Capitol Riot

Saying Trump 'Provoked' the Capitol Riot With 'Lies,' Mitch McConnell Tries To Distance His Party From a Dangerous Demagogue

The Senate minority leader sees a grave political risk in failing to repudiate the former president.

|

Confirming his decisive break with Donald Trump, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.) yesterday said the "violent criminals who tried to stop Congress from doing our duty" by invading the Capitol on January 6 were "fed lies" and "provoked by the president and other powerful people." That characterization, which McConnell offered in a speech on the Senate floor, jibes with the charges in the article of impeachment against Trump that the House of Representatives approved a week after the riot. It therefore suggests that McConnell is open to convicting Trump in the Senate, which would be a strong signal to his fellow Republicans.

The House noted that Trump "repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the Presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by State or Federal officials." Trump reiterated those false claims in the speech he delivered to thousands of angry followers, who had gathered in D.C. at his behest to "stop the steal," shortly before a joint session of Congress was scheduled to affirm President Joe Biden's election victory. "We won this election, and we won it by a landslide," Trump said. "If you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." Given the context, the article of impeachment says, Trump's comments "encouraged—and foreseeably resulted in—lawless action at the Capitol."

McConnell, who in private reportedly has said he believes Trump committed impeachable offenses, has now publicly endorsed the main thrust of the House's charges. His reasons for doing so are both personal and political. McConnell—who even before the riot condemned the effort to stop Biden from taking office based on "sweeping conspiracy theories" that sowed doubt about the election "without evidence"—clearly was shaken by the violent invasion of his own workplace. More important, he has decided that the Republican Party's continued viability depends on separating itself from the dangerous demagogue whose whims have defined its agenda for the last four years.

There are sound reasons for believing that, even aside from the proposition that a political party should stand for something other than a cult of personality. Trump's domination of the GOP resulted in Democratic control of both the White House and the Senate. The New York Times reports that "McConnell's allies say he has grown increasingly concerned that if party leaders do not intervene, the president's campaign to discredit his own defeat could do lasting damage both to democracy and to Republicans' political fortunes, driving them into a permanent minority in Washington."

The loss of the Senate was directly attributable to Trump's fantasy of a stolen presidential election, which he promoted instead of focusing on winning the crucial January 5 runoffs in Georgia. Worse, Trump's general warnings that absentee ballots are inherently untrustworthy and his specific claim that Georgia's election system was hopelessly corrupt discouraged even ardent Trump supporters—especially ardent Trump supporters—from voting in those races. And his demand that the party's Senate candidates in Georgia back up his outlandish claims about massive election fraud probably also turned off voters who were less enamored with Trump. McConnell has Trump to thank for his demotion from majority leader to minority leader.

Although a large bloc of Republicans remains loyal to Trump, recent polling underlines the potential political cost of catering to them. Since the attack on the Capitol, Geoffrey Skelley notes at FiveThirtyEight, "Trump's approval rating has plummeted at a record rate." According to the site's composite index, Trump's net approval rating—the difference between the percentage of Americans who thought he was doing a good job and the percentage who disagreed—fell from –10.3 points on January 6 to –16.8 points on January 14. That 6.5-point drop in eight days, Skelley says, is "the biggest drop in Trump's net approval that our tracker has ever recorded."

For most of Trump's presidency, the Pew Research Center noted last Friday, his job approval rating "remained more stable than those of his predecessors; it never surpassed 45 percent or dipped below 36 percent." But the share of Americans who approve of Trump's performance, according to Pew, "now stands at just 29 percent, down 9 percentage points since August and the lowest of his presidency."

Gallup puts Trump's job approval rating at 34 percent, the same as Jimmy Carter's in 1981 and George W. Bush's in 2009. No outgoing president has done worse since Harry Truman in 1953. Gallup also notes that Trump's "41 percent average approval rating throughout his presidency is four points lower than for any of his predecessors in Gallup's polling era." Trump is "the only president not to register a 50 percent job approval rating at any point in his presidency since Gallup began measuring presidential job approval in 1938."

Pew found that three-quarters of Americans, including 52 percent of Republicans and 95 percent of Democrats, believe Trump "bears at least some responsibility" for the Capitol riot. In the same survey, which was conducted January 8–12, more than two-thirds of respondents said they did not think Trump should "continue to be a major political figure for years to come." Pew did not provide a party breakdown for that question, but we can be pretty sure there was a dramatic split between Republicans and Democrats, and therein lies the risk for McConnell and likeminded Trump critics.

Before the the Capitol riot, polls found a large majority of Republicans agreed with Trump that the presidential election was compromised by widespread fraud. "The only lies that were fed are that Joe Biden won the election," Amy Kremer, a leader of the "Stop the Steal" movement, tweeted yesterday in response to McConnell's criticism of Trump. "Your comments are bullshit & if you think Pres Trump's base is going anywhere, u are sadly mistaken."

On Fox News—where reporters were skeptical of Trump's fraud claims from the beginning but several hosts promoted them, only to be rebutted by corrective stories that the channel aired after it was threatened with defamation lawsuits—Sean Hannity slammed McConnell last night. "Soon-to-be Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and a handful of other long-serving establishment Republicans are trying to reassert control of the GOP, and their playbook is sadly all too predictable," he said. "Instead of picking up the mantle and promoting the president's bold America First agenda, they are cowering in fear, wilting under the pressure from the media mob, liberal Democrats, and Big Tech companies. Many spineless Republicans are joining forces with their Democratic friends to repudiate all things Trump."

Hannity was a persistent promoter of the delusion underlying the deadly assault on the Capitol. But he thinks Republicans should forget all that and continue to take their lead from Trump. McConnell thinks that would be a grave political mistake.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.), who years ago switched from harsh criticism of Trump to humiliating obsequiousness, seems to agree with Hannity. "I'm looking for our leadership to recognize that the best thing for the Republican Party and the country" is "moving on," he said after McConnell's speech. If "moving on" means consigning Trump's reckless behavior and its shocking consequences to the memory hole, the GOP will richly deserve the fate that McConnell fears.

NEXT: Trump's Immigration Policy Was Brutal and Inhumane. Will Biden Fix It?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. TDS outlives Trump.

    Go fuck yourself, Reason.

    1. Was this act of violence incited by left wing rhetoric?

      Yes.

      Fuck you, Reason.

      https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/12/rand-paul-media-covered-scalise-shooter-shouting-for-health-care/

      I was there at the ballfield when Steven Scalise almost died from a very, very angry, violent man who was incited, really, by rhetoric on the left. And this hasn’t been reported enough: When he came on to the ball field with a semiautomatic weapon, firing probably close to 200 shots at us, shooting five people and almost killing Steve Scalise, he was yelling, “This is for health care!” He also had a list of conservative legislators–Republicans–in his pocket, that he was going to kill.

      1. 2 dead in the riots the “he was unarmed” lie started

        Fuck you, Reason.

        Officials say Jacob Blake admitted to having a knife in his possession during Kenosha shooting
        https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/officials-say-jacob-blake-admitted-to-having-a-knife-in-his-possession-during-kenosha-shooting-officer-identified

        1. Obsolete right-wing bigots seem especially cranky — and impotent — today.

          1. no one cares why your husband isn’t putting out

            1. I get paid 95 $ each hour for work at home on my PC. I never thought I’d have the option to do it however my old buddy NTW is gaining 65k$/month to month by carrying out this responsibility and she gave me how.

              Give it a shot on following website……..READ MORE

              1. Jacob, "Sullen Dick" still can't get Trump out of his mind. And acts as if McConnel is going to survive this, which he likely will not. McConnell should retire this term, because he will likely be primaries next. You see, the people of "Kentucky" are very pro-trump and tired of McConnell's crap about as much as Wyoming is tired of Liz Cheney's crap. And I can guarantee Cheney will be gone. Jacob Sullen Dick can't see this, because he is so full of leftist jizz, he's been shitting that AIDS infected shit for years. And he better hope and pray, that civil war 2.0 and secession doesn't happen. Because cops will be preoccupied, and there will be no one to watch over his ass, or help him in his time of need when someone is quenching lucille's thirst.

                ………………………………………………………………………TDS
                …………………………………………………………….TDS….. TDS…TDS
                …………………………………………………TDS……………………TDS..TDS
                ………………………………………….TDS………………………………..TDS
                ……………………………………TDS
                ………………………………..TDS
                ……………………„„-~^^~„-„„_
                ………………„-^*” : : „” : : : : *-„
                …………..„-* : : :„„–/ : : : : : : : ‘\
                …………./ : : „-* . .| : : : : : : : : ‘|
                …………/ : „-* . . . | : : : : : : : : |
                …………\„-* . . . . .| : : : : : : : :’|
                …………/ . . . . . . ‘| : : : : : : : :’|
                ………./ . . . . . . . .’\ : : : : : : : |
                ……../ . . . . . . . . . .\ : : : : : : ‘|
                ……./ . . . . . . . . . . . ‘\ : : : : : /
                ……/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . *-„„„„-*’
                ….’/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘|
                …/ . . . . . . . ./ . . . . . . .|
                ../ . . . . . . . .’/ . . . . . . .’|
                ./ . . . . . . . . / . . . . . . .’|
                ‘/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .’|
                ‘| . . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . .|
                ‘| . . . . . . \„_^- „ . . . . .’|
                ‘| . . . . . . . . .’\ .\ ./ ‘/ . |
                | .\ . . . . . . . . . \ .” / . ‘|
                | . . . . . . . . . . / .’/ . . .|
                | . . . . . . .| . . / ./ ./ . .|
                | . . . . . . .| . . \ ./ ./ . .|
                | . . . . . . .| . . . ./ .\ . .|

                1. ……..…. ▄▄ ▄▄
                  ….……▄▌▒▒▀▒▒▐▄
                  ..…. ▐▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▌
                  ..… ▐▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▌
                  ..….▐▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▌
                  ..….▐▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..….▐░░░░░░░░░░░▌
                  ..…▄█▓░░░░░░░░░▓█▄
                  ..▄▀░░░░░░░░░░░░░ ▀▄
                  .▐░░░░░░░▀▄▒▄▀░░░░░░▌
                  ▐░░░░░░░▒▒▐▒▒░░░░░░░▌
                  ▐▒░░░░░▒▒▒▐▒▒▒░░░░░▒▌
                  .▀▄▒▒▒▒▒▄▀▒▀▄▒▒▒▒▒▄▀
                  ….. ▀▀▀▀▀…..▀▀▀▀▀

                  ………………………………………._¸„„„„_
                  …………………….……………„–~*’¯…….’\
                  ………….…………………… („-~~–„¸_….,/ì’Ì
                  …….…………………….¸„-^”¯ : : : : :¸-¯”¯/’
                  ……………………¸„„-^”¯ : : : : : : : ‘\¸„„,-”
                  **¯¯¯’^^~-„„„—-~^*’”¯ : : : : : : : : : :¸-”
                  .:.:.:.:.„-^” : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :„-”
                  :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: : : : : : : : : : ¸„-^¯
                  .::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. : : : : : : : ¸„„-^¯
                  :.’ : : ‘\ : : : : : : : ;¸„„-~”
                  :.:.:: :”-„””***/*’츒¯
                  :.’: : : : :”-„ : : :”\
                  .:.:.: : : : :” : : : : \,
                  :.: : : : : : : : : : : : ‘Ì
                  : : : : : : :, : : : : : :/
                  “-„_::::_„-*__„„~”

                  1. ░░░░█─────────────█──▀──
                    ░░░░▓█───────▄▄▀▀█──────
                    ░░░░▒░█────▄█▒░░▄░█─────
                    ░░░░░░░▀▄─▄▀▒▀▀▀▄▄▀──DO─
                    ░░░░░░░░░█▒░░░░▄▀────IT──
                    ▒▒▒░░░░▄▀▒░░░░▄▀───FOR──
                    ▓▓▓▓▒░█▒░░░░░█▄───BIDEN──
                    █████▀▒░░░░░█░▀▄────────
                    █████▒▒░░░▒█░░░▀▄───────
                    ███▓▓▒▒▒▀▀▀█▄░░░░█──────
                    ▓██▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█░░░░█─────
                    ▓▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▒▒█░░░░░█────
                    ░▒▒▀▀▄▄▄▄█▄▄▀░░░░░░░█───

