At least BBC inversely agreed with the "creative prosecutors" – they have in fact applied "clear, pre-existing law" (and yes I know, would be hard to prosecute any other sort of law, partly because if it pre-exists not, then WTF?
“Pre-existing” is a term that should be fed through a wood chipper, stuffed into a barrel, and fired into the sun. So the “pre-existing” thing existed before it existed? Neat trick! Just like “pre-boarding” a plane. You board it before you board it. It’s Schrödinger’s Boarding Pass!
Baker: “[Trump] is, depending on the perspective, a serial lawbreaker finally being brought to justice or a victim of persecution by partisans intent on keeping him out of office.”
Let me try: “Jeffrey Dahmer was, depending on the perspective, a homicidal cannibal or a misunderstood gourmand.” “Bernie Madoff was, depending on the perspective, the operator of the largest Ponzi scheme in history, or a visionary investor.” “Josef Mengele was, depending on the perspective, a war criminal or a pioneering medical researcher.” Hey, Mr. Sulzberger, can I have a job?
Seriously, what information is being conveyed here? That some people like Donald Trump and are angry to see him prosecuted, while other people do not like Donald Trump and are happy to see him prosecuted? OK, message received loud and clear, thanks for the super-fresh insight, now go do some actual reporting you lazy hack.
Normally, all the wing nut bleating and stuff is just so much smog over the intellect. I mean, it's just the kind of stupidity for which there's no response.
But in the case of the indictments, as some professional stated somewhere in the inter-tubes, a lot of this was done in plain sight.
So if Trump is acquitted on all four, in a hundred years, presuming there's the freedom to say so, everyone without brain worms is going to say What a broken system that cannot convict someone who broke laws in plain sight.
Anyway, inexplicably, maybe understandably, missed in Roy's roundup is this gem from our greatest statesman now in office:
"What will historians say in 100 years if the Terrorist Alert System completely vanishes immediately after the 2004 election?" Hey! Wait a minute! THIS thing actually happened!
In a hundred years they're going to say "BREAKING: Insiders Say Obama, Biden and the Clintons Will Be EXECUTED Tomorrow by Military Tribunals, Trump Restored to Office, and The Plan Vindicated!"
I must have told this a dozen times, but you're going to hear it again anyway. Conducting legend Herbert von Karajan kept a brutal schedule, spending almost every day of the year either conducting live or doing studio recordings. When a colleague was told of his death, he replied "Oh, that's sad news. I guess he'll only be doing studio recordings now."
She also basically praised Biden’s infrastructure bill, thinking she was annihilating it. Let’s face it, MTG isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed and definitely has a few bats flying around the attic.
And when I say this, I’m being extremely generous! She’s foundry known as the Jewish lasers from space lady...:)
I know, but that’s just bullshit pandering to morons. This thing had an added frisson as noted. I mean, it’s sort of like a chunk of gold in a river of sewage. Taking credit for the passage of something she opposed is actually too common. Telling a GA DA to go after rapists when is already a court-certified rapist, please. Much too funny.
To be fair (and I am ALWAYS fair) there are circles where "Accomplishing what FDR started" is the worst accusation you can make. She just forgot she was on camera and people outside the room might hear her.
I think my favorite is the “impeachment was the appropriate remedy” defense by the same people who ardently opposed both impeachments.
And as far as the “now you’ve done it to us we’ll do it to you first chance we get” threat, the only response is “no shit, Sherlock.” I mean, what have they been doing all these years, playing patty-cake? Bill Clinton, anyone? We all remember the way they went after Obama, and they were threatening to impeach Hillary before she was elected.
I say: bring it, bitch. If any Democrat shows their entire ass the way Trump and his rogue’s gallery have, they deserve to be impeached.
Impeachment seems to be the hammer they wield for the nails that are elected Democrats. To be fair, they have monkey wrenches they use to freeze the congressional machinery, and a sharpie the better to gerrymander with. Fortunately, their hammer blows are mostly errant, at best glancing. But I fear for Janet Protasiewicz, the WI Supreme Court justice. The godawful WI gop is threatening to impeach her if she doesn’t recuse herself from hearing a case challenging the severe gerrymandering of that state.
Trump paid 40 million in lawyers fees the first half of the year. I can't imagine that there is some organized way of keeping track of that. Now, realistically, he's probably been billed 40 mil
In legal fees but ain't paid Jack shit because that's how he rolls, but if they have been paying, you know it's a bookkeeping nightmare. Seems to me, if someone were to send an invoice from say," Jesus Loving All-American Patriot
Lawyers for Christ L.P.A."
there's a pretty good chance of getting paid.( You might have to send it from
Manischewitz, Shapiro, Mogen-David LPA)
Don't get greedy, ask for like, 113k.Tell them for 20%
premium you'll accept crypto.
If you do get money and feel bad( though why would you ? ) Donate 10 grand to the SPCA or something.
I'm guessing one of the many reasons Trump's lawyers are usually crap is because at this point any attorney who isn't stupid or deeply submerged in the MAGA tank will demand a large chunk of his fee be paid up front.
"Someone can 'function' as your lawyer, as Eastman did here, but still not legally be your lawyer because 1) you don’t have any agreement with them, and 2) you never paid them anything."
There's quite a bit more in that post, including the 'what did he say when' thing that implies lawyer-shopping to (lamely) support an already-conceived notion. Which, ipso facto mondo attornioso leads us to Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis, Lin Wood, Cleta Mitchell, Jeff Clark...
