276 Comments

Tell your crazy uncle - “Biden was cooperative, while Trump was obstructive.”

Expand full comment
author

Exactly

Expand full comment

Not only obstructive, but he also schemed and involved others to make the documents more hidden and inaccessible. Biden and Pence were actively and unconditionally cooperative, and Trump was knowingly and deliberately obstructive. I would think intent is very important in this case.

Expand full comment

Hur pointed this out in the report: that Trump deserved indictment and Biden did not. I think he said it in pretty explicit terms: 'Trump is the only indicted president' 'all presidents have taken classified documents' 'all have cooperated except Trump' 'Trump tried to hide and destroy the documents - thus should be indicted.'

My view is he gave Biden and easy out with the memory: Biden can recite the Taiwan Agreement from 1979 - his memory is fine.

Expand full comment

THAT horrible Vance is her Uncle? How unfortunate.

Expand full comment

@marlo - this comment was in reply to Joyce's sentence,

"So it’s important to push back every chance we get, especially in conversations with friends and family who may hear this on the news or see it on Facebook and be unaware of the truth. Donald Trump is not the victim of a witch hunt, and he cannot be permitted to continue to play the victim, yet again."

And the reference to "crazy uncle" = "in conversations with friends and *family*"

Meaning, any of us with misinformed relatives.

Expand full comment

(I wish some mean witches and warlocks WOULD hunt him down. Then, we might be able to breathe again.)

Expand full comment

Break out the voodoo doll.

Expand full comment

I was addressing all readers to reach out to others (including their crazy uncles) to explain the difference between Trump’s and Biden’s behavior.

Expand full comment

And my crazy cousins.

Expand full comment

I consistently post Joyce’s, Dan Rather, Jay Kuo, The Lincoln Project and other reliable sources and am discouraged by the many Trump supporters who ignore it, attack or defend Trump. It feels hopeless at times.

Expand full comment

Please keep posting Colleen: the more often he loses in court, the more it will be in their faces that he is a convicted grifter/fraud; convicted rapist; has been bought because he does not have the cash he needs to pay for his appeals; has been annihilated by E. Jean Carroll; is likely going to spend his final years in prison: he is not who he has represented himself to be. And he did not give them the promised tax cuts. Those went to billionaires. Fight the disinformation as frequently as it spews from Steve Bannon's lips. He'll be in jail soon too. 💙

Expand full comment

No. There is no relation between Joyce Vance and Cyrus Vance if that's who you're referencing.

Expand full comment

or JD Vance either. I think Peter mistook Joyce for Mary L Trump, who is the trumpster's niece, much to Mary's disgust.

Expand full comment

I think Peter may not have been referencing a specific person. He probably was just thinking of everybody's crazy MAGA relative!

Expand full comment

Be sure to read BOTH of Mary Trump’s books if you haven’t already.

Expand full comment

No. She's referring to each of our "crazy uncles". If you don't have one you are lucky, unless you happen to actually be the crazy uncle yourself, which I highly doubt.

Expand full comment

Thank you Michael! I needed a smile.

Expand full comment

Riddle me these: Why was Milquetoast Garland ever appointed AG in the first place? Why did he wait 2 years after the insurrection to start investigating and prosecuting it? Why did he allow Hur’s gratuitous comments included in the report? Why is he still the US Attorney General?

Expand full comment
author

I'm not as quick to criticize Garland on this point. I think once the Trump/Biden situation arose, he had to appoint special counsels. I have often wondered why so frequently, Republicans get a Republican counsel and Democrats get a Republican counsel. Seems to me there should be a professional corp of apolitical DOJ employees who get these assignments.

Expand full comment

I also thought he had to wait until the insurrectionists settled down. No point getting people riled up that you cannot control, if you can avoid it. By the time the January 6 Committee was really going, it adjusted the crazies on treacherous-treasonous-traitor-Trump's side to the idea that there are those who will find what he did is wrong. But now, I feel like he should be going after a lot more people, like those in Congress who participated in the coup.

