User Controls
THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty's
-
2021-07-15 at 4:41 AM UTC
-
2021-07-15 at 4:46 AM UTCMILLEY...
A
GREAT
AMERICAN!
The Washington Post
Joint Chiefs chairman feared potential ‘Reichstag moment’ aimed at keeping Trump in power
Reis Thebault
In the waning weeks of Donald Trump’s term, the country’s top military leader repeatedly worried about what the president might do to maintain power after losing reelection, comparing his rhetoric to Adolf Hitler’s during the rise of Nazi Germany and asking confidants whether a coup was forthcoming, according to a new book by two Washington Post reporters.
As Trump ceaselessly pushed false claims about the 2020 presidential election, Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, grew more and more nervous, telling aides he feared that the president and his acolytes might attempt to use the military to stay in office, Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker report in “I Alone Can Fix It: Donald J. Trump’s Catastrophic Final Year.”
Milley described “a stomach-churning” feeling as he listened to Trump’s untrue complaints of election fraud, drawing a comparison to the 1933 attack on Germany’s parliament building that Hitler used as a pretext to establish a Nazi dictatorship.
“This is a Reichstag moment,” Milley told aides, according to the book. “The gospel of the Führer.”
A spokesman for Milley declined to comment.
Portions of the book related to Milley — first reported Wednesday night by CNN ahead of the book’s July 20 release — offer a remarkable window into the thinking of America’s highest-ranking military officer, who saw himself as one of the last empowered defenders of democracy during some of the darkest days in the country’s recent history.
The episodes in the book are based on interviews with more than 140 people, including senior Trump administration officials, friends and advisers, Leonnig and Rucker write in an author’s note. Most agreed to speak candidly only on the condition of anonymity, and the scenes reported were reconstructed based on firsthand accounts and multiple other sources whenever possible.
Milley — who was widely criticized last year for appearing alongside Trump in Lafayette Square after protesters were forcibly cleared from the area — had pledged to use his office to ensure a free and fair election with no military involvement. But he became increasingly concerned in the days following the November contest, making multiple references to the onset of 20th-century fascism.
After attending a Nov. 10 security briefing about the “Million MAGA March,” a pro-Trump rally protesting the election, Milley said he feared an American equivalent of “brownshirts in the streets,” alluding to the paramilitary forces that protected Nazi rallies and enabled Hitler’s ascent.
Late that same evening, according to the book, an old friend called Milley to express concerns that those close to Trump were attempting to “overturn the government.”
“You are one of the few guys who are standing between us and some really bad stuff,” the friend told Milley, according to an account relayed to his aides. Milley was shaken, Leonnig and Rucker write, and he called former national security adviser H.R. McMaster to ask whether a coup was actually imminent.
“What the f--- am I dealing with?” Milley asked him.
The conversations put Milley on edge, and he began informally planning with other military leaders, strategizing how they would block Trump’s order to use the military in a way they deemed dangerous or illegal.
If someone wanted to seize control, Milley thought, they would need to gain sway over the FBI, the CIA and the Defense Department, where Trump had already installed staunch allies. “They may try, but they’re not going to f---ing succeed,” he told some of his closest deputies, the book says.
In the weeks that followed, Milley played reassuring soothsayer to a string of concerned members of Congress and administration officials who shared his worries about Trump attempting to use the military to stay in office.
“Everything’s going to be okay,” he told them, according to the book. “We’re going to have a peaceful transfer of power. We’re going to land this plane safely. This is America. It’s strong. The institutions are bending, but it won’t break.”
In December, with rumors circulating that the president was preparing to fire then-CIA Director Gina Haspel and replace her with Trump loyalist Kash Patel, Milley sought to intervene, the book says. He confronted White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows at the annual Army-Navy football game, which Trump and other high-profile guests attended.
“What the hell is going on here?” Milley asked Meadows, according to the book’s account. “What are you guys doing?”
When Meadows responded, “Don’t worry about it,” Milley shot him a warning: “Just be careful.”
After the failed insurrection on Jan. 6, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) called Milley to ask for his guarantee that Trump would not be able to launch a nuclear strike and start a war.
“This guy’s crazy,” Pelosi said of Trump in what the book reported was mostly a one-way phone call. “He’s dangerous. He’s a maniac.”
Once again, Milley sought to reassure: “Ma’am, I guarantee you that we have checks and balances in the system,” he told Pelosi.
Less than a week later, as military and law enforcement leaders planned for President Biden’s inauguration, Milley said he was determined to avoid a repeat of the siege on the Capitol.
