Yes! He's going away for looooong time.
It’s a very good precedent for the upcoming Proud Boys trials where there is much stronger evidence of sedition.
Well, a good fraction of the GOP 'base' is honest business folk for whom you express much sympathy, except the radicalization has infected a great many of course. But there are a few percent who actually were turned-off enough to vote for Biden. A thing that would not have happened in the case of a more leftist Democratic candidate.I take your point. To be honest I struggle to see any good anywhere in any aspect of the Republican Party or their base. It is becoming impossible to avoid the word ‘fascist’. I had some respect for Liz Chaney even though I have zero overlap with her politically as at least she called it out. Schwarzenegger too. I don’t see that elsewhere though. They either actively welcome it or are cowed by those who do.
An amazingly total rebuke of Judge Cannon. They found not only that the Special Master regime was unwarranted, but that Trump's entire lawsuit so lacked foundation that it afforded the court no jurisdiction in the case. They remanded the case back to the trial court "with instructions for the trial court to DISMISS the underlying civil action." They are saying that Cannon should have done nothing in the first place except throw the case out!Sounds like Cannon’s whole Special Master chicanery has crashed into a wall. DOJ get what they want (Twitter). \o/
Indeed she should be, but impeachment of a federal judge faces the same hurdles as impeachment a president. So the thing would fail due to lack of a 2/3 majority in the Senate. Also, strong precedent requires evidence OTHER than the content of rulings to impeach a judgeIs Judge Cannon going to be impeached after this? She certainly should be.
That's as it should be, of course - it's inconceivable that judges should be cowed by threats of impeachment if their judicial rulings go 'the wrong way' as far as the government is concerned. However, if their judgements go 'the wrong way' because they are already in thrall to somebody else, or some dubious ideology, that's an entirely different matter.Indeed she should be, but impeachment of a federal judge faces the same hurdles as impeachment a president. So the thing would fail due to lack of a 2/3 majority in the Senate. Also, strong precedent requires evidence OTHER than the content of rulings to impeach a judge
The House Committee now has 6 years of Trump’s tax returns (CNN).
One thing that strikes me about all of this is that lots of rather useful legal precedents seem to be being created out of all the various challenges that Trump's camp throws out. Rulings about the jurisdiction of courts, about whether presidents can expect special treatment, should disclose tax records, access to siezed materials, and such like. Hopefully these will be useful tools in the armoury of the democratic process, and available in the ongoing fight against fascism.