This is just a very good lawsuit.
On Wednesday, the Trump 2020 campaign filed a libel lawsuit against the New York Times, whining that an opinion piece about Russia and Donald Trump being BFFs wasn't very nice to the Trump campaign.
And yes, it's just as dumb as it sounds.
Donald Trump and his buddy, lawyer Charles Harder, are big fans of using bullshit lawsuits like this to intimidate journalists and use as press releases. They believe they are entitled to abuse the legal system by suing over news they don't like and using their money to silence people who disagree with them. Lawsuits like this one, styled Donald Trump for President v. New York Times, are no more than attempts to use American courts to frighten dissenters into silence.
The op-ed in question, titled "The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo," was written by Max Frankel, former Times executive editor, in March of last year. The first paragraph of the piece sets the tone:
Collusion — or a lack of it — turns out to have been the rhetorical trap that ensnared President Trump's pursuers. There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin's oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration's burdensome economic sanctions. The Trumpites knew about the quid and held out the prospect of the quo.
I mean ... seems pretty accurate thus far.
Isn't SCOTUS season just the best?
Oh goodie, the Roberts Court is doing things again.
Tuesday, in an absolutely horrific opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that the parents of a Mexican child shot and killed by a Border Patrol agent could not sue over his death.
Because why shouldn't we let federal law enforcement murder children with impunity?
Everything about this, from what happened to what SCOTUS has to say about it, is awful.
The opinion is exactly what it sounds like. Using justifications of vague concepts like "national security" and "border protection," Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion heartlessly describes the fatal shooting and blithely brushes off arguments that will likely affect people's rights for decades to come.
My face basically looked like this the entire time I read it:
Yup, goatee and all.
Go to jail, asshole!
What did Judge Amy Berman Jackson ever do to deserve Roger Stone and his endless antics? After dropping Stone's motion for judicial recusal in the courthouse dumpster where it belongs, Her Honor was subjected to a four-hour hearing on his motion for a new trial Because of Mean Black Lady Juror. It was RIDICULOUS.
What is not ridiculous, though, and not even a little bit funny, is Trump's brazen attacks on the jury foreperson and Judge Jackson during this trial. It is frankly terrifying that the president of the United States is putting a target on the back of a private citizen who did her civic duty as an independent jurist.
You will be shocked, shocked to find that he was sending these tweets during the hearing yesterday. And also that Bill Barr failed to resign in protest.
It's not a final ruling, but the Supreme Court has lifted yet another stay letting yet another fascist Trump immigration policy go into effect. USA! USA! USA!
It's a day that ends in "y," so the Trump regime is screwing over immigrants again.
As of Monday, US immigration officers around the world will be using a person's wealth to determine whether they should be granted a visa or green card.
This was yet another fun indication from the Supreme Court that it has no problems with the racist-in-chief's penchant for fascism and destroying the lives of would-be immigrants.
Did Mike Flynn's Pal Barbara Ledeen Get A Prosecutor Fired For Failing To LOCK HER UP Trump's Enemies List?
Sure looks like it!
Let's talk about Senate Judiciary Committee staffer Barbara Ledeen and her unrelenting assault on the rule of law in this country. Axios reported yesterday that Ledeen is part of Ginni Thomas's coven trying to turn the federal government into a year-round CPAC convention. It also claims the conservative activist personally authored a hit-piece on former US Attorney for DC urging the president to fire her for failing to launch un-predicated, political prosecutions of Trump's enemies. And Ledeen did it all from her perch as a congressional staffer, paid by American taxpayers, and given access to classified US intel materials. Neat, huh?
When Barbara Ledeen, an ardent anti-feminism activist, met Michael Ledeen, a warmongering neo-con from way back when that term actually meant something, it was love at first sight. Probably. The couple are longtime allies of former NSA Michael Flynn, and the two men actually wrote a book together in 2016 on the "war" with "radical Islam." As confirmed in the Mueller Report, Barbara Ledeen and Flynn wandered into the Dark Web in 2016 to see if they could get their hands on Hillary Clinton's emails, a field trip underwritten by mercenary merchant Erik Prince. Yep, her Twitter TL is just exactly as batshit as you think it is.
My kingdom for a Metamucil!
Didn't Mama Trump ever tell little Donny not to push too hard? Are there no prunes in DC? Or is that the real reason Hope Hicks has been summoned back to Washington? Because if someone doesn't convince the old man to eat a plant, our national security is at grave risk from the extended morning tweet sessions as he, uh, strains at stool?
