Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The current Supreme Court is a dangerous, rogue court.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Weird. Rome has an American Pope and America has a Russian President.

Make the republican party small enough to drown in a bathtub.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

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

If America since Jan 2025 hasn’t broken your heart, you haven’t loved her enough.

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

Trump should be leading, not lying.

Those who are easily outraged are easily manipulated.

Optimism opens the door to great things.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

All hail the time of the bunny!

Come on, man.

There are some who say that there are too many strawmen arguments on this blog.

How stupid are these people?

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

The words do not have to be perfect.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

The republican speaker is a slippery little devil.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

Donald Trump found guilty as fuck – May 30, 2024!

You are here: Home / Open Threads / DC Indictment Activity + House Proceedings

DC Indictment Activity + House Proceedings

by | 93 Comments

This post is in: 

I was shocked yesterday to see Judge Chutkan set a date of Oct 16 for the hearing on Trump polluting the jury pool with threats and other things he should not be discussing.

So I am not surprised to see some new Trump Indictment news in the DC case.

I haven’t read the filing yet, but it appears that they are asking Judge Chutkan to impose some limits before the hearing on Oct 16.

Going with “there is not a non-peeing part of the pool”, it seems to me that every day the attacks go on, Trump is indeed polluting the jury pool.  So why give him all these weeks before acting on the motion?

Prosecutors reiterate need for gag order against Trump in 2020 election case.

(The Guardian)

Here’s a .pdf of the filing itself.

Special counsel prosecutors reiterated Friday to the federal judge overseeing the 2020 election interference prosecution against Donald Trump the need to impose a limited gag order against the former president to curtail his ability to attack them and potentially intimidate trial witnesses.

The sharply worded, 22-page filing, submitted ahead of a hearing scheduled for 16 October in federal district court in Washington, accused Trump of continuing to make prejudicial public statements even after they had first made the request three weeks ago.

“He demands special treatment, asserting that because he is a political candidate, he should have free rein to publicly intimidate witnesses and malign the court, citizens of this district, and prosecutors. But in this case, Donald J Trump is a criminal defendant like any other,” prosecutors wrote.

The prosecutors said the need for a limited gag order had only increased in urgency since their initial request, filed under seal to US district judge Tanya Chutkan on 5 September, as they cited several threatening statements from Trump that could impact their case and potential jurors.

In particular, the filing highlighted Trump’s posts on his Truth Social platform that attacked his former vice-president Mike Pence, saying without evidence that he had “made up stories about me” and had gone over to the “dark side” after he testified to prosecutors about Trump’s conduct.

The filing also raised Trump’s post about Gen Mark Milley, the retiring chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and another likely trial witness after he was cited in the indictment, that baselessly accused him of committing treason and suggested that he be executed.

“No other criminal defendant would be permitted to issue public statements insinuating that a known witness in his case should be executed,” the assistant special counsel Molly Gaston wrote. “This defendant should not be, either.”

Jack Smith’s team also raised the issue of the Glock incident:

The filing also raised the issue to the judge about how Trump appeared to be seeking special treatment as the frontrunner for the GOP nomination, saying he may have violated the terms of his release agreement when he visited a gun shop this week on a campaign swing through South Carolina.

The incident involved Trump’s campaign spokesperson posting a video of the former president handling a custom Glock pistol and suggesting he wanted to buy the gun, which would be a federal offense because he is under indictment – but aides quickly denied he had done so.

What actually happened with the gun is uncertain, not least because Trump would have to be a South Carolina resident to lawfully buy a firearm in that state. But prosecutors used the episode as an example of Trump benefiting from incendiary public statements and have others take responsibility.

“The defendant either purchased a gun in violation of the law and his conditions of release, or seeks to benefit from his supporters’ mistaken belief that he did so,” the filing said, adding that Trump surely knew the effect of his words in all of his public statements.

