The Mahablog

Politics. Society. Group Therapy.

The Mahablog

Republicans Don’t Care What You Think

Trump is threatening death and destruction if he is indicted. He posted on “Truth”:

Former president Donald Trump warned early Friday of “potential death & destruction” if he is charged in Manhattan in a criminal case related to alleged hush-money payments to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels to conceal an affair. …

… Trump wrote: “What kind of person can charge another person, in this case a former President of the United States, who got more votes than any sitting President in history, and leading candidate (by far!) for the Republican Party nomination, with a Crime, when it is known by all that NO Crime has been committed, & also known that potential death & destruction in such a false charge could be catastrophic for our Country?”

Sounds to me that he’s bleeping scared. I wonder what set him off? Hmmm … maybe this

A key lawyer for Donald Trump appeared Friday before a federal grand jury investigating whether the former president sought to keep top-secret documents in his home — testimony that capped an ultimately losing effort by Trump’s legal team to prevent prosecutors from reviewing the lawyer’s notes and other documents in the case.

Shortly before 9 a.m., Evan Corcoran strode into the federal courthouse in D.C., where judges had previously ruled he could not use attorney-client privilege to shield his material from investigators.

Corcoran is testifying to Jack Smith’s grand jury, not Alvin Bragg’s, but maybe in Trump’s tiny mind it’s all running together.

I’m not too worried about the “death and destruction,” since Trump’s groupies seem reluctant to put their bodies on the line for him again. However, there could always be the one guy who goes it alone. Like the poor schmuck in Ohio who wanted to shoot FBI agents for Trump and got himself killed instead.

This next item comes under the heading of “when they show you who they are, believe them.” The Oklahoma Supreme Court recently ruled that a woman has the right under the state Constitution to receive an abortion to preserve her life. Note that the vote was 5-4. This means four bleeping judges don’t think a woman should be allowed to have an abortion even if the pregnancy is killing her.

Some news stories are saying the ruling is a “win” for women. I don’t. Even Ruth Marcus was appalled.

A chilling glimpse of life in post-Roe America: The Oklahoma Supreme Court has ruled, just barely, that a pregnant woman has the right to abortion “when necessary to preserve her life.”

For four of the nine justices, even that shred-let of protection was too much. Weighing the life of the mother against the interests of the fetus, they said, was a choice for the legislature, not the province of judges.

The “thorny medical, philosophical, and practical debate of balancing the developing life of the unborn against the life of the mother, and the government’s involvement in those decisions,” Chief Justice John Kane wrote in dissent, “is a necessary and worthy dialogue for the people to commence.” In “some rare and terrible circumstances, people’s rights to life may conflict,” observed Justice Dana Kuehn. “How do we balance that?”

Before viability, if the mother dies the embryo or fetus dies also, so I’m not sure where they need to find a “balance.” Marcus continues,

We should, I suppose, be thankful for the outcome, and for the fact that Republican-appointed Justice James Winchester broke ranks to join with four Democratic-appointed justices to strike down part of the state’s draconian abortion law. After all, Oklahoma could be worse; it could be Texas.

You’ll appreciate this one, too — you might remember that 81-year-old Mitch McConnell was injured in a fall a few days ago and is now recovering at a rehabilitation center. I notice news stories leave out where this rehab center is. Anyway, Sherrilyn Ifill (president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund) writes at Slate that back in 2020, when Mitch was having another health issue, he lobbied the Kentucky legislature to change the law to make sure his seat remained in Republican hands if he checks out, so to speak.

… the Kentucky Republican began a campaign to pressure the GOP-controlled Kentucky Legislature to change that state’s law to remove from the governor—who is a Democrat—the authority to select a candidate to fill the unexpired term of a departing U.S. senator. The ability of the governor to appoint a nominee to fill the unexpired term of a senator without restrictions is the law in 35 states. …

… But McConnell urged, and the Kentucky Legislature took the step of changing that state’s law—overriding the veto of the governor to do so—in a way that assured that Republicans would maintain control of McConnell’s seat should it become vacant.

The new law says that the governor still appoints the person who will serve the remainder of the term, but he can only choose from a list of names “submitted by the state executive committee of the same political party as the Senator who held the vacant seat to be filled.” Mitch will still be looming over us after he dies.

Tom Sullivan writes at Hullabaloo that this is just part of a trend of Republican legislatures taking powers away from elected Democrats.

Examples in the news recently are Republicans stripping elected reform-minded prosecutors of their powers, if not their jobs. “Prosecutors who prosecute or investigate the wrong kind of criminal suspects in the eyes of Republican legislators have also received this treatment,” Ifill notes. She references recent cases in Florida and Missouri. 

And, of course, the Georgia state legislature recently voted itself the power to remove Fulton County DA Fani Willis from office if she dates indict Donald Trump. And this is all another way to make voting irrelevant.

12 thoughts on “Republicans Don’t Care What You Think

  1. “the Georgia state legislature recently voted itself the power to remove Fulton County DA Fani Willis from office if she dates indict Donald Trump”

    The legislators may discover that willful obstruction of justice is a real thing, especially if the Feds step in. As they would in this big a case.

