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

[TwiceHorn 32191]

4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

We have enough real world negative problems without you creating fictional new ones all the time.  Also, you need to learn the difference between defending and explaining. 

I cannot say, if Trump will be guilty or not, but I can say that the system is working perfectly in this case, and that the judge and the prosecutor and the appellate courts and “the system” is so far working perfectly.   There have been no bullshit rulings, and everything has been on the up and up.

Of course, you will ignore the 100 correct rulings that have happened so far in this case and latch on to one if it’s not to your liking as an example of the corrupt system. 

That does not mean I don’t agree we should repeatedly keelhaul Alito using the Constitution….the frigate, I mean. 

I wouldn't quite say perfectly.  Although delay is inherent to the system and can be exploited, some things are being delayed more than they should be, e.g. Cannon and appeal of the immunity decision.  I thought the Florida case had the best chance of getting tried to verdict before the election, but the CIPA stuff was a bit of a wildcard there and I think the jury there will be a huge wildcard as to guilty/not guilty, although I think the evidence is near-indisputable.

[wildcat09 29631]

That Florida case is very possibly never going to trial, even if Trump loses in November.

[Chewbacca 7843]

29 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

We have enough real world negative problems without you creating fictional new ones all the time.  Also, you need to learn the difference between defending and explaining. 

I cannot say, if Trump will be guilty or not, but I can say that the system is working perfectly in this case, and that the judge and the prosecutor and the appellate courts and “the system” is so far working perfectly.   There have been no bullshit rulings, and everything has been on the up and up.

Of course, you will ignore the 100 correct rulings that have happened so far in this case and latch on to one if it’s not to your liking as an example of the corrupt system. 

That does not mean I don’t agree we should repeatedly keelhaul Alito using the Constitution….the frigate, I mean. 

Nothing about the classified documents case has been on the up and up.  Cannon will never hear that case if she has anything to say about it.

[C-Man 27940]

19 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

That Florida case is very possibly never going to trial, even if Trump loses in November.

 

12 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

Nothing about the classified documents case has been on the up and up.  Cannon will never hear that case if she has anything to say about it.

Seems that way.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/22/politics/trump-documents-case-judge-cannon-hearing/index.html

Quote

A hearing in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case devolved into shouting Wednesday as attorneys battled over an alleged threat made last year to a defense attorney.

The morning proceeding in Fort Pierce, Florida, had been scheduled for Walt Nauta, one of former President Donald Trump’s co-defendants, to present arguments that special counsel Jack Smith’s team had selectively and vindictively brought charges against him. The presiding judge, Aileen Cannon, did not issue a ruling from the bench.

But the hearing quickly diverted into a longstanding disagreement over an August 2022 meeting between prosecutor Jay Bratt and Nauta’s defense attorney, Stanley Woodward. Woodward has claimed in court proceedings and filings that Bratt attempted to pressure him into convincing Nauta to cooperate against Trump by threatening to affect a potential judgeship nomination.

Nauta claims that he was criminally charged in the case as retaliation for declining to cooperate with the Justice Department’s investigation into the former president’s retention of classified documents at his estate.

This photo from the US Department of Justice allegedly shows Walt Nauta moving boxes inside former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida. 

From US Department of Justice

“I had been recommended for a judgeship, that’s beyond dispute,” Woodward said Wednesday. “There was a folder about defense counsel on the table” during that meeting, he said, claiming Bratt referenced that judgeship recommendation.

“I think the implication was that I was to travel and convince Mr. Nauta to cooperate with the investigation, and if I didn’t that, there would be consequences,” Woodward said.

Prosecutor David Harbach then rose and accused Woodward of engaging in “procedural gamesmanship” by making a “garbage argument” about the meeting.

“Mr. Woodward’s story of what happened at that meeting is a fantasy,” Harbach shouted, banging his hand on the lectern in front of him. “It did not happen.”

The heated proceedings Wednesday come as the Manhattan hush money case against Trump nears its conclusion and a new phase of pretrial activity gets underway in the federal classified documents prosecution in Florida.

