rawstory--2020-01-12--Trump has never been anti-war — he’s just another Republican

American foreign policy has always been dictated by the wants and whims of powerful business interests .
This article first appeared in Salon .
As I plowed through my favorite works of historical literature to trace the evolution of Republican foreign policy through alternating periods of imperialism and isolationism , that fact was unavoidable .
We are a capitalist society , and the dictates of our business community trump all other considerations in shaping public policy .
It is foolish to pretend there was ever a time when those financial interests were not critical in determining our foreign policy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a crucial difference between our isolationist and interventionist eras — as well as a way of understanding how Donald Trump , for all his efforts to depicting himself as something new on the foreign policy scene , is just a continuation of the status quo that has existed for the last century or so .
1 .
Republican foreign policy was isolationist from the party ’ s founding through the 1890s .
The Republican Party was founded in 1854 , and acquired national power until the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was so focused on winning the Civil War that foreign policy was an afterthought ; to the extent that the 16th president took a serious interest in foreign affairs , it was in making sure that the Confederacy did not receive assistance from world powers like the British and French empires .
His successor , Andrew Johnson , was the first Republican president to make a major foreign policy move .
( Admittedly , calling Johnson a Republican is problematic : He had been a lifelong Democrat , and became so estranged from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
In 1867 , Johnson allowed Secretary of State William Seward to purchase Alaska from Russia for $ 7 million .
This acquisition , which was roughly one-fifth the size of the rest of the United States , went a long way toward furthering America ’ s ambition to become an empire in the Western Hemisphere .
At the time , however , it was ridiculed as “ Seward ’ s folly , ” with many in the press arguing that he had wasted taxpayer money on a frozen wasteland .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Alaska in 1898 — an important year in American foreign policy for other reasons — that Seward ’ s wisdom became apparent .
After Seward , however , America ’ s post-Civil War foreign policy was defined by isolationism .
The Civil War had made Americans weary of bloodshed .
During this time some smaller imperialist overtures were undertaken , such as Ulysses S. Grant ’ s attempt to annex Santo Domingo ( as the future Dominican Republic was then known ) and Benjamin Harrison ’ s support for a coup led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ monarchy .
For the most part , though , the guiding rule of American foreign policy was to follow the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 , which held that the U.S. would protect the Western Hemisphere from foreign invasion and otherwise stay out of foreign affairs , and the dictates of George Washington ’ s Farewell Address in 1796 , which similarly urged that the nation resist foreign entanglements ) .
2 .
Republican foreign policy went through an imperialist phase after the Spanish-American War in 1898 .
If there is one book you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it is Kristin L. Hoganson ’ s “ Fighting for American Manhood : How Gender Politics Provoked the Spanish-American and Philippine-American Wars.
” Hoganson discusses how cultural concerns about a decline in American masculinity during the late 19th and early 20th century bled over into politics .
William McKinley , despite not being inclined toward imperialism by nature , was so harshly criticized for refusing to wage war with Spain in order to “ liberate ” Cuba and the Philippines that the pressure caused him to declare war after the USS Maine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was blamed on the Spanish Empire but is now believed to have been an accident .
This was a turning point in the history of American foreign policy .
America ’ s victory of Spain meant that our nation began to take on the trappings of a true world power for the first time .
Matters were exacerbated under Theodore Roosevelt , for whom imperialism wasn ’ t a reluctant “ obligation ” but a grand adventure .
Roosevelt may be deified today , but his blatantly racist and jingoistic philosophy solidified the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He oversaw the building of the Panama Canal and established a “ Roosevelt corollary ” to the Monroe Doctrine that would allow America to intervene in Western Hemisphere nations on economic issues .
Even his successor , William Howard Taft , implemented a policy of “ Dollar Diplomacy ” in which he blatantly admitted that American financial interests would dictate its foreign policy decisions .
When World War I broke out in Europe , the Republican Party was split between the internationalist faction that wanted the U.S. to get involved and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bloody conflict .
Because public opinion was overwhelmingly against American involvement , the isolationists prevailed .
Then came the Zimmerman Telegram in 1917 , which revealed that Germany had tried to seduce Mexico ’ s support by offering to give back the lands America had seized during the Mexican-American War ( 1846-1848 ) .
At that point , Republicans joined the rest of the country in supporting American involvement on behalf of the Allies during World War I .
3 .
Republican foreign policy was isolationist and anti-immigrant from the end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After World War I , Woodrow Wilson tried to create an international alliance called the League of Nations that would prevent another world war from breaking out .
His plan was met with suspicion by the leader of the Senate Republicans , Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts , and the GOP emerged as staunchly isolationist in response to Wilson ’ s sudden intense internationalism .
The Republican presidential candidate in 1920 , Sen. Warren G. Harding of Ohio , ran on his opposition to the League of Nations and won what was then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Not surprisingly , he and his two successors — Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover — continued his larger tradition of being avowedly isolationist .
One striking parallel between this period and the era of Trump is in its open hostility toward immigrants .
Harding , Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover were all supporters of the Johnson-Reed Act , which established quotas for individuals from Southern and Eastern European countries , and outright banned immigration from Asian countries ( many of whom had already been barred under previous immigration laws ) .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go from the prejudices of that era to Trump ’ s open hostility toward immigrants from Latin America , Africa and the Middle East .
It was rooted in an ingrained xenophobia among the nation ’ s more powerful demographic classes , fueled by obvious racism .
Not all of the Republicans from this era were isolationist , however .
The GOP ’ s 1940 presidential candidate , Wendell Willkie , defeated challengers who opposed doing anything to help the Allies during World War II and instead pushed an internationalist perspective .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the Senate ’ s premier isolationists , Robert Taft , was poised to get the Republican presidential nomination — the GOP instead chose Gen. Dwight Eisenhower , an internationalist and war hero who became the first Republican president in 20 years .
4 .
World War II and the Cold War changed everything .
By then , however , World War II had already fundamentally transformed American society .
The trauma of Pearl Harbor convinced the American government , and its people , that the nation needed to have a strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world affairs .
The growth of the Soviet Union , and the spread of socialist or communist revolutions throughout the world , convinced Americans that they faced an existential threat during the Cold War .
After the Cold War ran its course in 1991 , Islamist terrorists became a new existential threat that ( purportedly ) called for a strong military-industrial complex .
Despite warning about the dangers of the military-industrial complex near the end of his presidency , Eisenhower believed in a robust military that used America ’ s clout to shape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by every Republican president that followed him : Richard Nixon , Gerald Ford , Ronald Reagan , George Bush the father and George W. Bush the son .
The names of the countries where those presidents waged war have varied — Korea , Vietnam , Afghanistan , Iraq .
Some of them were more favorable toward international institutions than others : There ’ s a considerable contrast between George H.W .
Bush and his son on that issue , for example .
But overall , the idea was that the U.S. had both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the leader of the “ free world , ” in contrast to fascism , Soviet expansion and Islamic terrorism .
5 .
Aside from a handful of minor issues , Trump is basically continuing the foreign policies of the last 80 years of Republican political leaders .
He ain ’ t that special .
I will leave it to the psychologists to speculate why Trump has chosen a handful of issues on which to be non-normative .
It ’ s a subject I ’ ve discussed with one of his favorite Fox personalities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve sought comment from the White House with minimal acknowledgment .
Either way , it is fair to identify a few semi-arbitrary issues where Trump ’ s ideas differ from those of mainstream Republicans since World War II .
Trade is a big one .
The last president to actively promote a protectionist perspective on trade was Herbert Hoover , who is associated with the Great Depression .
Trump also likes to make a big deal about his reluctance to participate in multinational organizations like NATO , and tends to cozy up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Salman , Kim Jong-un , Rodrigo Duterte and Vladimir Putin .
He pulled U.S. forces largely out of Syria and generally appears to make decisions at random , with no consistent philosophy at work .
Or rather , if there is one , it ’ s rooted in the character flaws of one man rather than a body of thought about how the world works .
Where it has counted , though , Trump has been a traditional Republican .
He pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal long before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pumped up the military budget ; and his contempt for international institutions like the UN was foreshadowed by presidents like George W. Bush .
Let ’ s not pretend that Trump is the first Republican president who has made deals with disreputable foreign regimes ( think of Ronald Reagan and apartheid South Africa ) .
Trump ’ s “ America First ” and “ nationalist ” rhetoric may sound like Republicans of the 1920s , but he is only amplifying the prejudices that his party has always held .

