Kansas Crimson

Obama judge, so obviously tainted

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 7:34 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:36 am

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 9:51 pm But...muh...tRuMp!

Pretty sure it's just called a specific, accurate example of the complaints being made. It's what non-delusional people do when they have a conversation.

Only when they're obsessed.

Did someone steal your login info? I would expect Randy to say that providing specific, relevant examples to support an argument is only what obsessed people do. Because it's just what normal, rational people who research what they are talking about to make sure they aren't talking nonsense do.

Whatever this weird version of you is, it is very out of character for you.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 12:01 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 7:34 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:36 am

Pretty sure it's just called a specific, accurate example of the complaints being made. It's what non-delusional people do when they have a conversation.

Only when they're obsessed.

Did someone steal your login info? I would expect Randy to say that providing specific, relevant examples to support an argument is only what obsessed people do. Because it's just what normal, rational people who research what they are talking about to make sure they aren't talking nonsense do.

Whatever this weird version of you is, it is very out of character for you.

LOL

"Relevant"

Alright well, moving on.

Any developments in the charges that have been brought against the former President for his intentional mishandling of Top Secret documents and his attempts to hide those documents after the DoJ spent more than a year giving him every opportunity to return those documents without charges being brought?

It's hard to find any decent news with everyone barfing news about the ding dongs who thought it was a good idea to get in a tin can and go to the bottom of the ocean with not back up plan in place.

the defense, as of yesterday, has been made aware of at least some of the evidence that prosecutors have…this includes multiple audio files in addition to the one recorded at Bedminster where he brags about having secret military docs

If, in response to Trad's post, I were to start rambling aimlessly about people nominally connected to President Biden doing things that were also very, very naughty, you would be more than justified in rolling your eyes. Under other circumstances, y'all might be expected to shriek (as you often do) "bOtH-SiDeRiSm!" -- again, justifiably.

I know this is going to shock some of you, but it is possible (in theory and practice) to acknowledge that both Donald Trump AND Hunter Biden are disgusting, law-breaking dirtbags. Moreover -- and again, this'll make twocoach's head spin -- pointing out the wrongdoing of one of the two (or someone nominally connected to him) does NOT justify the others' wrongdoing and is, in fact, totally irrelevant to it.

"Normal" people DO NOT see it as relevant and applicable to divert from the discussion of one's wrongdoing by focusing instead on the other's. "Normal" people don't give a fuck either way. The only people who care are those who are ABnormally politically obsessed (and who, ironically, see politics as a zero-sum game).

Fry Trump. Don't fry Hunter. Who fucking cares, either way? Just don't presume that one justifies the other.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 9:38 am So, what’ll the talking point be here? That this patriot is now a political prisoner because the corrupt Department of Injustice needed pretext for an unfair punishment for King Griftalot?

I don't wear dentures, but if I did they might have fallen out when I heard she lives in Dodge City, KS.

It is a little "rich" for for right wingers to bitch about identity politics.

I'd love to see Trump take the stand:

Ok, so when a jury is selected, politics being what they are, will a jury be able to convict Donald Trump? (Just playing devil’s advocate here.)

dolomite wrote: ↑Sat Jun 24, 2023 1:09 pm Ok, so when a jury is selected, politics being what they are, will a jury be able to convict Donald Trump? (Just playing devil’s advocate here.)

This is one of the things where a lunatic, partisan judge can have a lot of impact. Good jury instructions would put the jurors very much in a box (they should weigh whether the law was or was not broken, not on whether the law is or is not good).

The most batshit line of thinking on the right is espoused here:

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politic ... 86706.html

Former President Donald Trump allegedly kept more than 300 documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida after leaving office. He kept them in boxes in a ballroom, in a storage closet and in a bathroom, according to prosecutors. He had top secret information about the U.S. nuclear program and the defense capabilities of the U.S. and foreign countries.

“Well, the difference would be, with the former president, is that the Presidential Records Act, as interpreted by courts, allows him to decide what to take with him or not,” Hawley said. “Now, how’s that going to play into this case that they’ve charged, I don’t know. But I’ll just say the Justice Department’s interpretation of the Presidential Records Act now seems to be a lot different than it has been under any other president.”

[...]

[Hawley has] mentioned the Presidential Records Act, a law that says a president’s records are largely public documents, with a few exceptions for personal documents. Hawley said the law has wide discretion for a former president to determine what is personal and what is public.

Ok. So whatever Biden takes is 100% fine. Whatever Clinton might have taken is 100% fine.

Sure thing, Karen.

^^^

I tend to think that Hawley, no matter how misdirected, still possesses an elite intellect, or he wouldn't have made it thru Stanford and Yale law school. That being the case, how in the world could he have missed an opportunity to include the 2nd most overused and meaningless term in the republican propaganda effort, i.e., how "unprecedented"* it is to charge a former president like this!

Uh, yeah, speaking of "unprecedented", no shit.



*"2nd" only to "woke" in the competition for trite, overused words by "conservative" republicans.

Feral wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 12:07 pm ^^^

I tend to think that Hawley, no matter how misdirected, still possesses an elite intellect, or he wouldn't have made it thru Stanford and Yale law school. That being the case, how in the world could he have missed an opportunity to include the 2nd most overused and meaningless term in the republican propaganda effort, i.e., how "unprecedented"* it is to charge a former president like this!

Uh, yeah, speaking of "unprecedented", no shit.



*"2nd" only to "woke" in the competition for trite, overused words by "conservative" republicans.

Fundamentally, the party of "make loyalty pledges to this proudly bigoted, profoundly ignorant grift-king" should not lecture anyone on how to right the goddamn ship that is listing over because of that party's fealty to said grift-king.

In fairness, Trump took highly classified documents as a business venture that only threatens our lives.

Sparko wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 12:42 pm In fairness, Trump took highly classified documents as a business venture that only threatens our lives.

I'm even willing to accept that he did not have anything approaching a firm plan or idea about what exactly to do with the documents. As with so much else with him, I am not expecting to find much in the way of sophistication and nuance.

Which is exactly why the law is what it is; the harm that can come to the United States and our allies/supporters from vanity disclosure (by someone without malign intent, to (directly or indirectly) someone with malign intent) is...checks notes...EXACTLY AS BAD as the harm that can come from Trump himself having traitorous/treasonous intent.

It's extremely important that the media not fall into the same "quid pro quo" trap here as it did with the Russia stuff.

It simply does not matter whether Trump sold or did not sell (or intended to sell, or did not intend to sell) this information.

Just to be clear in case Smith is slowplaying what he knows (and in fact there IS evidence of malign intent): of course it matters a LOT if there is evidence of Trump selling stuff. That of course makes it much worse for him.

But by NO means is it a requirement in order to establish sufficient grounds for convicting him on bushels of felony counts that, in all statistical likelihood, means he will spend most/all of his remaining life as a BOP guest.

AG Garland pushes against whistleblower claims of interference in Hunter Biden investigation

Feral wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 7:18 pm AG Garland pushes against whistleblower claims of interference in Hunter Biden investigation

DOJ must (and will) keep their heads down and do their jobs. You could have had MTG in a 180 sqft room with Garland 24/7 throughout all of 2020-now, and she’d still say he was somehow directing Smith telepathically.

There is no fixing crazy. Just cutting off its resources and letting it eat itself.