“Where’s My Weapon?” Florida Man Hit With Multiple Charges After Full Monty

Drunk Florida man exposes himself to officers


There was a bizarre arrest in Palm Coast, Florida, where Shawn Madden, 40, proved that he was no threat by stripping naked and asking “where’s my weapon?” There is ample evidence to support charges of disorderly conduct and exposure in the video below. However, a couple of the charges are as baffling as Madden’s full Monty performance.

Madden was allegedly yelling at people when police arrived and began to unload on the officers.  On the videotape, Madden is heard yelling “Let’s go! Let’s go! I’m swinging on everybody. I’m swinging on everybody.”

Later, he seems to assume the posture of a man misunderstood, asking “What did I f**king do? I ain’t brandishing sh*t.” He then dropped his pants and exposed himself while asking repeatedly “Where’s my weapon?”

Among the charges are assault on an officer and resisting an officer without violence — a charge that I have long criticized (here and here). It is a charge that often defies definition. It can be used when no other charge is available to justify an arrest. It is often based on a suspect merely disagreeing with an officer on the basis for an arrest or alleging abusive conduct by officers. To answer Madden’s question, he does not need a weapon or even physical resistance to be charged with this crime.

In a prior Florida case, a man was arrested for walking on the wrong side of the street (even though the officer could not remember which side he was walking on) and resisting without violence. The suspect, who was black, was punched in the face by the officer and later sued. The case was troubling not only due to alleged racial elements but also the use of two charges that served to legitimate the stop and striking of the suspect.

In this case, there was ample basis for the arrest. The use of the resisting without violence charge seems superfluous and unnecessary. It is often used to count stack to force a plea.

134 thoughts on ““Where’s My Weapon?” Florida Man Hit With Multiple Charges After Full Monty”

  1. I agree that this was overcharged. We don’t need to gild the lily, when indecent exposure was plenty.

    I assumed that resisting without violence was like when someone went limp like a sack of potatoes, and a cop would throw his or her back out dragging him or her to the police car. Sounds like it’s too vague to be applied properly. I’ve known cops who were spat at, and now wonder if this would be a form of assault, via possibly infectious bodily fluids, or resisting arrest without violence? I never thought to ask if that act caused additional charges, because I was so grossed out at the description. Honestly, cops should be appreciated more for handling people that most of us couldn’t possibly deal with.

    How was your day?

    Oh, I had to cuff a bare naked guy and haul him into the patrol car. Glad I had disposable gloves.

    It’s a thankless job nowadays.

  2. Jonathan: As usual some on your blog have misinterpreted and distorted my comment “I am ashamed” (10/28@5:07pm). Thinkitthrough says: “Dennis McIntyre always turns every subject to Trump. This is his go to subject whenever he has nothing else of interest to say” (10/28@5:49pm), Tit even waxes poetic about my comment: “Like a clanging cymbal blowing in the wind that irritates everyone within earshot”. Tit never bothers to actually address the issues raised in my comment. That’s Tit’s frequent response to a POV he disagrees with on this blog.

    John Say, like Tit, simply dismisses my comment as “vile and dangerous”. He says “the core of DM’s argument is orange man bad and anyone who defends him is also bad…DM’s position is not even that narrow–no one would be allowed to challenge government on ANYTHING without risking criminal prosecutions (10/28@12:45am). JS is sleep deprived because he missed the salient points in my comment.

    For the record, I never said ALL lawyers working for DJT were “bad”. WH counsel for DJT, Pat Cipollone, his deputy Pat Philbin, Eric Herschmann and acting AG Jeff Rosen were good lawyers. They told DJT not to listen to “team crazy” because there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election. They pushed back on DJT’s illegal scheme to stop the certification of the electoral vote and put up fake electors. They are the heroes who defended the Constitution.

    But JS goes further in distorting my comment. He erroneously concludes from my comment that “no one accused of anything by the government would be entitled to a lawyer” I never said that. DJT is entitled to “effective assistance of counsel”. In the NY civil fraud case before Judge Engoron, DJT is represented by Kris Kise, Alina Habba and other attorneys. DJT is entitled to hire as many attorneys he wants to defend him. That is the right of every civil or criminal defendant. What DJT was not entitled to do was to use lawyers, like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Ken Chesebro and Jenna Ellis, et al, to pursue an illegal conspiracy to overturn a legitimate election. In the Georgia case they intimidated election workers, tampering with election tabulating machinery and put up fake DJT electors. Chesebro and Ellis have already admitted their guilt. They all deserved to be prosecuted.

