crazietalk.net

dudog wrote: ↑

July 11th, 2022, 7:50 am

Unfortunately, this just makes these states dumber.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/some- ... li=BBnb7Kz

I'm hoping this kind of thing has a real economic impact, as well. The problem is that it is only a central issue for younger people, which typically isn't (yet) where the money is. But I wouldn't want my daughter living in a state where abortion is not legal for rape victims. So far, so good, but I don't trust the North Carolina legislature farther than I can throw them.

dudog wrote: ↑

July 10th, 2022, 11:39 pm

CameronBornAndBred wrote: ↑

July 10th, 2022, 12:59 pm

Furniture wrote: ↑

July 10th, 2022, 11:47 am

So Bannon wants to testify. I would not touch that with a barge pole.. it has to be a setup.

Well, since Trump waived executive privilege claims, I'm sure it is. That being said, the committee HAS to take his testimony. I'm sure they will be smart in their questioning, and hopefully have an idea of the truth (with ways to back it up) ahead of time.

It's all bullshit. Bannon was not a member/employee of the executive branch, therefore executive privilege does not exist.

My understanding is that, legally, this position is not clear. Bannon could be considered a presidential advisor, and thus subject to a privilege claim. Personally, I think that would be bad law and would allow future presidents entirely too much secrecy, but it isn't clear what the current Supreme Court would do. We all know that, if Trump and Co. really wanted to claim privilege, they could tie up the process for years, which the committee likely doesn't have.

So ultimately, Trump "waiving" a privilege he may or may not actually have is a very good thing. I hope the committee can catch him out in either devastating admissions (which I can envision him making due to hubris), or blatant falsehoods, or both.

Phredd3 wrote: ↑

July 11th, 2022, 9:20 am

dudog wrote: ↑

July 10th, 2022, 11:39 pm

CameronBornAndBred wrote: ↑

July 10th, 2022, 12:59 pm

Well, since Trump waived executive privilege claims, I'm sure it is. That being said, the committee HAS to take his testimony. I'm sure they will be smart in their questioning, and hopefully have an idea of the truth (with ways to back it up) ahead of time.

It's all bullshit. Bannon was not a member/employee of the executive branch, therefore executive privilege does not exist.

My understanding is that, legally, this position is not clear. Bannon could be considered a presidential advisor, and thus subject to a privilege claim. Personally, I think that would be bad law and would allow future presidents entirely too much secrecy, but it isn't clear what the current Supreme Court would do. We all know that, if Trump and Co. really wanted to claim privilege, they could tie up the process for years, which the committee likely doesn't have.

So ultimately, Trump "waiving" a privilege he may or may not actually have is a very good thing. I hope the committee can catch him out in either devastating admissions (which I can envision him making due to hubris), or blatant falsehoods, or both.

You're more hopeful than I. But yeah, a lot of hubris there.

I fear they just want to throw out conflicting information for publication by the right. I mean, what's gonna be the penalty for lying to Congress? A few months in jail? Maybe? I get the feeling Bannon would enjoy that. Add to his martyrdom, and he can work on Mein Kampf II.

OPK, what are the penalties for attorneys lying to the court? Hand slaps, tsk-tsks? Is it possible they could face more trouble than their client Bannon?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnb7Kz

dudog wrote: ↑

July 11th, 2022, 12:36 pm

OPK, what are the penalties for attorneys lying to the court? Hand slaps, tsk-tsks? Is it possible they could face more trouble than their client Bannon?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnb7Kz

Disbarment, civil contempt of court, criminal contempt of court. It’s a really bad idea for anyone to lie in court, especially a lawyer.

As far as just making stuff up in a case in which you are not appearing, though, bar penalties could apply still but maybe not much else.

Thanks OPK. And in other news, a judge has ordered Lindsey to testify in Georgia.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnb7Kz

dudog wrote: ↑

July 11th, 2022, 6:42 pm

Thanks OPK. And in other news, a judge has ordered Lindsey to testify in Georgia.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnb7Kz

Telling judges you don’t need to do what they say rarely goes well. But LG has a few different plays here.

OPK wrote: ↑

July 11th, 2022, 7:34 pm

dudog wrote: ↑

July 11th, 2022, 6:42 pm

Thanks OPK. And in other news, a judge has ordered Lindsey to testify in Georgia.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnb7Kz

Telling judges you don’t need to do what they say rarely goes well. But LG has a few different plays here.

Do tell.

Herschel Walker is my favorite candidate. Not ever, but he's up there. (Except for the scary fact that so many people are going to vote for him.)

"Since we don't control the air, our good air decided to float over to China's bad air. So when China gets our good air, their bad air got to move. So it moves over to our good air space. Then -- now we got we to clean that back up."

---HW to a campaign crowd.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/11/politics ... index.html

Former President Donald Trump and a host of Republican personalities have canceled their scheduled appearances Friday in Greensboro.

News of the cancellation comes as Axios reports Trump, his son, Donald Trump Jr., and his daughter, Ivanka Trump, have been scheduled to testify under oath Friday in an investigation into Trump’s finances.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-rally- ... 50334.html

A preview of today's hearing featuring Pat Cipollone's version of events, from Jamie Raskin.

