Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

[YGIFS 19458]

Uh, I realize we're coming up on what is finally some serious legal proceedings regarding the orange taint-monkey...and I'm totally down to clown on some really freaky shit to celebrate the myriad milestones.  But did you guys have to select Red Foreman and a cartoon child for your opening salvo?  I mean, I'm open to some shit...but come the fuck on...we gotta start normal here.  

I couldn't find it in the thread search because some get deleted out of cause, and rightfully so as they age out.  But literally three years ago to this week, I (under a previous handle) confidently and quite accurately predicted that Donald J. Trump would fall very, very ill in about two months time (so mid-August to mid-October).  There were stories about food supply issues at one of his golf resorts which cannot be as easily monitored as White House meals.  Ended up being Covid-19 and looked pretty serious for the first day or two, but access to great health care can help the biggest co-morbid tubs of shit so God Bless America.  

He's too egotistical to be a man and take his own life.  And nobody can take him out given the sophistication of his detail.  A past president is one thing, but somebody also still actively running for President as well?  Nope.  And none of the people that hate him have the balls to attempt anything like that anyway.  So what I think happens is somebody close to him puts him out of his misery to adopt his platform/base/foundation/money/fame/legend & lore.  Or he dies from the stress of the grift and four sets of court appearances.  He's not alive in 2025.  And as a result, we are all doing to start seeing how many deep-fried heroin twinkies you can shove up your own ass (or a friend's if that's how you choose to celebrate).  For big guy #45, I'm gonna buy 45 AR-15's and hand them out to every deer in my neighborhood.  Drink some illegal puncheon rum and go 20 rounds with the one Longshoreman  left in Austin before I anally violate his wife and shit in his sunroof.  I would start stockpiling rare blood types if I were some of you because we're gonna get weird.  

[Macanudo 13331]

22 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

He's not alive in 2025. 

Sounds great and all but are we ready for Vice President Lake to take over?

[Js1 87225]

5 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Sounds great and all but are we ready for Vice President Lake to take over?

She’s running for Senate. She can’t be Arizona’s true governor, a senate candidate and a vice presidential candidate in one cycle. 

Edited August 10, 2023 by Js1

[TwiceHorn 32094]

3 hours ago, Hermanator said:

The interesting thing about the end of that video is the former Cobb county district attorney said that while pardons in Georgia are decided by a pardon's review board appointed by the governor, a pardon cannot even be applied for until the convicted person serves their entire term and lives incident free for 5 years after their prison term ends.

So apparently if Trump is convicted and sentenced to 10 years in prison in Georgia and his appeals are denied the governor and his review board can't do anything about it until he serves that term and lives 5 years past it. 

 

Well, we always talk about "pardons," but there is something less in the form of clemency or a commutation of sentence. The feds call it a commutation and both pardons and commutations are forms of clemency.

Georgia apparently treats a commutation as a form of parole and only commutes death sentences.

So, he can't get pardoned, but he could get let out of prison way early.

Edited August 10, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[Macanudo 13331]

49 minutes ago, Js1 said:

She’s running for Senate. She can’t be Arizona’s true governor, a senate candidate and a vice presidential candidate in one cycle. 

Says the Republican party?

[Rimbo 27074]

2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Rimbo's life has taken an interesting sexual turn as of late.

I wish it had taken any kind of sexual turn, man.

[Bullneck 19549]

Watching CNN interview some people in Iowa.  Holy shit what a bunch of fucking morons.

Glad Iowa isn't the first place to start for the Dems any more.

[Js1 87225]

12 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

Watching CNN interview some people in Iowa.  Holy shit what a bunch of fucking morons.

Glad Iowa isn't the first place to start for the Dems any more.

Idiots

Out

Walking

Around 

[YGIFS 19458]

To be fair to Iowans, when I drive 600 yards from my home...I realize I'm in the dumbest fucking state save for maybe Florida.  We're just Mississippi Morons with oil money who can't wait to show off how fucking macho moronic we are.

[BamaATL 16593]

43 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

Watching CNN interview some people in Iowa.  Holy shit what a bunch of fucking morons.

Glad Iowa isn't the first place to start for the Dems any more.

They got an interview with Kirk Ferentz?  And here I thought CNN had more or less dropped sports coverage.  

