Yeah, he knew it was illegal

I downloaded Michigan’s COVID data, updated Wednesday. I get the data here. The current status chart on that page includes current totals. Through the full course of the pandemic (since cases started showing up in March 2020), over 2.5 million people have tested positive. The state’s population is 10 million. So a quarter of the state has tested positive (yeah, I know this ignores the people who have tested positive from two or more different infections). The number who have died is over 36,600. The peaks in new cases per day might be reaching a plateau. For the last few weeks the peaks are 3398, 3046, 2198, and 2331. Many numbers likely adjusted from previous reports. Deaths per day is not getting posted quickly. The data for last week shows deaths in single digits. But the week before is now in the range of 9-14. Thankfully, the ten weeks before then the deaths per day have been 22 or fewer. Brandi Buchman of Daily Kos liveblogged Thursday’s hearing of the January 6 Committee in two posts, here and here. The primary focus of this day of testimony was to show the pressure placed on the vice nasty to overturn the Electoral College vote counting. In late December and early January several people, lawyers, legal scholars, and lawmakers, told the vice nasty his role in the EC vote counting was a formality. He could not interfere in the counting. Some of the Committee’s proceedings documented who said that to the vice nasty. The proceedings also showed how much pressure the vice nasty was getting from the nasty guy and those supporting the insurrection. John Eastman was a lawyer for the nasty guy. In some of the photos of the speeches at the Ellipse before the march to the Capitol Eastman is standing to the side of the podium wearing a tan overcoat (an example here). There are also photos of him speaking at the event. On January 4th Eastman was one of those telling the nasty guy he could not recommend rejecting electors. On January 5th Eastman told the vice nasty about his plan to reject certain electors. Walter Einenkel of Kos reported a couple days after the Capitol attack Eastman asked to be put on the list of those seeking a pardon from the nasty guy. Yeah, he knew it was illegal. In a third post Buchman summarized the day. This included a discussion of how close – only 40 feet – the rioters were to the vice nasty as he was taken to safety and if the rioters were not distracted by a Capitol Policeman they would have killed him. This summary also includes a photo of the vice nasty at a place of safety talking on a phone while looking at another phone showing a tweet from the nasty guy praising the hordes as they chant “Hang Mike Pence!” Mark Sumner of Kos reported that Eastman claimed there was a “heated fight” among the justices of the Supreme Court about getting enough of them to hear one of the claims of election fraud. Eastman claimed insider knowledge (he had clerked for Clarence Thomas). Was this bragging? Threatening violence on the Capitol if the Supremes did nothing? Was he succeeding in getting some of them to join his plan? Another part of this is the revelation that the insider knowledge was coming from Ginni Thomas, wife of Clarence. We knew she was pressuring Arizona legislatures to submit a nasty guy slate of electors. We also knew she had sent a series of texts to nasty guy Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. And now we know there were a series of emails between her and Eastman about what’s going on with the Supremes. If Ginni was talking to justices to get their support for this scheme the resignation of Clarence should be only the first. Sumner also reported the January 6 Committee would like Ginni to come for a little chat. She agreed to come to “clear up misconceptions.” Joan McCarter of Kos reported that with these revelations the Supremes are now in the middle of the insurrection mess.

Eastman knew what he was pushing—with help from Ginni Thomas—was illegal. Following that to its logical conclusion, with the revelations of the last 24 hours, how does the committee not subpoena Ginni Thomas? Furthermore, how do President Joe Biden, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer not demand that Clarence Thomas resign? How do the House and Senate Judiciary Committees not turn their attention to Clarence Thomas and investigating just what Clarence and Ginni Thomas were cooking up together? ... It’s time to begin the investigations leading to an impeachment of Clarence Thomas. No, this Senate would not convict with 50 Republicans, but after the work of the Jan. 6 committee and all of these revelations, they need to be forced to vote to protect him. They need to be making the case against Clarence Thomas, and then they need to start real work of reforming and expanding the Supreme Court.

Paul Waldman, opinion writer for the Washington Post, tweeted:

Whenever I see a news story that starts "A man with connections to a violent extremist group..." it's an even bet whether the next line is "was convicted in federal court today" or "won the Republican primary today"

Leah McElrath tweeted:

Trump is not done with his destruction. He will never stop on his own. He is fueled by envy, grievances, and a desire for revenge of what he perceives as ways he was betrayed. He will never stop on his own. Instead, he must be stopped by those with greater power.

So will these proceedings prompt someone with greater power actually stop him? Bill in Portland, Maine, in his Cheers and Jeers column for Kos included an excerpt from Molly Ivins:

As an American living today, your one vote means you have more political power than 99 percent of all the people who ever lived on this planet. Think about it: Who ever had this much power? A peasant in ancient Egypt? A Roman slave? A medieval shoemaker? A French farmer? Your grandfather? Why throw power away? Use it. Leverage it. —November 2004

Actually, both my grandfathers were born in the US and voted quite consistently. As I was writing this the power went out – the third time this month. It likely happened because today has been windy. Fortunately, it was out for only a half minute. But that’s long enough for the computer to be shut down. So I rebooted the modem, then the computer. In the middle of rebooting the power went out again. And again for a short period – perhaps ten seconds. But this time the computer didn’t boot. Something about needing repairs, which it would attempt to do. So I let it repair. Ten minutes later it finished and said I should reboot. I did. Everything looks fine. Thankfully. I’m not ready to buy a new computer.