Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by James Brown

I'm unfamiliar with this one.   I'll do some reading and get back, but it might be tomorrow.   I think the prosecution and defense always submit proposed jury instructions before a trial, so based on the headlines alone, I don't know what the issue is.

Here is the actual order, it is short:   https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.407.0.pdf

I can sorta see why the Anti-Trump journalists are apoplectic.  The hypotheticals are very pro-Trump.  The apoplectic sort might be freaking out a bit prematurely though.  As best I can tell, Cannon is not saying that these will be jury instructions, she seems to be asking Smith and Trump's lawyers to argue for or against the use of the obviously pro-Trump hypotheticals.

My first impression is that these are the issues she should resolve by granting or denying Trump's pending motions to dismiss.  According to the Washington Post she is hostile to Trump's arguments:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/03/18/trump-judge-cannon-jury-instructions-pra/  (I recommend this article, it seems analytical and free from hysteria).

I can not figure out why she wants more arguments on these issues in the jury instruction context.   Maybe she is just being cautious.   Maybe she is totally incompetent.   Either way this is not the end of the world order that MSNBC paints it as.   She hasn't actually made any order on the instructions to be presented to a jury yet.  (Also, if she dismisses the case there will be no jury instructions, so this is sorta a signal that she is not going to dismiss)  What matters a lot is what she orders on instructions after the lawyers weigh in and when she ultimately does decide Trump's motions to dismiss.

Originally Posted by Maurice Clark

Hi Rod,

No need to be grumpy with Dave. He does have a fair point. Personally, I think the Onion has the best take on it all.

https://www.theonion.com/what-trump-meant-by-there-would-be-a-bloodbath-if-he-1851346115

To get back on topic, Dave, i hope you do manage to get to Oz for the 28 eclipse. Views through your mate's 32 in of objects like 47 tuc, eta carina, 30 doradus, NGC 1365, the helix nebula, and so many more will knock your socks off!

Cheers,

Maurice

No doubt!   I will make the trip to Australia one of these days!

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Yeah he did do it yesterday in Ohio just like he does in every other speech he makes when he starts off with his patriots and hostages in prison bullshit. Get it yet?

BTW, this is a political forum and if you don't like the heat get out of the kitchen...

Seriously?   Collegiality is a virtue Rod.   I personally like the side threads that humanize the participants here.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Upon reflection, what she is doing makes perfect sense:

1. In reality, anyone else would have been tried, convicted and serving time by now, especially considering the degree and willfulness of the magnitude in this case.

2. Trump's presence in the court on multiple occasions coupled by the multitude of favorable delays and decisions for him by Cannon is a matter of public record.

3. Cannon apparently has a quid pro quo with Trump that upon further delays and favorable rulings upon his behalf, she will be considered for advancement to SCOTUS upon retirement of Clarence Thomas who has been signaling his desire to do so for quite some time in order to live a life of luxury. The latter will likely be accommodated by the generous gifts from the billionaires associated with the federalist society in order to show their appreciation for his "conservative philosophy".

Sound about right?....

Not really!  The documents case is complex and presents novel legal issues.  Due process requires that Trump be given the right to make any arguments and motions in his defense that are at least sort of supported by law.   No one would care that this takes time but for the election in November.   Also, no one else (at least no one who could afford a proper defense e.g. Clinton, Biden, Pence or others who might have been charged in a documents case) would be convicted by now!

Cannon may be biased for Trump, I don't know.   (Of course the judges in GA, DC, and NY are almost certainly biased against Trump, and those cases have not rushed to judgement.)   So, it is not supportable in my opinion to argue that the bias of the judge is responsible for slow walking this case.   Complex criminal prosecutions with defendants who can afford decent counsel always take time.   No one would care but for the election in November and again, that is not a valid reason to discard due process.

It is ridiculous to think that Trump would nominate an extremely new district court judge to the Supreme Court.  The part I have bolded above is ridiculous and unsupported slander.   MSNBC is not even going this far, and they are way into the weeds of partisan speculation.  J

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Every word Trump utters is reported on and magnified in the right-wing MAGA social media, so they hear it regardless, loud and clear. I don't know what Trump hopes to accomplish with this over-the-top rhetoric. It's certainly not winning him back any independents or moderate Republicans. I doubt he is a Machiavellian genius. Instead, he is acting impulsively and reflexively, as always. Exactly the kind of person you want in the White House. Am I right?

