Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

For awhile I have thought the final test would be Trump trying to remain President beyond 2028.  But now I think that’s too late and it’ll be the mid-terms

YEP.  A couple of months ago I realized they were moving much faster than necessary to get 2028 elections cancelled/delayed/whatever. It’s become obvious they are going for 2026. 

  • Rage+1 1
  • Replies 33.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
7 hours ago, HenryJames said:

 

This has some real Fort Sumter vibes.  And if you don't see that, then you need to pick up a book.

4 hours ago, Bateshorn said:

Are you landed gentry associated with the Royalist side of the English Civil War?  Then TJ means you. 
 

Anyone else? I got bad news for you. 

Well, as a matter of fact, . . . . 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

it's been a few years since the bernard at the fifth circuit thread. isn't qualified immunity only a thing when the victim is trying to sue for money? does it apply when a state like California is saying the officer committed a crime?

Qualified immunity comes up most often in the context of civil suits for money damages (as opposed to injunctive relief).

But it would also provide a defense to criminal charges against a federal official acting in his/her official capacity.  There are a range of immunity defenses that might be available to a federal official ranging from absolute to "qualified."  

And, while "qualified immunity" has come to refer most often to the defense to constitutional torts (those officials are mostly absolutely immune under state law to state law torts and federal law to federal and state torts without a constitutional dimension), qualified just means not absolute.

More than you wanted to know, but an accessible and contemporary law review article. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2006&context=wmborj

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Trust me ... you want to watch this.
 

 

 

The scene where Melania was laughing...   The Dude should have leaned back and have it be Justin Trudeau.

 

As for the MAGA Carnival Cruises, I love this idea.   And it would be so on point of the cruise ship got Tomahawked or torpedoed by the U.S.

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

And, while "qualified immunity" has come to refer most often to the defense to constitutional torts (those officials are mostly absolutely immune under state law to state law torts and federal law to federal and state torts without a constitutional dimension), qualified just means not absolute.

Sure. The qualification is that you have to be a Republican. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Sure. The qualification is that you have to be a Republican. 

Or doing fascist shit in general.  Like in the 5th circuit, if the defendant is a cop who was cracking skulls?  QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.  But if the official was a non-partisan board member who voted for a policy to maybe not treat people like shit, THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THE LAW, NO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.  You could ask me how I know, but judge Edith Jones would do a much better job of explaining how that super-serious and very real distinction isn't arbitrary at all, for reasons.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

YEP.  A couple of months ago I realized they were moving much faster than necessary to get 2028 elections cancelled/delayed/whatever. It’s become obvious they are going for 2026. 

Cool.

Ima still vote for no reason.

Posted
6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Cool.

Ima still vote for no reason.

Hey, same.  And not for no reason.  Because it's my American right.  And I hope you are right and we are all hyperventilating over this, but this second admin has absolutely been different than the first.  They are no longer testing the fences.  They are barreling through them because they realize the electricity is off.

I would rather be like Dr. Grant, understanding how they work and what to look out for.  I'm don't want to be caught off guard like Genarro on the toilet (which, by the way, was the same digital body they used for the T-1000).

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Or doing fascist shit in general.  Like in the 5th circuit, if the defendant is a cop who was cracking skulls?  QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.  But if the official was a non-partisan board member who voted for a policy to maybe not treat people like shit, THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THE LAW, NO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.  You could ask me how I know, but judge Edith Jones would do a much better job of explaining how that super-serious and very real distinction isn't arbitrary at all, for reasons.

Goddamn, you're still this fucking bitter about that?

I mean, I don't know about you, but I had a lot of fun on that trip.  Dinner at Galatoire's the night before and then four-dozen after-argument oysters at Felix's?  That was a damned good time.

Of course, Edith Jones didn't chew my ass out at oral argument.  So maybe that colors my perspective.

