They have a long and painful intimate knowledge of being bullied. The problem is many whites shrug and do nothing. Do something, your life depends upon it.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
State attorneys general absolutely have the authority to prosecute violations of state law — so the real question is not whether they can, but why many have chosen not to pursue charges against Doge, Trump and others for potential state crimes.
First, prosecuting a former or sitting president is legally complex and politically explosive. State AGs must weigh evidence thresholds, jurisdictional limits, and the likelihood of successful conviction against claims of political retaliation. Even when misconduct appears obvious to the public, prosecutors are bound by strict standards requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt — not political outrage.
Second, many alleged actions overlap with federal investigations or involve conduct spanning multiple states, creating uncertainty about which authority should proceed first.
Some AGs defer to federal prosecutions to avoid conflicting cases or claims of double jeopardy complications.
Third, political pressure is real.
Attorneys general are elected officials.
Bringing charges against a nationally polarizing figure invites intense backlash, security risks, legislative retaliation, and accusations of partisan weaponization — factors that can discourage even legally justified prosecutions.
Fourth, resource and evidentiary barriers matter.
Complex financial crimes, election interference allegations, or multi-state conspiracies require years of investigation, massive funding, and cooperative witnesses.
Without airtight cases, prosecutors risk acquittals that could strengthen the defendant politically and legally.
But none of these explanations eliminate the central concern: the rule of law depends on equal accountability.
If ordinary citizens would face investigation or prosecution for the same conduct, failure to act risks creating the perception that political power places someone above state law.
Ultimately, the question facing state attorneys general is not merely legal — it is institutional: whether caution protects justice, or whether inaction undermines public confidence that laws apply equally to everyone
The rule of law requires backbone, and the will to do the job. Without it, laws become suggestions, not safeguards.
Great comment overall. One small thing: Some of it doesn't hold in some states like New York, where the AG is politically safe. Same with Illinois and CA, although finding relevant crimes there might be a challenge. Trump has done some significant business in Chicago, which means he's likely committed a crime there, but any crimes there may have expired from a prosecutorial standpoint (statute of limitations).
New Mexico has a Democratic AG. Possibly not politically safe, but the case there would be child sex trafficking. It's sort of hard to bitch and moan about that in a public forum. I don't know what the statute of limitations looks like on child sex crimes. So, that's another problem, maybe. The number of people who don't think Trump is guilty of something is falling to near zero, even among maga voters (many of whom don't care because they think he's the anti-christ, and thus part of the rapture story).
This is not meant to bash the good points here. All of it is a consideration, but a strong, confident AG will look beyond political considerations and even threats, assuming that it is simply not too late.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
"I started pulling a thread on a story I thought I already knew. What came out was 413 text messages, a private investigator with no named client, a legal standard invented for one case by judges who shared a political patron, and a prosecutor who read the evidence, called it a real conspiracy, and made it disappear anyway. That’s the pile of thread on the floor. You can decide what it looks like. I know what it looks like to me.
I still think this case in Georgia is rife with corruption. They pinpointed this case because she had such an awesome case against mad Donnie and it would be state charges. Republicans evilly took her down for the same reason dementia pedo Donnie was guilty of. This was a concerted effort by the Georgia Republican Party and our corrupt doj.
My question is what malicious entities were operating behind the scenes, orchestrating an outcome favorable to the president - the KGB? Other Russian/MAGA-GOP operatives? I can’t believe random people wanting to protect the president could have put something this sophisticated together.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
What this shows, is that this racketeering model is so entwined into the governmental institutions of the U. S. now, that they can't be rooted out anymore without bringing the whole house of cards down with it.
Maybe that's what we need now. A complete reset. Clean them all out, from the states to D.C. and start over with a few different, more restrictive rules of conduct. There are several democratic countries that could be used as models.
Let me be very clear. There is no policy of the justice department against prosecuting a sitting president. You may have heard that 100 times in the media, but they were wrong every time they said it.
The 1973 and 2000 opinions are just that; opinions. The first one was created by the office of legal counsel to intimidate vice president Agnew into resigning, but they couldn’t very well say he could be prosecuted and also the president. So they made up some bullshit. I’m a lawyer. Trust me, it’s bullshit.
