Just effin crazy the Speaker of the House is being a proxy to bypass the gag order. He is going after judge, prosecutor and not in link the judge's daughter.
The sad part is Cannon in the classified is doing the most damage. Idk good or bad, but Dems silent on this issue. Yes, back in the day we had civil politics.
Watch out Democrats you might get your teeth kicked in by playing nice.
"Buh dah DEMS"
And his crazy rambling script sounds like Trump wrote it.
Color me uninformed, but hasnt Johnson been pretty good at keeping his mouth shut up to this point? I cant say I recall him mouthing off in any meaningful manner before.
I once again circle back to: how the fuck does the fat, crazy, orange criminal have this kind of influence over people? He doesnt pay anyone so it cant be money. Influence? With who? At this point Im beginning to suspect hes either got IRL brainwashing koolaid or is threatening their families.
"Winning? Is that what you think it’s about? I’m not trying to win. I’m not doing this because I want to beat someone, or because I hate someone, or because I want to blame someone. It’s not because it’s fun. God knows it’s not because it’s easy. It’s not even because it works because it hardly ever does.. I DO WHAT I DO BECAUSE IT’S RIGHT! Because it’s decent! And above all, it’s kind! It’s just that.. Just kind."
"Winning? Is that what you think it’s about? I’m not trying to win. I’m not doing this because I want to beat someone, or because I hate someone, or because I want to blame someone. It’s not because it’s fun. God knows it’s not because it’s easy. It’s not even because it works because it hardly ever does.. I DO WHAT I DO BECAUSE IT’S RIGHT! Because it’s decent! And above all, it’s kind! It’s just that.. Just kind."
https://thehill.com/regulation/court...ney-gag-order/
Donald is still gagged. Not that it's stopping him from using proxies to make his complaints on his behalf, but he's still gagged.A New York appeals court on Tuesday affirmed a gag order against former President Trump in his hush money criminal case.
The order, imposed on Trump by Judge Juan Merchan, bars Trump from publicly commenting on witnesses, prosecutors, court staff or the judge’s family. It does not prevent him from attacking Merchan or Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D).
Trump has railed against his gag order as a violation of his First Amendment rights, arguing it prevents him from responding to political attacks being levied by high-profile witnesses and others.
“Justice Merchan properly determined that petitioner’s public statements posed a significant threat to the integrity of the testimony of witnesses and potential witnesses in this case as well,” the decision from the five-judge panel reads.
In the decision, the panel compares Merchan’s gag order to a gag imposed on Trump in his federal election interference case. The New York judges aligned with the District of Columbia U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision to allow Trump’s gag there to stand.
“Weighing these concerns, the circuit court ultimately concluded that, given the record, the court had ‘a duty to act proactively to prevent the creation of an atmosphere of fear or intimidation aimed at preventing trial participants and staff from performing their functions within the trial process,’” the five-judge panel wrote. “This Court adopts the reasoning in the circuit court’s Federal Restraining Order Decision.”
Yes.
From December 2020,
The USA has a domestic terrorism problem that its existing institutions and ruling class refuse to address. I expect that's because part of them agree with the terrorists, and part of them are hoping the the terrorists will just go away if they can keep things seeming normal long enough.Kim Ward, the Republican majority leader of the Pennsylvania Senate, said the president had called her to declare there was fraud in the voting. But she said she had not been shown the letter to Congress, which was pulled together hastily, before its release.
Asked if she would have signed it, she indicated that the Republican base expected party leaders to back up Mr. Trump’s claims — or to face its wrath.
“If I would say to you, ‘I don’t want to do it,’” she said about signing the letter, “I’d get my house bombed tonight.”
"For the present this country is headed in directions which can only carry ruin to it and will create a situation here dangerous to world peace. With few exceptions, the men who are running this Government are of a mentality that you and I cannot understand. Some of them are psychopathic cases and would ordinarily be receiving treatment somewhere. Others are exalted and in a frame of mind that knows no reason."
- U.S. Ambassador to Germany, George Messersmith, June 1933

Tommy Tuberville admits on Newsmax that "one of the reasons he went" to NYC yesterday was to "overcome this gag order"
Vid in link.
Has to be the dumbest mother bleeper alive.
"Buh dah DEMS"
Do Donald said he invited them to come help him get around the gag order. The people who came up said they came up to help him get around the gag order.
I gotta wonder if there's precedent Judge Merchan can point to or if he's gotta pioneer new ground here because this sounds like Donald is intentionally violating his gag order and that a bunch of other people are complicit in it.
- - - Updated - - -
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/14/polit...020/index.html
America's Mayor is now also dodging being served on his indictment in AZ.Arizona prosecutors have tried for weeks – and so far failed – to serve Rudy Giuliani with notice of his indictment related to an alleged scheme to overturn the 2020 election results in that state.
Giuliani is among a group of former President Donald Trump’s allies indicted last month in Arizona alongside the 11 individuals who acted as fake GOP electors from the state in the last presidential election.
But the former New York City mayor and one-time attorney for Trump is the only defendant prosecutors have been unable to serve with a summons, according to Richie Taylor, a spokesperson for the Arizona attorney general’s office.
The summons is a formal notice that Giuliani has been criminally charged and must appear before a judge on May 21.
CNN has reached out to a spokesman for Giuliani for comment.
Gosh, everyone around Donald is a dishonest, spineless crook! How does that happen?!

That's not a slur, that's a stroke.
"It's 2013 and I still view the internet on a 560x192 resolution monitor!"
