Trump's Card

[ursus arctos]

I shouldn’t have looked up Sauer’s background. So he will argue anything for money and a stage.

Appellate advocacy in general, and Supreme Court advocacy in particular is the closest the US system has to a Barrister role.

There is no formal (or informal) "cab rank", but the opportunities are rare and the hold of older, more established lawyers strong (it is both an immensely prestigious and very lucrative role to fill).

Dreeben, for instance, has argued before SCOTUS over 100 times.

That said, there is good evidence (Posh Catholic school, FedSoc, Luttig and Scalia clerk, Hawley protege, etc.) that Sauer is a true believer as well as an opportunist.

[San Bernardhinault]

If the Republican Party believed they were being destroyed by a fifth column of embedded sleeper-cell idiots, Kelli Ward wouldn't be a bad place to start looking.

[ursus arctos]

Meanwhile, in Arizona

https://twitter.com/joycewhitevance/status/1783473685531140096?s=12&t=xvOireV8JOIS_CpbTtDBow

[Satchmo Distel]

Sauer needs a lozenge then

A sweet for Sauer?

[San Bernardhinault]

I shouldn’t have looked up Sauer’s background. So he will argue anything for money and a stage.

... can't quite resist generic gag about all lawyers

[caja-dglh]

I shouldn’t have looked up Sauer’s background. So he will argue anything for money and a stage.

[caja-dglh]

Sauer needs a lozenge then

[ursus arctos]

Sauer is 49

Dreeben, who is argiuning for the Special Counsel, is 70

[Plodder]

I did really mean it: in the moment I believed it to be true. But I reached the conclusion too quickly and was checking if others had the same reaction, which they didn't so I reconsidered. So not bad faith. It's nothing something I would do in a town hall meeting or (hopefully) when teaching a class (and if I ever did there would be a tone of voice indicating that I am throwing out a question not making a statement, and asking for a critical response).

Also, the context was that the post was not authored by Trump and there are people in his circle who could be antisemites knowingly employing certain tropes. And IIRC Trump has used vermin/pest metaphors before for minorities.

But I think on balance he was employing a pun to insult a woman and that seeking a deeper motive is an overreach, as Ursus stated. Let's move on.

Thanks for that. Makes sense to me now.

And thanks too UA and G-Man for their responses.

[caja-dglh]

Trump’s lawyer in the Supreme Court hearing sounds like he is about 80 years old.

[ursus arctos]

So do you think he could be indicted further down the line?

Also would an election defeat in November maybe result in more convictions if states/other bodies believe his lack of political power will make it easier to pursue them?

Yes and yes, though on the latter point there is also a real possibility that some prosecutors will decide that it just isn't worth it if he is no longer available candidate for office

These proceedings severely disrupt the everyday operation of the local justice system and courts and the possibility of violence has to cross the minds of those making these decisions, particularly in states with very lax gun laws like Arizona.

[Satchmo Distel]

New-ish here, and not looking to start anything, but how is suggesting Trump is being anti-semitic , and then saying you didn't really mean it, but were just floating an idea, not acting in bad faith?

Just for the record, I hadn't ever thought SD was acting in bad faith.

I did really mean it: in the moment I believed it to be true. But I reached the conclusion too quickly and was checking if others had the same reaction, which they didn't so I reconsidered. So not bad faith. It's nothing something I would do in a town hall meeting or (hopefully) when teaching a class (and if I ever did there would be a tone of voice indicating that I am throwing out a question not making a statement, and asking for a critical response).

Also, the context was that the post was not authored by Trump and there are people in his circle who could be antisemites knowingly employing certain tropes. And IIRC Trump has used vermin/pest metaphors before for minorities.

But I think on balance he was employing a pun to insult a woman and that seeking a deeper motive is an overreach, as Ursus stated. Let's move on.

[Sean of the Shed]

So do you think he could be indicted further down the line?
Also would an election defeat in November maybe result in more convictions if states/other bodies believe his lack of political power will make it easier to pursue them?

[ursus arctos]

Trump is famous for not giving direct instructions for many of his crimes, in a manner learned from mob bosses, and is equally asssidious at avoiding the creation of paper trails.

