If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,289
edited April 30
Biden
It's worth taking a few minutes to familiarize with Project 2025 and it's parent company, The Heritage Foundation, and Wikipedia sums both up quite well.
What concerns me is that an argument could be made that Trump actually makes this plan less likely to happen that it could be. Trump has scared off a few Republican lawmakers, but you'd think even more would be distancing from him. So if all these lawmakers are willing to go along with someone that unhinged, imagine what would happen if they groomed someone who is a proponent of the Heritage Foundation ideals who can at least act a lot more stable, who can speak in complete intelligible sentences, who presents better than an old overweight perpetually scowling crank and who is more charismatic. Combine that with the fact that millions upon million of (I would argue, poorly educated) Americans who blindly follow the like of Trump, and it's easier to see that our threat to Democracy is much larger than one man.
Yes, I know, disturbing thoughts. Well, sorry to say, more of us need to contemplate these horrors
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
What a bunch of nonsense. How would he "let" red states monitor pregnancies, and if he could do that, why wouldn't he do it in blue states too?
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
What a bunch of nonsense. How would he "let" red states monitor pregnancies, and if he could do that, why wouldn't he do it in blue states too?
Red states will pass legislation to allow and the Feds won’t be party to appeals.
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
What a bunch of nonsense. How would he "let" red states monitor pregnancies, and if he could do that, why wouldn't he do it in blue states too?
You seem to keep dismissing what 2025 Project supporters and their ilk are trying to accomplish. They’re telling you their vision. POOTWH is the means, not the end. That empty suit doesn’t have a clue on how any of this works but he’ll support it for the adoring crowds and to stay out of prison and to prevent the PTAPE from being released. POOTWH will die someday eventually but there are other adherents waiting in the wings. As Lux mentioned, someone much smarter and polished picks up the torch and gets elected, turn out the lights.
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
What a bunch of nonsense. How would he "let" red states monitor pregnancies, and if he could do that, why wouldn't he do it in blue states too?
Red states will pass legislation to allow and the Feds won’t be party to appeals.
They wouldn't be anyway. 10th Amendment.
The only other issue is if the law violated federal law. And even in that case a private group could sue even if the feds didn't join or file amicus.
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
What a bunch of nonsense. How would he "let" red states monitor pregnancies, and if he could do that, why wouldn't he do it in blue states too?
You seem to keep dismissing what 2025 Project supporters and their ilk are trying to accomplish. They’re telling you their vision. POOTWH is the means, not the end. That empty suit doesn’t have a clue on how any of this works but he’ll support it for the adoring crowds and to stay out of prison and to prevent the PTAPE from being released. POOTWH will die someday eventually but there are other adherents waiting in the wings. As Lux mentioned, someone much smarter and polished picks up the torch and gets elected, turn out the lights.
I understand what they want. I just don't think they can accomplish it. And even if they do succeed at the unitary president in some capacity, the next D president has the same powers.
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
What a bunch of nonsense. How would he "let" red states monitor pregnancies, and if he could do that, why wouldn't he do it in blue states too?
Red states will pass legislation to allow and the Feds won’t be party to appeals.
They wouldn't be anyway. 10th Amendment.
The only other issue is if the law violated federal law. And even in that case a private group could sue even if the feds didn't join or file amicus.
DOJ routinely joins and/or files briefs or takes the lead in cases the executive, POTUS, feels strongly about, provided they can exhibit an interest and standing. Which cases have more clout? Those filed by a sole complainant or ones where the feds join in?
If 45 becomes 47 everything is on the table. We might not even have a functioning federal government a year from now.
As much as I am not a fan of Biden this is what scares me with Trump. The retribution tour and just destroying things with no plan. I don’t think all is bad, but because it will just be retribution and they won’t have a well thought out plan, it will all end badly
so what do you think project 2025 is then? halfbaked bullshit?
People need to wake the fuck up. In case you’re not a twitter link clicker:
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
What a bunch of nonsense. How would he "let" red states monitor pregnancies, and if he could do that, why wouldn't he do it in blue states too?
