Orange Duce

[cradleandshoot]

If you can put aside the whataboutism that seems to fill the debate about this case, this Judge really seems to be in the bag for the Moron:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... tructions/

"Lawyers and former judges said they are baffled by an order issued this week by the federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s pending trial on charges that he mishandled classified documents — and believe her instructions suggest the case will not go to trial anytime soon.

“In my 30 years as a trial judge, I have never seen an order like this,” said Jeremy Fogel, who served on the federal bench in California and now runs the Berkeley Judicial Institute.

On Monday evening, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon ordered the defense lawyers and the prosecutors in the case to file submissions outlining proposed jury instructions based on two scenarios, each of which badly misstates the law and facts of the case, according to legal experts.

She has given the sides two weeks to craft jury instructions around competing interpretations of the Presidential Records Act, often referred to as the PRA. While the law says presidential records belong to the public and are to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of a presidency, Trump’s lawyers have argued the PRA gave Trump the right to keep classified materials as his personal property.

“What she has asked the parties to do is very, very troubling,” Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge in Massachusetts, said of Cannon. “She is giving credence to arguments that are on their face absurd. She is ignoring a raft of other motions, equally absurd, that are unreasonably delaying the case.”

Trump’s team has argued that under the PRA, he automatically designated the classified records he is accused of willfully retaining as personal documents when he removed them from the White House and took them to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home and private club. Prosecutors and legal experts have rejected Trump’s interpretation and said the former president’s reading of the PRA is simply wrong.

Cannon is presiding over a case involving the first former U.S. president ever charged with a crime, and Fogel said it is not inappropriate for a judge in that situation to seek guidance. Still, he said, Cannon’s order is an unusual way to sequence the legal decisions and she may be putting “the cart before the horse.”

Typically, he said, judges make their rulings about the laws at the heart of the case — and then determine jury instructions closer to trial time.

“The more innocent interpretation is that she is just trying to get a sense of what the practical implications are if she decides one way or the other on the legal issues,” Fogel said. “The less charitable view is that she should decide the legal issues first and then decide how she should implement the law in the case.”

Cannon held a hearing weeks ago to discuss when to schedule the trial — one of four criminal cases Trump is facing as he again seeks the White House and has clinched enough delegates for the Republican nomination. Cannon has yet to make a decision on the trial date.

Last week’s hearing focused on two requests that Trump made to dismiss the case, one based on supposed flaws in the Espionage Act and another based on what Trump lawyers claim are the sweeping powers granted to him by the PRA.

Cannon, a Trump nominee who has been on the bench since late 2020, expressed skepticism toward both claims while also suggesting they may play a meaningful role in instructing the jury at the end of the trial. She quickly ruled against Trump’s claims about flaws in the Espionage Act and has yet to rule on the merits of the PRA request.

Her two-page order embraces at least the possibility that Trump’s PRA claims are valid, a stance that veteran national security lawyers questioned.

“The PRA is just not relevant here in any way it all; it provides no defense. To even allow it to be argued at trial would create confusion for the jury,” said Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and a former U.S. attorney.

Ordinarily, a judge will take up the question of jury instructions much later in the process. McQuade called Cannon’s decision to reach for those questions ahead of a slew of other pretrial motions “premature and baffling.”

Cannon’s order suggests that she thinks the PRA is critical to the case — and that parts of the law are open to interpretation.

Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, said that’s just not true. He said Cannon seems to continually conflate the PRA with the Espionage Act, which makes unauthorized sharing or handling of national defense information a crime. Baron said the PRA does not influence whether someone can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

“There is no ambiguity that the classified documents at issue in this case are presidential records,” Baron said. “He wasn’t indicted because he took newspaper clippings. He was indicted because he took documents that were marked as classified.”

Baron said the judge, who has not previously overseen a major national security trial, seems to be embracing a fantastical view of the law.

“Like the queen in ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ Judge Cannon appears to be asking the jury to believe at least two impossible things before breakfast,” Baron said. “First, that a president has unfettered discretion to decide that documents marked ‘top secret’ are his own personal records, just because he decided to keep them for himself. And second, that a president can avoid criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act because he decided that classified records were really his under the PRA. In both cases, the judge profoundly misinterprets the law.”

When Trump was indicted last year on dozens of counts of mishandling classified documents and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them, Cannon set a trial date of May 20. That date is no longer possible, given still-unresolved issues involving presenting the classified evidence in court.

Prosecutors have asked for the trial to start in early July; Trump’s lawyers have argued it shouldn’t begin until after the November election or, at the earliest, August.

Cannon’s recent instructions seem to entertain the notion that Trump’s legal interpretation of the PRA could be presented to the jury.

The appeals court above Cannon has already determined, on a separate matter that is also part of the Trump documents case, that the former president cannot declare classified documents his personal property.

Trump “does not have a possessory interest in the documents at issue, so he does not suffer a cognizable harm if the United States reviews documents he neither owns nor has a personal interest in,” the appeals court found in September 2022, after Trump asked the court to appoint a special master, or a neutral arbiter, to sort through the materials the FBI had seized from Mar-a-Lago.

Cannon granted Trump’s special master request, prompting an appeal from the Justice Department. An appeals court panel then resoundingly reversed her decision.

Gertner, the former federal judge, said Cannon’s latest order means it is time for special counsel Jack Smith to try to get Cannon off the high-profile case — an exceedingly rare step for any prosecutor to take. “I think that the better route is for Smith to move to recuse her now — listing all of her rulings that make little sense, the delays, rulings so far out of the mainstream that they clearly suggest bias,” Gertner said.

Other lawyers said the legal standard for recusal is so high — not just under court rules, but also in Justice Department practice — that any discussion of attempting to remove Cannon from the case is far-fetched. Typically, recusals occur when a judge has a close personal relationship with someone involved in a case or owns a significant amount of stock in a company involved.

“It’s not enough to say this judge has ruled against my case several times, therefore they must be biased. That’s not going to do it,” said McQuade, the former U.S. attorney. “I’d be surprised if an effort to remove her would be successful, and that’s a bad look for the government.”

Veteran trial lawyers say it is not unusual for a judge to make it hard for one side to try their case — and jurists are often, but not always, harder on defense lawyers than on prosecutors.

