Since earlier today when the story broke that bail had been set at $200,000 for Donald Trump, and conditions spelled out to him as to what he could and could not do, social media has been deluged with people predicting that he won’t be able to abide by the terms he agreed to. It has literally only been a few hours and despite the fact that the man was told to not: 1) tamper with witnesses 2) insult anybody on social media 3) talk to other defendants, except via counsel, he’s now potentially jury tampering and he has absolutely insulted an officer of the court, Fani Willis, again. This attack came along with his announcement that he was surrendering on Thursday.
Trump denies he’s the one sending these tweets. The judge isn’t going to revoke him for this stuff unless it gets insane.
— EveryThursday (@Remember22200) August 22, 2023
Maybe that’s how this will go down. Maybe Stephen Miller or Dan Scavino, who have access to his social media accounts, or did, will do what they want and Trump will sleaze out that way. Although, Georgia has been predicted as a different place, one where the judge isn’t going to take any guff from Trump and also a place where cameras are in the courthouse. Meanwhile, social media comments on the latest Trump arrest.
Can someone please remind law enforcement that Trump told them “please don’t be too nice” when taking suspects into custody?
— Smirnoff and Sprite (@smirnoff_sprite) August 22, 2023
Someone needs to tell him that he should probably STFU about "murder" since credible arguments have been made that he should be prosecuted for Negligent Homicide based on his covid response.
She could always through those in if he'd like her to prosecute some murders.
— Eric Foltz (@EricFoltz) August 22, 2023
So, what do we have to look forward to now?
- Mugshot — to be used to fundraise;
- Weigh-in — which will be “rigged” like everything else;
- Spread butt cheeks — I’m sorry. Now I have to buy brain bleach for the entire class.
- Fingerprints — which may reveal he’s not really human and that sure would explain a lot;
- Girdle and diapers? What happens with them? (ditto on brain bleach)
And this is the Republican frontrunner we’re talking about here, folks. Never let that fact leave your mind for a moment. The cancer on the body politic that Trump is, needs to be excised and ironically, it’s the Republican party who would benefit the most from that. Yes, the entire country could begin healing when he’s gone and won’t begin that process until that happens. But the longer the Republicans hang onto him and buttress all his lies, the worse their situation gets.
Just another history making week, folks. We are living at a very strange time in American history. I’ve read letters and diaries from the Civil War era and they are amazing because they put historical events in the context of normal, everyday people. Social media and the internet is serving a function like that now. As we gather and personally record our feelings, we’re leaving a living record behind for people of the future who will research this time and marvel.
Well, let’s see what the MAGA cult does. This is a case of first impression for them, too.
Are we seeing, in real time, how laws don’t apply to rich people now?
It appears Wilhoit was correct about one thing. Great if you’re in the in-group.
“There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
Oh, God, that’s brilliant. I’m going to copy that down somewhere and use it. Who is Wilhoit? That name is not familiar but s/he is somebody I want to read, I feel certain of that.
Make sure you get the right Wilhoit
Frank Wilhoit:
“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
https://slate.com/business/2022/06/wilhoits-law-conservatives-frank-wilhoit.html
The original comment in response to an article by a Henry Manney, titled ‘The Travesty Of Liberalism’ on The Crooked Timber website, in 2018. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288
Frank Wilhoit 03.22.18 at 12:09 am
There is no such thing as liberalism — or progressivism, etc.
There is only conservatism. No other political philosophy actually exists; by the political analogue of Gresham’s Law, conservatism has driven every other idea out of circulation.
There might be, and should be, anti-conservatism; but it does not yet exist. What would it be? In order to answer that question, it is necessary and sufficient to characterize conservatism. Fortunately, this can be done very concisely.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:
There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time.
For millennia, conservatism had no name, because no other model of polity had ever been proposed. “The king can do no wrong.” In practice, this immunity was always extended to the king’s friends, however fungible a group they might have been. Today, we still have the king’s friends even where there is no king (dictator, etc.). Another way to look at this is that the king is a faction, rather than an individual.
As the core proposition of conservatism is indefensible if stated baldly, it has always been surrounded by an elaborate backwash of pseudo-philosophy, amounting over time to millions of pages. All such is axiomatically dishonest and undeserving of serious scrutiny. Today, the accelerating de-education of humanity has reached a point where the market for pseudo-philosophy is vanishing; it is, as The Kids Say These Days, tldr . All that is left is the core proposition itself — backed up, no longer by misdirection and sophistry, but by violence.