Of course I want him to lose, for all the reasons you document from time to time!  That said, I think that objectively, Trump's play for the auto worker vote based upon Chinese EV plants in Mexico is reasonably savvy.   Obviously he obscured his meaning in the word salad, but the press made sure that everyone now knows what Trump was trying to say thanks to "Bloodbathgate."

Originally Posted by James Lacey

_

Hi James - Funny!  I have a resolution to make.  See my new thread.

Hi all:

Richard's most recent posts are rife with scatological slang and curse words.  I do not think that is OK.  I do not favor ignoring Richard altogether.  He does bring a different point of view to the forum, which is valuable.  He is (I think) the only Trump supporter who posts here anymore, and in my view any fan of political discussion owes it to themselves to try to understand all perspectives.

That said, I value civil dialog and intelligent conversation.  Life is too short to wallow through potty-mouthed screeds.  So from here on out I personally will not ever reply to a post by anyone that uses gutter language, overt swearing, over the top insults and the like.  For whatever reason, Herb has chosen not to enforce the TOS language and decorum rules in this forum.  So Richard keeps pushing his threads and posts across the line into uncharted regions of vileness and juvenility.

I'm happy to engage with Richard or anyone else if they post in a civil manner.  Otherwise, I'll ignore any and all vile and gratuitously insulting posts.  I encourage the rest of you to join me.  Jim

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

You guys are missing the point: You gotta do it like a Republican! That's why Rich posts in the manner that he does and it typifies today's Republican party, the party of MAGA and Donald Trump! 
I really don't know what kind of a sheltered life Jim Brown has been leading since he apparently doesn't understand that in Republican speak, every other word and a half is the F word. And for everything in between, see Rich's posts for a tutorial...

Rod, you need to get out and meet some real republicans.   Do you really think 1/2 the voters in this country share Richard's point of view and rhetorical style?  I do not, although I am pretty sure that these are the only sort of republicans you will ever see on an MSNBC video clip.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Well, it may be more than that since the vast percentage of Republicans think the 2020 election was "stolen" so clearly you're out of touch with the majority's "thinking" these days...

Speaking of the fraudulent claims of the election being stolen:

"A California judge on Wednesday recommended disbarring a lawyer at the center of former President Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election."

"State Bar Judge Yvette Roland found John Eastman culpable on 10 of the 11 counts filed by the California State Bar last year. The state bar sought to strip Eastman’s license to practice law in the state over “false and misleading statements” about purported election fraud and his role in “provoking” the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot."

“It is recommended that John Charles Eastman, State Bar Number 193726, be disbarred from the practice of law in California and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys,” Roland wrote.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4560409-judge-rules-john-eastman-should-be-disbarred-over-efforts-to-overturn-2020-election/

Time to activate Clarence and Samuel on their speed-dial...

Interesting.  Did you know that according to reputable polls at least Seventy-two percent (72%) of Democrats still believe it’s likely the 2016 election outcome was changed by Russian collusion and interference;   Seventy Two Percent!  What to make of these facts?

My conclusion is that Democrats and Republicans are both far too susceptible to the big lies put out by their parties and their own flavor of our woefully biased press.   Democrats and Republicans are by and large too bound in their own news bubbles to avoid it I suppose.   The fact that large majorities still believe the two big political lies of our generation, even after those big lies have been debunked by experts and official inquiry, is an indictment of humanity, our political operatives, and the press.   This is not an indictment of Republicans or Democrats.   large majorities of everyone bear the shame of falling for, supporting, and deriving comfort from the big lies.

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2022/democrats_still_believe_russia_changed_2016_election#google_vignette

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1R72SJ/

Here is an opinion piece that perhaps better explains what I am talking about:

"That continuing problem led us, in our most recent Feb. 9-12 “Winning the Issues” survey to compare voter confidence in the outcome of the 2020 and 2016 elections.  We asked people first whether they believed Joe Biden had won the November election fairly or because of voter fraud. And then whether Donald Trump had won fairly in 2016 or because of Russian interference.

What we got was an almost perfectly partisan result — two sides of the same coin. By almost exactly the same percentage, Democrats and Republicans opted for a conspiratorial cause for their parties’ defeats. "


https://rollcall.com/2021/02/24/partisan-voters-claim-we-wuz-robbed-no-they-werent/

By the way, I still think you should get out and meet some real Republicans, assuming you really do think a large percentage of the voters in this country share Richard's point of view and rhetorical style.   Jim