Someone responded to Liddle' Ben's tweet by reminding him that he once wrote an entire book "advocating the prosecution of President Obama under the RICO statute" - while Obama was still in office.
>>New York Times bestselling author Ben Shapiro presents a comprehensive case against Barack Obama’s abuses of power during his time in office.
From the DOJ to the NSA, from the EPA to the Department of Health and Human Services, Barack Obama’s administration has become a labyrinth of corruption and overreach touching every aspect of Americans’ lives. The People vs. Barack Obama strips away the soft media picture of the Obama administration to reveal a regime motivated by pure, unbridled power and details how each scandal has led to dozens of instances of as-yet-unprosecuted counts of espionage, involuntary manslaughter, violation of internal revenue laws, bribery, and obstruction of justice.
The story of the Obama administration is a story of abuse, corruption, and venality on the broadest scale ever to spring from the office of the presidency. President Obama may be the culmination of a century of government growth—but more important, he is the apotheosis of the imperial presidency. Obama chooses when to enforce immigration laws, delays his own Obamacare proposals when it is politically convenient to do so, micromanages the economy, attacks the Supreme Court, Congress, and the sovereign states. And he proclaims that he alone is the voice of the people while encroaching on their rights. In The People vs. Barack Obama, Ben Shapiro brings Obama into the people’s court and addresses each of his abuses of power.<<
It's hilarious how they tried so hard to pin actual crimes on the Clintons and Obama, while now saying that Trumps' actual crimes are just violations of his freeze peach. "Is it a crime to watch TV???"
I remember when you used to see comparisons of how many people in each president's administration were accused/convicted of crimes, and how you'd get dozens in every recent Republican presidency, and for Obama zero. Now, of course, it's the number of indictments for an actual former president, which stood at zero until 2023. Trump is truly breaking new ground!
I still say - I think the whole project has been to impeach a Democratic President for something, ANYTHING, to avenge innocent mistreated Dick Nixon. I don't remember, but I'm sure there were calls to impeach Carter, for Desert One if nothing else.
I guess it all evens out in the end. Trump incites a crowd to storm Congress in an effort to overthrow the government and install himself as dictator. And of course Democrats overthrow the government every time they win an election.
Also, too--Peter Baker's attempt to say "All this is now boring. Ho-um, another raft of indictments against Trump. Nobody cares, and voters may decide to reward him!" Recall that the NYT and WaPo were both snorting after Dobbs that the issue was now dead and no longer something to motivate voters on either side.
Yes, this is all pure savvy (h/t Jay Rosen). We don't care if a thing is true or false, we just care what effect it has. Will it move enough voters? All this true/false stuff is like using the word "lie" to describe a lie, something for amateurs.
"And of course Democrats overthrow the government every time they win an election."
So true. And what about the somewhat-less-than-half of the voters who didn't vote for Biden, huh? Why don't they get the President THEY want, huh? Halp, halp, Oim bein' oppressed!
Ah, the Prestige Media . . . . They were so cocky after Watergate. “We saved America!” Now they’re fully in the tank for the same impulses that brought about Watergate, or desperately trying to ignore it or pretend it’s normal. It’s like they want to skip right from the commission of the crime to “Let’s look forward and not to the past, it will divide, DIVIDE, I TELLS YA, the nation!” I guess if all political opposition is crushed by a fascist regime, that’s a kind of unity.
Well, of course, Prestige Media™ also told us after Desert Storm that they'd never let the Pentagon lead them around by the short hairs ever again, and after 9/11 told us that they'd do so much better on informing us about international issues, and, as we can see, 100% accuracy on both counts! 👍💯
"But there is a concern about piling on here. Why stop at Georgia? The federal indictment sets out conduct in six other states in which Trump and his co-conspirators allegedly sought to overturn the election results. Will he be prosecuted in those states too? At some point, it becomes unfair — yes, even to Trump, to go state by state. That’s why the federal approach is preferable."
Why (theoretically) pile on poor Donald Trump when all he did was try to subvert democracy and deny the nation and its people their choice of President.
When somebody commits serious criminal offenses in several states, the question arises of whether they should be prosecuted in each state in which they committed a crime, possibly also federally, with states being allowed to weigh their use of prosecutorial and judicial resources against the fact that a defendant has already been convicted in another jurisdiction. In those cases, as Marcus suggests, we might hear a prosecutor argue that it’s necessary to score a conviction and serious penalty just in case the courts in another jurisdiction eventually reverse the defendant’s conviction or shorten his sentence.
The difference? I somehow doubt that Marcus has ever worried about those defendants, or that the state prosecutors that handle their cases (or the vast majority of criminal prosecutions in this nation) are elected.
She’s also wringing her hands over the “professionalism” of Willis because the indictment occurred late in the evening – this apparently being the first time she has encountered a court’s staying open after official hours to wrap up proceedings. ..."
Yes, Virginia, it is -- that's why the states are separate legal entities & violations of those states' legal codes are prosecutable by th\ose states. [Such as in Virginia...]
And if this makes you uncomfortable, miss ma'am, maybe you should have supported placing all elections under Federal oversight.
Hate to obscure Ruth's View From 50,000 Feet with mere details, but Willis isn't just indicting Trump. Also on the list are the two scumbags who tried to intimidate Ruby Freeman into giving a false confession. I believe that's known as suborning perjury? So, 1) Let it go unpunished for the sake of national unity, or 2) Ruth Marcus hasn't bothered to read enough of the indictment to know it's even in there. One or the other.
