Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"Donald Trump will not be sentenced on his business fraud conviction until September, a New York judge ruled Tuesday in the wake of Monday’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity."

"The announcement underscores the far-reaching implications of Monday’s Supreme Court ruling, in which the court’s conservative wing found that presidents have absolute immunity for “core” presidential duties."

"Will Scharf, an attorney who represents Trump in the immunity case, told CNN Monday night the high court’s ruling “absolutely” impacts the hush money case."

“The Supreme Court was very clear that for acts that fall within the outer perimeter of the president’s official responsibilities, acts that are presumptively immune from prosecution, that evidence of those acts cannot be used to try essentially private acts,” he said on “The Source.”

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/02/politics/trump-sentencing-date-delay-proposal/index.html

Like I stated, the bottom line is: justice denied.

More like justice delayed until September.  And only if one thinks the hush money prosecution involves "justice."  I personally think this particular case has nothing to do with justice.  As you know, I think the verdict will be overturned for all the reasons we discussed a couple weeks ago.

Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer

Alive and kicking folks.....That said, I am in the midst of starting treatment for throat cancer. Prognosis is good though.

Lets just say I took a needed break from politics.....

Hope everyone is doing well.....

Good to hear from you!  Glad the prognosis is good, hang in there!

Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer

Having read this thread from start to finish I am going to consider myself caught up lol

I would also make the observation that things have not changed much here, if at all.

You have been missed though!  Everyone have a great 4th.  J

We must acknowledge the limitations of these grandiose promises made before elections.  Rarely does anything but a watered down version ever get implemented.   That said, there are plenty of good reasons to prefer that Trump not be reelected.

Which gets us to the only US political news that matters this week.  What are the Ds going to do with Biden?  He did not rehabilitate himself in the Stephanopoulos soft-ball interview.  All we learned is that he'll not take a cognitive test and that he'll give this election the old "college try."  He can not rehabilitate himself, he is too far gone and we all saw it in real time.  It is a crime his family and advisors are propping him up.

Democrat Van Jones has acknowledged that a vote for Biden is a vote for Harris, since Biden certainly can not complete a second term.  Is this a viable election strategy?  Jones does not think so, he thinks Harris needs to run directly if she is going to beat Trump.  I agree with the strategy, although I doubt Harris beats Trump. 
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/07/07/van_jones_democrats_are_running_kamala_harris_for_president_
one_way_or_another_lets_do_it_right.html

Democrat Ezra Kline quoting Democrat Jim Clyburn is endorsing a mini-primary, to the best that some sort of contest can be cobbled together.  I think this is a great idea.  A lot better than just anointing Harris or running Biden and hoping that Harris can step in if Biden wins then immediately retires or dies.  https://dnyuz.com/2024/07/07/jim-clyburn-is-right-about-what-democrats-should-do-next/

Many Republicans and some media critics have pointed out that the White House (and some media outlets) have been lying to our faces about the President's mental health.  This is a lie of importance.  According to one of my favorite Democrats, Nate Silver, this is a lie "orders of magnitude" more important to the country than lying about hush money payments to a porn star.  In view of the following point, it seems small potatoes to worry about this scandal aspect of the underlying lie, but in other times we would (or should) be.  https://www.natesilver.net/p/blaming-the-media-is-what-got-democrats

Last, who is running the country now?  What happens if the pudding hits the fan in one of the ongoing wars?  There have been several disturbing, and credible, accounts out there indicating Jill and Hunter Biden are the President's closest advisors.  I always laugh when you guys say in response to Richard's latest Hunter rant that "you won't vote for Hunter Biden..."  Touché and point to you.  But now - what if Biden is really taking advice from his crack-addled dipshit son?  There have reportedly been serious discussions about removing Biden under the 25th amendment.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/07/06/25th-amendment-talk-grows-to-replace-biden-as-president-digs-in-his-heels/  I hope it does not come to that, but not nearly as much as I hope there is no new international crisis when Dr. Jill, Hunter, or some unnamed sycophant is really at the helm.  

Bottom line, there are really important political things going on, far more important than any far-right campaign wish list without much chance of being enacted.  No chance really, unless of course that Ds do nothing about Biden, and Trump landslides the election winning the House and the Senate on his coattails.  If that happens, it is the Democrat's fault for hiding Biden's condition until it was far too late and thus lying to the people in a matter of supreme importance.  J

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

There is no chance for Biden to rehabilitate his image, and it is only hope that fuels his continuing on, and a false hope at that IMO. Biden needs to go and now. As you point out, most rational voters realize that his VP would be the actual candidate they are voting on, so he isn't even substantively on the ballot at this point, other than "not being Trump" and a place-holder for the VP.

We need a contest to get the best candidate, even if it is only at the convention. Harris is not a legitimate alternative as nobody voted for her and it is very doubtful that she is the best candidate the Dems could put forward.

