quote:

“If the defendant were to begin issuing public posts using details — or, for example, grand jury transcripts — obtained in discovery here, it could have a harmful chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case,” he added.

This from the Special counsel Jack Smith, whose "office" leaks out information, like a sieve... Which, for the record, is NOT legal.
F this guy!

Can't make up this shit.

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan on Saturday issued a new deadline for former President Donald Trump to respond to special counsel Jack Smith's request for a protective order as the Department of Justice (DOJ) seeks to safeguard evidence and rein in Trump's public comments.

https://www.newsweek.com/judge...ocial-threat-1817743

In a Saturday filing, Chutkan wrote, "It is hereby ORDERED that by 5:00 PM on August 7, 2023, Defendant shall file a response to the government's 10 Motion for Protective Order, stating Defendant's position on the Motion."

Trump's lawyers then responded on Saturday asking for an extension to file a response to the motion for the protective order from Monday, August 7 to August 10 "to ensure counsel has adequate time to prepare a fulsome response."

...or Robert Mueller, Jack Smith, Merrick Garland, etc.



.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Can't make up this shit.

Yeah...

On Friday, ABC ran an ironic story headlined, “Jailed Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny gets 19 more years in prison.”

Navalny, 47, is a lawyer-turned-politician who has languished in Russian jail since 2021, after recovering in Germany from nerve agent poisoning that he blames on the Kremlin. In 2022, a Russian judge added another nine years to Navalny's previous sentence of two and a half years for embezzlement and other miscellaneous charges.



Needless to say, Navalny is a vocal and strident Putin critic, and has often been accused of being a U.S. agent. His current sentence of 19 years is for promoting an insurrection, sorry, I mean “promoting extremism.” My bad.

Secretary of State Antony Blinking, I mean Blinken, expressed official U.S. outrage over Russia criminally targeting one of the CIA’s top agents, sorry!, I mean one of Putin’s political opponents.

Unsurprisingly, Blinken said nothing, however, about Joe Biden’s criminal prosecution of President Trump for promoting extremism, I mean promoting insurrection. Dang it, I don’t know why I keep doing that. I get it, the two situations are totally different, there’s no comparison whatsoever.

You really can’t make this stuff up!

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email

Bitch.


https://nymag.com/intelligence...umps-indictment.html

Things have a way of balancing out over time.

They pulled out all the stops to rob Trump of the White House only to have one of the worst administrations in history. Way to go assholes. Was it fun?

Pelosi will eventually answer for the shit she has done to this nation.

Good. It's about time some of these judges start pushing back here, it's very clear why they are trying to do it:

Florida judge in Trump classified docs case comes out swinging against Special Counsel Jack Smith and demands to know why DOJ is using OUT-OF-STATE grand jury to investigate ex-President

Well, they also used a DC judge to pierce attorney/client privilege in the FL case, and presented it to the DC grand Jury. I'm hoping that gets reviewed because a good chunk of the case is based on that attorney testimony.

At one time, I had a lot of respect for Pence. He fooled me... once.

My apologies if sdy may have already posted this article from the Treehouse elsewhere on this forum. . .

REMINDER – The Parliamentary Motive Behind the J6 Fedsurrection

. . .but it is an excellent summary / observation of the timing of the J6 ‘protestors’ and how they coincided with some of the congressional proceedings that day.

Excellent article, Cookster, thanks for the link.

Reminds me that by August 2021, at least four of the Capitol police officers were no longer available as witnesses.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RichardC,

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:
At one time, I had a lot of respect for Pence. He fooled me... once.

Mike Pence, 'Constitutional Hero'?

By Don Brown

If you once served as Vice President of the United States, polling below 5% in your own party's presidential primary can trigger a stream of unbridled bitterness.

Case in point: Mike Pence, who, in a Real Clear Politics poll published through August 2, 2023, polled at 4.8 percent among Republican voters, trailing the previously-unknown Vivek Ramaswamy, who had 5.2 percent.

Like a freezing cold bucket of reality splashed onto Pence’s face, losing to a 37-year-old entrepreneur who, six months ago, nobody ever heard of, has apparently unleashed the floodgates of animosity harbored deep within. Embittered by his demise, Pence now fumes against President Trump, the man to whom he owes the Vice Presidency, seemingly siding with rogue prosecutor Jack Smith.