So this tells us what anti-conservatism must be: the proposition that the law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone, and cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.
Then the appearance arises that the task is to map “liberalism”, or “progressivism”, or “socialism”, or whateverthefuckkindofstupidnoise-ism, onto the core proposition of anti-conservatism.
No, it ain’t. The task is to throw all those things on the exact same burn pile as the collected works of all the apologists for conservatism, and start fresh. The core proposition of anti-conservatism requires no supplementation and no exegesis. It is as sufficient as it is necessary. What you see is what you get:
The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone; and it cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.
ph 03.22.18 at 1:02 am
The truest aphorism is there, right at the end.
“The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone; and it cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.”
And the GOP and the billionaire RWNJs and the seditionists of Jan 6 forgets this. They want the rule of law to protect them, and their wealth, privilege, and property, but not bind them, but there is only one rule of law, if it doesn’t bind them, why should it bind anyone? You either have a rule of law, or you don’t.
https://slate.com/business/2022/06/wilhoits-law-conservatives-frank-wilhoit.html
Found this Ursula.
“An unjust law is no law at all.” St. Francis
Baby huey is the poster child for the corruption that money and power causes. Only the law itself can restore respect for the LAW. Time will tell.
And even though His Lowness has been indicted four times, showing that those who uphold the law are willing to enforce the law evenhandedly, it still has to be proven that the public shares that will. For a felony, it only takes one person to hang a jury.
so, in the normal course of court events for anyone else, how soon would you expect the judge to summon him to a “show cause” hearing about him violating court orders? or would they just wait until he turns himself in on Thursday and not let him back out?
since he was not there in person for arraignment yet, who got the bail and conditions documents? is it normal for bail to be set before arraignment?
Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!
I think it’s time to delve into the GA State legislature attempts to get rid of Fani Willis, that little law the bastards recently passed about prosecutors they don’t like. Big news, not fake.
Nancy…I spent thousands of dollars, hours, etc. to get my two daughters through donor/infertility and later adoption. They are grown now. My wife cheated on me in a no fault state and I lost everything I owned fighting for them. Although I had always been a hands on dad, and a professional, as my ex-wife also had a good job, I eventually lost my job. The court, even after giving my wife the house I owned to keep her from taking my young children out of state, jacked my agreed upon child support, in our legal divorce agreement, to an unreasonable amount. I was arrested twice for being behind one month. I even had a job interview the next day and was put in contempt of court and led out of the courtroom in leg irons and handcuffs. That very day. That’s how it works for the rest of us. My crime? Being a faithful husband and good dad. Any questions about EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW?
You got a bad wrap. But I will counter with my SiL whose abusive ex slammed the door on the handher child by another marriage. He lied on the witness stand about how much he made us ing a pay stub from.the business he co-ownrd,,and was caught out by the joint tax return she had photocopied. The judge told him if he was caught in a lie once more,he himself would find him.guilty of perjury and contempt. He lied about abuse of their daughter by her, her sister, her grandmother, all 3of who worked in education and was caught out for it after DFACS investigated. He filed for a TRO against my husband who accompanied his sister to.pick up the daughter,claiming that my husband keyed his car and threatened him and also because he is “A self-proclaimed witch (devil.worshipper).” Luckily the handoff of the kid was at the combo police and fire station and there were witnesses. The judge explained the first amendment on religion protects all religions, even ones,BiL.doesn’t like this after BiL mouthed off several.times and wss told to.shut up.or cool his heels in.jail along with his attorney. And BiL took SiL.to.court every year to try to.gain custody. He made 100K;she made at most 49 and was forced tp.declare bankruptcy. He admitted once that he wanted to.force her to.pay child support. Oh, and he cheated on her with wife#4,with whom.he had 3more life– cheated on #4as well. SiL.hired a,PI and learned he hadn’t just been married once (#1 was divorced but was dead of cancer by the time he met SiL.–at church no less-+so.he figured that erased #1). And that he had done time for drug dealing.
I.doubt he has anything to do with Rio’s child, who is now a trans man because he is homophobic.
And even though His Lowness has been indicted four times, showing that those who uphold the law are willing to enforce the law evenhandedly, it still has to be proven that the public shares that will. For a felony, it only takes one person to hang a jury.
Our stories share the same point…the most prolific liars and those with no conscience can twist the law any way they want. My youngest daughter doesn’t even call her mother on mother’s day, although I encourage her to consider it. When I ask her why…she says she doesn’t deal with fake people. I get it.