https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...4640a8604b0ffa5ba3e0

Biden White House feeling 'unbridled glee' at seeing MAGA diehards getting key committee spots: report
Story by Brad Reed • Yesterday 8:29 PM

"Privately, the president’s aides sent texts to one another with digital high fives and likened their apparent luck to drawing an inside straight," the publication writes. "One White House ally called it a 'political gift.'"

Another Biden administration official told Politico that the MAGA House Oversight Committee members are “extreme and crazy, yes, and easy to dunk on in the media," which could benefit the White House politically.

While some House Democrats were apprehensive about the MAGA allies being so much in the national spotlight, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) said that it would make the GOP caucus appear unhinged.

"“The Republicans have brought the QAnon caucus to the Oversight Committee, and you can expect them to run with the most ludicrous conspiracy theories one can ever imagine,” he said. “And I think our job is very simple, which is to make sure that we ground our work and any of these investigations in reality.”

mmmmmm.....maybe. The American public's capacity for crazy hasn't bottomed out yet.

If the far right MAGA types are actually correct and not looney, and do a good job, more power to them.

I tend to agree it will just be more political theater and given these folk’s demonstrated abilities, it’s going to hurt conservatives more than help.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...487bb6663a14d19badf1

House GOP's 'all-star' oversight panel features 13 election deniers, 10 impeach-Biden-world advocates, and 3 congressional subpoena dodgers
• 4h ago

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
mmmmmm.....maybe. The American public's capacity for crazy hasn't bottomed out yet.

I agree. That vegetable from Pennsylvania got elected, ocasio Cortez got reelected as did Pelosi.....


.

Trump, Lawyer Hit With $1 Million Sanctions in Clinton Case
Story by Erik Larson • 1h ago

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...&ocid=winp2fptaskbar

“Its inadequacy as a legal claim was evident from the start,” the judge said. “No reasonable lawyer would have filed it. Intended for a political purpose, none of the counts of the amended complaint stated a cognizable legal claim.”

Trump, his lead attorney, Alina Habba, and her law firm Habba Madaio & Associates, are jointly liable for $937,989, the judge ruled. The sanctions were issued on behalf of 18 defendants who submitted a joint motion accusing Trump and Habba of knowingly filing a lawsuit with bogus and unbelievable claims to dishonestly advance a political narrative.

Middlebrooks, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, said in his ruling that filing such lawsuits “undermines the rule of law, portrays judges as partisans, and diverts resources from those who have suffered actual legal harm.”

Trump’s suit repeated many of his grievances over the FBI’s 2016 investigation into whether his presidential campaign was colluding with Russia to influence the election that year, alleging the entire probe was the result of a Democratic-led conspiracy to undermine his presidency and tarnish his reputation. Along with Clinton, he named former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey, Clinton Campaign Chair John Podesta, British intelligence ex-agent Christopher Steele and many others.

Middlebrooks dismissed Trump’s suit in September, calling it a “manifesto.” The judge in November ordered Habba and another lawyer to pay $50,000 to the court and $16,274 in legal fees and costs to one of the defendants, Democratic political operative Charles Dolan, who was involved in Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and filed his own motion for sanctions.

The judge rejected any notion that Trump’s lawyers were the only ones at fault, saying the former president is a sophisticated client with a long history of going to court.

“Mr. Trump is a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries,” the judge said. “He is the mastermind of strategic abuse of the judicial process, and he cannot be seen as a litigant blindly following the advice of a lawyer.”

================================================

Donald Trump Just Proved How Dangerous He Is
Story by Brent M. Eastwood • 12h ago

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...481c91a5a711ab0889bb

===============================================

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...481c91a5a711ab0889bb

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s rationale for targeting Ilhan Omar isn’t believable
Opinion by Dean Obeidallah • 7h ago

================================================

House Republicans will use the debt ceiling battle to 'inflict significant pain' on Americans: journalist
Story by Alex Henderson • 13h ago

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...481c91a5a711ab0889bb

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...4151fe8e6020b9801d08

Under oath, Trump is confronted with his ‘hoax’ hyperbole
Story by Philip Bump • 9h ago

But Carroll’s lawyers wanted something more concrete to demonstrate his flippancy on such allegations. So they walked him through some.

“Isn’t it true,” an attorney asked, “that you also referred to the use of mail-in ballots as a hoax?”

“Yeah, I do. Sure,” Trump replied. “I think they’re very dishonest. Mail-in ballots, very dishonest.”

Then the lawyer struck: “Isn’t it true that you yourself have voted by mail?”

“I do. I do,” Trump admitted. Then, a bit of moderation: “Sometimes I do. But I don’t know what happens to it once you give it. I have no idea.”

You get the point. Oh, mail-in voting is a hoax — but you vote by mail. Ergo, if the Carroll allegations are a hoax …

A bit later, the attorney tried to bolster the point with another example.

“Isn’t it true, sir,” the attorney asked, “that you also have referred to global warming as a hoax?”

“Yeah,” Trump said. “I think it’s largely a hoax, yes.”

“When you say ‘largely a hoax,’” the lawyer followed up, “what do you mean?”

“Well, I think the whole environmental thing is destroying our country in so many different ways,” Trump claimed. “I think they’ve weaponized the environment, yeah. A lot of what they do is a hoax, yes. Absolutely.”

“But just so the record is clear,” the attorney pressed, “do you think the scientific consensus that the temperatures on planet Earth have been getting warmer and are continuing to get warmer is a hoax?”

This question is fascinating because it suggests that the attorneys believe that Trump’s position on the subject is rooted not in rejection of the science but, instead, in political opportunism. What the record shows, though, is that Trump has never shown a robust grasp of the nuances of climate science — and that his dismissal of climate change may, in fact, be largely sincere.

Which is what his answer suggested.

“I think they go both ways,” he replied, presumably meaning temperatures. A bit later he again claimed that climate change activists had stopped using the term “global warming” because “it wasn’t working” rhetorically.

In reality, Republican consultant Frank Luntz recommended that conservatives adopt the term “climate change” to blunt the implications of “global warming.” https://www.theguardian.com/en...usnews.climatechange

After his “both ways” response to the initial question, Trump quickly pivoted.

“I think it has nothing do with this case,” he complained. “I mean, why are you asking — other than you’re a political person, why are you asking this question? What does that have to do with this case?”

The answer is obvious. Trump’s statement rejecting Carroll’s allegations included what, coming from another person, would be a strong rejection: that the whole thing was a hoax. What Carroll’s lawyers showed, under oath, was something that was otherwise obvious to any outside observer over the past eight years: A claim from Trump that something is a hoax often means it isn’t — even if it doesn’t always effectively serve as an indicator that the thing is, in fact, quite legitimate.

Trump is an egomaniac that can’t stand to be out of the spotlight. Thus his continual stream of lawsuits, all of which he loses. He must really enjoy paying whopping legal bills.

Talking about ecosystems:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a73KKwy7-Rc

Fox News, at apex of 'ecosystem of disinformation,' faces potential legal comeuppance