Jump to content

A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]


Francisco 2.0

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

1) Fuck Bill Barr

2) the judge is going to have to appoint someone bc no way the parties will agree, much less find, this mythical lawyer with top level clearances

3) I don’t see how DOJ doesn’t at least appeal the part of the order enjoining the criminal investigation. Reputational harm cannot be a realistic standard to put a criminal investigation on hold indefinitely 

BQBNSJ4SBNDXFOQKG3DWK5GMKM.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footnote 16 from Conner’s ruling:


[16] The Court recognizes that, under the PRA, “[t]he United States District Court for the District of Columbia shall have jurisdiction over any action initiated by the former President asserting that a determination made by the Archivist” to permit public dissemination of presidential records “violates the former President’s [constitutional] rights or privileges.” 44 U.S.C. § 2204.
 

Why in the hell is she even allowing herself to be dragged into this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Horndog said:

Reluctantly, I am with Twicehorn on most of this.  I, too, would love to see the dotard publicly tarred and feathered, then dropped headfirst into a YUGE bucket of steaming shit, and then washed off with tapwater from Jackson, MS., before being hauled off to a maximum security prison and being assigned to a cell full of violent sex offenders.  But we can't just jettison the entire judicial system because we don't like the asshole.  We all know that he had classified documents and other government records he had no right to possess which, coupled with our blinding hatred of the dotard and our awareness of past crimes, generates the urge to move straight to the punishment phase. But on the whole, law enforcement having the exclusive right to review the documents is somewhat troubling.  However much we side with the government in this situation, the bigger purpose is served by eliminating any possible flaws or defects now, rather than later (see Page, Carter).  

There is a bit of horse and cart problem.  The DOJ says, hey it's good, we only got documents that he has no right to.  Is a Judge required to take that at face value, without any ability to independently confirm?  We can all be skeptical of the Judge's motivation, but it is also true that several dotard appointees were involved in the election suits and ultimately applied the law correctly.  I am willing to see how this plays out a bit longer.  The tell may well be the name of the person named as Special Master and the authority granted/limitations imposed.  If Cannon truly has an agenda, it should be evident when we hear who has been appointed and what specific functions that person is supposed to perform. 

The point upthread about the dotard's right to appeal is very true.  If Cannon had rejected the request altogether, he would have appealed and created further delay.  And then if the Circuit Court reversed, it would have been with instructions on how to proceed.  So months from now we might be back at this same point. 

The judicial process can be painful and frustrating, but if we are truly a country of laws and  not men, then the process has to play out.

Well, you sir can get fucked too.

HANG THEM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Footnote 16 from Conner’s ruling:


[16] The Court recognizes that, under the PRA, “[t]he United States District Court for the District of Columbia shall have jurisdiction over any action initiated by the former President asserting that a determination made by the Archivist” to permit public dissemination of presidential records “violates the former President’s [constitutional] rights or privileges.” 44 U.S.C. § 2204.
 

Why in the hell is she even allowing herself to be dragged into this?

Because what it actually says is "The Archivist's determination."

The Archivist hasn't made a determination.

I think it's critically important to make sure the Archivist gets involved PDQ so that this becomes a PRA thing where DC decides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

That part makes no sense to me. Unless he could appoint those which he had blackmail material on.  It’s not like he can revoke these appointments. They have no reason to be so beholden to him as to ignore or rewrite the laws. 
 

morons can hold the opinion that trump should be able to do as he pleases. Judges, members of the bar, should be educated enough to have a line that is well short of moronic. 

In the past, at least, appointment party has not been a real good predictor of ideological behavior by judges.

The "Opus Dei chapter" of the Federalist Society, and Leonard Leo, its Komandant, has made the vetting process more reliable for appointing ideologues.  And it's worth noting that those ideologues are bad enough in their own right, but do not necessarily fully align with MAGA or Trump.

But, to date, Herr Leo and his gruppe have mostly vetted Supreme Court and Circuit Court of Appeals judges and are less concerned with and influential on district court appointments, probably because a district court judge is the least likely to be ideologically useful.

A guy like Alan Albright, the Trump appointee in Waco, has no real history of militant fundamental Catholicism, or MAGA membership or anything else, that I am aware of.  He tried patent cases most of his career, which is about as apolitical as you can get.

And, as demonstrated here, people seem to think he's mostly a righteous dude on the bench.

