Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    34,528
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Man, secondary has always been a bit of an issue, but it's getting exposed lately. Not sure whether it's a result of the lack of penetration on DL, or a cause. Something, film, or something, seems to have led to this.
  2. Umm, that might have been the reasoning for the fake FG.
  3. A felony conviction usually leads directly to disbarment or suspension for the term of any "deferred adjudication" arrangement, the suspension being of the type that requires reapplication for admission. The one caveat being the type of felony, depending on the jurisdiction. But, a felony conviction for filing false documents pretty seriously implicates one's honesty, especially in "official" matters, so odds are pretty good that that felony leads to disbarment/suspension.
  4. Also given that all crimes charged against Trump other than in Manhattan occurred long after Muellers appointment and discharge as special counsel, it kinda has nothing to do with it.
  5. Another loose end here. I saw an MSNBC thing (yes fairly speculative) analyzing whether Sidney Powell has federal criminal exposure. One would think that she and her lawyers would not plead in this case unless securing some kind of deal with the feds to avoid prosecution. But in her plea "colloquy" with the judge, she was asked if there were any other agreements pertaining to the plea and she answered "no," indicating that there possibly was no such deal with the feds. So, her testimony here, secured by the plea agreement, could not only help the federal case, but give her more exposure to federal indictment. She ostensibly can't plead the Fifth because of the plea agreement. As to her own individual acts, I'm not sure Powell faces much federal exposure, other than as a conspirator in the overall 1/6 conspiracy. She is, after all, unindicted co-conspirator 3, most likely. One of the usual reasons a co-conspirator is unindicted is that they are providing "state's evidence." Another is that their guilt is not as easily proven as the indicted conspirators. Or maybe indictments will be forthcoming upon winning the main case against Trump, or as limitations expire (late 2025). Hard to know why someone like Powell remains unindicted.
  6. Yeah, although Cheeseman wasn't a super high-profile target (upthread I think several didn't even know who he was), securing his plea to a felony count of filing false documents relating to the electoral certificates and scheme, all by itself, establishes for both this case and the federal one, the illegality of an element of the 1/6 conspiracy. This kind of just went from, "we were just advocating a legal position" to we did some crimes. And, presumably Cheeseman can provide good evidence as to Trump's knowledge and endorsement of the plan. If so, that is a major boon I think to both this case against Trump and the 1/6 case.
  7. I think what I did say was that the indictment recited potentially excessive predicate acts, many of which were not criminal in and of themselves. One way RICO charges fail is that the predicate acts are insufficient to support the enterprise. So, overpleading is incentivized. But I think there are more than 200 and closer to 300 predicate acts, understanding that some of them may get "tossed." I thought, still think, that might be kind of excessive, And it appeared that it was going to aid Meadows and maybe others in getting their cases removed to federal court. Ain't no one we really care about guilty of a felony yet. One we seem to care quite a bit about got off with a misdemeanor (Powell). And we don't and can't know the motivations for and backgrounds of these pleas. Objectively speaking, those who think they were a result of case weakness are about as likely to be right as those who think Cheeseman and Powell gave up vital "state's evidence." Of course we hope the the latter, but there's really no way of knowing until later. It's all speculation at this point, but you'd certainly hope and think Willis has this knocked. So, this may be going to plan.
  8. There's really hardly any reason to believe the Supreme Court will help him out much on this. They haven't at all on similar and related questions in the last couple of years. I don't think there will be anything resembling Trump's absolute immunity from criminal prosecution. There may be some scrap or remnant of immunity for former Presidents when their actions in office are core or fundamental to the office.
  9. That's not legal. If these debts has been held subject to discharge, then they would have been paid off, somehow, probably partially and over a long period of time by his bankruptcy plan, and that would be it. Now, the bankruptcy won't affect them at all. He'll probably prefer to dismiss them and take his chances with fraudulent transfer and collection suits in Texas courts. These judgment creditors will be harassing him for the next 20 years and slowly, surely bleeding the fat fucking pig dry.
  10. Ain't that the goddamn truth. Even a psychopath like Jones has to be nervous as a cat in a room full of rocking chairs this last 11 years.
  11. Ok folks, here it is, the Government's Response to Trump's motion to dismiss the DC indictment on the grounds of presidential immunity. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67656604/109/united-states-v-trump/ No court has had the opportunity to consider this question, and, even setting aside our interest in Trump suffering manifold consequences for his mopery and cuntery, this is one of the bigger constitutional questions lying out there unresolved.