Even by the debased standards of Trump's (allegedly) obstructed colon, this morning's poop tweets were completely off the rails. At 8 a.m., he attacked the judge in Roger Stone's case by name again, quoting "Fox Judge" Andrew Napolitano's call for a new trial because the foreperson is a BIASSSSSS Democrat.
Judge Jackson now has a request for a new trial based on the unambiguous & self outed bias of the foreperson of the jury, whose also a lawyer, by the way. 'Madam foreperson, your a lawyer, you have a duty, an affirmative obligation, to reveal to us when we selected you the existence of these tweets in which you were so harshly negative about the President & the people who support him. Don't you think we wanted to know that before we put you on this jury.' Pretty obvious he should (get a new trial). I think almost any judge in the Country would order a new trial, I'm not so sure about Judge Jackson, I don't know." @Judgenap (Andrew Napolitano) @foxandfriends
Guess Trump forgave Judge Nap for being a closet Democrat who supported impeachment. Anyway, no, fuck off, the foreperson has no "affirmative obligation" to disclose her public social media posts. Stone's lawyers had an affirmative obligation to craft a jury questionnaire and ask questions during voir dire that would reveal potential bias against their client. If they couldn't be bothered, well, that's on them, not her. They had a chance to strike her, either peremptorily or for cause, and they didn't.
Collins and Murkowski to raise eyebrow alert levels to 'red.'
Did we not just get done impeaching the motherfucker? Yes, we did, and impeachment is forever. But now that lunatic is out there on Twitter trying to extort the state of New York, demanding personal favors in exchange for federal government action. It's quid pro quo all over again, only this time you don't have to spend ten minutes READING THE TDJ@4QRPPPPPPPP5T, thanks to Twitter's 280-character limit.
He just ... he just tweeted it out. In preparation for a meeting with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo about suspending the state's residents from the Trusted Traveler Programs, which allow speedy entry at most highly-traveled northern border points, Donald Trump just demanded that the state stop suing him.
Don't worry, we haven't forgotten about the other DOJ news.
Welp, Donald Trump and Bill Barr are going after immigrants and the state and local governments that try to help them again.
In a trio of lawsuits filed Monday, the Department of Justice went after New Jersey, California, and King County, Washington, for laws and policies that seek to protect immigrants from the Nazis at the Department of Homeland Security.
Barr bragged about his xenophobic new lawsuits in remarks to the National Sheriffs' Association, making references to "criminal aliens" and claiming detaining immigrant families is "a vital part of how we keep our country safe."
All of them, Katie?
Roger Stone has already been convicted of multiple felonies. Now, it's time for the court to figure out how long he's going away for.
And really, it couldn't happen to a better person.
In November, Trump buddy Roger Stone was convicted of obstructing a congressional investigation, making numerous false statements to Congress, and witness tampering, all related to the congressional investigation of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia to defraud the American people out of a free and fair election. On Monday, federal prosecutors asked Judge Amy Berman Jackson to sentence Stone to seven to nine years in prison, arguing a sentence of seven to nine years would "accurately reflect the seriousness of his crimes and promote respect for the law."
As the US Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia so succinctly summarized it,
Roger Stone obstructed Congress's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, lied under oath, and tampered with a witness. And when his crimes were revealed by the indictment in this case, he displayed contempt for this Court and the rule of law.
As a wise woman once said (it was me!) GO SUE SOMEONE ELSE.
Larry Klayman, he's this lawyer. As he explains in his lawsuit against me, your editrix, personally, he is a very famous man, a public figure even, and I, your editrix, have committed defamation most foul by saying he seemed, based on (not his first) bar disciplinary proceedings, not to be a very good lawyer. He also seemed, based on his saying Obama administration employees were Barack's "white slaves," and based on his suing Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Louis Farrakhan, and Black Lives Matter, for "starting a race war," to be some flavor of white supremacist. He also seemed, based on those disciplinary proceedings, to have sexually harassed a woman. (I said "harassed," but Larry Klayman, in his lawsuit against me, added [sexually] before harassed in the excerpt from my story, because he is so "honest.")
Also, I let Jamie laugh at him some. And she DID say "sexually" harassed, which I wouldn't have said because it was romantic harassment (and definitely stalking), but she's the First Amendment attorney, not me, so I let it ride. Shall we read some lawsuit, like I read all 185 pages including the footnotes of his HARROWING DC bar disciplinary report, together?
All's well that ends well!
For years, the Ramapough Lenape Nation Tribe, the Township of Mahwah, New Jersey, and a homeowner's association called the Hunt and Polo Club (yes, that's its real name) have been at odds over the Ramapough's right to use their own land.
