Veteran Vic Meyers takes Republicans to task for misreporting the U.S. pullout from Afghanistan, which Trump set up before Trump released 5,000 Taliban from Afghanistan prisons — one of whom conducted the fatal attack on 13 U.S. soldiers and hundreds of Afghan citizens during evacuations.
Trump’s debate lies
July 2, 2024Biden/Trump debate was notable for the astounding slew of misstatements and outright lies told by Donald Trump.
Now CNN’s champion fact checker Daniel Dale follows Trump’s accuracy, and has done since 2016. Even he was amazed at the avalanche of balderdash from Trump.
We are left to wonder how to disqualify Trump on the basis of his failed performance. Is Trump genuinely unaware of the lies he tells? Then he is not well enough informed to hold high office. Is he aware of the lies, but tells them anyway? Then he is too corrupt and malicious to hold office.
Or has Trump’s already-evident cognitive difficulties advanced so far in 363 months that he is unable to tell fact from fiction? In that case he lacks the cognitive chops to replace Biden, who has done a good job as president fixing the problems Trump created and leading America to genuine greatness?
Trump cannot be a serious candidate, can he? If he believes his own falsehoods, he’s not capable of making good policy. If he knows he’s lying, he’s too corrupt.
Biden ad from 2020 — still true about Trump’s catastrophic presidency
May 27, 2024We can’t afford four more years of Trump.

What would be insurrection, if Trump on January 6 was not insurrecting?
December 28, 2023Consider the facts. What is required to be “insurrection?”

Greg Sargent at Plumline posted a long series on X (Twitter) discussing just what then-President Trump’s actions should be considered, using evidence that heavily points towards Trump’s intent being insurrection.
It’s an important listing, a point-by-point discussion with facts we have, not what has been revealed in courts. The full thread is below, first level. There are links inside the thread you may wish to explore at “X.”
Read this thread. I would like to pose some hypothetical questions to insurrection-deniers: Is there anything Trump could have done that *would* have unambiguously constituted insurrection β anything that youβd acknowledge *does* require disqualifying him? 1/
What if, in the runup to 1/6, Trump had explicitly told his supporters to descend on the Capitol to stop the VP and Congress from certifying the transfer of power *by any means necessary*? Well, hereβs what he did do: 2/


What if Trump had explicitly told top DOJ officials to fabricate evidence of widespread election fraud because he needed a pretext to justify his premeditated, illegal scheme to sabotage the transfer of power? Well, hereβs what he did do: 3/

What if Trump had repeatedly and explicitly told his VP to ignore the law and abuse his authority to subvert the electoral count in keeping with his premeditated scheme to sabotage the transfer of power? Well, hereβs what he did do: 4/



What if Trump, as he harangued the mob on 1/6, had explicitly told them to force Pence to scuttle the transfer of power, broadcasting a message to Pence that if he failed, heβd face the mobβs fury? Well, hereβs what he did say: 5/


What if, while the mob attacked the Capitol, Trump had tweeted explicit instructions that the rioters should do whatever it takes to force Pence to sabotage the transfer of power? Well, hereβs what Trump did tweet β again, *while* the mob was rampaging: 6/

What if Trump, as people begged him to call off the mob, explicitly said no, because he wanted them to keep going, to intimidate the VP and Congress from certifying the transfer of power? Well, hereβs what he did do: 7/


Would you really deny the sum total of those hypotheticals = insurrection? Doubtful. Yet the line between that and what Trump did do is functionally nonexistent. The case that his insurrection was ambiguous rests on a deliberately blinkered reading of uncontested facts. 8/
Hereβs how the CO ruling defines the threshold for committing insurrection: βa concerted and public use of force or threat of forceβ¦to hinder or prevent the US government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish the peaceful transfer of power.β 9/

Insurrection-deniers should say (1) whether the CO rulingβs description of the threshold Q is a reasonable one; and if so, (2) whether Trumpβs conduct meets it. If your answers are no, what *would* be disqualifying? Or is the claim that Disqualification is a dead letter? 10/
Yes, disqual could have severe consequences/enter new territory. But via
@ianbassin, if trying to end lawful constitutional democracy is not deemed disqualifying, it could also cross a Rubicon: 11/ https://protectdemocracy.org/work/trump-bal

One more point: As
notes, the case for disqualification also rests on whether someone who so flagrantly broke their oath of office can be trusted to take the oath again. Read Parloffβs whole thread: 12/
Roger Parloff, @rparloff
βA construction of Section Three that would nevertheless allow a former President who broke his oath, not only to participate in the government again but to run for and hold the highest office in the land, is flatly unfaithful to the Sectionβs purpose.β /14

Any political discussion of this matter simply must include Trumpβs current threats to *again* serially violate his oath of office and even to be a βdictator.β Are there consequences in green lighting all this? You need to weigh one set of consequences against the other. 13/13
This is a discussion for voters much more than a discussion for prosecutors and courts.
We do not need courts to tell us Trump is unqualified to be president. But we need to mark our ballots to reflect that judgment, as voters, to keep America great.
Life accordion to Trump
January 19, 2017When in doubt, read the instructions, Donald Trump version
November 16, 2016How is the transition coming?
Sure, in comments, tell us the instruction manual is the Constitution.
Trump hasn’t read that, either, I wager. In any case, he’s unprepared to put together an administration. Our republic really is in danger. It’s going to take all of us to hold it together, to have any chance of success in the next four years.
In the interim, I don’t recognize the style, and I don’t recognize the signature; can you help discover who is the cartoonist?
Cartoon by Matt Davies, Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist for Newsday.
https://twitter.com/MatttDavies/status/797860046017282048
Save
Michelle Obama lays it on the line in New Hampshire – listen
October 13, 2016President Barack Obama maybe told us. We need to listen to first Lady Michelle Obama.
Some wag said back at the convention, think about it this way: How would you like to be Barack Obama, and realize you’re not even the best orator in your own home?
Listen to what Michelle Obama said about the election, today, October 13, in Manchester, New Hampshire. Here I start just over five minutes in, at the serious stuff that goes for about 9:30 minutes:
Mrs. Obama had some good things to say about the future for girls, and women, in the first five minutes, too, you may want to see. Full 24-minute speech here:
More:
- Washington Post’s Plumline blog, “Michelle Obama’s remarkable speech sums up the case against Donald Trump”
Save
Teachers, did your kids come back to school with Trump attitudes?
August 30, 2016How does the 2016 GOP campaign shape our children? Trees misshapen by constant wind or cold are known as krummholz in German. A reminder of the old saw that, as a twig is bent, so the tree grows. This is a Banner tree, in Torres del Paine National Park, Chile, bent by prevailing winds from the west. Photo by John Spooner – flickr.com, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5007578
What examples do our children take from our quadrennial elections? What lessons have they learned in 2016?
Do our kids adopt these attitudes into their daily lives?
What do your kids’ teachers say they see? What do you see?
Posted by Ed Darrell 








