Tuesday, March 19, 2024

I Kinda Assume Michael Cohen Knows What He’s Talking About

 On this topic, at least. 

He's in the real estate industry. Much of his assets are leveraged," said Cohen. 
"Let's not forget, if he sells the asset there's also a tax consequence that would be due. He has long-term capital gains. Because it's New York, you also have city and state tax, so you're looking at effectively a 40 percent taxable rate. 
"He also has on top of that mortgages attached. So state taxes, federal taxes come first, then followed by the mortgage, then whatever is left over would ultimately go to pay off the judgment or to repay the bond." 
That, he explained, is why no one is taking such a deal.
This; not so much.
"It's effectively impossible. What does that tell you?" Cohen asked. "It tells you that he's not nearly as rich as he sold himself to the American people, that he — even at the trial he told the judge he had at least $400 million in cash. If that's true, post it, and if it's not true, it could be a perjury charge."
Well, he did say, outside court if not also in, that MAL alone was worth nearly $3 billion. Or at least $1.5 billion. Or $1.5 billion. Can he not borrow against that? Was that a lie? Very likely. Was it material to the fraud case? Only insofar as it proved it (which, IIRC, Engoron noted in his judgment). Still, it must be a lie, else he could fund the bond easily. He also said there was no debt on it. Ooops! Another lie?

Yeah, probably.
Which sets up this:
"Despite the fact that witnesses frankly had said that they were great clients, we all made money, they did nothing wrong, we got slammed with this egregious number, and I'm confident we'll overturn it," she said during an interview with the online podcast X22 Report, which was reported by Newsweek. 
Habba claimed in the interview that New York Attorney General Letitia James had set the Trump Organization up for certain defeat. 
"We lost before we even walked in," she said.
Does she understand the trial was for damages? That they had lost on liability before they walked in?
Anyway, the claim was fraud, which the court found was proven. If Trump indeed lied on the stand, that fraud judgment is pretty solid. Which means it’s pretty sure you aren’t going to overturn it.

Besides, Habba said Trump would come up with the bond for this case.

“This Is Not America!”

I really want to see one of these assholes put his money where his mouth is and walk into a courtroom and show off his big brass clanging ones by shouting this at the judge. Instead of into a studio microphone.

I mean, if he’s got the courage of his convictions, take ‘em where they can get things done. Don’t be shy! Step right up and cut loose!

There’s a reason they don’t, of course. Because this is America. And they know where the real power lies. Just ask Elmo if he really wanted to buy Twitter.

Quislings.

Monday, March 18, 2024

(Can’t Get No) Satisfaction

He can’t be a man 
Because he does not wear 
The same kinda shoes 
As me

Yeah, it’s a thing:
I wear cowboy boots for maximum stability and comfort. And for my flat feet and my bad back. What of it? Biden and I are both old enough to prefer comfort and stability over style. FDR spent his entire Presidency across three plus terms, in a wheelchair. Does that make a difference, either?

These things that pass for knowledge I don’t understand.

I Came To That Conclusion…

...during the case prior to this case, when the 11th Circuit all but told Cannon to resign. And yes, this is why Loose Cannon is dumber than Alina Habba.

You Go First

Although berating people for not giving Trump half a billion dollars, gratis, is an interesting way to persuade them.  I wonder how that works for him.

I’ll Go Out On A Speculative Limb Here

And surround myself caveats that I don’t know anything about Georgia law or criminal procedure. But, the central claim of the motion was that a conflict of interest existed, which required removal of the entire AG’s office from the case.

No such conflict was found. That’s a question of fact: whether the conduct alleged rose to the level of a conflict under Georgia law. The allegation was that Willis improperly benefited from the case, by hiring Wade to help prosecute it, and then going on trips with him. The court reacted to the appearance issue, without finding actual conflict of interest sufficient to force the AG off the case. And here’s my speculation:

The court gave Willis two choices: throw the case to the Prosecuting Attorney’s council for reassignment; or fire Wade. The option allowed McAfee to toss a bone to the appellate court (and the public), without effectively dismissing the charges. McAfee effectively gave the appellate court a reason to say “good enough,” and not send it back to tie up McAfee’s time any more, and to keep either of them from being the court that dismissed all charges based on rather negligible grounds.