You seem to keep dismissing what 2025 Project supporters and their ilk are trying to accomplish. They’re telling you their vision. POOTWH is the means, not the end. That empty suit doesn’t have a clue on how any of this works but he’ll support it for the adoring crowds and to stay out of prison and to prevent the PTAPE from being released. POOTWH will die someday eventually but there are other adherents waiting in the wings. As Lux mentioned, someone much smarter and polished picks up the torch and gets elected, turn out the lights.
I understand what they want. I just don't think they can accomplish it. And even if they do succeed at the unitary president in some capacity, the next D president has the same powers.
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
You're one of "those," aren't you? One of thoooooooooooooose.
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
You're one of "those," aren't you? One of thoooooooooooooose.
Actually I never say a word. But I had a William and Mary shirt and he was on his way there . He was also GC of a bank I did business with so wet knew the same people. Normally I like to sit in complete silence.
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
You're one of "those," aren't you? One of thoooooooooooooose.
Actually I never say a word. But I had a William and Mary shirt and he was on his way there . He was also GC of a bank I did business with so wet knew the same people. Normally I like to sit in complete silence.
I read that as you had a Bloody Mary shot and he was on his way. How many drinks did he have?
I'm the same. I just go Zen, try to sleep, not move and wake up however many hours later at my destination. Flying isn't fun anymore.
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
You're one of "those," aren't you? One of thoooooooooooooose.
Actually I never say a word. But I had a William and Mary shirt and he was on his way there . He was also GC of a bank I did business with so wet knew the same people. Normally I like to sit in complete silence.
I read that as you had a Bloody Mary shot and he was on his way. How many drinks did he have?
I'm the same. I just go Zen, try to sleep, not move and wake up however many hours later at my destination. Flying isn't fun anymore.
Flying sucks. I'm paranoid about laying my head back and snoring. THAT'S the guy I don't want to be.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,289
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
You're one of "those," aren't you? One of thoooooooooooooose.
Actually I never say a word. But I had a William and Mary shirt and he was on his way there . He was also GC of a bank I did business with so wet knew the same people. Normally I like to sit in complete silence.
I read that as you had a Bloody Mary shot and he was on his way. How many drinks did he have?
I'm the same. I just go Zen, try to sleep, not move and wake up however many hours later at my destination. Flying isn't fun anymore.
Flying sucks. I'm paranoid about laying my head back and snoring. THAT'S the guy I don't want to be.
Flying's for the birds. Besides, I'm self-grounded for life. Be safe when you're up there!
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
I agree that it would be difficult to achieve wholesale change, but they don’t need to replace the majority of career officials. By replacing some and arresting a few for non compliance , trump will be able to intimidate enough officials to achieve his goals.
he and his inside circle are well aware of the obstruction from his first term. They now have an eight year head start and the knowledge necessary to better achieve their goals.
Two weeks ago I was flying back from Dallas to Richmond and I sat next to a law professor from TCU and we chatted the entire time. He was also a former federal prosecutor. I told him I was worried about Trump's ability to damage foreign policy and even he doubted his ability to change policy, that the FSOs are so entrenched and influential that he could never get it done in one term. And that's even if he was disciplined, which he isn't. We talked about the rest of the Deep State and that is even more entrenched. He made compelling arguments.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
I agree that it would be difficult to achieve wholesale change, but they don’t need to replace the majority of career officials. By replacing some and arresting a few for non compliance , trump will be able to intimidate enough officials to achieve his goals.
he and his inside circle are well aware of the obstruction from his first term. They now have an eight year head start and the knowledge necessary to better achieve their goals.
Arresting for non-compliance? Failing to do your job is not a criminal offense anywhere, other than the military.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Giuliani bankruptcy judge frustrated with case, rebuffs attempt to challenge $148 million judgment
By MICHAEL HILL
14 May 2024
The judge overseeing Rudy Giuliani's bankruptcy case said he was “disturbed” so little progress has been made in sorting out his finances, and refused Tuesday to lift a legal barrier that has kept the former New York City mayor from appealing a $148 million defamation judgment.