“Everyone in this room, whether you’re a cop, whether you’re a soldier, we’re going to stop these guys to make sure we have a peaceful transfer of power,” he told them. “We’re going to put a ring of steel around this city and the Nazis aren’t getting in.”
At Biden’s swearing-in on Jan. 20, Milley was seated behind former president Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama, who asked the general how he was feeling.
“No one has a bigger smile today than I do,” Milley replied. “You can’t see it under my mask, but I do.” -
2021-07-15 at 12:06 PM UTC
-
2021-07-15 at 1:13 PM UTC
-
2021-07-15 at 1:37 PM UTC
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-07-15 at 1:45 PM UTCJan. 6 rioters face years in jail for ransacking Capitol. Harsher penalties loom for more violent defendants
Bart Jansen, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON – Paul Hodgkins, a 38-year-old Tampa man, dodged the violence that surrounded him during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot before spending 15 minutes in the Senate chamber, meandering the room with a Trump flag and snapping selfies.
Now Hodgkins could land in prison for more than a year, after becoming one of the first four defendants to plead guilty to felonies in the attack. Sentencing guidelines in three other felony agreements call for terms of at least three to five years. Another eight people have pled guilty to a misdemeanor that could lock them up for six months.
Prosecutions of the hundreds charged in the riot are just getting started, offering Americans an initial look at just how severe the punishments will be for those who stormed the Capitol more than six months ago. The first dozen plea bargains reveal defendants could spend years behind bars for ransacking the historic building – and legal experts say harsher penalties loom for those who assaulted police and destroyed property.
The agreements also illustrate federal prosecutors are playing hardball, using the threat of harsh sentences and requirements for cooperating to convict others, according to legal experts.
“The federal system has notoriously long sentences – the guidelines are famously draconian,” said Erin Murphy, a law professor at New York University, who called the sentencing guidelines “run of the mill” for joining a mob to contest the election and break into a federal building.
Sentences could be reduced by defendants who cooperate with prosecutors, as required by the agreements with the three members of Oath Keepers, a far-right paramilitary group. Also, judges in the District of Columbia tend to issue sentences shorter than the guidelines more than one-third of the time.
But initial plea agreements didn't cover the most serious crimes on Jan. 6 and aimed for cooperation to convict organizers or more violent rioters. Longer sentences would be expected for those convicted of assaulting police and destroying property, according to legal experts.
“I would certainly expect that judges would be very concerned about assaults on law enforcement," said Ian Weinstein, a law professor at Fordham University who has practiced federal law for decades. “I would think that an assault on a police officer is something in my experience that judges take very seriously when sentencing people."
About 140 police officers were injured during the melee that temporarily halted Congress counting Electoral College votes. The disruption led to charges of obstruction of an official proceeding, which carries a 20-year maximum sentence. Dozens of conspiracy charges were based on planning for the attack through encrypted messages, military-style training and wearing helmets and reinforced vests.
At least 535 people were charged in the first six months after the attack, with 165 accused of assaulting, resisting or impeding officers, according to the Justice Department. More than 50 people are charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon, or causing serious bodily injury to an officer, the department said.
Felonies carry multi-year sentences
The felony plea agreements came in cases that described defendants planning for the attack through encrypted software, transporting firearms to the D.C. area, joining the mob that broke into the Capitol and standing inside the Senate chamber. Some of the defendants barged their way past police to enter the building. But the average time that each of the four defendants spent inside the Capitol ranged from four to 20 minutes.
Plea agreements so far include:
Graydon Young, 54, of Englewood, Florida, pled guilty June 23 to conspiracy and obstruction of Congress. Sentencing guidelines call for 63 months to 78 months in prison and a fine of at least $25,000. Young, who wore a reinforced vest and helmet while carrying a radio, entered the Capitol in a military "stack" formation. He was part of a group pushing “against a line of riot police officers guarding the hallway connecting the Rotunda to the Senate,” according to the agreement. He was in the Capitol for 20 minutes.
Mark Grods, 54, of Mobile, Alabama, pled guilty June 30 to conspiracy and obstruction of Congress. Sentencing guidelines call for 51 to 63 months in prison and a fine of at least $20,000. Grods, who acknowledged coordinating with other Oath Keepers, brought a shotgun, semi-automatic handgun and ammunition for a co-conspirator to store at a Virginia hotel. Grods was charged with storming past police barricades in a "stack" formation. Grods was in the Capitol about four minutes, before police deployed chemical irritants. He had participated in planning meetings on encrypted apps such as Signal and Zello in the days before Jan. 6 and later deleted messages.
