Free Republic

This nonsense about how this verdict shows “no one is above the law” is the definition of ridiculousness.

James Comey did not say Hillary didn’t break the law, he confirmed she broke it with her secret email server, but he said he couldn’t find a prosecutor who would charge her.

Hur did not say Biden didn’t break the law regarding possession of top-secret documents, Hur said Biden was a doddering old man that no one would be able to prosecute.

Seems to me both of them were put “above the law”.

There are some interesting videos on youtube concerning the law of unintended (or unexpected) consequences throughout history. For example, in the late 50’s the Communist Chinese became concerned about the overwhelming sparrow population affecting crops. So, everyone was compelled to go after them, shoot them, swat them, whatever. However, the unexpected consequence was that the sparrows had been keeping the locust population down, but now locusts were free to attack the crops and food supply. And did they ever. This led to a major famine in China.

I think the communists in America did something equally devastating (for them) yesterday. We’ll see.

Although I regularly refer to him as “Judas” Pence, I mostly agree with what he said here. Except the part about hopefully the appeals process reverses the verdict and restores American’s faith in the legal system. Ain’t gonna happen! Oh, I think the appeals will eventually reverse the verdict, but our faith in the legal system has been shattered beyond repair. Regardless of the appeals outcome, the purpose of the trial has been completed. Get Trump, brand him a felon!

Most legitimate judges do not want successful appeals to go against their record. But clown Juan, I don’t believe, cares. He is counting on future book deals and CNN/MSNBC appearances to take care of him when he is disbarred or retired.

No, I agree if it is a hung jury, we will know who the “hanger” is. What I said was if there is a juror who would hang the jury, but is pressured to find for guilt, then we probably won’t know who that was and we won’t know what threat they had to endure, to get them to change their vote.

Unfortunately, body language is all we have at this point. And this can be even “thinner gruel” because, this juror might truly be sympathetic to the defense’s case, and yet come under such peer pressure from 11 other jurors, that he/she cannot stand up to the pressure and ultimately succumbs. We will never know who this was or what stand they took. Watch “12 Angry Men” to see how it is for one holdout on a jury.

BTW, on a lighter note, look up an old Dick Van Dyck show that was a really funny parody of “12 AM”. I think it was the 3rd season, but maybe not. Anyway, DVD is on a jury considering whether a voluptuous babe has stolen jewelry. He is the only holdout on the jury, and everyone (including his wife!) thinks he is holding out because he is captivated by her. And he does incredibly embarrassing things in the courtroom. A very funny show, especially if you are familiar with “12 AM”.

On what planet (other than DNC headquarters) does anyone think DJ Trump is getting “special treatment” by the courts or the DOJ or any other legal entity? The only special treatment I see is to be especially hounded and harassed in ways never seen before in this country.

I will start by saying the ruling should have been for her, and her office to be taken off the case, and another DA takes the case if he wants it.

That said, the good news is, here’s where we are now:

1. Although she is still the prosecutor, Fani’s case has been set back weeks (months?).
2. She is still being investigated by the House (misusing grant money), Ga. Senate and local county commission for misusing her funds.
3. She looks preposterous trying a case for Trump’s “conflict of interest”
4. Based on the stuff discovered in the last few weeks, there is probably more to be found, which may shut down the case again.
5. Regardless of the outcome of a trial, the opportunity for an appeal is off the charts.

Why would people not be buying electric cars? Let us count the ways:

1. They tend to run about $10,000 more than a similar standard car.
2. They can spontaneously ignite. Once ignited, they are very difficult to put out.
3. Per no. 2, insurance companies are raising rates on EV’s. What would be a simple fender-bender in a gas car, can be a totaled car in an EV because a little damage to the battery pack can be very costly.
4. They may be fine for tooling around town, to the store, etc. but they are a problem for cross-country travel. Charging stations are few and far between.
5. Clearly, the more people who own them, the more no.4 is a problem. See recent incident with Jennifer Granholm demonstrating “how easy it is” to travel and recharge. (Her people went ahead and blocked out a charging station from users in line, so she could arrive and charge immediately).
6. Replacement batteries tend to cost about half the price of the car.
7. Some very extensive infrastructure changes (some say impossible) are needed to make them truly functional and practical.
8. Because of the batteries, EV’s are much heavier. Tires wear out typically in 13,000 miles, not typical 40,000 for ICEs.
9. Because of 8. above, pollution in the form of soot (the tire rubber particles) is greatly increased.
10. Unlike ICEs, EVs have a much lower range in cold weather, due among other things, the heater uses battery power. A heater in an ICE vehicle uses heat generated that would otherwise be discharged.

It’s a little more complicated than that. He was appointed, not elected to his present judgeship. He has been appointed a number of times by the governor. So on the surface, it may seem like the upcoming election will affect his ruling, I personally don’t think it will. The fact that he needs two weeks to prepare his ruling, seems to lean to him taking her out. If he was going to keep her, that would be a straight-forward ruling, require much less time to justify.

All that being said, I will not be surprised if he keeps her on the case. Trump’s legal team might not be too unhappy either, since she has been made the poster child for sleazy lawfare.

