testimony, but I don’t understand why it’s such a shocker.

It’s what he did during the Mueller investigation, during his first impeachment trial, during his second impeachment trial, as well as during all the other investigations of him and his associates, and no one seemed to care, even though he did this publicly, on social media.

He did so much worse during his Presidency, using his presidential powers to destroy FBI agents, he tried to blackmail journalists, and no one seemed to care very much. There always seemed to be a law enforcement consensus that it was OK as long as he didn’t make explicit and direct threats.

I really don’t get why anyone’s going to care now.

84

And often refuse to see the cult for its swamis.

85

Ah. So now I wonder if he’s moved or not living in the district he represents. I’m not up on the requirement for that in this state.

86

While he was President of the United States and couldn’t be charged with a crime.

He no longer has the legal shield of the office.

That’s probably not all of it, but it has to factor in.

87

The bit about not being charged with a crime while president is more of an understanding, a kind of gentelmen’s agreement, than a matter of law, IIUIC.

88

It is law, as of 1982, per the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution and history of the office.

The President’s absolute immunity is a functionally mandated incident of his unique office, rooted in the constitutional tradition of the separation of powers and supported by the Nation’s history. Because of the singular importance of the President’s duties, diversion of his energies by concern with private lawsuits would raise unique risks to the effective functioning of government. While the separation-of-powers doctrine does not bar every exercise of jurisdiction over the President, a court, before exercising jurisdiction, must balance the constitutional weight of the interest to be served against the dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch. The exercise of jurisdiction is not warranted in the case of merely private suits for damages based on a President’s official acts.

The President’s absolute immunity extends to all acts within the “outer perimeter” of his duties of office.

A rule of absolute immunity for the President does not leave the Nation without sufficient protection against his misconduct. There remains the constitutional remedy of impeachment, as well as the deterrent effects of constant scrutiny by the press and vigilant oversight by Congress. Other incentives to avoid misconduct may include a desire to earn reelection, the need to maintain prestige as an element of Presidential influence, and a President’s traditional concern for his historical stature.

As long as person holds office, they are immune. The remedies to that are impeachment, and the court of public opinion.

89

Thanks.

90

:+1:

Admittedly, it is relatively recent considering the entirety of US history.

91

Yep. And we’ve seen how effective impeachment is today, not to mention the value of public opinion today.

92

Maybe the Supreme Court can rule differently in light of recent events.

I have no faith that this Supreme Court would, though.

93

A friend of mine sends me an article like this every morning to see if he can make my brain explode. He has managed to turn more than one morning into mourning.

We met as dorm mates at a very repressive and backward Bible College that got a University designation while we were there (for very limited courses of study) in the very late seventies and early eighties. We were both Reagan Republicans back then and were very good at defending and minimizing Iran/Contra.

94

It seems that when Trump insists upon running the Nixon playbook, he refuses to learn the lessons which should be most important to him. Once the crimes are committed, avoid cover-ups and tampering-- those are the things that kill you!

95

I think it’s possible that Trump gets assassinated by one of his cultists. Maybe someone who’s so deep into cult-think and QAnon that they become convinced “Trump” is actually an impostor while the real Trump is secretly still President-in-hiding. Or maybe a cultist who wakes up one day broke and realizes all his money has gone to a complete scam.

(I admit this thought may have been triggered by the assassination of former Japanese Prime Minister Abe, although the circumstances aren’t similar.)

96

A self-described heavy user of social media convicted in the attack on the Capitol testifies about losing his job and home.

“Ayres was asked how he feels about Trump continuing to spread the lie that the election was stolen even though there is no evidence of it.”

“It makes me mad,” Ayres testified. “Everything he was putting out I was following it. If I was doing it, hundreds of thousands or millions of other people were doing it. Or maybe even still doing it.”

Tell us again, O Trump devotees, about how your opponents are just sheeple doing what they are told.

97

If they were to rule differently it might be to decide that the Constitution really means that impeachment must be carried out only by Congressmembers of the President’s party*. Those Other kind of Congrescritters can’t be trusted, so their votes on impeachment are invalid.

* As long as that party is R.

98

This whole thing is stressing me out enough, don’t do that. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

99

Then the current Supreme Court should strike it down since it wasn’t thought up in 1789, right?

100

That’s too recent. What did they do in Medieval England while developing common law?