“I had no right to overturn the election,” Pence told CNN. ”And on that day, President Trump asked me to put him over the Constitution. But I chose the Constitution. And I always will.” He rambles on. “Anyone who puts themselves over the Constitution should never be President of the United States.”

Really, Pence? You “chose the Constitution,” did you? That’s your spin? The President asked you to “overturn” the election? To put himself over the Constitution? He said that?

Actually, the President suggested sending questionable electors back to state legislatures, for proper consideration, in states where highly irregular tactics had seemingly undermined the election.

If, after further consideration, Biden still won, then Biden won.

Despite Pence’s “I was for the Constitution and Trump wasn’t” nonsense, the truth is the Constitution doesn't address the issue, one way or the other. It isn’t like some constitutional clause decrees that “the President shall not ask the Vice President to send electors back to certain states for certification or clarification.”

The only reference to the Vice-President’s role is in the Electoral College Clause (Article II, Section 1, Clause 3), which provides that the President of the Senate (The VP) shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted."

Some self-anointed “constitutional scholars,” say that the VP has no discretion in the Electoral College count, and that his role is primarily “ceremonial.” In other words, they claim the VP can count, and nothing else. That’s their opinion. But a quick search of the Constitution reveals no reference to the word “ceremonial.”

To the contrary, at least some evidence exists historically that the VP’s role is more than ceremonial. In the 1960 election, after a razor-thin back-and-forth between Nixon and Kennedy in Hawaii, Hawaii sent two competing sets of electors to Washington.

Upon receiving the competing slates, Vice President Nixon made a discretionary decision. Rather than freezing up, as Pence did, and claiming the Constitution didn’t allow him to act, Nixon opened envelopes from competing electors, then presented both sets of Hawaii’s electors to Congress, three for Kennedy and three for himself. He then moved that the Democrat slate be counted.

In other words, Nixon served as judge over the count, even though the Constitution did not specifically address the procedure Nixon followed. By the way, nobody prosecuted the alternate electors from Hawaii, under some concocted bizarre Jack Smith-like legal theory.

Both Nixon and Pence, and other VPs since 1877, operated under the Electoral Commission Act of 1877, passed after the contentious 1876 election between Rutherford Hayes and Samuel Tilden.

The 1877 Act did not limit the VP’s role only to something ceremonial, but instead, established a procedure for handling competing electors from each state.

The Act established a special Electoral Commission with fifteen members, including five members from the Senate, five members from the House, and five Supreme Court Justices.

Pence could have arguably sent disputed electors to that Commission. Instead, he acted as if he had no authority to do anything.

After the 2020 Election, Congress amended the 1877 Act to declare that the VP’s role is only “ministerial in nature.” But as President Trump has asked, if the VP’s role were merely “ministerial” or “ceremonial” to begin with, why now pass a law declaring it ministerial?

Back to Pence’s ‘I’m for the Constitution but Trump is not” babblings,

The Constitution is silent on whether Pence, prior to the count, could send electors back to the states for clarification. Pence didn’t want to rock the boat. That’s on Pence.

But Pence suggesting some clear-cut constitutional divide where he defended the Constitution, while Trump opposed it, is beyond disingenuous.

Had Pence said, “The President I simply disagreed on a legal interpretation,” that would have been one thing.

But to portray himself as a Constitutional Hero, and Trump as a villain, such exaggerated bombast undermines the faith that Pence so frequently claims to embrace.

President Trump, like millions of Americans, questioned the election process. After all, six states Trump was winning reportedly shut down at 10 PM. In all those states, votes trickled in over the following days for Biden -- one of many major red flags from the 2020 election.

Perhaps Pence should learn that defending the Constitution might mean not turning a blind eye, without question, to questionable circumstances that on the surface resemble rampant cheating.

“The courts have spoken,” Pence and his RINO allies like to claim.

But consider this: what court heard evidence on what we saw in the State Farm Arena in Atlanta, where election officials shut down, sent Republican poll watchers home at 10 PM, then pulled out pull long black boxes of ballots and ran them through counting machines with no Republican observers present?

What court considered ballot-stuffed truckloads to the TGY Center in Detroit, in the dark, early morning hours, where Michigan, like Georgia and four other states, suddenly shut down at 10:00, with Trump winning big time?

