Tired of ads? Want to support our progressive journalism? Click to learn more.LEARN MORE
Enjoy good journalism?
… then let us make a small request. The COVID crisis has slashed advertising rates, and we need your help. Like you, we here at Raw Story believe in the power of progressive journalism. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnston’s DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. We’ve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. We’ve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and legal efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. And unlike other news outlets, we’ve decided to make our original content free. But we need your support to do what we do.
Raw Story is independent. Unhinged from corporate overlords, we fight to ensure no one is forgotten.
We need your support in this difficult time. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click to donate by check.
Value Raw Story?
… then let us make a small request. The COVID crisis has slashed advertising rates, and we need your help. Like you, we believe in the power of progressive journalism — and we’re investing in investigative reporting as other publications give it the ax. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnston’s DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. We’ve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. We’ve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. We need your support to do what we do.
Raw Story is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us in the future. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you.
  |  |
Report typos and corrections to: corrections@rawstory.com.
'Nobody else is to blame': MSNBC's Morning Joe busts GOP excuses for 'Trump cop killers'
January 28, 2021
MSNBC's Joe Scarborough unloaded on former president Donald Trump for provoking a violent mob to overthrow democracy -- and bashed Republicans for flocking back to his defense after the Capitol insurrection.
Top GOP lawmakers initially blamed Trump for the Jan. 6 riot aimed at upending the congressional certification of President Joe Biden's win, but they're now trying to shift the blame to "everybody" as the former president faces a Senate impeachment trial -- and the "Morning Joe" host said he shouldn't be let off the hook so easily.
<p>"This is what Trump supporters did, this is what Trump terrorists did, this is what the Trump rioters did," Scarborough said. "Why?"</p><p>"Why are there cops with brain injuries, cracked ribs, smashed spinal cord disks, why is one going to lose an eye, stabbings -- why is that?" he added. "Because Donald Trump held a rally and told them to go up there and whipped them into a frenzy with two months of lies. There is a direct link directly from Donald Trump's words, from Donald Trump's actions to this, and, by the way, a <a href="https://www.koin.com/news/oregon/oregon-house-republicans-denounce-state-gops-false-flag-capitol-claims/" target="_blank">false flag</a> -- not even close. We have all the videotape, and the more we pore through the videotape, the more we see they are saying they are doing it for Donald Trump and they're <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/ted-cruz-would-want-us-to-do-this-capitol-rioter-tells-maga-mob-pals-in-video-from-senate-floor" target="_blank">doing it for Ted Cruz</a>, the insurrectionist."</p><p>Scarborough said it really shouldn't be hard for the Senate to convict the former president, because he said the case was open-and-shut.</p><p> "The evidence is overwhelming," he said. "These cops were killed by cop killers, Trump cop killers, or maimed by Trump cop killers because of the words of Donald Trump. Nobody else is to blame, nobody else has this or their shoulders. It's Donald Trump, and you have Kevin McCarthy going down today to bow to cop killer insurrectionist Donald Trump."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="0e3b0143b03e6f271954da40d25cee9d" style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="auto" type="lazy-iframe" scrolling="no" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aoNdQK37k64?rel=0" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;" width="100%"></iframe></span>
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">01 28 2021 06 12 41</small>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoNdQK37k64&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">www.youtube.com</a>
</small>
</p>
CONTINUE READING
Show less
John Roberts' absence from Trump's second impeachment trial should come as no surprise
January 28, 2021
Former President Donald Trump's second impeachment trial will be different from the first one in some key respects. First, Trump is no longer president of the United States. Second, the person presiding over the trial won't be Chief Justice John Roberts, but Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont. And journalist John Kruzel, in an article published by The Hill on January 27, explains why Roberts' absence should come as no surprise.
Roberts, according to Kruzel, is hoping to "shield the Supreme Court from unnecessary exposure to the political fray." And although Roberts felt constitutionally obligated to preside over Trump's first impeachment trial in 2020, Kruzel reports, he "apparently believes the Constitution has let him off the hook" this time because Trump is no longer president.