  2. HA!!!

    The fat, orange weasel is freaking the f*ck out because he's cornered!

    Caught in a legal dead-end in one of a series of labyrinths he designed and built with his own capacity for lying.

    Lying to cover-up all of the hideous character flaws contained within his  corpulent carcass.

  3. I found this to be more disturbing than the "death and destruction" rant.

    Trump Posts Photo Of Him Holding A Baseball Bat Next To Pic Of Bragg | Crooks and Liars

    The text in all caps finished with, ""OUR COUNTRY IS BEING DESTROYED, AS THEY TELL US TO BE PEACEFUL!" Which is a call to not be peaceful and a demonstration of an instrument of murder next to a picture of the target. Want to know who Trump is channeling? Robert DiNiro as Al Capone. (My guess,) 

    Batter Up – The Untouchables (3/10) Movie CLIP (1987) HD – YouTube

    You may disagree. I think the MAHAts got the message perfectly. 

    Put this in perspective. Yesterday(?) Maha posted a comment from a Trumpster that Trump's call for protests was "vague." I guess Trump was listening. I agree that there's no sign of an organized response so far. The J6 prosecutions may have saved the country – these guys like the idea of beating an unarmed, unsuspecting person with a bat.  Risking jail, that's a lot less fun. 

    The status on Georgia's law: it's not a passed law and GA has until March 29 to pass it or it's on hold until January when they meet again. I don't expect Willis to do anything dramatic until April. 

    Being a felon gives me a different perspective than a normal person. One of the first things my public defender drilled into me was that I have nothing to say about the prosecutor or the judge. (I broke the rule once calling the prosecutor a liar but I did it very politely. I was flattered that he whined about it as a single instance of a larger argument to the judge. But the judge had called the prosecutor out for distortions. So I think she and I were in agreement and she's a classy lady – perhaps she appreciated the eloquence of my charge. And I digress.

    The reason you should not attack the prosecutor or the judge is because you bias the judge against you. The judge will be making decisions about bail and the restrictions that are part of your release. For example, I was not allowed in DC except on court business and not near the White House or Capitol Building. I was fitted with a GPS to guarantee I never strayed into those zones. And one Metro line runs under a corner of the WH complex – I got a panicked call once when I was on court business in DC and Pre-trial Services got an alarm about my location. Again, I digress. Senility. 

    The point being, the court can set "reasonable" restrictions to ensure the safety of public officials and the general public. If Trump is using Truth Social to agitate a mob to terrorize the prosecutor and judge, part of Trump's release (If he does not want to await trial in a NYC cell) may be to STFU about the case. The judge can require Trump attend status hearings. (Mine were monthly, and I was required to attend. Nothing was happening month after month – I wanted to be spared the expense. The judge didn't even think long about the motion, I had to attend at my own expense.) 

    It's SOP for a judge to set reasonable limits based on the offense and the conduct of the defendant, especially considering the likelihood of doing physical harm to others. Trump is personally and deliberately inciting violence. Trump probably thinks that because it's cute and in code, there will be no response from the judge. Granted, there's no judge yet, but generally, they have a low tolerance for BS. If the judge requires that Turmp attend status hearings, he/she will be able to hold Trump responsible for violations. I don't know NY law, but a federal judge can order you held for up to 90 days for contempt. 

    From what I know about the attitude of judges in general about maintaining order vs what I know about Trump doubling down and confronting any authority in opposition, I predict an epic smackdown. 

  4. Recently I found it amusing to learn that the Russian word for truth is pravda.  Could the Big Loser have been oblivious to the similarity?  I guess the youngsters don't hear about Pravda so often – they've got this modern version now.  For sure the past isn't even past

    So many more phrases come to mind to add to that rant about his magnificent superiority. 

  5. Oklahoma's supreme court ruled but the legislature just tabled the bill with language to make it so. Sorry women maybe next year maybe never. Welcome to the shithole states.

    And they just made it easier to lose your custody of your children and terminate your parental rights so the baby stealing adoption industry can have an easier time making money off of the breeding stock’s misery. If the court sends you a notice and you don’t get it, too bad.

    Really shows what this bullshit is about.
    Sorry for the cursing but I am incapable of being civil anymore.

  6. Trump's rhetoric and his rally in Waco is a call to his hard-core extremists. Joyce Vance pointed out that the Waco location is no accident – this is where the Branch Davidians had their last stand, it's ground zero for anti-government extremists. It's going to be very interesting to see who and how many show up, and how much noise they make.

    Ian Welsh made the point months ago, that the US is on track for creating and refining an internal army of dissidents, in much the way that Israel created Hizbollah. The amateurs, the dimwits taking selfies on Jan 6, were skimmed off, and are getting processed thru the justice system, many of them doing prison time.  Those still free, are the ones smart enough to not get caught, are more dangerous. In Hizbollah's case, twenty years of this has left a cadre that's too clever to get caught, and vastly more dangerous than the initial set of participants.