    None of these facts are on the radar of either Tit or John Say. They don’t like any discussion of DJT and his threat to our Democracy. They rather attack the messenger! They are the three monkeys in the Japanese proverb.

    1. DM – I did not simpy waive off your argument,
      I tore it apart bit by bit in dozens of different way.

      No you did not say all lawyers arguing for Trump are bad.

      That does not alter the FACT that you do not have a single attack on a Trump lawyer that does not FAIL as a violation of core principles that are centuries if not milenia old.

      Even Micheal Cohen scum bag that he is, did NOT do anything as Trump’s lawyer that was actually illegal. Yet, you violated Trump’s priviledge and got … NOTHING.
      Cohen is a crook – he was engaged in an NYC taxi medallion scam.
      You can question Trump’s judgement in hiring him.

      But the evidence of some conspiracy to act illegally DOES NOT EXIST.

      Further you and other argue here REPEATEDLY that perfectly legal, constitutional excercises of free speech, political protest, petitioning government are Crimes.
      And that the lawyers who were involved are criminals.

      I would note that the garbage arguments you are making are NOT NEW. These are the same arguments that have been used over the years to attack sometimes successfully attorney’s defending unpopular or politically weak clients.

      This is only a Left/Right thing recently – because of the willingness of those like you – to destroy Trump by “Any means necessary”.

      As I noted – this “attack the lawyers” game is not new. Until recently it was not even a characteristic of the left.
      But it has ALWAYS been wrong. DOJ, FBI, and local prosecutors have engaged in it in the past. They done it to a very wide array of attorneys representing
      unlikeable clients.

      IT IS ALWAYS WRONG. In my lifetime I have seen numerous instances in which Lawyers have committed crimes. I am hard pressed to think of a single instance of any lawyer – including the thoroughy disreputable Micheal Cohen, conspiring with a client to commit a crime.

      But I have seen untold numbers of attacks claiming that or even devolving to – you represent a bad [person – therefore you are a bad person.

      You claim that SOME of Trumps lawyers are worthy of your excoriating and deserved to be targeted for their representation of Trump.

      Which ones and what for ? I have read the guilty please of All the Trump lawyers from Cohen through Ellis. To the extent there is anything at all in those please involving conduct related to Trump – all of it is the legitimate legal representation of a client.

      Even the Cohen case proves that SDNY violated Trump’s constitutional rights in seizing his communications with Trump. After violating those rights they STILL walked away with nothing. The SDNY attorney’s should have been sanctioned for false representations to the court. They claimed to have met the crime fraud exception and OBVIOUSLY they did not.

      The Trump attorney’s you are excoriating – did their jobs, and they did their jobs well – and that is why those on the left like you hate them.

      They rank with the Alan Dershwitz’s and the F Lee Baileys and the Gerry Spences – who faced the same kinds of attacks that Trump lawyers have faced.

      But you can not get past your Trump derangement.

      This is not even a slippery slope – we have seen the DOJ go after most of the attorneys that defended those in Guantanamo accused of terrorism.

      You are on the wrong side of this argment. You are on the morally bankrupt side of this argument.

      We would be better off as a country, as a society, as a legal system if Micheal Cohen got away with his taxi medallion scam.
      Then to have experiences the political rape of the law that the left has done in the past decade.

      The ends do NOT justify the means.

      Trump has promised his supporters retribution when he is elected in 2024.
      You should pray to god that the courts do not allow Trump to do to you and yours what you have allowed them to do to him and to those on the right.

      You have allowed your political views to distort your morality, to your own harm and to that of the country.

      Bad conduct by those in government does not become acceptable when the target is someone you hate.
      It is all the worse still when it is amplified by politics.

      The people and actions you are defending are the villians not the heros.
      Not because of their politics – though their motives are primarilly political.
      But because of their conduct.

    2. You seem to think that guilty pleas mean something ?

      Actually real the pleas – they allocuted to facts that do not constitute crimes, and if they did, then the laws they violated are unconstitutional.

      You do know that EVERY SINGLE PERSON on the exhonerated list – this is over 1000 people who were wrongfully convicted of crimes. Not technically not guilty, but ACTUALLY INNOCENT,

      Every single one of them confessed.

      regardless, if you actually bothered to review these pleas and confessions – you would discover that Willis’s case is falling apart.