I have federal appeals court decisions in DC and a letter from the very office that wrote the 1973 opinion saying that the opinions of the department of justice, office of legal counsel are NOT the “policy of the justice department.”
Remember the independent counsel pursuing Clinton, Ken Starr? He had a 30 page memorandum from a law professor saying that you could prosecute a sitting president. While this was in the media and Trump was the target, Ken Starr was asked very simply on TV. Can you prosecute a sitting president and he had a one word answer. Yes
The media kept saying there was a policy. Robert Muller said there was a policy. Jack SMITH avoided using the word policy when he TEMPORARILY asked for dismissal of the January 6 case. Yes you read that right, it’s dismissed without prejudice, meaning it can be restarted again.
Robert Muller could have gone to a grand jury and indicted Trump for obstruction of justice. The rules appointing a special counsel did not prohibit him from doing so. He only needed to inform the Attorney General, not seek permission.
Likewise, Jack Smith just could’ve continued to proceed while Trump was in office saying there’s no policy. And then let Trump move to dismiss the indictment, and the federal appeal courts have already held that those opinions are just opinions and a judge can disagree with them. It would’ve gone to the Supreme Court, but it would’ve been resolved about prosecuting a sitting president. The court had no problem saying a president could be in a lawsuit while president. The Paula Jones case. The fact that he’s a busy guy was held to be irrelevant by the Supreme Court. Well, that stupid 1973 opinion said, in a bunch of legalese, a president a busy guy.
The US Supreme Court criminal immunity decision had essentially no impact on the Jan 6 prosecution whatsoever. Trump was acting as a candidate and was trying to help himself as a candidate. He was not acting as president on behalf of the country. No immunity. Very simple. That’s why Jack Smith sought a second indictment and it was identical, except he removed evidence concerning consultations with the DOJ between the president and DOJ. Because of language in the Supreme Court decision.
The next attorney general can simply revive the January 6 indictment or get a new one from another grand jury, which would be easy (they could have an FBI agent read the transcripts of the prior testimony from the prior grand jury proceeding and present the exhibits.)
I doubt it will happen. No one has any balls. Mueller could’ve prosecuted Trump. He didn’t. Smith could’ve continued, but he didn’t.
Merrick Garland is mostly to blame for Trump being president now. If he had gone after Trump right away that would’ve been enough time to have him convicted and jailed.
Garland apparently told everyone in the office they weren’t allowed to say the word Trump in the hallways. He was definitely afraid of any appearance of impropriety. What an asshole. He fucked us all.
And if there was always a conflict, then why wasn’t Jack Smith appointed at the very beginning?
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
Chris did us a solid. He pulled the Georgia RICO case apart layer by layer, named the names, cited the text message counts, and traced the paper trail that turned a live racketeering prosecution into a court filing nobody will ever act on. If you haven’t read it, go read it first. I’ll be here.
He covered a lot of ground. But one thing’s been bugging me since I put it down, and I want to add it to the pile.
There’s a concept that gets used in counterintelligence work. It’s called access and placement. When you’re trying to compromise a process, you don’t always attack it head-on. You put the right people in the right spots ahead of time and wait. Keep that in mind.
Peter Skandalakis had already handled two cases routed to his desk involving Trump allies before the main Georgia case landed on him. He declined both. When Willis was removed, his desk was where the big case went next. He was already there. Already seasoned on related matters. Already 0 for 2.
Then he filed his own court document describing the indictment as presenting a compelling set of acts that, if proven beyond a reasonable doubt, would establish a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 presidential election. That’s not a paraphrase. That’s what the man put in writing. Then he moved to dismiss every charge against every defendant. Judge McAfee signed it. Case closed.
Most prosecutors who decide not to proceed say the evidence doesn’t support the charges. Skandalakis said the opposite and still pulled the plug. That’s not a legal judgment. That’s something harder to name politely.
Chris frames what happened to the Georgia case as a coordinated operation, and he’s right. The private investigator, the 413 text messages, the novel legal standard built by judges with a shared political patron, the appeals that targeted the remedy rather than the merits. That’s not a series of coincidences. But the Skandalakis filing is the part of the record that does the most work. You don’t need to infer intent when the man wrote down that the evidence was compelling and dismissed it anyway.
