Why not allow the congressional proceedings to proceed in the ordinary course? Why not allow the 2024 presidential campaign to proceed in its ordinary course?
Whose "ordinary course" has the right of way in this busy intersection?
A federal judge might decide. (Bragg is asking a federal judge to decide to give the Manhattan D.A. priority over the House Judiciary Committee.) But is that in the ordinary course of federal court jurisdiction?
पोस्ट्स
८० टिप्पण्या:
There is nothing ordinary at all about this case.
"Whose "ordinary course" has the right of way in this busy intersection?"
Well, "ordinary course" is for democrats like Bragg to do what they want regardless of how ethically devoid or criminal it is and for republicans to talk a big game and in the end issue sternly worded letters.
Sounds to me like the democrats currently have the right-of-way, and it will remain so until the republicans and the silent majority drop consequences in the megaton range.
Heck...what am I saying. even then they'd double-down.
See you in court, Rep. Jordan.
Fuck off, Jim Jordan. You shitposting, sex-assault enabling, unlicensed-lawyer, Trump-cocksucking, subpoena-ducking dickhead.
Of all of the things that the House Judiciary Committee could and should be doing, Jim Jordan is steering it into serving as a footsoldier for an indicted former president running another losing campaign.
There's no playing around anymore. Donald Trump has been getting his ass kicked in federal court for about 2 1/2 years. And now it's time to kick Jim Jordan's ass too.
Bring it, you ignorant TrumpCult fuckheads. We are going to fuck you up.
Are grand juries called out in the constitution, or are they just a political construct to harass defendants???
Why would a federal judge want to help a state attorney pursue a state cause of action --in a manner that would impede the business of the federal legislature? Bragg has yet to explain the federal crime which his indictment claims is the predicate for his styling this prosecution as a felony rather than a misdemeanor. And even if he ever does explain it, he has zero jurisdiction to pursue it.
What a goat-rodeo.
"Rather than allowing the criminal process to proceed in the ordinary course . . ."
"Ordinary," right. Progs really are shameless, aren't they?
So comments are dead?
"My intentions are pure and noble. Those guys are jackals and thieves."
Seems to be the ordinary course of thinking today.
If extremist Republicans like Gym Jordan can feel free to obstruct criminal investigations, any politician that is under indictment will be emboldened to use his sycophants in government to do the obstructing for him. How convenient.
I sure would like to see that pleading given the absurd indictment Bragg's office drafted.
Looks to me like Bragg wants a home team umpire to help him out.
If the Manhattan DA received federal money, the House should have the right to call Bragg in for questioning.
There's no conflict. Each can proceed at the same time.
"Bragg is asking a federal judge to decide to give the Manhattan D.A. priority over the House Judiciary Committee."
I can't get past the NYT paywall, but that seems unlikely. It sounds like Bragg is asking a federal judge to block the house judiciary committee from receiving testimony. Sure. Why not? Can he get a side of fries with that?
How did this shit sausage get into Law School, anyway? Oh, right.
AA: "But is that in the ordinary course of federal court jurisdiction?"
It is if you're hell-bent on sticking it to Trump.
Jordan is looking for evidence that Bragg is secretely a member of Trump's reelection team.
Congressional constitutional oversight authority is superior.
Whatever a judge says, Jordan should go right ahead.
He should dare the feds to arrest him...
After more than 7 years, over 31 trimesters, Democrats can no longer wield Congressional authority as a viable hammer to force people... persons to take a knee, so they have chosen Plan-'B'ragg as the day after remedy to trump President "burden".
Talk about a witch hunt. This is NEVER going to end, no matter who the Republicans nominate.
It would be very interesting to hear Bragg explain his pleading problem. Jordan would eat his lunch.
Its outrageous that Rep Jordan is acting like a Democrat!
Of course, Bragg will go to a leftwing Federal judge and get what he wants. blah, blah, blah will say the Lefty Judge "Bragg is right". Who knows where it will end up. If Bragg wins, it wouldn't be the first time, all the precedents are thrown out, or some Judicial "grand exception" is found to support Bragg, when if it was a Democrat committee it would be upheld.
It may be harder this time, since we just went through the J6 committee where the District judges let them do anything they wished, and sentenced a Trump supporter to jail for contempt & refusing to testify.