Had McAfee said “FUCK THIS SHIT! GET OUTTA MY COURTROOM!,” it would likely just come back to him for more pointless fact finding. Had he essentially ruled “same answer,” greatly possibility of same result: coming right back at him. As it is, he split the baby, and all parties lose something. These were never grounds for dismissal (the telos of the motion), and yet it made the AG’s office look bad (not ready for prime time).

It’s also not a matter the court wants to take up in interlocutory proceedings, for the reasons listed above. Now the appellate court can say: “Well, Wade is gone. That’s all you’re gonna get right now.”

Close enough quite often is good enough.

And Trump keeps burning money on legal fees like he was a rich man.

Begun, The Presidential Campaign Has

But Trump has the outreach effort. Polls prove voters are obsessed with who won on 2020 and universally believe the vote was rigged. 

Or not.
Rabbi Trump.
Let’s see what $155 million will buy. Besides lawyers, I mean.

“A Clown Living On Credit”

Better to be pretty than smart. And if you’re neither? 💯  Sucks to be you, bro. And it’s time to reiterate that a final judgment is presumptively valid unless and until a superior court finds otherwise. The appeal bond is to secure that validity against attempts to use the appeal to escape execution of the judgment by extra-legal means.

So I’m pretty sure the court’s response to this motion will be: “Sucks to be you, bro. Put or shut up.”
?????

Because appeal bonds are a procedural matter. Trump is unlikely to get a break not usually given to others. Attention to procedure matters. And Trump has brought a lot of attention to himself, and so to the procedure followed in this case.

😎 
Donald Trump is not a billionaire. Alternatively, “billionaire” doesn’t designate what we all think it designates. That is, Trump is a billionaire; but “billionaire” doesn’t mean anything.

Rick Wilson says a properly rich man insisted to him that Trump was not rich, but “a clown living on credit.” Looks like we’ll finally find out.

New RNC GOTV Effort: “It Couldn’t Hurt!” 🤷🏻‍♂️

Just A Reminder

Apparently the MAGA talking point started with the New York Times: Or the NYT was just parroting a MAGA talking point. I don’t know which came first. But the earnest question is: what did he really mean? OTOH:

The Horse’s Mouth

Trump is not a billionaire. If he is, he’s a very poor billionaire. I’m a retired pastor/community college teacher, and I’m in a much better position to pay my bills as they come due than Trump is.

Which is pretty much the threshold for entering bankruptcy. Trump clears it easily.

Next Stop…

Which tells me he doesn’t have that much collateral value.

He’s supposed to be a billionaire, right? This is half a billion dollars. By definition, he should be able to front that much, right? Or is “billionaire” just an empty term that only means “don’t look behind the facades.” Like a Hollywood set, it’s all just propped up?

Sounds to me like he’s not going to have any money by November.

Next stop: bankruptcy court.

In a new filing with the appellate court, Trump's team said that it has become a "practical impossibility" for Trump to post the bond needed to appeal the decision. In addition, Trump's team is asserting that there are no bond companies that are willing to take real estate as collateral for a judgment of this magnitude.
Not surprising. A) how much real estate does Trump have that isn’t already encumbered by liens/mortgages? B) real estate foreclosures go at fire sale prices. Mortgage holders look to cut their losses. Lienholders for bonds want their money back. Foreclosing on real property is a sure way to get just some of it back. With half a billion on the line, close enough is not good enough. This isn’t a loan where some of the value is in the interest payments.

Bankruptcy is the only way to stop this now.

Attention Must Be Paid

It is being paid. And this is what the (new, improved, and gutted) RNC is going with. “Who you gonna believe? Me? Or your lyin’ eyes?” 👀 

Because all three of the “hoax/fakes” listed are on tape.  The “bloodbath” comment is getting analyzed by everyone, not just on Twitter. And Team Trump (well and truly the RNC, now), is left with Robert McCloskey’s famous comic quote as their defense:
I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Except the RNC isn’t in on the joke.

Attention and scrutiny are going to kill them, and they know it.

Sunday, March 17, 2024

The First Signs Of The Changing Season

Primary season has ended, and the presidential campaign season has begun. Which can only mean: FULL SCRUTINY OF EVERYTHING TRUMP SAYS!

And just a week from tomorrow Trump has to put up or shut up for his last pending judgment. Inquiring minds want to know: does Trump even have a portfolio upon which he can leverage half a billion dollars? Signs point to: “What’re you, stupid?”