      It is likely Trump and other defendants will be filing for dismissal shortly – because Willis has gutted her own case.
      These pleas as to non offenses of no consequence with no prospect of consequetial sentencing Rather than ensuring cooperation to “get Trump” Willis has lost any leaverage she has with these defendants.

      There three fundamental types of plea deals.

      Deals that involve pleading to a number of significant crimes with a very light even sweat heart deal for sentencing in return for damning testimony against more important targets.

      Deals for judicial efficiency where the prosecution and defendant trade oversharging for a plea to something close to the actual crime. These do not involve third parties.

      And finally slap on the wrist deals were the prosecution avoids the high risk of losing a bad case and the defense avoids the cost of a trial and appeals necessary to prevail.

      Every single plea so far has been in that last catagory.
      The only useful purpose it serves willis other than moral preening is avoiding the risk of losing. Each of these defendants has bet that Willis had no case and could not be ready for an october trial and that bet proved correct, and they used that to get sweetheart deals.

      They pose ZERO threat to trump or other defendants – because though they most cooperate – the top range sentences are still only probation and the deals can not be revoked. The pleas themselves do not include anything of consequence, and they can not be leveraged into testifying to anything beyond what they plead to.

      Ellis, Powell and Chesboro are not going to “flip on Trump” – they are not going to testify to a conspiracy – because they did not plead to one, and Willis therefore has no leverage.

      I suspect – though I do not know, that many of these pleas may still include a right to appeal. That is not common – but these are very sophisticated defendants.
      And finally they are likely free to do much as Gen. Flynn did. Plead, testify as Flynn did and then when it is Clear that Willis has nothing, revoke their plea.

    3. You say my conclusions based on your comments are false.

      But your argument is “That is not what I meant”

      I do not care what you meant. The logical results of what we are seeing is exactly what I claimed.
      YOU are supporting that – whether you FEEL that way or not.

      Lets use the Cohen case as an example. There is no doubt that Cohen is a crook. But the FACT is that even after violating priviledge, there is ZERO evidence of any actual crime fraud exception violation. Cohen was convicted of fraud involving taxi medallions.

      By logic and by law the the breach of Trump’s attorney client priviledge int he Cohen case by SDNY attorneys was immoral unethical, illegal and unconstitutional.

      While the ends do NOT justify the means – Failed ends DO frequently obliterate the legitimacy of the means.

      The same is true of the Willis pleas thus far. Ellis’s allocation does not even truly admit to a crime. She appologized for not doing due dilligence on statements that were not under oath, were not a crime and may not have been wrong.

      Willis – and democrats generally are trying to establish a legal standard that they will regret. That it is a crime to make an allegation in the context of an election that is not absolutely proveably correct. That is NOT the standard for the statements and arguments of lawyers – either in courts, or in election matters or anything else. It is also a standard that Willis would find HERSELF guilty of, if she falls short on a SINGLE count of her prosecution.

      You claim to be a lawyer – If you do not understand how wrong that is then you should never have practiced law.

      I would further note that the Ellis plea is NOT for making a false statement but for facilitating the making of a false statement.
      And Finally – both Willis and Ellis are Silent as to what that False statement was.

      So in the end we have Ellis pleading to something that is not what she allocuted to, and that is not even identified by either Willis or Ellis.

      So if Willis, or Smith or James or Bragg fail to prove even one count of their charges against Trump – must they plead guilty to the same crime ?

      You say I am misrepresenting you. But YOU are the one supporting this nonsense. And you are the one who is ashamed of Trump attorney’s like Willis who have been coerced by the likes of Willis to plead guilty to the non crime of MAYBE being wrong about some UNSPECIFIED claim in the course of their legal representation.

      And that is NOT my Spin. that is the FACTS as reflected in the charge, plea and allocution.


    4. “What DJT was not entitled to do was to use lawyers, like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Ken Chesebro and Jenna Ellis, et al, to pursue an illegal conspiracy to overturn a legitimate election. ”

      And here is the absolute Core of the problem – there is no such crime. Your interjection fo the word illegal does not make the acts involved illegal.

      “What DJT was entitled to do was to use lawyers, like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Ken Chesebro and Jenna Ellis, et al, to pursue a conspiracy to overturn a legitimate election”

      This is an ACCURATE statement of what occured. it is also what Al Gore did in 2000, what Al Franken did successfully against Coleman. What Hillary tried in 2016, what Stacy Abrahms tried repeatedly – NEED I GO ONE ?

