The Most Significant Case of Judicial Misconduct is About to Explode

[Redemptionman]

Democrats would actually need brain cells for them to die, they are those ones destroying democracy all the while they blame the otherside. Straight out of the Mao xiu socialist communist play book. Hey kids look, over here illegal migrates coming to rape and kill your wives and daughters. Don't blame the democrats also dont kill one of the deranged verhmem in a blue state. We will charge you with murder for defending yourself from our chosen voter people.

We have created 250k per year federal jobs to increase the homeless population, give them the open air drugs they need, and encouraging them to come to our beautiful blue states. Don't kill one of them either or like Daniel Penny we will charge you with murder. My brain cells are just fine blue chew.

 

[Tax Counsel]

But I, and the majority of Constitutional scholars, are strict constructionist. That is a theory limiting interpretation of legal and constitutional language to the literal meaning of this language at the time of passage.

A strict constructionist analyzes the powers granted the federal government in the constitution and statutes only on the powers that that are expressly granted by the Constitution - i.e. they reject the idea of any implied powers being granted to the federal government.

Textualism is the idea of interpreting a law (regardless of what kind it is, and regardless of whether the government is a party to the case) based on how that language would have been understood by the ordinary person at the time it was enacted. They reject use of any other sources to, like legislative history, the intent of the body passing the law, etc. Oliver Wendell Holmes, one of the more distinguished jurists to have sat the Court described the approach this way: "We ask, not what this man meant, but what those words would mean in the mouth of a normal speaker of English, using them in the circumstances in which they were used ... We do not inquire what the legislature meant; we ask only what the statutes mean."

Antonin Scalia, one of the most conservative justices to have sat on the court in recent decades rejected strict construction and claimed to take instead the texualist approach. As he put it: "Textualism should not be confused with so-called strict constructionism, a degraded form of textualism that brings the whole philosophy into disrepute. I am not a strict constructionist, and no one ought to be... A text should not be construed strictly, and it should not be construed leniently; it should be construed reasonably, to contain all that it fairly means."

While different, both approaches have one big thing in common: they reject the use of legisative history, i.e. the intent of those writing the law in interpreting the law. Your apparent reliance on legislative history is thus not consistent with either theory.

In any event, I don't think it likely that the Supreme Court is likely hold that the term "officer" as used in the statute at issue in the fairly recent Trump hotel case is significantly different from what the term "officer" meant for the 14th Amendment. But all you and I can do is speculate on that since so far the Supreme Court has not issued an opinion that expressly states what it means under the 14th Amendment. But, as I pointed out earlier, if the Court thought presidents were not officers under the 14th Amendment, why didn't the court just state that. That would made the opinion much more simple since it wouldn't have had to dive into an issue that only comes up if, in fact, the president is an officer: how the 14th Amendment insurrection provision should be enforced against a person seeking a position as an officer of the U.S. If he was not regarded as an officer, then the Court wasted most of its opinion on a matter that was not all relevant to the case under review.

 

[welkin]

I do not believe that the Constitution is a living, breathing document that changes with the whim of society at any given time in our history. If the framers intended that, they would not have made the process of amending it so difficult.

Artical 5:
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

It doesn't say the President, does it? One would think that if the framers wanted to include the President, it would say so and not leave it to an interpretation of hold any office. But it does say Senator or Representative or elector specifically.

You should read the Federalist and the Fourteenth Amendment analisys.

 

[welkin]

But, as I pointed out earlier, if the Court thought presidents were not officers under the 14th Amendment, why didn't the court just state that.

The court went far but didn't have to decide that issue to resolve the dispute and stop the disqualification case. That will be for a different day if the BS doesn't stop, maybe.

 

[stealthy1]

Nathan Wade Resigns From Trump Case After Judge’s Ruling

The romance between District Attorney Fani T. Willis and Mr. Wade, the lawyer she hired to manage the Georgia election case, created an “appearance of impropriety,” the judge said.

www.nytimes.com

 

[army judge]

Certain individuals are pursued by a howling pack of persecutors, while other individuals are feted and celebrated for initiating modern day witch hunts.