American foreign policy has always been dictated by the wants and whims of powerful business interests.
This article first appeared in Salon.
As I plowed through my favorite works of historical literature to trace the evolution of Republican foreign policy through alternating periods of imperialism and isolationism, that fact was unavoidable. We are a capitalist society, and the dictates of our business community trump all other considerations in shaping public policy. It is foolish to pretend there was ever a time when those financial interests were not critical in determining our foreign policy.
Having said that, there is still a crucial difference between our isolationist and interventionist eras — as well as a way of understanding how Donald Trump, for all his efforts to depicting himself as something new on the foreign policy scene, is just a continuation of the status quo that has existed for the last century or so.
1. Republican foreign policy was isolationist from the party's founding through the 1890s.
The Republican Party was founded in 1854, and acquired national power until the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860. Not surprisingly, Lincoln's administration was so focused on winning the Civil War that foreign policy was an afterthought; to the extent that the 16th president took a serious interest in foreign affairs, it was in making sure that the Confederacy did not receive assistance from world powers like the British and French empires.
His successor, Andrew Johnson, was the first Republican president to make a major foreign policy move. (Admittedly, calling Johnson a Republican is problematic: He had been a lifelong Democrat, and became so estranged from Republicans in Congress he was eventually impeached.) In 1867, Johnson allowed Secretary of State William Seward to purchase Alaska from Russia for $7 million. This acquisition, which was roughly one-fifth the size of the rest of the United States, went a long way toward furthering America's ambition to become an empire in the Western Hemisphere. At the time, however, it was ridiculed as "Seward's folly," with many in the press arguing that he had wasted taxpayer money on a frozen wasteland. It wasn't until gold was discovered in Alaska in 1898 — an important year in American foreign policy for other reasons — that Seward's wisdom became apparent.
After Seward, however, America's post-Civil War foreign policy was defined by isolationism. The Civil War had made Americans weary of bloodshed. During this time some smaller imperialist overtures were undertaken, such as Ulysses S. Grant's attempt to annex Santo Domingo (as the future Dominican Republic was then known) and Benjamin Harrison's support for a coup led by American businessmen who overthrew the Hawaiian monarchy.
For the most part, though, the guiding rule of American foreign policy was to follow the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which held that the U.S. would protect the Western Hemisphere from foreign invasion and otherwise stay out of foreign affairs, and the dictates of George Washington's Farewell Address in 1796, which similarly urged that the nation resist foreign entanglements).
2. Republican foreign policy went through an imperialist phase after the Spanish-American War in 1898.
If there is one book you should read after looking at this article, it is Kristin L. Hoganson's "Fighting for American Manhood: How Gender Politics Provoked the Spanish-American and Philippine-American Wars." Hoganson discusses how cultural concerns about a decline in American masculinity during the late 19th and early 20th century bled over into politics. William McKinley, despite not being inclined toward imperialism by nature, was so harshly criticized for refusing to wage war with Spain in order to "liberate" Cuba and the Philippines that the pressure caused him to declare war after the USS Maine exploded in 1898 — an explosion that was blamed on the Spanish Empire but is now believed to have been an accident.
This was a turning point in the history of American foreign policy. America's victory of Spain meant that our nation began to take on the trappings of a true world power for the first time. Matters were exacerbated under Theodore Roosevelt, for whom imperialism wasn't a reluctant "obligation" but a grand adventure. Roosevelt may be deified today, but his blatantly racist and jingoistic philosophy solidified the imperialist ventures that had begun under McKinley. He oversaw the building of the Panama Canal and established a "Roosevelt corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine that would allow America to intervene in Western Hemisphere nations on economic issues. Even his successor, William Howard Taft, implemented a policy of "Dollar Diplomacy" in which he blatantly admitted that American financial interests would dictate its foreign policy decisions.
When World War I broke out in Europe, the Republican Party was split between the internationalist faction that wanted the U.S. to get involved and the isolationist faction eager to stay out of the bloody conflict. Because public opinion was overwhelmingly against American involvement, the isolationists prevailed. Then came the Zimmerman Telegram in 1917, which revealed that Germany had tried to seduce Mexico's support by offering to give back the lands America had seized during the Mexican-American War (1846-1848). At that point, Republicans joined the rest of the country in supporting American involvement on behalf of the Allies during World War I.
3. Republican foreign policy was isolationist and anti-immigrant from the end of World War I until Pearl Harbor.
After World War I, Woodrow Wilson tried to create an international alliance called the League of Nations that would prevent another world war from breaking out. His plan was met with suspicion by the leader of the Senate Republicans, Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts, and the GOP emerged as staunchly isolationist in response to Wilson's sudden intense internationalism. The Republican presidential candidate in 1920, Sen. Warren G. Harding of Ohio, ran on his opposition to the League of Nations and won what was then the biggest popular vote majority in history. Not surprisingly, he and his two successors — Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover — continued his larger tradition of being avowedly isolationist.
One striking parallel between this period and the era of Trump is in its open hostility toward immigrants. Harding, Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover were all supporters of the Johnson-Reed Act, which established quotas for individuals from Southern and Eastern European countries, and outright banned immigration from Asian countries (many of whom had already been barred under previous immigration laws). It isn't much of a leap to go from the prejudices of that era to Trump's open hostility toward immigrants from Latin America, Africa and the Middle East. It was rooted in an ingrained xenophobia among the nation's more powerful demographic classes, fueled by obvious racism.
Not all of the Republicans from this era were isolationist, however. The GOP's 1940 presidential candidate, Wendell Willkie, defeated challengers who opposed doing anything to help the Allies during World War II and instead pushed an internationalist perspective. In 1952 — when it looked like one of the Senate's premier isolationists, Robert Taft, was poised to get the Republican presidential nomination — the GOP instead chose Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, an internationalist and war hero who became the first Republican president in 20 years.
4. World War II and the Cold War changed everything.
By then, however, World War II had already fundamentally transformed American society. The trauma of Pearl Harbor convinced the American government, and its people, that the nation needed to have a strong military and play a leading role in world affairs. The growth of the Soviet Union, and the spread of socialist or communist revolutions throughout the world, convinced Americans that they faced an existential threat during the Cold War. After the Cold War ran its course in 1991, Islamist terrorists became a new existential threat that (purportedly) called for a strong military-industrial complex.
Despite warning about the dangers of the military-industrial complex near the end of his presidency, Eisenhower believed in a robust military that used America's clout to shape foreign affairs. This philosophy was shared by every Republican president that followed him: Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George Bush the father and George W. Bush the son. The names of the countries where those presidents waged war have varied — Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. Some of them were more favorable toward international institutions than others: There's a considerable contrast between George H.W. Bush and his son on that issue, for example. But overall, the idea was that the U.S. had both national security interests and ideological responsibility as the leader of the "free world," in contrast to fascism, Soviet expansion and Islamic terrorism.
5. Aside from a handful of minor issues, Trump is basically continuing the foreign policies of the last 80 years of Republican political leaders. He ain't that special.
I will leave it to the psychologists to speculate why Trump has chosen a handful of issues on which to be non-normative. It's a subject I've discussed with one of his favorite Fox personalities, Steve Hilton, and I've sought comment from the White House with minimal acknowledgment. Either way, it is fair to identify a few semi-arbitrary issues where Trump's ideas differ from those of mainstream Republicans since World War II.
Trade is a big one. The last president to actively promote a protectionist perspective on trade was Herbert Hoover, who is associated with the Great Depression. Trump also likes to make a big deal about his reluctance to participate in multinational organizations like NATO, and tends to cozy up to authoritarian leaders like Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, Kim Jong-un, Rodrigo Duterte and Vladimir Putin. He pulled U.S. forces largely out of Syria and generally appears to make decisions at random, with no consistent philosophy at work. Or rather, if there is one, it's rooted in the character flaws of one man rather than a body of thought about how the world works.
Where it has counted, though, Trump has been a traditional Republican. He pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal long before the assassination of Qassem Soleimani; he has pumped up the military budget; and his contempt for international institutions like the UN was foreshadowed by presidents like George W. Bush. Let's not pretend that Trump is the first Republican president who has made deals with disreputable foreign regimes (think of Ronald Reagan and apartheid South Africa). Trump's "America First" and "nationalist" rhetoric may sound like Republicans of the 1920s, but he is only amplifying the prejudices that his party has always held.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Mike Huckabee complained about mean tweets — and it backfired spectacularly

Former Governor Mike Huckabee ( R-AR ) spent Saturday evening in a television studio for an appearance on Fox News , where he once hosted a show .
Meanwhile , on Twitter , a new image emerged of Huckabee with Lev Parnas , the indicted associate of Donald Trump defense attorney Rudy Giuliani .
How the story was unearthed is a fascinating story , involving a thin-skinned politician , beachfront property in Florida , and one determined attorney .
Daniel Uhlfelder , who posted the picture , is the legal counsel for Florida Beaches for All , a citizens group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is where Huckabee comes in , as he purchased a beachfront mansion in the Sunshine State , Sun Sentinel columnist Steve Bousquet reported in December .
“ He spent some of his Fox dough to build a $ 7 million beachfront house on the Gulf of Mexico near Destin in the Panhandle at a place called Blue Mountain Beach in Walton County .
The three-story home is near Ground Zero of an epic legal fight that threatens the Florida tradition of public beach access , ” the newspaper noted .
“ Huckabee ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where he ’ s known for awful puns and a steady barrage of criticism against Democrats , such as a racist tweet that went viral last year.
” “ Ol ’ Huck can dish it out , but he can ’ t take it .
When a persistent critic , a lawyer on the public side of the beach access battle , tweeted back with sarcasm and humor , Huckabee tried to silence him by filing a formal complaint with the Florida Bar .
The complaint should be tossed out as a sham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disciplining lawyers , ” Bousquet explained .
When the complaint against him was filed , Uhfelder had 400 followers , but quickly grew his followers about 80,000 .
Uhfelder as went after the former governor ’ s daughter , ex-White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders .
Former Rep. Gwen Graham ( D-FL ) praised Uhfelder as “ a great person and true Floridian .
”

Former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR) spent Saturday evening in a television studio for an appearance on Fox News, where he once hosted a show.
Meanwhile, on Twitter, a new image emerged of Huckabee with Lev Parnas, the indicted associate of Donald Trump defense attorney Rudy Giuliani.
How the story was unearthed is a fascinating story, involving a thin-skinned politician, beachfront property in Florida, and one determined attorney.
Daniel Uhlfelder, who posted the picture, is the legal counsel for Florida Beaches for All, a citizens group fighting to protect public access.
This is where Huckabee comes in, as he purchased a beachfront mansion in the Sunshine State, Sun Sentinel columnist Steve Bousquet reported in December.
"He spent some of his Fox dough to build a $7 million beachfront house on the Gulf of Mexico near Destin in the Panhandle at a place called Blue Mountain Beach in Walton County. The three-story home is near Ground Zero of an epic legal fight that threatens the Florida tradition of public beach access," the newspaper noted. "Huckabee’s other favorite hangout is Twitter, where he’s known for awful puns and a steady barrage of criticism against Democrats, such as a racist tweet that went viral last year."
"Ol’ Huck can dish it out, but he can’t take it. When a persistent critic, a lawyer on the public side of the beach access battle, tweeted back with sarcasm and humor, Huckabee tried to silence him by filing a formal complaint with the Florida Bar. The complaint should be tossed out as a sham and an abuse of the system of disciplining lawyers," Bousquet explained.
When the complaint against him was filed, Uhfelder had 400 followers, but quickly grew his followers about 80,000.
Uhfelder as went after the former governor's daughter, ex-White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
And he posted pictures.
Former Rep. Gwen Graham (D-FL) praised Uhfelder as "a great person and true Floridian."