Saying The Quiet Part Out Loud

Regulation is always making this balance. You’re just not supposed to say so.

Loose Lips 👄

Huh?  🤔 

1) “…they’re not gonna be able to sell those cars if I get elected.”  Electric cars? He’s been schmoozing Elmo, but he also rants against electric cars because Biden’s for them.

2) “Now if I don’t get elected it’s gonna be a bloodbath for the whole….(pause)…that’s [he’s referring to the impact on the auto industry] gonna be the least of it.” Okay… The whole what? Auto industry? Why stop in the middle, then, and start over? Because your mouth just recognized what your brain is sending down? And why shift to “that’s gonna be the least of it”? Context is important, right?

3) “It’s gonna be a bloodbath for the country.” So the bloodbath extends to the entire country?  If Trump gets elected? Er, doesn’t get elected? 

Either way, this seems inexcusably bad.

“Context Is All.”—E.M. Forster

Just The Auto Industry, Right?

But not anyone in the auto industry!

Reuters:
During an outdoor speech that was whipped by strong winds and punctuated by some profane language, Trump predicted that if he does not win the Nov. 5 general election, American democracy will come to an end. "If we don't win this election, I don't think you're going to have another election in this country," Trump said.
Pretty sure he meant another election in the auto industry. You’d probably let him drive your car, though. Especially the auto industry. "Many people are saying…” Not in the courts, but certainly in the auto industry.

Cars Are Cars 🚙

Good thing he didn’t say they’re automobiles. Because then, there’d be a bloodbath. Yes, back to that. Immediate context v. general context. Trump may have said “bloodbath” after he mentioned the auto industry, but he also said elections would end if he lost. What’s the explanatory context for that? 
I wonder if anyone else wonders if the Trump regime might stem in part from the neglect of history and civics in the STEM mania in education. Though that's nothing compared with the stupid from media.
As close as we’re going to get, eh?

Nothing New Under The Sun

I don’t disagree. At all. I’m an absolutist about two things: voting, and books (well, and being kind to people and animals, and lots of other things. But you get my point.). I don’t care who you vote for, so much as I care that you bother to vote. And I don’t care what you read, so long as you do so. Deeply. Widely.

But our latest “enemy” is Moms for Liberty. They didn’t originate book banning, and book banning won’t stop because they lose their clout in scandal and failure. The ABA runs a Banned Book Week every year. They’ve been doing it since the founders of Moms for Liberty were even a gleam in their parents eyes.

Book bans are bad. Always have been, always will be. There are clearly books that don’t belong in school libraries; but that’s why we have librarians. I read my way through several libraries in my feckless youth. It wasn’t all up building moral teachings or deeply insightful literature. But it never did me any harm.

Widely. Deeply is good; but widely is, in some ways, better. And lay off banning books. Period.

Nothing To See Here 👀

So, there’ll be a bloodbath in the auto industry if Trump is not elected?

Well, that’s so much better!

I Arise Today…

Which, by all accounts, is drying up. Not a lot of outreach there. I guess one has to read the article: Or maybe it’s a question of context. Yeah, pretty obvious he was concerned about the auto industry.

His Mainspring Is Running Down

He then added, "EXAMPLE: YOU CAN’T STOP POLICE FROM DOING THE JOB OF STRONG & EFFECTIVE CRIME PREVENTION BECAUSE YOU WANT TO GUARD AGAINST THE OCCASIONAL 'ROGUE COP' OR 'BAD APPLE.' SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH 'GREAT BUT SLIGHTLY IMPERFECT.' ALL PRESIDENTS MUST HAVE COMPLETE & TOTAL PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, OR THE AUTHORITY & DECISIVENESS OF A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL BE STRIPPED & GONE FOREVER."
That’s why we prosecute bad cops. Because otherwise, all the bad apples would spoil the barrel.

We’ve just never had such an egregiously bad President before.

St. Patrick’s Day 2024

 It occurred to me this is not a prayer in the way we are commonly told to think of prayer. The situation, says tradition, is that Patrick and his converts, on an island controlled by people hostile to Patrick and his evangelism, don’t pray like this: “O God protect us and hide us from the bad guys and keep them away and don’t let them see us and keep us safe.”  Patrick prays like this:

I arise today through a mighty strength, the invocation of the Trinity, through belief in the Threeness, through confession of the Oneness of the Creator of creation.