Jon Schaffer, 53, of Columbus, Indiana, pled guilty April 13 to obstruction of an official proceeding and entering and remaining in a restricted building with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Sentencing guidelines call for 41 to 51 months in prison and a fine of at least $15,000. Schaffer, a founding, lifetime member of Oath Keepers, was part of a mob that broke open Capitol doors guarded by four police officers wearing riot gear. He left the building after about nine minutes.
Hodgkins pled guilty June 2 to obstruction of an official proceeding after being indicted on five charges. Sentencing is set for Monday, with guidelines calling for 15 to 21 months in prison and a fine of at least $4,000. Hodgkins told investigators that while walking through the Capitol, he saw other people breaking windows, engaged in a knife fight, and others who were injured, but he didn't participate in that conduct, according to charging documents.
“Almost always, federal charges carry very significant potential sentences of incarceration,” Weinstein said.
Judges could take into consideration “relevant conduct” at sentencing, such as Young, Grods and Schaffer being members of Oath Keepers, a group whose members are recruited from former members of the military and law enforcement.
“Of course, the purposes of punishment are not just to punish the actor for what they did, but also to send a strong deterrent message to others who might consider such actions in the future,” Murphy said.
Cooperation yields shorter sentences
Some defendants, such as Jake Angeli, who wore horns and face paint on Jan. 6, have already spent months behind bars awaiting trial. But sentences could be shorter than the guidelines suggest, if defendants cooperate with prosecutors to convict others.
At least 16 Oath Keepers are charged in the attack. Three Oath Keepers who pled guilty so far – Grods, Schaffer and Young – each agreed to turn over any evidence of crimes they are aware of, to testify in court and potentially to participate in covert law enforcement. Judges will weigh that cooperation when deciding prison terms.
“If these are guideline calculations in cooperation cases, then the guideline range has less meaning than it would in other contexts,” Weinstein said.
Judges could also simply impose shorter terms. Federal judges imposed sentences shorter than guidelines in 24.5% of cases nationwide, according to a 2020 report by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. In the District of Columbia, federal judges imposed shorter sentences 38.9% of the time, according to the commission.
“At least one could infer that judges see the guidelines as relatively harsh because they often give sentences below the guideline range,” Weinstein said. “The actual sentence imposed will turn very much on the individual defendant’s conduct and characteristics, and the vigor of the prosecutor’s advocacy at the time of sentencing.”
Defendants also each agreed to restitution, to help pay for $1.5 million damage to the Capitol. Young, Grods and Hodgkins each agreed to pay $2,000 restitution, and Schaffer's hasn't been set.
Even misdemeanors can mean jail time
The misdemeanor “parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building” has become a catchall charge for minor cases in the riot. Eight defendants pled guilty to this single charge, while numerous other charges, including felonies, were stripped away. The misdemeanor carries a maximum sentence of six months in jail and a $5,000 fine.
Six misdemeanor defendants await sentencing. Most spent just a few minutes inside the building to take pictures or video without attacking anyone or destroying anything.
Bryan Wayne Ivey, 28, of Crossville, Tennessee, watched another rioter break through a window using a riot shield and then he entered the building through the window.
Robert Maurice Reeder, 55, of Harford County, Maryland, recorded an assault against an officer. “I got gassed several times inside the Capitol, many times outside the Capitol," Reeder said in one video. "We had to do…ah…battle with Police inside. It was crazy…absolutely insane.”
Two defendants have been sentenced for misdemeanors, reflecting the most and least they could have received.
Michael Thomas Curzio, who was arrested in Summerfield, Florida, was sentenced Monday to the full six months after being detained that long awaiting trial. He had previously served an eight-year sentence ending in 2019 for attempted murder.
Anna Morgan-Lloyd, 49, of Bloomfield, Indiana, was sentenced to three years of probation and $500 for restitution. She had been jailed for two days between her arrest and initial court appearance.
The sentences capped a saga for those who described an exhilarating day of protest, but one that ended with federal convictions and penalties. Morgan-Floyd had called Jan. 6 "the most exciting day of my life," which included about five minutes inside the Capitol, but she said at sentencing she was ashamed of the violence unleashed.
“Some of my defendants in some of these other cases think there’s no consequence to this, and there is a consequence,” District Judge Royce Lamberth said at her sentencing. -
2021-07-15 at 1:55 PM UTCHOW DOES IT FEEL TO BE PUTIN"S PUPPET?
Business Insider
Leaked documents appear to confirm a Russian plot to support Trump in 2016, Guardian report says
tporter@businessinsider.com (Tom Porter)
Russian approved a plan to help Trump win the 2016 election, The Guardian reported Thursday.
It cited papers said to be leaked from the Kremlin, which experts said appear genuine.
