The Supreme Court found that the the government gave the jury too broad an interpretation of what an “official act” means. Federal law prohibits quid pro quo corruption. But by the government’s definition, Roberts wrote, nearly anything of value would be considered a quid and nearly “anything a public official does” could be considered a quo.
Roberts writes:
“But conscientious public officials arrange meetings for constituents, contact other officials on their behalf, and include them in events all the time. The basic compact underlying representative government assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act appropriately on their concerns — whether it is the union official worried about a plant closing or the homeowners who wonder why it took five days to restore power to their neighborhood after a storm. The Government’s position could cast a pall of potential prosecution over these relationships if the union had given a campaign contribution in the past or the homeowners invited the official to join them on their annual outing to the ballgame. Officials might wonder whether they could respond to even the most commonplace requests for assistance, and citizens with legitimate concerns might shrink from participating in democratic discourse.”
Leaving aside the obvious context (i.e., when a gangster ask you to do something while dangling you out a window, even if he does not explicitly state “do it or I drop you,” that sort of goes without saying), after Zelensky asks to buy more Javelin missiles form the US, Unser Drumpfenfuhrer immediately states “I would like you to do us a favor though …” Really, who can say with a straight face that that is not even a “suggestion” of a quid pro quo?
That’s not what I saw. No interest in defusing any tension, just baleful glares hoping that someone even looks like he’ll step out of line, and then the rush to arrest on any flimsy pretext.
Do not expect discretion or restraint from the men in blue/black.
Fair enough. Neither of us are seeing Weimar, then. And I won’t say what you’re envisioning is impossible at all. I don’t mean to make light of the type of violent incidents we already have. I’d hate to have to explain that to the broken families in El Paso and so many other places. Trump fed the madness, and we let him do it.
I’m sure it’s concerning when you take a paddle through the fever swamps. And I’m sure it’s a-boil there. This is the endgame, and they know it perfectly well. I hope responsible authorities at the national, state, and local levels are keeping an eye out, is all.
I assume it is. I go there all the time to get a sense of what the conservatives are raging against. But I am starting to feel like its more of a libertarian leaning site than Trump-servative.
So much for the redo of the comments helping on busy days - this place is breaking down just like the old days for me. Bad Gateway, have to post 3 times before it posts etc.
It’s the ones with guns, batons, riot helmets, and an overweening need to prove their masculinity in tense crowd situations that worry me. It’s not the everyday scenarios that will be the problem. It’ll be the extrajudicial enforcement of NYMBY laws against the homeless followed by the inevitable organized backlash that you’ll see the blue wall form and inflict its will on the masses.
BREAKING: The Senate has voted 54-41 to terminate President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency at the southern border and to stop the diversion of military funds to pay for a wall along the border.
