More to ignore, Book 88.......

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1
Liz Cheney loses primary while vowing effort to keep Trump from White House

Rep. Liz Cheney — the once-high-ranking Republican who defied her party to wage a lonely crusade against former president Donald Trump — lost her primary Tuesday while vowing she would do everything in her power to keep Trump from returning to the White House.

Harriet Hageman, a lawyer with Trump’s endorsement, ousted Cheney, clinching the GOP nomination for deep-red Wyoming’s only House seat. Cheney fell in defeat despite her appeals to Democrats and independents to re-register as Republicans and vote for her. The race marked the last primary challenge to a small group of House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump last year and are mostly set to leave Congress after withering backlash.

With about 38 percent of the vote tallied, Hageman had more than 62 percent to Cheney’s 33 percent, according to the Associated Press, which projected Hageman’s win. Hageman headed into the day as the clear favorite and close observers had anticipated her victory for weeks......
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1

Liz Cheney isn't the most important thing about her primary loss. It's about the Republican Party

Laura Clawson

As expected, Rep. Liz Cheney lost her primary by a large margin Tuesday night, purely for the sin of speaking out against Donald Trump’s coup attempt. That was enough to have her Republican In Good Standing card stripped despite her reliably conservative positions on everything else. It just can’t be said enough: The desire to overturn an election, or at least the willingness to flirt with it, is a requirement for status in the Republican Party in 2022.

It’s not just Cheney, though she is the most prominent case. Ten House Republicans voted to impeach Trump in 2021. Just two will remain in Congress after this year, with four having lost primaries and four having decided to retire (before they could lose a primary).

Top Republicans didn’t just fail to support an incumbent in a primary. They didn’t just actively support a primary challenger to an incumbent. They actively and publicly celebrated Cheney’s loss.

“Congratulations to @HagemanforWY on her MASSIVE primary victory to restore the PEOPLE of Wyoming’s voice,” Rep. Elise Stefanik tweeted, noting that she had joined Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy in endorsing Harriet Hageman. Stefanik, of course, replaced Cheney as the third-ranking House Republican when Cheney’s excommunication from the party really got rolling.

”Girl, BYE,” was all Rep. Lauren Boebert had to say. Similarly, Sen. Rand Paul capped his tweet celebrating Hageman’s win with a “Bye Liz.”

This level of venom is spurred not by broad policy disagreement but by Cheney’s disloyalty in refusing to embrace the effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election, or at least keep her mouth shut about her opposition to that. That’s it. That’s all. It’s a staggering statement about today’s Republican Party.

There’s a lot of debate among Democrats about how to assess Cheney. Is she a hero? Is she just meeting the minimum bar of not supporting coups? But Cheney isn’t the point. The point is that, among Republicans, Cheney’s courage in adhering to the idea that the outcome of elections should be respected stands out, and her willingness to keep talking and name names stands out still more. Yes, everyone in office should be where she is on the basic question of whether the winner of the presidential election should become president, but they’re not. Far from it.

 
  • Like
Reactions: tgar

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1
FaWCuwsXwAEhuDH
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1

Ukraine update: Russia's dependence on massed artillery and brute force is its greatest weakness

Mark Sumner

GettyImages-1242552694.jpg

A boy looks at a massive crater in Druzhkivka village, Donetsk region. August 17, 2022,

On Wednesday, more explosions have been reported in the Russian-occupied city of Melitopol. This time, the site of the attack appears to be the Russian command center for the area. This follows attacks over the last two days that took out the Russian HQ that had been set up in Lysychansk, electrical infrastructure for Melitopol, the rail lines serving much of Crimea, two Russian air bases in Crimea, and a massive supply depot containing both ammo and vehicles. These attacks continued a Ukrainian strategy of striking well behind the lines to hit high-value targets. And in the case of Lysychansk, Ukraine had very precise targeting information.



That location looks a little different following Ukraine’s latest exhibit on precision-controlled weaponry.



