Fogbow

bob wrote: ↑Mon Aug 28, 2023 4:03 pm
Which is among the reasons why the quadfectee wants to go last: If one of the attorneys-turned-co-defendant can win (or at least get a mistrial), that's good for the quadfectee. But if one is convicted (or worse, flips), that's superbad for him.

I would have thought he’d want to go first. The difference between them and him is he at least has the I-was-advised-that-it’s-OK-to-crime* defense. As all these lawyers’ cases get litigated, it might be harder for him to make that claim. It’ll depend on what the evidence is.

*I don’t actually think there is such a defense. I’m pretty sure that in order to avoid criminal liability by claiming you were led down the bunny trail, you have to have been led by the government. Otherwise people would just keep hiring lawyers until they find one who tells them what they want to hear, then claim they were ignorant of the law.

It will be very interesting to see what the judge has to say about all of this when it comes to instructing on the issue of intent.

I just saw a Youtube video that claims the Supreme Court has disqualified Trump due to section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

I killed it after about 40 seconds of the guy spouting obvious stuff but nothing about the Supreme Court (of course) with no apparent direction to get there and forgot to a save a link.

REMEMBER: if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is a fake attempt at a hit from somebody like deathsantcus.

Maybenaut wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2023 12:00 am I would have thought he’d want to go first. The difference between them and him is he at least has the I-was-advised-that-it’s-OK-to-crime* defense.

But how does he present that defense without taking the stand and testifying under oath?

If I understand it, it's kind of a "mental state" defense, in other words it's based on what he was thinking at the time. And nobody else can testify about what he was thinking. They can testify about what he said and did, but not what he was thinking.

I think the only way to get that in at trial would be, umm ... some really creative cross-examination, maybe? "Did the president roll his eyes at Eastman's suggested plan?" And then argue from those "facts". Hey maybe we can tell what he was thinking after all, from circumstantial evidence!

But he's sitting right there, why doesn't he just swear to tell the truth and then tell us himself what he was thinking.

From Politico:

A recent piece in the Atlantic added two more voices to the chorus from across the ideological spectrum: Laurence Tribe, a liberal constitutional scholar at Harvard Law School, and retired conservative judge J. Michael Luttig both support the notion that the Constitution stands between Trump and the White House. It even came up during the first GOP debate this week, when former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson said he would not “support somebody who’s been convicted of a serious felony or who is disqualified under our Constitution.”

I remember 2012 when the birthers filed over 200 lawsuits, many trying to get state secretaries of state to investigate Barack Obama's birthplace and eligibility. They were largely dismissed for lack of standing or other grounds. A total of one magistrate judge in Georgia actually made a determination of fact that Obama was presumably eligible. In the main, state secretaries of state argued that eligibility determinations are the responsibility of the political parties, or legally required oaths of eligibility from the candidate in a handful of states.

While there have been a rare of instances where a candidate who was too young was excluded from the ballot, secretaries of state have universally said that investigating eligibility was not their job and the courts have agreed. The legal history of this approach has been a total failure.

mini Mussolini

Donald Trump vows to lock up political enemies if he returns to White House
Former president tells Glenn Beck he would have ‘no choice’ but to lock up opponents ‘because they’re doing it to us’

Martin Pengelly in Washington
Wed 30 Aug 2023 16.55 BST

Donald Trump says he will lock up his political enemies if he is president again.

In an interview on Tuesday, the rightwing broadcaster Glenn Beck raised Trump’s famous campaign-trail vow to “lock up” Hillary Clinton, his opponent in 2016, a promise Trump did not fulfill in office.

Beck said: “Do you regret not locking [Clinton] up? And if you’re president again, will you lock people up?”

Trump said: “The answer is you have no choice, because they’re doing it to us.”

Trump has encouraged the “lock her up” chant against other opponents but he remains in considerable danger of being locked up himself.




https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... glenn-beck

He did ask both of his AG's to lock up Hillary Clinton. They both told him you can't just lock someone up for no reason, you have to have evidence of some kind of crime. So, he's already tried to "lock her up". If he gets into the White House again, he will put some scary people into powerful positions. That is a terrifying thought.

