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?
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:
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.
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.
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.
"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. ..."
"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...
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.....:)
"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?"
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
"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...
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.....:)
"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
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.
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.
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.