Thursday, January 7, 2021

I Hate Federal Commissions, But Americans Need One To Look Into The 2020 Election — Jonathan Turley

No reason not to have an independent investigation. But I am skeptical of it accomplishing much based on past performance. I think Jonathan Turley is being overly optimistic here.

In the first place, there were commissions that investigated the assassinations of JFK, MLK, and RFK, and there are still many people that don't accept the procedure or conclusions and books are still being written about them. Same with the investigation of the 9/11 attack. Why would this time be different? Moreover, one doesn't need to be a conspiracy theorist to be dissatisfied.

Secondly, following the sites and comments on both left and right, it seems obvious to me that these people are never going to give up their position based on evidence when it is ideological and emotional rather than rational. Not going to happen.

So, by all means, have a commission, but don't be surprised if it doesn't change many minds.

I Hate Federal Commissions, But Americans Need One To Look Into The 2020 Election
Jonathan Turley | Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University

29 comments:

lastgreek said...

Tom, since you are still up :)

You mentioned in another thread that the American Civil War never really ended. Not sure what you meant by that, but if you mean it in the sense that the North did not seek the unconditional surrender of the South, then, yes, I agree. Think about it: there were no trials after the war to bring all those responsible for starting and carrying out the war, the Confederate leaders and officers -- including, and especially, the scoundrel Robert E. Lee -- to face the charge of treason against the United States of America, and if convicted, hanged. (Btw, Tom, there were military tribunals against soldiers who committed war crimes, the most famous being that of Captain Henry Wirz, but that was another matter). Also, within a generation, the South was permitted to enact Jim Crow laws. No pushback from the federal government. Germany surrendered unconditionally in 1945. Even if Germany wanted, they would have never been allowed to reestablish ghettos or enact their version of Jim Crow laws, let's say, afterwards? Yet the South did.

You know, I'm sure it crosses many an American high schooler's mind that if the North defeated the South, then why did the United States need a Civil Rights act a 100 years later? :)

lastgreek said...

Sad...

https://twitter.com/aungeliquefox5/status/1347325983393800194

Peter Pan said...

They needed a Civil Rights Act because segregation was bad for business.

Now they need an Elections Act to require a hand count of paper ballots.

Andrew Anderson said...

Also automatic registration at birth.

Btw, fear of democracy is a fear of the rough justice that might result to rectify systematic injustice.

In other words, there need be no fear of democracy in a just system (and much less need for it too).

The wicked flee when no one is pursuing, but the righteous are bold as a lion. Proverbs 28:1

Ryan Harris said...

Permanent independent election auditor. Provide a report to the American people and no secret reports to congress, justice, admin, fbi, cia or whatever, all detailed, above board and uses best practice audit methods standard across industry. If people believe Mitch Mcconnell won his reelection after looking at his county by county data, I've a bridge in Brooklyn, I'd love to sell you. It makes me wonder how long this election tampering has been going on, not just a little bit here and there 1% to push them over... but blatant ballot box stuffing amounting to double digits of entire thing. Obviously Dems didn't want to discuss before inauguration, I get it, but now, it's time to fix it.

Matt Franko said...

“then why did the United States need a Civil Rights act a 100 years later?“

Because Democrats were suppressing the opposition vote and ballot box stuffing same as today...

lastgreek said...

"Because Democrats were suppressing the opposition vote and ballot box stuffing same as today"

[facepalm]

There is no hope for these MAGA trumpsters. Hell, they don't even know their country's own history. Embarrassing to say the least :(

The only documented cases of election fraud that have come to light are the few cases of deadbeat MAGA trumpsters voting in place of their dead mother or father... in the red states!

lol... late last night the shameless, lifelong grifter, who convinced enough fools to vote for him in 2016, just threw the same MAGA mob he incited the day before under the proverbial bus:

Shameless, lifelong grifter...

last night:

"I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack on the United States Capital. Like all Americans, I am outraged by the violence -- [lol] -- lawlessness, and may hem..."

2 days before:

"We -- [we!!!] -- are going to walk down to the Capital! and we are going to cheer our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we'll probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you'll never take back our country with weakness."


lastgreek said...

