Former Trump adviser Paul Manafort was removed from a plane at Miami International Airport before it took off for Dubai because he carried a revoked passport, officials said Wednesday.
Miami-Dade Police Detective Alvaro Zabaleta confirmed that Manafort was removed from the Emirates Airline flight without incident Sunday night but directed further questions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. That agency did not immediately respond to an email Wednesday seeking comment.
Is Paul Manafort's passport still revoked from his conviction? (Note that the article says "revoked", not "expired".) You'd think that he'd have had it re-instated after he was pardoned over a year ago, so maybe it's been re-revoked for other reasons? Why go to Dubai now? Why is CBP doing the enforcement on this? Many questions, but not a lot of substance.
Yes. I saw that in a NYT article on Trump suing Clinton and others (including Steele) over the 2016 election. One of those snippets that makes you sit up and take notice.
As for Trump's legal action, what a ripper! It seems like an open invitation for the Defendants not only to reprise the damning findings of the Mueller Report, but for a Court to find that Trump did collude with Russia on the balance of probabilities. I very much hope that the defendants run the bastard to trial, but there is always the possibility that the Coward Trump will withdraw the proceedings.
Former Trump adviser Paul Manafort was removed from a plane at Miami International Airport before it took off for Dubai because he carried a revoked passport, officials said Wednesday.
Miami-Dade Police Detective Alvaro Zabaleta confirmed that Manafort was removed from the Emirates Airline flight without incident Sunday night but directed further questions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. That agency did not immediately respond to an email Wednesday seeking comment.
Is Paul Manafort's passport still revoked from his conviction? (Note that the article says "revoked", not "expired".) You'd think that he'd have had it re-instated after he was pardoned over a year ago, so maybe it's been re-revoked for other reasons? Why go to Dubai now? Why is CBP doing the enforcement on this? Many questions, but not a lot of substance.
Yes. I saw that in a NYT article on Trump suing Clinton and others (including Steele) over the 2016 election. One of those snippets that makes you sit up and take notice.
As for Trump's legal action, what a ripper! It seems like an open invitation for the Defendants not only to reprise the damning findings of the Mueller Report, but for a Court to find that Trump did collude with Russia on the balance of probabilities. I very much hope that the defendants run the bastard to trial, but there is always the possibility that the Coward Trump will withdraw the proceedings.
Discovery affects plaintiffs too, right? Plus, does Trump really want to risk being asked questions under oath, or really appearing in a court room and risk being jailed for contempt after pissing off the judge one too many times?
Former Trump adviser Paul Manafort was removed from a plane at Miami International Airport before it took off for Dubai because he carried a revoked passport, officials said Wednesday.
Miami-Dade Police Detective Alvaro Zabaleta confirmed that Manafort was removed from the Emirates Airline flight without incident Sunday night but directed further questions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. That agency did not immediately respond to an email Wednesday seeking comment.
Is Paul Manafort's passport still revoked from his conviction? (Note that the article says "revoked", not "expired".) You'd think that he'd have had it re-instated after he was pardoned over a year ago, so maybe it's been re-revoked for other reasons? Why go to Dubai now? Why is CBP doing the enforcement on this? Many questions, but not a lot of substance.
Yes. I saw that in a NYT article on Trump suing Clinton and others (including Steele) over the 2016 election. One of those snippets that makes you sit up and take notice.
As for Trump's legal action, what a ripper! It seems like an open invitation for the Defendants not only to reprise the damning findings of the Mueller Report, but for a Court to find that Trump did collude with Russia on the balance of probabilities. I very much hope that the defendants run the bastard to trial, but there is always the possibility that the Coward Trump will withdraw the proceedings.
Discovery affects plaintiffs too, right?
Yes, discovery goes both directions. And trial, if there is one, is at least a year away, probably longer.
Interesting ruling [PDF] from a U.S. District Court in California. It was hearing the controversy of whether Trump attorney John Eastman (composer of the infamous sedition memos) has to turn over some documents to the January 6 Committee. Eastman argues that those documents are protected by attorney-client privilege. The Committee argued that attorney-client privilege doesn't apply in this case because of the crime-fraud exception. Judge Carter agreed and ordered Eastman to turn over the documents. The basic ruling was:
Donald Trump likely committed a felony
John Eastman likely conspired with him
The crime-fraud exception applies
Note that the judge is using a balance of probability standard ('more likely than not') since this isn't a criminal trial with its "beyond reasonable doubt" standard. This is a District Court ruling and will likely be appealed, first to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and then to the Supreme Court.
