TargaGTS | January 26, 2024 at 5:24 pm
Can someone explain how the NY legislature was allowed to essentially ”unexpire’ the statute of limitations that had LONG expired before they just changed the law a few years ago…almost certainly to allow this specific case to be litigated. I honestly don’t understand how that’s constitutional considering the limiting principles of the ex post facto clauses. //

DaveGinOly in reply to TargaGTS. | January 26, 2024 at 10:17 pm
The term “ex post facto” refers only to criminal laws. According to Madison, at least two important aspects of ex post facto laws were discussed. The first was if an explicit prohibition was necessary at all, because “everyone” knew such were not lawful (it was decided it would do no harm to make an explicit statement, and much help could be had from it). The second was a discussion of their nature, in which it was agreed that the term applied only to criminal law, and not to civil law. It was suggested the the prohibition should be extended to civil law, but the counter-argument that such a prohibition could be troublesome, for sometimes back-dated civil law is “unavoidable,” won the day. //

Olinser in reply to Olinser. | January 27, 2024 at 12:57 pm
Again, just a blatant lie. Here’s a list of what they were FORBIDDEN by the judge to present to the jury:

1) They were NOT ALLOWED to demonstrate that she had previously accused at least SIX different men of rape – from a random babysitter to Les Moonves – and that every single claim was provably false

2) They were NOT ALLOWED to present as evidence the coat she publicly claimed she wore during the alleged assault, when her own DNA report came back showing it had the DNA of multiple men…. but not Trump

3) They were NOT ALLOWED to present as evidence the Law and Order episode whose plot EXACTLY matched her alleged assault – the show that she had said multiple times she loved to ‘binge-watch’

4) they were NOT ALLOWED to present as evidence her multiple public statements that The Apprentice was her favorite show, the show starring her alleged rapist
...
8) They were NOT ALLOWED to present as evidence that the lawsuit was funded by Hoffman, who is also directly funding Trump’s political opponents

And that’s not even getting into that the was allowed to make an accusation without specifying the day, the month, or even the freaking YEAR that it happened, making it literally impossible for him to provide an alibi.

Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action for America President Dr. Kevin Roberts was invited to the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual conference in Davos, Switzerland, to appear on a panel about “What to Expect from a Possible Republican Administration” on Thursday.

In an op-ed penned ahead of the conference, Roberts wrote that he accepted the invitation to deliver the global elites a message. “Davos must accept the moral virtues, practical benefits, and natural rights of nations, families, and individuals to govern themselves,” Roberts wrote, or “‘We, the People’” will “take matters into our own hands.”

Roberts certainly delivered that message. When asked about who will likely join a new Trump administration, Roberts said it will be those who wish to destroy “the grasp that political elites and unelected technocrats have over the average person.”

“The agenda that every single member of the administration needs to have is to compile a list of everything that’s ever been proposed at the World Economic Forum, and object to all of them wholesale,” he added. //

The Heritage Foundation president aptly pointed out that the WEF elites, “the media, the academy, government agencies, international organizations, corporations, and the arts,” don’t actually care about preserving “democracy.” They fear Trump because a Trump presidency poses an existential threat to their power — and Roberts did nothing to alleviate that fear. //

Roberts also condemned elites for scaring people into believing “so-called climate change” is an “existential” threat to humanity and pointed out that Davos’ “solutions” to the supposed climate crisis are killing people. “More than a billion people in the world have been lifted out of poverty in the last 35 years because of fossil fuels,” Roberts explained. Yet climate alarmists are shutting down energy production to replace it with insufficient green energy.

“China,” Roberts added, is “the No. 1 adversary not just to the United States, but to free people on planet Earth. Not only do we at Davos not say that, we give the Chinese Communist Party a platform.” //

“I think President Trump, if in fact he wins a second term, is going to be inspired by the wise words of Javier Milei, who said that he was in power not to guide sheep, but to awaken lions,” concluded the president of Heritage. “That’s what the average American and the average free person on planet Earth wants out of leaders.”