Meanwhile, Russia conducted an expanded campaign of both shelling and missile launches overnight. Both Kharkiv and the Zaporizhzhia area saw some of the heaviest attacks in weeks, with Russia lobbing longer-range MLRS missiles into the city of Kharkiv. The north side of the city, closest to the Russian area of control, has taken a particular beating again overnight. Russian ballistic missiles once again arced in on Ukrainian cities from sites inside Russia as well as Belarus.

However, for whatever reason, either lack of the necessary weapons or lack of even half decent intelligence, Russia continues to make what seems to be inaccurate blind swings, targeting population areas rather than striking high-value military targets. Six months into Russia’s illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, Russia has fired over 3,700 missiles into Ukrainian cities. That’s an absolutely astounding number, and it has generated some absolutely astounding levels of damage in places like Kharkiv—and even in cities like Kryvyi Rih and Odesa that are not on the front lines of the war.



But what may be most amazing is, 3,700 missiles later, the offices of the Ukrainian government in Kyiv are intact. Ukrainian military bases are still operating at many points around the country. Ukrainian planes are still flying from Ukrainian airfields. Volodymyr Zelenskyy is still openly walking the streets, greeting foreign dignitaries, and visiting sites around his nation, including some that are within miles of the front lines.

..........
At some point, it might have been possible to believe that Russia was, for some reason, holding back, but that point is way back there in the rearview. Russia isn’t taking out high-value targets in Ukraine because it can’t. Sure, they can occasionally manage to hit a shopping mall, and they’ve been dedicated shooters of hospitals. But they can’t take out the targets that allow the Ukrainian military to stay supplied, trained, and organized. They just can’t. Or they would have done it by now.

Anyone who has spent their life in America, or any of the 99% of the world subject to exported American culture, would have a hard time avoiding some level of exposure to one of those long-term staples of U.S. cinema—the boxing movie. Those that are old enough to remember the days when boxing was among the most followed sports in the nation probably still harbor memories of Muhammad Ali and Sonny Liston, Ali and Joe Frazier, Ali and George Foreman … basically Ali engaging in a kind of beautiful and intelligent violence along with someone who was about to be forever remembered for falling down.

In both real life and on film, there’s a frequent pairing that makes for a classic confrontation. On one side is the fearsome slugger. The guy who throws a punch that can take down an ox and whose scowling visage marks a ruthless, straight-ahead confidence that no one can stand against them. In the opposite corner is the boxer who can “stick and move,” but, more importantly, keep his brain engaged along with his fists. A few rounds later, the ox-feller is really confused about why this guy across from him just refuses to go down, and that other guy is just getting ready to attack.

That kind of seems like where we are with Ukraine. Russia continues to stagger forward, throwing only wild haymakers, while Ukraine jabs, sidesteps, and looks for an opening. Maybe it’s not a coincidence that Sonny Liston’s nickname was “the big bear.” Ali went into that fight an 8-1 underdog. Liston gave up in the seventh round. It’s not clear what round we’re in now, but it is clear that the pace of the action in Ukraine is no longer being dictated by Russia.

When it comes to action on the ground, in the Kharkiv area, Russia claimed to have captured the village of Udy, near the Russian border northwest of Kharkiv. However, Ukrainian military images from the site on Tuesday indicate that this is a thing-that-did-not-happen. Russia also claims to have taken the village of Odnorobivk, which is even further to the west and kilometers away from any area of conflict over the last few months. Whether this is a real attack or not isn’t clear.

Over near Kherson, Russia has attacked that bridgehead across the Inhulets River that Ukraine established back in June, and which Russia had already claimed to have eliminated at least three times. It’s difficult to tell how the fighting is going at the moment, but Russia seems to have moved against Ukrainian forces at all points. The status of Ukraine’s pontoon bridge (which is well south of Davydiv Brid) is unknown.

As has been true every day for the last several weeks, Russia launched attacks at multiple points along the line between Sivernsk and Bakhmut, but there don’t appear to be any major changes. Further south, the Ukrainian military reports that Russia achieved “partial success” near Novomykhailivka, but other Russian attacks south of Donetsk were repulsed.

By the end of today, I hope to have the maps updated so that the next Ukraine Update can reflect the current positions. Oh, and there are unconfirmed reports that Taiwan is sending 800(!) of these to Ukraine.