MAGA Trumpsters will eventually come to the realization that they were, all along, Trump's mark*. Already talk in some MAGA Forums of "being played" by Trump after Trump's video address last night.

* The mark' is the intended victim of the planned con.



Peter Pan said...

Trump didn't shit on them like most of the political class in the US. Was love at first site.

Peter Pan said...

*sight*

lastgreek said...

Conmen don't have time to drop their pants and shit on their marks -- they're too
busy profiting off them. And if he can, he won't even shake their hands:

"Maybe this Covid thing is a good thing... [Now] I don't have to shake hands with those disgusting people." -- shameless, lifelong grifter Donald Trump

Here that, Franko? He won't shake your hand if he can avoid it (

Tom Hickey said...

@ Ryan

Permanent independent election auditor

agree

In addition:

1. Elections need to be transparent, but consistent with a secret ballot process.

2. The archaic elements of the Constitution need to be amended to decision by the majority in free, fair, open, transparent elections.

3. Gerrymandering has to end.

4. Voter suppression needs to end. There also needs to be a monitoring the voting process to ensure that every voter as the ability to vote as directly and easily as every other voter.

5. The transition of power should take place in a more timely way. No need to wait months.

6. Asymmetry needs to be removed from the political process through campaign finance and lobbying reform, along with closing the revolving door that results in at least apparent conflict of interest.

7. The goal should be democracy as government of, by and for the people instead of oligarchy based on political asymmetry.

8. Consideration should be given to ending the two party system (which is really rule by two factions of the Establishment) by switching to either a parliamentary system or at least a multiparty system in which different viewpoints can be represented.

Other suggestions welcome.

Peter Pan said...

I suggest Americans take the trappings of democracy seriously. But hey, you're supposed to be a republic.

Andrew Anderson said...

Other suggestions welcome. Tom Hickey

Eliminate ALL welfare for the banks and, by extension, for the rich.

But the MMT School proposes INCREASED* welfare for the banks.

So what's it going to be, Tom? Equal protection under the law or welfare for the banks and rich?

*e.g. unlimited deposit guarantees and FOR FREE, no less.
*e.g. unlimited, unsecured Central Bank loans to banks at ZERO percent interest - a cynical implementation of permanent ZIRP which also violates equal protection under the law in favor of the so-called "credit worthy."

Ryan Harris said...

100% Agreement, Tom

Tom Hickey said...

@lastgreek

You mentioned in another thread that the American Civil War never really ended.

What I meant was that it never ended in people's minds. This goes for both sides, although obviously the losers were more involved on more levels than the winners. But the winners bear responsibility, too.

This is too extensive a topic to deal with in a comment, but I'll give it a shot.

LBJ, for whatever reasons, felt he had to address the situation — probably owing to MLK, Jr. in no small way. The situation was a festering wound that was causing social unrest./ My feeling is that LBJ felt he had a moral obligation to act as national leader and leader of the free world. This was a huge step at that time. LBJ was under no illusion that the Civil Rights Act was going to immediately change everything for the better without opposition and conflict.

Skipping the tape forward, one reason for Trump's ascent to the presidency was the Civil Rights Act. I have seen this asserted on alt-right sites, for example. Confederate flags in the Capitol during this "incident" are a stark reminder of the Civil War not being over in some people's minds.

Looking at the big picture, his is all part of the historical dialectic and it takes time for these things to get worked through. We are still sort of in the middle of it, but I think this may be a last stand against full integration and acceptance of diversity.

It is part of the march of liberalism toward an integration of traditionalism and liberalism in a newly emerging global order. This chiefly involves mind-change — perceptions, values, emotions, understanding, ideology, etc., which then leads to cultural and institutional change. Sociologist call this a shift in the collective consciousness.

Liberalism is basically a shift in collective consciousness in the direction of greater appreciation of universality. Traditionalisms tend to be about preserving diversity. The two are clashing and the result will be a multipolar world based on unity in diversity as in e pluribus unum, the motto of the US, meaning "from many one." The full extent of liberalism is that no group or clique has asymmetrical power or influence.