Giuliani declared bankruptc y in December after he was ordered to pay the staggering sum to two former election workers for spreading a false conspiracy theory about their role in the 2020 election.
Since then, Giuliani has missed deadlines to file financial disclosure reports. He hasn't succeeded in selling residences in New York and Florida. Last week, he was suspended from WABC Radio, where he had a daily show, over what the station called his repeated violation of a ban on discussing discredited 2020 election claims.
“They have done nothing. They sold nothing. They settled nothing," said Rachel Strickland, an attorney representing the election workers. She accused Giuliani of getting fired on purpose by “deliberately flouting his employer’s restrictions.”
“I agree with you,” U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane responded. “And I am disturbed about the status of this case."
Attorneys for Giuliani said he has additional work lined up to bring in money, though they didn't say what kind of work that was. Giuliani's Manhattan apartment could soon be liquidated, they said. His attorneys said issues have been ironed out and necessary financial filings will also be made. Giuliani faces accusations from a slew of people who say he potentially owes them money.
“They finally have, I think, gotten things on track,” said his lawyer, Heath Berger.
The judge rejected a request from Giuliani, though, to lift an automatic stay so that he could pursue post-judgment litigation in the defamation case. Creditors' lawyers argued that doing so would delay the bankruptcy proceeding.
Lane also addressed a request from lawyers for the election workers that Giuliani be barred from making additional defamatory statements against them. While holding off on a decision, Lane said there was already a court decision on the matter and he was "not going to let this court be used as a place where parties can flout the requirements of the law.”
“Tell your client to stop," Lane told lawyers for Giuliani. "It's not complicated.”
Lawyers will meet with the judge again on Thursday to discuss the issue.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani pleads not guilty to felony charges in Arizona election interference case
By JACQUES BILLEAUD
50 mins ago
PHOENIX (AP) — Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani pleaded not guilty Tuesday to nine felony charges stemming from his role in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Ten others, including former Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, also pleaded not guilty to conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges related to the case. Giuliani appeared remotely for the arraignment that was held in a Phoenix courtroom. His and Ward's trials are scheduled for Oct. 17, about 3 weeks before the U.S. election.
During his remote appearance, Giuliani said he did not have an attorney at this time but will. When asked by the court whether he needed counsel appointed for the arraignment, Giuliani said: “No, no, I think I am capable of handling it myself.”
Giuliani said he received a summons but did not have a copy of the indictment. He said he is familiar with the charges, though, by reading about them.
Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration in Florida.
On Tuesday, in response to the prosecutors request for a $10,000 cash bond after outlining the difficulty in serving Giuliani in the case, Giuliani said: “I have a fair number of threats including death threats, and I don’t have security anymore ...so I have very strict rules about who gets up and who doesn’t.”
The judge required Giuliani to post a secured appearance bond of $10,000 as well as appear in Arizona within the next 30 days for booking procedures. “He has shown no intent to comply with the legal process in Arizona,” prosecutor Nicholas Klingerman said in asking for the bond for Giuliani.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state’s true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
The 11 people who were arraigned Tuesday are Giuliani; Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; and attorney Christina Bobb.
Two other defendants — attorney Jenna Ellis and and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations — were scheduled to be arraigned on Tuesday, but ultimately didn't appear at the hearing. Their lawyers had requested postponements. It's unclear from the court record whether the judge had ruled on that request.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,289
Biden
Dan Rather reminds us of something that can induce nightmares if Trump is elected:
No
one has ever cast their ballot for Samuel Alito. Ditto Clarence
Thomas. Or any Supreme Court justice. They are nominated by the
president and confirmed by the Senate, then guaranteed a job for life.
And they are accountable to no one.
It’s
a sweet deal as long as you can stay on the straight and narrow. Today
that unwritten but implied requirement seems almost quaint.
We
have taken for granted that justices should be impartial, should have
sound judgment and their conduct should be beyond reproach.
Unfortunately, “shoulds” leave a lot of room for interpretation.
And
it was always understood that in order for the American people to have
faith in the high court, the justices must display unimpeachable
integrity. For the past 233 years, this has seldom been an issue. Now it
is a major one.
