Below is my column in the Hill on the real possibility of a federal trial of former president Donald Trump just before or even through the 2024 election. The claim that this schedule is the result of treating Trump like other criminal defendants is increasingly dubious given statements of courts and the Special Counsel.
Here is the column:
“This trial will not yield to the election cycle.” Those words of U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan last year made clear that she will not consider that Donald Trump will likely be the 2024 Republican presidential nominee in setting the schedule for his federal trial in Washington, D.C.
Most recently, in the federal prosecution in Florida, Special Counsel Jack Smith declared that he will not consider himself bound by the Justice Department’s longstanding policy of not bringing charges or holding trials of candidates close to an election.
With the Supreme Court reviewing the immunity question (and a decision not expected until June), a nightmare scenario is unfolding in which Trump could be tried not just before the general election, but actually through November’s election.
Chutkan has insisted that her refusal to consider Trump’s candidacy is simply denying special treatment to the former president. But there is nothing typical about how she and others have handled the case. The fact that Chutkan was pushing for a March trial date shows just how extraordinary her handling has been.
In the D.C. courts, with thousands of stacked up cases, that would be a rocket docket for a complex case of this kind. There are roughly 770,000 pending cases in roughly 100 district courts around the country. The backlog of pending criminal cases in the federal court system increased by more than a quarter in the last five years. Even when defendants plead guilty, criminal cases average 10 months. If a trial is needed, it runs on average to two years, absent serious complications over classified or privileged material. Smith indicted Trump less than a year ago.
At every juncture, Smith has tried to expedite and spur the case along. This has included an attempt to cut off standard appellate options for Trump. It seems as if the entire point is to try Trump before the election.
Smith has offered no reason, other than that he wants voters to consider the outcome of the trial. It is a rare acknowledgement of a desire for a trial to become a factor in an election.
Judge Chutkan has shown the same determination. The judge was criticized for comments she made before any charges were brought that strongly suggested she thought Trump should be criminally charged. Chutkan told one defendant that he showed “blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” In another case, Chutkan told the defendant that it was unfair that he might go to prison but “the architects of that horrific event will likely never be charged.”
When asked to recuse herself, Chutkan denied the clear implication of her own words. She insisted that she has not expressly stated that “’President Trump should be prosecuted’ and imprisoned… And the defense does not cite any instance of the court ever uttering those words or anything similar.”
Of course, neither the court nor the prosecutors seem willing to apply a similarly deferential view of the meaning of Trump’s words within the context of the case. There, the implications are sufficient for that “one person” described earlier by the court.
Chutkan is now reportedly telling parties in other cases that she will be out of the country in August, and that defendants will have to delay any proceedings in light of her plans…unless she can try Trump. She told lawyers that she will stick with her schedule unless “I’m in trial in another matter that has not yet returned to my calendar.”
Given the apparent motivation of the trial court to try Trump before the election, the only other source of restraint would be the Justice Department itself. Smith, however, has insisted that he will show no such restraint, even if he tries Trump through the election.
In his filings in Florida, Smith insisted that the oft-cited Justice Department policy to avoid such proceedings within 60 days of an election would not be applied in Trump’s case. He insisted that, since everyone knows about the allegations, there would be no harm or foul in holding him for trial for the weeks before the election as his opponent, President Biden, is free to traverse the country campaigning.
Smith’s position was applauded by commentators who had previously invoked the rule to oppose charges that might have helped Trump before prior elections. Take Andrew Weissmann, who served as the controversial top aide to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Now an MSNBC legal analyst, Weissmann assured viewers that there was no problem trying Trump just before the election because this is just “an internal rule. It is not a law.”
He then added “Second, the rule does not apply! For anyone who has been at the Justice Department, this is such a red herring.” He insisted this is only meant to avoid some “covert cases” being tried “because you don’t want to influence the election when that person — the candidate — doesn’t have an opportunity to get to trial.”
However, when the issue was the possibility of Special Counsel John Durham charging figures in the Russia investigation before the 2020 election, Weissmann and Professor Ryan Goodman wrote a column not only invoking the rule but encouraging prosecutors to refuse to assist Durham.
I have previously written about the ambiguity of this rule and the selectivity of its applications. However, Weissmann and Goodman were adamant that such prosecutions would be dangerous. Even though no actual election candidate would have been charged, they invoked this Justice Department “norm” and declared, “The Justice Department should not take action that could distort an election and influence the electorate. If someone is charged immediately before an election, for instance, that person has no time to offer a defense to counter the charges. The closer the election, the greater the risk that the department is impermissibly acting based on political considerations, which is always prohibited.”
It is certainly true that these charges have been known for a while, but Trump may not have an ability to present a complete defense before the election. It is also clear that he will have to choose between campaigning for office and defending his liberty.
Moreover, this is the leading candidate for the presidency, and the opponent to the current incumbent. A 2023 poll found that a 47 percent plurality of Americans already believe the charges are politically motivated. That appearance will only worsen as the election approaches, a recognition that should force a modicum of restraint upon both the court and the prosecution. Finally, Smith is referencing the election as the reason to expedite the trial precisely because it may have an influence on voters.
The Trump trials are troubling precisely because they are being handled differently because of who the defendant is. No one can seriously suggest that Judge Chutkan would be moving other cases or canceling trips in order to shoehorn them into the calendar this year, if it were not for the election and the name of the defendant. Such cases are, after all, notorious for taking years to work out complicated pre-trial matters.
Most citizens already see that reality. State prosecutors in New York and Georgia waited for years to charge Trump, then pushed for expedited schedules in order to try him before the election.
That brings us back to Judge Chutkan’s pledge to “not yield to the election cycle.” Yet the expedited effort of the court seems clearly motivated by the election cycle. She and Smith are depending on the election cycle as they struggle to pull Trump into court at the height of a presidential campaign.
It is a schedule conceived for the “one person” described by Chutkan in the earlier cases. As the calendar continues to shrink, claims of blind justice increasingly look like the blind pursuit of a specific person.
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.
Most of (I didn’t read ’em all) the comments seem to ignore the simple fact that the 2020 election was a “fraud”. Funny/not funny.
I didn’t “ignore” the 2020 election. I’m just dealing in 2024 rather than continuing to gripe about something that has happened and is over. No matter what our opinions re that election, we need to deal with the present.
“griping about something that happened in the past” applies to your boss picking someone he thought better qualified than you for a promotion. Griping about systemic fraud and corruption in Washington DC and every place there are Democrats in charge, or just roaming around, is not the same. If the elections are patently corrupt, since who knows how long, how can you stick your head in the sand and say let’s “deal with the present”?