<p>Following the violent insurrection on January 6 and the storming of the U.S. Capitol Building, Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives — along with ten House Republicans, including Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming — indicted Trump on one article of impeachment: <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/13/us/politics/trump-impeached.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">incitement to insurrection</a>. Trump's critics, from Cheney to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, believe that he encouraged a violent effort to overthrow the results of the 2020 presidential election.</p><iframe src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1354450543004028930&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.alternet.org%2Fr%2Fentryeditor%2F2650154908%23publish&partner=rebelmouse&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px" style="position: static; visibility: visible; width: 405px; height: 577px; flex-grow: 1;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe><p>This impeachment marks some firsts in U.S. history. It marked the first time a president had been impeached twice, and it will be the first time an impeachment trial in the Senate took place after the person had already left office. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were sworn in on January 20, officially marking the end of Trump's presidency.<br/></p><p>"The Founders made clear that when an impeachment trial concerns a sitting president, 'the Chief Justice shall preside,'" Kruzel explains. "But they did not explicitly prescribe the same role when the high crimes and misdemeanors in question were carried out by a president who has since departed the White House, as Trump did on January 20."</p><p>On January 25, Kruzel notes, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, "The Constitution says the chief justice presides for a sitting president. So, it was up to John Roberts whether he wanted to preside with a president who's no longer sitting: Trump. And he doesn't want to do it."</p><p>Leahy was chosen because he is the president pro tempore of the U.S. Senate, which means that he is the member of the majority party with the most seniority. The 80-year-old Democrat was first elected to the U.S. Senate via Vermont in 1974, and he became the Senate's president pro tempore again this year when Democrats won a narrow Senate majority.</p><p>Frank Bowman III, a University of Missouri law professor, is disappointed that Roberts opted not to preside over Trump's second impeachment trial. Bowman told The Hill, "It would be better to have Roberts in the chair but not, I think, an error of constitutional dimension not to have him there. Still, since I have reason to think that Roberts was requested to appear, but declined, I find myself disappointed in him. I think he's shirking here."</p>
CONTINUE READING
Show less
The myth of bipartisanship: Will a fully radicalized GOP finally blow up DC silliest fantasy?
January 28, 2021
Well, now it's official: On Tuesday, nine out of ten Republican senators blessed Donald Trump's efforts at sending a mob to violently overthrow democracy. Despite the very real threat to their lives posed by the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 45 out of 50 Republican senators, answering the call of the ever-showboating Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, voted against proceeding with an impeachment trial of Trump for the crime of inciting an insurrection. This, even though Republicans know Trump is guilty. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., even previously admitted that Trump "provoked" the riot that led to 5 deaths and unhinged mobs roaming the Capitol looking to murder prominent politicians like Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and then-Vice President Mike Pence.
Yes, there's some nonsense cover story about how it's a procedural objection, but no one is fooled by this. Tuesday's vote was a proxy vote for the belief that no consequences should flow to Trump for his attempt to violently overthrow democracy. This was made obvious by comments from Sen. Lindsay Graham, R.-S.C., who is helping Trump on his defense and told reporters, "He just needs to keep doing what he's doing, and the trial will be over in a couple of weeks."
<p>Really, it should be no surprise. The Capitol insurrection was just the last-ditch move by Trump, who spent the two and a half months prior looking for every angle he could to void the election results and declare himself a second term president by fiat. At every point in Trump's failed coup, GOP leadership passively supported him — and often actively, as happened with the effort to throw out the election results in Congress that was <a href="https://www.salon.com/2021/01/20/cruz-and-hawley-became-dc-pariahs--but-their-cynical-ploy-for-2024-may-have-worked-anyway/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">led by Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Josh Hawley of Missouri</a>. </p><p>As <a href="https://www.salon.com/2021/01/27/why-senate-republicans-are-still-playing-defense-for-donald-trump/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Heather "Digby" Parton wrote at Salon Wednesday morning</a>, there's "a concerted effort on the part of the entire GOP establishment to cleanse Donald Trump of any responsibility for what he did so that he might emerge once again as the hero they've all been waiting for."</p> <p>Republicans' consistent support of Trump really should be putting more of a damper on the mewlings about compromise with the GOP from centrist Democratic holdouts like Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Sen. Joe Manchin. These two senators have been in the news lately because of their <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/sen-sinema-opposes-eliminating-filibuster-210537647.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">stated opposition to ending the filibuster</a>. Even President Joe Biden, despite his welcome interest in forging ahead with a series of progressive executive orders, has expressed concerns about eliminating the filibuster, which gives the Republican minority veto power over any meaningful legislation. </p><p>The idea that that filibuster is some marvelous tool of bipartisanship has long been a childish fantasy. Republicans have manipulated it so they can pass their priorities — tax cuts and federal judicial appointments — with a straight majority vote, yet it magically remains in place as an insurmountable obstacle for Democratic priorities, such as ethics reform and a minimum wage hike.