Simon Ateba @simonateba
·
BREAKING - EXPLOSIVE: JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon tells CNBC people are voting for Trump because he was right about the economy, immigration, and China, says people should be a bit more respectful of MAGA people. They know what they are doing. WATCH

10:57 AM · Jan 17, 2024

Vivek then listed some truths that were a battle cry:

"There are two genders...Fossil fuels are a requirement for human prosperity -- drill, frack, burn coal, embrace nuclear energy. Reverse racism is racism. An open border is not a border. Parents determine the education of their children. The nuclear family is the greatest form of governance known to mankind. Capitalism lifts us up from poverty. There are three branches of government in the United States, not four. And the U.S. Constitution is the strongest and greatest guarantor of freedom in human history."

Vivek said that is the truth that still gives hope to the free world.

"If we can revive that dream over group identity, victimhood, and grievance, then nobody in the world — not a nation, not a corporation, not a virus, not China, is going to defeat us," Vivek said. "That is what American exceptionalism is all about." //

mikwcas Lugger66
9 hours ago edited
I was the same way eight years ago for Ted Cruz. I will never be that short sighted or self righteous ever again. This is Politics, not my Pastor and the deacon board having a disagreement. I've grown. And I hope I live for the day that I can eventually vote for RDS on a presidential ticket. It probably just isn't gonna be on this one, and that's fine by me.

I think the country needs a redo here anyhow.

Just 23% of Haley supporters say they would vote for Trump in a matchup with Biden. The plurality of Haley supporters, 43%, would vote for Biden instead. //

Chris Paige
2 hours ago
Nope, you're reading that poll wrong: what it says is that Haley's supporters are Ds who either will not or cannot admit they're Ds. The last thing we should want as a nominee is someone who is preferred by Biden voters (you're guaranteeing ZERO enthusiasm &, even if by some miracle you win, you're guaranteeing that she'll be a RINO in office). These people don't agree w/ us on anything, so why should we put them in office? Better to run them out of the party for the same reason & in the same way that the Whigs always lost & the GOP won - trying to hold the pro slavery Whigs in the party was just doomed to failure; we had to get rid of them & we need to get rid of Haley's people. This is addition by subtraction (just like when we rid ourselves of pro slavery Whigs). //

afeblue32
2 hours ago
All that tells me is 1) Democrats are looking for anyone else, and 2) Nikki Haley appeals to Democrats.

Curmudgeon
10 hours ago
The bank in question testified at the trial for the defence. They stated they did their own assessment and agreed terms with Trump. The loan was paid back in full in accordance with the agreement. //

Blue State Deplorable
9 hours ago edited
This prosecution is patently ridiculous. First, there are no damages - the bank was made whole with interest. Second, the bank is not some unequal partner that was taken advantage of. This is their business and they have professionals that advise them accordingly. Third, and as Kevin O’Leary points out, this is a negotiation that happens every day in every city in America. It’s how commercial real estate development is often financed. Anyone who thinks Trump is guilty of something here is galactically stupid. //

Ready2Squeeze Romeg
9 hours ago
At least here in NY, valuations for purposes of taxes are always much lower than what the property is worth on the market. That is done intentionally as it fools a lot of people into thinking that they are getting a 'deal' on their tax assessment - when in fact everyone else's property is similarly 'under valued'.

But don't worry - the government just makes it up on the tax rate ...

It is encouraging, though, to see that there are candidates who understand the stakes and are willing to stand up and say that the nation and our republic are not served by imprisoning a former president for the sake of spite. //

Trump is playing a dangerous game ... that will do massive damage to the nation. //

Laocoön of Troy etba_ss
5 hours ago edited
This is 100% true. Trump hasn't learned a damned thing. He thinks this is a game and he'll be able to schmooze his way out of the hole he dug for himself. Like Trump University, Trump Steaks, and all of the rest of the scams he's run for most of his life. He really stupidly thinks he can talk his way outta this. I don't think dumbass properly describes his foolishness.

the Meese brief addresses the question of the universe of individuals who can be lawfully appointed to the position of “Special Counsel” in order for this regulation to fit under federal statutes and the Constitution’s Appointment Clause.

Meese states that the appointments of Patrick Fitzgerald, John Huber, and John Durham as past “Special Counsels” were all valid because, at the time of their appointment, each was serving as a Senate-confirmed United States Attorney within the Department of Justice. Their appointment as “Special Counsel” did not alter their authority; it just granted them the same authority over a particular investigation pursuant to the regulation that they otherwise would not have under their individual geographic limitations.

