Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    42467
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by TwiceHorn

  1. 1 minute ago, cattail said:

    To the lawyers here, how serious is this? Is this something those prosecutors could be disbarred for?

    The actual prosecutors are doing their job, basically, see post 494.  

    The problem with them is that they for some unfathomable reason stepped up to handle a case where they knew or should have known that the government/administration would put them in difficult ethical positions.  See also post 494.

    So far, what Halligan has been shown to have been done is incompetence, which is an ethical violation, but is usually addressed by malpractice litigation rather than lawyer discipline.

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 2
  2. 31 minutes ago, The Dog said:

    more details on what HJ posted:

    I hope this woman prosecutes every case for the DOJ in their witch hunt. She's wonderfully incompetent.

    As glaringly incompetent as she is, the rest of Trumpco (Harmeet Dhillon, Todd Blanche) doesn't seem much better.

    And they really are running off all the decent civil servant prosecutors.

    • Like 1
  3. 26 minutes ago, The Dog said:

    more details on what HJ posted:

    I hope this woman prosecutes every case for the DOJ in their witch hunt. She's wonderfully incompetent.

    Yeah, that's what the magistrate indicated, but wasn't quite as sure that that rendered the indictment a nullity.

    Whatever popehat says about it is probably accurate because he's a seasoned federal prosecutor and defense lawyer.

    This is probably a rare situation because it is probably pretty rare for a federal grand jury to no bill an indictment, period, much less just one charge.  Meaning, federal prosecutors don't often bring indictments to the grand jury without probable cause, and the probable cause standard means you can indict a ham sandwich.

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 29 minutes ago, freyguy said:

    So when Trumpy vetos it, then what?

    Really, at this point, I don't think what's in the files matters.

    First off, I think if there had been indictable/convictable evidence in there, there would have been indictments and convictions.

    Second, enough good stuff has been released to create quite a cloud of suspicion.

    Third, Trump is going to continue to obfuscate, by redaction, withholding because of investigation, etc.

    The best thing about it is that it won't die down and Trump continues to blunder into keeping it very alive.

    LBJ was right, "make the sonofabitch deny it."

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 2
  5. Probably mentioned before, but I subscribe to Kindle Unlimited.

    That gives me access to a lot of what I'll call "pulp fiction," books published by Thomas & Mercer, Amazon's imprint and some other off brands.  Some of those authors are more serious/better than others.  I hog through them at a pretty high rate.

    But, I'll say this:  in the realm of non-literary fiction, some of them are pretty, pretty good.

    This one, a fairly serious spy thriller, was one of the most engaging page-turners I've come across in a while.

    https://www.amazon.com/Honeytrap-Espionage-Thriller-Book-ebook/dp/B0D4614BLM

    It's part of a three book series with 2 and 3 as yet unreleased, so I was unable to verify if this was a one-off.

    Same guy also did a series with some spy hero named Lance Spector.  Haven't dug into those.

    It's a pseudonym and there's no information on the author, really, but it seems he might know of what he speaks.

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  6. On 11/17/2025 at 9:32 AM, Captainant said:

    image.thumb.png.fe41ecf1d1d8b9b966e71943bf75e1cb.png

     

    What's kind of odd about that is that, in the court proceedings, local cops were mostly "nah, this is no big deal, we got it under control," which severely undermined ICE's allegations of violence and interference.

    That was Chicago and Broadview PD, though, not Cook County Sheriffs.  I guess Sheriffs there are kinda shitty like in LA and Texas.

  7. 58 minutes ago, Earl Haffler said:

    Of course, libs consider pedophilia to be at best a legitimate expression of human sexuality, and at worst, a mental disorder that the afflicted should not be held responsible for.

     

    Image

    Also what's this about normalizing pedos?

    Been keeping up with Megyn Kelly?

    • Hook 'Em 7
  8. 43 minutes ago, Firemans4Horn said:

    image.thumb.png.c00f8df77b266a17c2749f7d09e916c0.png

     

     

    30 Rock Hello GIF

    As if you needed any evidence that Trump's policies are being dictated by tech oligarchs, this is about all the evidence you need.

    • Hook 'Em 7
    • Like 2
  9. 5 minutes ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

    I'm as annoyed at the rank amateurism of the people running my country as I am at their policies.

    image.png.0928e3df89f7af3093557812fef9efb9.png

    That letter went out on the signature of Civil Rights Chief Harmeet Dhillon.

    • Haha 1
  10. 2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

     

    Even Loomer is beginning to position herself for a spot in post-Trump conservatism.  Either they know Trump is dying quickly or think he's so weak now that he might as well be. Anyone trying to predict how this will all unfold is an idiot, but we're definitely looking at some kind of schism.

    So, is it now OK to call them Nazis?  

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Haha 2
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  11. 38 minutes ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

    Sark definitely has a type.   Google kyrah mcgowant

    image.thumb.png.9c60f0daa55ccd5e5a1d95e854f3a190.png
     

     

    that is her office phone number   Public knowledge. @immamac delete if you need to

    I was looking at some other Texas sports page where she and her title didn't appear.

    There was a Zoe, an Amy and an Emily that didn't seem likely, in appearance or title, subject to the Applewhite exception.

    • Haha 2
  12. 4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

    I'm ignoring the batshit dumbassery of the president because my god, but @TwiceHorn is it now possible we end up with California getting more house seats and Texas not?

    Possible, yes.  In this timeline, not sure.  I think I'd be happy with the status quo.

    I think the demographics and general disposition of California is that they're less likely to fuck it up than Texas.

    There was a time when saying that would be laughable.  Not no mo.

  13. 1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

    The lawsuits against Cali are certainly that they racially gerrymandered. 

    Allegations are not proof.  The key point here is that two judges, both politically inclined not to find racial problems, found racial problems with the gerrymander.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  14. 5 minutes ago, Ojo Rojo said:

    You know, I don't know whether to be encouraged or discouraged.  It is encouraging that Trump (Stephen Miller) is slowly failing at just about everything he is trying to do. The foundation of American democracy is holding.  That should be encouraging.  Except, a plurality of American voters wanted this and they want Trump (Stephen Miller) to succeed.  That is discouraging.

    I had another thought - American democracy has to expose itself to risk in order to maintain itself.  It's like the tradeoff between security and freedom.  How do we put restrictions on the president so that this kind of shit doesn't happen, while still allowing him or her to act as necessary for the benefit of the country?  There are benefits to a strong executive when they are a good faith actor.  Not so much when you have a bad faith actor who is literally constrained by nothing.

    It's not on this thread, but one of the others regarding the effective dissolution of the United States Department of Justice.

    It's infuriating and sad.

    It has never been a perfect institution, by any stretch of the imagination, but what Trump and his cronies are doing is fucking disgusting.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  15. 1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

    I wonder what effect this is going to happen on California's maps. Does it matter that the maps there were literally put up for a vote and people passed it? Or will the Supreme Court just strike down that map if they also strike down the Texas map?

    California is likely not stupid enough to create an inference of racial gerrymandering, which is the problem here.  And you have a Trump appointee and a GHWB appointee finding racial gerrymandering.  It must be pretty blatant.

    • Hook 'Em 2
×
×
  • Create New...