For those who would prefer a journalistic account rather than forty-four pages of legal reasoning, here's CNN's summary.
The legal reasoning was fun, though, and the good bits are in the last few pages (in the 40s).
Dare we yet hope to see the Frump outfitted in a Size 3X orange jumpsuit? Apropos of which, can ANYBODY please explain to me how in bloody hell this deluded mal-educated megalomaniac manage to inspire such loyalty among his followers?
Newsweek is reporting that Trumps most recent campaign stop in Georgia had only 5,000 in attendance. In the 2020 campaign he could draw up to 35,000 people.
Of course, the Trump people dispute this report, claiming he had 35,000.
Gentle hostly nudge that in Purgatory we have a policy of not misnaming public figures, however much we may feel they deserve it, and however many might agree with us.
[can ANYBODY please explain to me how in bloody hell this deluded mal-educated megalomaniac manage to inspire such loyalty among his followers?
I thought it was because he hates the same things/people that they hate.
I’d tweak that a little and say it’s because he tells them what they want to hear.
Yeah, there's a fair amount of evidence that he doesn't believe even half of what he says. Just today I was listening to the BBC's Things fell apart and they were quoting a source that said Trump put himself on mute to one of his "stop the steal" lawyers and was mocking her bizarre theories to aides in the oval office with him before taking himself off mute and encouraging her.
My apologies to BroJames and all for misnaming the former president; I'm afraid my (of-late infrequent) visits here have muddled my awareness of the rules. Off to review same.
Thank you @Ohher
I don’t think the issue is addressed specifically in the Purg guidelines. It emerged, I think, during the tenure of the 45th president of the US. In Purgatory, at least, derogatory naming of people was found not to make a good contribution to serious discussion.
What happened to the seven hour, thirty seven minute gap in the phone logs of Trump's White House logs? Could it be they were using burner phones? Reminds me of the gap in the Nixon Watergate tapes.
Could it be they were using burner phones? Reminds me of the gap in the Nixon Watergate tapes.
Maybe. Another possibility is that Trump was using one of his unsecured cell phones, or Dan Scavino's unsecured cell phone (which we know Trump used on occasion). This would also explain why Trump and Scavino have fought tooth and nail to keep Scavino from giving testimony to the January 6 Committee or turning over documents or subpœnaing Scavino's phone records. I suppose it's possible Trump used a burner phone during the time we know he was calling various members of Congress which nonetheless do not seem to be logged by the White House system, but it's not a necessary assumption.
On the one hand taking the trouble to acquire a burner phone (or multiple burner phones) indicates the very non-Trumpian idea that Trump thought his coup could fail. (If he succeeded no one would investigate because he'd be a dictator at that point.) On the other hand I can very easily see one of his aides handing him a burner phone and telling him it was an untraceable super-secret spy phone and Trump being impressed.
Now Trump is asking Putin to provide any dirt on Hunter Biden--and Joe as well.
Without attributing Trump's comments to mental illness, I think theey show that he's pretty detached from reality, or at least political reality.
Yeah, there's still a bit of Putin-worship on the alt-right, but for most of the public, including most Republicans, the invasion of Ukraine severely altered the equation.
Trump's earlier comments about what a genius Putin was for invading could be rationalized away as just praising political acumen, and Trump further qualified the remarks by saying that, much as he admires Putin's intellect, he opposes the invasion itself. But publically asking post-invasion Putin for political assistance is another matter.
Now Trump is asking Putin to provide any dirt on Hunter Biden--and Joe as well.
Something tells me Putin might just do that,
However, if Trump has any direct contact with Putin at this point, it could be treason.
The US is not at war with Russia, so treason would (in legal terms) be a reach. Plenty of other crimes that could be involved, of course.
Not legally treason as such (see Art. III, § 3 of the U.S. Constitution for the American legal definition) but let's look at what he actually said.
As long as Putin is not exactly a fan of our country . . . I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it . . . you won't get the answer from Ukraine . . . I think Putin now would be willing to probably give that answer.
The full video is at the linked tweet so you can see all the verbal goo that's been edited out by those ellipses if you're so inclined. The important point is that that Donald Trump is openly asking a dictator and war criminal to do him a political favor now that "Putin is not exactly a fan of our country". In other words, Trump recognizes that what he's asking Putin to do will hurt America but puts his own political interests above the national interests. It may not legally be treason, but asking a hostile foreign dictator to hurt your country for your own short-term political advantage is morally and politically traitorous.