RVInit wrote: ↑Wed Aug 30, 2023 9:05 pm He did ask both of his AG's to lock up Hillary Clinton. They both told him you can't just lock someone up for no reason, you have to have evidence of some kind of crime. So, he's already tried to "lock her up". If he gets into the White House again, he will put some scary people into powerful positions. That is a terrifying thought.

Think Attorney General Stephen Miller, and I don't even know if he's an attorney, but I am pretty sure it wouldn't matter to Trump.

Gregg wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 9:16 pm

Think Attorney General Stephen Miller, and I don't even know if he's an attorney, but I am pretty sure it wouldn't matter to Trump.

Nor does it for the job, you get nominated and Senate confirmed, you gots the job...

Frater I*I wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 9:57 pm

Gregg wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 9:16 pm

Think Attorney General Stephen Miller, and I don't even know if he's an attorney, but I am pretty sure it wouldn't matter to Trump.

Nor does it for the job, you get nominated and Senate confirmed, you gots the job...

So get out and vote for your Senators like your future depends on it. Because it does.

Trump don't need no Senate confirmations, he just puts them in, calls them "Acting" and starts the crime and corruption.

I knew Esper in the Army. I actually ranked him by date of rank, but he was a swarmy little shit who thought West Point and actually being a "real Infantry Officer" made him the smartest guy in the room. Trump deserved him.

This is amusing -- even the Gateway House of Boys is dubious about the paper tiger's claims

“Be Careful What You Wish For!” – President Trump Warns Democrats and DC Elites What Waits for Them When He Wins Again
By Jim Hoft Sep. 3, 2023 7:20 pm

President Trump warned Democrats what may await them when he wins the next election. After everything they have thrown at him, Trump warned the Marxist DC elites, “Be careful what you wish for.”

Via Trump on Truth. [Yeah, yeah, yeah ]





Joe Biden and Democrats have indicted President Trump 91 times on garbage charges – a historic abuse of the US legal system in an attempt to jail the opposition party leader. With each arrest President Trump has become more popular with his base and the American public.

The Democrats have destroyed our borders, our military, our standing in the international community, our dollar dominance, our economy, our culture, our traditions, our laws, our energy sector, our oil reserves, our middle class, and have managed to rob us of our God-given freedoms. [IMPRESSIVE for 2 years and 7 months, that's how long President Biden has been in office]

Here are the list of bogus politicized indictments against President Trump by the current regime.

***Indictments from Wikipedia, too lazy to write them up (!)***

The Marxists have destroyed our country.

[Here's the best line ... starring IF]

When Trump is elected, if he does not break up the DC criminal cartel then shame on him.

Democrats are right to be worried.

Nope, Jim, it's the MAGAts that should be worried... you clearly are. After LOCKHERUP the paper tiger did nothing (of course, because there was no basis except your fantasies).

I have no doubt that djt et al would try to turn up their noise to 11 and break off the knob if they regain majority again.

Only if they can figure out a way to monetise it.

Indeed. It used to be the candidate playing the part of the monkey on a chain while the party acted as the organ grinder shaking the cup for change from passerbys. That dynamic has changed, and the roles have reversed.

keith wrote: ↑Mon Sep 04, 2023 7:57 am Only if they can figure out a way to monetise it.

can you say "Bounties"

Get your Trump cards now! Just $99 each. and if you buy the complete set, you get to have dinner with the President at Maralago!!!



https://www.collecttrumpcards.com

bill_g wrote: ↑Mon Sep 04, 2023 10:59 am Get your Trump cards now! Just $99 each. and if you buy the complete set, you get to have dinner with a photo of the Former President at Maralago graveyard!!!

Correction.

Foggy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 28, 2023 11:22 pm

Off Topic

Hay nao, I let "pants" slide.


Sometimes literally.

I took a break over the holiday weekend from news and internet. So refreshing. But it did occur to me that never, for as long as I live, will tfg not be in the news, mostly hogging the headlines. He has too many charges hanging over his head. I doubt he can be found not guilty of anything, but there can be hung juries and appeals. This part of it will only end when he dies; no other way.

The Republican Party is in a death spiral, it might not last past the 2024 election.

