Jump to content

45 indicated


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, Nivek said:

So if the defense is attacking her credibility and she has described the penis, then why can we not have it shown in court?  Hunter Biden's tallywacker was shown in a higher forum with less privacy attached to it,  Michael Jackson's junk was photographed as well back in the 90s.  Let's get the dick out there and call up the ex-wives to describe the penis.   If they match Daniel's testimony, then have we not established that the serial liar is lying again?   This is the circus we want!  Where is my bread?

Judge Chang says:

giphy.gif?cid=6c09b952zsdpmcn6p2ncbu5u0h

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, immamac said:

never really understood that part either.

The NDA has been dealt with previously. But judicial testimony under subpoena is almost always a valid exception to any NDA. 

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

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Yes, me. Among others. Millions of others negatively affected by her stupid and selfish decision. 

I went ahead and bolded the part where you sound exactly like every single Trumpkin moron in America since you can't see it in yourself. 

I get it. Hindsight is 20/20. If she had only lived a few months longer than it wouldn’t be an issue and you wouldn’t be indirectly calling me a moron. If you want to put term limits on Supreme Court justices, I’m willing to listen to your argument. Yes, in retrospect, it would’ve been nice if Obama could’ve appointed her replacement rather than Trump. It would also be really nice if McConnell wasn’t a massive piece of shit who stole two SCOTUS seats for blatantly partisan and unconstitutional reasons. Let’s not lose sight of who the real villains are here. 

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

4 minutes ago, mdmost said:

The least shocking news of the day.

Trump classified documents trial postponed indefinitely

PUBLISHED TUE, MAY 7 20245:02 PM EDTUPDATED 3 MIN AGO

Kevin Breuninger@KEVINWILLIAMB

SHAREShare Article via FacebookShare Article via TwitterShare Article via LinkedInShare Article via Email

KEY POINTS

A federal judge indefinitely postponed the criminal classified documents trial of former President Donald Trump, a court filing shows.

Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump gestures while he walks with his attorney Todd Blanche, as his criminal trial over charges that he falsified business records to conceal money paid to silence porn star Stormy Daniels in 2016 continues, at Manhattan state court in New York City, U.S., May 6, 2024. 

Brendan Mcdermid | Reuters

A federal judge Tuesday indefinitely postponed the criminal classified documents trial of former President Donald Trump, a court filing shows.

The trial on charges that Trump willfully retained classified national security records after leaving the White House and then hid them from federal authorities was scheduled to start May 20.

But U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon wrote in Tuesday’s court order that it “would be imprudent” to finalize a trial date “at this juncture” when various pre-trial issues have yet to be resolved.

Cannon pointed to pending questions about how classified information will be handled in the high-profile trial of the former president, and “additional pretrial and trial preparations necessary to present this case to a jury.”

To move forward with the trial in May would be “inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider” those issues, she wrote.

“The Court therefore vacates the current May 20, 2024, trial date (and associated calendar call), to be reset by separate order following resolution of the matters before the Court, consistent with Defendants’ right to due process and the public’s interest in the fair and efficient administration of justice,” Cannon ruled.

Can any of the lawyers on here legitimately defend this type of action?  It sure looks like she is just protecting the guy that made her a judge no matter what crimes he may have committed.  

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

Yeah, I think if IIRC from CivPro...it's pretty tough to crack for a civil trial (which is what most NDA's are designed for), but if a criminal trial judge orders you to speak to the issues, you can pretty much light that NDA on fire because of the weight of getting everything correct for someone's freedom.

Sidenote-that Cannon ruling was expected but I didn't think she's make it so open-ended and obvious.  I repeat myself (I know, totally unexpected for Lobo).  For $150k, I can get your name on the POTUS ballot as a third party/independent in one of a dozen different states that I know the minutiae of.  You can then commit any number of crimes and we can then claim that you are under political persecution during an election cycle and cannot be held liable/guilty/under indictment.  Now it won't carry as much water as "Presidential Immunity", but it will be an interesting precedent.  Bold strategy, Cotton.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mdmost said:

The least shocking news of the day.

Trump classified documents trial postponed indefinitely

PUBLISHED TUE, MAY 7 20245:02 PM EDTUPDATED 3 MIN AGO

Kevin Breuninger@KEVINWILLIAMB

SHAREShare Article via FacebookShare Article via TwitterShare Article via LinkedInShare Article via Email

KEY POINTS

A federal judge indefinitely postponed the criminal classified documents trial of former President Donald Trump, a court filing shows.

Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump gestures while he walks with his attorney Todd Blanche, as his criminal trial over charges that he falsified business records to conceal money paid to silence porn star Stormy Daniels in 2016 continues, at Manhattan state court in New York City, U.S., May 6, 2024. 

Brendan Mcdermid | Reuters

A federal judge Tuesday indefinitely postponed the criminal classified documents trial of former President Donald Trump, a court filing shows.

The trial on charges that Trump willfully retained classified national security records after leaving the White House and then hid them from federal authorities was scheduled to start May 20.

But U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon wrote in Tuesday’s court order that it “would be imprudent” to finalize a trial date “at this juncture” when various pre-trial issues have yet to be resolved.

Cannon pointed to pending questions about how classified information will be handled in the high-profile trial of the former president, and “additional pretrial and trial preparations necessary to present this case to a jury.”

To move forward with the trial in May would be “inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider” those issues, she wrote.

“The Court therefore vacates the current May 20, 2024, trial date (and associated calendar call), to be reset by separate order following resolution of the matters before the Court, consistent with Defendants’ right to due process and the public’s interest in the fair and efficient administration of justice,” Cannon ruled.

Lolololol

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

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Can any of the lawyers on here legitimately defend this type of action?  It sure looks like she is just protecting the guy that made her a judge no matter what crimes he may have committed.  

Yeah, I mean, she's either in the tank for him or isn't competent enough to manage all of these pretrial motions involving voluminous documents before a trial date this month.  Either idea is plausible, I suppose, or both.  That's not to be construed as a defense on my part.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

Honestly a beautiful car. 

Would I proudly drive that sonofabitch today?

You bet your fucking ass I would.

With the windows down, cranking some Jethro Tull.  Maybe some Thin Lizzy.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I get it. Hindsight is 20/20. If she had only lived a few months longer than it wouldn’t be an issue and you wouldn’t be indirectly calling me a moron. If you want to put term limits on Supreme Court justices, I’m willing to listen to your argument. Yes, in retrospect, it would’ve been nice if Obama could’ve appointed her replacement rather than Trump. It would also be really nice if McConnell wasn’t a massive piece of shit who stole two SCOTUS seats for blatantly partisan and unconstitutional reasons. Let’s not lose sight of who the real villains are here. 

Except that McConnell didn't really do anything that is unconstitutional. It had just been previously understood by both parties that a sitting POTUS would not put forth any replacement SCOTUS candidates within a certain # of months of an upcoming Presidential Election. But, hey, look the GQP took their shot and have probably forever altered how this will be done in the future. It was the perfect time for them to do it because it gave the GQP control of the Court to roll back Roe and do their other fuckery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dcbc said:

Yeah, I mean, she's either in the tank for him or isn't competent enough to manage all of these pretrial motions involving voluminous documents before a trial date this month.  Either idea is plausible, I suppose.

That sounds like a bunch of fancy lawyer talk but since I imagine it coming from your avatar/Earl Campbell, I will allow it. 

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

18 minutes ago, tbone_ said:

Can someone remind me, did she just willingly violate the NDA or did this become public some other way?

How is it that she’s now talking freely about something that she, ostensibly, willingly signed and took consideration for agreeing to not talk about.

I’m sure this has all been covered before but I just can’t remember how it all squares.

 

14 minutes ago, immamac said:

never really understood that part either.

It was covered in today's testimony. Tldr, they were talking about it, she hired an attorney. Said attorney is now in prison for unrelated bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Would I proudly drive that sonofabitch today?

You bet your fucking ass I would.

With the windows down, cranking some Jethro Tull.  Maybe some Thin Lizzy.

Zep and Sabbath, personally. With a little bit of T-Rex thrown in.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rimbo said:

Zep and Sabbath, personally. With a little bit of T-Rex thrown in.

You bring the cassettes, we'll work 'em into the rotation.  We got nothin' but time, man.  Nothin' but time.

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

2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

It had just been previously understood by both parties that a sitting POTUS would not put forth any replacement SCOTUS candidates within a certain # of months of an upcoming Presidential Election.

giphy.gif

 

I mean, I could have sworn McConnell pulled this out of his as, then reinserted it when it was Trump's time, but there's plenty I don't know.  But this is the first I've heard of this from someone who I would not consider a lunatic.

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

Just now, Brisketexan said:

You bring the cassettes, we'll work 'em into the rotation.  We got nothin' but time, man.  Nothin' but time.

cassettes? fuck that newfangled tech

8-tracks all the way

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

7 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

That sounds like a bunch of fancy lawyer talk but since I imagine it coming from your avatar/Earl Campbell, I will allow it. 

And that, sir, is among many of the reasons I have that avatar (plus, who's cooler than Earl).  But to be less lawyerly about it, she seems biased and incompetent to me.

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

Just now, Rimbo said:

cassettes? fuck that newfangled tech

8-tracks all the way

Good sir, my cordoba will be late 70s vintage, with the latest in sound system technology....and of course, rich Corinthian leather.  I'll let you pick out the air freshener to hang from the rearview mirror, though.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

If I've learned anything about lawyers, they can defend anyone against anything. 

You're not wrong. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

You bring the cassettes, we'll work 'em into the rotation.  We got nothin' but time, man.  Nothin' but time.

8 tracks... 

This is the sound I hear in my head when I see that old POS

 

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

Just now, dcbc said:

And that, sir, is among many of the reasons I have that avatar (plus, who's cooler than Earl).  But to be less lawyerly about it, she seems biased and incompetent to me.

Ding ding ding.  Her incompetence is what gave her the idea for a path to satisfy her bias.  "I'm too stupid to figure out any of these pre-trial issues.  WAIT...that will be a PERFECT excuse to do what I want to do....delay this trial forever!  My stupidity is brilliance!"

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dcbc said:

(plus, who's cooler than Earl)

 

the answer is none

none more cool

 

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Good sir, my cordoba will be late 70s vintage, with the latest in sound system technology....and of course, rich Corinthian leather.  I'll let you pick out the air freshener to hang from the rearview mirror, though.

 

In the interest of harmony, I propose a solution.

X5uG-bQX7b1eX6TMg9kW18Gj9EWS8-sP96EK2f5b

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

1 minute ago, Rimbo said:

 

the answer is none

none more cool

 

 

In the interest of harmony, I propose a solution.

X5uG-bQX7b1eX6TMg9kW18Gj9EWS8-sP96EK2f5b

 

We had one of these in an old 1978 Chevy G20 Van we used to take on road trips.  The noise that thing made when you tried to use the Rew/FF function.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Bring it.  We've got room in the back seat....hold on, lemme swing this super heavy giant seat back forward so you can get in...

It's going to sound killer on that Quadraphonic Blaupunkt.  I saw the ad for it in last month's OUI, which, I assure you, I read mostly for the ads.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

If I've learned anything about lawyers, they can defend anyone against anything. 

I was thinking about that when perusing the monkey torturer thread.  Somebody is going to defend that fuckhead.  That's just not something I could ever do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Peace through Kraco.  A life slogan if I've ever heard one.

i mean let those of us who have not enhanced our fine automobile's appearance with a Kraco snap-on whitewall cast the first stone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

200.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dcbc said:

It's going to sound killer on that Quadraphonic Blaupunkt.  I saw the ad for it in last month's OUI.

I am perfectly fine with this thread diversion.  It's the threadjack we need and deserve.

Found this bad boy for sale for $19k:

141903485.jpg

Or if you wanna go full burnt orange....nearly $40k...

1977-Chrysler-Cordoba-American_Classics-

  • Drool 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, dcbc said:

He has not testified and may not testify.  If his denial come into evidence in some other way, that's another story.  I still think there's an argument that it's relevant, but for the reasons mentioned above, it's in, it likely isn't harmful, and so it's a moot point.

Pretty sure it came into evidence already through other means. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

I was thinking about that when perusing the monkey torturer thread.  Somebody is going to defend that fuckhead.  That's just not something I could ever do.

In my defense, I once turned down a client who asked me to represent him in a simple name change . . . to Skywalker.

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

In my defense, I once turned down a client who asked me to represent him in a simple name change . . . to Skywalker.

That would have worked if you hadn’t stopped me.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

What options does Jack Smith have at this point?

Imagine a situation where he has evidence that Trump has been selling off those documents. What then?

 

Set those pretrial motions for hearings and request a new trial setting.

Just now, Red Five said:


That would have worked if you hadn’t stopped me.

Username definitely checks out.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, tbone_ said:

Can someone remind me, did she just willingly violate the NDA or did this become public some other way?

How is it that she’s now talking freely about something that she, ostensibly, willingly signed and took consideration for agreeing to not talk about.

I’m sure this has all been covered before but I just can’t remember how it all squares.

I've always wondered what the remedy would be for violation of an NDA related to hush money. If a politician pays a women $1,000,000 to sign an NDA and not disclose her allegations of rape against said politician, she takes the money, and goes ahead and speaks about it publicly, does the politician then sue to recover the $1,000,000 plus additional damages? Does that go to a jury?

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the bitch took money and signed a contract to not disclose publicly that my client raped her, and she should be punished for said disclosure." Would a jury really punish a rape victim? I guess the defense would be that it wasn't really rape but to keep her from even making an accusation, but a trial on the matter is just as damaging if not more than what the NDA was meant to prevent. It also feels like an illegal contract. I'm happy I don't practice in this area. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, dcbc said:

In my defense, I once turned down a client who asked me to represent him in a simple name change . . . to Skywalker.

you mother fucker

anakin skywalker hate GIF

Edited by Rimbo
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Yes, in retrospect, it would’ve been nice if Obama could’ve appointed her replacement rather than Trump. It would also be really nice if McConnell wasn’t a massive piece of shit who stole two SCOTUS seats for blatantly partisan and unconstitutional reasons. Let’s not lose sight of who the real villains are here. 

Nobody needed hindsight to recognize the problem with a decent replacement if she held on too long-  and her age and the type of cancer that she had pretty much takes away the need for hindsight.  People were screaming about it at the time.  Anyone here who has tried to pry an elderly parent out of their home for their own good will cosign that it is almost impossible for them to do it of their own volition.  Same deal with the stakes being much higher.

But please don’t act like the Turtle’s plan was unknowable when he had already publicly stated that his goal was to defeat anything that Obama wanted to achieve.

 

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...