The insurrectionists went back home or to their hotel rooms after taking selfies inside the Capitol. The frightening thing about J6 is not that there was a massive protest, even if some of the protesters got way out of line. The horrifying part is what we are discovering about the role of the FBI and other government provocateurs, who seem to have taken steps to encourage/incite violence that day, while setting forth a plan to “ discover ” fake pipe bombs at about the same time the doors were opened to allow the public inside the building, setting in motion the “emergency” evacuation of Congress. The FBI was working to undermine a sitting president.
There is more than a little evidence to support that.
Which may also explain why the FBI and the DoJ have declined to charge anyone (and Donald Trump in particular) with insurrection. Proving a charge of insurrection in court would invite some very unpleasant and potentially explosive discovery. Even the number of protesters charged with seditious conspiracy has been an unusually small number relative to the number of people arrested.
This much is clear. J6 was no insurrection. It arguably was a riot, but no one has been charged under federal riot statutes, so even that interpretation is legally open to challenge (no charge means no crime, no crime means no riot, no riot means no insurrection).
The only way Judge Porter does not wind up with major egg on her face is if the Supreme Court upholds the insurrectionist claim against Donald Trump.
With no trial and with his impeachment acquittal specifically for incitement of insurrection, I do not see how the Supreme Court can possibly rule on this in a way that makes Judge Porter look good.
Boy, I’m glad you’re addressing this issue today, Peter. This morning I read this nonsense from Judge Porter, and was dumbfounded. Trump has not been charged with or convicted of insurrection, so how is she getting away with this? My thinking is that she is virtue-signaling and kissing up to the Chicago political powers for her own career advancement, knowing full well that her ruling will be overturned next week, AFTER the political damage is done to Trump in the public’s eye. At least, that’s the only plausible explanation I can come up with for such an obviously illegal ruling. What do you think, Peter - corrupt Chicago political maneuvering?
Their mistake is in believing the law can be weaponized without consequence.
With each new instance of lawfare, with each new example of weaponizing the criminal justice system against a political adversary, more and more people realize that if the criminal justice system can be deployed against Donald Trump, it can be deployed against anyone, including themselves.
More and more, Donald Trump's putative supporters are not so much hard core "MAGA" ideologues but people who are seeing the corruptions of the current regime and realize that a President Trump is not the worst thing that could happen to this country.
The constant demonization of anyone who supports Trump, the constant harangues for anyone not condemning Trump as the most evil person of all time, simply push more and more people away from the Democrats and into Trump's very big tent.
If Trump does win in the fall, it will be in large measure because the Democrats kept shooting themselves in the foot with these insane antics.
I could like this comment a hundred times, Peter. I am one of those old school democrats forced out of a party I do not recognize anymore. But at the moment I’m marooned politically. We have no saviors on any side. Maybe trump is the Dems scapegoat and distraction from their utterly empty and dangerous ideology and policies. My only grandchild is wrapped in the web of democrats evil transgender child sacrifice weapon. I fear for her/his very life. This alone disqualifies any democrat from my vote. Along with the heinous behavior during covid. Warmongering. So much. Trump is not evil. Dems should look in the mirror more.
As a longtime and extreme libertarian, I've never been "in" either party. Each election is its own moment, and I vote for who will do the most good--or more commonly who will do the least damage.
I was not a Trump fan in 2016, although I did respect his innovative and unbelievably energetic campaign strategy. As President pre-COVID he was a solid B/B+; in 2020 he was an abysmal failure, all due to the Pandemic Panic and to Operation Warp Speed--two sins for which he has yet to give good account.
Yet despite all that, at present if the choice is Biden (or the Democrat du jour) or Trump, Trump wins. After everything I've watched the Democrats do since 2021, there simply is no credible alternative.
this is true - and don't you believe even some on the derangement side know at some level it is a dangerous game - and yet they still encourage/facilitate it; is it like those who eat their young, they are so depraved it just doesn't occur to them?
One would think they would be able to extrapolate likely consequences from their actions.
The question is whether they believe those consequences represent a negative. Given the Trotskyite attitudes and ideologies we see among those with TDS, it is quite possible that the outcomes we predictably describe as "dangerous" they might even describe as "desirable."
Good point! He is damaged in the eyes of those who already rail against the J6 as ‘insurrectionists’. Those who know better - and our number is growing larger each time the legal system is weaponized against Trump - just dig in our heels deeper against all this travesty.
First, a somewhat snarky quibble: "corrupt Chicago" is redundant! :P
The part that is amazing is that, with two other states having already crossed this particular Rubicon, and with the matter now before the Supreme Court (and SCOTUS watchers who observed oral arguments noted that even the liberal wing of the Court seemed none too impressed with the "insurrectionist" argument), how it is that Judge Porter thinks this is even a proper ruling to make at this time.