Drones are playing an ever greater part in this war, and the various roles and types of drones are undergoing a fast evolution. It’s a very safe bet that the results in Ukraine are being carefully examined by every military in the world. From observation drones directing precision munitions, to large drones launching missiles at targets dozens or hundreds of kilometers behind enemy lines, to loitering munitions with varying levels of AI, to drones like the “revolver” that can drop explosives straight down on enemy troops and vehicles, the battlefield is becoming ever more dangerous. How all this stuff works is changing in real-time, and the winner of this war may well be the side that is nimble enough to incorporate these technologies in the best way.

That’s probably not the big bear.

(Side note: The current heavyweight champion of the world is Daniel Dubois, or Tyson Fury, or Oleksandr Usyk, depending on which organization you believe. Of all of these, Usyk may be the best known because, in February, he returned to his native Ukraine and spent a few months in the territorial defense forces, but he has now left to train for another match. Fury may be best known for comments in which he threatened to hang his sister, for warning that abortion was going to bring a “biblical reckoning,” and for a string of antisemitic as well as anti-LGBTQ statements.)
 
Last edited:

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1

Planned Parenthood pours a record-breaking $50 million into midterm races in GOP-led states

Rebekah Sager

Jenny Lawson is the executive director of the new website, Planned Parenthood Votes. When it comes to talking about November’s midterm elections, she is unequivocal.

Lawson tells Associated Press (AP), “Who wins in these midterm elections will determine whether a state has access to abortion and potentially determine whether we will face a national abortion ban. … We will be clear about who is on which side.” And that’s why Planned Parenthood has committed to a $50 million spend on the driving turnout in Republican-led states.

Planned Parenthood is breaking records, AP reports, topping the $45 million the organization spent on election-year efforts in 2020. This November, the group is focusing on gubernatorial races, Senate seats, and congressional races in the nine states where abortion care is most severely limited: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
...........
Amy Kennedy, a spokesperson for Planned Parenthood Votes in Georgia, says, “We say this every cycle: ‘This is the important election.’ … For us, this really is the most important election cycle of our life.”

Planned Parenthood recently launched the website Take Control 2022 as part of the Planned Parenthood Votes campaign. The new site serves as a hub for information on key races and candidates and how to get involved in Planned Parenthood advocacy.

“The Supreme Court and anti-abortion rights politicians have stripped people of their constitutional right to abortion and the ability to make personal health care decisions,” Lawson writes a press release. “Should these out-of-touch politicians gain or stay in power, they will continue doing everything they can to ban all abortion, throw health care providers and pregnant people in jail, and endanger the health and lives of pregnant people across the country. This is not what the American people want. This November, voters are going to take control by electing reproductive health care champions, up and down the ballot, who trust us to make our own decisions about our bodies, our lives, and our futures.”

In addition to the nine most at-risk states, Planned Parenthood Votes will also focus on local advocacy and political power in states such as Colorado, California, Maine, Ohio, and Florida, hoping to reach up to 6 million voters via door knocking, phone banking, paid TV and digital ads, and more.

According to a USA Today/Suffolk poll, 64% of Democratic voters say they’re both sad and outraged by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June, which effectively overturned the legal protections for abortion access granted by Roe v. Wade. These voters are more motivated now than ever to vote in the midterms—which typically have a far lower turnout than presidential election years.

A Gallup poll taken in August found that concerns about abortion ranked as a top-five issue inspiring voters this year. And a recent KFF survey found that 73%, or six in ten people identifying as women voters, are “more motivated” to vote this November thanks to the fall of Roe.

“Big stakes require big investment, which is why this fall, Planned Parenthood advocacy, and political organizations will run our largest-ever electoral campaign to preserve and expand abortion access in as many states as possible,” Lawson says. “From now until Election Day, we’ll make sure voters know who’s on their side and channel their dissent into political power at the ballot box.”
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1

Let's talk about the Mar-a-Lago warrant and the underlying investigation

Brandi Buchman

Let’s talk about the search warrant for Mar-a-Lago.

Specifically, let’s talk about the potential crimes committed by former President Donald Trump underpinning that search.

