Nixon got busted because he tape recorded his own office. It's a pattern.
Also, always go for the cheap pun.
Isn't it wildly unlikely that this is just coming out now AND they were in the room for smoking-gun-type conversations? The whole thing about Trump is that he says blatantly incriminating things right out in the open and that somehow magically makes it OK.
What could be "juicy enough" to make a difference? Even if there is video of Trump telling Pence, "Declare me the winner, or I will have you executed", would that make a difference?
2: Not smoking guns, true, that was plenty open, but maybe a clear mens rea for those who care about that - like judges; and maybe some other footage that would look more cavalier / less sympathetic to true believers, who knows, maybe denigrating them.
5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su3qmvCkvtE
I thought something like that might happen in 2016, but Trump denigrates his followers all the time, and they love it.
To be fair, they deserve the denegration.
6: What are you thinking of? The Fifth Avenue comment? I interpret that differently if so. I think his main note is obsequious, like in his 1/6 tweets to the insurrectionists.
Extremely transparent car-salesman-y obsequity, we all know, but still.
||
I do not know what to make of the fact that, in striking down New York's law restricting concealed carry, Thomas cited Dred Scott.
This Supreme Court is killing me. Too bad Scalia didn't live another 8 years and Ginsburg couldn't have lasted another 6 months.
|>
||
I do not know what to make of the fact that, in striking down New York's law restricting concealed carry, Thomas cited Dred Scott.
This Supreme Court is killing me. Too bad Scalia didn't live another 8 years and Ginsburg couldn't have lasted another 6 months.
|>
This seems like it could result in juicy enough material to cut through the noise.
I reflexively roll my eyes when people say things like this, but after having followed the link, I am compelled to admit that I am intrigued and hopeful.
I think 5 is also important and correct.
I continue to think, however, that Trump is not going to jail, regardless. I'd just like to see some of those other fuckers at least do a little time until they get pardoned.
10: Writing for the Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393 (1857), Chief Justice Taney offered what he thought was a parade of horribles that would result from recognizing that free blacks were citizens of the United States. If blacks were citizens, Taney fretted, they would be entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, including the right "to keep and carry arms wherever they went." Id., at 417 (emphasis added). Thus, even Chief Justice Taney recognized (albeit unenthusiastically in the case of blacks) that public carry was a component of the right to keep and bear arms--a right free blacks were often denied in antebellum America.
In case, anybody else was curious about Thomas's citation to Dred Scott.
The man is a giant, giant, troll. That's the whole thing.
I do also like the search of Jeffrey Clark's home. Has the DOJ done anything else that shows this clearly that they are interested in enforcing the law against Trumpists who didn't invade the Capitol?
but after having followed the link, I am compelled to admit that I am intrigued and hopeful.
I finally followed the link and my reaction was that the director had found a good way to create some buzz about his documentary.
16: A refusal to embrace maximal cynicism is, I admit, generally not the path of wisdom these days.
17: Sorry, I'm in kind of a weird state of overcaffeinated nihilism.
The "pardon list" consisted of Mo Brooks, Matt Gaetz, Andy Biggs, Louie Gohmert, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and apparently in blanket "every Congressman and Senator who voted to reject the electoral college submissions of Arizona and Pennsylvania".
Jim Jordan only hinted he wanted to be on the list - he's a Guess Culture guy, it seems.
Jim Jordan only hinted he wanted to be on the list - he's a Guess Culture guy, it seems.
This made me laugh.
I think they will get a few little nuggets but nothing that big for various reason including what Yawnoc says in 2. It does appear that many on the campaign were not aware it was being filmed so it probably is really only the family and real inner circle on tape. Maybe something will come out that could add a little bit more froth to the simmering intra-Republican froth that the hearings have helped sustain*. For instance Politico has linked and "unexpected" call to/from Putin that the documentary guy was aware of to immediately around the time that Putin publicly pooh-poohed some Russia-involved Hunter Biden conspiracy crap shortly before the election. But I think it will all be on the margin.
One depressing thing I heard the filmmaker say last night was that he came to believe that Trump "really believed" he had won the election. Not that I think it matters for the legal mumbo jumbo, but I think it illustrates how helpless people seem to be in adequately dealing with How trump thinks and uses his words. Concepts like "believe", "true", "false" etc. are not really relevant given his absolute commitment to the purely operational use of language. From all accounts he is quite persuasive in person, one like to believe one would be immune**, but I suspect a lot of it is the context/gatekeeping under which people are allowed to talk to him, so folks are pre-stupefied.
*For instance the McConnell/Fed Society rep "leaders" clearly want to keep the Trump base without Trump being the actual candidate. They'd rather destroy democracy and restore the Gilded Age more incrementally. But of course they will be all in if it turns out that he is.
**It does seem that some of the DOJ guys were able to resist (in their telling of course).
And before Roe drops and takes over all discourse, I will mention one other very depressing thing from this week re J6 hearings (would like to discuss them in more depth, but maybe after the death of Roe and the EPA get their howls).
That was the AZ Speaker of the House who did stand firm on the certification of the close election in AZ and experienced a lot of personal threats to himself and his family, but who is prepared to support Trump if he is the nominee.
Fuck all these fucking fuckers.
The myriad asymmetries of the political climate in the US (and elsewhere) just seem overwhelming. There must be some name for the concept that almost *every* significant institution in the country (and many influential people) have internalized that the consequences of crossing a true Trump/DeSantis autocratic kleptocracy dwarfs that of crossing a "lawful" regime. I do see the hearings and probable lack of consequences* as a bit of a tipping point (or yet another one).
*To illustrate the asymmetry there *will* most likely be significant consequences for those one the committee next year under a Republican House.
Dobbs opinion release, Alito writing. Let's see if he changed anything from the leaked draft.
Dobbs out. Seems to be as previewed. Maybe a thread.
Probably time for a Supreme Court thread, eh?
Disingenuous bullshit from the first paragraph:
"A proper application of stare decisis, however, requires an assessment of the strength of the grounds on which Roe was based."
So respect for precedent requires overruling precedent if you disagree with the ruling.