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
Just now, Brisketexan said:

Remember when you called me shortly after Trump was elected in 2016, to ask me "is this really as bad as you're making it sound?"  And remember I said "yes?"  I was wrong.  It was worse than I thought.

As was I.  There was some hope in .e that we could weather 4 years of Trump and move on.  I was incredibly naive and terribly wrong.

How do I get a visa for New Zealand?

 

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Bwahaha.  Not funny, but she's going to get cornholed by the 11th Circuit.  I would not be at all surprised to see this reassigned to a different judge.

The Supreme Court might take cert though.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Bwahaha.  Not funny, but she's going to get cornholed by the 11th Circuit.  I would not be at all surprised to see this reassigned to a different judge.

Robert Downey Jr Laughter GIF by PBS SoCal

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Bwahaha.  Not funny, but she's going to get cornholed by the 11th Circuit.  I would not be at all surprised to see this reassigned to a different judge.

 

I Dont Believe You Will Ferrell GIF

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I presume that by now, y'all have reached the conclusion that "the ledge" is actually a pretty large fucking chunk of real estate, right?

 

Move over, Bacon.  We're headed up.

Edited by dcbc
Posted
9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I presume that by now, y'all have reached the conclusion that "the ledge" is actually a pretty large fucking chunk of real estate, right?

The takeover is almost complete.  Enjoy the illusion of this election.  It's the last remotely "free and fair" election you'll ever see (in truth, that election is in your rearview mirror).  The installation of the king is almost complete.  Wanna bet on whether the SCOTUS actually enforces the 22nd amendment in 2028 when Trump "runs" for a third term?

It's like in the great stories Mr. Brisket, the ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were, and sometimes you didn't want to know the end because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end it's only a passing thing this shadow, even darkness must pass. A new day will come, and when the sun shines it'll shine out the clearer. l know now folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn't. They kept going because they were holding on to something. That there's some good in the world, Mr. Brisket, and it's worth fighting for.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Bwahaha.  Not funny, but she's going to get cornholed by the 11th Circuit.  I would not be at all surprised to see this reassigned to a different judge.

The Supreme Court might take cert though.

How long will that take? What are the steps to get there?

Posted
3 minutes ago, elguapo said:

I Dont Believe You Will Ferrell GIF

Despite all the bitching, she has finally made a substantive ruling that is actually very likely wrong.  This has not yet happened in the case.

In the manifold ways in which she could have fucked the government on this and left Smith without remedy, without appeal, this is not it.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Despite all the bitching, she has finally made a substantive ruling that is actually very likely wrong.  This has not yet happened in the case.

In the manifold ways in which she could have fucked the government on this and left Smith without remedy, without appeal, this is not it.

After she gets reversed, she'll then wait until the jury is sworn in before dismissing it again. Then it's donezo. 

It's a multi step plan. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Bwahaha.  Not funny, but she's going to get cornholed by the 11th Circuit.  I would not be at all surprised to see this reassigned to a different judge.

The Supreme Court might take cert though.

Might? You really have a shred of remaining faith that this isn't a coup that has nothing to do with reason, precedent, logic, decency or any consideration other than it's time to put a handful of billionaires in complete control through a puppet king?

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
Just now, dieucla98 said:

How long will that take? What are the steps to get there?

Smith will appeal immediately to the 11th Circuit.  I'm not sure there's any particular basis this time to expedite the appeal, as there was last time, as this order actually terminates the criminal case, so there's no underlying case to worry about.  But I'm not sure how that works, tbh.

There were several different arguments advanced that were subtly different. The one she seized upon is the one that has been rejected everywhere else, including in a very similar fashion by the Supreme Court itself in Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988); referenced with approval by this very Court in the CFPB case.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

So do I still have right to be chagrined at Garland?  Couldn't he have just told one of his young turk US attorneys to go fuck Trump up?

 

Not on this. He's not good at his job, but this case was getting tossed in any event. She would have found another "reason."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Hookah Horns said:

After she gets reversed, she'll then wait until the jury is sworn in before dismissing it again. Then it's donezo. 

It's a multi step plan. 

There are 4 votes to grant cert at SCOTUS and a stay. There’s no way this case will be tried 

Posted
8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

There were several different arguments advanced that were subtly different. The one she seized upon is the one that has been rejected everywhere else, including in a very similar fashion by the Supreme Court itself in Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988); referenced with approval by this very Court in the CFPB case.

Good news for us.  SCOTUS seems hard-wired to follow precedent.

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 4
Posted
13 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Hope everyone realizes the violence on Saturday was not a one-off, it was the beginning of what's coming.

Beginning?  Dude.  It started quite a while back.  El Paso.  Buffalo.  Pittsburgh.  January 6th.  Saturday was a continuation, and a tiny one at that.  We've been in a bloody civil war for years now.  Which is exactly what the MAGAs want, and have always wanted.

They want everyone who doesn't bow to them dead, imprisoned, or deported.  They have acted on that desire.  They will continue to do so.

Even if you have an anti-gun philosophy, you should change your fucking mind.  You should 1) buy a firearm, 2) learn how to use it with skill, and 3) lay in a decent supply of ammunition.  The chances of you needing to use lethal force to protect yourself against emboldened Trumpist Irregulars are only going up.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Yup. Biden needs to quit worrying about the propriety of being perceived as attempting to affect the case and just go ahead and publish all of the evidence against Trump (though if he wants to wait until October to do so, I'm ok with that). "I'd hoped that the legal system wasn't broken yet, but it is clear that MAGA judges and justices will never allow the American people to see this evidence" is an easy enough explanation.  

If there is evidence that Trump was selling any of it, I would say it's Biden's obligation to do that at this point.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Good news for us.  SCOTUS seems hard-wired to give the far right, the gop, and Trump in particular, anything they want. 

FIFY 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
Just now, immamac said:

I'm pretty likely to start my move to mexico after this weekend. 

So $3.50 is currently 62.33 pesos.  Are we changing subscription names?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Posted
1 minute ago, immamac said:

I'm pretty likely to start my move to mexico after this weekend. 

Another Trump promise fulfilled... Mexico is going to build a wall to keep Americans out.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted

Appointing special counsels has been around for a long time. Can a judge just arbitrarily rule like that? "I think blue ties should be illegal and since Jack Smith is wearing one right now this case is dismissed." 

Posted
Just now, immamac said:

I'm pretty likely to start my move to mexico after this weekend. 

Might want to explore hosting the site in a non-extradition country, just in case.

Posted
18 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Yup. Biden needs to quit worrying about the propriety of being perceived as attempting to affect the case and just go ahead and publish all of the evidence against Trump (though if he wants to wait until October to do so, I'm ok with that). "I'd hoped that the legal system wasn't broken yet, but it is clear that MAGA judges and justices will never allow the American people to see this evidence" is an easy enough explanation.  

MAGA will just say it was all made up.  Nothing will change the cult's mind.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Another Trump promise fulfilled... Mexico is going to build a wall to keep Americans out.

I'm a Mexican citizen.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Can a judge just arbitrarily rule like that?

I would guess that's going to be Smith's appeal argument.  It's not her place to decide that. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

MAGA will just say it was all made up.  Nothing will change the cult's mind.  

Talk about fucking irrelevant shit, jesus. Who cares what his cult thinks? His cult isn't enough to win him the fucking election. There are millions of undecided voters who are not in his cult but might vote for him anyway (or stay home rather than vote for Biden).  

I swear to fucking god I will say the meanest things I can think of about the moms of any more of you motherfuckers who respond with some "nothing matters his cult won't believe it" to any political discussion. That shit is ten times dumber than anything Icono has ever posted on this board.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Even if you have an anti-gun philosophy, you should change your fucking mind.  You should 1) buy a firearm, 2) learn how to use it with skill, and 3) lay in a decent supply of ammunition.  The chances of you needing to use lethal force to protect yourself against emboldened Trumpist Irregulars are only going up.

Steve Buscemi Fuck All That GIF - Steve Buscemi Fuck All That - Discover &  Share GIFs

Posted
15 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Appointing special counsels has been around for a long time. Can a judge just arbitrarily rule like that? "I think blue ties should be illegal and since Jack Smith is wearing one right now this case is dismissed." 

The really fucked up thing about it is, the Appointments Clause is concerned with Separation of Powers, that is, the extent to which Congress can impose limits (or expand) the authority of the Executive to do things, such as appoint superior officers without the advise and consent of the Senate.

That is what most of this litigation in the past has centered upon.

But this regime of appointing special counsel has nothing whatsoever to do with Congress:  it occurs entirely within the Executive branch.  By regulation, the SC can only be removed for cause by the AG.  But, presumably, given that the AG reports to the President, the AG could be ordered to remove the SC.

She fucked the dog on this.  BIg time bro.

If SCOTUS followed her ruling, they would be taking power away from the Executive, which is something they're not particularly inclined to do.  Unless it gives power to them, which this would not.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

I think it's very darkly funny that, in his endless good faith attempts to explain the legal system to Surly, Twice has probably done about as much as Cannon and SCOTUS to destroy its legitimacy in the eyes of most non-lawyer posters. He's actually done a better job demonstrating that law is Calvinball than me repeatedly saying "law is Calvinball" has.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The really fucked up thing about it is, the Appointments Clause is concerned with Separation of Powers, that is, the extent to which Congress can impose limits (or expand) the authority of the Executive to do things, such as appoint superior officers without the advise and consent of the Senate.

That is what most of this litigation in the past has centered upon.

But this regime of appointing special counsel has nothing whatsoever to do with Congress:  it occurs entirely within the Executive branch.  By regulation, the SC can only be removed for cause by the AG.  But, presumably, given that the AG reports to the President, the AG could be ordered to remove the SC.

She fucked the dog on this.  BIg time bro.

If SCOTUS followed her ruling, they would be taking power away from the Executive, which is something they're not particularly inclined to do.  Unless it gives power to them, which this would not.

I guaran-fucking-tee you that whatever happens, it will benefit the orange cunt.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1


×
×
  • Create New...