Trump CONVICTED - NO new Trump threads part III

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Jan 24 - 06:39 AM

The campaign promise from Trump that he would imprison immigrants and citizens alike as enemies of the people and himself in camps has a lot of support from ALEC which is a corporate political organisation that writes laws for Republicans like Stand your Ground and 1078 and runs the private prisons of the USA.
Here are a few of their corporate owned prisons and sub contractors for supplies:

U.S. FOR-PROFIT PRIVATIZED CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
January 2017 – Not a full listing
Facility Operations
CoreCivic (Corrections Corp. of America)
The GEO Group
Management & Training Corp.
Community Education Centers
LaSalle Corrections
Emerald Companies
Medical / Mental Health Care
Corizon Health (Beecken Petty O'Keefe & Co.)
Centurion (Centene)
NaphCare, Inc.
Correct Care Solutions
Wexford Health Sources
Armor Corr. Health Services
Advanced Correctional Healthcare
Correctional Medical Care
Southern Health Partners
MHM (mental health)
Cal. Forensic Medical Group (Correctional
Medical Group Companies; H.I.G. Capital)
Southwest Correctional Medical Group
CFG Health Systems
PrimeCare Medical, Inc.
CorrectHealth, LLC
Pharmaceutical Services
PharmaCorr (Corizon)
Diamond Pharmacy Services
Maxor Correctional Pharmacy Services
Correct Rx
Transportation Services
TransCor (CCA)
PTS of America
U.S. Prisoner Transport Services
Black Talon Enterprises
GEO Transport (GEO Group)
In-Custody Transportation

Package/Commissary Services
Access SecurePak (Keefe)
Union Supply Group
Jack L. Marcus
Access
ABL Management
Bob Barker Company
ICS Jail Supplies
Food Services
Aramark
Canteen Corr. Services
Trinity Services Group (H.I.G. Capital)
ABL Management, Inc.
Food Services of America (Services Group of
America)
Phone/Video Visit/Email Services
Global Tel*Link (American Securities)
Securus Technologies (ABRY Partners)
CenturyLink
PayTel
Telmate
NCIC
Consolidated Telecom
ICSolutions (Keefe / H.I.G. Capital)
Legacy Inmate Communications
IWEBVisit, LLC
JPay (Securus)
HomeWAV
Turnkey Corrections
JailATM
Primarily Juvenile Facilities
G4S Youth Services (U.S. operations)
Youth Services International
Abraxas Youth & Family Services (GEO)
Cornerstone Programs
Mid-Atlantic Youth Services Corp.

Money Transfer Services
JPay (Securus)
Western Union
Access Corrections (Keefe)
Tech Friends, Inc.
Halfway Houses/Community Corrections
Community Education Centers
Hope Village (DC)
Correctional Alternatives, Inc. (CCA)
Avalon Correctional Services (CCA)
ComCor, Inc.
Correctional Management (CCA)
GEO Care (GEO Group)
Release Debit Cards
JPay (Securus)
NUMI Financial/Futura
JP Morgan Chase Bank
Release Pay/Rapid Financial Solutions
EZ Exit/Continental Prison Systems
Turnkey Corrections
Global Tel*Link
Keefe Commissary
Skylight Financial
Electronic Monitoring
BI, Inc. (GEO)
3M Electronic Monitoring, Inc.
ISECUREtrac Corp.
Satellite Tracking of People (Securus)
Offender Management Services
Probation Services
Sentinel Offender Services
Judicial Corr. Services (Correct Care Solutions)
Georgia Probation Services
CSRA Probation Services, Inc.

Compiled by Prison Legal News (www.prisonlegalnews.org)

Facility Design and Build
Sierra Companies
Hale-Mills Construction
Turner Construction (Hochtief)
Kimme & Associates, Inc.
Primarily Immigration Detention
Ahtna Corporation
Akai Security
Asset Protection and Security Services
Immigration Centers of America
Valley Metro Barbosa Group

Compiled by Prison Legal News (www.prisonlegalnews.org)


I believe this conglomerate has the ability for concentration and ghetto prison camps. An investigative journalist or our own Stilly could look into the contributions to a Trump campaign from this ALECprivate prison group.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 04:25 PM

The odds of the Supreme Court taking the case is still about 50-50 in my guess. There are strong arguments on each side.

