Questo sito utilizza i cookies per fornire i nostri servizi, per migliorare le prestazioni, per analisi, e (per gli utenti che accedono senza fare login) per la pubblicità. Usando LibraryThing confermi di aver letto e capito le nostre condizioni di servizio e la politica sulla privacy. Il tuo uso del sito e dei servizi è soggetto a tali politiche e condizioni.
Risultati da Google Ricerca Libri
Fai clic su di un'immagine per andare a Google Ricerca Libri.
Biography & Autobiography.
History.
Politics.
Nonfiction.
HTML:Read by Liz Cheney with 50+ audio source material clips included, Oath and Honor is a gripping first-hand account from inside the halls of Congress as Donald Trump and his enablers betrayed the American people and the Constitutionleading to the violent attack on our Capitol on January 6th, 2021by the House Republican leader who dared to stand up to it.
In the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump and many around him, including certain other elected Republican officials, intentionally breached their oath to the Constitution: they ignored the rulings of dozens of courts, plotted to overturn a lawful election, and provoked a violent attack on our Capitol. Liz Cheney, one of the few Republican officials to take a stand against these efforts, witnessed the attack first-hand, and then helped lead the Congressional Select Committee investigation into how it happened. In Oath and Honor, she tells the story of this perilous moment in our history, those who helped Trump spread the stolen election lie, those whose actions preserved our constitutional framework, and the risks we still face. .… (altro)
The most striking thing about this book is the lack of citations. Despite being a member of the special House Committee that accumulated hordes of data, nothing is supported. One writes a novel without citations; one writes a revelation with many citations.
It is impossible for any one not to be moved by reading this book. The author was clearly disgusted by the story she tells but what is not clear is what came first: her disgust or the story. Her reverence for the oath she took when she entered the House is clear. As one progresses through the presentation, it is well to recall that Article II, section 4, of the Constitution lists the grounds for impeaching a President: “Treason, Bribery and other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” The first two listed are self-evident and the third is whatever the House of Representatives says they are. Although, over the years, many members have often filed bills of Impeachment, only 4 times have House managers journeyed to the Senate carrying a Bill of Impeachment. Three failed and one was not acted upon. I wish Senator McConnell had allowed the 4th, Mr. Trump’s second, to come to the Floor of the Senate for a trial and vote.
Each crime rises and falls from the immediate actions of the alleged perpetrator. Even so, American justice does try to recognize the environment in which a crime is occurs. This is called mitigation. Cheney’s work successfully avoids any consideration of the environment.
The first argument is Mr. Trump’s denial of the election results in 2020, and that denial took place in a vacuum. It did not. The world was in a pandemic of epic proportions in November, 2020.
Republicans have long held that a voter present him or herself at a polling place on election day during the time the polls are open. Mail-in ballots exist for those who request them in advance. All votes must be in the clerk’s hands before the polls close. The Democrats seek to lessen the majesty of voting by advocating “a time for voting” with the ballots eventually being counted around election day. It is clear, the “election day” thinking of the GOP was inadequate for the chaos of the pandemic. The Democrats took full advantage of the chaos and pushed all sorts of emergency means for folks to vote. The GOP will lose in 2024 if it doesn’t take a broader look at accommodating voters. Even so, the principle of vote by election day must be upheld. The novelties of November 2020 led many to question the integrity of the election. Having grown up in Chicago, I’ve seen all sorts of means used “to get out the vote,” including cash payments by a Democratic precinct captain on election day. Whatever other innovations we attempt, ballots must only be cast by registered voters and received by the clerk before polls close on election day.
The chaos of November 2020 led Mr. Trump to relentlessly question the election results, as was his right. However the votes got there, it is clear that Mr. Biden won that election. Cheney remarks that Mr. Trump has yet to concede his loss but she does not mention that neither has Mrs. Clinton from 2016.
Liz Cheney does not recognize the environmental elements of Mr. Trump’s campaign for the 2016 election or during his entire presidency. It is in this way that she blunts the story she tells.