Expand full comment

Linda, DOJ will go after those folks in congress in time. But if they go after large numbers now, it will be like over-kill. The effect and impact will diminish and it will look like the DOJ is conducting scorched earth. They are resigning: but in time they will be indicted and convicted. Trump needs convicted first.

Expand full comment

Not only settling down the insurrectionists, but Garland needed to indict and imprison them, so trump couldn't order them to complete his government takeover.

Expand full comment

I wonder the same thing, but I really think he was trying too hard not to look political and went too far. At any rate, he could and should have had Hur delete the unnecessary references to President Biden's age in his special report. He is, after all, head of the Justice Dept. and the reference was not factual, but conjecture.

Expand full comment

Now that everyone has seen it, the department should require Hur to put out an updated edition, with a specific forward that states, edited to create a more professional product, and remove inappropriate personal opinions. Hur, as a lawyer is clearly not trained to professionally evaluate someone’s cognitive function, and to allow that personal comment to stand in the record makes him, whichever superior signed off on it, and the whole department look at best inept, and at worst, cluelessly corrupt. Ugh.

Expand full comment

Linda Weide and Celeste k - Garland had to leave the comments in so he couldn’t be accused of hiding information from the public. Someone would have leaked it.

Expand full comment

So what. Being afraid to do the right thing because of a leak is a poor excuse for doing nothing.

Expand full comment

Celeste,

Garland could not use 'white out' to take words out of an independent counsel's report. That's the reason for having an independent counsel. Biden stayed out of the mix and has clean hands. So does Garland. Garland will unquestionably be on the right side of the law, dotting 'i's' and crossing 't's' to ensure any trial with Trump is appeal proof. He and Smith cannot afford to make mistakes. I would rather be able to recite the Taiwan Agreement from 1979 word for word (as can Biden with his very excellent short and long term memory); and accept a special prosecutor keeping me away from prosecution for having classified documents and have the special counsel find a reason to absolve me (memory) than be accused of knowingly having the documents. If you read the 388 page report Joyce linked - it's all in there: Biden wanted his notebooks (with classified notes and such) for his memoir. Those were sitting in the garage. He cooperated fully. Trump did not. Biden's memory is better than folks half his age.

Expand full comment

I agree President Biden's memory is fine, but I still can't get over Hur being allowed to make claims about the President memory in his report. It was totally inappropriate. I would think AG Garland would have made some statement to that effect, at least noting that Hur's opinion was inappropriate. But I get your point about independent counsel.

Expand full comment

Valerie -

Thank you Valere. I appreciate your thorough response to Celeste for clarity in the details.

Expand full comment

Agreed Joyce, It seems Democrats bend over backwards to be seen as 'fair' while Republicans are just happy to be found 'innocent' of their misdoings.

Expand full comment

I believe that is commonly referred to as bringing a knife to a gun fight. Unfortunately, something we Dems have failed to efficaciously correct in the age of MAGAts.

Expand full comment

Biden fought the gun fight at SOTU with words:)) 💙 We will win in the end! In the words of Clint Eastwood (I paraphrased): 'We don't need no stinkin' guns. We fight with our keyboards!'

Expand full comment
founding

We fight at the ballot box

Expand full comment

It's actually better for the durability of any successful conviction that Garland is not a firebrand.

Because the situation was, and is, so fraught with political landmines, and due to the prospect of endless appeals of any successful prosecution, perhaps it was wise of Garland to not be too hasty and give the wrong impression. Also, allowing the bipartisan January 6th Commission to do the heavy lifting was a very good move. The findings of the Commission can be used to corroborate and add legitimacy to whatever evidence Jack Smith puts forth.

After all, this is not your average everyday criminal trial.

Expand full comment

I disagree. I don’t think it really mattered if Garland came across as a “firebrand” or not. And it doesn’t really matter whether he would have been “hasty” or gave the “wrong “impression.”. It will not earn him any respect from the Trump supporters. And kudos to the January 6 committee but had Garland brought Smith on board a year earlier I don’t think we would be facing oral arguments before SCOTUS in the immunity case on the last day of the Court’s session. And IMO a successful prosecution is the evidence, the jury, the judge, the attorneys and sometimes luck but not public opinion.

