white house meeting in december of 2020. flynn along with a crew of trump s lawyers like rudy giuliani and sidney powell, presented an avalanche of baseless claims of election fraud, while the white house lawyers debunked all of them. at that meeting, sydney powell presented trump with a draft executive order that would have directed the military to seize our nation s voting machines. a lot of that plan would have also made sydney powell herself a special counsel, and could have imposed martial law, and require a re-run of the election. obviously, that didn t, and thankfully, in the happening. the mutinous ideas pitched in that oval office meeting did not exist in a vacuum. they were part of a desperate effort by trump s outside legal team to upend the results of the 2020 election. those lawyers would ultimately file and lose more than 60 lawsuits, pushing bogus instances of election fraud. so, it makes sense that the wall street journal today is reporting that special counse
hayes tonight on this special two hour edition of all in. it was an hour-long shouting match in the oval office which nearly ended in a fistfight. there was almost a physical brawl between a top white house aide and former trump national security adviser michael flynn. i am referring of course to that now infamous a white house meeting in december 2020. flynn, along with a crew of trump s lawyers like rudy giuliani presented an avalanche of baseless claims of election fraud while the white house lawyers debunked all of them. at that meeting, sydney powell presented trump with the draft executive order that would have directed the military to seize our nation s voting machines. part of that plan we have also been by sydney carroll herself, a special counsel and could have impose martial law and required everyone run of the election. obviously that didn t thankfully end up happening. they mutinous ideas pitched in the oval office meeting a date not exist in they are part of a
principles of constitutional liberty. a color blind constitution on one hand, and a quote, dominant race on the. other two diametrically opposed concepts on the same page. so this contradiction was actually laid bare in a new piece, coauthored by ibram x. kendi, author of how to raise an anti-racist. and founder of boston university center for anti racist research. dr. ibram x. kendi writes quote, the color blind offense either color or superior, as harlan did. the peoples production costs in the constitution quebecers figured by legal fantasy yet again, to protect racial inequity. history repeats sometimes without rhyming. race neutral is the new separate but equal. then, the fantasy was that separate facilities for education appointed to the race this were equal and that actions to desegregates them were unnecessary if not harmful. today the fantasy is that regular college admission objects are race neutral in
is color blind and neither tolerates glasses among citizens. and in part for that reason, the court find affirmative action in violation of the 14th amendment equal protection. 14t amendment equal protection but that roberts majority opinion happened to skip this part of harlan s 1896 dissent right before the color-blind constitution. harlan, writes quote, the white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. and so it is in prestige and achievements and education and wealth and in power. so i doubt not that it will continue to be for all-time if it remains true to its great heritage and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty. a color blind constitution on one hand, and a quote, dominant race on the other two diametrically opposed concepts on the same page. so this contradiction was actually laid bare in a new piece, coauthored by ibram x. kendi, author of how to raise an anti-racist. and founder of boston