There's an arrangement trick in, like, 40s pop jazz where a chorus of men half-sings lines, in response to the girl singer for example. It's super annoying because they're not in tune with each other. Extra points for using this ploy in a romantic song that should sound intimate: now we've got a gang of men shouting about "beside a garden wall ... and you are in my arms" etc.
What I'm saying is that Bern's excellent parody should be arranged that way.
"What if Jesus Christ comes back to earth and says, 'Donald Trump is my Son in whom I am well pleased,'”
MAGATs *already* believe this, and nothing short of him personally coming to their houses and killing them will get them to believe otherwise. Maybe not even then.
You see, Even the Liberal New York Times can see how Trump Derangement Syndrome has taken over our justice system! And Even the Liberal Washington Post! And Even the Liberal Politico! And the Liberal National Review! And the liberal American Conservative! And...
I'll always associate that phrase with the original Alfred Hitchcock Presents. They occasionally did a story which ended with the killer getting away with it, and in such cases, when Hitchcock came on for the last word, he would inevitably tell the audience that the killer later met with "the long arm of the law." And his tone of voice and facial expression would clearly declare, "we all know this is bullshit, but the network won't let me put this story on unless I say it."
Since Fani Willis signaled months ago that she'd indict Trump in August, shouldn't these bozos have been a little more... prepared? Like the obituaries newspapers have ready to go on old or otherwise candle-burning-low celebrities? Because this shit be weak.
“Fanni Willis is indicting lawyers for doing legal work. Real banana republic stuff.” --Will Chamberlain
Seriously? Has it dawned on these hypocrites that it was Trump who weaponized the DOJ? Barr opened investigations into Hillary, Hunter and the FBI on Trump’s behalf. Not to mention, Barr mischaracterized and lied about the Mueller Report, and refused to defend many convicted Trump sycophants on appeal. Essentially, reversing their convictions. Trump also managed to get the IRS to audit two former heads of the FBI: Comey and McCabe. Who knows who else was on his enemies list.
Personally, I don’t believe for a minute that these incompetent, hired guns actually believe their own nonsense; they just love to profit off of the illiterate rubes and own the lib’s; regardless of the cost to the well being of this nation.
As for prosecuting republicans for no good reason? One word: BENGHAZI! Second word: HUNTER! Although, in the case of going after Trump and his keystone lawyers; they actually committed crimes!
Hunter, no doubt committed tax fraud, but he’s hardly alone, and few go to jail if they pay their back taxes and penalties; he did both. The gun in question, was never used in a crime and he never threatened anyone with it. He lied on the background check about drug use. How many of Trump’s minions lied about Russian contacts on their SF-86’s (security clearances)? All of them!
That said, these same wing-nuts who are calling out Hunter for his tax crimes, are the same people trying to defund the IRS completely. How ironic!
And of course, we have a tin-foil hat senator from of all places, Alabama, holding our military hostage over an abortion access issue. Our enemies continually test our weaknesses and TurDville is not only playing with fire, he’s become a one man national security threat; doing more damage than all of our adversaries combined.
So when these grifters and snake oil salesmen open their mouths, nothing good will come of it, and it’s best to ignore and deny them oxygen. As the adage goes, “there’s no such thing as bad publicity, just publicity!” And these scoundrels are just a bunch of parasites, whose only purpose in life, is to grift the easily grifted, and serve as a warning to others.....:)
What's it like being Rudy right now, having put your heart and soul into this criminal enterprise, only to have the capo refuse to pay your legal bills, unless you beg him.
"Ahem, I'm all for the rule of law until said law actually has to be enforced. I'm a very smart opinioneer."
-- Some asshole writing an op-ed for the NYT or WaPo
"Whether you think the charges against the former President are justified or not, we must ask the very serious legal question: If we charge the former President with all these crimes, will there be any crimes left to charge other wrongdoers with when other wrongdoers do crimes?"
"Whether you think the charges against the former President are justified or not..."
Hey, wait, hold it right there. Why don't we pause at that point and try to ascertain whether they are in fact justified? Because kinda a lot depends on that, don't you think? Like sure, charging your political opponents with crimes could be a dictator trying to hold on to power, as with Putin and his treatment of Alexei Navalny, or it could be a justified application of the law, a sign that we are all truly equal under the law. Depends on the facts, right? Could we look at those before... no? OK, never mind.
Sigh... I suppose we'll now have to go through some sort of process where a bunch of people come together in a big room and try to sort through everything to try to figure out what's true and what's not. How exhausting that must be, I'm so glad, as a prestige journalist, that I never have to do that!
Excellent review of the execrable pseudoconservative defense of the indefensible. Whatever the outcome of these cases, let’s remember that to this day there is a persistent effort to blame the North for the Civil War. Propagandists of the future will have to either bury (like Agnew) or whitewash (like Bush Jr) the facts of the Trump/MAGA era’s rampant amorality.
Yeah, once you've started a war that kills more than 600,000 Americans all because you just LOVE slavery, and then get your ass kicked in that war in the most humiliating fashion possible, and then you actually make the whole thing a point of pride and "heritage", I'd say what they're trying to do now is child's play compared to that.
Remember Mumia Abu-Jamal? I remember going to a Mumia event years ago, the speaker was DETAILED, to put it mildly, taking the government's case apart, bit by bit, this witness said this at trial but later recanted their testimony, etc. Because that's how WE roll, my people. Someone writes a book (oh, there's ALWAYS a book) and then we all read it and gather at Rainbow Bookstore for discussion, point by point. Same with Leonard Peltier, and I imagine our ancestors did the same with Joe Hill. Take the indictment, the government's case presented at trial, tear it to bits.