I arise today through the strength of Christ with his Baptism, through the strength of His Crucifixion with His Burial through the strength of His Resurrection with His Ascension, through the strength of His descent for the Judgement of Doom.

I arise today through the strength of the love of Cherubim in obedience of Angels, in the service of the Archangels, in hope of resurrection to meet with reward, in prayers of Patriarchs, in predictions of Prophets, in preachings of Apostles, in faiths of Confessors, in innocence of Holy Virgins, in deeds of righteous men.

I arise today, through the strength of Heaven; light of Sun, brilliance of Moon, splendour of Fire, speed of Lightning, swiftness of Wind, depth of Sea, stability of Earth, firmness of Rock.

I arise today, through God's strength to pilot me: God's might to uphold me, God's wisdom to guide me, God's eye to look before me, God's ear to hear me, God's word to speak for me, God's hand to guard me, God's way to lie before me, God's shield to protect me, God's host to secure me: against snares of devils, against temptations of vices, against inclinations of nature, against everyone who shall wish me ill, afar and anear, alone and in a crowd.

I summon today all these powers between me (and these evils): against every cruel and merciless power that may oppose my body and my soul, against incantations of false prophets, against black laws of heathenry, against false laws of heretics, against craft of idolatry, against spells of witches, smiths and wizards, against every knowledge that endangers man's body and soul.

Christ to protect me today against poisoning, against burning, against drowning, against wounding, so that there may come abundance in reward. 
Christ with me, Christ before me, Christ behind me, Christ in me, Christ beneath me, Christ above me, Christ on my right, Christ on my left, Christ in breadth, Christ in length, Christ in height, Christ in the heart of every man who thinks of me, Christ in the mouth of every man who speaks of me, Christ in every eye that sees me, Christ in every ear that hears me.

There’s a lesson in prayer here. We think of prayer as only asking. “Supplication” is the seminary word, but it just means asking for something. Prayer, popularly, is asking for something. “O Lord, won’t you buy me a Mercedes-Benz.” A funny line when Janis sang it, but I have to honestly wonder how many pray a version of it in the pews of Joel Osteen’s church; and how many of them would recognize the Lorica as a proper prayer. 

The prime mockery of faith is that the faithful pray, but God does not answer. You can find that in the Psalms, or in Isaiah; or, since this is Lent, even in the Passion stories. It’s a criticism that old: prayer is a bailout attempt. Its prime use is as the last resort. You use it to get something you can’t get anywhere else. That’s why there are no atheists in foxholes (it’s an ironic statement, not a universal truth. Calm down.). Prayer is supposed to be about asking; God is supposed to be about answering.

But the prayer Jesus taught, the Lord’s Prayer, the Our Father, is not about asking. Look at it; what does it ask for? This day our daily bread. Forgiveness for us only insofar as we forgive others. Not to be led into temptation, but delivered from evil. What else? A new car? A better job? Hot pizza?🍕 

Now look at the Lorica again. What does it ask for? It is a series of statements. It is not a series of requests. Like the Pater Noster, it doesn’t focus on us, but focuses us outwards.

It’s certainly a legitimate use of prayer to use it in dire circumstances; to use it to get something you can’t get otherwise. But how do you do that? By praying really earnestly? By putting your heart into that prayer, like Creon does at the end of “Antigone”? He prays for death, realizing all his best intentions have ended in death and tragedy. Did he simply not pray hard enough; or were the gods truly not going to let him off that easily? Or was that, in our Christian context, not the right prayer?

Patrick doesn’t pray for deliverance from his enemies; or invisibility; or even to look like a herd of deer (the stories vary). Patrick prays that he be more faithful to God. His prayer is simply a series of statements. Statements that remind him of the presence of God, and that put him in the presence of God. Put him there consciously; deliberately; purposefully. This prayer displaces self and replaces it with Christ; but Christ is in the other.

Call it the ultimate humility.

It’s not the only purpose of prayer. But it’s the one too many Protestants, at least…🙋‍♂️… seldom consider.

Saturday, March 16, 2024

“We Would Not Have You Ignorant, Brothers And Sisters…”

On a recent livestream, Boebert quoted a scripture from 1 Timothy and then opined that God is not pleased with works, but only faith.*
I don’t know what verse she quoted, but I doubt it was this one:

Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.
Boebert was ridiculed for her venture into theology, but she’s only repeating what she’s been told.