The possible violation of three laws were cited by the Justice Department to predicate its warrant. The laws potentially violated include the Epsionage Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and lastly, a law that expressly forbids the general concealment, removal or mutilation of any government documents.
........
In America, the criminal justice system guides itself by something known as Title 18 of the United States Code. In Title 18, there are many chapters and the Espionage Act falls under the 37th chapter. The act itself is catch-all of statutes tied to the retention or collection or distribution of sensitive or classified materials otherwise known as “national defense information.”

Though perhaps a term like “espionage” invokes images of spies in trench coats meeting in subterranean parking lots generally speaking, in Trump’s case and the way the act is most often applied in America, it’s not about spywork as much as it is about illegal transmission, gathering or possession of government records.

The chapter of the Espionage Act cited by the department in its warrant also covers when an individual refuses to return records after the federal government has requested them.

It is a rare thing for an American to be charged with violations of the Espionage Act but it certainly does happen. The legislation from 1917 arrived just after World War I and was intended to control dissent among Americans and to dissuade them from sharing state secrets with foreign enemies.

A century after President Woodrow Wilson made it federal law with his signature, the former National Security Agency contractor Reality Winner received a five year sentence for the leak of classified government records under the Espionage Act.

Winner leaked a top secret document about Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election to the news outlet The Intercept. Her crime could have earned her the recommended maximum sentence of 10 years in prison but prosecutors agreed to pare that back to just over 5 years after she plead guilty. The government was willing to significantly reduce her recommended sentence because they did not want a jury trial. A jury trial, they argued, would gravely risk exposing even more national defense information than what Winner had already revealed.

The same year Winner was sentenced, a former CIA contractor, Kevin Patrick Mallory of Virginia was found in violation of the Espionage Act. He didn’t just leak information however, he sold it to the Chinese government for a profit and exposed sensitive information about his fellow CIA agents along the way. For this and other crimes, he’s now serving 20 years in prison. He appealed his sentence this June but was denied.

Trump, like Winner, started out with legal access to sensitive documents.

For Trump, that access ended when he left office because the Presidential Records Act demands that at that time, all presidential documents are returned to the National Archives. Presidential archival records do not belong to a president. They belong to the federal government and therefore, the American people.

The Espionage Act also makes it illegal for a person to knowingly retain records that they understand could damage national security if not restored to the government’s custody.

Trump appears to have run afoul of this portion of the Espionage Act in particular. According to The New York Times, one of his lawyers on June 3 signed off on a statement plainly asserting that all classified records in Trump’s possession from after he left office had been returned to the Archives.

But an inventory list published with the warrant last week undercuts that claim since agents hauled away some 11 sets of classified records, including those with top secret or sensitive compartmented information labels.

Trump has since claimed he declassified those documents by verbal order but whether he could declassify this way is murky. The national political news beat has been flooded with analysis of late about Trump’s authority to unilaterally declassify, but most legal experts agree: if Trump were to have his day in court over the illegal retention of records, it would not be a discussion about classification powers at the fore.

Rather, it would more likely be about retention or theft of government documents.

Even if Trump did unilaterally declassify documents, it is extremely critical to note here and now: Neither the Espionage Act nor the two other criminal statutes cited in the DOJ’s warrant require documents to be classified for a violation to occur.

Again, it boils down to how he kept the records and his treatment of them, especially after he was asked to return them.

The second statute cited in the warrant, Section 1519, is about obstruction standards set out in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It is not tied to issues of national security in the same way the Espionage Act applies.

The 2002 legislation was devised in response to major scandals like the Enron and WorldCom debacles that had rocked the financial services industry. Section 1519 offers up to 20 years in prison per offense for the destruction, falsification or concealment of records when coupled with an intent to impede, obstruct or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter.

By opting to predicate its search on this criminal statute, it would strongly suggest that the Department of Justice is reviewing whether Trump not only unlawfully held onto records at his Mar-a-Lago resort but whether he was doing so in an attempt to impede a greater criminal probe into his conduct.

Trump is under no less than five inquiries right now. Including the classified records investigation, he is also under review for criminal election interference in Georgia in 2020, fraud and obstruction tied to Jan. 6 plus two inquiries in New York where his real estate dealings and financial practices under Trump Organization are under criminal and civil review.