One of the defense attorneys was summing up all the conflicts of interest in the case. The last one was amazing. If the court (judge) believes that Nathan Wade or Terrence Bradley committed perjury, then their cases need to be investigated and brought before a jury. Who would be responsible to do this? Why, none other than the Fulton County District Attorney!

My take is, Judge Mcaffe will release Wade from the case. He will then come up with a convoluted legal-beagle reason to retain Fani. Regardless of what reason he says, the real reasons to keep her are:
1. His chances for re-election are much higher,
2. Her office and she can continue the case from where they are now.
3. Because, if she and her office were dismissed, it is unlikely the new prosecutor would even take up the case.

However, in spite of the above, even if she picks up the case, a lot of damage has been done. Weeks have been lost on her schedule and her credibility is shot. Also, if Roman or others find other examples of conflict of interest, it will have to be reviewed again, losing more time. I think her goal of tying Trump up during election season has mostly been negated.

I agree. I vote in Texas. I am more interested in voting Cornyn out of office than seeing him become speaker. Every 6 years, in radio ads, he becomes a conservative’s conservative. “I will protect your gun rights, I am pro-life, blah, blah, blah” Then, once re-elected, back to mega-RINOhood.

For those who are saying Biden admin can target these independent truckers for not delivering to NYC ... I don’t see how that happens. What they (truckers) have said is, they will refuse NYC loads and only deliver to other parts of the country.

So Biden is going to revoke CDL’s for every truck that delivered anywhere outside of NY?

Very good thoughtful analysis. Thanks.

However, besides “breaking a law”, there are also ethical violations involved here, also. I will make some assumptions, here:

1. Fani and her cohorts did not bring this case to “put Trump in prison”. Oh, I know they would love that, but the purpose of this case, which was coordinated by the WH, is mainly to harass Trump and his associates.
2. So she goes to her boyfriend and says, “look, we have the “golden goose of trial cases! We will have money pouring in for this case and I can hire you at an exorbitant rate, and we both cash in.” What a deal!

If this is the initiating scenario, and I believe it is, then the judge has to rule this illicit arrangement as a spectacular case of conflict of interest, and ironically, a RICO violation.

To me, this case is open/shut for removing Fani and Wade. That doesn’t mean it will happen but I see no reason not to remove them.

Consider:

1. She hired a special prosecutor (her boyfriend, no less) and paid him far more than others with more experience.
2. She personally benefitted from the higher payments, since he used his fees to buy her gifts, trips, et. al. This is called “money laundering”.
3. She is trying Trump for RICO violations, yet she herself has engaged in RICO, that is colluding with others to subvert funds to their own gain.
4. She had an employee whistleblower tell her (it’s on tape) that a $500,000 federal grant was being used in her office for unauthorized purchases. This employee was fired by Willis. Willis has used the specious argument that this is only being publicized because of Racism!, yet this employee was a black woman.
5. The judge in the Trump case, the US House, the Ga. House, the Ga. Senate and the Fulton County commissioner (auditor) have all demanded that she explain her actions regarding abuse of funds.

There is no valid case for keeping her ... if she is not thrown off the case, it just means the fix is in.

To me, one of the very funniest scenes was when 2 black dudes are jive talking to the stewardess and she doesn’t understand. Up jumps none other than June Cleaver (mother in Leave it to Beaver). She says “I speak jive!” and proceeds to translate. It’s a scene I don’t believe would be permitted in today’s “woke” films.

No. 2 is a bit of a double-dip because you did say they have 30% less range in cold weather. However, the point is, if you are trying to make it to a certain location, you might have to sacrifice heating the inside of the car to get there ... something no ICE driver has to worry about.

Add three more points to your list.

1. EV’s are much more expensive to insure, because relatively minor accidents can “total” them.

2. Since the engine does not generate heat via internal combustion, the heater in the car is powered by the batteries, further reducing range during cold weather.

3. EV school busses are so heavy, only the largest tow trucks can move them when they break down.

To me, minimizing Fani’s illicit and unethical actions the way they are doing here is ridiculous!

1. She hired a special prosecutor (her boyfriend, no less) and paid him far more than others with more experience.
2. She personally benefitted from the higher payments, since he used his fees to buy her gifts, trips, et. al. This is called “money laundering”.
3. She is trying Trump for RICO violations, yet she herself has engaged in RICO, that is colluding with others to subvert funds to their own gain.
4. She had an employee whistleblower tell her (it’s on tape) that a $500,000 federal grant was being used in her office for unauthorized purchases. This employee was fired by Willis. Willis has used the specious argument that this is only being publicized because of Racism!, yet this employee was a black woman.
5. The judge in the Trump case, the US House, the Ga. House, the Ga. Senate and the Fulton County commissioner (auditor) have all demanded that she explain her actions regarding abuse of funds.

Yet somehow, reading this article, it implies these unethical and criminal violations are “no big deal”.

Even knowing that Black Female Democrats get special treatment, it is difficult to see how fani avoids removal from the Trump case and disbarment. Now she has the county commissioner and the judge in her case and the judge in Wade’s divorce case all demanding she give answers to the charges. And its hard for her to deny anything when Wade’s wife has receipts for airplane tickets with her name on them, bought by him.