Even Rudy Giuliani thought her plan to seek blanket immunity, before breaching Georgia voting machines, was āover the top,ā according to a new book by reporters Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman.
As allies of Donald Trump schemed to seize voting machines in swing states after the 2020 election, Sidney Powell proposed issuing preemptive pardonsāwhich the team described as āhunting licensesāāto shield them from legal liability, according to a new book by investigative reporters Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman.
āI need six to eight pardons,ā the former Trump attorney said in a Virginia planning meeting, according to Find Me the Votes, excerpts of which were reviewed by Vanity Fair ahead of its January 30 publication date. āWhat we need is a āhunting licenseā that provides top cover for ops,ā a member of Powellās team wrote to Lin Wood, another Trump lawyer involved in the effort to overturn Joe Bidenās 2020 victory, according to Isikoff and Klaidman.
According to Isikoff and Klaidman, the team asked Michael Trimarco, an associate of Rudy Giulianiās, to get the former New York City mayor to approve the pardon proposal. But Giuliani ādismissed the idea as over the top,ā according to the book. Trimarco apparently agreed, recalling that he thought, āWhat the fuck?ā as the group mulled the idea.
I think why they do not care is because they donāt ābelieveā it. The more important question (IMO) is: āHow can they deny this blatant reality?ā
The answer is because they shield themselves from reality with Olympics level mental gymnastics, rationalizing away cognitive dissonance and living in their own deluded reality.
Oh my, no. Itās nothing that complicated. These are conservative minds, and the entirety of their worldview can be boiled down to one question:
Is this good for us?
It has nothing to do with denial or cognitive dissonance, because they simply are not thinking that hard about anything.
Is this good for us?
If the answer is yes, then everything else is negotiable. Reality is negotiable. Nothing is absolute unless it absolutely benefits the conservative self.
Is Trump a liar? Is Trump a serial rapist? Is Trump a national security threat?
Is it good for us if he is? No, so he isnāt.
Or maybe he is, but itās not that big of a deal because it is better for us if itās not a big deal.
Was the election stolen? It would be good for us if it was, so it was. We donāt have to prove it, because we already know it was because it would be good for us if it was. Why are we still arguing about this? Arguing about it is bad for us, so just accept that it was stolen and anything anyone did trying to prove it was fully justified because it would have been good for us if they had been successful.
Is abortion murder? Calling it that gets angry people to vote for us, so it is. Medical science? Thatās not good for us, so itās not real. Maybe itās a conspiracy or the devil or immigrant trans lesbian atheists, but thatās not important right now so thereās no need to defend any of that ridiculousness.
You cannot argue with a conservative. You cannot point to the flaws in their logic, or provide concrete evidence that contradicts their beliefs. Changing the mind of a conservative is like changing the direction on a revolving door. Youāre still either in or youāre out.
Realize this, and accept that you are not dealing with a rational ideology. Itās a dog with a ball that wants you to throw but wonāt let go of the ball. Itās not complicated, thereās no deeper hidden communication coordinating all of the conservatives to orchestrate a big conspiracy. Itās simple narcissism. And it should be treated the same way you would treat a narcissist.
Set boundaries. Ignore theirs because they are not fixed.
Justify your boundaries with facts. Ignore their arguments because they are not based on facts. Youāre not trying to convince them, you are justifying your position for the next rational person coming along. You donāt need to disprove every one of their firehose of bullshit arguments, you just need to prove your case and stand your ground.
Do not compromise or negotiate with a conservative. They will not be satisfied with whatever you give up, and they will take whatever extreme position is necessary to make the āmiddleā wherever they want to be.
Demand your rights, and accept no substitutes. The law exists to protect each of us from tyranny, and the conservative craves the position of tyrant. Your rights will not be given to you by a conservative, you will have to fight for them.
Remember this, and you will not be surprised by the hypocrisy of a conservative. You will never be confused about how they could possibly ignore facts and believe what they want. Your expectations will align with reality.
The āIs it good for us? Let me modify my interpretation/beliefsā act youāre describing is in itself rationalizing. What youāre focusing on is their motivation for doing so. And yes, it is a simple motivation.
You are right that there is no reasoning with radical groups like MAGA/QAnon/mainstream conservatives. We cannot pull them out of their extremism with reason. They have to want to change themselves.
Trying to persuade family who have fallen into this extremism typically backfires and results in frustration, anger, and hostility. This tends to just push the family member(s) further into the community they feel āgets them.ā
All of this is cited and elaborated on in this blog post of mine. (I have ads turned off and do not benefit in any way from my blog.)
this guy spectacles
Their media bubble protects them from reality.
Yeah, that is absolutely a huge part of it. The reinforcement from their ācommunityā is an essential part of how people are radicalized.
(To cite that claim, here is my write-up on the subject with valid citations. My blog has ads turned off and I donāt benefit from it in any way.)
The rationalizing comes in when their beliefs are challenged by other people/other media (or reality checks when QAnan predictions repeatedly fail to come to fruition).
yep. never underestimate the damage propaganda from places like faux news cause on a daily basis.