GOP can’t bring itself to stop defending Trump: This time on declassifying documents by thought

Listening to Republicans’ continued support of former President Donald Trump, an unfamiliar onlooker might think the former president’s words hadn’t inspired an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. It’s like the FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Palm Beach, Florida, didn’t happen, and it didn’t end in the seizure of 11 sets of classified documents, including those related to nuclear weapons.

Only in real life, those events happened. They just haven’t led to the kind of GOP repudiation that would have followed had Trump been a Democrat. The Republican Party just keeps defending him. Rep. Nancy Mace said Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press that there's “pressure” for House Republicans to act to impeach President Joe Biden, but as of Trump, she isn’t ruling out supporting another presidential run should it happen.

Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming had a hard time answering what ABC This Week host George Stephanopoulos said was a rhetorical question about whether Barrasso agreed that as president, Trump was allowed to “declassify documents by thinking about it.”

RELATED STORY: GOP senator struggles to admit Trump can't declassify documents with his goofy head

"I've not heard that one before ... I don't know anything about the rules for when a president declassifies documents" -- George Stephanopoulos can barely believe it when John Barrasso refuses to say that Trump can't declassify docs by merely thinking about it pic.twitter.com/WticattUtc

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 25, 2022

“I’ve not heard that one before, George,” Barrasso said. “But I’ll tell you, in terms of national security documents, we have to always use extreme caution.”

He went on to say he doesn’t know about the rules regarding when a president declassifies documents. “What I do know is, and what I’d like to see from a Senate standpoint, is I’d like to see the Department of Justice come to us and show us in a classified setting what the information is, what they’ve done,” Barrasso said. “I thought this was a raid at the former president’s home, never seen anything like that before, clearly, and it’s become political.” 

Stephanopoulos cut off the rambling response, to explain that his was a rhetorical question. “You know that a president can’t declassify documents by thinking about it. Why can’t you say so,” the journalist asked.

Barrasso did ultimately say so, but to Stephanopoulos’ point, it shouldn’t have been that difficult to rule out such a ridiculous notion.

For some reason, when it comes to Trump, Republicans often seem to have a difficult time simply calling a wrong a wrong. 

In the same interview in which Rep. Mace spouted off her allegiance to “the future of democracy,” she also said she’s “going to support whomever Republican’s nominate in ’24,” even if that person is Trump.

She also highlighted the fact that she didn’t vote to impeach the former president because she felt “due process was stripped away.” 

“I will not vote for impeachment of any president if I feel that due process was stripped away, for anyone,” Mace said. “I typically vote constitutionally, regardless of who’s in power. I want to do the right thing for the longterm because this isn’t just about today, tomorrow, this year’s election. This is about the future of democracy.”

Mace says she'll support Donald Trump in 2024 if he's the Republican nominee pic.twitter.com/a6BPo9gq2m

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 25, 2022

Campaign Action

Mace explained why she didn’t support new legislation introduced by Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California to protect U.S. elections.

The Presidential Election Reform Act is the only plan to reform the 135-year-old Electoral Count Act that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi backs, Daily Kos staff writer Joan McCarter wrote. 

The legislation the House passed on Wednesday says:

“The Electoral Count Act of 1887 should be amended to prevent other future unlawful efforts to overturn Presidential elections and to ensure future peaceful transfers of Presidential power.”

RELATED STORY: House releases bipartisan election bill, gives Senate GOP chance to put up or shut up on passing fix

Pelosi called it “a historic and bipartisan legislative action to safeguard the integrity of future presidential elections.”

She asked:

“How could anyone vote against free and fair elections a cornerstone of our Constitution? How could anyone vote against our founders’ vision, placing power in the hands of the people? How could anyone vote against their own constituents allowing radical politicians to rip away their say?”

When it comes to Trump, Republicans prove time and time again that any act can be defended. 

The protection the new election legislation would provide isn’t needed, according to Mace. “I was very outspoken about Jan. 6 in the days and weeks leading up to it, and thereafter for months on end. But when you look at what actually happened, the Constitution worked on January 6,” Mace said. “The vice president was not able to, was not allowed constitutionally, to overturn the results of the electoral college, and so for that reason I voted against the bill.”

"The Constitution worked on January 6" -- Nancy Mace on why she voted against an overhaul of the Electoral Count Act pic.twitter.com/FFk3uYCrWq

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 25, 2022

For the sake of Republicans like Mace and Barrasso, who apparently feel beholden to Trump, or “Orange Jesus” for those who know him as such, it’s okay to part ways with someone in your party when they inspire an attempted coup. 

Liz Cheney describes what was happening in the Republican Cloakroom on Jan. 6. One member said under their breath: “The things we do for the Orange Jesus.” pic.twitter.com/NvniqtFVCd

— The Republican Accountability Project (@AccountableGOP) September 19, 2022

RELATED STORY: Trump's Messiah Scam Increases His Threat To America

Pssst. Good judges are more important now than ever. In some states, judges are on the ballot this November. In this episode of The Downballot, we shine a spotlight on elections for state supreme courts: actor and activist Julia Louis-Dreyfus. Together, Daily Kos and Julia are proud to announce their endorsement of seven Democratic candidates running for closely divided courts in Michigan, North Carolina, and Ohio. You can support this slate by going to JusticewithJulia.com and donating today.