  7. It's Saturday night after Trump's Waco (whacked-out) rally. From the early reports, Trump focussed on "prosecutorial misconduct." He's successfully selling his cult on a grand conspiracy to weaponize the justice system against him. (We will forget rallies where the cheer he led was, "Lock her up.") 

    Therein lies the huge difference. I believe Trump ordered both of his AGs to take legal action against HRC. I can not prove it, but Trump wasn't joking or just playing to the mob. They loved the chant – they would have orgasmed if Trump delivered on Clinton in jail. The problem was and is – HRC operated inside the law. I detest her pay-to-play politics but she scrupulously operated within boundaries that are ethically wrong. Neither AG took action against Clinton because they would have lost in court and been humiliated and mocked for bringing the case to trial. There may be evidence that they tried to find some pretense to charge Clinton to satisfy Trump but I am not presenting a theory as a fact.

    Trump is in a world of hurt (putting it nicely) because he ignored legal boundaries flagrantly, deliberately, and repeatedly. Where Clinton is ethically challenged and dances close to the edge, Trump denies there is a line for him. When juries in NYC, GA,  and DC see the facts and hold them up against the law, Trump will be convicted. (I'm not saying of all charges in every case.) He's going down and his lawyers have told him so. Trump is outraged that prosecutors are subjecting him to the same restrictions as are applied to commoners. He's benefited from a two-tiered system of justice that he can't publicly declare. 

    The cult is saying (and might believe) that people will flock to Trump out of sympathy for being persecuted. I do not think so. It's persecution if Trump is found not guilty – it's justice if a jury convicts. ALL the facts are going to be in the public eye for those who exert the effort to use the gray matter in their skulls. 

    Opinion: Trump's lawyers told Trump to back off on the threats. So we heard, "prosecutorial misconduct". This won't last because it never does. Trump is on the cusp of being charged in NY and probably GA. (Let's watch what happens – the GA legislature has only four days to pass the law that might allow the GA legislature to remove Wills. If they don't, she can charge Trump. If they DO pass the law, she'd be better off strategically charging Rudy, and get him to flip on Trump. Then charge Trump – or not. With Rudy, the feds have Trump.)

    Someday, the feds will charge Trump with Obstruction of Justice. They have the lawyer who drafted the fraudulent letter that said all the docs had been turned over – before the search turned up over 100 classified documents that had not.That lawyer (if reports are right) left in writing evidence he conspired with Trump to commit fraud in that document. Even though he did not sign the document, if he's caught red-handed,  as the judge decided he was, he's up for charges himself. Charges are guaranteed if he does not flip. 

    Trump's lawyers have told Trump in those cases where Trump is guilty, to back down, negotiate a settlement. Play nice – act contrite. Blame some of it on, "mistakes were made" or other people misunderstood instructions. Take a misdemeanor with a fine and no jail. Make it go away without a trial. (No, I'm not getting memos from the meetings. I'm guessing based on what's happening.) Trump is telling his lawyers to make the investigations go away. The House tried – Bragg seems to be calling their hand which is pretty weak. Congress can't make Bragg divulge the status of a NY state investigation and if they House interferes after charges are filed, it's Obstruction of Justice in NY. Whether McCarthy could be charged is uncharted territory. It would be fun for Bragg to bring it up indirectly and academically as a State's Rights issue.

    IMO, Trump thinks he can threaten and try to provoke riots because if it does not work, Trump still thinks he can leave the US to prevent going to jail. If there are riots, a cushy restriction to a gilded cage may not be an option. Trump won't wait for sentencing to find out. 

  8. @doug wrote: When juries in NYC, GA, and DC see the facts and hold them up against the law, Trump will be convicted.

    I’d give good odds for NYC or DC, Georgia is problematic. A jury needs to be unanimous. Facts don’t matter to people who reason emotionally. OTOH, Georgia will likely have a multitude of charges, and so something is likely to stick.

    the GA legislature has only four days to pass the law that might allow the GA legislature to remove Wills.

    I’ve read that the law won’t take effect for another year, and so Willis is probably safe until then. My bet is that what she’s going to present is so damning, they won’t dare remove her. I’m hopeful that the whole Republican power grab goes down in flames because of this, but that’s nothing more than hope at this point.

    Great post by Teri Kanefield where she teases out a couple of points

    1) Trump’s court tactics are not about delaying things, although they have that effect. They’re about destroying the courts and the rule of law

    2) Trump’s experience with the law is largely in the world of civil suits (citizen vs citizen), and he’s used to bullying and getting his way. He’s now transgressed into the world of criminal law, where these same tactics will absolutely work against him. In criminal law, it’s one person against all the resources of the government. And so his arrogance and success at getting his way in civil suits is an Achilles heel in this larger world. I also don’t need to say this, but it’s why he’s calling on the mob to overthrow the government, his newer and vastly bigger opponent.

    Thrilled that the courts have ruled that Meadows and the other top people must testify.

  9. Let's hope that this week brings with it a Trump indictment. And if not, let's again hope that April showers brings May flowers… So that all the possible indictments against Trump come into bloom by then.


Comments are closed.