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

[wildcat09 28563]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

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.

Maybe, maybe not. But the American people would know that Trump had been convicted of stealing top secret information.  There are very real and continued harms being done every day to the average American's perception of our justice system by all this bullshit and just dismissing those concerns as uninformed doesn't help your case. None of the way Trump's crimes have been investigated and prosecuted have actually gone by the book. They've been delayed by the vain political concerns of chickenshits who thought maybe if they just ignored it he'd go away, and by numerous and easily foreseeable corrupt actions of conservative public officials.  People are right to be pissed and as a functioning member of that system you should be pissed at the people who are destroying it, not those who are noticing the destruction. 

This is like the people who argued there was no point in Woodward quickly reporting that Trump knew in February 2020 that covid was airborne and would be catastrophic. I dunno man, I think millions of voters would've liked to have known that before the election. How the fuck am I consistently less cynical than most about the American public?

[TwiceHorn 30851]

12 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

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

What would it change?  The base doesn't give a fuck about Trump's criminal problems, not one single fuck.  Think that would change if he was actually convicted, serving time? ELeCtiON InTERfeReNce! Maybe among some "independents," but I'd guess those that would be affected are already affected by the fact of the indictments and trials.

A startling number of voters are willing to accept this as politically motivated and the product of a "two-tiered" system.  Do you think convictions, even affirmed on appeal, would change any of that?

Edited May 24 by TwiceHorn

[Biff Tannen 45226]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

What would it change?  The base doesn't give a fuck about Trump's criminal problems, not one single fuck.  Think that would change if he was actually convicted, serving time? ELeCtiON InTERfeReNce! Maybe among some "independents," but I'd guess those that would be affected are already affected by the fact of the indictments and trials.

 

As much as I’m on the Ledge, I do think if he were convicted and sentenced for the federal crimes he’s accused of committing, including stealing classified information and inciting and directing a coup to overturn an election, he would actually lose support among the “independents” and even some of the GOP voters.  And it would undoubtedly increase turnout for Biden. 

[TwiceHorn 30851]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Maybe, maybe not. But the American people would know that Trump had been convicted of stealing top secret information.  There are very real and continued harms being done every day to the average American's perception of our justice system by all this bullshit and just dismissing those concerns as uninformed doesn't help your case. None of the way Trump's crimes have been investigated and prosecuted have actually gone by the book. They've been delayed by the vain political concerns of chickenshits who thought maybe if they just ignored it he'd go away, and by numerous and easily foreseeable corrupt actions of conservative public officials.  People are right to be pissed and as a functioning member of that system you should be pissed at the people who are destroying it, not those who are noticing the destruction. 

This is like the people who argued there was no point in Woodward quickly reporting that Trump knew in February 2020 that covid was airborne and would be catastrophic. I dunno man, I think millions of voters would've liked to have known that before the election. How the fuck am I consistently less cynical than most about the American public?

I'm not dismissing them, but they are uninformed. 

[Captainant 26927]

8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

What would it change?  The base doesn't give a fuck about Trump's criminal problems, not one single fuck.  Think that would change if he was actually convicted, serving time? ELeCtiON InTERfeReNce! Maybe among some "independents," but I'd guess those that would be affected are already affected by the fact of the indictments and trials.

A startling number of voters are willing to accept this as politically motivated and the product of a "two-tiered" system.  Do you think convictions, even affirmed on appeal, would change any of that?

Yeah when you post shit like this it reads to me as if you're saying "there's no point in prosecuting him, so why bother?"

[wildcat09 28563]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm not dismissing them, but they are uninformed. 

He got Cannon right and you didn't. What does that tell you about the value of your knowledge? 

[TwiceHorn 30851]

Just now, Captainant said:

Yeah when you post shit like this it reads to me as if you're saying "there's no point in prosecuting him, so why bother?"

Not at all.  It's a simple acknowledgment of the fact that his base is fucking insane and the people knowledgeable enough to follow this (and complain about it) were never voting for him anyway.

 

[TwiceHorn 30851]

5 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

He got Cannon right and you didn't. What does that tell you about the value of your knowledge? 