These people, let's just be kind and say readin' ain't their thing.
And yet Abu-Jamal and Peltier are still incarcerated (in a country that supposedly lets murderers roam free), and Joe Hill passed in jail. There's ALWAYS been a two-tier judicial system; it's just that between J6 prosecutions and Hunter Biden, the dumdums are finally figuring it out - in the wrong way, of course.
At least BBC inversely agreed with the "creative prosecutors" – they have in fact applied "clear, pre-existing law" (and yes I know, would be hard to prosecute any other sort of law, partly because if it pre-exists not, then WTF?
And WillC, calling out "Real banana republic stuff" is simply recognizing global heating will change the crop rotation round these parts...
These assclowns should LOVE banana republics, considering how many their peers have created and supported over the years.
Could also be a callout to the popularity of cargo shorts among white men with shaved heads and goatees.
Finally, CK says as long as I never watch cable news (check) nor tweet (check again) then I'll never be indicted (Checkmate!)
You know what other town had some creative prosecutors? Nuremburg.
Trump's defense: "I was just giving orders."
“Pre-existing” is a term that should be fed through a wood chipper, stuffed into a barrel, and fired into the sun. So the “pre-existing” thing existed before it existed? Neat trick! Just like “pre-boarding” a plane. You board it before you board it. It’s Schrödinger’s Boarding Pass!
2 marks, but Schrödinger’s eyes rolling over in their sockets...
Littleface!
https://substack.com/@brawlatthepoetscafe/note/c-22922991?r=insr
I've seen some shit in a Donald Trump tweet ."Riggers" has to be the very worst.
I'd like to kick " both sides" of Peter Baker's ass.
This was a really good run down
Some days you feel like using short sentences.
I was hoping you were going to mention Matt Walsh so I could call him "Homeschoolio"
I saw that somewhere yesterday and can't wait to steal it.
Baker: “[Trump] is, depending on the perspective, a serial lawbreaker finally being brought to justice or a victim of persecution by partisans intent on keeping him out of office.”
Let me try: “Jeffrey Dahmer was, depending on the perspective, a homicidal cannibal or a misunderstood gourmand.” “Bernie Madoff was, depending on the perspective, the operator of the largest Ponzi scheme in history, or a visionary investor.” “Josef Mengele was, depending on the perspective, a war criminal or a pioneering medical researcher.” Hey, Mr. Sulzberger, can I have a job?
Charles Manson: murderous psychopath or charismatic leader?
Depending on the perspective!
Damn you, Brunelleschi!
Manson: Beach Boys collaborator, or hater of new wave Polish cinema?
“While some denounce Mengele’s work as appalling, inhuman depravity, others admire his intellectual curiosity.”
“No one who’s intellectually curious could be an evil man!” /HelenLovejoy
Seriously, what information is being conveyed here? That some people like Donald Trump and are angry to see him prosecuted, while other people do not like Donald Trump and are happy to see him prosecuted? OK, message received loud and clear, thanks for the super-fresh insight, now go do some actual reporting you lazy hack.
"Trump supporters still support Trump" has been a staple of the Times political coverage since 2017.
Trump believes X; when Dahmer drilled holes in that kid's head, he believed he might be making progress toward creating a sex robot
Dahmer: serial killer or innovator of psychosurgergy?
I love Homeschoolio
I know!
Seems like it would be easy to write a theme song / parody for Matt along those lines -
Something about " Livin' in an Assholes Paradise"
I hear that to the tune of Dancin' at the Nuclear Holocaust. Is that fair?
You could really use “1234 (sumpin’ new)” in remedial math lessons.
Finding the real riggers = finding the real murderers.
Any day now I'm expecting Trump to accuse people of being "rigger lovers."
"AAAAHH! I AM HOMESCHOOLIO! I NEED PRAEGER U VIDEOS FOR MY BUTTHOLE!"
Normally, all the wing nut bleating and stuff is just so much smog over the intellect. I mean, it's just the kind of stupidity for which there's no response.
But in the case of the indictments, as some professional stated somewhere in the inter-tubes, a lot of this was done in plain sight.
So if Trump is acquitted on all four, in a hundred years, presuming there's the freedom to say so, everyone without brain worms is going to say What a broken system that cannot convict someone who broke laws in plain sight.
Anyway, inexplicably, maybe understandably, missed in Roy's roundup is this gem from our greatest statesman now in office:
https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/status/1691592588485328956?s=20
The irony and stupidity is, like, crushing.
"What will historians say in 100 years if the Terrorist Alert System completely vanishes immediately after the 2004 election?" Hey! Wait a minute! THIS thing actually happened!
Are you referring to Tom Ridge’s color coded Terror Rainbow that was perma-stuck on Orange (until it quietly disappeared)?
That's it. Almost made it to red alert the week before the election, then was discontinued two days after the election.
What about all the worries about Ebola in t5he run-up to the what 2012 election that disappeared immediately afterward?
Hearted for ", like, "
In a hundred years they're going to say "BREAKING: Insiders Say Obama, Biden and the Clintons Will Be EXECUTED Tomorrow by Military Tribunals, Trump Restored to Office, and The Plan Vindicated!"
Not happening. Everyone will be dead by then.
What makes you think that will stop them?
"But Johnson is dead"
"That wouldn't stop Lyndon!"
Bubba Ho-Tep
I must have told this a dozen times, but you're going to hear it again anyway. Conducting legend Herbert von Karajan kept a brutal schedule, spending almost every day of the year either conducting live or doing studio recordings. When a colleague was told of his death, he replied "Oh, that's sad news. I guess he'll only be doing studio recordings now."