Gubernatorial hopeful who failed Breonna Taylor as prosecutor awfully quiet amid word of plea deal

It's a shame Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron didn’t come to the same conclusion about a former Louisville police detective that she did about herself. That conclusion seems to be that Kelly Goodlett is guilty of helping falsify a no-knock search warrant for Breonna Taylor's home and filing a false report to cover it up. Goodlett will plead to one count of conspiring to violate Taylor's civil rights, ABC News reported on Friday. Taylor, a 26-year-old emergency medical technician, was killed on Mar. 13, 2020, in Louisville, Kentucky although she wasn't the subject of the warrant Goodlett allegedly helped falsify. The Black medical worker was sleeping when officers rammed through her door.

Still, Cameron didn’t even pretend to seek Goodlett’s prosecution or that of any other officer for Taylor’s death. It’s a fact that hopefully voters won’t soon forget amid his gubernatorial run.

RELATED STORY: 'Cannot tolerate this type of conduct': Finally, cops involved in Breonna Taylor's death are fired

Cameron attempted to make his case for why he should be the state’s next governor on Aug. 6 at the 142nd Fancy Farm Picnic. But demonstrators refused to let him have an unearned moment in the sun at the picnic in the unincorporated community in Graves County, Kentucky. They’ve watched him avoid holding officers involved in Taylor’s death accountable for more than two years now, and they refused to be silent while Cameron attempted to profit politically from his inaction.

“Breonna Taylor,” protesters shouted while Cameron raised his voice to compete with them.

He didn’t mention her name once in his speech, but he voiced support for law enforcement, telling them: “Know that we will always have your back, and we will always support the blue.”

Earlier in the day, Cameron told reporters two of the cops who shot Taylor, retired Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly and former Detective Myles Cosgrove, didn't use excessive force the night of Taylor's death.

“I know folks have very strong feelings about this case ... but we have a responsibility to not give into any preferred narrative,” he said, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader. “We have a responsibility to do right by the laws of Kentucky and that’s what we did.”

Campaign Action

What was right to Cameron, who served as special prosecutor after Jefferson County Commonwealth’s Attorney Tom Wine recused himself, was to allow the officers involved with Taylor’s death to rest easy knowing they wouldn’t be held accountable by the state’s top prosecutor.

Cameron only sought charges against one cop, former Detective Brett Hankison, not for killing Taylor but for allegedly endangering her neighbors in the process.

It took the Department of Justice stepping in to charge former Louisville police Detective Joshua Jaynes, former Sgt. Kyle Meany, and Goodlett allegedly for violating Taylor’s Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The officers sought the warrant to search Taylor's home "knowing that the officers lacked probable cause for the search," Attorney General Merrick Garland said in remarks announcing the federal charges. Goodlett is set to appear in court to enter her plea on Aug. 22, ABC News reported.

The Department of Justice also charged Hankison "with two civil rights offenses alleging that he willfully used unconstitutionally excessive force” when he fired 10 shots through a window and a sliding glass door, “both of which were covered with blinds and curtains,” according to the Department of Justice. 

Cameron attempted to excuse his lack of action in a seven-part Twitter thread responding to the federal charges.

He said:

“As in every prosecution, our office supports the impartial administration of justice, but it is important that people not conflate what happened today with the state law investigation undertaken by our office. Our primary task was to investigate whether the officers who executed the search warrant were criminally responsible for Ms. Taylor’s death under state law.

"At the conclusion of our investigation, our prosecutors submitted the information to a state grand jury, which ultimately resulted in criminal charges being brought against Mr. Brett Hankison for wanton endangerment.

"I’m proud of the work of our investigators & prosecutors. This case and the loss of Ms. Taylor’s life have generated national attention. People across the country have grieved, and there isn’t a person I’ve spoken to across our 120 counties that isn’t saddened by her loss. There are those, however, who want to use this moment to divide Kentuckians, misrepresent the facts of the state investigation, and broadly impugn the character of our law enforcement community.

"I won’t participate in that sort of rancor. It’s not productive. Instead, I’ll continue to speak with the love and respect that is consistent with our values as Kentuckians."

Three grand jurors in the Taylor case filed a petition with the Kentucky House of Representatives calling for Cameron's impeachment for what they described as manipulation in his presentation to jurors. Kevin Glogower, the lawyer who represented the jurors, told the Courier-Journal: “Mr. Cameron continues to blatantly disregard the truth,” which was that he never even mentioned a homicide charge in his presentation to jurors.

RELATED STORY: Jurors take stand against Daniel Cameron for lying to protect cops who shot, killed Breonna Taylor