Several State Capitols were evacuated today with more BOMB THREATS.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 12:04 PM

>
"Let me call the Senator's attention to the words 'or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States,'" Morrill said, ending the discussion on that point.

That reply is distressingly cavalier, possibly because Morrill thought the point to obvious to discuss.

But had he said, specifically, "Those words clearly apply as well to the highest offices in the land," that could have settled it. I'm surprised none of his colleagues required the wording of the Amendment to nail that down.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 11:25 AM

Stop the sniping. Steve and Donuel, we're all sick of it. Keep your opinions about each other's posts to yourselves. Everyone else, if you can stop referencing those remarks they can be deleted without interrupting the conversation.

ABC ran a story on December 29, 2023, that NPR and MSNBC and others have referenced. They did the hard work, digging into the Congressional Record and probably reading a lot of published speeches by the Senators holding the discussion about that amendment. (I've had to scan the speeches of House members discussing the Wilmot Proviso, to do with allowing slavery in Western states - it was earlier but will be much the same format of published remarks.)

As it originally passed the House, the 14th Amendment's third section was not nearly as broad as the version now being invoked to strike Trump's name from the ballot. It was narrowly crafted to apply only to those who willingly took part in the Civil War, and it was only meant to deprive former confederates of their right to cast ballots in federal elections. It also had an expiration date.

"Sec. 3. Until the 4th day of July, in the year 1870, all persons who voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving it aid and comfort, shall be excluded from the right to vote for Representatives in Congress and for electors for President and Vice President of the United States," the original, House-passed version read, according to congressional records of the era.

The Senate spent several days debating the House-passed amendment in the spring of 1866. While the birthright citizenship provisions in Section 1 earned a lot of time in debate, Section 3 was also the subject of an intense back-and-forth on the floor. The transcripts can be read in the Congressional Globe, a forerunner to the Congressional Record.

Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, who led the Republicans in debate, insisted that it wouldn't be enough to deprive the former confederates of their right to vote in federal elections -- he wanted them banished from government service altogether.

"I should prefer a clause prohibiting all persons who have participated in the rebellion, and who were over twenty-five years of age at the breaking out of the rebellion, from all participation in offices, either Federal or State, throughout the United States," Howard said on the Senate floor on May 23, 1866. "I think such a provision would be a benefit to the nation."

After about a week of discussions with colleagues, Howard offered the Sec. 3 language that was ultimately ratified. Howard's revision removed specific references to "the" rebellion and added an important qualifier: those who were to be excluded from government service would have to have violated prior oaths to defend the constitution by having "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against [it] or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."

Senators rejected various attempts to re-insert the word "voluntarily," or to restrict the exclusion to those who violated their oaths during the time they were still serving in office.

There was a great deal of concern voiced in debate that Howard's exclusion clause might leave the South ungovernable, with so many confederates poised to be disqualified from serving, even in state posts. Opponents expressed fear that the provision might alienate Union-loyal supporters in state legislatures. Nevertheless, the version Howard introduced made it through the entire ratification process and became effective on July 9, 1868.

In 2024, the originalists on the Supreme Court will likely seek to determine whether the ratifiers could have had it in mind 158 years ago that Sec. 3 might not only be applied to the "late insurrection," as the House-passed version originally had it, but also to any other rebellion that might later take place.

But originalists might take note of what Sen. Peter Van Winkle of West Virginia said as he sought to have the threshold for congressional amnesty in Howard's version lowered to a simple majority, rather than two-thirds.

"This is to go into our Constitution and to stand to govern future insurrection as well as the present; and I should like to have that point definitely understood," Van Winkle said at the time.

It's also worth noting that there was just a single reference in the Senate debate to the fact that the president and vice president were not explicitly mentioned in Howard's draft as "officer(s) of the United States," the way members of Congress and state officials had been itemized in the text. Would the disqualification clause of the amendment not cover the top posts in the executive branch?

