Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

đŸŽ¶ Those boots were made for mockin’ đŸŽ”

This year has been the longest three days of putin’s life.

Dumb motherfuckers cannot understand a consequence that most 4 year olds have fully sorted out.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

Giving in to doom is how authoritarians win.

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it is not glory.

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

We know you aren’t a Democrat but since you seem confused let me help you.

There are a lot more evil idiots than evil geniuses.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

New McCarthy, same old McCarthyism.

It may be funny to you motherfucker, but it’s not funny to me.

It’s a good piece. click on over. but then come back!!

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

Jesus watching the most hateful people claiming to be his followers

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

Boeing: repeatedly making the case for high speed rail.

Marge, god is saying you’re stupid.

Jack be nimble, jack be quick, hurry up and indict this prick.

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

You cannot love your country only when you win.

You are here: Home / Open Threads / Late Night Open Thread: Well This Is An Interesting Turn

Late Night Open Thread: Well This Is An Interesting Turn

by | 43 Comments

This post is in: ,

I was just reminded that I have to be somewhere at the butt-crack of dawn tomorrow and I’m grumpy about it, but only because a miscommunication left me scrambling tonight. No one’s fault, but I have to figure out how to get all the animals taken care of and still get out of the house by 6:30. I should be in bed, but I can’t stop reading about this.

 

 

Sorry for the politico links…

Okay, gonna continue on with my evening and savor the brief moment of “careful what you wish for” for the orange one’s team.

Open thead

Reader Interactions

43Comments

  6. 6.

    Cameron

    I believe Judge Cannon reserved the right to yank Judge Dearie from the Special Master gig.  If that’s correct, he’s gone by Friday.

  7. 7.

    sanjeevs

    @Cameron: Yeah, Judge Trumpy changed the boilerplate appointment language for Special Masters to reserve the right to fire Dearie if Trump is displeased.

    18. The Court reserves the right to remove the Special Master if the Court finds that the parties are not expeditiously completing this work. [my emphasis]

    But in her order, Cannon replaced the boilerplate about removing the Special Master if things are not moving along with language that gives her authority to remove him unbound by any specific reason.

    17. The Special Master shall be discharged or replaced only upon order of this Court. The Court reserves the right to remove the Special Master.

    Aileen Cannon’s Special Master Is Designed to Preempt Decisions Reserved for a Jury – emptywheel

  8. 8.

    West of the Rockies

    Can Cannon be impeached?  I don’t see how a judge so manifestly corrupt faces zero consequences.

  9. 9.

    Edmund Dantes

    Tuesday is a busy day for Trump’s lawyers. Their reply to the DOJ in the 11th appeal is due around noon I think. And they are supposed to be in front of Dearie at 2 PM discussing logistics and plans for his review.

  11. 11.

    Citizen Alan

    And to think, Loose Cannon is only one judge. A fucking third of the Federal Judiciary is now Trump appointments! We will never be rid of these assholes! Wow, thank God none of the Susan Sarandons out their every had to sacrifice the tiniest bit of their immaculate principles and let concerns about judicial appointments influence their voting decisions!

  12. 12.

    Cameron

    @West of the Rockies: Impeached?  I don’t see it.  More likely the next time there’s a Republican president, Thomas retires and she gets his seat on the SC.  Why not?  She’ll be as well-qualified for the SC then as she is now at her present job.

  15. 15.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    Somebody on MSNBC said they liked Dearie because he ruled against the FBI in something to do with Carter Page

  16. 16.

    Jinchi

    The Top Secret nuclear documents were all declassified, but then Trump made the declassification itself Top Secret, “Eyes Only”, and unfortunately Dearie doesn’t have the need to know.

    Makes perfect sense.

  18. 18.

    Ishiyama

    It would be irresponsible not to speculate about ex parte communications between Judge Twinkie and, say, Ginni Thomas – but if somebody from team Trump is feeding her the script for her rulings, and DOJ tracks it, that might produce favorable results. Just saying.

