Glenn Kirschner – While Trump gets prosecuted in NY, the classified documents/MAL/obstruction of just case heats up!
The Lincoln Project – Indictment Requiem
Thom Hartmann – New GOP Motto Reveals Their Real Agenda
Liberal Redneck – Trump Indictment (For Real Though)
18-Pound Cat Decides To Be Dad To Teeny Kitten
Beau – Let’s talk about Disney vs Florida….
Yesterday, I received a small grocery order with nothing missing, no substitutions, and everything put into the correct cart (which I label based on how I’ll need to store tham.) That’s just about unheard of. I do have to say there were a few things I would have ordered, and will eventually need, but didn’t because they were marked out of stock or pickup only. That was a bit frustrating, but not nearly as frustrating as ordering and having them not come.
Cartoon –
Short Takes –
The 19th – What a landmark sweatshop case tells us about Julie Su’s approach to labor
Quote – [J]ustice and remedy for what Jaknang endured would come years later. That happened with the help of a young lawyer who took the lead of a landmark case against the clothing companies that benefited from the workers’ labor. She secured millions in back wages, advocated for a visa that allowed Jaknang and others to remain in the United States and helped her find a fair job. That lawyer, Julie Su, was nominated last month to head the U.S. Labor Department, tasked with enforcing laws involving workers, workplaces and labor unions. Jaknang, 64, described Su as a “kind and hard-working woman” who empowered her to fight for justice at a vulnerable time. This early episode in Su’s career, supporters say, illustrates something important about Su: that the daughter of Chinese immigrants has cultivated a passion for advocating for the nation’s most vulnerable workers, including those who are low-wage, who are immigrants and whose English is limited.
Click through – It matters because Biden has nominated her for Secretary of Labor. Adnd there are people claiming she is hostile to small businesses. Nonsense. She’s hostile to egregious scofflaws. It’s not her fault so many of them own “small” businesses. Someone should do a study on the incidemce of Libertarians among small business owners. I suspect it would raise eyebrows.
Democratic Underground (mia) – TBA*
Click through for a comprehensive (although I do not claim complete) list of school shootings at all educational levels in chronologucal order. My first reaction was, “Someone should set that to music, as Tom Lehrer did with thechemical elements.” But then I thought, no, even that had to be updated eventually, and this… where would one stop?
Food For Thought
Glenn Kirschner – Trump’s attorney Tacopina spouts nonsense on TV; why Trump’s statute of limitations claim will fail
MSNBC – New Fox emails: CEO says Trump fact-checks are ‘bad for business’
Farron Balanced – Jim Jordan’s Report On ‘Weaponization’ Of Government Blows Up In His Face
Mark Russell died last week, aged 93. I surely remember him – there don’t seem to be any short clips from his prime, but he made this when h was 80.
Dog Dumped At The Shelter Discovers The Great Outdoors
Beau – Let’s talk about Nebraska, allies, and holding the line….
Yesterday, looking at the coverage, I decided thatright now we know as much about Trump**’s legal issues as we are going to know until he is arraigned, when the indictment will be unsealed. So instead of speculating, I’m going to feature other news today, and probably tomorrow, since I work ahead. So hopefully I won’t mention him again until Wednesday (with the possible exception of in the Video Thread.) So take a deep breath and go into a holding pattern for a while, and I’ll do the same. There is plenty of other news. If you must speculate, or just really want to, I recommend Joyce Vance’s “The Week Ahead” on her Substack. She is knowledgeable and cool-headed, and covers a number of “if”s which are likely to upset some people no matter how they are decided
Cartoon – 03 Cell RTL
(It weighed 2.5# – just over a kilo – and was nicknamed “the brick.” But it worked.)
Short Takes –
SPLC – TRASHING THEIR RIGHTS: ALABAMA TOWN USES ‘DEBTORS’ PRISON’ FOR PEOPLE WHO FALL BEHIND ON GARBAGE BILLS
Quote – Even though the concept of “debtors’ prison” has been declared unconstitutional, the town of Valley was dragged into the spotlight for its practice of arresting people who could not pay their bills. In November, 82-year-old Martha Menefield was arrested for owing $77 for trash pickup. Her story went viral online, and national media outlets carried it through several news cycles because of how preposterous the situation sounded. But Menefield’s case was not unusual. The city of Valley has been arresting its citizens for years over past-due trash bills, adding hundreds if not thousands of dollars to the owed amount in fines and court costs by the poorest of its residents.
Click through for story. Sorry about the shouting headline, though I can’t very well maintain shouting is not appropriate.