I don’t know if this is true, but someone on twitter said that, in Florida, if an indicted felon is even in a photo with a gun… that’s enough to charge them with being in possession of a firearm.  I don’t even recall where Trump was when pulled the stunt with the Glock with his face on the handle, but it would be interesting to know the laws in that jurisdiction.

I have it on good authority that i would be irresponsible not to speculate!

Open thread.

Update: Meanwhile, in the same timeline on Earth-1, we have Trump promising that he will order federal officers to shoot shoplifters on sight – received with cheers by the audience filled with MAGA.

Update 2: To include the house proceedings.  Check out C-SPAN for Hakeem’s speech that finished a few minutes ago. h/t Another Scott.  I chose start from the beginning, and then moved the slider to mourned 1:45 when he started speaking.

 

Reader Interactions

93Comments

  4. 4.

    OzarkHillbilly

    Shhhh…. Nobody tell him that federal officers don’t work store security.​

    eta: notice he doesn’t say that about people who try to steal elections.

  6. 6.

    NotMax

    Open thread? Weekend watch.

    Long form NBC documentary from 1965, The Decision to Drop the Bomb. So relatively soon after WW2, more even-handed than one might expect. The opportunity to see and hear, in their own words, so many people who were present at the inception of the atomic era is enlightening. As is the present day afterword by historian Michael Beschloss.

    Did not know or had forgotten that at the Potsdam conference in July of 1945, just as the first atomic bomb test was taking place, Stalin had already informed Truman of the Soviet Union’s intention to enter the war in the Pacific on August 8.

  8. 8.

    WaterGirl

    @Suzanne: I confess to having a similar thought that i nearly put in the post.  The details were different, though, because I was thinking that at least 75% of all shoplifters are MAGA.

  12. 12.

    Boris Rasputin (the evil twin)

    @Urza: The idea of Trump handling any form of firearm is scary. He’d never understand basic gun safety. The best place to stand would be in another state if he went to a range.

  14. 14.

    eversor

    I’m not sure if a photo is enough to do it but purchasing or owning a gun as a felon or an indicted one is a huge no no in most places.  What I don’t see included in the quote though are four key factors in all of this.

    The first and most glaring is that this is the same shop that sold a gun to a right wing mass shooter.  The second is that they traffic in right wing crap like selling Boogaloo clothing and other kit.  The third is that the shop sells lower recievers for AR-15 weapons (for non gun people this is the part that is regulated and often gets onto the black market to make gray market guns).  The fourth is that the gun was a Donald Trump edition GLOCK.  GLOCK being the favored brand of a lot of people but especially right wingers.  They also do not come with a safety.  They have a trigger dingus which means the safety is a trigger in front of the trigger and you pull both at once.  Thus non trained people are famous for shooting themselves or other shit at random.

    It’s all just very crazy.

  15. 15.

    WaterGirl

    @Urza:

    A person who is on probation as a felony first offender or has been convicted of a felony in Georgia, or anywhere else in the United States is prohibited from receiving, possessing, or transporting any firearm. O.C.G.A. § 16-11-131(b).

    I guess it depends on what the definition of IS is.  Wasn’t that the Bill Clinton phrase?

    Appears to depend on the definition of “possessing” and “receiving”.

    edit:

    South Carolina:

    Code is amended by adding: Section 16-23-545. (A) It is unlawful for a person convicted of a felony to possess a firearm in this State. (B) A person who violates this section is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction of a first offense must be imprisoned not more than five years.

  16. 16.

    Suzanne

    @S Cerevisiae: Dude, the bloodlust is seriously alarming. My neighborhood has had some ongoing incidents in which teenagers are caught on Ring cameras trying doors on people’s cars parked on the street to see if they’re unlocked, and then stealing small items…. change, sunglasses, etc. I will routinely see neighbors on my page openly calling for people to shoot these kids. Settle the fuck down, people!

  18. 18.

    wjca

    @Boris Rasputin (the evil twin): The idea of Trump handling any form of firearm is scary. He’d never understand basic gun safety. The best place to stand would be in another state if he went to a range.

