crooksandliars--2020-06-20--SCOTUS DACA Ruling Sends Clear Message To The White House: You Have To Tell The Truth

When it came down to it , the fate of 700,000 immigrants brought to U.S. as children hung on a simple question : Does the White House have to tell the whole truth in justifying its move to deport them ?
On June 18 , the Supreme Court said “ yes.
” In a 5-to-4 decision that came as a major blow to President Trump , the justices ruled that the administration could not proceed with plans to dismantle Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals , or DACA .
The Obama-era provision halted the deportation of undocumented immigrants brought to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ referred to as Dreamers .
Its provisions allow for those young people to live and work in the U.S. although doesn ’ t provide a path to citizenship .
DACA will now stay in place…for the time being .
In ruling against the White House , the Supreme Court did hold out the possibility that the administration could try to rescind DACA at a later date .
Only next time , they would have to provide adequate reasoning for doing so .
Writing the majority opinion , Chief Justice John Roberts explained : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or its rescission are sound policies .
The wisdom of those decisions is none of our concern.
” He continued : “ We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action.
” And it is here the Supreme Court found the administration wanting .
Trump responded by tweeting that the ruling was “ horrible & politically charged.
” From the beginning , this case was not about whether the president of the United States has the authority to rescind DACA .
All @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does .
Rather , the question was whether under U.S. law , the executive branch has to give complete and accurate reasons for its actions .
From my perspective as a scholar of constitutional politics , the fact that the Supreme Court has now answered “ yes ” has broad ramifications .
It could usher in a new era in which the Supreme Court and many lower courts judge the evasion or candor of public officials .
A “ no , ” on the other hand , would have given carte blanche to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and offer less-than-full reasons for doing what it does .
The core of the case became clear during oral arguments in November .
Advocates for DACA recipients and the government both seemed to agree that the court ’ s role was only to determine if the procedure the Trump administration followed was adequate under congressional laws , especially the Administrative Procedure Act .
The case was about procedure , not policy .
Perhaps the key exchange in November ’ s arguments was a fascinating exchange between Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Ted Olson , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s position on Dreamers has shifted over time .
In the early days of his presidency , he told reporters that he would show “ great heart ” over the issue , adding that there were some “ absolutely incredible kids ” in the program .
But by the fall of 2019 , Trump was portraying Dreamers in a different light , suggesting that “ some are very tough , hardened criminals.
” Different explanations for his decision to rescind DACA were heard by the Supreme Court .
The administration argued that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the grounds that the executive order from President Obama exceeded executive authority .
Advocates for the DACA recipients offered alternative explanations .
They argued that the White House is willing to accept the high costs to so many current residents in order to achieve their political goal of reducing the number of unauthorized immigrants .
Or as Justice Sonia Sotomayor phrased it , this is a “ political decision ” that “ is not about the law ; this is about our choice to destroy lives.
” Others said the administration was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other legislative goals , including funding for the border wall .
It all came down to whether the justices believed that the administration was doing this for partisan and policy reasons .
And if so , was the White House legally bound to be honest in explaining why ?
Justice Elena Kagan , who joined Justice Roberts in the majority decision along with the three other liberal justices , asked the key question back in November ’ s arguments : “ Well , what would an adequate explanation look like ?
” Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be , “ We don ’ t like DACA and we ’ re taking responsibility for that , instead of trying to put the blame on the law.
” And nothing but ?
Ahead of the June 18 ruling , Justice Stephen Breyer asked an important question for the legacy of the ruling : “ What ’ s the point ?
” In other words , why make the administration say what everyone already knows – that it opposes DACA and is not moved by the human cost of deportation ?
The answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the University of California , where around 1,700 Dreamers study .
He argued in November that the reason to reject the Trump administation ’ s actions is that “ they have not made a decision that actually takes ownership of a discretionary choice to end this policy … so the public could hold them accountable for the choice they ’ ve made.
” The point is democratic accountability .
If the executive branch is forced to make full and honest admissions , then voters can judge elected officials accurately .
In regard to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice Roberts ruled that the administration “ should have considered these matters but did not.
” …so help us all !
The DACA ruling was anticipated by an earlier precedent established by Chief Justice Roberts .
In 2019 , when the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration ’ s effort to put a citizenship question on the 2020 census , Roberts argued that if the executive branch advances dishonest arguments , the court would not accept them .
The phrases Roberts used included “ pretext , ” “ contrived ” and “ a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” In common language , that means lying .
Roberts ’ assertion in the census case met with deep disdain from Justice Clarence Thomas , who wrote : “ For the first time ever , the court invalidates an agency action solely because it questions the sincerity of the agency ’ s otherwise adequate rationale.
” In his dissent to the DACA ruling , Thomas describes the decision as “ mystifying.
” In deciding to rule on , in Roberts ’ words , “ whether the agency action was adequately explained , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given the green light for future political battles to be fought in this Court rather than where they rightfully belong – the political branches.
” The point has been even more bluntly made by Justice Samuel Alito .
Having said in the census case that the federal judiciary had “ no authority to stick its nose into ” whether reasons given by the administration were the “ only reasons , ” he followed the DACA ruling with a one-page dissent stating simply , “ our constitutional system is not supposed to work that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roberts has extended his ruling on the census , demanding executive candor regarding DACA as well .
The long-term legacy of this case may be that the Supreme Court led by John Roberts has now become an arbiter of public honesty .
This is an updated version of an article originally published on Jan. 15 .
[ Get the best of The Conversation , every weekend .
Sign up for our weekly newsletter . ]
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

Protesters celebrate the Supreme Court ruling. AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin
Morgan Marietta, University of Massachusetts Lowell
When it came down to it, the fate of 700,000 immigrants brought to U.S. as children hung on a simple question: Does the White House have to tell the whole truth in justifying its move to deport them?
On June 18, the Supreme Court said “yes.”
In a 5-to-4 decision that came as a major blow to President Trump, the justices ruled that the administration could not proceed with plans to dismantle Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. The Obama-era provision halted the deportation of undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. at an early age, often referred to as Dreamers. Its provisions allow for those young people to live and work in the U.S. although doesn’t provide a path to citizenship.
DACA will now stay in place…for the time being.
In ruling against the White House, the Supreme Court did hold out the possibility that the administration could try to rescind DACA at a later date. Only next time, they would have to provide adequate reasoning for doing so.
Writing the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts explained: “We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies. The wisdom of those decisions is none of our concern.” He continued: “We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action.” And it is here the Supreme Court found the administration wanting.
Trump responded by tweeting that the ruling was “horrible & politically charged.”
From the beginning, this case was not about whether the president of the United States has the authority to rescind DACA. All of the parties involved agreed that he does. Rather, the question was whether under U.S. law, the executive branch has to give complete and accurate reasons for its actions.
From my perspective as a scholar of constitutional politics, the fact that the Supreme Court has now answered “yes” has broad ramifications. It could usher in a new era in which the Supreme Court and many lower courts judge the evasion or candor of public officials.
A “no,” on the other hand, would have given carte blanche to the executive branch to avoid public accountability and offer less-than-full reasons for doing what it does.
The truth?
The core of the case became clear during oral arguments in November.
Advocates for DACA recipients and the government both seemed to agree that the court’s role was only to determine if the procedure the Trump administration followed was adequate under congressional laws, especially the Administrative Procedure Act. The case was about procedure, not policy.
Perhaps the key exchange in November’s arguments was a fascinating exchange between Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Ted Olson, the advocate for DACA recipients:
Justice Kavanaugh: Do you agree that the executive has the legal authority to rescind DACA? Mr. Olson: Yes. Justice Kavanaugh: Okay. So the question then comes down to the explanation.
The whole truth?
Trump’s position on Dreamers has shifted over time. In the early days of his presidency, he told reporters that he would show “great heart” over the issue, adding that there were some “absolutely incredible kids” in the program.
But by the fall of 2019, Trump was portraying Dreamers in a different light, suggesting that “some are very tough, hardened criminals.”
Different explanations for his decision to rescind DACA were heard by the Supreme Court.
The administration argued that DACA was unconstitutional to begin with, on the grounds that the executive order from President Obama exceeded executive authority.
Advocates for the DACA recipients offered alternative explanations. They argued that the White House is willing to accept the high costs to so many current residents in order to achieve their political goal of reducing the number of unauthorized immigrants. Or as Justice Sonia Sotomayor phrased it, this is a “political decision” that “is not about the law; this is about our choice to destroy lives.”
Others said the administration was using DACA as a bargaining chip for other legislative goals, including funding for the border wall.
It all came down to whether the justices believed that the administration was doing this for partisan and policy reasons. And if so, was the White House legally bound to be honest in explaining why?
Justice Elena Kagan, who joined Justice Roberts in the majority decision along with the three other liberal justices, asked the key question back in November’s arguments: “Well, what would an adequate explanation look like?”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested the answer should be, “We don’t like DACA and we’re taking responsibility for that, instead of trying to put the blame on the law.”
And nothing but?
Ahead of the June 18 ruling, Justice Stephen Breyer asked an important question for the legacy of the ruling: “What’s the point?” In other words, why make the administration say what everyone already knows – that it opposes DACA and is not moved by the human cost of deportation?
The answer came from Michael Mongan, advocate for the University of California, where around 1,700 Dreamers study. He argued in November that the reason to reject the Trump administation’s actions is that “they have not made a decision that actually takes ownership of a discretionary choice to end this policy … so the public could hold them accountable for the choice they’ve made.”
The point is democratic accountability. If the executive branch is forced to make full and honest admissions, then voters can judge elected officials accurately.
In regard to the effects on DACA recipients, Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the administration “should have considered these matters but did not.”
…so help us all!
The DACA ruling was anticipated by an earlier precedent established by Chief Justice Roberts.
In 2019, when the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration’s effort to put a citizenship question on the 2020 census, Roberts argued that if the executive branch advances dishonest arguments, the court would not accept them. The phrases Roberts used included “pretext,” “contrived” and “a story that does not match the explanation.” In common language, that means lying.
Roberts’ assertion in the census case met with deep disdain from Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote: “For the first time ever, the court invalidates an agency action solely because it questions the sincerity of the agency’s otherwise adequate rationale.”
In his dissent to the DACA ruling, Thomas describes the decision as “mystifying.” In deciding to rule on, in Roberts’ words, “whether the agency action was adequately explained,” Thomas argues that the decision “has given the green light for future political battles to be fought in this Court rather than where they rightfully belong – the political branches.”
The point has been even more bluntly made by Justice Samuel Alito. Having said in the census case that the federal judiciary had “no authority to stick its nose into” whether reasons given by the administration were the “only reasons,” he followed the DACA ruling with a one-page dissent stating simply, “our constitutional system is not supposed to work that way.”
With this decision, Justice Roberts has extended his ruling on the census, demanding executive candor regarding DACA as well. The long-term legacy of this case may be that the Supreme Court led by John Roberts has now become an arbiter of public honesty.
This is an updated version of an article originally published on Jan. 15.
[ Get the best of The Conversation, every weekend. Sign up for our weekly newsletter. ]
Morgan Marietta, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Massachusetts Lowell
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--Is It Really A 'Rally' If No One Shows Up?