They lay out the chaos officials expected to follow a Trump win, weakening Russia's greatest rival.
Documents purporting to record a top-level Kremlin meeting show that Russian President Vladimir Putin approved an operation to help Donald Trump win the presidency in 2016, The Guardian reported.
The documents are said to be from a Kremlin meeting on January 22, 2016, a time when Trump was defeating challengers and whipping up outrage on his path to be named Republican Party presidential candidate.
The Guardian said it took steps to verify the documents. Experts told the outlet they appeared genuine, and its contents appear to correlate with other verifiable events.
Per the documents, Putin and top military and security officials were at the meeting. Public accounts describe the meeting as concerning events in Moldova, but the Guardian says its real subject was the US.
According to the documents, Putin approved an audacious plan by top officials to use "all possible force" to tip the balance of the election towards a Trump victory.
The documents contain a psychological profile of Trump, describing him as "impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex."
According to the papers, Russian officials believed that a Trump victory would cause internal turmoil in the US and weaken the US on the world stage.
It outlines US vulnerabilities including "deepening political gulf between left and right", as well as growing anti-establishment feeling under the Obama administration.
"It is acutely necessary to use all possible force to facilitate his [Trump's] election to the post of US president," the paper says.
According to the publication western intelligence agencies are aware of the documents.
The plan was said to have been drawn up in response to sanctions imposed by the Obama administration, punishment for Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimea peninsula in 2014. Russia is said to have justified the election-meddling plan on national security grounds.
Multiple US intelligence agencies and congressional reports have concluded that Russia embarked on an ambitious campaign to help Trump win in 2016, leaking hacked DNC documents and spreading disinformation on social media.
Trump during his time in office repeatedly sought to downplay the Russian interference campaign.
The 2019 report by Robert Mueller did not find sufficient evidence to charge the Trump campaign with conspiring with Russia in 2016, though it did find multiple occasions where Trump officials welcomed Russian help.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov in remarks to the Guardian described the report as "pulp fiction." Putin has for years denied that Russia interferes in US elections. -
2021-07-15 at 1:55 PM UTC^ tl/dr
-
2021-07-15 at 2:09 PM UTCI GOT YOUR CONSPIRACY THEORY RIGHT HERE AND GUESS WHAT...
YOU'RE THE JOKE!
Mediaite
Putin Plotted to Put ‘Mentally Unstable’ Trump in White House According to Report on Leaked Kremlin Papers
Colby Hall
Here we go again?
Leaked documents from the Kremlin obtained by The Guardian reportedly reveal a plot to put Donald Trump in the White House approved by Russian President Vladimir Putin in January of 2016. The Kremlin has dismissed this report as “great fiction.”
Former President Trump was the focus of a Department of Justice investigation led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which did not lead to any charges against the 45th president, but did uncover Russian intel operations designed to destabilize the American electorate and help elect Trump to the highest office.
The Guardian opens with a stunning lede: “Vladimir Putin personally authorised a secret spy agency operation to support a “mentally unstable” Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election during a closed session of Russia’s national security council, according to what are assessed to be leaked Kremlin documents.”
The report features screenshots of the documents in question, which they reportedly have shown to independent experts who claim “they appear to be genuine. Incidental details come across as accurate. The overall tone and thrust is said to be consistent with Kremlin security thinking.”
The key meeting took place on 22 January 2016, the papers suggest, with the Russian president, his spy chiefs and senior ministers all present.
They agreed a Trump White House would help secure Moscow’s strategic objectives, among them “social turmoil” in the US and a weakening of the American president’s negotiating position.
Russia’s three spy agencies were ordered to find practical ways to support Trump, in a decree appearing to bear Putin’s signature.
By this point Trump was the frontrunner in the Republican party’s nomination race. A report prepared by Putin’s expert department recommended Moscow use “all possible force” to ensure a Trump victory.
Western intelligence agencies are understood to have been aware of the documents for some months and to have carefully examined them. The papers, seen by the Guardian, seem to represent a serious and highly unusual leak from within the Kremlin.
Charges of “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia have been largely derided by Trump and his media surrogates. However, the Senate Intel Committee report on the matter did find ample evidence of senior campaign officials communicating with what is now known to be Russian operatives. That report came from a Senate that featured a Republican majority, and the committee was charged by Senator Richard Burr (R -NC) and opened with the following conclusions:
The Committee found that the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multi-faceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Parts of this effort are outlined in the Committee’s earlier volumes on election security, social media, the Obama Administration’s response to the threat, and the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA).
