placeholder

So eloquent. So pithy. So what.

This is from the NY Post. Not exactly know for it's adoration of Joe Biden Biden ripped for apparently glancing at watch during ceremony for fallen troops "Biden and first lady Jill Biden were at the airport for a “dignified transfer” ceremony, a somber military ritual of receiving the bodies of fallen service members who died in foreign combat... During the event, he placed his right hand to his chest as the flag-draped coffins were carried off the Air Force C-17 Globemaster plane. But at one point, the commander-in-chief appeared to cast a furtive glance at his watch before putting his arms behind his back, prompting criticisms from veterans, Republican politicians and conservative commentators." https://nypost.com/2021/08/30/biden-ripped-for-apparently-looking-at-watch-at-troops-ceremony/ Nothing quite so awful and demeaning as a furtive glance at a watch. Far better if he had been laughing or playing solitaire on his phone. At least those activities wouldn't be furtive.

Now this is a truly ridiculous comment. Your indignation is farcical.

Well that depends with the grand jury was drawn from. If it was drawn from Atlanta, which is a democratic stronghold, most likely that wouldn't be the case

I wasn't aware that the poll asked the people who contributed whether or not they were afraid of Trump running? Maybe there were some secret questions that you have access to? If so, can you share them and the result with the rest of us?

And some (all?) of his supporters here keep on insisting that none of the charges against him have any validity or lie and compare his actions to those of Biden or Pence. And claim that all the cases are politically inspired. But not you, of course.

Actually, some of Trump's favorite people pushed a kind of military coup when they advocated declaring martial law and having the military confiscate voting machines. Even after they made that proposal, they are still some of his favorite people. And here's what Trump wrote on Truth Social: "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”" He followed up by posting “UNPRECEDENTED FRAUD REQUIRES UNPRECEDENTED CURE!” https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3761987-trump-comes-clean-says-america-should-terminate-the-constitution/

Well speaking of schoolyard taunts... "You are right... when dems get caught out they immediately go into the "I'm sorry mode"... I'm sorry that I got caught out that is." A foolish, unproveable generalization from someone who clearly has little use for fact-based discussion. The real issue is that Trump repeatedly makes these kind of statements and never apologizes whereas Schumer did.

Whereas Republicans are utterly shameless.

And what currency are they going to use then?

Because if there's one thing we know about Putin, is that he would never resort to violence against his enemies. Especially when those enemies threaten his regime.

But they do apologize: On Thursday, Schumer walked back his original remarks somewhat in a statement on the Senate floor. “I should not have used the words I used yesterday,” he said, adding that, “they did not come out the way I intended to.” He says that his intention was to convey that “there would be political consequences—political consequences, for President Trump and Senate Republicans—if the Supreme Court, with newly confirmed Justices, stripped away a woman’s right to choose.” https://www.vox.com/2020/3/5/21165479/chuck-schumer-neil-gorsuch-brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-whirlwind-threat I'm sure an industrious researcher such as yourself can come up with plenty of examples of Trump apologizing for his many similar statements. How about just one?

Right. It wasn't the Devil that made Trump do it. It was the Democrats.

Speaking of the ignorant...I guess you don't understand that Trump was the Commander-in-Chief and had the authority to call in the National Guard under these circumstances. Trump refused to take phone calls imploring him to do that. He refused to listen to Republicans in the White House asking for the same thing. Instead, he was glued to his TV set to watch the insurrection. Afterwards he lied about watching it on TV. Instead, he claimed he was in meetings. But members of the administration in the White House, his people, reported that he was watching it on TV.

You mean the Democrats actually tried to keep a Republican from winning the Presidency? Now this is shocking news.

The issue isn't that both high heat record and low cold records are being set, it's the ratio. In a stable climate, the ration should be about one to one. Worldwide in 2022 it was 10 to 1. Hot records are outpacing cool by more than 10-to-1 this year as Europe, US brace for dangerous heat Hot-temperature records are far outpacing cool records across the globe this year as Europe and the United States brace again for dangerous heat waves. In the US, 92 all-time record high temperatures had been set through July 16, compared with only five all-time record low temperatures, according to data from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Globally, 188 all-time heat records were broken versus 18 cool records. https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/18/weather/heat-records-outpace-cool-records-globally-climate/index.html

Perhaps they would have wanted him or if someone else were President to stay longer and tie up resources? Really? As for the rest, get back to me when you have the results of the Nielsen ratings.

I'm sure the authorities were begging him to stay longer so he could divert resources away from efforts to aid Hawaiians afflicted by this disaster.

If Trump contracted with the lawyer to represent this person, then it could be the lawyer who faced being stiffed. But I think by now, most lawyers know to ask for cash in advance when dealing with Trump.

I agree. But on the other hand, it's going to cost a fortune to defend oneself. Some of these defendants could easily be bankrupted by this. A court appointed public defender is free, but generally you get what you pay for. Maybe because this case is special some public spirited lawyers, or those looking for publicity, might agree to defend them.

I have just obtained a video of the event If you're too impatient to wait through the whole thing, skip to 6 minutes and 10 second into this historic document. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLVChRVfZ74

Neither of these links go to articles about co-defendants in a criminal case.

I don't see anywhere in that article that says that. And obviously, it it were forbidden, any lawyer who attempted to do so would face disbarment. It is allowed. I asked this question on google: Is one lawyer allowed to represent more than one defendant in a criminal case? Try it and see what answers you get. I think you'll be surprised.

I don't think an attorney has to withdraw. And it's not cut-and-dried that a fellow defendant is necessarily an adversary. If that were the case, then it would never have been allowed in the first place.

It's very difficult to prove. But, obviously, anyone who accepts lawyers paid for by a fellow defendant should be prepared for the possibility that they might be sacrificed to protect that fellow defendant.