Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    34556
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by TwiceHorn

  1. 11 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

    Changing double jeopardy policy, which affects a much broader segment of the population, to ensnare Trump is probably not good policy.”

    You lost me. In what world will allowing NY state prosecution in the case of presidential pardon affect a much broader segment of the population? This is harmless and advances the cause of justice 

    Perhaps not this change specifically, but I don't really like the notion of changing criminal laws in a fit of pique about one particular defendant or group of defendants.  However valid that pique may be.

     

    And, as pointed out above, there may be ex post facto problems with this.

     

    Oddly enough, it seems the history of the NY statute is that robber barons like Morgan and other Wall Streeters didn't want to stand federal and state prosecutions for their financial malfeasances, so they "encouraged" the NY lege to enact this law, which very broadly prevented just that.  Still and all, I dislike the dual sovereignty aspect of double jeopardy (part of what I object to is that there are overlapping federal and state crimes, which should be a rare exception, not a general rule as it is today), therefore I like the NY statute and wish more states had similar ones, despite the unsavory origins.

  2. 11 hours ago, DanRydell said:

     


    The dual sovereignty rule is bullshit. But being pardoned for a federal crime should also not attach jeopardy to a state prosecution. You can both maintain federalism and ensure the state can’t just continually try someone until they get their desired result.

    I agree with this.  But it depends whether the pardon comes before or after a jeopardy-attaching event.  To me, pardons before conviction/acquittal are more politically hazardous than after.

  3. 10 hours ago, Pods said:

    Well that's what happens when you assume. In this case, you're wrong. I was a government major for a while in undergrad before following my heart. My best friend is a lawyer that eats, breathes and shits policy. 

    I like this policy change because if Trump pardons his co-conspirators, the Rule of Law has broken down on the federal level and we live in a Banana Republic. When NY wrote this law, they weren't imagining that something like that was a possibility. It's a realistic possibility now and they are changing the law. 

    Eh, I disagree.  The pardon power is in there (the Constitution, that is).  If it represents a breakdown of the rule of law in Trump's case, then it represents such a breakdown in every case.  I'm looking at this in a broader sense than Trump.

     

    The saving grace I suppose is that just because prosecutors CAN initiate a second prosecution, doesn't mean they WILL in every case or most cases.  However, we have gotten ourselves right solid fucked as a nation by trusting prosecutorial discretion.

  4. 12 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    In the book, he said he debated putting it all on Lynch and let her deal with it but he felt that would be cowardly and a disservice to the FBI.

    That is bizarro.  Instead he did a real disservice to the FBI by making it look like the organization of political pawns (at the high level) that it actually is.

  5. 53 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

    That’s a lot of words defending an unintended result of the double jeopardy legislation. There is 0% chance the legislature considered the possibility of a presidential pardon being abused to get associates/family members/stakeholders of the President’s businesses off the hook for crimes committed. Permitting state prosecution ensures that no one is above the law. 

    Arguing otherwise makes you sound like a douche

     

    Oh come on.  The statute says no second "prosecutions."  Which means once indicted anywhere else, no more indictments in NY.  Doesn't matter how or if the prosecution terminates which would include pardon.  They clearly meant to tolerate no further prosecutions for offenses in NY.  Escaping a NY prosecution after a federal prosecution is terminated by pardon is not an "unintended consequence" of that legislation.

     

    Pods said it was "good policy."  Respectfully, I don't think pods knows shit about the policy underlying double jeopardy and the dual sovereignty rule.  He just likes that it offers a second bite at the Trump apple.

     

    Fuck trump.  I am against expanding double jeopardy, period.  Changing double jeopardy policy, which affects a much broader segment of the population, to ensnare Trump is probably not good policy.

  6. I think one real nice reform would be to put an end to congressional subpoena power.  And their "investigations."  They aren't investigators.  They have no law enforcement power.  Every "investigation" I can think of is just a political shitshow.

  7. 40 minutes ago, Pods said:

    Because there is an enormous amount of evidence that Trump and Russia were cooperating with one another and it's far past time for people to stop lying about it and claiming the coordination didn't happen. It's time to start confronting the actual evidence. 

    When we study catastrophic events in science, we have to find explanations that fit all the facts. A mechanism to explain a mass extinction on land must also explain a mass extinction in the water if one occurred at the same time. An explanation that only covers part of the data is by definition impossible, or at least incomplete. 

    Most, if not all of the 121 separate events Hugo posted above are factual and only fit together and make sense if Trump was coordinating with Russia. 

    But there are a half dozen threads with this all over it.  It's bizarre.  It's unhealthy.

     

    It was also a rhetorical question.