The fifth and final volume focuses on the counterintelligence threat, outlining a wide range of Russian efforts to influence the Trump Campaign and the 2016 election. In this volume the Committee lays out its findings in detail by looking at many aspects of the counterintelligence threat posed by the Russian influence operation. For example, the Committee examined Paul Manafort’s connections to Russian influence actors and the FBI’s treatment of reporting produced by Christopher Steele. While the Committee does not describe the final result as a complete picture, this volume provides the most comprehensive description to date of Russia’s activities and the threat they posed. This volume presents this information in topical sections in order to address coherently and in detail the wide variety of Russian actions. The events explained in these sections in many cases overlap, and references in each section will direct the reader to those overlapping parts of the volume. Immediately below is a summary of key findings from several sections.
When reached for comment by The Guardian, Putin’s spokesman Dmitri Peskov said the idea that Russian leaders had met and agreed to support Trump was “a great pulp fiction” when contacted Thursday morning.
Documents “leaked” from the Kremlin should always be met with healthy circumspection, as Russian disinformation campaigns designed to roil foreign countries are well documented. The Guardian is a reputable news outlet that its critics see as having a left-of-center agenda. How this story is reported — more “Russia, Russia, Russia!” or “I told you so!” — will likely speak volumes about other news outlets. -
2021-07-15 at 2:11 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ^ tl/dr
DID YOU NOTICE THIS PART?
Originally posted by stl1 The documents contain a psychological profile of Trump, describing him as "impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex."
According to the papers, Russian officials believed that a Trump victory would cause internal turmoil in the US and weaken the US on the world stage. -
2021-07-15 at 2:13 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2021-07-15 at 2:15 PM UTCGonna have to start calling aldra "Pinnochio".
-
2021-07-15 at 2:29 PM UTC
-
2021-07-15 at 2:30 PM UTCThe most surprising revelation from Leonnig and Rucker, who cite friends, lawmakers and colleagues of Milley, was that the Joint Chiefs discussed a plan to resign, one-by-one, rather than carry out orders from Trump that they considered to be illegal, dangerous or ill-advised.
MILLEY
A
GREAT
AMERICAN
New Trump revelations underscore his undimmed danger
Analysis by Stephen Collinson, CNN
The most chilling implication from new reports that America's top military officer feared Donald Trump would try to order the armed forces to stage a coup is not how close the nation came to a post-election disaster last year.
It's the extreme danger that the US system of government, Constitution and cherished freedoms would face if an ex-President even now trying to revive his demagogic political career ever gets anywhere near the Oval Office again.
In the latest staggering glimpse into Trump's crazed, final days in office from a flurry of new books, it emerged Wednesday that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley was so shaken by Trump's refusal to concede defeat that he feared he might attempt a coup or other illegal gambit to stay in power.
Milley saw himself and the armed forces as a bulwark against any presidential mutiny against the Constitution and the nearly two-and-a-half centuries of democratic transfers of power.
"They may try, but they're not going to f**king succeed," Milley told his deputies, according to excerpts of the book "I Alone Can Fix It" by Washington Post reporters Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker, which was obtained by CNN ahead of its release next Tuesday.
Milley saw Trump as the "classic authoritarian leader with nothing to lose," the authors wrote, but he told subordinates: "You can't do this without the military. You can't do this without the CIA and the FBI. We're the guys with the guns."
In the end, Trump did not seek to turn the military on the American people or stage the most alarming showdown in living memory between a modern commander-in-chief and top military brass. But that seasoned military officers thought it was a real possibility and hatched a plan for rolling resignations to thwart Trump's autocratic impulses underscores the ex-President's extraordinary instability. Their preparations raised the specter that the uniformed military was ready to act to protect democracy and the rule of law from a civilian commander-in-chief in a reversal of normal Constitutional order -- furthering an impression repeatedly left by Trump himself that he was unfit to ever be President.
There can be little doubt that if he is ever again in a position of supreme power, the twice-impeached former President would be similarly erratic and lawless as he was in office. His behavior since returning to private life proves it.
New details of his past malfeasance come as Trump and his supporters actively seek to whitewash the truth of the insurrection that he incited against the US Capitol as Congress was certifying President Joe Biden's victory on January 6. The former President still has most of the Washington Republican Party -- which acted to excuse his assault on democracy -- in thrall to his personality cult. Millions of his voters believe his lies about non-existent voter fraud spread by propagandistic right-wing media networks.
Trump is, meanwhile, moving to tighten his grip over national elections by effectively installing acolytes in positions of power in state GOP parties as local Republican legislators pass laws making it harder for Democrats to vote that also weaken non-partisan control of elections, which could make them easier to steal in the future.