    He probably has no clue how to load a gun.  After all, he’s got peole for that.  Which people, for their own safety, would be well advised to load only blanks.  Although by this point anyone bright enough to think of that has probably found new employment elsewhere.

    I can also picture the Secret Service guys, however dedicated MAGAts they may be, freaking out about the whole deal.

  29. 29.

    hotshoe

    @Dorothy A. Winsor: ​
     
    I understand this is the 45-day Continuing Resolution.

    It’s a bit of limbo but clearly better than millions of Americans being out of work tomorrow with a shutdown.

    So now, Dems and any sane Rs in the House still have to work out the real budget.
    And that’s 45 days to restore funding for Ukraine.

    Folks on Hakeem Jeffries twitter are already telling him to get the U funding back up.

  31. 31.

    Baud

    @hotshoe:

    Now that they’ve caved, they’ll keep caving. Otherwise the shutdown happens over the holidays, and after that, in the election year.

  32. 32.

    planetjanet

    Did I just smell the Hastert Rule go up in flames?  Only 91 votes from Republicans on a bill on the Republican-controlled House floor.

  33. 33.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Baud:

    The Dems must figure they can secure that separately.

    The Dems and the majority of Rs. I believe a procural vote on Ukraine aid last week got 300 votes, but then got lost when Marge tugged on Kevin’s strings.

    I’m wondering if we won’t see, at long last, the use of the fabled discharge petitition. I just tried to read up on the rules on Wiki and my eyes glazed over, but I think if they’re going to try that, they have to start more or less immediately

  34. 34.

    japa21

    Okay, so either McCarthy decided to stand up to the nuts (which is apparently 50% of his caucus) or somebody got to him with something else.  Has Gaetz already put in a motion to vacate?

  35. 35.

    Baud

    @hotshoe:

    Folks on Hakeem Jeffries twitter are already telling him to get the U funding back up.

     

    Jeez. This is why the Republicans stay strong.

  42. 42.

    Baud

    I have mixed feelings about this.

    Merriam-Webster adds word first used on ‘The Simpsons’ to dictionary

    It’s a perfectly cromulent word, but I liked that it was unofficial.

  43. 43.

    japa21

    @Baud: ​
    I was listening to some Dem rep earlier today who was asked about the Ukraine funding that was in the Senate package. She explained that it wasn’t even money specifically for Ukraine, but rather to replenish our inventories to cover what has been sent.

     

    ETA: I may have misheard, but it actually makes sense.

    And I always thought cromulent was a perfectly good word.

  45. 45.

    Redshift

    @Baud:

    The Dems must figure they can secure that separately. This is just the CR, right?

    Right, the vote on Ukraine funding was associated with the defense appropriations bill (which it was separated from.) So as I understand it, it’s technically already passed a floor vote the House. (I don’t know if it’s somehow dependent on main the Defense appropriations bill, which is full of wingnut bullshit and definitely won’t pass the Senate, but I don’t think so.)

    It’s not in the CR because a “clean” CR only continues everything at the same level, so not having it there isn’t a loss for the Dems.

    Anyway, that’s my understanding. I’m guessing there’s some reason they won’t do it, but it would be hilarious if the Senate brought up the separate Ukraine funding bill for a vote, and was the only appropriations bill that passed because the Putin caucus demanded it be removed.

  47. 47.

    Redshift

    @Baud:

    Why is anyone bugging Jefferies about Ukraine funding? He doesn’t have any control over the House.

    Because they don’t understand the difference between an appropriations bill and a CR.

  48. 48.

    Tony G

    @NotMax: Interesting.  Apparently there’s a school of thought among historians that it was the Soviet Army overrunning the Japanese Army in China in less than 12 days — rather than the atomic bombs per se — that convinced the Japanese to surrender.  That seems plausible, because the Japanese government  had already shown itself to be indifferent to Japanese civilian casualties.  That would mean that the Soviet Union played a major role in the Asian theater of the war, in addition to playing the leading role in the defeat of Nazi Germany.  When I was a nerdy kid reading about the war in the sixties, the Soviet Union was usually not even mentioned (for obvious Cold War reasons).

