The Capitol Takeover

[c_hawkbob]

we haven't even rounded up all the suspects yet

But we took selfies with them, helped wash the mace out of their eyes with water bottles and helped them down the stairs to see them off after the carnage was over. I question how hard we're actually trying to round them up.

[NorthHawk]

The evil side of me wonders if there weren't orders (or at least strong suggestions) from the top to be very lenient with the protesters.
They then became rioters and it got out of hand.
Why would they be lenient? To favor the President, of course. But that's the dark side of me.

[NorthHawk]

People are discussing the motives for Trumps video and change of attitude since the insurrection.
It might be more than his legacy, as things associated with Trump in the marketplace are being avoided and dumped.
I read a headline (but not the story) that said Shopify is delisting anything associated with the Trump brand.
So personal greed may be the factor in his change of attitude. But I think the horse has left the barn.

[RiverDog]

we haven't even rounded up all the suspects yet

But we took selfies with them, helped wash the mace out of their eyes with water bottles and helped them down the stairs to see them off after the carnage was over. I question how hard we're actually trying to round them up.

We also had one of those sympatric cops die in the line of duty, along with over 50 others injured.

Obviously there's a lot of irregularities to sort out.

[I-5]

Perhaps not, but it does show his staff and others around him that he's committed to the proposition of a peaceful transfer.

If anyone thinks he had a change of heart in one day after inciting the violence that killed both citizens and police, then shame on us. From all I've seen, he only reluctantly read the words on a teleprompter. He doesn't mean a single word of it, and can still do a lot of damage, even without social media (his Twitter account has already been restored). Nancy Pelosi is rightfully inquiring with the Joint Chiefs about Trump's access to the nuclear codes. A cornered animal is a very dangerous animal, and this man is the most dangerous man in the world until he is no longer the president. There is no way to downplay the threat. Pence also has the power to take action to begin the process to remove his boss, he knows Trump is mentally unfit, and yet he is choosing to stay quiet..hoping he'll survive politically I'm sure. He might end up with a similar legacy as Ford and Nixon. Their intentions might be good, but there will be consequences....there always are.

[RiverDog]

People are discussing the motives for Trumps video and change of attitude since the insurrection. It might be more than his legacy, as things associated with Trump in the marketplace are being avoided and dumped. I read a headline (but not the story) that said Shopify is delisting anything associated with the Trump brand. So personal greed may be the factor in his change of attitude. But I think the horse has left the barn.

At this point, I really don't care what Trump's motivation was for the things he's said over the past couple of days, whether that be his incendiary statements he made before the riots or his conciliatory remarks he said yesterday. The guy is a lying sack of manure so I don't trust anything he says anyway. What I care about is how those statements affected or may affect those that heard them.

[RiverDog]

Perhaps not, but it does show his staff and others around him that he's committed to the proposition of a peaceful transfer.

If anyone thinks he had a change of heart in one day after inciting the violence that killed both citizens and police, then shame on us. From all I've seen, he only reluctantly read the words on a teleprompter. He doesn't mean a single word of it, and can still do a lot of damage, even without social media (his Twitter account has already been restored). Nancy Pelosi is rightfully inquiring with the Joint Chiefs about Trump's access to the nuclear codes. A cornered animal is a very dangerous animal, and this man is the most dangerous man in the world until he is no longer the president. There is no way to downplay the threat.

Where was it that I said that I thought that Trump had a change of heart? Or are you not responding to me, rather making a general statement?

Twitter has unlocked his account, however, they have issued a pretty frank warning that anymore posts that violates their TOS would result in a permanent suspension. I'm certain that they are watching his account like a hawk.

[I-5]

What I care about is how those statements affected or may affect those that heard them.

I don't think it would affect the mob at all - I already heard a few rioters say that Trump does't speak for them (even though they were supposedly fighting for his right to be president). They will say that he was just forced to say them..and they would be right. Once you have drunk the Kool Aid, how do you go back?

[I-5]

he's committed to the proposition of a peaceful transfer.

I was responding to what you said here. 'Change of heart' was my term, not attributed to you. I did not say that you said that. I am also saying that he is NOT committed to the proposition of a peaceful transfer, despite the words he read off a teleprompter. He's still cooking up trouble.

[RiverDog]

What I care about is how those statements affected or may affect those that heard them.