If no one comes to a `` rally '' , did it really happen ?
Donald Trump 's return to @ @ @ @ @ a rally at the BOK stadium in Tulsa , Oklahoma .
Brad Pascale , Trump @ @ @ @ @ who will probably be his former campaign manager shortly ) claimed over 800,000 people requested @ @ @ @ @ show that only a few thousand showed up .
At least the outdoor area where @ @ @ @ @ speak is packed : Donald Trump is still speaking to both outdoor and indoor folks @ @ @ @ @ fault of protesters : I figured out where all the guests are : Poor Donnie @ @ @ @ @ the ego fluff that he had hoped for .
He 's going to need three @ @ @ @ @ .
And a binkie .

If no one comes to a "rally", did it really happen? Donald Trump's return to the road kicked off with a rally at the BOK stadium in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Brad Pascale, Trump's current campaign manager (who will probably be his former campaign manager shortly) claimed over 800,000 people requested tickets:
Just passed 800,000 tickets. Biggest data haul and rally signup of all time by 10x.
Saturday is going to be amazing! https://t.co/u2tQ812odW — Brad Parscale (@parscale) June 14, 2020
Well, photos show that only a few thousand showed up.
As others are reporting, looks like attendance here in Tulsa is well below campaign's expectations. Here's the main floor at the arena currently pic.twitter.com/EASfSHL5nN — Steadman™ (@AsteadWesley) June 20, 2020
At least the outdoor area where Mike Pence is supposed to speak is packed:
Update: outdoor area has completely emptied out. pic.twitter.com/XS8M0IJRFc — Abby D. Phillip (@abbydphillip) June 20, 2020
Donald Trump is still speaking to both outdoor and indoor folks.
JUST IN: Campaign source confirms the President will only speak indoors tonight. Original plan had him speaking in the arena and to the overflow crowd. https://t.co/EdregxG5Dx — Ryan Nobles (@ryanobles) June 20, 2020
Oh.
Obviously it is the fault of protesters:
NEW: The Trump campaign is blaming tonight’s turnout which has fallen well short of their expectations to protestors “interfering with supporters” attempting to gain access to the Trump events.
FULL STATEMENT from @TimMurtaugh pic.twitter.com/Dm6TuI06da — Ryan Nobles (@ryanobles) June 20, 2020
I figured out where all the guests are:
Clearly 1,000,000 people are wearing invisibility cloaks. That is why they are INVISIBLE at the rally #Tulsa — Red (@Redpainter1) June 20, 2020
Parscale, scrambling:
Twitter responded:
Looks like someone is going to be applying for unemployment tomorrow... https://t.co/cOScILLDxd — Katie Phang (@KatiePhang) June 20, 2020
Tulsa rally feels familiar. pic.twitter.com/al0FloOv9Y — Philippe Reines (@PhilippeReines) June 20, 2020
What do you call a "rally" of 1000 people? A gathering? A small audience? — The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) June 20, 2020
LOL
Maybe the on-ramp is slippery. pic.twitter.com/NKmGW6cwCk — Philippe Reines (@PhilippeReines) June 20, 2020
Poor Donnie isn't going to get the ego fluff that he had hoped for. He's going to need three scoops on the flight home. And a binkie.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--Six Members Of Trump's Team Bring COVID-19 To Tulsa A Week In Advance Of Rally

Six members of Trump 's team in Tulsa have COVID-19 .
On which part of his team do they serve , you ask ?
I 'll tell ya .
The advance team .
That 's the team that comes to the rally location a week in advance to make contact with the venue and contractors , and take care of logistical details having to do with making sure the rally goes off without a hitch .
Well , consider this a hitch .
He did promise a `` wild evening , '' did he not ?
Contact tracing has begun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this case , because apparently these idiots have been traipsing around Tulsa going to restaurants and hotels and such unmasked and uninhibited .
According to Josh Lederman : LEDERMAN : We 're also finding out a little bit more about what the staffers were doing .
The source telling us those staffers had been on the ground in Oklahoma for about a week and had been basically engaging in normal everyday life , going out to restaurants and for the most part had not been wearing masks .
And Joshua , that matches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people who are in the crowd waiting to get into this rally tonight .
The majority of them also not wearing masks .
JOHNSON : Looking at that crowd right now , to be clear , though , Josh , these are people who were , it sounds like , doing field work as opposed to being in direct contact with the president or the vice president , right ?
LEDERMAN : That 's correct .
These are people sent out in advance to get the logistics and organizing done ahead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in contact with Trump campaign and potentially White House Secret Service officials as they were planning that event , and also potentially touching and handling the same kinds of equipment and stuff in the area of the rally that is going to be in the vicinity where those rally-goers , as well as the president and his staff are tonight in Tulsa .
It 's good I do n't believe in Hell , because I 'm not worried I 'll go there when I say these MAGAts absolutely deserve what they get , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The problem is , they will spread it to people around them who do NOT deserve to get it , and ironically , that includes people with the consideration and intelligence to actually wear masks and not attend events like this .

Six members of Trump's team in Tulsa have COVID-19. On which part of his team do they serve, you ask? I'll tell ya. The advance team. That's the team that comes to the rally location a week in advance to make contact with the venue and contractors, and take care of logistical details having to do with making sure the rally goes off without a hitch.
Well, consider this a hitch. He did promise a "wild evening," did he not?
Contact tracing has begun, which is even more important in this case, because apparently these idiots have been traipsing around Tulsa going to restaurants and hotels and such unmasked and uninhibited. According to Josh Lederman:
LEDERMAN: We're also finding out a little bit more about what the staffers were doing. The source telling us those staffers had been on the ground in Oklahoma for about a week and had been basically engaging in normal everyday life, going out to restaurants and for the most part had not been wearing masks. And Joshua, that matches what we're seeing from most of the people who are in the crowd waiting to get into this rally tonight. The majority of them also not wearing masks. JOHNSON: Looking at that crowd right now, to be clear, though, Josh, these are people who were, it sounds like, doing field work as opposed to being in direct contact with the president or the vice president, right? LEDERMAN: That's correct. These are people sent out in advance to get the logistics and organizing done ahead of an event. They would have been in contact with Trump campaign and potentially White House Secret Service officials as they were planning that event, and also potentially touching and handling the same kinds of equipment and stuff in the area of the rally that is going to be in the vicinity where those rally-goers, as well as the president and his staff are tonight in Tulsa.
It's good I don't believe in Hell, because I'm not worried I'll go there when I say these MAGAts absolutely deserve what they get, and I do hope they get it. The problem is, they will spread it to people around them who do NOT deserve to get it, and ironically, that includes people with the consideration and intelligence to actually wear masks and not attend events like this.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--More Bad News For Trump: Federal Judge Rules To Bolton’s Book Can Be Released

The ruling is good news for America but John Bolton may well lose that $ 2 million dollars he sacrificed national security for .
From The New York Times : A federal judge on Saturday ruled that John R. Bolton , President Trump ’ s former national security adviser , can go forward with the publication of his memoir , rejecting the administration ’ s request for an order that he try to pull the book back and saying it was too late for such an order to succeed .
“ With hundreds of thousands of copies around the globe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is done .
There is no restoring the status quo , ” wrote Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the Federal District Court of the District of Columbia .
But in a 10-page opinion , Judge Lamberth also suggested that Mr. Bolton may be in serious jeopardy of forfeiting his $ 2 million advance , as the Justice Department has separately requested — and that he could be prosecuted for allowing the book to be published before receiving final notice that a prepublication review process to ensure it had no classified information was complete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national security of the United States , ” Judge Lamberth wrote .
“ He has exposed his country to harm and himself to civil ( and potentially criminal ) liability .
But these facts do not control the motion before the court .
The government has failed to establish that an injunction will prevent irreparable harm.
” Bolton losing that $ 2 million payday for throwing national security under the bus or , more to the point , under the book , would be poetic justice as far as I 'm concerned .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ abuses he now relays and kept them to himself during the impeachment process .
Because he wanted to sell books .
I would be happy to see his greed go unrewarded while most of the rest of us get the information anyway .
But if you 're someone with a security clearance or hope to get a security clearance , The Washington Post has this warning : It sounds Orwellian , but believe it or not , if you have — or expect to need — a security clearance , you could jeopardize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( or anything else that is claimed by the government to be classified ) .
Back when WikiLeaks was new and the intelligence community was coming to grips with the fact that news articles seemed to be running every other day based on leaked national security information , the government decided not only to crack down on leakers , but to use the largely unregulated security clearance authority at its disposal to intimidate government employees and contractors into not even reading about the leaks .

