Massholya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,946
|
Post by Massholya on Dec 17, 2023 18:42:34 GMT -5
Exactly this. If they were acting in good faith and believed they had a credible position, they would want to get this all behind them as fast as possible. The fact that they are displeased by Smith’s move shows, with no uncertainty, they simply want to game the system and delay as much as possible. IMO, the double jeopardy argument (acquittal in impeachment proceeding bars a criminal prosecution) is frivolous. The immunity argument is not much more meritorious. ABA Rule 3.1 A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding, or the respondent in a proceeding that could result in incarceration, may nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established. www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/policy/ethics_2000_commission/e2k_rule31/To a non-lawyer person, this argument makes zero sense. It is not a criminal proceeding. It can’t result in “jail” and the jury is far from impartial. They don’t seem even close to being the same thing.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 17, 2023 19:00:51 GMT -5
IMO, the double jeopardy argument (acquittal in impeachment proceeding bars a criminal prosecution) is frivolous. The immunity argument is not much more meritorious. ABA Rule 3.1 A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding, or the respondent in a proceeding that could result in incarceration, may nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established. www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/policy/ethics_2000_commission/e2k_rule31/To a non-lawyer person, this argument makes zero sense. It is not a criminal proceeding. It can’t result in “jail” and the jury is far from impartial. They don’t seem even close to being the same thing. Exactly. That's what makes the double jeopardy argument frivolous. Competent and ethical lawyers should know better.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 19, 2023 20:35:55 GMT -5
I bet you wish that Mango had actually given you a pardon, you insurrectionist POS. The Army should recall you to active duty and court-martial your a#*. A federal judge on Tuesday granted the Justice Department access to nearly 1,700 records recovered from the cellphone of Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) in a long-running legal battle in the criminal investigation of former president Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. An outline of the contents of Perry’s sensitive discussions with Trump’s legal advisers, aides and others spilled into public view in a quickly withdrawn court filing last month, revealing details of efforts to gain access to secret intelligence about the election, to replace the attorney general with former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark and to reverse the department’s finding that Biden had been elected fairly. The filing also described Perry’s discussions with Pennsylvania state officials who supported Trump’s fraud allegations, with private individuals claiming expertise in cybersecurity and with attorneys for Trump’s campaign. www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/12/19/rep-perry-records-jan6/WASHINGTON (CN) — In a 2-1 vote, the D.C. Circuit ruled on Tuesday that it is constitutional for the military to court-martial retired servicemembers for post-retirement crimes. The appeals court panel’s ruling reverses a federal judge's decision. Two Trump-appointed judges — U.S. Circuit Judges Neomi Rao and Justin Walker — were in the majority. with Clinton-appointed U.S. Circuit Judge David Tatel dissenting. Writing for the majority, Rao said the jurisdiction question depends on a single factor. www.courthousenews.com/dc-circuit-finds-court-martial-of-military-retirees-constitutional/
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 22, 2023 14:48:41 GMT -5
DC Circuit gets first crack at immunity argument. SCOTUS punts! The best possible interpretation is that SCOTUS wishes the "normal" appellate process play out before addressing the immunity issue (jeopardy issue is BS), have the benefit of the denial of the immunity, and then simply deny cert. sending it to trial. The set of facts presented by Orange Jesus may not (hopefully) be replicated and this is, perhaps, not a factual circumstance under which SCOTUS wishes to establish the parameters of absolute immunity for a President in a criminal context. My shoot-from-the-hip opinion. WASHINGTON — Steering clear of a political firestorm for now, the Supreme Court said Friday it would not immediately decide the key question of whether Donald Trump has broad immunity for actions he took as president challenging his 2020 election loss. www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-sidesteps-decision-trump-presidential-immunity-claim-fed-rcna130769
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,614
|
Post by DanMcQ on Dec 22, 2023 21:12:01 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 22, 2023 21:22:49 GMT -5
Depends upon what media you listen to. My opinion above is consistent with that of Andrew Weissman and Mary McCord (for whom I worked for briefly before I retired). DC Circuit rules quickly affirming Judge Chutkan, and even if Mango petitions for rehearing en banc, it will be denied. SCOTUS denies cert forthwith. Special Counsel maybe loses a month and can still get to trial in April or May.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 23, 2023 18:31:27 GMT -5
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,332
|
Post by tashoya on Dec 23, 2023 23:40:19 GMT -5