“Cipollone has corroborated almost everything that we’ve learned from the prior hearings,” Raskin said. “I certainly did not hear him contradict Cassidy Hutchinson. … He had the opportunity to say whatever he wanted to say, so I didn’t see any contradiction there.”

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/exp ... 49272.html

Also, what else to expect.

The House of Representatives committee's seventh hearing in five weeks will focus on the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, two pro-Trump groups that investigators say helped plan the attack, as well as QAnon, a right-wing conspiracy theory movement.

The hearing, starting at 1 p.m. ET (1700 GMT), will explore ties between the two groups and Trump aides including Roger Stone and Mike Flynn, according to a committee aide who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity.

I think the anonymous twitter employee was useless and detrimental. I tell you right now the far right is going to concentrate on that person. "Who was that" "Why anonymous" "Why the voice manipulated"?

Worst day for the committee by far. The 2nd half just worthless.

An ex-(EX!) Oath Keeper and a dipshit. Seriously?

dudog wrote: ↑

July 12th, 2022, 3:42 pm

Worst day for the committee by far. The 2nd half just worthless.

An ex-(EX!) Oath Keeper and a dipshit. Seriously?

I agree with the 2nd half, that was useless, and yeah, other than seeing why he'd get sucked in to Trumpism (and from his "do you now believe the election was stolen" wishy washy answer), witness number two was indeed a dipshit.

The first half was informative, and they should have left it at that.

I also chuckled at this moment, not surprised the interwebs has picked up on it. But what timing: the official Dr. Pepper account tweeted this yesterday afternoon:

"Can you guys write some tweets for me about how everyone deserves a Dr. Pepper? I'm taking a break bc I deserve a Dr. Pepper. Thx Peppers"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/ ... li=BBnb7Kz

dudog wrote: ↑

July 12th, 2022, 8:30 pm

I also chuckled at this moment, not surprised the interwebs has picked up on it. But what timing: the official Dr. Pepper account tweeted this yesterday afternoon:

"Can you guys write some tweets for me about how everyone deserves a Dr. Pepper? I'm taking a break bc I deserve a Dr. Pepper. Thx Peppers"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/ ... li=BBnb7Kz

All I could think about during the Powell snippets was "WHY IS SNL ON SUMMER BREAK?!!!"

I missed Cheney's closing since I had to do some actual work, but it looks like the hearing did get a bit spicy at the very end.
Here's what she said.

"After our last hearing, President Trump tried to call a witness in our investigation — a witness you have not yet seen in these hearings. That person declined to answer or respond to President Trump's call and, instead, alerted their lawyer to the call," said Cheney, a Wyoming Republican, in a bombshell revelation that concluded the House January 6 committee's seventh public hearing.

Big wow.
Since she said "Not yet seen", I'm assuming that we will see him/her next week. While it was smart to not take the call, I totally wish they had, and recorded.

Ratfarts.

CameronBornAndBred wrote: ↑

July 12th, 2022, 10:36 pm

I missed Cheney's closing since I had to do some actual work, but it looks like the hearing did get a bit spicy at the very end.
Here's what she said.

"After our last hearing, President Trump tried to call a witness in our investigation — a witness you have not yet seen in these hearings. That person declined to answer or respond to President Trump's call and, instead, alerted their lawyer to the call," said Cheney, a Wyoming Republican, in a bombshell revelation that concluded the House January 6 committee's seventh public hearing.

Big wow.
Since she said "Not yet seen", I'm assuming that we will see him/her next week. While it was smart to not take the call, I totally wish they had, and recorded.

Ratfarts.

I'm assuming the dumbass left a voice mail. Otherwise, Trump made a call and if it wasn't answered who can know what his intention was. Maybe he was inviting the person to a round of golf (which I doubt). In fact, I'd bet on it. He's not very smart, despite him saying he has a "very good you-know".

I thought Jamie Raskin‘s summing up was incredibly damming for Trump. Brilliantly put together.

dudog wrote: ↑

July 12th, 2022, 3:42 pm

Worst day for the committee by far. The 2nd half just worthless.

An ex-(EX!) Oath Keeper and a dipshit. Seriously?

While I agree it wasn't spectacular to hear (which I only did in recaps), some of it was important. I thought the insider looks were helpful because it shows what Trump could count on happening. It showed that his plan was very plausible. It helps nail down intent. Also, the Cipollone stuff was crucial. I don't think there is much doubt about what Trump believed or should have believed about the election and the plausible outcomes of his egging on the crowd, and the fact that the Trump team was intentionally NOT informing other agencies of the plan to head to the capitol is a huge piece of the puzzle.

So, yes. Not great from a public impressions point of view, but I think very important from a criminal charges point of view.

I also thought the "dipshits" were important in the broader context because it shows the absolute barely-surface-level thinking that we're dealing with when we hold elections. These are the types of people we, as a society, WANT to marginalize. Is that elitist? Absolutely. I don't think Democrats should shy away from that kind of elitism. We don't want to enable people who are willing to riot without actually thinking about the consequences of their actions.