"When karma comes back to punch you in the face, I want to be there. Just in case it needs help." —Unknown

"By each crime and every kindness, we birth our future." —David Mitchell

"Karma is a tricky thing. To serve karma, one must repay good karma to others. To serve karma well, one must sometimes deliver bad karma where it is due." —M.R. Mathias

"There's a natural law of karma that vindictive people, who go out of their way to hurt others, will end up broke and alone." —Sylvester Stallone

"Before you act, you have freedom, but after you act, the effect of that action will follow you whether you want it to or not. That is the law of karma." —Paramahansa Yogananda

"If your actions were to boomerang back on you instantly, would you still act the same?" —Alexandra Katehakis

"When you truly understand karma, then you realize you are responsible for everything in your life." —Keanu Reeves

"There are the waves, and there is the wind, seen and unseen forces. Everyone has these same elements in their lives, the seen and unseen, karma and free will." —Kuan Yin

"Sometimes you get what's coming around. And sometimes you are what's coming around." ―Jim Butcher

 

[welkin]

Nathan Wade Resigns From Trump Case After Judge’s Ruling

The romance between District Attorney Fani T. Willis and Mr. Wade, the lawyer she hired to manage the Georgia election case, created an “appearance of impropriety,” the judge said.

www.nytimes.com

It wasn't unexpected. Judge Mc Affee weaseled out an opinion where he didn't have to make any hard determinations about evidence or the case. Willis and Wade will be finished by the time the State of Georgia (and all their boards) and the Feds are finished with them. And the shadow of impropriety has been cast over the entire indictment as the trial proceeds, if it proceeds and Willis doesn't recuse herself and her office.

Stay tuned.

 

[Redemptionman]

Fani is still on the case, her bff hook up call had to go. Only people who get to face charges of RICO is the Trump administration. Fulton county Georgia had over 228,000 plus thousand advanced votes and over 100 thousand mail in ballots for Joe Biden, Interesting to say the least. I would imagine if you were to audit them then probably less than 20 percent would be validilated.

Fani should have charged herself with RICO she would have had a better case then against Donald Trump.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Fulton county Georgia had over 228,000 plus thousand advanced votes and over 100 thousand mail in ballots for Joe Biden, Interesting to say the least. I would imagine if you were to audit them then probably less than 20 percent would be validilated.

That statement seems to me to based purely on speculation based on your political outlook rather than any facts that would support it. A number plucked out of thin air.

Trump tried hard to get the vote count in GA changed in his call to the Georgia Secretary of State, a blatant attempt at interfering with the election. He failed, thankfully. Elections should not be decided by Secretaries of state "finding" extra votes for Trump or by Trump trying to persuade Pence to interfere with the counting of the electoral votes in the Congress. Those efforts and others tell me that it is Trump that doesn't respect the voting process and is willing to do whatever he can to throw the election in his favor. Biden's camp has not been accused of trying those kinds of tactics to win. He didn't need to. He had the legitmate votes to win, despite Trump's initial whining otherwise.

Eventually, even Trump grudgingly indicated that Biden won after all his efforts to overturn the election camp up empty. If Trump wants to win this time, he needs to focus on the future rather than past grievances. What specifically does he plan to do if elected? What can he do to show the public that his second term would be less chaotic than the first? And how can he reassure the public that he doesn't want to be dictator himself when he keeps heaping high praise on the likes of Putin and Kim Jung Un?

Trump already knows he has some repair work to do if he wants to win back voters he lost in 2020. His flip-flopping the abortion issue is one indicator of that. He's trying to find a position on the issue that will tick off the least number of voters. Reminding voters of this first term isn't going to help that repair. He has to persuade voters he'll be better this time around than last and that his policies are the right ones for the American people. So far I've not heard from him a whole lot about that.

 

[welkin]

Trump tried hard to get the vote count in GA changed in his call to the Georgia Secretary of State, a blatant attempt at interfering with the election.