😂
Nobody ever really dies in MAGA World. Just ask JFK Junior. Or Herman Cain.
😂
Two marks, for instance...
Or WILL THEY...
😱
She also basically praised Biden’s infrastructure bill, thinking she was annihilating it. Let’s face it, MTG isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed and definitely has a few bats flying around the attic.
And when I say this, I’m being extremely generous! She’s foundry known as the Jewish lasers from space lady...:)
I know, but that’s just bullshit pandering to morons. This thing had an added frisson as noted. I mean, it’s sort of like a chunk of gold in a river of sewage. Taking credit for the passage of something she opposed is actually too common. Telling a GA DA to go after rapists when is already a court-certified rapist, please. Much too funny.
To be fair (and I am ALWAYS fair) there are circles where "Accomplishing what FDR started" is the worst accusation you can make. She just forgot she was on camera and people outside the room might hear her.
Fair to MIDDLIN'!
Gaaaah, I'm not sure what part of that makes head hurt most.
Ignore her, she’s not speaking to you. She’s speaking to her base, the people who inspired *that* part of “Deliverance “.
I exaggerate, of course, but given that those people keep voting for her, I’m clearly not exaggerating all that much.
Well, I'm also counting the "Newsmax says you can now be ARRESTED for watching Newsmax" in the chyron.
😂
Brilliant roundup, Roy.
I think my favorite is the “impeachment was the appropriate remedy” defense by the same people who ardently opposed both impeachments.
And as far as the “now you’ve done it to us we’ll do it to you first chance we get” threat, the only response is “no shit, Sherlock.” I mean, what have they been doing all these years, playing patty-cake? Bill Clinton, anyone? We all remember the way they went after Obama, and they were threatening to impeach Hillary before she was elected.
I say: bring it, bitch. If any Democrat shows their entire ass the way Trump and his rogue’s gallery have, they deserve to be impeached.
Impeachment seems to be the hammer they wield for the nails that are elected Democrats. To be fair, they have monkey wrenches they use to freeze the congressional machinery, and a sharpie the better to gerrymander with. Fortunately, their hammer blows are mostly errant, at best glancing. But I fear for Janet Protasiewicz, the WI Supreme Court justice. The godawful WI gop is threatening to impeach her if she doesn’t recuse herself from hearing a case challenging the severe gerrymandering of that state.
Shit, I hadn't heard that about the threat to impeach Protasiewicz. I'll add it to my list of things to worry about.
I listen to The Devil’s Advocates on MAD Radio WMDX on their App. That’s where I heard that. Robin Vos is one huge POS.
And under Wisconsin rules an official under impeachment is suspended from office while the process plays out.
OTOH a very loud "fuck you" delivered to the voters right before an election could be just what we need.
That’s my hope, if they go through with it.
I think we can be fairly confident that it's a thought that won't occur to them (see, for another example, Ohio Republicans).
So, win/win for the GOP - either she's kicked out of office, or at least she's neutralized while they play their legal games.
Yup.
Trump paid 40 million in lawyers fees the first half of the year. I can't imagine that there is some organized way of keeping track of that. Now, realistically, he's probably been billed 40 mil
In legal fees but ain't paid Jack shit because that's how he rolls, but if they have been paying, you know it's a bookkeeping nightmare. Seems to me, if someone were to send an invoice from say," Jesus Loving All-American Patriot
Lawyers for Christ L.P.A."
there's a pretty good chance of getting paid.( You might have to send it from
Manischewitz, Shapiro, Mogen-David LPA)
Don't get greedy, ask for like, 113k.Tell them for 20%
premium you'll accept crypto.
If you do get money and feel bad( though why would you ? ) Donate 10 grand to the SPCA or something.
I'm guessing one of the many reasons Trump's lawyers are usually crap is because at this point any attorney who isn't stupid or deeply submerged in the MAGA tank will demand a large chunk of his fee be paid up front.
Hell, Clarence Motherfucking Darrow couldn't do anything with the set of facts they've been handed.
Gonna be a lot of pounding the table, LOL.
What "defense" did he present in the E. Jean Carroll case? None.
The "Why would a smoking hot billionaire need to finger a meh middle-aged woman in a dressing room?" defense.
And there's this:
https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/jack-smith-has-set-a-trap-for-trump
that showed up on my 'best of stack' feed today (so you all may already have seen it).
Drama Queens Man be all "attorneys told me to do this so I'm off the hook"; Jack Smith sez "Really? They're all your attorneys? Prove it, Loser."
"Someone can 'function' as your lawyer, as Eastman did here, but still not legally be your lawyer because 1) you don’t have any agreement with them, and 2) you never paid them anything."
Oops.
There's quite a bit more in that post, including the 'what did he say when' thing that implies lawyer-shopping to (lamely) support an already-conceived notion. Which, ipso facto mondo attornioso leads us to Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis, Lin Wood, Cleta Mitchell, Jeff Clark...
Someone responded to Liddle' Ben's tweet by reminding him that he once wrote an entire book "advocating the prosecution of President Obama under the RICO statute" - while Obama was still in office.
https://www.amazon.com/People-Vs-Barack-Obama-Administration/dp/1476765138
Heh.
>>New York Times bestselling author Ben Shapiro presents a comprehensive case against Barack Obama’s abuses of power during his time in office.