                    ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠿⠿⢿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
                    ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠟⠉⠄⣀⡤⢤⣤⣈⠁⣠⡔⠶⣾⣿⣿⣿
                    ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠋⠁⠄⠄⠄⣼⣿⠁⡀⢹⣿⣷⢹⡇⠄⠎⣿⣿⣿
                    ⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠉⠁⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠹⣇⣀⣡⣾⣿⡿⠉⠛⠒⠒⠋⠉⢸
                    ⡿⠋⠁⠄⠄⢀⣤⣤⡀⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠈⠙⠛⠛⠉⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠈
                    ⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⢹⣧⡈⠿⣷⣄⣀⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⢀⣠⢄⣾
                    ⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠈⠻⢿⣶⣌⣙⡛⠛⠿⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠖⣒⣒⣚⣋⡩⢱⣾⣿
                    ⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠈⠉⠛⠛⠛⠻⠿⠿⠟⠛⠛⠛⠉⢉⣥⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿
                    ⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠒⠶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
                    ⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠈⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
                    ⣿⡿⠛⠛⠛⢻⣿⠿⠛⠛⠛⢿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠛⠛⢻⡟⠛⣿⡿⠛⣻⣿⣿⣿
                    ⡟⠄⣼⣿⣿⣿⡇⠄⣾⣿⣧⠄⢻⡏⠄⣼⣿⣿⣿⡇⠄⡟⢀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿
                    ⡇⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠄⣿⣿⣿⠄⢸⡇⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠄⣀⠈⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿
                    ⣿⣄⠈⠙⠛⢻⣧⡄⠙⠛⠉⣠⣿⣷⣄⠈⠙⠛⢹⡇⠄⣿⣧⠄⠻⣿⣿⣿

                    1. ______________________▀█▀█▄
                      _________________▄█▀____█____▀█▄
                      _______________▄█▀_______________▀█▄
                      ______________█______________________█
                      ______________█_____________________█
                      ______________▀█▄▄____█______▄█▀
                      __________________█____▄▀▄____█
                      __________________█__▀_____▀__█
                      __________________█_____________█
                      __________________█_____________█
                      __________________█_____________█
                      __________________█_____________█
                      __________________█_____________█
                      _________▄█▀▀█▄█______________█▄█▀█▄
                      ___▄█▀▀_________▀______________________▀▀█
                      █▀____________________________________________▀█
                      █________________________________________________█
                      █_____________________▄█▄_____________________█
                      ▀█_________________█▀__▀█________________█▀
                      __▀█▄___________█▀______▀█__________▄█▀
                      _______▀█▄▄▄█▀____________▀█▄▄▄█▀

          2. You would know.

          3. Hey Rev,

            Try a little love, man. Your team won. How about dialing down the rhetoric? Are you trying to judge the right, vilify the right or represent the right?

            It’s hard to tell.

          4. Stick your head back in your shorts and gnaw on that chicken sandwich.

          5. Unity and tolerance on display, the Donkey way.

        2. Cops shooting suspects in the back is never justified.

          1. So every fleeing suspect is forfeit? Do they have to shout “No shootsies in backsies!” while running away or is just understood that the cops report back to the chief “Yeah, we would’ve prevented him from murdering someone else but, you know the rule, ‘No backsies’.”

            Get out of here with your stupid apocryphal bullshit.

          2. But shooting dangerous fleeing felons is fine. Especially when he’s about to turn flight into a potential hostage situation with some children.

            1. “But shooting dangerous fleeing felons is fine.”

              Define “dangerous” and your list of felonies that merit the death penalty.

              FFS shoot for the “children,” really? GTFOH

              1. A guy who’d just pulled a knife when fighting a couple of cops, who were there in the first place because the violent fuck was violating a protective order taken out against him.

                Pulling a deadly weapon on cops—or me, for that matter—is something that puts the other person at imminent risk of serious bodily injury or death. That means the other person gets to use deadly force to stop that risk, which is what you are calling “the death penalty.”

                Don’t pull knives on people.

                1. Exactly. Stand your ground is merely recognizing one’s right to self defense.

              2. While not comprehensive, “armed with a knife, after fighting off legitimate arrest attempts, and attempting to flee with children as hostages” pretty much fits under any definition of dangerous. And FFS, “don’t shoot the armed and violent would be kidnapper,” really? GTFOH

    2. Yup. A man that started no new wars and actually tried to bring troops home is “dangerous” according to reason. Pelosi wanted crew served weapons pointed at civilians but Trump is “dangerous”. Lol

    3. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple works from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regularDEW office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    4. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple works from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and OIU its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

  2. The Senate minority leader sees a grave political risk in failing to repudiate the former president.

    Can’t entirely blame him. He probably doesn’t want to end up on a list of “known Trumpists/ Enemies of the State.”

    1. More likely he thinks the risk of losing corporate donors is bigger than the risk of being primaried by Kentucky tea partiers. Guess again.

      “Powerful interests” peddled the election fraud story? Seems like all the powerful interests were trying to discredit it.

      1. This is likely his last term given his age. But even if it weren’t, McConnell is a survivor, and this is what is required to survive with his position of Minority Chair intact. He helped Trump appoint judges when that was necessary to preserve his influence, and he’ll do what he can to preserve what dwindling influence and status he still possesses.

    2. McConnel has always had ties to China. He is probably glad he has a friendly accomplice in his dealings there.

      1. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 250$+ daily… You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish…PLMiuy It’s a flexible job but a good
        eaning opportunity……… Visit……….Home Profit System

    3. @JohnBrennan: Biden intel community “are moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about” the pro-Trump “insurgency” that harbors “religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians” pic.twitter.com/SjVXWhPhR8
      — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 20, 2021

      1. I thought reason telling us orange man bad for 4 years was supposed to save us from our overlords (that reason supported)?

    4. That’s funny considering which side is actually making all the death threats for people interfering with trying to get Trump another term by throwing out votes.

    5. True considering the left is creating “lists”

    6. I am making a good salary online from home.I’ve made 97,999 dollar.s so for last 5 months working online and I’m a full time student.UHwa I’m using an online business opportunity I’m just so happy that I found out about it………….Visit……….Home Profit System

  3. Jesus you people just can’t quit him.

    1. “You complete me”.

  4. When did Reason go from hard left blog to hard right?

    1. Umm…never.

  5. “Saying Trump ‘Provoked’ the Capitol Riot With ‘Lies,’ Mitch McConnell Tries To Distance His Party From a Dangerous Demagogue”

    Which is far different from saying that McConnell’s statement is true.

    1. Because everything has a cause effect relationship with something, pretty much everything can be rationalized–but rationalization does not equal justification.

      Rationalization: He’s a serial killer, but it’s because his mother abused him.

      False Justification: Murdering women was okay because his mother abused him.

      Because what McConnell is saying has a rationalization doesn’t justify it, and the negative consequences of saying this may outweigh whatever positive consequences you imagine.

      If I had to list the negative consequences of this, I’d probably put the marginalization of a huge chunk of people on the right as a serious one up near the top of the list. Convincing populists that the conventional institutions will never accept someone who represents their views doesn’t make them lose any faith in their views. It makes them lose faith that their views can ever be realized through the conventional institutions of democratic government.

      The other big negative from McConnell’s inaccuracy is the chilling effect on speech. What impact on speech if people are too afraid to say what they think and why for being labeled an insurrectionist? Jesse Walker would have us understand that conspiracy theories aren’t just a feature of the radical fringe. They’re a central aspect of mainstream society. The data seems to bear that out.

      “Seventy percent of Republicans say they don’t think that President-elect Joe Biden won a “free and fair” election, according to a new Politico/Morning Consult poll.”

      https://thehill.com/homenews/news/525388-poll-70-percent-of-republicans-dont-believe-election-was-free-and-fair

      70% of Republicans is not on the radical fringe. That’s the mainstream. And regardless of whether 70% of Republicans should believe something else, the fact is that they don’t.

      If McConnell manages to convince these people that they’re all on the radical fringe–along with their preferred president–that may become self-fulfilling prophecy. The danger of a radical fringe seizing the levers of power and inflicting themselves on the rest of us probably isn’t as significant as the danger of the mainstream being marginalized and pushed to where the radical fringe used to be.

      You’re not marginalizing the mainstream. You’re mainstreaming the radicals. After Biden’s first 100 days, what happens if mainstream Republicans become convinced that the only way back to capitalism and the First Amendment is through some Pinochet like dictator?

      1. I’m gonna state a wild theory, Mitch made a deal with Nancy to never send the articles over to the Senate in exchange for repudiating Trump publicly. If they are filed, then the republicans would have to go on record of either convicting or not. I don’t think they have the votes to convict but what would happen would be a schism in the party. And unlike other attempts at creating a third party this would be more of a centrist party that would be attractive to both sides of the isle. Contrary to what is often stated in the media Trumps policies were very much centrist in nature. Take a look at them:
        1. Immigration, despite being vilified at every turn he never said he was against immigration just illegals that abuse our laws. If most voters were for them, we would already have new laws on the books but they are not so regardless of who is in power the laws have not been changed as that is not what most voters want.
        2. Defense, most voters want a strong deterrent but want us out of the endless wars in the middle east. When he tried he got push back from both sides of the isle, obviously there are some powerful interests that want to keep us in the fight but the voters are not one of them.
        3. The economy, right or wrong most of his economic plans were supported by the average voter. His tariffs may not have defeated the ChiComs but at least he tried and that show them something.
        4. Crime, he made common sense proposals to curb a lot of the abusive laws that exist. Not just refusing to prosecute those who his voter base support.
        The list goes on and on. My point being a lot of voters like a lot of what he did, those from both parties so if he was to be further vilified by the elites in Washington it could be the push needed to create that third party that drains voters from both parties and into a third. I personally believe that would be a good thing, imagine a speaker of the house being selected from a party with only 40% control because they had to work with a third party? Or the senate leader? The Dems and Repubs would either have to work with the third party or with each other, and that scares them most. Not working with each other but they would expose themselves for what they are, two sides of the same coin. Incidentally that is my theory of why they went after the Tea Party so hard, yes there were a few nuts in the bunch but for the most part they were reasonable centrists that if they had not been crushed could have threatened their duopoly.

        Just my opinion.

        1. “I’m gonna state a wild theory, Mitch made a deal with Nancy to never send the articles over to the Senate in exchange for repudiating Trump publicly.”

          That is not such a wild theory. It makes a ton of sense.

          Of course, it’s all speculation at this point, and we’ll see what happens, but that is a solid hypothesis.

        2. Well stated and interesting thoughts provided here. There is certainly some dealmaking being done and with the agenda of the left, many on the right are running for cover and planning for the upcoming 100 days.

          The real problems the left has with Trump’s relatively down to earth policies have always been masked by the left’s constant animosity against him and his person. It’s a “we don’t like his policies but we hate him and what he represents” kind of approach to dealing with him.

          But let’s not forget how much some loved him for being a prick. Some, meaning millions of people, felt and still feel that it is his prickishness that made him an effective outsider and willing to do whatever it took to represent the unheard voices of America.

          And is it so crazy to believe that in order to get anything really done of real substance and effect in Washington DC, one might have to be a prick? I don’t think so. Maybe Obama was a prick, but a much more polished and diplomatic prick. When he used the IRS to go after conservative groups, was he a prick? Oh yes he was! But the left saw him and continue to see him as the messiah.

          The ignorant left speaks out their views on TV, stating that Trump supporters need to be “reprogrammed.” The smart ones instead work to take away basic human rights to gain power. That is the world we live in.

          1. So, who actually, of the Swamp investigated the allegations of voter fraud? Do the writers of REASON actually trust the career politicians who would gain an advantage in cheating in an election rather than the outsider who has been driving the Swamp?

          2. How many presidents during my lifetime have not been pricks to one degree or another? I was born during Eisenhower.

            The only ones that it seems even possible they didn’t have any prick tendencies at all are Bush the Elder and Carter. Maaaaaaybeeee Ford. All of the others had varying degrees of cocky asshole in there somewhere.

          3. Obama was a prick, but a much more polished and diplomatic prick.

            Yes, and this is exactly what the Donkeys keep putting forward, slimy, devious, ‘eloquent’ assholes.

            But that’s what many people want. Someone with a soothing voice and tenor, regardless of the shit he proposes.

            1. Obama used to be a prick. He still is, but he used to be one too.

        3. Thanks for the reasonable synopsis, much appreciated by the reasonable folks here at UnReason.

        4. As one who predicted here (on another thread) last week that there likely won’t be a Senate trial for Trump’s impeachment, as 17 Republicans aren’t going to vote to end Trump’s political career because doing so would create civil war within the GOP, which is why Schumer will almost certainly call off the trial before it begins.

          I suspect the plan is for Biden to ask Schumer to call of the impeachment trial of citizen Trump (to purportedly promote national unity), and that Schumer will respond by reluctantly agreeing to Biden’s request (to also purportedly promote unity).

          Besides, if McConnell throws Trump under the bus (by voting for the impeachment of Trump), which would create a civil war in the GOP, would likely result in McConnell’s ouster as GOP Senate leader. But I won’t be surprised if McConnell cut deals with Schumer and Pelosi to screw Trump.

          If Trump creates a third political party, only the Democrats will benefit. Look what happened when Teddy Roosevelt created the Bull Moose Party, which got racist Democrat Woodrow Wilson elected.