"Why did you omit to exclude them?" asked Maryland Democratic Sen. Reverdy Johnson.

Maine's Lot Morrill jumped in to clarify.

"Let me call the Senator's attention to the words 'or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States,'" Morrill said, ending the discussion on that point.

Van Winkle and Morrill have spelled it out. The US Supreme Court won't be able to ignore these remarks, and those who consider themselves "originalists" can't ignore the later amendment to the constitution.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 10:36 AM

What I quoted is the entirety of Section 5, which applies (it seems) to all four preceding sections.

Read the whole Amendment here:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 09:45 AM

The state of Maine's Attorney General that obeyed the 14th amendment that disqualifies Trump from running for office was Swatted the following day, which is an anonymous caller claiming an emergency involving a shooting that prompted an armed response by law enforcement that has led to an accidental shooting of residents.

The bomb threats, Swatting, arson, and shootings by Trump supporters resemble the Taliban more each day.

Lighter could you expand on what the 5th Amendment orders and by whom?
The word shall, which means must, does not appear. I do not trust the Supreme Court to be literalists anymore.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 09:17 AM

Trump's best bet - a strong one, I think, as a non-lawyer - is Section 5 of the Amendment, which seems not to get much attention in these discussions:

"The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

He can argue that it takes an act of Congress to disqualify a candidate in a national election and possibly in a state primary as well.

Admittedly it doesn't say "Congress alone," but interpretation will be up to the Supreme court.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 08:23 AM

Very good Dave, I would expect that only Americans could notice the degraded integrity of NPR and some PBS journalism. The main point of voter fatigue in another Trump-Biden face-off is however true.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 08:12 AM

It's like watching a train that is about to crash. All the outsiders in the rest of the world can see it is about to happen but those on the US train are in denial :-(

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 08:08 AM

What about PBS?

Are they pathetic too? From that article

Biden vs. Trump

Public polling strongly suggests that voters do not want a rematch between Trump and Biden.

Most U.S. adults overall (56%) would be “very” or “somewhat” dissatisfied with Biden as the Democratic presidential nominee in 2024, according to a poll conducted last month by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. A similar majority (58%) said they would be very or somewhat dissatisfied with Trump as the GOP’s pick.

Perhaps because of such apathy, some voters simply don’t believe Biden and Trump will end up on the general election ballot, despite strong evidence to the contrary. That’s an idea that conservative strategist Sarah Longwell, who founded the Republican Accountability Project, says she hears regularly during weekly focus groups with voters across the political spectrum.

“Voters really aren’t thinking about it, so they don’t see the thing that’s coming right at us — the most likely scenario, which is Trump vs. Biden,” Longwell said. “But Trump is so dangerous. … I wish the level of urgency from everybody matched the reality of where we are headed.”

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 07:14 AM

That is a pathetic source subject to deliberate corruption.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jan 24 - 06:42 AM

Here's your problem, which is also the world's problem: in whichever national poll you look at, Trump is ahead of Biden (wiki was my source).

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 02 Jan 24 - 11:49 PM

The part of the article called "History of Section 3" makes an interesting point:

...

"The two-sentence clause says that anyone who swore an oath to 'support' the constitution and then engaged in insurrection cannot hold office unless a two-thirds vote of Congress allows it.

"Mr Trump's lawyers argue the provision isn't intended to apply to the president, contending that the oath for the top office in the land isn't to 'support' the constitution but instead to 'preserve, protect and defend' it.

"They also argue that the presidency isn't explicitly mentioned in the amendment, only any 'officer of the United States'.

[Note from me: The next paragraph is the interesting bit]

"Mr Trump made the opposite argument defending against his prosecution for falsifying business records by the Manhattan District Attorney's office, contending the case should move to federal court because the president is "an officer of the United States".

"The prosecutors argued that language only applies to presidential appointees — Mr Trump's position in Maine.

"The contention that Section 3 doesn't apply to the president drew a scathing response from the Colorado Supreme Court last month.

"'President Trump asks us to hold that Section 3 disqualifies every oath breaking insurrectionist except the most powerful one and that it bars oath breakers from virtually every office, both state and federal, except the highest one in the land,' the court's majority opinion said.