No one really knows why Cannon is doing what she's doing.  So, that's not knowledge, that remains speculation.  I never said Cannon wouldn't fuck it up, I speculated that the reason was that she's a dumbfuck ill-suited to handle a trial like this moreso than in the bag for Trump.  He speculated the other way.

We still don't know, know.

Edited May 24 by TwiceHorn

[jimmyjazz 45211]

16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Yeah when you post shit like this it reads to me as if you're saying "there's no point in prosecuting him, so why bother?"

That's not really fair.  @TwiceHorn is talking about the vote, not the crime.  I'm quite confident he's of the opinion that crimes were committed and that justice should be served.

[South Austin 51681]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm quite confident he's of the opinion that crimes were committed and that justice should be served.

Justice is waiting for him.

 

[TwiceHorn 30851]

Also, to be ultra-realistic:

• Even if all of these prosecutions had commenced in 2021 (unrealistic in itself), only experienced, hard-core judges like Chutkan or Merchan were getting these to trial within a year
• Appeals would have prevented the finality of any judgments of conviction in any court until past the election, which in all likelihood would keep Trump out of prison and able to continue to squawk about witch hunts and corrupt judges and prosecutors
• The immunity question, bullshit as it is, would hamstring and delay the January 6 case, even under Chutkan, making trial within a year, or even two, completely unrealistic, let alone any post-conviction appeals
• The CIPA issues surrounding 30 someodd classified documents would have made trial within a year, or even two, a dubious proposition even with a judge like Chutkan or Lewis Kaplan  (see, e.g. Reality Winner case, resolved by plea one year after filing and involving far fewer classified documents)

Getting a final final conviction against Trump before the election was a pipe dream, even if events had lined up better than they have (no Cannon, no delay in indictment).

Edited May 24 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 30851]

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's not really fair.  @TwiceHorn is talking about the vote, not the crime.  I'm quite confident he's of the opinion that crimes were committed and that justice should be served.

Correct.  I remain hopeful that the system, permitted to operate, will result in convictions.  But it won't be on our timeframe.  In this belief, I am discounting jury nullification (hung juries by Trumpists) and Trump winning the election and halting proceedings.

[miguelito 11116]

Lawdogs: do y'all think that all of Cannon's delays are totally normal, reasonable, and justified, and would happen in any other case, and are beyond scrutiny?

[TwiceHorn 30851]

1 minute ago, miguelito said:

Lawdogs: do y'all think that all of Cannon's delays are totally normal, reasonable, and justified, and would happen in any other case, and are beyond scrutiny?

Beyond scrutiny, no.

But the case is not a year old, yet, even (filed June 8, 2023).  As said repeatedly, getting to trial in a year is an ambitious project even for an experienced, strong judge.  And that's without unique issues involving classified documents and CIPA, a statute that is relatively new and relatively few judges have experience with and which multiplies pretrial proceedings excessively

There are a few other unique issues, including now whether the piercing of privilege before the grand jury will also apply at this trial.  

Also, the fact that this involves three defendants is a complicating factor.  That basically triples the number of pretrial motions the judge has to deal with.

[WhatTheBuck 28618]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

No one really knows why Cannon is doing what she's doing.  So, that's not knowledge, that remains speculation.  I never said Cannon wouldn't fuck it up, I speculated that the reason was that she's a dumbfuck ill-suited to handle a trial like this moreso than in the bag for Trump.  He speculated the other way.

We still don't know, know.

I guess they don’t teach “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck” theory in law school. It’s ability to explain and predict Cannon’s actions has been pretty reliable in this case. 

[wildcat09 28563]

1 hour ago, miguelito said:

Lawdogs: do y'all think that all of Cannon's delays are totally normal, reasonable, and justified, and would happen in any other case, and are beyond scrutiny?

No. I'm fairly sure every lawyer that posts here but TwiceHorn thinks Cannon is pretty openly in the tank for Trump. He seems to have mostly quit giving her the benefit of the doubt, but is still rationalizing his error with this "we can't REALLY know what she's thinking" stuff. Which, c'mon man. 

