“We actually see a lot of the same problems …. We’re more of a politically homeless faction …” “I would vote for a Bernie Sanders before I’d vote for a Ted Cruz or a Marco Rubio.” “The working class has gotten beaten up by the loss of small businesses.”
Click-bait coverage of Trump rallies makes it easy to believe that the country is hopelessly divided. Or at least the 70% from the fringe-right 30%. If Trumpers don’t get their way, it’s civil war, etc., etc. As if these two below will lock and load and defend march to war behind some 21st-century Robert E. Lee.
If Donald Trump were to be found guilty by a jury, where do you see this going?
Trump supporter: “A civil war. Divide it up, because we can’t live together, obviously.” pic.twitter.com/kNr0fjG2T9
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) August 10, 2023
Capitalism and democracy being strange bedfellows, it’s those voices that get air time because they draw eyeballs and generate clicks. But is it really as bad as quickie profiles of the blowhard right make it seem?
We asked this guy about the Tennessee drag law and he said it was “stupid” and “government overreach.” pic.twitter.com/77WiGPDqpl
Under cover of mullet, John Russell of The Holler discovered that there is more common ground between the left and right than footage appearing on social media and in news coverage makes it seem. “Solidarity is waiting to have a moment.”
“You would never know [this]” about people at a Trump rally, Russell explains, “if you just watched Fox or CNN.”
“They’re trying to divide people,” one young woman says of the dominance of hot-button social issues.
Would you expect to hear about how anti-trust laws were used to break up the telephone monopoly, Bell Systems, in the 80s and that it might be time to dust them off again? Or about small businesses being squeezed out by corporate consolidation? Or how the world’s largest asset managers, Blackrock and Vanguard, command nearly $20 trillion dollars of wealth?
I went to the Trump rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, and heard all of this and more from people waiting in line.
It’s not surprising to me. I poured drinks in a rust belt dive bar for the last year where plenty of the Trump faithful slaked their thirst. When your county votes for Trump by 71% and the bartender is me, a white guy with a mullet, most people assume you’re on the same page. When they find out that I’m a card-carrying labor leftist, there’s always shock that we occasionally *are* on the same page.
All of us live in a petri dish of engineered division. If the working class on the left and right ever united on things like reining in billionaire power, ending forever wars that enrich the already wealthy, breaking up corporate power structures, and unionizing major industries, the world would look a lot different than it is, and the ruling class would have far to fall.
One commenter (among over 10k) writes, “These are the conversations we need to see to bring people back together. It’s easy to punch down at Trump’s supporters and assume they’re all racists and idiots, this right here is the actual track to mending the country.”
It’s twelve, eye-opening minutes well worth your time. I subscribed, and I never subscribe.
Gaslighting, brainwashing, or just dominating the information battle-space?
Blowhards have a way of attracting attention. They thrive on it. They put on a good show. Rush Limbaugh made his fortune as one, as have a biblical flood of TV preachers. Rupert Murdoch erected a global media empire around blowhards. The decibels they generate and maintain day after day do more than entertain audiences and generate cash flow.
What Bill McKibben once said of the Christian right might have presaged the rise of the flag-bedecked MAGA cultist: “They’re like the guy who gives you directions with such loud confidence that you drive on even though the road appears to be turning into a faint, rutted track.”
Is it gaslighting, brainwashing, or simply dominating the information battle-space? Blowhards organize discontent to “groom” their base and work the media refs. Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, the Freedom Caucus, and fringe-right disinformers succeeded in convincing followers that the 2020 election was “stolen” from their savior-king. The blowhard right has long convinced the media that they represent majority opinion.
Philip Bump’s analysis of the Issue 1 vote in Ohio reflects that biasing even as his data demonstrates the opposite:
A review of six statewide votes since last year, including Ohio’s, shows that in 500 of 510 counties, access to abortion outperformed President Biden’s 2020 results. Across those counties, including a lot of deep-red ones, the margin of support for abortion access topped Biden’s 2020 margin by an average of 26 points, a significant shift to the left.
No. That’s not a “shift to the left.” That majority support for abortion rights was always there. It was just so drowned out by the blowhard right that it created the illusion that, as Matt Novak of Paleofuture blog observes, “an extremely loud 30% of the country … convinced a lot of people they’re half the country but they’re not.”