"'Both results are inconsistent with the plain language and history of Section 3.'"

After reading this bit from the second paragraph I quoted above "...contending that the oath for the top office in the land isn't to 'support' the constitution but instead to 'preserve, protect and defend' it' I'm wondering how on earth Trump can argue that inciting a riot at the Capitol, where people died trying to defend the Capitol can be defined as preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 02 Jan 24 - 09:13 PM

His clown car can't keep it between the ditches; they're all over the place in that list of imaginary "facts."

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 02 Jan 24 - 09:10 PM

Donald Trump appeals Maine ruling barring him from ballot under US constitution's insurrection clause

Key points:

"Donald Trump's lawyers argue his removal from the Maine ballot was 'due to her bias'

"He is also expected to appeal a similar decision in Colorado
   
"Mr Trump contends he incited no riot, never swore to 'support' the constitution and was not a government officer"

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Jan 24 - 08:45 PM

Recall that a Florida court decided to stop the recount of the Bush v Gore vote.
The Supreme Court then took 2 whole days to decide that Bush won the election.
Compare the time it is taking the Supreme Court to decide anything about the Trump 2020 election or his qualification to run again.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 31 Dec 23 - 07:02 AM

That is a profound question.

There were many unknowns after 1-6 despite the obvious actions by the Trump forces. On top of the cool-down argument of the MAGA mob, there were many historical reasons to delay and nail down the details of how far the infection had spread. Two issues resembled the McCarthy era and the WWII spread of fascism within Congress. Strangely enough, we were also facing the ramifications of a president using the Roy Cohn handbook of the big lie, delay, countersuit, and deny strategies. Don't forget a young Donald Trump actually retained Roy Cohn.

Allowing insurrectionist politicians to roast in their own juices could allow a few of them to come forward and inform on others.
The gears of justice are designed to grind slowly.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 30 Dec 23 - 12:48 PM

I hope one day we learn what the story is behind why AG Garland took so long to go ahead with the investigations and prosecutions of Trump. That there is a reasonable reason.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Dec 23 - 10:27 AM

I could only stand about 30 seconds of that crap parody.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Dec 23 - 10:18 AM

Goodbye Trump

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 29 Dec 23 - 10:43 AM

Maine removes Trump from ballot.
after weeks of humiliating ineptitude, the Republicans manage to elect a new speaker, an individual named “Mike Johnson” who wasn’t on anybody’s list, and in fact isn’t even a member of Congress. He was delivering a pizza to the Capitol and seemed at least marginally competent — all the toppings were correct — so they made him speaker. Minutes after delivering a pizza to the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson is elected Speaker. Kent Nishimura / USA TODAY NETWORK So the Republicans are a pathetic joke. This should be good for the Democrats, but they have big problems of their own. The public is increasingly dissatisfied with the Biden administration, which has based its appeal to the voters on four major claims: 1. Inflation is no longer a problem. 2. The border is under control. 3. The president is fully capable, physically and mentally, of carrying out his duties for another full term. 4. The Moon is actually a giant spaceship controlled by an alien race of highly intelligent rutabagas. Polls show that the public is deeply skeptical of these claims, especially the first three. In fact the voters are skeptical of pretty much everything happening in Washington, and increasingly pessimistic about the future; it is a worrisome time in America. Fortunately, the international outlook is more promising, especially in the often-volatile Middle East, which lately has been unusually peacef.... Never mind.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 23 Dec 23 - 12:48 PM

An interview with PhD psychologist niece Mary Trump talked about Trump's use of phrases and concepts from Hitler's Mein Kampf. While they aren't original ideas to Trump, she said he probably hasn't read Hitler's book - "He doesn't read." I've linked to the Wikipedia description. Maybe he checked out that for the background. And I'd guess that some of his minions like Stephen Miller have acquainted him with the philosophy regarding non-Aryan races.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Dec 23 - 06:17 PM

I had that thought too, but the expression is routinely used without that context, unfortunately. As for me, I thank my lucky stars that I was born and raised in good old Blighty. I love it and have travelled all over it, Scotland too. But I'd never say it's the best place on earth or that anyone else's home patch is in any way inferior. I think I'm a rock-solid patriot!