[tx 3 putt 78730]

beautiful ...

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Eat shit traitors 

[Rimbo 27074]

9 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

beautiful ...

 

[YGIFS 19458]

Holy shit, I forgot there was 16 of them.  I knew it was somewhere between 3 and Michigan's 21 actual EC votes, but thought it was much lower than 16.

Oh man, 16?  Absolutely we can have one murdered in prison or driven to suicide.  I mean statistically speaking with their age 'n shit, this is a no-brainer bet.  It's almost a Shawshank Redemption thing with the first night fishes.  We could almost make a reality show out of it and sell ad space.  

[Old Freak Nasty 821]

Trump's surely going to get those patriots set up with the best attorneys and pay the bills, right?

[Biff Tannen 46192]

I love how their defense is "we didn't know!".  Um, get fucked traitors.

[Pato del Muerto 53568]

On 8/9/2023 at 1:06 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Brief skim of the motion is they just want to be able to talk to him in a secure facility at MAL or somewhere, no documents present.

 

On 8/9/2023 at 1:07 PM, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

Let me guess---she's gonna rule that sure, Trump can have an SCIF in his ballroom.  

 

 

seems a reasonable request and remedy 

 

 

 

[Born to Run 6601]

To be fair to Iowans, when I drive 600 yards from my home...I realize I'm in the dumbest fucking state save for maybe Florida.  We're just Mississippi Morons with oil money who can't wait to show off how fucking macho moronic we are.

West Austin Drivers are the worst and we really enjoy killing eachother in horrific fashion. Worst anywhere I've ever lived. It's insane out here.

[NWBuck 8630]

11 hours ago, The Dog said:

 

(also explains the recent relationship storyline)

[henrygandorf 29228]

2 hours ago, YGIFS said:

Holy shit, I forgot there was 16 of them.

16 sounds like a lot. 

Edited August 11, 2023 by henrygandorf

[Mdhorn 6166]

Listened to a podcast that really gave me hope that Trump may finally go to jail.  Curious if any of the Surly legal eagles have thoughts on Legal AF--is it real or just LW law porn for the masses: 

 

 

[Francisco 2.0 32607]

 

 

 

[TwiceHorn 32094]

4 hours ago, Mdhorn said:

Listened to a podcast that really gave me hope that Trump may finally go to jail.  Curious if any of the Surly legal eagles have thoughts on Legal AF--is it real or just LW law porn for the masses: 

 

 

Don't kid yourself, he's in about as deep a shit as anyone can possibly be.  

He has some possible outs and we tend to focus unduly on them.  And, of course, we unduly focus on the "teflon Don" bullshit.

The most "real" of those outs is that he wins the 2024 election and pardons himself.  Two things about that we don't talk about much.  First, if he had been indicted on January 7, 2021, there's a high likelihood that he could keep the appeal plates spinning until inauguration, so the delays don't matter, because that's on the table no matter what.  The second thing is how grotesque will be the optics of a convicted president pardoning himself, or worse shutting down the cases against him.  The GQP won't care most likely, but it's hard to know.**  That would constitute the gravest impeachment we've ever seen.

So, it's really important to get out and vote.

**He's damaging the fuck out of the GQP right now, so the composition of the Senate in 2025 is unpredictable as is the possibility of enough GQP Senators growing a pair to convict in an impeachment.

Edited August 11, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[Francisco 2.0 32607]

The best judges.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-one-egregious-mistake-from-trumps-florida-judge-aileen-cannon

 

Quote

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, whose pro-Trump bias and head-turning errors have raised questions about whether she should be overseeing former President Donald Trump’s criminal trial in Florida, made what appears to be another surprising mistake last year.

Now, a defense lawyer is seizing on her misstep to try freeing his client from prison—even though he was caught on tape violently throwing a courtroom chair at a prosecutor and threatening to kill him.

 

Quote

The blunder was simple and entirely avoidable. The federal judge told jurors they could find the man, Christopher Wilkins, “guilty or not guilty.” But then she handed jurors a verdict form that didn’t even have those options.

“How far does somebody have to go to school to say that a verdict form is supposed to say guilty and not guilty?” asked defense lawyer Jeffrey Garland. “That would be one of the more egregious versions of jury instruction error… it’s such a rare error.”

