IANAL etc.
But I believe it would be far preferable to live in a legal universe where this kind of language and sanction from Judge Middlebrooks was used more liberally with Trump’s other court games – in particular his game about immunity. That would seem like a more sane universe, one where the legal-justice complex would merit more respect.
5 Likes
Thanks for such an insightful and well written question, Sport. I am truly impressed with your razor sharp intellect. But, no I am not five years old. I’m just not interested in conforming to the very tired and very small box adults like to spend their lives in. If you don’t like it, you can always choose not to comment, and simply move on.
Sigh…
Another day passes and no trump stroke. Just gibberish about “Article XII” in the Constitution that trump claimed he would defend. And he said nothing about potential Articles IIX, IX, X, or XI that do not exist. Just his fanciful Article XII. And he never said what it was about.
Sigh
Defending a client in a criminal case is a wholly different kettle of fish than a civil lawsuit.
1 Like
Fair enough.
Nevertheless, in law school I’m sure one studies the existence of a threshold beyond which a defense argument is deemed frivolous – and the lawyers bringing the case get sanctioned. I’d be delighted to know of an authoritative analysis of this, particularly regarding the shitbag’s actions. Surely it is possible for Trump to attempt to make a case which passes a threshold of frivolousness; It seemed to me that the immunity case should pass such a threshold, but evidently it does not. Where lies the threshold? It must exist.
Yup! Our collective reaction to the court hearing of the immunity issue reveals just how political and corrupt the court is. Roberts, Alito, Barrett, Gorsuch, Thomas didn’t even try to hide their hand. Much less, their total lack of focus on the legal issues.
Will this nightmare ever end? Trump has overstayed his presence on the national stage by 6 years.
I’m no expert on sanctions standards against defense counsel in criminal cases, but my general sense is that it’s reserved for outright lying and fraud, if even then. I am well aware of the standard for sanctions in civil cases, and it’s basically the “no reasonable lawyer” standard.
3 Likes
“Constitutional actors” is what these bozos were pretending to be. They violated various statutes to continue their conspiracy to subvert a lawful Presidential election while trying to throw wall paper over the large gap in legality that they’d opened up.
A convention is not necessary to amend the constitution. It’s a far right fascist wet dream to open the entire constitution up for debate, but it’s not required and it’s not necessary. It’s a reality only because the people who talk the most about the constitution don’t believe a word of it.
2 Likes
I forgot to mention, this also lays out how complicit the co-conspirators in the Senate were! They are really a bunch of criminals who have not received any measure of punishment yet.
4 Likes
We don’t need to have too many more states pass the national popular vote act (or whatever it’s called) to make the electoral college reflect the popular vote. Passed here in Colorado.
2 Likes
II can see the wheels turning in Trump’s head now as the details of the plot are explained to him. All he had to do was attend the rally say the magic words then return to the White House and watch the results on TV.
1 Like
Um, in the context of the series Trump was the president. Follow the actual timeline and where this was occurring - before Jan 6, 2021. He remained the president until noon Jan 20, like it or not. Learn how reporting on a timeline works. The piece is absolutely accurate. Jeez.
1 Like
Um, that’s a pipe dream. Just as an actual repeal of the amendment that requires 2/3 of the all of the states to agree. Check the map. It’s the same 50 states. And the ones who benefit from the EC are more than 1/3. All a bunch of hot air. GOTV. VOTE. That’s THE answer.
What exact law did they violate? You do understand that the constitution specifically protects their actions in the senate including voting. Unlike the other players, like it or not members of congress cannot be prosecuted for anything they say or do in the act of their job. Per the constitution.
Correct. Amendment is the step, and it does not open the fever dream of a rip apart convention. BUT in this environment the same states which BENEFIT from their unbalanced power in the EC have the same power on whether an amendment passes. Assuming it would clear congress. See that “same states” reference. GOTV. VOTE. That’s OUR constitutional power.
Um, what SCOTUS immunity hearing? The only thing on immunity they did so far was to call for briefings. Which is what happens when an appellant requests a stay. There has been no hearing. You’re thinking about the 14.3 hearing, where there’s broad disagreement in expert community on what SCOTUS position will be, and you might have missed where questions from “liberal” justices were as aligned with the conservatives as different. But it was NOT a hearing on immunity. Try to keep up.
The more I learn about this, the surer I am of what I’ve been saying since late January 2021: The only reason this didn’t work is because there were too many states. If Trump only needed one of these states to win, they’d have done it for him—especially since Fox News would be going full Radio Rwanda on the electoral workers in whatever state it was, and the New York Times would be all about the questions and perceptions and shadows.
1 Like
Attempting to promulgate the submission by the fake electors.
They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
Minute they get home they can be elected just like anyone else. Simply can’t use their speeches in Congress against them. However Congress can use their speeches in Congress to expel them.