The Omnibus P01135809 Criminal Investigation Thread

Ten Lubak · Jan 2, 2024

I had to see it to believe it, but Trump actaully did get Vanilla Ice and a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle to perform at Mar-awhatever on new years:

https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1741818653580898435?s=20

Should be in jail just for this nonsense

14thDoctor · Jan 2, 2024

Michelangelo, huh? I always figured it'd be Raphael going MAGA in his old age.

matthunter · Jan 2, 2024

14thDoctor said: ↑

Michelangelo, huh? I always figured it'd be Raphael going MAGA in his old age.
Click to expand...

We said "nunchucks" but they just heard "dumbfucks"...

Raoul the Red Shirt · Jan 2, 2024

14thDoctor said: ↑

Michelangelo, huh? I always figured it'd be Raphael going MAGA in his old age.
Click to expand...

He's got already got red headgear.

shootER · Jan 7, 2024

Special counsel probe uncovers new details about Trump's inaction on Jan. 6: Sources
Aides allegedly said Trump was "not interested" in doing more to stop the riot.

Ancalagon · Jan 9, 2024

Trump’s lawyers were asked if he could have Navy SEALs assassinate a political rival and avoid prosecution and his lawyers said yes.

Joe Biden now has the opportunity to do the funniest thing in world history.

https://bsky.app/profile/emily.gorcen.ski/post/3kiktnybxao2j

Kommander · Jan 9, 2024

Ancalagon said: ↑

Trump’s lawyers were asked if he could have Navy SEALs assassinate a political rival and avoid prosecution and his lawyers said yes.

Joe Biden now has the opportunity to do the funniest thing in world history.

https://bsky.app/profile/emily.gorcen.ski/post/3kiktnybxao2j
Click to expand...

Can't see it without signing in. Can't sign up without an invite code.

Seeing as Bluesky is a thing here, does someone have an invite code for me? In return for one, I will say "thank you" and will make an effort* to not sound insincere.

* "An effort" is not meant to imply any minimum standard as far as how much effort is put forth, simply that an effort will be made. The author of this post is not responsible if the recipient is not satisfied with the amount of sincerity present in the tone of the "thank you." No purchase necessary, void where prohibited.

Ancalagon · Jan 9, 2024

Kommander said: ↑

Ancalagon said: ↑

Trump’s lawyers were asked if he could have Navy SEALs assassinate a political rival and avoid prosecution and his lawyers said yes.

Joe Biden now has the opportunity to do the funniest thing in world history.

https://bsky.app/profile/emily.gorcen.ski/post/3kiktnybxao2j
Click to expand...

Can't see it without signing in. Can't sign up without an invite code.

Seeing as Bluesky is a thing here, does someone have an invite code for me? In return for one, I will say "thank you" and will make an effort* to not sound insincere.

* "An effort" is not meant to imply any minimum standard as far as how much effort is put forth, simply that an effort will be made. The author of this post is not responsible if the recipient is not satisfied with the amount of sincerity present in the tone of the "thank you." No purchase necessary, void where prohibited.
Click to expand...

Check your DMs.

The Original Faceman · Jan 9, 2024

Midland Asphalt for the win?

As all eyes watched every word filed by Donald Trump and federal prosecutors ahead of crucial oral arguments on immunity, a third party slipped in the side door with a brief that may dramatically foil the former president’s efforts to leverage the issue for maximum delay.

The watchdog organization American Oversight, which is not a party to the case, successfully petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to accept its friend-of-the-court brief on the ground that it provides a “unique perspective.”

Indeed it does. The brief makes the apparently compelling argument that the court shouldn’t be hearing this appeal at all because it lacks jurisdiction — that is, the power to consider it in the first place. If the court agrees, it would mean dismissing the appeal and returning the case to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, abruptly aborting Trump’s best opportunity to delay the federal Jan. 6 trial.

Trump’s argument is that he is entitled to avoid trial because the Constitution prohibits indicting him for conduct he undertook as president, at least if it was within the “outer perimeter” of his official duties. Most observers, including me, think Trump will lose the claim on the merits, but it’s likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will have to make that pivotal determination. The question is when — before trial, putting the case on ice, or afterward.

