Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    34428
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by TwiceHorn

  1. 59 minutes ago, dcbc said:

    But if she grants it, they come to the bench, offer to admit it at that point, and she grants the admission, the jury has already been empaneled and jeopardy has attached. 

    Fuuuuck.  

    Edit to add that that is somewhat common with evidentiary MIL, maybe not so much with the question of law type. But it would be a helluva yoink. 

    • Prepare your anus 1
  2. 1 hour ago, Foosters said:

    I agree with the MIL tactic, but given what we've seen from Cannon thus far, she won't rule on it and just say that the jury instructions will be given to the jury when the time comes. Can you get to the 11th when a judge continues to say "I haven't made any ruling yet."

    Interesting question. I think you can mandamus the failure to rule, but that is a less severe error than making the wrong ruling and less likely to be overturned. However given the stakes and the potential for her refusing to rule on jury instructions and MIL before jeopardy attaches, there might be some traction there. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. On 4/1/2024 at 11:44 AM, MonkeyDoughnut said:

    I'm a little suspect of a place offering a hard to get, extremely popular now medication at a walk in clinic for way less than other places. Something doesn't add up there.

    Very likely also patent infringement and pharma doesn't tend to fuck around with that.  The FDA might have some questions, as well. 

  4. Just now, Foosters said:

    I agree with the MIL tactic, but given what we've seen from Cannon thus far, she won't rule on it and just say that the jury instructions will be given to the jury when the time comes. Can you get to the 11th when a judge continues to say "I haven't made any ruling yet."

    The latter is the rub. There needs to be some sort of ruling to appeal. Currently, there isn't one.

    A motion in limine is usually filed on the eve of trial but there is nothing that says it has to be. They are also usually evidentiary in nature, while this one would be more to resolve something as a matter of law (PRA does not apply here). 

    But I think her denial of one would give Smith the ruling he needs. 

     

    • Hook 'Em 2
  5. 1 hour ago, safe sex said:

    Seems like a judge that doesn't have a good support staff around her and has made several really questionable decisions would be a great candidate for reassignment

    Maybe. But when I said reason, I meant also that the judge is recused on motion by a party or requests that the case be reassigned. It's highly unusual for a chief judge to just reassign based on her own evaluation. Sometimes it happens based on redistributing case load. 

    The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals could conceivably remand after appeal to another judge. They are not really constrained by much. 

  6. 43 minutes ago, C-Man said:

    And didn't Smith file the case there to eliminate any semblance that he was seeking a sympathetic/partisan Dem judge? I wonder if he's rethinking that strategy yet.

    We don't know what he was thinking. However, I believe venue would have been proper anywhere within the Southern District of Florida, although Trump could have asked to move it closest to his residence and where the acts occurred, which is her court. So educated speculation is that Smith filed it in the most "proper" venue to avoid all that.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  7. 11 minutes ago, C-Man said:

     

    Cannon was given this case for a reason -- loyalty, inexperience or stupidity all aid Trump's efforts to delay this past the 11/5 election. His only way to "win" is to win back POTUS and he can snap his fingers and make the legal shit go away. Delaying past 11/5 is winning in a sense because there's no way he beats the rap in all these trials if they're legitimately tried.

    She was "given" this case mostly because she's the sole judge in the Fort Pierce Division. There's another judge from another division that takes some cases there, but apparently not many because he has to travel to that courthouse. 

    The Chief Judge can reassign, but usually needs a reason to do so. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
  8. 1 minute ago, dcbc said:

    Right.  Isn't that the subject of the dumb jury instruction submitted by Donald?

    Well she actually ordered both sides to prepare jury instructions modifying 18 USC 793 with the PRA, which Smith contends is a grievous error of law. And Trumpco loves. 

    It's fucking nuts. 

    • Rage+1 1
  9. 3 minutes ago, dcbc said:

    Under ordinary circumstances, I tend to agree with the idea that you don't lock down jury instructions at this stage of the proceedings.  But trial judges also tend not to ask the parties to submit jury instructions (or briefing thereon) at this stage of the proceedings.  So to the extent that she is entertaining an instruction that does not comport with the law (despite her statement that she is not) and to the extent that such an error (if she gave that instruction) could not be appealed be the government since jeopardy already attached, her refusal to rule might be properly subject to mandamus review.

     

    She brought the question about the jury charge.  Her saying now that it shouldn't be interpreted as anything but her trying to learn about this novel case is like her holding a lighted match near a pile of gasoline soaked rags and saying, "Don't worry.  I just wanted to see if these matches were any good."

    Yep. Ironic that she chides Smith for asking for an early resolution on the jury instructions THAT SHE FUCKING ORDERED THEM TO SUBMIT. 