But in the Trump documents case, lawyers said, Smith may simply have to weather whatever legal storms Cannon creates, and be patient and confident that the evidence his team has amassed will ultimately convince a jury. That is what happened when a previous special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, went to trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

In that trial, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III frequently made comments critical of the special counsel team and its handling of the case, questioning its judgment and limiting what evidence it could show the jury. Prosecutors pushed on, and Manafort was eventually convicted."

I read your first sentence counselor and came to a dead stop. You use so many words that could have been condensed and still allowed you to make your point. Trump sucks, we get that. The ultimate question is does trump suck more than Biden? What a great reality for the voters in November. Which candidate sucks the least?? Boy that just inspires me to want to go out and vote.

So you would have read the article if I had started out saying, for example, "Interesting article on the Trump documents case Judge's rulings"? Sure. The case has nothing to do with the question of "does trump suck more than Biden?" He does, and that is only in dispute among chuckleheads. The article is about the case against former President Trump in Florida. That's it. But, you be you.

Thank you counselor for your enlightenment. I can refine my point by saying that the Democrat appointed judge sucks more than the Republican appointed judge sucks.
What Republican thinks that Judge Erdogan doesn't suck?
What Democrat thinks that Judge Cannon doesn't suck??
This might be an example of how political bs rolls downhill and picks up steam.

FTR I was thinking of you last night. My wife and I are huge supporters of an organization called rescue pet treasures. They had an adorable 8 week old beagle pup named Lidia. She looked like she would have loved sitting on your lap in front of the fireplace. I know you have a soft spot for beagles. If I remember correctly your beloved beagle was a lap dog?

[Seacoaster(1)]

If you can put aside the whataboutism that seems to fill the debate about this case, this Judge really seems to be in the bag for the Moron:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... tructions/

"Lawyers and former judges said they are baffled by an order issued this week by the federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s pending trial on charges that he mishandled classified documents — and believe her instructions suggest the case will not go to trial anytime soon.

“In my 30 years as a trial judge, I have never seen an order like this,” said Jeremy Fogel, who served on the federal bench in California and now runs the Berkeley Judicial Institute.

On Monday evening, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon ordered the defense lawyers and the prosecutors in the case to file submissions outlining proposed jury instructions based on two scenarios, each of which badly misstates the law and facts of the case, according to legal experts.

She has given the sides two weeks to craft jury instructions around competing interpretations of the Presidential Records Act, often referred to as the PRA. While the law says presidential records belong to the public and are to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of a presidency, Trump’s lawyers have argued the PRA gave Trump the right to keep classified materials as his personal property.

“What she has asked the parties to do is very, very troubling,” Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge in Massachusetts, said of Cannon. “She is giving credence to arguments that are on their face absurd. She is ignoring a raft of other motions, equally absurd, that are unreasonably delaying the case.”

Trump’s team has argued that under the PRA, he automatically designated the classified records he is accused of willfully retaining as personal documents when he removed them from the White House and took them to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home and private club. Prosecutors and legal experts have rejected Trump’s interpretation and said the former president’s reading of the PRA is simply wrong.

Cannon is presiding over a case involving the first former U.S. president ever charged with a crime, and Fogel said it is not inappropriate for a judge in that situation to seek guidance. Still, he said, Cannon’s order is an unusual way to sequence the legal decisions and she may be putting “the cart before the horse.”

Typically, he said, judges make their rulings about the laws at the heart of the case — and then determine jury instructions closer to trial time.

“The more innocent interpretation is that she is just trying to get a sense of what the practical implications are if she decides one way or the other on the legal issues,” Fogel said. “The less charitable view is that she should decide the legal issues first and then decide how she should implement the law in the case.”

Cannon held a hearing weeks ago to discuss when to schedule the trial — one of four criminal cases Trump is facing as he again seeks the White House and has clinched enough delegates for the Republican nomination. Cannon has yet to make a decision on the trial date.

Last week’s hearing focused on two requests that Trump made to dismiss the case, one based on supposed flaws in the Espionage Act and another based on what Trump lawyers claim are the sweeping powers granted to him by the PRA.

Cannon, a Trump nominee who has been on the bench since late 2020, expressed skepticism toward both claims while also suggesting they may play a meaningful role in instructing the jury at the end of the trial. She quickly ruled against Trump’s claims about flaws in the Espionage Act and has yet to rule on the merits of the PRA request.

Her two-page order embraces at least the possibility that Trump’s PRA claims are valid, a stance that veteran national security lawyers questioned.

“The PRA is just not relevant here in any way it all; it provides no defense. To even allow it to be argued at trial would create confusion for the jury,” said Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and a former U.S. attorney.

Ordinarily, a judge will take up the question of jury instructions much later in the process. McQuade called Cannon’s decision to reach for those questions ahead of a slew of other pretrial motions “premature and baffling.”

Cannon’s order suggests that she thinks the PRA is critical to the case — and that parts of the law are open to interpretation.

Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, said that’s just not true. He said Cannon seems to continually conflate the PRA with the Espionage Act, which makes unauthorized sharing or handling of national defense information a crime. Baron said the PRA does not influence whether someone can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

“There is no ambiguity that the classified documents at issue in this case are presidential records,” Baron said. “He wasn’t indicted because he took newspaper clippings. He was indicted because he took documents that were marked as classified.”

Baron said the judge, who has not previously overseen a major national security trial, seems to be embracing a fantastical view of the law.

“Like the queen in ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ Judge Cannon appears to be asking the jury to believe at least two impossible things before breakfast,” Baron said. “First, that a president has unfettered discretion to decide that documents marked ‘top secret’ are his own personal records, just because he decided to keep them for himself. And second, that a president can avoid criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act because he decided that classified records were really his under the PRA. In both cases, the judge profoundly misinterprets the law.”

When Trump was indicted last year on dozens of counts of mishandling classified documents and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them, Cannon set a trial date of May 20. That date is no longer possible, given still-unresolved issues involving presenting the classified evidence in court.

Prosecutors have asked for the trial to start in early July; Trump’s lawyers have argued it shouldn’t begin until after the November election or, at the earliest, August.

Cannon’s recent instructions seem to entertain the notion that Trump’s legal interpretation of the PRA could be presented to the jury.

The appeals court above Cannon has already determined, on a separate matter that is also part of the Trump documents case, that the former president cannot declare classified documents his personal property.

