• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

Two tiered justice system

The same way Trump was investigated for the last six years by the Democrat congress and house committees.

Wow, thought we were having a discussion. Nice ad hominem, personal attack. It appears every time you start getting annoyed at the way the discussion is going, you drag out that same old trope questioning my integrity.

If we can't do this without the personal attacks, I won't do it at all. You win. Have a nice day.
To be fair, @brihard suggesting you put equal weight to the Jan 6th proceedings isn't an Ad Hominem attack.

It might be less than relevant (maybe) or maybe circumstantial, but if their point is how much one puts stock into House proceedings, that's something else altogether.
 
Two tiered justice system

The same way Trump was investigated for the last six years by the Democrat congress and house committees.

Wow, thought we were having a discussion. Nice ad hominem, personal attack. It appears every time you start getting annoyed at the way the discussion is going, you drag out that same old trope questioning my integrity.

If we can't do this without the personal attacks, I won't do it at all. You win. Have a nice day.

That's not an attack. It's a challenge. You spent years dismissing everything the Democrat controlled House of Representatives did. You made it exceptionally clear for the entire time how little you thought of those proceedings: how meritless, contrived, partisan, and fraudulent the house committee investigation and the impeachment proceedings were. Alluding to your own frequently stated beliefs is not a personal attack. I merely expressed a slightly sarcastic expectation that you'll hold yourself to the same standards now that the House is flipped. Obviously I don't actually expect you to because you've already shown that you won't. That is not an ad hominem. An ad hominem would be an attack on you personally to try to detract from an otherwise sound position; this is the opposite. If you want to leave the discussion on that basis, fine by me.

18 s 1924 doesn't say anything about fraudulent intent.

"Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both."

It can't plausibly be argued that anyone at that level has not been briefed more than once on what is expected.

To the best of my knowledge, 1924 is not one of the offences that has been named in court records so far. 1924 explicitly deals with classified information. While I would not be surprised to see it eventually land on an indictment, you'll recall that the Mar A Lago search warrant pertained to documents with classification markings (a distinction we've discussed earlier in this thread), and named the three Title 18 offences found in sections 793 (wilfully retaining defense information), 1519 (obstruction), and 2071 (concealment or removal of government documents). I discussed the elements of thsoe offences here: A Deeply Fractured US 1924 was very notably absent. So you're starting form a point of assumption that branches off from what we were discussing. Do you have something to suggest that 1924 is in play? Because that would certainly be an interesting and significant development.

Presupposing that you didn't just make a mistake, and that 1924 is one of the offences now being seriously examined, The very section you cite, is still riddled with requirements of intent; anyone at all versed in criminal law would plainly see that. "knowingly removes", "without authority", "with the intent to retain", "unauthorized location"- each one of those is an element of the offense, and you have to make each of thsoe stick to someone specifically. Plus, of course, the element of the documents actually containing classified information, which is not at this point known to us.

The what happened is seldom the difficult part in a complex investigation; it's who knew, who acted, who decided, who intended. If you imagine the mechanics of packing up an office, moving its contents elsewhere, unpacking and storing those contents, then later returning and searching them, and then signing a false declaration that they aren't there- each one of thsoe could be (and likely was) a different person. It requires thorough investigation to determine if any one person, or a conspiracy of persons knew, intended, and either acted or directed that someone act in a way that would be prosecutable. The imminent testimony of Evan Corcoran is likely important in determining this.

In any case, an interesting hypothetical should it come to pass that 1924 is on the table. If prosecutors prove that the documents from Mar A Lago did in fact remain classified, then maybe we'll see this offense, with the stricter liability its wording entails, thrown into the mix. I wouldn't expect to hear about that before the indictment stage, unless there were to be another search warrant with an affidavit naming it- and I feel like if that was going to happen, it would have.
 
If s1924 isn't already on the table, I doubt it will be, even though the plain texts suggest it suits. Proving intent to injure, though, is a harder lift than simply proving improper handling. If something so straightforward is hard to prove, poor Bragg is in for a rough go if he has nothing better than what has been speculated so far.

Trump's a lucky guy. After his 2020 performance, and especially after his 2022 activities, he was in bad flavour with many people who used to support him. He was well on his way to footnote status. Now a few Democrats are openly voicing worries about his surge of popularity.

I had hoped he was going to fade away; that the collective voter opinion was going to be along the lines of "in the name of God, go" (which, after the midterm elections, seemed very likely). But if people can't control their animosity and are determined to fight every battle bitterly, then it's worth seeing him win. A second time and people might learn to stop tearing down fences.
 
If s1924 isn't already on the table, I doubt it will be, even though the plain texts suggest it suits. Proving intent to injure, though, is a harder lift than simply proving improper handling. If something so straightforward is hard to prove, poor Bragg is in for a rough go if he has nothing better than what has been speculated so far.

Trump's a lucky guy. After his 2020 performance, and especially after his 2022 activities, he was in bad flavour with many people who used to support him. He was well on his way to footnote status. Now a few Democrats are openly voicing worries about his surge of popularity.

I had hoped he was going to fade away; that the collective voter opinion was going to be along the lines of "in the name of God, go" (which, after the midterm elections, seemed very likely). But if people can't control their animosity and are determined to fight every battle bitterly, then it's worth seeing him win. A second time and people might learn to stop tearing down fences.