rawstory--2020-01-12--‘He stood up to Nancy Pelosi’: Lindsey Graham praises Mitch McConnell for impeachment being his ‘fin

‘He stood up to Nancy Pelosi’: Lindsey Graham praises Mitch McConnell for impeachment being his ‘finest hour’

Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) praised Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for his handling of President Donald Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ interview that was broadcast by Fox News on Saturday night .
Former Judge Jeanine Pirro @ @ @ @ @ the Senate judiciary committee , and asked about the standoff between McConnell and Speaker Nancy @ @ @ @ @ trial will feature witnesses .
Pelosi has been pressuring McConnell for a fair trial .
@ @ @ @ @ the debate to be over .
“ It makes no sense , she ’ s @ @ @ @ @ how to run the Senate , ” he complained .
“ Mitch McConnell — this @ @ @ @ @ ” Graham declared .
“ He stood up to Nancy Pelosi , she ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Senate , she gave in , and I think it hurt her , ” he @ @

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) praised Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for his handling of President Donald Trump's impeachment trial during an interview that was broadcast by Fox News on Saturday night.
Former Judge Jeanine Pirro interviewed Graham, who chairs the Senate judiciary committee, and asked about the standoff between McConnell and Speaker Nancy Pelosi over whether the Senate trial will feature witnesses.
Pelosi has been pressuring McConnell for a fair trial.
Graham, however, declared the debate to be over.
"It makes no sense, she's trying to tell Mitch McConnell how to run the Senate," he complained.
"Mitch McConnell -- this is his finest hour," Graham declared.
"He stood up to Nancy Pelosi, she's not going to run the Senate, she gave in, and I think it hurt her," he argued.
Watch:


rawstory--2020-01-12--Rudy Giuliani blasts Mike Pompeo on Fox News — demands Trump’s State Department ‘wake up’ on Iran

President Donald Trump ’ s personal attorney blasted his Secretary of State for his administration ’ s foreign policy on @ @ @ @ @ Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was interviewed by former Judge Jeanine Pirro about @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s defense attorney suggested that the regime of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei would @ @ @ @ @ of State Mike Pompeo was asleep at the wheel .
“ Iran is on the @ @ @ @ @ our State Department would wake up !
” Giuliani declared .

President Donald Trump's personal attorney blasted his Secretary of State for his administration's foreign policy on Fox News on Saturday.
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was interviewed by former Judge Jeanine Pirro about the protests in Iran.
Trump's defense attorney suggested that the regime of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei would remain in power because Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was asleep at the wheel.
"Iran is on the brink of being overthrown if our State Department would wake up!" Giuliani declared.
"Would wake up!" he repeated.
Watch:


rawstory--2020-01-12--Trump was trolled on Twitter — in Farsi — by Kellyanne Conway’s husband

Donald Trump addressed the people of Iran using the president ’ s favorite social media platform on Saturday .
“ @ @ @ @ @ people of Iran : I ’ ve stood with you since the beginning of my @ @ @ @ @ will continue to stand with you , ” Trump tweeted .
“ We are following @ @ @ @ @ are inspired by your courage.
” The president also repeated his message in Farsi .
@ @ @ @ @ , a frequent critic of the White House , shared his own message in response @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re still being impeached , and you always will be , ” the @ @ @ @ @ Google Translate .
Conway noted he intended for the message to read that Trump is @ @ @ @ @ was lost in translation .
Also on Saturday , The Washington Post published an op-ed @ @ @ @ @ acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal offering advice to Speaker Nancy Pelosi in her confrontation with @ @ @ @ @ .

After announcing the names of those who are being indicted, she also listed off the premise of her indictment of the 19 individuals and 41 counts.
"Specifically, the participants in association took various actions in Georgia and elsewhere to block the counting of the votes of the presidential electors who were certified as the winners of Georgia's 2020 general election. As you examine the indictment, you will see acts that are identified as overacts and those are that are identified as predicate acts, sometimes called acts of racketeering activity," she explained. "Over acts are not necessarily crimes under Georgia law in isolation but are alleged to be acts taken in furtherance of the conspiracy."
She went on to say that many occurred in Georgia, while some happened in other places, but are included because they are part of the effort to overthrow the 2020 election results in Georgia.
"The acts identified as predicate acts or acts of racketeering activity are crimes that are alleged to have been committed in furtherance of the criminal enterprise," Willis explained. "Acts of racketeering activity are also charged as separate counts in the indictment against those who are alleged to have committed them. All elections in our nations are administered by the states which are given the responsibility of ensuring a fair process and an accurate counting of the votes. That includes elections for presidential electors, congress, state officials and local offices. The state's role in this process is essential to the functioning of our democracy. Georgia, like every state, has laws that will allow those who believe the results of an election are wrong, whether because of intentional wrongdoing or unintentional error, to challenge those results in our state courts. The indictment alleges that rather than abide by Georgia's legal process for election challenges, the defendants engaged in a criminal racketeering enterprise to overturn Georgia's presidential election result."
Willis went on to say that she intends to try all 19 defendants together.
See her full statement and answer questions in the video below or at the link here.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Iran ‘dispersed’ protesters — and arrested UK envoy Rob Macaire: report

Iran said Saturday it “ unintentionally ” shot down a Ukrainian passenger jet , killing all 176 people aboard , in an abrupt about-turn after initially denying Western claims it was struck by a missile .
President Hassan Rouhani said a military probe into the tragedy had found “ missiles fired due to human error ” brought down the Boeing 737 , calling it an “ unforgivable mistake ” .
At a student protest to pay tribute to the crash victims on Saturday , Iranian authorities briefly detained Britain ’ s ambassador to Tehran , in what the British government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He was later released .
US President Donald Trump told Iranians that he stands by them and is monitoring the demonstrations .
“ To the brave , long-suffering people of Iran : I ’ ve stood with you since the beginning of my Presidency , and my Administration will continue to stand with you , ” he tweeted .
“ There can not be another massacre of peaceful protesters , nor an internet shutdown .
The world is watching , ” he added , apparently referring to an Iranian crackdown on street protests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau demanded that Iran provide “ full clarity ” on the downing of the plane , which Ottawa says had 57 Canadian citizens aboard .
“ A full and complete investigation must be conducted , ” Trudeau said .
“ Iran must take full responsibility.
” Iran ’ s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also offered his condolences and ordered the armed forces to address “ shortcomings ” so that such a disaster does not happen again .
Tehran ’ s acknowledgement came after officials in Iran denied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ International Airlines plane had been struck by a missile in a catastrophic error .
The Kiev-bound jet slammed into a field shortly after taking off from Tehran ’ s Imam Khomeini International Airport on Wednesday .
The crash came hours after Tehran launched missiles at bases hosting American forces in Iraq in response to the killing of top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in a US drone strike .
Fears grew of an all-out war between Iran and its arch-enemy the United States , but those concerns have subsided after Trump said Tehran appeared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US bases .
On Saturday evening , police dispersed students who had converged on Amir Kabir University in Tehran to pay tribute to the victims , after some among the hundreds gathered shouted “ destructive ” slogans , Fars news agency said .
British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said UK envoy Rob Macaire had been detained .
“ The arrest of our ambassador in Tehran without grounds or explanation is a flagrant violation of international law , ” Raab said in a statement .
The US called on Iran to apologise .
Iran @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is close to the country ’ s conservatives , said the envoy had been “ provoking radical acts ” among students .
He was released a few hours later and would be summoned again by Iranian officials on Sunday , it said .
State television reported that students shouted “ anti-regime ” chants , while Fars reported that posters of Soleimani had been torn down .
The aerospace commander of Iran ’ s Revolutionary Guards accepted full responsibility for Wednesday ’ s accident .
But Brigadier General Amirali Hajizadeh said the missile operator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mistaking it for a “ cruise missile ” .
The operator failed to obtain approval from his superiors because of disruptions to a communications system , he said .
“ He had 10 seconds to decide .
He could have decided to strike or not to strike and under such circumstances , he took the wrong decision.
” Iran had been under mounting international pressure to allow a “ credible ” investigation after video emerged appearing to show the moment the airliner was hit .
In footage that the New York Times said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is seen rising into the sky before a bright flash appears .
Several seconds later , an explosion is heard .
Iran ’ s military said it had been at the highest level of alert after American “ threats ” and that the plane had turned and come close to a “ sensitive ” military site before it was targeted due to “ human error ” .
Rouhani said Iran had been on alert for possible US attacks after Soleimani ’ s “ martyrdom ” .
The European Union ’ s air safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flying over Iran .
“ Iran is very much saddened by this catastrophic mistake and I , on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran , express my deep condolences to the families of victims of this painful catastrophe , ” the president said .
Rouhani added he had ordered “ all relevant bodies to take all necessary actions ( to ensure ) compensation ” to the families of those killed The majority of passengers on Flight PS752 were Iranians and Canadians , including dual nationals , while Ukrainians , Afghans , Britons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told his Ukrainian counterpart Saturday that “ all the persons involved in this air disaster will be brought to justice , ” Ukraine ’ s presidency said .
President Volodymyr Zelensky said earlier on Facebook “ we expect Iran… to bring the guilty to the courts.
” This is Iran ’ s worst civil aviation disaster since 1988 when the US military said it shot down an Iran Air plane over the Gulf by mistake , killing all 290 people on board .

