202 Comments
User's avatar
Susan Howard's avatar

How many people who can afford to spend $100,000 a plate are still supporting trump and willing to throw that much money down the drain to keep Rudy from flipping?

Another question: why hasn’t ted cruz been at least questioned about January 6?

Expand full comment
Norma Lee Kerns Barnhart's avatar

Or any of the congress members who continued to support Trump with his lies about the election?

Expand full comment
Erica's avatar

None of the sitting politicians are going to be held account. The best thing we can do is VOTE them out.

Expand full comment
Marycat2021's avatar

It's one thing to be supportive of criminals but another to be a criminal. We can't prosecute people for thought crimes. Unless they actually did something illegal, they won't be prosecuted.

Expand full comment
Bryan Sean McKown's avatar

"Unless they actually did something illegal, they won't be prosecuted." We are on the Eve of a 3 Day Weekend but, I wanted to say "You got that right" no crime for mere thought without some firm of "overt act".

I think it may have been the first Law School Lecture on Criminal Law, where the Professor stated 'there is no crime without the Acts Reus', the actual action of the offender or "Perp". Lots of Perps out there.

Expand full comment
Marycat2021's avatar

Plenty of federal employees have committed crimes in office, but almost none have been prosecuted for them. This absolutely has to change.

Expand full comment
Bryan Sean McKown's avatar

There are several legal options more than just Inspector General investigations; Special Prosecutor Appointments but, such Special Counsel Appointments have not gone well for many reasons such as political interference, errors in tasking & lack of ability.

One of my favorites is a " QUI TAM" actions. A person just lays out a civil lawsuit in a verified, speaking complaint. The FEDs have certain amount of time to take over the case and become the Plaintiff -- the Real Party In Interest. The original plaintiff lays back but, gets a portion of the damages.

The Bigger the Bust the Bigger the Award. "Clean Up" in more sense than one.

Expand full comment
Marycat2021's avatar

It seems that all attempts to prosecute politicians are bound to appear political. It's also possibly true that prosecutors are reluctant to spend large chunks of their operational budgets on litigation involving very rich people, who usually have plenty of money at their disposal to pay for top notch lawyers. And it seems to me that Americans are inordinately inclined to believe that rich people are on a higher moral plane than the rest of us, and don't get emotional over financial crimes. Notice that there's been next to no mention in the media of Alvin Bragg's case against Trump.

Expand full comment
Linda Weide's avatar

Exactly. Or MTG and James Jordan. Weren't they both involved?

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

DOJ is saving Ted Cruz et al for later. They want the focus to be on don Don for now. I think the net is going to wide and deep for quite a while. I don't eat much popcorn but I will get it ready for Ted Cruz, Tommy Tuberville (who took Trump's call and his marching orders on January 6), MTG, Gaetz (who asked for a pardon and I wonder why?) and all the rest. Trump knows nobody is going to buy a plate of chicken for Rudy. This is his pretend help for his ex-buddy. So where's the party being held? Mara Lardo?

Expand full comment
Wendy's avatar

Wondering if that net will also include Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

He had to testify before the Georgia grand jury. I wonder if that Q&A is public? So in that context, he was in the net - and concerned enough that he fought appearing. They need something concrete besides his not having a core.

Expand full comment
Marycat2021's avatar

Grand jury testimony is not generally made public.

Expand full comment
Gregg Barak's avatar

I am dubious about Whyte they will go after these folks as they should, but I am still hopeful but time will run if they have not moved on those folks by 2026 and the appeals from Trump’s convictions will all I imagine still be occurring.

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

I think there ‘may’ be more in the wide and deep net, such as the far right instigator Alex Jones and Trump’s buddy Tucker Carlson. They are both bad to the bone. My personal opinion.

Expand full comment
Gregg Barak's avatar

I hope you are correct but I think that may be overly optimistic but I really do not know.

Expand full comment
Carol C's avatar

That would make Trumpian sense for the venue.Thanks for that, Valerie.

Expand full comment
Sandy Gottstein's avatar

I keep thinking, just you wait, Enry Iggins, just you wait!

Expand full comment
Lynell(VA by way of MD&DC)'s avatar

LOL, Sandy! I just watched that movie last week!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwNKyTktDIE&t=1s

Expand full comment
Lynn S's avatar

😂

Expand full comment
pam brown's avatar

I want the 34 who supported the insurrect in text with Meadows removed from congress! Ted is one!