Moving on to January 6, 2021, it is understatement to say that day was horrid. It must never be repeated. Cheney takes the lofty position that if only Mr. Trump is dealt with January 6 in a definitive way, things would have been far different. I believe this is misguided optimism. One has to ignore the environment that was seeded during Mr. Clinton’s presidency.
An overwhelming majority of the media have gone all-in on the liberal point of view, that is government is our best friend. I proudly admit I am a Republican. I believe in small and decentralized government that permits citizens to make their own decision within carefully crafted but simple laws without being hampered and harassed by a nanny state. It is appalling to me that the Federal government is the third largest employer in the nation. On the national level, neither major political party has been especially frugal. In fact, the notion that we spend more tax dollars to pay the interest on the National Debt than we do on National Defense is nauseating.
As for 1/6/2021, it is clear Mr. Trump did not do everything he could have done to end it as promptly as he could. I do not agree with those, Liz Cheney included, who would have us believe Mr. Trump instigated it or put it into motion. At the same time, I distance myself as far as I can from those who did plan it and put it into motion. Yet, even this is part of the environment for many mob actions since 2016 have not even been criticized to say nothing about punishment for the perpetrators. It is sadly true that outrageous behavior on the right will be resoundingly punished and from the left ignored and even encouraged.
Fortunately, in 2028, there will be two candidates who will be new to us. Maybe that will bring a bright new approach to elections in these marvelous United States. ( )
I swore I was through reading books about Donald Trump’s efforts to overthrow the government. But when my turn came up for the audio book at my library, I decided to listen to it. I watched every minute of the January 6th hearing that Mississippi congressman Bennie Thompson chaired. Liz Cheney was the ranking minority member. She narrated the book. One of the real bonuses of this book is the use of actual audio from the hearing sessions when she was talking about them. That really helped my understanding of the procedures even though I had watched them on television. I really wish every American would read Cheney’s book, but, unfortunately, those who need it the most—Republicans who refused to watch the proceedings—probably would never give a book like this the time of day. I have a good friend who happens to live in Bennie Thompson’s district in Mississippi. When he last visited, I mentioned how impressed I was with the way the congressman ran the January 6th Commission hearing sessions. My friend’s response was, “I didn’t see it.” It’s too bad that most Republicans probably feel this way. One of the most jarring things Liz Cheney said was that she never thought she would see the day when the Republican Party couldn’t be counted on the protect our republic, but that was the case now. This coming from one of the highest ranking Republicans in Congress….at least until she was primaried in the next election. If you are reading this review and you’re thinking, “I don’t want to read another book about Trump’s antics,” at least read (or, better yet listen to) the Epilogue of “Oath and Honor.” That chapter, even if you saw the hearings, is well worth the few minutes it takes to read. Liz Cheney sacrificed her political career to do what she did on the Jan. 6 commission. History will be much kinder to her than it will be to Donald Trump. ( )
Today I watched the first day of former president Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial for election fraud surrounding his hush payments to a porn star. I have read several books about Trump, written mainly by journalists. I bought Oath and Honor to get perspective. I’m a Democrat, but I have voted for the other guys a few times and like to hear all sides of any issue. Liz is one of my favorite Republicans. Her book is a testament to her devotion to her oath of office and her determination to uphold the laws of this country. She meticulously documents the steps and hard work she and the other members of the January 6th committee took to bring the truth to the American people. Trump’s desire to end our republic is a story that is still playing out in real-time. I think many people in our country have been misled into believing lies through repeated propaganda spewed daily by certain news channels and social media. I’m not naïve enough to believe all politicians are truthful. Most measure what they tell the public against what they think they need to say to get re-elected. If you read a lot, you know this is nothing new. But, most members of the Republican party are perpetrating a massive lie to appease Trump. Their behavior is beyond anything we’ve seen in this country. I recommend that anyone concerned about this issue read this book and others and educate themselves so they can make an informed decision at the ballot box in November. ( )
This is a riveting account of the investigation into the Jan. 6 attempted coup in the United States as well as the investigation committee's two-year fight against a disinformation campaign to try to document the truth of what happened. ( )
Excellent audio book read by the author. I follow the political news pretty closely, but I still found this book insightful and informative. To hear the inside story of the last year of Trump's presidency from someone who lived through it as a member of the House of Representatives and then a member of the January 6 committee was very powerful. Highly recommend. ( )
Dati dalle informazioni generali inglesi.Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
For my parents, who taught me to love America and read her history.
