Jump to content
Jordan Washington chats with Bobby for Burnt Ends ×

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

Cairn Horn88

By Cairn Horn88
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gatorubet

Gatorubet 29391

Posted
Posted

I think politically the Democrat should focus on the shit stain of a Justice Clarence Thomas and his obvious corruption. They need to keep banging that drum and formally seek impeachment.   For one, you want GOP elected officials to defend the indefensible.   Also, at some point there needs to be a motion to recuse Thomas due to his traitorous bitch wife’s participation in the matters before the Court, and everything that can be done to help create a better record and have that succeed should be a priority.  

Plus, unlike some other party spats, it really is hard to defend a justice complaining about not making enough - and then GOP versions of George Soros giving him all of that money while he sits on cases his bagman sugar daddies have an interest in, and then rules in their favor.   I get that the cult followers won’t care, but I think you can get traction from about everybody else.  I would want every Senate and Representative debate to include a discussion of impeaching Thomas.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 28.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

HillCountryBevo
HillCountryBevo

Imagine your basis of hating Trump is because of mean tweets, January 6 and “hush money” trial all because liberal media is crooked. Fuck right off. This is my last post in this forum  dumb fucki

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

When you're a court, you just grab their asset, and they let you do it!

HillCountryBevo
HillCountryBevo

Bye bitch. Enjoy living in literal hell if your man Biden is re elected

Posted Images

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13336

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

So Jon Edwards should have just stayed in the race to decrease his chances of prosecution? We make a president immune to the law, and those running aren't subject to equal treatment, except in certain cases where family members of politicians are subjected to exceptional punitive scrutiny and charges. 

 

Is there any argument to be made that given the multiple exceptions, all are equal under the eyes of the law? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Willfully Horn

Willfully Horn 7820

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

This has nothing to do with the 14th Amendment. 

This is presidential immunity arising in the January 6 case. 

And it's not like they won't review it, they just won't review it right now. 

I have never said they never helped trump. They helped him plenty of times when he was in office. 

They just have not, until now, helped him with his post- presidential problems. 

Thanks for clarifying. I was mistaken.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 30715

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, assuming Trump loses at the DC Circuit (a very good assumption, btw), he has some dilatory options.  One is to ask for rehearing, then rehearing en banc (the full court).  Those would be denied with quickness, but would soak up a couple of weeks. 

Trump then has 90 days, either from the entry of judgment or the denial of rehearing by the DC Circuit to petition for cert.  I am not sure there is any way to force him to expedite.

Assuming DC Circuit decides in early February, and rehearings are disposed of by mid-February, Trump will have until May to petition for cert.  One might assume it would be taken up and granted expeditiously and a shortened briefing schedule perhaps established, but even then, we're probably at the end of the October 2023 term and it wouldn't be resumed until October 2024.

So, yeah.

The thing that's most bothersome from a time perspective here is the 90 days Trump has to petition for cert.  Followed by a lengthy pendency at SCOTUS.

But, after seeing George Conway on CNN (bright fucker he is), something occurred to me.

The mandate returning jurisdiction to the trial court ordinarily issues seven days after judgment/opinion.  Once that happens, Chutkan is free to send him to trial.

Trump, however, can move to stay the mandate pending a cert petition.  Part of the winning argument there is that the cert petition presents a substantial question.  The DC Circuit is probably going to disagree that it is a substantial question and maybe condition staying the mandate on a quick cert petition filing.  At which point, Smith can jump in and beg the Court to take it up quickly if they take it up at all.  Or they could refuse to stay it altogether, forcing Trump to the Supreme Court on an expedited schedule.

So, maybe there's more hope than I thought.

March 4 is still out, though, most likely.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 18825

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Does withholding aid to the gvt = aiding the insurrection?  Or would they be separate and distinct acts as defined by a court?

not engaging the NG on his own or when called to do so by pelosi/shumer most certainly aided the Maga side and is very affirmatively provable that he had the means to do so and refused the direct request. 

If only there was something in the oath of office about defending the Constitution. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 18825

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

But here's the problem:  Trump cannot be tried with an immunity question pending on appeal.  Nor can he be subjected to discovery, but then criminal defendants aren't really subject to discovery.  In any event, if the appeal remains pending on March 4, or near it, the trial date will move.

The trial date will move, it's virtually guaranteed.  The question is, how far.

Keep going, I know you can figure this one out. 
 

Totally not doing him any favors, right?

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14060

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, assuming Trump loses at the DC Circuit (a very good assumption, btw), he has some dilatory options.  One is to ask for rehearing, then rehearing en banc (the full court).  Those would be denied with quickness, but would soak up a couple of weeks. 

Trump then has 90 days, either from the entry of judgment or the denial of rehearing by the DC Circuit to petition for cert.  I am not sure there is any way to force him to expedite.