Expand full comment

Connie,

A grand jury still needed to recommend the indictments. The process of finding classified documents in those Trump refused to return had to be conducted within the parameters of our legal system. The only reason some folks are concerned about the 'timing' is they want Trump in court before the election. But recall: Trump announced his run for the 2024 presidency unusually early. And oddly, it was three days before Merrick Garland announced Jack Smith would be special counsel. A DOJ mole informed Trump Jack Smith was coming on board and Trump immediately announced his run. He knows he is going to jail And he knows Jack Smith - and Alex Whiting who has prosecuted war criminals with Jack Smith and mafia in New Jersey. Trump is plenty worried. Biden will be re-elected. Trump will be in jail for life.

Expand full comment

Exactly what indictments are you referring to in what jurisdiction?

Expand full comment

I used an incorrect tense: 'A grand jury *was* still needed to recommend the indictments.' DC and Florida/Miami. We are a country with the rule of law. Whether we agree or not: both Joyce Vance and Jack Smith said on the day the indictments were issued: "Donald Trump is innocent until convicted in a court of law." The operative word is 'convicted.' The accused/criminal is given all the benefit. It makes us feel that they are getting away. It is hard to recognize with our want to 'throw him in jail' because we are so certain he is guilty (he is btw) that we are wondering why it hasn't happened already. Trump and company are adept at delay, delay, delay. Smith and Garland are adept at dotting i's and crossing t's and getting air tight convictions (recall their forte with Mafia and war criminals). Air tight means Trump will lose on appeal and go to jail for life. It's hard to recognize as well that he is ruined at the moment. He just sold himself to a billionaire major investor in TicTok. Even Steve Bannon (Trump's sidekick in graft, grift and crime) said Sunday: "Trump has been bought." (Like he wasn't already). E. Jean Carroll (in her NY cases) has annihilated him. Think about it: he had to borrow money and sell himself to pay for raping her and lying about her. His base doesn't care that he raped her. They do care that he is broke. He is ruined. And he knows he is going to jail for life. A lot of things threw a wrench in the DOJ's case: Trump announcing for presidency 2024 three days prior to Garland announcing Jack Smith's appointment as special prosecutor (indeed there WAS a mole on that one). So Trump wanted to announce so it would not give the optic 'I'm afraid of Jack Smith.' Without the optics: Trump is terrified of Jack Smith and he knows he is going to jail. Aileen Cannon delayed in Florida. These cases are going amazingly quickly. We do not live in a third world country, where tanks can rumble down the streets to Mara Lardo and crash the front gates on January 22, the day Trump arrived from the White House. Our job is to re=elect Joe Biden and I have said this ad nauseum and we need to also elect Blue bicameral. We will. But we are not going anywhere with unfounded accusations against Merrick Garland (I've said that ad nauseum as well. Our legal system is fine. In 69 cases that Trump brought after losing in 2020 November he LOST 68 times and then appealed the one case and lost.

Expand full comment

Yes Kenneth!

Expand full comment

I agree with Kenneth James.

Expand full comment

Dems need to play hard ball. They very well could select people who would conduct themselves in the manner necessary to bring justice i.e. ones from their own party.

For that matter why do they keep questionable people on after an administration change? To not appear partisan? Get real.

Expand full comment

This is worth a listen and the article is worth a read, at least for those of us lost in the weeds. About fact-finding by the appeal and Supreme courts, and how it is supposed to work.

youtube.com/watch?v=UWL4_3QQXLI

moritzlaw.osu.edu/sites/default/files/2024-02/1.1Whitehouse%20Knights%20Final.pdf

Expand full comment

Thanks for sharing this video of Sheldon Whitehouse calling out the outrageous Federalist Society Supreme Court. This was excellent and informative. I hope if we take back the house and keep the senate and presidency that we can reform the court and overturn so much of the damaging rulings from this Robert's Court.