As
you may have seen, Justice Samuel Alito has a flag problem. Well, two
flags, actually. Flags flown at his homes in Virginia and New Jersey are
symbols used by the insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol on January
6.
Justice
Clarence Thomas has a billionaire problem. ProPublica has reported how
Harlan Crow, a heavily monied Texan, paid for luxury vacations for
Thomas and his wife and funded their nephew’s private school tuition,
among other gifts. In addition, Mrs. Thomas was involved in efforts to
overturn the 2020 election.
Neither
of these justices should be involved in cases dealing with the January 6
insurrection or Trump’s claim of absolute immunity. But they are, and
there is no mechanism to stop them. Democrats’ demands that Alito and
Thomas recuse themselves have been ignored.
The
approval rating of the Supreme Court has never been lower. However, an
approval rating for a group with lifetime tenure and no accountability
is fairly meaningless. Historically, the Supreme Court has not had, nor
needed, a code of ethics, going back to the first court in 1790. But
after the revelations about Crow’s gifts to Thomas, Congress made it
clear that something had to be done.
That did not sit well with some Supreme Court justices, including a vociferous Justice Alito. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal’s
editorial board last summer, he said, “Congress did not create the
Supreme Court. No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority
to regulate the Supreme Court — period.”
Justice
Elena Kagan vehemently disagreed with her colleague’s assertions,
arguing that Congress can and does regulate the court. “Congress funds
the Supreme Court. Congress historically has made changes to the court’s
structure and composition. Congress has made changes to the court’s
appellate jurisdiction. We’re not imperial.”
The high court, it seems, is not immune from the rancor and hostility overwhelming the rest of the country.
Finally,
late last year, Chief Justice John Roberts announced the court had
agreed to a voluntary code of conduct. But because it is so full of
loopholes and lacks an enforcement mechanism, critics say it’s
toothless.
The
court that Donald Trump packed with three far-right jurists is steering
the country and setting the political agenda much more than Congress,
despite the resounding unpopularity of many of those decisions, such as
the one that overturned Roe v. Wade.
And
more are coming. In the weeks ahead, decisions on controversial cases
from bump stock bans to medication abortion to Donald Trump’s claim of
immunity from prosecution are expected.
Three
of the current justices are in their 70s. There’s a good chance whoever
wins the presidency in November will fill more than one court vacancy. A
strategy for Democrats would be to hammer home the long-term effects of
this election on all three branches of government.
This,
among many other reasons, is why defeating Donald Trump matters well
beyond the four years he would occupy the Oval Office.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Hillary was right in 2016 when she said abortion was on the ballot, but people couldn't (and still can't) see the forest for the trees.
And her basket of deplorables comment was prescient and still valid. Plus, her comment in comparison to POOTWH’s violent rhetoric was reported on by the four largest newspapers by circulation at a 9:1 ratio. And here we are.
It’s hard to adequately describe what happened to Donald Trump in Venezuela-on-the-Hudson. Outrageous? A travesty of justice? A devasting blow to the sanctity of our justice system and its reputation for fairness and nonpartisanship? An American repetition of the Soviet show trials of the 1930s?
It’s all of those things. And you don’t have to be a Trump supporter to understand that.
A former president was convicted of 34 misdemeanors for paperwork errors (whose statute of limitations had run out) that were changed to felonies because he had supposedly violated another state law – nowhere mentioned in the indictment – that makes it a crime to use “unlawful” means to promote or oppose the election of a candidate.
And what was that “unlawful” means? Well, the defendant didn’t know because those other “unlawful” means (i.e., other crimes) weren’t mentioned in the indictment, either. The judge told the jurors that they didn’t need to even agree on what other crimes the defendant had committed, seemingly in conflict with hundreds of years of English and American jurisprudence, including the Constitution’s guarantee of due process of law.
No, said the judge, the jury could consider violations of tax law or a violation of federal campaign finance law or of some other unnamed law for listing as a legal expense – instead of as a campaign expense – a settlement payment made to an individual who was represented by counsel in a perfectly legitimate, and perfectly legal, transaction. But no need for a unanimous decision on that issue.