Trump “does not have a possessory interest in the documents at issue, so he does not suffer a cognizable harm if the United States reviews documents he neither owns nor has a personal interest in,” the appeals court found in September 2022, after Trump asked the court to appoint a special master, or a neutral arbiter, to sort through the materials the FBI had seized from Mar-a-Lago.

Cannon granted Trump’s special master request, prompting an appeal from the Justice Department. An appeals court panel then resoundingly reversed her decision.

Gertner, the former federal judge, said Cannon’s latest order means it is time for special counsel Jack Smith to try to get Cannon off the high-profile case — an exceedingly rare step for any prosecutor to take. “I think that the better route is for Smith to move to recuse her now — listing all of her rulings that make little sense, the delays, rulings so far out of the mainstream that they clearly suggest bias,” Gertner said.

Other lawyers said the legal standard for recusal is so high — not just under court rules, but also in Justice Department practice — that any discussion of attempting to remove Cannon from the case is far-fetched. Typically, recusals occur when a judge has a close personal relationship with someone involved in a case or owns a significant amount of stock in a company involved.

“It’s not enough to say this judge has ruled against my case several times, therefore they must be biased. That’s not going to do it,” said McQuade, the former U.S. attorney. “I’d be surprised if an effort to remove her would be successful, and that’s a bad look for the government.”

Veteran trial lawyers say it is not unusual for a judge to make it hard for one side to try their case — and jurists are often, but not always, harder on defense lawyers than on prosecutors.

But in the Trump documents case, lawyers said, Smith may simply have to weather whatever legal storms Cannon creates, and be patient and confident that the evidence his team has amassed will ultimately convince a jury. That is what happened when a previous special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, went to trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

In that trial, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III frequently made comments critical of the special counsel team and its handling of the case, questioning its judgment and limiting what evidence it could show the jury. Prosecutors pushed on, and Manafort was eventually convicted."

I read your first sentence counselor and came to a dead stop. You use so many words that could have been condensed and still allowed you to make your point. Trump sucks, we get that. The ultimate question is does trump suck more than Biden? What a great reality for the voters in November. Which candidate sucks the least?? Boy that just inspires me to want to go out and vote.

So you would have read the article if I had started out saying, for example, "Interesting article on the Trump documents case Judge's rulings"? Sure. The case has nothing to do with the question of "does trump suck more than Biden?" He does, and that is only in dispute among chuckleheads. The article is about the case against former President Trump in Florida. That's it. But, you be you.

Thank you counselor for your enlightenment. I can refine my point by saying that the Democrat appointed judge sucks more than the Republican appointed judge sucks.
What Republican thinks that Judge Erdogan doesn't suck?
What Democrat thinks that Judge Cannon doesn't suck??
This might be an example of how political bs rolls downhill and picks up steam.

FTR I was thinking of you last night. My wife and I are huge supporters of an organization called rescue pet treasures. They had an adorable 8 week old beagle pup named Lidia. She looked like she would have loved sitting on your lap in front of the fireplace. I know you have a soft spot for beagles. If I remember correctly your beloved beagle was a lap dog?

I think the point here might be that Cannon's rulings are really unusual. Engoron's (Erdogan is the authoritarian leader of Turkey) rulings have been harsh, for sure, but have some basis in the law of misrepresentation and fraud.

Yes, had a beagle and she was the sweetest creature in the world, and I'd love to have another. But She Who Must Be Obeyed has decreed that we are getting a golden retriever, and we are queued up for a puppy in the Fall, in August or early September. I'm just going to be happy to have a four footed friend back in the house.

[cradleandshoot]

If you can put aside the whataboutism that seems to fill the debate about this case, this Judge really seems to be in the bag for the Moron:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... tructions/

"Lawyers and former judges said they are baffled by an order issued this week by the federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s pending trial on charges that he mishandled classified documents — and believe her instructions suggest the case will not go to trial anytime soon.

“In my 30 years as a trial judge, I have never seen an order like this,” said Jeremy Fogel, who served on the federal bench in California and now runs the Berkeley Judicial Institute.

On Monday evening, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon ordered the defense lawyers and the prosecutors in the case to file submissions outlining proposed jury instructions based on two scenarios, each of which badly misstates the law and facts of the case, according to legal experts.

She has given the sides two weeks to craft jury instructions around competing interpretations of the Presidential Records Act, often referred to as the PRA. While the law says presidential records belong to the public and are to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of a presidency, Trump’s lawyers have argued the PRA gave Trump the right to keep classified materials as his personal property.

“What she has asked the parties to do is very, very troubling,” Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge in Massachusetts, said of Cannon. “She is giving credence to arguments that are on their face absurd. She is ignoring a raft of other motions, equally absurd, that are unreasonably delaying the case.”

Trump’s team has argued that under the PRA, he automatically designated the classified records he is accused of willfully retaining as personal documents when he removed them from the White House and took them to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home and private club. Prosecutors and legal experts have rejected Trump’s interpretation and said the former president’s reading of the PRA is simply wrong.

Cannon is presiding over a case involving the first former U.S. president ever charged with a crime, and Fogel said it is not inappropriate for a judge in that situation to seek guidance. Still, he said, Cannon’s order is an unusual way to sequence the legal decisions and she may be putting “the cart before the horse.”

Typically, he said, judges make their rulings about the laws at the heart of the case — and then determine jury instructions closer to trial time.

“The more innocent interpretation is that she is just trying to get a sense of what the practical implications are if she decides one way or the other on the legal issues,” Fogel said. “The less charitable view is that she should decide the legal issues first and then decide how she should implement the law in the case.”

Cannon held a hearing weeks ago to discuss when to schedule the trial — one of four criminal cases Trump is facing as he again seeks the White House and has clinched enough delegates for the Republican nomination. Cannon has yet to make a decision on the trial date.

Last week’s hearing focused on two requests that Trump made to dismiss the case, one based on supposed flaws in the Espionage Act and another based on what Trump lawyers claim are the sweeping powers granted to him by the PRA.

Cannon, a Trump nominee who has been on the bench since late 2020, expressed skepticism toward both claims while also suggesting they may play a meaningful role in instructing the jury at the end of the trial. She quickly ruled against Trump’s claims about flaws in the Espionage Act and has yet to rule on the merits of the PRA request.

Her two-page order embraces at least the possibility that Trump’s PRA claims are valid, a stance that veteran national security lawyers questioned.

“The PRA is just not relevant here in any way it all; it provides no defense. To even allow it to be argued at trial would create confusion for the jury,” said Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and a former U.S. attorney.