          1. If Trump creates a third political party, only the Democrats will benefit. Look what happened when Teddy Roosevelt created the Bull Moose Party, which got racist Democrat Woodrow Wilson elected.

            It would be much, much worse than that. We would likely get a real honest to god Communist, like Kamala.

            Oh wait…..

        5. Lord, I hope you are right. It is is well above plausible.

      2. Spot on, Ken. It’s KYA time and making the choice to run and hide will not inspire confidence in what remains of the right. It will erode it. Well said. CW

    2. Well, it is true. Trump’s irresponsibility and lies since losing the election have incited dangerous outlying groups to act with no restraint or ethics…culminating in the Capitol riot. Yes, McConnell was an enabler for far too long. No, he is not wrong to place the blame for the riot at least partly in Trump’s lap, where it belongs.

      1. It’s an act of a man trying to desperately hold on, making deals to save himself and a dying party.

      2. I think you meant to say “Stop the Steal!”. You’re welcome.

      3. “culminating in the Capitol riot”

        The mildest of the 64 riots that have hit DC in the last four year.

        Maybe those “dangerous outlying groups” can give your “mostly peaceful protesters” lessons in not destroying shit.

        1. But! But! SACRED SPACE!

          1. Not sacred ‘space’ but definitely having a direct impact on a legitimate government function. So definitely more problematic.

      4. Well, its true – Trump’s use of his first amendment rights raised a lot of legitimate questions about the ridiculously incomplete and ineffective legislative protection of fair elections in multiple states. That hurt a lot of bureaucrat’s feeling and made a bunch of leftist officials nervous about their capacity to retain power if those flaws are ever addressed. He needs to be punished for that.

        As for that riot log in my eye, just ignore that and focus on your speck.

  6. McConnell, who in private reportedly has said he believes Trump committed impeachable offenses, has now publicly endorsed the main thrust of the House’s charges.

    The stench of Trump will be with the GOP for a while, Mitch.

    But the cycle will go on and the GOP will be back in power in 2024 before some other asshole brings the GOP down again.

    1. “GOP will be back in power in 2024”

      No way. Democrats will expand their Congressional majorities in the next midterm. Then Kamala Harris (hopefully with Cuomo as VP) will win in 2024.

      #HarrisCuomo2024

      1. What about #NewsomWhitmer2024 ????

        1. No white/white Democratic presidential ticket will win again. It’s doubtful any will even get the chance to try.

      2. They’ll get by with a little help from their friends. At Dominion.

      3. I am assuming that is satire. The GOP will be in control of the legislature in 2 years

  7. Cause making Trump a martyr to his base will definitely fix faith in government. /s

  8. Provoked, not incited.

    And the loss of the Senate is mostly on McConnell, for canceling the 2K checks Trump realized were needed to win Georgia.

    1. False. Perdue and Loeffler were clearly ahead until Trump sandbagged his own Treasury Secretary and McConnell at the 11th hour after they managed to hold the line on even more helicopter money (note: remember when the default libertarian position was against welfare/”stimulus”? Fun times, pre-Trump).

      It was typically undisciplined and the results were all-too-predictable. If Trump were half as capable as his sycophants think he is then he would have kept his fucking mouth shut for two weeks. But no, fish gotta swim, birds gotta sing, and Donald Trump has to make himself the center of attention especially when doing so runs completely counter to his own best interests.

      1. Agreed

        1. Ofcourseyouwould… lol

          1. He’s dead on right. Trump fucked up the senate. Yeah maybe Mitch should have just given in and done the $2k to try to preserve Georgia. But Trump put him in an impossible position.

      2. Oh, I’m against all of the bailouts. But a non-zero number of Georgian voters saw the Dems as the 2K free money party, and the Repubs as the Grinch. Trump was trying to level the playing field.

        1. That’s just not the case.

          For much of December, Trafalgar showed Republicans consistently trending up in the red-leaning state. One poll released on December 18 showed the Republicans in the driver’s seat, with Loeffler leading Warnock by nearly seven points and Perdue pulling ahead of Ossoff by nearly three points.

          But Trafalgar’s subsequent poll, conducted from December 23 to December 27, showed a dramatic shift, with both Democrats taking a narrow lead. Cahaly said the only explanation he could summon for the abrupt shift was President Trump’s call on December 22 to increase COVID relief checks from $600 to $2,000 — defying his own hand-picked negotiators with a plan quickly endorsed by Democrats.

          “Literally the 23rd is when this thing moved,” Cahaly told National Review. “. . . Nothing changed the polling like that. It was just like a bomb went off.”

          “It’s all designed to make Trump people be disenchanted, because they see the same thing we do, and they’re clever and they’re fast. I just see the Democrats as clever and fast and reactive. Just like how both Democrats engaged for the $2,000 after Trump said it, before either of the Republicans did. That’s just a speed of operation thing,” he said.

          Again, total lack of discipline. Even if his instincts were right, he c/shouldhave made this clear during the negotiations. But after the deal is announced? You have to be retarded.

          1. “This Pollster Thinks”

            Well I’m convinced, despite what I actually saw.

          2. You and that guy are fuckin retards.

            The drop in support was from red voters feeling disenfranchised from the first vote they know was rigged in Atlanta on Nov 4th.

            Period. Full stop.

            And even then Perdue was much closer than Loeffler until he got covid. Then, 2 days before the election Loeffler started to bump up near Warnock and past Perdue when she attended the trump rally and supported both trumps call for 2k checks and rejecting states fraudulent electors.

            You can keep lieing about it, but that’s the truth you fucktard.

          3. That is a valid criticism.

        2. “Oh, I’m against all of the bailouts. But a non-zero number of Georgian voters saw the Dems as the 2K free money party”

          A larger amount of them saw the R’s as the “no money for you” party once Trump said he would sign the checks. He made the R senate an unnecessary enemy at the worst time possible for them

          He sandbagged them plain and simple. Fucking retard

          1. Nah you’re the fucking retard. Millions of voters struggling financially, dems already promising 2k relief, reps only 600.

            The 2k was already put on the table by the dems, it wasnt the Republicans idea to move off the table. They either needed a better idea or a way to explain how $600 was better than $2k to people in need. Trump realized you’ll never convince $600 is better than 2k so you better get on board.

            Also, the fact trump had been calling fir larger stimulus checks since last summer also proves you wrong.

            But you’re a fucktard n you’re going to fuck tards.

            1. Especially after Congress had already authorized 600 billion plus in pork to head overseas, but it’s the extra 1400 bucks to Americans that was a bridge too far? The GOP did it to themselves, and now is crawling back to their base, promising “they’ll really fight this time, guys!”

              Fuck ’em. This election, and likely the GA Senate races, given the margin made up by the D candidates between Nov. 4 and the runoff, was stolen. Stolen. Nobody got punished. Or will be punished. And the vast majority of the GOP looks cool with it, so long as party leaders can keep safe seats and siphon off some graft.

              Get fucked.

              1. yup sure, you got it

                they cheated thats why you lost

                dont do anything different, just cry foul and cry your way home

                just dont be surprised when you lose the next election too

                enjoy the dems you earned, fucking loser

      3. That’s a lie.

        Perdue was only ahead before he got covid. Loeffler never was but she closed the gap when she came to. Trumps rally saying she supported the 2k check and would argue against the fraudulent state electors.

      4. Purdue was ahead, but Loeffler wasn’t.

        And sorry, there’s just too many poor Republicans who weren’t willing to shoot themselves in the foot and turn down money while they’re struggling just to uphold the principles of libertarianism and/or ‘own the libs’ since they wanted it.

    2. Perdue and Loeffler lost because of the same fraud machine that stole the election from Trump.
      The fact that there was no serious investigation of the steal, signaled to the fraudsters that they could use the same shit in the Georgia runoff.

      1. guess itll happen again

        you retards didnt learn anything

        1. White knight realizing hes an authoritarian, anti liberty, retard?

          1. seems like jeff and WK are in yals head rent free, as you spend 50% of your time trying to call out socks for them

            one of those tells, similar to an ad hominem, that you have nothing to contribute and cant argue a point…SOCK!!! GOT EM!! I DID IT GUYS! SOCK!!

            you are still a retard, you got conned, and backed a fucking loser

            take the L fucking loser

  9. Well, the pivot back to acting as the ‘loyal, toothless, opposition’ lasted all of about 6 hours.

    This is how the moderate/establishment right permanently loses control of the party. Trump’s approval ratings are down, which makes it seem like distancing from him is the best strategy, but it is still at 30+%. Assuming nobody on the Democrat side approves of him, that leaves roughly 60% of Republican voters who still do, plus probably close to 20% more who don’t revile him.

    Distancing is okay, repudiation will provoke a populist backlash.

    1. ‘took’ not ‘lasted’

    2. Alternative perspective:

      Paul foresees a colossal schism in the party should Trump be convicted and barred from future office-holding, warning that one-third of the party will walk away from the GOP in that scenario. He’s wrong: One of the curses (but also, sometimes, one of the blessings) of our culture is our notoriously short collective memory. Should Trump be disqualified this winter, the discussion will quickly move on to other topics. Who should be the new party’s standard-bearer?

      A disqualified Trump would, of course, rain hellfire on the senators who disqualified him, as well as any other perceived backstabbers. But four years from now, when ten Republican senators face reelection, Trump’s rage will be background noise at worst. Six years from now, when Ben Sasse, Mitch McConnell, Susan Collins, and 17 of their Republican colleagues face the voters, it won’t be any noise at all. Trump himself has a short attention span and a fear of being boring; even he won’t be able to keep up the insults for four years, much less six, on whatever cable-news perch from which he chooses to harangue the nation. It is true that Trump is the only thing that consistently fascinates Trump. But America does not love a sore loser, and his victim act will begin to go stale by the next time voters go to the polls. Gradually, even many of his most ardent supporters will begin to realize the man is embarrassing.

      With Trump already making noises about starting a third party whose sole reason for existing would be to solidify Democratic control across the country, disqualification would serve to strangle that in its crib. What we’ve seen time and again since 2016 is when Trump makes things about Trump, he loses. He may have been the only person who could beat Hillary!, but she’s the only person that could lose to him.

      1. LOL. No shit, that National Review doesn’t think the GOP’s treatment of Trump the last few months is going to be a big deal.

        They are going to be a permanent minority party. But it’ll be a minority party the ‘right people’ control, so that’s OK.

        1. Trump and the GOP are both in a bind. But they’re in a bind because of Trump: if you think they’re having these conversations without Trump’s pissing away of their Senate majority at the 11th hour, then I don’t what to tell you.

          For all the shit the Trumpers give McConnell et al about being the toothless opposition, they’re undoubtedly much, much happier about being an opposition that has some say over things.

          What’s a better racket than ranking member of X committee? Chairman of X committee.

          1. But they’re in a bind because of Trump: if you think they’re having these conversations without Trump’s pissing away of their Senate majority at the 11th hour, then I don’t what to tell you.

            Correlatedly, this is somewhere between bullshit and self-evident nonsense. The party was fractured and permanent minority status at the end of Obama’s reign. Do you think they’d be in a better position after 4 years of HRC? Would the party be unified and rallying behind Cruz? Paul? Jeb?

            1. The Republican party has been embroiled in civil war since the mid to late 90’s, when ending up in the majority exposed that they didn’t actually MEAN anything they’d been running on. Trump was just the latest and most successful attempt by the base to wrest control of the party from people like McConnell.

              2024 is going to be really ugly. I doubt Trump will be the candidate, if he’s smart he won’t even try to be, but he might make enough noises in that direction to keep the Uniparty distracted from whoever he’s setting up to take his place.

              What I’d look for now is for some kind of ‘bipartisan campaign reform’. That’s the Uniparty’s go-to move for blocking insurgencies.

              And Schumer may not like McConnell, but they can certainly work together on keeping the grifters in control of the GOP.

            2. The GOP was in permanent minority status in 2016?

              Apparently you are unaware of history before, I don’t know, lets say 2010? Democrats held the House virtually the entirely of 6 or 7 decades until 1994 (the Senate was nearly as monolithic). Since then, Rep. held the House 20 out of 28 years and the Senate 16 of 28 (holding the WH 12 of those years – bear in mind that Clinton’s first term had started before those 28 years, so make it 12 of 26).

              The historical reality is that the party of a first term president takes a beating in the next mid-term. Republicans will control the legislature in 2 years. (My recommendation, if they don’t have reasonable evidence for a legitimate impeachment of Biden, run three consecutive baseless ones to give him the record and they say to him, do you want do some business or do you want to go for four)

      2. Glad you’re so happy the duopoly will remain in power. Aren’t they missing you over at HuffPo?

        1. That’s not a HuffPo take. It reads like a NR/Spectator take. “How dare these peasants actually expect us to get results,” kind of opinion the GOPe admits in unguarded moments.