For Kate, Elizabeth, Grace, Philip, and Richard -may you always live in freedom.
For Phil, for everything.
Incipit
Dati dalle informazioni generali inglesi.Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
This is the story of the moment when American democracy began to unravel. It is the story of the men and women who fought to save it, and of the enablers and collaborators whose actions ensured the threat would grow and metastasize. (Prologue)
Two days after the 2020 election, House Republication Leader, Kevin McCarthy told me he had talked to Donald Trump. "He knows its over," McCarthy said. Trump just needed some time to process the loss." (Part 1, The Only Thing That Matters Is Winning)
Thomas Jefferson was the first president to take the oath of office in Washington, D. C. (Epilogue)
Citazioni
Dati dalle informazioni generali inglesi.Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
Not a single member of Congress—including those from the states Trump was already saying had been stolen from him—suggested that their own election had been rigged or was flawed in any way.
“The only thing that matters,” Jordan said, “is winning.”
Esper believed he had been fired in part because he had made it clear that he would not stand for any use of the military to contest the outcome of an election.
Douglas MacGregor, a retired colonel who regularly spreads pro-Putin propaganda on American airwaves, was named senior adviser to the secretary of defense.
Trump also named retired Brigadier General Anthony Tata to be acting undersecretary of defense for Policy. Tata was yet another Trump nominee unable to win Senate confirmation. In this case, Trump was appointing him to the very position for which the Senate had refused to confirm him just a few months earlier.
It didn't seem right to me for a member of Congress to agree to have their vote bound by anything other than their obligations to their constituents and to the Constitution.
Appointed by Trump himself, Krebs had spent two years working to harden America's election systems from outside interference.
On November 12, Krebs had issued a joint statement with other state and federal election officials explaining that “the 2020 election was the most secure in American history” and that “there is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”
Rudy failed to explain how even 1,000 “affidavits” would be adequate to justify throwing out the votes of tens of millions of Americans. Instead, he insisted he had additional secret evidence—“aspects of this fraud that at this point I really can't reveal.”
...the damage had already been done. Millions of Americans—including tens of thousands of my own constituents—believed these lies, and they believed in the people telling them.
...the president cannot prove these claims or demonstrate that they would change the election result, he should fulfill his duty to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States by respecting the sanctity of our electoral process.
The amicus brief is not a simple support document to tell the Court to allow the President to make his legal argument. It makes serious claims about the integrity of the election, and attempts to cast doubt on the legality of actions many election officials have taken. The allegations of fraud and impropriety cannot be squared with the historic gains we see in the House Republican Conference.
Mike Johnson and our Republican leaders had played a destructive role. Johnson had convinced 125 other Republican members of Congress to sign on to an amicus brief that many had never read—a brief, moreover, that made numerous false factual and constitutional claims. Members signed on in the hope that it would show support for Trump—and out of fear of political retribution if their names were not on the list. Some who had shown an initial inclination to do the right thing, like Kevin McCarthy, lost their fortitude when they faced public criticism—and, I assumed, private pressure from Trump.
Of course, Donald Trump's public campaign to spread false allegations of massive election fraud had created those polling numbers. And when members of Congress and other elected Republicans echoed his stolen-election claims, or accused the Supreme Court of throwing out the rule of law, those falsehoods had an impact on polling results because some people believed the lies.