Ordinarily, a judge will take up the question of jury instructions much later in the process. McQuade called Cannon’s decision to reach for those questions ahead of a slew of other pretrial motions “premature and baffling.”

Cannon’s order suggests that she thinks the PRA is critical to the case — and that parts of the law are open to interpretation.

Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, said that’s just not true. He said Cannon seems to continually conflate the PRA with the Espionage Act, which makes unauthorized sharing or handling of national defense information a crime. Baron said the PRA does not influence whether someone can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

“There is no ambiguity that the classified documents at issue in this case are presidential records,” Baron said. “He wasn’t indicted because he took newspaper clippings. He was indicted because he took documents that were marked as classified.”

Baron said the judge, who has not previously overseen a major national security trial, seems to be embracing a fantastical view of the law.

“Like the queen in ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ Judge Cannon appears to be asking the jury to believe at least two impossible things before breakfast,” Baron said. “First, that a president has unfettered discretion to decide that documents marked ‘top secret’ are his own personal records, just because he decided to keep them for himself. And second, that a president can avoid criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act because he decided that classified records were really his under the PRA. In both cases, the judge profoundly misinterprets the law.”

When Trump was indicted last year on dozens of counts of mishandling classified documents and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them, Cannon set a trial date of May 20. That date is no longer possible, given still-unresolved issues involving presenting the classified evidence in court.

Prosecutors have asked for the trial to start in early July; Trump’s lawyers have argued it shouldn’t begin until after the November election or, at the earliest, August.

Cannon’s recent instructions seem to entertain the notion that Trump’s legal interpretation of the PRA could be presented to the jury.

The appeals court above Cannon has already determined, on a separate matter that is also part of the Trump documents case, that the former president cannot declare classified documents his personal property.

Trump “does not have a possessory interest in the documents at issue, so he does not suffer a cognizable harm if the United States reviews documents he neither owns nor has a personal interest in,” the appeals court found in September 2022, after Trump asked the court to appoint a special master, or a neutral arbiter, to sort through the materials the FBI had seized from Mar-a-Lago.

Cannon granted Trump’s special master request, prompting an appeal from the Justice Department. An appeals court panel then resoundingly reversed her decision.

Gertner, the former federal judge, said Cannon’s latest order means it is time for special counsel Jack Smith to try to get Cannon off the high-profile case — an exceedingly rare step for any prosecutor to take. “I think that the better route is for Smith to move to recuse her now — listing all of her rulings that make little sense, the delays, rulings so far out of the mainstream that they clearly suggest bias,” Gertner said.

Other lawyers said the legal standard for recusal is so high — not just under court rules, but also in Justice Department practice — that any discussion of attempting to remove Cannon from the case is far-fetched. Typically, recusals occur when a judge has a close personal relationship with someone involved in a case or owns a significant amount of stock in a company involved.

“It’s not enough to say this judge has ruled against my case several times, therefore they must be biased. That’s not going to do it,” said McQuade, the former U.S. attorney. “I’d be surprised if an effort to remove her would be successful, and that’s a bad look for the government.”

Veteran trial lawyers say it is not unusual for a judge to make it hard for one side to try their case — and jurists are often, but not always, harder on defense lawyers than on prosecutors.

But in the Trump documents case, lawyers said, Smith may simply have to weather whatever legal storms Cannon creates, and be patient and confident that the evidence his team has amassed will ultimately convince a jury. That is what happened when a previous special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, went to trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

In that trial, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III frequently made comments critical of the special counsel team and its handling of the case, questioning its judgment and limiting what evidence it could show the jury. Prosecutors pushed on, and Manafort was eventually convicted."

I read your first sentence counselor and came to a dead stop. You use so many words that could have been condensed and still allowed you to make your point. Trump sucks, we get that. The ultimate question is does trump suck more than Biden? What a great reality for the voters in November. Which candidate sucks the least?? Boy that just inspires me to want to go out and vote.

So you would have read the article if I had started out saying, for example, "Interesting article on the Trump documents case Judge's rulings"? Sure. The case has nothing to do with the question of "does trump suck more than Biden?" He does, and that is only in dispute among chuckleheads. The article is about the case against former President Trump in Florida. That's it. But, you be you.

Thank you counselor for your enlightenment. I can refine my point by saying that the Democrat appointed judge sucks more than the Republican appointed judge sucks.
What Republican thinks that Judge Erdogan doesn't suck?
What Democrat thinks that Judge Cannon doesn't suck??
This might be an example of how political bs rolls downhill and picks up steam.

FTR I was thinking of you last night. My wife and I are huge supporters of an organization called rescue pet treasures. They had an adorable 8 week old beagle pup named Lidia. She looked like she would have loved sitting on your lap in front of the fireplace. I know you have a soft spot for beagles. If I remember correctly your beloved beagle was a lap dog?

I think the point here might be that Cannon's rulings are really unusual. Engoron's (Erdogan is the authoritarian leader of Turkey) rulings have been harsh, for sure, but have some basis in the law of misrepresentation and fraud.

Yes, had a beagle and she was the sweetest creature in the world, and I'd love to have another. But She Who Must Be Obeyed has decreed that we are getting a golden retriever, and we are queued up for a puppy in the Fall, in August or early September. I'm just going to be happy to have a four footed friend back in the house.

You just really hit my soft spot. We had a golden retriever named Charlie a long time ago. He flunked out of seeing eye dog school. He and I had a very strong bond. He loved chasing anything thrown into the water. I use to call him Sir Charles of Pond Fetcher of Sticks. A noble name for a noble dog. My favorite picture of him is sitting on the beach at Hamlin Beach State Park with the wind blowing his wet fur and his stick in his mouth.
This little plaque is on wall of our kitchen.
If your lucky, a dog will come into your life, steal your heart and change everything. I hope your future Goldie gets to chase a million sticks in his or her life.

[Seacoaster(1)]

If you can put aside the whataboutism that seems to fill the debate about this case, this Judge really seems to be in the bag for the Moron:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... tructions/

"Lawyers and former judges said they are baffled by an order issued this week by the federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s pending trial on charges that he mishandled classified documents — and believe her instructions suggest the case will not go to trial anytime soon.

“In my 30 years as a trial judge, I have never seen an order like this,” said Jeremy Fogel, who served on the federal bench in California and now runs the Berkeley Judicial Institute.