Yeah, there's still a bit of Putin-worship on the alt-right, but for most of the public, including most Republicans, the invasion of Ukraine severely altered the equation.
It's more likely that the invasion of Ukraine has temporarily altered the political equation where Republicans are concerned. A severe and sudden shock can sometimes cause the modern Republican party to temporarily act like a political party rather than a cynically power-hungry death cult, but the effect wears off after a little while. (e.g. in the immediate aftermath of Trump's attempted coup on January 6, 2021 a lot of Republicans were appalled and angry. Now . . . not so much.) We're already seeing some of that starting to take place, with various Republicans taking the line that Joe Biden is being to tough on Russia and others taking the line that Biden is being too soft on Russia. Some are even taking both positions. I'm guessing that by the time the mid-terms roll around the Russian re-invasion of Ukraine will be considered a hoax by most Republicans. A slight exaggeration perhaps, but not by much.
Ok, not treason. But a clear violation of this law;
18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments
U.S. Code
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
That nice absolute free speecher Mr. Musk will resurrect Trump on Twitter if its shareholders sell out.
The Twitter board of directors have created a poison pill which preserves the right for Twitter shareholders other than Musk to acquire more shares of the company at a relatively inexpensive price, effectively diluting Musk's stake. The provision will be triggered if Musk (or any other investor) acquires more than 15% of the company's shares. Musk currently owns around 9% of Twitter's shares.
That nice absolute free speecher Mr. Musk will resurrect Trump on Twitter if its shareholders sell out.
The Twitter board of directors have created a poison pill which preserves the right for Twitter shareholders other than Musk to acquire more shares of the company at a relatively inexpensive price, effectively diluting Musk's stake. The provision will be triggered if Musk (or any other investor) acquires more than 15% of the company's shares. Musk currently owns around 9% of Twitter's shares.
Good to know. One of these millennia we'll single tax all of these evil bastards off the commons face of the planet.
Of note concerning Trump, though, a New York State judge is now holding Trump in contempt for failing to hand over personal records dealing with properties under his name. He had been ordered to hand over the records the first of the year. Trump's lawyers claim he does not have any personal records the court is seeking. Regardless, the judge is fining him $10,000 a day until he does hand over the records. Chump change for Mr. Trump, no?
Probably. Though it's entirely possible that Trump is actually flat broke and 10k a day won't even be a brick in the side of the gaping cavern of debt opening up under him.
There's flat broke, and there's flat broke. In one, he has absolutely nothing and is dependent upon others. In the other, he has absolutely nothing save what is squirrelled away out of sight.
There's flat broke, and there's flat broke. In one, he has absolutely nothing and is dependent upon others. In the other, he has absolutely nothing save what is squirrelled away out of sight.
Remember the $25M he had to pay out to the victims of his fraudulent "university"? It will be the same again if he has to pay the latest fine. Other people's money, as always, and he will walk free. The authorities know only too well that there will be another insurrection if they try to jail him.
I dunno about that. The loudmouth support generated at the ex-president's rallies doesn't necessarily translate to putting life, limb, and liberty on the line when the now fore-warned-&-fore-armed authorities are taking names and note and bundling insurrectionists off to jail. Shooting off one's mouth at rallies is one thing; serving actual time in actual prisons -- with all that can mean for mucking up one's prospects upon release -- is another.
I dunno about that. The loudmouth support generated at the ex-president's rallies doesn't necessarily translate to putting life, limb, and liberty on the line when the now fore-warned-&-fore-armed authorities are taking names and note and bundling insurrectionists off to jail. Shooting off one's mouth at rallies is one thing; serving actual time in actual prisons -- with all that can mean for mucking up one's prospects upon release -- is another.
Yeah, unlike eg. anti-abortion terrorists, I think Trump's supporters tend to be the kind of people who want to maintain a modicum of middle-class comfort in their lives, and would not be willing to face either prison-time or a life underground.
And yes, the 1/6ers rampaged and looted right in full view of the cameras, but that's actually pretty common behaviour in riot situations, even apolitical ones(see the Vancouver hockey riots of 2011: a kid fully expecting to start university in a few months figured he would light a police car on fire while people snapped photos). Plus, some of them likely thought that they would be able to overturn the election, and then get legally exonerated. That would seem an even less plausible outcome now.