I don't think it would affect the mob at all - I already heard a few rioters say that Trump does't speak for them (even though they were supposedly fighting for his right to be president). They will say that he was just forced to say them..and they would be right. Once you have drunk the Kool Aid, how do you go back?

If that's the case, then I guess there's no need to worry about his access to Twitter.

As far as what motivates the rioters and others like them, it's pretty hard to argue that Trump doesn't speak for them or have an effect on their behavior yet condemn him for inciting them to riot. You can't have it both ways.

[RiverDog]

he's committed to the proposition of a peaceful transfer.

I was responding to what you said here. 'Change of heart' was my term, not attributed to you. I did not say that you said that. I am also saying that he is NOT committed to the proposition of a peaceful transfer, despite the words he read off a teleprompter. He's still cooking up trouble.

Just because I said that he committed to something doesn't mean that I think that he'll follow through with it. What's important is that his commitment gives his staff and others around him a reason not to carry out something crazy or illegal if it's opposite of what he just said.

[I-5]

Riv, his senior advisor is Stephen Miller, who is more unhinged than he is. I don't think Miller is going to hold Trump's feet to any fire. Ivanka might be his other strongest advisor (who knows where Jared is), so it's likely her that begged him to make the reluctant speech.

And yes, he can make it worse on Twitter. He just can't make it better - the genie has been unleashed, and you can't put that anger back in the bottle even if it's based totally on fabrications by him. This is Jonestown on a massive scale, no ifs and buts about it. I read that the MAGA mob is planning something for Jan 20, but maybe now they'll change their plans. They are not going away, just underground. However, the next violent incitement on Twitter will get him a permanent ban.

[RiverDog]

Riv, his senior advisor is Stephen Miller, who is more unhinged than he is. I don't think Miller is going to hold Trump's feet to any fire. Ivanka might be his other strongest advisor (who knows where Jared is), so it's likely her that begged him to make the reluctant speech.

I'm not necessarily talking about specific individuals like Miller. I'm talking about the staff in general, the people that make the trains run on time.

And yes, he can make it worse on Twitter. He just can't make it better - the genie has been unleashed, and you can't put that anger back in the bottle even if it's based totally on fabrications by him. This is Jonestown on a massive scale, no ifs and buts about it. I read that the MAGA mob is planning something for Jan 20, but maybe now they'll change their plans. They are not going away, just underground. However, the next violent incitement on Twitter will get him a permanent ban.

I agree. I am not expecting that anything he says over Twitter or any other platform is going to make things better. But he's not going to be able to rally his crazies to assemble and cause a disruption like he was prior to the EC vote count. Additionally, the next violent incitement on Twitter will be taken down 30 seconds after he posts it. It won't be seen by very many individuals, and like you said, it will be the last one he ever posts on that platform.

So as I said, they've pretty much pulled Trump's stinger, at least for the next couple of weeks.

On another topic, with the resignation of two cabinet members, it's looking less and less likely that they'll be evoking the 25th. It does, however, appear that impeachment is eminent, of which I fully support. I do wonder about the legal aspect, though.

[I-5]

Regarding the legality of impeachment and the time remaining, my understanding is that it doesn't have to be complete by Jan 20, but it will serve to permanently prohibit him from ever running or holding public office again. That's the significance of either the 25th Amendment or Impeachment route.

Secondly, if the republicans can get a Supreme Court Justice confirmed in record time, I see no problem here.

Regarding keeping the trains running, do you see any semblance of order coming the White House? The train is running without the White House, and has been for some time. Miller is one of the last advisors left, and I'm sure he's in the President's ear as we speak.

At this point, I think the crazies are planning things without his involvement. He already did his part to incite them, they are doing the rest.

[RiverDog]

Regarding the legality of impeachment and the time remaining, my understanding is that it doesn't have to be complete by Jan 20, but it will serve to permanently prohibit him from ever running or holding public office again. That's the significance of either the 25th Amendment or Impeachment route.

Secondly, if the republicans can get a Supreme Court Justice confirmed in record time, I see no problem here.

As far as the 25th goes, there is no provision that would prevent Trump from running again in 2024. That's one of the reasons why I favor impeachment.

They're going to have to move damn fast if they want to get an impeachment and trial completed before Jan. 20th. My guess is that the House could impeach him before the 20th but that the Senate is going to want more time to hold a trial. They're going to need 17 Republican Senators to convict him and they're not going to want to be seen by their constituents as railroading the process no matter how guilty he appears. Remember, we're talking about denying the people of their choice as to who represents them. Even a felony conviction doesn't prevent people from electing a person of their choosing to represent them.

