 
     |
| TRUMP 2024 (Page 9/59) |
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 13, 09:08 PM
|
|
Who better to look to for the latest legal low-down than Neal Katyal, who I might add, has become a regular guest on MSNBC's "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell," and has a decidedly puckish sense of humor about all things "Trump."
| quote | | Neal Katyal, the Paul Saunders Professor at Georgetown University and the former Acting Solicitor General of the United States, focuses on Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, and Intellectual Property. He is a best selling New York Times author, and has spent the last three years serving as Special Prosecutor for the State of Minnesota in the murder of George Floyd. In December 2017, American Lawyer magazine named him The Litigator of the Year; he was chosen from all the lawyers in the United States. At the age of 52, he has also already argued more Supreme Court cases in U.S. history than has any minority attorney, recently breaking the record held by Thurgood Marshall. He has argued 48 cases before the Supreme Court of the United States, with his 49th and 50th coming up in March and April of this year. |
|
https://www.law.georgetown....culty/neal-k-katyal/
Here's what I got from Neal Katyal, just the other night.
First, the two federal criminal cases where Donald Trump is a defendant... the "documents" case that will be tried in Fort Pierce, Florida, and the "election interference" case that will be tried in Washington, DC.
The only scenario that matters is if Trump were to be elected the 47th President of the United States.
Trump could be convicted on any of the charges in either of these cases, and sentenced to a term of confinement in federal prison, before he would be sworn in as the 47th President on January 20, 2025.
He could say "You know what? I've just realized what a total schmuck I've been, so I will gladly go to prison and forget about being President again." Of course, he announces this on the steps in front of the courthouse, immediately after being sentenced. He even has a "confederate" ready to photobomb the moment, who moves in back of Trump and holds up a large, Monopoly board game-style "GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL" placard over Trump's head, for a gag. That uniquely Trumpian sense of humor.
Or he could ask for BAIL, while his case is being appealed. Neal Katyal says that any appeal of this kind would go on for at least a year before reaching a conclusion.
What would Bail Appending Appeal be like for a President-elect, and then President Donald Trump? About the same as a GET OUT OF JAIL FREE card, going back to the Monopoly game metaphor again.
Could Bail Appending Appeal be denied? I'm really not seeing that.
As soon as Trump is sworn in on January 20, 2025, or as soon as he can after being sworn in, Trump appoints and has the Senate confirm a new Solicitor General, who—unsurprisingly—directs the U.S. Department of Justice to immediately "drop" the pending federal criminal case(s) against Donald Trump, even before Trump's appeal process has run its course. Trump doesn't have to Pardon himself. And that's the end of that, for the two current federal criminal cases against him.
What if the Senate refuses to confirm a new Solicitor General? No one raised that with Neal Katyal on "The Last Word." Trump appoints an Acting Solicitor General? I dunno. Or maybe he just Pardons himself. Whobody knows?
As far as the two state criminal cases, the one in Manhattan and the one in Fulton County, Georgia, any negative outcomes for Defendant Trump are put on hold until after he completes his term as the 47th President of the United States. That's because of the "Supremacy Clause" that puts the federal government above any state government in such a circumstance. That's so far ahead, I think it is not worthy of speculation.
Lawrence O'Donnell reminded his viewers of the pending civil lawsuits against Trump by U.S. Capitol Police Officers over Trump's role in "January 6." If large monetary damages are awarded in those cases, Trump would likely be involved for the rest of his life in trying to thwart the police officers and their lawyers from collecting the damages from him. So says the ineffably astute host of MSNBC's "The Last Word," which airs from 10 to 11pm Eastern Time on weeknights, although there's usually a stand-in host on Fridays.
 [This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-14-2024).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JAN 13, 11:07 PM
|
|
He must be a good prosecutor to be able to put an innocent man in jail for following department procedure, not withstanding the amount of illegal substances in the cult heroes system......
No wonder he's a regular on MSNBC.....🙄
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 14, 10:07 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
You must have missed where I posted the [VDH] video as 'opinion,' not analysis.
|
|
Not at all. I didn't miss that. This is just "semantics."
Opinions based on analysis have value. Opinions without analysis are like the seeds of a dandelion, wafting this way and that on air currents—and no more valuable than these cotton-like puffs that spring from this common lawn weed.
This Victor Davis Hanson is a real "lightweight"—to extend the dandelion metaphor—when he says this:
| quote | Currently, four leftist prosecutors—three state and one federal—have indicted Trump.
They are petitioning courts to accelerate the usually lethargic legal process to ensure Trump is tied up in Atlanta, Miami, New York, and Washington, D.C. courtrooms nonstop during the 2024 election cycle.
Their aim is to keep Trump from campaigning, as he faces four left-wing prosecutors, four liberal judges, and four or five overwhelmingly Democratic jury pools. |
|
To reprise, Reply #74 on the previous page of this thread:
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/...ML/000994-2.html#p74
 [This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-14-2024).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JAN 14, 11:07 AM
|
|
You are so misinformed, and by your own lack of curiosity.
Stay within your comfort zone, like the rest of the people that refuse to look at everything around them.
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JAN 14, 11:22 AM
|
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 14, 11:27 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
I think you are confused. This isn't one of those "everyone is bad," situations.
I'm talking about the Democrat-led PACs and election commissions that intentionally violated local state election laws, AGAINST the will of the state legislatures. I'll repost what I said again, because I think either you're confused, or you are intentionally misrepresenting this. I have it saved in a text file so I can easily copy/paste any time I need to for situations just like this.