  19. 19.

    Kent

    @West of the Rockies:Can Cannon be impeached?  I don’t see how a judge so manifestly corrupt faces zero consequences.

    Of course she can.  Do you have the necessary 67 votes in the Senate (i.e. 17 Republican votes) to get the job done?

  22. 22.

    David 🌈 ☘The Establishment☘🌈 Koch

    they’re like the dog

    What do you have against dogs?

  24. 24.

    SFAW

    @sanjeevs:

    “Judge” Cannon to Judge Dearie: “Stop being so mean to my Lord and Master! You’re Fired!”

    (while the Mighty Mouse theme song plays in the background)

  25. 25.

    TriassicSands

     

     

     

    @West of the Rockies: Can Cannon be impeached?

    What good would it do to impeach someone who will never be convicted and should never have been confirmed in the first place.

    I don’t see how a judge so manifestly corrupt faces zero consequences.

    Um, Clarence Thomas. He’s every bit as corrupt as any SCOTUS justice ever. We have no mechanism* for disciplining or removing judges who are corrupt partisan hacks. Just as there is no mechanism for disciplining or removing a president who is corrupt and a criminal. He didn’t do it singlehandedly,  but Gerald Ford helped make it impossible to hold presidents accountable.

    • Impeachment is not a viable mechanism when political parties won’t convict “their own.”
  26. 26.

    ColoradoGuy

    We’re certainly seeing all the constitutional defects all at once. The Electoral College appoints two terrible presidents against the will of the people, who in turn make lifetime appointment of partisan hacks to The Court of No Appeal. The hacks then systematically dismantle democracy, piece by piece, and start stripping rights from millions of people using made-up logic. And impeachment has completely failed, not once, but twice, with the most openly criminal President in American history. And the Senate is one of the most grossly undemocratic institutions in the developed world, with absurd customs like the filibuster.

    Although a Constitutional Convention seems like an obvious answer to an outsider, most politically aware people know it would lead to the destruction of the Republic.

  27. 27.

    Shalimar

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: It’s slightly more complicated than that.  Dearie issued 2 warrants to spy on Page that were later overturned because an FBI agent lied on the applications.  There were also 2 warrants against Page that Dearie signed that weren’t overturned.

    The idea that Dearie would turn against the entire FBI after a decade on the FISA court because one agent lied in one of Dearie’s thousands of federal cases is just bizarre wishcasting.

  28. 28.

    lowtechcyclist

    @ColoradoGuy: ​
     

    Although a Constitutional Convention seems like an obvious answer to an outsider, most politically aware people know it would lead to the destruction of the Republic.

    When they were in control of Congress, the GOP used to introduce politically motivated Constitutional amendments.

    We should be doing the same, only with amendments to reform our democracy. Like making the right to vote an affirmative right. Or giving the ERA another go. Sure, at first they wouldn’t get anywhere, but it would highlight the problem, and you’ve got to start somewhere.

    And while I agree that a Constitutional convention would be a shitshow, you’ve got to remember that anything passed by such a convention still has to be approved by the legislatures of 38 states before becoming part of the Constitution. All it does it bypass Congress. So for us, it’s no panacea, and it’s not the nuclear weapon they seem to think it is.

  29. 29.

    mrmoshpotato

    Flee to Moscow to cry to your Daddy Vladdy, you traitorous orange Soviet shitpile mobster bitchass.

  30. 30.

    Baud

    @lowtechcyclist:

    We should be doing the same, only with amendments to reform our democracy. Like making the right to vote an affirmative right. Or giving the ERA another go. Sure, at first they wouldn’t get anywhere, but it would highlight the problem, and you’ve got to start somewhere.

     I agree.

    We should also make clear we’re doing it because the Supreme Court can’t be trusted.

  31. 31.