Expand full comment
JA's avatar

There is a good place to start!

Expand full comment
Lance Khrome's avatar

"Mr Mayor" is becoming very close to being voted off the island...given the report in Rolling Stone that SC Smith's investigators have been asking tRump associates about Rudy's drinking habits, and how much "legal advice" was given when he was plastered, his use to tRump is diminishing rapidly, and could be cut loose.

Expand full comment
Leonard Lubinsky's avatar

Giuliani asks Trump for financial help to cope with his troubles. Trump's solution is to get other people's money through this $100,000 a plate. Is Trump taking anything off the top and making money from what he is raising for Giuliani?

Expand full comment
BC's avatar

Honestly, anything trump does "for" someone, it's because he's getting something from it. Benevolence isn't a word associated with trump or Republicans.

Expand full comment
Kathy Balles's avatar

Is the pope Catholic?

Expand full comment
Charlie Austin's avatar

Trump does nothing that doesn't benefit him in some way.

Expand full comment
Carol C's avatar

And why wouldn’t he? He’s The Beggar Billionaire.

Expand full comment
Beth B's avatar

But tfg looooves "other people's money"

Expand full comment
Mike Yochim's avatar

I’ll believe that it goes to Giuliani when I see it. Until then, it’s another grift.

Expand full comment
Leonard Lubinsky's avatar

You are not the only skeptic. Consider my newsletter Len's Political Notes https://lenspoliticalnotes.com

Expand full comment
Solange Kellermann's avatar

Hadn't thought of that, but duh probably... sure.

Expand full comment
Karen Leeds's avatar

Of course he is. Where do you think the dinner is going to be held? Bedminster or Mar a Lago? See how that works?

Expand full comment
Leonard Lubinsky's avatar

And are there enough billionaire fools to participate to putt Giuliana out of his hole and pad the Donald a little bit? One long time Giuliani funder was quoted as saying "not another nickel."

Expand full comment
Judy the Lazy Gardener's avatar

Roger Stone's name has been coming up in the news so it may be they are in the sights of the DOJ. First the king (Trump) and then his court?

Expand full comment
JA's avatar

🤞

Expand full comment
Mimi Champlin's avatar

FYI in response to questions I had and from others who've asked me while discussing all of this.

From the internet "McCarthy and three other lawmakers were referred (by the January 6th Committee) for defying subpoenas: Reps. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.). Another GOP member who ignored the summons, Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama, is leaving Congress after this year and will be out of the ethics panel's reach."

So, unless you want our Congress to start sending out the Congressional Police to round 'em up and bring 'em in, they've been referred .

The referrals come in the form of a letter from the committee to the Justice Department making its case for prosecution. Referrals do not carry any legal weight or compel the Justice Department to act.

The orange pustule was also referred, for the crime of insurrection, for obstruction of an official proceeding of Congress and for conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Expand full comment
Lloyd Germaine's avatar

I think you’d be surprised how many will buck up $100000 a plate. It’s all about quid pro quo .

Expand full comment
Marilyn Lemons's avatar

There are a lot of Republicans I wonder if they have been question or not. I still don't trust Garland to do the right thing.

Expand full comment
kdsherpa's avatar

LOL (re dinner)

YES! (re ted crude)

Expand full comment
Armand Beede's avatar

Susan Howard: You say it all in so few words!

The donation drain; the puny result -- to prevent Rudy from flipping -- Rudy with a reputation tattered with holes like Swiss cheese.

The real Zinger: ted cruz (I love the lower case) must be questioned about January 6th.

What is an Ivy-League degree worth?!

Think of Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, Rick Santorum. Princeton, Harvard, Yale . . . And look at the results!

Expand full comment
Hope Lindsay's avatar

Clearly, they skipped their Ethics Classes...

Expand full comment
Abigail Norling's avatar

Rand paul!!!!!

Expand full comment
Rigel Dyess Hall's avatar

YardTrash Paul has been very quiet lately. It’s possible that he has been questioned by the FBI and DOJ, and that dumpster will definitely spill his guts to protect himself.

Expand full comment
Beth B's avatar

WHY HAVEN'T ANY OF THEM BEEN QUESTIONED!?!?!?!?!?!?

Expand full comment
SPW's avatar

Or Jeff Hawley and others that my brain refuses to call up at this moment. It gets overwhelmed with all this traitorous activity that was engaged in by far too many in both Houses of Congress.