          The Republican Party leadership thinks Trump’s base of supporters has nowhere else to go. Maybe they’re right.

  10. Jacob, Trump is not President any more.

    1. Last I checked, the impeachment process wasn’t automatically stopped by Trump’s departure, so McConnell’s views on it are still news.

      1. Actually it is.

        You checked somewhere stupid

        1. Not necessarily. The constitution specifies two potential penalties on impeachment. yes, one of those penalties is now moot, but the other is not.

          And while it would be a first for a President to be tried on impeachment after leaving office, it has been done before for lesser officers. Secretary of War William Belknap was impeached after resigning in 1876.

          1. And what happened at the trial retard?

            He was acquitted based on lack of authority by congress you fucking dumbass.

      2. The impeachment is over.
        All that remains is to see if the democrats are going to work on their campaign promises, or focus on a show trial in the senate.

        1. Y’know, I think I’m going to hope for “Show Trial”. The actual campaign promises are worse.

  11. Please don’t beat me any more daddy!!

  12. He’s not so much concerned about the viability of the Republican party, as he is the viability of that party’s establishment continuing in control of it.

    Trump was a rare failure of their ability to act as gate keepers to public office, and as such threatened their continued control of the party. It might have fallen under the control of people more in tune with the party’s own voters.

    1. “Trump was a rare failure of their ability to act as gate keepers to public office, and as such threatened their continued control of the party. It might have fallen under the control of people more in tune with the party’s own voters.”

      Trump won the primary with about 45% of the vote, with that total skewed a bit from the final few states voting after everyone else had announced “suspending” their campaigns. So you should remember that 55% of Republican primary voters wanted someone other than Trump. That included me, by the way. I voted for Rubio in his last stand in Florida. I don’t think that I would have voted for Cruz over Hillary in 2016, but Rubio or Kasich, definitely, and had Cruz been the nominee, I may have gone the protest route and voted Libertarian, Green, Peace and Freedom, or written in Cthulu.

      Trump benefited from the way both parties run their nomination processes – set up to avoid a contended convention by giving whoever is the most solid leader the majority of delegates even if short a majority of votes. A contested convention where every candidate had a number of delegates proportional to their vote total would have been highly unlikely to result in Trump as the nominee. That is because the majority of delegates would have known how toxic he would be the future of the party.

      Trump violated so many GOP norms on both policy and behavior that no one should have been surprised by how his Presidency ended. He was violating the “11th Commandment” (“Though shalt not speak ill of any other Republican.”) almost right away after announcing his run. Reagan popularized this idea, but it was the CA state GOP Chair that said it, as a response to the personal attacks on Reagan during the 1966 primary for CA governor. Someone so childish and personal in his attacks on Republicans was never going to be qualified to lead the whole country. He should have been sunk as a viable candidate as soon as he was the only one to refuse to say that he would support the eventual GOP nominee in the first debate (if it wasn’t him), and he didn’t rule out a 3rd party bid.

      The story of how Trump turned this fervent, minority support from the GOP primary voters into near-slavish loyalty of an overwhelming majority of the party’s base is both scary and sad, frankly. It also relates to the destructive myth among hardline Republicans that the GOP base represents the “real America”, and that compromising in order to achieve a real governing majority is a betrayal of that base.

      1. Well stated and relatively pompous in light of how well our country was feeling about just about everything in February of 2020. But tell me honestly you believe, if a legal ballot were cast by every voter in February of 2020, would Donald Trump win? If you can’t say “yes” to that question then you are deluding yourself. So you’re ignoring what some, and when I say some I mean millions of people, believe. This election was not held. It was stolen and not primarily at the ballot box. Riot or no riot, there are well over a couple thousand that believe this. To ignore this reality is to ignore four years of endless obstruction by the left, the clean delivery of a curious new virus that seems to morph according to whoever is reporting on it, a radical movement against local law enforcement spurned by those who rather propagate hate than acknowledge basic historical facts and statistics and a finally, a controversial election that undoubtedly, due to its very nature, ensured additional voter fraud over the norm.

        Amidst all of this, do you really believe that the main focus should be that Trump was a childish prick? He did a lot. He spoke to a lot of America. He was heard and felt by many who feel more marginalized than ever. Who are you to say they are less than?

        1. “But tell me honestly you believe, if a legal ballot were cast by every voter in February of 2020, would Donald Trump win?”

          It is hard to predict, even with hindsight, how that would have turned out. I can agree that it was probable that he would have won, but I can’t commit to a definite “yes”, because the pandemic wasn’t his only problem. He had just come through impeachment, but not unscathed. And while the broad economic numbers looked good, there were still weak spots, as others have pointed out elsewhere, such as his ineffective trade wars. Trump always managed to gain with his supporters from things that infuriated his opponents, so even his handling of the pandemic didn’t hurt him as much as it really should have. To be honest, that seems to have been a large part of his appeal. His fans like that liberals get bent out of shape over him, seeing that a sign of him doing things right.

          That, of course, is part of the problem with the current split in the country being based on animosity toward the other side more than anything else. If the enemy likes it, it can’t be good; if the enemy hates it, it must be good! That is no way to try and reason about anything.

          “This election was not held. It was stolen and not primarily at the ballot box.”

          The election was held, I assure you. I went and voted. I saw other people voting. I saw an election volunteer stationed at a vote-by mail drop box where I went to vote. (Florida had no-excuse mail balloting and they call the system “Vote by mail”, not absentee ballots. They started counting them ahead of Election Day and that is why Florida was called for Trump early and stayed that way. This was unlike states like Pennsylvania where the state GOP wouldn’t agree to let them start counting sooner so that the mail in votes that arrived early could be done by then.)

          You don’t really specify what you mean by the election not being held. And you don’t say what, specifically, “ensured additional voter fraud over the norm.” Why should anyone believe that there was additional voter fraud over the norm? That norm, by the way, is that fraud is minuscule and insignificant to the result of all federal elections and statewide state elections over the last 30 years. (Well, with the exception of that one in 2018 where the Republican candidate benefited from contractor of his allegedly engaging in absentee ballot fraud, but even then it wasn’t that the candidate’s ~900 vote victory was proven to have been because of fraud. The state just decided that the election was tainted enough to declare the result invalid.)

          But then, there is your example of what level of evidence is needed to justify changing the results, with the election board finally deciding to order a new election when the candidate himself called for that result. Some people reporting on it suggesting that he may have done so in order to avoid having to testify himself about what he did or didn’t know about his contractor’s scheme. A large number of absentee ballots witnessed by the same people at the same address, and even Leslie McRae Dowless Jr.’s own step-daughter testified against him, admitting to being told by him to fill out ballots.

          This is evidence that proves fraud. It is backed by independent witnesses subject to cross examination that corroborate each other’s testimony and paper trails that further match that testimony. There is a specific storyline that can be checked. None of the allegations about PA, AZ, MI, WI, NV, or GA had that.

        2. “To ignore this reality is to ignore four years of endless obstruction by the left…”

          You’ll need to be specific about what “obstruction” “by the left” was so bad or unprecedented if you expect me to answer about whether I am ignoring it. I’m not going to try and read your mind and guess what you are referring to.

          “…the clean delivery of a curious new virus that seems to morph according to whoever is reporting on it…”

          There was nothing “clean” about its delivery. China hid information that would have helped us prepare better, I don’t dispute that. But there were also weaknesses in our own response, some of which that weren’t Trump’s fault directly, like the CDC’s bungling of getting a test ready. As a new virus, information about it was always going to be subject to uncertainties and changing data, so I don’t know what your complaint is about that.

          “…a radical movement against local law enforcement spurned by those who rather propagate hate than acknowledge basic historical facts and statistics…”

          You should at least acknowledge the legitimate anger over specific cases. There was no reason for George Floyd to die, and the historical facts are that Black people were at the business end of local law enforcement for generations of actual oppression. The Civil Rights movement didn’t fix all of that, as much as we might want to believe that it did. I don’t support “Defund the Police” or riots and destruction any more than you do, but I’ve watched as many videos of riot cops clearly abusing both protestors and journalists as videos of rioters causing damage. I don’t turn a blind eye to anything.

          “Amidst all of this, do you really believe that the main focus should be that Trump was a childish prick?”

          When being a “childish prick” means that he fails to lead the country in a good direction, instead whipping up people that will take his demagoguery as a call to start the “storm”, then, yes, we should all pay attention to that and learn from it.

          “He spoke to a lot of America. He was heard and felt by many who feel more marginalized than ever. Who are you to say they are less than?”

          I am not “more” than any other voter, when it comes to my rights as a citizen. Everyone has an equal right to their voice and their vote. But not more than that. Trump voters had their say, and Trump lost. They don’t have a right to act on a belief that the election was stolen, when the processes and authorities we have for adjudicating such disputes aren’t giving them the answer they want. Their feelings are not equal to what can be shown to be true objectively. If they were as skeptical of what Trump, Rudy, Sidney Powell, etc. were saying about the election as they were of what even Republicans were saying was a lack of evidence of significant fraud, then we wouldn’t have gotten here.

      2. You’re choices for 2016 of Hillary over Cruz make you an ffing joke.Literally no one can take anything you say seriously.

        1. JoeB,

          Since I don’t pick a political party or ideology as if picking a religion, I don’t look at members of the other side as inherently evil heathens. (Since there really is no “other side” for me.) I didn’t like Hillary, personally, or as a politician. I didn’t like many of her policies or think that she was a smart as she thought she was. But I liked Cruz less for a lot of reasons that have been shown to be valid in recent years and especially in the last month. He was spineless in his switch to having been so personally attacked by Trump (including his wife and Trump suggesting that Cruz’s father was involved in the JFK assassination). He almost showed some backbone when he stood up at the convention and didn’t explicitly endorse Trump, but that didn’t last long at all.

          “Literally no one can take anything you say seriously.”

          Thanks for the input.

          1. You dislike a politician for putting policy above his feelings being hurt by mean old Trump?

      3. So, if Trump had 45%, how many people were that other 55% split among? Definitionally, the next guy on the list had less than 45%. So that 45% Trump had sounds like a pretty solid percentage to me, even if there were only *two* other options, and I know that there were more than that.

        1. My point is that in a contested convention, that 55% might have coalesced around a single alternative to Trump. In that case, 45% would have been “a pretty solid percentage” that was short of the majority needed to be the nominee. It is an unknown what the 55% that picked someone other than Trump would have done in some kind of ranked-choice system or other method of finding a consensus nominee.

          Instead of a consensus nominee that truly represented a clear majority of the Republican base, they got the plurality nominee with an even more fervent fan base. Stuck with him, most of that 55% went along with it as being better than Hillary. Some would later become fervent Trump fans themselves, while some would become even more disgusted by him and leave the party.

      4. A contested convention where every candidate had a number of delegates proportional to their vote total would have been highly unlikely to result in Trump as the nominee.

        This is pure conjecture and not based on any kind of reality in 2016. The primary process is specifically designed to weed out pretenders quickly, so that the party can begin the process of focusing on the general. In fact, it can be argued that the process was actually set up for Jeb, the establishment’s choice, to take the nomination. Except Jeb fucked that up by being a Bush in 2016, when NO one in the GOP base wanted him running. You really think it’s a coincidence that Trump announced his candidacy THE VERY NEXT DAY after Jeb did?

        The story of how Trump turned this fervent, minority support from the GOP primary voters into near-slavish loyalty of an overwhelming majority of the party’s base is both scary and sad, frankly. It also relates to the destructive myth among hardline Republicans that the GOP base represents the “real America”, and that compromising in order to achieve a real governing majority is a betrayal of that base.

        I hate to break it to you, but populism has won the Republicans far more elections in the last 10 years than being a milquetoast establishment fluffer, including the 2016 election. The base going populist after the bank bailout is the primary reason Mitch McConnell got to play at being Majority Leader for 6 years. The reason Trump gained such support from over 90 percent of Republican voters was precisely because he at least gave lip service to their interests.

        His big mistake this past election was similar to the one Romney made in 2012; while Romney tried expanding his base by appealing to independents and still lost (the “45%” video probably did more damage to his candidacy than even his pathetic debate performances), Trump tried expanding his by appealing to minorities. Trump forgot that it was the white working class, whom Democrats have been increasingly shitting on over the last 20 years, that got him in the seat, not Jose and Del’Monte.

        1. “I hate to break it to you, but populism has won the Republicans far more elections in the last 10 years than being a milquetoast establishment fluffer, including the 2016 election.”