Iran said Saturday it "unintentionally" shot down a Ukrainian passenger jet, killing all 176 people aboard, in an abrupt about-turn after initially denying Western claims it was struck by a missile.
President Hassan Rouhani said a military probe into the tragedy had found "missiles fired due to human error" brought down the Boeing 737, calling it an "unforgivable mistake".
At a student protest to pay tribute to the crash victims on Saturday, Iranian authorities briefly detained Britain's ambassador to Tehran, in what the British government called a violation of international law. He was later released.
US President Donald Trump told Iranians that he stands by them and is monitoring the demonstrations.
"To the brave, long-suffering people of Iran: I've stood with you since the beginning of my Presidency, and my Administration will continue to stand with you," he tweeted.
"There can not be another massacre of peaceful protesters, nor an internet shutdown. The world is watching," he added, apparently referring to an Iranian crackdown on street protests that broke out in November.
Earlier, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau demanded that Iran provide "full clarity" on the downing of the plane, which Ottawa says had 57 Canadian citizens aboard.
"A full and complete investigation must be conducted," Trudeau said. "Iran must take full responsibility."
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also offered his condolences and ordered the armed forces to address "shortcomings" so that such a disaster does not happen again.
Tehran's acknowledgement came after officials in Iran denied for days Western claims that the Ukraine International Airlines plane had been struck by a missile in a catastrophic error.
The Kiev-bound jet slammed into a field shortly after taking off from Tehran's Imam Khomeini International Airport on Wednesday.
The crash came hours after Tehran launched missiles at bases hosting American forces in Iraq in response to the killing of top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in a US drone strike.
Fears grew of an all-out war between Iran and its arch-enemy the United States, but those concerns have subsided after Trump said Tehran appeared to be standing down after targeting the US bases.
Protesters 'dispersed'
On Saturday evening, police dispersed students who had converged on Amir Kabir University in Tehran to pay tribute to the victims, after some among the hundreds gathered shouted "destructive" slogans, Fars news agency said.
British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said UK envoy Rob Macaire had been detained.
"The arrest of our ambassador in Tehran without grounds or explanation is a flagrant violation of international law," Raab said in a statement. The US called on Iran to apologise.
Iran's Tasnim News Agency, which is close to the country's conservatives, said the envoy had been "provoking radical acts" among students. He was released a few hours later and would be summoned again by Iranian officials on Sunday, it said.
State television reported that students shouted "anti-regime" chants, while Fars reported that posters of Soleimani had been torn down.
The aerospace commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards accepted full responsibility for Wednesday's accident.
But Brigadier General Amirali Hajizadeh said the missile operator acted independently, targeting the 737 after mistaking it for a "cruise missile".
The operator failed to obtain approval from his superiors because of disruptions to a communications system, he said.
"He had 10 seconds to decide. He could have decided to strike or not to strike and under such circumstances, he took the wrong decision."
Justice, compensation
Iran had been under mounting international pressure to allow a "credible" investigation after video emerged appearing to show the moment the airliner was hit.
In footage that the New York Times said it had verified, a fast-moving object is seen rising into the sky before a bright flash appears. Several seconds later, an explosion is heard.
Iran's military said it had been at the highest level of alert after American "threats" and that the plane had turned and come close to a "sensitive" military site before it was targeted due to "human error".
Rouhani said Iran had been on alert for possible US attacks after Soleimani's "martyrdom".
The European Union's air safety agency on Saturday advised airlines to avoid flying over Iran.
"Iran is very much saddened by this catastrophic mistake and I, on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran, express my deep condolences to the families of victims of this painful catastrophe," the president said.
Rouhani added he had ordered "all relevant bodies to take all necessary actions (to ensure) compensation" to the families of those killed
The majority of passengers on Flight PS752 were Iranians and Canadians, including dual nationals, while Ukrainians, Afghans, Britons and Swedes were also aboard.
Rouhani told his Ukrainian counterpart Saturday that "all the persons involved in this air disaster will be brought to justice," Ukraine's presidency said.
President Volodymyr Zelensky said earlier on Facebook "we expect Iran... to bring the guilty to the courts."
This is Iran's worst civil aviation disaster since 1988 when the US military said it shot down an Iran Air plane over the Gulf by mistake, killing all 290 people on board.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Involuntary Celibates are an ‘emerging domestic terrorism threat’: Texas warns of an ‘Incel Rebellio

Involuntary Celibates are an ‘emerging domestic terrorism threat’: Texas warns of an ‘Incel Rebellion’

Misogynistic men who identify as part of the “ Involuntary Celibate ” movement are domestic terrorism threats , according to a new report .
The Texas Department of Public Safety included the warning in their 2020 , “ Texas Domestic Terrorism Threat Assessment ” ( PDF ) .
“ Although not a new movement , Involuntary Celibates ( Incels ) are an emerging domestic terrorism threat as current adherents demonstrate marked acts or threats of violence in furtherance of their social grievance , ” the report noted .
“ Once viewed as a criminal threat by many law enforcement authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ growing domestic terrorism concern due to the ideological nature of recent Incel attacks internationally , nationwide , and in Texas.
” “ What begins as a personal grievance due to perceived rejection by women may morph into allegiance to , and attempts to further , an Incel Rebellion .
The result has thrust the Incel movement into the realm of domestic terrorism , ” the report explained .
“ The violence demonstrated by Incels in the past decade , coupled with extremely violent online rhetoric , suggests this particular threat could soon match @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of lethalness demonstrated by other domestic terrorism types , ” the report warned .

Misogynistic men who identify as part of the "Involuntary Celibate" movement are domestic terrorism threats, according to a new report.
The Texas Department of Public Safety included the warning in their 2020, "Texas Domestic Terrorism Threat Assessment" (PDF).
"Although not a new movement, Involuntary Celibates (Incels) are an emerging domestic terrorism threat as current adherents demonstrate marked acts or threats of violence in furtherance of their social grievance," the report noted. "Once viewed as a criminal threat by many law enforcement authorities, Incels are now seen as a growing domestic terrorism concern due to the ideological nature of recent Incel attacks internationally, nationwide, and in Texas."
"What begins as a personal grievance due to perceived rejection by women may morph into allegiance to, and attempts to further, an Incel Rebellion. The result has thrust the Incel movement into the realm of domestic terrorism," the report explained.
"The violence demonstrated by Incels in the past decade, coupled with extremely violent online rhetoric, suggests this particular threat could soon match, or potentially eclipse, the level of lethalness demonstrated by other domestic terrorism types," the report warned.
[caption id="attachment_1579282" align="aligncenter" width="786"] “Texas Domestic Terrorism Threat Assessment” by the Texas Department of Public Safety (screengrab)[/caption]
[caption id="attachment_1579283" align="aligncenter" width="803"] “Texas Domestic Terrorism Threat Assessment” by the Texas Department of Public Safety (screengrab)[/caption]


rawstory--2020-01-13--Trump wants to talk to Kim Jong Un again: report

President Donald Trump ’ s attempts to score a denuclearization treaty from North Korea fell flat after over a year of diplomatic talks .
The move comes after dictator Kim Jong Un promised a “ gift ” for the United States for Christmas , setting the public on edge .
When nothing happened , however , Kim became the butt of jokes .
In an interview with Axios , White House national security adviser Robert O ’ Brien said that the administration has “ reached out to the North Koreans ” to reignite talks .
“ We ’ ve reached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them know that we would like to continue the negotiations in Stockholm that were last undertaken in early October , ” he said .
“ We ’ ve been letting them know , through various channels , that we would like to get those [ negotiations ] back on track and to implement Chairman Kim ’ s commitment ” to the denuclearization agreement .
Trump has long maintained he ’ s the best dealmaker , but he ’ s failed to craft an agreement on Chinese trade or denuclearization with North Korea .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president is trying to play off of his “ warm personal relationship ” with Kim .
Kim “ promised to send a Christmas present , ” O ’ Brien noted .
“ The president suggested he send him a vase .
We didn ’ t get a vase or any other sort of Christmas gift .
That appears to be positive.
” “ All we know is we were told we were going to get a Christmas gift , and the Christmas gift didn ’ t come .
And so I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , again , that doesn ’ t mean we won ’ t see some sort of test in the future , ” O ’ Brien continued .

President Donald Trump's attempts to score a denuclearization treaty from North Korea fell flat after over a year of diplomatic talks.
The move comes after dictator Kim Jong Un promised a "gift" for the United States for Christmas, setting the public on edge. When nothing happened, however, Kim became the butt of jokes.
In an interview with Axios, White House national security adviser Robert O'Brien said that the administration has "reached out to the North Koreans" to reignite talks.
"We've reached out to the North Koreans and let them know that we would like to continue the negotiations in Stockholm that were last undertaken in early October," he said. "We've been letting them know, through various channels, that we would like to get those [negotiations] back on track and to implement Chairman Kim's commitment" to the denuclearization agreement.
Trump has long maintained he's the best dealmaker, but he's failed to craft an agreement on Chinese trade or denuclearization with North Korea. Still, Axios said that it appears the president is trying to play off of his "warm personal relationship" with Kim.
Kim "promised to send a Christmas present," O'Brien noted. "The president suggested he send him a vase. We didn't get a vase or any other sort of Christmas gift. That appears to be positive."
"All we know is we were told we were going to get a Christmas gift, and the Christmas gift didn't come. And so I think that was an encouraging sign. But, again, that doesn't mean we won't see some sort of test in the future," O'Brien continued.
Read the full report at Axios.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Trump may pull troops out of Afghanistan without a deal — as 2020 election approaches