Once Trump leaves office, there's considerable debate as to whether or not a former government officer can be tried in an impeachment trial. It's never happened before so there is no precedent to follow. It would likely end up in SCOTUS.

At this point, I think the crazies are planning things without his involvement. He already did his part to incite them, they are doing the rest.

I don't doubt that, but at least Trump won't be spewing his conspiracy theories and helping them recruit new members, at least not to the same degree that he has. I'm 'hoping' that without Trump to keep pumping them up, that the movement will "die on the vine" so to speak. That's a wish and not a prediction.

[I-5]

That's definitely a wish. It's difficult to put toothpaste back in the tube, so to speak.

You had suggested impeachment before I did - I had said I just didn't see it as possible before Jan 20, but from my recent learning, I don't think it has to be complete by Jan 20 in terms of banning him from holding future office.

[Hawktawk]

I think this last deal may have actually broken the stranglehold Trump has had on this party. Not the riots necessarily but his concession and attacks on them in the speech. I heard an avid supporter today call it the "ultimate betrayal". Hawley screwed himself royally too by being foolish enough to continue his challenge after the riot. Also there's a picture of him in his white shirt and red tie, fist raised as the crowd starts walking towards the capitol. Total sieg heil moment. Simon and Schuster withdrew from a book contract with him last night. These trumpies may well yet wind up pariahs. one can hope

[RiverDog]

That's definitely a wish. It's difficult to put toothpaste back in the tube, so to speak.

You had suggested impeachment before I did, because I had said I just didn't see it as possible before Jan 20, but from my recent learning, I don't think it has to be complete by Jan 20 in terms of banning him from holding future office.

It's debatable:

Legal experts are divided into three camps of opinion, however, on what happens if the president leaves office.

One group says a president can be impeached only while in office. "I tend to believe it is only for current office holders," said Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein, author of "Impeachment: A Citizen's Guide.

According to a second group of scholars, if the House votes to impeach while the president is in office, the Senate can proceed to a trial even after the president has left office.

"Once an impeachment begins in the House, it may continue to a Senate trial. I don't see any constitutional problem with the Senate acting fast or slowly," said Prof. Michael Gerhardt of the University North Carolina at Chapel Hill law school.

And a third view is that the entire process can begin even after the president is out of office.

"The constitutional case for late impeachment has more strengths and fewer flaws than the case against it," wrote Prof. Brian Kalt of the Michigan State University College of Law in a widely cited law review article on the subject.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... e-n1253544

There is the clause that the Senate has the "sole power to try all impeachments", so my take is that they can try him after he leaves office. But who am I. The safest thing would be for the House to pass an article of impeachment before the 20th.

[I-5]

There is the clause that the Senate has the "sole power to try all impeachments", so my take is that they can try him after he leaves office. But who am I. The safest thing would be for the House to pass an article of impeachment before the 20th.

That is exactly what I think will happen. House will pass an article of impeachment by next week (as early as Monday), and Senate will try him after he leaves office (hence, when I said it doesn't have to be finished by Jan 20).

[RiverDog]

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has come out and called for Trump to resign, indicates that she's thinking about leaving the Republican Party:

“I want him to resign,” Ms. Murkowski said in an interview with The Anchorage Daily News. “I want him out. He has caused enough damage.” She went on: “He’s either been golfing or he’s been inside the Oval Office fuming and throwing every single person who has been loyal and faithful to him under the bus, starting with the vice president. He doesn’t want to stay there. He only wants to stay there for the title. He only wants to stay there for his ego. He needs to get out. He needs to do the good thing, but I don’t think he’s capable of doing a good thing.”

“...if the Republican Party has become nothing more than the party of Trump, I sincerely question whether this is the party for me,”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp

That's as harsh of language as I've heard any Republican Senator or Representative direct towards Trump, worse than what Romney has ever said. Her threat to leave the party may shake some things up in the Senate.

[RiverDog]

And in other news, Twitter has permanently suspended Trump's account:

"After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them -- specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter -- we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence," Twitter wrote in a statement.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp

That's perhaps more significant punitive action than anything Congress will be able to muster.