Garland formally filed an appeal on Thursday and hopes to overturn a case that’s as black-and-white as they come—on a technicality.

 

Quote

“This is the judge’s deal. This is nobody else’s deal. I’m gonna tell ya, I’ve done a lot of appeals, and I’ve got a pretty good winning record. This is a great issue,” he said. “For a guy who’s on tape throwing a chair in court, it’s pretty ‘not good’ behavior. It would have been simple. You have a trial, properly instruct a jury, give them a form, and the jury’s gonna do what the jury’s gonna do.”

Cannon’s short and controversial history on the bench is under a microscope, given that she is presiding over such an historic criminal trial: that of a former president facing prison time for mishandling classified records at Mar-a-Lago and lying to the feds in a coverup. Trump himself appointed her in his final months in office, yet she has not recused herself from the case.

 

Spoiler

Cannon first came to people’s attention last year, when Trump’s lawyers were chastened by a judge who accused them of trying to game the judicial assignment system in a brazen attempt to have her oversee a conspiracy-laden lawsuit against political rival Hillary Clinton.

But she gained notoriety when Trump sued to block the feds from investigating Mar-a-Lago and she was oddly assigned the case, despite being in a distant corner of the district far from Trump’s mansion. Cannon immediately began to issue bizarre orders that froze the investigation—until appellate judges told her to back off. A court screwup even exposed how she was bending over backwards to appease the man who appointed her.

But now she’s come under fire over her inexperience.

Last month, The New York Times discovered that Cannon has only handled four trials, collectively accounting for just 14 days in court—less than three weeks of experience before handling a potential turning point for American democracy. Last week, Reuters exposed how Cannon kept family members of an accused viewer of child sex abuse locked out of her courtroom during some of his trial in June, violating his Sixth Amendment rights to have a public trial—and somehow forgot to swear in the prospective jury pool, the most basic of mandatory procedures.

Now, The Daily Beast can confirm that Cannon made yet another round of gaffes during a two-day trial.

 

First the backstory: Wilkins, who had already served time behind bars, ran into problems while at a halfway house and got caught with guns. When a Fort Lauderdale jury eventually read his guilty verdict on the evening of Nov. 7, 2019, an enraged Wilkins grabbed his chair in the courtroom and flung it at the prosecutor across the room while yelling, “I’ll kill you when I catch you, boy!” A video camera and court reporter’s audio device recorded it all.

Fast-forward three years, and Wilkins found himself in court again, this time before Judge Cannon, for attacking the federal prosecutor.

The Daily Beast reviewed 500 pages of trial transcripts that show what went on during the two-day ordeal in January 2022. Prosecutors and Wilkins’ defense lawyer couldn’t agree on jury instructions—minor stuff, like whether to use “deadly or dangerous” rather than “deadly and dangerous.” But the judge surprised the lawyers when she came back with her own verdict form, which looked nothing like the kind given to jurors at a typical criminal trial.

Cannon’s draft asked: “Did the Government prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant Christopher Tavorris Wilkins committed forcible assault against a federal officer with a deadly or dangerous weapon?” The listed options were either “yes” or “no.”

At the time in court, Wilkins’ lawyer objected, twice pointing out to the judge that “guilty/not guilty” is “the traditional nomenclature.”

Judge Cannon wouldn’t reconsider.

“So, I’m going to finalize the ultimate language, but I don’t see at this point anything legally incorrect about the manner in which the verdict form is drafted as to Count 1 or Count 2, although, I note your arguments in opposition, Mr. Garland,” she said, according to the transcript.

This isn’t a minor issue. In deciding to hand jurors that questionnaire, Cannon took a novel approach to something that’s fairly basic in criminal trials. For example, jurors in Washington were asked whether the right-wing MAGA fanatic Elmer Stewart Rhodes was guilty or not of seditious conspiracy for planning an armed revolt on Jan. 6, 2021. New York jurors checked off “guilty” when deciding that the lawyer Michael Avenatti had committed wire fraud and identity theft for stealing nearly $300,000 from his porn-star client, Stormy Daniels. Jeffrey Epstein’s right-hand woman, Ghislaine Maxwell, was sent to the clink after jurors selected “guilty” on a form that asked whether the socialite engaged in child sex-trafficking.