In a constitutional republic, a candidate can utilize the system to the very end, and if that doesn't work, they concede. What Pierson was suggesting was something else entirely—and it sounded unconstitutional.
I believe that Donald Trump's decision to attack the lawfully certified Electoral College results and to ignore the rulings of our courts was an assault on the structural constitutional safeguards that keep us free.
I bowed my head in prayer. I am a firm believer in the power of prayer. I have seen it work in my own life and in the life of our nation. But at that moment, I couldn't help thinking that we needed to pray quickly so we could prepare to confront the violent mob right outside the chamber door.
Terrorists couldn't shake the foundations of our republic, but what if an American president refused to guarantee the peaceful transition of power? What if he attempted to overturn an election in order to stay in power, ignored the rulings of the courts, mobilized a violent mob, and provoked them to attack and invade the Capitol? An American president willing to do those things was a threat unlike any we had ever faced before—a direct threat to the foundations of our republic.
One concern I heard repeatedly was this: Members believed Trump should be impeached, but they feared a vote for impeachment would put them—and their families—in danger. We were now entering territory where the threat of violence was affecting how members voted, preventing them from voting to impeach the president who had already unleashed violence.
Davis said the Capitol Police were monitoring different groups that planned to attend, and they thought the plan to push out the security perimeter and use bike racks for crowd control would work. These measures had worked a few months earlier, when there had been protests but no violence. They were nowhere close to adequate for the violence on January 6.
Today Donald Trump poses a threat that many in Washington simply fail to grasp. He can move Americans to action based on total dishonesty.
...the power to rally a mob must never be underestimated. Nor should the fear that a mob can instill in people of reason. A person with that kind of power—to intimidate and threaten and motivate others to carry out violent acts—does not just slowly fade into the background. He must be defeated.
when the Committee later issued Jordan a subpoena, we asked for his testimony on multiple topics, including “communications with President Trump on January 6th” and “any discussions involving the possibility of presidential pardons for individuals involved in any aspect of January 6th or the planning for January 6th.” Although Jordan had said publicly that he had nothing to hide, and that he would be happy to speak with the Committee, he declined to do so: He refused to comply with a congressional subpoena.
Rather than selecting two Republican alternatives, however, Kevin McCarthy decided to withdraw all five of his nominees. For the next year and a half, he would argue that the Select Committee was irretrievably partisan because Pelosi had rejected his nominees. He suggested repeatedly that she had rejected all of his nominees, which of course was not true:
In the months that followed, many potential witnesses would attempt to resist Committee subpoenas by making the spurious argument that Pelosi had rejected all of McCarthy's nominees, and that the Committee was therefore improperly constituted. Multiple courts ultimately addressed these arguments, and every one of them ruled in the Committee's favor.
Although it should be obvious to any objective person that my staff could not remotely be described as “liberal Democrats,” Trump's allies in Congress nevertheless tried to characterize the investigation as a partisan effort, run entirely by Democrats. It wasn't.
It bears repeating: At this point in the fall of 2021, Jim Jordan was saying that investigating January 6—including what Donald Trump did on that date—was the job of the Department of Justice. Today Jordan calls that same investigation the “weaponization” of the Justice Department.
If the country does not commit to investigating and pursuing accountability for those responsible, the Court fears January 6 will repeat itself.
I was disappointed that Ginni Thomas had been deceived by the demonstrably untrue election-fraud nonsense. I was even more concerned that she did not seem to respect the rulings of our courts. Ginni, like many others, seemed to believe everything she read and saw in the Trump-friendly media.
And we saw a note written by Lincoln on August 23, 1864, when he thought he was likely to lose the upcoming presidential election to General George B. McClellan. If McClellan prevailed, Lincoln believed McClellan would seek an armistice with the Confederacy, essentially recognizing the independence of the Confederate states. Lincoln wrote, in part: This morning as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so cooperate with the President-elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such grounds that he cannot possibly save it afterwards.