Expand full comment
Patricia Davis's avatar

Great question ! I DO wonder what ‘those complicit’ will amount to...as to how many actually played legally at that table.

Explanations of the law give me a headache usually, the nuances are minute and cause me too many ‘what ifs’...glad I didn’t go into law. I do appreciate the careful decipher though Joyce ,but am always left with how complicated does this have to be..because seems there’s far too many loopholes and a great deal needs changed ...let alone justice be exacted .

Innocent until proven guilty, right....except, except, except? An act done in full sight of many? Is a person guilt if under hypnosis during a crime...hmmmmm🤔

1) It’s pretty obvious to me that even a sitting President should be liable to the law.

2) Some people walk away from the boss due to their upholding principle , executive privilege should never excuse one from criminal acts.

..to name two..just sayin’

There’s a whole layer of underlings needing carefully watched from a point far back and from now on...

💙💙VOTE💙💙

Expand full comment
William (Bill) McGuire's avatar

Navarro is one guy I look forward to see crying his eyes out when convicted. Such a putz going on tv with Ari Melber who famously asked, "You do understand you just admitted to trying a coup?" Navarro has no one else to blame for copping to the "Green Bay sweep". Rudy will go down in history as the former "America's Mayor" who may end up bankrupt but receive some free room and board in prison. Yes, Rick Wilson was right, everything trump touches dies. Carry on

Expand full comment
Tutone's avatar

I saw that episode and my jaw dropped.

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

Same.

Expand full comment
BC's avatar

Except trump himself. Rule of law. These people seem to think the law doesn't apply to them. They are all (hopefully) going to find out how wrong they are.

Expand full comment
Charlie Austin's avatar

They'll both get what they deserve.

Expand full comment
Bonnie MacEvoy's avatar

Are there any removal rules similar to 25th Amendment that apply to Congress? Mitch McConnell's "events" are very concerning and not normal. These are major symptoms of cerebrovascular or neurological dysfunction and do not bode well for the Senator or his constituents. Ditto for Dianne Feinstein; this is not a partisan issue.

Expand full comment
Sharon L Bonney's avatar

We need to keep Feinstein in office because even though Democrat Gavin Newsom would select her replacement that person would not automatically serve on the Judiciary Committee. I'm guessing that on the "sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander" principle, Democrats do not want to bring up the issue with McConnell lest the Republicans counter with Feinstein.

Expand full comment
Donna Baske's avatar

There's also Grassley on the Republican side who also, how shall I say it "shows mental slippage" as well.

Expand full comment
Bonnie MacEvoy's avatar

Chess, Risk, or Clue. Too many agendas for me to track!

Expand full comment
John D. Cooper's avatar

It is, yet another challenge we face in 2023. We have a lot of work to do moving forward. What’s really sad is that there are younger people who failed and fail to put governance before holding on to power - whether it be ego or to protect themselves now that they cannot look back to see the damage they have done or see in the mirror to see what wrongs they embrace.

Expand full comment
Bryan Sean McKown's avatar

Love your 3 dimensional Chess cognitive considerations Sharron

Expand full comment
Sally Hart's avatar

Feinstein has formally announced she is not running in 2024 when her term is up. Her replacement is guaranteed. Mitch won in 2020 and will not run again until 2026. Absent his death, the Rs may well want a healthy MOC and may pressure him to "retire" now in order to have a functioning body present in the Senate. Much of Feinstein's committee work could not proceed while she was in California recovering from shingles (at least that's the official story).

Expand full comment
Judy the Lazy Gardener's avatar

I just wish both of them had faced up to their infirmities years ago. They aren't fully able to do their job and are just place holders at this point.

Expand full comment
William Burke's avatar

I agree. Neither one of them wants to give up their car keys.

Expand full comment
Charlie Austin's avatar

The 14th Amendment applies to them. Mitch has dementia. Although I don't care for the man, it's still sad to watch.

Expand full comment
Sally Hart's avatar

Please do not diagnose from afar and without a medical degree on your part. I assume the absence of a medical degree and if you have one, I apologize.

Expand full comment
Sharon L Bonney's avatar

I have an MD and board certification in internal medicine. All I can say from observing Mitch is that something is the matter and it seems to date from the fall where he hit his head. I hope his medical team is pursuing all the appropriate diagnostic procedures. I wish him well but the country deserves to know whether he is capable of carrying out his duties. IMHO he should stay a senator but resign as Minority Leader.