[kevwun 15341]

I have no doubt she's stupid, but every "oops" she has is in Trump's favor.

[TwiceHorn 30851]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

No. I'm fairly sure every lawyer that posts here but TwiceHorn thinks Cannon is pretty openly in the tank for Trump. He seems to have mostly quit giving her the benefit of the doubt, but is still rationalizing his error with this "we can't REALLY know what she's thinking" stuff. Which, c'mon man. 

I mean, you can't actually know what she's thinking.

I have expressed no certainty on that issue, only that it is equally consistent with her being a dipshit, which I think is fairly beyond cavil at this point.

[The Original Greaser Bob 2736]

Just look at her.  She looks like she is a shitty judge.

[Biff Tannen 45226]

1 hour ago, kevwun said:

I have no doubt she's stupid, but every "oops" she has is in Trump's favor.

In the same way we can't REALLY know if the "Reich" photo was included in that tweet on purpose.

[Fudge Nuggets 19001]

4 hours 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.

 

If dotard was convicted under the espionage act then he wouldn’t be running around the country free to spout his bullshit.  That would be a huge and welcome change.

[Neonmoon 38126]

6 hours 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.

Just because the frogs in the pot are used to the high temperatures doesn’t mean the rest of us are jazzed about hopping in. The justice system is working, but not well, mainly because it only works for the people that created it ($) and just because it’s what we got doesn’t mean we can’t make it better. The only way to make it better is to vote, which leads us into another problem in this whole democracy experiment, the electorate is a brainwashed cumstain that believes in fairytales and worships Kim Kardashian 

 

[atomheartbevo 89054]

28 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Just because the frogs in the pot are used to the high temperatures doesn’t mean the rest of us are jazzed about hopping in. The justice system is working, but not well, mainly because it only works for the people that created it ($) and just because it’s what we got doesn’t mean we can’t make it better. The only way to make it better is to vote, which leads us into another problem in this whole democracy experiment, the electorate is a brainwashed cumstain that believes in fairytales and worships Kim Kardashian 

Exactly.  Any one of us could create some shell corporations, fudge some loan and real estate paperwork involving a dead woman and falsifying the info of a public notary in Florida, and then claim a property in Memphis that we  are foreclosing on so we can auction it for big bucks, but because we aren’t Donald Trump, it’s now in the news and the Tennessee Attorney General is coming after us.

[South Austin 51681]

21 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Any one of us could create some shell corporations, fudge some loan and real estate paperwork involving a dead woman and falsifying the info of a public notary in Florida, and then claim a property in Memphis that we are foreclosing on so we can auction it for big bucks,

[Brisketexan 103656]

23 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Exactly.  Any one of us could create some shell corporations, fudge some loan and real estate paperwork involving a dead woman and falsifying the info of a public notary in Florida, and then claim a property in Memphis that we  are foreclosing on so we can auction it for big bucks, but because we aren’t Donald Trump, it’s now in the news and the Tennessee Attorney General is coming after us.

"Allegedly."  You forgot that very important word.  I "allegedly" did those things.  And you wanted to be my lawyer.  Sheesh.

[atomheartbevo 89054]

34 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

"Allegedly."  You forgot that very important word.  I "allegedly" did those things.  And you wanted to be my lawyer.  Sheesh.

I didn’t expect the woman’s daughter in this hypothetical situation to lawyer up and go to the media.

[Huckleberry 32417]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

No one really knows why Cannon is doing what she's doing.  So, that's not knowledge, that remains speculation.  I never said Cannon wouldn't fuck it up, I speculated that the reason was that she's a dumbfuck ill-suited to handle a trial like this moreso than in the bag for Trump.  He speculated the other way.

We still don't know, know.

Oh ffs.

[Bullneck 18779]

 

 

[Gatorubet 29789]

On 5/24/2024 at 6:51 AM, Hermanator said:

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. 

Your heart is certainly in the right place on Cannon and SCOTUS, But you need to work a little bit more on your reading comprehension and memory.

[Gatorubet 29789]

https://cofeatured.s3.amazonaws.com/FINAL+Sidebar+Series+The+Trump+Jury+Instructions.pdf
this article distills the legal issues in a concise way. 