      For the above to ACTUALLY be a crime – there must be an ACTUALLY illegal act – such as bribery.
      Otherwise what you have is the normal workings of the legal system, worse still an excercise of exvery single clause in the first amendment except religious liberty.

      It would be extremely hard for your claims to be more offensive to the first amendment.

      Not only is there nothing that Trump did after the 2020 election that was never done before – there was nothing Trump did that was not SUCCESSFULLY done at some time in the past.

      If you were actually paying the slightest attention – all this has been hashed out both constitutionally, historically and in case law.

      States have advanced their own slates of electors in the past – that is not only constitutional, but it is literally what the courts long ago determined is what a state legislature should do if it felt there was problems with the election.

      One of the core problems with YOUR and the lefts entire claims here is that beyond the fact that they are constitutionally barred and offensive.
      That as a practical matter they are logically stupid.

      Lets Presume that in 2024 Trump wins the election. Various states certify, and after States have certified Dominion comes out ans says – we found a flaw in our counting software and we overcounted Trump votes by 5%.

      By YOUR logic – the election is over. it has been certified by the states, Congress must certify proforma, Biden would be barred from further challenges, by mootness, standing, laches, ripeness or other legal obstructions that have nothing to do with merit.

      And any effort by democrats or their lawyers to “overturn” the results would be itself a crime.

      Your position is logically absurd. It ASSUMES that error, or fraud never occur, and that state executives can do whatever they please in an election and need not share anything with anyone.

      That those challenging an election must – without being able to gain any information regarding the actual process of the election – must PERFECTLY identify exactly what what error was made and if they can not they are criminals if they proceed.

      Worse still – the discussion above is about elections. But the legal standard you are manufacturing is defacto universal.

      No one would ever be able to challenge government without committing a crime.

      You say that is not what you mean. As I said before – I do not care what you “meant” – it is still the completely absurd logical outcome of the claims you support.

      Whether you “meant” that or not, you are responsible for the logical consequences of your own claims.

      I would suggest some wisdom from 2 millenia ago.
      Matthew 25:31-46

      Right and wrong are determined by what you DO. Not your intentions.

      The fact that you do not intend to criminalize the practice of law – particularly by your political opponents,
      does not alter the FACT that is the logical consequences if your absurd arguments were accepted as valid.

      The fact that you are logically incompetent does not evade moral responsibility.

    1. He laid down peacefully on the street with his hands behind his back after police approached him unlike what blacks do.

  3. Turley writes two types of columns — columns about legal cases where he cites law and cases, where he has expertise and valid expert opinion, and more and more these days, columns about OTHER STUFF where his opinion is worth no more than anyone else’s, if that much, considering that Fox pays him to have those opinions, such as this one:

    “Many now question democracy as a sustainable system of government. It represents the single greatest threat to this nation: a citizenry that has lost faith not just with our system of government but with each other.”

    Not saying he’s right, and I’m not saying he’s wrong. I’m just saying that you can get the same kind of stuff from any crusading TV talkshow host or Sunday-morning Bible-thumper. Similar stuff has probably even been tossed around the cackling TV henhouse called The View.

  4. In 2021, 98,268 people died from preventable drug overdoses – an increase of 781% since 1999. These deaths represent 92% of the total 106,699 drug overdose deaths in the United States, which also include suicide, homicide, and undetermined intents.

    If we kept the 10 Commandments, these problems, the traumas, the violence, racism, the collapse of Western Civilization, would all but stop.

  5. You know, it dawns on me every once in a while, every 17 seconds roughly, that mankind goes in circles thinking that at any moment the current tragedy will be the last for a while, and soon the sun shine will break out. Ad Infinitum. It never happens, never. We are as cruel and hateful as ever.

  6. If only the news were about a hapless drunk doing foolish things. A man dropping his pants is pee wee news compared to Democrats / MSM going full anti-Semitic, pro-Hitler. The New York Times has rehired a freelancer to cover Gaza with a history for pro-Hitler, pro-terrorist social media posts.

    NYT Reenlists Anti-Semitic Freelancer for Gaza Coverage

    1. Nerd, the headline identifies this cameraman as a FREELANCER. So he’s NOT an employee. He’s probably never been to New York.

      1. If you’re paid to do something, you’re an employee, even if you’re only paid once to do something once. Anything else is just semantic BS. The guy IS and employee. There are many other NYT employees who don’t work or live in NY.

        1. This is a stupid semantic argument.

          Employee is an arbitrary term for SOME people who sell their labor.