    Also the denial of the motion to dismiss is somewhat inconsistent with the jury instructions ruling. 

    • Hook 'Em 6
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  10. 12 hours ago, Cairn Horn88 said:

    But, she’s got help…she’s not doing this by herself….imho.

    I dunno man.  You'd really think her clerks would at least question what she's doing. But a dumbshit may hire dumbshit clerks.

    And to be somewhat fair, neither the PRA itself or the court decisions nibbling around the edges of it are particularly clear about how the overall process works.  Another unfortunate thing is that there is a pretty long history of questioning the legitimacy and constitutionality of the Espionage Act, particularly as applied to the press, so looking askance at it is not wholly unwarranted.  My/our hero Steve Vladeck ironically gave testimony to Congress about the Espionage Act being a bit of a shit show about 10 years ago.  https://irp.fas.org/congress/2010_hr/051210vladeck.pdf

    Still, as is well known, I try to follow this shit in fair detail.  I'm probably not the greatest legal mind and I do have a pretty hardcore anti-Trump bias, but this shit just doesn't seem that difficult.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  11. 2 minutes ago, Cairn Horn88 said:

    Who is mentoring or coaxing this Judge Cannon?  She’s not smart enough to be delaying and coming up with these slow-downs on her own.

    I think she's really fucking stupid.  

    • Hook 'Em 3
  12. 9 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

    can you just summarize it for us? 🤣

    After conventional instructions regarding 793, the government proposed the following addition:

    I instruct you, however, that, as to a former President, even if he lacks a security clearance, lacks a need to know classified information, and stores information outside of a secure facility, he is authorized to do so if the classified information is contained within a “personal record,” within the meaning of the Presidential Records Act (PRA), a statute that establishes the public ownership of presidential records and ensures the preservation of presidential records for public access after the termination of a President’s term in office.

    And this after instructing, in accordance with the PRA, that a "personal record" is:

     all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President, and includes (A) diaries, journals, or other personal notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal which are not prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the course of, transacting Government business; (B) materials relating to private political associations, and having no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President; and (C) materials relating exclusively to the President’s own election to the office of the presidency; and materials directly relating to the election of a particular individual or individuals to Federal, State, or local office, which have no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

    Trump's lawyers have to be fairly astonished that she actually bit on any of this shit.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  13. The executor has the power and discretion to sue on behalf of the estate, ie the deceased. If uncle could have sued while alive, then in most cases the executor can sue post-mortem.  Discretion may be the key word here.

    It sounds like the attorney-in-fact (sister) may have breached her fiduciary duty under the POA.  If it was severe, ie a lot of money, and there's much chance of recovering some or all of it, that's something the executor can do.  The expenses are paid by the estate.

    And yes, the executor should obtain an attorney at minimum to help with the Jim Bob issue.  The lawyer that files the probate is usually the executor's lawyer, because it is the executor who applies to probate the will in many or most cases.  

    • Hook 'Em 1
  14. 49 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

    That filing is great. I feel like this is the legal equivalent of calling someone stupid 


    IMG_0420.thumb.jpeg.8f0d2e9220e9caa4f621f29160aa1b3f.jpeg

     

    IMG_0421.thumb.jpeg.201e301ef300ea65c99339fe9015fe0a.jpeg

    it pretty much is.

    • Haha 1
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  15. 55 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

    He’s going to commit fraud on that financial statement isn’t he?

     

    can the bond issuer get in trouble for having issued the bond if the financial statement shows that Trump doesn’t have enough equity in the pledged properties to cover the 175 million, or is it simply more financial risk for them?

    The bond issuer, unlikely.  Their concern is putting up 145M shekels in Trump's name and getting paid when the bond gets disbursed to the plaintiff.  Now, if for some reason or other the bond didn't turn into 145M on disbursement, they might have a problem.

    Trump's financial statement is going to need to indicate that he doesn't have 454M in cash or cash-equivalents lying around and support his arguments for reducing the bond, e.g. that liquidating real estate on short notice is hard and a money-loser.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  16. 15 hours ago, Foosters said:

    I suggest everyone read the last couple of pages of that. They formulate a set of jury instructions under Cannon's proposal to show how fucking stupid she is. 

    That's good shit.

    And, I was unsure of the remedies available to the government upon threatened adoption or bad jury instructions.  But that motion-thing cites authority for mandamus being an appropriate and grantable remedy.

    And, although I don't think it's very likely in a general case, this is the kind of thing that might actually get her kicked off the case by the 11th Circuit.  Mandamus is premised on the notion that the trial judge has screwed the pooch, nay, fucked the dog and is going to fuck someone hard in the process.  It invokes the supervisory jurisdiction of the appeals court to correct grievous errors in real time, rather than after trial and judgment.  