The ruling is good news for America but John Bolton may well lose that $2 million dollars he sacrificed national security for.
From The New York Times:
A federal judge on Saturday ruled that John R. Bolton, President Trump’s former national security adviser, can go forward with the publication of his memoir, rejecting the administration’s request for an order that he try to pull the book back and saying it was too late for such an order to succeed. “With hundreds of thousands of copies around the globe — many in newsrooms — the damage is done. There is no restoring the status quo,” wrote Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the Federal District Court of the District of Columbia. But in a 10-page opinion, Judge Lamberth also suggested that Mr. Bolton may be in serious jeopardy of forfeiting his $2 million advance, as the Justice Department has separately requested — and that he could be prosecuted for allowing the book to be published before receiving final notice that a prepublication review process to ensure it had no classified information was complete. “Bolton has gambled with the national security of the United States,” Judge Lamberth wrote. “He has exposed his country to harm and himself to civil (and potentially criminal) liability. But these facts do not control the motion before the court. The government has failed to establish that an injunction will prevent irreparable harm.”
Bolton losing that $2 million payday for throwing national security under the bus or, more to the point, under the book, would be poetic justice as far as I'm concerned. Bolton remained silent as he witnessed the abuses he now relays and kept them to himself during the impeachment process. Because he wanted to sell books. I would be happy to see his greed go unrewarded while most of the rest of us get the information anyway.
But if you're someone with a security clearance or hope to get a security clearance, The Washington Post has this warning:


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--Tulsa Police Arrest Rally Attendee Sheila Buck For Wearing 'I Can't Breathe' Shirt

Well , Trump has the first arrest under his belt for today , and it comes at the hands of his Tulsa police officers outside his rally venue .
Sheila Buck had tickets for the rally tonight , and like thousands of others , had arrived hours ahead of time to get in .
Unlike the other knuckle-draggers just dying to inhale those COVID-filled MAGA-hate respiratory droplets , Ms. Buck sat quietly on the ground wearing an `` I Ca n't Breathe '' shirt .
She was n't blocking anyone 's pathway for walking or driving , nor was she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crosslegged , masked , and minding her own business when a Trump employee approached , then police , all of whom told her she had to leave .
The back and forth lasted at least fifteen minutes , much of which was caught by news cameras , and ultimately ended in the police forcibly removing Ms. Buck and placing her under arrest and into a squad car , driving off with her just as soon as the door was closed .
But really , is n't this exactly what Trump threatened yesterday ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fascism .
Right on schedule .

Well, Trump has the first arrest under his belt for today, and it comes at the hands of his Nazi Cops Tulsa police officers outside his rally venue.
Sheila Buck had tickets for the rally tonight, and like thousands of others, had arrived hours ahead of time to get in. Unlike the other knuckle-draggers just dying to inhale those COVID-filled MAGA-hate respiratory droplets, Ms. Buck sat quietly on the ground wearing an "I Can't Breathe" shirt. She wasn't blocking anyone's pathway for walking or driving, nor was she armed or dangerous. Just sitting there crosslegged, masked, and minding her own business when a Trump employee approached, then police, all of whom told her she had to leave.
The back and forth lasted at least fifteen minutes, much of which was caught by news cameras, and ultimately ended in the police forcibly removing Ms. Buck and placing her under arrest and into a squad car, driving off with her just as soon as the door was closed.
Sheila Buck was wearing an "I Can't Breathe" shirt at #TrumpsCoronavirusRally.
Thulsa Police arrested her for "trespassing" even though she had a ticket for that shitty event.
Sheila Buck is a bucking hero.pic.twitter.com/p7fdl1sJJJ — BrooklynDad_Defiant! (@mmpadellan) June 20, 2020
This ALLY has tickets to @realDonaldTrump’s Tulsa KLAN rally. She is peaceful protesting in her #ICantBreathe t-shirt. The #TulsaPolice & #TrumpCampaign is blocking her from talking to press & trying to removed her. This is #GoodTrouble as @repjohnlewis says in his @JohnLewisDoc pic.twitter.com/Lv2UpvyiZM — yvette nicole brown (@YNB) June 20, 2020
One protestor at Trump rally surrounded by three men trying to get her to leave. This protestor does have a ticket to the rally so she is a guest.
Even if she didn’t have a ticket, it’s her right to be there. NOW, she’s been told they’re arresting her for trespassing. pic.twitter.com/2TH7N26S4s — Cristela Alonzo (@cristela9) June 20, 2020
Sheila Buck had a ticket to a Trump rally but was arrested by Tulsa PD for wearing “I Can’t Breathe” shirt. pic.twitter.com/MTVay2u8mt
Had she showed up w/a Confederate Flag banner, all would be good: pic.twitter.com/d0JCl0wDRb — ChuckModi (@ChuckModi1) June 20, 2020
Here’s Sheila Buck being a brave badass before she was arrested.
pic.twitter.com/lRxLCa7fXz — Joshua Potash (@JoshuaPotash) June 20, 2020
Sheila Buck, who was arrested outside the rally in Tulsa, is a mental health advocate, an arts patron, and a big fan of her city.
She’s quoted in a 2013 story about the city’s renovated arts district. pic.twitter.com/wDICBMzuby — Katie Cooper (@thekatiecoop) June 20, 2020
But really, isn't this exactly what Trump threatened yesterday? And here he is, delivering. Fascism. Right on schedule.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--UPDATED: Bill Barr May Have Met His Match In SDNY U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman

UPDATED : AG Bill Barr has notified U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman that he has asked Trump to fire him , and he has done so .
So , Trump fired Berman , and we are back where we were yesterday with a very big exception : the matter of succession .
He will now be succeeded by Deputy U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss , instead of Jay Clayton .
Bill Barr , the most corrupt Attorney General in the history of our country , tried to force U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York , Geoffrey Berman , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He actually put out a statement that Berman would be leaving , and named his replacement .
Here is the DOJ statement .
Berman was not having it , and put out this tweet on the SDNY Twitter account : Legal twitter did a real time analysis of whether Barr even has the authority to fire Berman , and the consensus appears to be that he CAN NOT .
Why ?
Because Berman was installed without Senate approval , and after a certain amount of months , his appointment was made official by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AM Joy had great panel to of legal minds to discuss this further : REID : Attorney General William Barr 's latest ploy to use the Department of Justice to go after Donald Trump 's enemies , Barr announced late Friday night , that Geoffrey Berman , U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York , who oversees investigations into some of Trump 's most loyal allies , would be stepping down from his post .
Shortly after , in a stunning act of resistance , Berman contradicted Barr in a statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he has no intention of doing so , and he also went on to say `` all investigations will move forward `` without delay or interruption . ''
Those investigations have included inquiries into Trump associates , like Michael Cohen , Rudy Giuliani , and his associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman .
Barr announced that Berman 's position would be filled by Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Jay Clayton who , by the way , has never served , even as a prosecutor , in his entire career .
Joining us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , MSNBC contributor Joyce Vance , and legal analyst Paul Butler and MSNBC contributor Barbara McQuade , I will just go in order , Joyce , let me read you what Geoffrey Berman said , this is his full statement : `` I have not resigned , and have no intention of resigning my position to which I was appointed by the Judges of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York .
I will step down when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate .
Until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without delay or interruption . ''
That is pretty gutsy .
Unexpected .
And what do you make of this entire debacle ?
VANCE : So it 's absolutely unprecedented , Joy , you know , Berman was court appointed , because they never put him up for Senate confirmation .
And that frankly may come back to bite the President here .
But what we should keep in mind , is how unusual the announcement itself was , I ca n't remember a U.S. Attorney , ever announcing a resignation , at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr tried to sneak this in under cover of dark .
And then the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York turned around , and called him out as a liar on Twitter , of all places .
So we 're in uncharted territory here .
REID : Yes , and Preet Bharara , who used to run the Southern District of New York , tweeted , `` Why does a President get rid of his own hand picked U.S. attorney in SDNY on a Friday night less than five months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me go to you on this Paul , a CNBC article from my producer , this is from CNBC , about SDNY , one of their investigations of Deutsche Bank .
Also last year , `` It was reported that the SDNY was among a group of federal investigative offices that were probing whether Deutsche Bank had complied with anti-money laundering and other laws .
Deutche Bank has reportedly loaned billions of dollars to Trump 's company and companies controlled by the family of his son-in-law Jared Kushner . ''
It is hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
BUTLER : The question is why does the President do this ?
It is because his Attorney General lets him get away with it .
He authorizes this conduct .
Oh , and about that half-billion dollars in loans coming due soon ?
Those are to Deutsche Bank .
There may be a showdown brewing between the DOJ and the White House and the SDNY .
Just a reminder : This is going to get interesting .
I am sure details will come out about cases currently under investigation , and people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr tried furiously to corruptly force Berman out .
After some back and forth with Bill Barr ( and Donald Trump denying that he knew about the firing ) , Berman has decided to step down .
Here is his statement :