The new account also raises even more questions about senior Republican leaders' attitude toward Trump. Given the close links between Capitol Hill and the top echelons of the military, it is impossible to believe that Milley's testimony in the book will come as a surprise to congressional leaders or that they did not understand his fears in real time. Even if they didn't know, the fact that the GOP is still protecting, elevating and preparing to follow Trump into the 2022 midterm elections suggests even greater complicity with his offenses against democracy.
If the 2024 GOP nominating contest were taking place now, Trump would be the favorite, and he is giving every sign that he may indeed run for the White House again, meaning the idea of a return to power is not out of the question -- even if new evidence of a despotic temperament might harm his chances in a national election.
His grip on the Republican Party was underlined, again, with the news Thursday that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy will meet with the former President in New Jersey.
The inevitable Trump defense
The authors interviewed Trump for more than two hours. But his allies are sure to accuse them and the media of lying about his record, and officers like Milley of grandstanding, polishing their place in history and bearing grudges against the former commander-in-chief.
The detail in the book leaves a strong impression that Milley cooperated with the authors. But it doesn't follow that he is just seeking to burnish his own legend. Such accounts are often a way of making clear exactly what happened -- with a thin veneer of deniability for non-partisan military officers. And the armed forces remain one of the few institutions in American life to retain broad public respect.
Milley will not publicly address the issues raised in the book, a defense official close to him told CNN. But the official didn't dispute that during the last weeks and months of the Trump administration, Milley went to extraordinary lengths to protect the country.
"He's not going to sit in silence while people try to use the military against Americans," the official said.
Furthermore, Trump's behavior as depicted here is familiar from other new accounts of how a defeated President lashed out like a toppling dictator late last year. In those books, which back up contemporary reporting, including by CNN, Trump comes across as delusional, self-pitying, desperate, angry and vindictive, seeking to save his political skin while ignoring the democratic will of voters, all while negligently refusing to deal with the real emergency -- the murderous and worsening coronavirus pandemic that would claim its 400,000th victim before he left office in January.
The books and media accounts are sketching the kind of historical record that Trump's pliant Republican allies on Capitol Hill sought to prevent by killing off a bipartisan plan for an independent commission into the January 6 insurrection.
The new accounts add to a staggering anecdotal, journalistic, legal and political narrative -- augmented by Trump's own public inflammatory remarks and actions -- of the most aberrant and dangerous presidency of modern times and maybe ever.
Still, if there is one reassuring aspect of the latest account, it is that the military was well aware of the potential danger posed by Trump and the compliant political aides he installed in the White House after systematically driving out professional civil servants, diplomats and former military and intelligence officers -- the so-called adults who, early on, tried to contain his wild instincts. And as well as the military, other institutions -- including the courts and even the Justice Department under an Attorney General William Barr, who often did Trump's political bidding -- stood firm against his attempts to steal the election. Their example casts a poor light on the democratically-elected Republican lawmakers who refused to do their duty to hold another branch of government to account and to protect the Constitution.
The plan of the Joint Chiefs
The most surprising revelation from Leonnig and Rucker, who cite friends, lawmakers and colleagues of Milley, was that the Joint Chiefs discussed a plan to resign, one-by-one, rather than carry out orders from Trump that they considered to be illegal, dangerous or ill-advised.
Such a sequence would have precipitated the most serious civil-military crisis and chain-of-command disruption in decades, a fact that underscores how seriously the top brass took the possibility of a revolutionary moment.
Milley was concerned that personnel moves that put Trump acolytes in positions of power at the Pentagon and raised alarm in Washington at the time, including the firing of Defense Secretary Mark Esper, were sinister omens.
"Milley told his staff that he believed Trump was stoking unrest, possibly in hopes of an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act and call out the military," Leonnig and Rucker reported.
Rucker and Leonnig interviewed more than 140 sources for the book, though most were given anonymity to speak candidly. Milley is quoted extensively and comes off in a positive light as someone who tried to keep democracy alive after receiving a warning from an old friend who is not named.
"What they are trying to do here is overturn the government," the friend said, according to the authors. "This is all real, man. You are one of the few guys who are standing between us and some really bad stuff."
Milley apologized after being seen as too close to Trump in June 2020, when, wearing military fatigues, he joined the President in a controversial photo-op after protesters were cleared from the square outside the White House.
But according to the new book, he feared that the President would try to fire FBI Director Christopher Wray and CIA Director Gina Haspel in order to solidify his control over the intelligence services.
Such a scenario was widely feared late last year. Though it did not happen, Trump did have past form in this area, having fired former FBI Director James Comey, before going on television to say he did it because of the Russia investigation.