The thread Chris pulled is the right thread. What I’d add is this: the Skandalakis document isn’t just evidence that the case was buried. It’s evidence that the person who buried it knew exactly what he was burying.
Dino, that Skandalakis part was what stood out to me the most too. He really made sure that case was dead and buried. And the other side knew who Skandalakis was and what he was willing to do for them. I have to wonder what his financial records looked like after this whole thing happened. But usually people like that are too smart too keep financial records that might show any signs of impropriety.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
I live in Georgia, and this situation drove me crazy as it was occurring.
We can be sure that no matter what large county we live in, there are crimes that have been committed by the trump crime ring, Epstein, or otherwise. The tentacles run deep.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
Who wrote the Justice Department 1973 memos during Nixon that say a sitting President cannot be prosecuted? Was the memo requested by Nixon or his Chief of Staff? I mean it seems like given all the dirty tricks and extralegal maneuvers they were doing, that it is high time that this memo be thoroughly investigated and revealed to us and reversed.
Thank you, Mr. Armitage, for your research on Georgia's act of submission to Trump. Georgia Republican politicians are not bound by the Constitution or their own state laws. An incriminating audio tape describing a criminal request by Trump should have assured a conviction. And the people Trump tried to enlist in the criminal act should have been reliable witnesses. But having a Black woman prosecuting Trump from the hated Fulton County, Georgia, was something Republicans could not be a party to. The maze of legal maneuvers was instituted to allow racism to be the driving force to prevent Trump from being prosecuted. Neither Fani Willis nor Trump suffered from the disreputable act, but the State of Georgia has. Republicans hate the mention of racism as a catalyst for political and legal decisions, but to ignore established laws as a guide to what must be done leaves only one reason. Black people wish that racism would not be a determining factor, but damn, Georgia keeps doing it.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
I follow, read, and respect Chris Armitage, who runs his own Substack called the Existentialist Republic, and his articles are featured on Medium's Daily Digest. Chris is an expert on soft secession and talks about its advantages and disadvantages. In short, soft secession is when states acknowledge their own power and instruct their citizens to deposit federal taxes into accounts controlled by the state. The state's representatives in Congress decide when and how the funds collected will be sent to the federal government.
I believe this soft secession will curb the erratic behavior of Trump because his budget would be cut in half, and he would face an organized resistance from the states. The Constitution was designed to limit the president's authority by giving the House of Representatives control over how tax money is spent. Our Congress is failing to fulfill its professional responsibilities.
My concern with a soft secession is that it merely delays the inevitable. Can this strategy work in the long run? How long can it be maintained? Most importantly, we would still have a fractured country divided between democratic and republican states, and this division has paralyzed our nation from the start. Additionally, we would still be stuck with the Senate, an ineffective and irrational institution created as a token to the southern states in 1778 to secure their support for the Constitution. It was a reckless compromise meant to appease the smaller-populated southern states, which feared that the larger northern states would dominate Congress. Consider this: a small state like Wyoming, with a population of 580,000, has the same voting power as California, with its 39 million residents. This was a late addition at the Continental Congress. Another equally flawed idea is the electoral college, which controls the presidential election. It was established "due to pressure from slave states wanting to increase their voting power, since they could count slaves as 3/5 of a person when allocating electors, and by small states who increased their power given the minimum of three electors per state.” (Wikipedia)
And finally, the continued existence of the republican and democratic states, existing with the process of soft secession, means we will still have to live with Southerners who want a different kind of world than we Northerners. In fact, our country could easily be divided into three regions: the West Coast, with four states; the Northeast, with at least eight states; and the remaining states. Whatever is done now, eventually we will become a union of three entities, and we will have to stop referring to ourselves as the United States of America. This idea faces strong opposition now, but with Trump's highly irrational behavior, it will eventually persuade Americans to accept this path to preserve their way of life.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
They have a long and painful intimate knowledge of being bullied. The problem is many whites shrug and do nothing. Do something, your life depends upon it.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that
State attorneys general absolutely have the authority to prosecute violations of state law — so the real question is not whether they can, but why many have chosen not to pursue charges against Doge, Trump and others for potential state crimes.
First, prosecuting a former or sitting president is legally complex and politically explosive. State AGs must weigh evidence thresholds, jurisdictional limits, and the likelihood of successful conviction against claims of political retaliation. Even when misconduct appears obvious to the public, prosecutors are bound by strict standards requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt — not political outrage.
Second, many alleged actions overlap with federal investigations or involve conduct spanning multiple states, creating uncertainty about which authority should proceed first.
Some AGs defer to federal prosecutions to avoid conflicting cases or claims of double jeopardy complications.
Third, political pressure is real.
Attorneys general are elected officials.
Bringing charges against a nationally polarizing figure invites intense backlash, security risks, legislative retaliation, and accusations of partisan weaponization — factors that can discourage even legally justified prosecutions.
Fourth, resource and evidentiary barriers matter.
Complex financial crimes, election interference allegations, or multi-state conspiracies require years of investigation, massive funding, and cooperative witnesses.
Without airtight cases, prosecutors risk acquittals that could strengthen the defendant politically and legally.
But none of these explanations eliminate the central concern: the rule of law depends on equal accountability.
If ordinary citizens would face investigation or prosecution for the same conduct, failure to act risks creating the perception that political power places someone above state law.
Ultimately, the question facing state attorneys general is not merely legal — it is institutional: whether caution protects justice, or whether inaction undermines public confidence that laws apply equally to everyone
The rule of law requires backbone, and the will to do the job. Without it, laws become suggestions, not safeguards.
Great comment overall. One small thing: Some of it doesn't hold in some states like New York, where the AG is politically safe. Same with Illinois and CA, although finding relevant crimes there might be a challenge. Trump has done some significant business in Chicago, which means he's likely committed a crime there, but any crimes there may have expired from a prosecutorial standpoint (statute of limitations).
New Mexico has a Democratic AG. Possibly not politically safe, but the case there would be child sex trafficking. It's sort of hard to bitch and moan about that in a public forum. I don't know what the statute of limitations looks like on child sex crimes. So, that's another problem, maybe. The number of people who don't think Trump is guilty of something is falling to near zero, even among maga voters (many of whom don't care because they think he's the anti-christ, and thus part of the rapture story).
This is not meant to bash the good points here. All of it is a consideration, but a strong, confident AG will look beyond political considerations and even threats, assuming that it is simply not too late.
Like I said balls and backbones are needed - I’m also sure that any AG in any state can find something
Is CA investigating the claims of bodies buried at Ranch Palos Verdes, CA Golf Course?
GET JACK SMITH!!!!
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that
I agree thats why we need to take back the house and the senate then maybe we will get things done and get rid of that crazy moron
"I started pulling a thread on a story I thought I already knew. What came out was 413 text messages, a private investigator with no named client, a legal standard invented for one case by judges who shared a political patron, and a prosecutor who read the evidence, called it a real conspiracy, and made it disappear anyway. That’s the pile of thread on the floor. You can decide what it looks like. I know what it looks like to me.
Racketeering. That’s what it looks like."
Very nicely done.
I still think this case in Georgia is rife with corruption. They pinpointed this case because she had such an awesome case against mad Donnie and it would be state charges. Republicans evilly took her down for the same reason dementia pedo Donnie was guilty of. This was a concerted effort by the Georgia Republican Party and our corrupt doj.
My question is what malicious entities were operating behind the scenes, orchestrating an outcome favorable to the president - the KGB? Other Russian/MAGA-GOP operatives? I can’t believe random people wanting to protect the president could have put something this sophisticated together.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that
What this shows, is that this racketeering model is so entwined into the governmental institutions of the U. S. now, that they can't be rooted out anymore without bringing the whole house of cards down with it.
Maybe that's what we need now. A complete reset. Clean them all out, from the states to D.C. and start over with a few different, more restrictive rules of conduct. There are several democratic countries that could be used as models.
BRAVO ! @Christopher Armitage
Reposted on Facebook
Let me be very clear. There is no policy of the justice department against prosecuting a sitting president. You may have heard that 100 times in the media, but they were wrong every time they said it.
The 1973 and 2000 opinions are just that; opinions. The first one was created by the office of legal counsel to intimidate vice president Agnew into resigning, but they couldn’t very well say he could be prosecuted and also the president. So they made up some bullshit. I’m a lawyer. Trust me, it’s bullshit.
I have federal appeals court decisions in DC and a letter from the very office that wrote the 1973 opinion saying that the opinions of the department of justice, office of legal counsel are NOT the “policy of the justice department.”