UPDATED: AG Bill Barr has notified U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman that he has asked Trump to fire him, and he has done so. So, Trump fired Berman, and we are back where we were yesterday with a very big exception: the matter of succession. He will now be succeeded by Deputy U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss, instead of Jay Clayton.
NOW: AG Barr says in a letter to Manhattan US Attorney Geoffrey Berman that Trump has now officially fired him, and that's that, rejecting any argument by Berman that a judicial appointment means he can't be removed.
Previously: https://t.co/3Kil8GKQQv pic.twitter.com/y1fkXsAFDC — Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) June 20, 2020
Barr to Berman: "Unfortunately, with your statement of last night, you have chosen public spectacle over public service."
Note that Barr's letter changes the succession plan from last night — deputy US atty Audrey Strauss will take over as acting US atty https://t.co/3Kil8GKQQv — Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) June 20, 2020
*********
Bill Barr, the most corrupt Attorney General in the history of our country, tried to force U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Geoffrey Berman, in a Friday night news dump. He actually put out a statement that Berman would be leaving, and named his replacement.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Department says Geoffrey Berman, US attorney in NYC who oversaw investigations of Trump allies, is resigning. — Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) June 20, 2020
Here is the DOJ statement.
Berman was not having it, and put out this tweet on the SDNY Twitter account:
So to recap:
A recap:
Bill Barr announced that SDNY Attorney Geoff Berman was resigning.
Media reported that Berman was forced out.
Berman released a statement saying he isn't leaving.
As of right now, 11:25 Eastern, Berman is still in his job. — Scott Stedman (@ScottMStedman) June 20, 2020
Legal twitter did a real time analysis of whether Barr even has the authority to fire Berman, and the consensus appears to be that he CANNOT. Why? Because Berman was installed without Senate approval, and after a certain amount of months, his appointment was made official by judicial appointment, not Senate confirmation.
Berman is the Acting U.S. Attorney by dint of a *judicial* appointment.
There’s a pretty good argument that, per the plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 546(d), he gets to keep serving in that post until the *vacancy* is filled (through Senate confirmation of a permanent successor). pic.twitter.com/xeRpvMRHWN — Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) June 20, 2020
AM Joy had great panel to of legal minds to discuss this further:
REID: Attorney General William Barr's latest ploy to use the Department of Justice to go after Donald Trump's enemies, Barr announced late Friday night, that Geoffrey Berman, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who oversees investigations into some of Trump's most loyal allies, would be stepping down from his post. Shortly after, in a stunning act of resistance, Berman contradicted Barr in a statement and said he has not resigned, and he has no intention of doing so, and he also went on to say "all investigations will move forward "without delay or interruption." Those investigations have included inquiries into Trump associates, like Michael Cohen, Rudy Giuliani, and his associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman. Barr announced that Berman's position would be filled by Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Jay Clayton who, by the way, has never served, even as a prosecutor, in his entire career. Joining us is a panel of former federal prosecutors, MSNBC contributor Joyce Vance, and legal analyst Paul Butler and MSNBC contributor Barbara McQuade, I will just go in order, Joyce, let me read you what Geoffrey Berman said, this is his full statement: "I have not resigned, and have no intention of resigning my position to which I was appointed by the Judges of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. I will step down when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate. Until then, our investigations will move forward without delay or interruption." That is pretty gutsy. Unexpected. And what do you make of this entire debacle? VANCE: So it's absolutely unprecedented, Joy, you know, Berman was court appointed, because they never put him up for Senate confirmation. And that frankly may come back to bite the President here. But what we should keep in mind, is how unusual the announcement itself was, I can't remember a U.S. Attorney, ever announcing a resignation, at 9:00 p.m. on a Friday night. Barr tried to sneak this in under cover of dark. And then the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York turned around, and called him out as a liar on Twitter, of all places. So we're in uncharted territory here. REID: Yes, and Preet Bharara, who used to run the Southern District of New York, tweeted, "Why does a President get rid of his own hand picked U.S. attorney in SDNY on a Friday night less than five months before the election?" And let me go to you on this Paul, a CNBC article from my producer, this is from CNBC, about SDNY, one of their investigations of Deutsche Bank. Also last year, "It was reported that the SDNY was among a group of federal investigative offices that were probing whether Deutsche Bank had complied with anti-money laundering and other laws. Deutche Bank has reportedly loaned billions of dollars to Trump's company and companies controlled by the family of his son-in-law Jared Kushner." It is hard to read anything good into that Paul. BUTLER: The question is why does the President do this? It is because his Attorney General lets him get away with it. He authorizes this conduct.
Oh, and about that half-billion dollars in loans coming due soon? Those are to Deutsche Bank.
There may be a showdown brewing between the DOJ and the White House and the SDNY. Just a reminder:
Two DOJ whistleblowers testifying before House Judiciary next week about politicization. Geoff Berman should consider joining them. — Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) June 20, 2020
This is going to get interesting. I am sure details will come out about cases currently under investigation, and people and companies facing charges, now that Barr tried furiously to corruptly force Berman out.
After some back and forth with Bill Barr (and Donald Trump denying that he knew about the firing), Berman has decided to step down. Here is his statement:


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--Moundsville Police Department Gets A New Toy

At a time when the militarization of the police is being questioned as never before we get this latest obscenity .
Moundsville , West Virginia is a small town ( around 9000 pop . )
that is experiencing severe economic hardship .
But because of an insane Federal program that gives away toys like these they just took ownership of this .
The Moundsville Police Department unveiled a “ tactical resource vehicle ” they obtained from the military at no cost as part of a federal government program on Thursday .
The vehicle is a 2019 Cougar mine resistance ambush @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was obtained under a federal program that makes surplus equipment available to states and cities , according , to Moundsville Police Chief Tom Mitchell .
This particular piece of equipment was initially purchased by the federal government for the U.S. Marine Corps and is manufactured by Force Protection Inc. , a division of General Dynamics .
“ We could use it for various things , ” Mitchell said .
He said the department can use it as a “ tactical resource vehicle ” for various scenarios .
The vehicle ’ s rollout comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country to demilitarize police equipment and resources in the wake of protests and civil unrest in recent weeks .
While the vehicle had to be “ demilitarized ” before the city police department could make use of it , the MRAP could be used in a hostage situation as a tactical “ rescue ” vehicle or as an “ incident command ” vehicle , according to Mitchell .
He said it is bulletproof and is capable of stopping a 50-caliber round of ammunition .

At a time when the militarization of the police is being questioned as never before we get this latest obscenity. Moundsville, West Virginia is a small town (around 9000 pop.) that is experiencing severe economic hardship. But because of an insane Federal program that gives away toys like these they just took ownership of this.
Source: The Intelligencer
The Moundsville Police Department unveiled a “tactical resource vehicle” they obtained from the military at no cost as part of a federal government program on Thursday.
The vehicle is a 2019 Cougar mine resistance ambush protection vehicle, or MRAP, and was obtained under a federal program that makes surplus equipment available to states and cities, according, to Moundsville Police Chief Tom Mitchell. This particular piece of equipment was initially purchased by the federal government for the U.S. Marine Corps and is manufactured by Force Protection Inc., a division of General Dynamics.
“We could use it for various things,” Mitchell said. He said the department can use it as a “tactical resource vehicle” for various scenarios.
The vehicle’s rollout comes as there have been growing calls across the country to demilitarize police equipment and resources in the wake of protests and civil unrest in recent weeks.
While the vehicle had to be “demilitarized” before the city police department could make use of it, the MRAP could be used in a hostage situation as a tactical “rescue” vehicle or as an “incident command” vehicle, according to Mitchell. He said it is bulletproof and is capable of stopping a 50-caliber round of ammunition.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--Jim Acosta Gets To Accuse The White House Of Being 'Fake News'

You have to wonder how long Jim Acosta has waited for the chance to ask this question at a White House Press briefing .
Trump has been calling CNN `` fake news '' for so long , it 's white noise already .
He accuses most respectable media of putting out fake news , actually , but CNN has always been the target of his particular ire , and that particular label .
So , when Twitter slapped a label of `` manipulated media '' on one of Trump 's tweets , because it featured a completely misleading and doctored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chasing one another playfully , but labeled it `` Terrified Todler [ sic ] Runs From Racist Baby , '' Acosta had his moment .
ACOSTA : Why is the president sharing fake videos on Twitter about two toddlers , who are obviously showing a lot of love for one another ?
It seems as though he 's exploiting children to make some sort of crass political point .
Now , why is he sharing fake video ?
McENANY : He was making a point about CNN specifically .
He was making the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of context .
That in 2019 , CNN misleadingly aired a clip from one viewpoint repeatedly to falsely accuse the Covington boys of being quote `` students in MAGA gear harassing a Native American Elder . ''
That 's a harassing video about children that had really grave consequences for their future .
*NARRATOR VOICE* The description of the Covington boys was not misleading , nor were they falsely accused .
They were recorded doing exactly what they were accused of doing , wearing MAGA gear while they did it .
Furthermore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing about Trump or CNN taking him out of context .
It simply showed the toddler video in edited form , with a different , made-up , false , ( and misspelled ) chyron .
So , this is when Acosta goes in for the kill .
ACOSTA : So , you 're saying it 's okay to exploit two toddlers hugging one another on a sidewalk , to make some sort of political point .
As you know , the president has described the members of the press as fake news during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you share fake videos like that , does n't that make YOU fake news ?
McENANY : I think the president was making a satirical point that was quite funny , if you go and actually watch the video .
In order to do satire , you have to be smart .
So , right there , she 's lying out her lying-ass face .
And to do humor , you have to have the proper ratio of truth to absurdity .
So , right THERE she is lying out her lying-ass face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or smart about anything Trump does .
There is no room for that in Trump 's actions because they 're filled with meanness and revenge .
Acosta continues to push back quite gamely on McEnany 's bullsh*t , but clearly , he 'd already hit that nerve .
And good for him .
There is nothing faker than this president and the lackies who defend him .