Chutkan has decided that she can’t go forward with the trial until that’s settled, reasoning that immunity is a right not to go to trial in the first place. That suggests that even if Trump is bound to lose his claim, he will be able to string out the process for at least a couple of months, bumping back the start of probably the most important of the four criminal trials he faces. Originally scheduled for March, the trial is thereby being delayed deeper into Trump’s campaign to return to the White House.

Enter the American Oversight brief, written by lawyers with the Washington-based firm Arnold & Porter. The brief relies on a unanimous 1989 Supreme Court opinion, Midland Asphalt Corp. vs. United States, written by the late Justice Antonin Scalia. The defendant in the criminal case, Midland Asphalt, had moved unsuccessfully for a dismissal of the charges based on the prosecution’s alleged violation of grand jury rules.

The Supreme Court held that neither it nor the circuit court had the power to hear the case on “interlocutory appeal,” or before trial. As with the vast majority of issues that may arise at trial, the court ruled, this one could be considered only after a conviction.

The court emphasized that in criminal cases, the compelling interest in prompt trials demands that courts apply the interlocutory appeal doctrine “with utmost strictness.” Federal courts have jurisdiction over such appeals, the justices found, only if they are brought under a constitutional or statutory provision that expressly gives the defendant a right not to go to trial.

Since the Midland Asphalt opinion, the court has identified only three categories of motions that may be considered before trial in criminal cases: motions to reduce bail and those concerning the double jeopardy clause in the Constitution’s 5th Amendment, and the speech or debate clause, which protects legislators from being “questioned” — that is, tried — at all.

Trump’s immunity argument therefore doesn’t seem to fit within Midland Asphalt’s exceptions. It doesn’t rest on any explicit constitutional guarantee. And the D.C. Circuit Court previously held that a right based on constitutional principles such as the separation of powers doesn’t cut it.

The Justice Department and Trump had been assuming the D.C. Circuit Court has jurisdiction based on Nixon vs. Fitzgerald, which established broad but not endless immunity from lawsuits over a president’s conduct while in office. But that civil case was not subject to the “utmost strictness” standard the Supreme Court has applied to criminal trials. It also predated the Midland Asphalt opinion, which the Justice Department somewhat bafflingly failed to mention.

There may be a reason the Midland Asphalt doctrine doesn’t apply here, but I can’t think of one.

Jurisdiction is an issue that courts take extremely seriously, and I think the D.C. Circuit Court should and probably will consider the argument that it lacks jurisdiction very carefully. It’s already ordered the parties to address American Oversight’s position at oral argument Tuesday, when it’s likely to be a subject of intense questioning.

If the argument succeeds, it will be an appellate version of the sort of Perry Mason moment that rarely happens in a real courtroom. With a wave of a jurisdictional wand, Trump would be back in the district court preparing for an only slightly delayed trial.
Click to expand...

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/sto...circuit-court-american-oversight-amicus-brief

I wonder what Professor Federal Farmer, Esq., thinks of this one!

Order2Chaos · Jan 9, 2024

The Original Faceman said: ↑

Midland Asphalt for the win?

As all eyes watched every word filed by Donald Trump and federal prosecutors ahead of crucial oral arguments on immunity, a third party slipped in the side door with a brief that may dramatically foil the former president’s efforts to leverage the issue for maximum delay.

The watchdog organization American Oversight, which is not a party to the case, successfully petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to accept its friend-of-the-court brief on the ground that it provides a “unique perspective.”

Indeed it does. The brief makes the apparently compelling argument that the court shouldn’t be hearing this appeal at all because it lacks jurisdiction — that is, the power to consider it in the first place. If the court agrees, it would mean dismissing the appeal and returning the case to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, abruptly aborting Trump’s best opportunity to delay the federal Jan. 6 trial.

Trump’s argument is that he is entitled to avoid trial because the Constitution prohibits indicting him for conduct he undertook as president, at least if it was within the “outer perimeter” of his official duties. Most observers, including me, think Trump will lose the claim on the merits, but it’s likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will have to make that pivotal determination. The question is when — before trial, putting the case on ice, or afterward.