From the DOJ to the NSA, from the EPA to the Department of Health and Human Services, Barack Obama’s administration has become a labyrinth of corruption and overreach touching every aspect of Americans’ lives. The People vs. Barack Obama strips away the soft media picture of the Obama administration to reveal a regime motivated by pure, unbridled power and details how each scandal has led to dozens of instances of as-yet-unprosecuted counts of espionage, involuntary manslaughter, violation of internal revenue laws, bribery, and obstruction of justice.
The story of the Obama administration is a story of abuse, corruption, and venality on the broadest scale ever to spring from the office of the presidency. President Obama may be the culmination of a century of government growth—but more important, he is the apotheosis of the imperial presidency. Obama chooses when to enforce immigration laws, delays his own Obamacare proposals when it is politically convenient to do so, micromanages the economy, attacks the Supreme Court, Congress, and the sovereign states. And he proclaims that he alone is the voice of the people while encroaching on their rights. In The People vs. Barack Obama, Ben Shapiro brings Obama into the people’s court and addresses each of his abuses of power.<<
Fantasy Impeachment is the new #1 Republican armchair sport!
Fantasy Impeachment > Actual Impeachment
"And he didn't even put buzzsaws on floats on the border, can you believe it?"
"micromanages the economy"
Now a crime!
It's hilarious how they tried so hard to pin actual crimes on the Clintons and Obama, while now saying that Trumps' actual crimes are just violations of his freeze peach. "Is it a crime to watch TV???"
I remember when you used to see comparisons of how many people in each president's administration were accused/convicted of crimes, and how you'd get dozens in every recent Republican presidency, and for Obama zero. Now, of course, it's the number of indictments for an actual former president, which stood at zero until 2023. Trump is truly breaking new ground!
"Trump is truly breaking new ground!"
Or, to put it another way, "The prosecutors were creative."
I still say - I think the whole project has been to impeach a Democratic President for something, ANYTHING, to avenge innocent mistreated Dick Nixon. I don't remember, but I'm sure there were calls to impeach Carter, for Desert One if nothing else.
It was the sweaters what did it.
Aggravated solar-paneling of White House roof.
Sing Ho! for the roof solar paneled!
No longer must we be all flanneled!
Master Ronnie moved in
Said "Dump it in the bin!"
Thus the entire thing's been dismaneled
I guess it all evens out in the end. Trump incites a crowd to storm Congress in an effort to overthrow the government and install himself as dictator. And of course Democrats overthrow the government every time they win an election.
Also, too--Peter Baker's attempt to say "All this is now boring. Ho-um, another raft of indictments against Trump. Nobody cares, and voters may decide to reward him!" Recall that the NYT and WaPo were both snorting after Dobbs that the issue was now dead and no longer something to motivate voters on either side.
A NEW, Steeper Date every two years!!!
The oh, so savvy Very Serious Pundits never admit they’re wrong. They proceed as if they had predicted the actual outcome all along.
Yes, this is all pure savvy (h/t Jay Rosen). We don't care if a thing is true or false, we just care what effect it has. Will it move enough voters? All this true/false stuff is like using the word "lie" to describe a lie, something for amateurs.
Filling those inches with words of all kinds!
NYT and WaPo try to YMMV the attempted murder of democracy in America.
Excuse me, chacun à son goût, I forgot this was the PRESTIGE media.
I hope they all develop gout.
It works for centrists, it works for pundits.
"And of course Democrats overthrow the government every time they win an election."
So true. And what about the somewhat-less-than-half of the voters who didn't vote for Biden, huh? Why don't they get the President THEY want, huh? Halp, halp, Oim bein' oppressed!
Ah, the Prestige Media . . . . They were so cocky after Watergate. “We saved America!” Now they’re fully in the tank for the same impulses that brought about Watergate, or desperately trying to ignore it or pretend it’s normal. It’s like they want to skip right from the commission of the crime to “Let’s look forward and not to the past, it will divide, DIVIDE, I TELLS YA, the nation!” I guess if all political opposition is crushed by a fascist regime, that’s a kind of unity.
Untied, Untidy Unity, but yeah...
"Untied, Untidy Unity". . .when we get to Unalive our political enemies. . .
Unalloyed, Unibomber, Unalive, yeah...
The owners of the Prestige Media realized after Watergate that they could never allow that media to interrupt another right-wing coup...
Well, of course, Prestige Media™ also told us after Desert Storm that they'd never let the Pentagon lead them around by the short hairs ever again, and after 9/11 told us that they'd do so much better on informing us about international issues, and, as we can see, 100% accuracy on both counts! 👍💯
The Ruth Marcus one really set my teeth on edge,
From a lawyer friend:
"Going back to Ruth Marcus,
"But there is a concern about piling on here. Why stop at Georgia? The federal indictment sets out conduct in six other states in which Trump and his co-conspirators allegedly sought to overturn the election results. Will he be prosecuted in those states too? At some point, it becomes unfair — yes, even to Trump, to go state by state. That’s why the federal approach is preferable."
Why (theoretically) pile on poor Donald Trump when all he did was try to subvert democracy and deny the nation and its people their choice of President.
When somebody commits serious criminal offenses in several states, the question arises of whether they should be prosecuted in each state in which they committed a crime, possibly also federally, with states being allowed to weigh their use of prosecutorial and judicial resources against the fact that a defendant has already been convicted in another jurisdiction. In those cases, as Marcus suggests, we might hear a prosecutor argue that it’s necessary to score a conviction and serious penalty just in case the courts in another jurisdiction eventually reverse the defendant’s conviction or shorten his sentence.