Expand full comment

Thank you Joyce for your eloquent response To Ann.

Expand full comment
founding

There should be such a pool.

We are in the fight of our lives at this point.

Expand full comment

I wonder the same thing, Ann. I think he is so busy trying not to be political that grave errors have been made concerning his decisions. He should have been more aggressive, considering the fact that we are dealing with traitors here. I believe President Biden should replace him next term.

Expand full comment

I wish I could be as generous as you. Wouldn’t be surprised if the Trump camp has the goods on him. Imagine—he could have been on the Supreme Court. If Biden gets a second term, I hope Jack Smith will be the next USAG.

Expand full comment

Garland wasn't on the Supreme Court b/c Mitch said that picking a justice 9 months away from the election was too close to the election. The Republicans had the majority then. Fast forward to October 2020 Ruth Bader Ginsberg dies and the Republicans have no concern about picking a juctice just a few weeks before the election. Blame the unethical antics of the Republicans, especially Mitch McConnell. I don't think anyone has "anything" on Garland and I don't think he is timid or insecure. I agree with the poster about the carefully laid out investigation, but wonder if it might have been completed sooner.

Expand full comment

It’s on McConnell. He more than anyone has screwed with our judicial system to all of our detriments.

Expand full comment

Best video ever about the courts - Scheme 29 by Whitehouse does such a good job of explaining the appellate system and some of the errors committed by the SCOTUS. I actually enjoyed listening so much I repeated to listen again!

youtube.com/watch?v=UWL4_3QQXLI&t=119s

Expand full comment

I listened to a few minutes of it - I think Whitehouse is an exceptional member of the Senate. Represents his constituents (and others) extremely well. One of a kind.

Expand full comment

He is so clear in his explanations. Excellent!

Expand full comment

And he did it happily just like he announced his retirement and then endorsed Trump while holding his nose. He is the devil incarnate.

Expand full comment

I’ve wondered if appointing Garland AG wasn’t just a consolation prize for his getting aced out of the SCOTUS gig due to McConnel’s shenanigans. Obama really caved to McConnell on that one.

Expand full comment

Ann, No. Obama nominated Merrick Garland - and after something like an 8 month stand-off during which the McConnell led senate refused to hold a confirmation hearing the congressional term ended. Obama left office and Trump appointed Gorsuch. It is all of our fault for not working harder to have a blue bicameral congress - we need to look in the mirror on that one - and move on to do better for this next go round. But Obama did not drop the ball to McConnell. Obama did not cave.

Expand full comment

My 2 cents. It does us no good to look at negative opinions here. The fact that this has never happened in our Country, all the dis/mis information, the amount of citizens involved that have mostly been dealt with and have/ or are serving their time and the enormous amount of proof for all of it AND that is without any cooperation from the other party, shoot Jim Jordan is still accountable for ignoring his subpoena. Then take all the other crimes and accusations out there. I am sure I am missing much. My point is, this is not Merrick Garland’s 1st rodeo and he is meticulous.

Now, I am much more worried about the SC and really (pissed) that they could not “STEP IT UP” to help the Country get Justice. Especially because this is an Election year.

As to my last sentence: this should tell us something else that needs to be fixed and changed. A Supreme Court Justice should NOT be heard via the Senate. In this case in particular. However, because a Former President has NEVER had to go In front of the SC. They should have to recuse.

These are just my opinions, I have no education in the Constitutional Law or any workings in this field. 🤣🇺🇸🙏🏻 I do know that this is an 🆘

Expand full comment

Ruth,

You have a PhD in Truth and common sense. And the ability to look in the mirror, accept responsibility and move on. Brava! Proud to know you.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Valere those are very kind words, you really do describe who I am. I have to apologize though as I do not know my way around Substack. I can’t find my post to reply there so am hoping this will get to you. I have much more to say.