</p><p>Moreover, the notion that a Democratic majority can "work together" with a Republican minority is a cruel joke.</p> <p><strong><em>Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter <a href="https://salon.us8.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=71cb3e8a6e9639c81023cd427&id=2327d11e12" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Standing Room Only</a>.</em></strong></p> <p>The only goal of Republicans is to make sure not just that Democrats fail, but that government itself fails, so they can continue campaigning on a fatalistic, cynical anti-government platform. This has been true since at least Barack Obama's presidency and has only become more so since them. In light of the widespread GOP support for Trump's insurrection, however, the calculus of the bipartisan feint has shifted even more into the negative. Now it's not only silly and delusional to imagine there can ever be a "working with" Republicans — it's what the kids might call <em>problematic</em>.</p><p>Republicans, after all, are the party of Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene of Georgia, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/26/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-democrats-violence/index.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">whose calls for Democrats to be assassinated</a> were just exposed by CNN. And while there's some performative hand-wringing from some Republican leaders on this, the easy bet here is that nothing will be done to sideline or eject Taylor-Greene from their caucus. It is for the same reason that 90% of Republican senators just signed off on the idea of not blocking Trump from running for office again, due to his fascistic insurrection. They know <a href="https://www.salon.com/2021/01/07/dont-let-smarmy-calls-for-civility-fool-you--most-republicans-still-side-with-insurrectionists/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">most of their voters are fine with outright overturning democracy</a> now and are only too happy to follow suit. </p><p>This isn't a mere matter of political differences. This is an entire political party rejecting the very idea that political differences should be hammered out with democratic deliberation. Instead, they're backing — however cowardly, with their disingenuous process arguments — a president who tried to end democracy through violence. </p><p>Democrats have long liked to talk up "bipartisanship" and "compromise" because mainstream pundits reward them for it and voters — especially the kinds of voters who barely follow politics — react warmly to those words during focus groups. It sounds so nice, doesn't it, getting together with people who you disagree with, having a beer and coming to some sort of agreement? Of course, people like that fantasy, especially if they're largely unfamiliar with how obstructionist Republicans have become in the past couple of decades. </p><p>And sure, it makes raw political sense to appeal to those fantasies in campaign ads and even to make theatrical but ineffectual gestures towards bipartisanship in public. But what has been foolish for a long time now is actually trying to make good on the idea of compromise with Republicans so radical that their idea of "unity" and "compromise"<a href="https://www.salon.com/2021/01/26/biden-promised-no-malarkey--he-can-start-by-ignoring-mcconnell-and-nuking-the-filibuster/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> is they get everything they want and Democrats can walk off a short pier.</a> </p><p>Now, the situation has grown more dire. Sitting in a room trying to compromise with Republicans means trying to work with people who are just fine with Trump sending a violent mob after Congress. So fine, in fact, that they aren't interested in taking what should be a sensible step in convicting Trump so that he can't run for office again.</p><p>And no, the fact that Trump's coup failed is no excuse to not take it seriously. At the risk of having people yell "Godwin's law" at me (though <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/08/14/the-creator-of-godwins-law-explains-why-some-nazi-comparisons-dont-break-his-famous-internet-rule/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Mike Godwin himself said it doesn't count in with actual fascism on the rise</a>), it's worth remembering that <a href="https://www.history.com/topics/germany/beer-hall-putsch" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Hitler's first attempt to overthrow democracy also failed</a>. Giving men like Trump a chance to regroup and try again is not a good idea!</p> <p><strong><em>Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter <a href="https://salon.us8.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=71cb3e8a6e9639c81023cd427&id=2327d11e12" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Standing Room Only</a>.</em></strong></p> <p>Even the most devout believers in "bipartisanship" must understand that the idea is built upon a more fundamental idea, which is democracy itself. That's the whole point of democratic governance, that different political factions have to work through problems deliberatively, instead of trying to cheat or use violence.</p><p>The Republicans have become radicalized against democracy itself. They've elected to put themselves outside of the systems of democratic discourse. It's really okay to take them at their word and stop trying to work in the system with people who are happy to destroy the system. It is furthermore a moral obligation to minimize contact and compromise with people who are just fine with sedition. </p><p>There are a lot of reasons to overturn the filibuster sooner rather than later, starting with the fact that Americans elected Democrats to get things done and <a href="https://www.salon.com/2021/01/22/mcconnells-plan-to-derail-democrats-takeover--and-nuke-the-economy---is-already-in-full-swing/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">will not re-elect them if they fail to make good on that promise</a>. But the moral seriousness of the problem just rose dramatically with Tuesday's vote. Republicans are faced with a stark choice between supporting or rejecting democracy. As long as they continue to do the latter, Democrats should shun Republicans as much as possible, instead of carrying on like everything is normal. </p>
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Trending
Latest
Videos
Copyright © 2021 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections or concerns, please email corrections@rawstory.com.