  8. 19 hours ago, Disco Missile said:

    9200000014393768.jpg

    I just read Annihilation by Vandermeer. I was very, very surprised by how much I enjoyed it.
    I can't think of a book to compare, but it reminds me of the movies the Sphere and Event Horizon. Several parts make more sense after rereading, because he plants things that aren't explained until later in the book. Later you remember a detail that seemed unimportant that makes sense.

    I ordered the next two in the series before I put Annihilation down. I read it in two days, lol.

    I haven't seen the movie but the synopsis doesn't sound like they followed the book very closely.

    I seem to have detected that you are an "adventurous" reader.  I did not care for Annhilation.  Seemed to build a fair amount of suspense to no end.

     

    I will strongly recommend The Ritual, though.  I really enjoyed it.

  9. 58 minutes ago, Pods said:

    It good policy to change. You shouldn't be exempt from state charges because the president pardons you for federal charges. Two totally separate systems and should be treated as such. Trump and his associates shouldn't be able to violate NY law with impunity just because he is president. 

    That's the default rule everywhere else: Federal or another state's conviction or acquittal does not bar retrial for the same offense in this jurisdiction.  Pardons are of no effect.

    NY apparently made a decision some time ago not to abide by the default, dual-sovereignty rule.  Further, the NY law, by its terms, applies to "prosecutions" not convictions or acquittals, which is where jeopardy normally attaches.  So they went about as far 180 as you can go.  I'm not sure making a "pardon" exception, for either federal or another state's pardon, is consistent with the original intent of the NY law.

    And I am rather suspicious of changes in law driven by Trump-gate.  Bad facts make bad law, yknow.

     

    For the record, I don't like the "dual sovereignty" rule in double jeopardy, but I think it should only attach after conviction or acquittal or a dismissal with prejudice against the state.  Under my preference, a federal conviction, acquittal or dismissal (with prejudice), or one in any state, would prevent another trial in any US jurisdiction.  A pardon would not affect it:  if there was a conviction, acquittal, or dismissal, jeopardy attaches.  If the pardon comes before that event, it doesn't.

     

  10. 2 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

    Mueller is ready to lay charges and NY AG trying to get exception to NY double jeopardy law in case of Presidential pardon...

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/18/nyregion/schneiderman-trump-mueller-pardons.html

    *popcorn.gif (edit: the Mueller part is speculation by me)

    Seriously, though, rather than good policy, even for Trump, that sounds like a Trump-Schneiderman dick-measuring contest more than anything else.

  11. 1 hour ago, NBMisha said:

    I don't see it as the cops' duty to enforce whatever claims the starbucks manner may make.  What gives the starbucks manner the inherent civil authority to take this police action?  Why can't the cops come in and judge the situation, then act in proportion to what they find?  I think that is their job.

    It's the nature of trespass.  The owner determines when a person is trespassing.  If the owner denies or revokes permission to be on the premises, bang, it's a civil tort and a criminal offense.  If the owner calls the popo and tells the popo "These people do not have permission to be on my property, but will not leave," the popo has little choice but to remove them, at minimum, and charge them with trespassing at worst.

     

    I am of the belief that the popo in this instance probably should have asked the manager "really?"  But, the same sort of "casual racism" that provoked the manager to call the popo in the first place operated to prevent them from community policing.

  12. 1 hour ago, XYZ said:

    I think the pressure difference is around 6.5 PSI. The plane is pressurized to the equivalent of about 1/3 of the altitude, so if it’s flying at 30,000 ft, the pressure inside is similar to athmospheric pressure at 10,000 ft., or that’s what I’ve been told.

    Yeah, I was using sea level atmospheric pressure.  I'm sure cabin pressure is lower than that.  And the volume of a fuselage is relatively small, one would have to think that the pressure equalizes very rapidly.  But, at speed there could be a significant venturi effect that would produce a sustained pressure differential.

  13. 4 minutes ago, bernorange said:

    I liked the burnt orange & white background better than this dark one.  If you do make this new one permanent, would it be possible to make the old one optional?

    It is.  Go to "Theme" drop down at the bottom of the home page.  Choose default for the old, etc.

     

    The new one looks nice, but the default seems easier to read in the final analysis.

  14. So I started reading this after seeing the movie.

    The_Ritual_Adam_Nevill_cover.jpg

     

    It's quite different, with a heavy focus on the relationship between old friends.  About halfway through, it's really quite enjoyable.

  15. So, for cabin depressurization at 32k feet, there's about a 10psi differential between inside and outside.  I guess there's also a venturi effect with a smallish orifice.  But the differential would also seem to equalize very rapidly.  What's the mechanism here?

    I see that the real potential for injury is lung damage from the inability of the lungs to vent.

    Online sources seem to indicate that getting sucked out is a myth.

×
×
  • Create New...