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 22 Dec 23 - 05:27 PM

To say "patriotism" is "the last refuge of the scoundrel" doesn't logically mean that all patriots are scoundrels - just that some of them are not really patriots.

Just sayin'.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Dec 23 - 03:06 PM

Jack Smith recently requested that the Supreme Court decide quickly on the immunity claim made by Trump and just now the court offered a one-sentence order that they won't take up the case. So it is left to the Court of Appeals (Jan. 9 hearing scheduled). This is parallel to the Nixon refusal to respond to the subpoena for the White House tapes - the Supreme Court was asked to decide ahead of the court of appeals, and they did so. Nixon had to hand over the tapes.

Trump is into delay delay delay, so this is the Supreme Court dragging its feet that can benefit him (there is no information about the makeup of the members as far as this order - 5-4 or all nine, etc.)

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Dec 23 - 12:57 PM

And, like religion, it’s another control mechanism.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Dec 23 - 12:45 PM

I don't think I agree with the good doctor. Here's George Orwell on patriotism:

"By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force upon other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality." [wiki]

The first sentence there echoes only good sentiments. "Best in the world" may not represent clear thinking but it reflects contentment and positive feelings about where you live. "America first" and "Make America great again" have nothing to do with patriotism and everything to do with ultra-nationalism, and resemble a quasi-religious form of bigotry.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 22 Dec 23 - 10:11 AM

Dr Johnson defined "patriotism" as "the last refuge of the scoundrel"; and Asimov later wrote "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent". I hereby channel Ambrose Bierce: "It is not the last resort, but the first."

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 21 Dec 23 - 01:04 PM

The judges in the Colorado Supreme Court decision have received a lot of threats. Trumpites are unleashed.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Dec 23 - 10:34 AM

It has taken many years to speak of Trump and Hitler in the same breath and be taken seriously. The next step is to speak of Trump and domestic terrorism as part and parcel.

Bomb threats have risen exponentially.
Keeping people from the polls is the plan.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 11:00 AM

The rest of Richardson's newsletter can be read on Facebook or her Substack column.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 10:59 AM

From historian Heather Cox Richardson's Letters from an American yesterday:

This evening, by a vote of 4–3, the Colorado Supreme Court decided that former president Donald Trump is disqualified from holding office and should be removed from the 2024 ballot in the state, citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

That section was written in the wake of the Civil War, after former Confederates had reelected to Congress men who had left in 1861 to try to destroy the United States government after voters elected Abraham Lincoln.

The section reads: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

Six Colorado Republican and Independent voters challenged Trump’s inclusion on the state’s ballots because of his role in the January 6, 2021, attempt to stop the counting of the nation’s lawful electoral ballots that had elected Democrat Joe Biden president in 2020. Last month, Denver District Court Judge Sarah Wallace ruled that Trump had engaged in insurrection by inciting the riot that led to an attack on the U.S. Capitol but said that Section 3 did not apply to the president.

Today the Colorado Supreme Court agreed that the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, constituted an “insurrection” and that Trump “engaged in” that insurrection through his personal actions, including his incitement of the crowd that breached the Capitol. But it disagreed that the 14th Amendment did not apply to the president.

“The sum of these parts is this,” the court wrote. “Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three; because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Secretary to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.”

“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” the court said. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.” Colorado voters preferred Democratic candidates to Trump in 2016 and 2020, so this case is less likely to reflect on Colorado in 2024 than it is to open the door to other challenges in swing states.

The president is nothing if not an officer of the United States.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 10:56 AM

Supreme Court? Don't hold your breath, folks.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 10:16 AM

The Colorado Supreme Court did a masterful job of interpreting the 14th amendment section 3. It was methodical, conscientious, and was not political whatsoever. It was to the letter of the law. It is up to Trump to appeal before New Year's day.