  • Haha 6
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Hey, same.  And not for no reason.  Because it's my American right.  And I hope you are right and we are all hyperventilating over this, but this second admin has absolutely been different than the first.  They are no longer testing the fences.  They are barreling through them because they realize the electricity is off.

lt's fine to hyperventilate. Having said that, I think a lot of folks on the left overestimate the average American's level of concern with regard to authoritarianism and Trump's threat to democracy. This leads to disappointment when much of the country seems less than enthusiastic about meeting the real threats posed by the radical right.

Edited by David Dennison
Posted
12 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

lt's fine to hyperventilate. Having said that, I think a lot of folks on the left overestimate the average American's level of concern with regard to authoritarianism and Trump's threat to democracy. This leads to disappointment when much of the country seems less than enthusiastic about meeting the real threats posed by the radical right.

Oh, we get it.  And we look to historical precedent, which matches up.  We KNOW that the masses won't actually become alarmed until it's much, much, much too late.  When the regime starts killing their friends and neighbors, that sort of thing.  That's what gets Ollie Oblivious to go "what the hell?  That's some bullshit."  But by then.....it's been too late for a long fucking time.

We know how this is going to go, and the toll that it will levy. That's why those of us who ARE aware are so fucking pissed.  We see it happening.  We know what's going to happen.  And we have zero chance of stopping it.  Then, when it's as bad as it can be, we'll have to deal with these fuckheads actually saying "why didn't someone say/do something?"  Oh for fuck's sake.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Anastasis said:

 

Proof they were drug runners? Actual fucking evidence? I’ll wait but you should probably shut the fuck up

Edited by achooloco
Posted
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, we get it.  And we look to historical precedent, which matches up.  We KNOW that the masses won't actually become alarmed until it's much, much, much too late.  When the regime starts killing their friends and neighbors, that sort of thing.  That's what gets Ollie Oblivious to go "what the hell?  That's some bullshit."  But by then.....it's been too late for a long fucking time.

We know how this is going to go, and the toll that it will levy. That's why those of us who ARE aware are so fucking pissed.  We see it happening.  We know what's going to happen.  And we have zero chance of stopping it.  Then, when it's as bad as it can be, we'll have to deal with these fuckheads actually saying "why didn't someone say/do something?"  Oh for fuck's sake.

The wife has gotten fully on board with bailing out of the country or at least to a blue state.  For a while, we were stuck in Texas because she wants to take care of her parents.  That ship has sailed with this second admin.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Maybe. But also maybe not. 

Plan accordingly.

FIF accuracy.  You damned well know that "maybe not" isn't even on the table as a possibility anymore.

Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

There are a range of immunity defenses that might be available to a federal official ranging from absolute to "qualified."  

So bear with me here. Let's say a federal official in California is at work arresting brown children, and after an arrest (in the van during the ride to the concentration camp) he decides to sexually assault one of them in violation of California law, and he's dumb enough to record himself doing that and share it with his Nazi friends, one of whom gets drunk at a Nazi bar in California and drops his unlocked phone in a parking lot, where it is found by a journalist who discovers the CSAM and delivers it to a local police department in California. The cops have the evidence necessary to identify the federal official, and they have enough evidence to get a grand jury to indict that federal official for being a chomo and a kiddie porn producer/distributor.

Does the chomo get absolute or "qualified" immunity for his crimes?

Posted
7 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

I've seen a lot of AI slop around what the East Wing "project" is going to look like or what is affected, but saw this and it seems to be the most neutral, factual view (from atop) so thought I'd share as it was helpful to me:

image.png.2e4131dbc8bb9e8845bb1c68c5f8a7f0.png

 

IMG_2825.gif

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, achooloco said:

Proof they were drug runners? Actual fucking evidence? I’ll wait but you should probably shut the fuck up

You should probably learn to use the quote function. After you do a deep study in reading comprehension. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
44 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Goddamn, you're still this fucking bitter about that?

I mean, I don't know about you, but I had a lot of fun on that trip.  Dinner at Galatoire's the night before and then four-dozen after-argument oysters at Felix's?  That was a damned good time.

Of course, Edith Jones didn't chew my ass out at oral argument.  So maybe that colors my perspective.