A violation of federal campaign finance law? What were a local prosecutor and a state court judge doing bringing up a violation of federal law over which they have no jurisdiction whatsoever? And if that was something the members of the jury—who know nothing about federal campaign finance law—could consider, why did the judge tell the defendant he would not allow Brad Smith, a former Federal Election Commissioner and one of the nation’s leading experts on federal campaign finance law, to explain to the jury what is considered – and what is not considered – a campaign-related expense under federal law?
The judge acted like a member of the prosecution team throughout this case, a case so lacking in merit that the prior district attorney—the one who preceded the Soros-supported rogue prosecutor Alvin Bragg—refused to file it. Judge Juan Merchan consistently ruled against Trump and allowed the prosecution to essentially do whatever it wanted, including admitting evidence and allowing testimony to matters that were completely irrelevant to the actual charges and whose only purpose was to confuse the jury and blacken the character of the defendant.
Judge Merchan committed the same sorts of error that recently prompted the New York Court of Appeals in People vs. Weinstein to throw out Harvey Weinstein’s rape conviction. How so? Because the trial judge in that case abused his discretion by admitting irrelevant testimony and evidence that was comprised of, as the appeals court said, “untested allegations of nothing more than bad behavior that destroys a defendant’s character but sheds no light on their credibility as related to the criminal charges lodged against them.”
Moreover, Judge Merchan should never have presided over this case in the first place, just like this prosecution should never have been brought in the first place. Merchan should have recused himself from handling it from the very beginning. In addition to the fact that he donated money to the Biden campaign as well as to a group called “Stop Republicans,” his daughter is a Democratic political consultant who worked for the Biden-Harris campaign and whose clients have been raising money off of this kangaroo court trial.
After a six-week trial, the jury took less than two days to find Trump guilty of 34 felony charges. This hardly seems like enough time to take a hard, objective look at the lack of evidence produced by the prosecution that an actual crime had been committed. This suggests that political bias and animus towards the defendant for reasons unconnected to the case may have been a decisive — if not the decisive — factor during their hasty deliberations.
This is especially true given the only people who could provide any insight into what Trump did and what he knew with respect to the alleged offenses were Allen Weisselberg—the Trump Organization’s CFO whom the prosecution did not call as a witness—and Michael Cohen—who lied under oath on innumerable prior occasions, admitted that he hates Donald Trump, blames Trump for everything that has gone wrong in his life, stole from Trump, recorded their conversations in violation of the attorney-client privilege, and said he would profit handsomely if Trump is convicted.
When the defense team files its appeals brief, it will probably have to be the size of the novel, “War and Peace,” to list all of the legal errors and fallacies committed by the judge and the prosecution. The Appeals Court of New York should follow the example of the U.S. Supreme Court. When Trump’s lawyers filed an appeal with that court over Colorado’s unconstitutional action in disqualifying Trump from the ballot, the court acted with unprecedented speed to put the matter on an expedited schedule in order to get a decision out as soon as possible.
The New York courts have a duty and responsibility to do the same thing. I don’t have a lot of faith in those courts, many of whose judges, as we have seen in this case and the meritless civil case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, seem infected with partisan politics influencing what they do.
One final point about all of this. One of my colleagues just got back from an international conference that had representatives from all over the world, including many third-world countries. Their reaction to these prosecutions of the former president was that the United States had finally joined the ranks of their home countries where their governments use the judicial system to go after their political opponents.
It is a sad day for America and a justice system that was, until now, much admired and copied around the world.
Hans von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a former Commissioner on the Federal Election Commission and lawyer at the U.S. Justice Department. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The only other issue is if the law violated federal law. And even in that case a private group could sue even if the feds didn't join or file amicus.
I don't doubt that there would be some replacing of career officials with political appointees at the very senior level, but I don't think there will be some wholesale change to political deep state.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Normally I like to sit in complete silence.
I'm the same. I just go Zen, try to sleep, not move and wake up however many hours later at my destination. Flying isn't fun anymore.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Flying's for the birds. Besides, I'm self-grounded for life. Be safe when you're up there!