[c_hawkbob]

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has come out and called for Trump to resign, indicates that she's thinking about leaving the Republican Party:

“I want him to resign,” Ms. Murkowski said in an interview with The Anchorage Daily News. “I want him out. He has caused enough damage.” She went on: “He’s either been golfing or he’s been inside the Oval Office fuming and throwing every single person who has been loyal and faithful to him under the bus, starting with the vice president. He doesn’t want to stay there. He only wants to stay there for the title. He only wants to stay there for his ego. He needs to get out. He needs to do the good thing, but I don’t think he’s capable of doing a good thing.”

“...if the Republican Party has become nothing more than the party of Trump, I sincerely question whether this is the party for me,”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp

That's as harsh of language as I've heard any Republican Senator or Representative direct towards Trump, worse than what Romney has ever said. Her threat to leave the party may shake some things up in the Senate.

Good for her! Interesting, but not surprising, that the first Republican to show the balls to demand his resignation is a woman (ovaries of steel?)

[c_hawkbob]

And in other news, Twitter has permanently suspended Trump's account:

"After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them -- specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter -- we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence," Twitter wrote in a statement.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp

That's perhaps more significant punitive action than anything Congress will be able to muster.

Damn man, for Trump that's like cutting his tongue off! Well done Twitter!

[RiverDog]

Yeah, I'm sensing a momentum. This morning, I saw Colin Powell calling for Trump's resignation, said he wishes Trump would do what Nixon did. Even Ted Cruz is in full retreat. The rats are starting to jump off the ship. Twitter's banning, in addition to pulling Trump's stinger, makes a huge statement.

[Aseahawkfan]

My buddies think the end of freedom is coming now that the Democrats have taken over. The level of irrationality in America right now is unbelievable.

[I-5]

Even Ted Cruz is in full retreat. The rats are starting to jump off the ship.

I might have missed it as I've been at work the past few hours, but what did Cruz say in retreat mode? He's almost worse than Trump in my view, because he actually knows better. At least he SHOULD know better than to play dumb the way he's been playing the past few days. I watched a video of him shouting exhortations to Trump supporters the day before the riot that sounded like a battle cry at worst, and at best a pregame football pep talk. Trump Jr also posted a video of himself on the day of the riots counting down, even using the phrase 'T minus...' in terms of what was about to happen. They can play dumb, but when you incite a mob who happens to carry guns, what do you expect will happen?

[Aseahawkfan]

I might have missed it as I've been at work the past few hours, but what did Cruz say in retreat mode? He's almost worse than Trump in my view, because he actually knows better. At least he SHOULD know better than to play dumb the way he's been playing the past few days. I watched a video of him shouting exhortations to Trump supporters the day before the riot that sounded like a battle cry at worst, and at best a pregame football pep talk. Trump Jr also posted a video of himself on the day of the riots counting down, even using the phrase 'T minus...' in terms of what was about to happen. They can play dumb, but when you incite a mob who happens to carry guns, what do you expect will happen?

It's fortunate Trump, Cruz, and all those Republicans claiming election fraud are cowards and ran when it got hot, then backtracked like cowards do. Trump wasn't up to the task of being a revolutionary leader. Just a cowardly antagonist with no balls to finish what he started.

Imagine if George Washington or the other Founders would have been like Trump. America wouldn't even exist. Talk it up against the British, then run like a b****.

Trump's a bunch of hot air not ready for a real revolution unless it's someone else doing the fighting.

[I-5]

So as I said, they've pretty much pulled Trump's stinger, at least for the next couple of weeks.

As I thought, Trump's nicey nice talk lasted less than 1 day, and it doesn't matter anyway what he said. He is like a cornered and wounded animal now than ever, and that makes him extremely dangerous - esp after Twitter banned him for his 2 posts on Friday (rightfully so when you can easily see how it could incite violence), and knowing that articles will be drafted against him on Monday. Expect to see the wildest, most reckless version of Trump in the coming days, if not this weekend. He needs to be nowhere near the nuclear codes. Even without Twitter, I don't think anyone should downplay the danger we are in, and the whole world for that matter.

[RiverDog]

Even Ted Cruz is in full retreat. The rats are starting to jump off the ship.

I might have missed it as I've been at work the past few hours, but what did Cruz say in retreat mode? He's almost worse than Trump in my view, because he actually knows better. At least he SHOULD know better than to play dumb the way he's been playing the past few days. I watched a video of him shouting exhortations to Trump supporters the day before the riot that sounded like a battle cry at worst, and at best a pregame football pep talk. Trump Jr also posted a video of himself on the day of the riots counting down, even using the phrase 'T minus...' in terms of what was about to happen. They can play dumb, but when you incite a mob who happens to carry guns, what do you expect will happen?