Yet, in her South Florida courtroom, Cannon chose to draft yes/no questions that read more like the kind of verdict form given to jurors when they consider specific elements of a crime.

“That’s her verdict form. There’s no ‘guilty’ and ‘not guilty.’ The traditional format is ‘guilty’ and ‘not guilty,’ as it was on the proposed form the government and I had created. We agreed on that. And she comes up with this. This is her creation. This is her baby. It’s kind of funny. It’s ridiculous,” Garland told The Daily Beast.

“Nowhere on this form is there any opportunity to find him ‘not guilty.’ What kind of trial is this? The judge said ‘guilty’ on a make-believe trial,” he said, quoting from a Reba McEntire country song.

Garland filed an appeal on Thursday to the 11th Circuit in Atlanta—the same judges who reversed Cannon’s decisions on Trump earlier this year.

Phone calls to Cannon’s court staff went unanswered on Thursday.

The Daily Beast reviewed this with several legal scholars, who universally noted that Cannon’s move here strikes them as odd.

“I’ve never seen anything like it. I am a law professor, and I found it cumbersome to read and follow,” said Elizabeth Taxel, who spent a decade as a DeKalb County public defender and now teaches at the University of Georgia. “It’s unclear to me why the court didn’t, out of an abundance of caution, include ‘guilty or not guilty.’”

Others noted that these kinds of “special verdicts,” as they’re called, are rarely used—and only in the most strange or complex cases. Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman noted how a Virginia jury in 2009 faced detailed questions when deciding to convict the disgraced congressman William Jennings Jefferson (D-LA). But even in that complicated case, in which jurors were asked whether the government managed to prove any of 12 different racketeering acts, they were still asked to decide if he was guilty or not.

“The primary role they play is guilt/non-guilt, and that ought to be specified. Perhaps for a matter of local practice in the Southern District of Florida, that’s not done here,” Richman said.

But if Cannon’s verdict is perceived to be unfair, he said, that’s on her.

“To the extent that she introduced a formulation that arguably prejudiced the defendant, that’s a kind of error,” Richman added.

Jenny Carroll, a professor at the University of Alabama’s law school, stressed that these types of jury forms are exceedingly rare. She pointed to at least one instance where it was used successfully: in convicting Zacarias Moussaoui, the French member of al-Qaeda known as the 20th hijacker of the September 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States. But jurors were asked those questions during the second phase of a trial, and the questions related to aggravating factors to the underlying crime.

“It’s very unusual—super-unusual—which is why you’ve probably never seen one,” Carroll said. “Even within these specific verdict forms, you nonetheless end up with an ultimate question where the jury has to check ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty.’ And that’s what you’re missing on this form.”

All three law professors agreed that an appeal could venture into relatively unexplored territory and open up a spicy debate: What exactly is the role of the jury?

"What strikes me is, they have been asked to consider these bifurcated factual questions and to answer them ‘yes’ or ‘no’ without ever getting to the ultimate question: Should we conclude this person is culpable and should be punished as a criminal? Which is really what you’re asking when you say, guilty or not guilty,” Carroll said.

She summarized what she would say on a theoretical appeal.

“You, judge, took away some of the job of the jury. And you did it without any authority to do so. You’re an Article III judge, which has a lot of power, but you don’t have the authority to do this,” Carroll said. “The ultimate fact finder is the jury, and you took away the last question they're entitled to answer.”

Of course, this is based on a technicality. Jurors clearly concluded that Wilkins threatened to murder a law enforcement officer and committed forcible assault with a deadly or dangerous weapon. And as Wilkins’ own lawyer admits, the evidence in the case was pretty stark: video footage and recorded prison calls where he boasted about attacking his prosecutor. In that sense, Cannon’s error may seem trivial. But her refusal to use the proper legal terminology has introduced an avenue for appeal—while once again demonstrating that Cannon is comfortable playing fast and loose with hundreds of years of legal traditions.

As the judge overseeing the Department of Justice special counsel’s criminal case against Trump in Florida, every word she utters in court and each decision she makes will be closely scrutinized by the entire American legal society.

Already, law professors have criticized how she seemed to have gone out of her way to reveal the existence of an unknown grand jury investigation—which are typically kept secret—that’s outside South Florida and apparently still probing Trump’s actions. She’s also taken heat for scheduling his classified documents trial for May 2024, leaving the former president free to travel across the country in his bid to secure the Republican nomination during the bulk of the primary election season.

 

 

[locodos 5593]

9 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

beautiful ...

 

[Bullneck 19549]

8 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I love how their defense is "we didn't know!".  Um, get fucked traitors.

 This is advanced legal theory.  Two simple words: skip to :50

 

 

[ohchaucer 1444]

So, it's really important to get out and vote.

Just quoting this part again for, ya know, the future of our democracy, our country, and, in no small sense, our society.

(And it’s also a good reminder that the presidential election is only one part of the puzzle. Every election is nothing less than critical right now.)

[Underdog 29210]

10 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

beautiful ...

 

But we were duped! 

[Biff Tannen 46192]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The second thing is how grotesque will be the optics of a convicted president pardoning himself, or worse shutting down the cases against him.  The GQP won't care most likely, but it's hard to know.**  That would constitute the gravest impeachment we've ever seen.

So, it's really important to get out and vote.

If the first part occurs, the protests of the 60s and the 2020s will look like child's play.

Very much yes to the second part so we can avoid that scenario.

[Bookman 4766]

15 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, we always talk about "pardons," but there is something less in the form of clemency or a commutation of sentence. The feds call it a commutation and both pardons and commutations are forms of clemency.

Georgia apparently treats a commutation as a form of parole and only commutes death sentences.

So, he can't get pardoned, but he could get let out of prison way early.

If Trump is convicted in Georgia they will change the law immediately.

[BamaATL 16593]

29 minutes ago, Bookman said:

If Trump is convicted in Georgia they will change the law immediately.

Not so fast.  Actually, the constitution in Georgia is difficult to change, even with a super majority, which they don't have.  Combine that with vulnerable Republicans not being willing to put themselves further on the line, that's not realistic.  I don't know how this all ends, but I do know the notion of the Georgia Constitution being changed is very unlikely.  

[Fudge Nuggets 19469]

4 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Not so fast.  Actually, the constitution in Georgia is difficult to change, even with a super majority, which they don't have.  Combine that with vulnerable Republicans not being willing to put themselves further on the line, that's not realistic.  I don't know how this all ends, but I do know the notion of the Georgia Constitution being changed is very unlikely.  

GQP will make some promises they have no intention of keeping to a few "on the fence" Dems.  Dems will join in on the fuckery and act all surprised when the promises are ignored.  Same old shit, different day.

[BamaATL 16593]

2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

GQP will make some promises they have no intention of keeping to a few "on the fence" Dems.  Dems will join in on the fuckery and act all surprised when the promises are ignored.  Same old shit, different day.

Extremely unlikely.  In 2020, battleground Republicans in Georgia that tied themselves to Trump's wagon lost, a lot.  Ones that did well were generally distanced from his nonsense.  Further, the divide vs Democratic strongholds and Republicans is growing, with the math going strongly in our favor.  In order to push something like this thru (which Democrats have zero interest in entertaining), the rural Republican strong holds would have to concede something major for them to even consider it.  Yet can't just make a deal if you have nothing to offer.  Anything the Republicans would have to offer would yield even more power to the urban areas.  When you consider that the demographics are already against Republican interests in Georgia, they would only be accelerating the power shift against themselves.  Rural power players may say shit and talk a game, but in the end they won't even really attempt to reach across the aisle.  Their hope will be that this will give even shade to battleground areas to stay out of the fray, but that will be as far as it goes.  At the end of the day, the real power players know that seriously getting involved in trying to make this happen would be like doubling down on 4 when the dealer shows 18.  

[hpslugga 4097]

 

[dcbc 14645]

9 hours ago, Born to Run said:

13 hours ago, YGIFS said:

To be fair to Iowans, when I drive 600 yards from my home...I realize I'm in the dumbest fucking state save for maybe Florida.  We're just Mississippi Morons with oil money who can't wait to show off how fucking macho moronic we are.

West Austin Drivers are the worst and we really enjoy killing eachother in horrific fashion. Worst anywhere I've ever lived. It's insane out here.

Tyler, Texas says hold my beer.  Purest cocktail of lunacy and dumbfuckery on the roads these eyes ever have seen.