  12. Oof the felony is conspiracy to file false documents. Texas almost automatically suspends (in the case of a non-conviction, deferred arrangement like this) or disbars (straight-up conviction by plea or trial) those with felony convictions. I imagine most states are similar (in fact, know they are with some variation, at least as of about 20 years ago). There is a slight bit of wiggle room in Texas in the event the felony is not one of moral turpitude, which generally means directly impacts one's fitness to practice law. But filing false documents is most likely not going to be one of those offenses. Of course, AFAIK he's not licensed in Texas, but I think the licensing/discipline schemes are pretty similar nationwide. So, this plea highly likely jeopardizes his law license. He must have been quite fearful of a conviction.
  13. Interdasting. Really hope they're giving up the goods, bigtime, bro. If, as many suspect, this was the RICO strategery all along, it seems to be working.
  14. Honestly, I hope that Engoron doesn't do it. I might guess here's what happens: Trump will claim it was inadvertent and it will be difficult to prove otherwise. If he's jailed for any length of time, he may seek a writ of habeas corpus and that might be granted on the ground that it's not a "new" violation of the order and in any case not purposeful. And then he will claim vindication and Engoron hopelessly biased etc. Seemingly, there will be other opportunities for Trump to get his tit in the wringer for more clear cut violations.
  15. Not necessarily no. A single violation of a gag order -- and tbh this really isn't a separate violation -- probably gets you a fine and a warning that the next one may put you in jail for a few days. Sometimes, something resembling a gag order is part of your bail/pretrial release conditions. Yeah, violate that and you may get sent back to the pokey, especially in the federal system. But when the gag order is separate from bail/release conditions, the order of punishment is usually as follows: fine, bigger fine, jail. Also, some federal judges, but not all of them, do not suffer fools and are more likely to do something harsh first time out of the box.
  16. While I don't agree with it, making an institutional decision not to do pride week is a bit different from telling an individual in an organization they can't wear a jersey. Yeah they're both "political." But one may have worse optics than the other, notwithstanding any political bias.
  17. And an actual Israeli citizen. And manager of Team Israel even this year.
  18. I think copperheads are among the most beautiful snakes out there. Cottonmouths, not so much. There's another Agkistrodon in Mexico called a Cantil that doesn't look much like either one and a fairly broad variation among subspeciies. Check em out.
  19. Just like most GOP "constitutional concerns" other than 2A, there aren't any. Because current GQP'ers don't even wipe their ass with the constitution. That would imply an intimacy with the document that doesn't exist.
  20. Where religious fanaticism is involved, I think that makes the power imbalance a smidgen less,at least. But as stated above, the power balance in Israel's favor does matter.
  21. To me, Israel's biggest flaw is the following. In 1948 they were FRESH off the memory of the holocaust, three, four years. So, yeah, they might have been a little aggro and overly so. But also perhaps understandably. Then, of course, they were immediately invaded by essentially all of their neighbors on the premise not only that they had no legal right to exist, but no existential right to exist or even live, even if elsewhere. And then that shit continued on, sporadically, to the present. So, Israel from the outset has an understandably "under siege" mentality. Various events over the last 75 years have tended to support that notion, but ever less so. In the meantime, Israel has pretty effectively kicked the living shit out of everyone that fucked with them, and built a pretty nice society for themselves, including a fairly awesome military. All the while, the threats to its existence becoming less and less credible. But, like the US and other places, fear-mongering politicians have kept that siege mentality going for their own benefit, stoking fear etc. I get where they came from, but they need to chill the fuck out, in my opinion. They are an advanced and wealthy society, almost all of their neighbors are not. They need to start being the "bigger person" in this. That said, still fuck the jihadist turds.
  22. He's been around elsewhere. Stop.
  23. In a lot of ways, there's a lot to like about ol' Joe. Being a career politician learns you some stuff.
  24. Then maybe she has more dirt on Trump than I thought/remembered. Chesebrough has been more publicly associated with the false-elector scheme than she has, by far. ETA: So, I was right that she was dismissed earlier when the Kraken suits failed. But it is correct that she was brought back, and this timeframe apparently was the crazy screaming meeting where Flynn advocated seizing the voting machines ant Trump contemplated appointing her Special Counsel.https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fired-attorney-sidney-powell-back-advising-trump-chart/story?id=74823842 The fact that she was dismissed as crazy and then brought back may well factor into the "advice of counsel" defense and good faith reliance thereon. It seems to me that there are three key facets to proving the conspiracy in the federal case, in order of importance: The false elector scheme and Trump's knowledge and endorsement thereof The 1/6 speech, which was the culmination of bringing the false elector scheme to reality The prior efforts to legally/judicially oveturn the results, ranging from fairly legit recount petitions and the like, to outre shit like the Kraken It seems to me that proof of any one alone won't sustain a criminal conviction, it has to be sort of the continuum of events making a conspiracy out of it.
×
×
  • Create New...