But now that Biden has been certified as the winner, and Trump has since admitted that Biden will be taking office, Cruz is suddenly trying to pretend he’s always been anti-Trump

Ted Cruz said this to ABC, as documented by CNN: “The president’s language and rhetoric often goes too far. I think, yesterday in particular, the president’s language and rhetoric crossed the line and it was reckless … I disagree with it, and I have disagreed with the president’s language and rhetoric for the last four years.”

https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/t ... ils/35338/

I don't think we've heard Cruz say anything close to that since Trump was nominated.

[RiverDog]

Coming on the heels of Trump being permanently being banned by Twitter, Google has announced that it is removing the Parler, the app that has advertised itself as "Twitter without rules" and favored by many far right extremists, from its play store:

"We recognize that there can be reasonable debate about content policies and that it can be difficult for apps to immediately remove all violative content, but for us to distribute an app through Google Play, we do require that apps implement robust moderation for egregious content. In light of this ongoing and urgent public safety threat, we are suspending the app's listings from the Play Store until it addresses these issues."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/08/tech/par ... index.html

Apple may follow suit.

A couple more smaller social media platforms, Twitch and Snapchat, have also banned Trump's account at least through the 20th, and the e-commerce website Shopify has shut down all shops run by the Trump campaign and organization.

They've pretty much put a muzzle on Trump. It must be pretty humiliating for him, but I doubt that it causes any self reflection on his actions.

[NorthHawk]

But now that Biden has been certified as the winner, and Trump has since admitted that Biden will be taking office, Cruz is suddenly trying to pretend he’s always been anti-Trump

Ted Cruz said this to ABC, as documented by CNN: “The president’s language and rhetoric often goes too far. I think, yesterday in particular, the president’s language and rhetoric crossed the line and it was reckless … I disagree with it, and I have disagreed with the president’s language and rhetoric for the last four years.”

https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/t ... ils/35338/

I don't think we've heard Cruz say anything close to that since Trump was nominated.

With video of him standing on a podium and inciting the crowd, it may have occurred to him that he may be held to account along with Trump, but has more to lose since he has
Presidential aspirations and a continuing career in the Senate. He took advantage of the situation for his own benefit and now is scrambling to try to cover his tracks as the
investigation starts. He didn't win by a lot in the Senate race, so how will it look if he's charged or included in any report about sedition or an attack on democracy? That's juicy
ammo for any opponent.

[RiverDog]

But now that Biden has been certified as the winner, and Trump has since admitted that Biden will be taking office, Cruz is suddenly trying to pretend he’s always been anti-Trump

Ted Cruz said this to ABC, as documented by CNN: “The president’s language and rhetoric often goes too far. I think, yesterday in particular, the president’s language and rhetoric crossed the line and it was reckless … I disagree with it, and I have disagreed with the president’s language and rhetoric for the last four years.”

https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/t ... ils/35338/

I don't think we've heard Cruz say anything close to that since Trump was nominated.

With video of him standing on a podium and inciting the crowd, it may have occurred to him that he may be held to account along with Trump, but has more to lose since he has Presidential aspirations and a continuing career in the Senate. He took advantage of the situation for his own benefit and now is scrambling to try to cover his tracks as the investigation starts. He didn't win by a lot in the Senate race, so how will it look if he's charged or included in any report about sedition or an attack on democracy? That's juicy ammo for any opponent.

I wasn't commenting on Cruz's motivation. I was noting that since the riot that he's changing his tune and distancing himself from Trump, ie the rats jumping off a sinking ship. It's part of a momentum that I'm sensing.

[c_hawkbob]

If you're wondering if it’s worth impeaching him this time, it means he:

1) loses his 200k+ pension for the rest of his life
2) loses his 1 million dollar/year travel allowance
3) loses lifetime full secret service detail
4) loses his ability to run in 2024

*that list was quoted from a tweet by Ben Costiloe, my add is:

5) ensures that the Trump Insurrection will not go down in history as unpunished

Much more than worth it in my book!

[NorthHawk]

Wouldn't he have to be convicted in the Senate as well?
I'm not sure McConnell will give it the time of day, but I have heard impeachments can run after the President leaves office.
That may be untested and ripe for a legal fight, I would think.