On Monday evening, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon ordered the defense lawyers and the prosecutors in the case to file submissions outlining proposed jury instructions based on two scenarios, each of which badly misstates the law and facts of the case, according to legal experts.

She has given the sides two weeks to craft jury instructions around competing interpretations of the Presidential Records Act, often referred to as the PRA. While the law says presidential records belong to the public and are to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of a presidency, Trump’s lawyers have argued the PRA gave Trump the right to keep classified materials as his personal property.

“What she has asked the parties to do is very, very troubling,” Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge in Massachusetts, said of Cannon. “She is giving credence to arguments that are on their face absurd. She is ignoring a raft of other motions, equally absurd, that are unreasonably delaying the case.”

Trump’s team has argued that under the PRA, he automatically designated the classified records he is accused of willfully retaining as personal documents when he removed them from the White House and took them to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home and private club. Prosecutors and legal experts have rejected Trump’s interpretation and said the former president’s reading of the PRA is simply wrong.

Cannon is presiding over a case involving the first former U.S. president ever charged with a crime, and Fogel said it is not inappropriate for a judge in that situation to seek guidance. Still, he said, Cannon’s order is an unusual way to sequence the legal decisions and she may be putting “the cart before the horse.”

Typically, he said, judges make their rulings about the laws at the heart of the case — and then determine jury instructions closer to trial time.

“The more innocent interpretation is that she is just trying to get a sense of what the practical implications are if she decides one way or the other on the legal issues,” Fogel said. “The less charitable view is that she should decide the legal issues first and then decide how she should implement the law in the case.”

Cannon held a hearing weeks ago to discuss when to schedule the trial — one of four criminal cases Trump is facing as he again seeks the White House and has clinched enough delegates for the Republican nomination. Cannon has yet to make a decision on the trial date.

Last week’s hearing focused on two requests that Trump made to dismiss the case, one based on supposed flaws in the Espionage Act and another based on what Trump lawyers claim are the sweeping powers granted to him by the PRA.

Cannon, a Trump nominee who has been on the bench since late 2020, expressed skepticism toward both claims while also suggesting they may play a meaningful role in instructing the jury at the end of the trial. She quickly ruled against Trump’s claims about flaws in the Espionage Act and has yet to rule on the merits of the PRA request.

Her two-page order embraces at least the possibility that Trump’s PRA claims are valid, a stance that veteran national security lawyers questioned.

“The PRA is just not relevant here in any way it all; it provides no defense. To even allow it to be argued at trial would create confusion for the jury,” said Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and a former U.S. attorney.

Ordinarily, a judge will take up the question of jury instructions much later in the process. McQuade called Cannon’s decision to reach for those questions ahead of a slew of other pretrial motions “premature and baffling.”

Cannon’s order suggests that she thinks the PRA is critical to the case — and that parts of the law are open to interpretation.

Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, said that’s just not true. He said Cannon seems to continually conflate the PRA with the Espionage Act, which makes unauthorized sharing or handling of national defense information a crime. Baron said the PRA does not influence whether someone can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

“There is no ambiguity that the classified documents at issue in this case are presidential records,” Baron said. “He wasn’t indicted because he took newspaper clippings. He was indicted because he took documents that were marked as classified.”

Baron said the judge, who has not previously overseen a major national security trial, seems to be embracing a fantastical view of the law.

“Like the queen in ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ Judge Cannon appears to be asking the jury to believe at least two impossible things before breakfast,” Baron said. “First, that a president has unfettered discretion to decide that documents marked ‘top secret’ are his own personal records, just because he decided to keep them for himself. And second, that a president can avoid criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act because he decided that classified records were really his under the PRA. In both cases, the judge profoundly misinterprets the law.”

When Trump was indicted last year on dozens of counts of mishandling classified documents and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them, Cannon set a trial date of May 20. That date is no longer possible, given still-unresolved issues involving presenting the classified evidence in court.

Prosecutors have asked for the trial to start in early July; Trump’s lawyers have argued it shouldn’t begin until after the November election or, at the earliest, August.

Cannon’s recent instructions seem to entertain the notion that Trump’s legal interpretation of the PRA could be presented to the jury.

The appeals court above Cannon has already determined, on a separate matter that is also part of the Trump documents case, that the former president cannot declare classified documents his personal property.

Trump “does not have a possessory interest in the documents at issue, so he does not suffer a cognizable harm if the United States reviews documents he neither owns nor has a personal interest in,” the appeals court found in September 2022, after Trump asked the court to appoint a special master, or a neutral arbiter, to sort through the materials the FBI had seized from Mar-a-Lago.

Cannon granted Trump’s special master request, prompting an appeal from the Justice Department. An appeals court panel then resoundingly reversed her decision.

Gertner, the former federal judge, said Cannon’s latest order means it is time for special counsel Jack Smith to try to get Cannon off the high-profile case — an exceedingly rare step for any prosecutor to take. “I think that the better route is for Smith to move to recuse her now — listing all of her rulings that make little sense, the delays, rulings so far out of the mainstream that they clearly suggest bias,” Gertner said.

Other lawyers said the legal standard for recusal is so high — not just under court rules, but also in Justice Department practice — that any discussion of attempting to remove Cannon from the case is far-fetched. Typically, recusals occur when a judge has a close personal relationship with someone involved in a case or owns a significant amount of stock in a company involved.

“It’s not enough to say this judge has ruled against my case several times, therefore they must be biased. That’s not going to do it,” said McQuade, the former U.S. attorney. “I’d be surprised if an effort to remove her would be successful, and that’s a bad look for the government.”

Veteran trial lawyers say it is not unusual for a judge to make it hard for one side to try their case — and jurists are often, but not always, harder on defense lawyers than on prosecutors.

But in the Trump documents case, lawyers said, Smith may simply have to weather whatever legal storms Cannon creates, and be patient and confident that the evidence his team has amassed will ultimately convince a jury. That is what happened when a previous special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, went to trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

In that trial, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III frequently made comments critical of the special counsel team and its handling of the case, questioning its judgment and limiting what evidence it could show the jury. Prosecutors pushed on, and Manafort was eventually convicted."

I read your first sentence counselor and came to a dead stop. You use so many words that could have been condensed and still allowed you to make your point. Trump sucks, we get that. The ultimate question is does trump suck more than Biden? What a great reality for the voters in November. Which candidate sucks the least?? Boy that just inspires me to want to go out and vote.