What court heard evidence shown in the documentary 2000 Mules, evidence on hundreds of thousands of ballots stuffed into drop boxes in the dark of the night, with nobody looking, without any identifiable chain-of-custody as to their source?

The answer? Zero. Most courts found form-over-substance reasons to avoid election fraud cases, many citing “standing” as their reason for dismissal.

Not even the Supreme Court, which 20 years earlier, in Bush v Gore, found that different counting procedures in different counties violated the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, would touch this hot potato. Texas v. Pennsylvania in 2020, made Florida’s hanging chad controversy look like a harmless Romper Room party. But SCOTUS wouldn’t touch it.

Trump had every right to ask questions.

Perhaps Pence, if he were concerned about constitutional integrity, should have pushed a little harder, too. “On that day,” as Pence calls it, he seemed all too eager to pal it up with Nancy Pelosi, once the deed was done.

Wallowing in bitterness from the realization that he couldn’t get elected dogcatcher, Pence now aligns with the Anybody but Trump RINOs, alongside Bill Kristol, George F. Will, and “Lincoln Project” champagne-sippers like George Conway.

Just be honest, Mike. You interpreted the law differently -- probably from fear -- to justify inaction. And that’s your right.

But you’re no constitutional hero. So stop with the false bravado. Your newfound role of whining prevaricator doesn’t suit you well.

Don Brown is a former U.S. Navy JAG officer

https://www.americanthinker.co...titutional_hero.html

That guy just needs to be punched in the taint...

Mike Thirty Silver Pence is as relevant as 2 day old spitoon juice. Just go away, now.

long article, partial here

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...riginally-portrayed/


The universe of political entities surrounding former President Donald Trump, the leading 2024 GOP candidate, is far stronger financially than some reports originally suggested, Breitbart News has learned from speaking with several senior Trump advisers and from federally-filed data.

“Grassroots donors have given President Trump a massive fundraising advantage, and his campaign team has fiercely protected these precious resources,” a senior Trump campaign aide told Breitbart News. “This ensures that the candidate of the people, President Trump, will continue to operate from a dominant position throughout the primary and general elections.”

There are two major formal entities that comprise the Trump team’s 2024 prospects: his actual campaign and the super PAC MAGA Inc. In addition, there is a leadership PAC that Trump controls called Save America.

Trump’s campaign since launch has raised a total of $39 million, but only approximately $700,000 of that cash is reserved for the general election. Having a giant pile of $26 million cash that can be used for the primary—while Trump is currently leading all the polls—is an extremely good detail for the Trump campaign given the fact that represents about a 37 percent burn rate, which is much lower than the rest of the field. While that’s good for Trump, the picture gets even better for him when considering the universe of donors available to him to tap and tap again.

The Trump campaign has a house file of more than 21 million individuals comprised of those who are both historical and current donors—people who have given to Trump’s previous campaigns and this one—as well as people who have volunteered, attended rallies, or taken some other kind of action in support of Trump over the years. Of that 21 million house file of people, four million of them are donors and 17 million are non-donors.

The people who have already given to Trump’s 2024 campaign, for the most part, have not even come close to maxing out in primary donations. That universe of several hundred thousand unique donors can be tapped again and again, several more times before they would give the $3,300 max—and most will probably never reach that. So the actual Trump campaign is in great shape—lots of cash on hand, a low burn rate of around 37 percent, and essentially unlimited potential in future donations from people who have already given to Trump in the 2024 campaign and even more potential in the many millions of other donors who have given to Trump in previous campaigns but not this one.

Joey D
8/7/23

Prosecutors obtained warrant for Trump's Twitter account, judge fined company $350,000 for delay

https://justthenews.com/politi..._campaign=newsletter

Federal prosecutors led by Special Counsel Jack Smith obtained a search warrant in January for materials related to former President Donald Trump’s Twitter account, and a judge fined the social media platform $350,000 for delaying compliance with the warrant, court documents released Wednesday show.

The information was revealed in a federal appeals court decision rejecting the social media platform's claim that a lower court was wrong to hold it in contempt and impose the fine.

Smith obtained a warrant directing Twitter, which has since been renamed X, to produce "data and records" relating to the former president's account on the platform, according to the filing obtained by The Associated Press.