Lectryk

Ah, the clown car that is modern American politics, with a candidate bragging about getting so much money from the Russians (with a B!) and other foreign sources that it will be difficult to launder into into his campaign (and more than he needs - that's how serious these backers are!) - all in the name if keeping Anerica from turning into a 'Communist-Socialist Sh*thole', even if it comes to using former communist-socialist military personnel to perform a hit. I'm leaning towards legitimate, because even the most out there comedians/writers don't think something this batsh*t would actually be believable.

Um, no. Not at all. Treason has a very defined meaning under the law. Expressing an opinion, no matter how misguided you may feel it is, or how much you disagree with, isn't treason. It may be argued to be a lot of things (misstated, misguided, incendiary, etc) but it is nowhere near treason.

Personally, I agree with Pariah's point. To yours though, the story doesn't say if the other accused seen before Judge Cooper have gone home early and it doesn't say what those who were released were actually charged with - they could have been charged with lesser offenses, in the aggregate. If they really did 'worse things' than Barnett, then I can see a plea bargain involving him providing evidence against these people in his future. I'd also want to know Federal guidelines for holding til trial - judges do have leeway. And in this case the word 'normally' used by his defense attorney indicates to me that the hold falls within discretion. It would be harsher language if his attorney felt his client was wrongfully being held. Archer - he was very lucky. It doesn't matter if the outburst is directed at the judge or not - simply being disruptive in a court setting can lead to contempt charges; in this case, that's just a cherry on the top kind of thing, but still...

Cruz and Graham, the dream team?

I think sentencing guidelines/mandatory minimums play a bigger part in Federal punishment than discretionary decisions about violent/non parameters. I'd be interested to see what your research turns up about the perennial reform efforts. This is from - https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R45074.html#_Ref503372497 (a very small clip out) for ref; the link has the full report. If you look further down the chart, you'll see that's it's very easy to draw a 20-life charge for what is considered by some to be a minor amount - it depends on what message the prosecutor wants to send with the charges brought, or the target of the operation, or.. etc. Politics.= Mandatory Minimums for Drug Crimes Table 1 below describes the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions for various drug and drug-related offenses.40 Table 1. Federal Drug Offenses: Mandatory Minimum Terms of Imprisonment Substance Minimum Maximum Trafficking 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)/960(b)(1) substances (e.g., 1 kilo or more of heroin) 10 years life if death or serious injury results 20 years life with prior drug felony conviction 20 years life with prior drug felony conviction if death or serious injury results, or with two or more drug felony convictions life life

Is this what you're looking for? https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_offenses.jsp

Also, I wonder what his track record has been with his other clients (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/21/us/politics/butch-bowers-donald-trump-impeachment.html). Anybody know if Trump can assert ineffectiveness of counsel in case of a conviction in the Senate?

I'd hope Bowers is planning to use the notoriety bump this will give his career, given Trump's history of non-payment/litigation around payment of his debts.

The people who were giving tours have a fig leaf - they were just showing constituents around, and 'I didn't know they would do what they did with the knowledge' (unless someone has been boneheaded enough to say something consistently enough to establish a pattern - and I don't think there's a modern day Patrick Henry in the lot) will cover a lot of issues for any juror wanting to to let them off of treason - plus, where will you find enough people to form an unbiased/tainted jury pool to begin with? At least felony murder has the advantage of a clear crime and lower burdens of proof and furtherance. Believe me, the last thing I want is to give 'The Movement' martyrs like Ruby Rudge, Waco, etc did, but these people have got to understand the U.S will go Liam Neeson on them (I WILL find you, I WILL .. etc) let them really feel what happens when they kick something so much bigger than they are.

Ah, excuse me, maybe I was projecting my need for accountability.

If it's any consolation - https://www.lawfareblog.com/felony-murder-and-storming-capitol Long article, but the section 'Felony Murder and the Deaths at the Capitol' is relevant, if you don't want to read the rest. the conclusion: 'In short, felony murder charges are definitely on the table for at least some of the people who stormed the Capitol. But it remains to be seen how broadly the rule can be applied to the rest.'

Former governor of Michigan, please. Those of us from Michigan on the list might be the only ones who care, but Snyder is out. As a side note, I don't think his policies would have gotten him targeted in a kidnapping plot (if he had reacted to Covid the way I expect he would have, given his other stances on public health v the economy in the past). With that article posted up-thread about misogyny, I wonder how much of that plot was motivated by 'Us guys have to save Michigan from the crazy woman' who happens to be a Democrat, how much was anti-Democrat in general, and how much was all government is bad.

Defend your assertion - I'd like to know how Jr was worse than Trump, in your view.

Tomato, tomahto; still huge ratings. Even if Twitter follows through and bans his account, you think the media won't report on whatever the Right-verse settles on as a platform for the rants he goes on? Fox/OAN/Whatever will most likely have an embed with whatever after-Presidential office that exists, and Trump has huckster so deeply in his dna he does not know HOW to keep his mouth shut. And, his loyal followers will echo his sayings/pronouncement/whatever so much that even if by some miracle he is directly muzzled by the entire world media, his drivel will still get out. I fully expect to spend the rest of my life to be hearing something from Trump directly or reported on.

thank you, both.

Probably a better investment than the ~60 billion dollars in the F22/weapons welfare boondoggle. At least this 9 billion will maybe have an impact on education, health, economically, etc on those communities, and not just the corporations winning the contracts. I know I'd like to have gig speed to my house .

There is this thread, over on Fantasy Grounds site, about a rule set - https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/group.php?discussionid=7&pp=10&page=20&do=discuss

Sorry I wasn't clear, I meant more the tech - did you run it on Roll20? If so, did you do it with the tools/space created by some of the people here? How did that go (either your own build, or the macros the group created)? Or did you use another solution, like the tabletop simulator talked about in the Online resources? Or did UCon have a solution up? That kind of thing. I'm always interested in hearing about experiences with remote gaming particularly with hero system games. I've been using maptool as a player and ref for quite a number of years, with various combinations of hangout, discord, vent, skype, etc and I was wondering what your impressions were of whatever you had available to you.

How did the session go? Is there an AAR posted somewhere else, already?

You're not believing enough. If Tinkerbell was relying on your claps to live, she'd fizzle out...

There is too big a gap in elector votes, covering too many states, for the Supreme Court to weigh in and change the election. The only cases that might stick only affect one state's vote totals (last I looked, anyway). Electoral College shenanigans around appointment/assignment of electors is where you have to worry.

Has anyone heard about a boycott/refusal to use mass media (TV, FaceBook, Twitter, et al - substitute Parler, One Network and such) to start on November 13th? Copied below is a call to arms (don't bother to read if you don't want to - it's saying there are 71 million of us, we should show our strength, don't buy in to to usage of media, etc - there is also a 'quote' from a 'constitutional attorney' about how Trump can still be President, and the vote is going to the Supreme Court) that I can't find any other info about yet. I don't think it'll have any real effect (if it's a real effort, even); but it would be nice if it hurt Facebook/Twitter/etc along with Fox, since they put us here in the first place. That brings up another thing, for the Aussie members of the list - what has the U.S. done to you that justifies Murdoch in retaliation? Again, don't read if nonsensical blather bothers you - "Subject: It’s not overFrom a friend...powerful🇺🇸71 Million Trump🇺🇸voters. It’s time we really fight back! Please copy and paste this and share to every Trump supporter you know! We need to be impactful as we can starting November 13th.It’s time to MOBILIZE!It’s time we put forth the power we truly hold in this country. This working class truly is the heart of America. We are being tested!Starting November 13th️Step 1: Move to Parler and exit Facebook & Twitter ️Step 2: Turn off the TV. Do not tune into CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC, NBC or any other mainstream media stations. Tune into OAN or Newsmax ️Step 3: November 13th - December 1st Do not spend any money on Amazon or any large retailers! Support only small businesses!We don’t loot, we don’t burn we don’t turn to violence, we do things differently!Please COPY & PASTEThank youBelow is from a constitutional attorney:Ok in a nutshell... This is going to the Supreme Court. Where they will rule that the election is invalid due to fraud or mistakes on a country wide scale. It will go one of two ways, either they will rule that all the unconstitutional mail in ballots will be removed and the states ordered to recount without them or they will simply rule the election is invalid due to mass voter fraud and at that point it will be sent to the congress and senate for a vote. This is where it gets good. The house/congress votes on who the President will be. It has nothing to do with what party that has power. Every State gets one vote and 30 States are held by Republicans.and 19 by Democrats. They have to vote down party lines, they have no choice due to the 12th Amendment of the Constitution and the Senate votes for the Vice President where a similar even will take place. This is The law. This is why the Democrats are so mad at Nancy Pelosi. This will all happen in January. The only way President Trump won’t be President is if he concedes the election and that will never happen!Sent from my iPhone"

I agree with others about the slog we still face until the 20th, but...

No, they don't. At least, not under the Republican plans - we know what they want to cut, with payroll taxes/social security, and other entitlement spending being at the top of that list. The Republican mantra since Reagan has been "Growth Through Slashing Spending". Given their history, and Democratic willingness to capitulate to get *something* passed (again, look at the Obama administration), don't look for any future fiscally responsible legislation out of congress in the near term. We'd have to have gotten a clear majority in both houses of Democrats *and* a clear repudiation of the interests of the donor class by those same Democrats (and Biden/Harris is clearly not the leader of that movement), to have any hope that the deficit or deficit enhancing catastrophes (let alone the debt) while maintaining services would get anything more than lip service.

The Republicans like to be in the minority/spoiler position - paralyzing legislation while not taking blame (cf the entire Obama administration). If Trump loses the election, it'll put them back in their sweet spot and allow them to mend some of the fences Trump kicked over, while continuing to block any/all legislation to change anything the Dems propose. Then they'll be in a strong position in 2024 running against Harris.