Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
23 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

All I know is the stall tactics will work and we'll get to hear all our resident attorneys tell us that's how it's supposed to work.

Not trying to be a dick to our lawyer friends, just sick of hearing about how having unlimited funds makes one de facto untouchable. 

No one is saying that's how it is supposed to work.  It's how it does work.  Pretty much for everyone.  

Like dcbc says, courts and other legal institutions are underfunded if you want speed, and no one seems to want to do anything about it. Maybe they're funded just about right, because the rest of the world seems to proceed at about the same pace, at least as far as civil cases, patents and trademarks go.  Some are probably swifter in criminal because they don't afford the same rights to defendants.

The first thing you learn as a baby lawyer is that you are going to experience extreme delayed gratification in just about anything you do in any legal system.  It's all years, not months, not weeks.  You get inured to it.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
On 2/9/2024 at 9:59 PM, Captainant said:

The problem is that trump lawyers have a documented habit of leaking documents, and the documents in question are classified information that he's already under indictment for storing in an unlocked shitter. 

When trumps pocket judge is ordering the government to give trump BACK the shit that he STOLE, it's pretty goddamn dramatic. 

It isn't the shit he stole. It's an exhibit detailing either threats to witnesses or investigation of those threats that the government wants to keep even from Trump's lawyers while arguing the information to support something.  That's kind of frowned on in America.

I'm not aware of his lawyers, subject to a protective order in a live court proceeding, leaking documents.  And if it were classified documents, there would be the precise same penalties applied to the lawyers.

These lawyers, especially Todd Blanche, are a cut above the usual Trump clown show.  Lauro is a blowhard, but apparently not a clown like Habba, or even Joe Bob Dobalina Tacopina.

So, yeah, not really very dramatic. Except in your fevered brain and some other people's.  

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
7 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

GGK-W2KXcAApadK.jpg.018cacbcb34b51521d3244acd0cc6401.jpg

Spoiler: it will not make any difference.  None at all.

Donald Trump could stand in front of the White House, decapitate a puppy and fuck its bloody throat while yelling "I wish this was my daughter, and also hail Satan!," all on live TV broadcast on every network and every social media site, and he would lose not a single supporter.  In fact, their support for them would only become stronger, because the criticism he would get is proof that the libs really ARE out to get him.

You all know that's true.  The criming only makes them love him more.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Drool 1
Posted

Trump asks SC to temporarily block last week's DC Circuit decision that said Trump had no immunity from election subversion charges brought by Jack Smith.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/12/politics/trump-supreme-court-immunity-filing/index.html

Quote

Former President Donald Trump on Monday asked the Supreme Court to step into the charged dispute over whether he may claim immunity from prosecution, once again pressing the nine justices to resolve a question that could undermine his campaign for a second term.

Trump asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block a scathing and unanimous decision from the DC Circuit handed down last week that flatly rejected his claims of immunity from election subversion charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith.

“Conducting a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt President Trump’s ability to campaign against President Biden,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in their request.

The DC Circuit’s ruling “threatens immediate irreparable injury to the First Amendment interests of President Trump and tens of millions of American voters, who are entitled to hear President Trump’s campaign message as they decide how to cast their ballots in November.”

The emergency filing instantly shoves the Supreme Court into the unusual position of having to juggle two politically fraught matters involving the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination. Four days ago, the court heard a historic argument over whether Trump should be disqualified from the ballot for his actions on January 6, 2021.

How the Supreme Court responds to Trump’s request will have huge influence on whether – and how quickly – the former president will be put on trial for criminal allegations as he seeks the Republican nomination and presidency again.

Trump took the unusual step of saying he might seek to two avenues to appeal the earlier decision: An appeal to the Supreme Court and, potentially, a separate rehearing before the full DC Circuit. That move underscored Trump’s unusual position in a case where he was incentivized to file at the Supreme Court but also wants to preserve his ability to keep the immunity question before the appeals court.

“Former President Trump is making it rather clear that his goal is to stretch out these proceedings as much as possible,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

While that won’t necessarily stop the justices from treating the filing as an appeal, “it underscores Trump’s unambiguous endgame here, which is to play out the string for as long as the courts will let him,” Vladeck added.

A panel of three DC Circuit judges set an aggressive timeline for Trump to appeal, nudging him directly to the Supreme Court and effectively requiring him to make his request by Monday. A key part of Trump’s legal strategy has been to delay his criminal cases until after the 2024 election. The fight over Trump’s immunity had already prompted US District Judge Tanya Chutkan to postpone a trial date previously set for March 4.

Chief Justice John Roberts, who handles emergency appeals from the DC Circuit, will likely set out a schedule quickly that will offer clues about the timing. Smith, eager to avoid further delay in starting a trial, is expected to push for a quick resolution.

Generally, it takes the votes of five justices to grant a stay.

At issue is a striking 57-page unanimous opinion from the DC Circuit on Tuesday that allowed Trump to face charges for actions he took while in office and brushed aside his claims that former presidents are immune from such prosecution.

“We cannot accept that the office of the Presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time thereafter,” the court wrote. “Former President Trump lacked any lawful discretionary authority to defy federal criminal law and he is answerable in court for his conduct.”

Broadly, Trump argued in court that presidents might be hesitant to act if they were concerned about the prospect of criminal charges after they left office. His criminal indictment in the 2020 election interference probe, if allowed to stand, would have a “chilling effect” on future administrations, he said.

But US Circuit Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson, Florence Pan and J. Michelle Childs rejected all of Trump’s arguments that those principles conferred sweeping protections to a former president.

The judges were clear that the allegations against Trump are serious and left no question they believe the charges can be prosecuted. The panel repeatedly eviscerated Trump’s alleged behavior after the 2020 presidential election as unpresidential and constituting an assault on American institutions.

The case has already made its way to the Supreme Court once before. In December, the justices rejected a request from Smith to leapfrog the DC Circuit and decide the immunity question on an expedited basis. At that time, the court did not explain its reasoning and there were no noted dissents.

Trump’s lawyers referenced the earlier decision in the very first line of their brief, quoting the renowned late Yankees catcher Yogi Berra.

“This application is ‘déjà vu all over again,’” Trump’s attorneys wrote.

During more than two hours of oral arguments Thursday in the separate ballot case, most of the justices appeared willing to side with Trump on the question of whether he can appear on the ballot or if his actions on January 6 made him ineligible under the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.” The court may have to decide how it wants to handle the former president’s immunity claim at the same time it is drafting an opinion in the ballot case.

Together, the cases have thrust the court into the middle of this year’s presidential election in a way it has largely managed to avoid since its decision in Bush v. Gore effectively decided the 2000 election between former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Al Gore.

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Spoiler: it will not make any difference.  None at all.

Donald Trump could stand in front of the White House, decapitate a puppy and fuck its bloody throat while yelling "I wish this was my daughter, and also hail Satan!," all on live TV broadcast on every network and every social media site, and he would lose not a single supporter.  In fact, their support for them would only become stronger, because the criticism he would get is proof that the libs really ARE out to get him.

You all know that's true.  The criming only makes them love him more.

CNN: Trump’s puppy stunt stuns FEMA, but now to our main story, we talk about Biden’s problem at the border. Does he even understand the problem at his age? 
 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
Just now, Neonmoon said:

CNN: Trump’s puppy stunt stuns FEMA, but now to our main story, we talk about Biden’s problem at the border. Does he even understand the problem at his age? 
 

Bingo.

His fucking insanely evil shit has utterly desensitized most to how shitty it is, and the media are key architects of that phenomenon.  They fucking normalize him saying that he gleefully would tell Russia to skullfuck our NATO allies.  That is 100%, no-questions, no-doubt, a completely disqualifying statement if you are running for POTUS.  And it just passes, like any other number of evil shit he says.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Bingo.

His fucking insanely evil shit has utterly desensitized most to how shitty it is, and the media are key architects of that phenomenon.  They fucking normalize him saying that he gleefully would tell Russia to skullfuck our NATO allies.  That is 100%, no-questions, no-doubt, a completely disqualifying statement if you are running for POTUS.  And it just passes, like any other number of evil shit he says.

Speaking of media, Jon Stewart's first show back with The Daily Show is tonight.

Posted
20 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

If any reporter was worth a shit, they ask every R congressman/senator/voter they talk to.

Are you okay with voting for a rapist?

"I don't believe anyone has been convicted of rape."

15 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Speaking of media, Jon Stewart's first show back with The Daily Show is tonight.

Is this a real thing? 

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Slacks said:

"I don't believe anyone has been convicted of rape."

Is this a real thing? 

Yes. John Stewart is back tonight.

Edited by Walser
que
Posted
3 minutes ago, Slacks said:

"I don't believe anyone has been convicted of rape."

Is this a real thing? 

Yeah, he's not going to be full-time, only on Mondays.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

Chiding anyone about nobility is rich coming from a GGW alum.

 

(Pre-emptive apologies if I’m confusing you with a different poster)

nope, it's me.  and yes, i think it's silly to deactivate access to twitter because you don't like the nazi running it.  i hate his fucking guts, but i enjoy the platform, regardless of how much he's trying to fuck it up.  it's not like i pay for a blue check.

there are probably several companies i "support" that have shitbags in charge.  i've been off facebook since 2012 so hopefully this evens me out.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

e can’t run for election because of this

Really? Because it doesn't seem to be stopping him. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Really? Because it doesn't seem to be stopping him. 