Meese and his co-authors first published the objection set forth in the current brief in law journals and other publications following Robert Mueller’s appointment as Special Counsel, given that he was an attorney in private practice at the time he was named Special Counsel to investigate former President Trump, but never to a court.

Now Meese and his co-authors are making the claim against Jack Smith to a court because of his effort to have the Supreme Court take up the immunity issue. This created an opportunity for them to raise the question by arguing that Smith lacks jurisdiction to seek the Court’s relief because he is not truly an “Officer” of the United States.

Congress alone has the authority to create federal offices not established by the Constitution. And the Attorney General cannot ex nihilo fashion offices as he sees fit. Nor has Congress given the Attorney General power to appoint a Special Counsel of this nature. Thus, without legal office, Smith cannot wield the authority of the United States, including his present attempt to seek relief in this Court. //

Because Jack Smith was a private citizen when appointed, never having been nominated by a President or confirmed by a vote of the Senate, he was not within the scope of individuals who could be authorized by Garland to exercise prosecutorial authority equivalent to United States Attorneys. Any action purporting to create such a position – or “office” -- and vest it with the same authority as United States Attorneys is unconstitutional because it was not “created by law." //

Among the most compelling arguments made by the Meese brief comes at the end when it notes the incarnation of a Special Counsel vested with a Javert-like mission, as compared to the statutorily-created officers of the Justice Department – the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, Associate Attorney General, Solicitor General, eleven Assistant AGs, and 94 U.S. Attorneys – all subject to Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation. According to the Biden DOJ, the Attorney General can simply create a Special Counsel Office, appoint a non-government actor to that post, grant him the power to wield the authority of a grand jury, draw resources from various federal law enforcement agencies, and direct their conduct, and seek search and arrest warrants when loosed upon a member of the public.

If the Meese brief’s argument is correct, then all the actions taken by Smith have been without lawful authority under federal law – beginning with the use of the grand jury in Washington D.C. to build the cases he has brought against former President Trump. The outcome would almost certainly mean that the cases would be dismissed.

“Defendant contends that the Constitution grants him “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions performed within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility” while he served as President of the United States, so long as he was not both impeached and convicted for those actions…. No court—or any other branch of government—has ever accepted it. And this court will not so hold.” //

Earlier today, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that Trump was not immune from civil suit based on claims related to January 6, on the ground that the conduct constesting the election was in his capacity as a candidate, not as a president.

If Donald Trump were the covert Kremlin agent Democrats made him out to be, he might have given President Vladimir Putin the same kind of red-carpet treatment that Democrats gave Chinese communist dictator Xi Jinping this week.

On Wednesday, President Xi was greeted in the hastily sanitized streets of San Francisco with all the fanfare of a communist parade, complete with waving red banners, to welcome the head of Red China. //

President Joe Biden is to China what Democrats claimed Trump was to Russia: that is, compromised by complex financial ties that raise significant conflicts of interest and warrant a congressional impeachment inquiry. What if the streets of Palm Beach, Florida were draped in Russian flags to greet President Putin after Donald Trump Jr. had accepted $3.5 million from an ex-Moscow mayor’s wife? //

Will the same people who raised a circus over ridiculous “pee tape” rumors about Trump and Russian prostitutes wonder if the Chinese have any more illicit films of Hunter Biden indulging in crack cocaine and hookers? We never found those pee tapes but there’s plenty of graphic porn online starring the first son. //

But even beyond the Bidens’ entanglement in influence-peddling schemes involving prominent Chinese leaders, there’s good reason why Democrats might want to leave a good impression on the world’s leading civil rights offender. A Federalist analysis of federal campaign donations found that companies credibly accused of harnessing Chinese slave labor overwhelmingly donated to Democrats. Of the nearly $40 million that went to congressional candidates between the two major parties in 2020, Democrats took home more than 85 percent while Republicans received less than 15.