I beg to differ with Trump that vermin are poisoning the blood of America. https://www.amazon.com/Delicious-Vermin-Rosie-Barham/dp/0992606241

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 08:59 AM

The Supreme Court is politized beyond the norm with Trump appointees.
The 3 issues proposed here are legally moot and do not support any vindication of Trump in the language of article three or by precedent.
The ultimate decision will either support other Republican candidates or make a clear advocacy of Fascism. However the Court flips this coin they will appear to be evil to Republicans for Trump or Democrats for democracy. Roberts is between a rock and a disintegration of the Constitution they were meant to interpret. He probably thinks throwing it back to voters is a Solomon option but he would be wrong imo.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 08:27 AM

I saw a meme the other day with a bloke sat behind a desk saying to a job applicant

"So, you used to work here before but you defrauded your expenses, stole company secrets, you sexually harassed you female colleagues and when you got fired you got all your friends to attack the board room. Tell me why you think you should be re-employed..."

That is what it looks like from over here and, sadly, it looks like he will get the job :-(

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 08:18 AM

BTW, similar suits have already been rejected by the supreme courts of New Hampshire, Arizona, and Minnesota.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Lighter
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 08:01 AM

There are at least three issues at stake:

1. a legal definition of "insurrection" and its application in this case.

2. the question of why the Amendment doesn't specify president and vice-president if it applies to them.

3. just who - courts or Congress - decides on whether a candidate has engaged in insurrection.

The split opinion of the Colorado Supreme Court shows that these won't be simple decisions for SCOTUS.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 06:33 AM

Now it's the Supreme Court's turn to uphold the Colorado court, overturn or make a decision in between the two.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 20 Dec 23 - 03:00 AM

Colorado Supreme Court bans Donald Trump from the state's ballot under US constitution's insurrection clause

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 19 Dec 23 - 01:39 PM

Good one, Donuel!

And as you said, SRS, "The only parties winning in all of this (if they can get their clients to pay them) are the attorneys" and that means that when clients are not paying the attorneys it is a bad strategic move, biting the hand that feeds them, their only defence.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 19 Dec 23 - 01:38 PM

An excerpt from an interview with former House Speaker Paul Ryan surfaced last week and is a good read on how GOP politics are going these days:

Donald Trump is “not a conservative”, the former Republican House speaker Paul Ryan said, but “a populist, authoritarian narcissist”.

The former vice-presidential pick, who led the House majority for two years when Trump was president, also praised the Republicans Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for opposing Trump to the cost of their congressional careers.

Ryan, from Wisconsin, left Congress in 2019 and now sits on the board of Fox Corp, parent company of Fox News. He was speaking to Kevin Kajiwara, co-president of Teneo Political Risk Advisory, in a podcast interview recorded in November but widely noticed this week.

This article from The Guardian offers commentary and also a link to the full hour+ interview. The fact that Ryan is now at Fox Corp, the parent company of FAUX NEWS shows he's still in the conservative ranks, not in the Lincoln Project, etc.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 19 Dec 23 - 05:23 AM

Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows was denied moving his GA court case to a DC Federal Court which could make his outcome more dire.

Guilliani is standing by his lie.

Sometimes it's hard to be a fascist
Givin' all your love to just one man
You'll have the bad times
And he'll have the good times
Doing things that you don't understand
But if you love him, you'll forgive him
Even though he's hard to understand, mm, mm
And if you love him, oh, be proud of him
'Cause after all, he's just a man
Stand by your lie
Give him more arms to cling to
And some more harm to come to
When camps are cold and lonely
Stand by your lie
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the cash you can, mm, mm
Stand by your lie, hmm, hmm
Stand by your lie (Ooh, ooh)
Even though you know it won't fly (Ooh, ooh)
Just give him all the power you can
Stand by your lie, mm, mm, mm


Well, it wasn't funny last weekend with over a hundred bomb threats against Synagogues from Massachusetts to Colorado and throughout the South. The Trump quotes taken directly from Mein Kampf are polling well in Des Moines.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Dec 23 - 03:56 PM

Skimpy indictees sound like diapers that are too small.