[Neonmoon 38126]

Evidence wise, I think they proved it, but no jury is going to convict a former President of boring finance violations. I’m betting hung jury.

[dcbc 14282]

2 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

https://cofeatured.s3.amazonaws.com/FINAL+Sidebar+Series+The+Trump+Jury+Instructions.pdf

this article distills the legal issues in the concise way. 

Yeah it does.  Good find.

[BamaATL 16286]

2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Evidence wise, I think they proved it, but no jury is going to convict a former President of boring finance violations. I’m betting hung jury.

He's found guilty on 32 of 34 all by Friday.  Problem is, he'll be sentenced in October and free to walk pending appeal, which will take over a year.  He'll be dead by then.  

[TwiceHorn 30851]

8 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

He's found guilty on 32 of 34 all by Friday.  Problem is, he'll be sentenced in October and free to walk pending appeal, which will take over a year.  He'll be dead by then.  

Why 32 and not all 34?  There's no material difference in the 34 checks corresponding to the 34 counts.

[BamaATL 16286]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Why 32 and not all 34?  There's no material difference in the 34 checks corresponding to the 34 counts.

Just a guess, nothing more.  I've noticed over the years when a prosecutor charges with a shit load, typically a couple of things don't stick entirely.  

[Gatorubet 29789]

6 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Just a guess, nothing more.  I've noticed over the years when a prosecutor charges with a shit load, typically a couple of things don't stick entirely.  

Finding him not guilty on some (or several) charges can also be a negotiation chip for some wavering MAGA sympathizing juror who hesitates finding Trump guilty on all, but needs a bone thrown to him or her to get guilty votes on the others. 

As a former bailiff who sat outside the door overhearing the deliberations, disabuse yourself of the notion that they are in there employing nothing but logic and a desire to follow instructions. 

[tx 3 putt 75560]

 

[Gatorubet 29789]

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

I did say exactly that about the Stormy trial. I never said that about the others.  As mad as we all are about how things are turning out, it is understandable to get some of my babbling mixed up.
The people here who thought that all the trials could be completed and Trump jailed before the election were always massively delusional. 
Everybody hates it when Twice tells them all the reasons that it was very difficult to conclude it all by November and that likely things would be delayed.  But he was not wrong about that. 
Everybody’s minds are already made up, but I just want to leave everyone with the not so surprising concept that there can be more than one reason for something.
A Judge can be stupid, inexperienced, over her head and panicking - and also be a Trump fan with no problem delaying the trial if it helps her - and also does a solid for the guy who appointed her.  The easiest way for her to not fuck up in an embarrassing way and get bench slapped again by the 11th Circuit is to push everything down the road.   Does this help Trump?  Abso-fucking-lutely!  Could she also have a selfish reason to delay making decisions that she obviously is inept in making decisions - in front of the whole world - while it is closely watching and so far excoriating her?  Yeah, I think so.    
Could she see slow playing everything as a means to avoid criticism and embarrassment, Jack asking the 11th circuit to take the case away, etc., and concluding that putting the brakes on everything until maybe Trump gets elected again will stops the trial and save her…. and maybe get her appointed to a circuit court? Also, yes.
FWIW, that is my take. it does not have to be a 100% either or thing.  Feel free to stab away.

[Sawbonz 26904]

38 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

disabuse yourself of the notion that they are in there employing nothing but logic and a desire to follow instructions. 

They’re typical Americans right? No one is thinking that

[tx 3 putt 75560]

On 5/24/2024 at 10:39 AM, wildcat09 said:

No. I'm fairly sure every lawyer that posts here but TwiceHorn thinks Cannon is pretty openly in the tank for Trump. He seems to have mostly quit giving her the benefit of the doubt, but is still rationalizing his error with this "we can't REALLY know what she's thinking" stuff. Which, c'mon man. 

jack smith was over matched vs cannon from day 1. she knew her job, and has executed it to T. I guess smith had faith in the impartial judicial system ? Hubris ? 
 