          And in a world where winning now is what matters, that makes populism seem like a good thing. But, I hate to break it to you, but populism is fickle. The passions of the moment don’t make for a stable political party or movement. Throw in a cult of personality around a populist demagogue, and you have a recipe for turning off people that might otherwise have stuck with the party after that individual is out of the picture. That was what Hawley and Cruz and so many GOPers in the House were after – to try and keep the fervent Trump supporters voting for the GOP in the future, even after their guy was out. But we see what ended up of that effort, and now it is going to be even harder for the GOP to expand beyond a fervent populist base that is short of a majority in most of the country.

          “Trump forgot that it was the white working class, whom Democrats have been increasingly shitting on over the last 20 years, that got him in the seat, not Jose and Del’Monte.”

          Wow, okay. Besides matching your user name, your analysis is contrary to most everything else I’ve read in which Trump made it close because he drew increased support from Latinos with backgrounds in countries like Venezuela, Cuba, etc., that have socialist/communist dictators and others with left-wing problem governments. That is, the whole “We have to stop socialism!” cry worked on some. Cuban Americans in Florida were likely crucial to getting Trump over the top here. Even if he didn’t draw a majority of them, he increased the percentage that did vote for him.

          1. Literally nothing you wrote in that word-vomit of a shitpost refuted what I wrote.

      5. *I* wanted somebody other than Trump. Rand Paul, to be specific.

        But the fact remains that they threw every establishment hack they had at him, and he ended up ahead. Sure, he won a plurality victory, but that was in the teeth of BOTH major parties and the media trying to defeat him.

        In a straight up contest between him and ONE party hack, and an even playing field? He’d have gotten that majority, I think.

        Still, in 2024 the party establishment is probably going to settle on one favored hack in advance, to make sure the vote for establishment hacks isn’t divided.

      6. Nah you disingenuous piece of shit.

        Trump won because he was the most pragmatic and the voters saw that.

        Trump won because he seemed most likely to get shit done, and he did.

        That’s why these establishment types are so confused and scared. Republicans will be voting for pragmatism from now on. And pragmatism means the establishment boat will rock and they’ll actually have to put their names on legislation and go on record with their votes. That scares the establishment more than anything.

  13. You know, I kinda’ sorta’ half wish Trump was the demagogue/authoritarian Jacob thinks he was. Then Jacob would have been in jail and not writing hundreds of TDS riddled articles for Reason.

    1. Given what we’re seeing now I would have much preferred that Trump declare martial law and remove the democrats.

      1. If you’re going to be a fascist and want to live under an unelected fascist dictator you might as well own it like you’re.

        However, if you hate America and hate freedom then why don’t you take your anti-American ass out of my country!

        You will speak when spoken to Mark Sextus Fascist Traitor and I don’t give you permission to reply to this comment. So cram it traitor!

        1. Blah blah blah. (Insert fart here). Oh, did you say something, KAR? A legally elected president has the right to resist a coup with force. Fraudulent votes producing an illegitimate result constitutes a coup. MTSR is spot on. It would be ugly, though.

          1. If there was evidence of election or voter fraud then why hasn’t Trump presented it? Why did his lawsuits get dismissed? You would think there would be at least one judge who’d rule in his favor if there was evidence of fraud? Why did the three supreme court justices he appointed not even vote to hear a case about the election?

            If you still believe there was fraud nothing is going to convince you otherwise. This is one of the consequences of Trump’s constant lying. He’s conditioned his braindead followers to only believe what they want.

            The GOP and Trump’s base is uneducated, backwards, inbred rubes who live in shithole rural areas or the asshole part of the country(the south). The rest of the country looks down on you backwards simpletons… And we should. You people are stupid trash.

            What’s it like to be laughed at and ridiculed by your superiors?

            1. Kirkland? Is that you?

              As ever, I have no superiors.

              1. Not every account on here that isn’t a far right Trump supporter is a sock of another user.

                What people should be asking is if Reason is the “commie rag” like so many on here describe it then why is there so many more ultra right wing Trump supporters than non Trump supporters? Biden got over 7 million more votes than Trump. So why would Trump supporters outnumber people with “TDS” like 6 to 1 on a “commie rag” like Reason? It must be because so many right wing accounts are socks of other right wingers! It would explain why so many Trump lovers accuse the non Trump lovers of being socks of non Trump lovers. Because they’re a sock themselves!

            2. What’s it like to be laughed at and ridiculed by your superiors?

              You tell us, hicklib, it happens every time you post here.

              1. You seem reply to all my comments mentioning this so I must be bothering you somewhat.

                Try not being a bigoted asshole to everyone!

                There are lots of red rocks in Utah. Do you live in Utah? Are you Mormon? It would explain your lack of intelligence and homophobia.

                1. You seem to be delusional about how much I reply to you, you hicklib faggot.

                  How long have you lived with AIDS, exactly?

                  1. I know in the uneducated, backwards place you live homophobia and aids jokes are common. However, the majority of the country are repulsed by them. To be fair the majority of the country is just repulsed by most things about you.

                    Even the homophobic religious kooks keep the f word and aids jokes to themselves. Jesus christ you must be one straight up cousin fucking rubes.

                    Unless you say otherwise I’m going to assume you’re a Mormon in Utah.
                    It’s not the gays fault you live in such a shithole. That’s your fault. It’s not my fault either you uneducated, homophobic hick.

                    1. I know why you’re so jealous of us.

                      Oregon sucks, your women don’t shave, your men act like women, and Portland smells like a port a potty.

                      Oh, and the carpet in your airport is stupid. Just like you.

    2. I kinda ‘sorta’ agree with you.

  14. McConnell can fuck off along with Sullum
    None of Trump’s words were criminal and whether or not they were “lies” has yet to be proven.
    But lies or not, they do not rise to a criminal level or to the constitutional threshold for impeachment.
    And…
    The constitution specifically give congress the authority to impeach a president and remove him from office. But at this point he is not president and not in office so congress has no authority.
    This is over. Period.
    If Republicans allow this sham to proceed with their assistance, the consequences will not be pleasant or politically survivable for the culprits.
    In fact, I would say the Republican party will be done

    1. Fun fact is that if they can impeach Trump now that he’s out they can also impeach Biden in two years when the Rs take congress

      1. They can, and should, do that anyway. The fun fact is that if you can impeach someone not in office, and the punishment is that you can’t run for office, then they can impeach anyone outside of the establishment before they win an election, and they won’t be able to serve.

        The idea of Congress impeaching someone not currently in government should be terrifying to libertarians.

        1. I just developed a new goal in life. To be impeached as president of the United States without ever coming anywhere near the office.

          Gonna have to plan that one out carefully…

          1. Probably already got yourself on a list with this comment.

  15. This is a smart bet. Trump enjoys broad support in the Republican party, but support that I suspect is broader than it is deep. I am guessing that out of power Trump will fade quickly.

    1. I think that is what many on the right are quietly wishing for. Who knows, but I doubt it.

    2. I think this is exactly right. I believe a lot of Trump support was fairly surface level because he “took it to the Dems.” But at the end of the day, it’s pretty obvious there wasn’t a lot of substance there.

      1. How are you tards this delusional?

        Trump has reshaped the party into one demanding pragmatism and the voters will require that, at least for several more elections.

        If anything trump has reshaped the party in the image of “play hardball and get shit done” and that is as anti republican establishment as it gets. I feel like you guys are just trying to manifest that reality so you’ll stop crying and having nervous breakdowns.

        The last thing the establishment wants is to constantly be forced to go on record on issues or legislation. We’re finally seeing the Republicans grow a spine, and it will culminate with a change in much of their leadership in the next 2 years.

        Liz Cheney already getting the axe and more to follow.

  16. I am creating an honest wage from home 1900 Dollars/week , that is wonderful, below a year agone i used to be unemployed during a atrocious economy. I convey God on a daily basis i used to be endowed these directions and currently it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with everybody, Here is I started..
    For more info.

  17. Please let the GOP split into multiple parties.

  18. Well if neither party will investigate the voting inconsistencies, and both are okay with just sweeping this under the rug, why bother voting anymore? You’ll never convince me that Biden legitimately got more votes than Obama.

    1. What counts is that Biden got more than Trump.

      1. No what counts is the integrity of those votes. Something severely in question right now.

        1. Not really. A few dead enders still believe the conspiracies.

          1. 80 million people being a few deadenders by Mendacious4ever’s totally unbiased estimates.

            1. Us population is 328M with a voting population of 258M of which 25% identify as Republican and 75% of those saying they think the election is wrong. So

              258M * 0.25*075 = 48M

              That assume that those 48 million actually believe what they are telling the pollsters. I am guessing they don’t.

              1. Your math lesson isn’t really helping your case. 48M is still a lot more than “a few”.

              2. The only place youll find 48 million dead enders in America is in Democrat run urban areas.

      2. Clueless reply, as usual.

  19. “clearly was shaken by the violent invasion of his own workplace”

    The govt should have protected the workplaces of average Americans against lawless violence – I never would have predicted that they’d be consistent in their negligence and fail to protect Congress, as well.

    Well, that consistency is over. They still won’t protect average Americans but from now on they’ll protect the nomenklatura.

    Riots are bad, not because they’re for the “wrong” cause, but because…well, because rioting is wrong. But who’s going to uphold *that* position nowadays?

    “Protection for me, not for thee,” will be the rule going forward.

    1. Burning down plebian neighborhoods and looting their shops is just vox populi, but you better believe that some retard daring to put his feet up on Nancy Pelosi’s desk is an insurrection.

      1. I’m keeping this and I’m going to quote it because it’s brilliantly succinct.

  20. Cognitive dissonance. We didn’t independently investigate election fraud but the results contained some anomalies. Like the results weren’t believable. Those who ran the lections looked at it again and said no problem we did it rights the first time.

    When asked if these results could be independently audited the answer was no. SO I’m sure just like Saddam and Hugo when asked there elections were “fair and square”

    The courts dodged and weaved looking for technicalities to not take the cases.

    1. Why were the results not believable? An popular President and the country has a crisis in his final year in office. There is nothing unbelievable about Trump losing.

      Trump lost the popular vote in 2016, won the EC but with thin margins in critical states.
      Trump did nothing to expand his popularity in 4 years in office and never broke 45% in popularity.
      Presidents like Johnson (Vietnam War), Carter (hostage crisis), Bush41 (recession) have all lost when a crisis arises in country.

      There is nothing unbelievable in Trump’s loss.

      1. The way it happened was EXTREMELY suspicious. Trump is rolling and only needs a couple of the remaining states he leads in……then they ALL stop counting.

        In the morning Biden “won” them all.

        1. “Hey everyone, we’ll fight this election on the up and up, but just for shits and giggles, how can we look like we stole the upcoming election and staged a coup?”

          “Have the legacy and social media blatantly collude to suppress negative stories about our candidate? We’ll even awkwardly block newspapers who dare report those stories using our social media allies”

          “I know, have our guys lock the observers out of the polling places”

          “let have our legacy and social media guys clumsily sanction anyone who questions the results”

          “Let’s do one better and shut down websites that still allow people to talk about it”

          “I know, lets publicly call for reeducation camps and investigations on anyone who voted for our opponents”

          “And if anyone protests lets call them “insurrectionists”, and throw the entire state machine against them”

          “And then let’s declare a war on terror but against our own citizens”

          “Yeah, and then at the inauguration we can fill DC with razor wire and troops”

          “And after the inauguration let’s impeach Trump again over any protests, to further legitimize our “War on Insurrection””

          “Yeah, but what if Trump told them to protest peacefully and patriotically, or something, and the protesters were unarmed?”

          “Who cares, we’ll do it anyway! Remember, we’re trying to make it look exactly like a coup”

          “You think anyone will complain? What about that Moderation4ever chap?”

          “Nah, he’ll be cool with it. He’s one of ours”

  21. That wasn’t much of a riot and was certainly not an insurrection. The very target of the riot were the houses of congress. There is video of folks just being waved in by Capitol cops and Viking man strolling into the senate with a BSing with a cop who asked can you guys just leave.

    They wrote Mitch a note, said a prayer and left. OMG what a takeover.

    A complete staged joke.

  22. loveconstitution1789, delusional moron:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/06/georgia-senate-runoff-elections-still-undecided-but-it-looks-good-for-the-democrats/#comment-8675352

    “Its a great day. Republicans and perdue win in georgia based on legal votes.

    Trump serves his second term as president 2021-2025.

    Biden so close.

    Notice harris has not resigned her senate seat yet? She knows she wont be VP.”

    1. His political predictions may be off, but at least he doesn’t fuck up water and quotation marks, you retarded piece of shit.

  23. And are we really beginning an era of kicking people out of public life for wildly exaggerated claims which inflame the unstable?

    Or just Trump?

    So far it just seems to be Trump.

    And if Trump is kicked out of public life, the lesson won’t be “politicians in general should be more responsible,” the lesson will be “vote Democratic!”

    1. Trump would not be the first person drummed out of public life. It is not hard to find people who were popular one day and barely heard of the next. Some people survive, some fade away.