I am proud to know you, I do follow you and have read and like what you have to say. More later, I best get off of here and get some sleep… I worked outside today, will probably pay for it tomorrow. But, I love Springtime…it is like a new beginning 🇺🇸

Expand full comment

Garland has been sluggish and rather indifferent to our legal issues! He is way too timid, careful, and insecure over big decisions. All of these Federal Trump election matters could have been handled several years ago! Not months prior to national election?

Expand full comment

Where AG Garland is concerned, I find it hard to believe there is much by way of "goods". But these days, who knows?

Expand full comment

What goods do you think they may have on him? When I think of the AG I remember who brought Timothy McViegh to justice. WAPO and the Guardian have good points on him. Worth the read.

Expand full comment

I do too. But I read an article that rattled on about how he actually didn’t do much. I can’t find it right now, have to look back I know it was on Substack though. I will check, in the meantime, that’s the kind of crap that could be dis/or/mis information. Really????🤣

Expand full comment

Yes, Ruth: that is exactly the kind of stuff that is put out as disinformation to undermine our high functioning and hard working federal judicial system.

Expand full comment

Obama nominated him. McConnell refused to allow a confirmation hearing. Garland would have been confirmed.

Expand full comment

Yes, Yes a thousand times yes.

Expand full comment

Well, let’s see. He was nominated and confirmed because he was the best, most qualified, most thoroughly vetted, most respected man for the job. He didn’t “wait” two years; he’s been methodically building his case from the bottom up, as any prosecutor would, so that it has a solid foundation (see also all of those who have been convicted, some of whom are now providing evidence for the prosecution). Mr Hur is a special prosecutor. The AG does not have veto power over his report, inflammatory though it may be. Why is he still AG? See above.

Expand full comment

I agree. Prosecutors start with the "low-hanging fruit," (i.e., the ones who can be incentivized to flip on others), and work their way up the food chain. Prosecutors don't start with the top dog, then work their way down an organiztation. With so many Insurrectionist suspects to charge and take to trial, the entire process has taken several years.

Expand full comment

Thank you Chuck: 100%

Expand full comment

Church Heath - Bravo.

Expand full comment

See below.

Expand full comment

I just read online he is quitting. Hur I mean. My feeling is that the Rep want to question him about the decision on Biden. He can’t be affiliated with AGO because they want him to lie about Biden. Here we go again. 🙄

Expand full comment

I think I remember hearing that he wanted to let the Congressional investigation finish and get some lesser participants convicted. Although it has been frustrating for us, I think it must be easy to blow a case like this or give the impression of partiality and he wanted to get that right. Justice is a small hampster in a large and heavy legal wheel.

Expand full comment

Thank you Bonnie. Garland cannot afford a misstep. Neither can Smith. And they have not made any.

Expand full comment

I agree. They have to take their time, because all hell will break loose if any error is made. I wonder if Smith ever sleeps.

Expand full comment

I would guess they have a suite at DOJ with shower, fold out bed. It around the clock for Alex Whiting, Jack Smith and team. I just hope Alina stays on board with Trump. I actually saw her on the YouTube where she said “it was more important for her to be pretty than smart because she could fake smart.”

She’s not going to be faking smart with Jack Smith across the aisle. Nor with Alex Whiting, taking notes. The operative words for her are from ‘The Bird Cage,’ Albert: “Sweetie, you’re wasting your gum.“ (Sweetie, you’re wasting your $25 worth of mascara). I hope she goes to gets her nails done. In the meantime, Jack Smith is sleeping in the office and putting in some all nighters on his homework.

Expand full comment

Sometimes I think I'm glad he didn't get to the Supreme Corruptors. I'm not sure he has the manhood to stand up for decisions. On the other hand I guess he couldn't be much worse than what we have.

Expand full comment

Lucy - Garland would have made us all proud I have no doubt. Why do you thing McConnell prevented his appointment to SCOTUS? He would have been trouble to the Republican base of autocrats. I bless every day Garland is with us now. He is the very best ❤️

Expand full comment

Read the article and it has some good points. But it still doesn't explain why MG is such a "Nancy" (no offense to the Nancys out there - it is a more polite word). Like why Hur? And all the legal sources said he was just editorializing where it was inappropriate. God please give us courage in these dark times.