The AG claims Team Trump exaggerated the value of real estate to secure favorable loans and insurance rates. That’s it. Lenders rely upon their own appraisals. Sophisticated businesses decided to loan him money, all of which he repaid. And the banks are not complaining. This is the Trump defense. Yet, so far, James is winning. //

The AG disregards that there is no victim such as a wronged investor or lender who wound up holding the bag on an undervalued piece of real estate. The state contends that none of this matters; that exaggerating, fibbing, or lying is wrong, and that the Trumps must be destroyed. Apparently, no expenditure of tax dollars is too much for the state to invest to punish these wrongs. The relief sought is the revocation of business licenses throughout the state of New York and fines as high as $250 million. Because it is unusual for a prosecutor to bring a civil case without a victim or cognizable harm, the AG’s motivations have been questioned, especially during her unprecedented daily press conferences. //

Each of these Trump cases brings an odd claim, one that has never been brought against others in the past, or a charge that is not being pursued today against others who have mishandled documents or challenged elections, for instance. //

If the court of appeals reverses Judge Engoron’s decisions, the irreparable harm to the Trump family will have already been done, though. And, for many, that is the goal. //

Much of the damage will have already occurred regardless of future vindication. These are the hallmarks of lawfare. If your goal is to harm your opposition or enemy, a trial win is welcome, but a trial loss also inflicts noticeable pain and offers plenty of consolation.

As a lawfare plaintiff, you win some and lose some — but you can make all of them hurt.

Chris Paige
3 hours ago
Here's the problem: if you believe in qualified immunity for cops, you can scarcely argue against immunity for presidents. That is, the logic of qualified immunity is that lower level officials couldn't do their jobs if they could be sued by everyone/anyone for their errors - same w/ president. Basically, any local prosecutor can influence public policy by forcing every president to go through risks/costs of criminal trial whenever that prosecutor deems appropriate - that would force presidents to consider the risk of trial before making a decision. Are they doing what they think is right or are they avoiding trial?

You see the critical point here is that acquittal doesn't solve the problem. Lots of people wouldn't be willing to be branded a criminal & go to criminal trial even if they knew they're going to be acquitted - it's just too much power. Imagine if NY could put SCOTUS on trial for various crimes - who cares about the outcome? It would give NY too much influence over SCOTUS. Same thing here.

So, regardless of what either side claims in their pleadings, the question of immunity of a former President from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office is novel and presents an “issue of first impression” for the Courts to resolve. Any claim to the contrary is legally ignorant or expresses a bias as to what the outcome should be. The question has never been answered, because it has never before been an issue that needed an answer. //

Smith has said that “no man is above the law” – and that’s just about it. That might seem a bit flip on my part, but in an Opposition that has 42 pages of “argument,” I count that phrase being used six times in the first nine pages alone.

What the former President has is the case of Nixon v. Fitzgerald, a Supreme Court çase decided in 1982. //

the Supreme Court took the matter up prior to trial and overruled both lower courts, finding that a President does enjoy absolute immunity from civil damage lawsuits for acts taken while in office pursuant to his authority as President. The boundary for conduct falling within that absolute immunity was acts within the “outer perimeter” of the President’s official responsibility. Former President Trump contends that all the operative facts relied upon by Smith in the indictment fall within the “outer perimeter” of his official responsibility while in office. //

What the Supreme Court did not say in Fitzgerald was that the immunity recognized therein would extend to immunity from criminal prosecution for acts “within the outer perimeter” of Trump’s official responsibility. Smith’s response to Fitzgerald relies primarily on that point. But the Court did not say that such immunity would not apply either – that question was not before the Court. //

The Court did say that the public has a greater interest in criminal prosecutions than in civil damages lawsuits, and that fact played a role in not allowing Fitzgerald to pursue his case against Nixon personally. But the same interests in granting immunity – laid out in the text above – applies in both situations, and the Supreme Court did not suggest that the case for immunity would be less compelling if the issue before it involved a criminal prosecution. //

Yes, it would create a substantial barrier to even the justified pursuit of a criminal prosecution of any future President for alleged criminal behavior while in office. But it would not be an insurmountable barrier. The “Impeachment” process in the Constitution includes what is referred to as the “Judgment” clause – Article I, Section 3, Clause 7:

“Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, Trial, and Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”

The House of Representatives impeached former President Trump for actions relating to the 2020 election, but he was not convicted by the Senate. His motion argues that criminal prosecution is allowed for conduct in office following an impeachment, conviction, and removal from office as stated in the “Judgment Clause.”

