Fogbow

p0rtia wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 7:58 pm Further thought after reading the transcript:

Canon basically ignored everything both sides said. The closest she got to digging into the DOJ's arguments was say "But what harm could it do?" (re the Special Master) and "I think you're potentially overreading Nixon" (re former presidents claiming executive privilege).

Whereas she never challenged blustering and contentless bloviating of the Palintiffs; rather she put words in their mouths and made their arguments for them. She's the one pushing for TFG having legitimate claims of exec priv.

I agree. Even in the very first response to TFG's initial filing she was telling them what to do and making suggestions that they might go further, i.e. don't you want to stop the DOJ cold in their tracks? It's scary that she's a judge, but certainly is giving us every indication of why Trump judge shopped way up in her neck of the woods.

And thanks for the rundown, that is a lot of pages to read! for sure!

RVInit wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 8:07 pm

p0rtia wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 7:58 pm Further thought after reading the transcript:

Canon basically ignored everything both sides said. The closest she got to digging into the DOJ's arguments was say "But what harm could it do?" (re the Special Master) and "I think you're potentially overreading Nixon" (re former presidents claiming executive privilege).

Whereas she never challenged blustering and contentless bloviating of the Palintiffs; rather she put words in their mouths and made their arguments for them. She's the one pushing for TFG having legitimate claims of exec priv.

I agree. Even in the very first response to TFG's initial filing she was telling them what to do and making suggestions that they might go further, i.e. don't you want to stop the DOJ cold in their tracks? It's scary that she's a judge, but certainly is giving us every indication of why Trump judge shopped way up in her neck of the woods.

And thanks for the rundown, that is a lot of pages to read! for sure!

Welcome. Reading trial transcripts is like ice cream to me. I love it. Depositions are even better. *sigh*

RVInit wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 8:07 pm

p0rtia wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 7:58 pm Further thought after reading the transcript:

Canon basically ignored everything both sides said. The closest she got to digging into the DOJ's arguments was say "But what harm could it do?" (re the Special Master) and "I think you're potentially overreading Nixon" (re former presidents claiming executive privilege).

Whereas she never challenged blustering and contentless bloviating of the Palintiffs; rather she put words in their mouths and made their arguments for them. She's the one pushing for TFG having legitimate claims of exec priv.

I agree. Even in the very first response to TFG's initial filing she was telling them what to do and making suggestions that they might go further, i.e. don't you want to stop the DOJ cold in their tracks? It's scary that she's a judge, but certainly is giving us every indication of why Trump judge shopped way up in her neck of the woods.

Mike Dunford
@questauthority

I don't have time to deep dive the transcript right now. But one thing is extrememly apparent on first look:

The only effective legal advocacy *in this entire case* for Trump's position has come from the bench. That's not hyperbole.


emptywheel
@emptywheel

Kise doesn't even hide that the point of a Special Master is to find things to attack the case against Trump.

June bug wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 12:14 pm If you’ve ever signed a notarized document, there’s your thumbprint in the notary’s logbook. Don’t know how long those are kept, but I’d say the feds should check around Trump lawyers’ offices, etc.

Interesting. I was a notary for over 20 years and in addition to that have signed dozens and dozens of notarized documents and never had anyone thumbprint my book nor has anyone ever requested I thumbprint theirs. State specific perhaps?

realist wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 8:45 pm

June bug wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 12:14 pm If you’ve ever signed a notarized document, there’s your thumbprint in the notary’s logbook. Don’t know how long those are kept, but I’d say the feds should check around Trump lawyers’ offices, etc.

Interesting. I was a notary for over 20 years and in addition to that have signed dozens and dozens of notarized documents and never had anyone thumbprint my book nor has anyone ever requested I thumbprint theirs. State specific perhaps?

Yeah, I had a notary stamp for a few years during my career as a litigator and dealt with countless notaries. Never encountered or heard of a notary who took a fingerprint.

realist wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 8:45 pm

June bug wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 12:14 pm If you’ve ever signed a notarized document, there’s your thumbprint in the notary’s logbook. Don’t know how long those are kept, but I’d say the feds should check around Trump lawyers’ offices, etc.

Interesting. I was a notary for over 20 years and in addition to that have signed dozens and dozens of notarized documents and never had anyone thumbprint my book nor has anyone ever requested I thumbprint theirs. State specific perhaps?

We had to do it at the bank but they used that invisible ink pad that they have for cashing checks.

chancery wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 8:51 pm

realist wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 8:45 pm

June bug wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 12:14 pm If you’ve ever signed a notarized document, there’s your thumbprint in the notary’s logbook. Don’t know how long those are kept, but I’d say the feds should check around Trump lawyers’ offices, etc.

Interesting. I was a notary for over 20 years and in addition to that have signed dozens and dozens of notarized documents and never had anyone thumbprint my book nor has anyone ever requested I thumbprint theirs. State specific perhaps?

Yeah, I had a notary stamp for a few years during my career as a litigator and dealt with countless notaries. Never encountered or heard of a notary who took a fingerprint.