In retrospect, the period following the election -- one of the most harrowing in the modern history of the United States given Trump's trashing of democracy and the sacking of the US Capitol by his supporters -- was even more terrifying behind the scenes.
But events since have shown that the danger did not pass when Trump left the White House on the morning of January 20. In fact, a new threat is rising given the still vast political influence of a modern American demagogue. -
2021-07-15 at 2:39 PM UTCThe shamelessness of those articles is breath-taking.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2021-07-15 at 2:53 PM UTCThe lack of shame by Donald Trump and the Republican Party that enabled and continues to enable him is unfathomable.
-
2021-07-15 at 2:55 PM UTC
-
2021-07-15 at 3:39 PM UTCAnd you believe Putin?
-
2021-07-15 at 4:21 PM UTC
Originally posted by stl1 The most surprising revelation from Leonnig and Rucker, who cite friends, lawmakers and colleagues of Milley, was that the Joint Chiefs discussed a plan to resign, one-by-one, rather than carry out orders from Trump that they considered to be illegal, dangerous or ill-advised.
MILLEY
A
GREAT
AMERICAN
New Trump revelations underscore his undimmed danger
Analysis by Stephen Collinson, CNN
The most chilling implication from new reports that America's top military officer feared Donald Trump would try to order the armed forces to stage a coup is not how close the nation came to a post-election disaster last year.
It's the extreme danger that the US system of government, Constitution and cherished freedoms would face if an ex-President even now trying to revive his demagogic political career ever gets anywhere near the Oval Office again.
In the latest staggering glimpse into Trump's crazed, final days in office from a flurry of new books, it emerged Wednesday that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley was so shaken by Trump's refusal to concede defeat that he feared he might attempt a coup or other illegal gambit to stay in power.
Milley saw himself and the armed forces as a bulwark against any presidential mutiny against the Constitution and the nearly two-and-a-half centuries of democratic transfers of power.
"They may try, but they're not going to f**king succeed," Milley told his deputies, according to excerpts of the book "I Alone Can Fix It" by Washington Post reporters Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker, which was obtained by CNN ahead of its release next Tuesday.
Milley saw Trump as the "classic authoritarian leader with nothing to lose," the authors wrote, but he told subordinates: "You can't do this without the military. You can't do this without the CIA and the FBI. We're the guys with the guns."
In the end, Trump did not seek to turn the military on the American people or stage the most alarming showdown in living memory between a modern commander-in-chief and top military brass. But that seasoned military officers thought it was a real possibility and hatched a plan for rolling resignations to thwart Trump's autocratic impulses underscores the ex-President's extraordinary instability. Their preparations raised the specter that the uniformed military was ready to act to protect democracy and the rule of law from a civilian commander-in-chief in a reversal of normal Constitutional order – furthering an impression repeatedly left by Trump himself that he was unfit to ever be President.
There can be little doubt that if he is ever again in a position of supreme power, the twice-impeached former President would be similarly erratic and lawless as he was in office. His behavior since returning to private life proves it.
New details of his past malfeasance come as Trump and his supporters actively seek to whitewash the truth of the insurrection that he incited against the US Capitol as Congress was certifying President Joe Biden's victory on January 6. The former President still has most of the Washington Republican Party – which acted to excuse his assault on democracy – in thrall to his personality cult. Millions of his voters believe his lies about non-existent voter fraud spread by propagandistic right-wing media networks.
Trump is, meanwhile, moving to tighten his grip over national elections by effectively installing acolytes in positions of power in state GOP parties as local Republican legislators pass laws making it harder for Democrats to vote that also weaken non-partisan control of elections, which could make them easier to steal in the future.
The new account also raises even more questions about senior Republican leaders' attitude toward Trump. Given the close links between Capitol Hill and the top echelons of the military, it is impossible to believe that Milley's testimony in the book will come as a surprise to congressional leaders or that they did not understand his fears in real time. Even if they didn't know, the fact that the GOP is still protecting, elevating and preparing to follow Trump into the 2022 midterm elections suggests even greater complicity with his offenses against democracy.
If the 2024 GOP nominating contest were taking place now, Trump would be the favorite, and he is giving every sign that he may indeed run for the White House again, meaning the idea of a return to power is not out of the question – even if new evidence of a despotic temperament might harm his chances in a national election.
His grip on the Republican Party was underlined, again, with the news Thursday that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy will meet with the former President in New Jersey.
The inevitable Trump defense
The authors interviewed Trump for more than two hours. But his allies are sure to accuse them and the media of lying about his record, and officers like Milley of grandstanding, polishing their place in history and bearing grudges against the former commander-in-chief.