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
he and his inside circle are well aware of the obstruction from his first term. They now have an eight year head start and the knowledge necessary to better achieve their goals.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
The judge overseeing Rudy Giuliani's bankruptcy case said he was “disturbed” so little progress has been made in sorting out his finances, and refused Tuesday to lift a legal barrier that has kept the former New York City mayor from appealing a $148 million defamation judgment.
Giuliani declared bankruptc y in December after he was ordered to pay the staggering sum to two former election workers for spreading a false conspiracy theory about their role in the 2020 election.
Since then, Giuliani has missed deadlines to file financial disclosure reports. He hasn't succeeded in selling residences in New York and Florida. Last week, he was suspended from WABC Radio, where he had a daily show, over what the station called his repeated violation of a ban on discussing discredited 2020 election claims.
“They have done nothing. They sold nothing. They settled nothing," said Rachel Strickland, an attorney representing the election workers. She accused Giuliani of getting fired on purpose by “deliberately flouting his employer’s restrictions.”
POLITICS
Upside-down flag at Justice Alito's home another blow for Supreme Court under fire
After blaming his 2020 loss on mail balloting, Trump tries to make GOP voters believe it’s OK now
Trump accepts a VP debate but wants it on Fox News. Harris has already said yes to CBS
Taking presidential debates out of commission's hands virtually guarantees fewer viewers
“I agree with you,” U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane responded. “And I am disturbed about the status of this case."
Attorneys for Giuliani said he has additional work lined up to bring in money, though they didn't say what kind of work that was. Giuliani's Manhattan apartment could soon be liquidated, they said. His attorneys said issues have been ironed out and necessary financial filings will also be made. Giuliani faces accusations from a slew of people who say he potentially owes them money.
“They finally have, I think, gotten things on track,” said his lawyer, Heath Berger.
The judge rejected a request from Giuliani, though, to lift an automatic stay so that he could pursue post-judgment litigation in the defamation case. Creditors' lawyers argued that doing so would delay the bankruptcy proceeding.
Lane also addressed a request from lawyers for the election workers that Giuliani be barred from making additional defamatory statements against them. While holding off on a decision, Lane said there was already a court decision on the matter and he was "not going to let this court be used as a place where parties can flout the requirements of the law.”
“Tell your client to stop," Lane told lawyers for Giuliani. "It's not complicated.”
Lawyers will meet with the judge again on Thursday to discuss the issue.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
PHOENIX (AP) — Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani pleaded not guilty Tuesday to nine felony charges stemming from his role in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Ten others, including former Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, also pleaded not guilty to conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges related to the case. Giuliani appeared remotely for the arraignment that was held in a Phoenix courtroom. His and Ward's trials are scheduled for Oct. 17, about 3 weeks before the U.S. election.
During his remote appearance, Giuliani said he did not have an attorney at this time but will. When asked by the court whether he needed counsel appointed for the arraignment, Giuliani said: “No, no, I think I am capable of handling it myself.”
Giuliani said he received a summons but did not have a copy of the indictment. He said he is familiar with the charges, though, by reading about them.
MARK MEADOWS
Arizona indicts 18 in case over 2020 election in Arizona, including Giuliani and Meadows
Appeals court says Mark Meadows can’t move Georgia election case charges to federal court
Judges express skepticism that Mark Meadows' Georgia election case should be moved to federal court
Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows sued by book publisher for breach of contract
Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration in Florida.
On Tuesday, in response to the prosecutors request for a $10,000 cash bond after outlining the difficulty in serving Giuliani in the case, Giuliani said: “I have a fair number of threats including death threats, and I don’t have security anymore ...so I have very strict rules about who gets up and who doesn’t.”
The judge required Giuliani to post a secured appearance bond of $10,000 as well as appear in Arizona within the next 30 days for booking procedures. “He has shown no intent to comply with the legal process in Arizona,” prosecutor Nicholas Klingerman said in asking for the bond for Giuliani.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state’s true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
The 11 people who were arraigned Tuesday are Giuliani; Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; and attorney Christina Bobb.