The last statute cited in the warrant is known as Section 2071 and it makes it illegal to conceal, remove or mutilate government records. Anyone who possesses a government document and does any of the aforementioned, can be hit with a sentence of up to 3 years in prison if convicted. Again, whether a document is classified does not make or break how this law is enforced.

Key to note in the warrant as well is that the DOJ appears to have been very careful with its language. Agents were greenlit to take “any government and/or presidential records” spanning from Trump’s inauguration to his last day in office. There was also instruction to seize “any evidence” that would support a “knowing alteration, destruction or concealment of any government and/or presidential records, or of any documents with classification markings.” [Emphasis added]

Section 2071 also stipulates that a conviction on this charge should bar a defendant from holding office.

While this might set tongues wagging as expectations are sky high that Trump will run for office again in 2024, even if he was convicted on 2071, it is the Constitution that determines eligibility requirements.

The Constitution only states that a president must be 35 years old or older, a natural born citizen and a U.S. resident for at least 14 years. Further, the Constitution overrides federal code.

What would bar Trump from serving again can be found in an altogether different segment of the criminal code known as 18 USC 2383. It governs rebellions and insurrections.

Under Section 2383, “whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

For now, federal prosecutors have asked that a key document known as the warrant affidavit—it describes the basis of the search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property—be kept under seal.

This is necessary because unveiling it in full could blow apart the Justice Department’s ongoing investigations, U.S. Attorney Juan Gonzalez noted in a motion filed Monday. He also noted that witnesses continue to come forward in the DOJ’s probe of the mishandled documents.

DOJ Response Seeking to Keep Affidavit Sealed Mar a Lago by Daily Kos on Scribd

There is considerable pressure on witnesses to the probe in light of Trump’s reaction to the search and that of his cohorts still in Congress.

To that end, on Monday, Adam Bies of Pennsylvania was charged after making numerous threats to the FBI online, including vowing to kill agents he described as akin to Nazis for conducting the Mar-a-Lago search. The department says Bies posted on the right-wing social media site Gab and vowed it was “open season” on the FBI. He also taunted agents to come get him. They did, citing his illegal threats. He now faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted.

This past weekend, about two dozen of Trump’s supporters turned up armed at the FBI’s Phoenix, Arizona office. Some waved a Confederate flag as others called to abolish the FBI, a sentiment currently being peddled by Trump’s lapdogs in Congress like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. The group in Arizona was broken up in a matter of hours by police. And preceding this event was an attack launched by Ohio man Ricky Shiffer who died after a conflict with police at a Cincinnati, Ohio FBI office. Shiffer fired a nailgun at the building. Before the attack, Shiffer posted on Trump’s Truth Social platform that the search at Mar-a-Lago, “must not [be] tolerated.”

A hearing on requests to unseal the affidavit has been set for Aug. 18 at 1 p.m. ET before presiding Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart.
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1

Trump can't find a good criminal defense attorney. Go figure

Joan McCarter

Once again, Donald Trump finds himself in need of a few good lawyers, and once again he can’t find them. As The Washington Post reports, his “current legal team includes a Florida insurance lawyer who’s never had a federal case, a past general counsel for a parking-garage company and a former host at far-right One America News.”

He’s never been in greater need of a lot of lawyers on a lot of fronts, including criminal defense. Daily Kos’s Brandi Buchman notes that there are so many probes right now that he “needs a small army of attorneys.” He is “under scrutiny from nearly every angle, from the search of Mar-a-Lago for White House records to the Justice Department’s ongoing probe of Jan. 6 to the civil and criminal investigations of his taxes and real estate dealings under the Trump Organization banner.” And don’t forget Georgia, where he’s under investigation by district attorney Fani Willis for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

“Everyone is saying no,” a prominent Republican lawyer told the Post. He needs some heavy-duty criminal defense representation and they’re not touching him with a ten-foot pole. “Trump’s search is being hampered by his divisiveness, as well as his reputation for stiffing vendors and ignoring advice,” the Post explains. That’s making the people in his orbit who inexplicably remain on his side “extremely worried,” because his “current stable of lawyers” is about as competent as the crew that latched onto him in all of his election challenges.
.......
The current Trump mouthpiece, Taylor Budowich, strongly denies that the team is concerned. “The President’s lead counsel in relation to the raid of his home, Jim Trusty and Evan Corcoran, have decades of prosecutorial experience and have litigated some of the most complex cases in American history,” Budowich said. “President Trump is represented by some of the strongest attorneys in the country, and any suggestion otherwise is only driven by envy.”