It may come to that. They can/should hold a press conference warning shot. "We have tried multiple times to serve Mr. Giuliani with this fair and legal subpoena. He has willfully resisted each time. So, we're just going to publicly announce to any state/local authorities that are listening that we're trying to serve this subpoena. We're starting at his house, but if any state/local authority knows of his location, we're open to fair and legal actions. Also, Mr. Giuliani, willfully hiding from a subpoena is a crime, you'd know that if you were a lawyer."
EDIT: It's contempt. Maybe that's not a crime but it is "we send people to take you to jail".
- - - Updated - - -
Speaking of Giuliani:
Giuliani bankruptcy judge frustrated with case, rebuffs attempt to challenge $148 million judgment
"Uh, you have a space between c and y."The judge overseeing Rudy Giuliani’s bankruptcy case said he was “disturbed” so little progress has been made in sorting out his finances, and refused Tuesday to lift a legal barrier that has kept the former New York City mayor from appealing a $148 million defamation judgment.
Giuliani declared bankruptc y in December after he was ordered to pay the staggering sum to two former election workers for spreading a false conspiracy theory about their role in the 2020 election.
I just cut and paste, dude. You can't expect a no-name site like the Associated Press to have a proofreader.
"Didn't Giuliani miss several deadlines, causing problems like, oh I don't know, summary judgements in cases like this one?"Since then, Giuliani has missed deadlines to file financial disclosure reports. He hasn’t succeeded in selling residences in New York and Florida. Last week, he was suspended from WABC Radio, where he had a daily show, over what the station called his repeated violation of a ban on discussing discredited 2020 election claims.
“They have done nothing. They sold nothing. They settled nothing,” said Rachel Strickland, an attorney representing the election workers. She accused Giuliani of getting fired on purpose by “deliberately flouting his employer’s restrictions.”
“I agree with you,” U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane responded. “And I am disturbed about the status of this case.”
Yes.
"Isn't he a lawyer?"
No.
"Okay fine, wasn't he a lawyer?"
I'm starting to wonder myself.
"Did he offer evidence of literally any of this?"Attorneys for Giuliani said he has additional work lined up to bring in money, though they didn’t say what kind of work that was. Giuliani’s Manhattan apartment could soon be liquidated, they said. His attorneys said issues have been ironed out and necessary financial filings will also be made. Giuliani faces accusations from a slew of people who say he potentially owes them money.
“They finally have, I think, gotten things on track,” said his lawyer, Heath Berger.
It doesn't look like it.
"Wait, he was breaking every rule about the judgement against him, and still wanted to change the outcome?"The judge rejected a request from Giuliani, though, to lift an automatic stay so that he could pursue post-judgment litigation in the defamation case. Creditors’ lawyers argued that doing so would delay the bankruptcy proceeding.
Yes.
"Why can't this judge help with the subpoena?"Lane also addressed a request from lawyers for the election workers that Giuliani be barred from making additional defamatory statements against them. While holding off on a decision, Lane said there was already a court decision on the matter and he was “not going to let this court be used as a place where parties can flout the requirements of the law.”
“Tell your client to stop,” Lane told lawyers for Giuliani. “It’s not complicated.”
It looks like Guiliani isn't in the courtroom.
Last edited by Breccia; 2024-05-15 at 02:55 AM.
Top US ethics watchdog investigating Trump over dinner with oil bosses
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Crew) has told the Guardian that it is investigating the dinner at Trump’s club with more than 20 oil and gas company executives. Trump asked them for a $1bn presidential campaign contribution, while at the same time vowing to undo Joe Biden’s restrictions on natural gas export permits, oil drilling and car pollution, the Washington Post reported.
Virginia Canter, Crew’s chief ethics counsel, said the group’s lawyers were investigating what she called a matter of considerable concern. “We’re taking a very serious look at whether Trump’s fundraising pitch to the oil executives for $1bn would merit some further action,” she said.
Canter added that details of the discussion between the former president and the oil companies were troubling.
“This was a very focused small group directed at a particular industry, there was an amount put out there of $1bn, which he described as a deal, which all raises questions about the transactional nature of the meeting.”
News of Crew’s investigation came as House Democrats announced their own inquiry into the Mar-a-Lago dinner. Letters were sent from the House oversight committee on Monday to nine oil executives asking for details of their companies’ participation.
Sheldon Whitehouse, the senator from Rhode Island who chairs the Senate budget committee, which has subpoena powers, is also considering an investigation. In a statement, he told the Guardian that Trump’s reported pledge to tear up fossil-fuel restrictions on day one of a second Trump administration, combined with the request for campaign money, was an “offer of a blatant quid pro quo”.
Whitehouse said it was “practically an invitation to ask questions about big oil’s political corruption and manipulation”. He added that his budget committee was looking at “how to ensure the industry cannot simply buy off politicians in order to saddle taxpayers with the bill."
Under the bribery statute, 18 USC 201(b), public officials are forbidden from seeking or receiving anything of value in return for carrying out an official act. Presidential candidates are allowed to solicit donations within the constraints of campaign finance laws, and they are also free to lay out their policy objectives to companies that might benefit from them.
They are not, however, allowed to ask for money directly in return for carrying out beneficial acts once in office.
For the bribery statute to be invoked, there would have to be evidence that Trump promised to dismantle regulations in exchange for donations, said Professor Deborah Hellman of University of Virginia law school. “For him to say, ‘I’m doing it because you’re giving me the money’, is a quid pro quo, but to say, ‘I’m going to do it, so you should want me to get elected’, is not.”
Legal bribery is so easy in the US, its astonishing that we now have a number of Republicans who are so stupid they managed to fuck it up and engage in actually illegal bribery.
"its impossible to prove unless you literally say 'this is a quid pro quo transaction". And what does Trump do. lol
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death