So you would have read the article if I had started out saying, for example, "Interesting article on the Trump documents case Judge's rulings"? Sure. The case has nothing to do with the question of "does trump suck more than Biden?" He does, and that is only in dispute among chuckleheads. The article is about the case against former President Trump in Florida. That's it. But, you be you.

Thank you counselor for your enlightenment. I can refine my point by saying that the Democrat appointed judge sucks more than the Republican appointed judge sucks.
What Republican thinks that Judge Erdogan doesn't suck?
What Democrat thinks that Judge Cannon doesn't suck??
This might be an example of how political bs rolls downhill and picks up steam.

FTR I was thinking of you last night. My wife and I are huge supporters of an organization called rescue pet treasures. They had an adorable 8 week old beagle pup named Lidia. She looked like she would have loved sitting on your lap in front of the fireplace. I know you have a soft spot for beagles. If I remember correctly your beloved beagle was a lap dog?

I think the point here might be that Cannon's rulings are really unusual. Engoron's (Erdogan is the authoritarian leader of Turkey) rulings have been harsh, for sure, but have some basis in the law of misrepresentation and fraud.

Yes, had a beagle and she was the sweetest creature in the world, and I'd love to have another. But She Who Must Be Obeyed has decreed that we are getting a golden retriever, and we are queued up for a puppy in the Fall, in August or early September. I'm just going to be happy to have a four footed friend back in the house.

You just really hit my soft spot. We had a golden retriever named Charlie a long time ago. He flunked out of seeing eye dog school. He and I had a very strong bond. He loved chasing anything thrown into the water. I use to call him Sir Charles of Pond Fetcher of Sticks. A noble name for a noble dog. My favorite picture of him is sitting on the beach at Hamlin Beach State Park with the wind blowing his wet fur and his stick in his mouth.
This little plaque is on wall of our kitchen.
If your lucky, a dog will come into your life, steal your heart and change everything. I hope your future Goldie gets to chase a million sticks in his or her life.

As long as this old shoulder can toss a stick, she'll have something to fetch, promise.

[cradleandshoot]

If you can put aside the whataboutism that seems to fill the debate about this case, this Judge really seems to be in the bag for the Moron:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... tructions/

"Lawyers and former judges said they are baffled by an order issued this week by the federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s pending trial on charges that he mishandled classified documents — and believe her instructions suggest the case will not go to trial anytime soon.

“In my 30 years as a trial judge, I have never seen an order like this,” said Jeremy Fogel, who served on the federal bench in California and now runs the Berkeley Judicial Institute.

On Monday evening, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon ordered the defense lawyers and the prosecutors in the case to file submissions outlining proposed jury instructions based on two scenarios, each of which badly misstates the law and facts of the case, according to legal experts.

She has given the sides two weeks to craft jury instructions around competing interpretations of the Presidential Records Act, often referred to as the PRA. While the law says presidential records belong to the public and are to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of a presidency, Trump’s lawyers have argued the PRA gave Trump the right to keep classified materials as his personal property.

“What she has asked the parties to do is very, very troubling,” Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge in Massachusetts, said of Cannon. “She is giving credence to arguments that are on their face absurd. She is ignoring a raft of other motions, equally absurd, that are unreasonably delaying the case.”

Trump’s team has argued that under the PRA, he automatically designated the classified records he is accused of willfully retaining as personal documents when he removed them from the White House and took them to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home and private club. Prosecutors and legal experts have rejected Trump’s interpretation and said the former president’s reading of the PRA is simply wrong.

Cannon is presiding over a case involving the first former U.S. president ever charged with a crime, and Fogel said it is not inappropriate for a judge in that situation to seek guidance. Still, he said, Cannon’s order is an unusual way to sequence the legal decisions and she may be putting “the cart before the horse.”

Typically, he said, judges make their rulings about the laws at the heart of the case — and then determine jury instructions closer to trial time.

“The more innocent interpretation is that she is just trying to get a sense of what the practical implications are if she decides one way or the other on the legal issues,” Fogel said. “The less charitable view is that she should decide the legal issues first and then decide how she should implement the law in the case.”

Cannon held a hearing weeks ago to discuss when to schedule the trial — one of four criminal cases Trump is facing as he again seeks the White House and has clinched enough delegates for the Republican nomination. Cannon has yet to make a decision on the trial date.

Last week’s hearing focused on two requests that Trump made to dismiss the case, one based on supposed flaws in the Espionage Act and another based on what Trump lawyers claim are the sweeping powers granted to him by the PRA.

Cannon, a Trump nominee who has been on the bench since late 2020, expressed skepticism toward both claims while also suggesting they may play a meaningful role in instructing the jury at the end of the trial. She quickly ruled against Trump’s claims about flaws in the Espionage Act and has yet to rule on the merits of the PRA request.

Her two-page order embraces at least the possibility that Trump’s PRA claims are valid, a stance that veteran national security lawyers questioned.

“The PRA is just not relevant here in any way it all; it provides no defense. To even allow it to be argued at trial would create confusion for the jury,” said Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and a former U.S. attorney.

Ordinarily, a judge will take up the question of jury instructions much later in the process. McQuade called Cannon’s decision to reach for those questions ahead of a slew of other pretrial motions “premature and baffling.”

Cannon’s order suggests that she thinks the PRA is critical to the case — and that parts of the law are open to interpretation.

Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, said that’s just not true. He said Cannon seems to continually conflate the PRA with the Espionage Act, which makes unauthorized sharing or handling of national defense information a crime. Baron said the PRA does not influence whether someone can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

“There is no ambiguity that the classified documents at issue in this case are presidential records,” Baron said. “He wasn’t indicted because he took newspaper clippings. He was indicted because he took documents that were marked as classified.”

Baron said the judge, who has not previously overseen a major national security trial, seems to be embracing a fantastical view of the law.

“Like the queen in ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ Judge Cannon appears to be asking the jury to believe at least two impossible things before breakfast,” Baron said. “First, that a president has unfettered discretion to decide that documents marked ‘top secret’ are his own personal records, just because he decided to keep them for himself. And second, that a president can avoid criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act because he decided that classified records were really his under the PRA. In both cases, the judge profoundly misinterprets the law.”