Expand full comment

Beatrice - Biden allowed Hur to stay on to show fairness. It would appear Hur was favoring the other guy and everyone knows it. Too bad he crossed that line. He’s the one who doesn’t look good now. We know exactly where he stands and it’s not in the middle.

Expand full comment

And I pray that the Dems on the committee rip Hur's testimony to shreds.

Expand full comment

He’ll either lie or tack the 5th. They are good at that.

Expand full comment

Thank you for sharing this article. What a tangle to think through, let alone proceed through, to find and substantiate evidence that will hold up in trial.

Expand full comment

Thank you Karen. I had not read the indictment of Alex Jones' sidekick Jonathon Owen Shroyer. I have wondered why Alex Jones has not faced the music for his disinformation campaign. Perhaps in time.

Expand full comment

Can't offer a reasonable answer to any of your questions.

Expand full comment

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Expand full comment

His voice is fractured: “spasmodic dysphonia”. Often occurring from a traumatic incident. I wonder what that incident was?

Expand full comment

Hi Marlo, Are you referring to Joe Biden's voice? He is Catholic - and may have gone to a parochial school - where the nuns spanked his hands for writing with his left hand - forcing him to use his right hand. Just a guess. Or punished him harshly from speaking in class. Just a guess....but that could be causal to a brain-crossover and thus spasmodic dysphonia (stuttering). And that harsh punishment can cause a 'brain crossover' causal to reading or mathematics dyslexia.

Expand full comment

Good question.

Expand full comment

Jamie Raskin 😁 Count on him to nail Mr. Hur. 👍

Expand full comment

Schiff is on the committee also, along with Zoe Lofgren and others.

Expand full comment

Thank you William, Yay Zoe and Jamie. Adam as well.

Expand full comment

Plus Eric Swalwell and the great Jasmine Crockett!

Expand full comment

Victoria, they need to 'nail' the Republicans for once again causing a distraction that substitutes the conflict. The real conflict is Donald Trump took classified documents without authorization, deserving an indictment (and Mr. Hur said so right in the 388 page report); and Joe Biden took the documents because he wanted to write his memoir (and Mr. Hur provided a plausible 'reason' without an indictment (and he said so for Mr. Biden as well). There is no other way he could explain one taking the classified documents - but he did say they were found with all former presidents as far back as Reagan. The difference is: Joe Biden immediately offered to return the documents and openly explained he had the notebooks to write his memoir and did not know what the boxes contained.

Expand full comment

Oh, I hope so!!!

Expand full comment

In plain view, Trump is exhibiting all of the behaviors of an autocrat. In plain view, he is saying simply that the rule of law does not apply to him because he says it doesn’t. He destroys those who are not loyal to him and him only. Hur will be self-protective, so count on Hur to show loyalty to Trump.

Hopefully, the Democrats will ask questions that will bring out the ageism and elder abuse inherent in Hur’s report. Hopefully, the Democrats will bring out the truth.

Expand full comment

I can’t wait for that hearing. Hur took advantage.

Expand full comment

The problem is WHO will be asking the questions?

Expand full comment

Since it is the House Judiciary Committee, the Democrats on the committee would have time to ask questions of Hur during the hearing.

Expand full comment

William, if you read the report: Hur states that Trump was indicted and deserved to be so. He gives Joe Biden a pass: Joe Biden did nothing more than every past president going back to Reagan. When the documents were discovered, he cooperated fully.

Expand full comment

Thank you William. Sage.

Expand full comment

I'll be looking forward to Jamie Raskin's questioning of Hur. I imagine that Staci Plaskett bites a large chunk out of his ass also.

Expand full comment

Yes. Questioning from those two, and their colleagues Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, Zoe Lofgren, Pramila Jayapal, Madeline Dean, et al, will be just what Hur deserves.