And the prosecution may have determined that adding him to a criminal trial in a state he won in 2016 and only lost by 10,000 votes in 2020 would have risked making their entire case much more complicated and difficult to win (as has arguably happened in Georgia).

Then there is the complication of the Supreme Court not having ruled on his claims of absolute immunity.

All that said, it is a standard prosecutorial tactic here to indict "unindicted co-conspirstors" after plea deals with those lower down the chain secure sufficient evidence of their guilt.

[Sean of the Shed]

Why have they not indicted Trump himself? Do they not have the onus of proof? I'd have thought it was pretty obvious that the instruction came from him and, as shown in Georgia, in the interest of self preservation, people will eventually roll on him.

[G-Man]

New-ish here, and not looking to start anything, but how is suggesting Trump is being anti-semitic , and then saying you didn't really mean it, but were just floating an idea, not acting in bad faith?

Just for the record, I hadn't ever thought SD was acting in bad faith.

Given all we know about Donald Trump, it isn't really a fantasist stretch to ascribe anti-Semitic sentiments to him. Satchmo suggested that there were such sentiments in Trump's language; others have noted that the bigotry at play in this instance rather was misogyny. I don't think Satchmo's post requires a great deal of discussion.

[caja-dglh]

It was for me (I lurked for a couple of years before posting, and stayed out of World for longer than that).

Think of all the posts we could have had...

[ursus arctos]

Satchmo can answer for himself, but I would say that those of us who have been interacting with him for years have "known" (or at least felt) that he sometimes uses the board (and particularly political posts) to float ideas that are neither fully forned in his mind nor positions to which he is fully committed.

And that he has always done so in good faith, rather than as a "just asking questions" troll.

I have really appreciated your contributions here, but it is intrinsically difficult for newish posters to have any idea what we are talking about when we talk about 15 year old stramashes or invoke context that has been lost in the mists of time.

It was for me (I lurked for a couple of years before posting, and stayed out of World for longer than that).

[Plodder]

New-ish here, and not looking to start anything, but how is suggesting Trump is being anti-semitic , and then saying you didn't really mean it, but were just floating an idea, not acting in bad faith?

Just for the record, I hadn't ever thought SD was acting in bad faith.

[ursus arctos]

It's partly what I do on here - float an idea and see if it works. It's not intended to be annoying (and it's never in bad faith) but I apologize if it has that effect.

I think that's a perfectly cromulent thing to do here (and also what I thought you were doing in this case).

[ursus arctos]

An Arizona grand jury on Wednesday indicted seven attorneys and aides affiliated with Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign as well as 11 Arizona Republicans on felony charges related to their alleged efforts to subvert Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in the state, according to an announcement by the state attorney general.

Those indicted include former TrumpWhite House chief of staff Mark Meadows,attorneys Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman and Christina Bobb, top campaign adviser Boris Epshteyn and former campaign aide Mike Roman.They are accused of allegedlyaiding an unsuccessful strategy to award the state’s electoral votes to Trump instead of Biden after the 2020 election. Also charged are the Republicans who signed paperwork on Dec. 14, 2020, that falsely purported Trump was the rightful winner, including former state party chair Kelli Ward, state Sens. Jake Hoffman and Anthony Kern, and Tyler Bowyer, a GOP national committeeman and chief operating officer of Turning Point Action, the campaign arm of the pro-Trump conservative group Turning Point USA.

Trump was not charged, but he is described in the indictment as an unindicted co-conspirator

[scratchmonkey]

There's also at least one oxford comma.

[WOM]

He also wouldn't use 'stanchions' in a million years.

[scratchmonkey]

After a second perusal, I would say that the intermediary or ghostwritten would be my guess if only because there's only one exclamation point.

[Nocturnal Submission]

For the better written posts, I usually assume that they're produced in a similar way that sports pundits views appear on websites - "Alan Shearer was in conversation with (hack's name)." In other words, Trump babbles on for a bit and one of his flunky's cleans it up, pads it out (or slims it down) and makes sure to include whatever insults, whether old favourites or newly-minted ones, the boss insists upon.