Regarding the G-7 accommodations: Choosing Doral to be the winner from among ten places. You couldn't get a 5 yr old kid to believe that. Did a blindfolded Evanka plunge her hand into a bag containing 9 marbles and 1 golf ball? "O Daddy! YOU WON!"
Did the govmint put out requests for 'bids' (applications) for hosting the thing? I don't think so.
What's wrong with Camp David? It seems up-to-snuff in security, and probably does NOT need a total make-over. It would be a lot more pleasant in June than Miami FL.
Just a side note: Bedbugs will soon be put onto the Endangered Species List. This will protect visiting royalty from the annoying odor of insecticides if forced to stay at the Trump rag-tag resort. And one last thing. I think I heard that our Repubican Presinut will have a book signing event @ the G-7. His long-awaited memoire entitled "The Smell of Money".
I don't remember much about the Watergate hearings. I was living in International House at the University of Chicago. I sometimes returned from campus and walked past the huge lounge where a vast number of foreign students were sitting, watching the hearings and laughing at great length. (What? A third rate burglary and nobody got killed? What's all the fuss?)
Maybe the ladies employed @ The Casino make too high a salary, whilst attending to the marks-er...customers, and then when the owner/operator of said casino, who has become "famous" is confronted with a few ladies who demand hush money---- the cash on hand goes not to paying bills or utilities or debts, and the bank accounts get emptied pretty fast.
Just a thought. This explanation doesn't include the art of dipping into money in accounts that really don't belong to the owner/operator, but to John and Joanne Taxpayer.
It seems to me the only way a casino can loose money is through lack of punters or financial indiscretions. POTUS is certainly not the great business man he pretends to be, so maybe both
How you lose money on a casino: AIUI, Trump’s gold-plated imitation Taj Mahal was so staggeringly expensive to build that he never recouped his costs from the actual punters.
Staggeringly expensive to build, possibly . . . but as he's well-known for not paying his contractors, decorators, designers, etc. such costs as he might have had to recoup were likely considerably reduced.
Was it something like he was spending money like a drunk at the races on all sorts of projects and his bankers didn't like what they saw and called in his loans when a recession hit. They did some sort of deal where he became an employee and spruiked for them, but everybody else got stiffed? I saw a show on it a few years ago, but memory is a fickle beast.
Had to look up "spruiked." Great word. While spruiking is pretty much The Don's only stock in trade, I have a hard time imagining him agreeing to slither into the role of "employee." Of course, he could be inveigled into this through simply failing to grasp the nature of the re-set relationship.
Cool word. Yes, very much fits him. Used to do that sort of thing on a professional wrestling show. I don't know how fans and those involved felt, but he was probably a lot happier there.
I am not sure how it was challenged at the closed sitting but on the face of it the deposition provides conclusive evidence of Presidential abuse of power and therefore grounds for impeachment. It is worth a read if you haven't already done so.
That's a powerful statement, Barnabas. It pulls one up short to realise how surprising it is to read a solid, believable public statement with no apparent 'side' from a public servant at the moment, especially where the trajectory of the piece appears to run counter to the immediate interests of the writer's own party-political affiliation.
If POTUS committed a regular crime could he be taken to court?
The Queen cannot be tried in court she has to be tried in the House of Lords.
No; the Justice Dept. says a sitting President cannot be charged with criminal activity. He can be impeached by the House, then tried by the Senate, and then removed from office. Once removed, he can be charged with a "regular crime."
That's my understanding, and yes, 45'll fight hard to remain in office since he's trying to avoid jail. Pence, if/when he takes over, could presumably pardon the Don's federal crimes, but New York state has charges awaiting which are not subject to such pardons.
No; the Justice Dept. says a sitting President cannot be charged with criminal activity. He can be impeached by the House, then tried by the Senate, and then removed from office. Once removed, he can be charged with a "regular crime."
Two twists on this. The first is that, as Ohher noted, this isn’t really a law per se, it’s from a legal memo written by Justice Department lawyers and has never been tested in court. Of course since it’s the Justice Department that would have to bring federal charges . . .
The other point is that the memo only covers federal criminal charges. States are not bound by this Justice Department memo and could conceivably criminally charge a sitting president.
On this very subject the Trump administration* is in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals this morning arguing that not just the president but also his family and business associates are immune not just from prosecution but investigation. If you’re reading this before 10:30 am EDT and like watching oral arguments you can watch here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nyMvIRLgeY
On this very subject the Trump administration* is in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals this morning arguing that not just the president but also his family and business associates are immune not just from prosecution but investigation. If you’re reading this before 10:30 am EDT and like watching oral arguments you can watch here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nyMvIRLgeY
Wow. That seems . . . a bit of a stretch. Is 45 now Hierophant as well as Emperor? Communing with him invokes some Sacred Seal? Descent from his loins confers sanctity-by-proxy?