In a sense, the US is a paradigm case for the rest of the world, since this dialectic has been unfolding in the US (and colonies prior to it) for hundreds of years. It's a messy process and the march, while inexorable, is cyclic rather than linear. We are in a trough right now and it could get deeper, in fact, I am pretty sure it will, not only in the US but also globally. The US tends to lead globally, just as the West Coast has tended to lead the rest of the country wrt cultural shifts over the past decades.

Andrew Anderson said...

one reason for Trump's ascent to the presidency was the Civil Rights Act. Tom Hickey

A very, very minor one, if at all, e.g. look at the number of biracial children in the South.

The true cause is economic injustice; e.g. the automation and export of US jobs away with what is, in essence, the public's credit but for private gain.

lastgreek said...

"3. Gerrymandering has to end.

4. Voter suppression needs to end. There also needs to be a monitoring the voting process to ensure that every voter as the ability to vote as directly and easily as every other voter."

What! Are you out of your cotton-pickin' mind, Tom? Then Republicans will never get re-elected ;)

Notwithstanding voter suppression (read: Republican efforts to suppress black voter turnout)

and gerrymandering (Republicans) again), need to stop the baseless election voter fraud claims.

Peter Pan said...

LBJ did what big business interests wanted him to do, which was to end segregation.
Nevertheless, the US has made progress since the Jim Crow era, but SJWs will never admit it.

2021 Liberalism is being revealed as a righteous authoritarian movement. They want blood.

Peter Pan said...

Common Greek, both sides have routinely cheated. Americans just shrug their shoulders and accept it as 'the way things are'.

Andrew Anderson said...

SJW?

Andrew Anderson said...

both sides have routinely cheated. Peter Pan

Because the stakes are way higher than they should be.

SJW = Social Justice Warrior?

Tom Hickey said...

So what's it going to be, Tom?

I am a socialist on this issue. The national currency is a public monopoly and should be viewed as a public utility deployed for the equal good of all rather than to benefit a plutocratic oligarchy. Presently, the asymmetry has become obscene.

It is also necessary to realize that the issue is actually credit, the currency being a government liability that functions as a tax credit. The entire credit system, that is, the basis of the financial system, follows from this. So the issue is really designing a well-functioning credit system based on a provision of a public utility. The objective is fair distribution of available real resources.

For this to happen, capitalism understood as the favoring of capital over the other factors, labor (people) and land (environment), needs to end. The need is for an integrated system in which all factors as balanced harmoniously in a productive way that optimizes resources and resource distribution. This requires a fresh approach to economics and policy in general, not just economic policy. A systems approach.

Tom Hickey said...

Then Republicans will never get re-elected

Not without reconfiguring the party to gain more popular appeal. It's a minority party now that takes advantage of the archaic US political system.

If elections were decided based on the popular vote, both parties would be driven by that criterion.

lastgreek said...

Ok another, day. Frustrated typing on my phone. :(




Peter Pan said...

Social justice warrior, or if you prefer, grievance culture.

Andrew Anderson said...

So the issue is really designing a well-functioning credit system based on a provision of a public utility. Tom Hickey

Fiat itself is a public utility and should be created and distributed justly and all citizens, at least, should be able to use it in account form, not just banks.

A credit system, otoh, is INHERENTLY DISCRIMINATORY in favor of the "credit worthy", whoever that may be - the rich and/or politically favored.

It follows then that government privileges for credit creation violates equal protection under the law in favor of the so-called "credit worthy"

So you can be for an ethical fiat system or you can be for government or government-privileged credit creation but you can't be for both.

Peter Pan said...

Because the stakes are way higher than they should be.

But this is all theater, isn't it?
What does it matter who wins?

https://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/3045723-spot-breakdown-politics-america.html

Andrew Anderson said...

But this is all theater, isn't it? Peter Pan

Excellent point; we have one party with two wings.

But potentially, and that was the desperate hope that some* had for voting for Trump, things could radically change based on 1 or 2 elections.

*But not me since my prediction in 2016 was that voting for either of the Presidential candidates would be a cause for shame.