Special Counsel Jack Smith: Judgement Day (one way or the other)
Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2023 8:13 pm
If he's a billionaire, it's because he won't pay lawyers for them.
Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester and Grow
https://thefogbow.com/forum/
I don't believe for a second that his net worth is more than a billion dollars. True, he controls several billion dollars in assets, but most if not all of them are mortgaged to the hilt, and it is widely believed that he inflated the value of them in order to obtain bigger loans.
Although Trump's case was randomly assigned to Cannon, the arraignment will be handled by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman.
According to the Miami Herald, Cannon has not been taken off the case.
"Cannon, who had been widely reported to be handling those duties, will still remain on the historic case as the lead judge," the report said.
Goodman was described as a "well-regarded veteran magistrate who once worked as a newspaper reporter."
I totally agree.noblepa wrote: ↑Mon Jun 12, 2023 10:44 pmI don't believe for a second that his net worth is more than a billion dollars. True, he controls several billion dollars in assets, but most if not all of them are mortgaged to the hilt, and it is widely believed that he inflated the value of them in order to obtain bigger loans.
Actually, if his assets were accurately valued, I'm not even sure that he would be solvent.
His kids may be in for a rude awakening when TFG's estate is probated. There may be no real value there for them to inherit.AndyinPA wrote: ↑Mon Jun 12, 2023 11:22 pmI totally agree.noblepa wrote: ↑Mon Jun 12, 2023 10:44 pmI don't believe for a second that his net worth is more than a billion dollars. True, he controls several billion dollars in assets, but most if not all of them are mortgaged to the hilt, and it is widely believed that he inflated the value of them in order to obtain bigger loans.
Actually, if his assets were accurately valued, I'm not even sure that he would be solvent.
and yet she signed a sketchy legal document she should have been wary as hell about without even blinking an eye, apparentlyraison de arizona wrote: ↑Mon Jun 12, 2023 5:41 pmFun facts, Bobb holds a master's degree in national-security law from Georgetown University and served as a judge advocate in the US Marine Corps.
I doubt they would feel the need to take one.Dave from down under wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 12:29 am May he have many more such days
(having his mug shot taken)
Court ends routine access to federal mugshots
By JOSH GERSTEIN
07/14/2016 02:42 PM EDT; Updated 07/14/2016 03:28 PM EDT
Public access to mugshots of people arrested on federal criminal charges will be dramatically curtailed under a ruling issued Thursday by a federal appeals court, unless the Supreme Court steps in.
On a 9-7 vote, the full bench of the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a two-decade-old legal precedent that allowed news organizations and others to obtain booking photos of criminal defendants who've appeared in federal court.
Writing for the majority, Judge Deborah Cook found erroneous a 1996 6th Circuit decision essentially guaranteeing access to mugshots requested under the federal Freedom of Information Act. Both that case and the one the court ruled on Thursday were brought by the Detroit Free Press.
Calling mugshots "squarely within [the] realm of embarrassing and humiliating information," Cook noted that they're considered so damaging to a person's reputation that they can't normally be shown at a trial.
"Booking photos convey guilt to the viewer," she wrote. "Indeed, viewers so uniformly associate booking photos with guilt and criminality that we strongly disfavor showing such photos to criminal juries."
The FBI says Hi:much ado wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 12:43 amI doubt they would feel the need to take one.Dave from down under wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 12:29 am May he have many more such days
(having his mug shot taken)
I was hoping for a mugshot also, but the Feds do not release them, even if they take them.
At least this is what I found, perhaps someone has better information...
Court ends routine access to federal mugshots
Court ends routine access to federal mugshots
By JOSH GERSTEIN
07/14/2016 02:42 PM EDT; Updated 07/14/2016 03:28 PM EDT
Public access to mugshots of people arrested on federal criminal charges will be dramatically curtailed under a ruling issued Thursday by a federal appeals court, unless the Supreme Court steps in.
On a 9-7 vote, the full bench of the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a two-decade-old legal precedent that allowed news organizations and others to obtain booking photos of criminal defendants who've appeared in federal court.
Writing for the majority, Judge Deborah Cook found erroneous a 1996 6th Circuit decision essentially guaranteeing access to mugshots requested under the federal Freedom of Information Act. Both that case and the one the court ruled on Thursday were brought by the Detroit Free Press.
Calling mugshots "squarely within [the] realm of embarrassing and humiliating information," Cook noted that they're considered so damaging to a person's reputation that they can't normally be shown at a trial.
"Booking photos convey guilt to the viewer," she wrote. "Indeed, viewers so uniformly associate booking photos with guilt and criminality that we strongly disfavor showing such photos to criminal juries."
Volkonski wrote: ↑Mon Jun 12, 2023 11:04 pm Ron Filipkowski
@ronfilipkowski@bird.makeup
BREAKING: Mike Lindell is on his way to Miami.
It’s on now.
A bit moar at the link.BREAKING FROM PRETTYMAN:
Nevada GOP Chairman spotted inside the DC courthouse where the Jan. 6 et al grand jury meets.
“Not on my bucket list,” Michael McDonald joked when I asked him about appearing the same day as Trump’s court date.
W/
@victoria_ebner
and
@natashakorecki
.
Michael Gravesande @OldBlackHack wrote: CNN don't hold back in commenting after Donald Trump's attorney
Alina Habba says; "The people in charge of this country do not love America. They hate Donald Trump." Jake Tapper's brief retort: "OK, well, that's a lot of crazy."
Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie wrote: For what it’s worth, under the Constitution, no member of Congress can be prosecuted for reading aloud on the floor any of the documents Trump allegedly has copies of.