Indeed, the planning for January 6 appears to have consumed the vast majority of the president's time for several weeks in December of 2020. He was doing almost nothing else. Donald Trump did not do all this on a whim. It was not something planned in one hour, or in one day, or even in one week. It was complicated and detailed. And, above all else, it was premeditated.
1) We knew we had to begin with Donald Trump's successful effort to persuade millions of Americans that the election had somehow been stolen from him.... we knew that Trump had been told repeatedly—by his campaign, by his Justice Department, and by his White House staff—that none of his stolen-election claims were true.
2) We also now knew—again thanks to the work of our investigative staff—how Donald Trump had tried to pressure state legislatures and state officials to flip official certified Biden electoral votes to Trump.
3) Our staff had also uncovered significant evidence showing how the Trump team had created fraudulent Trump electoral slates for states that Biden had won.
4) When Trump's plot to convince state legislatures to flip the electoral votes did not work, Trump began looking for a way to make the US Justice Department persuade those legislatures to do so.
5) The Trump team planned each of those steps with the January 6 joint session of Congress in mind. The intent was that Vice President Mike Pence, in his formal role as president of the Senate, would agree on January 6 not to count the official Biden electoral votes from multiple states. And Pence would rely on the fraudulent Trump electoral slates as a rationale for doing that.
6) To further support what he planned for Mike Pence, Donald Trump summoned his supporters to Washington on January 6, where he would stage an emotionally charged rally with slogans like TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY before sending them to the US Capitol. The crowd itself would apply the pressure needed to make all this work.
7) The ultimate element of Trump's plan took shape as the crowd attacked the Capitol. Donald Trump was trying to delay the electoral count, but once it became clear that Mike Pence would not refuse to count genuine Biden electoral votes, Trump had few options remaining.
the violent attack and the invasion of the Capitol were the only things stopping the electoral count.
Withdrawing from the race for my seat in Congress would be seen as declaring defeat in my own election. It might also signal that our investigation had failed—that I was giving up, or that this fight somehow no longer merited the effort. I knew that the Trump team would claim my decision to quit as their victory.
Trump supporter had posted my home address online and encouraged people to converge on our house after the rally. I had to call one of our daughters who was home alone that day and tell her to leave the house immediately. Violence—and, more specifically, the threat of violence against Trump's political opponents—was a reality that threatened our families, too.
Twenty-two federal judges appointed by Republican presidents, including 10 appointed by President Trump himself, and at least 24 elected or appointed Republican state judges dismissed Trump's claims.
At the heart of the attack on January 6 is a willingness to embrace dangerous conspiracies that attack the very core premise of our nation: that lawful elections—reviewed by the courts when necessary, and certified by the states and Electoral College—determine who serves as president.
Ultime parole
Dati dalle informazioni generali inglesi.Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
Many of you sacrificed for the good of our nation. You have helped make history - and, I hope, helped to right the ship. (Chapter 58, Unfit for Any Office)
Most importantly, we cannot make the grave mistake of returning Donald Trump - the man who caused January 6 - to the White House, or to any position of public trust, ever again. (Prologue)
Biography & Autobiography.
History.
Politics.
Nonfiction.
HTML:Read by Liz Cheney with 50+ audio source material clips included, Oath and Honor is a gripping first-hand account from inside the halls of Congress as Donald Trump and his enablers betrayed the American people and the Constitutionleading to the violent attack on our Capitol on January 6th, 2021by the House Republican leader who dared to stand up to it.
In the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump and many around him, including certain other elected Republican officials, intentionally breached their oath to the Constitution: they ignored the rulings of dozens of courts, plotted to overturn a lawful election, and provoked a violent attack on our Capitol. Liz Cheney, one of the few Republican officials to take a stand against these efforts, witnessed the attack first-hand, and then helped lead the Congressional Select Committee investigation into how it happened. In Oath and Honor, she tells the story of this perilous moment in our history, those who helped Trump spread the stolen election lie, those whose actions preserved our constitutional framework, and the risks we still face. .
