What's a little taxpayer money in the days of slashing things people want, money spent on "investigating" fraud in 2020. This comes under the heading of been there, done that, does it not? Do you see Elon nixing this?
I hope Jack Smith and group will simply join together in law firm to represent people harmed by whatever trump pulls. Unless I'm missing something, immunity from prosecution in a "core function" doesn't mean that whatever he does in a core function is LEGAL. It just means he can't be prosecuted for doing it. Given the power to fire that Roberts slides in, there may not be "wrongful termination" suits available (or could there be? Has Congress given the attorneys any protections?) But how about ignoring the Administrative Procedures Act in "executive orders", or challenging the perimeters of Schedule F, or arguing that "emergencies" that trump decides warrant the moon have to be actual emergencies. Sending the army to an overall peaceful protest might not qualify.
I have noted that if every Harris voter gave just ONE dollar, there would be a 75 million dollar pot ready to fund this. Could it be set up as a tax deductible way to contribute? Then a lot of folks might send more than $1.00. The lawyers could then represent the plaintiffs (or defendants in vengeance suit) pro bono if they need it.
They could start by lending their expertise to that stupid NBC suit by trump. THAT might get some spine in the MSM--and think of constant reporting on the gritty details of all the stupidities DOJ will try to inflict. I'll bet there are some pretty good First Amendment lawyers in DOJ looking at layoffs, and they could join the firm.
To me it’s so,equated encouraging that T has chosen seasoned litigators for the deputy/associate positions. They may actually have some understanding of the law and provide a little pushback to the persecutions and snark hunts.
Presumably they’ll be pardoned prospectively for all the illegal shit he orders them to do if they don’t resign.
How bad will his orders have to be for lawyers who have sold their souls to act for him in court to refuse to follow his orders, knowing the probable consequences for themselves and their families? I hold out no hopes for any significant pushback from any of them.
One looks forward to Trump 2.0 going after Roberts 2.0 (that is, SCOTUS after the three Trump justices) if and when Roberts dares to disagree. Or put that smarmy smile into a frown.
I feel sick. Absolutely sick. The supreme court’s recent decisions have shown this court is a farce. A sham run by the billionaire class who have bought the right wing judges.
I refuse to abide by any law that they passed down or change let them come get me. This fight has just begun.
I think this will develop into a series of harassing investigations as Trump orders DOJ to target individuals without a specific allegation in mind. IRS could be a vehicle for this.
Trump will be frustrated by time it takes to conduct an investigation and look at evidence. He’s also likely to publicly say that he’s told the DOJ to target an individual which opens up DOJ to challenges and complicates any investigation.
It’s said that grand juries indict ham sandwiches, but there is an actual process that DOJ needs to follow to issue an indictment-can’t be out of thin air.
But does this still apply if these attorneys were not part of his cabinet at the time of said discussions. If the cases were not closed but instead were reopened after Trumps upcoming term when these attorneys would again not be part of his cabinet, would said discussions again be admissible?
The point is that Trump will be immune for whatever they might do in DOJ. This is not addressing, at all, things that happened before or might happen after they would be in DOJ.
What's a little taxpayer money in the days of slashing things people want, money spent on "investigating" fraud in 2020. This comes under the heading of been there, done that, does it not? Do you see Elon nixing this?
I hope Jack Smith and group will simply join together in law firm to represent people harmed by whatever trump pulls. Unless I'm missing something, immunity from prosecution in a "core function" doesn't mean that whatever he does in a core function is LEGAL. It just means he can't be prosecuted for doing it. Given the power to fire that Roberts slides in, there may not be "wrongful termination" suits available (or could there be? Has Congress given the attorneys any protections?) But how about ignoring the Administrative Procedures Act in "executive orders", or challenging the perimeters of Schedule F, or arguing that "emergencies" that trump decides warrant the moon have to be actual emergencies. Sending the army to an overall peaceful protest might not qualify.
I have noted that if every Harris voter gave just ONE dollar, there would be a 75 million dollar pot ready to fund this. Could it be set up as a tax deductible way to contribute? Then a lot of folks might send more than $1.00. The lawyers could then represent the plaintiffs (or defendants in vengeance suit) pro bono if they need it.
They could start by lending their expertise to that stupid NBC suit by trump. THAT might get some spine in the MSM--and think of constant reporting on the gritty details of all the stupidities DOJ will try to inflict. I'll bet there are some pretty good First Amendment lawyers in DOJ looking at layoffs, and they could join the firm.
To me it’s so,equated encouraging that T has chosen seasoned litigators for the deputy/associate positions. They may actually have some understanding of the law and provide a little pushback to the persecutions and snark hunts.
Presumably they’ll be pardoned prospectively for all the illegal shit he orders them to do if they don’t resign.
How bad will his orders have to be for lawyers who have sold their souls to act for him in court to refuse to follow his orders, knowing the probable consequences for themselves and their families? I hold out no hopes for any significant pushback from any of them.
One can hope.
One looks forward to Trump 2.0 going after Roberts 2.0 (that is, SCOTUS after the three Trump justices) if and when Roberts dares to disagree. Or put that smarmy smile into a frown.
I feel sick. Absolutely sick. The supreme court’s recent decisions have shown this court is a farce. A sham run by the billionaire class who have bought the right wing judges.
I refuse to abide by any law that they passed down or change let them come get me. This fight has just begun.
I think it should be disqualifying if the nominee defended POTUS in a court case or impeachment trial.
Sorry if I double posted. Wasn't sure my comment went through
I think this will develop into a series of harassing investigations as Trump orders DOJ to target individuals without a specific allegation in mind. IRS could be a vehicle for this.
Trump will be frustrated by time it takes to conduct an investigation and look at evidence. He’s also likely to publicly say that he’s told the DOJ to target an individual which opens up DOJ to challenges and complicates any investigation.
It’s said that grand juries indict ham sandwiches, but there is an actual process that DOJ needs to follow to issue an indictment-can’t be out of thin air.
Thank you.
Thanks Chris
But does this still apply if these attorneys were not part of his cabinet at the time of said discussions. If the cases were not closed but instead were reopened after Trumps upcoming term when these attorneys would again not be part of his cabinet, would said discussions again be admissible?
The point is that Trump will be immune for whatever they might do in DOJ. This is not addressing, at all, things that happened before or might happen after they would be in DOJ.
Forever and ever amen.
Not sure I understand what you mean by this. You condone that?