My hope is that this will be an echo of the 2002 NJ Senatorial campaign. Remember Sen. Doug Forrester? Yeah, neither do I. He was running for the Sen seat in NJ against incumbent Sen Robert Torricelli, when late in the campaign, Torricelli fell to a political scandal. I, and most people, knew Forrester was about to be elected, when the Dems pulled a fast one - they brought back popular Dem Frank Lautenberg in the 11th hour and replaced a disgraced Torricelli on the ballot. I remember how pissed I was when Lautenberg won the seat. 

I hope the Dems figure this out. Biden is not the right answer, and neither is Harris under these conditions. She could be if she can win a true Dem contest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_United_States_Senate_election_in_New_Jersey

Yes, I was thinking of the 2002 NJ campaign... Not!   Surprising that a commie, leftist, liberal democrat voter like you (or so I have heard) would be upset, even hypothetically upset, that the R lost... 

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

This thread is about project 2025 and not Biden. We all get it about Biden.

My recollection from a previous thread or two on project 2025 is that you continually attempt minimize it in much the same manner as you minimize the impact on the SCOTUS immunity decision in general and on Trump in particular.  

Everything is about Biden now.  All other issues and concerns relate back to Biden and the question of w/n the Ds are even going to compete against Trump.  Otherwise Trump will win with what he perceives as a mandate.  For all I know he will enact the 2025 agenda verbatim, and it will be the Democrat's fault.

Also, the immunity decision is correct, important, and any negatives are grossly exaggerated by a hysterical press.  Sotomayor beclowned herself.  
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2024/07/07/highly_misleading_coverage_of_scotus_immunity_decision_626957.html

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"We must acknowledge the limitations of these grandiose promises made before elections.  Rarely does anything but a watered down version ever get implemented.  That said, there are plenty of good reasons to prefer that Trump not be reelected."

This thread is about project 2025 and not Biden. We all get it about Biden.

My recollection from a previous thread or two on project 2025 is that you continually attempt minimize it in much the same manner as you minimize the impact on the SCOTUS immunity decision in general and on Trump in particular.  

That said, project 2025 is as aggressive as a conservative agenda can and will be including its president's admonishment of a bloodless revolution unless Democrats provoke it.  Make no mistake, it is a revolution, or more appropriately, a devolution backwards into 17th/18th century living standards and most of what matters that goes with it...

I assume you are opposed to immunity for legislators acting within the scope of their legislative duties too?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/legislative_immunity#:~:text=


How about judicial immunity:  https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/overview-judicial-immunity

If you read the immunity decision, you will see that the SC merely confirmed that the type of immunity enjoyed by all government officials for official acts extends to the president.   Frankly, I think that most all objections to this case can be boiled down to "but Trump!"  (Tip of the hat to James Lacey since I am riffing off of one of his patented phrasings.)

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"... I would not worry about project 2025. If Trump is elected..."

I heard the same thing in the aftermath of the SCOTUS reversal of Roe v Wade, i.e. it's just returning decision making back to the states where it belongs and yada yada...

The actual and awful consequences for those who would care to know the truth can be found in these recent reviews from the University of Colorado Boulder:

https://www.colorado.edu/today/2024/06/20/2-years-after-roe-v-wade-reversal-impacts-and-whats-come

and

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/22/us/roe-v-wade-overturned-2-years/index.html#:~:text=Two%20years%20after%20Roe%20v,%2C%20Texas%2C%20Idaho%20and%20Tennessee.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/22/us/roe-v-wade-overturned-2-years/index.html#:~:text=Two%20years%20after%20Roe%20v,%2C%20Texas%2C%20Idaho%20and%20Tennessee.

Bad consequences as a result of reversal do not make Roe a properly decided case.  Lot's of people think it is the Supreme Court's job to find and enact new rights to protect certain classes of people.  It is not.  

I am personally quite confident that the real and undeniable hardships resulting from the reversal will be resolved with Roe-like regulations in all but a handful of states relatively soon.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Make no mistake, it is a revolution, or more appropriately, a devolution backwards into 17th/18th century living standards and most of what matters that goes with it...

This is a little extreme, don't you think?  I'm not a big fan of Trump and I'm not going to vote for him, but I surely do not expect a reintroduction of slavery, child labor, mass starvation, rampant disease obliterating the working classes, and the elimination of indoor plumbing after he is elected.

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Neither one of them deserves to run based on mental health alone, but the sooner we accept the fact that neither one of them is going to drop out and get behind Biden, the better.

I want the media to focus on Trump's fitness to lead the nation. Any objective person can tell he is legitimately unqualified for many reasons, and we have been over them too many times to count now.

By the way, here is Biden's Letter to Congressional Democrats, in case you think there is any chance of getting him to drop out. Democrats need to quit cannibalizing themselves and unite.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/07/08/us/read-biden-letter-democrats.html

Hi James:  I am fine with your first line, but think there is a better than 50/50 chance Biden is forced out.  (I could not read the letter behind the NYT paywall, but I know Biden has shown no personal inclination to drop out).   What will the D's do when Trump's lead in the polls extends a few more points?   More importantly, what will they do when Biden's cognitive abilities deteriorate further, to the point where he can not make campaign stops, and must drop out of the debate in September?