The land in question is the Ramapough's ancestral land, which they have been on since well before the United States existed. The Ramapough people are descendants of the Munsee people of Lenapehoking, which includes parts of what's now New York and New Jersey. Now, the Ramapough are clustered mostly in Mahwah, New Jersey, Ringwood, New Jersey, and Hillburn, New York.
They are one of the only tribes that has been able to remain on their ancestral land through the systemic displacement of indigenous people by the US government. So, as you would guess, a bunch of white people tried to screw them out of it.
That's some catch, that Catch-22.
Donald Trump's legal strategy of throw it all up against the wall and see what sticks has hit a bit of a snag. Turns out, people actually notice when you take one position with the courts and a totally opposite one in nationally televised impeachment hearings. Go know!
To wit, Trump's crack legal team has asserted for months that the court has no right to intercede in a dispute between the House and the president. But now they're arguing that the House impeachment efforts is UNLEGAL and no further witnesses can be called because mean Adam Schiff with his treason paraphrases failed to sue to enforce subpoenas on witnesses the White House barred from testifying.
And that goes double for anyone who might have a book coming out that contains a firsthand account of Trump withholding aid to Ukraine until their government agreed to announce a bullshit investigation of Joe Biden and his son!
Don't worry, they'll find a reason madrassas aren't eligible.
Once again, everything is fucked.
In a truly insane oral argument last week, a majority of Supreme Court justices seemed ready to destroy public education and force states to fund private religious schools.
The case is Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue and the battle is over whether it's constitutional for states to refuse to fund private religious schools. And our rightwing Supreme Court, with five justices who went to Catholic schools at some point in their lives, seemed ready to absolutely obliterate the wall that separates church and state.
On the steps of the Supreme Court, petitioner Karen Espinoza made it clear that was her goal, saying:
We are a Christian family and I want those values taught at school. Our morals as a society come from the Bible.
So that's great.
Yeah, seems like the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 is pretty on-point!
A prosecutor suing her own police force for perpetuating a racist conspiracy is not something you see every day. But that's what Kimberly Gardner, the chief prosecutor for St. Louis, Missouri, is doing.
Kimberly Gardner is the first African American circuit attorney in the history of St. Louis. She was elected in the wake of the shooting of Michael Brown in nearby Ferguson. Gardner won her election after running on a platform of rebuilding trust between law enforcement and St. Louis's black community.
Since taking office in 2017, Gardner has sought to reform both her office and the practices of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. And the city's white establishment has fought it, kicking and screaming at every turn, even going as far as to appoint a special prosecutor to criminally investigate her.
Now, Gardner is suing the City of St. Louis, the St. Louis Police Officers Association labor union, a special prosecutor appointed to investigate her office, and others for violating her civil and constitutional rights through a "racially motivated conspiracy to deny the civil rights of racial minorities."
The suit argues that the local officials targeting her have violated the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution and makes explosive allegations, like, "On information and belief and based on recent media reports, there are white supremacists on the St. Louis police force."
As the complaint notes,
The stakes are high. This case cries out for federal enforcement.
Look who's been doing hinky shit in Venezuela, ALLEGEDLY!
"Lev Parnas has no right to be talking about that meeting," Rudy Giuliani told Reuters yesterday. "It was a confidential meeting -- if it did happen." You don't even need the back story to know that this is comically, ridiculously not how law goes. If Rudy flapped his yap about confidential client matters to his chucklefuck buddy Lev, then Lev was under absolutely no legal obligation to keep quiet about it. Clearly, the person who breached his obligation of confidentiality is Rudy himself!
If you look up SLAPP lawsuit in the dictionary, you'll find this brief.
Has Tulsi Gabbard been sniffing Denin Nunes's cowpies? Because her defamation lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS is a load of hot bullshit. As is the one she filed against Google in July demanding $50 million for "send[ing] communications from Tulsi into people's Spam folders at a disproportionately high rate." And while it is the policy of this particular writer never to slag any Democratic candidate during the primary, for Tulsi I will make an exception.
Just look at this garbage.
Tulsi Gabbard is running for President of the United States, a position Clinton has long coveted, but has not been able to attain. In October 2019—whether out of personal animus, political enmity, or fear of real change within a political party Clinton and her allies have long dominated—Clinton lied about her perceived rival Tulsi Gabbard. She did so publicly, unambiguously, and with obvious malicious intent. Tulsi has been harmed by Clinton's lies—and American democracy has suffered as well.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but what the fuck is she talking about? Gabbard repeatedly refers to Clinton as her "political and personal rival," despite the fact that Clinton isn't running for office. Is Tulsi putting the moves on Bill Clinton? Because, Ma'am, this ain't an Arby's, it's a federal tort claim, and a shit one at that.
©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc