Jump to content

Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)


Simon

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Old Man said:

It appears that, when Michael Cohen appeared on CNN immediately after his office and apartment were raided by the FBI, he may have waived his right to plead the 5th. 

On the other hand, Mike Aventi is saying quit delaying our lawsuit with your criminal case and plead the fifth so we can get this over with.

CES  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2018 at 11:21 AM, BoloOfEarth said:

 

Bwa-ha-ha!  (snort)  Man, that was really funny, but the Jokes thread is over that-a-way.  (giggle)  Doing their jobs...  what will they think of next...

Glad I could give you a laugh "Bolo". Of course some of them see themselves as "doing their jobs"; destroying public education, wrecking the EPA, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

judge slams Daca freeze and tells the dhs they are to start it again with the people already in it, and accept new applicants and run them through as fast as governmentally possible. The words malicious, stupid, incompetent, and others of such nature  filled out the sixty page ruling.

CES

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada's level-headed response to the Toronto attack shocks US.

Quote

Footage shot by a witness shows Minassian waving an object at a police officer, saying he has a gun, and asking the officer to kill him. The office calmly replies, “I don’t care. Get down.” He is taken down and handcuffed without any apparent injuries.

 

In the US, an unarmed innocent man will say "don't shoot" and get shot 20 times. Heck, officers have been fired for NOT doing that. In Canada, a guilty man can beg for suicide by cop and be peacefully arrested with all civil rights observed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sigh* So Trump phoned into Fox and Friends this morning.  He revealed some key information:

 

- He admitted to staying overnight in the Moscow pee tape hotel

- Thereby admitting that he lied to James Comey about it

- He declared that Michael Cohen does not represent him

- Thus wrecking most claims of client-attorney privilege

- Except in the Stormy Daniels case, where he admitted that Cohen did represent him

- Contradicting his own statements from two weeks ago

 

Seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2018 at 12:24 PM, Lord Liaden said:

It's pure distraction. Trying to shift the attention on to Hillary Clinton's shenanigans and away from Trump's. Create some sort of mock equivalency, as if her not being investigated means he shouldn't be investigated.

 

 

Hey, he's trying.

I'd say that Trump is VERY trying !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Old Man said:

*sigh* So Trump phoned into Fox and Friends this morning.  He revealed some key information:

 

- He admitted to staying overnight in the Moscow pee tape hotel

- Thereby admitting that he lied to James Comey about it

- He declared that Michael Cohen does not represent him

- Thus wrecking most claims of client-attorney privilege

- Except in the Stormy Daniels case, where he admitted that Cohen did represent him

- Contradicting his own statements from two weeks ago

 

Seriously.

Par for the course with Trump isn't it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IANAL, but AIUI, a "taint team" is a group of lawyers who specifically aren't directly involved in the particular investigation -- they go over collected evidence (like that taken from Cohen's office) to determine what relates to the investigation and what doesn't.  What does relate, can be given to Mueller and his staff, while what doesn't relate is presumably returned to the person from whom it was originally taken.

 

I think a "special master" is someone who works for the judge, who in this case would do the same work as the "taint team" - go over the stuff taken from Cohen's office and decide what parts can be given to Mueller et al. and what parts they don't get to see.

 

So in this particular case, the judge told Mueller that he couldn't use people from his office to go over what was taken from Cohen's office, but rather that the judge's own person would do that.  At least, I think that's the case.  I don't see a news item relating to what Sociotard said, so I could be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, a link. That I can do

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-prosecutors-quickly-cite-trumps-fox-and-friends-comments-to-help-make-their-case-on-cohen-documents/2018/04/26/709eeaee-4961-11e8-827e-190efaf1f1ee_story.html

 

Honestly, I'm still a little confused on the difference between the Special Master (Barbara S. Jones). If I follow correctly, it is that the Taint Team were government employees, and the Special Master is not. So the Taint Team was independent in that the only impact they would ever have would be to filter out privileged material, while the Special Master is even more independent, because they are not affiliated with the government.

 

Barbara Jones used to work for the government because she was a Judge, but she is retired.

 

If I read it correctly, I was wrong, and the original Taint Team will still be there, but the Special Master will help arbitrate what is and isn't tainted by privilege, with Cohen's Lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, BoloOfEarth said:

IANAL, but AIUI, a "taint team" is a group of lawyers who specifically aren't directly involved in the particular investigation -- they go over collected evidence (like that taken from Cohen's office) to determine what relates to the investigation and what doesn't.  What does relate, can be given to Mueller and his staff, while what doesn't relate is presumably returned to the person from whom it was originally taken.

 

I think a "special master" is someone who works for the judge, who in this case would do the same work as the "taint team" - go over the stuff taken from Cohen's office and decide what parts can be given to Mueller et al. and what parts they don't get to see.

 

So in this particular case, the judge told Mueller that he couldn't use people from his office to go over what was taken from Cohen's office, but rather that the judge's own person would do that.  At least, I think that's the case.  I don't see a news item relating to what Sociotard said, so I could be wrong.

90% of this case is not about what will go back to Mueller. It appears that Mikey C is a front man for a mobster laundering money through his taxi companies so his case is being tried by the Federal Prosecutor of New York. The warrant was issued from Mueller because our buddy may have violated the campaign finance laws, fronted for some Russians, and may have laundered some money through Trump, and then the evidence was handed over for someone else to prosecute.

 

But Cohen caught a break. At one point it looked like he would have to take the fifth in his civil trial when called to a stand which would have put a lot of this out in the open. Instead, he has 90 days to clear all this up before he has to go to LA and tell the court why he paid Stormy Daniels off.

 

On top of all that, Cohen says he has only had three clients in the last little bit: Trump, the Trump Organization, and Sean Hannity. So there's a lot of speculation who's baby mama he paid off for Hannity.

CES    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember that chart I posted earlier, correlating "killed by police" with "police killed"? I hit a problem.

 

I used "% households with at least one gun" for the Size parameter. The more I looked at it that way, though, the more Hawaii bugged me. It's a very liberal state with higher-than-average gun control, but it had a huge value for gun ownership. It had a higher percentage than Texas!

 

I looked back at the original site, and found a problem: the data came from a survey. Given the sample size, it is possible  that Hawaii just got respondents who weren't representative of the whole. Or, I'm told it is very common for people to lie on that question; they suspect the surveyor might be a thief casing homes for valuable guns to steal, or what have you.

 

It turns out, this is another spot where even in the 21st century, we just don't have good data. I tried thinking of something else that might be more officially recorded, like gun sales per year, or background checks for gun sales per state per year, but all these are by law kept out of any centralized public database.  It is tricky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...