I’m not concerned about the rape in 2020 I’m focused on being raped in 2024. Ya, real wisdom.
Not wisdom, deflection. Pretty typical.
Gary is correct, you cannot redo the past, but unless you’ve given up and thrown in the towel, you can still work to make 2024 a fair election. Where do you see avenues for ballot fraud? Call up your county elections office, and go through each type of fraud, one by one, asking what counter-measures exist to detect it.
Oh, not really that interested in PREVENTING ballot fraud while there are still 8 months left to do it? That shows your true colors.
Past victimhood is a cozy place for escapists…you can dodge responsibility completely for the future, and just whinge on about some slight that can never be redressed. It’s got “loser” written all over it.
But, I retract that accusation if you call your election office and pepper them with your sincere concerns about Nov 5, 2024.
One can be concerned about both and do both. If we just forget about the past we’re doomed. We need to seek justice for wrongs done in the past while also trying our best to prevent them from being repeated in the future. Denying those injustices is a new injustice to the victims.
We have statutes of limitations for a reason.
We do not hold sons and daughters accountable for the sins of their fathers.
Like it or not we can not remedy past injustices.
In fact we really can not remedy current ones.
If real harm has been done to you – no one can put your life back together but you.
Getting over the past is not denying injustice.
The victims of the past are long dead, they will get no more justice than they have already received.
We can not relitigate the sins of the world back to Cain and Able.
We still we can not play this stupid games of heirarchical victimhood.
While you are correct that we should strive to avoid repeating the injustices of the past – we are actually pretty good at that.
Further whether past or present as important as fighting and preventing injustice might be, it does not make us all that much better off. We can destroy society with too much injustice. But acheiving perfect justice is not nearly sufficient to make us better off.
We can not and should not try to redress past injustices – though they are among the MANY things we should learn from.
Regardless justice itself is a luxury good that can only be afforded by a productive society.
Some of what you are asking is already being done. But most of the problems with election fraud are structural.
There is absolutley possitively no means to have a secure trustworthy secret ballot election with mailin voting.
It is possible to reduce mailin voting fraud, it is even more possible if you eliminatge the requirement of secret ballot elections.
Though that introduces all kinds of new forms of election fraud.
If you want elections to be trusted – you have to conduct elections such that they are trustworthy.
The means to improve the trustworthness of elections is really not that difficult to understand.
There are a number of independent principles.
Secret ballot elections do the best possible job of reducing inducement and coercion – these were rampant in the 19th century.
With secret balloting – you can not buy votes, you can not threaten people to get votes, you can not leverage jobs.
You government, your party, your boss, your spouse your children your friends all have no way to compel you to vote a specific way because secret ballots mean they will never know how you voted.
The KISS principle applies to most things – especially elections.
If you allow vote by mail, absentee voting, early voting and in person voting on the day of the election
you have myriads of vectors for fraud, error, and complexity.
Every different means of voting you interduce increases the oportunities for fraud exponentially and decreases the odds of getting caught.
As bad an idea as mailin elections are the combination of mailin and inperson is actually worse.
It is also important to determine what you aretrying to accomplish and how you are going to deal with it.
What does reducing fraud mean ? Are you looking to reduce the possiblity of a few individuals voting twice, or are you looking to reduce the possibility of injecting 80,000 fraudulent ballots. Detecting and preventing the former is far harder than the latter.
Are you looking to make fraud impossible – that is really really tough.
Alternatively you can settle for making fraud detectable.
The best and easiest means of preventing fraud is to have detection measures and consequences.
While there are many ways to detect fraud – of course you have to impliment them, and once implimented – you have to do so rigourously and with consequences.
In Cobb County GA a random audit of mailin ballot envelopes found that 6% failed to meet the fraud prevention standards.
Were all 6% fraudulent – probably not, but 0.6% were beyond any doubt fraudulent.
So what was done about this ? NOTHING.
It is absolutely essential that you have error reducing laws and processes and that they are followed.
Because where you have high error rates you have much greater oportunity for Fraud.
Until the courts are willing to say – hundreds of ballots did not meet legal standards and will be disregarded , you can expect that election officials will not care about errors, and most errors open the door from fraud or they destroy the effectiuveness of anti-fraud measures.
The above and many other issues drive us to confront SCALE.
If a precinct with 15,000 ballots fails audits and security measures there is a small possibility that the courts will toss the ballots of the entire precinct. If on the other hand you have massive county wide systems in counties will millions of voters – no judge is going to have the courage to reject 2million ballots no matter what is found.
handling everything in small precincts will likely have greater overall fraud and error, but neither the fraud nor error will heavily go one way. Conversely dealing with millions of ballots in one place – is a gigantic flare begging for organized large scale fraud and radically increases the odds of getting away with it.
To the greatest extent possible you want counting done in the smallest units as possible, as close in both time and space to actually voting as possible, you want all counting operations public, and you want counting results reported quickly – again as close in time and place as possible to actually voting.
There is almost no need at all to protect the counting infrastucture – if the raw counts are publicly reported at the lowest possible level. The media will have worked out the winners long before the state, and if the official tally disagrees substantially that means there was fraud.
Nothing I have described about should be partisan or even controversial.
Designing a system where fraud is imposible can not be done.
Designing a system that is far better than what we have and can be trusted is trivial.
Vote in person on election day only, with proof of eligability to vote, only at the polls, only on ballots preprinted by the state that never leave the polls. Vote in precincts with no more than 15,000 voters. count ballots in public by hand immediately after the polls close in the precinct and publicly report all tallies as soon as groups of ballots are counted.
When you say “fact” you really mean “Shit Trump made up.”
Sammy, did you see more evidence and facts the Jan6th Committee tried to cover up?
Democrats’ Jan. 6 panel withheld crucial evidence, including denial from Trump driver
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/democrats-jan-6-panel-withheld-crucial-evidence-including-denial-trump-driver
More and more of your attempted coup narrative is falling apart!
Upstate – whenever Sammy says “sh*t someone made up,” he’s making up sh*t. You can count on that.
Sometimes I play along, but I know you can’t actually believe there was no attempted coup. No one is that gullible.
The REAL coup was the Russian Collusion Hoax and the spying on Trump by Obama. The media ran with the lies and have half of America believing the propaganda they spewed. Prime example…Sammy.