Growing up in Baptist East Texas, I was raised in the culture of the fierce anti-Catholicism that is our American religious heritage, thanks to the Puritans and English history. That’s a long story, but the short version is the bad blood between Elizabeth I and Rome, and the Puritan determination to always ask the question:  WWPopeD?, and do the opposite. I oversimplify to make a point of avoiding anything that smacks of “popery”. It’s an impulse as American as apple pie.

There is a strain in the Reformed branch of Protestantism that harmonizes, to this day, with the Puritan desire to burn away all hints of similarities to the Roman church (their term, let the reader understand). Catholicism places great importance on helping others as a product of being a disciple. I perhaps put that too Protestantly. But works is as important as faith to Catholic doctrine, as it is in much of Protestantism. The roots of my own denomination on this continent were set down by German immigrants who almost immediately set about establishing an orphanage, a hospital, a mental health institution, even a place for boat workers on the Mississippi. As far as I know, all of them still function, almost 200 years later.

You see, there are two emphases in Christianity, both related to soteriology. One emphasizes works, although that’s a reductionist way to describe it. Like the hospital and orphanage, the point is to care for others. Your faith, if you will (I prefer to say “belief,” but explaining that is another discussion, isn’t it?), is expressed in how you care for others; or at least provide for their care. I said this has to do with soteriology, although I’d prefer to teach that it is the central teaching of Jesus of Nazareth. I mean, we don’t have to entangle it with the doctrine of salvation at all. But that’s another discussion, too.

The other strain of Christianity, a strain strong in American Protestantism, teaches that salvation is not only everything, it is the only thing. And while Christianity entangles soteriology with works, the corrective to that was to declare works a false witness of faithfulness. This was meant to make faith something worked out in fear and trembling, rather than acts of kindness and charity to prove God loved you. The problem is, when salvation is the point of being a Christian, it’s very hard to displace yourself from the center and replace self with other. It’s easier to turn salvation personal, and from there make your obligation saving others, make your salvation dependent on your efforts to save others. It becomes the broken echo of the teaching to care for others. In fact, care for others becomes abstract, metaphysical, and obliges you only to get others to think like you. Which doesn’t displace the self so much as it comfortably displaces the other.

I’d even say it displaces God.

It’s an either/or: either we are here to take care of each other, or we are here to save each other. Dorothy Day lived poor among the poor, and recognized the need to accept them as they were, never to “help” them by bringing even the salvation of good works. Day worked hard to respect the poor as people, to treat them as wholly other rather than objects receiving her charity. It’s much harder to do good works from an approach of humility, than to try to persuade someone to think, or believe, as you do. I grew up and lived through the fervor of my Baptist peers convinced that what they thought of as salvation should not be denied to me. The effect, then and in memory now, was one of being invited into a cult; and if I wouldn’t come, I was dismissed like a used Kleenex. My only value was insofar as I thought like them; and I never did. This doesn’t make me superior; and it didn’t shadow my entire childhood. What I’ve told you did happen, but only once, and only from two girls I barely knew and haven’t seen again. I mean only to present it as an example.

This is where we get back to Boebert. You and I may say her statement is, indeed, the opposite of what Jesus said. But she’s just repeating what she’s been taught: that faith is a thing (I don’t think it is. Faith is only trust.  As I say, I’d replace the term with “belief,” but we still have the problem of “believing what you know ain’t so,” in the words of William James. Which is not what I mean at all. So that’s the other discussion.), and that thing has to be common to others, otherwise what’s the point of them? How many people you get to think like you is the central tenet of modern (v. historical, I mean. Yeah, another discussion.) evangelism. That’s the point of the preacher: the man (typically) who “brings people to Jesus.” What else is the point of a revival? (I attended one once, in my hometown. A friend’s church, the one tout le town attended. 5 nights consecutively. I took notes like an anthropologist in New Guinea. I still remember a girl I knew through her boyfriend, a good friend of mine. She was a member of that church (he wasn’t, either), and I remember one night she leaned over to talk to me, unable to take it anymore. She was terribly concerned I wasn’t “getting it;” that my salvation, in short, was at risk.) The church I grew up in taught us to do for others, and provided opportunities for us to volunteer to do just that. But it was because it was right, not because we would be saved if we did.