          I sell my labor all the time – but I am almost NEVER an employee.

          In a free market everyone is buying things and everyone is selling things.

          There is little distinction.

        2. Is this ATS? There is no lie or deception, only stupidity. The word employer is based on usage. Under IRS rules, the freelancer is known as an independent contractor.

  7. Jonathan: I am ashamed. As a retired attorney I am ashamed that so many lawyers were part of DJT’s conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. I am ashamed these same attorneys took an oath to protect the Constitutional order and then turned their backs on that oath. I graduated from law school about the time of the Watergate hearings when John Dean testified and asked the Q: “How in God’s name could so many lawyers get involved in something like this?” I ask the same Q today about all the lawyers who willingly joined DJT’s narcissistic cult of personality.

    Now we have lawyers like Sidney Powell, Ken Chesebro and Jenna Ellis who have been forced to plead guilty to crimes, admitted they lied about the 2020 election and violated their duty to abide by the ethics rules they promised to follow. They have lost whatever good name they had and will probably lose their law licenses. That is something no lawyer wants to face.

    Other co-defendants in the conspiracy to overturn the Georgia election are also lawyers–Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman and Jeff Clark. They were at the center of DJT’s conspiracy. They have yet to join the other three in seeking plea deals. No doubt one or more will decide it’s time to stop pretending. But if they don’t they know they are facing long prison sentences for their roles in trying to overturn the election results in Georgia.

    This is why I am ashamed of some in my chosen profession.

    1. Dennis McIntyre always turns every subject to Trump. This is his go to subject whenever he has nothing else of interest to say. Like a clanging cymbal blowing in the wind that irritates everyone within earshot. No nuance, no originality, no vocabulary and everything he says disappears in the passing of one minuscule bit of time in the totality of history. You can sense the obsessed anxiety.

        1. Because his views and yours are vile and dangerous – as we see.

          Even King George did not treat colonial lawyers they way you would people who take positions you do not like.

          1. “Because his views and yours are vile and dangerous – as we see”

            More like rational and to the point. The truth is often ugly to those in denial.

            1. What truth ?

              The core of DM’s argument is orange man bad and anyone who defends him is also bad.

              Are you so intellectually challenged that you can not see the trivial consequences of DM’s position ?

              Accept DM’s proposition – and no one accused of anything by the government would be entitled to a lawyer.
              And no lawyer would ever be allowed to challenge government. \

              But DM’s position is not even that narrow – no one would be allowed to challenge government on ANYTHING without risking criminal prosecutions.

              All protest would be illegal.

              There is not even a slippery slope here – this position falls off the cliff into an evil abyss instantly.

            2. What truth ?

              What have those of you on the left been truthful about in decades ?
              You have lied about the collusion delusion.
              You have lied about Covid.
              You have lied about the Biden investigations.
              You have lied about censorship.

              What HAVEN’T you lied about ?

              Why should anyone beleive you about ANYTHING much less the election ?

        2. David,

          Thinkthrough is Estovir, James, Upstate Farmer, Iowa 2, Shakdi, N.N., Ralph DeMimus, Ralph Chappell, Old Man From Kansas, Guy Ventner, Edward Mahl, Margot Ballhere, Mistress Addams, and endless one-day puppets.

          1. I am looking forward to seeing you this evening at the West Hollywood bathhouse. I have a double size room with a sling just for you


              1. AGAIN: No respectable website would allow you to post your off-topic trash. Keep up the good work exposing this website as a complete fraud.

          2. I’m Ralph de Mininis — at least spell it correctly, moron — and I only used that pseudonym because this incredible crapsite blocked me from posting comments under my real name back in 2018. Other than using my real name and Ralph de Minimus, I’ve never used any other name, and I now post anonymously — which this moronic website capitalizes as if it’s a screen name and not an adjective — because this moronic website — with literally no rules other than the whims of the webmaster — began blocking my comments posted as Ralph de Minimis.

            Virtually everything you wrote is just plain silly, and a respectable website wouldn’t allow such lying, off-topic rubbish. But it’s fine here in Turleyville.

            1. If the website is so bad – why are you here ?

              You free to post anywhere including here.
              I am not questioning your rights, just your judgement.

              There are myriads of places you can go to listen to post with others that share your views.

              Few posting here actually share Turley’s views. Turley is a traditional liberal – I do not think there is a single one of those who posts here.
              The closest we get is a sprinkling of libertarians and libertarian conservatives.