But the massive dishonesty has never stopped the Left. One rule for the D's, one rule for the R's. One rule for Antifa. Another rule for Trump supporters. Biden issues executive orders. No challenges or they stand. Trump's get tied up in court for years, or overturned. We look to SCOTUS for relief, but Roberts and probably Kavanaugh side with the D's.
A judicial clown show. Like always.
Which venue host which case?
Who gets pick ... Jordan or Bragg
There is no "ordinary course" here just more law-fare by the Soros crew. Rules for Radicals.
As usual, a Marxist DA thinks he's above the law.
The only "norms" that must be followed are those that lefties make up on the spot.
Lol "ordinary course."
It’s ironic that few, if any comments are posted.
whilst throttling can be understood, it ain’t right
if people are fans of 1st amendment.
All good, wish you well, but words gotta be free!
Is this when we say "if DA Bragg has nothing to hide, then he shouldn't have a problem talking to Congress?" or is the current thing "DA Bragg will have his chance to prove his innocence to Congress." The left changes their slogans so fast, like just a week ago it was "nobody is above the law", and this week it is "President Biden should ignore the law".
Of course, all of this can be summed up "I'm rubber, you're glue..." Isn't it great to have the grown-ups back in charge.
DA interrupted on his political stage a cuses interrupters of playing politics.
Heh.
I'm not a lawyer & have never played on on TV, but, for the life of me, I can't understand what topic there might be on the American scene that Congress cannot investigate. Now, I italicize "investigate" because, while I believe that while Congress may look into almost anything, there are lots of matters that they would be powerless to change no matter what they find (e.g. issues within the Executive branch that Congress can't touch because of separation of powers).
But, can the judicial branch of a state government declare itself beyond the purview of Congressional review? I can't see how. Perhaps a future ruling from a Federal court may enlighten me on this topic. I'd be very interested to read it.
No standing to block subpoena of former employee.
Congress should have the right to investigate state level election interference in a federal election. If Alvin Bragg hasn’t done anything wrong, why should he worry?
Congress should have the right to investigate state level election interference in a federal election. If Alvin Bragg hasn’t done anything wrong, why should he worry?
Isn’t Bragg bootstrapping the felony charges with a federal statute in an unprecedented fashion?
Isn’t the subpoena of a former prosecutor from Bragg’s office not involved in the case?
What’s the basis of Bragg’s jurisdictional or interference argument?
Sounds like a political question to me.
If this argument is worth making, then it's worth noting that in Texas Gov Abbot allowed the prosector, jury, and courts to complete their processes before beginning his own "pardon" process. A Donald Trump like executive might have confronted a court with executive pardon powers and a "don't waste your time" sort of threat.
Abbot, of course, gets no such benefit of the commentariat.
There is nothing ordinary or legitimate about this banana republic kangaroo court trial. Bragg is a fat buffoon doing the bidding of the masters of his plantation. He’ll probably be president one day.
i'm Pretty sure, that in the hierarchy of Goverments, it's:
City.....
State....
Federal..
and then, at the very Top... County
That's the way? isn't it?
The ordinary course these days is to resist responding to Congressional subpoenas until ordered by a federal court.
Gilbar: “i'm Pretty sure, that in the hierarchy of Goverments, it's: City..... State.... Federal.. and then, at the very Top... County”
Posse Comitatus
Does it matter what a judge says? Democrats will defy the order if it suits them, just like with mifepristone. As to Chuck and Inga, I wonder which is the trans version of the other. Hard to tell, since both are mindless inbred liars.
Chuck is drunk again.
MarcusB. THEOLDMAN
Chuck is drunk again.
Probably, but he is really upset that his "date" did not show up.
But, can the judicial branch of a state government declare itself beyond the purview of Congressional review?
=======
what happens if Bragg should invoke 10th Amendment and seek expertise from Federalist Society
what say you Young Hegelian to that dialectic?
No comment.
But, can the judicial branch of a state government declare itself beyond the purview of Congressional review?
=======
what happens if Bragg should invoke 10th Amendment and seek expertise from Federalist Society
what say you Young Hegelian to that dialectic?
In the words of Bart and Lisa Simpson: "I'm going to walk and swing my arms. If you happen to get hit then it's your fault."
