"You? Or the word?”
“Our little band of lawyers is working on a memorandum that explains exactly what you can do,” Mr. Olson wrote in his memo, obtained by The New York Times. “The media will call this martial law,” he wrote, adding that “that is ‘fake news.’”— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) July 16, 2022
According to the memo, Trump and Olson spoke on Christmas Day, seven days after the infamous Flynn/Powell Oval Office meeting. Olson wrote that Trump directed him to reach out to Jeff Rosen, the acting AG. https://t.co/OXQXsbm4Hv— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) July 16, 2022
“In our long conversation earlier this week, I could hear the shameful and dismissive attitude of the lawyer from White House Counsel’s Office toward you personally — but more importantly toward the Office of the President of the United States itself. This is unacceptable."— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) July 16, 2022
That case had been decided 17 days earlier. There was nothing to “replicate.” Stare decisis applying, presumably, at least to this Court’s rulings.
For those confused: William Olson is a different lawyer than Kurt Olsen. William Olson did try to get Trump to hire Kurt Olsen, who is already a known figure in the J6 committee investigation. Olson wanted Trump to have DOJ replicate the Texas v PA suit https://t.co/C0dtUP5crP— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) July 16, 2022
It is still possible that in response to this lawsuit that the U.S.Supreme Court will come to its senses and issue an Order that would disqualify the designation of electors selected by processes not authorized by state legislatures indeed, often in defiance of state law. I believe we have a duty to try every judicial mechanism available to obtain relief. However, even if it results in another loss in the Supreme Court, this suit would serve an important function in exposing to the diminishing number of Americans who still have faith in government, the true depth of corruption.
If the Acting Attorney General were to refuse to file suit, and you were required to replace the AG to get it filed, it would create what the press would call a constitutional crisis, yet we are already in such s crisis brought on by corruption at the highest levels of government. We have suffered massive election fraud, and state and Federal courts avert their eyes. Election crimes have occurred, and the FBI and the Department of Justice see nothing. We have had a near collapse of the institutions of our government. Constitutionally, the President truly is the chief law enforcement of the United States not the Attorney General whose position is not mentioned in the Constitution.
If the Supreme Court were then to refuse to act on this case, the deep corruption of that institution again would be laid bare for all to see confirming what the People learned when the Texas case was dismissed. Thus, filing the case is a win-win with the overwhelming number of Americans who just voted for you. As you said, all you have is the People and the votes.With a nice dollop of “whoever is not with us is against us” for good measure. If you presented this in a thriller, this is the point in the plot where it’s clear there is a conspiracy to commit sedition afoot. I honestly don’t know what else you could call it.*
He’s not wrong.
I was talking recently with a friend abt the growing disconnect btw the social deference, respect, compensation we given certain professions vs how much those professions police accountability in their ranks: lawyers, cops, doctors, etc. Again and again in this ... https://t.co/sIPFsPKkaC— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) July 16, 2022
Nor is he. This is a problem.
Can someone name one tactic used by the legal end of the January 6 insurrection that wasn't present in one way or another during the Republican recount campaign in Florida in 2000?#RememberingIsPower— Charles P. Pierce (@CharlesPPierce) July 16, 2022
So is this.
When will people wake up to the fact that our former NC Chief Justice, while dean of an accredited law school (Regent) was advising the president on how to overthrow an election? pic.twitter.com/LR8BDElgib— Eric Muller (@elmunc) July 16, 2022
For these reasons, the constitutional authority of the President of the United States to ensure that constitutional order is maintained, particularly when the federal judiciary has abdicated its role to decide controversies. At such time the President, armed with all of the executive power vested in the office of the presidency, has a duty to act decisively to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution from threats, whether they be domestic, foreign, or both.Still not a good idea.