Remember the independent counsel pursuing Clinton, Ken Starr? He had a 30 page memorandum from a law professor saying that you could prosecute a sitting president. While this was in the media and Trump was the target, Ken Starr was asked very simply on TV. Can you prosecute a sitting president and he had a one word answer. Yes
The media kept saying there was a policy. Robert Muller said there was a policy. Jack SMITH avoided using the word policy when he TEMPORARILY asked for dismissal of the January 6 case. Yes you read that right, it’s dismissed without prejudice, meaning it can be restarted again.
Robert Muller could have gone to a grand jury and indicted Trump for obstruction of justice. The rules appointing a special counsel did not prohibit him from doing so. He only needed to inform the Attorney General, not seek permission.
Likewise, Jack Smith just could’ve continued to proceed while Trump was in office saying there’s no policy. And then let Trump move to dismiss the indictment, and the federal appeal courts have already held that those opinions are just opinions and a judge can disagree with them. It would’ve gone to the Supreme Court, but it would’ve been resolved about prosecuting a sitting president. The court had no problem saying a president could be in a lawsuit while president. The Paula Jones case. The fact that he’s a busy guy was held to be irrelevant by the Supreme Court. Well, that stupid 1973 opinion said, in a bunch of legalese, a president a busy guy.
The US Supreme Court criminal immunity decision had essentially no impact on the Jan 6 prosecution whatsoever. Trump was acting as a candidate and was trying to help himself as a candidate. He was not acting as president on behalf of the country. No immunity. Very simple. That’s why Jack Smith sought a second indictment and it was identical, except he removed evidence concerning consultations with the DOJ between the president and DOJ. Because of language in the Supreme Court decision.
The next attorney general can simply revive the January 6 indictment or get a new one from another grand jury, which would be easy (they could have an FBI agent read the transcripts of the prior testimony from the prior grand jury proceeding and present the exhibits.)
I doubt it will happen. No one has any balls. Mueller could’ve prosecuted Trump. He didn’t. Smith could’ve continued, but he didn’t.
Merrick Garland is mostly to blame for Trump being president now. If he had gone after Trump right away that would’ve been enough time to have him convicted and jailed.
Garland apparently told everyone in the office they weren’t allowed to say the word Trump in the hallways. He was definitely afraid of any appearance of impropriety. What an asshole. He fucked us all.
And if there was always a conflict, then why wasn’t Jack Smith appointed at the very beginning?
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that
Congressman Raskin sent out a form(upon request) to demand from DOGE your personal info and what DOGE did with it.
Chris did us a solid. He pulled the Georgia RICO case apart layer by layer, named the names, cited the text message counts, and traced the paper trail that turned a live racketeering prosecution into a court filing nobody will ever act on. If you haven’t read it, go read it first. I’ll be here.
He covered a lot of ground. But one thing’s been bugging me since I put it down, and I want to add it to the pile.
There’s a concept that gets used in counterintelligence work. It’s called access and placement. When you’re trying to compromise a process, you don’t always attack it head-on. You put the right people in the right spots ahead of time and wait. Keep that in mind.
Peter Skandalakis had already handled two cases routed to his desk involving Trump allies before the main Georgia case landed on him. He declined both. When Willis was removed, his desk was where the big case went next. He was already there. Already seasoned on related matters. Already 0 for 2.
Then he filed his own court document describing the indictment as presenting a compelling set of acts that, if proven beyond a reasonable doubt, would establish a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 presidential election. That’s not a paraphrase. That’s what the man put in writing. Then he moved to dismiss every charge against every defendant. Judge McAfee signed it. Case closed.
Most prosecutors who decide not to proceed say the evidence doesn’t support the charges. Skandalakis said the opposite and still pulled the plug. That’s not a legal judgment. That’s something harder to name politely.
Chris frames what happened to the Georgia case as a coordinated operation, and he’s right. The private investigator, the 413 text messages, the novel legal standard built by judges with a shared political patron, the appeals that targeted the remedy rather than the merits. That’s not a series of coincidences. But the Skandalakis filing is the part of the record that does the most work. You don’t need to infer intent when the man wrote down that the evidence was compelling and dismissed it anyway.