All living politicians are tin-hat dictators.
What’s the basis of Bragg’s jurisdictional or interference argument?
It's all explained the Mueller report.
Bragg's argument would be a good one if he were the one subpoenaed. But he's not. He's trying to quash a subpoena to Pomerantz and the only argument he can make is that the committee does not have a legislative purpose since Congress has no power to control local prosecutions. The Committee's response is, “May it please the Court. Congress’s legislative purpose is to consider legislation requiring deferral of state and federal prosecutions of announced presidential candidates. Whether such legislation is constitutional or not would be decided if and when it is passed, by a court that has proper jurisdiction. This court today need not and should not decide whether that future legislation would be constitutional; it’s only task today is to decide whether Congress has a legislative purpose.” Given the very wide berth the courts give to Congress in conducting investigations, see, e.g., the Trump tax return case, my prediction is that Bragg will lose this case.
Joe Smith said...
"Whatever a judge says, Jordan should go right ahead.
He should dare the feds to arrest him...'
Go right ahead and what? Serve his subpoena? Don't think you understand what's going on here.
"But is that in the ordinary course of federal court jurisdiction?"
Branch #3 to tell Branch #1 how to do its job?
Isn't #3's range of action here limited here, via Marbury v. Madison (power to review after the fact), to telling #1 if it did its job but only after the fact?
According to the NYT, the only "ordinary course" that matters is the one where Trump winds up in leg irons....and you're a racist transphobe if you think otherwise.
And, Chuck? Y'all need serious therapy. Or go back on the meds.
Brags problem is he used federal funds in the investigation effort. That gives Congress oversight on how those funds were used.
Funny to read stuff like Left Bank Charles arguing that the way to show nobody is above the law is to resist responding to the law.
The House has authority to do what it's doing and the courts do not have the authority to question it. Bragg is asking a judge to violate the separation of powers.
Judiciable--that's the word I was looking for. This is a non-judiciable issue.
if you accept federal funds, then you get federal and Congressional oversight. End of subject.
Substantively, what is it that the Trumpkins think that Pomerantz can say that will help defend Trump?
In his book and subsequent interviews, Pomerantz made it clear that he thought Trump needed to be prosecuted, and that a prosecution would be meritorious.
In his own recent interviews, Cy Vance Jr. says that he was pressured by Trump's Justice Department to NOT advance the prosecution.
This has all the signs of becoming as successful a hearing for Jim Jordan as his fantastically inept "Weaponizing the Federal Government" hearings. Putting Mark Pomerantz and Cy Vance on the record, and hearing both of them detail further and additional crimes by Trump and his Administration.
Well, just a little. I had just closed with par-birdie-par, and was drinking Bud Lights.
Eric Columbus (Congressional lawyer) and Kyle Cheney (Politico reporter steeped in Trump investigations) on Twitter, speaking to the procedural issues:
https://twitter.com/EricColumbus/status/1645876047689416705
What exactly is the harm Bragg claims? If Congress conducts oversight, how does that interfere with a court case? It seems that Bragg has just revealed that his case is really an attempt to dominate the media for maximum negative impact on Trump.
"Blogger Inga said...
If extremist Republicans like Gym Jordan can feel free to obstruct criminal investigations, any politician that is under indictment will be emboldened to use his sycophants in government to do the obstructing for him. How convenient."
Our resident dullard got to use her favorite big word "sycophants." Plus do the Gym/Jim thing to show how clever she is.
It's a good day.
Chuck,
You need to go into the phone booth and change into your lonejustice uniform!
Mouse cartoon time now is here. Get used to it.
Lawfare is only allowed if Democrats do it.
Dick is like the Dylan Mulvaney of Republicans.
Dylan has a dick. So so Michigan republicans.
John Henry
Wow, Chuck is such a lovely fellow. It's great to have him around!
I believe it is an ecumenical matter...
Chuck would love our nation to go to hell under the corrupt rule of the lying Schitt-o-crats... and other lying liars who lie.
Chuck for Crook Biden Family!
