https://www.theepochtimes.com/...OikU%2BGj45GqiXzs%3D

January 6 Committee Withdraws Subpoena for Trump

The Jan. 6 House select committee withdraw its subpoena of former President Donald Trump, which prompted a victory lap from his attorney and the former commander-in-chief himself.

The panel’s chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), said in a letter to Trump’s attorneys that the committee is no longer pursuing the subpoena that was issued in October for the former president’s testimony and documents regarding the Jan. 6, 2021 incident at the Capitol.

cont...

^^^^^ It's a welcome thing, but not very useful. DOJ is still considering filing charges.

flashguy

The committee has always played footsie under the table with Garland.

They know that: 1. Trump will make a show if he shows, 2. He'll invoke the 5th, 3. They have set precedent for Biden to be hauled in once he leaves office, 4. The October announcement was only a stunt to drive people to the polls, 5. They know Garland is planning on filing charges or 6. All of the above.

Joey D
1/2/22

No description provided

I will vote for you in 2024 if you are the nominee.

Don’t Let Government 
Be The Pilot

quote:

Originally posted by OldYooper:
I will vote for you in 2024 if you are the nominee.

Cliff? Hell, I didn't even know he was running. Go get 'em, Cliff!

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by OldYooper:
I will vote for you in 2024 if you are the nominee.

Cliff? Hell, I didn't even know he was running. Go get 'em, Cliff!

HA! I would be like Trump on steroids, but black. Handle that democratic party.

a long article by Lee Smith. Worth a read. Ties together several years of FBI efforts to take down Donald Trump.

How the FBI Hacked Twitter

https://www.tabletmag.com/sect...ed-twitter-lee-smith

Highlights efforts triggered by obama. And also shows how involved James Baker was . Baker the former FBI General Counsel.

Lots more in the article than just Twitter issue

That is a sick lot of people involved sdy. Even AG Barr and they all just walk away. The kenyan, clinton, all those in big tech behind the scenes, they all just walk away. The fbi and doj actors all just walk like nothing ever happened. Such a waste of money and LE ageancy resources. Dirt bag criminals who need to be punished.

Seems ole Joe has an extension office from his "job" with U Penn.
This right here, is hilarious! Of course they found this stuff back before the primaries...

REVEALED: Top Secret Intelligence Documents Related to Ukraine, Iran Found in Biden’s Private Office

Seems there's also some UK documents related to, wait for it, Crossfire Hurricane.

Joey D
1/9/23

Joey D
1/15/23

I don't really know where to post this...
I thought about putting it in the Covid thread, but it's really about Trump so I'm posting it here. Is he off-base with his supporters? Why? Does he have a reason?

Earlier this week, Newsweek ran a breathless story headlined, “Trump Dismisses COVID-19 Vax Safety Claims, Says He Saved 100 Million Lives.”

Corporate media LOVES this kind of story, it gives them a chance to boost the vaccines AND drag President Trump.

The article reported on an Trump interview on a conservative podcast called The Water Cooler. Host David Brody asked Trump if he’d admit that the vaccines were not as safe or effective as they were originally promised. Here’s now Newsweek described President Trump response:

“You have to understand, there are the pros and cons,” said Trump. “Some reports [say] that it’s the greatest thing that’s ever happened and we saved tens of millions of lives. Then you’ll read other reports [that] say there were some problems with the vaccine…but relatively small numbers. But you know, you have many reports that say the vaccines save tens of millions of lives,” he continued. “That without the vaccines you would have had a thing…where perhaps 100 million people died.”

So. Trump did point out that he never ordered mandates.

As far as I know, this is the first time President Trump has acknowledged ANY problems with the vaccine, but it’s still similar to other curious pro-jab remarks Trump has made over the last year, which have provoked outrage and vows to never to vote for him again among Trump supporters.

The whole thing is extremely curious. For a moment, let’s set aside the factual question of whether the vaccines are dangerous or not and just focus on the President.

The first odd thing is that — apart from this issue — Trump inarguably has the greatest political instincts of any politician since Reagan. Trump MUST know that lots of his supporters hate the jabs. Even if he didn’t know, his advisors must have told him. We can take it as a fact that Trump knows.

But even though he surely knows about the awful conflict, he has never directly addressed unhappy supporters.

I’m not the only person who’s noticed this odd discongruity. Many people have speculated that it’s Trump’s pride; he just can’t admit he was wrong. Or a more nuanced version: Trump calculates he’ll be more damaged politically if he admits the jabs are problematic than if he continues to insist they are fine.

Perhaps. But neither of those explanations are satisfying. They both presume Trump couldn’t find a third way, a way to exploit the crisis to his own advantage, which after all is his specialty. We’re talking about a man who survived the “grab them by the p***” video released days before his 2016 election.