      1. You really are trying hard to will that into existence. But sadly you’re wrong, again.

        For like the 10th time in this thread…

        1. I don’t have to will it into existence, Trump left today with a small gathering while the crowd was at the Inauguration. All the people that fawned over him left for the big show. Trump is history.

          1. What the hell would you expect in any situation? The exact same thing happened with every outgoing president. There’s no “special” lesson to be learned here no matter how badly you try to force it.

          2. Who was at the inauguration?

            The national guard and about 1000 flag poles.

            If you’re so concerned with gathering size, compare and contrast trumps rallies with bidens please.

            You’re so fucking dumb you didn’t even think of that one lmao

      2. Bachman Turner Overdrive?

        1. Case in point.

      3. Andrew Johnson returned to Tennessee after his term was up (surviving the impeachment trial). When he tried to re-enter political life, his own party – the Democrats – told so many salacious lies about Johnson’s wife that she committed suicide! I’m shocked Johnson didn’t slit a few throats, but he tried again and eventually returned to Congress.

        1. So you thinking Trump will run for Congress?

    2. And are we really beginning an era of kicking people out of public life for wildly exaggerated claims which inflame the unstable?

      Beginning? Off the top of my head, you might seek out Assange, Snowden, Franken, Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Damore’s opinions on when it began before saying Trump was the beginning.

      Fair to say that Trump will not be the end.

  24. The election was rigged. Everyone knows it (it was wildly obvious) whether they want to ‘pretend’ to the contrary or not. Trump was right AGAIN.. He fought the D.C. Swamp and the Swamp won.

    And McConnell is just another Swamp fungus. Do they really expect the people to buy that all Democrats voted by mail at 90% count but somehow managed to show up in-person too? The idiocy is baffling.

    1. “The election was rigged. Everyone knows it (it was wildly obvious)…”

      You know, claiming that the football game was “rigged” when your team loses is usually just considered being a sore loser. You are insisting that your side was cheated of a last second TD when the replays show the QB being tackled at the 2 yard line. Somehow, the video was altered and the ball really did cross the plane of the goal line! If you look at this one angle from this fan’s cell phone video of the play, then it is obvious! If the refs had bothered to look at that video evidence, instead of just the corrupt establishment camera angles, they would have ruled it a touchdown. After all, my favorite QB says he made it into the end zone, and anyone that doubts him is a liar!

      1. I’m still waiting for the other ‘camera angle’ (explanation). Instead all we’ve got is a “Cancel Culture” justice system. No one has presented a justification for numbers being so obviously false that they made the entire PA election hearing laugh out-loud. All its been is ridiculous excuses (1+5=2), censorship, focus change and prosecuting dissent.

        1. You have nothing to base your beliefs on, you’d have presented it. There have been many attempts by Trumpists to claim that this or that “camera angle” proves fraud, but they all get laughed at by those willing to look at them the least bit skeptically. Besides, when the existing video is clear that the QB came up short, why do we even need to look for other video?

          You just keep telling us how it was so obvious that the election was stolen from Trump instead of doing any work at all to convince someone that doesn’t already believe it.

          1. JasonT20, “Dear dissenter; Everyone knows the charts show a huge bullet found in the victims body; but because you haven’t YET established PROOF it was a homicide; ‘STOP LOOKING’ for the video or you’ll be silenced, censored and publicly humiliated?”

            It’s exactly like I said; It’s ‘Cancel Culture’ justice at work here. Refusal to dig-deeper – actually put man power behind an effort to authenticate the election it’s all about CANCELLING dissent.

            1. “It’s exactly like I said; It’s ‘Cancel Culture’ justice at work here. Refusal to dig-deeper – actually put man power behind an effort to authenticate the election it’s all about CANCELLING dissent.”

              It’s exactly like I said; It is conspiracy thinking at work here. When asked to provide evidence that would convince someone not already a True Believer, they clam up and resort to saying that the real evidence is being suppressed.

              Spell: Circle of Protection from Reason
              Cast time: However long it takes to type 240 characters or less
              Spell components: An internet connection
              Target: Self
              Effects: This spell protects the caster from facts and logical argument that would make them question something that they very badly want to believe, granting them +5 to their saving throw versus Truth. Proximity to others with the same beliefs within the Circle increase this bonus by +1 per individual. Any individual within the Circle with the Populist leadership skill adds an additional +1 and the Charisma bonus of the Populist also adds to this bonus. If the incoming argument and information is cast by someone of the opposing party, the caster gets an additional +5 bonus. If the incoming argument and information is cast by someone of the same party, the save is made with a -2 penalty instead, but the caster will be able to reverse this to a +2 bonus with a successful “RINO” roll.

              The Circle offers no protection from false information that supports the desired belief. On the contrary, it amplifies its effectiveness, with the caster receiving a -20 penalty to their saving throw vs. Disinformation, and future attempts to dispel the detrimental effect of the disinformation are made with a 90% chance of failure prior to any other check.

              1. You are the one trying to pretend that a 90% favor in a “swing” state isn’t evidence. Like I stated before; The bullet was found. It exists… It’s not some “theory” it is REAL…

                1. What is this “90% favor” that you are blathering about? Why should I listen to incoherent ramblings?

                  1. It’s all over the news; you must live in a box.

          2. Pennsylvania clearly violated the fed and its state constitutions by allowing the sec of state to change election laws mere weeks before the election. The legislature sued all the way to the USSC BEFORE the election. The SC said they wouldn’t hear it then because there were no provable damages but would review it if it affected the election. And justice alito ordered all absentee ballots to be segregated if they didn’t meet the prior laws requirements.

            Guess what?! It did!

            So they went back to the SC after the election. But rather than hearing the case on its merits the SC stated they now didn’t want to hear the case, even though alitos segregated ballot request was ignored in only Philly n Pittsburgh the two hit spots for fraud accusations, because justice Robert’s decided they now felt the state legislature should resolve it even if the sec of states laws were unconstitutional…

            Except the fact that justice Robert’s is too corrupted or stupid to understand IT WAS THE LEGISLATURE THAT BROUGHT THE CASE TO HIM.

            So here in Pennsylvania they basically said you literally can’t do anything about this election in the courts or investigatively, but you can try next time.

            That’s not disproving the fraud, it’s trying to sweep it under the rug.

  25. And Obama too

  26. Welcome to Soviet America, peasants

    1. No worries. I have plenty of vodka and blintzes. We are looking at a little dacha by the lake. Got some rubles stashed away. Took a semester of Russian in college. Maybe could brush up on that. One of those jobs they are still gonna need if I want to work.

      1. Lol. You’re going to Miniluv with the rest of us, Tom Parsons, no matter you much you say that you hate Goldstein.

  27. But let’s be real – the country would have been better off if Trump *hadn’t* encouraged the demonstrators on Jan. 6.

    This doesn’t mean he was planning a putsch.

    It doesn’t mean the Dems/swamp wouldn’t have found another excuse for targeting their class enemies.

    It means there was no point making it easier and helping them with their talking points.

    I would only accept Trump’s ban from public life if it were accompanied by a ban on other, similarly-irresponsible politicians on the other side of the aisle. I don’t want to be part of a double standard where politicians who encouraged rioting in our cities get a free pass while they wag their tongues at someone who was no worse than them.

    1. If things had played out the way you say here, then they would have blamed his rhetoric in the past months for inspiring it, and you would instead be saying he did the nation no favors by speaking out about the blatant violations of election laws in several states. So there’s really no point in going down this trail.

      1. I couldn’t quite follow that sentence, I was saying his Jan. 6 speech was ill-advised.

        “you would instead be saying” [something or other]

        How can one falsify something that takes place in an alternate universe? You seem to think that gives you a rhetorical advantage.

    2. The idea that he encouraged them does not stand up to basic scrutiny. Why would a sitting President who is eligible for a second term, who refused to concede and is still contesting the election, intentionally encourage a violent riot?

      We’re not supposed to eliminate the double standard by also criticizing Democrats who “encouraged” rioting over the summer. I don’t think any of them did. Their policies were weak and ineffectual which lead to the riots being worse than they needed to be. It’s comparable to how unprepared we were for the Capitol riots, but several degrees worse because the riots were not a one-off incident. They dragged on for months and several are still ongoing, like in Portland.

      It also makes no sense for Democrats to encourage rioting. They made fools of themselves with their poor response and racist identity politics. You really think they wanted to bring even more attention to it by having riots that drag on for months? You don’t think law and order resonated with Trump voters?

      I think the Libertarian answer is to re-examine 1A and realize that unless you purposely tell someone to literally go commit crimes, you can’t call it incitement.

      1. “Why would a sitting President who is eligible for a second term, who refused to concede and is still contesting the election, intentionally encourage a violent riot?”

        Your first error is in assuming logic on the part of someone that has little history of using it.

        Your second error is saying that Trump had any reason to think that “contesting” the election through purely legal and constitutional means was going to work. No one reasonable was thinking that the objections being raised to the counting of the Electoral Votes were going to result in Trump coming out on top. The House was never going to vote to deny the Electoral Votes for Biden that were objected to, and it was highly unlikely that the Senate would have either.

        It was all supposed to be for show. It was a way for Hawley, Cruz, and the GOP members of the House to show Trump’s fans that they deserved the loyalty of those fans after Trump left office, possibly positioning Hawley and Cruz for 2024 if Trump didn’t run again.

        It is possible that Trump didn’t imagine that his supporters in the crowd he was speaking to (and those that were already setting up near the Capitol before he was done) would actually break into the building, but what did he do to discourage that from happening? How quick and forceful was he in getting them to stop once they did? Did he even think it was a bad thing that they had done this, or did it raise his hopes that it might work?

        1. So you’re just biased against Trump then. Duly noted. Not liking or agreeing with someone’s logic does not mean the structure of that logic is nonexistent. Trump has been highly logical for quite a long time.

          1. “So you’re just biased against Trump then.”

            It isn’t bias to be opposed to a politician based on what they have said and done. Trump’s speech at rallies and other events over the years where he defies logic and reason are too many to list. I could simply pick one and find plenty to criticize in that way. Why don’t you pick one and show me how well-reasoned and logical his arguments are instead? Perhaps a speech about how China pays the tariffs he imposed rather than American consumers and businesses? That’d be a good one to start with.

      2. As for whether Trump is guilty of incitement in a legal sense, probably not. But that doesn’t mean that he isn’t responsible enough for what happened to warrant impeachment.

        1. You’re just whiting out the 1st Amendment, whether you want to admit it or not. TDS forever!

          1. Impeachment is about removing someone from the job of working for the government. Elected and appointed officials swear oaths or affirm to support and defend the Constitution, they are required to uphold the law, and to otherwise work for the good of the American people instead of themselves.

            The 1st Amendment is not a complete shield for someone to use to hold onto power when they abuse their power and otherwise act in ways contrary to the good of the country, even if their actions are short of the few exceptions to the 1st Amendment that allow for criminal penalties.

            The 2/3 requirement for removal in the Senate is a high bar to clear, so I am not worried at all about this move to try him again chilling the speech of any future officeholders. The only speech it may chill is that of officeholders that might call on people to violently resist after their side loses an election.

            1. Election authentication isn’t “good for the country”?

              1. “Election authentication isn’t “good for the country”?”

                Your idea of “authentication” is certifying that Trump really won, regardless of what any other evidence has to say, it seems. So, no, that is not “good for the country”.

                1. It’s so awesome you think you can tell me what my idea of “authentication” is. Can you think for me too? Oh the self-proclaimed powers you think you have.

                  Well; frankly a 90% favor on Nov 4th at 3AM in masses of 600,000 votes in multiple swing states without some *definite and proven authentic reason for existing* certainly violates any preconceived notion of “authentication” that I’m looking for.

                  Do you have a definite and proven authentic reason it exists?

                  1. “Well; frankly a 90% favor on Nov 4th at 3AM in masses of 600,000 votes in multiple swing states without some *definite and proven authentic reason for existing* certainly violates any preconceived notion of “authentication” that I’m looking for.”

                    I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about with this. You’ll need to translate from conspiracy bullshit to English for me.

      3. I guess you missed aocs tweets, or Maxine waters soapbox speech, or Rashida tailibs comments, the list could go on.

    3. Just to be clear, I doubt Trump wanted an attack on the Capitol, it’s just that, at least in hindsight, encouraging a crowd to congregate near the Capitol while Congress is counting the votes isn’t what I’d call going the extra mile to be respectful of Congress. It’s free speech, but not all free speech is wise.

      As for the Democrats, I don’t think they sat down and said “let’s burn some buildings and maybe get a security guard killed, etc.” More likely is that they said, “a bunch of potential Democratic voters are mad, let’s keep them riled up until the election to benefit ourselves politically.” If riots ensued, well, then, well, it’s just normies’ property being damaged and they have insurance blah blah.