              Regardless, the posters on this site are varied and do not reflect the views of the owner – That is a good thing.

              The most fundimental problem here is that the posts from those on the left are so poor. But that problem is common most everywhere.

              Probably because those on the left are not used to having to make reasoned arguments and defend their positions.

              Many possibly most of the posters here are “wrong” – in the sense that few get everything right all the time. But outside of those on the left most post arguments

              I do not agree with some of what many on the right here post. But they are mostly respectful and mostly make arguments.
              Those on the left – with a few exceptions just lob insults.

          3. Likely an idiotic troll hoping for the point that “they all agree”, yet I do believe you are too stupid to notice writing styles and their personalities, so maybe you are serious, and thus, seriously low IQ.

    2. “DJT’s conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.”

      – Dennis the Dumb—

      Did Dennis the Dumb— say “Overturn the…election?”

      “Russia, Russia, Russia!”

      Hillary, who did her best to “overturn the election” post-2016, sews the seeds of the prodigious, historical, egregious, and continuing Obama Coup D’etat in America.

      Have Hillary and Obama been indicted and prosecuted for their crimes of subversion and insurrection against the U.S. government during the Donald J. Trump Presidency?

      “Russia, Russia, Russia!

      “Clinton opens door to questioning legitimacy of 2016 election”

      Updated 11:07 PM EDT, Mon September 18, 2017
      Clinton: Russia hacking bigger than Watergate

      Clinton’s new book is called “What Happened”

      Hillary Clinton, in an interview that aired Monday on NPR, said she “would not” rule out questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election if Russian interference is deeper than currently known.

      The comment, a remarkable step for the former Democratic nominee, exemplifies Clinton’s belief that President Donald Trump and his campaign could have knowingly received help from Russian operatives in the 2016 election.

      – CNN

      “Special counsel John Durham concludes FBI never should have launched full Trump-Russia probe”

      Special counsel John Durham concluded that the FBI should never have launched a full investigation into connections between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election, according to a report compiled over three years by the Trump-administration appointee and released on Monday.

      Durham’s 300-plus page report also states that the FBI used “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence,” to launch the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation into Trump and Russia but used a different standard when weighing concerns about alleged election interference regarding Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

      – CNN, May 16, 2023

      “Clinton campaign, DNC fined by FEC for lying about Steele dossier payments”

      The commission ruled it had found probable cause that both the Clinton campaign and the DNC had violated election law.

      The Federal Election Commission has fined both Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee for lying about how they spent money used to fund the now-debunked Steele dossier on former President Donald Trump.

      The Clinton campaign and the DNC will be forced to pay $8,000 and $105,000 respectively for mislabeling payments that ultimately went to Fusion GPS, the consulting firm that commissioned the dossier, according to FEC documents viewed by the Post.

      – CNN, March 30, 2022

    3. So in DM world no lawyer can ever represent a client if there is any possibility that clients possition might prove incorrect ?

      In DM world – we may not question elections – especially elections where election laws were routinely violated – and continue to be through today, where one party has fought tooth and nail against transparency ?

      Let me ask you Dennis – We al Gores efforts to overturn the 2000 election criminal ? Were Hillaries efforts – where Hillary demanded (and got) recounts, that Trump did not. Where hillary demanded (and got) electors to flip their votes. Were these criminal ?

      What is the critieria – aside from “orange man bad” that allows you to determine when challenging an election is a crime and when it is a legitimate duty ?

      My wife is a public defender – I am incredibly proud of her and that. Nearly all of her clients are bad people. Nearly all did something bad – even if not what they are accused of. My wife is the head of the criminal appelate division in our county. All of her clients have lost their case – they have been convicted – either by a judge or a jury of their peers.

      Are you telling me that my wifes conduct is criminal ? That a lawyer offering legal positions that you do not like is a criminal ?

      That sure as h311 sounds like what you are arguing to me ?

      The people behind majro decisions like Gideon or Miranda, or Skokie are people I have held as heros all my life. These were some of the leading lawyers ON THE LEFT.

      And those like you are disowning some of the most significant accomplishments of liberals in the past 100 years. Worse still – you are not merely trying to reverse miranda and Gideon and Skokie – but you are trying to make the people who accomplished those cases into criminals.

      Your ashamed of your profession ? You should be. Not of Ellis and Powell and Chesboro and Eastman. You should be ashamed of Biden and Democrats and Garland, and Smith and Bragg and Willis and all the others who seek to criminalize political differences and worse still to criminalize those who would defend political views you do not like.