What I find most interesting is that there is a manifest upside to Trump’s stubborn recalcitrance. It is perfectly clear that, if Trump ever does attack the vaccines’ safety and efficacy, then the leftwing media will immediately, rabidly, and irrationally defend the jabs to the death. They would use Trump’s opposition to the jabs as evidence — in and of itself — that the jabs are the most brilliant invention since Alexander Fleming accidentally sneezed his prized fungus-spore collection right into his bacteria dish.

Trump’s opposition to the jabs would mean the democrats and the media would never back down.

So while it is vexing, it is also helpful that Trump defends the jabs. He is making it much easier for the truth to come out. It’s like he’s almost daring them to blame him for vaccine injuries.

Just something to think about.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...ack&utm_medium=email

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Is he off-base with his supporters?

Thank you for a perfect example of the logical fallacy of begging the question.

BTQ refers to a statement with an element that is assumed to be true without actually having been proved or which is the point of a discussion. A classic example that turns up in many arguments about proper behavior would be, “Stealing is wrong because God disapproves of it as stated in the Bible.” The reason it’s begging the question is because the question itself assumes that God exists. That may be fine if everyone in the discussion believes that, but many people don’t, and the ones who don’t would have to be convinced that stealing is wrong by other arguments.

Your question assumes that all of Trump’s supporters are against COVID-19 vaccinations.
That is simply wrong, but it demonstrates that anyone on his side who might be tempted to support vaccinations is instantly shouted down—if not ostracized or shunned—by the anti-vax majority. Whatever arguments and support for vaccinations they might offer are therefore never so much as heard, much less considered. Those who suppress the ones who go against the common flow are no different than the child leftists on university campuses who make it impossible for anyone to argue that men should not be allowed to compete with women in women’s sports, just to cite one example.

That sort of thing is of course not limited to Trump and COVID-19 vaccinations. Someone who became a good friend once said, “I’ve never met a conservative atheist before.” My response was, “Yes, you have.” Because he is very intelligent, I didn’t have to say, “You just never met one before who was willing to admit and discuss the fact in the face of other conservatives,” but that was my point.

I am willing to accept or at least give careful consideration to the arguments against vaccinations (and not just for COVID-19), but I’m certainly not going to waste my time debating my contrary beliefs with the Converted who have seen the anti-vax light. I know that others share my beliefs, and who keep their mouths shut for the same reasons. Something to keep in mind, though, is when people are told, “We don’t want your kind here,” sometimes they take the hint.

But to return to Trump, perhaps he is one of the honest ones among us who is willing to admit what he truly believes. And if any conservative decides to turn against him for that reason, then they—and the rest of us—deserve what we get.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Is he off-base with his supporters?

sigfreund,
I appreciate your views.
I guess I should have asked
Is he off-base with many of his supporters? or even most of his supporters?
You're right... not ALL of his supporters.
Which I didn't say.

I've seen video of Trump at rallies, in an adoring crowd of supporters, all of whom waited in line for hours to come see him, actually get booood by his crowd when he brought up the Operation Warp Speed as his greatest accomplishment and recommended that people go get their shots.

so, yes, he's out of tune with many of his supporters on this issue.

You make fair points, but my point is that unless someone makes the minor effort to add a qualifier when talking about groups, especially specific groups like “Trump supporters,” most (my qualifier) people understand it as referring to everyone in that group. And I would also argue that more commonly the characterization is accepted as true, the more likely it’s believed to pertain to everyone in the group.

For example, when I see the statement, “Atheists cannot be moral because they don’t believe in (or, more accurately, fear) God,” it’s almost never accompanied with any qualifying limiters such as “some” or even “most.” I contend that the near-universal absence of qualifiers when that statement is made is because the accusers do in fact believe it’s true of all atheists, and are trying to convince everyone else that it’s true.

In any event, to reiterate my response to the question you posed, “Is he off-base with his supporters?” No, not with all of us. It is also gratifying to me that he didn’t try to weasel out of something that obviously annoys many of his supporters. I don’t agree with his position on many issues, but I can at least respect his willingness to express his positions and not attempt to satisfy everyone in the typical politician’s manner. As I’ve said before, everyone* claims to hate politicians—until they stop acting like politicians, and then they hate that even more. And if that makes someone believe that I unthinkingly gobble up all the shit that’s shoveled at me, it reveals far more about him than he can possibly know about me.

*Yes, an all-inclusive characterization for effect that is not literally true of everyone.

quote:

In any event, to reiterate my response to the question you posed, “Is he off-base with his supporters?” No, not with all of us. It is also gratifying to me that he didn’t try to weasel out of something that obviously annoys many of his supporters.