 

Edited May 26 by tx 3 putt

[Sawbonz 26904]

4 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

jack smith was over matched vs cannon from day 1. she knew her job, and has executed it to T. I guess smith had faith in the impartial judicial system ? Hubris ? 
 

 

 

ok. Right about now you are thinking to yourself “how did he wind up here?”

[Captainant 26927]

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

As a former bailiff who sat outside the door overhearing the deliberations

Lol now your stanning of our busted ass justice system makes a bit more sense. 

[Scheiss Meister 8321]

2 hours ago, BamaATL said:

He's found guilty on 32 of 34 all by Friday.  Problem is, he'll be sentenced in October and free to walk pending appeal, which will take over a year.  He'll be dead by then.  

From your lips to God's ears.

[tx 3 putt 75560]

2 hours ago, BamaATL said:

He's found guilty on 32 of 34 all by Friday.  Problem is, he'll be sentenced in October and free to walk pending appeal, which will take over a year.  He'll be dead by then.  

[Jack Straw 2953]

4 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Evidence wise, I think they proved it, but no jury is going to convict a former President of boring finance violations. I’m betting hung jury.

it’s going to be a hung jury.  they only need one Republican voter on the jury. and the chances are very night that there are several.  
 

would you trust any person who votes for Republicans in 2024 to do the right thing, ever? I wouldn’t.  

[Gatorubet 29789]

2 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

jack smith was over matched vs cannon from day 1. she knew her job, and has executed it to T. I guess smith had faith in the impartial judicial system ? Hubris ? 

Seriously, what exactly was Jack supposed to do differently than he did? I guess he could’ve shot Trump, but I believe that’s against DOJ policy. 

There are rules and precedent for most everything in law, and that includes recusing a federal judge. No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because a lawyer thinks the judge might mess up.  No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because a lawyer has a gut feeling that the judge is in the tank for the other side.   No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because the judge got one or two things wrong in pretrial proceedings.   It is even less likely with a brand new judge who has very little experience.

You can accuse Jack of hubris if you could explain to me exactly what he could’ve done differently in this situation - because you insinuate that he could have done something and didn’t because of hubris.  

[tx 3 putt 75560]

5 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Seriously, what exactly was Jack supposed to do differently than he did? I guess he could’ve shot Trump, but I believe that’s against DOJ policy. 

There are rules and precedent for most everything in law, and that includes recusing a federal judge. No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because a lawyer thinks the judge might mess up.  No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because a lawyer has a gut feeling that the judge is in the tank for the other side.   No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because the judge got one or two things wrong in pretrial proceedings.   It is even less likely with a brand new judge who has very little experience.

You can accuse Jack of hubris if you could explain to me exactly what he could’ve done differently in this situation - because you insinuate that he could have done something and didn’t because of hubris.  

Bring the case to the dc courts ?

the original crime took place in dc 

[Fudge Nuggets 19001]

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because a lawyer has a gut feeling that the judge is in the tank for the other side.   No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because the judge got one or two things wrong in pretrial proceedings.   It is even less likely with a brand new judge who has very little experience.

Justice system would be better if they would.

[Bozo_Casanova 25909]

2 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

There are rules and precedent for most everything in law, and that includes recusing a federal judge. No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because a lawyer thinks the judge might mess up.  No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because a lawyer has a gut feeling that the judge is in the tank for the other side.   No court of appeal will affirm a recusal because the judge got one or two things wrong in pretrial proceedings.   It is even less likely with a brand new judge who has very little experience.

 

I think the important lesson here is to be rich and powerful when you crime. 

[Gatorubet 29789]

32 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Justice system would be better if they would.

The problem here is you do not consider the fact that the Maga team would also be allowed the same rights in your new justice system.  Trump thinking someone will be unfair is grounds to recuse the judge..   We would have no Stormy trial at all. We would have no trials ever because he would be recusing everybody on just “feels” and “wants”.   It is natural for everyone to consider their side’s interests when you have an asshole like Trump violating the law at will.  But you have to step back and flip it to the other side taking advantage of the same things you want to take advantage of, and it becomes less attractive.  

You do not fix a court system by making it unfair and partisan.  This is why Trump has the advantage right now.