With each day the base gets more irrationally radical, pushing away what is left of a right-center membership and making it improbable that they they can ever win any fair elections. Even in red states their power is amplified or even propped up by stupid political tricks that cannot endure. Take Wisconsin, where statewide races are close contests, yet through extreme gerrymandering Republicans' have veto proof majorities in both houses and until this year had the majority of the State Supreme Court that allowed it. When a Liberal was elected to the Supreme Court this year, changing the majority control, Republicans began impeachment proceedings even before she had heard her first case.

Americans are sick of it, sick of the fighting and sick of a party that proves to them every day that yes they can go even lower. The Democrats might have problems, but the Republicans are doomed. Proving once again that everything Trump touches, dies, even 160 year old political parties.

Gregg wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2023 5:23 pm The Republican Party is in a death spiral, it might not last past the 2024 election.

With each day the base gets more irrationally radical, pushing away what is left of a right-center membership and making it improbable that they they can ever win any fair elections. Even in red states their power is amplified or even propped up by stupid political tricks that cannot endure. Take Wisconsin, where statewide races are close contests, yet through extreme gerrymandering Republicans' have veto proof majorities in both houses and until this year had the majority of the State Supreme Court that allowed it. When a Liberal was elected to the Supreme Court this year, changing the majority control, Republicans began impeachment proceedings even before she had heard her first case.

Americans are sick of it, sick of the fighting and sick of a party that proves to them every day that yes they can go even lower. The Democrats might have problems, but the Republicans are doomed. Proving once again that everything Trump touches, dies, even 160 year old political parties.

This is why Trump's maniacal rants don't really bother me even though their content is sickening. He is tearing the GOP apart. He is repelling most independents and even some moderate republicans. Several republicans are saying that there is no way Trump can win in 2024, and what's more, he will damage down-ticket republican candidates. Chris Sununu (gov. of NH) is saying that if Trump wins the nomination, 2024 will be a repeat of 2020.

One can only hope.

Gregg wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2023 5:23 pm The Republican Party is in a death spiral, it might not last past the 2024 election.

With each day the base gets more irrationally radical, pushing away what is left of a right-center membership and making it improbable that they they can ever win any fair elections. Even in red states their power is amplified or even propped up by stupid political tricks that cannot endure. Take Wisconsin, where statewide races are close contests, yet through extreme gerrymandering Republicans' have veto proof majorities in both houses and until this year had the majority of the State Supreme Court that allowed it. When a Liberal was elected to the Supreme Court this year, changing the majority control, Republicans began impeachment proceedings even before she had heard her first case.

Americans are sick of it, sick of the fighting and sick of a party that proves to them every day that yes they can go even lower. The Democrats might have problems, but the Republicans are doomed. Proving once again that everything Trump touches, dies, even 160 year old political parties.

I share your assessment of the current state of what used to be the Republican party. I never thought I would think of the Ronald Reagan/John Behner era as "the good old days".

However, I'm not as sure of the prognosis. People were making similar predictions after Richard Nixon resigned in the wake of the Watergate scandal, but the party bounced back, and not because their policies changed all that much. Peoples' memories of RMN just faded and new personalities came on the scene, such as the aforementioned Reagan and Behner. Tax cuts for the rich and the "Southern Strategy" never left the R's psyche.

The R's may not elect a President for a few election cycles, but they will continue to elect jackasses like emptygee and bobblehead. They will continue to control state legislatures through blatant gerrymandering.

Life will return to normal. The next time we have a recession or high unemployment while a democrat is in the WH, some republican will come along proposing massive tax cuts for the rich as a way to put America back "on the right track". This, even though, you, as an economist, know better than most of us, that the President doesn't have as much direct and immediate control over the economy as many people think he/she does. When the economy is good, the Prez gets to take the undeserved credit for it and when it is bad he/she gets more blame than warranted. But the opposing party will always take advantage of this phenomenon.

Well Tom has settled the 14th Amendment eligibility quandary…. It doesn’t apply to NY real estate developers.

Next he’ll say the 22nd Amendment doesn’t apply as well.

Tom Fitton @TomFitton wrote: Fact check: Trump didn't engage in insurrection/rebellion and, even if he did, the key 14th Amendment clause doesn't apply to the president.

Huh. Good thing MISTER tfg is not president anymore. I guess.