I am pretty clueless and here I can't hide it anymore. How exactly is Jordan interfering with Bragg going forward? Bragg has DONE his "investigation" --and apparently has dug up enough "facts" to support an indictment. He's probably got a list of witnesses and affidavits and will build up his stash of "evidence" in the coming days (and months; and years). How does Jordan's calling of Pomerantz affect Bragg's freedom of maneuver and ability to dig up, and develop, pretty much whatever he wants?
Is Bragg trying to say that his (glacial) progress on all fronts is stymied by a different branch (legislative) discharging its (federal) responsibilities of oversight? Does he want a veto on every damn thing that happens in government?
All excellent questions regarding jurisdiction, separation of powers, and Supremacy Clause. Since we have no legal precedents for the Trump/Bragg/Jordan cage match, we can only hope that many more current and former Presidents, Vice Presidents, Senators, etc. will be aggressively pursued by prosecutors and indicted for eating ham sandwiches.
Eventually it will work its way to the USSCt, where the jurisdictional questions can be settled, and then the Justices who issue the wrong sort of Opinions can be criminally charged with having rich friends who serve them fine Spanish jamon sandwiches.
That's why I like Trump. It makes the emotion based people like Chuck the liar, inga and gadfly lose their shit.
There's no reason for it. It's all emotional. "Trumps' an asshole." Yeah. So?
Rusty said...
That's why I like Trump. It makes the emotion based people like Chuck the liar, inga and gadfly lose their shit.
There's no reason for it. It's all emotional. "Trumps' an asshole." Yeah. So?
That's how much we hate each other. I can say that the reason I like to see prosecutions of Trump is to drive you Trump fans over the edge. But in truth, I don't care about you so much. I want Trump taken off the national scene, legally. By criminal prosecutions that are so effective and so far beyond reproach that even you, or Sean Hannity, or Laurence Meade, will concede that they were legitimate convictions.
I prefer LLR-democratical Chuck's comments like the one at 3:15PM rather than his much more seriously disturbed, and possibly driven by alcohol, violent homosexual rage rape fantasies that he has felt compelled to share.
In addition to his now quite "out there" pushing of known pedophiles and pedophile adjacent individuals and organizations.
Here's to hoping that LLR-democratical Chuck can keep it on normal person side of the total deviant line.
exhelodrvr1: "Chuck, You need to go into the phone booth and change into your lonejustice uniform!"
Thread Winner.
The only "norms" that must be followed are those that lefties make up on the spot.
Ethical fluidity.
The FEC said the payments to Daniels are NOT campaign contributions. Bragg insists they were and this is the whole basis for the business record falsification charges. Bragg has no jurisdiction over a federal election (the law he cites is NY state law for NY elections). The payments were in 2017--how could they affect the 2016 election?
As to the lawsuit, Jordan isn't even calling Bragg as a witness. And I would think that indeed Congress can investigate state corruption or a political witch hunt of an announced presidential candidate.
"Fuck off, Jim Jordan. You shitposting, sex-assault enabling, unlicensed-lawyer, Trump-cocksucking, subpoena-ducking dickhead....Bring it, you ignorant TrumpCult fuckheads. We are going to fuck you up."
Now THAT is why I read this blog. Irrefutable logic. Soundly rooted in facts.
If Chuck has guns, he sounds like a prime candidate for Red Flagging.
Chuck said...
""Fuck off, Jim Jordan. You shitposting, sex-assault enabling, unlicensed-lawyer, Trump-cocksucking, subpoena-ducking dickhead....Bring it, you ignorant TrumpCult fuckheads. We are going to fuck you up."
Chuck, do you address the judge in court with that mouth?
In my head I heard this as Tom Cruise in a fat suit playing Les Grossman in Tropic Thunder.
The judge was not impressed by Bragg for not submitting all of the supporting documents in his filing.
https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:d58bb6e4-ea28-3b9b-a85e-8daa1ae02f5b
The judge was not impressed by Bragg for not submitting all of the supporting documents in his filing.
https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:d58bb6e4-ea28-3b9b-a85e-8daa1ae02f5b
LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck: "I want Trump taken off the national scene, legally."
Oh, dont worry. The Soviets and Castroites and Maoists et al were quite effective at creating the "legal" bases for removing from the scene and imprisoning their political opponents which also delighted, in some cases sexually as with Chuck, all their apparatchik minions....like Chuck.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा