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
2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Tell me.

When.

He.

Is fucking.

DEAD.

You'll know because you'll be getting a telephone call from my wife to ask you for help settling my estate.  My new hope is that he needs to die in evening/nighttime.  So that when I go on my bender, I can die next day so I don't have to share a 'date of death' with him.  If he dies between 3:00am-3:00pm, there's a very high chance we both go on the same day and that just doesn't sit well with me.  It's going to be this Autumn/Winter.  Which is going to make it difficult to get fireworks and non-fentanyl laced heroin.  But I did make a connection with a guy that can me both within 24 hours.  But it's gonna cost a lot.  We really are gonna need a VRBO in the Hill Country or somewhere similar for a "business conference."  But then, it's hard to get strippers out there on a day's notice.  Shit, I gotta put down some deposits on some bitches...

  • Like 1
Posted

I see absolutely no reason to presume good faith on Cannon's part. I don't care how stupid and unqualified you are, if you've made it through law school and end up appointed as a federal judge, you know you don't just get to interfere with a criminal investigation you have no fucking jurisdiction over.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

they're not licensed/approved by the State of New Year to provide appeal bonds in NY apparently.

either that, or they didn't provide proper verification that the money is there should forfeiture be necessary.

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
21 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

He’s going to commit fraud on that financial statement isn’t he?

 

can the bond issuer get in trouble for having issued the bond if the financial statement shows that Trump doesn’t have enough equity in the pledged properties to cover the 175 million, or is it simply more financial risk for them?

 

In a few weeks there will be two new lawsuits filed: dOTArd vs the bond insurer, and the bond insurer vs doTaRd. 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 4
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Posted

Looks like a desperation bid to get the 11th circuit to think she is not favoring Trump due to Jack’s latest filing. She probably thinks the pain is coming and wants to get ahead of it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
44 minutes ago, The Dog said:

and more on Cannon:

 

In Oklahoma the judge doesn’t respond, the parties in interest respond. I assume it’s the same there. It would be trumps lawyers saying she’s right and smiths team saying she’s wrong. Naming the judge as the respondent is a matter of form because the order would be for her to do or not do something. 

Posted
4 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

The entire world literally celebrated when he lost in 2020

You will hear the bells ringing again

And the drums

giphy.gif

  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

Nothing will come of this other than continued delays.  But the good news is being 'betrayed' by an allied judge will press the rodent farther into the corner.  And while his arrogance shields him from any self-reflection or doubt, his cardiovascular system will ramp up its concern about his fate.  The plan was never for him to do jail time.  The plan was for his obese, ragged ass to perish given his carnival of errors.  It would appear there's been another huge step towards that goal today.  He'll stay up late tonight to post truth social/trump socialist shit about these 'outlandish' rulings.  And if fake subscriber bots will reply and engage him to keep him awake and angry........his already obvious demise will accelerate.  And then the next one.  And the one after that.  And so on.  This is how to end false gods.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, 'stache said:

In Oklahoma the judge doesn’t respond, the parties in interest respond. I assume it’s the same there. It would be trumps lawyers saying she’s right and smiths team saying she’s wrong. Naming the judge as the respondent is a matter of form because the order would be for her to do or not do something. 

Same in Texas.  Just is listed as the "respondent" but has not real role in the appellate proceedings.

Posted
1 hour ago, TexasEd said:

image.thumb.png.388d53367856b72991b088fc1b38ce6b.png

 

Haha, bond company not eligible to post bond in NY

 

What's the big deal, Donald?  It's only $175M  I thought you were a Billionaire.  Don't you carry this around in your wallet?

I'm just noticing the date Knight Specialty Insurance's Undertaking. I suspect if the appellate court affirms we'll hear about the "April Fool's Defense" about why it's not really owed.

 

 

spacer.png

Posted
4 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

I’m sure he will totally be held accountable 

IMG_0425.thumb.jpeg.167a7986240fc9c8e5a2ecf9c870e66d.jpeg

 

If either the "$200,000,000 in CASH" or the "ZERO DEBT" part of this can be verified to be false, this is a real problem for him.

However, he'll almost certainly be cleared with a defense of, "Do you really think I wrote that entire paragraph with only a handful of grammar and spelling mistakes?" 

 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Some think Jack will use her unwillingness to rule on this for 11 circuit smackdown 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.431.0.pdf

IMG_0426.thumb.jpeg.387fc4ae4a285f66a7bef63f5a908152.jpeg

Under ordinary circumstances, I tend to agree with the idea that you don't lock down jury instructions at this stage of the proceedings.  But trial judges also tend not to ask the parties to submit jury instructions (or briefing thereon) at this stage of the proceedings.  So to the extent that she is entertaining an instruction that does not comport with the law (despite her statement that she is not) and to the extent that such an error (if she gave that instruction) could not be appealed be the government since jeopardy already attached, her refusal to rule might be properly subject to mandamus review.

 

She brought the question about the jury charge.  Her saying now that it shouldn't be interpreted as anything but her trying to learn about this novel case is like her holding a lighted match near a pile of gasoline soaked rags and saying, "Don't worry.  I just wanted to see if these matches were any good."

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

https://thedispatch.com/podcast/advisoryopinions/judge-cannons-clerkship-problem/

I think the problem is that she has no help.  I often want to punch these two hosts, but this is a pretty good podcast that stressed me the fuck out at not only how over her head she is, but how she's going to self-destruct.

 

4 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

there is a small possibility that her refusal to issue any rulings is also related to her whimpering in the corner in a fetal position, knowing she’s gonna fuck up whatever decision she makes and be a laughing stock, so she does nothing. The fact that it helps Trump may be a secondary reason. 

The issue is whether it is malice or stupidity. Feel free to put a why not both gif after this.

Cannon was given this case for a reason -- loyalty, inexperience or stupidity all aid Trump's efforts to delay this past the 11/5 election. His only way to "win" is to win back POTUS and he can snap his fingers and make the legal shit go away. Delaying past 11/5 is winning in a sense because there's no way he beats the rap in all these trials if they're legitimately tried.

Posted
3 minutes ago, dcbc said:

Under ordinary circumstances, I tend to agree with the idea that you don't lock down jury instructions at this stage of the proceedings.  But trial judges also tend not to ask the parties to submit jury instructions (or briefing thereon) at this stage of the proceedings.  So to the extent that she is entertaining an instruction that does not comport with the law (despite her statement that she is not) and to the extent that such an error (if she gave that instruction) could not be appealed be the government since jeopardy already attached, her refusal to rule might be properly subject to mandamus review.

 

She brought the question about the jury charge.  Her saying now that it shouldn't be interpreted as anything but her trying to learn about this novel case is like her holding a lighted match near a pile of gasoline soaked rags and saying, "Don't worry.  I just wanted to see if these matches were any good."

Yep. Ironic that she chides Smith for asking for an early resolution on the jury instructions THAT SHE FUCKING ORDERED THEM TO SUBMIT. 

Also the denial of the motion to dismiss is somewhat inconsistent with the jury instructions ruling. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yep. Ironic that she chides Smith for asking for an early resolution on the jury instructions THAT SHE FUCKING ORDERED THEM TO SUBMIT. 

Also the denial of the motion to dismiss is somewhat inconsistent with the jury instructions ruling. 

Right.  Isn't that the subject of the dumb jury instruction submitted by Donald?

Posted
1 minute ago, dcbc said:

Right.  Isn't that the subject of the dumb jury instruction submitted by Donald?

Well she actually ordered both sides to prepare jury instructions modifying 18 USC 793 with the PRA, which Smith contends is a grievous error of law. And Trumpco loves. 

It's fucking nuts. 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well she actually ordered both sides to prepare jury instructions modifying 18 USC 793 with the PRA, which Smith contends is a grievous error of law. And Trumpco loves. 

It's fucking nuts. 

Okay, so she denied the motion to dismiss, but that doesn't foreclose her sending the issue to the jury on the PRA.  

 

Asking them to submit jury questions is just dumb.  Just ask for a trial brief on the issue of the interplay between the PRA and Section 793 if you want to learn something.  Or, I don't know, research it yourself, your Honor.

 

But as a generalization:  Did facts happen = fact question (jury).  Does law apply to certain set of facts = legal question (court).  What is the law = also a legal question, but cannot be misapplied.