Expand full comment
Bryan Sean McKown's avatar

Sharon, I understand Mitch has had two (2) "falls". I am always concerned about proper diagnostics, possible bleeding, TBI etc.

Expand full comment
Annie D Stratton's avatar

Sally, you do not need to apologize. Whether medical degree or not, throwing out medical diagnoses of someone one has does not know personally and has not examined is inappropriate. A medical professional would know this.

Expand full comment
Ruth A James's avatar

This now “Full time job you have” educating all of us on the “Rules of Law” and how our Courts/Judges work in this tragedy of a President’s lying and misleading w/false information and so much more. I thank you so much for all you are doing. P.S. tonight on Stephanie’s program, you looked amazing even though you are working your butt off! Bless You, you are a model Citizen. Hope all the animals are well. 🇺🇸

Expand full comment
Dana Jae Labrecque's avatar

Truth, Ruth! Ditto! Joyce Vance is a national treasure!

Expand full comment
Ruth A James's avatar

Thanks Dana. It is just crazy what they have created. Greed for one. Is never a good idea 🇺🇸

Expand full comment
Dan Ellis's avatar

The arrogance of this gang that can’t shoot straight is truly astounding....Thanks, as always, Joyce, for the spot on analysis!

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

Exactly. Anyone left in Trump's camp will now circle the wagons and shoot in. The paid lawyers will duck and run.

Expand full comment
Betsy Dillon's avatar

Love the visual of this.

Expand full comment
John D. Cooper's avatar

Let’s vote them out and never turn away from holding them accountable, requiring that they look truth in the eye and reflect on the consequences of lying.

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

I agree. I've been thinking about (and resisting) this comment for a few hours. My first thought was 'accountability from these bad actors will never happen.' But the thought now comes to me that when the pack is separated and they are isolated - with nothing to think about except their bad deeds, they may reflect. And be forced to look truth in the eye. Thank you for posting your comment. The best part your comment was 'never turn away from holding them accountable.' And of course vote them out. I believe there will be a 'second wave' after these first indictees. And we will see bad representatives and senators held accountable.

Expand full comment
BC's avatar

I agree. I think we will be seeing indictments and court cases for many years. There are a lot of bad actors playing in this farce. I'm still gobsmacked that all of this even happened at all! But, it did and here we are.

Expand full comment
Robert Kattenburg's avatar

Regarding your last two sentences: From your lips to God’s ears.

Expand full comment
Sally Hart's avatar

Vote is the operative word. Vote and work to keep the vote available to all. Support with money and time, politicians (ordinary people who want to work for your benefit). If you are busy the best thing you can do is politely talk to friends and co-workers about what the Dems have done in the last three years for the people. During Covid, on-line phone banks were organized and even one or two hours a week phone banking helps.

Expand full comment
Bryan Sean McKown's avatar

I read Judge Howell's 3 page Order earlier today, a Big victory for all Election Workers. I admit I ordered a "Ginger Mint" in celebration. : ) 9/5 Update: I should be eating that Ginger Mint today!

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

Bravo that you read the three page order! That is likely not the ginger mint lozenge that first came to mind, right? I'm having chai tea with 11 powdered mushrooms, dandelion, chicory and a bunch of dried herbs. I'm only on page 18 of the Georgia indictment, plugging and chugging. I've kept up with most everything else - but this is a busy time....I had to take a deep breath and pull up the Georgia to force myself pick up reading it again. I have the feeling we are going to have a bunch of reading hand-outs this semester, even with Joyce's briefings and outlines.

Expand full comment
Bryan Sean McKown's avatar

Joyce's briefings will really cut down on the number of handouts this long, long semester.

Expand full comment
Sabrina Hanan's avatar

G not only got his comeuppance in this civil trial but is awaiting his comeuppance in the J6 criminal trial. Bam. Now Donald. The moral arc of the universe is finally in the FO stage of FAFO.

Expand full comment
Lloyd Germaine's avatar

If Navarro is being held to account git ignoring a subpoena then why isn’t Jim Jordan?

Thanks Joyce.

Expand full comment
Ita Sanders's avatar

These Trump loyalists behaved as though their country’s rule of law does not apply to Trump nor to them by their association with him. But it does because American jurisprudence is not subservient to willful law breakers and traitors. For that, Navarro can find a more receptive country in a place that Trump loves more than our United States, Putin’s Russia.