You have to wonder how long Jim Acosta has waited for the chance to ask this question at a White House Press briefing.
Trump has been calling CNN "fake news" for so long, it's white noise already. He accuses most respectable media of putting out fake news, actually, but CNN has always been the target of his particular ire, and that particular label. So, when Twitter slapped a label of "manipulated media" on one of Trump's tweets, because it featured a completely misleading and doctored video of two adorable toddlers hugging and chasing one another playfully, but labeled it "Terrified Todler [sic] Runs From Racist Baby," Acosta had his moment.
ACOSTA: Why is the president sharing fake videos on Twitter about two toddlers, who are obviously showing a lot of love for one another? It seems as though he's exploiting children to make some sort of crass political point. Now, why is he sharing fake video? McENANY: He was making a point about CNN specifically. He was making the point that CNN has regularly taken him out of context. That in 2019, CNN misleadingly aired a clip from one viewpoint repeatedly to falsely accuse the Covington boys of being quote "students in MAGA gear harassing a Native American Elder." That's a harassing video about children that had really grave consequences for their future.
*NARRATOR VOICE* The description of the Covington boys was not misleading, nor were they falsely accused. They were recorded doing exactly what they were accused of doing, wearing MAGA gear while they did it.
Furthermore, the spot that Trump tweeted said nothing about Trump or CNN taking him out of context. It simply showed the toddler video in edited form, with a different, made-up, false, (and misspelled) chyron. So, this is when Acosta goes in for the kill.
ACOSTA: So, you're saying it's okay to exploit two toddlers hugging one another on a sidewalk, to make some sort of political point. As you know, the president has described the members of the press as fake news during the course of this administration. When you share fake videos like that, doesn't that make YOU fake news? McENANY: I think the president was making a satirical point that was quite funny, if you go and actually watch the video.
In order to do satire, you have to be smart. So, right there, she's lying out her lying-ass face. And to do humor, you have to have the proper ratio of truth to absurdity. So, right THERE she is lying out her lying-ass face. We know there is nothing truthful or smart about anything Trump does. There is no room for that in Trump's actions because they're filled with meanness and revenge.
Acosta continues to push back quite gamely on McEnany's bullsh*t, but clearly, he'd already hit that nerve. And good for him. There is nothing faker than this president and the lackies who defend him.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--Trump Sacrifices Supporters Lives By Promoting 'Wild Evening' In Tulsa Rally

Getting sick from COVID-19 and then dying is just fine by Trump .
You 'll be sacrificing your life for the country , and that 's honorable .
Next - please get sick and die for the economy .
Of all the foul and vile things Donald Trump has done since he came down from the escalator in 2015 to announce his candidacy , calling Mexicans murderers and rapists — this may be the worst .
Trump used his subservient Vice President to write a phony article in the Wall Street Journal that claims : There Isn ’ t a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he blames the media for ginning up your fear of COVID-19 .
Pence has done this all in an effort to motivate Trump 's rally-goers to show up in droves during a pandemic .
This should be criminal .
On Friday , Trump 's press secretary said that wearing a mask for officials who attend the Oklahoma rally was a `` personal choice , ' and that she wo n't wear one , even though that goes against CDC guidelines .
Trump gave an interview to Axios on Friday and said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living our lives '' and `` we 're going to have a wild evening tomorrow night at Oklahoma . ''
A `` wild evening ? ''
The CDC , and especially Dr. Fauci , have been telling Americans NOT to gather in large groups — and if you are outside , to wear masks — but indoor gatherings are especially dangerous , and create a highly infectious environment .
Even the malleable Dr. Birx has pushed back against Trump 's deadly plans .
Trump could n't care less .
He 'll do what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the face of warnings from Trump 's own government 's top infectious disease expert , Dr. Anthony Fauci .
During the 2016 election Trump bragged that if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue , his supporters would still love him .
He 's banking on that now , as thousands of Trump cultists are lining up to be shot with COVID-19 , and putting their own lives in the balance just to attend and cheer for a narcissistic , misogynist , racist , tweeter-in-chief .
The only thing that matters is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing that matters to Donald Trump is Donald Trump .

Getting sick from COVID-19 and then dying is just fine by Trump.
You'll be sacrificing your life for Trump, the country, and that's honorable. Next - please get sick and die for the economy.
Of all the foul and vile things Donald Trump has done since he came down from the escalator in 2015 to announce his candidacy, calling Mexicans murderers and rapists — this may be the worst.
Trump used his subservient Vice President to write a phony article in the Wall Street Journal that claims: There Isn’t a Coronavirus ‘Second Wave.’ As usual, he blames the media for ginning up your fear of COVID-19. Pence has done this all in an effort to motivate Trump's rally-goers to show up in droves during a pandemic.
This should be criminal.
On Friday, Trump's press secretary said that wearing a mask for officials who attend the Oklahoma rally was a "personal choice,' and that she won't wear one, even though that goes against CDC guidelines.
Trump gave an interview to Axios on Friday and said that "we have to get back to living our lives" and "we're going to have a wild evening tomorrow night at Oklahoma." A "wild evening?"
The CDC, and especially Dr. Fauci, have been telling Americans NOT to gather in large groups — and if you are outside, to wear masks — but indoor gatherings are especially dangerous, and create a highly infectious environment.
Even the malleable Dr. Birx has pushed back against Trump's deadly plans.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert, and task force response coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx both vocalized concerns internally in the last week about the safety of holding a rally on Saturday with as many as 19,000 people in an enclosed arena in Tulsa, Oklahoma
Trump couldn't care less. He'll do what he wants, even if it flies in the face of warnings from Trump's own government's top infectious disease expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
During the 2016 election Trump bragged that if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue, his supporters would still love him. He's banking on that now, as thousands of Trump cultists are lining up to be shot with COVID-19, and putting their own lives in the balance just to attend and cheer for a narcissistic, misogynist, racist, tweeter-in-chief .
The only thing that matters is the reelection of Donald Trump.
The only thing that matters to Donald Trump is Donald Trump.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--A Field Guide To Trump’s Dangerous Rhetoric