Since when is following the law and calling the Secretary of State (after filing a challenge) a crime and a blatant attempt at interfering with the election when challenging election results? Every state has the ability to file a challenge to election results. Georgia never held a hearing or responded to the challenge. If you are referring to the bogus GA RICO indictment, you are behind the news.

Fani is still on the case,

Not for long. There will be plenty of legal maneuvers in the coming weeks. First, there is this: Georgia Code Title 15. Courts § 15-18-27

(a) When any person makes an affidavit before a judge of the superior court which alleges that the district attorney or a member of the staff of the district attorney has committed an indictable offense and the court finds that there is probable cause to believe that the accused has committed the alleged offense or the grand jury files a sealed report with the presiding judge that the grand jury has found reasonable grounds to believe that the district attorney or a member of the staff of the district attorney has committed such an offense and intends to proceed as provided in Code Sections 45-11-4 and 45-15-11, it shall be the duty of the court to notify the Attorney General as provided in Code Section 15-18-5.

I think Judge Mc Affee's ruling establishes that, in the four corners of ruling, along with the defense offering perjury, witness tampering, misappropriation of funds, and a few others.

There will also be (no doubt) an application for an interlocutory appeal of the judge's ruling. And maybe a motion to suppress all the evidence that has Wade's fingerprints on it now that he resigned under a court order.

Tune in tomorrow for the continuing soap opera The Georgia DA v. Donald Trump.

If you haven't read Mc Affee's opinion, I urge you to read it for yourself and not rely on news's interpretations. See if you think it makes any sense.
DocumentCloud


.

 

[Redemptionman]

https://www.fultoncountyga.gov/-/me...-Report---WriteIn---Recount---Unofficial.ashx

For us to believe those numbers, you would have to believe that not only did Biden out perform every other candidate in that category as far as advanced ballots are concerned but he did so by over 180 thousand votes. Impossible unless they allowed votes from the dead, felons, and multiple votes by the same people.

Registration and Elections

Fulton county Georgia is one of the most corrupt counties in America, go through that place on a workday and you are liable to get your CC stolen some from the local community, have them purchase tractor parts to put 30 inch wheels on their 80s model Impala or Caprice. I should know as this happened to me, not only that on the receipt they had the fax number and name of the local Sheriff's office. There is no right or wrong there, it is only stick it to anything white and hate whitey because they are the ones that make us live in this environment. Keep the welfare checks up and the theft rings going since ole Fani is not going to prosecute us, the government has our backs and the democrats keep us on this plantation.

 

[EeeeekitsaMouse]

I would vote for any politician who actually could refrain from all this crap-talking and instead clearly state a well thought out plan for the country if they were elected.

 

[army judge]

If you haven't read Mc Affee's opinion, I urge you to read it for yourself and not rely on news's interpretations. See if you think it makes any sense.
DocumentCloud

Thanks for supplying the ruling.

All I can add is that I've read better writing from the paws of 1L "Crim Law" and "Con Law" students.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Oh my poor little misinformed tax counsel, you must realize that they have to actually publish these numbers don't you.

I know the vote counts are reported, of course. But none of them support the specific claim you made, including the ones you linked in this latest post. Your claim is merely speculative. You may find them suspicious, but your suspicions aren't proof of anything. Trump, with all his money, resources and happening to hold the most powerful office in the country at the time couldn't prove any election tampering, either in GA or anywhere else. He has even conceded Biden won after he blew all his long shots at trying to get the results overturned.

You seem to think that everyone opposing Trump must be insane. That's the thinking of dictators: everyone must think exactly like they do or they are either insane or a subversive. That is not the kind of thinking that one supporting democratic principles engages in. While you obviously like Trump, I don't think you insane for doing so. One of the great things about this country is that reasonable people may disagree on things and both can have their views respected even if one doesn't agree with it. So do you support democratic principles, or do you instead lean towards dictatorship, as some of the MAGA crowd does? If the former then your name calling of people who think differently than you is out of character. If it is the latter, then you fit right in with Trump himself who has no respect for democracy, calls everyone who opposes him in any way insulting names, and who admires the likes of Putin, Kim Jung Un, and other dictators.