    • Hook 'Em 7
  17. 6 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

    We have an unprecedented ability to get accurate information from various media and non-media sources.  We just have to be vigilant and critical in how we process that information.

    The blame lies with the voter.  Not 100%, but so much so that nothing else matters.

    That's democracy's fatal flaw.

    The left is banking on it working, the right is committed to finding an alternative.

    Finding an alternative based on the votes of the dumbest, least-informed voters in the history of evar.

  18. 5 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

    JFC 

    Reschenthaler's bill is also backed by Reps. Michael Waltz, R-Fla.; Andy Ogles, R-Tenn.; Chuck Fleischmann, R-Tenn.; Paul Gosar, R-Ariz.; Barry Moore, R-Ala.; and Troy Nehls, R-Texas, according to the website Congress.gov.

    image.thumb.png.96a01172ab0eeb02740de5c9658863c3.png

    • Hook 'Em 1
  19. 3 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

    So Axos may have had a choice, lose $175 million against book value right now, or potentially more on liquidated property right now.  They may well still lose the same amount a few months from now, but at least for now they are able to kick the can down the road a bit.  

    Do I have that right?  

    Possibly.  An execution-style foreclosure can be an even bigger clusterfuck than a mortgage foreclosure, so pushing that off could have some value.

  20. 1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

    Someone probably explained this but how does this bond work? I get how a criminal bond works where the court keeps the money until you appear and if you do then they refund it. What happens here? If Trump loses his appeals does the bond company forfeit the money it put up and then have to go after Trump for it?

    Yup.  That's why they're typically 100% secured with liquid, foreclosure-free assets.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  21. On 3/26/2024 at 6:56 PM, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

    Ok sure, but my comment was personal to him. I have quite a bit of familiarity with the guy and he's a certain... strain... of defense attorney. The kind that quotes Shakespeare in his briefs, name-drops continually, and dances up to the edge of outright misrepresentations to the court 

     

    On 3/26/2024 at 4:32 PM, Satchel said:

    Pay attention, little people. The system is the solution…for the rich and powerful

    Wice seems to get quite a few of these special prosecutor gigs and for some reason unauthorized practice of law cases. 

    Any insight into that? lockquote widget

  22. 10 hours ago, safe sex said:

    Lmao I remember when Ken got off on his impeachment, the "trust the system" people kept chiding the thread that Ken still had his federal charges looming over him.

    Why do we even have laws? (Rhetorical)

    To be honest, these charges were kinda chickenshit from the get go. The SEC declined to charge him criminally and Texas rarely charges these kinds of things. 

    While it is quite amazing how he was able to delay the case, it is also somewhat amazing that he was charged in the first place and pursued for so long. The fact that the special prosecutor was getting paid (admittedly a pittance) may have had something to do with it. 

    • Like 1
  23. 11 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

    I'd like to know what these Christian nationalists are.  Are they Southern Baptists (seems like a lot of them come from that group) or are they are mix of various branches of Christianity?

    Because if they are a mix, there's no way in hell they'd all agree on how Christianity should be taught or enforced.

    A common theme among fundagelicals is congregationalism. Meaning in this application that the individual congregation manages its own affairs, including deciding its own theology. 

    Although certainly not infallible, those denominations with a more episcopal polity, that is, a hierarchy of governance, tend to be less extreme and more nuanced in their deeper beliefs and the hierarchy tends to exert a moderating influence.

    Congregationalism seems to be the most direct path to fundamentalist extremism in all the worlds religions. Judaism being a somewhat notable exception, probably given their strong tendency toward academicism among clergy and even lay members. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 3
  24. On 3/26/2024 at 11:28 AM, Brisketexan said:

    Just show that video to any jew who is fucking stupid enough to vote MAGA.  And I don't just mean Trump, I mean anyone aligned with that movement.  THEY HAVE TOLD US WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO.  FUCKING BELIEVE THEM.

    This long ago stopped being about "politics."  It is about survival in the face of a murderous cult -- and for those fucking pathetic cult members, including people on this site, who say "well, I don't believe those things, and wouldn't take part in killing non-christians," you are actually a necessary part of that system: you support, enable, and - importantly - empower the people who WILL do so.  "I don't believe in killing non-Christians....I just vote for people who do so" is not the absolution you think it is, you nazi pieces of shit.

    The catlick common gooders, too. They might need a little reminder that took 150 years to elect a papist president.  

    The mackerel snappers and the ratfuck babtis gonna be at each other's throats before we know it. /ht Stephen King

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...