PleaseBlitz Posted January 23, 2023 Share Posted January 23, 2023 2 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: PB, you might want to let this one go. You're fighting an unpopular war, and we know how those end. Fair enough. I just think the important part of the news was that he was convicted of all charges, not that he isn't going in immediately. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmirOfShmo Posted January 23, 2023 Share Posted January 23, 2023 (edited) Some more mofo's headed to jail... Guessing that Hunter's Laptop will be trending soon... Edited January 23, 2023 by EmirOfShmo 1 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted January 23, 2023 Author Share Posted January 23, 2023 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 23, 2023 Share Posted January 23, 2023 8 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: Fair enough. I just think the important part of the news was that he was convicted of all charges, not that he isn't going in immediately. The important part will be his sentence. I didn't doubt that he would get convicted. I just hope he gets an appropriate sentence. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 23, 2023 Share Posted January 23, 2023 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 24, 2023 Share Posted January 24, 2023 "Narcisistic self-entitled asshole who posted pictures of himself in the national office he broke into, concedes that maybe demonstrating his contempt for the law in front of his jury might have been a Bad Move" 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 Meh, it's not a nightmare for him until he's actually indicted. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 4 hours ago, China said: Meh, it's not a nightmare for him until he's actually indicted. It says it's a nightmare statement, not a nightmare for Trump (at least not yet). The district attorney saying to the grand jury not to release the hearing transcripts because indictments are imminent and she doesn't want to prejudice any future jurors against those being indicted will not have Trump sleeping soundly...outside of him being a sociopath that is lol... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted January 26, 2023 Author Share Posted January 26, 2023 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 27, 2023 Share Posted January 27, 2023 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 27, 2023 Share Posted January 27, 2023 Ok, so....this is real lol: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simmsy Posted January 27, 2023 Share Posted January 27, 2023 22 minutes ago, Califan007 The Constipated said: Ok, so....this is real lol: 1.Does she have to give consent or does she just have to NOT say no? 2. Does she have to be alive? Uhhh...asking for a friend... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long n Left Posted January 27, 2023 Share Posted January 27, 2023 1 hour ago, Simmsy said: 1.Does she have to give consent or does she just have to NOT say no? 2. Does she have to be alive? Uhhh...asking for a friend... 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 29, 2023 Share Posted January 29, 2023 Proud Boys Aim To Subpoena Trump As Witness At Their Jan. 6 Trial: Reporter Five Proud Boys plan to subpoena former President Donald Trump as they face seditious conspiracy charges for their role in 2021′s Jan. 6 insurrection, a New York Times journalist reported this week. The defendants — including Enrique Tarrio, the far-right group’s longtime chairman — “intend to subpoena Donald Trump as a witness at the trial,” tweeted reporter Alan Feuer. It’s not immediately clear why they want Trump on the witness stand. Other Jan. 6 defendants, however, have said they stormed the U.S. Capitol because they thought it was what Trump wanted, which they believed may have legitimized the riot. But a request for Trump to be subpoenaed hasn’t been granted in other Jan. 6 trials, noted Feuer. Click on the link for the full article 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 29, 2023 Share Posted January 29, 2023 Uh, they do know that if by some miracle they get him on the stand, he'll lie his ass off an throw them under the bus. Don't they? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 29, 2023 Share Posted January 29, 2023 Jan. 6 rioter who assaulted Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick sentenced to over 6 years in jail A man who assaulted United States Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick with pepper spray on January 6, 2021, was sentenced on Friday to 80 months behind bars. Julian Khater pleaded guilty in September to two counts of assaulting, resisting or impeding officers with a dangerous weapon. His co-defendant, George Tanios, pleaded guilty last summer to disorderly conduct and entering and remaining in a restricted building. Khater was also ordered to pay a $10,000 fine and $2,000 in restitution. Tanios was sentenced to time served and one year of supervised release. He previously spent more than five months behind bars. The day after the attack, Sicknick died after suffering several strokes. Washington, DC’s chief medical examiner, Francisco Diaz, determined that the officer died of natural causes and told The Washington Post that the riot and “all that transpired played a role in his condition.” Sicknick’s family and partner were present for the sentencing and law enforcement officers dressed in uniform filled the courtroom. According to the plea agreements, Tanios bought two cans of bear spray in preparation for his trip with Khater to Washington on January 6. During the Capitol attack, when the two men arrived near a line of police officers by the steps of the Capitol, Khater said to Tanios, “Give me that bear s**t,” according to the plea. Khater took a white can of bear spray from Tanios’s backpack, walked up to the line of officers and, as rioters started pulling on the bike rack barrier separating them and the police, Khater sprayed multiple officers – including Sicknick – who had to retreat from the line. Click on the link for the full article 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long n Left Posted January 29, 2023 Share Posted January 29, 2023 14 hours ago, Larry said: Uh, they do know that if by some miracle they get him on the stand, he'll lie his ass off an throw them under the bus. Don't they? Wonder if Tarrio, or any others, have documentation of contact with Orange Asshat just prior to the coup attempt. That could make things interesting. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 29, 2023 Share Posted January 29, 2023 Donald Trump Fails to Toss Massive Jan. 6 Lawsuit from Capitol Police Officers Former President Donald Trump failed to dismiss another — and more massive — complaint in a growing pile of federal lawsuits seeking to hold him liable for the events of Jan. 6, 2021. “What is unique about this case is the number and type of named defendants,” U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta‘s ruling on Thursday states. “The earlier actions focused mainly on former President Donald J. Trump and attempted to hold him liable for the events of January 6th. Those actions included a few individual defendants and some groups.” The latest lawsuit to proceed to discovery, filed by seven U.S. Capitol Police Officers, also named dozens of his allies and extremist groups as co-defendants: 20 people and six entities. “These Are Not First Amendment-Protected Activities” A little less than a year ago, Judge Mehta rejected Trump’s contention that the First Amendment absolutely shielded him from liability from his supporters’ violence and ransacking of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6th. That ruling advanced a set of three federal lawsuits in Mehta’s courtroom. Those included allegations that Trump violated the Ku Klux Klan Act, a Reconstruction-era law designed to deter white supremacist groups from interfering with the rights of formerly enslaved people. The law has become used more broadly in recent decades to punish conspiracies to interfere with civil rights. In November, a separate federal judge advanced similar claims by civil rights groups, again rejecting Trump’s claim of absolute immunity. For Judge Mehta, the case filed by the septet of law enforcement officers, led by 32-year U.S. Capitol Police veteran Conrad Smith, stands alone in its massive size and scope. The defendants include Trump, right-wing activist Ali Alexander, WalkAway founder Brandon J. Straka, Republican operative Roger J. Stone, Jr., and several members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys. Click on the link for the full article 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 31, 2023 Share Posted January 31, 2023 Secret hold restricts DOJ's bid to access phone of Trump ally Rep. Scott Perry A federal appeals court panel has put a secret hold on the Justice Department’s effort to access the phone of Rep. Scott Perry as part of a broader probe of efforts by Donald Trump and his allies to subvert the 2020 election. In a sealed order issued earlier this month, the three-judge panel temporarily blocked a lower-court ruling that granted prosecutors access to Perry’s communications. The Dec. 28 ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell was the product of a secret, monthslong legal battle by prosecutors who have been fighting the Pennsylvania Republican’s attorneys on the matter since August. The existence of the legal fight — a setback for DOJ reported here for the first time — is itself intended to be shielded from public scrutiny, part of the strict secrecy that governs ongoing grand jury matters. The long-running clash was described to POLITICO by two people familiar with the proceedings, who spoke candidly on the condition of anonymity. The fight has intensified in recent weeks and drawn the House, newly led by Speaker Kevin McCarthy, into the fray. On Friday, the chamber moved to intervene in the back-and-forth over letting DOJ access the phone of Perry, the House Freedom Caucus chair, reflecting the case’s potential to result in precedent-setting rulings about the extent to which lawmakers can be shielded from scrutiny in criminal investigations. The House’s decision to intervene in legal cases is governed by the “Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group,” a five-member panel that includes McCarthy, his Democratic counterpart Hakeem Jeffries, and other members of House leadership. The panel voted unanimously to support the House’s intervention in the matter, seeking to protect the chamber’s prerogatives, according to one of the two people familiar with the proceedings. After this story was first published Monday, McCarthy spokesperson Mark Bednar acknowledged the House has stepped into the legal fight about Perry’s communications. “The Speaker has long said that the House should protect the prerogatives of Article I. This action indicates new leadership is making it a priority to protect House equities,” Bednar said. FBI agents seized Perry’s phone with a court-approved warrant in August but still lack a necessary second level of judicial permission to begin combing through the records. Perry has claimed his communications are barred from outside review because of constitutional protections afforded to members of Congress that were designed to let lawmakers better fulfill their official responsibilities. Click on the link for the full article 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted January 31, 2023 Share Posted January 31, 2023 So the Right's argument is essentially that the Legislative branch should get access to anything they want because "oversight" but there is zero oversight of anything any Congress person does, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted January 31, 2023 Share Posted January 31, 2023 12 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: So the Right's argument is essentially that the Legislative branch should get access to anything they want because "oversight" but there is zero oversight of anything any Congress person does, right? Might be a tad beyond them, something along the lines of "We do whatever we want, **** everybody else" might be closer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 31, 2023 Share Posted January 31, 2023 On 1/27/2023 at 12:57 PM, Califan007 The Constipated said: Ok, so....this is real lol: Those clowns would be a hell of a lot less violent if they - uh - relaxed those rules a little bit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 31, 2023 Share Posted January 31, 2023 1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said: So the Right's argument is essentially that the Legislative branch should get access to anything they want because "oversight" but there is zero oversight of anything any Congress person does, right? After four years of "Subpoena? What's that? Shred it.", I fail to see how you can claim they believe in a double standard based on governmental branch. Let the Senate continue investigating Jan 6, and see how much the GOP thinks the legislative branch should get whatever they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted January 31, 2023 Share Posted January 31, 2023 32 minutes ago, Larry said: After four years of "Subpoena? What's that? Shred it.", I fail to see how you can claim they believe in a double standard based on governmental branch. Let the Senate continue investigating Jan 6, and see how much the GOP thinks the legislative branch should get whatever they want. Oh, I'm sorry. I should have been more clear. I don't think they BELIEVE in their argument. Just that they are making that argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now