I’ve never been sure how to apply Occam’s Razor to the GOP’s response to Jan 6. Is the simplest explanation Reagan’s 11th Commandment? Is it fear of a highly motivated and heavily armed base? Or is it that they know that if the truth comes out, a significant percentage of GOP Reps and Senators could end up in prison?
Grassley Says He Was Not ‘Involved In Any Conversations’ About Him Presiding Over Congress On Jan. 6
1 Like
The degree to which US politics media is either the useful idiot of Russian intelligence or flat out asset is the untold story of the decade.
Certainly a tempting target for Putin.
1 Like
I meant it friendly… apologize if it came off as condescending. No disrespect…
The particular comment in question was surely juvenile but i disagree it was vulgar.
I guess i mean, it being the internet, I caution about getting too concerned about juvenile comments.
Cheers
3 Likes
As I read it, the coordinate clause (phrase?) and we don’t expect him to be there is conditional: part of the if condition, rather than a comment on his current belief.
He may lie all the time, but there’s no inconsistency in what’s shown here.
2 Likes
He never said that, so how do you know it?
Great. We beat the fascists, then become fascists ourselves. All the elements of tragedy: irony, hubris, and catastrophic results.
1 Like
From TPM’s own site. On January 5, Grassley said:
“Well, first of all, I will be — if the Vice President isn’t there and we don’t expect him to be there, I will be presiding over the Senate,” Grassley said at the time, according to a transcript of his remarks a spokesperson later sent out.
3 Likes
We did not hold a trial for the Empire of Japan, or the allies of the Empire of Japan. We declared war, and we started sending munitions down range. Existential threats are existential threats.
I do understand. I’m not in charge, and we’ll do it the civilized way, and that’s good. But… don’t bitch at me if it doesn’t work.
Nonsense.
The was every expectation that he would be there, as have all Vice Presidents have been there, when it comes to presiding over the certification of the Electoral College vote.
That anyone was expecting Pence to not be there, is shady as fuck, and demands an explanation of why Grassley and others (i.e. “we”) had an expectation that Pence would not be present.
5 Likes
Your quote is what I discussed. The and we don’t expect him to be there is not a statement of current belief; it’s part of the conditions. Try reading it, not for what you want it to say, but for what it says.
That’s exactly what you are spouting. He did not say that he expected Pence not to appear. He said that if Pence did not appear, and if he were not expected to appear, then he would preside.
If you don’t want to take the plain meaning, fine. Your problem, not mine.
1 Like
When pressed about how the mix up happened, Grassley was led away by a staffer
I wished I had had the services of this person when I was in high school. It would have saved me many a sleepless night.
2 Likes
Never believe a rumor until it’s officially denied.
4 Likes
that she would even want to join is actually cause for my face to have a pained expression
1 Like
I’d draw a distinction between scatological (toilet humor, grossness for its own shock value) and vulgarity, which can have its own poetry.
One of my favorite vulgarities is by James Carville when responding to Hamilton Jordan’s crossing over to Ross Perot, then wanting back in after Perot dropped out:
“I wouldn’t piss down his throat if his heart was on fire.”
Almost as eloquent as Shakespeare to me.
5 Likes
You’re operating on a whole other level. Grassley is not simply speculating, he’s specifically saying that “we” (whoever “we” are) do not expect the VP to be at a meeting of Congress where his presence is specifically required. I’m not reading it for what I want it to say, I’m reading what it actually says, which begs a whole lot of uncomfortable questions for Grassley. Unless you would care to explain why you think up is actually down or water is only wet in my fevered imagination.
he’s already budgeted for an appeal, said he’d spent 3/4 million and the appeal would push his legal fees over a million
I don’t think an appearance on Melber quite covers that additional expense.
1 Like
Chuck Grassley was the designated getaway car driver for the Senate in the January 6 Coup. Ginni Thomas was the designated getaway car for the Judiciary. Mike Flynn would take care of the military-mercenary complex.
1 Like
The ‘we’ is the Senate as a whole. The innocent reading is that Grassley is simply explaining the Senate rules. If the vice president is not there and if he is not expected by the Senate to be there, then Grassley would be the one to preside.
The ambiguity arises because Grassley starts by stating that he will preside and then stating the conditions under which would that would be proper. So is this simply an explanation of the rules or a prediction of what he believes will happen?
Eastman’s attempted invocation of attorney/client privilege is highly suspicious.
2 Likes
Oh, they told him alright. They even rehearsed his role in the coup.