Assuming DC Circuit decides in early February, and rehearings are disposed of by mid-February, Trump will have until May to petition for cert.  One might assume it would be taken up and granted expeditiously and a shortened briefing schedule perhaps established, but even then, we're probably at the end of the October 2023 term and it wouldn't be resumed until October 2024.

So, yeah.

Petition for cert won’t deprive the trial court of jurisdiction though.  DC court would have to issue a stay wouldn’t it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29472

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I am reasonably certain that the DC Circuit will resolve the case in late January or February, before March 4.  Petitioning for cert does not automatically stay the return of jurisdiction to the trial court, thus freeing the case for trial. But the DC Circuit could rule that it should in this case.

Even if they had granted cert and expedited the briefing and oral argument, I'm not sure the Supremes, any of them at any point in history, would resolve it before March 4.

The trial date will move, it's virtually guaranteed.  The question is, how far.

It's a freak show, baby baby on the dance floor.  Freak. Show.

I just saw the story on this in my Washington Post feed. I'm outraged. It's become more common as this shit gets treated as business as usual. Thanks for your interpretation, by the way. Always appreciated.

The sequence of my responses 

- I read the headline that the SC wouldn't speed this up. Motherfuckers are trying to help him. After reading legal commentary on here, I think it's part anti-republic bias and hidebound determination to stick to procedures when you don't have to.

- I note the date of the decision. Friday before Christmas weekend. Outrage. This is a political move. Am I to believe that this little bomb was dropped on the universally chosen day for releasing shameful news due to normal procedure? What a coincidence! Amazeballs.

- Okay, I read most of the article. Smith makes the argument about the unique nature and implications of this prosecution. You know, petty shit like a threat to the republic which, if proven to exist (watching it on TV isn't really persuasive at all because that evidence needs to pass through the intestine of proceedings to be acknowledged. Of course!) I see no reason not to have the Supreme Court deal immediately with it's part in checks and balances. 

- I read the arguments of Trump's crack legal team:

 

image.png.7d32b5420b9514957cebe851cac44848.png

image.png.a095ff8f8c6587aae490f04b0129acbc.png

1  It's too important not to be expedited. This isn't to put the pressure of rushing on the defense. A judge has determined the trial date and the defense has that time no matter this ruling. (I'm not a lawyer. I do, however, have something of a brain.) 

2  This doesn't invite comment from the highest court? If this were a serious assertion, how could one not comment that it has gravity? If the court does not take it seriously, they should state that as well. I think the silence is calculated not for neutrality but to support the Trump teams claim by not laughing it out of the court. That's not legal procedure? The date of release. The failure to opine are political moves. Fuck petty procedure so long as it doesn't damage a defendant's right to a fair trial. 

3  No shit there's compelling inference of partisan motivation. Were Trump's guys giving big irony winks to the slime the GOP has put on the bench? I laughed out loud. There is no doubt of an abundance of partisan motivation in the whole procedure. It's just not Smith.

Maybe the district court doesn't take a long recess for the holidays. Maybe they tend to the business of the republic. Rule by the first week in January.

The SC doesn't put the decision about hearing the case through the usual cumbersome process. Get right down to it. rule by the first week in February. Fuck, rule by the third week in January.

How is that crazy?

Usual procedures? Fuck that. I don't see how the defense is damaged by this.

Worrisome precedent? Sure, every president that tries to overthrow the government will be able to use this or be subject to it. So? We expecting a lot of this sort of thing?

 

The GOP and their appointees to various places in government including federal court seem bent on proving that government doesn't work as it is. Secretaries undermine their agencies. Congress ceases to be about policy and obstructionism becomes a strangely tolerated policy. Now we have outright misuse of House Committees.

Let's see, that's two branches. Oh yea, the judiciary. They contentedly give the appearance that everything is slow and maybe you won't get justice.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. As the great Congressman Adam Schiff said in his speech in the first impeachment trial:

“Well, let me tell you something,” Mr. Schiff went on, his forefinger jabbing the air for emphasis. “If right doesn’t matter, if right doesn’t matter, it doesn’t matter how good the Constitution is. It doesn’t matter how brilliant the framers were. Doesn’t matter how good or bad our advocacy in this trial is.” If “right doesn’t matter,” he concluded, “we’re lost.”

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Five

Red Five 40109

Posted
Posted

Dotard, pillow guy, Rudy, etc. have all been screaming for years now about all of this evidence they have. I wonder if any of their supporters have paused for a moment to think about why they have released exactly zero of it. Just too busy? Keep forgetting? 

I feel like if you played "got your thumb" with these people they would fall for it. Or literally anything. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GenXer

GenXer 2470

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Dotard, pillow guy, Rudy, etc. have all been screaming for years now about all of this evidence they have. I wonder if any of their supporters have paused for a moment to think about why they have released exactly zero of it. Just too busy? Keep forgetting? 

I feel like if you played "got your thumb" with these people they would fall for it. Or literally anything. 

They’re easy marks for grifting 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13336

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Dotard, pillow guy, Rudy, etc. have all been screaming for years now about all of this evidence they have. I wonder if any of their supporters have paused for a moment to think about why they have released exactly zero of it. Just too busy? Keep forgetting? 

But they have produced the evidence. And that "voluminous and irrefutable" evidence produced more than 60 losses in court, a GOP-appointed audit that showed Biden won Arizona by a larger margin than originally tallied, a 787 million defamation settlement against Fox and a 140 million defamation verdict against Giuliani. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 29391

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I have no idea what this means.

The 14th amendment ban on insurrectionists holding office specifically mentions the term “officer” in the verbiage. Trump law dogs say that the President is not an officer - he is something different, so you can’t kick me off the ballot.

Calling himself an “officer” to a different federal appellate court runs counter to his argument in the Colorado case. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 74769

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Red Five said:

Dotard, pillow guy, Rudy, etc. have all been screaming for years now about all of this evidence they have. I wonder if any of their supporters have paused for a moment to think about why they have released exactly zero of it. Just too busy? Keep forgetting? 

I feel like if you played "got your thumb" with these people they would fall for it. Or literally anything. 

Animated GIF

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brandywine

Brandywine 1288

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

image.thumb.png.e55bae03e2a4447e0ae38665bcaab3b2.png

What a childish joke. Expose what? His own made up lies which were fabricated in his tiny brain because he refused to accept that he lost? The only person trying to steal an election is him. What a spoiled child. That one single so called human has done more harm to our country. Hard to believe we are being conned by this idiot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Sam Beckett

Doc Sam Beckett 5695

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

Great but are we gonna see all this shit before the election?!

Cracking Up Lol GIF by NBA on TNT

 

Yeah dude. I've been assured that all these pieces of shit are super duper close to "finding out."

Spin the wheel, who do you want to find out? Rudy? Alex? Donald? Flynn?  Even if you hit the "finding out" grand prize, what you're actually going to get is a pawn stars "best I can do" 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28574

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

But they have produced the evidence. And that "voluminous and irrefutable" evidence produced more than 60 losses in court, a GOP-appointed audit that showed Biden won Arizona by a larger margin than originally tallied, a 787 million defamation settlement against Fox and a 140 million defamation verdict against Giuliani. 

And Giuliani still insists he has proof and got sued again. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13336

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

And Giuliani still insists he has proof and got sued again. 

MAGA "proof" of a stolen election is a shotgun barrel Bugs Bunny spins around just before Elmer Fudd pulls the trigger. Not only does it fall comically short of its intentions, it provides evidence Trump tried to overturn an election. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19443

Posted
Posted

"Immunity for doing nothing wrong."  

Think about that, politics aside, for a hot second.  That changes every single foundation of our entire society from godly forgiveness, to our judicial system, to disciplining children. 

Being granted immunity for being perfect.  Think about the logic of that this Christmas Day.  Does that mean you're now perfectly imperfect?  You've done everything so wrong that it's now come full circle and is now completely right?  You're immune from everything because you've done nothing or you're immune from nothing because you can't do anything?  Take all of ontology and all the LSD in the world, and you'll still have fucking clue what the fuck is going on that half-tard's head.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Degenerate Gardner

Degenerate Gardner 4057

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hard Times said:

Column: Newsom loves Trump? Not at all. But he made the right call on ballot access - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

Newsom says leave Doturd on the ballot. I agree, he isn't going to win anything anyway. Democrats will make sure of that. And that eliminates all the stupid excuses.

Eliminating all stupid excuses for a guy who claimed justification to violently overthrow a democratic election? Good luck with that. Trump didn’t become god king to angry douchebags without having the ability to turn every story into a tale of victimhood. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 103148

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

What Dems still fail to grasp is that we need to do much, much, much more than defeat Trump at the ballot box.  We need to destroy him.  Drive him to an early grave.  Destroy his entire family.  Wreck their lives.  Ruin them.  Drive them to suicide.  And all who enabled him and supported them?  Drive them out of politics.  Drive them back under the rocks whence they came.  Shame them, relentlessly, repeatedly, and totally.  Drive them from public life.

Sic semper fascist pieces of shit.

My grandfather shot them in the fucking face with an M-1 carbine -- they should be happy for more merciful treatment.

  • Hook 'Em 16
  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 103148

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, NAVY said:

Nothing to see here…

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/28/politics/recordings-trump-team-fake-elector-ballots/index.html

IMG_2580.jpeg

Gallows for all.

It's what every single other country would do.  If we want to survive as a Republic, we should do the same.

They opted out of the rule of law.  The only rule that should apply to them now is the universal law of FAFO.  They tried to murder my country.  They should hang.  But only after they weep, beg for mercy, and soil themselves, because that's what every one of those treasonous pathetic cowards would do.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...