An unarmed coup to take over the most powerful government on the planet? That is what you actually believe?
lololol. Sammy, again, maybe you are simply trying to play devil’s advocate or get a job at Perkins, but know that no one is buying your BS.
If you think some assertion of fact is “made up” – make that argument – provide actual facts that counter or disprove the assertion.
Insulting an argument is not a counter argument and to the extent it is persuasive, it persuades that the allegedly made up assertion is likely correct.
“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
“We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated. Lawfully slated.”
“And we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.”
– President Donald J. Trump, January 6, 2021
_________________________________________________
Chutkan must have thrown out this baseless, frivolous, and flagrantly political prosecution—an entirely corrupt Soviet-style “Show Trial,” approved by her political benefactor, Barack Obama.
Instead, just coincidentally, Chutkan has the trial running simultaneously with a presidential election.
Oh, no! Democrats don’t continually work tirelessly and focus like a Bill Clinton “laser” to “fix” and “rig” elections. Oh, —- no!
Will Chutkan, Willis, James, Smith, Garland, Obama et al. put Ken Paxton on trial next?
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Attorney General of Texas
December 08, 2020
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton today filed a lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in the United States Supreme Court. The four states exploited the COVID-19 pandemic to justify ignoring federal and state election laws and unlawfully enacting last-minute changes, thus skewing the results of the 2020 General Election. The battleground states flooded their people with unlawful ballot applications and ballots while ignoring statutory requirements as to how they were received, evaluated and counted.
“Trust in the integrity of our election processes is sacrosanct and binds our citizenry and the States in this Union together. Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin destroyed that trust and compromised the security and integrity of the 2020 election. The states violated statutes enacted by their duly elected legislatures, thereby violating the Constitution. By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but of Texas and every other state that held lawful elections,” said Attorney General Paxton. “Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election. We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error.”
Elections for federal office must comport with federal constitutional standards. For presidential elections, each state must appoint its electors to the electoral college in a manner that complies with the Constitution. The Electors Clause requirement that only state legislatures may set the rules governing the appointment of electors and elections and cannot be delegated to local officials. The majority of the rushed decisions, made by local officials, were not approved by the state legislatures, thereby circumventing the Constitution.
– Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas
Going to double dip for the trolls: nobody with a brain, particularly if we are old enough to have watched Trump the entire time since the 80s (and yes, he is a blowhard) believes that he is a fascist (used to be a dem, and when he was, no one said diddly), racist, or rapist. Beyond perhaps gen z, that just isn’t going to work this time. You are big kids now, relinquish the pull-ups, already. At least here, absolutely *nobody*is being swayed by your nonsense.
James,
That is the funny part.
They act like there is a huge number of undecided out there and they have to be convinced Trump is Hitler, a threat to democracy, etc.
What I think it really is, based off polling, shows Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and even some Jews are considering or have already decided not to vote this year, that is how disillusioned they are with the Democrat party.
That is what has the Biden campaign and the DNC in a panic. So, all the hype of the threat to our democracy.
Does not help them when come election day, people will ask themselves if they were better off under the Trump admin, or the Biden admin.
Wait and see all the additional hype of Russian interference. But as most of us know, we all already know who we are voting for as of now.
Read an article the other day, the JP Morgan chief US economist was of the opinion that the effects of the Fed rate hikes to combat Bidenflation have not been fully felt yet. Food prices are expected to take another surge. While Biden is jumping up and down and crying about “shrinkflation” he fails to address it was Bidenflation that caused “shrinkflation.”
Remember, inflation is cumulative.
Let me first apologize for the length of this post.
I find that every day another assortment of charges or allegations are fostered to demonize President Trump or those that see the future of America at risk by the zealot disciples of the socialist left movement. They have abandoned any pretense of cover that they are hell bent on changing the structure of governance of America. They have set every obstacle they can muster to muddy the waters while preaching that the water is clear as a cloudless sky. They continually throw accolades and monetary dispensations to their devotees while simultaneously whirling degenerative motives and actions to those they oppose. Fools a many are those that follow these nearsighted Socialists, for the path they are setting is surely a road to Tyranny!
From Franz Kafka “The Trial”
“Above all, the free man is superior to the man who has to serve another.”
“Before the Law stands a doorkeeper on guard. To this doorkeeper there comes a man from the country who begs for admittance to the Law. But the doorkeeper says that he cannot admit the man at the moment. The man, on reflection, asks if he will be allowed, then, to enter later. ‘It is possible,’ answers the doorkeeper, ‘but not at this moment.’ Since the door leading into the Law stands open as usual and the doorkeeper steps to one side, the man bends down to peer through the entrance. When the doorkeeper sees that, he laughs and says: ‘If you are so strongly tempted, try to get in without my permission. But note that I am powerful. And I am only the lowest doorkeeper. From hall to hall keepers stand at every door, one more powerful than the other. Even the third of these has an aspect that even I cannot bear to look at.’ These are difficulties which the man from the country has not expected to meet, the Law, he thinks, should be accessible to every man and at all times, but when he looks more closely at the doorkeeper in his furred robe, with his huge pointed nose and long, thin, Tartar beard, he decides that he had better wait until he gets permission to enter. The doorkeeper gives him a stool and lets him sit down at the side of the door. There he sits waiting for days and years. He makes many attempts to be allowed in and wearies the doorkeeper with his importunity. The doorkeeper often engages him in brief conversation, asking him about his home and about other matters, but the questions are put quite impersonally, as great men put questions, and always conclude with the statement that the man cannot be allowed to enter yet. The man, who has equipped himself with many things for his journey, parts with all he has, however valuable, in the hope of bribing the doorkeeper. The doorkeeper accepts it all, saying, however, as he takes each gift: ‘I take this only to keep you from feeling that you have left something undone.’ During all these long years the man watches the doorkeeper almost incessantly. He forgets about the other doorkeepers, and this one seems to him the only barrier between himself and the Law. In the first years he curses his evil fate aloud; later, as he grows old, he only mutters to himself. He grows childish, and since in his prolonged watch he has learned to know even the fleas in the doorkeeper’s fur collar, he begs the very fleas to help him and to persuade the doorkeeper to change his mind. Finally his eyes grow dim and he does not know whether the world is really darkening around him or whether his eyes are only deceiving him. But in the darkness he can now perceive a radiance that streams immortally from the door of the Law. Now his life is drawing to a close. Before he dies, all that he has experienced during the whole time of his sojourn condenses in his mind into one question, which he has never yet put to the doorkeeper. He beckons the doorkeeper, since he can no longer raise his stiffening body. The doorkeeper has to bend far down to hear him, for the difference in size between them has increased very much to the man’s disadvantage. ‘What do you want to know now?’ asks the doorkeeper, ‘you are insatiable.’ ‘Everyone strives to attain the Law,’ answers the man, ‘how does it come about, then, that in all these years no one has come seeking admittance but me?’ The doorkeeper perceives that the man is at the end of his strength and that his hearing is failing, so he bellows in his ear: ‘No one but you could gain admittance through this door, since this door was intended only for you. I am now going to shut it.”