  49. 49.

    hotshoe

    @Baud: ​
     

    I couldn’t read anyone else’s mind even if it wasn’t twittering, so how would I know — but my sense is: this is reassuring folks on “our side” that we haven’t sacrificed/won’t sacrifice Ukraine aid just to keep government open for short term.

    And now that Kevin has been proven to need Dems to keep his side of the House from completely self-destructing, Hakeem Jeffries does not have control but surely does have influence over what’s going to be in the actual budget they will be working on. We expect him to use his influence, as of course he expects, too.

    I think it’s good, on balance, for folks to remind Dem politicians at this moment that we expect them to keep pushing for Ukraine support — I’m a little bit sad that we can’t even take a week or two to simply celebrate the victory of keeping the fed gov’t open in the face of MAGAt insanity — but nah we don’t have many moments to spare in reality.

    So, take one moment to celebrate today’s win of the battle of CR, then stand back up and continue the battle …

    That’s the message I see, that’s the message I hope our Dem representatives are hearing.

  53. 53.

    Redshift

    @hotshoe: I am all in favor of Dems online and in the real world pushing for Ukraine funding. But knowing that there are plenty of trolls and anti-Dem “leftists” who are always looking for an opportunity to claim the Democrats are failing their supporters makes me suspicious of the motivations of those doing it right now.

  54. 54.

    Gvg

     

    @Suzanne: we had someone come out of the nextdoor house and actually do it. Shoot a very young teen in the back, dead. He was arrested for murder or manslaughter and convicted of some degree.  This was just a few years ago. Neighborhood was shocked. A few tried to say we couldn’t allow the thefts to go on, but they were kind of ignored. I wonder if the guy got egged on or had the impression most people would support him?

    Anyway, nobody likes petty theft, but shooting is too extreme and not a solution. People can think both things.

  55. 55.

    hotshoe

    @Gin & Tonic: That’s Jeffries’ moment of celebration, and I think he’s completely entitled to it 🥳

    The last couple of hours were nail-biting tense, and Jeffries used his “magic moment” of allotted leadership speech just to give his side some time to look at the R proposal, to make sure it wasn’t boobytrapped before they voted on it.

    Done good!

  56. 56.

    Baud

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Republicans surrendered. The only why they could get outvoted was if they brought a clean CR to the floor.  The Dems couldn’t make them do that. They had to surrender.

  58. 58.

    Baud

    @Redshift:

    Even with the good faith folks, the idea that we can’t have a minute to celebrate a victory is tiring.  Especially when it comes to pushing for an issue that Dems have been solid on and all the problems come from the other side.

  59. 59.

    lowtechcyclist

    we have Trump promising that he will order federal officers to shoot shoplifters on sight

    He tried to shoplift a Presidential election. AFAIAC, he can give his Secret Service agents the order to shoot him anytime.

    ETA: Unsurprisingly, beaten to the punch by Ozark Hillbilly all the way back at #4.

  60. 60.

    AlaskaReader

    “New government spending bill dramatically raises prospect ‘Congress’ will reject Biden funding request for Ukraine.”
    Washington Post: True statement if by ‘Congress’ they mean ‘Republicans’.

  62. 62.

    Redshift

    @hotshoe: The fact that the separate Ukraine appropriations bill passed the House with a large majority has me feeling hopeful, too, so I’ll try not to let my suspicions dampen that. Twitter is not the real world.

  64. 64.

    lowtechcyclist

    @Redshift:

    Because they don’t understand the difference between an appropriations bill and a CR.

    OK, what’s the difference?  Doesn’t the CR appropriate money to continue government operations for the next 45 days?

    Serious question. I honestly don’t see the distinction. AFAICT, the CR is just a particular kind of appropriations bill.