DU (LiberalArkie) – Google Co-Founder, Other Billionaires Are Issued Subpoenas in Lawsuit Over JPMorgan’s Ties to Jeffrey Epstein
Quote – The U.S. Virgin Islands issued subpoenas this week to Sergey Brin, Thomas Pritzker, Mortimer Zuckerman and Michael Ovitz to gather information for its civil lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase & Co. over the bank’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, according to people familiar with the matter.
Click through for a bit more. The source of the story is the WSJ, but it is paywalled. My respect for the USVI continues to increase. Stacey Plaskett is the House delegate from there. She’s not entitled to a vote on the floor, but she’s so competent she was an impeachment manager over Trump**, and she’s a ranking member on at least one Committee. Statehood for PR, DC, and USVI!
Food For Thought
Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”
Now that Donald J. Trump** has finally been arraigned, everyome is wondering what this or that aspect of pressing the charges will look like. There are probably still a few people naïve eenough to think it is going to look like a trial in the movies or on TV. (It would not surprise me to learn that Trump** hnself thinks that.) It won’t. But the arraignment also won’t look like an ordinary actual arraignment for multiple reasons,none of them aimed at helping or hurting him, but simply reasons peculiar to his situation. For example, most arraignments do not involve the Sevret Service. This one, by law, must. And of course, there’s more. The author, being cute but I think probably accurate, describes this case as “the most complex straightforward case in history.”
==============================================================
Jeffrey Bellin, William & Mary Law School
When former President Donald Trump turns himself over to authorities in New York on Tuesday, April 4, 2023, and is arraigned, the charges on which a Manhattan grand jury indicted him will likely be made public.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg obtained the indictment on March 30, 2023, following a grand jury vote, but the exact charges against Trump remain sealed. Multiple media sources are reporting the indictment alleges the former president committed business fraud.
I am a former prosecutor and law professor who studies the criminal justice system. While the complexities of Trump’s case will continue to unfold, The Conversation asked me to break down the complex legal situation. Here are four key points to understand about the prosecution and what will likely come next.
From what we understand of the investigation, the charges against Trump appear to stem from a US$130,000 payment in 2016 by Trump’s then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, to an adult film star, Stormy Daniels. In return, Daniels promised not to tell the media about her alleged affair with Trump.
Media reports suggest that there could be about 30 counts against Trump, and at least some of those counts will be felonies.
Just the fact that there are so many counts does not mean that there are many different criminal events or kinds of crimes alleged. Prosecutors often charge similar, repeated conduct – for example, multiple drug sales – as separate counts. In this case, the multiple counts may refer to a series of business records that record the same or similar transactions. Or the charges may, indeed, span multiple alleged criminal events.
Media reports indicate that Bragg does not appear to be alleging that Trump’s payment to Daniels was itself illegal.
Instead, Trump will likely be charged with “falsifying business records” for trying to hide the payment by lying about its nature in the records of the Trump Organization, his company.
Creating a false business record with the intent to defraud is a Class A misdemeanor offense in New York. But the offense can become a low-level Class E felony if Bragg can prove that Trump created false business records for the purpose of facilitating a second crime.
It is not yet clear what the second crime will be – or even that a second crime is being alleged – but possibilities include federal or state campaign finance violations or tax evasion.
If there is a trial, the prosecution will have to put together a series of pieces to secure a conviction on each of the charges facing Trump.
First, the prosecution would have to prove that the Daniels payment was recorded by Trump officials as something clearly inaccurate. It is not enough to show that the payment was recorded ambiguously – like “miscellaneous” or even “legal services.” The business records at issue must be unequivocally “false.”
Second, it is not necessary that Trump himself created false records. The prosecution would just have to prove that Trump was the direct cause of the false entry – meaning someone followed his specific directions.
Third, the prosecution would have to prove that Trump created the false record for a fraudulent purpose and, to prove a felony, with the specific purpose of committing – or covering up – another crime.
This is important because there could be other potentially plausible reasons the defense might offer, including that Trump sought to avoid embarrassment to his family or himself. Another option is indifference, that Trump gave little thought to how the transaction was recorded. That’s why the details of the allegedly false records, and Trump’s degree of involvement in their creation, will be central questions at trial.
Finally, for the felony offense, the prosecution would also have to prove that there was another crime that was either committed or covered up by using this false business record.
While everyone will be watching to see if this case is handled like other cases, differences are inevitable. For example, the New York Police Department and court officers will need to coordinate the arrest process with Trump’s Secret Service agents.
Further complications will arise if there is any prospect of incarceration. Based on what we know now, there is little prospect that Trump will be jailed pending trial for this allegation of a nonviolent crime. And even if he is ultimately convicted, it’s still unlikely he’ll be locked up, based on the nature of the charges and his lack of a prior criminal record. That said, judges have broad discretion in determining sentences.
That is only a small window into the logistical challenges that await the Manhattan district attorney’s office and the New York courts. If this were any other defendant, this would be a relatively straightforward case, the kind that make up the hundreds of cases in a typical prosecutor’s caseload.
However, Trump is not any other defendant. That means this is likely to be the most complex straightforward case in American history.
Most low-level felony and misdemeanor cases are resolved before trial, especially when there is no obvious victim. Typically, the prosecution will offer a plea deal, perhaps including a term of probation, or even propose a diversion program with community service, for example, which will lead to a dismissal of the charges.
It will be interesting to see if Bragg makes an offer along those lines. Even if he does, defendants must typically admit guilt to take advantage of these arrangements, and Trump may refuse for political, personal or legal reasons to admit guilt.
So it’s likely the case will go to trial, a process that will be messy for many reasons – most importantly, the jury.
When choosing a jury in a criminal case, the trial judge is supposed to screen out potential jurors who are biased in favor of, or against, the defendant. That’s normally easy because the jurors have usually never have heard of the defendant.
But most potential jurors will have opinions about Trump and many will need to be excused from jury service because of a lack of objectivity.
In a trial with this much media attention, there will also be people who have strong feelings about Trump and want to be on the jury. Some of them may hide their biases. That’s a problem by itself.
Then, once the trial starts, the media attention will shine a spotlight on the selected jurors. If it becomes clear that the jurors lied or failed to disclose information in jury selection, that could be grounds for removing them from the jury in the middle of the trial. If enough jurors are removed, the case will end in a mistrial, sending everyone back to square one.
So, while there is a lot about this prosecution that isn’t yet clear to the general public, one thing is clear – this will be a case with unprecedented attention and complexity.
Jeffrey Bellin, Mills E. Godwin, Jr., Professor of Law, William & Mary Law School
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
==============================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, while this has never happened before (though it probably should have), my expectation is that the prosecutors, the court, and the court security personnel (and there will be some) are going to be, at every moment, asking themselves, “Can we do this just as we would do for anyone else?” And if the answer is yes, that’s what will be done. If not, they will struggle to come as close to “just as … for anyone else” as they possibly can. I think it was Bette Davis (maybe technically her character in the film) who was the first person recorded to have said, not on an airplane, “Fasten your seat belts. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.”
The Furies and I will be back.
Glenn Kirschner – Trump set to be arraigned on his criminal indictment on Tuesday. Then, it’s on to “The Trump Trials”
MSNBC – New Fox emails: CEO says Trump fact-checks are ‘bad for business’
Ring of Fire – Trump’s Entire Life Just Got Turned Upside Down
Rocky Mountain Mike – I’m So Indicted
Cat Hides From Her Foster Mom For A Year — Then She Does This
Beau – Let’s talk about the GOP, Obamacare, and Wyoming….
Yesterday, the radio opera was Verdi’s “Falstaff,” based on Shakespeare’s “The Merry Wives of Windsor. Back in the day when the filmed matinees were replayed on PBS, I remember there were a couple of very odd (to put it nicely) schedulings – like for instance “Medea” being replayed on Mothers’ Day (and there were others.) And then, of course, , hthey were being played after the fact, so that those scheduling them could have looked at the calendar and noted that “Medea,” for instance, was not the best choice for Mothers’ Day. That’s the one I remember, but I also remember that similar contretemps occurred several times. They seem to do better when the related real life occurrences are spontaneous – such as “Falstaff” being on radio (and also HD broadcast into theaters) in a week when a real life misogynistic conman has just been indicted after way too long a hiatus (of course, they were thinking of April Fools’ Day). There are differences – Falstaff gets his comeuppance from the very ladies he planned to seduce and swindle, and (ar least apparently) learns from the experience. I don’t anticipate any learning from experience to be happening in a Manhattan courtroom any time soon. The prodution is apparently the second one within about ten years – the previous one was very 1950’s, including a midcentury modern kitchen (through the window of which Falstaff got dumped into the Thames in a laundry basket.) This production doesn’t look consistently like any particular time and place, but it does appear to have a lot of color – reds, blues, and for one of Falstaff’s costimes an almost flueorescent orange. Also a lot of standing on tables. But then with such an absurd play it’s not out of line for the production to be a bit absurdist. (The play was supposed to have been inspired by Queen ELizabeth I telling Shakespeare she wanted to see “Sir John in love.” If so, evidently the best he could do was Sir John in heat, and certainly not forgetting about money. Falstaff may have been a knight, but he was not a noble character.) But it’s all in good fun, and the singers always seem to have at least as much fun as the audience – maybe more.
Cartoon –
Short Takes –
Crooks & Liars – DeSantis Gets Caught In The Disney Mousetrap
Quote – The previous board, Disney controlled Reedy Creek Improvement District, approved the last minute agreement on Feb. 8, the very day before the Florida House voted to put the governor in charge. They knew what was coming and had a plan. The Board had a public meeting, but didn’t get into great detail about the document before unanimously voting to approve it…. One of the funniest parts of the declaration is the following rule: The declaration is valid until “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England.”
Click through for details. DeSantis thought he was so smart appointing his own board to control Disnet territory. Dunning-Kruger prevented him from realizing that Disney has real lawyers – and real mockery.
The First Amendment Encyclopedia – Actual Malice
Quote – Actual malice is the legal standard established by the Supreme Court for libel cases to determine when public officials or public figures may recover damages in lawsuits against the news media…. Beginning with the unanimous decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), the Supreme Court has held that public officials cannot recover damages for libel without proving that a statement was made with actual malice — defined as “with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
Click through for article. When we non lawyers hear the word “malice,” we think of feelings – a hatred of someone or something, and a desire to harm that target. But that’s not what it means in law. Dominion has received summary judgment against Fox for everything except Actual Malice (and therefore damages.) Given the texts and emails, I believe that too could be proven without a trial. The judge is probably thinking that those texts, emails, and other evidence need to bemore widely publicized.
Bonus: In the Public Interest – The Privatization of Everything: Now in Paperback
Just to announce that this book, subtitled “How the Plunder of Public Goods Transformed America and How We Can Fight Back,” has been reissued, now in paperback, which makes it both easier to handle and less expensive. So many people have fallen for the myth that “Government should be run like a business” -which may be applicable to authoritarian governments, but certainly not to a democracy – and if you are seeking talking points to push back, this would be a great source.
Food For Thought
No April Foolin’ here.
Whenever there is a national election, there are always people who say “If so-and-so is elected, I’m getting outta the country!” Yeah, right. I doubt that even one in a thousand of those who talk that talk actually walk even a few steps of the walk.
After Trump won several state primaries, a website on how to move to Canada received so many hits that its servers crashed. Even so, there was no mass exodus across the border in 2017.
In last week’s essay I discussed what we should do if a fascist or extremely religious government does take over the U.S. For some people, fleeing the country may be their best bet. However, unless you do face violent persecution, staying here so you can fight back may be a better option. Emigration should be a last resort. Some of this essay will be redundant, but this essay grew out of the previous one, and some of the points I made previously bear repeating.
Moving to Canada entails a lot more than piling your lares and penates, the cat, and Junior’s Pokemon card collection into the SUV and heading north. Visit any website about how to emigrate to Canada – or another country – and you will see it’s rather complicated.
Even if you get accepted as an immigrant, or a refugee, settling in a foreign country can be expensive.You will have to move a lot of your personal belongings, which could cost thousands of dollars. You will have to find a new place to live and a new job. You probably will have to get a sponsor. You may have to learn a new language, and you certainly will have to learn a new culture. Finally, if you decide to renounce your US citizenship, that will be another big expense.
Besides, if your country is going in the wrong direction, it’s often better to stay and resist. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Contact your elected officials, sign petitions, take part in peaceful demonstrations, attend phone and text banks and postcard-writing parties, and above all, do your homework on those running for office, and VOTE!
Of course, if a real bugnut extremist does get in the White House, and Congress is overrun by right-wing wack jobs, certain people in this country will face persecution and arrest. Non-binary people, anybody who stands up for real science, anybody who is of the “wrong” race or ethnicity or creed, known activists who support certain causes, and many others will risk the ol’ midnight knock on the front door. The urge to flee will be very strong for them if they feel that they have no support network here, or a thin one that cannot accord sufficient protection.
Indeed, for some people emigration may actually make sense. One need but consider the fate of Jews who found themselves at the mercy of the merciless Nazi regime. In some countries today, many people face persecution and even death due to their ethnicity, creed, gender identity or sexual orientation. Even today, in the United States, non-binary people are regularly and often ruthlessly harassed and bullied, and numerous atheists feel as though they must keep quiet about their non-faith lest they face discrimination.
To stay, or not to stay – that is the question. You will have to play this by ear so you can decide whether it is (more or less) safe to stay, or if you really need to bug out. If you are a member of a group that is likely to face violent persecution, you may want to start doing your homework now. Also, you will have to consider the expenses and other problems that emigration entails. How much can you take with you? How will you find work and make friends in your new country? Will you have to learn a new language? Can you get to your destination by car, or will you have to take a plane or ship? Which of your possessions can you sell or donate in order to reduce the burden? Do you have kith or kin in another country, who can sponsor you or at least provide a place to stay? Are you a member of an international group that can assist its members when they move?
