Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Twilight]

8 minutes ago, Old Man said:

 

At this point the question is whether the Netanyahu administration should be removed for incompetence or for deliberate incompetence.  It's that bad.

 

edit: Don't forget that the Egyptians warned Netanyahu personally that Hamas was up to something.

I'd imagine a few heads will be rolling at Israeli intelligence too, I'd imagine.  I don't know what Israeli internal security is called but logically their job is to keep watch on West Bank and Gaza Strip in order to prevent attacks like these.

[death tribble]

Several things have been reported about how Israeli intelligence missed what Hamas was up to.

One is that counter intelligence had success against Hamas and as such Hamas was unwilling or unable to mount such an operation.

Another is that Netanyahu told Intelligence to switch their focus onto dissenters to what he was trying to achieve i.e. the judicial overhaul

[Cygnia]

I would not at all be surprised if the tin foil hats are correct (for once) about Bibi intentionally allowing this to happen... 😕

[Lawnmower Boy]

11 hours ago, Twilight said:

I'd imagine a few heads will be rolling at Israeli intelligence too, I'd imagine.  I don't know what Israeli internal security is called but logically their job is to keep watch on West Bank and Gaza Strip in order to prevent attacks like these.

This is not a new thing. The thought process is that if you want to do something, and you lack the resources to do it and some other thing, than that other thing doesn't need to be done. Your enemies will either not notice that you can't do the other thing, or will give you a pass on it because they're just dumb/corrupt/racially inferior. Anyone warning that you are trying to do the impossible is just a negative nelly. Any evidence that the enemy isn't going to cooperate is discounted, since you already know what the enemy will do. It happens all the time. You have your Pearl Harbour, your fall of Singapore, your BARBAROSSA, and that's just a sample collection from WWII. 

 

 

[Cygnia]

Trump tells court he had no duty to ‘support’ the US Constitution in bizarre legal defence

 

Quote

Donald Trump has sought to have a lawsuit filed against him in the state of Colorado dismissed, by arguing that, as president, he was not required to “support” the US Constitution.

The bizarre legal defence, put forward by the former president’s attorneys, comes in response to a suit filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which seeks to have him disqualified from the ballot in the state under the 14th Amendment.

A clause of the amendment, which passed into the Constitution in 1868, bans those who “engaged in insurrection” against the United States from holding any civil, military, or elected office without the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate.

Mr Trump’s lawyers are arguing that the phrasing of the clause – section three – does not apply to all officers of the United States, “but only those who take an oath ‘to support the US Constitution’”.

“The Presidential oath, which the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment surely knew, requires the President to swear to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Constitution — not to ‘support’ the Constitution," said the filing, obtained by news outlet Law and Crime.

 

[Tom Cowan]

5 minutes ago, Cygnia said:

Trump tells court he had no duty to ‘support’ the US Constitution in bizarre legal defence

 

 

pound head on desk, must kill brain to see how that right

[csyphrett]

And Popok and Miceallis said he lost that motion like he loses most of his motions. 

The only people he beats in court are the ones who don't have enough money to outlast his footdragging. Anyone else, he gets hammered.

CES

[Asperion]

Let Trump have his way on this.  That will mean that EVERYTHING he did as President will be erased.  All deals removed from will be returned to,  if put in,  will be taken out,  all legislation needs to be suspended or deleted until current administration can rule on them.  Whatever he performed as President will need to be either deleted or reexamined during this current administration that presently dislikes Trump and will take a MUCH harder view of what Trump was attempting. 

[Lord Liaden]

1 hour ago, csyphrett said:

And Popok and Miceallis said he lost that motion like he loses most of his motions. 

The only people he beats in court are the ones who don't have enough money to outlast his footdragging. Anyone else, he gets hammered.

CES

 

I don't think Donnie has ever faced an opponent in court with greater resources than his, who's willing to fight the case to the end.

 

His lawyers are trying Hail Mary tactics now. I have to admit that this last one, ridiculous as it is, was at least creative.

 

1 hour ago, Asperion said:

Let Trump have his way on this.  That will mean that EVERYTHING he did as President will be erased.  All deals removed from will be returned to,  if put in,  will be taken out,  all legislation needs to be suspended or deleted until current administration can rule on them.  Whatever he performed as President will need to be either deleted or reexamined during this current administration that presently dislikes Trump and will take a MUCH harder view of what Trump was attempting. 

 

I don't think it would work that way. First, this is a squabble over semantic meaning of "defend" vs "support." Trump's lawyers can always argue that his actions as POTUS did "defend" the constitution, but not "support" it. Second, legislation passed under his administration was the responsibility of Congress, not the President. Third, most of what Trump did under executive order, has already been reversed by President Biden.

[unclevlad]

What I find so mind-boggling is that each set of attorneys seems so willing to attempt such ludicrous defenses.

 

OK, in part, some of this is IMO nothing but delaying tactics, trying to run out the clock on one deadline or another, depending on the case.

 

But, the lawyers are seriously risking significant sanctions for some of these ridiculous arguments.  At the very least, their reputations as lawyers become total trash.  It might be that not many clients would look at it, but high-dollar clients would certainly seem more likely to.  Like the Legal Eagle videos point out...these are F-grade lawyers.

 

Another aspect...arguing "protect, preserve, and defend" excludes "support" is, to me, a serious rebuttal to the strict-literalist interpretations taken by the Supreme Court conservatives.