For a guy that doesn't drink, Trump sure makes a crapload of regrettable phone calls.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,224
|
Post by hoyarooter on Dec 24, 2023 4:45:34 GMT -5
For a guy that doesn't drink, Trump sure makes a crapload of regrettable phone calls. Nonsense, they're all perfect.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 29, 2023 6:30:41 GMT -5
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,224
|
Post by hoyarooter on Dec 29, 2023 19:27:05 GMT -5
DeSantis is indeed a clown, but his comment about Nikki Haley's slavery gaffe made me laugh and was spot on. Incomprehensible word salad, indeed.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 31, 2023 5:24:13 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 2, 2024 13:21:40 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 3, 2024 15:12:14 GMT -5
The hired shysters are dangerously tiptoeing toward ethical violations by citing to numerous debunked and unsupported "reports" of election fraud in their federal court filings. Trump lawyers’ doozy of a filing on voter fraud In a new filing, Trump’s legal team appears bent on helping prosecutors make that case. Tucked into Trump’s latest legal brief in his appeal for presidential immunity in his federal Jan. 6 case is a remarkable citation. His attorneys refer to a social media post from Trump the same day of the filing — Tuesday — which links to a report from an unnamed source running down various voter-fraud claims. The filing cites the report to argue that there remain “vigorous disputes and questions about the actual outcome of the 2020 Presidential election.” The report, to put it lightly, is a mess. And that Trump’s legal team would see fit to include it in a filing would not seem to augur well for his defense. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/03/trump-lawyers-doozy-filing-voter-fraud/
|
|
hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,366
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyajinx on Jan 3, 2024 16:02:19 GMT -5
The hired shysters are dangerously tiptoeing toward ethical violations by citing to numerous debunked and unsupported "reports" of election fraud in their federal court filings. Trump lawyers’ doozy of a filing on voter fraud In a new filing, Trump’s legal team appears bent on helping prosecutors make that case. Tucked into Trump’s latest legal brief in his appeal for presidential immunity in his federal Jan. 6 case is a remarkable citation. His attorneys refer to a social media post from Trump the same day of the filing — Tuesday — which links to a report from an unnamed source running down various voter-fraud claims. The filing cites the report to argue that there remain “vigorous disputes and questions about the actual outcome of the 2020 Presidential election.” The report, to put it lightly, is a mess. And that Trump’s legal team would see fit to include it in a filing would not seem to augur well for his defense. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/03/trump-lawyers-doozy-filing-voter-fraud/The guy that Trump commissioned to find voter fraud said that it was minimal and occurred almost equally between the parties. He is also very willing to talk about how much Trump is lying, which definitely won’t help Trump’s patently BS claims. www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2024/01/02/trump-lies-voter-fraud-2020-impact-2024-election/72057016007/
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 7, 2024 13:53:47 GMT -5
WASHINGTON — Former Trump administration officials allegedly told special counsel Jack Smith’s office that former President Donald Trump was not interested in taking action to stop the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack, ABC News reported. The outlet reported that Dan Scavino, Trump’s former deputy chief of staff, told Smith’s investigators that Trump was “very angry” on Jan. 6, 2021. But the then-president was upset because he falsely believed the 2020 election was stolen from him. Scavino told Smith’s investigators that Trump “was just not interested” in doing more to stop the riot, according to ABC News. Trump also shared a post on social media that Pence “didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done,” despite Scavino and other officials advising him to post a statement urging calm. ssnews.page.link/XjigeYFw3M8WWjeNA
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 9, 2024 9:36:54 GMT -5
Oral argument in DC Circuit on immunity and double jeopardy.
D. John Sauer has a gravelly voice not suited for oral argument! Irritating!
Judge Pan asks if a Prez ordered Seal Team Six to assasinate a political opponent can the Prez be prosecuted and Sauer can't give a straight answer. Sauer is throwing out great word salad.
Judge Pan is skewering Sauer in this hypothetical.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 9, 2024 9:56:43 GMT -5
DC Circuit bringing up estoppel regarding the insurrectionist's lawyers impeachment argument that an office holder would still be subject to criminal prosecution and therefore should not be impeached.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 9, 2024 10:04:33 GMT -5
Judge Henderson skewers Sauer on his position that "the take care clause" gives a President discretion to violate a criminal statute as an "official act" as "paradoxical."
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,404
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 9, 2024 10:14:46 GMT -5
Sauer knows he's losing. He requested the DC Circuit to stay its mandate if it affirms Judge Chutkan's decision.
|
|