President Donald Trump has been working with Taliban representatives to craft a deal so that the U.S. can pull out of Afghanistan .
Of the hundreds of campaign promises Trump made in 2016 was to “ keep ” troops on the ground in Afghanistan because it is “ a mess.
” But as the ongoing wars grow more unpopular and deaths continue , Trump promised he would pull troops out by 2020 .
“ He was fed up with hearing that the U.S. was not winning there , ” a former U.S. defense official told NBC News .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but deciding to pull out of the embassy , too , was a shock.
” Pulling out of the country means Trump must craft a deal with the Taliban , the group that Osama bin Laden led to take down the World Trade Towers in 2001 .
Trump had invited the Taliban to Camp David ahead of the Sept. 11 anniversary in 2019 , but it was ultimately canceled and reworked .
“ We ’ re back in a situation where we ’ re in talks with the Taliban , ” White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told Axios .
“ The Afghan forces are doing better , and I think we ’ ll be in a position at some point soon , whether it ’ s with a deal or without a deal , to reduce our military footprint in Afghanistan.
” “ Trump has long said he wants to pull American troops out of Afghanistan , ” wrote Axios .
“ A source close to the president told Axios Trump views this as one of his biggest unmet promises .
The source worries Trump would order a major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when asked if Trump could get a deal with the Taliban before the election , O ’ Brien said he doesn ’ t judge things based on elections .
“ We were very close to doing a deal last year , and the Taliban felt that they could increase pressure on the United States by blowing up a bunch of people , including an American , right before some critical end-game talks , ” he explained .
“ This president does not respond to that type of tactic.
” While the election isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brien , it is for Trump .
The military began drawing up plans in Oct. 2019 for a draw down if the president surprised them as he did with Syria .
“ Trump has long threatened to withdraw all American forces from Afghanistan , but his repeated emphasis in recent weeks on the need to end all foreign wars has infused a new sense of urgency into the renewed Pentagon effort , ” officials said according to NBC News .

President Donald Trump has been working with Taliban representatives to craft a deal so that the U.S. can pull out of Afghanistan. Of the hundreds of campaign promises Trump made in 2016 was to "keep" troops on the ground in Afghanistan because it is "a mess." But as the ongoing wars grow more unpopular and deaths continue, Trump promised he would pull troops out by 2020.
"He was fed up with hearing that the U.S. was not winning there," a former U.S. defense official told NBC News. "It was no secret he wanted out, but deciding to pull out of the embassy, too, was a shock."
Pulling out of the country means Trump must craft a deal with the Taliban, the group linked to al Qaeda, which worked to attack the World Trade Towers in 2001. Trump had invited the Taliban to Camp David ahead of the Sept. 11 anniversary in 2019, but it was ultimately canceled and reworked. The Taliban still denies the link.
"We're back in a situation where we're in talks with the Taliban," White House national security adviser Robert O'Brien told Axios. "The Afghan forces are doing better, and I think we'll be in a position at some point soon, whether it's with a deal or without a deal, to reduce our military footprint in Afghanistan."
"Trump has long said he wants to pull American troops out of Afghanistan," wrote Axios. "A source close to the president told Axios Trump views this as one of his biggest unmet promises. The source worries Trump would order a major drawdown before the 2020 election."
But when asked if Trump could get a deal with the Taliban before the election, O'Brien said he doesn't judge things based on elections.
"We were very close to doing a deal last year, and the Taliban felt that they could increase pressure on the United States by blowing up a bunch of people, including an American, right before some critical end-game talks," he explained. "This president does not respond to that type of tactic."
While the election isn't a concern for O'Brien, it is for Trump.
The military began drawing up plans in Oct. 2019 for a draw down if the president surprised them as he did with Syria.
"Trump has long threatened to withdraw all American forces from Afghanistan, but his repeated emphasis in recent weeks on the need to end all foreign wars has infused a new sense of urgency into the renewed Pentagon effort," officials said according to NBC News.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Hillary testified for 8 hours — Trump couldn’t make it 8 minutes: MSNBC host mocks president’s court

Hillary testified for 8 hours — Trump couldn’t make it 8 minutes: MSNBC host mocks president’s court fears

When former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified to Congress under one of the six Republican investigations into the Benghazi attacks , she appeared for eight hours , answering Republicans ’ questions .
In his commentary Sunday , Rev .
Al Sharpton speculated President Donald Trump probably couldn ’ t make it more than eight minutes .
Sharpton ’ s commentary section of his show specifically mentioned the president ’ s problems with corruption .
After chanting , “ Lock her up !
” for four years , it was discovered that Trump ’ s own Justice Department found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the conspiracy theories he and his supporters could drum up .
“ And who could forget Clinton testifying for over eight hours about Benghazi ?
I , for one , have my doubts the current president would last eight minutes testifying before anyone , ” said Sharpton .
“ But then again , unlike Clinton , your president is constantly committing actual crimes .
So , the next time you want to chant something at a rally for your dear leader , maybe rethink the lyrics.
” He then proposed some options .

"Trump and Giuliani had a handshake agreement that Giuliani and his team would get paid by the Trump political operation for their post-election work, according to Timothy Parlatore, an attorney for longtime Giuliani ally Bernard Kerik," Schwartz says. "But the Trump campaign and their affiliated committees ultimately did not honor that pledge, according to campaign finance records. The failure to pay Giuliani and his team came up last week in a private interview between prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith's team and Bernard Kerik, a member of Giuliani's team in late 2020, according to Parlatore."
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?
Schwartz recalls that "Federal Election Commission records and testimony from the House January 6th Select Committee hearings reveal that none of the private sector lawyers identified -- but not indicted -- in that case got paid for their post-election work: Not Sidney Powell, Kenneth Chesebro or John Eastman."
Trump reneging on his gentleman's contract with Giuliani, Schartz observes, "is all the more striking" given that Giuliani was charged along with Trump by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for trying to steal the election in Georgia under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) of 1970 — upon which Giuliani built his career as a federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York.
Trump's fundraising push after he lost to President Joe Biden is also under scrutiny by Smith, whom Politico's Betsy Woodruff Swan and Kyle Cheney explained on August 8th is investigating if Trump's Save America Political Action Committee "violated federal laws by raising money off claims of voter fraud they knew were false."
Those efforts, predicated on Trump's insistence that the election was stolen from him, raked in $250 million, according to the final report released by the House January 6th Select Committee.
READ MORE: Why Trump’s Georgia indictment is a 'reminder of the genius of American federalism': op-ed
"The money came in response to countless fundraising appeals that claimed it was needed to fund Trump's election challenges in court," Schwartz continues. "Yet instead of paying the lawyers who tried unsuccessfully to overturn his loss, the money went into Trump’s leadership PAC."
In fact, "Trump's entire political network, including his joint fundraising committees, spent over $47 million combined from the start of 2020 through the end of 2021 on legal fees, according to a report by OpenSecrets," Schwartz adds. "Today, that money is instead helping Trump pay his own legal bills. The PAC spent over $20 million in the first half of the year alone on legal fees as the president faced the first two of his four indictments."
READ MORE: Judge randomly assigned to Georgia Trump case once worked for Willis: report
Schwartz's report is available at this link.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Trump’s potential mental problems are ‘a public health emergency’: Yale psychiatrist tells critics

Saturday it was revealed that Yale University psychiatrist Bandy X. Lee is being sued by President Donald Trump ’ s lawyer Alan Dershowitz for saying he may have a shared psychosis with the president .
While the lawsuit may not proceed in court , there ’ s a very real question about the burden psychiatrist and psychologists have when warning about the president ’ s instability .
In a Twitter thread Sunday , Lee explained that she complied by “ the Goldwater rule ” for 20 years , though , as a forensic psychiatrist , she wasn ’ t obligated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lee , she clapped back , saying that there is a “ public health emergency ” due to the president ’ s instability .
“ If our political system were working and dangers were contained , the reasons for my speaking up would cease , and I would be able to go back to my own life , which is radically different than the one I am leading now , ” Lee wrote .
She recalled the powerful speech from climate activist Greta Thunberg , who said that she fell into a deep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real , those in charge weren ’ t acting rationally .
They were doing nothing , which meant she had no future .
“ I find myself unable to continue my own routine work , for if the signs I see in the president were real ( and there is no doubt now ) , and he has access to nuclear weapons as well as many other lesser powers , then those in charge are not acting rationally to save humanity , ” Lee continued .
“ Some say I have no place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If that is the case , can they possibly name a greater public health emergency ?
Especially as a mental health professional , as a violence expert , I can not think of anything that is more my business right now , ” she closed.
” When Lee explained Dershowitz ’ s “ shared psychosis , ” she said he “ may ” have it .
That could be enough protection for Lee , particularly given Dershowitz is a public figure .

Saturday it was revealed that Yale University psychiatrist Bandy X. Lee is being sued by President Donald Trump's lawyer Alan Dershowitz for saying he may have a shared psychosis with the president. While the lawsuit may not proceed in court, there's a very real question about the burden psychiatrist and psychologists have when warning about the president's instability.
In a Twitter thread Sunday, Lee explained that she complied by "the Goldwater rule" for 20 years, though, as a forensic psychiatrist, she wasn't obligated to. As critics like Dershowitz assail Lee, she clapped back, saying that there is a "public health emergency" due to the president's instability.
"If our political system were working and dangers were contained, the reasons for my speaking up would cease, and I would be able to go back to my own life, which is radically different than the one I am leading now," Lee wrote.
She recalled the powerful speech from climate activist Greta Thunberg, who said that she fell into a deep depression because, if climate change was real, those in charge weren't acting rationally. They were doing nothing, which meant she had no future.
"I find myself unable to continue my own routine work, for if the signs I see in the president were real (and there is no doubt now), and he has access to nuclear weapons as well as many other lesser powers, then those in charge are not acting rationally to save humanity," Lee continued.
"Some say I have no place in this discussion as a health professional. If that is the case, can they possibly name a greater public health emergency? Especially as a mental health professional, as a violence expert, I cannot think of anything that is more my business right now," she closed."
When Lee explained Dershowitz's "shared psychosis," she said he "may" have it. That could be enough protection for Lee, particularly given Dershowitz is a public figure.
Read her full thread on Twitter.


rawstory--2020-01-12--The more they learn the more Trump loses support from Americans on Iran actions

Presidents once saw dramatic upswings when they approve military action .
President Donald Trump changed that when he ordered a strike against Iran .
A September 2019 University of Maryland poll foreshadowed the trouble Trump would face with the public if the crisis with Iran escalated .
The poll showed that Americans believed that any war with Iran would be “ unwarranted.
” That includes Republican respondents .
They also believe that Trump is to blame for the heightened tensions with Iran .
It ’ s perhaps why Trump has tried the “ imminent threat ” tactic to justify the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the wake of the announcement , Americans said that they agreed with taking out Suleimani ( 43 percent to 38 percent ) , but they didn ’ t think he planned the airstrikes carefully enough ( 43 percent compared to 35 percent who said he did ) .
They believed that Trump should have gone to Congress for authorization ( 44 percent ) .
Almost one week later , that has shifted significantly , as Americans learned more about the president ’ s decision-making process .
CNN reported Sunday that seven in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s decision to kill Suleimani increased the chances that there will be future attacks by Iran in the Middle East .
A whopping 63 percent of Americans surveyed also expect more terrorist attacks to happen within the United States due to Trump ’ s actions .
They also believe , to the tune of 52 percent , that Trump ’ s actions made Iran more likely to develop nuclear weapons .