[Lord Liaden]

33 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

Another aspect...arguing "protect, preserve, and defend" excludes "support" is, to me, a serious rebuttal to the strict-literalist interpretations taken by the Supreme Court conservatives.

 

I've heard/read some political analysts warning that the SCOTUS would uphold Trump's objection to be excluded from the ballot. You've just given me more hope that that won't happen.

[dmjalund]

If Trumps presidency is reversed, then the Judges he appointed are out on their ear?

[DShomshak]

No, because the President only nominates judges. The Senate confirms them and so is the actual appointing authority.

 

As for lawyers making lunatic arguments... Even if they're disbarred (or maybe *especially* if), they can make a living as Heroic Victims of the Librul Establishment for years to come. And ithey may hope that if Trump gets back in office, he can appoint them to government jobs where they can cruh the people they feel wronged them. Since Trump seems to like people who are willing to be stupid on his behalf.

 

Given that Presidential elections and control of Congress seem to be coin tosses, not actually a bad gamble.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Cancer]

There is a remarkable surplus of lawyers nation-wide in any event.  It's kind of the Doritos of professions: Crunch all you want, we'll make more.

[csyphrett]

business insider says 17 Trump lawyers have been sanctioned with some of them becoming co-defendants. Some like Alina Habba got sanctioned a mill, and then got sanctioned again before another judge. And of course, Good Ol' Rudy got his license yanked, hauled into court over refusal to follow discovery, sanctioned, summarily tried and found guilty, and needing to pay what he owed.

CES

[csyphrett]

Update on Rudy.

CES

[Lord Liaden]

I wonder to what degree Giulianni was always what he's been shown to be now? Perhaps he just conned a lot of people for a long time into believing he was something else. Like Donald Trump -- maybe that's why they became such close confederates.

Edited October 16, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[Cygnia]

CW: child murder/hate crime

https://www.nydailynews.com/2023/10/15/illinois-landlord-kills-muslim-6-year-old-wounds-mother-in-hate-crime/

[Dr. MID-Nite]

48 minutes ago, Cygnia said:

CW: child murder/hate crime

https://www.nydailynews.com/2023/10/15/illinois-landlord-kills-muslim-6-year-old-wounds-mother-in-hate-crime/

 

I have no words really. Absolutely disgusting. America creates this. Sigh....

[Dr. MID-Nite]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

I wonder to what degree Giulianni was always what he's been shown to be now? Perhaps he just conned a lot of people for a long time into believing he was something else. Like Donald Trump -- maybe that's why they become such close confederates.

 

Rudy has always been....questionable. Like Reagan, he had the benefit of good PR to cover up his many deficiencies.

[unclevlad]

First take about Rudy.

 

He's going into court wearing the legal equivalent of the Emperor's new clothes.

 

And it's Alex Jones all over again.  Actively refuse to cooperate?  You render a fair trial impossible, through your refusal.  Ergo, as long as the plaintiffs can establish their claims prima facie...that's it.  You forfeit right of rebuttal.  And as the guy says, no appeals court is going to give you the time of day;  you did this to yourself, 1000%.

 

I think the trajectory here is that everything Guiliani has, is going to be seized.  CNN points out he owes his lawyers, IIRC, $1.3M;  the punitive damages here are going to be substantial.  Plus whatever else is still out there.  He hasn't been cooperative so far...so, ok, he loses all control, and all the instruments of financial tracing and auditing come into play against him.

 

A step further...I think anything discovered during *this* process...will be admissible in all the other cases to which he's connected.  The only downside is, this could take a while...note that the damages determination isn't for another 2 months.  Legal processes aren't fast.

[Lord Liaden]

What you describe for Giulanni, I want to see for Trump. There are a number of procedural and practical barriers to putting a former President in prison, and it's very questionable that he'll ever get worse than house arrest. So I say, every court with a case against Trump should fine him, to the maximum they can, in every case they can. Strip Trump of every last dime. Seize his properties as payment. Donnie has always defined himself by his money. That's his identity. Making him live his remaining years as a pauper would be the worst punishment for him.

Edited October 16, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[unclevlad]

On that point, the *stipulation* that Trump committed fraud in his real estate dealings is huge, and puts Trump in about the same, nearly untenable, position Giuliani's in.  Most of his legal defenses got blown away.

[csyphrett]

Plus he already owes Jean Carrol five mill, with another award on the way once that first case is settled. Judge Kaplan said we're not going to have another trial the same as the first. All the jury needs to do is award damage. The NYAG case has already found Trump guilty of one of the seven counts. The rest is about the other six. The fact that he has a paper monitor and his licenses are dissolved must already be galling.

 

As an aside, Merrick Garland stuck Trump like a prison shanking in the shower. Jim Jordan should have been on him about that instead of worrying about the obstruction case that is under Chutkan in the DC circuit.

CES

[DShomshak]

This Sunday I heard the 3rd part of "We Don't Talk About Leonard," an investigative co-report by On the Media and Pro Publica. It's about Leonard Leo, mastermind of the Federalist Society, architect of the current SCOTUS and the Dobbs Decision, and much more. He's the most successful activist in the last 100 years of American history... whom most people have never heard of.

 

Progressive activists, take note. Stop wasting your time marching in the street and chanting "Hey Hey Ho Ho." This is how you do it. But it takes a lot of time.

 

This is a link to the first episode but has sub-links to the other two.

 

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/episodes/on-the-media-we-dont-talk-about-leonard-episode-1

 

Dean Shomshak