So it’s a peculiar chopping off of a limb to forego the extra mile by reducing faith to evangelism and giving works the boot. Works become an obstacle to salvation, not a sign of it. And when that happens, it’s easy to see works as inimical to “real” faith. Discarding works also lets you off the hook. If the salvation pitch doesn’t win you over, well…they tried. And why bother with any works if the object of your charity is already damned? I mean, what can you really do for them? And if they aren’t damned, why aren’t they taking care of themselves? Doesn’t God help those who help themselves? Yeah, that’s Poor Richard, but I’m pretty sure a lot of Xians think it’s from Paul, or certainly Proverbs. Boebert may even imagine it’s found in 1 Timothy.

So Boebert is not actually committing bad theology. She’s just repeating the bad theology she’s been taught. Although considering how many people teach it, and how many it is taught to, it’s arrogant to say they are wrong, but I am right. So I’ll only say I disagree; and that I understand why she said what she said. And that, yes, I think she’s wrong. 

But who am I to judge? I disagree with her idea; I don’t accept it. But that doesn’t mean I want her to agree with me. I just wanted to note what had happened.

*I don’t personally think God is pleased by works or faith, but by us being pleased because we live in the basileia tou theou and are all working to be last of all and servant of all. Because then all is well and all manner of thing is well.

And that’s what Xianity is really all about, Charlie Brown. Much, much, much longer discussion, of course.


Ethics Is Morality Is…

...a fungible good?

I Coulda Been Watching The Stooges*

He should have stayed home today. The unbelievable part is right. American Horror Story: Xenophobia. American Horror Story: Apocalypse Soon.🔜  Nobody knows the troubles he’s seen. “*mild applause*” 😂 Size matters. Sounds like it, anyway. Of  ‘04. 1904. Trump can relate. He still doesn’t understand how tariffs work. Waiting for the media to pay attention to that. Maybe that’s what it will take.

*My usual Saturday evening activity.

Authentic Gibberish

First, she said that the RNC will, for the first time, start an initiative where they recruit and train people to then get jobs as poll workers around the country so they have their MAGA partisans counting the ballots. In the past, both parties have always recruited "poll observers" who watch poll workers as they count the ballots. But this is much different.
Remember four years ago, when Trump had the entirety of the administrative power of the Federal government at his command, and he couldn’t organize a two-car funeral procession, much less a national response to Covid? This is Lara Trump talking, the woman who wrote an email and thinks that was an Herculean effort. But the idea is daddy-in-law Trump’s. Neither Trump nor his son’s wife are capable of organizing the effort it would take to attempt to make this mad scheme work. Texas alone has 256 counties, which means 256 county clerks in charge of elections, and I honestly can’t begin to calculate how many polling places in each county. Hundreds, is my guess, in populous areas like Harris County, the Dallas-Fort Worth area, San Antonio and Austin. Early voting runs for about 2 weeks (give or take) prior to Election Day. There are generally more polling places open during that period.. The idea the RNC under Lara Trump is going to organize thousands of election workers for Texas alone and place them in counties that are primarily Democratic (the urban centers of Texas), is not just laughable, it’s delusional.

And then there’s the rest of the country. Aside from the need of the RNC to focus on closing the gap between the money the Democrats have on hand already, and the money the RNC has.

This idea is as mad as Trump’s delusion that he did everything right for the country during the pandemic. 😷  This plan is not a grim shadow of the shape of things to come. It’s the mad babbling of yet more incompetents ushered into power by the Incompetent-in-Chief. Well, they think it’s power. A local HOA has more authority than the RNC is going to wield.

Friday, March 15, 2024

Elon Musk Wants To Know Where To Donate

Authentic Legal Gibberish

Newsweek:
"I don't know if I can say this or not but I'm going to. I believe they're putting it on there in an emergency expedite," he said. "This is one of those things with the Supreme Court. To be able to get there, it has to be something that affects the whole country. This affects everything." 
He said he hopes his case will be heard "really fast" and that he expects his complaint will be made available for the public to read in the coming days. 
... 
His case stems from an April 2022 lawsuit filed by Kari Lake, an Arizona Republican Senate candidate who unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2022, and Arizona Secretary of State candidate Mark Finchem, alleging that the systems used to count votes in the state were untrustworthy.
That case, however, was dismissed on standing. Lindell said Friday that because the case was initially dismissed on standing, he was able to introduce new evidence uncovered by lawyers about three months prior to the Supreme Court.
Yeah, I don’t know what that last sentence means, either. Editing is a lost art. But I have a question for the lawyers: if the Kari Lake case was dismissed, it can’t be the case Lindell is trying to present evidence in now.  He’ll have to start a new one, and that means he can’t begin to present evidence until he’s filed suit and gotten an answer filed by the defendant (after serving the defendant). And if that case was dismissed on standing (lack of), what standing does Lindell have to take up the same cause?