Presidents once saw dramatic upswings when they approve military action. President Donald Trump changed that when he ordered a strike against Iran.
A September 2019 University of Maryland poll foreshadowed the trouble Trump would face with the public if the crisis with Iran escalated. The poll showed that Americans believed that any war with Iran would be "unwarranted." That includes Republican respondents. They also believe that Trump is to blame for the heightened tensions with Iran.
It's perhaps why Trump has tried the "imminent threat" tactic to justify the killing of Iranian Gen. Qasem Suleimani.
In the wake of the announcement, Americans said that they agreed with taking out Suleimani (43 percent to 38 percent), but they didn't think he planned the airstrikes carefully enough (43 percent compared to 35 percent who said he did). They believed that Trump should have gone to Congress for authorization (44 percent).
Almost one week later, that has shifted significantly, as Americans learned more about the president's decision-making process.
CNN reported Sunday that seven in 10 Americans (69 percent) say Trump's decision to kill Suleimani increased the chances that there will be future attacks by Iran in the Middle East. A whopping 63 percent of Americans surveyed also expect more terrorist attacks to happen within the United States due to Trump's actions. They also believe, to the tune of 52 percent, that Trump's actions made Iran more likely to develop nuclear weapons.
Read the latest updates from CNN.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Ex-prosecutor laughs at idea Rudy Giuliani would be helpful to Trump in impeachment trial: He ‘can’t

Ex-prosecutor laughs at idea Rudy Giuliani would be helpful to Trump in impeachment trial: He ‘can’t zip up his pants’

Former federal prosecutor Cynthia Alksne can ’ t stop laughing at Rudy Giuliani for thinking that he ’ s going to defend the president before the U.S. Senate or even the Supreme Court during the impeachment .
In an interview with Fox News Saturday , Giuliani proposed that President Donald Trump and his legal team go before the Supreme Court and declare the impeachment unconstitutional .
Giuliani justified the idea by saying that in the past , there was nothing in the Constitution that said the High Court could declare a law passed by Congress to be unconstitutional .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smart , ” Alksne said .
“ So , that ’ s just the bottom line .
The Constitution specifically says that the House has the sole power of impeachment and that the Senate has the sole power to try the impeachment .
And as much as Giuliani would like to be in charge of that , he is not .
Nor is the Supreme Court .
And the Supreme Court has even said so in case law .
So , there is absolutely no chance the Supreme Court is just going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to dismiss this impeachment.
” She went on to call the idea “ silly , ” saying that the only reason Giuliani says such things on Fox is to make the president feel better .
When asked if Giuliani would be on the legal team that tries the case , Alksne laughed and said , “ no.
” “ The people at the White House Counsel ’ s Office know better than that , ” she explained .
“ Rudy Giuliani just gave an interview to New York Magazine , and he forgot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one is going to put this guy in charge of anything .
”

Former federal prosecutor Cynthia Alksne can't stop laughing at Rudy Giuliani for thinking that he's going to defend the president before the U.S. Senate or even the Supreme Court during the impeachment.
In an interview with Fox News Saturday, Giuliani proposed that President Donald Trump and his legal team go before the Supreme Court and declare the impeachment unconstitutional. Giuliani justified the idea by saying that in the past, there was nothing in the Constitution that said the High Court could declare a law passed by Congress to be unconstitutional.
"Well, it's not very smart," Alksne said. "So, that's just the bottom line. The Constitution specifically says that the House has the sole power of impeachment and that the Senate has the sole power to try the impeachment. And as much as Giuliani would like to be in charge of that, he is not. Nor is the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court has even said so in case law. So, there is absolutely no chance the Supreme Court is just going to make a decision that they are going to dismiss this impeachment."
She went on to call the idea "silly," saying that the only reason Giuliani says such things on Fox is to make the president feel better.
When asked if Giuliani would be on the legal team that tries the case, Alksne laughed and said, "no."
"The people at the White House Counsel's Office know better than that," she explained. "Rudy Giuliani just gave an interview to New York Magazine, and he forgot to zip up his pants. No one is going to put this guy in charge of anything."
Watch her full comments below:


rawstory--2020-01-12--MSNBC chases down Trump’s confusion over the intelligence showing supposed ‘imminent threat’ to atta

MSNBC chases down Trump’s confusion over the intelligence showing supposed ‘imminent threat’ to attack 4 embassies

It ’ s unclear if the intelligence to justify the killing of Iranian Gen. Qasem Suleimani was invented or bent to justify the attack , explained NBC News correspondent Jonathan Allen during an MSNBC conversation Sunday .
The past week has been engrossed with different takes and absolute confusion over the claim that Suleimani posed an “ imminent threat ” to the United States and thus had to be taken out .
President Donald Trump first said there was intelligence that he was going to attack an American embassy .
He then said there was intelligence that Suleimani was going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Finally , Trump decided Suleimani was going to attack “ four embassies.
” During two appearances on Sunday morning talk shows , Secretary of Defense Mark Esper revealed Trump ’ s claims were false .
“ I didn ’ t see one with regard to four embassies , ” Esper said .
“ What I ’ m saying is I share the president ’ s view that probably — my expectation was they were going to go after our embassies .
The embassies are the most prominent display of American presence in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t mean the same thing as “ likely , ” much less “ imminent.
” Democrats who are members of the “ Gang of Eight , ” who are informed in the event of an attack , have said that there was no mention of an imminent threat against four embassies .
Both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) and Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) said that there was no mention of the four embassies in the briefing , and no one cited which embassies were being targeted .
Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ possible attack ” on a series of locations , “ as well as embassies.
” “ When you hear the president out there on Fox , he is fudging the intelligence , ” said Schiff .
“ When you hear the secretary say , ‘ Well , that wasn ’ t what the intelligence said but that ’ s my personal belief , ’ he is fudging.
” Given the dubious intelligence that delivered the justification for the Iraq War , which is now going into its 17th year , Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the government ’ s basis for military action .
“ I haven ’ t seen the intelligence , ” Allen clarified .
“ But what ’ s interesting is that the secretary of defense also said that he has not seen intelligence that supports what the president and the secretary of state said.
” “ This is not Adam Schiff the Intelligence [ Committee ] chairman on the Democratic side saying that the president is bending the intelligence , ” Allen later said .
“ This is the secretary of defense challenging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secretary of state has said about the intelligence .
You know , this is a country that has gone to war in Iraq in 2003 based on intelligence that turned out to be not what the administration said .
That ’ s not something that just Democrats were upset about .
It is something that much of Trump ’ s base was upset about that many Republicans — basically the entire country was upset about .
”