There's flat broke, and there's flat broke. In one, he has absolutely nothing and is dependent upon others. In the other, he has absolutely nothing save what is squirrelled away out of sight.
Remember the $25M he had to pay out to the victims of his fraudulent "university"? It will be the same again if he has to pay the latest fine. Other people's money, as always, and he will walk free. The authorities know only too well that there will be another insurrection if they try to jail him.
That nicely confirms my comment - all the real money is there, but just does not on the surface seem to be his. I don't think he's financially worried about where his next meal is coming from, just concerned whether the pheasant will be under glass or with truffles.
According to popular rumor, The Donald fights "current debts" rather than paying them. Apparently, that's how he bankrolls projects going forward.
The rumour also indicates that many lenders have got wise to this and only Deutsche Bank have recently been willing to provide credit. And Deutsche Bank has been the topic of some very murky allegations regarding Russian money.
In a Monty Python-esque defense, Donald Trump has reportedly justified telling his security detail to "knock the crap" out of protestors because the protestors might come at him with a banana.
In a Monty Python-esque defense, Donald Trump has reportedly justified telling his security detail to "knock the crap" out of protestors because the protestors might come at him with a banana.
This is my youngest daughter's favorite Monty Python sketch, so I had to call her from her gaming to read the article. She was satisfyingly amused.
In a Monty Python-esque defense, Donald Trump has reportedly justified telling his security detail to "knock the crap" out of protestors because the protestors might come at him with a banana.
Comments
What self-respecting criminal would want to be in the same gaol as Trump?
Yes. I saw that in a NYT article on Trump suing Clinton and others (including Steele) over the 2016 election. One of those snippets that makes you sit up and take notice.
As for Trump's legal action, what a ripper! It seems like an open invitation for the Defendants not only to reprise the damning findings of the Mueller Report, but for a Court to find that Trump did collude with Russia on the balance of probabilities. I very much hope that the defendants run the bastard to trial, but there is always the possibility that the Coward Trump will withdraw the proceedings.
Discovery affects plaintiffs too, right? Plus, does Trump really want to risk being asked questions under oath, or really appearing in a court room and risk being jailed for contempt after pissing off the judge one too many times?
Note that the judge is using a balance of probability standard ('more likely than not') since this isn't a criminal trial with its "beyond reasonable doubt" standard. This is a District Court ruling and will likely be appealed, first to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and then to the Supreme Court.
For those who would prefer a journalistic account rather than forty-four pages of legal reasoning, here's CNN's summary.
Dare we yet hope to see the Frump outfitted in a Size 3X orange jumpsuit? Apropos of which, can ANYBODY please explain to me how in bloody hell this deluded mal-educated megalomaniac manage to inspire such loyalty among his followers?
Of course, the Trump people dispute this report, claiming he had 35,000.
Now, who shall I believe?
BroJames, Purgatory Host
Yeah, there's a fair amount of evidence that he doesn't believe even half of what he says. Just today I was listening to the BBC's Things fell apart and they were quoting a source that said Trump put himself on mute to one of his "stop the steal" lawyers and was mocking her bizarre theories to aides in the oval office with him before taking himself off mute and encouraging her.
I don’t think the issue is addressed specifically in the Purg guidelines. It emerged, I think, during the tenure of the 45th president of the US. In Purgatory, at least, derogatory naming of people was found not to make a good contribution to serious discussion.
Destroyed by the ghost of Rose Mary Woods?
Maybe. Another possibility is that Trump was using one of his unsecured cell phones, or Dan Scavino's unsecured cell phone (which we know Trump used on occasion). This would also explain why Trump and Scavino have fought tooth and nail to keep Scavino from giving testimony to the January 6 Committee or turning over documents or subpœnaing Scavino's phone records. I suppose it's possible Trump used a burner phone during the time we know he was calling various members of Congress which nonetheless do not seem to be logged by the White House system, but it's not a necessary assumption.
On the one hand taking the trouble to acquire a burner phone (or multiple burner phones) indicates the very non-Trumpian idea that Trump thought his coup could fail. (If he succeeded no one would investigate because he'd be a dictator at that point.) On the other hand I can very easily see one of his aides handing him a burner phone and telling him it was an untraceable super-secret spy phone and Trump being impressed.
Something tells me Putin might just do that,
However, if Trump has any direct contact with Putin at this point, it could be treason.