)
)
Google Books — Sto caricando le informazioni...
(4.32)
1
It is impossible for any one not to be moved by reading this book. The author was clearly disgusted by the story she tells but what is not clear is what came first: her disgust or the story. Her reverence for the oath she took when she entered the House is clear. As one progresses through the presentation, it is well to recall that Article II, section 4, of the Constitution lists the grounds for impeaching a President: “Treason, Bribery and other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” The first two listed are self-evident and the third is whatever the House of Representatives says they are. Although, over the years, many members have often filed bills of Impeachment, only 4 times have House managers journeyed to the Senate carrying a Bill of Impeachment. Three failed and one was not acted upon. I wish Senator McConnell had allowed the 4th, Mr. Trump’s second, to come to the Floor of the Senate for a trial and vote.
Each crime rises and falls from the immediate actions of the alleged perpetrator. Even so, American justice does try to recognize the environment in which a crime is occurs. This is called mitigation. Cheney’s work successfully avoids any consideration of the environment.
The first argument is Mr. Trump’s denial of the election results in 2020, and that denial took place in a vacuum. It did not. The world was in a pandemic of epic proportions in November, 2020.
Republicans have long held that a voter present him or herself at a polling place on election day during the time the polls are open. Mail-in ballots exist for those who request them in advance. All votes must be in the clerk’s hands before the polls close. The Democrats seek to lessen the majesty of voting by advocating “a time for voting” with the ballots eventually being counted around election day. It is clear, the “election day” thinking of the GOP was inadequate for the chaos of the pandemic. The Democrats took full advantage of the chaos and pushed all sorts of emergency means for folks to vote. The GOP will lose in 2024 if it doesn’t take a broader look at accommodating voters. Even so, the principle of vote by election day must be upheld. The novelties of November 2020 led many to question the integrity of the election. Having grown up in Chicago, I’ve seen all sorts of means used “to get out the vote,” including cash payments by a Democratic precinct captain on election day. Whatever other innovations we attempt, ballots must only be cast by registered voters and received by the clerk before polls close on election day.
The chaos of November 2020 led Mr. Trump to relentlessly question the election results, as was his right. However the votes got there, it is clear that Mr. Biden won that election. Cheney remarks that Mr. Trump has yet to concede his loss but she does not mention that neither has Mrs. Clinton from 2016.
Liz Cheney does not recognize the environmental elements of Mr. Trump’s campaign for the 2016 election or during his entire presidency. It is in this way that she blunts the story she tells.
Moving on to January 6, 2021, it is understatement to say that day was horrid. It must never be repeated. Cheney takes the lofty position that if only Mr. Trump is dealt with January 6 in a definitive way, things would have been far different. I believe this is misguided optimism. One has to ignore the environment that was seeded during Mr. Clinton’s presidency.
An overwhelming majority of the media have gone all-in on the liberal point of view, that is government is our best friend. I proudly admit I am a Republican. I believe in small and decentralized government that permits citizens to make their own decision within carefully crafted but simple laws without being hampered and harassed by a nanny state. It is appalling to me that the Federal government is the third largest employer in the nation. On the national level, neither major political party has been especially frugal. In fact, the notion that we spend more tax dollars to pay the interest on the National Debt than we do on National Defense is nauseating.
As for 1/6/2021, it is clear Mr. Trump did not do everything he could have done to end it as promptly as he could. I do not agree with those, Liz Cheney included, who would have us believe Mr. Trump instigated it or put it into motion. At the same time, I distance myself as far as I can from those who did plan it and put it into motion. Yet, even this is part of the environment for many mob actions since 2016 have not even been criticized to say nothing about punishment for the perpetrators. It is sadly true that outrageous behavior on the right will be resoundingly punished and from the left ignored and even encouraged.
Fortunately, in 2028, there will be two candidates who will be new to us. Maybe that will bring a bright new approach to elections in these marvelous United States. (