Chutkan has decided that she can’t go forward with the trial until that’s settled, reasoning that immunity is a right not to go to trial in the first place. That suggests that even if Trump is bound to lose his claim, he will be able to string out the process for at least a couple of months, bumping back the start of probably the most important of the four criminal trials he faces. Originally scheduled for March, the trial is thereby being delayed deeper into Trump’s campaign to return to the White House.

Enter the American Oversight brief, written by lawyers with the Washington-based firm Arnold & Porter. The brief relies on a unanimous 1989 Supreme Court opinion, Midland Asphalt Corp. vs. United States, written by the late Justice Antonin Scalia. The defendant in the criminal case, Midland Asphalt, had moved unsuccessfully for a dismissal of the charges based on the prosecution’s alleged violation of grand jury rules.

The Supreme Court held that neither it nor the circuit court had the power to hear the case on “interlocutory appeal,” or before trial. As with the vast majority of issues that may arise at trial, the court ruled, this one could be considered only after a conviction.

The court emphasized that in criminal cases, the compelling interest in prompt trials demands that courts apply the interlocutory appeal doctrine “with utmost strictness.” Federal courts have jurisdiction over such appeals, the justices found, only if they are brought under a constitutional or statutory provision that expressly gives the defendant a right not to go to trial.

Since the Midland Asphalt opinion, the court has identified only three categories of motions that may be considered before trial in criminal cases: motions to reduce bail and those concerning the double jeopardy clause in the Constitution’s 5th Amendment, and the speech or debate clause, which protects legislators from being “questioned” — that is, tried — at all.

Trump’s immunity argument therefore doesn’t seem to fit within Midland Asphalt’s exceptions. It doesn’t rest on any explicit constitutional guarantee. And the D.C. Circuit Court previously held that a right based on constitutional principles such as the separation of powers doesn’t cut it.

The Justice Department and Trump had been assuming the D.C. Circuit Court has jurisdiction based on Nixon vs. Fitzgerald, which established broad but not endless immunity from lawsuits over a president’s conduct while in office. But that civil case was not subject to the “utmost strictness” standard the Supreme Court has applied to criminal trials. It also predated the Midland Asphalt opinion, which the Justice Department somewhat bafflingly failed to mention.

There may be a reason the Midland Asphalt doctrine doesn’t apply here, but I can’t think of one.

Jurisdiction is an issue that courts take extremely seriously, and I think the D.C. Circuit Court should and probably will consider the argument that it lacks jurisdiction very carefully. It’s already ordered the parties to address American Oversight’s position at oral argument Tuesday, when it’s likely to be a subject of intense questioning.

If the argument succeeds, it will be an appellate version of the sort of Perry Mason moment that rarely happens in a real courtroom. With a wave of a jurisdictional wand, Trump would be back in the district court preparing for an only slightly delayed trial.
Click to expand...

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/sto...circuit-court-american-oversight-amicus-brief

I wonder what Professor Federal Farmer, Esq., thinks of this one!
Click to expand...

If I had to guess, if it wasn’t an oversight (and if it was, how can you not love that the amicus brief was filed by American Oversight?), I think they didn’t want to rely on Midland because they want a ruling on Trump’s too-dumb-to-live position that the impeachment clause gives him immunity because he wasn’t convicted in the Senate, which, if upheld, WOULD give him a right to immunity from trial.

Kommander · Jan 9, 2024

Ancalagon said: ↑

Kommander said: ↑

Ancalagon said: ↑

Trump’s lawyers were asked if he could have Navy SEALs assassinate a political rival and avoid prosecution and his lawyers said yes.

Joe Biden now has the opportunity to do the funniest thing in world history.

https://bsky.app/profile/emily.gorcen.ski/post/3kiktnybxao2j
Click to expand...

Can't see it without signing in. Can't sign up without an invite code.

Seeing as Bluesky is a thing here, does someone have an invite code for me? In return for one, I will say "thank you" and will make an effort* to not sound insincere.

* "An effort" is not meant to imply any minimum standard as far as how much effort is put forth, simply that an effort will be made. The author of this post is not responsible if the recipient is not satisfied with the amount of sincerity present in the tone of the "thank you." No purchase necessary, void where prohibited.
Click to expand...

Check your DMs.
Click to expand...

