THE GOP DOUBLES DOWN
TCinLA
I thought waking up this morning to see a photo of Trump at his hatealong last night in Waco with him standing in front of photos of the January 6 insurrection while the âsongâ âJustice for Allâ he recorded with the âJ6 Prison Choir,â the insurrectionists he claims are patriotic Americans who participated in a ârighteous protestâ - essentially watching him remove the mask and admit he did in fact incite the insurrection and saying âYeah, I did it - what are you going to do about it?â - was as strange as things were going to get this final Sunday in March, 2023.
I thought having a confessed statutory rapist and draft dodger - one-hit wonder Ted Nugent - calling Volodomyr Zelenskyy a âhomosexual weirdoâ was a about as crass a new low for the MAGAts as things were going to get.
I thought having Marjorie Traitor Goon publicly creating an alternative reality by calling the J6 defendants political prisoners who are being âbadly treatedâ in a facility where they have access to computers and the internet, exercise and health services - all completely unavailable to the average inmate of the DC Jail - was a completely laughable denial of reality.
I was wrong.
Yesterday, the three blind mice - Gym Jordan and his co-conspirators masquerading as chairmen of three House committees - responded to District Attorney Alvin Braggâs reply to their first letter sent this past week by doubling down in a second letter on their intention to intervene in the New York City investigation ahead of possible criminal charges against Trump, revealing they plan to to consider whether Congress should take legislative action on three separate issues âto protect former and/or current Presidents from politically motivated prosecutions by state and local officials.â In other words, to find a way to make such a prosecution of Donald Trump impossible.
Trump admits his complicity in the January 6 insurrection and leaders of the Republican Party take steps to insulate him from accountability before they even know what specific charges he will be indicted on.
The Republicans declare war on reality and the rule of law. THAT is as strange as things got on this final weekend of March, 2023.
Bragg responded to the letter after it became public last night, writing, âWe evaluate cases in our jurisdiction based on the facts, the law, and the evidence. It is not appropriate for Congress to interfere with pending local investigations. This unprecedented inquiry by federal elected officials into an ongoing matter serves only to hinder, disrupt and undermine the legitimate work of our dedicated prosecutors. As always, we will continue to follow the facts and be guided by the rule of law in everything we do.â
A spokesperson for Oversight Committee Democrats has stated, âChairman Jordan, Comer, and Steil believe former President Trump is above the law. This outrageous position is further evidence of former President Trump and MAGA extremistsâ hold on Congressional Republicans.â
The MAGA Republican Party has now officially declared war on the rule of law.
Here are the high points from the Letter:
âNotably, your reply letter did not dispute the central allegations at issueâthat you, under political pressure from left-wing activists and former prosecutors in your office, are reportedly planning to use an alleged federal campaign finance violation, previously declined by federal prosecutors, as a vehicle to extend the statute of limitations on an otherwise misdemeanor offense and indict for the first time in history a former President of the United States.â
No, you morons, it wasnât âpreviously declinedâ by federal prosecutors. The Trump-appointed Attorney General Bill Barr, citing the so-called âNixon ruleâ that a sitting president cannot be indicted and prosecuted, ORDERED the DOJ attorneys to drop the case.
âContrary to the central argument set forth in your letter, this matter does not simply involve local or state interests. Rather, the potential criminal indictment of a former President of the United States by an elected local prosecutor of the opposing political party (and who will face the prospect of re-election) implicates substantial federal interests, particularly in a jurisdiction where trial-level judges also are popularly elected. If state or local prosecutors are able to engage in politically motivated prosecutions of Presidents of the United States (former or current) for personal acts, this could have a profound impact on how Presidents choose to exercise their powers while in office. For example, a President could choose to avoid taking action he believes to be in the national interest because it would negatively impact New York City for fear that he would be subject to a retaliatory prosecution in New York City.â
This is wholly and completely specious, but what Republican argument about anything isnât?
âLikewise, because the federal government has a compelling interest in protecting the physical safety of former or current Presidents, any decision to prosecute a former or current President raises difficult questions concerning how to vindicate that interest in the context of a state or local criminal justice system. For these reasons and others, we believe that we now must consider whether Congress should take legislative action to protect former and/or current Presidents from politically motivated prosecutions by state and local officials, and if so, how those protections should be structured.â
âSecond, the Committeesâ inquiry has an obvious legitimate legislative purpose and is âa subject on which legislation could be had.â To begin with, as discussed above, Congress has a specific and manifestly important interest in preventing politically motivated prosecutions of current and former Presidents by elected state and local prosecutors, particularly those tried before elected state and local trial-level judges. Therefore, the Committee on the Judiciary, as a part of its broad authority to develop criminal justice legislation, must now consider whether to draft legislation that would, if enacted, insulate current and former presidents from such improper state and local prosecutions. These legislative reforms may include, for example, broadening the existing statutory right of removal of certain criminal cases from state court to federal court.â
Here is the argument to use the federal government to protect Trump.
âMoreover, as discussed above, your prosecutorial decision to indict a former President may cause a potential confrontation between federal and local law-enforcement authorities. Federal law requires the United States Secret Service to protect a former President.8 Therefore, your unprecedented prosecutorial decision raises the potential for conflict between the federal law-enforcement officials required to protect the former President and local law-enforcement officials required to enforce your indictment and exercise control of him throughout his presence in the local criminal justice system. Such a novel and potentially fraught collision of federal and local law-enforcement officials with the safety of a former President at stake is certainly a matter of interest for the Committees. The Committeesâ oversight is necessary to inform potential legislation that would address or remedy any potential conflicts between federal and local authorities.â
You mendacious morons! It has already been established that state and local law enforcement would COOPERATE with the Secret Service, which would coordinate Trump surrendering after indictment. There is no possibility whatsoever of any âshoot outâ happening.
This is the most audacious assault on the rule of law by the Republicans. They are ALL, each and every one of them, traitors to their oath to protect and defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, because ALL THEM ARE THE DOMESTIC ENEMY.
[TCinLA]