Oh it sounded like a mini-campaign stop, but his moron followers probably think he can’t do both at the same time.  Or in his subconscious he is incapable of running for office while dealing with the court cases.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I thought people who beat up cops were called "hostages" after their convictions. 

There is one little exception to this rule.

Posted
37 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Oh it sounded like a mini-campaign stop, but his moron followers probably think he can’t do both at the same time.  Or in his subconscious he is incapable of running for office while dealing with the court cases.

Someone should remind him that a person who holds an office is an officer. 

Posted

JHC. I'm watching the Fulton County case on CNN right now. I don't see how you lawyers on here can do this for a living. Arguing every single point back and forth. Patience is a virtue I wasn't blessed with. I know this is important stuff being argued, but it would make me want to open up a vein. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Thrawn said:

JHC. I'm watching the Fulton County case on CNN right now. I don't see how you lawyers on here can do this for a living. Arguing every single point back and forth. Patience is a virtue I wasn't blessed with. I know this is important stuff being argued, but it would make me want to open up a vein. 

yeah, my gf watches/listens to a lot true crime podcasts and the like. she had to turn one off recently because they were going over blood spatter evidence for like 45 minutes. and it wasn't substantive. it was shit like "and how are you an expert?" and "how are you qualified to make that determination?" and so on. yeah, definitely not cut out for that shit. if I was on trial I would ask for ambien and to wake me up at the verdict. good thing I'm not a criminal (that you know of)

Edited by Longhorn_Fan68
  • Haha 2
Posted
44 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

160505-trump-cinco-mayo-mn-1515.jpg

We won't get that lucky.  Some people do just really have the genetic favor of being able to scarf down whatever the fuck they want and still live to 90.  We all know and/or are related to folks like this.  His narcissistic sociopathy will also embolden him to push on.  But the good news is, aside from genes and mental sternness, there are just parts of the human mind and body that pickup on stressors that we don't consciously acknowledge.  

Our best bet is being dragged around to four different court venues for multiple dates, whilst running the largest grift in human history, while propping up a house of cards real estate business, rushing from fundraiser to rally to campaign event to media appearance, while back to the courts and cutting checks he can't afford, to media appearances, to realizing he hasn't seen anyone he's related to in weeks or months...even with his selfish outlook, that's gonna weigh on a man of his age and obesity.  We are already seeing objective signs of it amplified more and more frequently.  He won't allow himself to appear to be taking a break, but there are passive systems in our brain and bodies that simply need to shut down.  The long game is to run him ragged in every single way to he dies between the convention and the general election.  If not, his protest of the another "STOLLEN" election will also require similar grinds and court appearances and grift rallies.  Part of his body will eat itself away, he just won't know it.  

But yes, there is a chance he wins.  That's not nothing, I get it.  A lot on the line.  Which begs the question, if he wins---he very well likely dies in office.  Who succeeds him?  This is our concern, dude.  Who's the running mate?  I don't give a shit what electoral college votes they bring to the table, I wonder what they do once he's gone?  

Posted
1 hour ago, Thrawn said:

JHC. I'm watching the Fulton County case on CNN right now. I don't see how you lawyers on here can do this for a living. Arguing every single point back and forth. Patience is a virtue I wasn't blessed with. I know this is important stuff being argued, but it would make me want to open up a vein. 

That defense lawyer going on the attack is quite… rude

Posted
On 2/13/2024 at 1:40 PM, henrygandorf said:

nope, it's me.  and yes, i think it's silly to deactivate access to twitter because you don't like the nazi running it.  i hate his fucking guts, but i enjoy the platform, regardless of how much he's trying to fuck it up.  it's not like i pay for a blue check.

there are probably several companies i "support" that have shitbags in charge.  i've been off facebook since 2012 so hopefully this evens me out.

Not any sillier than worrying about other people who make that choice. Not your choice? Cool.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I'm fairly pissed off that the Fulton Co DA's love life may ultimately lead to Trump walking on this case because she couldn't find a date who didn't work for her.

I don't think that is likely. It is a bad look for other reasons, but doesn't really negatively affect any of the defendants' rights. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, Dahobbs said:

I don't think that is likely. It is a bad look for other reasons, but doesn't really negatively affect any of the defendants' rights. 

SIAP. The judge can rule that neither she cannot lead the case, which then applies to her entire office. The case would get bumped to the state AG, who would most likely drop the charge.



×
×
  • Create New...