For district court judges, their names are sponsored by the state's Senators, and when those Senators are Cruz and Cornyn, that may be enough said.  I'm not really aware that FedSoc "double checks" their submissions for ideological purity.  Also, it is not unheard of for judicial appointment "candidates" to suck up to whomever they need to, very insincerely, just so they can get the appointment.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dnaguy said:


Trump will never serve a day in jail

IF he’s charged, he will take a plea bargain to a lesser crime that will have no jail time but an assurance he never runs again. He’ll claim victory and argue that he actually outsmarted the feds, it’s was political, and still weigh in on republican politics / politics in general.
If he’s ever convicted… which is unlikely his sentence will be commuted. He’ll claim victory b/c he he never actual went to jail.

 

I'm not sure anymore.  It will be interesting to see if the Special Master holds up and most importantly what sort of executive privilege she thinks is available to a non-elected official who is no longer part of the Executive Branch.

If this stuff is as bad as it seems, and the justice department does behave apolitically, Trump is toast.  The law is pretty fucking clear, and he broke it.   IF the nuke stuff is true how the hell do you not go after him?  Setting precedent that former Presidents can do anything they want, current Presidents can do anything they want... IF they are Republican...

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, horn4life said:

I'm not sure anymore.  It will be interesting to see if the Special Master holds up and most importantly what sort of executive privilege she thinks is available to a non-elected official who is no longer part of the Executive Branch.

If this stuff is as bad as it seems, and the justice department does behave apolitically, Trump is toast.  The law is pretty fucking clear, and he broke it.   IF the nuke stuff is true how the hell do you not go after him?  Setting precedent that former Presidents can do anything they want, current Presidents can do anything they want... IF they are Republican...

Agreed. I think his opportunity to negotiate went up in flames the moment he decided to put the FBI and DOJ’s shit on blast when they bent over backwards to keep this on the down low. I think the DOJ and WH would prefer a quiet outcome that didn’t further degrade the office of the presidency, but Trump had to go full Trump. Playing the victim has largely worked out in his favor, but those instincts are going to fuck him here. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

Then how did they get appointed?

 

1 hour ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Alan's a good guy.  At least he seemed so to me before he went to law school.

He was Cornyn’s guy when a door opened in Austin but Kay Bailey was ahead of him, so he missed out then grabbed the Waco one.  He’s a good guy and long predates DJT and really isn’t tied to the regard wing of the party. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

In the past, at least, appointment party has not been a real good predictor of ideological behavior by judges.

The "Opus Dei chapter" of the Federalist Society, and Leonard Leo, its Komandant, has made the vetting process more reliable for appointing ideologues.  And it's worth noting that those ideologues are bad enough in their own right, but do not necessarily fully align with MAGA or Trump.

But, to date, Herr Leo and his gruppe have mostly vetted Supreme Court and Circuit Court of Appeals judges and are less concerned with and influential on district court appointments, probably because a district court judge is the least likely to be ideologically useful.

A guy like Alan Albright, the Trump appointee in Waco, has no real history of militant fundamental Catholicism, or MAGA membership or anything else, that I am aware of.  He tried patent cases most of his career, which is about as apolitical as you can get.

And, as demonstrated here, people seem to think he's mostly a righteous dude on the bench.

For district court judges, their names are sponsored by the state's Senators, and when those Senators are Cruz and Cornyn, that may be enough said.  I'm not really aware that FedSoc "double checks" their submissions for ideological purity.  Also, it is not unheard of for judicial appointment "candidates" to suck up to whomever they need to, very insincerely, just so they can get the appointment.

why do these guys always look like you would think they do?  what a surprise that leonard leo is obsessed with other people having sex.

9ad390d49c1f5095bde4e81579a73db22714453f

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

That kind of thing has exactly zero to do with partisan politics.

In fact, it was invented by mostly Democratic-appointed judges in the Eastern District of Texas in the late 90s, early aughts.

The law changed, shutting down the racket in Tyler, Marshall, and Longview, to their significant economic detriment.

Albright resurrected it in Waco in the Western District and has been "militant" to the point of lawlessness in trying to preserve and expand his "franchise."