He’s also just speaking gibberish about Supreme Court jurisdiction.

Any way you slice it, this case is not getting to the Supreme Court this year. I don’t know who’s giving Lindell his legal advice, but he should get his money back.

“Don’t Judge, And You Won’t Be Judged”

As lawyers we have drummed into us the ethical need to avoid not only impropriety, but the "appearance" of impropriety. I have long had some vague sense that there's a problem with that. 
As it happens, when going through books I was thinking of selling a week or so ago, I was looking "The Mill on the Floss" and found the following, which expresses my qualms beautifully. The protagonist, Maggie Tulliver, though innocent, has been compromised by a young man, and has a ruined reputation in her home village. The local rector, Dr. Kenn, believes her innocent, and, to convince his parish, he engages her to tutor his children. But.... 
"Dr Kenn, at first enlightened only by a few hints as to the new turn which gossip and slander had taken in relation to Maggie, had recently been made more fully aware of it by an earnest remonstrance from one of his male parishioners against the indiscretion of persisting in the attempt to overcome the prevalent feeling in the parish by a course of resistance. Dr Kenn, having a conscience void of offence in the matter, was still inclined to persevere,—was still averse to give way before a public sentiment that was odious and contemptible; but he was finally wrought upon by the consideration of the peculiar responsibility attached to his office, of avoiding the appearance of evil,—an “appearance” that is always dependent on the average quality of surrounding minds. Where these minds are low and gross, the area of that “appearance” is proportionately widened. Perhaps he was in danger of acting from obstinacy; perhaps it was his duty to succumb. Conscientious people are apt to see their duty in that which is the most painful course; and to recede was always painful to Dr Kenn. He made up his mind that he must advise Maggie to go away from St Ogg’s for a time; and he performed that difficult task with as much delicacy as he could, only stating in vague terms that he found his attempt to countenance her stay was a source of discord between himself and his parishioners, that was likely to obstruct his usefulness as a clergyman. He begged her to allow him to write to a clerical friend of his, who might possibly take her into his own family as governess; and, if not, would probably know of some other available position for a young woman in whose welfare Dr Kenn felt a strong interest. 
"Poor Maggie listened with a trembling lip; she could say nothing but a faint “Thank you, I shall be grateful”; and she walked back to her lodgings, through the driving rain, with a new sense of desolation."
"Appearance" is all about who’s looking. And “ethics” is all about who’s judging.

I learned that in parish ministry when my congregations turned against me, and the hierarchy above wondered what I did to deserve it. It wasn’t that I was blameless, but they were all sure there was no one else to blame.

Ethics as an ideal, and ethics as a reality. And someone has to judge, else what’s an ethics for?

Getting back to the tweet at the head: rule of law means the rules MAGA likes. Complaints about conduct of Fani Willis from those who think Trump guilty fall rather flat when you consider MAGA will consider anything short of dismissal of charges (this all started as a motion to dismiss), or total exoneration, as the denial of justice and a “witch hunt.” Not that it’ll make a groat’s worth of difference. A conviction will be a conviction.

“They All Look…”

Good grief.

Besides the usual gibberish legal advice from non-lawyers unencumbered by knowledge.
And I suspect, as in Texas (where the governor also DOESN’T have pardon power), the State AG doesn’t have criminal jurisdiction.

PF Flyers 👟

When I was a kid it was “PF Flyers” with the “magic wedge” that would make you “run faster” and “jump higher.”

It was bullshit, but at least they weren’t shilled by politicians.

Or Because…. 🌳

That’s not the way the Supreme Court (or any court, for that matter), works?

But I suppose “conspiracy” is a better money raiser than “the Clerk looked at me like a man a big, tall tree just fell out of.”