As I've said, the Bragg investigation and now prosecution is the least important of the three potential criminal matters. Obviously I'm interested to see what actually got indicted on that one, but it's nothing I'm gonna get excited about. The fact that Trump was the president aside, the NY state investigation is probably gonna just be otherwise unremarkable slimy rich people bullshit.
 
That guys walks a tight rope LOL
I don’t agree with Manchin on a lot of things, but I do on this. Both the Republicans and Democrats have moved too far to one side or the other due to their parties being hijacked by extremists. Most Americans are tired of the crap that’s been happening in recent years. The party that becomes the first to occupy a valid centrist position will reap the rewards.
 
What things have Republicans moved too far on? Further right than they were at the time of Gingrich's Contract With America (middle of Clinton's first term)? Further right than during Reagan's terms?

(The point is that I doubt "Republicans" have moved all that much right, notwithstanding all the carping that tries to attach "Republicans" to extremists, and in particular white supremacists.)
 
What things have Republicans moved too far on? Further right than they were at the time of Gingrich's Contract With America (middle of Clinton's first term)? Further right than during Reagan's terms?

(The point is that I doubt "Republicans" have moved all that much right, notwithstanding all the carping that tries to attach "Republicans" to extremists, and in particular white supremacists.)
Roe v Wade?
 
Any comments on the indictment today? Didn't think so, it couldn't be any less impressive if it was written in crayon.
season 9 patrick the game GIF by SpongeBob SquarePants
 
  • Like
Reactions: QV
Any comments on the indictment today? Didn't think so, it couldn't be any less impressive if it was written in crayon.
If someone like Ian Millhiser isn't impressed, Bragg has lost the political part of the fight and all that's left is to clean up the legal mess.

Apparently he asked for a Jan 2024 trial. Can't really be much clearer that this is a bid to interfere in the Republican primary. Americans only have two realistic choices in any presidential election. Democrats ought to stop trying to pollute one of them.
 
Any comments on the indictment today? Didn't think so, it couldn't be any less impressive if it was written in crayon.
season 9 patrick the game GIF by SpongeBob SquarePants
Absolute clown show. I hope Trump wins again just to watch the shit show that will follow.
 
Absolute clown show. I hope Trump wins again just to watch the shit show that will follow.
Seemed pretty orderly and boring to me. What exactly about it was a clown show? Even the ruckus outside between his supporters and counter protesters was pretty tame.

And puuu-leeeaase, THAT's not why you hope he wins.
 
Any comments on the indictment today? Didn't think so, it couldn't be any less impressive if it was written in crayon.
season 9 patrick the game GIF by SpongeBob SquarePants
I think the clown show was Majorie Taylor Greene and George Santos trying to hold a protest to support him, getting drowned out, and fleeing. That was funny.

On the indictment, I haven’t read through in detail, but so far it seems to match up with the call I made before it was released: “slimy rich people bullshit.” Not bullshit in that the charges aren’t legit and called for, but just that the content is exactly the kind of petty, self-serving corruption and criminality that few of us find surprising. It is a lot of counts and seems to have a lot of specific and corroborative information. He could be in some minor trouble there.

But it wasn’t the most important Trump legal news yesterday. Amid the OJ-like public furor around Trump being arrested and arraigned, there was also another court decision quietly released that he’ll find very unfavourable- the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal denied Trump’s effort to block grand jury subpoenas for a number of his top aides in the Grand Jury investigation into January 6th; Meadows, Miller, and a number of others will have to testify very soon to the Grand Jury. That investigation continues to show signs of progress, and, from who’s testifying, seems to be orbiting ever closer to Trump’s inner circle.
 
I think the clown show was Majorie Taylor Greene and George Santos trying to hold a protest to support him, getting drowned out, and fleeing. That was funny.
Her comparing him to Mandela and Jesus was…but that’s her being her.
On the indictment, I haven’t read through in detail, but so far it seems to match up with the call I made before it was released: “slimy rich people bullshit.” Not bullshit in that the charges aren’t legit and called for, but just that the content is exactly the kind of petty, self-serving corruption and criminality that few of us find surprising. It is a lot of counts and seems to have a lot of specific and corroborative information. He could be in some minor trouble there.
Pretty much. Minor is a good description. I’m just not sure how this becomes a felony issue though. And not sure the prosecution has adequately explained that. But that may just be my lack of legal literacy. I did think the judge was pretty level headed. No cameras in the courtroom. No gag order for now. He was apparently offered the chance to do all of this over zoom but he opted not to take that option.
But it wasn’t the most important Trump legal news yesterday. Amid the OJ-like public furor around Trump being arrested and arraigned, there was also another court decision quietly released that he’ll find very unfavourable- the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal denied Trump’s effort to block grand jury subpoenas for a number of his top aides in the Grand Jury investigation into January 6th; Meadows, Miller, and a number of others will have to testify very soon to the Grand Jury. That investigation continues to show signs of progress, and, from who’s testifying, seems to be orbiting ever closer to Trump’s inner circle.
I think this is a more serious case.
 
Back
Top