A racist black Democrat member of Congress who is a former impeachment manager suggested a long-term solution to deal with former President Donald Trump on Sunday. Everyone should pay attention because this is how the Democratic Party will operate for real in the future.
Stacey Plaskett, a Democratic congressional delegate from the Virgin Islands who is a non-voting representative who acted as House manager during Trump’s second impeachment, appeared on MSNBC’s “The Sunday Show” when a fleeting slip of the tongue raised severe concerns.
The president’s federal indictment relating to his possession of materials designated confidential was discussed by the ranking member of the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
Plaskett argued to host Jonathan Capehart, leaning toward the lie of “guilty until proven innocent,” that “having Trump not only have the codes but now having the classified information for Americans and being able to put that out and share it in his resort with anyone and everyone who comes through should be terrifying to all Americans.”
Without missing a beat, she responded, “And he needs to be shot — stopped.”
In response to the remark, many people questioned the lack of corporate media indignation over such an obvious “incitement of violence” and whether or not the U.S. Secret Service would be knocking on her door for endangering the life of a former president.
Where is the secret service in all this ?
— Mike Knutar (@KnutarMike) June 18, 2023
Direct threat of an ex President…, she needs to be impeached
— Peter Zabroski (@PZabroski) June 18, 2023
Of course, that wasn’t Plaskett’s only contentious remark during the MSNBC interview; she also had a few things to say about Republican-led initiatives to rein in possible federal government power abuses, particularly a weaponized Justice Department.
The delegate criticized the GOP’s evidence-supported accusations of a two-tiered system of justice by accusing them of attempting to operate “above the law,” despite serving on the subcommittee in charge of those investigations.
“We know that this is a reckless man, who believes that he is above the law, that the rules do not apply to him — and that’s the thing that I’m concerned about with many of my colleagues in the GOP — that they believe that there is a two-tiered system. But the two-tiered system is not to punish them more,” she argued. “It’s to — they want it to allow them to get away with more than everyday Americans.”
This was from the same member who had previously called for the arrest of journalist Matt Taibbi for using the incorrect acronym for the Center for Internet Security (CIS) in sworn evidence, accidentally referring to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
“This mistake is important,” Plaskett stated in a letter referencing Taibbi’s testimony on the Twitter Files, which revealed the breadth of Big Tech and government agencies’ efforts to keep information from the public, “because, by adding an ‘A,’ you weren’t making a harmless spelling error. Rather you were alleging that CISA — a government entity — was working with the EIP [Election Integrity Partnership] to have posts removed from social media.”
The death threat comes on the heels of news that far-left groups are stopping Trump from retaining top legal help.
Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard lawyer, presented a paper on the Gatestone Institute website on Thursday that discussed the difficulties President Trump is having defending himself against the countless baseless accusations leveled against him by the far-left.
Here’s what Dershowitz had to say:
- There are disturbing suggestions that among the reasons lawyers are declining the case is because they fear legal and career reprisals.
- There is a nefarious group that calls itself The 65 Project that has as its goal to intimidate lawyers into not representing Trump or anyone associated with him. They have threatened to file bar charges against any such lawyers.
- I wrote an op-ed offering to defend pro bono any lawyers that The 65 Project goes after. So The 65 Project immediately went after me, and contrived a charge based on a case in which I was a constitutional consultant, but designed to send a message to potential Trump lawyers: If you defend Trump or anyone associated with him, we will target you and find something to charge you with. The lawyers to whom I spoke are fully aware of this threat — and they are taking it seriously…. It may even be worse today….
- Good lawyers… generally welcome challenges, especially in high-profile cases. This case is different: the threats to the lawyers are greater than at any time since McCarthyism. Nor is the comparison to McCarthyism a stretch. I recall during the 1950s how civil liberties lawyers, many of whom despised communism, were cancelled, and attacked if they dared to represent people accused of being communists.
- Our system of justice is based on the John Adams standard: he too was attacked for defending the British soldiers accused of the Boston Massacre, but his representation of these accused killers now serves as a symbol of the 6th Amendment right to counsel. That symbol has now been endangered….
- Trump’s lawyers have now alleged that one of the prosecutors has suggested to Stanley Woodward, the lawyer for Waltine Nauta, Trump’s co-defendant, that his application for judgeship may be negatively affected if he persists in defending Nauta vigorously rather than encouraging him to cooperate against Trump. If that is true – and I have not seen the evidence to support it – then it represents a direct attack on the 6th Amendment.