Expand full comment

Staci Plaskett is very smart, aware, and super sharp!

Why wouldn’t Staci be perfect for the next Justice spot on the Supreme Court?

Expand full comment

She would be an excellent choice.

Expand full comment

But there is no more retracting Hur's despicable comments.

Expand full comment
Mar 12·edited Mar 12

Andy,

Hur said in the 388 page report that every former president had taken classified documents, ostensibly to work on their memoirs - but all, including Joe Biden, had cooperated fully in returning them. By contrast, Mr. Hur stated in the report that while it was not part of his job to report on or contrast Trump's actions, he wanted to state that Trump was the only former president who had been indicted for removing documents without permission - and that he deserved the indictment because he had not returned the documents and hid and destroyed them (so had nefarious behavior). I'm sure this will come out tomorrow. Had I had classified documents in my garage, I would much prefer it being said that I was "elderly and well meaning with a poor memory" than nefariously removing and hiding/destroying them. So the Republicans will substitute the conflict: Trumps allegedly criminal behavior with Biden's memory. At the same time, Biden has shown very recently that he can recall and use the Taiwan Agreement to back off Chinese warships; negotiate with Modi for a climate and economic agreement; bring together Japan and Korea for a defense and economic accord at Camp David after the two countries had not had meaningful dialogue since the ending of WWII; obtain an agreement with 25 countries at G20 to support Ukraine and the climate; and most recently, work tirelessly for a middle east settlement. At the same time, Trump has cried 'victimhood' and 'witch hunt' and begun wearing a girdle to court, as he loses his cases and has no money to pay the appeal bond: so he has sold himself (again). E. Jean Carroll has annihilated him and his base is leaving him. He knows he is going to jail for the rest of his life. We will re-elect the best president the United States has ever had, with a Blue bicameral congress. Nope, Trump did not 'get to Hur.' Hur did Joe a huge favor and took one for the team.

Expand full comment

I’m pretty sure Trump got to Hur and told him to insert those words.

Expand full comment

Ohhh yes I forgot that she was on that panel too!

Expand full comment

!!!

Expand full comment

It was a completely unnecessary comment, intended, no doubt, to disparage Biden. I'm pretty sure Biden didn't pack up these documents, his staff did. So if anyone was well-meaning but befuddled, it was the staffers back when he was VP. He has certainly demonstrated his leadership over the past few years, tallied it up last week and blasted the GOP and the SCOTUS at the SOTU. But if you want a good laugh, watch the clip of Jimmy Kimmell reading T's criticism of him onstage as host of the Oscars (I paraphrase): "But thanks for watching! I'm surprised-- isn't it past your jail time?"

Expand full comment

For crying out loud - Page ONE says it all! That he didnt do it purposely & shouldnt be charged!

Then it went on for what - 300 pages? oh well.

I have the hearing set up to record on C-span. Where Repubs will ask stupid questions & Dems will bring out the truth! Does that sound partisan? well I am.

Expand full comment

Go Maggie!!

Expand full comment

Some days enough is enough. Right?

Expand full comment

Trump is such a clone of his teacher, Roy Cohn.

Expand full comment

Yes, equally instinctive, but not as smart.

Expand full comment

Sue, countersue, delay. Repeat.

Expand full comment

And always, obstruct everything - investigations, legal processes - everything.

Expand full comment

That's an understatement...

Expand full comment

Cohn taught him, ‘if someone sues you, countersue’.

If you notice, Trump is parroting the things Biden is saying about him!

Expand full comment

Very noticeable that Trump has nothing original left to say.

Expand full comment

Did he ever?

Expand full comment

Indeed, except for the fact that Cohn's sexual preference in this day and age would have never garnered opened support by the hypocrite known as Donald J. Trump.

Expand full comment

The Don didn’t go near him when he learned Roy had AIDS. What a good friend, huh?

Expand full comment

Get ready for another episode of the House GOP Big Top Circus and prostration before TFG.