When Trump was indicted last year on dozens of counts of mishandling classified documents and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them, Cannon set a trial date of May 20. That date is no longer possible, given still-unresolved issues involving presenting the classified evidence in court.

Prosecutors have asked for the trial to start in early July; Trump’s lawyers have argued it shouldn’t begin until after the November election or, at the earliest, August.

Cannon’s recent instructions seem to entertain the notion that Trump’s legal interpretation of the PRA could be presented to the jury.

The appeals court above Cannon has already determined, on a separate matter that is also part of the Trump documents case, that the former president cannot declare classified documents his personal property.

Trump “does not have a possessory interest in the documents at issue, so he does not suffer a cognizable harm if the United States reviews documents he neither owns nor has a personal interest in,” the appeals court found in September 2022, after Trump asked the court to appoint a special master, or a neutral arbiter, to sort through the materials the FBI had seized from Mar-a-Lago.

Cannon granted Trump’s special master request, prompting an appeal from the Justice Department. An appeals court panel then resoundingly reversed her decision.

Gertner, the former federal judge, said Cannon’s latest order means it is time for special counsel Jack Smith to try to get Cannon off the high-profile case — an exceedingly rare step for any prosecutor to take. “I think that the better route is for Smith to move to recuse her now — listing all of her rulings that make little sense, the delays, rulings so far out of the mainstream that they clearly suggest bias,” Gertner said.

Other lawyers said the legal standard for recusal is so high — not just under court rules, but also in Justice Department practice — that any discussion of attempting to remove Cannon from the case is far-fetched. Typically, recusals occur when a judge has a close personal relationship with someone involved in a case or owns a significant amount of stock in a company involved.

“It’s not enough to say this judge has ruled against my case several times, therefore they must be biased. That’s not going to do it,” said McQuade, the former U.S. attorney. “I’d be surprised if an effort to remove her would be successful, and that’s a bad look for the government.”

Veteran trial lawyers say it is not unusual for a judge to make it hard for one side to try their case — and jurists are often, but not always, harder on defense lawyers than on prosecutors.

But in the Trump documents case, lawyers said, Smith may simply have to weather whatever legal storms Cannon creates, and be patient and confident that the evidence his team has amassed will ultimately convince a jury. That is what happened when a previous special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, went to trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

In that trial, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III frequently made comments critical of the special counsel team and its handling of the case, questioning its judgment and limiting what evidence it could show the jury. Prosecutors pushed on, and Manafort was eventually convicted."

I read your first sentence counselor and came to a dead stop. You use so many words that could have been condensed and still allowed you to make your point. Trump sucks, we get that. The ultimate question is does trump suck more than Biden? What a great reality for the voters in November. Which candidate sucks the least?? Boy that just inspires me to want to go out and vote.

So you would have read the article if I had started out saying, for example, "Interesting article on the Trump documents case Judge's rulings"? Sure. The case has nothing to do with the question of "does trump suck more than Biden?" He does, and that is only in dispute among chuckleheads. The article is about the case against former President Trump in Florida. That's it. But, you be you.

Thank you counselor for your enlightenment. I can refine my point by saying that the Democrat appointed judge sucks more than the Republican appointed judge sucks.
What Republican thinks that Judge Erdogan doesn't suck?
What Democrat thinks that Judge Cannon doesn't suck??
This might be an example of how political bs rolls downhill and picks up steam.

FTR I was thinking of you last night. My wife and I are huge supporters of an organization called rescue pet treasures. They had an adorable 8 week old beagle pup named Lidia. She looked like she would have loved sitting on your lap in front of the fireplace. I know you have a soft spot for beagles. If I remember correctly your beloved beagle was a lap dog?

I think the point here might be that Cannon's rulings are really unusual. Engoron's (Erdogan is the authoritarian leader of Turkey) rulings have been harsh, for sure, but have some basis in the law of misrepresentation and fraud.

Yes, had a beagle and she was the sweetest creature in the world, and I'd love to have another. But She Who Must Be Obeyed has decreed that we are getting a golden retriever, and we are queued up for a puppy in the Fall, in August or early September. I'm just going to be happy to have a four footed friend back in the house.

You just really hit my soft spot. We had a golden retriever named Charlie a long time ago. He flunked out of seeing eye dog school. He and I had a very strong bond. He loved chasing anything thrown into the water. I use to call him Sir Charles of Pond Fetcher of Sticks. A noble name for a noble dog. My favorite picture of him is sitting on the beach at Hamlin Beach State Park with the wind blowing his wet fur and his stick in his mouth.
This little plaque is on wall of our kitchen.
If your lucky, a dog will come into your life, steal your heart and change everything. I hope your future Goldie gets to chase a million sticks in his or her life.

As long as this old shoulder can toss a stick, she'll have something to fetch, promise.

Your future fur baby will have found the perfect home. Your old shoulder will do just fine. Unconditional love is the gift our dogs give us in return. I have constructed a memorial in our back yard for my beloved rescue dog Tugger. I had just put Sir Charles down and went searching for a Goldie that needed a forever home. What I found wasn't the dog I was looking for. She was a 6 month old pitbull/ black lab mix. She saw me and put her stuffed toy in her mouth and walked over to me. The lady at the shelter was surprised. Tugger had not interacted or showed any interest with anyone. She was one of those dogs who didn't have much time left. The lady at the pound looked at me and said something I will never forget she strait up told me that Tugger had adopted me. What else could I do but adopt her. It turned out that happened at one of the lowest points in my life. I took her to Hamlin Beach SP one night after work and discovered she would chase sticks until the cows came home. I understand the concept of what a therapy dog is all about. The happiest feeling I would have all day was Tugger barking in the back seat because we were heading to her place. This dog would chase sticks until the sun went down. I could never repay the gift that my girl Tugger gave me. I needed her at that point in time as much as she needed me. I lost her on May 16 2016 two months after my sister Annie past away. My sister was the one who encouraged me to get another dog in the first place.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Yep, you have talked about Tugger in the past. She wasn't looking for repayment; she was looking for sticks and a loyal friend. The thing about dogs is the system works both ways: we save each other. If only humans could pull it off more regularly. Hope you and Rosie have a good walk today.

[cradleandshoot]

Yep, you have talked about Tugger in the past. She wasn't looking for repayment; she was looking for sticks and a loyal friend. The thing about dogs is the system works both ways: we save each other. If only humans could pull it off more regularly. Hope you and Rosie have a good walk today.

