No, you are correct. I misread the source I pulled it from.
TLDW, so if she answered it in the video forgive me, but.... Are you sure it was $120k per year? According to the Snopes article..... Since the organization’s inception in 2013, the Foundation said Cullors received compensation totaling $120,000 for work that included serving as spokesperson and engaging in political education. Since 2019, Cullors’ role with the Foundation has been voluntary and unpaid.
If you ever get dental work done, pray you don't get dry socket. This is the worst pain I have ever had.
Going away for a bit. Have a root canal and some other dental work being done Monday. I'll be nicely drugged for a few days.
Well, the 2nd covid shot knocked my dick in the dirt. I want to say it was almost as bad as having covid itself. Anyway, I am doing better but I still feel wiped out.
Wish me luck, first covid shot this Monday, unless it is the J&J one which is only one shot. I'm hoping it doesn't make me too ill since I had covid months ago.
It was theater, they never had enough votes. At least it's over and they can focus on covid.
And there we are. The most bipartisan vote to convict a president by a factor of 7 proves insufficient. I think this guarantees there will be a next time in the near future. At least there’s a congressional record now of what happened.
Let's say they actually get the votes, I still think it's a waste of time. They bar him from being elected again, but nothing can stop him from naming an 'heir'. If you think about it, that is even worse than him running again. If he runs, he will still unite every liberal leaning person and most fence sitters against him. If he designates a person for his supporters to align behind, they will get the almost half of voters that voted for him AND a lot of the middle who might be sick of Biden/Dems by 2024. A victory here is, at best, a moral one. It won't stop a future President of Trump's nature from trying the same thing because that is the way a person like him acts. It does nothing but provide a feel good moment while wasting more of my tax money.
But that’s the thing....they don’t have to prove his thoughts, nor his intent, only the results....because this isn’t a criminal trial and there are very different standards, they only have to show he didn’t preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, violating his oath and duty, because the only possible sentence is for him to be bared from office. His lack of action during the attack alone far exceeded that bar. It’s becoming more likely (but still unlikely) they could get the votes because he’s barely putting up a defense. To me it seemed like a mockery of the senate, like they were just proving the point that his defense could be someone standing at the podium shouting “Bababoui, Bababoui, Howard Stern’s penis!” and still he would not be convicted...and I think that’s pissing off some Republican senators....but there are also many who are reading books and unrelated documents among other distractions and clearly not paying attention at all, proving the defense correct, they could say anything and still get him off without presenting any defense. A sad state. On the contrary, the prosecution’s case is straight forward with video evidence and records of what Trump tweeted and did (or didn’t do like not calling in the national guard) during the attack on top of the horrific personal experiences of the same senators hearing the case....hard to forget a lynch mob looking for you and your family to hang less than a month ago. Remember, there is no possible prison term here, no fine, nothing but baring him from office, that’s it. There should be a criminal trial for treason IMO, but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk. I think the standard isn’t what he meant, it’s what a reasonable person would think he meant. That’s not prosecuting thought crime, it’s prosecuting speech and actions that it’s plainly foreseeable will incite real crimes. I barely remember the inauguration riots, the million pussy hat march made more news....Trump’s “biggest crowd ever” nonsense got more airtime, and damages and injuries were fairly minimal so, especially when faced with the fresh scars from 2020, they’re easy to forget. That said, I don’t disagree....by 2022 new scandals and a desire to forget will erase this from many people’s memories.
I haven't watched the hearings. To me it's still a case of bread and circuses. They can't convict, so all of this is just an attempt to burn these images into a voting publics mind that forgets events longer than 6 months ago. This won't even be remembered by the average person by the next votes in 2022. Just like most people don't recall the riots that were sort of incited by liberals in 2017 prior to and during the inauguration. Admittedly, they didn't storm congress, but they did break into buildings, burn cars, and injure people. Did Trump probably intend for violence? Probably, but proving his thoughts are going to take a lot more than words he used. Thankfully we haven't started putting people away for thoughtcrimes yet or I would be fucked.
Watching the opening statements today, it seems there are far more than one example of former officials being tried for impeachment after leaving office, including one tried by the founding fathers themselves with unanimous consent, solidifying the notion that their intent was to allow trying former officials constitutionally even though they could not remove them since they were already out of office, but they could bar them from holding any office in the future. When the people who wrote the constitution interpret it that way, I think that’s game over. No one knows their intent better than they did, and their actions of trying a senator, one who had already been removed from office, in an impeachment trial is unambiguous, more so when you read what they wrote about it. We shall see if today’s senate cares more about constitutional obligations or blind loyalty to an individual. It’s a forgone conclusion that they won’t convict out of blind loyalty, but exposing the criminality they’re going to excuse still serves a purpose. Edit: one purpose it serves is setting precedent....if this president can attempt to stop the peaceful (or not peaceful) transfer of power to the president elect by instructing a rabid armed violence prone crowd to “stop the steal” “you can’t let them certify Biden or your country is lost” “fight hard” “I’ll be there with you” without a single repercussion, so can the next one....and now the perpetrators know many of the weak points thanks to this disorganized coup attempt. Republicans should be terrified of that, enough to send a message by convicting. If they don’t, they invite every president that loses an election to attempt a January coup, precedent will protect them, so they would be obligated to try.
Not yet a member? No problem!Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?Recover it now.
Check your email for a verification code and enter it below.Don't close this box or you must fill out this form again.
Already signed up?Log in now.
Remember your password?Log in now.