Sunday, December 1, 2024

BREAKING: Trump makes BOMBSHELL weekend announcement

 

+ 2,900 COMMENTS WORTH READING!




Trump FL Voters have INSTANT REGRET…FIRST TO GO!

 


MeidasTouch

3.41M subscribers


Reporters UNCOVER Trump’s Secret PAYOFF To Elon Musk

 


Occupy Democrats

637K subscribers


Reporters from The Guardian just exposed Donald Trump‘s hidden payoff to Elon Musk for helping Trump win the election by spreading an incalculable amount of lies and Russian disinformation. The fix is in!

Litigation preview: Back into the bright light of reality

 


When I was a kid, the local movie theater had an exit at the front that opened on my town’s main street. When the show ended, the door would open, and we would step into the bright light and sidewalk traffic. We were immediately thrust from the intense action on the big screen to the harsh reality of daylight, noise and traffic.

For many of us focused on the election, the last few weeks have felt like that passage. For months we kept the distracting light of day-to-day life out as we focused nearly exclusively on the election playing out on our screens. We lived the highs and the lows. We worried about the outcome while we hoped for the best. Then suddenly, it was over.

When we ventured out into the world, it was disorienting. Trump had won.

We noticed that while some had shared the same experience, many did not. The truth is that most Americans barely pay attention to politics. They are like the passersby in the street, vaguely aware there is a movie theater but otherwise focused on their own lives and concerns.

You have probably noticed that for the last few weeks I have written regularly about broader themes the election taught us about democracy. I have wanted to talk about the movie and its larger meaning.

But reality has set in, and part of that reality for me, as a lawyer, is, once again, focusing on the courts. The courts continue to consider and decide monumental cases that will shape the future of free and fair elections and our democracy. Like the people on the street outside the theater, they did not stop what they were doing. Even as I was distracted, they continued business as usual.

If you are like me — deeply worried about the future of democracy — this is a good thing. We need the courts more than ever. We need them to uphold the rule of law. We need them to protect voters. We need them to ensure the promise contained in the inscription over the Supreme Court itself: Equal Justice Under the Law.

So, with this edition of my Litigation Look Ahead, it is time to be back in the light, roll up our sleeves and get to work.

My takeaways from last month

November was an historic month for democracy in court. Let’s dig in to see what happened.

A record month. With less fanfare than 2020, November 2024 saw the largest number of new voting and election lawsuits filed ever. There were 51 lawsuits filed in November 2020. This year, there were 60.

  • Pre-election: Until the final day before the election, we continued to see activity in court. On Nov. 1, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a GOP effort to disqualify certain Pennsylvania mail-in ballots. In the days that followed, we saw a flurry of last-minute court decisions — mostly favoring voters — in Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania.


  • Election Day: Between a pattern of false bomb scares and the usual election day issues, there were 19 lawsuits filed on Election Day itself related to the conduct of elections.


  • Pennsylvania: The biggest contributor to the post-election litigation docket came from Pennsylvania, where a close U.S. Senate election resulted in 25 being filed. Ultimately, Republican David McCormick prevailed in the count by a mere 0.2%.

Some big developments

Notwithstanding the election, voting rights litigation continued to grind away with some big decisions and court filings…

Want to read the rest? Upgrade now to get the full version sent straight to your inbox

Support from readers like you ensures that our team of 16 can provide the most accurate and in depth reporting. That’s why we launched a premium membership — to give you more of what you love and to power the team’s work.


Consider upgrading today for $120/year and you’ll receive this newsletter every month, plus my State of Democracy mid-month, my weekend reading list with a premium scorecard and more!

The New Matt Gaetz

 


Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more

It’s tempting to look at Trump’s announcement that he will appoint Kash Patel to be director of the FBI as just another attempt at trolling. Trump loves drama. Patel comes with a lot of baggage and so many detractors that much of the initial reaction is that he is not confirmable in the Senate.