Fulton county Georgia is one of the most corrupt counties in America

It's also heavily Democratic. Fulton County has voted Democratic in every election since 2000. Is it any surprise then that it continued that pattern in 2020? Not to me. Trump didn't make a compelling case to win over moderate voters; instead of gaining moderate, he lost the ones he had in 2016. That, in short, is why he lost. Not due to some vague Democratic conspiracy that no MAGA Republican has been able to come up with some evidence to support, let alone evidence that would be sufficiently compelling to stand up in court. All their efforts were rejected by Republican and Democrat judges alike.

I have a very clear vision of what Trump is. I was following the Trump career long before 2016 and have a pretty good idea of the kind of guy he is. Though I'm a life long Republican, I'm obviously no supporter of Trump. What I see is that those Republicans that in in thrall of Trump are slowly destroying the party. By the time Trump is done with the party it may be so damaged that it ends up back in the electoral wilderness it was in after the election FDR through to the election of Reagan. Decades of being out of power in Congress. That may end up being one of Trump's more enduring legacies.

It ought to tell you something when long serving Republicans in Congress are leaving in record numbers, all complaining about the divisiveness in the Republican Party. In the last session of Congress the party couldn't even keep a Speaker in place for very long, let alone actually govern.

I hope someday the Republican party will find itself back to more traditional conservative principles rather than pushing itself towards the far right land where lovers of facisists, Latin American dictators, etc dominate. It's not too late for the party to save itself, but the longer it remains dysfunctional, the harder it will be for the party to hang on to power at the national level.

 

[Redemptionman]

The only way to know for sure if those votes are legit would be to perform an audit. If you only eliminated 10 percent of them then Trump wins Georgia, period. It is obvious case of ballot stuffing, and election tampering. Republician observers were not allowed to watch the election tallies, they were kicked out. All the while they screamed racism. I suggest you look at Fani whose own father is/ was a black panther. Just because no federal judge would order an audit nor any election official stand up and do the right thing for fear of political suicide should say a lot. I have doubt that you consider yourself a republican but seriously doubt Joe biden will be alive in 4 years to finish out his term. I would say he is on the backward slope towards full time alzeimhers and dementia.

To say I think their was improperities in the last election would be correct. Besides what was betrayed by the media, Trump was seeking to audit those questionable ballots. He tried to get the election officials to look into improper election fraud. It is not against the law and the law provides a provision to question ineligible votes and cases of election fraud.

Just blue and you share the same views on things. Trump is not Hitler, Trump is not a wannabe dictator nor an oliarch. He loves America and American's more than the Biden/ Obama democrats who hate America, have an anti colonism, anti western agenda. If by some miracle Trump does get reelected and allowed to finish out it his term, then America probably can be saved from the third world dung hole that the current powers want to turn us into.

One thing about Georgia election officials have the power to correct it and measures put in place to catch it from happening this fall. Hopefully they will want a fair and correct election not one ramp with questions and illegal ballot stuffing. The key will be to see if Obama makes a trip down tehir to rattle the cages again. With the changes they made, no more water, pizza and food deliverys going to polling stations. I doubt they have or they will have the same type of ballot dancing they had the last election. In other words if it is fair then any Republician running would win Georgia. I too do believe that we need new leadership but DeSantis and Haley didn't get the nod. Biden is in no shape to debate anyone much less Trump so that won't happen. The powers that be may look to dump him at the convention or wait till he passes on so they can have kamela. Either way Trump is the better option.

 

[adjusterjack]

I'm not going to name names. Suffice it to say that I have edited out the, shall we say, less than respectful comments of a few people that are participating in this discussion. Feel free to discuss politics all you want but insults won't be tolerated.