I don't really like it or approve of it, and never have.  But it doesn't make him a MAGAT in any way, shape, or form. At some levels, though, it does actually implicate big business and their undue influence over Congress and weakening of the patent system, but that's waaay beyond the scope.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

How the god damn fuck did this fucking ape have these for 18 months?  You don't ask.  Just use a swat team and go get them week 2 after asking once nicely.  Jesus, fucking goat rodeo.  I can't believe how pathetic all this shit is.  There's already enough to hang his ass for treason.  I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.  

Well, but you see, we need to give the outrageously slow and outdated system that relies mainly on people acting in good faith time to work.  Some lawyers have told me this.  So we should trust them, not our lying eyes.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Well, but you see, we need to give the outrageously slow and outdated system that relies mainly on people acting in good faith time to work.  Some lawyers have told me this.  So we should trust them, not our lying eyes.

Make room on the fucking ledge, so I can jump off.  Dumbest simulation ever.  At least be a little bit believable.  Please. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

In the past, at least, appointment party has not been a real good predictor of ideological behavior by judges.

The "Opus Dei chapter" of the Federalist Society, and Leonard Leo, its Komandant, has made the vetting process more reliable for appointing ideologues.  And it's worth noting that those ideologues are bad enough in their own right, but do not necessarily fully align with MAGA or Trump.

 

who was just given $1,600,000,000.

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2022 at 4:07 PM, Ghost of LL said:

Right now, the GQP really is a collection of misfit toys.  The white supremacists; the teavangelicals; the Q nuts; the "conservatives" (whoever the fuck they are anymore)--who the fuck unites those people?  And then who manages to do that and also motivate the low-information voters who never voted in any election before and probably never will again (and who probably made up at least 5% of Trump's 2020 vote).

The Republican Party is a minority party right now.  But after Trump dies, it's only getting smaller.

image.jpeg.466b52d0c3566bb786ca8e07d8c421c3.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The unidentified lawyer, from a law firm that worked for Trump in the 1990s, visited the former president at Trump Tower after he refused to pay, according to The Guardian.

“Trump made some apologetic noises. Then he said: ‘I’m not going to pay your bill. I’m going to give you something more valuable,’” Enrich wrote, per The Guardian. The former president then “rummaged around in a filing cabinet” and pulled out a deed to a horse supposedly worth $5 million. 

“Once he regained the capacity for speech,” the lawyer reportedly said, “This isn’t the 1800s. You can’t pay me with a horse,” Enrich wrote, according to The Guardian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am reminded of some old scifi story, maybe from the Lazarus Long works, in which a woman ruler is presiding over a heated government argument.  She points to one of the men involved and says "This problem will go away if you take that man out and kill him.  Do it now!".  Problem solved, too bad she is not in charge now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2022 at 12:20 AM, elfenix said:

the fact that a lifetime appointment can be done in a lame duck session is a horrible design flaw in the system. 

We might want to look into the problem of only one party controlling the confirmation schedule as well. 

spacer.png

Hans undt Dieter in the background seem about right for Herr Leader. Like an American movie character, he's become as ugly as he is evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

How the god damn fuck did this fucking ape have these for 18 months?  You don't ask.  Just use a swat team and go get them week 2 after asking once nicely.  Jesus, fucking goat rodeo.  I can't believe how pathetic all this shit is.  There's already enough to hang his ass for treason.  I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.  

Decorum from we not from he.

He is accorded considerations given to prior presidents even though none of them regularly declared people enemies of the state, launched an attach on the Capitol, or stole state secrets. Those according those considerations still think they're in the stadium of politics instead of the real world outside.

That real world includes elected officials at the national level spewing outrage that a meticulously legal search warrant was at last executed and revealed a breech in national security. These degenerates prove the worst of what Hobbes wrote of men who have a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death.

It's the only Hobbes quote I know, but it's great and, today, sadly apt.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, elfenix said:

who was just given $1,600,000,000.

Never heard of the guy until just now. I read a few paragraphs in the Guardian article (I don't know the secret handshake for the NYT) that I googled and had to stop. Rage.

Quote

Leo defended the injection of a huge amount of “dark money” into the political process by claiming it merely levels the playing field against Democrats funded by liberal billionaires.

“It’s high time for the conservative movement to be among the ranks of George Soros, Hansjörg Wyss, Arabella Advisors and other leftwing philanthropists, going toe-to-toe in the fight to defend our constitution and its ideals,” he said in a statement.

power after power

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...