There’s an extremely loud 30% of the country that’s pro-Trump, anti-choice, and anti-trans. They’ve convinced a lot of people they’re half the country but they’re not. They’re 30%. https://t.co/kLiN4zUUmB
The blowhard right “are not actually popular.” But they believe, says Tennessean Trae Crowder, “if the hearts of the people cannot be won, then the will of the people must be quashed.”
Republican officials, write Melissa Murray and Kate Shaw, “are afraid of their constituents when it comes to abortion and … are taking increasingly aggressive steps to prevent voters from making their voices heard.”
Or as Rep. Shontel Brown (D) put it, they reach for the “‘If you can’t beat ’em, cheat ’em’ Republican playbook” (timestamp 4:52).
Democracy, popular sovereignty, government of the people, are more popular than the blowhard right. Ohioans proved that again on Tuesday.
Craig Robertson is seen in an undated photo.Facebook
A Utah man was shot and killed during an FBI raid early Wednesday morning, the FBI confirmed to ABC News. The raid was in connection with an investigation into alleged threats against President Joe Biden and others, according to two officials briefed on the case.
One of the officials told ABC News that the investigation began in April and the U.S. Secret Service was notified by the FBI in June. In addition to threatening posts, the official said, the man under investigation suggested online he was making plans to take physical action. The threats had been deemed “credible,” the official said.
The FBI in Salt Lake City said the shooting occurred around 6:15 am. local time while special agents attempted to serve arrest and search warrants at a residence in Provo.
“The FBI takes all shooting incidents involving our agents or task force members seriously,” the FBI said in a statement. “In accordance with FBI policy, the shooting incident is under review by the FBI’s Inspection Division. As this is an ongoing matter, we have no further details to provide.”
The deceased suspect was Craig Robertson, according to multiple sources and a federal complaint obtained by ABC News.
Robertson was facing three counts, according to the complaint — interstate threats, threats against the president, and influencing, impeding and retaliating against federal law enforcement officers by threat.
The complaint includes numerous social media posts believed to have been made by Robertson threatening to kill Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, as well as several officials involved in prosecuting former President Donald Trump.
The president is scheduled to visit Utah on Wednesday.
Among the posts allegedly made by Robertson was one published on Aug. 6, three days before Biden’s scheduled visit, according to the complaint. “I hear Biden is coming to Utah. Digging out my old ghillie suit and cleaning the dust off the M24 sniper rifle,” the post said, according to the complaint, which referred to the post as a “willful true threat to kill or cause injury to kill President Biden.”
THIS ⬇️ is why a protective order is needed in Trump’s criminal cases to prevent Trump’s identifying witnesses to his deranged loyalists. Who he incites. https://t.co/Ptl8CZVX2q
— Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)🌻 (@AWeissmann_) August 9, 2023
Hugh Hewitt says that voters in Ohio yesterday were confused:
Abortion was not on the ballot – not at all! The measure was the only thing on the ballot and the measure was about the ballot measure process. While it is true that a ballot measure concerning abortion is pending that is not what this election was about. And so, voters were (mis)lead to vote about something that has much broader implications based on something very immediate. And so, in pursuit of abortion rights in Ohio much mischief entirely unrelated to abortion will unquestionably ensue.
They weren’t confused. They knew that the ballot measure was immediately about abortion but that the Republicans were trying to make it harder to amend the state constitution so they could continue their increasingly unpopular minority rule.
Abortion is the issue that symbolizes what these throwbacks are trying to do generally: deprive Americans of their freedom and their rights in service of their base voters’ grievance and anger at democratic norms that force them to share power with people they don’t like.
Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday vowed that he “will talk” about the criminal charges he faces over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and accused federal prosecutors of “taking away my First Amendment rights.”
Last week, special counsel Jack Smith asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to impose a so-called protective order that would prevent Trump from disclosing evidence the government turns over to his lawyers as part of the discovery process.
Trump’s own lawyers chose not to object to a protective order and instead requested that the judge put in place a version that is “less restrictive” than the one proposed by the government. Trump’s lawyers asked Chutkan to shield only “genuinely sensitive materials” in order to protect his rights.
But Trump is fighting on multiple fronts as he tries to beat three indictments and win back the presidency. On Tuesday, when he chided prosecutors and President Joe Biden, Trump was battling in the political arena at a rally here.