Is this virtue-signaling or is it desperation? Frankly, I can't tell and I don't think it matters. It's lunacy either way.
If the case is so obvious against Trump then swear out an indictment and hold a trial.
If the case for insurrection is so obvious against the J6 protesters/rioters then charge them and try them and secure whatever convictions can be had.
Yet that is the one thing no Democrat is willing to do. They want to pass these unconstitutional bills of attainder--something explicitly forbidden by the text of the Constitution--but they do not want to honor Donald Trump's inalienable civil liberties and give him due process of law.
I do not, as many do, accuse Joe Biden of treason for his actions, for the simple reason that, according to the Constitution, Joe Biden's numerous malfeasances are corrupt and venal and vicious, but they are not treasonous.. I do not say that because I am a fan of Dementia Joe, but because I am a fan of the Constitution.
hear hear!!! -- you keep a moderate, fact-based approach to all your writing, and are willing to call this out for the tragic loss of intellectual and societal honesty it represents, that we would discard commonly known/recognized norms to 'win at all costs' (defeat our political opponent) -- the deeper concern/question is whether/should the conservatives respond in kind?
My concern is whether conservatives/libertarians will have a choice?
The rule of law works because EVERYONE accepts the law and abides by the law. When any one side unilaterally abrogates that basic social contract, the rule of law is effectively terminated.
If we have no rule of law, then for survival's sake how can we not respond in kind?
I wish I were a wise man that I could see how to stop this madness. So far I am coming up empty. I see it, and I see where it leads, but I am not seeing any way to stop it.
so one way to view the result if conservatives act likewise is the 'race to the bottom', but isn't that the secular view?
another way to think of it, credit to Jeff Childers, author of coffee and covid, is that only dumb/morally corrupt people would bring these kinds of suits, as people thinking clearly would know either the law wasn't made for the purported crime (as in Ga and in the NY over-valuation case) or that it was such common sense not to even go there (or more critically, it would break with the forever views/tradition of the US political system or constitution), leaving only these bankrupt/dumb folks to proceed, and then we have the Ga instance where those people's prior dumb things are brought to light, and then maybe that cycle reveals what happens when dumb people try bringing these cases and it deters others -- that maybe holds some street/base logic.
and then there's maybe the scripture view, which I've been pondering in a different context -- namely, when is it ever OK to knowingly violate a commandment? like, 'do not steal,' if I'm stealing only to feed my starving family?
is this permitted, would God understand?
I submit no -- that he expects us to obey in all instances, and that in pushing our faith to those limits it allows us to see Him work in our lives; and only if we do that will we see it come to fruition -- what is that passage from OT where the prophet meets the mother at the gate, during the famine, and he asks her to make him some food, and she replies the food is all she has for her and her dying son, they were going to eat their last meal before dying; the prophet convinces her to make him a meal with those last portions, and God reveals His grace (their faith is rewarded) with lasting food -- over and over this is revealed where we trust in Him; even Jesus in the garden just prior to being betrayed with was asking the cup to be taken, if it was His will, only -- and yet Jesus endured in His obedience to God and was clearly rewarded for His faith in God's will
so here, let's play by God's rules -- He will provide -- maybe not in our lifetimes or maybe so, but not in our sphere of awareness, but still, we can run the race. Let's see what great things He provides.
Peter, you have repeatedly shown yourself to be a very wise man. Now perhaps you need to hold onto hope, and faith in the American people. We have a history of naively being duped, but of waking up once we get our facts straight. You are daily doing your part in bravely speaking Truth, and that may end up contributing more than we could hope. I only wish your writings and sound reasoning could be read by hundreds of millions!
Gbill - would like your thoughts on my note prior, about how we are rewarded with wisdom into God's plans by always honoring His commandments, esp so when it is hard to do do.
Also, just wondering, what faith do you follow? We are Catholic and have found it hard to accept some of their recent activity -- is quite alarming and disappointing.
I could handle a subscriber base of hundreds of millions! :P
I'm actually not worried about people waking up and getting their facts straight. I'm worried about what has to be done when enough people wake up and get their facts straight.
If we cannot rely on the ballot box and the jury box to protect our civil liberties, then the only option left is the cartridge box.
I don't think the Democrats realize just how fragile the rule of law actually is, or how their antics could tear the Republic apart. Somehow they have convinced themselves that these lawfare tactics are immune to consequence--and that is just never true.
