I strongly believe that it is. I base this on; a) The primary goal of the Republican Party clearly seems to be protecting Trump and minimizing his criminality. - Minimizing and misrepresenting the un-American J6 attacks. - Turning a blind eye to obvious election tampering - Turning a blind eye to obvious deliberate mishandling of classified docs - Ignoring impeachment evidence regarding coercing an ally for election purposes - Tolerating obvious illegal acts of business fraud b) There now exists a litmus test where to not publicly support these un-American doings by Trump will get a Republican politician primaried, drummed out of the party, or not supported so as not to be able to run as a Republican. In my opinion, a vote for any Republican equates to voting for someone who must pay fealty to a criminal, and embrace deliberate misleading of the public. IMO a vote for any Republican today is a vote for supporting and minimizing the misdeeds of Trump, and is therefore an action that is decidedly un-American. Thoughts and opinions?
I have many times expressed in this forum my disapproval of the Republican Party’s fealty to Trump, but I must push back against your request to elevate this reverence to a crime. The Republican Party is a private entity that may legally push any narrative that it wishes, including that Trump is a stable and benevolent genius. None of us are under any requirement to believe this. In addition, it isn’t the party’s job to litigate the former president’s possible crimes. There is a set legal process for this, which is ongoing. In short, I agree that any vote for Trump, or anyone who has suggested that we should vote for Trump regardless of the outcomes of his trials, is a serious misstep for our country, but never should a difference of political opinion be considered a criminal offense.
But does the Republican Party, at the highest levels, not actively seek to minimize and disinform regarding actions that are pretty clearly worthy of, at the least, a thorough criminal trial? (see Speaker of the House Johnson issuing disinformation regarding J6.) (see top level Republicans repeatedly minimize and disinform by calling court-adjudicated J6 criminals "hostages".) I see your point, but I respectfully contend that you are omitting actions at all levels of the party to deliberately minimize what is clearly, or at least should be investigated as potentially,.........criminal activity.
I'll debunk the classified docs case. L Once Trump decided.to take those documents and move them to Mar-a-Lago they were automatically declassified under the Presidential Records Act. There is no formal declassification process. The docs are considered Trump's presidential records. The decision by Trump to take these records is not reviewable. . Doesn't matter anyway. Jack Smith was illegally appointed. That doesn't matter either, because: Trump will win the Immunity case that will be decided by SCOTUS. Thtje BIG FANNY Willis case in Georgia.at will make other cases go away, in cluding
I don’t think he’s implying that if you merely vote Republican you are committing a crime, but do you deny that many of the upper echelon and party activists now basically behave as organized crime?
With Lara (nothing like brazen nepotism) Trump now the co-chair of the RNC, the Trump crime org can raid the coffers for the legal fees and judgments. As the whole campaign has been about evading criminal prosecution does that make it a legitimate campaign expense?
The PRA establishes that all Presidential Documents are public record and should be, at the end of a Presidency, managed by the National Archives (NARA). The PRA is what gave NARA the legal right to ask for a return of the Trump documents by subpoena. And after Trump's failure to do so, it's what gave the FBI the right to ask for a warrant to search and seize items from Mar-A-Lago. There is also a formal, two-step declassification process. And it doesn't include a President magically declassifying docs in his/her head. Documents aren't officially declassified until they are stamped and dated with a proper mark. Before this mark, there is no way for distinguish between docs that have not yet been declassified, and docs that are declassified, but not yet marked.
Republican lady running to be in charge of North Carolina's schools has some interesting ideas about what to do with democrats: kill them, apparently. She suggested in 2020 that we televise the execution of Barack Obama, and also suggested killing Joe Biden (not sure how she avoided getting charged for that), for the hypothetical crime of asking Americans to wear a mask for 100 days. She also wants to get rid of the state Board of Education in NC. She is a firm believer in QAnon. So we could have some really insane people running our states, trying to support Trump as local fascist dictators. Nice. I was hoping that the Idiocracy would arrive after I finished my time on earth. It appears to have arrived. GOP nominee to run North Carolina public schools called for violence against Democrats, including executing Obama and Biden
More evidence. Shouldn't a political party disavow acts of criminality? It's like they have lower standards than many message boards....
A well worded opinion, strong rebuttal and generally valuable post. Another insightful contribution to the conversation.
A political party is not supposed to "collude together" ? (but obviously not in support of criminal activities) "Harvests votes"? Can you elaborate? Or are you just saying things?
President Biden would of course have the same munity as President Trump. If you're referring to classified documents, Senator Biden and Vice President Biden did not have the power to declassify any document. President Biden can declassify any document he wants to take with him as a "personper record" under the Presidential Records Act (as I understand it). If I got anything wrong that's on me. This 17+ minute video by Robert Barnes should answer any questions you have regardimg immunity beginning at 10:15. Listen from the start of the video to hear all 4 grounds for dismissal of the Florida classified documents case.
I said the documents zYrump took to Mar-a-Lago were his "presidential records." I should have said "personal records." Whether a document is a presidential record or is a personal record is a devision the president has the authority to male. He can do whatever he wants with a personal record. Personal records do not have to be preserved as I understand it.