      The issues surrounding the 2020 election are really trivial.

      Republican or Democrat – you can not claim to legitimately have won an election and to be vested with the power to govern as a result unless:

      You have not attempted – or worse still succeded in silencing your oponent – or worse still doing so when they were telling the truth – or worse still havng done so through government. You are not entitled to trust if you do not trust the people to hear the claims of your oponents and decide the truth for themelves.
      If you can not trust voters you are not worthy of trust yourself.

      You have not merely conducted the election carefully and according to the law, but also completely transparently. There is no portion of the operation of government that requires more transparency than elections.

      In 2000 Gores election workers observed the entire election process in FL, they were on the counting room floors with their republican counterparts. They looked over the shoulders of the election workers – mostly democrats counting ballots. They objected to some of the decisions those workers made and those ballots were set aside and if the challenge was continued ultimately those ballots were decided by the courts – by judges. In 2020 in state after state – Every major city in every swing state precluded republicans from being close enough to observe counting and object to ballot counts they found questionable.
      We already know that massive numbers of mailin ballots were accepted with ballot envelope information that was either dubious or complete garbage. Where envelopes were unsigned, signed with the wrong name or hundreds of envelopes were signed with the same signatures – often just a single letter.
      And envelope signatures are just one of many many major problems that were never subject to scrutiny.
      In My state Pennsylvania – hundreds of thousands of ballots were processed that were received – even postmarked AFTER the election – in some cases not postmarked at all. After a judge finally stopped this 4 days AFTER the election were were TOLD that none of these late ballots were counted. But we have no means to be able to tell if that was true. There were no observers and once a ballot is separated from its envolope you can not tell when the ballot was cast or recieved. You can not tell if it was not filled out by political operatives rather than voters and injected into the election.

      In the Franken Coleman election Coleman won the election on election day by 2500 votes. Franken and Democrats – many of the same attornies who fought exmaining the 2020 election fought and succeeded in deeply examining the Franken Coleman election. The legal fight over that election took over a full year to complete. Over the course of months – Franken Ballots were found – in car trunks, stasjed in odd closets and months long legal battles took place over whether to count them or not.

      Despite inarguable the most messy lawless election since the 19th century – the legal conflicts that Gore, Franken, Abrahms Hilleray mounted and got reviewed were universally dismissed without real opportunity for scrutiny.

      The massive efforts of the left to avoid any scrutiny of the 2020 election are the most powerful evidence of wrong doing.
      The fact that the courts Universally denied on the thinnest grounds having nothing to do with merits even the attempt to get into court and to examine the evidence is among the most damning evidence of all.

      Turley here shortly after the election called on Biden to give his voice to an open examination of the election – that is the most potent means to establish legitimacy. Not only did Biden refuse, Democrats took exactly the opposite tack. Thwarting inquiry at every chance.

      Further we have seen exactly this pattern of legal resistance multiple times before – we have seen it in the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, We have seen it regarding Covid, We have seen it Regarding The Biden syndicate.

      It is reasonable to presume when the left is hiding something from the public – that what they are hiding is bad.

      Regardless, elections require Trust – not of the winners or losers, but of the process and of those who conduct the process, and that requires transparancy, and following the law. And that did not happen.

      Dennis – I am ashamed of you. I am ashamed that you are a member of the legal profession.

      I am proud of lawyers like Kardaciean, F Lee, Derschowitz, and Chocrane defending OJ. I beleive OJ was guility, But his lawyers are heros.
      I am proud of Jerry Spence who Defended Randy Weaver. I am proud of John Adams who defended
      I am proud of the attorney’s that defended the Rosenbergs.
      I am proud of the attorneys that defended the Chicago seven or the Central park five – who were eventually found innocent – despite Trump participating in the blood lust for them.

      I am proud of John Adam’s for defending the british soldiers at the Boston Masacre.
      I am proud of the lawyers that Defended Eugene Debbs

      I am proud of the lawyers that Defended Zenger – and that the Crown courts allowed that attorney to argue for Jury Nullification and I am ashamed that the US will not permit lawyers to argue what Colonial courts did.

      I am ashamed that you and so many on the left have rejected the core anglo legal presumption that it is noble to defend those everyone else hates.

      I am ashamed at what is going on in Georgia and DC and New York and Florida – but not for the reason you are.
      I am ashamed that the polical left and the courts think it is acceptable to target political opponents criminally.