The insurrectionists went back home or to their hotel rooms after taking selfies inside the Capitol. The frightening thing about J6 is not that there was a massive protest, even if some of the protesters got way out of line. The horrifying part is what we are discovering about the role of the FBI and other government provocateurs, who seem to have taken steps to encourage/incite violence that day, while setting forth a plan to “ discover ” fake pipe bombs at about the same time the doors were opened to allow the public inside the building, setting in motion the “emergency” evacuation of Congress. The FBI was working to undermine a sitting president.
There is more than a little evidence to support that.
Which may also explain why the FBI and the DoJ have declined to charge anyone (and Donald Trump in particular) with insurrection. Proving a charge of insurrection in court would invite some very unpleasant and potentially explosive discovery. Even the number of protesters charged with seditious conspiracy has been an unusually small number relative to the number of people arrested.
This much is clear. J6 was no insurrection. It arguably was a riot, but no one has been charged under federal riot statutes, so even that interpretation is legally open to challenge (no charge means no crime, no crime means no riot, no riot means no insurrection).
https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/trump-appeals-illinois-disqualification-asks-for-stay-of-removal-from-ballot-5597630?utm_source=ref_share&utm_campaign=copy
The only way Judge Porter does not wind up with major egg on her face is if the Supreme Court upholds the insurrectionist claim against Donald Trump.
With no trial and with his impeachment acquittal specifically for incitement of insurrection, I do not see how the Supreme Court can possibly rule on this in a way that makes Judge Porter look good.
Maybe she and Fani Willis can go off on a luxury vacation together.
For the next 10-20 years! No time off for good behavior.
Boy, I’m glad you’re addressing this issue today, Peter. This morning I read this nonsense from Judge Porter, and was dumbfounded. Trump has not been charged with or convicted of insurrection, so how is she getting away with this? My thinking is that she is virtue-signaling and kissing up to the Chicago political powers for her own career advancement, knowing full well that her ruling will be overturned next week, AFTER the political damage is done to Trump in the public’s eye. At least, that’s the only plausible explanation I can come up with for such an obviously illegal ruling. What do you think, Peter - corrupt Chicago political maneuvering?
But IS "political damage [being] done to Trump in the public's eye" - ?
It seems like the more they try to hurt him, the more people wake up.
No?
Their mistake is in believing the law can be weaponized without consequence.
With each new instance of lawfare, with each new example of weaponizing the criminal justice system against a political adversary, more and more people realize that if the criminal justice system can be deployed against Donald Trump, it can be deployed against anyone, including themselves.
More and more, Donald Trump's putative supporters are not so much hard core "MAGA" ideologues but people who are seeing the corruptions of the current regime and realize that a President Trump is not the worst thing that could happen to this country.
The constant demonization of anyone who supports Trump, the constant harangues for anyone not condemning Trump as the most evil person of all time, simply push more and more people away from the Democrats and into Trump's very big tent.
If Trump does win in the fall, it will be in large measure because the Democrats kept shooting themselves in the foot with these insane antics.
I could like this comment a hundred times, Peter. I am one of those old school democrats forced out of a party I do not recognize anymore. But at the moment I’m marooned politically. We have no saviors on any side. Maybe trump is the Dems scapegoat and distraction from their utterly empty and dangerous ideology and policies. My only grandchild is wrapped in the web of democrats evil transgender child sacrifice weapon. I fear for her/his very life. This alone disqualifies any democrat from my vote. Along with the heinous behavior during covid. Warmongering. So much. Trump is not evil. Dems should look in the mirror more.
As a longtime and extreme libertarian, I've never been "in" either party. Each election is its own moment, and I vote for who will do the most good--or more commonly who will do the least damage.
I was not a Trump fan in 2016, although I did respect his innovative and unbelievably energetic campaign strategy. As President pre-COVID he was a solid B/B+; in 2020 he was an abysmal failure, all due to the Pandemic Panic and to Operation Warp Speed--two sins for which he has yet to give good account.
Yet despite all that, at present if the choice is Biden (or the Democrat du jour) or Trump, Trump wins. After everything I've watched the Democrats do since 2021, there simply is no credible alternative.
this is true - and don't you believe even some on the derangement side know at some level it is a dangerous game - and yet they still encourage/facilitate it; is it like those who eat their young, they are so depraved it just doesn't occur to them?
One would think they would be able to extrapolate likely consequences from their actions.
The question is whether they believe those consequences represent a negative. Given the Trotskyite attitudes and ideologies we see among those with TDS, it is quite possible that the outcomes we predictably describe as "dangerous" they might even describe as "desirable."
Good point! He is damaged in the eyes of those who already rail against the J6 as ‘insurrectionists’. Those who know better - and our number is growing larger each time the legal system is weaponized against Trump - just dig in our heels deeper against all this travesty.