Wouldn't this completely remove the executive branch from any kind of oversight by anybody, especially Congress? Someone please assure me this bullshit has no chance of working.
Wouldn't this completely remove the executive branch from any kind of oversight by anybody, especially Congress? Someone please assure me this bullshit has no chance of working.
The reason it's at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals is because the District Court of the Southern District of New York was highly unimpressed [PDF] by the Trump legal team's assertions. The Second Circuit is likely to be equally unimpressed. If the case gets taken up by the Supreme Court, who know how they'll decide given the recent addition of Snarly McFratboy to their ranks? He seems much more likely to endorse theories of complete executive impunity than someone like Anthony Kennedy.
Late in the evening on Oct. 16, Rudy Giuliani made a phone call to this reporter.
<snip>
Giuliani can be heard discussing overseas dealings and lamenting the need for cash, though it's difficult to discern the full context of the conversation.
The call appeared to be one of the most unfortunate of faux pas: what is known, in casual parlance, as a butt dial.
And it wasn’t the first time it had happened.
"Only the best people" will never not be funny. But I'm sure everything is on the up and up with the president*'s personal attorney, right?
“Is Robert around?” Giuliani asks.
“He’s in Turkey,” the man responds.
Giuliani replies instantly. “The problem is we need some money.”
The two men then go silent. Nine seconds pass. No word is spoken. Then Giuliani chimes in again.
“We need a few hundred thousand,” he says.
It’s unclear what the two men were talking about. But Giuliani is known to have worked closely with a Robert who has ties to Turkey.
His name is Robert Mangas, and he’s a lawyer at the firm Greenberg Traurig LLP, as well as a registered agent of the Turkish government.
Giuliani himself was employed by Greenberg Traurig until about May 2018.
<snip>
Mangas did not return a request for comment.
Giuliani’s conversation partner can be heard responding to the "few hundred thousand" comment. But it’s possible to make out only the beginning of his answer, and even that is somewhat garbled.
“I’d say even if Bahrain could get, I’m not sure how good [unintelligible words] with his people,” the man says.
“Yeah, okay,” Giuliani says.
This really is Stupid Watergate, with the part of Martha Mitchell being played by Rudolph Giuliani apparently.
I've thought, for a long time, that all we really need to do is just get these people talking--to an audience (1 person or more), with some recording device present. Get them when they're scared, angry, or narcissistic. Especially true with T.
Or texting and tweeting.
Now, if Giuliani's phone would just slip out of his pocket somewhere...unlocked...and someone find it, and feel the need to turn it in to the FBI, or a reporter...or put the contents on YouTube...
Addendum: I hope someone is keeping T, Giuliani, and other minions on suicide watch. Seriously.
Because if they finally figure out how much trouble they're in, and realize their public destruction is on the horizon...that's the kind of situation where some people decide to "exit".
I'm NOT wishing for that. I really don't want them dead.
Nor do I want the explosive chaos that would result if someone--especially T--decided to exit.
(:votive:)
Which reminds me... things have been pretty quiet about the Epstein case.
My guess is he's still rotting in his grave.
Because the issue was entirely about him.
Hey, you're the one who referred to it as "the Epstein case", referencing both a specific individual and a particular legal proceeding. Maybe if you wanted to refer to the wider implications of Epstein's alleged orchestration of an underage sex ring for the rich and powerful you should find a term that doesn't reduce it to "the Epstein case".
The Donald was expecting the Republican Controlled Senate to be his redoubt when it came down to quashing the impeachment, but it does not look very good there now. Yesterday he wanted Lindsey Graham to introduce a resolution in the Senate condemning the Democrat lead impeachment in the House, but all he got was a resolution pleading for more transparency in the process and only 44 of 53 Republican Senators signed on to it. Details here.
Sorry for the double post. Multiple American news sources are reporting Trump enterprise is now going to sell the Trump Hotel in DC. Asking price: $500 mil. Any takers?
Yes, it's very near the White House. Actually, I believe that the property belongs to the U.S. Government (it used to be the main post office), and it's actually the leasing rights that are currently owned by you-know-who and that are probably on the auction block.
One reason is taxes. But I wonder if he realizes that hiding out at Mar-a-Lago wouldn't fix anything, because he could be extradited back to DC, New York, or anywhere else that wants to drag him into court?
But I wonder if he realizes that hiding out at Mar-a-Lago wouldn't fix anything, because he could be extradited back to DC, New York, or anywhere else that wants to drag him into court?
He's too clever for that! Before he leaves office, he will issue an executive order declaring Mar-a-Lago to be a sovereign nation with no extradition treaty with the U.S.
But I wonder if he realizes that hiding out at Mar-a-Lago wouldn't fix anything, because he could be extradited back to DC, New York, or anywhere else that wants to drag him into court?
He's too clever for that! Before he leaves office, he will issue an executive order declaring Mar-a-Lago to be a sovereign nation with no extradition treaty with the U.S.
