A lot of hot air from Dems about "nobody being above the law" and "rule of law" and the like.
But what is "the law"? If it means anything, it means the whole of the law.
And the law is not "flat", with all laws independently existing and none being subject to another. No, some laws are junior and subject to other laws. To put it another way, the rule of law is subject to the rule of law. That is the fundamental principle of a constitutional republic, and what the Framers did that was so novel.
I know it's tempting to make that some kind of impossibility, some kind of infinite recursion, turtles-all-the-way down scenario. But it's only because of the limitation we have allowed to be put upon ourselves.
In short, the state and its actors should be held accountable--criminally so if called for--if they misuse the law, flouting a higher law in the service of a lower one.
We need to stop giving the privileges of immunity to the state--judges, prosecutors, and the police--when they don't follow higher laws in addition to the lesser ones.
I know this sounds like tit-for-tat. Rather, one could see this as upholding the rule of law.
Erick , I just donated $100 to the link you posted. It was easy.
You recommended "RightforAmeri aPAC.com" as a way to donate directly to his campaign. However, the website is very amateurish, and would not even take credit card donations.
I have always liked Tim Scott, Erick--he is a genuinely nice man with good intentions. I don't know if he would be the right person as Trump's VP (there are others I like better. Heck--there are others I liked better than Trump for the top of the ticket). However, it would probably be a very smart move for the Trump team to pick Sen. Scott. They need to really work hard on making smarter choices these days. Hope your wife gets to feeling better soon and you guys have a restful weekend.
Yet again (and as usual, to my surprise), I agree with Erick. Those on the left should be mindful that what goes around usually also comes around, while those on the right should not forget that Mr. Trump is, at his core, a dishonest, irreligious, porn star schtuping individual of consistently low character who, being incapable of meaningful introspection, considers anything that doesn't go his way to somehow be unfair . . . . Wait, this just in:
The former President was planning on taking Melania and Byron on a brief outing as a respite from the campaign and his just concluded trial, but it rained today. Trump immediately denounced the weather for being "rigged."
Thank you Neil for reminding me about Power Point Presentations. As an Executive Admin. to several high-level executives, we used Power Point for our presentations for our clients because the highlighted area was more readily retained then all the verbiage surrounding it.
Regarding Peggy Noonan. She didn't like or respect Trump from when he was first running and I dn't believe she ever sat down and interviewed him one-on-one. Noonan, "The tragedy is that one of two old men, neither of them great, neither of them distinguished in terms of character or intellect." Really? Character. First, Comey did not go after Hillary Clinton when she was surely guilty of committing a crime against America. BUT TRUMP also (little Character?) would not go after Clinton. He said let's move forward. He could have done some real damage to Clinton but decided not to. Regarding his intellect, he has it. He reads everything he can, speaks to as many people as he can and listens. To the dismay of CNN and the left, he even talks to our enemies because as smart people say, "Keep Your Friends Close and Your Enemies Closer." so you can study them and know what they are thinking. NO WARS UNDER TRUMP because our enemies couldn't read him, and it was done by his design.
Trump an avid reader? Now that's funny. The following is consistent with multiple reports to the effect that Trump had to be briefed in power point fashion because he would not read briefing memoranda:
My only disagreement is that I do view the 12 jurors and the judge as willing accomplices who should share some of the blame. The legal system we all crave a return to rests upon those of all views at least acting in good faith.
I have my own concerns about the judge, given some of his rulings and jury instructions. But I see no reason to believe that the jurors did anything other than their duty to follow and apply the law, given the evidence (remember, Trump's decision not to testify left a great many of the prosecution's points uncontested) and jury instructions that were presented to them.
Whereas the voir dire process fully afforded Trump's lawyers an opportunity to participate in and if warranted, object to their selection, you know absolutely nothing about the character or motivations of any of those people. How dare you?
I should add (as if I have not already said too much) that I have my own concerns about those jury instructions. However, for the reasons I have previously stated, the jurors bear no responsibility for them. They answered the call of their government, did their jobs, and that's it.
Though I am a lawyer, I have never participated in a jury trial. With that fully disclosed, I know of no means by which a juror could question a jury instruction, nor have I ever heard of this having ever been done. Such matters are determined by the judge and the parties' respective attorneys.
A jury's job is to first determine the facts and then apply the law to those facts. Until the case is submitted to them for verdict, they play no active role in a trial, either with respect to the admission of evidence or in determining the law that they are to apply. This makes sense because while this jury was unusual in having two lawyers on their panel (in reporting for jury duty, I've always been shown the door just as soon I divulged my profession), the ordinary juror has no background that would enable her to take issue with the law as it has been explained to them by the judge. In particular, a juror's sense that the judge's explanation of the law (i.e., jury instructions) is somehow unfair to a defendant is really beside the point. The law is the law.