 

[Tax Counsel]

I have doubt that you consider yourself a republican

I think I know myself better than you know me. But if you think you differently, I'd love to hear how you think you are able to know the thoughts in someone else's head, especially someone you've never met who is thousands of miles away from you. If have that skill, then you've accomphlished something no other human has come close to mastering in hundreds of thousands of years. I hope you'll understand why I think that extremely unlikely. Or did you mean to put a "no" in front of the word doubt?

He loves America and American's more than the Biden/ Obama democrats who hate America, have an anti colonism, anti western agenda. If by some miracle Trump does get reelected and allowed to finish out it his term, then America probably can be saved from the third world dung hole that the current powers want to turn us into.

I of course disagree with that. I've not seen much from Trump that convinces me that he partiucularly loves America. However much he loves America, it's clear to me that he loves himself much more than he does the country. Trump mainly cares about what is good for Trump. That kind of narcissism is destructive. Even though he may not want to be dictator, that doesn't mean he can't do a lot of damage if given the chance. You and I see Trump very differently; you aren't going to convince me Trump is great and the only one that can save America, and I'm unlikely to persuade you to take Trump off the pedestal you've put him on.

But so long as democracy is preserved and the outcome of elections are decided by the (untampered) votes of the public this country will probably come out ok regardless of the winner. Though with the 2 major party candidates we have I'm not expecting that the U.S. will realize its full potential. Neither of them has what I think is a real winning formula for the long term direction of the country. Both are also too old to really get what the concerns and problems are of the younger generations. This is country is much different today than when Biden and Trump were young, and it needs leaders that respond to the needs of today rather than trying to recreate something from the past. As much as we might long for some past period in history, time will never replicate that era again. Refusing to recognize that and working on ideas that will work for the age we are now in rather than pining for the past isn't a good recipie for success. But neither of them are offering us that. They are both trying to offer what they can't deliver: a return to some mythical Golden Age of America (though each has a different golden age in mind) that we tend to remember more fondly than what the reality of that era really was.

That said, whoever wins in a fairly conducted election should be given the chance to show he's got the right plan. I hope I'm wrong, but I strongly suspect that if Trump loses we'll hear four more years of whining from him about how the election was stolen from him. That's just his MO. He never concedes anything even its apparent to everyone else that he lost.

 

[Redemptionman]

I didn't say Trump can save America, for it will never be again what it was during the golden era of the 1920s or the post-war booms, which saw large prosperity. Trump running his mouth about a bloodbath if he loses is terrible, and he shouldn't say it. This election should be very decisive, and I hope that their is a clear winner. The two party system controls too much in this country. Since Ross Perot ran, they have had to eliminate an Independent from the equation since they knew there would be a scenario where there would be no clear candidate with the majority of the votes to win the election. I would support a runoff election for president like we do for every other office. This way, a clear winner can be determined, and there would be no doubts. The way it is now, you could say 3 elections in the past 20 years are questionable.

Gore vs. baby bush 1999
Obama's reelection campaign 2012
And of course, bidens win 4 years ago. 2020

If there was the ability to have run offs, then 1 or 2 of them would have different presidents

 

[justblue]

Obama did not run in 2016.

I didn't say Trump can save America, for it will never be again what it was during the golden era of the 1920s or the post-war booms, which saw large prosperity. Trump running his mouth about a bloodbath if he loses is terrible, and he shouldn't say it. This election should be very decisive, and I hope that their is a clear winner. The two party system controls too much in this country. Since Ross Perot ran, they have had to eliminate an Independent from the equation since they knew there would be a scenario where there would be no clear candidate with the majority of the votes to win the election. I would support a runoff election for president like we do for every other office. This way, a clear winner can be determined, and there would be no doubts. The way it is now, you could say 3 elections in the past 20 years are questionable.

Gore vs. baby bush 1999
Obama's reelection campaign 2016
And of course, bidens win 4 years ago. 2020

If there was the ability to have run offs, then 1 or 2 of them would have different presidents

 

[Redemptionman]

Obama did not run in 2016.

...fify, that Hillary who no one wanted.