Trump told the raucous crowd that Biden “wants the thug prosecutor, this deranged guy, to file a court order taking away my First Amendment rights so that I can’t speak.”
He said failing to answer the media’s questions about the case is “not good for votes” as he seeks to defeat Biden.
“I will talk about it, I will,” he said. “They’re not taking away my First Amendment rights.”
In addition to the federal charges related to the 2020 election, Trump is under indictment in state court in New York and in federal court in Florida. He may also face state charges in Georgia, where he sought to upend his defeat in the state in 2020.
Trump has profited from the indictments on the campaign trail, consolidating a massive polling lead in the Republican nomination fight as he argues that adversaries are targeting his political movement.
“I’m being indicted for you,” he told supporters Tuesday, a line that has become part of his stump speech.
Anything they provide in discovery that he thinks will help him will be shared, I have no doubt.And he’ll continue to insult and threaten all the witnesses, prosecutors and judges in his cases without giving it a second thought. And frankly, I fell pretty confident that he will get away with it because nobody’s going to put him in pre-trial detention. It just won’t happen.
He is a rogue monster who knows very well that he has an armed cult backing him up.
Anyone involved with his legal case in any capacity should get bodyguards for themselves and their families. That’s just common sense.
As I was crisscrossing Iowa following the third indictment of Donald Trump, I caught wind of a fresh perspective regarding the right time to winnow the field.
The conventional wisdom has always been that Trump’s opponents need to consolidate around the strongest challenger as quickly as possible to avoid dividing the opposition votes. Mitt Romney argued that the drop-dead date should be February 26, in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. (My view: Even that might be too late.)
But now at least one of Trump’s opponents is wondering if the frontrunner’s legal troubles could change the calculus and require candidates to stay in for the long haul in order to try and amass delegates in case there is a convention battle because the former president is . . . otherwise indisposed.
“This is about meeting the moment while also thinking long-term,” said a DeSantis super PAC staffer on the condition of anonymity pointing to their massive super PAC war chest.
The long-term game theory takes into consideration what might happen should the January 6th trial move fast enough to prevent Trump from accepting the GOP nomination (I’m lighting a Jack Smith votive candle as we speak). If the legal calendar presents that possibility, might his opponents have to consider earning as many delegates as they can ahead of a convention fight, rather than dropping out of the race once it’s clear they can’t win?
This possibility could be simply the case of consultants with a lot of super PAC dough trying to ride their moneymaker as long as possible. (Which is what one of DeSantis’s rival campaigns’ spokespeople suggested to me.)
But is it so crazy to think that these campaigns might be caught in a prisoner’s dilemma that disincentivizes them from getting out of the race—and thus helping Trump . . . again? Wasn’t that possibility the reason so many anti-Trump Republicans were warning about a big field to begin with?
A hypothetical: If the early contests offer a muddied result that doesn’t elevate a single challenger above the herd—but also Trump is staring down the barrel of spring court dates—it would not be illogical to assume that candidates would have incentive to stick around and try to earn delegates in the later states where they are allocated proportionally, just in case things get wild in Milwaukee.
This wishcasting candidacy would surely be met with some resistance and mockery, but that hasn’t stopped ambitious politicians before. And let’s be honest, after getting schlonged by a man under multiple federal indictments in the first few contests, the remaining candidates might figure there’s no point in getting out to preserve dignity that, by that point, would be long gone.
I don’t expect that we live in the beautiful timeline where Trump rots in jail while his sycophants fight on the convention floor. But it would be about par for the course for the sweet dream of this possibility to freeze a fragmented field—and help him coast to a third nomination.
If I recall correctly, that idea was bandied about in 2016 as well. At one point everyone thought that Trump would be forced to drop out at some point because he was so beyond the pale. There was even a tepid floor fight and Ted Cruz refused to endorse him.
Yeah. That’s how that went.
Ron DeSantis: Noble Warrior
I was chatting with two women in the cafe outside the livestock auction in Tama, Iowa, where DeSantis was about to hold a sparsely attended event when a field staffer from the Never Back Down Super PAC approached us with some commit-to-caucus cards.
Both women were undecided on whom to support at this stage and politely declined, so the young man went into his spiel.