      Every single poerson at J6 that did not initiate violence against the capitol police should be released and exhonerated,
      And those who persecuted them should be loathed and despised.

      If Trump actually beleived he had lost the 2020 election. If the proof was completely beyond question – his Conduct would STILL be legal.

      Those on the left today are unable to distinguish between conduct they did like and actually lawless conduct.
      Universally getting it wrong. Throwing molitov coctails in police cars a crime.
      Protesting pretty much anything – sometimes reprehensible, but never a crime.

      I have repeatedly used the recent pro-hamas protests in the US capitol and elsewhere as evidence that the conduct of the left is far worse them the right.
      But with the exception of those who ACTUALLY engaged in violence these protests are perfectly legal.

      Pro-Hamas college students can chant death to israel, death to america, death to jews – so long as they are not violent.
      They can invade the US capitol and through protest disrupt proceeding.
      Further their protests SHOULD feature on the news. We should see them as they are. Neither sugar coated, not demonized.
      We should judge them based on their actions.
      But so long as their actions are lawful – the government should be barred from that judgement.

      I have beleived these things my entire life.

      These are the values that “make america great” -and I am ashamed that so many like you repudiate them.

      Gerry Spence said that the greatest regret of his life was refusing to take Terry Nichols case. That even a co-conspirator in the IKC bombing deserved the best possible defense.

      Please keep posting as you are and please keep reminding us all how vile and unamerican your views are.
      Please keep reminding us all of the evil that we are up against in people like you.

      You say you are a retired Lawyer – You should know better.

        1. Which claims would be false ?

          Your the poster boy for a troll.

          You make a claim so vague as to be meaningless.
          You do not back up that claim – but then how could you – you do not even identify your actual claim.

          This is what purports to be intelligent argument by the left ?

    4. Amazing post that acts as if Trumps reaction to the 2020 rigged selection seems to forget the years of lawfare lies and as if his reaction came out of a vacuum! The attempted coup by Democrats, the FBA, the DOJ, and Obama White House happened. They lied and used government resources to negate the Trump Presidency. If you are a lawyer I would be ashamed of much more than the lawyers that supported Trump.

      1. I have no problems with Trump’s lawyers. Just as I have no problems with Biden’s lawyers.
        I have no problem with them making arguments that the courts may find unconstitutional.

        Or more accurately – I have a significant problems with the bad arguments they make. But I would never try to convict them for making constitutional and legal arguments that the courts may not accept.

    5. Are you sure you are a lawyer? You don’t sound like you know enough to be a legal assistant. Did you take pre law courses that made you feel like a lawyer?

      1. DM may well be a lawyer – but his views on the law as he just expressed are hypocritical and radically at odds with the entire western legal tradition.
        Frankly they are at odds with legal traditions going back through the Torah.

        The core to his argument – and the core to the J6 prosecution of lawyers – and more broadly anyone that protests the election is that
        That it is a crime to beleive anything he disagrees with and act on that beleif, and it is a crime to represent people who beleive differently.

        That is an incredibly dangerous position.

        There is no more authoritarian and anti-democratic step that a government can take than to prosecute the lawyers that oppose the government.

        1. Dennis has little respect for the law or the legal profession. He also makes ignorant legal comments that should not be acceptable, but in today’s world, we have Tribes who believe the law only exists to be twisted to prove their point of view.

          That is not the only reason I disbelieve DM’s claim. I think he is lying based on many of his earlier posts.

          Lack of respect for the law and lying is not atypical for the lawyer of today, so your claim DM might be a lawyer remains valid. Some states give law licenses online. Passing the Bar is another thing. If DM passed the Bar, he did so because he did not want to stop in to have a drink with the guys.

    6. I can’t help but think you are the most ignorant hypocrite ever.
      John Dean is the guy, the sole guy who devised the watergate breakin, paid for it, set it up, and procured the funds to carry it out.
      On the Nixon tapes he, John Dean, is heard confessing to a completely unknowing President Nixon, explaining what he did, bit by bit, as President Nixon listened.

      You quote John Dean because the lefty lib loon liars made him their confessor hero to entrap Nixon. Your people took the top criminal mastermind in the whole of the watergate incident and made him your personal savior.

      To cover up that gaping demented wound to justice, you all screamed “the cover up is worse than the crime.”
      To this very day you cover up John Dean’s role, which was MASTER AND SOLE CONTROLLER OF THE WATERGATE BREAK IN.

Leave a Reply