All leaders are demagogues .
You may not realize this , because we ’ ve come to associate the word “ demagogue ” with only dangerous populist leaders .
But in Greek , the word just means “ leader of the people ” ( dēmos “ the people ” + agōgos “ leading ” ) .
Some demagogues are good , and some are dangerous .
The fundamental difference between leaders who are good demagogues and leaders who are dangerous demagogues is found in the answer to this simple question : Are they accountable for their words and actions ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in any political community .
Donald Trump is a demagogue – he ’ s a heroic demagogue to his followers , and he ’ s a dangerous demagogue to everyone else .
I ’ ve been analyzing Trump ’ s rhetoric since 2015 and , despite how it may appear to some critics , Trump is a rhetorical genius .
I describe why in my new book , “ Demagogue For President : The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump.
” He ’ s a genius at using rhetoric like a dangerous demagogue does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him accountable .
Trump campaigned as an unaccountable leader .
He promised that he would fight for his followers and wouldn ’ t be accountable to established leaders in his party , the media , fact-checkers , political correctness or common standards of decency .
Trump has used six rhetorical strategies repeatedly since 2015 .
Three ingratiate Trump with his followers , and three alienate Trump and his followers from everyone else .
The effect is to unify his followers against everyone else and to make Trump the fulcrum for all political discussion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are used to set the nation ’ s agenda , distract the nation ’ s attention and frame how we understand reality .
Ad populum : appealing to the wisdom of the crowd , using popularity as the measure of value .
Dangerous demagogues have no power if they have no followers , so they use ad populum to solidify their base and wield their supporters as a cudgel against opponents .
Trump routinely praises his people as the smartest , best , most patriotic , hardest-working Americans .
They are great and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , when he claimed that he could “ stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn ’ t lose any voters , ” that was an ad populum appeal about the loyalty of Trump ’ s base .
Trump ’ s ad populum appeal was designed to silence his Never Trump critics while distracting attention away from their central criticism of him : that he was a populist , not a real conservative .
Popularity ( crowds , opinion polls , ratings , votes ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
Conservativism itself has no value unless it is popular .
Paralipsis : I ’ m not saying ; I ’ m just saying .
Dangerous demagogues use paralipsis because it gives them plausible deniability to assert that they didn ’ t actually say some controversial thing or that they were merely joking or being sarcastic .
Trump uses this strategy to spread rumor and innuendo and to give a “ backstage ” or “ real ” view of what he supposedly really thinks .
It is rewarding for Trump because it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once , without being held accountable .
For example , Trump repeatedly amplified racist white nationalist content on his Twitter feed while denying that he agreed with them .
“ I don ’ t know about retweeting , ” Trump told Jake Tapper .
“ You retweet somebody and they turn out to be white supremacists .
I know nothing about these groups that are supporting me.
” He also claimed that there was a difference between tweeting something and retweeting something , refusing to take responsibility for his retweets .
His retweets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him to say and not say and provided him with the out of plausible deniability .
American exceptionalism : This refers to America ’ s unique role in the world , simplified by Trump as “ America winning.
” Dangerous demagogues use American exceptionalism to take advantage of their followers ’ patriotism and feelings of national pride for the demagogue ’ s gain .
Trump presents himself as the apotheosis of American exceptionalism and claims that he is the heroic figure who can make America great again by defeating corruption and conspiracy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people – he ’ s their hero .
For example , Trump claimed that he was uniquely qualified to “ drain the swamp ” of corruption .
His campaign presented a hero narrative of sacrifice and struggle .
He had been “ the ultimate insider , ” he claimed , but once he decided to run for president and make America great again , he had been purified .
As “ the ultimate outsider ” Trump would “ drain the swamp ” and end corruption .
He said that it would be easy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : attacking the person instead of their argument .
Dangerous demagogues use ad hominem appeals to mock and delegitimize legitimate opposition .
Trump routinely attacks people with name-calling , appeals to hypocrisy and insults to distract the nation away from criticisms made about him .
He uses these strategies to avoid accountability by undermining the legitimacy of his opposition .
For example , he mocked a reporter with a physical disability .
Trump did this to distract attention from his misrepresentation of events on 9/11 by arguing that the reporter ’ s memory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This allowed Trump to claim that his version of history was the only truth , without actually proving that his version of history was accurate .
Dangerous demagogues use ad baculum to change the subject of debate and use force to silence legitimate opposition .
Trump silences his opposition by threatening them with mean tweets , violent mobs and condoning , or refusing to condemn , violence conducted in his name .
For example , he used threats and appeals to fear when he repeatedly told his supporters that Hillary Clinton was determined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them defenseless against rapists and murders .
When he accepted the National Rifle Association ’ s endorsement , he threatened , “ If she gets to appoint her judges she will , as part of it , abolish the Second Amendment.
” If that happened , Trump threatened , then gun owners would lose “ any chance they have of survival.
” Dangerous demagogues use reification to position opposition as less than human , thereby denying their standing to criticize or object .
Reification is traditionally a part of war rhetoric or genocide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them as objects – things , animals – rather than as people .
Objects shouldn ’ t have the same rights as people , so it makes Trump ’ s enemies easy to dismiss and attack .
For example , he treated Muslim refugees as dangerous enemy objects masquerading as people – as a “ Trojan horse ” that would unleash “ a 200,000-man army , maybe .
Or 50,000 or 80,000 or 100,000.
” The refugees weren ’ t people in need of help ; they were an army pretending to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to attack America .
Denying the humanity of the refugees made it easier to deny them refuge , which is precisely what Trump proposed doing with his Muslim ban .
Did Trump “ have the best words , ” as he once claimed ?
Hardly .
His words are weapons , well calculated to attack our public sphere by increasing distrust , polarization and frustration – making it more difficult to solve political problems .
Trump was so successful in using dangerous demagogic rhetoric that no one could hold him accountable for his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or since .
He uses rhetoric to gain compliance rather than for persuasion – he deploys language as force , or as a “ counterpunch , ” as he likes to explain .
Trump ’ s rhetorical strategies correspond to how authoritarians have historically eroded democracy , which is why his rhetoric is so dangerous .
[ Deep knowledge , daily .
Sign up for The Conversation ’ s newsletter . ]
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

Jennifer Mercieca, Texas A&M University
All leaders are demagogues. You may not realize this, because we’ve come to associate the word “demagogue” with only dangerous populist leaders. But in Greek, the word just means “leader of the people” (dēmos “the people” + agōgos “leading”).
Some demagogues are good, and some are dangerous. The fundamental difference between leaders who are good demagogues and leaders who are dangerous demagogues is found in the answer to this simple question: Are they accountable for their words and actions?
Obviously, an unaccountable leader is dangerous in any political community.
Donald Trump is a demagogue – he’s a heroic demagogue to his followers, and he’s a dangerous demagogue to everyone else.
I’ve been analyzing Trump’s rhetoric since 2015 and, despite how it may appear to some critics, Trump is a rhetorical genius. I describe why in my new book, “Demagogue For President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump.”
He’s a genius at using rhetoric like a dangerous demagogue does, to prevent the country from holding him accountable.
Trump campaigned as an unaccountable leader. He promised that he would fight for his followers and wouldn’t be accountable to established leaders in his party, the media, fact-checkers, political correctness or common standards of decency.
Trump has used six rhetorical strategies repeatedly since 2015. Three ingratiate Trump with his followers, and three alienate Trump and his followers from everyone else. The effect is to unify his followers against everyone else and to make Trump the fulcrum for all political discussion and debate.
All of the strategies are used to set the nation’s agenda, distract the nation’s attention and frame how we understand reality.
Trump’s ingratiating strategies
Ad populum: appealing to the wisdom of the crowd, using popularity as the measure of value.
Dangerous demagogues have no power if they have no followers, so they use ad populum to solidify their base and wield their supporters as a cudgel against opponents.
Trump routinely praises his people as the smartest, best, most patriotic, hardest-working Americans. They are great and good, and everyone else is not. For example, when he claimed that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters,” that was an ad populum appeal about the loyalty of Trump’s base.
Trump’s ad populum appeal was designed to silence his Never Trump critics while distracting attention away from their central criticism of him: that he was a populist, not a real conservative.
Popularity (crowds, opinion polls, ratings, votes) is the only sign of value to Trump. Conservativism itself has no value unless it is popular.
Paralipsis: I’m not saying; I’m just saying.
Dangerous demagogues use paralipsis because it gives them plausible deniability to assert that they didn’t actually say some controversial thing or that they were merely joking or being sarcastic.
Trump uses this strategy to spread rumor and innuendo and to give a “backstage” or “real” view of what he supposedly really thinks. It is rewarding for Trump because it allows him to say two things at once, without being held accountable.
For example, Trump repeatedly amplified racist white nationalist content on his Twitter feed while denying that he agreed with them.
“I don’t know about retweeting,” Trump told Jake Tapper. “You retweet somebody and they turn out to be white supremacists. I know nothing about these groups that are supporting me.”
He also claimed that there was a difference between tweeting something and retweeting something, refusing to take responsibility for his retweets. His retweets functioned as a paralipsis: It allowed him to say and not say and provided him with the out of plausible deniability.
American exceptionalism: This refers to America’s unique role in the world, simplified by Trump as “America winning.”
Dangerous demagogues use American exceptionalism to take advantage of their followers’ patriotism and feelings of national pride for the demagogue’s gain.
Trump presents himself as the apotheosis of American exceptionalism and claims that he is the heroic figure who can make America great again by defeating corruption and conspiracy. Trump will win for Trump’s people – he’s their hero.
For example, Trump claimed that he was uniquely qualified to “drain the swamp” of corruption. His campaign presented a hero narrative of sacrifice and struggle. He had been “the ultimate insider,” he claimed, but once he decided to run for president and make America great again, he had been purified. As “the ultimate outsider” Trump would “drain the swamp” and end corruption. He said that it would be easy for him to do.
Mark Wallheiser/Getty Images
Trump’s alienating strategies
Ad hominem: attacking the person instead of their argument.
Dangerous demagogues use ad hominem appeals to mock and delegitimize legitimate opposition.
Trump routinely attacks people with name-calling, appeals to hypocrisy and insults to distract the nation away from criticisms made about him. He uses these strategies to avoid accountability by undermining the legitimacy of his opposition.
For example, he mocked a reporter with a physical disability. Trump did this to distract attention from his misrepresentation of events on 9/11 by arguing that the reporter’s memory was as impaired as his body. This allowed Trump to claim that his version of history was the only truth, without actually proving that his version of history was accurate.
Ad baculum: threats of force or intimidation.
Dangerous demagogues use ad baculum to change the subject of debate and use force to silence legitimate opposition.
Trump silences his opposition by threatening them with mean tweets, violent mobs and condoning, or refusing to condemn, violence conducted in his name.
For example, he used threats and appeals to fear when he repeatedly told his supporters that Hillary Clinton was determined to take away their guns, leaving them defenseless against rapists and murders. When he accepted the National Rifle Association’s endorsement, he threatened, “If she gets to appoint her judges she will, as part of it, abolish the Second Amendment.” If that happened, Trump threatened, then gun owners would lose “any chance they have of survival.”
Reification: treating people as objects.
Dangerous demagogues use reification to position opposition as less than human, thereby denying their standing to criticize or object. Reification is traditionally a part of war rhetoric or genocide.
Trump undermines his opposition by treating them as objects – things, animals – rather than as people. Objects shouldn’t have the same rights as people, so it makes Trump’s enemies easy to dismiss and attack.
For example, he treated Muslim refugees as dangerous enemy objects masquerading as people – as a “Trojan horse” that would unleash “a 200,000-man army, maybe. Or 50,000 or 80,000 or 100,000.” The refugees weren’t people in need of help; they were an army pretending to be people, dangerous because they were determined to attack America.
Denying the humanity of the refugees made it easier to deny them refuge, which is precisely what Trump proposed doing with his Muslim ban.
Words as weapons
Did Trump “have the best words,” as he once claimed?
Hardly. His words are weapons, well calculated to attack our public sphere by increasing distrust, polarization and frustration – making it more difficult to solve political problems.
Trump was so successful in using dangerous demagogic rhetoric that no one could hold him accountable for his words and actions during the 2016 campaign or since. He uses rhetoric to gain compliance rather than for persuasion – he deploys language as force, or as a “counterpunch,” as he likes to explain.
Trump’s rhetorical strategies correspond to how authoritarians have historically eroded democracy, which is why his rhetoric is so dangerous.
[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter.]
Jennifer Mercieca, Associate Professor of Communication, Texas A&M University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


crooksandliars--2020-06-20--White Virginia Man Faces Charges For Aiming AR-15 At Black Bikers

On Sunday , a group of Black men riding motorcycles say they pulled into a residential neighborhood in the rural Virginia area .
According to the riders , shortly after they paused for a break , a man came outside and pointed an assault rifle at them , suggesting they were trespassing , as reported by local outlet WUSA 9 .
A video of the incident quickly went viral online , first on YouTube and then on Reddit .
The suspect , who has been identified as Dennis Lee Berry , has been arrested and charged with five misdemeanor counts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video , the suspect is heard saying : `` I 'm gon na take you out first . ''
One rider in the video can be heard saying , “ None of us have any weapons or anything to threaten your life ... but you 're pointing a gun at us that 's probably loaded.
” One rider narrates the video , saying , “ Parked my bike over here to take a break real quick .
I got a white guy here pointing a gun at four Black men .
Look at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is standing here.
” Berry does not mention race in the video .
The Sheriff ’ s Office says it received 911 calls from both Berry and at least one of the riders about the incident .
Berry has since been released on a $ 5,000 unsecured bond .
His weapon was seized as evidence in the case .
According to local outlet the Free Lance-Star , brandishing is a Class 1 misdemeanor .
It reportedly carries a maximum penalty of a $ 2,500 fine and one year in jail in the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ release shared on Facebook , there was a sign marking the neighborhood as private property .
The riders said they had not seen it .
Berry was charged anyway , however , because the bikers were not actually on his private property .
All of the riders were also unarmed .
Watch the video of local news coverage above , including the clip .

On Sunday, a group of Black men riding motorcycles say they pulled into a residential neighborhood in the rural Virginia area. According to the riders, shortly after they paused for a break, a man came outside and pointed an assault rifle at them, suggesting they were trespassing, as reported by local outlet WUSA 9. A video of the incident quickly went viral online, first on YouTube and then on Reddit. The suspect, who has been identified as Dennis Lee Berry, has been arrested and charged with five misdemeanor counts of brandishing a firearm.
In the video, the suspect is heard saying: "I'm gonna take you out first."
One rider in the video can be heard saying, “None of us have any weapons or anything to threaten your life ... but you're pointing a gun at us that's probably loaded.”
One rider narrates the video, saying, “Parked my bike over here to take a break real quick. I got a white guy here pointing a gun at four Black men. Look at this. All we’re doing is standing here.” Berry does not mention race in the video.
The Sheriff’s Office says it received 911 calls from both Berry and at least one of the riders about the incident. Berry has since been released on a $5,000 unsecured bond. His weapon was seized as evidence in the case.
According to local outlet the Free Lance-Star, brandishing is a Class 1 misdemeanor. It reportedly carries a maximum penalty of a $2,500 fine and one year in jail in the state of Virginia.
According to a press release shared on Facebook, there was a sign marking the neighborhood as private property. The riders said they had not seen it. Berry was charged anyway, however, because the bikers were not actually on his private property. All of the riders were also unarmed.
Watch the video of local news coverage above, including the clip.


crooksandliars--2020-06-22--Bill Barr Makes Up Brand New Conspiracy Theory About Mail-In Ballots

In an effort to protect Trump , his Attorney General , Bill Barr , claimed foreign governments could print up thousands of phony mail-in ballots to disrupt the 2020 presidential election .
The cover-up general , as the late William Safire nicknamed him , acts more like Trump 's personal attorney than the U.S. AG , and he dutifully attacked the validity of mail-in voting by creating a whole new conspiracy theory .
Barr joined Marie Bartiromo on her Fox News Sunday show , to cement his legacy as a destructive force to the rule of law .
First he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supposedly censoring conservatives , claiming their free speech rights are being abridged .
All Americans should at least feel confident that their US Attorney General understands the First Amendment protects the individual from government censorship .
He should know it does n't cover private companies trying to root out conspiracy theories and misinformation that are detrimental to our nation .
Then host Marie Bartiromo , who ca n't resist bringing up Hillary Clinton for no reason , brought her into the mail-in ballot conversation .
She said , `` While there 's a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Hillary Clinton said it 's fine , it 's fair . ''
Barr replied , `` Well , it absolutely opens the flood gates to fraud . ''
He continued , `` Those things are delivered to mailboxes .
They can be taken out — there are questions whether it denies a secret ballot because the states have you signing the outside of the envelope , so the person opens the envelope will know how how people voted . ''
Americans know how mail-in ballots are counted , a**hole .
`` Right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tens of thousands of counterfeit ballots , and it would be very hard for us to detect which is the right one and which is the wrong ballot , '' Barr said .
If any foreign country wants to go to those lengths it would be Russia , to elect Trump .
But it 's absurd on its face .
`` So I think it can upset and undercut the confidence in the integrity of our election .
If anything , we should tighten them up right now . ''
Bill Barr is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He puts the president above all others .
He helped cover-up IraqGate and the Iran-Contra scandal when he was George H.W .
Bush 's AG .
For Trump he participates in nonsensical lies and conspiracies , all in an effort to shield Donald from his egregious behavior and and crimes , as he did with Bush Sr .
HE 'S the person helping to destroy the integrity of the 2020 election , by heavily suppressing the vote and creating a new conspiracy that Trump and his minions can amplify .
He needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @

In an effort to protect Trump, his Attorney General, Bill Barr, claimed foreign governments could print up thousands of phony mail-in ballots to disrupt the 2020 presidential election.
The cover-up general, as the late William Safire nicknamed him, acts more like Trump's personal attorney than the U.S. AG, and he dutifully attacked the validity of mail-in voting by creating a whole new conspiracy theory.
Barr joined Marie Bartiromo on her Fox News Sunday show, to cement his legacy as a destructive force to the rule of law. First he began criticizing social media companies that are supposedly censoring conservatives, claiming their free speech rights are being abridged.
All Americans should at least feel confident that their US Attorney General understands the First Amendment protects the individual from government censorship. He should know it doesn't cover private companies trying to root out conspiracy theories and misinformation that are detrimental to our nation.
Then host Marie Bartiromo, who can't resist bringing up Hillary Clinton for no reason, brought her into the mail-in ballot conversation. She said, "While there's a big discussion right now about mail-in voting, Hillary Clinton said it's fine, it's fair."
Barr replied, "Well, it absolutely opens the flood gates to fraud."
He continued, "Those things are delivered to mailboxes. They can be taken out — there are questions whether it denies a secret ballot because the states have you signing the outside of the envelope, so the person opens the envelope will know how how people voted."
Americans know how mail-in ballots are counted, a**hole.
"Right now a foreign country could print up tens of thousands of counterfeit ballots, and it would be very hard for us to detect which is the right one and which is the wrong ballot," Barr said.
If any foreign country wants to go to those lengths it would be Russia, to elect Trump. But it's absurd on its face.
"So I think it can upset and undercut the confidence in the integrity of our election. If anything, we should tighten them up right now."
Bill Barr is an evangelical conservative of the worst order.
He puts the president above all others. He helped cover-up IraqGate and the Iran-Contra scandal when he was George H.W. Bush's AG. For Trump he participates in nonsensical lies and conspiracies, all in an effort to shield Donald from his egregious behavior and and crimes, as he did with Bush Sr.
HE'S the person helping to destroy the integrity of the 2020 election, by heavily suppressing the vote and creating a new conspiracy that Trump and his minions can amplify.
He needs to be prosecuted for his behavior.


crooksandliars--2020-06-21--Ex-Cop From George Floyd Killing Caught On Video 'Comfortably Shopping' After Jail Release

Former Minneapolis police officer J. Alexander Kueng , who was charged in the killing of George Floyd , was confronted while shopping over the weekend .
Kueng , 26 , was captured on video shopping at a Cub Foods grocery store after being released from jail on $ 750,000 bail .
Kueng is facing charges of aiding and abetting second-degree murder and aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter .
In video posted to social media , a customer can be seen confronting Kueng while he is shopping for items , including Oreo cookies , milk and whip cream .
`` What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is being filmed .
`` What 's your name ? ''
the shopper asks .
`` It is you , '' the shopper says .
`` So , you 're out of prison and you 're comfortably shopping in Cub Foods as if you did n't do anything ? ''
`` I would n't call it comfortably , '' Kueng replies .
`` I would say getting necessities . ''
`` I do n't think you should have that right , '' the woman explains .
`` I do n't think you should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can understand that , '' Kueng says .
`` How does it feel ? ''
the shopper asks .
`` I 'm sorry you feel that way , '' Kueng remarks before walking off .
`` No , you 're not sorry , '' the woman insists .
`` You do n't have the right to be here .
You killed somebody in cold blood .
You do not have the right to be here . ''
`` Do you feel any remorse for what you did ? ''
she presses .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to grab my stuff and go , '' Kueng says .
`` You 're not going to be able to comfortably go around Minnesota like this , '' the woman insists .
`` You do n't want to apologize ?
You do n't want to say anything because this video is going to be on the internet ? ''
`` And you will be going back to jail , '' she adds .