 

To the ELEVENTH!  No stay.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, YGIFS said:

Nothing will come of this other than continued delays.  But the good news is being 'betrayed' by an allied judge will press the rodent farther into the corner.  And while his arrogance shields him from any self-reflection or doubt, his cardiovascular system will ramp up its concern about his fate.  The plan was never for him to do jail time.  The plan was for his obese, ragged ass to perish given his carnival of errors.  It would appear there's been another huge step towards that goal today.  He'll stay up late tonight to post truth social/trump socialist shit about these 'outlandish' rulings.  And if fake subscriber bots will reply and engage him to keep him awake and angry........his already obvious demise will accelerate.  And then the next one.  And the one after that.  And so on.  This is how to end false gods.  

0e69673e-b54f-4316-a110-102f313ac497_tex

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
11 minutes ago, C-Man said:

 

Cannon was given this case for a reason -- loyalty, inexperience or stupidity all aid Trump's efforts to delay this past the 11/5 election. His only way to "win" is to win back POTUS and he can snap his fingers and make the legal shit go away. Delaying past 11/5 is winning in a sense because there's no way he beats the rap in all these trials if they're legitimately tried.

She was "given" this case mostly because she's the sole judge in the Fort Pierce Division. There's another judge from another division that takes some cases there, but apparently not many because he has to travel to that courthouse. 

The Chief Judge can reassign, but usually needs a reason to do so. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Seems like a judge that doesn't have a good support staff around her and has made several really questionable decisions would be a great candidate for reassignment

Posted
22 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The Chief Judge can reassign, but usually needs a reason to do so. 

Well it's a good thing that Aileen hasn't done anything questionable in her handling of this case then

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

Looks like a desperation bid to get the 11th circuit to think she is not favoring Trump due to Jack’s latest filing. She probably thinks the pain is coming and wants to get ahead of it.

 

Judge Cannon just rejected Trump's bogus Presidential Records Act defense, but only for now. She has (weirdly and pointedly) refused to actually decide the issue, despite Jack Smith's warning that double jeopardy would then apply. I think Smith has no choice but to go to the 11th Circuit on mandamus. It's a tough standard, but it is met here.
 

GKV7UiWXMAA6MOQ?format=png&name=medium

 

GKV8DZoW4AAkhV6?format=jpg&name=large

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
33 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

She was "given" this case mostly because she's the sole judge in the Fort Pierce Division. There's another judge from another division that takes some cases there, but apparently not many because he has to travel to that courthouse. 

The Chief Judge can reassign, but usually needs a reason to do so. 

And didn't Smith file the case there to eliminate any semblance that he was seeking a sympathetic/partisan Dem judge? I wonder if he's rethinking that strategy yet.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 minute ago, C-Man said:

And didn't Smith file the case there to eliminate any semblance that he was seeking a sympathetic/partisan Dem judge? I wonder if he's rethinking that strategy yet.

It seems like I recall something like that.  God knows we should give dotard every fucking benefit there is. 

Posted

Man you gotta feel for Smith.  I know most here think about Dotard in some form or fashion every day.  Can you imagine having to WORK on the motherfucker every day?

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

4 corner offense until election day 

if he goes to the 11th, that takes time

new judge means this whole trial starts over ?

I think new judge steps in where old judge left off.  Doesn't mean previous rulings couldn't be reheard.

 

But I don't think Cannot, er Cannon, is going to be replaced, if I were called upon to predict the future.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

4 corner offense until election day 

if he goes to the 11th, that takes time

new judge means this whole trial starts over ?

image.png.72e131d57cda090de6617451956fff08.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
43 minutes ago, C-Man said:

And didn't Smith file the case there to eliminate any semblance that he was seeking a sympathetic/partisan Dem judge? I wonder if he's rethinking that strategy yet.

We don't know what he was thinking. However, I believe venue would have been proper anywhere within the Southern District of Florida, although Trump could have asked to move it closest to his residence and where the acts occurred, which is her court. So educated speculation is that Smith filed it in the most "proper" venue to avoid all that.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

(I googled for us non-lawyers -  the purpose of a "motion in limine" is to prevent the jury from being exposed to potentially prejudicial information before a ruling on admissibility can be obtained.)

Edited by The Dog
  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, safe sex said:

Seems like a judge that doesn't have a good support staff around her and has made several really questionable decisions would be a great candidate for reassignment

Maybe. But when I said reason, I meant also that the judge is recused on motion by a party or requests that the case be reassigned. It's highly unusual for a chief judge to just reassign based on her own evaluation. Sometimes it happens based on redistributing case load. 

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals could conceivably remand after appeal to another judge. They are not really constrained by much. 

Edited by TwiceHorn


×
×
  • Create New...