Two other defendants — attorney Jenna Ellis and and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations — were scheduled to be arraigned on Tuesday, but ultimately didn't appear at the hearing. Their lawyers had requested postponements. It's unclear from the court record whether the judge had ruled on that request.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
https://youtu.be/C3AHtlF3gSk?si=vqTq3lXNjTJhCnwb
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
No one has ever cast their ballot for Samuel Alito. Ditto Clarence Thomas. Or any Supreme Court justice. They are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, then guaranteed a job for life. And they are accountable to no one.
It’s a sweet deal as long as you can stay on the straight and narrow. Today that unwritten but implied requirement seems almost quaint.
We have taken for granted that justices should be impartial, should have sound judgment and their conduct should be beyond reproach. Unfortunately, “shoulds” leave a lot of room for interpretation.
And it was always understood that in order for the American people to have faith in the high court, the justices must display unimpeachable integrity. For the past 233 years, this has seldom been an issue. Now it is a major one.
As you may have seen, Justice Samuel Alito has a flag problem. Well, two flags, actually. Flags flown at his homes in Virginia and New Jersey are symbols used by the insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol on January 6.
Justice Clarence Thomas has a billionaire problem. ProPublica has reported how Harlan Crow, a heavily monied Texan, paid for luxury vacations for Thomas and his wife and funded their nephew’s private school tuition, among other gifts. In addition, Mrs. Thomas was involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Neither of these justices should be involved in cases dealing with the January 6 insurrection or Trump’s claim of absolute immunity. But they are, and there is no mechanism to stop them. Democrats’ demands that Alito and Thomas recuse themselves have been ignored.
The approval rating of the Supreme Court has never been lower. However, an approval rating for a group with lifetime tenure and no accountability is fairly meaningless. Historically, the Supreme Court has not had, nor needed, a code of ethics, going back to the first court in 1790. But after the revelations about Crow’s gifts to Thomas, Congress made it clear that something had to be done.
That did not sit well with some Supreme Court justices, including a vociferous Justice Alito. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board last summer, he said, “Congress did not create the Supreme Court. No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court — period.”
Justice Elena Kagan vehemently disagreed with her colleague’s assertions, arguing that Congress can and does regulate the court. “Congress funds the Supreme Court. Congress historically has made changes to the court’s structure and composition. Congress has made changes to the court’s appellate jurisdiction. We’re not imperial.”
The high court, it seems, is not immune from the rancor and hostility overwhelming the rest of the country.
Finally, late last year, Chief Justice John Roberts announced the court had agreed to a voluntary code of conduct. But because it is so full of loopholes and lacks an enforcement mechanism, critics say it’s toothless.
Share
The court that Donald Trump packed with three far-right jurists is steering the country and setting the political agenda much more than Congress, despite the resounding unpopularity of many of those decisions, such as the one that overturned Roe v. Wade.
And more are coming. In the weeks ahead, decisions on controversial cases from bump stock bans to medication abortion to Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution are expected.
Three of the current justices are in their 70s. There’s a good chance whoever wins the presidency in November will fill more than one court vacancy. A strategy for Democrats would be to hammer home the long-term effects of this election on all three branches of government.
This, among many other reasons, is why defeating Donald Trump matters well beyond the four years he would occupy the Oval Office.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
POINT: Trump Verdict Makes NYC ‘Venezuela-on-the-Hudson’
It’s hard to adequately describe what happened to Donald Trump in Venezuela-on-the-Hudson. Outrageous? A travesty of justice? A devasting blow to the sanctity of our justice system and its reputation for fairness and nonpartisanship? An American repetition of the Soviet show trials of the 1930s?
It’s all of those things. And you don’t have to be a Trump supporter to understand that.
A former president was convicted of 34 misdemeanors for paperwork errors (whose statute of limitations had run out) that were changed to felonies because he had supposedly violated another state law – nowhere mentioned in the indictment – that makes it a crime to use “unlawful” means to promote or oppose the election of a candidate.