“You’re just trying to get me to vote Democratic because you support that party’s corruption. I won’t be intimidated: I’m going to vote for the best person to run the country!”
Often these types of statements are followed by:
“People in France and Israel can vote for any one of a dozen parties and nobody complains that they’re ‘throwing away their vote.’ This is America: we’re even better! So, I should be able to vote for anybody I want!”
Some people pushing this line simply don’t understand the difference between the political systems of France/Israel and the US.
Others are cynical hustlers (this is true mostly of the talk-show and YouTube hosts trying to differentiate themselves by pushing this), trying to grab and hold an audience by being “edgy,” “iconoclastic,” or “a rebel with a cause.”
So, let’s review some political basics.
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
Whatever its genesis, this opinion — that ignoring our two-party system and “voting for the best candidate is a good thing” — is widespread. After all, intuitively it seems to make perfect sense.
In a rational world, who would want to vote for anyone less than the best candidate? Unfortunately, though, America’s political system is not as rational as that of countries with proportional representation or ranked choice voting.
A 2022 Pew poll found people’s unfavorable view of both parties has gone from 6 percent in 1994 to 27 percent today. Similarly, 38 percent of Americans “wish there were more political parties to choose from in this country” and may be persuaded to vote for a third-party candidate.
So why is it that third parties don’t work in America, but they do in France?
The United States, in 1789, became the first modern democratic republic founded on the notion of the leaders of a government, through elections, “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
The Framers of the Constitution had never heard of proportional representation or the modern parliamentary system (more on that in a minute), so they went with a simple strategy that’s today referred to by political scientists as “first-past-the-post winner-take-all” (FPTP) or, sometimes, as “majoritarian” or “plurality” election systems.
Whoever gets the most votes becomes the elected politician, and everybody else gets nothing. If you voted with the majority, you’re represented; if not, you’re not at all represented by a person or party that shares your view.
America was an English-speaking country and, as a result, this system spread mostly throughout the English-speaking world and in former British or American colonies. Majoritarian FPTP systems like ours are used in Canada, the UK, India, Jamaica, Liberia, Singapore, Philippines, Pakistan, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and Bangladesh.
As a result, most all of these countries are dominated by two parties who tend to pass control of the nation back-and-forth over time. (Australia, New Zealand, and Ireland use Ranked Choice Voting, an even more recent innovation which allows for more political parties; more on that in a moment.)
In such a system, third parties almost always act as spoilers, drawing votes away from the major party to which they’re most closely aligned. People who vote Green, for example, generally would have voted Democratic, thus reducing that party’s vote; people who vote Libertarian would have voted Republican with the same effect.
For example, in Florida in 2000, Ralph Nader on the Green Party’s ticket got 97,488 votes, while George W. Bush “won” Florida by 537 votes.
It strains credulity to assert that the majority of Nader’s voters would have either voted for Bush or not voted at all, which is why when David Cobb ran for president on the Green Party ticket in 2004, he explicitly told people in swing states not to vote for him but to cast their ballots for John Kerry instead.
Jill Stein had no such moral compunction with her Green Party candidacy in 2016. Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin provided Trump’s margin of victory in the Electoral College over Hillary Clinton, and, in each of those states, Stein pulled more votes than Trump’s margin.
(In Michigan she got 51,463 votes and Trump won by 10,704; in Pennsylvania she won 49,678 versus Trump’s margin of 46,765; and in Wisconsin Stein carried 31,006 votes but Trump only won by 22,177.)
In other words, had liberals not voted for Ralph Nader in Florida in 2000, Al Gore would have become president and we never would have been lied into a war; had people in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin not voted for Jill Stein in 2016, Hillary Clinton would have become president and America would have been spared the trauma of 500,000 unnecessary Covid deaths and the ongoing assault to our democracy.
This is apparently not lost on sour-grapes Jill Stein, by the way; she’s reportedly helping run Cornel West’s 2024 Green Party candidacy. It’s also not lost on the Democrat-hating folks at No Labels, who have pledged to put up a candidate for president (presumably Joe Manchin) in 2024.
In the 1950s, French sociologist Maurice Duverger published several papers on this odd quirk of FPTP systems and the way they turn aligned third-party candidacies into agents for the opposition party.
This simple reality — apparently unknown to those who advocate third party candidates — has since come to be known as Duverger’s Law.
It’s why when I lived in Vermont in 2000 and voted for Ralph Nader, knowing there was no chance Vermont would go for George W. Bush, I was making a safe “protest” vote, but if I’d been living in Florida it would have been political suicide.
With our FPTP system, voters in swing states operate under an entirely different set of electoral facts and circumstances as do those in solidly Red or Blue states: a fact that third-party candidacy advocates would really rather you don’t know.
So, why can France have so many political parties without damaging their political system but here in America third parties harm those they’re most closely aligned with?
This goes to the invention of what’s called “proportional representation.”
It wasn’t until the year the Civil War started, 1861, that British philosopher John Stuart Mill published a how-to manual for multi-party parliamentary democracies in his book Considerations On Representative Government.
It was so widely distributed and read that nearly all of the world’s democracies today — all of them countries that became democracies after the late 1860s — use variations on Mill’s proportional representation parliamentary system.
In Mill’s system, if a political party gets, say, 12 percent of the vote then they also get 12 percent of the seats in that country’s congress or parliament. A party that pulls 34 percent of the vote gets 34 percent of the seats, and so on.
The result is a plethora of parties representing a broad range of perspectives and priorities, all able to participate in the daily governance of their nation. Nobody gets shut out.
Governing becomes an exercise in coalition building, and nobody is excluded. If you want to get something done politically, you have to pull together a coalition of parties to agree with your policy.
Most European countries, for example, have political parties represented in their parliaments that range from the far left to the extreme right, with many across the spectrum of the middle. There’s even room for single issue parties; for example, several in Europe focus almost exclusively on the environment or immigration.
The result is typically an honest and wide-ranging discussion across society about the topics of the day, rather than a stilted debate among only two parties.
It’s how the Greens became part of today’s governing coalition in Germany, for example, and are able to influence the energy future of that nation. And because of that political diversity in the debates, the decisions made tend to be reasonably progressive: look at the politics and lifestyles in most European nations.
In our system, though, if a party gets 12 percent of the vote — or anything short of 50 percent plus one — they get nothing. Whoever gets 50-percent-plus-one wins everything and everybody else gets nothing, which is why we always end up with two parties battling for the higher end of that 50/50 teeter-totter.
Pretty much every democracy in the world not listed above under the FPTP label are using Mill’s proportional representation. But we don’t, which is why we’re stuck with a two-party system.
Australia and New Zealand have diminished the damage third parties can do to the main, established parties, by using a voting system called ranked choice voting. In a system like that I could have voted for Ralph Nader as my first choice in 2000, with Al Gore as my second choice. When it becomes apparent that Nader isn’t going to make it, my first choice is discarded by the system and my vote for Gore becomes the one that gets counted.
Over 300 communities in America are now using ranked choice voting (including Portland, Oregon) and it works great. Moving from FPTP to proportional representation would require amending the Constitution, though, so that’s not going to happen any day soon: ranked choice voting is a nearly-as-good alternative.
At the national level, though, the best way to solve the problem of some Democratic politicians not being as progressive as we’d like is to get active by joining the Democratic Party and becoming a force for positive change within it. To stand up for public office and elect more progressives, something that can only be done within the Democratic Party.
To not “throw away your vote,” but to help rebuild the institution that brought America Social Security, the minimum wage, the right to unionize, Medicare, Medicaid, free college, regulatory agencies that defend and protect the environment and working class people, support for people in poverty, and that built America’s first real middle class.
Yes, there are corrupt and bought-off politicians within the Democratic Party. Ever since the Supreme Court fully legalized political bribery with their Citizens United decision and its predecessors, there have been more than a few Democrats who have enthusiastically put their hands out. The most obvious and cynical ones call themselves corporate “Problem Solvers.”
But voting for a third-party candidate and thus handing elections to Republicans won’t solve that problem: if anything it will make it worse, because the entire GOP has committed itself to being on the take and, as we saw with Nader and Stein, third-party candidacies often simply hand more power to the GOP.
Try to find, for example, even one Republican who isn’t benefiting from the billions in oil dollars that have flowed through the Koch network over the years and is thus willing to do something about climate change. Republican governance and their fealty to the fossil fuel industry is literally destroying America.
This is why real progressives like Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and Pramila Jayapal stay and work within the Democratic Party. For progressives to take over the country, we must first take over the DNC.
In other words, get inside the Party and take it over! It’s what hard-core conservatives did with the GOP over the past 20 years, starting with the Tea Party movement, and it’s what progressives must do with the Democratic Party.
Cornel West is a great guy, but with our FPTP election system a vote for him for president in a swing state is effectively a vote for the Republican nominee. No third-party candidate has ever won the White House, and none ever will until we have nationwide ranked choice voting.
So, the next time somebody tells you how they’re going to only vote for “the best candidate,” you may want to give them this little Civics 101 lesson, along with the phone number, website, or email address for their local Democratic Party. And get behind the movement to bring ranked choice voting to national elections.
We can’t afford any more George W. Bush’s or Donald Trump’s, who were both brought to us, in part, by Democratic-leaning voters thinking they were doing the right thing by voting for third party candidates.


rawstory--2020-01-12--Trump legally killed Suleimani — then ‘shot himself in the foot’ by lying about it: conservative col

Trump legally killed Suleimani — then ‘shot himself in the foot’ by lying about it: conservative columnist

In a column for the Washington Post , conservative Max Boot admitted Donald Trump had multiple legal justifications for ordering the assassination of Qassem Soleimani , but that he damaged any benefit he may have received politically by lying about his reasons for calling in the drone strike .
Or as he put it , “ President Trump is a straight shooter .
He consistently shoots himself in the foot.
” As Boot sees it , Trump consistently undermines everything that he does by lying about it afterward because he is incapable of telling the truth without embellishing it with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ self-sabotage is even more egregious in the case of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani , the Quds Force commander killed in a U.S. drone strike in Iraq on Jan. 3 .
There are multiple legal theories the administration could have used to justify the strike .
Soleimani was , after all , one of the leaders of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization that has been responsible for the deaths of an estimated 600 U.S. troops in Iraq — and most recently his proxies were responsible for a rocket attack that killed a U.S. contractor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Embassy in Baghdad , ” he wrote .
“ President Barack Obama ’ s lawyers could point to the portion of the [ AUMF ] resolution that authorized action to ‘ defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.
’ ( A tip of my fedora to New York University law professor Ryan Goodman for pointing this out to me . )
Trump could use the same wording .
Obama also invoked the president ’ s general authority as commander in chief to act in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even without congressional authorization .
Trump could easily have made a similar claim to justify the killing of Soleimani , and no one , aside from a few international lawyers , would have been much perturbed , ” he explained , “ But no .
To satisfy the legal standard for a preemptive military strike , the Trump administration decided to claim that it was acting to disrupt an ‘ imminent ’ attack on U.S. personnel but refused to release any intelligence to buttress its case.
” Boot then highlighted how the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skeptical of his claims — only to make his inflate claims even more making them unbelievable .
“ So he went from claiming that Soleimani was about to bomb the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad to claiming he was about to bomb four U.S. embassies .
At the rate Trump is going , by Monday he may well be claiming that Soleimani was going to bomb 40 embassies , ” Boot wrote .
“ But my Post colleagues Shane Harris , Josh Dawsey and Seung Min Kim report that “ a senior administration official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they spoke with ‘ were only aware of vague intelligence about a plot against the embassy in Baghdad and that the information did not suggest a fully formed plot .
Neither official said there were threats against multiple embassies . '
” Pointing to a report that the president had his hand in another attempt “ to kill a senior Quds Force commander in Yemen on the very same day that Soleimani was killed in Iraq , ” Boot writes , “ This begins to look more like an ambitious and premeditated campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a response to a looming threat.
” “ There is absolutely nothing wrong with that , ” he suggested .
“ What the administration is doing is legally — and perhaps even strategically — justifiable .
All Trump has to do is come clean with the American people .
In this case — unlike in his dealings with Ukraine or Stormy Daniels — it seems doubtful that he has anything disreputable to hide .
Yet Trump continues to sabotage his own cause by lying simply because it is his default mode of communication @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be presented as a rare foreign policy win to focus attention back on one of his biggest weaknesses : his congenital dishonesty.
” You can read the whole piece here .