+1 You will fall in love with your Goldie.

[Typical Lax Dad]

[NattyBohChamps04]

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 ... efore-rnc/

Former President Trump’s new joint fundraising agreement with the Republican National Committee (RNC) will send donations to his campaign and a political action committee covering his legal bills before they go toward the party itself.

Eating the GOP alive from the inside. And they willingly give him more. What a sad world we live in.

[a fan]

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 ... efore-rnc/

Former President Trump’s new joint fundraising agreement with the Republican National Committee (RNC) will send donations to his campaign and a political action committee covering his legal bills before they go toward the party itself.

Eating the GOP alive from the inside. And they willingly give him more. What a sad world we live in.

I wouldn't worry too much. Actual Conservatives will take back the party in, oh, 10-30 years.

[cradleandshoot]

What an entertaining evening for music fans. You go to listen to music and you get a political diatribe thrown in at no extra charge. He blew his chance for the Sunday champagne brunch at the trump command bunker. I'm thinking that rock and roll and politics is a toxic combination. To paraphrase yourself TLD...he sure sounded stupid.

[Kismet]

Orange Fatso gets a potential financial lifeline from GOP megadonor Jefffery Yass who is the biggest institutional investor in the SPAC that’s merging with Truth Social is Susquehanna International Group LLP, which was co-founded by Yass.

What kind of return is he banking on?

[old salt]

How many migrant squatter families can be crammed into a 63 bedroom Westchester County mansion ? NY at it's finest.

[Kismet]

How many migrant squatter families can be crammed into a 63 bedroom Westchester County mansion ? NY at it's finest.

Non sequitur yet again. Keep defending your favorite a-hole.

[runrussellrun]

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 ... efore-rnc/

Former President Trump’s new joint fundraising agreement with the Republican National Committee (RNC) will send donations to his campaign and a political action committee covering his legal bills before they go toward the party itself.

Eating the GOP alive from the inside. And they willingly give him more. What a sad world we live in.

I wouldn't worry too much. Actual Conservatives will take back the party in, oh, 10-30 years.

Does that include Dr. Miller-Meeks types. WHO ? (ya know, the one that wants to clean up the vaccine injured payout process _

ooppps. but, LOOK........mary taylor green MTG.......saying something.

conservatives don't give voice and media time to those that are ALREADY in the GOP, like Congresswomen, Dr. Miller Meeks.

think some enjoy the hate they get to spew and gaffa....."not my party , anymore"

yeah.....let's roll out MORE media coverage of MTG, instead of Dr. Miller Meeks. Who?

[cradleandshoot]

How many migrant squatter families can be crammed into a 63 bedroom Westchester County mansion ? NY at it's finest.

NYS has proven to be all hat and no cattle when it comes to its sanctuary state chops. Despite all the Empire State bluster and chest thumping they weren't happy at all when Texas took them up on their gracious implied offer. NYS was so very proud to consider itself a sanctuary state. Until the cold hard reality slapped the state in the face. There is a big chasm between declaring yourself a sanctuary state and then putting your money and resources where your mouth is. The mayor of NYC gets it. Why do any of you think the mayor of NYC bless his heart is fighting tooth and nail to prevent the stampede of illegal immigrants into his city? His city doesn't have the resources to accommodate his new guests. The last time I checked Biden wasn't handing out billions to NYC to help out. All it would take would be an EO. Joe could call it the " bail my ass out of the mess I created" act.

[cradleandshoot]

How many migrant squatter families can be crammed into a 63 bedroom Westchester County mansion ? NY at it's finest.

Non sequitur yet again. Keep defending your favorite a-hole.

Now now, we will never know the answer until we try. The baseline should be how many stupid college kids can you cram into a phone booth. I'm guessing that isn't a fad anymore?

[a fan]

How many migrant squatter families can be crammed into a 63 bedroom Westchester County mansion ? NY at it's finest.

NYS has proven to be all hat and no cattle when it comes to its sanctuary state chops. Despite all the Empire State bluster and chest thumping they weren't happy at all when Texas took them up on their gracious implied offer. NYS was so very proud to consider itself a sanctuary state. Until the cold hard reality slapped the state in the face. There is a big chasm between declaring yourself a sanctuary state and then putting your money and resources where your mouth is. The mayor of NYC gets it. Why do any of you think the mayor of NYC bless his heart is fighting tooth and nail to prevent the stampede of illegal immigrants into his city? His city doesn't have the resources to accommodate his new guests. The last time I checked Biden wasn't handing out billions to NYC to help out. All it would take would be an EO. Joe could call it the " bail my ass out of the mess I created" act.

Meh. It's NO different that what every single State (almost) has dealt with for the last 40 years. Texas? They've been royally F'ed by our "policy" for DECADES, no matter who is in the WH or in Congress.

But yes, as said when it happened: declaring your cities as exempt from Federal law is DANGEROUS...and these Dem idiots clearly learned NOTHING from the Civil Rights era, when Kennedy and others didn't tolerate States playing these games with Federal law. I would have CHEERED if Trump had sent in Federal Troops to deal with lawbreaking in those cities.

The Federal .gov comes first, fellas. And if you don't like what they do? Vote in new Reps. This holding your breath and pouting cr*p has some REALLY dangerous consequences.

[Brooklyn]

Forensic psychiatrist on physical signs of Trump's mental decline: "Changes in movement and gait"

Forensic psychiatrist on physical signs of Trump's mental decline: "Changes in movement and gait"
"His walk appears wide-based," Dr. Elizabeth Zoffman notes of Trump. "He has developed a swing of his right leg."



https://www.salon.com/2024/03/25/forens ... -and-gait/


Donald Trump’s obvious public challenges with speech, language, and thinking are continuing to get worse. At a recent rally in Ohio, the former president continued to act like a broken computer, going off on odd tangents, rambling, muddling his speech, and saying, “Joe Biden won against Barack Hussein Obama, has anyone ever heard of him? Every swing state, Biden beat Obama but in every other state, he got killed.”



more ...


Serious cognitive decline for tRump. For some reason, this doesn't get much attention from his supporters or the biased media.

[njbill]

The baseline should be how many stupid college kids can you cram into a phone booth. I'm guessing that isn't a fad anymore?

I think that’s a safe guess. When was the last time you saw a phone booth? Do they still have them in Rochester? Not in the areas of New Jersey where I prowl around.