[NorthHawk]

I wasn't commenting on Cruz's motivation. I was noting that since the riot that he's changing his tune and distancing himself from Trump, ie the rats jumping off a sinking ship. It's part of a momentum that I'm sensing.

I'm sure there is momentum to distance from Trump, but I was pointing out that Cruz has more than just the rank and file Republican support to consider. He's not a stupid man, but he did a stupid thing.

[c_hawkbob]

Wouldn't he have to be convicted in the Senate as well?
I'm not sure McConnell will give it the time of day, but I have heard impeachments can run after the President leaves office.
That may be untested and ripe for a legal fight, I would think.

Yes the Senate would have to convict for those outcomes.

As for the timeline I've been seeing 3 lines of thought (usually all three expressed by the same experts an various channels):

1) Both the Impeachment and conviction must come while the president is in office
2) The House needs to Impeach while the President is in office but the Senate may hold their trial afterword
3) Both the Impeachment and the trial can come after the term has ended

And universally these various experts say no it's never come up before and that the SCOTUS would have to make the final determination. If I had to say which way the majority of these experts leaned I would say option 2 with option 1 as the next most likely ruling.

[RiverDog]

If you're wondering if it’s worth impeaching him this time, it means he:

1) loses his 200k+ pension for the rest of his life
2) loses his 1 million dollar/year travel allowance
3) loses lifetime full secret service detail
4) loses his ability to run in 2024

*that list was quoted from a tweet by Ben Costiloe, my add is:

5) ensures that the Trump Insurrection will not go down in history as unpunished

Much more than worth it in my book!

Only #4 would be worth it in my book. Except as it relates to the future of the country and the ability to heal this current divide, I couldn't give a rip what happens to Trump once he's out of office.

[RiverDog]

And universally these various experts say no it's never come up before and that the SCOTUS would have to make the final determination. If I had to say which way the majority of these experts leaned I would say option 2 with option 1 as the next most likely ruling.

Actually it has come up, sort of. It didn't involve a POTUS, but there was a situation back during the Grant presidency where the Senate conducted an impeachment trial on a cabinet member after he had resigned and left office:

In 1876, the House impeached President Ulysses S. Grant’s war secretary for graft, even after he resigned from his post. The Senate at the time considered whether it still had jurisdiction to hear the case of a former official, and determined that it did. Ultimately, the secretary was acquitted.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/p ... pitol.html

[I-5]

Ted Cruz said this to ABC, as documented by CNN: “The president’s language and rhetoric often goes too far. I think, yesterday in particular, the president’s language and rhetoric crossed the line and it was reckless … I disagree with it, and I have disagreed with the president’s language and rhetoric for the last four years.”

https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/t ... ils/35338/

I don't think we've heard Cruz say anything close to that since Trump was nominated.

I wouldn't call that a retreat in any way. A retreat would be something that was more like 'I regret everything, I was wrong about Trump', or at least take a couple of steps back from a previous position. What he is trying to suggest is that he has disagreed Trump the past 4 years. Only if we pretend we've been asleep the past 4 years would that make any sense and that video of all his @ss kissing towards Trump isn't posted on youtube for the world to see. He's trying to revise his own history to show that he's always been on the right side of the argument. Sorry, no.

[RiverDog]

Ted Cruz said this to ABC, as documented by CNN: “The president’s language and rhetoric often goes too far. I think, yesterday in particular, the president’s language and rhetoric crossed the line and it was reckless … I disagree with it, and I have disagreed with the president’s language and rhetoric for the last four years.”

https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/t ... ils/35338/

I don't think we've heard Cruz say anything close to that since Trump was nominated.

I wouldn't call that a retreat in any way. A retreat would be something that was more like 'I regret everything, I was wrong about Trump', or at least take a couple of steps back from a previous position. What he is trying to suggest is that he has disagreed Trump the past 4 years. Only if we pretend we've been asleep the past 4 years would that make any sense and that video of all his @ss kissing towards Trump isn't posted on youtube for the world to see. He's trying to revise his own history to show that he's always been on the right side of the argument. Sorry, no.

If you don't like the term retreat, then call it a detachment of the lips from Trump's @ss. It's a pretty dramatic change and part of an overall momentum that has been going away from Trump over the past several weeks, especially since the riot.