It’s hard to believe Trump would nominate Patel just to watch him lose in hopes of appointing him to be the deputy director, a position that doesn’t require Senate confirmation. For one thing, the confirmation battle is likely to be bruising, and Patel may end up like Gaetz, making videos on Cameo for $500 a pop. It would be a bad look to lose a second major nominee for the Justice Department. But January, when confirmations start, is a long way off, and there is still the matter of the current Director of the FBI, Chris Wray, who is midway through the 10-year term Trump appointed him to. Wray will have to either resign or be fired before a Patel nomination would be in play. It’s hard to fathom what Trump’s end game—if he has one—is here.

Kash Patel is a former public defender who worked in DOJ’s National Security Division for a time. That means he’s in the category of people who should know better and who understand how the rule of law works. But last year, Patel told Steve Bannon, who has been one of his big supporters, that they could get “rolling on prosecutions” by putting in “all American patriots top to bottom” and find conspirators in government and the media who he says helped President Biden rig elections. He talked about both criminal prosecutions and civil actions against folks he apparently considers enemies.

Trump Attorney General Bill Barr rejected Patel for a possible role as deputy director of the FBI, telling Trump’s then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows that Patel would be appointed over “my dead body.”

An article in the Atlantic last summer characterized Patel as someone who was viewed as dangerous in the eyes of other Trump administration officials: “Patel was dangerous, several of them told me, not because of a certain plan he would be poised to carry out if given control of the CIA or FBI, but because he appeared to have no plan at all—his priorities today always subject to a mercurial president’s wishes tomorrow.” It is a lack of judgment coupled with inexperience that creates a perfect storm of susceptibility to Trump’s whims. You wouldn’t take a lawyer with just a few years of experience as a line prosecutor and put them in charge of their division at DOJ, let alone the FBI. But Patel appears to be precisely what Trump wants, a no-questions-asked loyalist.

The Atlantic article is full of insight into Patel, if you find yourself with time to spare Sunday morning. One point among many: the author writes that “many of the nearly forty” of Patel’s former Trump Administration colleagues she spoke with for the piece would only do so if they could remain anonymous because they feared retaliation.

The key, predictably, seems to be Patel’s loyalty to Trump. As the FBI geared up to investigate Trump’s retention of classified documents in 2022, it was Patel who floated the story that he was present when Trump verbally declassified scores of documents before he left the White House. That was the line of defense that Trump ultimately picked up on, despite officials who said they were unaware of any such order.

This, of course, led to Patel becoming a witness. In his first appearance before the grand jury, Patel took the Fifth. Subsequently, DOJ compelled his testimony with a grant of “use immunity,” which meant his testimony couldn’t be used against him, forcing him to testify because he no longer had a Fifth Amendment privilege to assert. Patel made it clear when he appeared before the grand jury this time that his appearance wasn’t voluntary and he had not made a deal with the Justice Department to testify against Trump. He remained a staunch critic of the classified documents case. It was in this maelstrom that Patel was asked on far-right host Benny Johnson’s podcast whether he would agree to be Trump’s FBI Director if Trump won in 2024. Patel responded that he was “all in with the boss.”

Apparently, he still is. In announcing Patel’s selection on Truth Social, Trump acknowledged that Patel is a fervent believer in the “deep state,” writing, “He played a pivotal role in uncovering the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, standing as an advocate for truth, accountability, and the Constitution.” Earlier this month, Patel said, “I'd shut down the FBI Hoover Building on day one and reopen the next day as a museum of the deep state. And I'd take the 7,000 employees that work in that building and send them across America to chase down criminals.” All in all, not a choice designed to inspire confidence that the FBI will be able to focus on its mission or that their new director would have the respect of the men and women the country depends upon to keep them safe.

Trump has thrown down another gauntlet to the Senate. Their answer must be no. Kash Patel cannot be put in charge of the FBI any more than Matt Gaetz could be put in charge of the Justice Department. Once more, we watch to see whether the Senate will do its constitutional duty or whether the Senate will bend the knee.

We’re in this together,

Joyce


YOU DID THIS. We’re #3 on Audible!

                                                                                  LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER..... OR REMOVED ON THEIR ...