Expand full comment

You can count on it!

Expand full comment

Donald Trump is not a victim.

Expand full comment

Does being a fashion victim count? Because he's always been that.

Expand full comment

He has to play the victim the rest of his life. First, it's the only thing remotely relatable about him is that he can pretend his (largely self-inflicted) suffering is something like the pain experienced by real people when dealing with him and his policies.

Two, it keeps him alive. The key benefit to always playing the victim is that he's set up so that if he dies in a way that's even slightly suspicious, he'll be an instant martyr. If he doesn't die in public from obviously natural causes, we're in for 500 years of "Oh Blessed Saint Trump, too pure for this sinful world."

Strap in and saw off your ears. It's going to be a terrible ride.

Expand full comment

I don’t care one iota if liar fraud con scumbag Trump dies in a suspicious way.

All I care about is that disgusting scumbag Trump dies (and sooner than later).

Expand full comment

There's an annoyingly-not-insignificant portion who will care and for some insane reason we let obvious psychos buy guns.

Expand full comment

I’ll enjoy news of their suicides!

Expand full comment

Someone I know prays every night he has a quick, natural death!

Expand full comment

I’m also fine with a slow and painful natural death - just before November.

Expand full comment

👏🏽🫶🏽🙏🏽

Expand full comment

Amen!!!

Expand full comment

Narcissists are always victims. Victimhood is the hallmark of narcissism. Recall Bernie Madoff: he was a convicted ponzi scheme narcissist and granted a single interview after he was convicted. The interviewer asked him if he could explain 'why' he committed his crimes. His response was: "I wanted them to feel sorry for me." Almost inexplainable to those of us who are somewhat 'normal' but it fits Trump to a T. He truly believes he is the victim.

Expand full comment

And some people believe the Earth is flat. They are still insane.

Expand full comment

With Trump's dubious lifestyle choices, it's almost inevitable that his demise will be a natural result of innumerable hamberders, or the buckets of KFC, the countless diet cokes (aspartame overload, anyone?) and a total lack of exercise (sorry guys, but non-professional golf is NOT exercise--not if you do it all from a golf cart!). Despite the overwhelming evidence of his poor choices, if Trump does, in fact, die of a heart attack or stroke...that won't stop the MAGA cultists from inventing a conspiracy or two "esplainin'" how it was all a liberal plot.

Expand full comment

That’s because he is a narcissist.

Expand full comment

Hopefully he will BE the victim, both in his election loss and even more, his multiple convictions in court

Expand full comment

Is HUR testifying because Republican Congresspeople can’t read?, can’t comprehend?

Expand full comment

Hur is testifying because the Republican right wing nationalist Christian evangelicals are substituting the conflict (that Hur points to in the 388 page report: all prior presidents as far back as Reagan, have removed classified documents; they all have returned them, and that Trump is the only prior president who has been indicted)- and Hur says that Trump was correctly indicted because he hid the documents and destroyed them and has not returned all of them. And Joe Biden is fully exonerated - with Hur noting that Biden was 'well meaning, and elderly man with a poor memory.' He exonerated him with this statement because he needed a reason to not charge him. There is absolutely nothing the Republicans can do about it. In the meantime, Biden recites the Taiwan Agreement from 45 years ago and forces China to back their warships out of the Taiwan Strait and stop flying their bombers next to Taiwan: because China knows that Joe Biden know Victor Li wrote the Taiwan Agreement in 1979 in such an ambiguous way that indeed Joe Biden can order boots on the ground and American jets and bombers to fly to protect Taiwan. Joe Biden knows this and China knows he does. Not sure: but since the press has finally appeared to have shut up, one or more may have read the Taiwan Agreement.

Expand full comment

Yes, well, I say to TFG: March 25th.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the heads-up, Joyce. On the calendar!!

Expand full comment

Barb McQuade’s new book is a must-read for all who consume “news” of any type and from any source, as well as social media. It’s not sufficient to know how to read until one is also able to read between the lines.

Expand full comment