  65. 65.

    bbleh

    So now the Senate can either pass the House bill, in which case a shutdown is averted (minus whatever time it takes to get all the paperwork over to Biden) OR it can pass its OWN bill, in which case reconciliation (of the 2 bills, not the 50-vote kind) will be necessary and a shutdown will occur in the meantime.

    No idea what the dynamics are — I’d bet half the Senate doesn’t even know — but I’d guess that Schumer et al will consider the House bill enough of a victory that they’ll just pass it without the Ukraine money — which btw is what Rand “Poodle-Do” Paul has been dragging his feet about — and then worry about it in the REAL bills to come

    @lowtechcyclist: I’m pretty sure that’s right.  If you read it, it’s full of appropriations language from all kinds of departments and programs.  IIRC there have even been “CRs” that cover entire fiscal years (or what’s left of them by the time they pass).  So yes, pretty sure it’s basically a stop-gap cover-everything appropriations bill that lets agencies keep spending money for a limited period of time while they put together the “real” department-by-department appropriations bills for the (rest of the) fiscal year.

  67. 67.

    Ruckus

    @Suzanne:

    This. While we may wish that our opposites are trash, shoplifting is not a political statement. It is a monetary statement most of all, and secondary it at least used to be an age related event. But with the advent of a sizable portion of the population not really having enough to live on, I’d bet that it is a bit less age specific these days.

  68. 68.

    lowtechcyclist

    @Redshift:

    The fact that the separate Ukraine appropriations bill passed the House with a large majority has me feeling hopeful, too, so I’ll try not to let my suspicions dampen that. Twitter is not the real world.

    I trust that Jeffries knows what he’s doing, and this CR got 209 Dem votes.  If they were worried about being unable to get Ukraine aid any other way, they’d have stood up for it here and now.  So Jeffries and the House Dems aren’t worried, so neither am I.

    Looking forward to work on Monday, got shit that needs to be done.

  69. 69.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    I don’t know the ins and outs of the funding, but I suspect something like this is what will happen wrt Ukraine funding. Even trump’s chief Senate ball-washer Lindsey Graham and looney-tunes Tom Cotton are on board with Ukraine funding.

    Armando @ArmandoNDK 1h

    On the Ukraine piece my understanding is Biden has enough appropriations to get through a few months and a new full year supplemental will be proposed shortly. I suspect it will be standalone so the Putinists can vote against it. If this is right I think yes on this is fine.

  70. 70.

    Frankensteinbeck

    @Suzanne:

    The context is crazier.  Trump isn’t talking about shoplifters like you’re thinking.  In the speech he says organized groups of 300 people are going into stores all at once and ‘cleaning them out’.  He says this is happening in Oakland and Los Angeles and will be happening everywhere soon unless he stops it.

    This is what Right Wingers think LA is like.  Same as they think Portland and Seattle were burned down.

    @japa21:

    either McCarthy decided to stand up to the nuts

    McCarthy, using profanity, already made public declarations daring Gaetz to try to oust him days ago.  I don’t think fear of them kicking him out of Speakership has been his motivation here.

  72. 72.

    Ruckus

    @lowtechcyclist:

    A CR is a continuing resolution. It is not a new bill/budget etc. It just continues a current bill, like funding. It has a start and a finish, a not indefinite or long timeframe. It was acceptable some time in the reasonable past so it is often likely to be approved. It gives the legislature time to move forward without, like in this instance, shutting off all funds so that the business of the government stops.

  73. 73.

    lowtechcyclist

    @Frankensteinbeck: ​
     

    The context is crazier. Trump isn’t talking about shoplifters like you’re thinking. In the speech he says organized groups of 300 people are going into stores all at once and ‘cleaning them out’. He says this is happening in Oakland and Los Angeles and will be happening everywhere soon unless he stops it.

    Sounds a lot like the attempted shoplifting of the 2020 election on 1/6/21.

  74. 74.

    hotshoe

    @Frankensteinbeck:

    The context is crazier. Trump isn’t talking about shoplifters like you’re thinking. In the speech he says organized groups of 300 people are going into stores all at once and ‘cleaning them out’. He says this is happening in Oakland and Los Angeles and will be happening everywhere soon unless he stops it.