The detail in the book leaves a strong impression that Milley cooperated with the authors. But it doesn't follow that he is just seeking to burnish his own legend. Such accounts are often a way of making clear exactly what happened – with a thin veneer of deniability for non-partisan military officers. And the armed forces remain one of the few institutions in American life to retain broad public respect.
Milley will not publicly address the issues raised in the book, a defense official close to him told CNN. But the official didn't dispute that during the last weeks and months of the Trump administration, Milley went to extraordinary lengths to protect the country.
"He's not going to sit in silence while people try to use the military against Americans," the official said.
Furthermore, Trump's behavior as depicted here is familiar from other new accounts of how a defeated President lashed out like a toppling dictator late last year. In those books, which back up contemporary reporting, including by CNN, Trump comes across as delusional, self-pitying, desperate, angry and vindictive, seeking to save his political skin while ignoring the democratic will of voters, all while negligently refusing to deal with the real emergency – the murderous and worsening coronavirus pandemic that would claim its 400,000th victim before he left office in January.
The books and media accounts are sketching the kind of historical record that Trump's pliant Republican allies on Capitol Hill sought to prevent by killing off a bipartisan plan for an independent commission into the January 6 insurrection.
The new accounts add to a staggering anecdotal, journalistic, legal and political narrative – augmented by Trump's own public inflammatory remarks and actions – of the most aberrant and dangerous presidency of modern times and maybe ever.
Still, if there is one reassuring aspect of the latest account, it is that the military was well aware of the potential danger posed by Trump and the compliant political aides he installed in the White House after systematically driving out professional civil servants, diplomats and former military and intelligence officers – the so-called adults who, early on, tried to contain his wild instincts. And as well as the military, other institutions – including the courts and even the Justice Department under an Attorney General William Barr, who often did Trump's political bidding – stood firm against his attempts to steal the election. Their example casts a poor light on the democratically-elected Republican lawmakers who refused to do their duty to hold another branch of government to account and to protect the Constitution.
The plan of the Joint Chiefs
The most surprising revelation from Leonnig and Rucker, who cite friends, lawmakers and colleagues of Milley, was that the Joint Chiefs discussed a plan to resign, one-by-one, rather than carry out orders from Trump that they considered to be illegal, dangerous or ill-advised.
Such a sequence would have precipitated the most serious civil-military crisis and chain-of-command disruption in decades, a fact that underscores how seriously the top brass took the possibility of a revolutionary moment.
Milley was concerned that personnel moves that put Trump acolytes in positions of power at the Pentagon and raised alarm in Washington at the time, including the firing of Defense Secretary Mark Esper, were sinister omens.
"Milley told his staff that he believed Trump was stoking unrest, possibly in hopes of an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act and call out the military," Leonnig and Rucker reported.
Rucker and Leonnig interviewed more than 140 sources for the book, though most were given anonymity to speak candidly. Milley is quoted extensively and comes off in a positive light as someone who tried to keep democracy alive after receiving a warning from an old friend who is not named.
"What they are trying to do here is overturn the government," the friend said, according to the authors. "This is all real, man. You are one of the few guys who are standing between us and some really bad stuff."
Milley apologized after being seen as too close to Trump in June 2020, when, wearing military fatigues, he joined the President in a controversial photo-op after protesters were cleared from the square outside the White House.
But according to the new book, he feared that the President would try to fire FBI Director Christopher Wray and CIA Director Gina Haspel in order to solidify his control over the intelligence services.
Such a scenario was widely feared late last year. Though it did not happen, Trump did have past form in this area, having fired former FBI Director James Comey, before going on television to say he did it because of the Russia investigation.
In retrospect, the period following the election – one of the most harrowing in the modern history of the United States given Trump's trashing of democracy and the sacking of the US Capitol by his supporters – was even more terrifying behind the scenes.
But events since have shown that the danger did not pass when Trump left the White House on the morning of January 20. In fact, a new threat is rising given the still vast political influence of a modern American demagogue.
what general gets shaken so easily by an old man.
isnt he the general that reads white fragility to understand white rage better but would not read mein kampf or turners diary to understand white supremacy better. -
2021-07-15 at 4:27 PM UTC
Originally posted by stl1 And you believe Putin?
you and tech are so bad at analysis it's unreal
you take at face value a document that was supposedly leaked from the Kremlin after consistently rejecting everything else they say because this time it aligns with what you want to believe.
the document hasn't been released outside of small excerpts and the western media has deemed it 'likely legitimate' simply because several think tanks have said 'yes this aligns with what we think the Russian government believes'.
and the best defence you can muster for this leap of faith is 'yeah well you must believe Putin then'.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
