POTUS 45.65: I'm Just Here For The Lincoln Project Ads

[Handyman]

Trump mouthed off on TS again about the law clerk in his civil trial and the judge finally put a gag order in place.

[ScoobyDoo]

He's saying regardless of any outcome you make the move.

I don't necessarily disagree but he's operating under the old paradigm where the Supreme Court isn't politicized. Now that it is I'm not sure a test is worth it.

[French Rage]

And so I asked him, "my Lord, why were there only 90 guilty verdicts?", and he said onto me, "My son, during the 91st indictment, I carried you." https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-new...court-30995392

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

The 14th Amendment argument really doesn't hold water anyways...and I think is a loser argument anyways.

It's far too easy to interpret "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against [the United States], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof" in a manner that doesn't disqualify Dump. He's never been charged or convicted on any act of sedition or insurrection stemming from 1/6/21. The current charges against him for that event are:

• Conspiracy to defraud the United States
• Witness tampering
• Conspiracy against the rights of citizens
• Obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding

Which of these may specifically constitute "aid or comfort" to the insurrectionists is not easy to argue or prove. At any rate, he'll keep all of the cases against him tied up in court with procedural stall tactics and appeals all the way until at least Nov '24.

[Slap Shot]

I read through his points on twitter and he seems to be all over the place. Ultimately the Supreme Court decision is important because there are questions regarding the amendment that have not been tested. Saying their decision is not relevant is like saying their decision in Dobbs isn't relevant.

He's saying regardless of any outcome you make the move.

[ScoobyDoo]

Then you missed one of his points, which is it doesn't matter what SCOTUS will or won't do once it's inevitably brought before them.

I read through his points on twitter and he seems to be all over the place. Ultimately the Supreme Court decision is important because there are questions regarding the amendment that have not been tested. Saying their decision is not relevant is like saying their decision in Dobbs isn't relevant.

[psych]

Then you missed one of his points, which is it doesn't matter what SCOTUS will or won't do once it's inevitably brought before them.

Absolutely. Get SCOTUS on record again as being unhinged. Worked to get some voters to the polls who may not have when it came to Roe v. Wade.
Granted, most of the media doesn’t care. Politico Playbook has a “What the White House doesn’t want you to read” section, and they had the audacity to put out a Politico article saying the Biden administration doesn’t want people to know the economy could take a hit from people having to start repaying their loans, as if the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress were the ones who wanted repayments to start without any assistance. Politico of course left out the “SCOTUS shot down Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, and Republicans in Congress have wanted loans to restart since Biden took office. Oh, and Republicans are trying to strike down Biden’s new repayment program as illegal.” No matter to any of that.

[Handyman]

The 14th Amendment argument really doesn't hold water anyways...and I think is a loser argument anyways.

[Slap Shot]

While the commentary is spot on the premise of the OP Ed isn't far fetched. This Court has no problem throwing out the baby with the bath water.

Then you missed one of his points, which is it doesn't matter what SCOTUS will or won't do once it's inevitably brought before them.

[Kepler]

Here's a nice run down of Dump's representation.

[ScoobyDoo]

While the commentary is spot on the premise of the OP Ed isn't far fetched. This Court has no problem throwing out the baby with the bath water.

[Slap Shot]

His commentary is 100% spot on.

Former federal judge rips Washington Post over 14th Amendment editorial

Former federal judge Michael Luttig ripped The Washington Post’s Monday op-ed against invoking the 14th Amendment to disqualify former President Trump from the 2024 election, calling it “perhaps the most journalistically incompetent and irresponsible” piece he has ever read on the U.S. Constitution.

“This editorial today by @washingtonpost is perhaps the most journalistically incompetent and irresponsible editorial on the Constitution of the United States and a question of constitutional law by a major national newspaper that I ever remember reading,” Luttig wrote Monday in a post on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.

Luttig, a conservative appointed by former President George H.W. Bush who has repeatedly criticized Trump’s false election claims, claimed the op-ed titled “The 14th Amendment can’t save the country from Donald Trump” misquoted Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

The provision has already been cited in two lawsuits in Minnesota and Colorado seeking to keep Trump off the ballot.

The Post’s op-ed addresses several points of uncertainty over the provision, writing that the answers “in most instances, aren’t terribly clear.”

Luttig was responding to the beginning of the piece, wherein the Post’s editorial board calls the case for invoking the 14th Amendment “intriguing,” but that “banking on an arcane paragraph to protect the country from a second Trump term would be foolish.”

“The editorial inauspiciously begins by ‘misquoting’ the Disqualification Clause of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment itself, next dismissively pronouncing the argument for disqualification made by the nation’s foremost constitutional scholars as little more than intriguing and then admonishing the American public that ‘banking on an arcane paragraph to protect the country from a second Trump term would be foolish’ of them,” Luttig wrote in a later post on X.

Luttig also argued the Post does not actually explain why the American public should not be relying on the 14th Amendment.

“But it is probably because, as we see in the newspaper’s buried cynical lede in the concluding paragraph,” Luttig wrote. “The [Washington Post] fears the current Supreme Court will never interpret the Constitution to disqualify the former president, no matter what the Constitution says.”

Luttig was referencing the final paragraph of the op-ed that argued invoking the 14th Amendment would make its way to the Supreme Court, where the chance of Trump’s disqualification being affirmed “seem low,” and that the nation would be “better off” relying on votes to keep the former president out of the White House.

“One would at least expect that serious reasoning would have to follow in support of its warning that the American public’s resort to and reliance upon the Fourteenth Amendment would be ‘foolish,'” Luttig wrote. “Instead, what follows borders on, if it does not pass into, the silly and absurd.”

[St. Clown]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/02/polit...mbers-veterans

Most of those positions were known, or actions taken, before TFG was elected, and yet still Kelly decided to work for him. With his scathing statements should come a period of self-reflection.

[Handyman]

John Kelly is as big of a piece of **** as the rest of them. This parade of rats fleeing the sinking ship and trying to launder their reputations would be laughable if it wasn't for the media lapping it all up like trained dogs. ****ing disheartening.

Yeah...I am sick of the media letting these criminals whitewash their reputations. All of them will vote for Trump in 2024 and if he offers they would line up to serve him. Screw all of them especially Kelly, Barr and Hutchinson. I don't care how much they cooperated they also enabled him at every turn. They should all serve time as should Conway and anyone else. Lock em all up the MAGAs should get no quarter.

[Handyman]

Following some Twitter reporters in the court room, it's going very badly for Alina Habba. She referred to opening statements as "testimony" (which they are absolutely not and any lawyer who's ever been in a courtroom should know this) repeatedly and the judge corrects her each time. Apparently she keeps bringing up previously-decided issues as well.

Look, he's going to lose this case and what happens after is anyone's guess. But if Habba has any interest in actually being a lawyer after all of this, she's doing a bad job at that.

She has no interest in being a lawyer...she wants a TV job.

The other lawyer is smiling btw because he asked to be paid up front!