    Which is all the more reason not to wet-dream about shooting them.

    If it really were a mob of hundreds of shoplifters, then you’d need thousands of bullets to shoot them all — so imagine the carnage among innocent civilians who just happened to be in the neighborhood of Walgreens when the gang runs out and the police start firing madly at them.

    It was a little less crazy when some “upstanding citizen” pictures a loner running out with a basket full of stolen cigarettes, and then the upstanding citizen pictures a steely-eyed shooter carefully taking aim …

    I mean, no one should fantasize about shooting people for theft in any case (do I really need to say that? yeah, probably do need to make that clear). But it’s completely demented to fantasize about inciting a small army’s worth of battle in your city streets!

    Dumpster is demented.

  75. 75.

    lowtechcyclist

    @Ruckus:

    A CR is a continuing resolution. It is not a new bill/budget etc. It just continues a current bill, like funding. It has a start and a finish, a not indefinite or long timeframe. It was acceptable some time in the reasonable past so it is often likely to be approved. It gives the legislature time to move forward without, like in this instance, shutting off all funds so that the business of the government stops.

    I’m familiar with all that. And I’m also aware that your standard appropriations bills that fund governmental operations fund those operations for a specific fiscal year, e.g. FY 2023 which began last October 1 and ends at midnight tonight.

    Absent this CR, the reason the government would have shut down tomorrow was that the appropriations previously passed didn’t cover past the end of FY23, i.e. didn’t cover past midnight tonight.  I’ll be working a regular day on Monday, rather than spending four hours engaging in “orderly shutdown activities,” because this CR appropriates the money to continue our operations for another 45 days at current spending levels.

    Hence it is an appropriations bill, even if it’s not your standard-issue appropriations bill that funds Cabinet departments X, Y, and Z for a full fiscal year.

  76. 76.

    BlueGuitarist

    @planetjanet:

    Did I just smell the Hastert Rule go up in flames? Only 91 votes from Republicans on a bill on the Republican-controlled House floor.

    No (not yet)

    Republicans 126 Yes, 91 No

    Democrats 209 Yes, 1 No

  80. 80.

    smith

    @BlueGuitarist: In a previous thread, someone pointed out that the thorn in Qevin’s side is not the Hastert Rule (the bill must get a majority of R votes), but the Boehner Rule (the bill must be passable with R votes alone).

  81. 81.

    Another Scott

    @Baud: Kinda looks that way, but things are moving fast.

    I heard a short interview with former Rep. Joe Walsh on the BBC news show on the radio this afternoon.  He said he sees no way to actually pass a budget through the House, and that there will be at least a couple of 45-day CRs.

    One thing I really didn’t like about the ”deal” earlier was that there will be automatic 1% cuts if there’s no budget by January 1, and 1% per month thereafter if there’s still no budget.  So the bombthrowers still have a way to do damage by throwing gravel in the gears.

    Of course, one could well-argue that that deal is null and void since the GQP blew it up earlier.

    We’ll see.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  82. 82.

    Another Scott

    The reality distortion field at RollCall.com seems very strong…

    House GOP leaders muscled through a 47-day government funding patch Saturday with broad bipartisan support, drawing critical backing from some Democrats who just hours earlier criticized the bill and how quickly GOP leaders were trying to push it through.

    The 335-91 vote sends the package to the Senate, […]

    (Emphasis added.)

    “Muscled through” ???

    “critical backing from some Democrats” ???

    Every Democrat voted for it except one. The vote was overwhelming – it wasn’t close. It didn’t need to be, and wasn’t, “muscled through”.

    Sheesh.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  91. 91.

    Jackie

    Alicia Menendez, daughter of Bob, and host of MSNBC’s American Voices, said she will not be commenting on Sen. Menendez’s indictment, but noted that MSNBC has been covering it aggressively, (her word) as they should.

Comments are closed.