The hearing was the first before Cannon since she indefinitely delayed the start of the trial, which had been scheduled to begin as early as this week. It has been more than a month since the judge last held a public, in-person hearing in the case – though she has held at least one sealed proceeding since then.

Trump is charged with taking classified national defense documents from the White House after he left office and of resisting the government’s attempts to retrieve the materials. Trump, Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira have all pleaded not guilty.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Harbach slammed Woodward, saying he chose not to report the alleged incident until months later and has repeatedly changed his recollection of the conversation.

“This is a lawyer whose allegations amount basically to him being extorted,” Harbach said of Woodward, waving his arms.

Woodward sat behind the prosecutor with his hands clasped and his head down.

The judge quickly scolded Harbach, telling the attorney to “calm down.” Cannon questioned why there was no evidence gathered of what happened in the 2022 conversation, saying, “Why do those comments [about Woodward] have to be made?”

RELATED ARTICLEFederal judge found ‘strong evidence’ of crimes before Trump was charged in classified documents case

“That is not true, and I didn’t say that,” Harbach shouted back. The prosecutor said that that there was no recording of the conversation between Bratt and Woodward, but that Smith’s team has preserved any record they have of the meeting.

Woodward shot back up to the lectern, saying that “I’m here” and offering to testify under oath to what he remembered of the meeting.

Nauta’s request to dismiss the case was the first of two issues before Cannon on Wednesday. An afternoon hearing will center on co-defendants’ argument the indictment suffers technical flaws requiring its dismissal.

Trump had obtained permission from the judge to skip Wednesday’s proceedings.

When postponing the trial, Cannon pointed to the mountain of unresolved pretrial issues for not putting a new date on the calendar. Wednesday kicks off a stretch of hearings scheduled through late July that will get the case through some – but not all – of the pretrial issues.

Cannon’s slow pace in the case has attracted criticisms from outside legal experts, who have accused the Trump-appointed judge of playing into delay tactics by the GOP’s presumptive White House nominee. Unless Cannon picks up her momentum considerably, it appears unlikely the charges will go before a jury before the 2024 election. If Trump wins the White House, it is expected he will make the charges against him go away.

Newly unsealed filings give more details about the investigation

Until recent days, several major motions from Trump attacking the prosecution were not even publicly docketed. The proceedings have become mired in disputes over what should be redacted in public filings.

On Tuesday, hundreds of pages of previously sealed court filings were posted publicly as part of efforts by the former president to have the charges against him thrown out. Those filings included a previously sealed March 2023 ruling by a federal judge in Washington, DC, finding there was “sufficient” evidence that Trump committed crimes, allowing investigators to obtain information from his former lawyer that would normally be protected by attorney-client privilege.

Trump is seeking to throw out that evidence, as well as the evidence obtained in the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago in August 2022, from which investigators obtained many of the documents underlying several of the charges against Trump.

Those motions are not scheduled for argument on Wednesday, and Cannon has not yet set a hearing on them.

In her order Sunday allowing for the filings to be made public, Cannon took a shot at prosecutors – one of several swipes she’s made at Smith’s office. She expressed “concern” the special counsel’s office had sought redactions of information in the newly unsealed filings after previously giving its OK for that information to be published in full in earlier court filings.

“The Court is disappointed in these developments. The sealing and redaction rules should be applied consistently and fairly upon a sufficient factual and legal showing,” Cannon wrote. “And parties should not make requests that undermine any prior representations or positions except upon full disclosure to the Court and appropriate briefing.”

 

[safe sex 12078]

I fucking hate her so much

[HenryJames 67697]

You're going to really hate her when she's on the Supreme Court.

[Hermanator 7718]

Y'all are torturing yourselves hoping the courts will save democracy. The courts were never meant to save democracy. 

Only Americans can save themselves in November. There is no other avenue. I'll check in on this trial from time to time but don't really worry much about these anymore. Battle lines have been drawn and I'm ready to vote against all MAGA and that's all any of us can do. 

[Brisketexan 107151]

15 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

Y'all are torturing yourselves hoping the courts will save democracy. The courts were never meant to save democracy. 

Only Americans can save themselves in November. There is no other avenue. I'll check in on this trial from time to time but don't really worry much about these anymore. Battle lines have been drawn and I'm ready to vote against all MAGA and that's all any of us can do. 

Correct.

1) It's up to us, "we the people."

2) We've demonstrated that we're not up to the task.  We the people are a bucket of wet shit.

So...

[Slacks 7169]

you MF'n chickens better get to MF'n roost'n.

[tbone_ 14534]

1) It's up to us, "we the people."
2) We've demonstrated that we're not up to the task.  We the people are a bucket of wet shit.

Hey Eeyore, we the people caused this dumb fuck to lose the popular vote by 6 million votes last time.

[Brisketexan 107151]

Just now, tbone_ said:

 

Hey Eeyore, we the people caused this dumb fuck to lose the popular vote by 6 million votes last time.

 

And the margin looks worse for us this time around.

As the facts about him are even fucking WORSE.  The WORSE he is, the more cemented his support is....and he even gains fucking support.  Or, we blame Biden for things that he didn't do (like repeal Roe).  Stop counting on the American people to save ourselves.  We are not up to the task.

[bolverk 30410]

1 hour ago, tbone_ said:

 

Hey Eeyore, we the people caused this dumb fuck to lose the popular vote by 6 million votes last time.

 

 

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

And the margin looks worse for us this time around.

As the facts about him are even fucking WORSE.  The WORSE he is, the more cemented his support is....and he even gains fucking support.  Or, we blame Biden for things that he didn't do (like repeal Roe).  Stop counting on the American people to save ourselves.  We are not up to the task.

Didn't someone on this site do the math before the 2020 election to determine that Biden would need to win by at least 5 million votes to get elected because of Electoral College fuckery? Since then, we've reapportioned EC votes, so I don't know if that goes in his favor or against him.

[Biff Tannen 46350]

2 hours ago, Hermanator said:

Battle lines have been drawn and I'm ready to vote against all MAGA and that's all any of us can do. 

It may come down to more than that if maga gets their way.  

[SaucyJack 3525]

5 hours ago, tbone_ said:

 

Hey Eeyore, we the people caused this dumb fuck to lose the popular vote by 6 million votes last time.

 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19399]

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/21/trump-classified-documents-bedroom-00159182

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/22/politics/trump-documents-case-judge-cannon-hearing/index.html

Cannon needs to be replaced yesterday. Also, fuck Trump.

Edited May 23 by PenelopeWitherspoon

[Bozo_Casanova 27041]

15 hours ago, HenryJames said:

You're going to really hate her when she's on the Supreme Court.

This, but unironically 

[dcbc 14677]

[Captainant 28670]

Man it's crazy to see the slow motion realization by some that aileen is who we thought she was a fucking year or more ago. She is 100% in the bag for trump and is an example of the class of trump judges that will bend the law on its head to protect him. 

Our judicial system has been irreparably warped by trumpco and a weird collective urge to insist that everything is fine. White knuckling your belief in collective good faith while hurtling towards a brick wall of authoritarianism and inequity justice. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19540]

2 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Cannon needs to be replaced yesterday.

That ship sailed a long time ago.  I remember when it was announced this case was in her court plenty of people were skeptical that it would ever see the light of day.  But lots of legal experts said nothing to worry about.

[Js1 87465]

15 hours ago, bolverk said:

 

Didn't someone on this site do the math before the 2020 election to determine that Biden would need to win by at least 5 million votes to get elected because of Electoral College fuckery? Since then, we've reapportioned EC votes, so I don't know if that goes in his favor or against him.

States that voted Trump +3 (Texas +2, Montana/NC +1, FL +1, WV/Ohio -1)
States that voted Biden -3 (Colorado/Oregon +1, CA/MI/IL/PA/NY -1)

So it helps very slightly for Trump

[C-Man 27940]

51 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Man it's crazy to see the slow motion realization by some that aileen is who we thought she was a fucking year or more ago. She is 100% in the bag for trump and is an example of the class of trump judges that will bend the law on its head to protect him. 

Our judicial system has been irreparably warped by trumpco and a weird collective urge to insist that everything is fine. White knuckling your belief in collective good faith while hurtling towards a brick wall of authoritarianism and inequity justice. 

There were a number of us who were doom-and-gloom when we realized Cannon was going to be the presiding judge. We were assured by countless Surly lawdogs that all was well, Kevin Bacon/Animal House style. Looking more and more like the doom-and-gloomers will be proven right in this instance. This is fuckery of the highest order.

[Fudge Nuggets 19540]

57 minutes ago, C-Man said:

There were a number of us who were doom-and-gloom when we realized Cannon was going to be the presiding judge. We were assured by countless Surly lawdogs that all was well, Kevin Bacon/Animal House style. Looking more and more like the doom-and-gloomers will be proven right in this instance. This is fuckery of the highest order.

Gator will be here any minute now to tell us we're wrong and overreacting.  The system is working as designed... blah blah blah.

[Willfully Horn 8335]

4 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Gator will be here any minute now to tell us we're wrong and overreacting.  The system is working as designed... blah blah blah.

As is the plane currently headed toward the mountain.

[wildcat09 29631]

He's doing more crimes right out in the open:

[locodos 5603]

8 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

He's doing more crimes right out in the open:

Well it worked for the GOP with Iran back in the 80's and nobody seems too upset about that.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/expert-analyzes-new-account-of-gop-deal-that-used-iran-hostage-crisis-for-gain

Edited May 23 by locodos

[Gatorubet 30921]

38 minutes ago, C-Man said:

There were a number of us who were doom-and-gloom when we realized Cannon was going to be the presiding judge. We were assured by countless Surly lawdogs that all was well, Kevin Bacon/Animal House style. Looking more and more like the doom-and-gloomers will be proven right in this instance. This is fuckery of the highest order.

3 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Gator will be here any minute now to tell us we're wrong and overreacting.  The system is working as designed... blah blah blah.

Bold is not correct. Fudge Nuggets is wrong. C-man must be remembering that Twice quite correctly pointed out that we did not know then if her initial mistakes were the result of Trump friendly shenanigans - or whether she was screwing up this case just like she had previously screwed up other non-Trump cases…..because she is completely inexperienced/unqualified and also apparently bigly dumb. IOW, the possibility remained back then that her initial rulings were a case of Hanlon's razor, an adage that states: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

Nobody said ‘all was well’, just that maybe a different reason remained that explained why her initial getting things wrong might be attributed to the same reasons she got the other non-Trump cases wrong - she was known to be unqualified and stupid. We now have a more complete record and it would be silly for anyone to conclude at this point that her fat ugly thumb was not firmly on the scale for Trump. 

I award you both cookies for your early, now-confirmed, certainty of her douchebaggery.   But don’t create alternate facts in order to pat yourself on the back harder.  

[TwiceHorn 32191]

4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Bold is not correct. Fudge Nuggets is wrong. C-man must be remembering that Twice quite correctly pointed out that we did not know then if her initial mistakes were the result of Trump friendly shenanigans - or whether she was screwing up this case just like she had previously screwed up other non-Trump cases…..because she is completely inexperienced/unqualified and also apparently bigly dumb. IOW, the possibility remained back then that her initial rulings were a case of Hanlon's razor, an adage that states: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

Nobody said ‘all was well’, just that maybe a different reason remained that explained why her initial getting things wrong might be attributed to the same reasons she got the other non-Trump cases wrong - she was known to be unqualified and stupid. We now have a more complete record and it would be silly for anyone to conclude at this point that her fat ugly thumb was not firmly on the scale for Trump. 

I award you both cookies for your early, now-confirmed, certainty of her douchebaggery.   But don’t create alternate facts in order to pat yourself on the back harder.  

Also, other than the delay, which is equally attributable to her stupidity and inexperience, we don't yet have a record of substantive rulings in favor of Trump.  She almost did one with the jury instructions stunt, but rapidly reversed herself.  She apparently has not yet fucked a CIPA ruling because the government has the right to immediately appeal those, which has not yet occurred.

I am most interested in whether she suppresses the Evan Corcoran evidence presented to the grand jury after piercing privilege on crime-fraud exception grounds.  Beryl Howell rendered an 80-plus page opinion on it and the DC Circuit affirmed her decision.  If that isn't res judicata or law of the case (which apparently it isn't) this is a big opportunity for Cannon to expose her bias.  This is Howell's opinion. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/561/4/united-states-v-trump/

[C-Man 27940]

Comey thinks Trump will be convicted in this case.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-comey-predicts-trump-will-be-convicted-in-hush-money-trial-and-defends-alvin-bragg-bringing-the-case/

Quote

Former FBI Director James Comey sat for a wide-ranging interview with Dan Abrams on NewsNation on Wednesday, where he said he believed former President Donald Trump would be convicted following his hush money trial.

It was a disagreement with Abrams (the owner of Mediaite), who believed that the trial would result in a hung jury. But not only did Comey believe Trump would be convicted of the charges he’s accused of — 34 counts of falsifying business records — he said there was “zero chance of an acquittal.” Comey also defended the decision by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to bring the case after the Department of Justice passed on it:

Abrams: If you had been the Manhattan D.A. — you were a former top prosecutor in New York, not the Manhattan D.A., but in another role — would you have brought the hush money case?

Comey: I wasn’t sure that I would have when I read the indictment, but now, having seen the case, I’m not sure after investigating how they wouldn’t bring it. They had a much stronger case than I imagined, and they’d be taking a pass on it because of who the defendant was. And that’s something you don’t ever want to do as a prosecutor.

Abrams: What about the fact that the feds, including the Biden DOJ, took a pass on it? And you would think that, particularly when it comes to the election piece of this, that that is typically something that would be tried in a federal court?

Comey: Yeah, it’s a good question. I don’t know the answer to that. And so like, I really don’t know. There could be all kinds of reasons that I can’t see internal to the Department of Justice.

Abrams: What do you think’s going to happen? I can’t imagine there’ll be anything about a hung jury. But that’s just my…

Comey: I actually, I have a different take. I think there’s an overwhelming chance of a conviction, a significant but much smaller chance of a hung jury, and zero chance of an acquittal.

Abrams: Why?

Comey: Why zero chance of acquittal?

Abrams: No, no, no, why do you think there’s more of a chance of a conviction than a hung jury?

Comey: Because they built a very strong circumstantial case. They built a building out of a series of bricks that really couldn’t be crossed because there were documents, there were texts, there were the words of the defendant before they went to their cooperator at the end. I bet they even debated whether they needed to call [Michael Cohen] as a cooperator. And that circumstantial case, at least in my experience, having tried a lot of cases, is very, very powerful with the jury.

 

[F250 29304]

29 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Bold is not correct. Fudge Nuggets is wrong. C-man must be remembering that Twice quite correctly pointed out that we did not know then if her initial mistakes were the result of Trump friendly shenanigans - or whether she was screwing up this case just like she had previously screwed up other non-Trump cases…..because she is completely inexperienced/unqualified and also apparently bigly dumb. IOW, the possibility remained back then that her initial rulings were a case of Hanlon's razor, an adage that states: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

Nobody said ‘all was well’, just that maybe a different reason remained that explained why her initial getting things wrong might be attributed to the same reasons she got the other non-Trump cases wrong - she was known to be unqualified and stupid. We now have a more complete record and it would be silly for anyone to conclude at this point that her fat ugly thumb was not firmly on the scale for Trump. 

I award you both cookies for your early, now-confirmed, certainty of her douchebaggery.   But don’t create alternate facts in order to pat yourself on the back harder.  

Counterpoint.