[Js1 87225]

42 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

GQP will make some promises they have no intention of keeping to a few "on the fence" Dems.  Dems will join in on the fuckery and act all surprised when the promises are ignored.  Same old shit, different day.

Making shit up is so fun and easy! 

[dcbc 14645]

4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Making shit up is so fun and easy! 

It's like a psychotic mad-lib.

[Celery Man 21100]

some, I assume, are good people

 

[The Dog 44862]

^LOL

[Red Five 41771]

Were those the ones on video, trying to get past security, saying that they were in fact the real electors? 

Edited August 11, 2023 by Red Five

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

Sounds like good stuff from Chutkan in the hearing regarding a protective order in the J6 case. 

 

Edited August 11, 2023 by Pig Bellmont

[jimmyjazz 47265]

1 hour ago, dcbc said:

Tyler, Texas says hold my beer.  Purest cocktail of lunacy and dumbfuckery on the roads these eyes ever have seen.

Tyler does suck.

South Austin sucks more.  My wife and I were driving south on Brodie yesterday and some dipshit pulled out from a driveway on the other side of the road, cutting through a long line a stopped traffic, completely invisible to us.  We came inches from t-boning her.  She was on her phone.

[Stilicho 1422]

12 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

some, I assume, are good people

 

This is my favorite FAFO sub-plot. Fuck these people.

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

[Js1 87225]

She is not taking any bullshit 

[The Dog 44862]

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Here is the Federalist scholar paper link

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751

Abstract

Quote

Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids holding office by former office holders who then participate in insurrection or rebellion. Because of a range of misperceptions and mistaken assumptions, Section Three’s full legal consequences have not been appreciated or enforced. This article corrects those mistakes by setting forth the full sweep and force of Section Three.

First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election.

Full paper at the link

But the most important thing is State officials can disqualify Trump. There will be tons of lawsuits as you know Democrat states will and should do this

 

[The Dog 44862]

2 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Here is the Federalist scholar paper link

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751

Abstract

Full paper at the link

But the most important thing is State officials can disqualify Trump. There will be tons of lawsuits as you know Democrat states will and should do this

 

(SIAP wanted to be sure the free NYT link was provided)

[Mdhorn 6166]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Don't kid yourself, he's in about as deep a shit as anyone can possibly be.  

He has some possible outs and we tend to focus unduly on them.  And, of course, we unduly focus on the "teflon Don" bullshit.

The most "real" of those outs is that he wins the 2024 election and pardons himself.  Two things about that we don't talk about much.  First, if he had been indicted on January 7, 2021, there's a high likelihood that he could keep the appeal plates spinning until inauguration, so the delays don't matter, because that's on the table no matter what.  The second thing is how grotesque will be the optics of a convicted president pardoning himself, or worse shutting down the cases against him.  The GQP won't care most likely, but it's hard to know.**  That would constitute the gravest impeachment we've ever seen.

So, it's really important to get out and vote.

**He's damaging the fuck out of the GQP right now, so the composition of the Senate in 2025 is unpredictable as is the possibility of enough GQP Senators growing a pair to convict in an impeachment.

Their take was that Jack has streamlined the process enough intentionally for the sake of a speedy trial.  They can also add charges to additional cases but there are over 100 charges against him already, and he isn't going to add to the indictments because he doesn't want to slow that process. As it is, Trump would have to beat all of his indictments--3 existing in firmly blue areas (DC, NYC and Fulton County, Georgia) which strains the possibility of Trump batting 1000.   He's sweating hard and his attorney orders are strictly delay, delay, delay.  

Additional indictments are coming against his accomplices, which will be filed separately.  

There's a whole section on Cannon that I'd have to re listen to get the gist correctly--don't want to wrongly discuss.  

It's an interesting listen, which I did late night while painting, so my handle on things is half assed.  However, when I look at the programming titles for their shows, it just seems to be click bait title porn to draw in ears, and I hate that.  "Hosted by MeidasTouch founder and civil rights lawyer, Ben Meiselas, national trial lawyer strategist, Michael Popok, and former Chief Assistant District Attorney of the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, Legal AF (Legal Analysis Friends) is a hard-hitting, thought-provoking look at this week’s most compelling developments at the intersection of law and politics."

 

[tx 3 putt 78730]

Start the trial next week 😂😂😂