He began by credentialing himself as a former Trump 2020 staffer before offering the case for his candidate. “We shouldn’t have to pick between policy and personality,” he said. (I presume the subtext here is that he thinks DeSantis has both?)
But then it got interesting. He said that Republicans deserve somebody who is “mobile.”
Well, at least, that’s what we heard.
The three of us at the table began laughing and I asked him for clarification. As it turns out this was not a dig at Biden and Trump’s advancing age. He clarified that he was saying that he thought the party deserves someone “noble.”
Now that is an interesting argument we haven’t heard much from Trump’s top-tier opponents! The staffer quickly pivoted to more anodyne talking points about the importance of winning the election because he’s worried his generation is succumbing to socialism. Then he moved on to the next table.
This suggestion that Trump might not be noble has not been something we had been hearing from DeSantis to date, but the candidate did get as close as he has come to making the moral case against his rival the previous day at a town hall in New Hampshire.
These insults are juvenile. That is not the way a great nation should be conducting itself. That’s not the way the president of the United States should be conducting himself. . . . I’m not going to insult somebody. Somebody’s looks or somebody’s dress or something like that. I wouldn’t teach my kids to treat people like that. We have a 6-, 5-, and 3-year-old, we teach our kids to treat people the way you would want to be treated yourself.
And here is the crux of the other DeSantis dilemma.
Everything the Florida governor said in that town hall in New Hampshire and that his super PAC staffer told us at the table in Tama is obviously true.
Trump has not acted with nobility. His insults are juvenile. No responsible parent would teach their kids to emulate him.
But making that argument now, after years of extolling Trump’s virtues, after running an ad where DeSantis read TheArt of the Deal to his kids, makes DeSantis sound like he’s the disingenuous, ignoble heel, not Trump. In fact, it might even help Trump, further cementing his claim that DeSantis is a normie cuck in MAGA wolf’s clothing.
Which has been the foundational flaw of the deal Republican politicians made with the Orange Devil eight years ago. Once they submitted to his terms, there was no take-backsies. The time for Republicans to win the argument about nobility was August 2015, or at the latest February 2021. The hour now is far too late. That’s why they are stuck in a confidence game, trying to extend the clock as long as possible, hoping Jack Smith and a jury of their peers will finally set them free.
Not to mention the fact that DeSantis is a roaring asshole himself. He’s rude and mean and nasty and any parent who wanted to raise something other than a sociopath would never see this creep as any kind of role model. He is anything but noble.
-a real one among the MAGA voters who like Trump and will determine the nominee; and
-a fantasy primary among Republican elites who secretly loathe Trump and are hoping that voters will soon come to their senses.
You can imagine my surprise when I learned that the fantasy primary is so ingrained in the old guard GOP mindset that it even extends to campaign events out in real ’Merica!
On Sunday, I attended Ashley’s BBQ Bash in Cedar Rapids, hosted by GOP Rep. Ashley Hinson. The event was a campaign cattle call featuring the local Iowa GOP politicians and many of the Republican candidates for president. But not Trump.
For the first hour of the event I sat in a daze as speaker after speaker came to the lectern without mentioning Trump’s name. What world are these people living in? It’s not as if there isn’t anything to say! He was the most recent Republican president, is currently winning the primary in a landslide, and just this week was indicted for the third time. You’d suspect leading members of his party would have some thoughts on that! Apparently not.
The only sign of the former president in the first half dozen speeches was a large man sitting in the front row holding an actual TRUMP sign right in front of DeSantis’s face as he was finishing speaking.
About halfway through tepid remarks from the next speaker, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, I went to the concessions for a water. In the back of the barn, I noticed two older women emblazoned with Trump flair sitting at the tables where people had been eating. I was curious if they had also noticed the lack of discussion about their candidate. And boy did I strike a nerve.
Paula said that “all the cool kids” are having their event and the “rest of us” who like Trump are being left out. “I just think that’s weird.”
Donna, who volunteered that she had taken a bus to the National Mall on January 6th and thought it was “awesome” getting to talk to Trump supporters from all over that day, said she was “shocked” by the lack of support for Trump from the event organizers.
“If Trump was here this place would be packed,” she said.
I’m sure Paula and Donna hold many views that I would find to be a bit out there—but on this score I gotta say it seems like they were the ones who were seeing things clearly.