The difference? I somehow doubt that Marcus has ever worried about those defendants, or that the state prosecutors that handle their cases (or the vast majority of criminal prosecutions in this nation) are elected.
She’s also wringing her hands over the “professionalism” of Willis because the indictment occurred late in the evening – this apparently being the first time she has encountered a court’s staying open after official hours to wrap up proceedings. ..."
https://forums.talkingpointsmemo.com/t/commentary-and-critiques-of-the-media-s-political-coverage/194776/5413?u=mrbill30560
Seditionists be too sleepy to respond that late at night, whines Ruth...
It's UNFAIR! UNFAIR I tell you! To stop a mob boss being an unelected dictator! UNFAIR!!!!
"Will he be prosecuted in those states too?"
Yes, Virginia, it is -- that's why the states are separate legal entities & violations of those states' legal codes are prosecutable by th\ose states. [Such as in Virginia...]
And if this makes you uncomfortable, miss ma'am, maybe you should have supported placing all elections under Federal oversight.
So for now -- laissez les bontemps rouler!
I went to the Laisser State Fair and all I got was this 6ft, overstuffed, underwhelming pretendsidential candidate thingie...
I went to the Deep State Fair and all I got was a used laptop full of dick pics.
SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!
Hate to obscure Ruth's View From 50,000 Feet with mere details, but Willis isn't just indicting Trump. Also on the list are the two scumbags who tried to intimidate Ruby Freeman into giving a false confession. I believe that's known as suborning perjury? So, 1) Let it go unpunished for the sake of national unity, or 2) Ruth Marcus hasn't bothered to read enough of the indictment to know it's even in there. One or the other.
Hey that indictment came out pretty late at night. She needed her beauty sleep!
"Why stop at Sharon Tate? What about the LoBiancas? At some point it becomes unfair..."
Geez, do we really have to prosecute John Wayne Gacy for ALL the young men in his crawl space?
Seems mean.
Prosecutors must be suffering from Gacy Derangement Syndrome.
Indicting Trump at midnight
'Neath a Georgia flag
Nice work if you can get it
It’s close to in the bag
Tweeting with the Big Guy
Trying not to get high
Nice work if you can get it
And you don’t try his supply
Just imagine someone
Waiting at the courtroom door
When mooks’ thoughts become one
Who could call for conspiracy more?
Called up to the court dock
I’m now starting to see
Nice work for prosecutors
And if you charge me
Won't you let me plea?
I would like to see this performed by Fred Astaire and a group of suddenly-hip madrigal singers in the main hall at Totley Castle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rq0TNOJpgQ
There's an arrangement trick in, like, 40s pop jazz where a chorus of men half-sings lines, in response to the girl singer for example. It's super annoying because they're not in tune with each other. Extra points for using this ploy in a romantic song that should sound intimate: now we've got a gang of men shouting about "beside a garden wall ... and you are in my arms" etc.
What I'm saying is that Bern's excellent parody should be arranged that way.
... Which is SteveB's point, almost to the letter.
Ah, but now I know what I'm seeing when I watch that YouTube clip! This is the content I come here for!
That ain't what Louis Armstrong was looking for from Mezz...
Mail me a quarter-pound of arrangements -- the good ones
As long as I get to use Mezz Mezzrow's arrangements.
"What if Jesus Christ comes back to earth and says, 'Donald Trump is my Son in whom I am well pleased,'”
MAGATs *already* believe this, and nothing short of him personally coming to their houses and killing them will get them to believe otherwise. Maybe not even then.
I think there are lots of examples of cults where loyalty continued right up to the moment of death at the hands of the cult leader.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails
Read this quite awhile back and don't remember a hell of a lot about it, but it seems relevant to the moment.
Cue the old joke. "He came to the house...?"
You see, Even the Liberal New York Times can see how Trump Derangement Syndrome has taken over our justice system! And Even the Liberal Washington Post! And Even the Liberal Politico! And the Liberal National Review! And the liberal American Conservative! And...
Actual quote I saw somewhere: ""Even the liberal CNN says that Fani Willis is overreaching!"
Probably when Even Liberal CNN had one of Trump's lawyers on. He said it THROUGH THEIR LIBERAL MICROPHONE.
Fani has long arms...
Of the Law.
Short-fingered vulgarian caught by long arm of the law
I'll always associate that phrase with the original Alfred Hitchcock Presents. They occasionally did a story which ended with the killer getting away with it, and in such cases, when Hitchcock came on for the last word, he would inevitably tell the audience that the killer later met with "the long arm of the law." And his tone of voice and facial expression would clearly declare, "we all know this is bullshit, but the network won't let me put this story on unless I say it."
Since Fani Willis signaled months ago that she'd indict Trump in August, shouldn't these bozos have been a little more... prepared? Like the obituaries newspapers have ready to go on old or otherwise candle-burning-low celebrities? Because this shit be weak.
Excellent Column, Roy.
“Fanni Willis is indicting lawyers for doing legal work. Real banana republic stuff.” --Will Chamberlain
Seriously? Has it dawned on these hypocrites that it was Trump who weaponized the DOJ? Barr opened investigations into Hillary, Hunter and the FBI on Trump’s behalf. Not to mention, Barr mischaracterized and lied about the Mueller Report, and refused to defend many convicted Trump sycophants on appeal. Essentially, reversing their convictions. Trump also managed to get the IRS to audit two former heads of the FBI: Comey and McCabe. Who knows who else was on his enemies list.