Former Minneapolis police officer J. Alexander Kueng, who was charged in the killing of George Floyd, was confronted while shopping over the weekend.
Kueng, 26, was captured on video shopping at a Cub Foods grocery store after being released from jail on $750,000 bail. Kueng is facing charges of aiding and abetting second-degree murder and aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter.
In video posted to social media, a customer can be seen confronting Kueng while he is shopping for items, including Oreo cookies, milk and whip cream.
"What?" Kueng says after noticing he is being filmed.
"What's your name?" the shopper asks.
"Yeah, that's me," Kueng confirms.
"It is you," the shopper says. "So, you're out of prison and you're comfortably shopping in Cub Foods as if you didn't do anything?"
"I wouldn't call it comfortably," Kueng replies. "I would say getting necessities."
"I don't think you should have that right," the woman explains. "I don't think you should be out on bail."
"I can understand that," Kueng says.
"How does it feel?" the shopper asks.
"I'm sorry you feel that way," Kueng remarks before walking off.
"No, you're not sorry," the woman insists. "You don't have the right to be here. You killed somebody in cold blood. You do not have the right to be here."
"Do you feel any remorse for what you did?" she presses.
"Ma'am, I'm just going to grab my stuff and go," Kueng says.
"You're not going to be able to comfortably go around Minnesota like this," the woman insists. "You don't want to apologize? You don't want to say anything because this video is going to be on the internet?"
"And you will be going back to jail," she adds.
Watch the video below.


crooksandliars--2020-06-21--Chris Wallace Grills Mercedes Schlapp On Failed Tulsa Rally: 'You Guys Look Silly When You Deny Real

Chris Wallace Grills Mercedes Schlapp On Failed Tulsa Rally: 'You Guys Look Silly When You Deny Reality'

Fox News host Chris Wallace challenged Trump 2020 campaign spokesperson Mercedes Schlapp for making `` campaign speeches '' during an interview on Sunday .
On his Fox News Sunday program , Wallace noted that President Donald Trump 's Tulsa rally on Saturday had been sparsely attended despite the fact that the president claimed nearly a million people had requested tickets .
`` We all saw the pictures last night , '' Wallace explained .
`` The arena was no more than two-thirds full .
And the outdoor rally was cancelled because there was no overflow crowd .
What happened ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand , '' Schlapp replied , `` there were factors involved , they were concerned about the protesters who were coming in . ''
`` He talks about how he can fill an arena , '' Wallace said , referring to the president .
`` And he did n't fill an arena last night .
You guys were so far off that you had planned an outdoor rally and there was n't an overflow crowd . ''
`` Protesters did not stop people from coming to that rally , '' he added .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not show up . ''
Schlapp disagreed before attacking presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden for holding virtual events during the ongoing pandemic .
`` Mercedes , please do n't filibuster , '' Wallace interrupted .
`` Frankly , it makes you guys look silly when you deny the reality of what happened . ''
`` I do n't know why you are saying that , '' Schlapp complained .
`` There are empty seats there , '' Wallace replied .
`` At least a third , if not half of the rally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it . ''
`` Joe Biden has been a failed politician that has done nothing but support failed institutions , '' Schlapp opined .
`` This is in contrast with President Trump who has a strong record and is rebuilding this economy . ''
`` Mercedes , you 're shifting to a campaign speech , which has nothing to do with the attendance of the rally , '' Wallace observed .

Fox News host Chris Wallace challenged Trump 2020 campaign spokesperson Mercedes Schlapp for making "campaign speeches" during an interview on Sunday.
On his Fox News Sunday program, Wallace noted that President Donald Trump's Tulsa rally on Saturday had been sparsely attended despite the fact that the president claimed nearly a million people had requested tickets.
"We all saw the pictures last night," Wallace explained. "The arena was no more than two-thirds full. And the outdoor rally was cancelled because there was no overflow crowd. What happened?"
"The key here is to understand," Schlapp replied, "there were factors involved, they were concerned about the protesters who were coming in."
"He talks about how he can fill an arena," Wallace said, referring to the president. "And he didn't fill an arena last night. You guys were so far off that you had planned an outdoor rally and there wasn't an overflow crowd."
"Protesters did not stop people from coming to that rally," he added. "The fact is, people did not show up."
Schlapp disagreed before attacking presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden for holding virtual events during the ongoing pandemic.
"Mercedes, please don't filibuster," Wallace interrupted. "Frankly, it makes you guys look silly when you deny the reality of what happened."
"I don't know why you are saying that," Schlapp complained.
"There are empty seats there," Wallace replied. "At least a third, if not half of the rally was empty. You can't deny it."
"Joe Biden has been a failed politician that has done nothing but support failed institutions," Schlapp opined. "This is in contrast with President Trump who has a strong record and is rebuilding this economy."
"Mercedes, you're shifting to a campaign speech, which has nothing to do with the attendance of the rally," Wallace observed.


crooksandliars--2020-06-21--AG William Barr: Mueller Investigation Is 'Closest We Have Come' To The Assassination Of Lincoln

Attorney General William Barr suggested recently that the investigation into Russia 's interference in the 2016 U.S. election was similar @ @ @ @ @ Abraham Lincoln .
During an interview that aired Sunday on Fox News , host Maria @ @ @ @ @ Barr .
`` A source said to me a couple of years ago , speaking @ @ @ @ @ , that this was the closest the United States ever came to a coup to @ @ @ @ @ the assassination of Lincoln , '' Bartiromo told Barr .
`` Is that an appropriate @ @ @ @ @ : `` In this sense , I think it is the closest we have come @ @ @ @ @ push a president out of office . ''
`` I 'm not reaching a judgement @ @ @ @ @ were , '' Barr insisted .

Attorney General William Barr suggested recently that the investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. election was similar to the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln.
During an interview that aired Sunday on Fox News, host Maria Bartiromo posed the question to Barr.
"A source said to me a couple of years ago, speaking of the Russia collusion story, that this was the closest the United States ever came to a coup to take down a president since the assassination of Lincoln," Bartiromo told Barr. "Is that an appropriate statement?"
Barr agreed: "In this sense, I think it is the closest we have come to an organized effort to push a president out of office."
"And it continues," Bartiromo volunteered.
"I'm not reaching a judgement to what the motivations there were," Barr insisted.


crooksandliars--2020-06-21--Trump Lackey Defends Refusal To Follow CDC Guidelines, Calls Masks A 'Personal Choice'

Heaven forbid any of these Trump administration officials would break from Dear Leader and do the responsible thing , like encouraging everyone to wear masks in the middle of a pandemic that the United States in no way , shape or form has under control right now .
Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf made an appearance on this Sunday 's Meet the Press , and when asked by host Chuck Todd why the Trump campaign was n't following Trump 's own CDC guidelines by holding these MAGA rallies , Wolf refused to cross his boss , and called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I mean even the president and his campaign are n't following these guidelines holding an indoor rally .
And so is it a surprise that the public is not following these guidelines as well as they should , given that the example from the top is not wearing a mask , holding an indoor rally against the recommendation of various public health officials and including people on the taskforce ?
TODD : It looks as if though these , the -- what you guys have put out , the guidelines the CDC , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think I disagree with the premise of that question .
I think what we saw , particularly in Tulsa , when you talk about the President 's rally , is a state in a phase three reopening .
And so activities like this are allowed .
And again , when you talk about face mask or face coverings , hand sanitizer .
You do temperature checks at such an event .
These are all things that are in those guidelines ; that are in that guidance that we talked about .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's also a personal choice that people are making on the face coverings and where you are within that phase .
So , again it 's very specific to individual states .
We ’ ll continue to provide that resource and guidance , making sure that governors have all the information that they need to make those decisions locally .
As Todd tepidly attempted to point out , with no leadership from the top on the need for mask-wearing , and with Trump continuing to flout the need to slow the spread of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to take this pandemic seriously ( or they wo n't until it finally kills or puts enough people they know personally in the ICU ) .
The number of daily coronavirus cases in the United States has now hit 30,000 for the first time since May .
It remains to be seen just how high the case numbers , deaths , and number of ICUs that end up over capacity we have to reach before more of Trump 's death cult start to take this thing seriously .

Heaven forbid any of these Trump administration officials would break from Dear Leader and do the responsible thing, like encouraging everyone to wear masks in the middle of a pandemic that the United States in no way, shape or form has under control right now.
Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf made an appearance on this Sunday's Meet the Press, and when asked by host Chuck Todd why the Trump campaign wasn't following Trump's own CDC guidelines by holding these MAGA rallies, Wolf refused to cross his boss, and called mask-wearing a "personal choice."
I mean even the president and his campaign aren't following these guidelines holding an indoor rally. And so is it a surprise that the public is not following these guidelines as well as they should, given that the example from the top is not wearing a mask, holding an indoor rally against the recommendation of various public health officials and including people on the taskforce? TODD: It looks as if though these, the-- what you guys have put out, the guidelines the CDC, put out. WOLF: Well, I think I disagree with the premise of that question. I think what we saw, particularly in Tulsa, when you talk about the President's rally, is a state in a phase three reopening. And so activities like this are allowed. And again, when you talk about face mask or face coverings, hand sanitizer. You do temperature checks at such an event. These are all things that are in those guidelines; that are in that guidance that we talked about. So I think it's important. It's also a personal choice that people are making on the face coverings and where you are within that phase. So, again it's very specific to individual states. We’ll continue to provide that resource and guidance, making sure that governors have all the information that they need to make those decisions locally.
As Todd tepidly attempted to point out, with no leadership from the top on the need for mask-wearing, and with Trump continuing to flout the need to slow the spread of the virus, his supporters are never going to take this pandemic seriously (or they won't until it finally kills or puts enough people they know personally in the ICU).
The number of daily coronavirus cases in the United States has now hit 30,000 for the first time since May. It remains to be seen just how high the case numbers, deaths, and number of ICUs that end up over capacity we have to reach before more of Trump's death cult start to take this thing seriously.