    SFAW

    @mrmoshpotato: ​
     
    Vladi has other things to worry about at the moment, and has probably also decided that he can’t get anything more of value from the Former Criminal-in-Chief.

  32. 32.

    New Deal democrat

    @lowtechcyclist: “And while I agree that a Constitutional convention would be a shitshow, you’ve got to remember that anything passed by such a convention still has to be approved by the legislatures of 38 states before becoming part of the Constitution.”

    I do not believe that is correct. The passage by 3/4’s of the States is only specified for Constitutional Amendments. Since a Convention is an entirely separate beast, they would get to make up their own rules for passage. The ultimate shitshow would be when certain States refuse to join any new Constitutional scheme. There is no “legal” means to resolve such an impasse.

  33. 33.

    New Deal democrat

    @lowtechcyclist: “you’ve got to remember that anything passed by such a convention still has to be approved by the legislatures of 38 states before becoming part of the Constitution.”

     

    I do not believe that is correct. The passage by 3/4’s of the States is only specified for Constitutional Amendments. Since a Convention is an entirely separate beast, they would get to make up their own rules for passage. The ultimate shitshow would be when certain States refuse to join any new Constitutional scheme. There is no “legal” means to resolve such an impasse.”

  34. 34.

    New Deal democrat

    If I recall correctly, any court at any time, on its own, may raise the issue of whether there is proper jurisdiction. So the 11th Circuit has it within its power to rule that Judge Cannon did not have jurisdiction to make any of her rulings, because the matter could only properly be raised under the Presidential Records Act.

    If Trump’s lawyers go running back to Cannon to complain about Dearie, and especially if she rebukes him (a judge with far more experience in these matters than she has), I can see the 11th Circuit taking notice of that and deciding it wants to address the underlying jurisdictional issue, even though the DoJ hasn’t raised it on this appeal.

  35. 35.

    Timill

    @New Deal democrat: No: still needs ratification:

    Article V

    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.

    https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/article-v.html

    So either Congress or a convention can propose amendments, but they have to be ratified by the States to take effect.

  36. 36.

    tokyocali (formerly tokyo ex-pat)

    Can someone explain what the Kyle Cheney tweet above means by “He suggests that Reinhart will have to preside over 4th amendment suit”? And why that is bad for Trump?

    @New Deal democrat: I wondered about this as well. It seems odd to me that this wet-behind-the-ears judge can decide arbitrarily about the work of a much more experienced and seasoned judge. If she does eject him, then what?

  38. 38.

    New Deal democrat

    @tokyocali (formerly tokyo ex-pat): “If she does eject him, then what?”

    Cannon gave herself complete authority over everything having to do with the search. At some point – like if she ejects Dearie – one suspects even GOP appellate court judges who have a shred of respect for Constitutional separation of powers would say “enough is enough.”

  41. 41.

    SFAW

    @pluky: ​

    Does lying to a Special Master in a case like this constitute perjury?

    According to the GQP Rules of Testimony: Not if you cross your fingers* when making the false statement(s).

    * Fingers need not be behind one’s back when false statement is made (whether oral or written). Also, the TFG Variant of the GQP RoT allows you to say, ex post facto, that, even if you didn’t cross them at the time, you intended to cross them, but never told anyone**, etc.

    ** Which probably means TFG’s “team” will ask for another Special Master to review the claims of intent, and to prevent the DoJ from investigating said claims.

  42. 42.

    Enhanced Voting Techniques

    This is all coming across like Trump is losing it seriously mentally now.  If Trump was going to black mail or sale the documents, he would have done it by now or just made copies, said “woops, well the exit from the White House was messy” and that would have been that.  This is coming some crazy old dude hording.

  43. 43.

    jimmiraybob

    First off, I like the official documents that show RE: “Trump v. United States.”  So true.

    Trump legal team:  “We plead the 5th …… but can’t actually plead the 5th.  Please don’t make us say it.”

Comments are closed.