The indictment describes Individual 1 as talking about a draft speech on or about Oct. 21, 2020, that falsely declared victory and alleged voter fraud. It matches what was found by the House Select Committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack and the attempt to overthrow the 2020 election. Fitton wrote a draft speech he emailed to Trump through two aides on Oct. 31.
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
That matches material the Jan. 6 congressional committee released last year, revealing that Fitton had written a draft speech and emailed it to Trump via two aides on Oct. 31, noting he had recently discussed the draft with the then-president.
“Dear Mr. President,” the email begins. “Please see below a draft statement as you requested.”
They can't say with absolute certainty that Fitton is the one, but it's their best guess. Just Security agreed with the assessment, naming Fitton, too.
Individual 2, they believe, is a fake elector that was among one of the most engaged, based on the descriptions in the indictment, according to both sites. No name is included.
Individual 3 is likely Boris Epshteyn, one of Trump's longtime aides that has provided legal advice. The indictment says that he was on stage with Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, and Sidney Powell, which narrows things down.
He sent an email that investigators have from John Eastman where he admits to constitutional questions about the Electoral Count Act before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which “could invite counter views that we do not believe should constrain Pence.”
Just Security agreed that Epshteyn is Individual 3, specifically citing Act 109 of the indictment.
Individual 4, the Daily Beast confirmed is Robert Sinners, who ran operations for Election Day for the Trump campaign. Indicted co-conspirator David Shafer, former Republican Party chair of Georgia, and Sinners exchanged emails on Nov. 20, 2020, which claimed that indicted Georgia bail bondsman Scott Hall “has been looking into the election on behalf of the President at the request of [Trump adviser] David Bossie." He then asked Individual 4 to contact Hall and lend a hand.
Just Security also named Sinners, saying that "the same email is accounted for in Curling v. Raffensperger ."
Sinners now works "with an institutional bulwark that brooked some of the most severe abuse and violent threats while holding the Trump team’s anti-democratic efforts at bay—the office of Georgia’s GOP Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger," said the Beast.
Individuals 5 and 6 are likely Bernie Kerik (5), and Phil Waldron (6). Kerik is the longtime Rudy Giuliani pal that was in the war room at the Willard Hotel on Jan. 6. But he was also chatting with Waldron about a conspiracy theorist in Texas who had a PowerPoint roadmap to overturning the election using China and Venezuela.
Just Security agreed, too, noting that the two men are in some of the same places or meetings as previously known. Waldron, for example, told The Washington Post that he was at the Nov. 25 meeting.
"The indictment then puts Individuals 5 and 6 together during similar back-to-back presentations that Giuliani’s team made days later to a group of Arizona GOP lawmakers. Kerik describes those meetings in detail to the Jan. 6 committee, matching details in the indictment," the Beast concluded.
Individual 7 was unknown to the Daily Beast, but Just Security can narrow it down to five people: "G. Michael Brown or others on email chain: James Fitzpatrick, Shawn Flynn, Thomas Lane, Valerie McConahay."
"Act 77 of the indictment alleges that Mike Roman sent an email on 12/14/2020 to Robert Sinners, Individual 7, and others stating: 'Please send me an update as soon as the State Electoral College has adjourned and all paperwork is secured.'"
The House Select Committee had the email, showing the possible people that were also on the email.
Individual 8 appears to be Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, both sites said. He was a state senator at the time, and was one of the 16 fake electors.
"The indictment makes it easy to identify Individual 8, who is portrayed as a central figure in the alleged fake elector scheme, appearing in 11 overt acts," said the report. "But the glaring tip that Willis included might not sit well with the purportedly anonymous Individual 8. Last year, Jones successfully barred the DA from publicly naming him in connection with the grand jury probe."
Still, he was quoted from an identifiable Dec. 7 tweet, that Rudy Giuliani shared.
“Georgia Patriot Call to Action: today is the day we need you to call your state Senate & House Reps & ask them to sign the petition for a special session,” the tweet says. “We must have free & fair elections in GA & this is our only path to ensuring every legal vote is counted. @realDonaldTrump.”
Jones is the author, making it easy to identify him. He refused to comment, but did attack D.A. Fani Willis on Twitter for "pursuing 'political vendettas of the past' and spending 'millions of taxpayer dollars' on the sprawling criminal investigation for 'the sole purpose of the furthering of her own political career.'"
Individual 9 the Daily Beast thinks is former Georgia Republican Party treasurer Joseph Brannan, but Just Security isn't as certain. They only identify 9 as a fake elector.
"Individual 9 is alleged in the indictment to have been on the receiving end of a Dec. 10 email from indicted pro-Trump lawyer Ken Chesebro, who is said to also be unindicted co-conspirator 5 in Smith’s federal indictment," said the Beast.
The House Select committee has an email from that as well, showing Chesebro trying “to help coordinate with the other 5 contested States, to help with logistics of the electors in other States hopefully joining in casting their votes on Monday.”
The recipients match Brannan's description, the report explained, which also featured indicted former Georgia GOP chair David Shafer along with “unindicted co-conspirator Individual 9.” The two other people on the email are women, and 9 is referred to as male.
Individuals 10-19 are all fake electors both sides aid.
Individual 20, which was cited by some of the legal analysts after the indictment dropped, was someone that was in the Oval Office during one of the key meetings on 12/18/2020. While the Daily Beast won't say, Just Security narrows it down to Michael Flynn, Patrick Byrne, or Emily Newman.
Individual 21, the Beast said was unknown, but Just Security identifies Todd Sanders or Conan Hayes. They use Act 91, which refers to an email sent by Sidney Powell that mentions both men along with Waldron, who was identified as Individual 6. The email was also included in the records from Curling v. Raffensperger.
Individual 22 would reportedly be the other of Todd Sanders or Conan Hayes.
Individual 23, which the Beast also said was unknown. Citing Act 115, Just Security said that Individual 23 was on one of the phone calls with Harrison Floyd and others on Jan. 3, 2021, at 8:11 p.m. Act 27 also references a four-way call that included Floyd, Trevian Kutti, Stephen Lee, and individual 23 on Jan. 5, 2021.
Individual 24 is Alex Cruce, Just Security said, using Act 143 which references the individual flying into Coffee County with Scott Hall, something Cruce admitted in Curling v. Raffensperger.
Individual 25, both sites believe to be Doug Logan, the CEO of the Cyber Ninjas.
Act 154 refers to Misty Hampton, one of the people who allowed Individual 25 into non-public areas of the Coffee County Election Board offices on Jan. 18, 2021. The videos were reported by ABC News and showed Logan and Jeff Lenbert being allowed in on that time. Act 150 refers to Individual 25 downloading the information from the county and putting it on legal technology company Sullivan Strickler's ShareFile, which showed Logan downloading the data on several dates in Jan. 2021.
Individuals 26 and 27, Just Security writes are probably Michael Pospieszalski or Jovan Pulitzer. They cite Acts 151 and 152 accusing Individuals 26 and 27 of downloading Coffee County data. There were six people who did this according to Curling v. Raffensperger. Others have already been identified, leaving these two men.
Individual 28, both believe is Jim Penrose, a former National Security official who ultimately went to work for Sidney Powell. Act 155 alleging an email on April 22, 2021 to SullivanStrickler COO Paul Maggio, asking that the voting data taken from Coffee County be sent to an attorney working with Powell.
“On or about the 22nd day of April 2021, unindicted co-conspirator Individual 28, whose identity is known to the grand jury, sent an email to the chief operations officer of SullivanStrickler LLC directing him to transmit all data copied from Dominion Voting Systems equipment at the Coffee County Board of Elections & Registration Office in Coffee County, Georgia, to unindicted co-conspirator Individual 30, whose identity is known to the grand jury, an attorney associated with Sidney Katherine Powell and the Trump campaign,” the indictment says.
Individual 29 is likely Jeffrey Lenberg, the Beast and Just Security believes, citing Act 154 of the indictment. Lenberg was with Logan on Jan. 18, 2021, when going into the board of elections.
Individual 30 is probably Stefanie Lambert, the sites agree, citing Act 155.
Jim Pemrose, though to be Individual 28, sent an email that was available in Curling v. Raffensperger, indicating Stefanie Lambert was to get the data from Coffee County. Penrose wrote to send the materials to "the same address as before," and "[i]nvoice Stefanie Lambert for the work like last time."
The Daily Beast spoke to Lambert's lawyer, Michael Smith, who said, “My client is a brilliant and zealous advocate for her clients. Stefanie Lambert has done nothing illegal. Like all law firms, Lambert hires experts to opine on potential cases or cases in active litigation. She intends to file suit against any person or entity falsely implying her legal work was improper.”
Read both reports at Just Security and the Daily Beast for significantly more details.


rawstory--2020-01-12--White House says Trump will issue new rules to expand ‘constitutional prayer’ in public schools

President Donald Trump plans to introduce new guidance for expanding “ constitutional prayer ” in public schools .
According to @ @ @ @ @ , Trump ’ s schedule for Thursday includes an announcement about “ guidance on constitutional @ @ @ @ @ The details of Trump ’ s guidance were not immediately available but the president is @ @ @ @ @ wants to expand prayer in public schools under the guise of First Amendment rights .
@ @ @ @ @ Jay Sekulow condemned schools for practicing “ Buddhist Meditation , ” which he said was @ @ @ @ @ .
”