First, a somewhat snarky quibble: "corrupt Chicago" is redundant! :P
The part that is amazing is that, with two other states having already crossed this particular Rubicon, and with the matter now before the Supreme Court (and SCOTUS watchers who observed oral arguments noted that even the liberal wing of the Court seemed none too impressed with the "insurrectionist" argument), how it is that Judge Porter thinks this is even a proper ruling to make at this time.
Is this virtue-signaling or is it desperation? Frankly, I can't tell and I don't think it matters. It's lunacy either way.
If the case is so obvious against Trump then swear out an indictment and hold a trial.
If the case for insurrection is so obvious against the J6 protesters/rioters then charge them and try them and secure whatever convictions can be had.
Yet that is the one thing no Democrat is willing to do. They want to pass these unconstitutional bills of attainder--something explicitly forbidden by the text of the Constitution--but they do not want to honor Donald Trump's inalienable civil liberties and give him due process of law.
I do not, as many do, accuse Joe Biden of treason for his actions, for the simple reason that, according to the Constitution, Joe Biden's numerous malfeasances are corrupt and venal and vicious, but they are not treasonous.. I do not say that because I am a fan of Dementia Joe, but because I am a fan of the Constitution.
You are magnificent, Peter.
hear hear!!! -- you keep a moderate, fact-based approach to all your writing, and are willing to call this out for the tragic loss of intellectual and societal honesty it represents, that we would discard commonly known/recognized norms to 'win at all costs' (defeat our political opponent) -- the deeper concern/question is whether/should the conservatives respond in kind?
My concern is whether conservatives/libertarians will have a choice?
The rule of law works because EVERYONE accepts the law and abides by the law. When any one side unilaterally abrogates that basic social contract, the rule of law is effectively terminated.
If we have no rule of law, then for survival's sake how can we not respond in kind?
I wish I were a wise man that I could see how to stop this madness. So far I am coming up empty. I see it, and I see where it leads, but I am not seeing any way to stop it.
That scares me.
so one way to view the result if conservatives act likewise is the 'race to the bottom', but isn't that the secular view?
another way to think of it, credit to Jeff Childers, author of coffee and covid, is that only dumb/morally corrupt people would bring these kinds of suits, as people thinking clearly would know either the law wasn't made for the purported crime (as in Ga and in the NY over-valuation case) or that it was such common sense not to even go there (or more critically, it would break with the forever views/tradition of the US political system or constitution), leaving only these bankrupt/dumb folks to proceed, and then we have the Ga instance where those people's prior dumb things are brought to light, and then maybe that cycle reveals what happens when dumb people try bringing these cases and it deters others -- that maybe holds some street/base logic.
and then there's maybe the scripture view, which I've been pondering in a different context -- namely, when is it ever OK to knowingly violate a commandment? like, 'do not steal,' if I'm stealing only to feed my starving family?
is this permitted, would God understand?
I submit no -- that he expects us to obey in all instances, and that in pushing our faith to those limits it allows us to see Him work in our lives; and only if we do that will we see it come to fruition -- what is that passage from OT where the prophet meets the mother at the gate, during the famine, and he asks her to make him some food, and she replies the food is all she has for her and her dying son, they were going to eat their last meal before dying; the prophet convinces her to make him a meal with those last portions, and God reveals His grace (their faith is rewarded) with lasting food -- over and over this is revealed where we trust in Him; even Jesus in the garden just prior to being betrayed with was asking the cup to be taken, if it was His will, only -- and yet Jesus endured in His obedience to God and was clearly rewarded for His faith in God's will
so here, let's play by God's rules -- He will provide -- maybe not in our lifetimes or maybe so, but not in our sphere of awareness, but still, we can run the race. Let's see what great things He provides.
and you sir are doing your part, keep at it!
Peter, you have repeatedly shown yourself to be a very wise man. Now perhaps you need to hold onto hope, and faith in the American people. We have a history of naively being duped, but of waking up once we get our facts straight. You are daily doing your part in bravely speaking Truth, and that may end up contributing more than we could hope. I only wish your writings and sound reasoning could be read by hundreds of millions!
Gbill - would like your thoughts on my note prior, about how we are rewarded with wisdom into God's plans by always honoring His commandments, esp so when it is hard to do do.
Also, just wondering, what faith do you follow? We are Catholic and have found it hard to accept some of their recent activity -- is quite alarming and disappointing.
I could handle a subscriber base of hundreds of millions! :P
I'm actually not worried about people waking up and getting their facts straight. I'm worried about what has to be done when enough people wake up and get their facts straight.
If we cannot rely on the ballot box and the jury box to protect our civil liberties, then the only option left is the cartridge box.
I don't think the Democrats realize just how fragile the rule of law actually is, or how their antics could tear the Republic apart. Somehow they have convinced themselves that these lawfare tactics are immune to consequence--and that is just never true.
See how wise you are?