[sincerity]Thank you.[/sincerity]

Tuckerfan · Jan 9, 2024

Bickendan · Jan 9, 2024

I'd get the popcorn but I don't want my ears to bleed.

Thoughts and Prayers · Jan 9, 2024

Tuckerfan said: ↑

View attachment 73768
Click to expand...

"I'm Donald Trump, and you all can suck my dick. Case closed!"

Tererune · Jan 9, 2024

I tell you Biden Bros I would actually consider voting for Biden if he sent seal team six into Mar-A-Lago, and they asked Trump directly if a president can order his political opponents killed for being a threat to america. I am not asking them to kill him, just stick their guns in his face, and video tape his answer. Then depants him and show all his followers the brown stain he left.

That would involve Biden doing something, and we know that sort of thing only happens with corn pop and Islam.

Tuckerfan · Jan 10, 2024

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=_PLUS_cASZsP0hNiBQOHYbw_PLUS_TPQ==

There’s more at the link.

Order2Chaos · Jan 10, 2024

So I guess Trump won’t be making the closing argument after all. Probably good for him not to.

Thoughts and Prayers · Jan 10, 2024

Well, that's that. President Trump, denied due process under the law! Is there any depth to which these activist judges will not sink? When will people realize Trump can do whatever the fuck he wants?

The Original Faceman · Jan 10, 2024

A couple observations. Attorneys writing emails to judges ought to use, you know, capitalization, punctuation, and things like that. Otherwise, you look like an idiot.

Second, this judge probably should consider a more measured approach to this case. I'm not saying his admonition is wrong or his conditions are too burdensome. But he's really playing into Trump's pocket as a wacky biased judge.

Thoughts and Prayers · Jan 10, 2024

The Original Faceman said: ↑

Second, this judge probably should consider a more measured approach to this case. I'm not saying his admonition is wrong or his conditions are too burdensome. But he's really playing into Trump's pocket as a wacky biased judge.
Click to expand...

Trump and his base (hi, @Steal Your Face) are going to paint any judge who doesn't bend their knee to His Majesty as wacky and biased. There's absolutely nothing anyone can do about that. The judge could act like a Vulcan on Valium and they'd say he was "out of control."

Still, I get what you're saying. But imagine the amount of obstinate stupidity this judge has had to deal with in this case. I think he has the patience of a saint.

Raoul the Red Shirt · Jan 10, 2024

The Original Faceman said: ↑

A couple observations. Attorneys writing emails to judges ought to use, you know, capitalization, punctuation, and things like that. Otherwise, you look like an idiot.

Second, this judge probably should consider a more measured approach to this case. I'm not saying his admonition is wrong or his conditions are too burdensome. But he's really playing into Trump's pocket as a wacky biased judge.
Click to expand...

I have never heard of a case where a party who was not pro se was allowed to make a closing statement. Have you?

Order2Chaos · Jan 10, 2024

The Original Faceman said: ↑

A couple observations. Attorneys writing emails to judges ought to use, you know, capitalization, punctuation, and things like that. Otherwise, you look like an idiot.

Second, this judge probably should consider a more measured approach to this case. I'm not saying his admonition is wrong or his conditions are too burdensome. But he's really playing into Trump's pocket as a wacky biased judge.
Click to expand...

Measured got him Trump cultists doxxing and threatening his clerk at Trump’s implication.

The Original Faceman · Jan 10, 2024

Raoul the Red Shirt said: ↑

The Original Faceman said: ↑

A couple observations. Attorneys writing emails to judges ought to use, you know, capitalization, punctuation, and things like that. Otherwise, you look like an idiot.

Second, this judge probably should consider a more measured approach to this case. I'm not saying his admonition is wrong or his conditions are too burdensome. But he's really playing into Trump's pocket as a wacky biased judge.
Click to expand...

I have never heard of a case where a party who was not pro se was allowed to make a closing statement. Have you?
Click to expand...

Nope.

The Original Faceman · Jan 10, 2024

Order2Chaos said: ↑

The Original Faceman said: ↑

A couple observations. Attorneys writing emails to judges ought to use, you know, capitalization, punctuation, and things like that. Otherwise, you look like an idiot.