Again, I would emphasize that the jury selection process (known as voir dire) is one in which a defendant's counsel fully participates, and usually armed with some number of what are called "preemptory challenges" that allow defense counsel to exclude a potential juror without even having to state a reason. And after those have been exhausted, counsel can object to other jurors "for cause," meaning that he has to convince the judge that there is cause to believe that a juror cannot be impartial.
In sum, as concerns the makeup of Trump's jury, his lawyers helped pick them!
These are people who were minding their own business, just leading their lives when the government compelled them to put their own lives, and livelihoods, aside and participate in determining the guilt or innocence of a fellow citizen. Not one of them asked to be there. For this, we owe every juror our thanks. They are the first line of defense against wrongful prosecution; another being the appellate process by which the correctness of the jury instructions will be reviewed by another court.
It is not a perfect system, only (at least in my opinion) the best ever devised.
I have heard some say that Biden should pardon Trump to make himself look good. Not sure that he could do it, since this is a state conviction. However, if Trump is pardoned wouldn't that stop his appeal to get the case overturned and he would still always be a "convicted felon"?
Hosea 8:7: "For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind."
Hmm. Where have I heard that before? I sure am glad the Lord is in control here, but I think we should fasten our seatbelts for some upcoming turbulence -- no sense hitting our heads on the ceiling of the plane. We're about to see another demonstration of why the ends don't justify the means -- but we'll never learn.
Erick, I'm glad to hear your timely thoughts, but I am also glad you continue to make sure your family is cared for before you try to care for us. Blessings to all of you.
Well, that quote was famously used by “Bomber” Harris as he discussed the quaint belief by the Nazis that they could bomb people without getting bombed back. Chilling to hear in the original film.
Unlike Michelle Obama, who said, 'for the first time in my life I'm proud of my country' after her husband was elected, in my nearly 64 years on this Earth, I've never been more embarrassed of the institutions of our country.
Congress is corrupt, incompetent and does nothing that they don't feel will benefit them politically- not what benefits the country.
The White House is occupied by a mentally deficient walking corpse/marionette and behind the scenes his strings are being pulled and policies being driven by the most extreme Left factions of his party.
EVERY single thing the Dems are accusing Trump of being they are themselves.
"Threat to democracy"? Yup.
"Dictator"? Yup. Biden routinely ignores the SCOTUS on student loan debt relief (among other things) and bypasses Congress via Executive Orders. And his Admin & party are verbally assaulting the SCOTUS in an attempt to influence the court's decisions.
Corrupt business dealings? Yup.
Republicans need to follow the adage, 'Don't get mad, get even" - at least with the election. Ground game, early voting, poll watching, ballot counting and more.
At the end of the movie, 'Tora! Tora! Tora!' Admiral Yamamoto finds out they attacked Pearl Harbor before the ambassador was able to give his message. Yamamoto says, 'I fear we have woken a sleeping giant, and filled him with a terrible resolve."
I hope they'll realize the same thing about Trump and the GOP after the 2024 election.
The first thing the republicans have to do is to stop "both siding" before being critical of the left. No, the right has nothing even close to the vicious, underhanded, morally corrupt acts of the left. The next thing republicans have to do is to stop believing that if they just remain calm and accepting and eventually people will come around to their point of view. It is not going to happen, it has taken decades of complacence by republicans, thinking they could ignore "social issues" , and suddenly here we are with no justice system in large parts of the country and pretty much all of our government is using the constitution as toilet paper. What does it take to wake up normal folks?
Well, I was not planning to vote for Trump because of the way he was treating Nikki Haley, but guess what Now I am. After the Democrats used lawfare to persecute a political opponent along with the way Biden is treating Israel, you just got my vote locked in for Trump. I hope more people who were on the fence join me in voting for Trump. It is the principal of the matter, the fact the democrats have stooped so low that they are willing to do what third world country dictators are willing to do against their opponents. I want them to be punished and not rewarded for that behavior. I hope they get beat, so badly at the polls that they will never do that again.
A lot of hot air from Dems about "nobody being above the law" and "rule of law" and the like.
But what is "the law"? If it means anything, it means the whole of the law.
And the law is not "flat", with all laws independently existing and none being subject to another. No, some laws are junior and subject to other laws. To put it another way, the rule of law is subject to the rule of law. That is the fundamental principle of a constitutional republic, and what the Framers did that was so novel.
I know it's tempting to make that some kind of impossibility, some kind of infinite recursion, turtles-all-the-way down scenario. But it's only because of the limitation we have allowed to be put upon ourselves.
In short, the state and its actors should be held accountable--criminally so if called for--if they misuse the law, flouting a higher law in the service of a lower one.
We need to stop giving the privileges of immunity to the state--judges, prosecutors, and the police--when they don't follow higher laws in addition to the lesser ones.
I know this sounds like tit-for-tat. Rather, one could see this as upholding the rule of law.
Erick , I just donated $100 to the link you posted. It was easy.
You recommended "RightforAmeri aPAC.com" as a way to donate directly to his campaign. However, the website is very amateurish, and would not even take credit card donations.
But what happens if Trump gets jail time?
I have always liked Tim Scott, Erick--he is a genuinely nice man with good intentions. I don't know if he would be the right person as Trump's VP (there are others I like better. Heck--there are others I liked better than Trump for the top of the ticket). However, it would probably be a very smart move for the Trump team to pick Sen. Scott. They need to really work hard on making smarter choices these days. Hope your wife gets to feeling better soon and you guys have a restful weekend.
Yet again (and as usual, to my surprise), I agree with Erick. Those on the left should be mindful that what goes around usually also comes around, while those on the right should not forget that Mr. Trump is, at his core, a dishonest, irreligious, porn star schtuping individual of consistently low character who, being incapable of meaningful introspection, considers anything that doesn't go his way to somehow be unfair . . . . Wait, this just in:
The former President was planning on taking Melania and Byron on a brief outing as a respite from the campaign and his just concluded trial, but it rained today. Trump immediately denounced the weather for being "rigged."
Thank you Neil for reminding me about Power Point Presentations. As an Executive Admin. to several high-level executives, we used Power Point for our presentations for our clients because the highlighted area was more readily retained then all the verbiage surrounding it.
Regarding Peggy Noonan. She didn't like or respect Trump from when he was first running and I dn't believe she ever sat down and interviewed him one-on-one. Noonan, "The tragedy is that one of two old men, neither of them great, neither of them distinguished in terms of character or intellect." Really? Character. First, Comey did not go after Hillary Clinton when she was surely guilty of committing a crime against America. BUT TRUMP also (little Character?) would not go after Clinton. He said let's move forward. He could have done some real damage to Clinton but decided not to. Regarding his intellect, he has it. He reads everything he can, speaks to as many people as he can and listens. To the dismay of CNN and the left, he even talks to our enemies because as smart people say, "Keep Your Friends Close and Your Enemies Closer." so you can study them and know what they are thinking. NO WARS UNDER TRUMP because our enemies couldn't read him, and it was done by his design.
Trump an avid reader? Now that's funny. The following is consistent with multiple reports to the effect that Trump had to be briefed in power point fashion because he would not read briefing memoranda:
https://theweek.com/articles/915606/trumps-lethal-aversion-reading
Trump is mostly an idiot, his only genius lying in the ability to convince others of things that are not true: a skill that is common to grifters.
My only disagreement is that I do view the 12 jurors and the judge as willing accomplices who should share some of the blame. The legal system we all crave a return to rests upon those of all views at least acting in good faith.
I have my own concerns about the judge, given some of his rulings and jury instructions. But I see no reason to believe that the jurors did anything other than their duty to follow and apply the law, given the evidence (remember, Trump's decision not to testify left a great many of the prosecution's points uncontested) and jury instructions that were presented to them.
Whereas the voir dire process fully afforded Trump's lawyers an opportunity to participate in and if warranted, object to their selection, you know absolutely nothing about the character or motivations of any of those people. How dare you?
None of the best 12 adults they could pick came in at least concerned about what the judge instructed them to do as being unlawful?
I should add (as if I have not already said too much) that I have my own concerns about those jury instructions. However, for the reasons I have previously stated, the jurors bear no responsibility for them. They answered the call of their government, did their jobs, and that's it.
Though I am a lawyer, I have never participated in a jury trial. With that fully disclosed, I know of no means by which a juror could question a jury instruction, nor have I ever heard of this having ever been done. Such matters are determined by the judge and the parties' respective attorneys.
A jury's job is to first determine the facts and then apply the law to those facts. Until the case is submitted to them for verdict, they play no active role in a trial, either with respect to the admission of evidence or in determining the law that they are to apply. This makes sense because while this jury was unusual in having two lawyers on their panel (in reporting for jury duty, I've always been shown the door just as soon I divulged my profession), the ordinary juror has no background that would enable her to take issue with the law as it has been explained to them by the judge. In particular, a juror's sense that the judge's explanation of the law (i.e., jury instructions) is somehow unfair to a defendant is really beside the point. The law is the law.
Again, I would emphasize that the jury selection process (known as voir dire) is one in which a defendant's counsel fully participates, and usually armed with some number of what are called "preemptory challenges" that allow defense counsel to exclude a potential juror without even having to state a reason. And after those have been exhausted, counsel can object to other jurors "for cause," meaning that he has to convince the judge that there is cause to believe that a juror cannot be impartial.
In sum, as concerns the makeup of Trump's jury, his lawyers helped pick them!
These are people who were minding their own business, just leading their lives when the government compelled them to put their own lives, and livelihoods, aside and participate in determining the guilt or innocence of a fellow citizen. Not one of them asked to be there. For this, we owe every juror our thanks. They are the first line of defense against wrongful prosecution; another being the appellate process by which the correctness of the jury instructions will be reviewed by another court.
It is not a perfect system, only (at least in my opinion) the best ever devised.
https://open.substack.com/pub/taibbi/p/ding-dong-the-witch-still-leads-the?r=eapxk&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
Watergate was when the pendulum reached the end of its rightward traverse, this conviction is when it reached the end of its leftward traverse
I pray you are right about that!!!
I have heard some say that Biden should pardon Trump to make himself look good. Not sure that he could do it, since this is a state conviction. However, if Trump is pardoned wouldn't that stop his appeal to get the case overturned and he would still always be a "convicted felon"?
Hosea 8:7: "For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind."
Hmm. Where have I heard that before? I sure am glad the Lord is in control here, but I think we should fasten our seatbelts for some upcoming turbulence -- no sense hitting our heads on the ceiling of the plane. We're about to see another demonstration of why the ends don't justify the means -- but we'll never learn.
Erick, I'm glad to hear your timely thoughts, but I am also glad you continue to make sure your family is cared for before you try to care for us. Blessings to all of you.
Well, that quote was famously used by “Bomber” Harris as he discussed the quaint belief by the Nazis that they could bomb people without getting bombed back. Chilling to hear in the original film.
Unlike Michelle Obama, who said, 'for the first time in my life I'm proud of my country' after her husband was elected, in my nearly 64 years on this Earth, I've never been more embarrassed of the institutions of our country.
Congress is corrupt, incompetent and does nothing that they don't feel will benefit them politically- not what benefits the country.
The White House is occupied by a mentally deficient walking corpse/marionette and behind the scenes his strings are being pulled and policies being driven by the most extreme Left factions of his party.
EVERY single thing the Dems are accusing Trump of being they are themselves.
"Threat to democracy"? Yup.
"Dictator"? Yup. Biden routinely ignores the SCOTUS on student loan debt relief (among other things) and bypasses Congress via Executive Orders. And his Admin & party are verbally assaulting the SCOTUS in an attempt to influence the court's decisions.
Corrupt business dealings? Yup.
Republicans need to follow the adage, 'Don't get mad, get even" - at least with the election. Ground game, early voting, poll watching, ballot counting and more.
At the end of the movie, 'Tora! Tora! Tora!' Admiral Yamamoto finds out they attacked Pearl Harbor before the ambassador was able to give his message. Yamamoto says, 'I fear we have woken a sleeping giant, and filled him with a terrible resolve."
I hope they'll realize the same thing about Trump and the GOP after the 2024 election.
The first thing the republicans have to do is to stop "both siding" before being critical of the left. No, the right has nothing even close to the vicious, underhanded, morally corrupt acts of the left. The next thing republicans have to do is to stop believing that if they just remain calm and accepting and eventually people will come around to their point of view. It is not going to happen, it has taken decades of complacence by republicans, thinking they could ignore "social issues" , and suddenly here we are with no justice system in large parts of the country and pretty much all of our government is using the constitution as toilet paper. What does it take to wake up normal folks?
Well, I was not planning to vote for Trump because of the way he was treating Nikki Haley, but guess what Now I am. After the Democrats used lawfare to persecute a political opponent along with the way Biden is treating Israel, you just got my vote locked in for Trump. I hope more people who were on the fence join me in voting for Trump. It is the principal of the matter, the fact the democrats have stooped so low that they are willing to do what third world country dictators are willing to do against their opponents. I want them to be punished and not rewarded for that behavior. I hope they get beat, so badly at the polls that they will never do that again.
After the verdict, the GOP and Trump fundraising websites crashed because so many people were trying to donate at once.
America and the Constitution is just fine. People need to back away from the edge just a bit.
We are in the middle of the process for Trump's trials. He will appeal the conviction and he will win. The Constitution will win.
The question is, will those who violated the Constitution, etc. be held accountable for their lawbreaking?
Just donated to Trump. Yes to selecting Tim Scott as VP.