But... he will still be blamed:

Why would the BBC, of all places, let Dr. Malhotra talk for several long broadcast minutes about vaccine injuries? And that’s not all. The Beeb has been quietly slipping in other signals:

Between the CDC’s cryptic 24-hour disclosure and un-disclosure of stroke signals, the BBC’s “accidental” interview with Dr. Malhotra, Elon Musk’s tardy vaccine injury posts, the CDC’s shift in vocabulary from “ultra rare” to “rare,” the journals’ growing willingness to publish studies critical of the jabs, and the new freedom in major social media accounts, the changing narrative is starting to get so obvious that a lot of people are thinking hard about everything and asking questions.

Some folks theorize that it’s a pre-primary hit on President Trump, a modified limited hangout where the authorities “leak” the reality of vaccine injury while still denying it’s happening. This way, they can still blame Trump without losing the democrat base. After all, they only need to sway MAGA people.

The “get Trump” theory is fueled by curious occurrences like this tweet, which popped up all over my feed and a lot of other people’s feeds yesterday:



Who is Ryan Cunningham? Is he part of some kind of cunning operation? Why is he in my feed? Why is he sprouting up all over Twitter? What ‘insiders’ got the jab because they ‘trusted Trump?’ Inquiring minds wanted to know.

But today, Cunningham’s account is gone like the wind, and people smell a deep state weasel.

A different theory is expressed by Naked Emperor’s thoughtful Substack article titled, ”Controlling the ‘Mark’ after a Con Trick.” It’s worth a read. Like the “Get Trump” crowd, Emporer also argues that the shifting narrative is a modified limited hangout, but to deploy a psychological technique originally developed by con men called “cooling the mark.”
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter
Controlling the 'Mark' after a Con Trick
A couple of comments from yesterday’s ‘excess deaths’ post got me thinking. Governments will never acknowledge any mistakes because a) the entire narrative would collapse, b) they are worried about liability and accountability and increasingly c) they are worried that there could be a massive wave of unrest if the people finally understand they have been…
nakedemperor.substack.com

In essence, cooling the mark is a second round of manipulation following a successful con job. A different, new con man arrives on the scene right after the first one legs it with the mark’s money. The second con artist sympathizes with the victim, convinces him not to call the cops, and teaches him how to accept his loss and move on.

As evidence, Naked Emperor cites the SPAR article, a sketchy Johns Hopkins pandemic planning ‘guide’ published in March 2020. Chapters 17 and 18 talk suggested ways for governments to navigate public anger and distrust founded in widespread vaccine injuries that would inevitably sprout from an emergency vaccination campaign.

The main technique chapter 18 described was “acknowledging the loss.” Hopkins advised public health experts to help people learn coping skills, support grieving folks, and encourage people to look ahead, not backwards.

The Johns Hopkins proposal sounds a whole lot like “cooling the mark.”

Under this scenario, the original con artists need to get going, so the “helpful” cons can arrive. Biden’s apparent slide into resignation or removal fits the theory. Trump is gone. Fauci is gone. Boris Johnson is gone. Jacinda Ardern just resigned. Take Biden out of the picture, and the first team of con artists will be off the scene, making room for new replacement leaders who had nothing to do with the original decisions, and who can start sympathetically guiding the public into the “acceptance” phase.

It’s an elegant theory, but we still don’t know where we’re headed yet. All we know for sure is a planned narrative shift is clearly underway. Keep your eyes open.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...ack&utm_medium=email

It is inevitable.

Trump preparing to ditch Truth Social so he can return to Twitter, Facebook: report

Former President Donald Trump is preparing to leave the exclusive relationship with his own social media platform Truth Social as part of an eventual return to mainstream sites like Twitter and Facebook, according to a report.

Trump, who is gearing up to campaign for the Republican nomination for president in 2024, has been telling confidantes he is eagerly anticipating the expiration of a “social media exclusivity term” with Truth Social, the app founded by his company Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG).

The exclusivity term requires Trump to “first channel any and all social media communications” to his Truth Social account six hours before posting the same content to other platforms, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Nonetheless, the exclusivity deal exempts posts the content of which “specifically relates to political messaging, political fundraising or get-out-the-vote efforts.”

But Trump has been telling those close to him for months that he has no appetite to renew the exclusivity clause once it expires in June, according to Rolling Stone.

“There’s not going to be a need for that,” Trump reportedly told an associate when asked about his contractual obligation to Truth Social.

Another associate told Rolling Stone: “He said there’s an expiration date and that he didn’t want to make commitments.”

As per the terms of the exclusivity contract, Trump must give notice in order to avoid an automatic renewal of the clause for a period of six months.

Even if the exclusivity contract sunsets, Trump will still be “required to post contemporaneously to Truth Social,” according to the filing.

Publicly, Trump has said he is sticking with Truth Social — despite the fact that Twitter’s new boss, Elon Musk, lifted the ban on the former president that was put into effect following the events of Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol.


https://nypost.com/2023/01/23/...campaign=android_nyp

Posted 4 days ago.

.