I mean....dinner and the oyster bar the next day WERE great.  No complaints there.  But you weren't the one who made her sigh loudly enough to be heard in Metarie.

  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I mean....dinner and the oyster bar the next day WERE great.  No complaints there.  But you weren't the one who made her sigh loudly enough to be heard in Metarie.

I never tire of this story.  Making her sigh like that should be a badge of honor.  Just sayin'.

 

When I was a younger lawyer, I had a visiting, retired (old) judge straighten my tie before a hearing once.  I was interviewing for my current job later that day and was appearing as ad litem (just needing to get paid)  So I let him.  Dammit, I encouraged him to get it good and straight.

Edited by dcbc
Posted
20 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

Just to again state the obvious, if Obama had destroyed an entire wing of the White House, there would be immediate calls for impeachment, investigations, and the public outcry from the right would be deafening.  Probably a January 6th style raiding of the White House grounds.

To be clear, this should also be the reaction from Dems and the public in this instance, but oh well.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
Just to again state the obvious, if Obama had destroyed an entire wing of the White House, there would be immediate calls for impeachment, investigations, and the public outcry from the right would be deafening.  Probably a January 6th style raiding of the White House grounds.
To be clear, this should also be the reaction from Dems and the public in this instance, but oh well.

I mean, the dichotomy right there is so easy.
Imagine what the coverage on Fox would be had Obama done exactly what Trump just did. We might actually be facing a violent insurrection. And while that degree of reaction wouldn’t be merited, universal condemnation would be.
Today…those same people can’t fall to their knees and suck Trump off fast enough.
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


I mean, the dichotomy right there is so easy.
Imagine what the coverage on Fox would be had Obama done exactly what Trump just did. We might actually be facing a violent insurrection. And while that degree of reaction wouldn’t be merited, universal condemnation would be.
Today…those same people can’t fall to their knees and suck Trump off fast enough.

To wit: Ana laughing at my post

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

Goddamn, you're still this fucking bitter about that?

I mean, I don't know about you, but I had a lot of fun on that trip.  Dinner at Galatoire's the night before and then four-dozen after-argument oysters at Felix's?  That was a damned good time.

Of course, Edith Jones didn't chew my ass out at oral argument.  So maybe that colors my perspective.

Brisket got his ass chewed by Edith?  Niiiice.  I'm fairly in awe.

Posted
3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

YEP.  A couple of months ago I realized they were moving much faster than necessary to get 2028 elections cancelled/delayed/whatever. It’s become obvious they are going for 2026. 

practice run

Posted

I'm guessing we get a special thread. But you're right, I need to stock up. I also intend to call my Trumpy parents for babysitting duty when that glorious day arrives so I can get absolutely blitzed.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
They don’t care.   Just lie and lie more like the president.   80% of the rubes believe it and it gets clicks and likes.  

They love him for the lies.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, miguelito said:

Every time this thread is marked as HOT, I panic a little, because I don't have any champagne in the house.

I stopped drinking in 2022.   Been sober 1,349 days.  

But when that fucker dies, I have serioulsy been considering ending that streak.

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

I stopped drinking in 2022.   Been sober 1,349 days.  

But when that fucker dies, I have serioulsy been considering ending that streak.

He’s not worth it. Congrats to you. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
5 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

I stopped drinking in 2022.   Been sober 1,349 days.  

But when that fucker dies, I have serioulsy been considering ending that streak.

Don’t blow it over that POS.

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
7 minutes ago, miguelito said:

Yeah, Mac, the rest of us will have you covered. By a lot. 

Like a whole lot.

We'll need a designated driver. 

Bwahahaha.   

Macanudo: Designated Driver for the World

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

That Tim Burchett twat retweeted this.  He's neck and neck with Tuberville for dumbest motherfucker in Congress.

The problem is that people believe everything they come across on the internet.  This lie has already spread across the magat world.  None of them will question it.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
42 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

I stopped drinking in 2022.   Been sober 1,349 days.  

But when that fucker dies, I have serioulsy been considering ending that streak.

Allow David Cross GIF

 

we might need a houston meet up 



×
×
  • Create New...