I don't get it. How can he claim to reside in Florida while living and working (as little as possible) in DC? Would the IRS accept this from Tammy Taxpayer?
Comments
Did the govmint put out requests for 'bids' (applications) for hosting the thing? I don't think so.
What's wrong with Camp David? It seems up-to-snuff in security, and probably does NOT need a total make-over. It would be a lot more pleasant in June than Miami FL.
Just a side note: Bedbugs will soon be put onto the Endangered Species List. This will protect visiting royalty from the annoying odor of insecticides if forced to stay at the Trump rag-tag resort. And one last thing. I think I heard that our Repubican Presinut will have a book signing event @ the G-7. His long-awaited memoire entitled "The Smell of Money".
What a devious, cheating piece of effluent he is.
Someone must have heard we were displeased!
Oh, and Camp David is on the alt list.
Maybe the ladies employed @ The Casino make too high a salary, whilst attending to the marks-er...customers, and then when the owner/operator of said casino, who has become "famous" is confronted with a few ladies who demand hush money---- the cash on hand goes not to paying bills or utilities or debts, and the bank accounts get emptied pretty fast.
Just a thought. This explanation doesn't include the art of dipping into money in accounts that really don't belong to the owner/operator, but to John and Joanne Taxpayer.
Corrected quoting code. BroJames Purgatory Host
Cute. But bear in mind that in the film, the problems emerged because the sure-fire tax loss made money.
*auto-correct kept trying to change it to "grabbing".
very good point.
I am not sure how it was challenged at the closed sitting but on the face of it the deposition provides conclusive evidence of Presidential abuse of power and therefore grounds for impeachment. It is worth a read if you haven't already done so.
The Queen cannot be tried in court she has to be tried in the House of Lords.
No; the Justice Dept. says a sitting President cannot be charged with criminal activity. He can be impeached by the House, then tried by the Senate, and then removed from office. Once removed, he can be charged with a "regular crime."
Two twists on this. The first is that, as Ohher noted, this isn’t really a law per se, it’s from a legal memo written by Justice Department lawyers and has never been tested in court. Of course since it’s the Justice Department that would have to bring federal charges . . .
The other point is that the memo only covers federal criminal charges. States are not bound by this Justice Department memo and could conceivably criminally charge a sitting president.
Wow. That seems . . . a bit of a stretch. Is 45 now Hierophant as well as Emperor? Communing with him invokes some Sacred Seal? Descent from his loins confers sanctity-by-proxy?
Wouldn't this completely remove the executive branch from any kind of oversight by anybody, especially Congress? Someone please assure me this bullshit has no chance of working.
The reason it's at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals is because the District Court of the Southern District of New York was highly unimpressed [PDF] by the Trump legal team's assertions. The Second Circuit is likely to be equally unimpressed. If the case gets taken up by the Supreme Court, who know how they'll decide given the recent addition of Snarly McFratboy to their ranks? He seems much more likely to endorse theories of complete executive impunity than someone like Anthony Kennedy.
Not even they: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity#United_Kingdom
"Only the best people" will never not be funny. But I'm sure everything is on the up and up with the president*'s personal attorney, right?
This really is Stupid Watergate, with the part of Martha Mitchell being played by Rudolph Giuliani apparently.
I've thought, for a long time, that all we really need to do is just get these people talking--to an audience (1 person or more), with some recording device present. Get them when they're scared, angry, or narcissistic. Especially true with T.
Or texting and tweeting.
Now, if Giuliani's phone would just slip out of his pocket somewhere...unlocked...and someone find it, and feel the need to turn it in to the FBI, or a reporter...or put the contents on YouTube...
Because if they finally figure out how much trouble they're in, and realize their public destruction is on the horizon...that's the kind of situation where some people decide to "exit".
I'm NOT wishing for that. I really don't want them dead.
Nor do I want the explosive chaos that would result if someone--especially T--decided to exit.
(:votive:)
Which reminds me... things have been pretty quiet about the Epstein case.
My guess is he's still rotting in his grave.
Speaking of folks who haven't been in the media eye as much recently, Maria Butina was released from prison today and will be deported back to Russia.
Because the issue was entirely about him.
Hey, you're the one who referred to it as "the Epstein case", referencing both a specific individual and a particular legal proceeding. Maybe if you wanted to refer to the wider implications of Epstein's alleged orchestration of an underage sex ring for the rich and powerful you should find a term that doesn't reduce it to "the Epstein case".
With friends like these, who needs enemies?
Maybe he wants to distract people from impeachment, etc., by putting the hotel scandal behind him?
Or maybe he's anticipating legal fees...or bail.
Here's a link to a Yahoo article.
One reason is taxes. But I wonder if he realizes that hiding out at Mar-a-Lago wouldn't fix anything, because he could be extradited back to DC, New York, or anywhere else that wants to drag him into court?