- - -
In all of the major swing states, Democrats got into the elections departments and... using COVID-19 as an excuse, wantonly violated state election laws to perform the following:
- Mass mail-in voting... in some cases, just sending out a ballot to literally everyone who was registered to vote.
- Ballot harvesting, as in... allowing people to go door to door and collect ballots on behalf of the political party.
- Ballot drop-boxes... allowing people from anywhere to be able to deliver ballots, without any verification.
- Waiving registration deadlines
- Waiving signature verification
- Waiving proof of identity verification
This allowed rampant and mass voting violations. I've gone through this whole thing before, and people say... "show me the proof, you have no proof!!!" so here it is... state Supreme Courts literally ruling that Democrats violated and illegally changed the state's election laws without the consent of the legislature. Go ahead, click the links:
Michigan:
- https://www.washingtonexami...-law-absentee-ballot
- https://www.detroitnews.com...-invalid/4699927001/
- https://trendingpolitics.co...e-ballot-order-knab/
Pennsylvania:
- https://www.cbsnews.com/pit...voting-law-decision/
- https://thefederalist.com/2...were-broken-in-2020/
Wisconsin:
- https://www.reuters.com/wor...lections-2022-07-08/
- https://www.breitbart.com/p...s-violate-state-law/
Georgia:
- https://www.gpb.org/news/20...ke-da-race-will-move
- https://thefederalist.com/2...ection-laws-in-2020/
There have been some other recent court rulings, but these are really the only ones I remember off hand. I can't remember the other states. I think maybe North Carolina, and a few others... |
|
You are correct. I missed the point that it was "election commissions" instead of legislature. But it is still not any type of fraud because the rules applied to both sides equally.
Don't you have to have a victim for there to be fraud? There is no victim because these rules applied to ALL voters.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 14, 12:16 PM
|
|
When I said that I had started to read that "VDH" in RealClearPolitics but stopped after just reading a small part of it, I was being a little theatric. I actually scrolled through the entire article the first time that I looked at it.
As you can see from my other remarks, I have not ignored that "VDH" from RealClearPolitics... I looked at it in its entirety and put part of it under a "microscope," for my critique.
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JAN 14, 12:24 PM
|
|
I can't imagine you being theatric.
🤣
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
JAN 14, 12:43 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by BingB:You are correct. I missed the point that it was "election commissions" instead of legislature. But it is still not any type of fraud because the rules applied to both sides equally.
Don't you have to have a victim for there to be fraud? There is no victim because these rules applied to ALL voters. |
|
It's not "technically" considered fraud in the eyes of the law because no conspiracy has been proven. There's obviously a mens rea, but there's no actus rae because the government was the one that facilitated it. The problem is, the state legislatures couldn't stop it in time. And the Democrats were poised to take advantage of these processes because they've already implemented them in places like California. They used things like hosting BBQs for people if they brought their ballots. Not technically giving them things, but hosting "block parties" to get out the vote, and then asking people to deliver their votes to them "unsealed" to make sure they're filled out properly, and then allowing a single person to deliver all of them (which under any normal circumstance would be totally illegal). Vast majority of the people who did this would never have voted anyway, and Trump lost by a few thousand votes in several of these states.
But it's clear to me that the intent and goal of all of this was well coordinated, and that makes it "fraud" in my eyes... even if it's not something that can be punished by law (which is totally intentional). It's like when the government is doing something they clearly know is unconstitutional... but they keep it up until such point that the Supreme Court tells them they can't. It's not like they didn't know they couldn't do this... they're just waiting out the clock.
|
|
|
|
theBDub
|
JAN 14, 07:28 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Absolutely... but it will never happen... or let's say I'd be really shocked if it happened. What would be more likely, is they come up with sort of a feigned made up conviction. Like... none of the actual charges will have applied, but they'll come up with something like falsifying information, or lying to FBI... which could be totally subjective in nature. It'll be none of the stuff they're actually charging him for.
We've gone round and round on this before, but there's only three people on this board here that have had a clearance, and understand unequivocally the power structure of classification, and who has ultimate authority. There's literally nothing in law that defines what classified material is, and you can't charge the President for it because he's literally the one that is the SOLE authority for it, and the president can literally wave his hand over a stack of documents and declassify it... all of the things he basically did while he was President. EVEN if he lied about doing such a thing... it wouldn't matter because of the power vested in him as President. It's one of the reasons why I said classification should be legislated... and not created by executive order.
The records thing is also totally silly... because literally everything was a print-out of a digitally generated document, which are all ALREADY recorded and stored in the National Archives... and anyone with a clearance already knows this because the President is a special person and everything he writes is automatically saved. The "we want the documents back" is so 1950s... because they already have them, these were just print outs in the first place.
All of it is so totally ridiculous. The public doesn't understand this, you don't understand this (no offense), and even most politicians don't understand this, but people who've had clearances clearly do. So as I've said from the very beginning... all of this stuff will get thrown out.
They'll probably try to charge him with something totally unrelated... to save face, like lying to the FBI or something ridiculous like that. And that's really a "gotcha" charge because it could simply be the same question asked two different times with a slightly different answer (with no ill-intent). They probably will just fine him too because there's no way they want the backlash of imprisoning the former President. This is all just to damage his campaign.
Anyone who actually thinks this is going to turn into anything... AGAIN... really needs to wake up. |
|
No offense taken… I already said up front I am no expert. But I highly doubt that those that are experts are pursing this if it’s all bullshit, even if someone on a Fiero forum who doesn’t actively practice law thinks it is.
|
|
|
|