I would like to see more fake electors face justice but that is as likely as Gulliani paying up for his crimes.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 16 Dec 23 - 11:58 AM

Some of his fellow indictees in the State of Georgia have issued one sentence apologies to fulfill a requirement when they pled guilty. As skimpy as they are, they are another form of admission of guilt.

You'll never see Trump apologise or admit guilt, and if you read his niece Mary Trump's analysis of the situation, you'll see he's pretty much incapable of such things.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: gillymor
Date: 16 Dec 23 - 06:28 AM

Rudy can always return to acting to replenish his coffers. Oh wait, he wasn't acting.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 15 Dec 23 - 08:38 PM

I posted the link to the article because I know the Giuliani case is not specific to Trump but it is related by association to Trump's claims of election rigging. I imagine it is everyone for him/herself in Trump's world when the legal battles start piling up.

I also am speculating that Giuliani has already siphoned off most of his assets to a sunny island somewhere and is now claiming his pockets are empty. It's very sad that he has had to put a house on the market for a measly price of a little over $4 million. He'll probably claim that that represents his total assets.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Dec 23 - 06:24 PM

Trump isn't paying the legal fees of the folks who were caught in the same net. The only parties winning in all of this (if they can get their clients to pay them) are the attorneys.

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Helen
Date: 15 Dec 23 - 06:17 PM

Rudy Giuliani ordered to pay nearly $150 million to two Georgia election workers he defamed

"A Washington, DC, jury has ordered Rudy Giuliani to pay nearly $150 million to two Georgia election workers for the harm caused by defamatory statements he made about them following the 2020 election."

...

"During the trial, an attorney for Freeman and Moss showed videos and played audio clips in which Giuliani repeated false claims that the two election workers stuffed ballots and were caught on video allegedly passing a USB drive as part of a vote-stealing scheme.

"None of those claims were true, and the supposed USB drive was a ginger mint."

....



He is claiming he doesn't have funds to pay, and that section of the article "How much money does Giuliani have?" also lists a number of other unpaid debts owed including "..more than $1 million to defense attorneys who’ve helped him on other matters, prompting them to sue him this year".

....

"It’s also not clear if Giuliani would be able to declare bankruptcy to shield himself from any sum of damages in this lawsuit. That issue, according to people familiar with the case, may have to be decided by the courts at a later time, and it’s possible he could still be on the hook for the award to Freeman and Moss, even if he goes into bankruptcy."

Subject: RE: Trump INDICTED x4 NO new Trump threads part III
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Dec 23 - 06:16 PM

Material From Russia Investigation Went Missing as Trump Left Office
A binder given to the Trump White House contained details that intelligence agencies believe could reveal secret sources and methods.

So apparently this folder was copied by WH staffers who were redacting some of the material that Trump wanted to publicise. The FBI and security folks became alarmed and gathered up the notebooks but they can tell that one is still missing and it may be Mark Meadows has or had it.

Material from a binder with highly classified information connected to the investigation into Russian efforts to meddle in the 2016 election disappeared in the final days of Donald J. Trump’s presidency, two people familiar with the matter said.

The disappearance of the material, known as the “Crossfire Hurricane” binder for the name given to the investigation by the F.B.I., vexed national security officials and set off concerns that sensitive information could be inappropriately shared, one of the people said.

The material’s disappearance was reported earlier Friday by CNN. The matter was so concerning to officials that the Senate Intelligence Committee was briefed about it last year, a U.S. official said.

The binder consists of a hodgepodge of materials related to the origins and early stages of the Russia investigation that were collected by Trump administration officials. They included copies of botched F.B.I. applications for national-security surveillance warrants to wiretap a former Trump campaign adviser as well as text messages between two F.B.I. officials involved in the inquiry, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, expressing animus toward Mr. Trump.

The substance of the material — a redacted version of which has since been made public under the Freedom of Information Act and is posted on the website of the F.B.I. — is not considered particularly sensitive, the official said.

But the raw version in the binder contained details that intelligence agencies believe could reveal secret sources and methods. (The publicly available version contains numerous portions that were whited out as classified.)

It is not clear if the missing material comprises the entire original binder of material provided to the White House for Mr. Trump’s team to review and declassify in part before leaving office.

Read the rest at the top link.