 

[TwiceHorn 32191]

14 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Abrams: What about the fact that the feds, including the Biden DOJ, took a pass on it? And you would think that, particularly when it comes to the election piece of this, that that is typically something that would be tried in a federal court?

Comey: Yeah, it’s a good question. I don’t know the answer to that. And so like, I really don’t know. There could be all kinds of reasons that I can’t see internal to the Department of Justice.

I think the reasoning there is that it was apparently debated in the Biden DOJ whether prosecuting this particular ex-president was a good idea.

[Fudge Nuggets 19540]

41 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Bold is not correct. Fudge Nuggets is wrong. C-man must be remembering that Twice quite correctly pointed out that we did not know then if her initial mistakes were the result of Trump friendly shenanigans - or whether she was screwing up this case just like she had previously screwed up other non-Trump cases…..because she is completely inexperienced/unqualified and also apparently bigly dumb. IOW, the possibility remained back then that her initial rulings were a case of Hanlon's razor, an adage that states: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

Nobody said ‘all was well’, just that maybe a different reason remained that explained why her initial getting things wrong might be attributed to the same reasons she got the other non-Trump cases wrong - she was known to be unqualified and stupid. We now have a more complete record and it would be silly for anyone to conclude at this point that her fat ugly thumb was not firmly on the scale for Trump. 

I award you both cookies for your early, now-confirmed, certainty of her douchebaggery.   But don’t create alternate facts in order to pat yourself on the back harder.  

I’m referring to the timeframe before she started showing her bias and incompetence.  There were plenty that said it was fine because the DOJ couldn’t be seen as judge shopping by asking to get the case moved to another court.

[Fudge Nuggets 19540]

22 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Comey thinks Trump will be convicted in this case.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-comey-predicts-trump-will-be-convicted-in-hush-money-trial-and-defends-alvin-bragg-bringing-the-case/

 

Convicted and asked to pay (asked, because no one will make him actually pay) a $1,000 fine.

[Longhorn_Fan68 34112]

  

3 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I’m referring to the timeframe before she started showing her bias and incompetence.  There were plenty that said it was fine because the DOJ couldn’t be seen as judge shopping by asking to get the case moved to another court.

and yet here we are. let historians debate the right and wrong later. right now, WE say it was wrong and he should be punished. we don't care what they say about it later. tbh

Edited May 23 by Longhorn_Fan68

[TwiceHorn 32191]

22 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

 the DOJ couldn’t be seen as judge shopping by asking to get the case moved to another court.

No one ever said that, as far as I know.  DOJ would have and currently has, no viable grounds for recusal or any other way of moving the case to another judge.

Once she commits a substantive error that gives DOJ the ability to appeal, they might ask the 11th Circuit to remand it to a different judge, or the 11th might do that of its own volition.

What was said is that Jack Smith did the unimpeachably right thing by filing in the Fort Pierce division.  He didn't have to, he could have filed anywhere else in SD Fla and avoided her.  But once he did, he was in for the long haul.

Edited May 23 by TwiceHorn

[C-Man 27940]

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

Bold is not correct. Fudge Nuggets is wrong. C-man must be remembering that Twice quite correctly pointed out that we did not know then if her initial mistakes were the result of Trump friendly shenanigans - or whether she was screwing up this case just like she had previously screwed up other non-Trump cases…..because she is completely inexperienced/unqualified and also apparently bigly dumb. IOW, the possibility remained back then that her initial rulings were a case of Hanlon's razor, an adage that states: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

Nobody said ‘all was well’, just that maybe a different reason remained that explained why her initial getting things wrong might be attributed to the same reasons she got the other non-Trump cases wrong - she was known to be unqualified and stupid. We now have a more complete record and it would be silly for anyone to conclude at this point that her fat ugly thumb was not firmly on the scale for Trump. 

I award you both cookies for your early, now-confirmed, certainty of her douchebaggery.   But don’t create alternate facts in order to pat yourself on the back harder.  

 

59 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also, other than the delay, which is equally attributable to her stupidity and inexperience, we don't yet have a record of substantive rulings in favor of Trump.  She almost did one with the jury instructions stunt, but rapidly reversed herself.  She apparently has not yet fucked a CIPA ruling because the government has the right to immediately appeal those, which has not yet occurred.

I am most interested in whether she suppresses the Evan Corcoran evidence presented to the grand jury after piercing privilege on crime-fraud exception grounds.  Beryl Howell rendered an 80-plus page opinion on it and the DC Circuit affirmed her decision.  If that isn't res judicata or law of the case (which apparently it isn't) this is a big opportunity for Cannon to expose her bias.  This is Howell's opinion. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/561/4/united-states-v-trump/

OK, so maybe we were just correct to fear the worst. Sorry if I painted with too broad a brush.

[dcbc 14677]

1 hour ago, C-Man said:

 

OK, so maybe we were just correct to fear the worst. Sorry if I painted with too broad a brush.

It's never a bad idea to fear the worst.  It's the predicting-the-dystopian-future-from-the-ledge part where I tend to draw the line (not that you're a member of the predicting-the-dystopian-future-from-the-ledge brigade).

[Red Five 41915]

So, in upside-down world, apparently right wing regards have spent the last day or so talking about how Biden tried to assassinate Trump. So, this will be a thing going forward I'm sure. "Did you hear Biden tried to kill him??"

[Neonmoon 38130]

Someone needs to 

[SaucyJack 3525]

4 hours ago, Red Five said:

So, in upside-down world, apparently right wing regards have spent the last day or so talking about how Biden tried to assassinate Trump. So, this will be a thing going forward I'm sure. "Did you hear Biden tried to kill him??"

[YGIFS 19461]

3 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Someone needs to 

So as we've repeated ad nauseam, all ex-Presidents still have plain-clothes secret service agents randomly select grocery stores to shop for the former first family.  Idea being that you can't possibly poison an entire city's grocery supply on an hour's notice.  It's worked damn well for decades.  Trump doesn't like that arrangement.  He insists on eating at Mar-a-Lago from the kitchen, directly.  The last few weeks, he's eating straight from his New York tower's executive cafe.  When you know what somebody will eat and when they will eat it, and they refuse Secret Service safety protocol....it's really not that complicated.  

My grandchildren, god willing, will get to attend Ben E. Keith Middle School.  

[Hermanator 7718]

11 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

Bold is not correct. Fudge Nuggets is wrong. C-man must be remembering that Twice quite correctly pointed out that we did not know then if her initial mistakes were the result of Trump friendly shenanigans - or whether she was screwing up this case just like she had previously screwed up other non-Trump cases…..because she is completely inexperienced/unqualified and also apparently bigly dumb. IOW, the possibility remained back then that her initial rulings were a case of Hanlon's razor, an adage that states: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

Nobody said ‘all was well’, just that maybe a different reason remained that explained why her initial getting things wrong might be attributed to the same reasons she got the other non-Trump cases wrong - she was known to be unqualified and stupid. We now have a more complete record and it would be silly for anyone to conclude at this point that her fat ugly thumb was not firmly on the scale for Trump. 

I award you both cookies for your early, now-confirmed, certainty of her douchebaggery.   But don’t create alternate facts in order to pat yourself on the back harder.  

Lawyers just can't turn off the lawyer lying bullshit even when the bullshit is plainly obvious. 

[Gatorubet 30921]

5 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

Lawyers just can't turn off the lawyer lying bullshit even when the bullshit is plainly obvious. 

 If the lie is so obvious, your smooth brain should have been able to point it out in a sentence or two.  But…no. 

 

[Biff Tannen 46350]

3 hours ago, YGIFS said:

Trump doesn't like that arrangement.  He insists on eating at Mar-a-Lago from the kitchen, directly.  The last few weeks, he's eating straight from his New York tower's executive cafe.  When you know what somebody will eat and when they will eat it, and they refuse Secret Service safety protocol....it's really not that complicated.  

Real question.  How do you know this?

[YGIFS 19461]

Are you under cover?  Because if you’re a cop, you have to tell me you’re a cop if I ask.  
 

Despite their insistence they switch things up, Trump likes to eat off the menus at his resorts and towers.  And they are worried as fuck about it.  
 

i have been questioned about where I got the wine and appetizer before breaking bread by federal officials.  They take food safety real serious for reasons i don’t ask about.  But apparently Trump doesn’t want to look weak but sending for takeout 

[Hermanator 7718]

7 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

 If the lie is so obvious, your smooth brain should have been able to point it out in a sentence or two.  But…no. 

 

You're just constantly full of shit. You've been here saying the whole thing is working exactly as it's supposed to when we have one judge intentionally delaying a trial in Florida and the fucking Supreme Court intentionally dragging their feet to delay his trial in DC. It's pure fucking corruption and I, for one, am tired of your constant bullshit. 

Just shut your lawyer cunt ass up already. 

[scottsins 2071]

You're just constantly full of shit. You've been here saying the whole thing is working exactly as it's supposed to when we have one judge intentionally delaying a trial in Florida and the fucking Supreme Court intentionally dragging their feet to delay his trial in DC. It's pure fucking corruption and I, for one, am tired of your constant bullshit. 
Just shut your lawyer cunt ass up already. 

Link to Gator saying the WHOLE THING is working EXACTLY as it’s supposed to?

[TwiceHorn 32191]

26 minutes ago, scottsins said:

Link to Gator saying the WHOLE THING is working EXACTLY as it’s supposed to?

Also probably worth noting that lawdogs are pretty inured to delays.  It's one of those things you have to get used to when you start practicing.  And law students are already used to delays in that you wait an entire semester before getting any indication of a grade, in the usual case.

That doesn't mean we like it, and it's extremely unfortunate in these cases.  But it's just one of those "well, shit" things.

Edited May 24 by TwiceHorn

[Captainant 28670]

12 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also probably worth noting that lawdogs are pretty inured to delays.  It's one of those things you have to get used to when you start practicing.  And law students are already used to delays in that you wait an entire semester before getting any indication of a grade, in the usual case.

That doesn't mean we like it, and it's extremely unfortunate in these cases.  But it's just one of those "well, shit" things.

My position is that y'all have a big fucking blind spot to when something that is common and mundane is being weaponized to further injustice. Y'all act like it's just normal for nuclear secrets to be stolen and the trial delayed for years, simply because other trials are delayed, like sometimes, I guess. 

You're so used to seeing the sausage made, you're not worried about people dumping sawdust and ratshit into the product - bad trimmings make it in all the time and there's a rule against it or something. But heaven forbid we say "hey they're dumping rat shit in" without having ironclad proof, otherwise we're just being alarmist amirite??

Edited May 24 by Captainant

[TwiceHorn 32191]

7 minutes ago, Captainant said:

My position is that y'all have a big fucking blind spot to when something that is common and mundane is being weaponized to further injustice. Y'all act like it's just normal for nuclear secrets to be stolen and the trial delayed for years, simply because other trials are delayed, like sometimes, I guess. 

You're so used to seeing the sausage made, you're not worried about people dumping sawdust and ratshit into the product - bad trimmings make it in all the time and there's a rule against it or something 

Well, because the outcome is usually as expected.  You learn to ignore the delay and focus on engaging in the process and getting the desired result.

And, let's face it, if, somehow, all of these cases were tried to verdict before the election, and the appeals exhausted, it wouldn't change a damn thing.

This idea that we're somehow normalizing crimes is complete bullshit.  There wouldn't be an indictment at all if that were normalized.  What we're doing is adjusting expectations to reflect the reality of the system, where trials inside of a year are an exception rather than the rule.

Edited May 24 by TwiceHorn

[Biff Tannen 46350]

8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

And, let's face it, if, somehow, all of these cases were tried to verdict before the election, and the appeals exhausted, it wouldn't change a damn thing.

Expand on this. Because it doesn’t seem correct.