Having a Republican party BBQ and pretending Trump doesn’t exist isn’t going to make it a reality, no matter how much the politicians in the fantasy primary wish it were so.
There’s big money in it apparently, DeSantis is blowing through it as fast as he can and vastly wealthy people who have more money than they know what to do with are writing numerous 8 figure checks to candidates who have no chance to win. Nice work if you can get it.
Miller is right. There is no real primary. There’s a death watch. If Trump drops dead on the gold course there will be someone left to pick up the pieces. That’s all there is.
Kellogg was the guy who said that he didn’t trust the Secret Service not to take Pence to Alaska that day to “keep him safe.” I guess that was misinterpreted?
Whatever the case, it’s very satisfying to see them going after each other. That’s when plots really unravel…
The December 6 “Fraudulent Elector Memo” written by attorney Kenneth Chesebro (Co-Conspirator 5) first appears in Para. 54 of the Jan. 6 indictment of Donald Trump. But the outline for the fraudulent electors scheme was not available for reading until The New York Times obtained and released it Tuesday evening.
It’s a doozy, and one the Jan. 6 Committee did not uncover:
“I recognize that what I suggest is a bold, controversial strategy, and that there are many reasons why it might not end up being executed on Jan. 6,” Mr. Chesebro wrote. “But as long as it is one possible option, to preserve it as a possibility it is important that the Trump-Pence electors cast their electoral votes on Dec. 14.”
Three days later, Mr. Chesebro drew up specific instructions to create fraudulent electors in multiple states — in another memo whose existence, along with the one in November, was first reported by The Times last year. The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot also cited them in its December report, but it apparently did not learn of the Dec. 6 memo.
“I believe that what can be achieved on Jan. 6 is not simply to keep Biden below 270 electoral votes,” Mr. Chesebro wrote in the newly disclosed memo. “It seems feasible that the vote count can be conducted so that at no point will Trump be behind in the electoral vote count unless and until Biden can obtain a favorable decision from the Supreme Court upholding the Electoral Count Act as constitutional, or otherwise recognizing the power of Congress (and not the president of the Senate) to count the votes.”
Mr. Chesebro and his lawyer did not respond to requests for comment. A Trump spokesman did not respond to an email seeking comment.
No kidding?
As Harvard Law School’s Laurence Tribe notes, “Judge David Carter called the 2020 election interference scheme ‘a coup in search of a legal theory.’”
Lawyer John Eastman (Co-Conspirator 2) has received more press coverage than Chesebro. Eastman spoke at the Stop the Steal rally just before Trump supporters breached, overran and ransacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. But Chesebro now appears as the brains behind the fake electors plot.
Prosecutors are still hearing evidence related to the investigation, even after charges were leveled against Mr. Trump, according to people familiar with the matter. The House committee last year releasedemails its investigators obtained showing that Mr. Chesebro had sent copies of the two previously reported memos, one from Nov. 18 and another from Dec. 9, to allies in the states working on the fake electors plan.
But he did not attach his Dec. 6 memo to those messages, which laid out a more audacious idea: having Mr. Pence take “the position that it is his constitutional power and duty, alone, as president of the Senate, to both open and count the votes.” That is, he could resolve the dispute over which slate was valid by counting the alternate electors for Mr. Trump even if Mr. Biden remained the certified winner of their states.
Chesebro suggests quoting statements by liberals — including what Tribe calls “a gross misrepresentation” of his work — as part of a messaging strategy for defending the plot. Given their statements, Chesebro claims “it would be the height of hypocrisy for Democrats to resist Jan. 6 as the real deadline, or to suggest that Trump and Pence would be doing anything particularly controversial …”
He suggests that fake electors in six contested states meet (preferably in private), vote, and transmit their documents on the same day (Dec. 14) and in parallel with the legitimate electors. Team Trump must then ensure that there are “on January 6, in each of the six States, at least one lawsuit, in either federal or state court, which might plausibly, if allowed to proceed to completion” award the state to Trump or deny it to Joe Biden. Thus would the plotters provide a pretext for denying Biden 270 electoral votes on Jan. 6 and have alternate slates at the ready.
