« First « Previous Comments 14 - 37 of 37 Search these comments
Al_Sharpton_for_President says
And yet Maryland morons elect him.
he's from monkey county (montgomery county) maryland...you have to live in the DC metro area to understand ...
.
he's from monkey county (montgomery county) maryland

Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) is trying to convince the American people that President Donald Trump made a choice to “disqualify” himself from the 2024 election.
The congressman claims that blocking Trump from running is more “democratic” than other clauses in the U.S. Constitution.
Raskin compared it to the clause disqualifying foreign candidates to run for president, which he described as “undemocratic.”
Raskin attempted to do so on Sunday, during an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union. ...
The claim is that Trump took such an oath when he became president and that he “engaged in insurrection” on Jan. 6, 2021.
Legal experts, however, insist that this amendment was never meant to be applied the way anti-Trump groups are attempting to apply it to the 45th president.
Also, Jan. 6 was not an “insurrection” and Trump has never been convicted of any such charges.
Montgomery County is the San Francisco of Maryland
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) the House Oversight Committee’s ranking member and a former Trump “impeachment manager,” previously advocated for non-citizen participation in the U.S. election system.
Raskin argues that the framers of the U.S. Constitution did not “intend” for a citizenship requirement to vote.
It comes as the House gears up to vote on a bill that would repeal a Washington D.C. law to grant non-citizen residents of the city the right to vote in local elections. ...
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) has suggested that Democrats are planning to block the certification of the 2024 election results if President Donald Trump wins.
Raskin, who sat on the anti-Trump January 6 Committee, discussed overturning the election results in order to supposedly “save democracy” if Democrats don’t get the outcome they want.
Raskin raised the alarming scenario in resurfaced comments from February.
He argued that Congress would disqualify Trump after the November election, even if the 45th president wins the presidential race.
The Democrat described the action as a necessary response to the Supreme Court’s refusal to disqualify Trump from the ballot.
In March, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that individual states cannot enforce the so-called “insurrection ban.”
Democrats had pushed the ban in a desperate attempt to keep Trump out of power.
Anticipating the court’s pro-Trump ruling, Raskin told a crowd at a Washington D.C. bookstore that Congress would have to take drastic action.
“They want to kick it to Congress, so it’s going to be up to us on January 6, 2025, to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he’s disqualified,” he said.
The History of Rep. Raskin Persecution of President Trump.
During President Trump’s first term, it was as if Rep. Raskin’s had taken a sworn oath to take vengeance on President Trump for winning the presidency in 2016. For instance, he consistently portrayed Trump as having colluded with the Russians to interfere with the 2016 election and that this was as a serious threat to American democracy. He worked tirelessly to portray Trump’s presidency as a cesspit of corruption.
Even after the Mueller report of 2019 vindicated Trump and documented that Russian interference was minimal and had little impact on the election, Raskin persisted.
In terms of the 2016 Russian disinformation, the Durham report of May 2023 further exonerated Trump and criticized the FBI for displaying a "serious lack of analytical rigor" towards the information they received, especially as it was from politically affiliated sources.
In contrast to Durham's findings, Jamie Raskin continues to assert that there was substantial evidence justifying the FBI's investigation into potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
The Durham and Mueller reports embarrassed and exposed the democrats, particularly Raskin. This is a hurt that they won’t easily forget. But understand that on January 6th, 2021, Raskin’s vengeance turned into a deeply personal vendetta against Trump.
The backstory: Emotional Trauma.
On January 6th, Jamie Raskin’s vengeance against Trump became his life’s work. A Newsweek articles lays out the details.
Just a day before the (January 6th) riot, the Raskins had held a funeral for his son, Tommy, who died by suicide at age 25 after suffering from depression—in his speech, the Maryland congressman called it "the saddest day of our lives."
On January 6th, Raskin was in the capital with his daughter.
"The reason they came with me was because they wanted to be together with me in the middle of a devastating week for our family," he said of bringing his daughter and son-in-law to the Capitol on January 6.
They gathered together to receive condolences in House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer's office in the Capitol. Raskin began drafting a speech on unity that he planned to give later that evening and then he left to head to the House floor before family members went to the gallery to watch.
"By the time we learned about what was going on, it was too late. I couldn't get out there to be with them in that office," Raskin said.