Personally, I don’t believe for a minute that these incompetent, hired guns actually believe their own nonsense; they just love to profit off of the illiterate rubes and own the lib’s; regardless of the cost to the well being of this nation.
As for prosecuting republicans for no good reason? One word: BENGHAZI! Second word: HUNTER! Although, in the case of going after Trump and his keystone lawyers; they actually committed crimes!
Hunter, no doubt committed tax fraud, but he’s hardly alone, and few go to jail if they pay their back taxes and penalties; he did both. The gun in question, was never used in a crime and he never threatened anyone with it. He lied on the background check about drug use. How many of Trump’s minions lied about Russian contacts on their SF-86’s (security clearances)? All of them!
That said, these same wing-nuts who are calling out Hunter for his tax crimes, are the same people trying to defund the IRS completely. How ironic!
And of course, we have a tin-foil hat senator from of all places, Alabama, holding our military hostage over an abortion access issue. Our enemies continually test our weaknesses and TurDville is not only playing with fire, he’s become a one man national security threat; doing more damage than all of our adversaries combined.
So when these grifters and snake oil salesmen open their mouths, nothing good will come of it, and it’s best to ignore and deny them oxygen. As the adage goes, “there’s no such thing as bad publicity, just publicity!” And these scoundrels are just a bunch of parasites, whose only purpose in life, is to grift the easily grifted, and serve as a warning to others.....:)
And for all of Barr's bad acts on behalf of Dear Leader, he's on the Trump shit list now. Amazing how many of the "best people" end up there.
I suppose “best and brightest” is a relative term in Trumpland; it’s an extremely low bar...no pun intended...:)
The love-somebody-passionately-right-up-to-the-moment-you-hate-them-with-the-burning-heat-of-a-thousand-suns construction is Narcissist 101.
What's it like being Rudy right now, having put your heart and soul into this criminal enterprise, only to have the capo refuse to pay your legal bills, unless you beg him.
I've looked at RICO from both sides now
From up and down and still somehow
It's just dead voters I recall
I really don't know the law at all
"Ahem, I'm all for the rule of law until said law actually has to be enforced. I'm a very smart opinioneer."
-- Some asshole writing an op-ed for the NYT or WaPo
"Whether you think the charges against the former President are justified or not, we must ask the very serious legal question: If we charge the former President with all these crimes, will there be any crimes left to charge other wrongdoers with when other wrongdoers do crimes?"
-- Some other asshole on Twitter
"Whether you think the charges against the former President are justified or not..."
Hey, wait, hold it right there. Why don't we pause at that point and try to ascertain whether they are in fact justified? Because kinda a lot depends on that, don't you think? Like sure, charging your political opponents with crimes could be a dictator trying to hold on to power, as with Putin and his treatment of Alexei Navalny, or it could be a justified application of the law, a sign that we are all truly equal under the law. Depends on the facts, right? Could we look at those before... no? OK, never mind.
"Whether you like chocolate or vanilla, I think we can all agree ice cream is delicious!"
No, Just... no. This is not that.
After reading these impassioned outcries, one might imagine TFG has already been banished to some nouveau gulag on Asteroid Ceres or something.
Mmmmm.... I like imagining that...
In space no one can hear you lie.
Asteroid Ceres, much like Martha's Vineyard, will still exclude him and his from the Best Parties.
Sigh... I suppose we'll now have to go through some sort of process where a bunch of people come together in a big room and try to sort through everything to try to figure out what's true and what's not. How exhausting that must be, I'm so glad, as a prestige journalist, that I never have to do that!
q.v. folks going into a rage about Zelensky banning the opposition party, when the opposition was actively cooperating with the invaders.
"You libs are going to be SO SORRY when all the murderers and rapists are let free because persecuting Trump took up all the crimes!"
Yeah, the inevitable next phase.
Excellent review of the execrable pseudoconservative defense of the indefensible. Whatever the outcome of these cases, let’s remember that to this day there is a persistent effort to blame the North for the Civil War. Propagandists of the future will have to either bury (like Agnew) or whitewash (like Bush Jr) the facts of the Trump/MAGA era’s rampant amorality.
Yeah, once you've started a war that kills more than 600,000 Americans all because you just LOVE slavery, and then get your ass kicked in that war in the most humiliating fashion possible, and then you actually make the whole thing a point of pride and "heritage", I'd say what they're trying to do now is child's play compared to that.
In other news, Morning Joe dug up Chris Matthews and stuck him on TeeVee this morning. My gob was smacked; I thought he was dead.
Hey, that's MY beat!
Tweety lives?
He had been hiding because he tot he saw a puddy tat
Remember Mumia Abu-Jamal? I remember going to a Mumia event years ago, the speaker was DETAILED, to put it mildly, taking the government's case apart, bit by bit, this witness said this at trial but later recanted their testimony, etc. Because that's how WE roll, my people. Someone writes a book (oh, there's ALWAYS a book) and then we all read it and gather at Rainbow Bookstore for discussion, point by point. Same with Leonard Peltier, and I imagine our ancestors did the same with Joe Hill. Take the indictment, the government's case presented at trial, tear it to bits.
These people, let's just be kind and say readin' ain't their thing.
And yet Abu-Jamal and Peltier are still incarcerated (in a country that supposedly lets murderers roam free), and Joe Hill passed in jail. There's ALWAYS been a two-tier judicial system; it's just that between J6 prosecutions and Hunter Biden, the dumdums are finally figuring it out - in the wrong way, of course.
Guess we should have tried the hand-waving "Eh, it's all bullshit" defense. Would have worked about as well, and taken much less time.