      As Snopes acknowledges amidst hemming and hawing, Harris did indeed say this during the riots – “They’re not gonna stop […] this is a movement I’m telling you, they’re not gonna stop. And everyone beware, because they’re not gonna stop, they’re not gonna stop before election day in November, and they’re not gonna stop after election day […] and everyone should take note of that on both levels, that they’re not gonna let up, and they should not, and we should not.”

      https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/kamala-harris-protests/

      Like Trump, her subjective meaning was probably to encourage peaceful protests, but also like Trump, she was riling up volatile people with what we can say is a highly exaggerated narrative (in her case a plague of white-supremacist police).

      1. “Just to be clear, I doubt Trump wanted an attack on the Capitol, it’s just that, at least in hindsight, encouraging a crowd to congregate near the Capitol while Congress is counting the votes isn’t what I’d call going the extra mile to be respectful of Congress. It’s free speech, but not all free speech is wise…”

        Speech with which you agree doesn’t need protection; you’re suggesting accepting the chilling effects of mob rule.
        Not.
        On.
        Your.
        (or my)
        Life.

    4. “But let’s be real – the country would have been better off if Trump *hadn’t* encouraged the demonstrators on Jan. 6.”

      Disagreed.
      It forced the swamp to put its cards on the table, and it is not a winning hand.

  28. Even WaPo is saying the Capitol wasn’t incited by riots but was part of a preplanned op by a few fringe groups:

    “Self-styled militia members from Virginia, Ohio and other states made plans to storm the U.S. Capitol days in advance of the Jan. 6 attack, and then communicated in real time as they breached the building on opposite sides and talked about hunting for lawmakers, according to court documents filed Tuesday.
    “While authorities have charged more than 100 individuals in the riots, details in the new allegations against three U.S. military veterans offer a disturbing look at what they allegedly said to each other before, during and after the attack — statements that indicate a degree of preparation and determination to rush deep into the halls and tunnels of Congress to make “citizens’ arrests” of elected officials.”

    But continue on blaming the person who actually called for a peaceful march.

    1. “But continue on blaming the person who actually called for a peaceful march.”

      Right, because all you have to do after telling radicals for months that their country is being stolen from them that they should protest peacefully in order to be absolved of any responsibility when they take you seriously and get violent.

      1. Right.
        For some reason Trump is not offering to pay all their legal fees. Does *he* think he or they went too far?

  29. Provide a persuasive case for some ideas, Republicans, or continue to lose.

    1. Yeah, I mean criminal justice reform getting all those brown folks out of jail that Joe helped put there was a bad idea.

      I always knew you were racist trash hihn.

    2. You mean like in 2010, 2014, and 2016, hicklib?

  30. They talked big while Trump had power, but now they run like a bunch of scared bunnies!

    The traitors like Hawley and Cruz need to be expelled. God knows their uneducated, backwards constituents won’t vote them out.

    1. Nothing is ever going to convince the uneducated rubes who still believe the election was stolen that it wasn’t. Hopefully as Trump becomes less and less relevant their temper tantrum will die down.

      The ones advocating civil war and insurrection need to be tried and given hefty sentences. If we would of hung(or at least life sentences) Lee, Davis, and all the other confederate traitors after the civil war we wouldn’t of had a lot of the problems we had.

      1. See, it’s shit like this that makes me think that KAR is actually Tucker Carlson astroturfing as a lefty stereotype.

      2. You mean like the Dems after 2016? Oh wait they didn’t. GFY.

        1. What did the Dems do in 2016? Hilary conceded the next day. Obama and Biden cooperated with the incoming Trump administration. They claimed 3 million illegals voted in California (the number they lost the popular vote by)… No wait that last one is what Trump did when he won in 2016!

          Hilary writing a book about why she thinks she lost is totally the same as not conceding, filing lawsuit after lawsuit that gets dismissed, and lying about voter fraud until you leave office(I don’t see him ever admitting he lost).

          The people who think what Hilary and the Dems did in 2016 is comparable to what Trump did are delusional.

          1. Lame, even for a parody account. Fuck off and die.

            1. Sevo sorry you’ve never had any friends to do drugs with, but that’s not the drug’s fault. I don’t know why you think coke makes you “addled?” You either have never done it or just did really shitty come.

              Doesn’t matter. You’re still stupid for making fun of people for doing it.
              What does that say about you? That the drunks, stoners, cokeheads, and junkies you despise are smarter than you? I’m sure it’s frustrating. That’s probably part of the reason you’re so mean and negative on here. If I were you I would just stop reading and posting comments on here. It can’t be good for you to be reminded of your stupidity all the time.

              Anyway I wish you the best!

  31. McConnell totally wants to wash Trump out of the body politic. McConnell sacrificed his queen (control of the Senate) by denying the $2,000 stimulus right before the Senate runoff in Georgia. This had to be done to knee-cap Trump and part of the plan of getting rid of Trump as soon as possible.

    McConnell is a political animal.

    1. I tend to agree. McConnell got what he really wanted out of Trump. A whole bunch of federal judges and a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court for at least the next dozen years. He can still wield a fair amount of obstructionist power in a 50-50 split Senate. Schumer would need to hold his side completely united for VP Harris to cast the tie-breaking vote, so that won’t always be decisive. Trump is damaged, used goods to Mitch now.

  32. By the logic used to suggest that Trump incited the riots, every single politician who spoke out in favor of the BLM protests/riots is just as much a dangerous demagogue who needs to be removed from office.

    It doesn’t matter if the protests were “mostly peaceful”, or if they sincerely believed (Which is quite likely) that the country is still severely racist and every minority is just one wrong turn away from death everyday. They added to the fire and therefore are culpable for all the deaths and destruction.

    1. That is not the sort of bipartisan approach favored here at Reason.

      Only one side is afforded recognition of goodwill, while the others is always implicated as bad.

      It’s in the stylebook.

  33. And tonight Jacob Sullum sits in front of his computer thinking, “What am I going to write about now that Trump’s gone?”

    1. Guess he’ll have to go back to drugs and guns. He’s been good on those topics. He should have just stuck with that.

      1. Ashli will not get the same concern as Rowena got.

  34. “The House noted that Trump “repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the Presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by State or Federal officials.” Trump reiterated those false claims in the speech he delivered to thousands of angry followers, who had gathered in D.C. at his behest to “stop the steal,” shortly before a joint session of Congress was scheduled to affirm President Joe Biden’s election victory. “We won this election, and we won it by a landslide,” Trump said. “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” Given the context, the article of impeachment says, Trump’s comments “encouraged—and foreseeably resulted in—lawless action at the Capitol.””

    McConnell confirmed for primaried.

    I’ll repeat it as many times as needed, but there were many significant, first-time changes to election procedures, using covid as an excuse, that would make voter fraud substantially easier. Some of these changes occurred by executive fiat and warrant real discussions about the role of state governments and legislatures in their respective elections.

    For the first time in the history of our elections, we saw a major campaign finance taboo left completely ignored. Not only did Democrat controlled states and cities use covid lockdowns to restrict political organization in manners that favor Democrats more, they also allowed social media to make billions of dollars of in-kind contributions to their party by ignoring them when they targeted conservatives and banned political ads and organizations. Other than Trump, nobody is talking about how influential this was despite the fact that the very same people who are silent now complained about “misinformation” on Facebook helping Trump win in 2016.

    There were also many statistical irregularities that made the manner in which Biden won almost statistically impossible. The bellweathers weren’t even remotely close, and it’s not like they suddenly became MAGA country overnight. These counties are highly predicative of election outcomes. He lost Florida and Ohio by landslides. Trump picked up several percentage points with every group except white people. Biden had even worse turnout from blacks than Clinton. Despite this, he “won” an astronomically high number of votes from a very small number of counties, counties which just happen to have single party Democrat cities with a rich and very recent history of voter fraud in local and state elections.

    We saw throughout the (still ongoing) process of Trump contesting this election that there is not really a formal process to contest the results. Even a sitting President does not have the authority to investigate. The courts can simply refuse to hear cases on their merits. The uniparty system can decide that even the appearance of a potentially fraudulent election is so damaging to their power that it must be suppressed at any costs. With no free press to report otherwise and the only “fact checkers” attempting to do so have limited information and are themselves from partisan news publications, we find ourselves at a crossroads where honest, intelligent people must ask: why are things this way? Who made elections impossible to contest? Why aren’t there actual audits? Why is it so hard to find objective information? Why are investigations decentralized? If this election is so secure and so easy to prove, why hasn’t anyone done it yet? Why is there so much resistance?

    We all knew something was fishy the moment we saw the results. Trump warned about it almost a year in advance when Democrats started to weaponize covid to their electoral advantage. Democrats have always pushed for power-preserving measures, which is why they’re still opposed to voter ID laws and why they love illegal immigration. It should not surprise anyone that one of the first things Biden has promised to do is restore illegal immigrants to the Census count.

    What I saw over the last month was a complete betrayal of this country by almost everyone. There is no harm in having more transparent elections. An investigation cannot hurt anyone. Libertarians know better than anyone else to run for cover the moment we see “bipartisanship.” It means the uniparty feels threatened and has made up its mind, regardless of what the “people” they so often refer to believe. Their refusal to address genuine, legitimate problems with the 2020 election (many of which predate 2020 by a long shot) have unfortunately cast Biden as an illegitimate President. Trump did the right thing being a dick to him. Now comes the hard part where he has to organize a popular movement that circumvents the entire uniparty system. Best of luck to him and he certainly has my support in these efforts.

    1. “McConnell confirmed for primaried.”

      In six years? Hardly. He’ll be 84. It isn’t entirely unlikely that he might keep going, some Senators have been older, but how likely do you really think it would be for him to run again when he’d be 90 at the end of another term after this one?

      1. His leadership is over and he won’t get it back even if Republicans win back the Senate. That’s the point. He’s probably the most hated “Republican” at this point for lying about incitement to save his own skin.

    2. “We saw throughout the (still ongoing) process of Trump contesting this election that there is not really a formal process to contest the results.”

      Oh? 60+ lawsuits? Canvassing boards with members from both sides? State election officials that are Republicans weren’t able to look into any allegations of fraud?

      I think you are just saying this without any understanding of how election results are checked and certified.

      “Even a sitting President does not have the authority to investigate.”

      Candidates always have options. But they are acting as private citizens in those procedures because they are candidates. The last thing we would want would be for an official to use their powers to act directly in regards to their own re-election.

      “The courts can simply refuse to hear cases on their merits.”

      And judges rulings can be appealed if the judge dismisses a case for invalid reasons. Besides, not all of the dozens of cases were dismissed because of standing issues. And you should recognize that Trump’s legal teams didn’t even allege fraud in some of the bigger cases, even when given the opportunity to present evidence. Rudy et al. would cry fraud in public, but when put on the spot by a judge, Rudy once admitted that a particular case in PA was not a fraud case. And, of course, standing does matter. A candidate would always have standing, I assume, but a lot of these lawsuits weren’t brought directly by the Trump campaign, but on behalf of other people, and a court rightly has to decide if those people are suffering a harm that the court can even address.

      1. 60+ lawsuits, almost all 60 of which were not actually filed by Trump’s legal team and all of which were thrown out of court on procedural grounds. Some of the cases attempted to address the merits of the allegations, such as Nevada, but the problem remains that Trump was requesting the ability to investigate the election to the degree that would be necessary to prove his suspicions.

        I do not agree with your assertion about the use of government power to verify elections. The first problem is that officials already use their power to act directly in regards to elections. That’s what Op Crossfire was all about. I don’t know why we just write that off as irrelevant, but there are still large swaths of the population today who seriously believe that Trump is a Russian operative. Funny how once the other party is in power again, they can’t find anything suggesting that.

        The reason “fraud” was not alleged is a red herring. Voter fraud is a strict legal definition that is basically limited to people committing the actual criminal act of fraud (impersonating/using another identity) in order to vote. A lot of the irregularities I’ve cited concerns over do not necessarily require “fraud” in order to be a problem. Many of the issues are simply procedural irregularities that provide unfair advantages to voters in certain states and municipalities. Some of the issues are legal disputes that I believe deserve further debate and SCOTUS interpretation. It is typically partisans who try to use reductionism to reduce the entire claim to “fraud” because we already have real evidence about literal fraud. It happens all the time, but it’s small scale and has never been organized at a national level. At worst, some of the more recent fraud convictions that have occurred within my own state of PA involved rogue election clerks and a local sheriff and implicated maybe ten or twenty thousand votes at best. I bring up the existence of fraud separate from 2020 because it shows a culture and system of checks that are inadequate for us to simply “trust” local investigators.

        1. “…he problem remains that Trump was requesting the ability to investigate the election to the degree that would be necessary to prove his suspicions.”