The people of these United States are the rightful masters of both Congresses and Courts, not to overthrow, the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. — Abraham Lincoln
One might infer from recent events that the erstwhile Party of Lincoln has not only undertaken to pervert the Constitution but Lincoln himself. Actions in GOP-controlled state legislatures as well as election conspiracies that spawned state and federal investigations and indictments suggest Republicans believe what Lincoln really meant to preserve was government of CERTAIN people, by CERTAIN people, and for CERTAIN people.
Ohio’s rightful masters on Tuesday demonstrated they are not content with being fleeced of their voice and their agency (Washington Post):
Ohio voters rejected a measure Tuesday that would have made it more difficult to amend the state constitution ahead of a November vote to ensure access to abortion.
For more than a century, Ohioans have been able to amend the state constitution with a simple majority. The failed measure would have changed that threshold to 60 percent.
As of this writing, with over 95 percent of votes counted, Ohio voters have rejected Issue 1 by a 57-43 margin. The underlying (underhanded?) purpose behind the GOP-led attempt —after 111 years — to raise the state’s bar for amending its constitution was to thwart efforts of Ohioans to amend their constitution by citizen referendum in November. That November measure “would guarantee access to abortion in a state where restrictions at about six weeks of pregnancy have been put on hold by a judge.” Multiplepolls show support for the citizen initiative at nearly 60 percent.
Ohio conservatives were not about to allow women that right. That old expression that goes when they say it’s not about sex, it’s about sex? The same applied to Issue 1 and abortion (Vox):
For months Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose denied he had switched positions on August special elections because of abortion rights. But in June, video footage reported by News 5 Cleveland and the Ohio Capital Journalshowed LaRose admitting abortion was motivating his stance. “Some people say this is all about abortion. Well, you know what?” he was recorded saying. “It’s 100 percent about keeping a radical pro-abortion amendment out of our constitution — the left wants to jam it in there this coming November.” (LaRose announced last month that he is running for US Senate.)
The Post’s E.J. Dionne called Issue 1 “the Ohio GOP’s scam referendum,” noting, “When you do everything you can to rig an election & still lose, you have a problem.”
Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio, tells Russell Berman of The Atlantic, “It’s this ‘Don’t tread on me’ moment where voters are being activated.”
Ohio state Rep. Rachel Baker (D) on a Zoom call Tuesday evening reported hearing dismay from more than Democrats at the polls, paraphrasing, “I’m a Republican, but this is ridiculous.”
“This is a clear instance of a more general problem plaguing American democracy today, especially in the states: increased partisan efforts to take decisions out of the hands of popular majorities,” said Daniel Ziblatt, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of the forthcoming book “Tyranny of the Minority” with his colleague Steven Levitsky.
Take note, America: Republicans don’t want to represent you. They want to rule you.
But then a majority of you knew that. And the minority? They are just fine with being ruled.
Democrats have to wonder if preserving both abortion rights and majority rule will play a roll in the 2024 elections. Ohio Republicans succeeded Tuesday night in intertwining the two.
Former President Donald Trump mocked Chris Christie, one of his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination, over eating habits and weight Tuesday.
“Don’t call him a fat pig,” Trump playfully admonished an audience member who shouted out during a speech at a high school gym in Windham, N.H. “You can’t do that.”
Trump was apprising the audience of recent polls that show him leading when he first mentioned the former New Jersey governor, who was once one a close adviser.
“Christie, he’s eating right now,” Trump said. “He can’t be bothered.”
That’s when a man in the crowd shouted out to prod Trump.
“Sir, please do not call him a fat pig. I’m trying to be nice. Don’t call him a fat pig,” Trump said. “You can’t do that.”
Isn’t he cute? There’s more:
Trump claims Fani Willis is racist against white people like him and spreads rumors about her sex life pic.twitter.com/DJu4XWCang
Trump claims that 2,000 Mules will be used as evidence in his upcoming criminal trial to show the election was stolen from him pic.twitter.com/kHXoG76xXH
He seems to think that he will be “proving” that the Big Lie was actually the truth in his trial. I doubt the court will allow that but in the event it does, he will regret it. Cheap, amateur propaganda like that is very easily rebutted.
I will never understand how a man who thinks his own country is a dystopian hellscape and who hates a majority of his countrymen can run for president and compel millions of people to vote for him. Never.