The US is not at war with Russia, so treason would (in legal terms) be a reach. Plenty of other crimes that could be involved, of course.
Without attributing Trump's comments to mental illness, I think theey show that he's pretty detached from reality, or at least political reality.
Yeah, there's still a bit of Putin-worship on the alt-right, but for most of the public, including most Republicans, the invasion of Ukraine severely altered the equation.
Trump's earlier comments about what a genius Putin was for invading could be rationalized away as just praising political acumen, and Trump further qualified the remarks by saying that, much as he admires Putin's intellect, he opposes the invasion itself. But publically asking post-invasion Putin for political assistance is another matter.
Not legally treason as such (see Art. III, § 3 of the U.S. Constitution for the American legal definition) but let's look at what he actually said.
The full video is at the linked tweet so you can see all the verbal goo that's been edited out by those ellipses if you're so inclined. The important point is that that Donald Trump is openly asking a dictator and war criminal to do him a political favor now that "Putin is not exactly a fan of our country". In other words, Trump recognizes that what he's asking Putin to do will hurt America but puts his own political interests above the national interests. It may not legally be treason, but asking a hostile foreign dictator to hurt your country for your own short-term political advantage is morally and politically traitorous.
It's more likely that the invasion of Ukraine has temporarily altered the political equation where Republicans are concerned. A severe and sudden shock can sometimes cause the modern Republican party to temporarily act like a political party rather than a cynically power-hungry death cult, but the effect wears off after a little while. (e.g. in the immediate aftermath of Trump's attempted coup on January 6, 2021 a lot of Republicans were appalled and angry. Now . . . not so much.) We're already seeing some of that starting to take place, with various Republicans taking the line that Joe Biden is being to tough on Russia and others taking the line that Biden is being too soft on Russia. Some are even taking both positions. I'm guessing that by the time the mid-terms roll around the Russian re-invasion of Ukraine will be considered a hoax by most Republicans. A slight exaggeration perhaps, but not by much.
Because America is a second rate democracy heading south?
seconded
The Twitter board of directors have created a poison pill which preserves the right for Twitter shareholders other than Musk to acquire more shares of the company at a relatively inexpensive price, effectively diluting Musk's stake. The provision will be triggered if Musk (or any other investor) acquires more than 15% of the company's shares. Musk currently owns around 9% of Twitter's shares.
Good to know. One of these millennia we'll single tax all of these evil bastards off the commons face of the planet.
Of note concerning Trump, though, a New York State judge is now holding Trump in contempt for failing to hand over personal records dealing with properties under his name. He had been ordered to hand over the records the first of the year. Trump's lawyers claim he does not have any personal records the court is seeking. Regardless, the judge is fining him $10,000 a day until he does hand over the records. Chump change for Mr. Trump, no?
Probably. Though it's entirely possible that Trump is actually flat broke and 10k a day won't even be a brick in the side of the gaping cavern of debt opening up under him.
The cash continues to pour in from the idiocracy that he still leads: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-is-fundraising-giant-his-miserly-spending-raises-questions-2022-03-22/
Remember the $25M he had to pay out to the victims of his fraudulent "university"? It will be the same again if he has to pay the latest fine. Other people's money, as always, and he will walk free. The authorities know only too well that there will be another insurrection if they try to jail him.
Yeah, unlike eg. anti-abortion terrorists, I think Trump's supporters tend to be the kind of people who want to maintain a modicum of middle-class comfort in their lives, and would not be willing to face either prison-time or a life underground.
And yes, the 1/6ers rampaged and looted right in full view of the cameras, but that's actually pretty common behaviour in riot situations, even apolitical ones(see the Vancouver hockey riots of 2011: a kid fully expecting to start university in a few months figured he would light a police car on fire while people snapped photos). Plus, some of them likely thought that they would be able to overturn the election, and then get legally exonerated. That would seem an even less plausible outcome now.
That nicely confirms my comment - all the real money is there, but just does not on the surface seem to be his. I don't think he's financially worried about where his next meal is coming from, just concerned whether the pheasant will be under glass or with truffles.
Yes, indeed.
The rumour also indicates that many lenders have got wise to this and only Deutsche Bank have recently been willing to provide credit. And Deutsche Bank has been the topic of some very murky allegations regarding Russian money.
This is my youngest daughter's favorite Monty Python sketch, so I had to call her from her gaming to read the article. She was satisfyingly amused.
"What if he's got a pointed stick?"
Are there a lot of bananas in Florida?