My experiences have Ben in California and Hawaii. I’ve had to sign notarized documents for non-profits and they took my thumbprint each time.

If there are small prints on the documents the size of a child's, those are probably from Donald.

Found online...

California Notaries are required to obtain a thumbprint for a deed, quitclaim deed, deed of trust, and other documents affecting real property or any power of attorney document. (Government Code Section 8206[a][2][G]).

From The National Notary Bulletin: When Does A CA Notary Need To Take A Thumbprint?

poplove wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 10:11 pm Objects In The Mirror.jpg

Interesting, but not at all reassuring.

That is amazingly funny.

We live in interesting times.

p0rtia wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 3:41 pm Part deux:

Thank you!

Foggy:

Because I have evil ebil secret sekrit powers.

FIFY.

Of course. You wouldn't be our Supream Dick Tater otherwise.

When I wanted to be an admin at Quatloos I took Webhick to NYC, Key West and Sanibel...

Sounds like you got off cheaper

Foggy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 04, 2022 7:28 am

Off Topic

Oh man, that reminds me of a caper I pulled in the early, early days of this great community. Ready for a stab from the past?

So my first post on this forum, back when it was Politijab, on February 23, 2009, was "Hi, I'm a left wingnut," but I used a photo of a wingnut that I happened to have for whatever reason on my Photobucket.

And some birther saw it and copied it to a birther blog. Y'know, like being a left wingnut is a bad thing or sumpin', I dunno.

And I decided to have some fun, so I posted on Politijab that because the dude had accessed my graphic, I could trace and track down his IP address, and that would give me his name and home address, and we could doxx him like they were desperately trying to doxx us.

Which was a lot of utter horseshit, you can't get any of that stuff from someone using a link to Photobucket, I just wanted to scare the dude, BUT ...

But I scared the crap out of Brian and Justin, the two guys in Pittsburgh who started Politijab, and owned it, and Brian actually worked for an ISP, so he should have known better, but they had to ask me to edit it, even though they were the admins back then.

So now you know how I became the admin. Because I have evil secret powers.

Actually ......if you had hosted the image file you would be able to get a huge amount of information if they opened/ accessed it. Everything from IP address, the browser they had used, operating system, a good idea of the device used, a fingerprint of the device that can see if they access other pages, a rough idea of physical location, if they are obfuscating by using a VPN or the TOR network, device screen resolution in use and a whole lot more. If they use Disqus or similar and a reasonably unique user name, a wee bit of googlng will get you other sites they post on, a bit of hunting on social media will probably get you images in posts, reverse lookup and meta data scraping and so on..... pretty quickly you have the real ID. You have to work to be anonymous on the InterTubes

bob wrote: ↑Sun Sep 04, 2022 4:42 pm

That's kind of hilarious, IMHO.

Poor NBC News! Those poor, poor bunnies! They were desperate for a scoop.

So they looked at the statement Trump released on August 22nd - honest, follow the link to the story - and even though it was full of malarkey, like accusing the FBI of planting fake evidence and claimed the search was "illegal and unconstitutional" and so forth, it made a little mention about how the documents would eventually go to the Donald Trump Presidential Library and Adult Video Palace.

And NBC, having nothing else, decided that even though the rest of the statement from over a week ago was total malarkey, the mention of the presidential library was A VERY SERIOUS THOUGHT by the thief & traitor, and lo and behold, what to my wondering eyes did appear but a VERY SERIOUS ARTICLE with some VERY SERIOUS DISCUSSION about whether the thieving moron was really planning an honest-to-god library like a real ex-president. And even better, the VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION that must be answered is, did he steal the nation's critical secrets and mix them in boxes of newspaper clippings and stuff he stole from other people because he's a thief and a traitor, or was he innocently doing serious research (and planning to give all the documents back after his scholarly investigation into the details of his wonderful achievements whilst president)?

But, y'know ... really. Was that one sentence, in a statement otherwise kompletely kooky, worth a VERY SERIOUS STORY by NBC?

Gregg wrote: ↑Sun Sep 04, 2022 4:34 pm When I wanted to be an admin at Quatloos I took Webhick to NYC, Key West and Sanibel...

Sounds like you got off cheaper

Several years ago, without asking me, Quatloos gave me moderator status. I was reluctant to do anything without understanding what was expected of me, and did not attempt to engage in any moderation.* After a few months, my moderator powers disappeared as silently as they had arrived. You REALLY overpaid!

* Even if they had asked me, I was probably not the best choice to serve as a moderator for Quatloos. While I have never posted any overtly political or religious items on that site, I find some of the Quatloos moderators rather heavy-handed in the enforcement of the "no politics, no religion" posting rules. These rules were put in place after a flame war circa 2012 that resulted in the banning/departure of many Quatloos posters. While the flame war and its aftermath may not be the sole reason, the site has become considerably less vibrant (far fewer post/day) that it had been in the early 2000s. In fact, more than two thirds of the post these days are made by UK or Canadian-based posters, who are doing a great job of following their own home-grown sovereign citizens/tax protestors.