          No, that is not correct. The lawsuits, including the ones actually filed by Trump’s lawyers, were seeking to throw out hundreds of thousands or even millions of ballots and/or push the whole decision to a GOP-controlled state legislature. Many of those lawsuits were tossed, in part, precisely because the remedy that was being sought was so extreme. Trump did request recounts in a couple counties in Wisconsin, and ended up with Biden’s margin increasing slightly. Trump didn’t want “investigations”. He and his side were already convinced that the election was “stolen” and that he really won, so they just wanted the ability to make that real.

        2. Crossfire Hurricane was about investigating any coordination between Trump campaign officials and operatives of the Russian government in the broad realm of “interference” with the 2016 election. That was mostly about disinformation efforts, not attempts to affect actual votes.

          I don’t know how large the swathes of the population are that seriously think that Trump was a Kremlin operative, but that strikes me as attempt at false equivalence to the clearly large swathes that think that Trump really won this time, or perhaps those that are convinced that Biden is in league with the CCP. Besides, when Don Jr., Jared, and Paul Manafort were in a room with a Russian lawyer thinking that they were going to get dirt on Hillary, what is so far fetched about believing that this should have been investigated? The biggest note to make is that almost none of this was made public before the 2016 election. The infamous ‘dossier’ was not widespread public knowledge until well after the counting was done. None of Crossfire Hurricane could have resulted in Hillary being sworn in instead of Trump.

          Trump was using his position to push for the results of the election to be changed when he called Raffensperger. No one from the White House should have ever talked to Raffensperger other than through legal filings and negotiations with counsel. That was one of the complaints that the Georgia AG made in his filing regarding the Trump side dropping its lawsuits, by the way. Trump’s lawyer in those cases was on the call, but the team supporting Raffensperger was not, which the AG said was a violation of ethics rules. (Since Raffensperger was named in the suits, and was represented by counsel, the opposing side and their lawyers are not supposed to talk to him without notifying his counsel, according to that AG.)

          “I bring up the existence of fraud separate from 2020 because it shows a culture and system of checks that are inadequate for us to simply “trust” local investigators.”

          Trump and his allies wanted the results overturned. That requires sufficient proof of actual fraud. “Irregularities” and insufficient “trust” (by the losing side) is not in any way enough to change the official results. You need specific, documented, evidence of illegal ballots that holds up to cross-examination. Canvasing boards hear disputes before they pass along their official results to the state. Recounts are automatic when the margins are within certain percentages, and campaigns can always request recounts beyond that (if they are willing to pay for them). And the courts can hear anything else that these processes don’t deal with to the satisfaction of the losing candidate.

          Of the procedural flaws that I see being alleged that aren’t fantastical conspiracy nonsense, I just don’t see anything adding up to real doubt if you take Trump losing out of the equation. The reason I think this is because this kind of “ballot security” talk is never balanced by “ballot access” talk by the right. This country has a well documented history of those in power denying the right to vote to Blacks. Lots of excuses about how people can’t get by without a photo ID and so on are tossed out, but I hear nothing from those same people about how they will help illegible citizens obtain the specific types of ID allowed. I see claims of a thousand or more polling locations in minority-heavy neighborhoods being closed to ‘save money’ after the 2013 Shelby County ruling eliminated pre-clearance in the Voting Rights Act.

          Perhaps the voters on the right that fret over voter fraud can compromise with those on the left that claim voter suppression and then both sides can get what they want to be able to trust that our elections are free, fair, and open to all. I don’t think I’ll hold my breath for that, though.

    3. “Why aren’t there actual audits?”

      You mean like the one that Georgia did? And the hand recount it did after that? Or that Antrim County Michigan did after people freaked out about the error that did switch votes that they quickly caught and corrected?

      You so fervently believe that Trump really won, that it simply isn’t possible that the results were checked and audited, or else the results would match what you believe. Your belief is simply immune to being disproved.

      1. “Why aren’t there actual audits?”, Well there was the peoples audits that caught all the Whoopsie-Daisies…… Expectantly; all favoring Biden.

        But we’ll sure as heck pretend that questioning a 90%-Biden Favor of 600,000 ballot count is just peoples lack of common-sense abilities and instead some kind of partisan faith in complete contrast to REALITY.

        1. How about instead of taking less than a minute to link to a video that is well over an hour long, you convince me that it would be worth my time by summarizing the one best instance of alleged fraud in that video?

          When I was grad student in physics, I went to the March Meeting of the APS. Unfortunately, I got sucked in by a guy with is self-published monograph explaining why Einstein was wrong. That was an hour I could have spent looking at real physics research, but instead, I was too nice and let him go on and on rather than extricate myself.

          You all want me to believe that all of these judges, election officials that include Republicans, are all in some conspiracy to deny a look at the “real” evidence of “massive fraud”. Sorry, but I simply have better things to do with my time than entertain conspiracy theories. That means that you need to try and convince me understanding that you have to show that it isn’t just a conspiracy theory, and linking to videos where people just go on and on in conspiracy theory fashion isn’t going to do it.

          1. “Ignorance is bliss”, JasonT20….

      2. Georgia never did a full audit. They targeted counties. You can clarify if you like, but since matters of fact are extremely important here, I believe you’re referring to the random sample signature verification audit in Cobb County. The rejection rates do not make sense and the audit itself is not actually a matter of public record. By their own admission, these ballots have already been separated from their envelopes and that means certain questions simply cannot be answered.

        There has been intentional obfuscation about which rates are being debated. Trump referred to past total rejection rates, which in Georgia ranged from 3-6% in recent elections (the complete 2016 and 2018 elections as well as the 2020 primary). We saw in multiple states that the total rejection rate appeared to be substantially less than it had been than in their own primaries several months prior. Fact checkers have tried to focus solely on rejections due to failure in signature verification while ignoring that some states, such as PA, changed their signature verification standards. They attempted to draw a false equivalence by conflating Trump’s concern over total rejection rates with the results of the audits. The fact is that even at this point, we don’t yet know what the total rejection rate was for Georgia or any other state. Now I’m fine criticizing Trump for calling it into question considering nobody even knows it now, but again, that’s why I have issues with how non-transparent this process is. Why do I have to do all this journalistic work trying to find information about something so important? Where is the info? Don’t people realize from the riots two weeks ago how damaging the appearance of impropriety is? This all spits in the face of good ethical standards.

        Your last missive is a strawman. I don’t believe Trump really won. I just don’t believe we checked the results properly. I don’t think we have the right attitude about election security. I’m concerned about how we’re just trying to sweep it under the rug and vilify people who ask questions, as if it’s somehow wrong to potentially be confused or misinformed. This isn’t how you enlighten people. When people question the Holocaust, I don’t call for them to be censored, deplatformed and jailed. I just answer their questions with sources.

        1. “Your last missive is a strawman. I don’t believe Trump really won.”

          I was addressing TJJ2000 specifically with that statement. It was him that I had quoted. Taking all of his posts together, I stand by my assertion that he believes that. Or at least that he pretends to.

          “I just don’t believe we checked the results properly.”

          You say that some states changed their standards for signature matching and such, but other than that, what really is different between Nov. 3, 2020 and previous elections? Why is the doubt all on the presidential race and not on the House and Senate races where the GOP did fairly well? This doubt you and most Republicans have really looks like motivated reasoning to me. You’re picking at threads that have gone viral among Trump supporters, but GOP election officials like the Georgia Sec. of State aren’t buying them. Reporting has AG Barr telling Trump in early Dec. that the fraud claims were “bullshit” and that he couldn’t even understand what his lawyers were trying to accomplish. Trump reportedly replied that Barr was “against Trump” (referring to himself in the 3rd person). Barr announced that he was resigning early not long after that.

          On signature matching and rejection rates:

          Is a 3%+ rejection rate of mail in ballots a good thing? If that is the baseline, then is it because ~3% of the mail in ballots were fraudulent, or was the rejection rate that high because of mistakes that voters were making and/or standards that were too strict for signature matching? It could be that efforts by many groups to inform voters on how to fill out their ballots properly to ensure that they counted worked. To me, it is a good thing to have a low rejection rate, because I work from the presumption that actual voter fraud is extremely rare. I make that presumption based on the fact that investigations into it find so few cases to prosecute, and those are almost always isolated to one or a few people, not big conspiracies.

          “By their own admission, these ballots have already been separated from their envelopes and that means certain questions simply cannot be answered.”

          Ballots are secret. My ballot (cast in person during early voting) cannot be tied back to me, either, so I don’t know what information you’d want that isn’t available now. The envelope is a record that a particular voter turned in a ballot. The signature on the envelope can still be checked to see if that voter really did sign it themselves. What else do you need to know?

  35. Trump failed to empty the swamp and his supporters let him get away with it.

    1. The swamp won.

      1. lol through their dishonest media/tech censorship Dems managed to convince the suburbs that Trump was the reason we had riots

        Biden winking and nodding as BLM/antifa expand their activities over the next couple years will be a rude wake-up call

        it may get ugly, like martial law ugly

        just keep all programmers far away from your voting results

  36. Well, it is true. Trump’s irresponsibility and lies since losing the election have incited dangerous outlying groups to act with no restraint or ethics…culminating in the Capitol riot. Yes, McConnell was an enabler for far too long. No, he is not wrong to place the blame for the riot at least partly in Trump’s lap, where it belongs.

    1. Yeah Antifa is dangerous.

  37. Quoting stats from fivethirtyeight? Where’s my gif for laughing my a** off?

  38. This MAY be true. “McConnell’s allies say he has grown increasingly concerned that if party leaders do not intervene, the president’s campaign to discredit his own defeat could do lasting damage both to democracy and to Republicans’ political fortunes, driving them into a permanent minority in Washington.”

    This IS true. With the Trump voters the GOPe is a dying fish flopping in the bottom of the boat. Trump’s POLICIES are winners. if the GOPe dumps them, 2024 will be a wipe out for them.

    I am finished with answering the GOPe call to “vote for the lesser evil”. The current GOP, the result of McConnel, Romney, Sasse’s “leadership”, cannot draw enough votes to win office as dog catcher.

    1. Edit. The word “with” in para 2 should be “withOUT”.

  39. Imagine a guy who is married to a woman whose entire family is dependent on the CCP doesn’t like Trump.

  40. The Dangerous Demagogue that didn’t start any wars, brought some troops home, presided over a booming economy in which minorities and the poor experienced large gains in employment and wage growth, who worked out peace accord in middle east, and lastly drove effort to get a Covid vaccine in less than a year -that dangerous demagogue?

    Or maybe you meant that Dangerous Den of Demagoguery that is CNN whose news anchors prattled on about supposed systemic racism and nefarious policemen murdering unarmed persons by the score while whole city blocks were burning? Or MSNBC whose anchors pushed Russia collusion for 2 years before switching story lines and aiding Dems in their quest to impeach Trump for daring to look into the quid pro quo that Biden foolishly bragged about in front of cameras? Or was it our new president and his party who can’t utter ten words without “white nationalist” being thrown on the fire?

    Orange man bad has left and gone away…woo, woo, woo

    But the dangerous demagogues are still all around us. One writes for Reason, a once respectable enterprise.

  41. Apparently Sullum didn’t get the Biden civility memo.

    1. Biden wants to cram civility down our throats good and hard.

      1. it does the civility or it gets the hose again

  42. During the past four months, Sullum has written more anti Trump screeds than anyone at any openly left wing anti Trump websites.

    TDS is a far more harmful pandemic for America than covid.

    1. the loons gotta keep their china masters happy …… as well as chinajoe & son in crackhead money

  43. lol voted against Trump three times but I have eyes

    rules only apply to Republicans

    old, brittle institutions are cracking and collapsing around us under the collective pounding of their own massive circle jerks

    from here it’s all Calvinball all the time kids

    hell yes they’re coming for your guns

    while antifa punches your Nazi face

    see at the mandatory public struggle sessions

    I’ll be the one rolling my eyes at your whispered “we didn’t know it would come to THIS!”

  44. I make 85 dollar an hour posting to internet. Very easy job and anyone can do it. Everyone need money during this time of COVID crisis. For detail click on here….  Read More  

  45. The incoming administration has agreed to not look into his corrupt wife’s China ties if he disavows Trump.

    1. as mitch has enough money and lobbyist opportunity to cover him and his kids for the future

      cuz, even mitch is smart enough to know he will never be in power again if he blows off the trumpsters block

      to bad he doesn’t care about America and its future ……

  46. Sullum is such a fucking cuck.

    1. Whats really “dangerous” are cowardly shills like sullum.

  47. Are u free at home want to do some work at home and earn money then go to this site link its can provide u to work at home and earn money easy without any investment…I also do this work..=====================Open this link here…………………. Click Here For More Info

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.