accountable. new york times with this, quote within hours of a jury finding mr. trump guilty last week, the anger conyield into demands for action. since then, the prominent gop leaders have demanded they use every instrument of power again democrats, included targeted investigations and prosecutors. here step miller puts it is every house committee controlled by republicans? in every way, it needs to right now with every republican d.a. to start is every donor off the sidelines and in the game, the rich guys, the wealthy guys? everything facet of republican party politics and power has to be used right-to-now to go toe to toe with marxism and beat these why do you have to talk to jesse waters that way? maybe he knows. i don t know. echoes miller s tirade, trump s comrades in arms in the january 6th bannon said in a text message to the times on tuesday that now is the moment for obscure republican prosecutors around the country to make a name for themselves by pro
mike at johnson, speaker of the house couldn t have found two more wingnuts to degrade the intelligence committee as part of the institution for ronnie jackson and scott perry. it s a stunning decision by the speaker, and i think really shows speaker johnson s true colors. he is pandering to the right that makes kevin mccarthy look mod rattle. it s going to make cooperation between counter-intelligence operations and the intelligence services and the congress much more complicated. it s a very bad decision. scott perry seemed to think he was a criminal. let me show you about a
nondisclosure about the gifts or reasons why recusals should or should not have happened, and then flotillas funded by the billionaires who put these justices on the court, and an appalling following of the front group, even if it means propping the decision up with false fact finding. it s a big problem that the court doesn t seem to recognize beyond a sad, emotional reaction to one of its worst decisions. senators, let s unpack some of those items while we have you here. if you rewind the clock, this is something that jack smith asked them to hear, on a schedule that
what is true. is it nothing that preor deign in nothing is permanent. when you hear justice sotomayor going back to her office and crying, you can put it together for the dire warning, about the stench, her worry that the body would never recover from the stench of politics. that wasn t about being pro-life. that was about the manufacturing a decision and a strategic i like senator whitehouse s theory, maybe they had this pent-up wage, when i m in power, i ll do x, y and z. they can reject all of this and vote the way republicans did for 60 years, of course on this issue, and this issue alone is that where the coalition?
would have allowed a trial before judge chutkan, so the american people could see the facts adjudicated ahead of the election. they rejected that. at donald trump s request, they agreed to hear their a. what are you girding for in that issue? i think the worst circumstances would be that the two conflicted justice actually tip the decisions if there s just a dissent of two, it s probably less significant, but if for any reason they are the balance point and they tip the decision a particular direction, given the very obvious conflicts of interests that they have, then i think it becomes really, really dark. the court missed a huge