And what was that “unlawful” means? Well, the defendant didn’t know because those other “unlawful” means (i.e., other crimes) weren’t mentioned in the indictment, either. The judge told the jurors that they didn’t need to even agree on what other crimes the defendant had committed, seemingly in conflict with hundreds of years of English and American jurisprudence, including the Constitution’s guarantee of due process of law.
No, said the judge, the jury could consider violations of tax law or a violation of federal campaign finance law or of some other unnamed law for listing as a legal expense – instead of as a campaign expense – a settlement payment made to an individual who was represented by counsel in a perfectly legitimate, and perfectly legal, transaction. But no need for a unanimous decision on that issue.
A violation of federal campaign finance law? What were a local prosecutor and a state court judge doing bringing up a violation of federal law over which they have no jurisdiction whatsoever? And if that was something the members of the jury—who know nothing about federal campaign finance law—could consider, why did the judge tell the defendant he would not allow Brad Smith, a former Federal Election Commissioner and one of the nation’s leading experts on federal campaign finance law, to explain to the jury what is considered – and what is not considered – a campaign-related expense under federal law?
The judge acted like a member of the prosecution team throughout this case, a case so lacking in merit that the prior district attorney—the one who preceded the Soros-supported rogue prosecutor Alvin Bragg—refused to file it. Judge Juan Merchan consistently ruled against Trump and allowed the prosecution to essentially do whatever it wanted, including admitting evidence and allowing testimony to matters that were completely irrelevant to the actual charges and whose only purpose was to confuse the jury and blacken the character of the defendant.
Judge Merchan committed the same sorts of error that recently prompted the New York Court of Appeals in People vs. Weinstein to throw out Harvey Weinstein’s rape conviction. How so? Because the trial judge in that case abused his discretion by admitting irrelevant testimony and evidence that was comprised of, as the appeals court said, “untested allegations of nothing more than bad behavior that destroys a defendant’s character but sheds no light on their credibility as related to the criminal charges lodged against them.”
Moreover, Judge Merchan should never have presided over this case in the first place, just like this prosecution should never have been brought in the first place. Merchan should have recused himself from handling it from the very beginning. In addition to the fact that he donated money to the Biden campaign as well as to a group called “Stop Republicans,” his daughter is a Democratic political consultant who worked for the Biden-Harris campaign and whose clients have been raising money off of this kangaroo court trial.
After a six-week trial, the jury took less than two days to find Trump guilty of 34 felony charges. This hardly seems like enough time to take a hard, objective look at the lack of evidence produced by the prosecution that an actual crime had been committed. This suggests that political bias and animus towards the defendant for reasons unconnected to the case may have been a decisive — if not the decisive — factor during their hasty deliberations.
This is especially true given the only people who could provide any insight into what Trump did and what he knew with respect to the alleged offenses were Allen Weisselberg—the Trump Organization’s CFO whom the prosecution did not call as a witness—and Michael Cohen—who lied under oath on innumerable prior occasions, admitted that he hates Donald Trump, blames Trump for everything that has gone wrong in his life, stole from Trump, recorded their conversations in violation of the attorney-client privilege, and said he would profit handsomely if Trump is convicted.
When the defense team files its appeals brief, it will probably have to be the size of the novel, “War and Peace,” to list all of the legal errors and fallacies committed by the judge and the prosecution. The Appeals Court of New York should follow the example of the U.S. Supreme Court. When Trump’s lawyers filed an appeal with that court over Colorado’s unconstitutional action in disqualifying Trump from the ballot, the court acted with unprecedented speed to put the matter on an expedited schedule in order to get a decision out as soon as possible.
The New York courts have a duty and responsibility to do the same thing. I don’t have a lot of faith in those courts, many of whose judges, as we have seen in this case and the meritless civil case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, seem infected with partisan politics influencing what they do.
One final point about all of this. One of my colleagues just got back from an international conference that had representatives from all over the world, including many third-world countries. Their reaction to these prosecutions of the former president was that the United States had finally joined the ranks of their home countries where their governments use the judicial system to go after their political opponents.
It is a sad day for America and a justice system that was, until now, much admired and copied around the world.
About the Author
Hans A. von Spakovsky