For over an hour Raskin and his son-in-law and daughter were separated. They barricaded in Hoyer's office, and he was on the House floor.
"She said, 'Dad, I don't want to come back to the Capitol,'" Raskin recalled. "Of all the terrible, brutal things I saw and heard that day, that one hit me the hardest."
In reading this account, the deep pain of the loss of a gifted son a few days before J-6, combined with the fear of not knowing if his daughter and family were safe during the events of January 6th must have been truly horrifying.
It is easy to imagine that as J-6 literally happened while his family were at the capital with him to accept condolences from members of Congress, Raskin might have linked that death and his hatred of Donald Trump forever in his mind. This was further enhanced by his personal cancer diagnosis just shortly thereafter.
I hypothesize that the these traumatic events, so closely linked in time, have become as one in Raskin’s mind. Rep. Raskin is no longer seeking vengeance against Trump for winning in 2016, he is seeking retribution and absolution for the death of his son.
Since January 6th, Raskin has spent countless resources, time, and energy in investigating, impeaching, and strategizing how to take down Trump permanently. It appears to have become a life passion.
Revenge is a never-healing wound inflicted upon oneself. ...
“Let folks cast their votes for Trump if that’s their choice. But mark my words, we won’t be certifying the election. He might win, but we’ll ensure he doesn’t step foot in the Oval Office.” — Jamie Raskin (D-MD)
Congressman Jamie Raskin says EVEN IF TRUMP WINS they will disqualify him on January 6th, 2025 under 14A.
...freedoms and equality of the American people but the court is not going to save us and so that means the only thing that really works is people in motion amending the Constitution but again it's necessary but it's not sufficient because what can be put into the Constitution can slip away from you very quickly and the greatest example going on right now before our very eyes is section three of the 14th Amendment which they're just disappearing with a magic wand as if it doesn't exist even though it could not be clearer what it's stating and so you know they want to kick it to Congress so it's going to be up to us on January 6 2025 to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he's disqual ified and then we need bodyguards for everybody in Civil War conditions all because the nine justices not all of them but these justices who have um not many cases to look at every year not that much work to do a huge staff great protection simply do not want to do their job and interpret what the great 14th Amendment means and I'm glad that sherin's creating her new center so we can bring that back to life even as we're continuing to amend the Constitution as professor Hass has invited us to do thank you so much and thank you everybody we've run out of time...
Frank DeCota
@DecotaFrank
5 Aug 2024
Trump was never charged or convicted of Insurrection, so how does that apply? Raskin is an unethical douchebag.
catsmeow
@purpleluv2the9s
6 Aug 2024
Truth and facts don’t matter to them, it’s pure emotion. Can’t believe I used to like him. They’ve all flipped.
Raskin is such a repellent dickhead, and Maryland is such a fucked up state.
Raskin is such a repellent dickhead, and Maryland is such a fucked up state
Percentage-wise, there are more black people and less white people in Maryland than in South Carolina, where I am moving to soon.
Probably Baltimore I assume
WookieMan says
Probably Baltimore I assume
Not just Baltimore. Population of Baltimore is around 585,000, 60% black. Maryland population around 6 million.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) on Monday doubled down on his push for the Trump administration to release all of the files and names associated with late financier Jeffrey Epstein’s case, saying failing to do so is “dangerous” to the public.
“If there are literally other people on this list who are somehow implicated in these actions, it is dangerous to public health and safety not to release the names publicly,” Raskin said during an appearance on MSNBC’s “Deadline: White House.”
Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) has mysteriously changed his tune on eliminating the Senate filibuster shortly after President Donald Trump called on Republicans to end the procedure.
On Wednesday, the anti-Trump Democrat declined to say whether he supports eliminating the filibuster, despite previously being a vocal supporter of such efforts.
Raskin previously endorsed calls to end the filibuster during the Biden administration. ...
“One of the things that he (Trump) has been talking about for the last couple of days more intensely is getting rid of the filibuster,” Bash asked.
“That’s actually something that you wanted to do when Joe Biden was president.
“Things weren’t getting through the Senate.
“So is that an area where you agree with him?”
Raskin responded that procedural changes were not his focus.
“Look, we don’t need a procedural fix at this point,” he said.
_congressman