Second, this judge probably should consider a more measured approach to this case. I'm not saying his admonition is wrong or his conditions are too burdensome. But he's really playing into Trump's pocket as a wacky biased judge.
Click to expand...

Measured got him Trump cultists doxxing and threatening his clerk at Trump’s implication.
Click to expand...

measured looks good on appeal.

We Are Borg · Jan 11, 2024

Judge Engoron granted Trump the opportunity to make final comments in the NY civil case this afternoon and then cut him off after a few minutes for not staying on topic.

Raoul the Red Shirt · Jan 11, 2024

I'm surprised that the judge allowed Trump to give comments during the close. But then being the target of a bomb threat might do that.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/11/nyregion/trump-judge-bomb-threat.html

MikeH92467 · Jan 11, 2024

Raoul the Red Shirt said: ↑

I'm surprised that the judge allowed Trump to give comments during the close. But then being the target of a bomb threat might do that.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/11/nyregion/trump-judge-bomb-threat.html
Click to expand...

Or since there's no jury he doesn't really give a shit and is willing to let Trump make himself look like even more of an idiot.

Tuckerfan · Jan 13, 2024

https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-york-times-taxes-lawsuit-slapp-f39342501d9a2a5cfd36181f9f336215

Raoul the Red Shirt · Jan 13, 2024

Tuckerfan said: ↑

View attachment 73842

https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-york-times-taxes-lawsuit-slapp-f39342501d9a2a5cfd36181f9f336215
Click to expand...

Fake news!

Seriously, it seems like Trump's batting average in court is pretty abysmal. I'm trying to think of cases he has won on the merits, or even gotten settlements where you could say "Yeah, that was a favorable deal for him." Coming up empty.

MikeH92467 · Jan 13, 2024

Raoul the Red Shirt said: ↑

Tuckerfan said: ↑

View attachment 73842

https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-york-times-taxes-lawsuit-slapp-f39342501d9a2a5cfd36181f9f336215
Click to expand...

Fake news!

Seriously, it seems like Trump's batting average in court is pretty abysmal. I'm trying to think of cases he has won on the merits, or even gotten settlements where you could say "Yeah, that was a favorable deal for him." Coming up empty.
Click to expand...

His MO has always been delay, delay, delay. It works great when you can wait out your opponents and force them into a "take it or leave it" position. Now for the first time in his life he's running into opponents who have the means and motivation to force him to actually go to trial. To his shock and dismay he's finding himself up against parties he can't starve or intimidate and it's not going well.

Log in or Sign up

The Omnibus P01135809 Criminal Investigation Thread

Ten Lubak Salty Dog

14thDoctor Oi

matthunter Ice Bear

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

Ancalagon Scalawag Administrator Formerly Important

Kommander Bandwagon

Ancalagon Scalawag Administrator Formerly Important

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

Kommander Bandwagon

Tuckerfan BMF

Bickendan Custom Title Administrator Faceless Mook Writer

Thoughts and Prayers Fresh Meat

Tererune Troll princess and Magical Girl

Tuckerfan BMF

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

Thoughts and Prayers Fresh Meat

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

Thoughts and Prayers Fresh Meat

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

We Are Borg Republican Democrat

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

MikeH92467 RadioNinja

Tuckerfan BMF

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

MikeH92467 RadioNinja

Log in or Sign up

The Omnibus P01135809 Criminal Investigation Thread

Ten Lubak Salty Dog

14thDoctor Oi

matthunter Ice Bear

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

Ancalagon Scalawag Administrator Formerly Important

Kommander Bandwagon

Ancalagon Scalawag Administrator Formerly Important

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

Kommander Bandwagon

Tuckerfan BMF

Bickendan Custom Title Administrator Faceless Mook Writer

Thoughts and Prayers Fresh Meat

Tererune Troll princess and Magical Girl

Tuckerfan BMF

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

Thoughts and Prayers Fresh Meat

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

Thoughts and Prayers Fresh Meat

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

The Original Faceman Lasagna Artist

We Are Borg Republican Democrat

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

MikeH92467 RadioNinja

Tuckerfan BMF

Raoul the Red Shirt Professional bullseye

MikeH92467 RadioNinja

Useful Searches