Judges are corrupt.
DoJ is corrupt.
FBLie is corrupt.
The entire system and bureaucracy has become corrupt.
This is literally what the Founding Fathers feared. It was all enabled by FDR in the corrupt New Deal in which he stacked the court for Unconstitutional stuff.
FDR is forever the single worst President in US history. Not even close though Obama is trying still
The American Founders established a severely restricted-vote republic, never a one-man, one-vote democrazy.
Turnout in 1789 was 11.6%, by design.
Voter qualifications were: Male, European, 21, and 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.
Those qualifications were soon further restricted by the Naturalization Act of 1790, which required foreigners admitted to become citizens to be “…free white person(s)….”
A law that was never validly, legitimately, licitly, and legislatively abrogated but altered by imposed kinetic force with a gun to America’s head.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
_________________________
“The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”
“If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote…
But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775
_____________________________________________________
“[We gave you] a republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin, 1787
_______________________
More telling than the corrupted vote, the entire communistic American welfare state is unconstitutional including, but not limited to, admissions affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Agriculture, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.Government exists, under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to provide maximal freedom to individuals while government is severely limited and restricted to merely facilitating that maximal freedom of individuals through the provision of only security and infrastructure.
Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax for ONLY debt, defense, and “…general (all, the whole) Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual Welfare, specific Welfare, particular Welfare, favor or charity. The same article enumerates and provides Congress the power to regulate ONLY the Value of money, Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes, and land and naval Forces. Additionally, the 5th Amendment right to private property was initially qualified by the Framers and is, therefore, absolute, allowing no further qualification, and allowing ONLY the owner the power to “claim and exercise” dominion over private property.
Government exists, under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to provide maximal freedom to individuals while government is severely limited and restricted to merely facilitating that maximal freedom of individuals through the provision of security and infrastructure only.
The airport management, the FAA., and the airlines, they’re all cheats and liars!
= Captain Rex Kramer
Nowhere does the Constitution enumerate any power of Congress to regulate or otherwise allow the government to regulate airlines or air travel.
Free Americans, free industries, and free market organizations must self-regulate with the primary goal of avoiding litigation and be sued into bankruptcy and penury.
Commerce clause.
If not the commerce clause, its the Reconstruction Amendments and incorporation
Wrong both times. The commerce clause does not say anything about air travel. That’s not “interstate commerce.” Contrary to popular belief, the commerce clause IS largely sufficient for the 21st century; it allows, for example, Congress to determine how disputes between customers in one state and businesses in another will be resolved. It does NOT permit Congress to tell Ford how to build a car or what its mileage should be or how air travel should be conducted.
“REGULATE BUYING AND SELLING”
THAT IS ALL
_______________
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3
“To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;…”
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. TO CONTROL BY MEANS OF RULES
2. THE ACTIVITIES AND PROCEDURES INVOLVED IN BUYING AND SELLING THINGS
3. WITH FOREIGN NATIONS, THE SEVERAL STATES, AND INDIAN TRIBES
THE REASON AND INTENT OF THE FRAMERS: TO PRECLUDE BIAS OR FAVOR BY ONE NATION OR STATE, OR A GROUP OF NATIONS OR STATES, OVER ANOTHER OR OTHERS.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Collins Dictionary
commerce
(kɒmɜrs IPA Pronunciation Guide )
1. uncountable noun
COMMERCE IS THE ACTIVITIES AND PROCEDURES INVOLVED IN BUYING AND SELLING THINGS.
They have made their fortunes from industry and commerce.
__________________________________________________________________
regulate
(rɛgyəleɪt IPA Pronunciation Guide )
Word forms: regulates3rd person singular present tense, regulating present participle, regulated past tense past participle
TO REGULATE AN ACTIVITY OR PROCESS MEANS TO CONTROL IT, ESPECIALLY BY MEANS OF RULES.
Under such a plan, the government would regulate competition among insurance companies so that everyone gets care at lower cost.
The people need to seize these bureaucracies and stuff them full of patriots. Then, use them against our enemies. In case some of you dullards still have not figured it out yet, our enemies are essentially the billionaires. The plutocracy; the international financiers who pretend to be citizens of the West, like Geo Soros and his imitators. Larry Fink is the one who seems to have taken his place. Anyhow you can call them “capitalists” if you want. Whatever you call them, there’s about 900 or so, and they are the enemies of the people.
Any exceptions? Maybe there’s some industrialists in there somewhere who are or could become “patriotic national capitalists” as they are called in Asia. Musk, Trump, maybe some others. Very few. But dont worry, they will all have fair trials! Their assets should be generally seized under RICO, they can prove their innocence to get them back, like they made all the little people do for decades.
Use antitrust to smash them up too. Yes, blackrock, state street, and vangauard, smash them up. Owners of ETFs should be able to vote underlying shares, not them!
The worthless military industrial complex needs an overhaul too. They can either learn to make useful munitions like a sufficient amount of artillery shells, or smash them up too! All this overpriced garbage has proved its ineffectiveness in Ukraine, another shameful chapter in the sad story of national decline under the domination of the parasites.
Saloth Sar
President Trump needs to pull a full Lincoln and impose martial law and the manifest tenor of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, after extirpating the “Reconstruction Amendments.”
“Smith has offered no reason, other than that he wants voters to consider the outcome of the trial.”
Election interference, cut and dries. Put him in prison.
@Anon,
Its not that simple.
Smith was brought in as special prosecutor to go after Trump.
Ignore the politics for a second…
He can’t be jailed for election interference since he’s doing his job.
There’s a bit of prosecutorial discretion.
That said… if there’s nothing to this case… and it was a political witch hunt that came down from Biden’s WH…. then there’s a different issue and Smith wouldn’t be the only one in the hot seat. Although I don’t know what laws were exactly broken…
Jonathan: Now on to your column. For you the “nightmare scenario”–the horrors of horrors is that DJT might actually go to trial in one of his criminal cases just before the election. What’s wrong with that? The 6th Amendment guarantees every criminal defendant the right to a “speedy trial”. Why should it be any different for the Trumpster–just because he is running for president? Fortunately, we don’t live in countries where a criminal defendant can languish for years in prison before going to trial. DJT enjoys the privilege of walking around free pending his trials. Isn’t that the way our criminal system is designed to work?
Now we know why DJT doesn’t want the “speedy trial” applied to him. That’s because the cases before Judges Cannon and Chutkan pose a serious risk DJT will be convicted and go to prison. I’m quite sure DJT’s attorneys have advised their client of the likelihood of convictions. So what does DJT tell his lawyers: “Ok, I understand so we’ll do what I have always done…delay and delay and appeal all the way to the SC. I appointed three of the Justices so I have a better chance with them then all the insane and crazy trial judges!” So far, DJT’s strategy has worked and now the SC is considering DJT’s absolute immunity claim from criminal prosecution. If his appointed and other conservative Justices rule in his favor, the cases before Judges Chutkan and Cannon magically disappear. If the SC rules against DJT the J.6 election interference case goes back to Judge Chutkan to set a new trial date and we are back and running. Add about 90 days and we are talking about a trial date maybe some time in August or September?
This is where you claim any trial would conflict with the DOJ’s “60-day” rule. As you mention prosecutor Jay Bratt told Judge Cannon that rule does not apply to indictments already brought and where a trial date has been set. So if Judge Cannon, who was appointed by DJT and is in bed with him, thinks a new trial date just before the election is impossible she is sorely mistaken.
The whole thrust of your column is to push DJT’s false narrative… that Judge Chutkan is biased against him and “Trump may not have the ability to present a complete defense before the election”. FACT CHECK: Not true. Jack Smith filed his indictment on 8/1/23 and Judge Chutkan set trial for last week– March 4. So DJT’s attorneys have had 8 months to prepare for trial–certainly enough time to prepare defenses. And if Chutkan gets the case back she will probably give DJT’s attorneys another 3 months to prepare. And it’s not like DJT’s attorneys have been sitting on there hands during the stay. Jack Smith provided all the discovery material months ago and during the stay both parties have filed pre-trial motions that Judge Chutkan will rule on if/when she gets the case back. So you claiming DJT hasn’t had time to prepare his defense is utter nonsense!
Neither Biden, nor Garland, nor Smith, nor Chutkan will desist from prosecuting Trump in the Fall. It may backfire, and help Trump politically.
The Supreme Court may well affect substance and timing, however.
It may decide in Fisher that the Enron obstruction law was improperly applied in the J6 indictments. This could affect two of the four counts against Trump.
It could also decide that Trump has immunity for official acts, and remand to Chutkan for a preliminary determination of the extent to which the allegations against Trump in the indictment are covered by that immunity. Chutkan’s judgment could then be appealed. This would delay the trial until after the election.
@Daniel…
I think you’re right that 2 of the 4 counts against Trump go away.
But consider this…
1) SCOTUS is accepting ‘friends of the court’ briefs that question Smith’s appointment as Special counsel since he wasn’t approved by the Senate.
2) We’re now finding out that there was exculpatory evidence in favor of Trump that was withheld by the J6 committee. And that the committee deleted evidence that they were supposed to retain.
What happens to Smith’s case?
Would it be a Brady violation if Smith willfully ignored or wasn’t presented w the exculpatory evidence?
I mean Smith claims he never had the evidence if it was ‘accidentally’ withheld by the committee. (Only sharing evidence that suggested Trump’s guilt.)
-G
Ian – two things. Brady applies to exculpatory or impeachment evidence held by the prosecutor or the police even if the prosecutor didn’t know about it (by “impeachment evidence” I mean evidence tending to impeach the credibility of the government’s witnesses). Evidence in the hands of legislators? Not so much unless.
More importantly . . . trial hasn’t happened yet. Trump and his lawyers are aware of this evidence and can present it at trial. Hence, no Brady violation.
“And that the committee deleted evidence that they were supposed to retain.”
Gumby, the manipulations used in this case and by J6 leave vital evidence unaccounted for. The intentional deletion of possible exculpatory evidence leads one to question the charges against Trump for good reason (deletion of material that was supposed to be kept). As a lawyer, should this potential evidence not be explored before any trial? Why can’t this be used to find the truth and delay the charges?
“The backlog of pending criminal cases in the federal court system increased by more than a quarter in the last five years.” Well, that’s what practicing lawfare does, Counselor. Also, if you haven’t connected the dots yet, indicting your political opponents (and their lawyers) of the crimes you commit yourself just before an election campaign tends to clog the courts just as quickly. — Thoughts from ‘Just Another F’n Observer’.
It is a travesty of epic proportions that Republicans did nothing re: Hunter Biden giving them the middle finger. Meanwhile the Democrat lawfare train continues to ruin Americans, (e.g. Peter Navarro) demonstrating that tyrants like Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and Fidel Castro are alive and well in the US Just-us System. The GOP should have at a minimum locked up Hunter Biden in the US Capitol jail for contempt of Congress to show failed SCOTUS nominee Merrick Garland Congress wields, in theory, checks and balances over the Executive Branch. Instead they did nothing.
Our nation collapses on the Republican watch. Millions of Americans hate weaklings which is why Republicans lose elections.
Democrats are Commie tyrants. Republicans make FTM Trans “men” look virile.
Peter Navarro ordered to report to prison on March 19 to serve 4-month prison term
Navarro was sentenced in January to four months in prison for not complying with a subpoena issued by the January 6 House Select Committee. He was convicted in the case in September, being found guilty of two counts of contempt of Congress.
https://thepostmillennial.com/peter-navarro-ordered-to-report-to-prison-on-march-19-to-serve-4-month-prison-term
“Democrats are Commie tyrants. Republicans make FTM Trans “men” look virile.”
Estovir, this is precisely the problem and has been so for years. Trump is one of the few policymakers who knows what he is doing and is virile. Vote for Trump. There are others, but at present, they are not in the running. He is making Republicans into stronger people.
S. Meyer,
I would argue we need to foster a political movement that takes the MAGA idea a step further, past him.
We need to foster not just virile men, but women as well. Focus on critical thinking, common sense, logic, physical and mental well being. Character. Grit. What it means to be an American. Bring out the best in each of them.
And if the Republican party is not bringing that to the table, ditch them and create a new party.
Upstate – your idea will be particularly salient when our currency collapses. At that time all of society will lose the luxury of being woke or politically correct . . . or worshipping the green cult.
Upstate, with or without Trump, I believe the MAGA movement stands solid, though admittedly, he is the most potent force binding MAGA together. It will continue after he is gone from the scene.
At this point I’m prepared to say: welcome to your *own* nightmare; you voted for Biden, you praised his inaugural speech, you wore a pink hat and played the fool. What, in the name of Hades, will it take to get the absolute, unconditional, generational sheep to wake up? How bad do thins have to get? Do we have to literally be killing each other? There has not been a true ‘dem party’ for nigh on 30 years or more, and yes, people like Bill O’Reilly were pricks, but come on, that is not the modern right, and there a WHOLE lot of us that refuse to choose a party, and we are night veering left. Our country and way of life are literally on the docket. In Ireland recently the people voted against a measure to redefine family, and the government acquiesced. We no longer have that here, at. all.
Really. If we do not correct course, like right effing now in this huge country, it is going to be very, very bad. If you are an idiot that still thinks you are voting for the party of JFK, ask yourself if you would vote for the party of Russia circa the same time frame. Your political prejudice is basically a temper tantrum at this point, and it is destroying this country. Grow. The. Eff. Up. Your own pampered a** is equally on the line, you are just too brainwashed to see it.
Sorry for the typos, at work and no ability to edit. I think the message is clear. The trolls can bite me.
“What, in the name of Hades, will it take to get the absolute, unconditional, generational sheep to wake up? How bad do thins have to get? Do we have to literally be killing each other?” James, I’m genuinely afraid it will take another ‘hot’ civil war. The problem will be the huge numbers of people who already don’t realize it’s their own ‘side’ setting the conditions to spark CV2.0 – the same sheeple who believe their government ‘cares’ about them, personally, when absolutely nothing could be further from the truth.
“Smith has offered no reason, other than that he wants voters to consider the outcome of the trial.” It seems that while Smith might be someone who believes justice delayed is sometimes justice denied, he seems also someone who understands that justice hastened is oftentimes helpful to expediting “justice” prearranged.
@Ron
Me too, and it terrifies me, largely because it will be due to stupidity. We are not debating slavery in the 21st century, and it is absolute madness.
We need this trial, and testimony from someone in Trump’s inner circle (e.g. Mark Meadows) who knows what that group was doing the entire month of Dec 2020 to overturn the election. I predict Trump will NOT take the stand and defend himself, a sign that he feels unaccountable to the public, or perhaps still has stuff to hide from us. If not, he should take the stand and defend his actions to mickey the EC count in his favor. That’s what he’s being charged with.
Court is where lies finally go to die.
LOL. So you don’t know. You are building your mountain of a coup on the molehill video of 75-yr old ladies walking around the Senate escorted by Capitol police narrated by joy reid and the rest of the cia-media?
At what point will you and the rest of you flat-earthers, er, coup zealots fall for the mountains of evidence against your case and stop hoping for the next bit of ‘gotcha’ to prove it? You’ve been had. Just as the earth can appear as flat from distances very near and very very far, you have had reality withheld from you by bias and propaganda.
Do the nation a solid and grow-up. You side’s lack of any beneficial polices (to Americans) or good leaders is what got you where you are, not some guy named Trump.
Does anyone in DC really give a rat’s patootie about this country and what this is doing to further divide us? Or is that the mission? Our enemies are licking their chops waiting for the right moment to strike. And, as always, we will be caught flat-footed.
Sadly, the “nightmare” described is exactly what the various lawfare prosecutors wanted. They waited three years to prosecute in order to make sure Trump was in the news for all the wrong reasons during election season
@garyesq2k2
Yup. and we need to keep saying it over and over. The dems are still running with their boosheet from years ago. We need to remind them we have very much lived in the intervening years, and largely under their ‘governance’. We need to do this at every opportunity.
The funny thing is–Turley NEVER talks about the obvious implication of his words. If, as he states, that Trump is being singled out, which is a serious Equal Protection problem, then where is Trump’s obligation to submit? You can talk about “rule of law” all you want, but when those with the badge propose to violate it, then those who don’t can (although it may not be a good idea) resist.
Letitia James ran her election campaign on the theme of getting Trump. Is that not a violation of equal rights?
Poor Anon…
“Equal rights?”
Trump is a rich old white dude… [sarcastic effect].
He’s not a member of a protected class. [Actual legal standard].
I think you meant to say that its selective prosecution.
And that Trump’s Civil Rights may have been violated.
But its not an Equal rights issue.
-G
It certainly is a violation of her ethical duty to treat every citizen fairly and similarly.
I look at this from a view that both President Biden and President Trump are highly mistrusted by the American people and some say this election boils down to the lessor of two evils.
For the people in the Biden camp, Trump is the leader who will destroy our Republic and become a dictator like Hitler.
While the people in the Trump camp believe Biden IS making decisions that are jeopardizing the Country by flying in illegal immigrants by commercial airline into America from South American countries. A total exceeding 350,000 people.
I have got to believe that the DOJ would be the cool head in the room and let the election continue without any further proceedings that a clear majority believe are politically motivated. Thus, trying to save our Republic by allowing the people to decide and then trust our checks and balances.
The extremist of both parties scares me. If the parties could speak to them and explain to them why this course is the only suitable course to follow for the good of our nation maybe we can tamper down this potential powder keg. Surly the Justice department is aware of the heightened anxiety the country is feeling. So why not act for the greater good of our Republic stop any congressional and judicial proceedings so the world sees that America is still America by allowing the vote to move forward.
The Democrats have less than zero interest in fairness and justice and the will of the people, as they have demonstrated by enabling an invasion of 10 million illegals/potential Dem voters over the last 3 years. They are trying to bankrupt and imprison the opposing candidate and many of his lawyers and advisers, an insatiable bloodlust that is unprecedented in our country’s history. One-party totalitarian rule is all that matters to them, and they will happily intimidate, lie, and destroy anyone who gets in their way. If they achieve their goal of controlling all three branches, say hello to 2 new Senators from DC and a bunch of new lefty judges of the Chutkan approach, and say good bye to the filibuster, the electoral college, and all the checks and balances devised by the Founding Fathers. The unspoken insurrection they plan against our country’s traditional values will make Jan 6 look like a picnic on the mall. Wake up, America!
Yup. And now the Dems are blocking any legislation that would prevent the registration of non-citizens and convicts, two parties clearly prohibited from voting in federal elections. We’re doomed. 20 years ago I would have said your comments were hyperbole, but sadly, today that is exactly what we are facing. God help us all.
Let the people decide, but fully informed. We need a trial to get out the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about what Trump, Giuliani, Eastman, Bannon, Meadows and the lawyers were doing to mickey the EC count.
Did the plot go further than a soft-coup using lawyers? In the same pre-election timeframe, we deserve a full, honest accounting of whether Biden engaged in undue foreign influence while VP or Prez.
If we don’t have full information, we could be duped into voting how the campaigns wants us to vote. That takes away our power to be the ones deciding. It takes away informed consent and turns “the consent of the governed” into a meaningless slogan.
If the media did their traditional job to investigate the truth, we wouldn’t need a trial in a court of law — but court is the only remaining venue in America where deceitful infowarfare games aren’t allowed.
PbinCA you must be blind.
How so? I get my news from a wide variety of sources. I’m open-minded, independent-thinking curious, and modest that I don’t know it all. Those who are cock-sure about everything presented to them through a screen are the ones who are blind.
The truth is that which can stand up to intense scrutiny over time until consensus puts to rest any remaining questions.
Half-truths are that which it is in my interest for you to believe in the short-term until the truth emerges.
You have no justice in mind. You have. a delusional opinion programmed into you by the media narrative. If you want to remain in your rainbow world, you’ll never see reality. Just SEE WHAT YOU SEE . If you can actually get past the programming.
PbinCA, I understand that Putin is looking for a new Beria. Why don’t you apply for the job? You know how the job works: ‘Find me the man, and I will find you the crime.’
We need a trial to get out the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Trial like Speaker of the House Tom Delay? Maybe a trial like Smith provided to Enron? That was a TRIAL
Sen Ted Stevens had a few thoughts on trials also.
Maybe an Earlier Trump trial. About an event that took place 30 years ago and the complainant cant pin down the year, and testified the dress she was wearing, hadn’t been make yet
Or Trumps fraud trial. Where the ones the govt claim suffered fraud testified they suffered no damages and will continue to do business with Trump
Those are the kind of trials you want.
Mark: Here’s what Snopes has to say about the flight of the so-called “illegal immigrants”:
The central assertions made by CIS, repeated by the Daily Mail or others, were that:
A Biden administration program was responsible for flying 320,000 migrants directly into the United States between January and December 2023. (True)
The program was a secret whose details were discovered by an outside group. (False)
The program allowed unvetted aliens to enter the United States. (False)
The U.S. government admitted that the program was a national-security risk. (False)
Such a program could affect U.S. politics by altering voter demographics. (False)
Of these five claims, only the first was true. The program has never been a secret, it does not transport “unvetted” aliens, and participation in it requires significant vetting and a sponsor who is a U.S. citizen. The program provides no pathway to citizenship, which is a requirement to vote.
Here’s what WaPo says about these migrants:
But migrants are not being flown into the U.S. randomly. Under a Biden policy in effect since January 2023, up to 30,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela can enter the country monthly if they apply online with a financial sponsor and arrive at a specified airport, paying their own way. Biden exercised his “parole” authority, which, under a 1952 law, allows him to admit people “only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.”
So, what Biden has done is legal–under a 1952 law that allows him to permit migration for urgent humanitarian reasons and for people who can proivde significant public benefit. So, if people perceive some kind of wrongdoing by Biden, it’s only because they believe lies pumped out by pro-Trump media. There’s nothing “extremist” about doing this.
As to Trump, he believes himself to be totally above the law–to wit: he keeps slandering E. Jean Carroll and lying about never meeting her, even after 2 court judgments and photos of him with her and her husband in which he misidentified Ms. Carroll as Marla Maples. He is claiming total immunity from prosecution, even for crimes committed after he was put out of office, like stealing and retaining classified documents and lying about returning them, like starting an insurrection based on claims he knew were lies (see reference to Block book, infra), like falsely claiming hush money paid to a porn actress is a legitimate campaign expense. He still won’t stop lying about losing in 2020. Tomorrow, a book by Ken Block will be released entitled: “Disproven: My Unbiased Search for Voter Fraud for the Trump Campaign, the Data that Shows Why He Lost, and How We Can Improve Our Elections”. Mr. Block was paid $750,000 by Trump to “find” proof that his 2020 “victory” was stolen by fraud. Mr. Block investigated each and every one of dozens of claims put out by Trump that Trump relies on to claim he was cheated. Mr. Block has proven that each and every one of these claims is a LIE, and yet, Trump went around the country, encouraged his fans to storm the Capitol, which they did, hunting Pence and Pelosi with the intent to kill them, all while he watched for over 3 hours and did nothing to stop them. To this day, he keeps on telling the same Big Lie. This is more proof of Trump’s unfitness for office, not to mention his unpopular policies–like, banning all abortions, outlawing certain forms of contraception, rolling back environmental and consumer protections, repealing Obamacare, more tariffs, which will increase the cost of goods, and more tax breaks for the wealthiest corporations and individuals, which will drive up our national debt.
You (and Turley) appear to be advocating for the notion that there’s some equality between Biden and Trump–but there isn’t. Trump has always had a bad reputation for cheating people in business and in his marriages and lying. Trump committed crimes for which he is being held responsible. He is a regular citizen, just like the rest of us, and if you or I did the things he did, we would be held to account. So should he. America deserves to have his crimes tried before November. The idea that Trump should just get off and that the “people should decide” ignores the effect of pro-Trump media to sway gullible people into believing lies. We have a criminal justice system in place to hold accountable those who violate our laws. Trump is not a victim here–he did the things he’s charged with, and is entitled to a fair trial. America is entitled to those trials to be held before November.
OMG!
NUTCHACHACHA and “Snopes.”
The Welfare Parasite and Affirmative Action Special Project of the Communist Party of America
together with
The “Brain Trust” and Propaganda Section of the Communist Party of America.
American taxpayers, “Whatever in life would we have done wiffout generations woith of all ya’all’s money?”
Don’t furget, April 15 is the tax deadline fo all ya’all to pay and pay and pay!
As Karl Marx said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
The Trump Derangement Syndrome is strong with this one.
What about the other ten million ILLEGAL ALIENS that have crossed our border again ILLEGALLY? Trump did nothing wrong, he questioned if there was fraud in 7 states and there were. We all saw it live on TV. There is so much eveidence showing this AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT BUT IS TO DISHONEST TO TELL THE TRUTH.
1. It is NOT “illegal” to cross the border and ask for asylum. Even if someone who crosses does so at a location other than a border, they may ask for asylum, because this is what our laws allow. Biden is trying to change the law. A bipartisan group of Senators, including Katie Britt, arrived at a Border Security Bill that gave Republicans most of what they wanted–more power for the POTUS to close the border, more power for immediate deportations, and, Republicans were in favor of it until Trump ordered them to oppose it, for the sole reason to have an issue to campaign on. The bill, which had the support of Border Patrol officers and the National Chamber of Commerce, would have greatly increased the number of border patrol agents, increased the number of immigration judges, to move along cases more quickly and this would create a disincentive to come here. Most migrants would be deported within months, not years. Under US law, migrants are entitled to a hearing in most cases. 2. Trump did not “question” the election. He: a. tried to bully Secretaries of State to “find” votes he didn’t get; b. when that didn’t work, he got citizens to falsify Electoral College documents, which is a felony; c. there wasn’t “fraud” that could have swayed the election to Trump, who knew he was predicted to lose and also knew he DID lose–so says Ken Block, who was paid $750,000 to investigate Trump’s claims of election fraud, and he came up with nothing–read his new book–it is released tomorrow; d. he tried to bully Pence into refusing to accept certified votes, something he had no authority to do. 3. Trump did plenty wrong–he stole classified documents after being told not to take them, refused to return them, returned some and lied about retaining others, and hid more of them to prevent the FBI and his attorney from finding them. He also falsified election finance reports by misrepresenting a payoff to a porn actress as a legitimate campaign expense. He also tried to get the GA SOS to falsify vote totals by “finding” votes he didn’t get. These things are the truth. Investigate for yourself if you don’t believe me.
10 million people are awarded asylum after 80 million previous cases of illegal immigration dating back to January 1, 1863, and continuing through the 20th century with Mexicans, Haitians et al. falsely and fraudulently enjoying laws made in the interests of freed slaves?
That is deceptive, pseudo-legal, and not rational in any way.
The Naturalization Act of 1802, the immigration law of the American Founders, has never been legislatively abrogated.
Ya’all sho do know how to pervert the letter and spirit of the law.
It’s the milquetoast buffoons who allow ya’all free rein that matter, though, right?
So, despite the length of your comment, you admit that Biden is bringing into this country people who not normally qualify for admission.
That happened on Jan. 1, 1863.
The communists are “replacing” Americans.
“I have got to believe that the DOJ would be the cool head in the room and let the election continue without any further proceedings”
Either your information sources are garbage or you re clueless about this DOJ/Goverment as a whole.
THE DOJ IS JUST ANOTHER ARM OF THE DNC. ARE YOU TOO BLIND TO SEE IT?
The Feminazi Gestapo!
Turley now he uses the time tested method of having nothing. “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. if the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.” Carl Sandburg. Nothing but kabuki theater from Turley to his Trump cult base. Just keep the victimization complaining and grievance going because thats all they got.
Dude, the comments by the judge are appalling. I don’t care where you come down, but she has no business presiding over this trial.
@Anon,
No she does not.
Her statements that she made earlier, before the trial, were prejudicial.
Its a point for appeal along w a reason why Trump’s lawyers may decide to file a complaint against the judge for violating her judicial canons.
Speaking of Kabuki Theater, Angry Man’s SOTU the other night was quite the performance. The next day, couldn’t even put a sentence together. Better living through chemistry.
I’m leaning towards an advanced Musk Neuralink implant chip gone wrong. Either from hardware or chemistry, it was crazy.
*that still dosen’t explain this .. .
https://www.racket.news/p/state-tv-slobbers-over-state-of-the
Has Trump been charged with insurrection? You know, 18 USC 2343? Seems that word is being thrown around as if there was an actual insurrection, which there obviously wasn’t since the charge has not been levied against anyone. You partisan hacks are certain to share a special place in hades for obvious lies, exaggerations, hate and double standards toward “Orange man bad”. The truth? Leftists are the actual threat to our democratic republic (not democracy) 🙂
No. He’s not being charged with Insurrection. Why?…there was no planned insurrection. It was a spontaneous riot meant to impede the the EC Count, since “Mike Pence let us down” (meaning Pence did not choose to impede it). Jack Smith and DoJ knows the difference between a Dem fictional narrative and facts.
He’s being charged with trying in several ways to mickey the EC Count to overturn the election ( a lawyerly coup). There the facts are clear. And Trump has never claimed he wasn’t taking those steps. His only defense is “I thought I would make a better President than Biden, so it didn’t make sense that I lost”. This type of ego-driven, solipsistic reasoning has guided Trump his entire life. The problem is it puts him above the law and other people in his own mind.
@pbinCA
Its not a question of a ‘planned ‘ insurrection.
There was no insurrection period. No armed rebellion against the government.
Trump didn’t declare one so he could bring in the troops to quell the rebellion.
Pelosi didn’t do it either.
Nor, per the 14th did 2/3rds of both houses declare one.
And yes… no one was charged w 18USC2383.
There’s more, but lets just keep this simple.
Trump didn’t instigate the riots.
There is video evidence and the transcript of what he said.
There is also some testimony that was buried by the J6 committee that would be exculpatory.
This gets into the question of it being hidden from Smith, or did Smith violate the law? (Its now coming out… )
So who knows?
phinCA – “His only defense is ‘I thought I would make a better President than Biden, so it didn’t make sense that I lost’.” Can you source this quote?
“I thought I would make a better President than Biden, so it didn’t make sense that I lost.”
The first thing you need to do, PbianCA, is find the quote I believe you made up. If you see such a quote, present the context and the entire speech.
You heard the public say Trump would make a better President than Biden. That would be true, and it makes a lot of sense.
And if you have no response accuse the other of bad faith without bothering to provide any facts or law of your own.
Hi FW: another version I heard was: “if the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law’s against you, argue the facts. If the facts and law are against you, try to change the facts.” The latter is the tactic used by Trump’s attorneys and Turley.
Natasha,
Change the facts?
Like Biden did at the SOTU and his economic data that was absolutely destroyed by the jobs report that came out the next day?
Those facts?
Another example of the dual-track “justice” system…one for Democrats and another one for Republicans. If it was a Democrat being tried you KNOW that the “election rule” would apply.
If the left thinks this will hurt Trump’s chances of success, they have it backward
Jonathan Turley appears to be sadly mistaken in the premiss of this essay.
‘Splain David? What premise is the prof missing?
These Democrat ghouls are going to wind up with a civil war on their hands if they don’t back off the Donald. This is very serious stuff … our freedom depends on Trump getting elected.
the irony…