😷

In these public and televised comments, the District Attorney complained that a Fulton County commissioner "and so many others" questioned her decision to hire SADA Wade," wrote McAfee. 
"When referring to her detractors throughout, she frequently utilized the plural "they." The State argues the speech was not aimed at any of the defendants in this case. Maybe so. But maybe not. 
"Therein lies the danger of public comment by a prosecuting attorney," McAfee said, adding that it was "legally improper." 
"Providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into," he went on.  
"The time may well have arrived for an order preventing the State from mentioning the case in any public forum to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity, but that is not the motion presently before the Court."
I was just thinking I never hear of judges ruling like this about Ken Paxton. He shoots his mouth off constantly, looking for media coverage for his very political lawsuits (like his attempt to buffalo Annunciation House in El Paso, an extra-legal effort he took to the press ASAP. The court stopped that cold, reminding the AG he, too, was bound by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure). Maybe it’s because he doesn’t try criminal cases (not a slight distinction). Maybe it’s because he’s not a black woman speaking to her church in public. Maybe there’s a difference between press releases and press conferences and black churches (or some white would give you the microphone, too. None I ever attended/pastored, but there are different cultures of church.). Or maybe because a stunt like this isn’t worth the candle.  Although the judge is inviting a motion, it would all depend on the facts. 

I’m just a bit uncomfortable with this, but largely in the abstract. Prosecutors should try their cases in the court of law, not in the court of public opinion. And I think that goes for AG’s, too; even in civil cases.

But there are generalizations, and there are specifics. Change the facts, change the outcome. What applies in Georgia doesn’t necessarily apply in Texas. Then again, there’s a lot of loose commentary on legal Twitter condemning Fani Willis for this situation. I’m happy to retain some criticism for the judge, too.

Well, Now I Know What’s Going On

Was it worth it? Because now: The defense lawyers remain strategic geniuses. You know who doesn’t care about your opinion, Kelly? The judge. The jury. But please, generate some more tweets on the subject. People will be tired of it by Monday.

Don’t Try This At Home, Kids

March 12, 2024, The New York Times published an article detailing potential running mates for independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s 2024 presidential campaign. High on the list was the quarterback of the New York Jets, Aaron Rodgers, who Kennedy had been talking to "pretty continuously" for at least a month, according to the article. 
As discussion over the potential options spread on social media, Ken White, the author of the legal blog Popehat, reposted the article on two "Twitter-like" social media platforms, Instagram Threads (owned by Meta) and BlueSky. White captioned the post with a purported quote from Rodgers: 
"If I can't walk anymore, nobody should" said injured Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers. "That's why I'm joining the team that's going to bring back polio." 
I’m A Snopes reader emailed us and asked if the quote was real. It was not. Rodgers never said that. 
.... 
In order to fact-check the "bring back polio" statement, we started by reading the New York Times article it supposedly appeared in, but did not find the quote. A quick google search using the quote's wording found no results from any news outlet, The New York Times or otherwise. 
When we reached out to Ken White via email for comment, he confirmed that the post was intended to be satirical and had no basis in reality.
Leave satire to the professionals. And remember: if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Thursday, March 14, 2024

Follow The (Lack Of) Money

It’ll be fine. Laura Trump wrote an email. What did Trump spend on lawyers at last report? $52 million?

 And there’s the free campaign advice: Free advice is worth what you pay for it. And probably the only advice the RNC can afford.

I Was About To Ask…

... if anyone had heard from Mike Lindell today.

I thought I was surprised, but then I thought: “No, I’m not.” It seems inevitable, doesn’t it?

And he’s back to claiming he’s going to get this before the Supreme Court. Wasn’t that too dangerous before? Or is that what the money is for? To start a lawsuit?

Or reimburse his business losses.

It’s all about the grift, isn’t it?

🗡️

Funny, that’s not what Bragg said: In case the Klasfeld tweet embedded there isn’t clear: Which means this bears repeating: Besides, yes, ordinary people aren’t paying attention to this (the Lovely Wife struggles to keep all the cases straight). Not now. But come November, when these cases are still pending and being argued and being set on dockets for trial, Trump will find out delay is a two-edged sword.🗡️ 

Besides, losing is losing.
And as for the New York case: Don’t jump to conclusions; especially based on what you’re reading. It’s always more complicated. (Bragg is leaving the door open for this. The judge controls the docket. Being reasonable is always the best policy. The judge could well decide his docket won’t brook the delay, and Trump’s dilatory action will not be reviewed favorably on appeal. Wait and see.)