The thread Chris pulled is the right thread. What I’d add is this: the Skandalakis document isn’t just evidence that the case was buried. It’s evidence that the person who buried it knew exactly what he was burying.
That’s the part that won’t leave me alone.
Dino, that Skandalakis part was what stood out to me the most too. He really made sure that case was dead and buried. And the other side knew who Skandalakis was and what he was willing to do for them. I have to wonder what his financial records looked like after this whole thing happened. But usually people like that are too smart too keep financial records that might show any signs of impropriety.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that
Fantastic.
I live in Georgia, and this situation drove me crazy as it was occurring.
We can be sure that no matter what large county we live in, there are crimes that have been committed by the trump crime ring, Epstein, or otherwise. The tentacles run deep.
💙💙💙
The United States Justice Department decided the president of a republic deserves more protection than a British royal.
The United States is not a Republic
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that
Who wrote the Justice Department 1973 memos during Nixon that say a sitting President cannot be prosecuted? Was the memo requested by Nixon or his Chief of Staff? I mean it seems like given all the dirty tricks and extralegal maneuvers they were doing, that it is high time that this memo be thoroughly investigated and revealed to us and reversed.
Thank you, Mr. Armitage, for your research on Georgia's act of submission to Trump. Georgia Republican politicians are not bound by the Constitution or their own state laws. An incriminating audio tape describing a criminal request by Trump should have assured a conviction. And the people Trump tried to enlist in the criminal act should have been reliable witnesses. But having a Black woman prosecuting Trump from the hated Fulton County, Georgia, was something Republicans could not be a party to. The maze of legal maneuvers was instituted to allow racism to be the driving force to prevent Trump from being prosecuted. Neither Fani Willis nor Trump suffered from the disreputable act, but the State of Georgia has. Republicans hate the mention of racism as a catalyst for political and legal decisions, but to ignore established laws as a guide to what must be done leaves only one reason. Black people wish that racism would not be a determining factor, but damn, Georgia keeps doing it.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that
I follow, read, and respect Chris Armitage, who runs his own Substack called the Existentialist Republic, and his articles are featured on Medium's Daily Digest. Chris is an expert on soft secession and talks about its advantages and disadvantages. In short, soft secession is when states acknowledge their own power and instruct their citizens to deposit federal taxes into accounts controlled by the state. The state's representatives in Congress decide when and how the funds collected will be sent to the federal government.
I believe this soft secession will curb the erratic behavior of Trump because his budget would be cut in half, and he would face an organized resistance from the states. The Constitution was designed to limit the president's authority by giving the House of Representatives control over how tax money is spent. Our Congress is failing to fulfill its professional responsibilities.
My concern with a soft secession is that it merely delays the inevitable. Can this strategy work in the long run? How long can it be maintained? Most importantly, we would still have a fractured country divided between democratic and republican states, and this division has paralyzed our nation from the start. Additionally, we would still be stuck with the Senate, an ineffective and irrational institution created as a token to the southern states in 1778 to secure their support for the Constitution. It was a reckless compromise meant to appease the smaller-populated southern states, which feared that the larger northern states would dominate Congress. Consider this: a small state like Wyoming, with a population of 580,000, has the same voting power as California, with its 39 million residents. This was a late addition at the Continental Congress. Another equally flawed idea is the electoral college, which controls the presidential election. It was established "due to pressure from slave states wanting to increase their voting power, since they could count slaves as 3/5 of a person when allocating electors, and by small states who increased their power given the minimum of three electors per state.” (Wikipedia)
And finally, the continued existence of the republican and democratic states, existing with the process of soft secession, means we will still have to live with Southerners who want a different kind of world than we Northerners. In fact, our country could easily be divided into three regions: the West Coast, with four states; the Northeast, with at least eight states; and the remaining states. Whatever is done now, eventually we will become a union of three entities, and we will have to stop referring to ourselves as the United States of America. This idea faces strong opposition now, but with Trump's highly irrational behavior, it will eventually persuade Americans to accept this path to preserve their way of life.
This is a war, declared on J6, we were too distracted to understand!!! WE CANNOT wait 3 more YEARS for our country to be completely destroyed!!! That makes NO sense!!! HE DID NOT WIN!! WE DID VOTE!!! People are cowards!!!
https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/
https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/the-psychiatrist-who-warned-us-that