Right, they’re all just jealous of . . . something?

Michael Cohen, the former Trump toady who is now happy to dish on his old boss, piled on. “In olden days, he would tell firms representing him was a benefit because they could advertise off it. Today it’s not the same,” Cohen said. His experience is a bit of a cautionary tale, given the time in jail he spent on Trump’s behalf. “He’s also a very difficult client in that he’s always pushing the envelope, he rarely listens to sound legal advice, and he wants you to do things that are not appropriate, ethically or legally.” Who wouldn’t want to be associated with that?

Potential counsel could also be remembering the total fiasco that was Trump’s 62 election challenges, where lawyers dropped out of the enterprise like flies and judges were not amused. This clip from the Jan. 6 committee with Rep. Zoe Lofgren shows just how unamused judges were.



Any self-respecting defense attorney is not going to be willing to antagonize judges with the kinds of antics Trump will demand.

Or as Ronald S. Sullivan Jr., the faculty director of the Harvard Criminal Justice Institute and the Harvard Trial Advocacy Workshop, puts it “Some lawyers may reasonably feel as though the public will conflate Mr. Trump’s policy aims and positions with the lawyer’s. In that way, many lawyers may be disinclined to expose themselves to the public opprobrium that would follow that sort of representation.”
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1
Wednesday, Aug 17, 2022 · 3:21:18 PM EDT · Mark Sumner
The general staff of the Ukrainian military sending their thanks to everyone involved in the logistical chain.

“The face of logistics of the Armed Forces. These are the ones who restore the combat effectiveness of complex mechanisms and put equipment and weapons back on track. These are the ones who save the lives of our soldiers at the front.”

 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
105,890
18,600
1

Secret Service failed to share threat to Pelosi until the Capitol was already under attack

Laura Clawson

The Secret Service knew about a threat to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi days ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol—but didn’t pass the information along to the United States Capitol Police until the attack was already underway, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington reports.

“January 6 starts #1776 all over again…Fight for EVERYTHING,” a Parler user not named by CREW posted on Dec. 31, 2020, in a post discovered by the Secret Service on Jan. 4, 2021. That line was accompanied by an “enemies” list with Pelosi’s name on it.

“Biden will die shortly after being elected,” a Jan. 2 post from the same account read. “Patriots are gonna tear his head off. Prison is his best case scenario.”

And the next day: “We’re all on a mission to save America. Lone wolf attacks are the way to go. Stay anonymous. Stay alive. Guns up Patriots!!”

It took until 5:55 PM on Jan. 6 for the Secret Service to send the post with Pelosi’s name in it to the Capitol Police. By that time, law enforcement had been fighting off the attack by a mob of insurrectionists for hours. They knew Pelosi was at risk, and she had been moved for her safety.

This is far from the first indication that a host of law enforcement agencies fell down on the job in the lead-up to Jan. 6. They had warnings. These social media posts filled with threats were … social media posts. They were available. What, though, is going on at the Secret Service?

First, the Secret Service denied former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s account of Donald Trump furiously demanding to be taken to the Capitol and attempting to wrest control of a vehicle from the Secret Service driver. There was supposedly going to be sworn testimony contradicting Hutchinson. Instead, the relevant agents and staff stopped cooperating and lawyered up. Worse, the Secret Service had deleted text messages from Jan. 6, and they apparently can’t be recovered.

The missing text messages showed the Secret Service to be complicit in a cover-up of Trump’s behavior during the attack on the Capitol. The fact that they didn’t turn the threat against Pelosi over to the Capitol Police when they found it—and that they were warned by a Mike Pence aide of threats to Pence as well—suggests that the cover-up wasn’t the only thing the Secret Service was complicit in. Either way, it’s time to clean house.