There is a logic and purpose for finding such a prerequisite. Impeachment and conviction, by the House and Senate respectively, provide the imprimatur of legitimacy from a co-equal branch of government closest to the people. It would provide independent justification for a subsequent elected Executive to prosecute the individual who was the prior elected Executive. Had the Senate convicted President Trump, that would have been a bipartisan “Judgment” that he had, in fact, committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” requiring his removal and disqualification from holding any office in the future. Such a finding would insulate a later criminal prosecution from claims of being politically motivated.

In a very real way, what partisan prosecutors are doing validates the exact point Trump is making as it confirms the risk identified by the Court in Fitzgerald.

Unlike Trump, Biden is not shaping global events so much as he is reacting to them. //

The Middle East is on fire. Eastern Europe is gridlocked in war. America’s southern border looks like a scene out of “Mad Max.” And Southeast Asia is a tinderbox that could ignite with one wrong move. After four years of expanding peace under President Donald Trump, President Joe Biden is presiding over a world careening toward mayhem. “Mean tweets and world peace” has a nice ring to it. But it’s also worth exploring why Trump’s unorthodox approach to foreign affairs produced such markedly better results than Biden’s heralded return to normalcy.

The current state of the Middle East — where most recently on Biden’s watch, Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists attacked Israel, slaughtered civilians, and even took American citizens hostage — is a case study in the contrast between the two presidents.

all the tags from https://b.plas.ml

1st-amendment 2nd-amendment 4th-amendment 5th-amendment 9/11 a8 abortion acl adhd afghanistan africa a/i air-conditioning amateur-radio amazon america american android animals anti-americanism antifa anti-semitism antiv antivirus aoip apollo apple appliances archaeology architecture archive art astronomy audio automation avatar aviation backup bash batteries belleville bible biden bill-of-rights biology bookmarks books borg bush business calibre camping capitalism cellphone censorship chemistry children china christianity church cia clinton cloud coldwar communication communist composed computers congress conservatives constitution construction cooking copyleft copyright corruption cosmology counseling creation crime cron crypto culture culture-of-death cummins data database ddt dd-wrt defense democrats depression desantis development diagrams diamonds disinformation diy dns documentation dokuwiki domains dprk drm drm-tpm drugs dvd dysautonomia earth ebay ebola ebook economics education efficiency electricity electronics elements elwa email energy engineering english environment environmentalism epa ethernet ethics europe euthanasia evolution faa facebook family fbi fcc feminism finance firewall flightsim flowers fonts français france fraud freebsd free-speech fun games gardening genealogy generation generators geography geology gifts git global-warming google gop government gpl gps graphics green-energy grounding hdd-test healthcare help history hollywood homeschool hormones hosting houses hp html humor hunting hvac hymns hyper-v imap immigration india infosec infotech insects instruments interesting internet investing ip-addressing iran iraq irs islam israel itec j6 journalism jumpcloud justice kindle kodi language ldap leadership leftist leftists legal lego lgbt liberia liberty linguistics linux literature locks make malaria malware management maps markdown marriage mars math media medical meshcentral metatek metric microbit microsoft mikrotik military minecraft minidisc missions moon morality mothers motorola movies mp3 museum music mythtv names nasa nature navigation navy network news nextcloud ntp nuclear obama ocean omega opensource organizing ortlip osmc oxygen paint palemoon paper parents passwords patents patriotism pdf petroleum pets pews photography photo-mgmt physics piano picasa plesk podcast poetry police politics pollution pornography pots prayer pregnancy presentations press printers privacy programming progressive progressives prolife psychology purchasing python quotes rabbits rabies racism radiation radio railroad reagan recipes recording recycling reference regulations religion renewables republicans resume riots rockets r-pi russia russiagate safety samba satellites sbe science sci-fi scotus secularism security servers shipping ships shooting shortwave signal sjw slavery sleep snakes socialism social-media software solar space spacex spam spf spideroak sports ssh statistics steampowered streaming supplement surveillance sync tarsnap taxes tck tds technology telephones television terrorism tesla theology thorium thumbnail thunderbird time tls tools toyota trains transformers travel trump tsa twitter typography ukraine unions united.nations unix ups usa vaccinations vangelis vehicles veracrypt video virtualbox virus vitamin vivaldi vlc voting vpn w3w war water weather web whatsapp who wifi wikipedia windows wordpress wuflu ww2 xigmanas xkcd youtube zfs