Expand full comment
Carey Ragels's avatar

Navarro and Trump might want to think twice about involvement with Putin’s Russia. With the Prigozhin plane crash, Putin showed how he deals with folks who engage in coup activities. Navarro and Trump wouldn’t last a week in Putin’s Russia once they are no longer useful to him.

Expand full comment
Charlie Austin's avatar

They aren't safe here either, even incarcerated.

Expand full comment
Carey Ragels's avatar

Well, that’s true. People who defy Putin do seem to fall out of windows all over the world. Not just in Russia.

Expand full comment
Charlie Austin's avatar

The former Soviet intelligence agent and his daughter were attacked by a nerve agent in London.

Expand full comment
Carey Ragels's avatar

Alexei Navalny too. He survived but just barely. Now Putin’s killing him slowly in prison.

Expand full comment
Bryan Sean McKown's avatar

And, a cold blooded Murder, very cold, right outside the walls of the Kremlin.

Expand full comment
Johnny Rochat - NorCal's avatar

“Judge Howell has apparently entered the find out stage of the proceedings.”

Meanwhile, Giuliani has entered the Eff Around And Find Out stage of the proceedings.

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

This is wonderful! Thank you for making me smile.

Expand full comment
Fay Reid's avatar

Thank you, Joyce for opening the waters of court findings to give us passage of understanding. I guess these 'hide me' pleas will continue until the trial are underway

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

Joyce: another consideration in the Navarro case is that the privilege belongs to the current president not the former one? And the current administration has made it perfectly clear in correspondence with Navarro that it does not choose to exercise any executive privilege in this instance! And, in addition to these appropriate legal considerations, the defendant is obviously crazy generally as well as to rely on the missing assertion of “executive privilege” in this instance!

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

I had to re-read your comment to 'think I got it.' But did Nararro have the gall to ask the current president for executive privilege? I almost feel embarrassed to ask.

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

No, not at all, but they obviously got wind of it because it was a very public stunt by this crazy guy (we Californians have had a very exhaustive experience with this guy) and the Biden Admin quickly chimed in publicly! Legal scholars contend that the privilege can only be asserted in court by the current Executive!

Expand full comment
Valere's avatar

I googled Navarro. The Hill said this tonight: "Navarro cannot be forced to testify as the committee ceased its work last year, but he can still be held in contempt of Congress, which carries a maximum penalty of a year in jail and a $100,000 fine." I am wondering what the conservative Supreme Court will say if he appeals (should he be found guilty for contempt of Congress)? I think it will be very hard for even the conservative members to refute established law. But....

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

He will appeal!

Expand full comment
Marilyn Lemons's avatar

Arrogance and privilege attitude. They say Giuliani has always been this way, but from what I understand he was a pretty good prosecutor (Joyce???). I think all the accolades he received, 'America's mayor', etc., went straight to his head. Navarro was looking for fame and fortune and thought he found it on Trump coattails. They all will be held accountable in a court of law and this country will be better for it.

Expand full comment
Linda's avatar

Your end comment was what I said after reading Rick Wilson’s book. The man has an uncanny ability to lure people to their figurative deaths.

Expand full comment
Edward Lehman's avatar

Quite a different day than I expected when it started! Thanks for keeping us on track, Joyce!

Expand full comment
Patricia  A  Martinez's avatar

Trump and his mega Republicans have put us through hell. I hope when this catastrophic mess is over, the people will come to their senses and vote out the corruption in Congress. We must salvage our Democracy because failure is not an

option.

Expand full comment
Tutone's avatar

🗳️🇺🇸🗽

Expand full comment
LeslieN's avatar

It’s never going to be over. And no one is suddenly going to come to their senses. The Republican party is the “win at any cost” party and they are continuing, and succeeding, at the state level to make sure they do. Until there’s a coordinated way to disrupt them at the state and local levels, it’s going to get worse.

Expand full comment
Patricia  A  Martinez's avatar

I disagree with your comment, because the majority of us believe in democracy. Yes , we can stop them by our vote in 24. This is not the time to be negative. We must be positive and keep on fighting. Like John Lewis said, we must never give up.

Expand full comment
LeslieN's avatar

Your "negative" is my "practical." I'm not giving up and I made a positive suggestion that we make a concerted effort to stop their anti-voting tactics at the state and local levels.

Expand full comment