#violation of oath of office | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 8 months

Text

Drew Sheneman, The Star-Ledger

* * * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

AUG 20, 2023

Various constitutional lawyers have been weighing in lately on whether former president Donald Trump and others who participated in the effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election are disqualified from holding office under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The third section of that amendment, ratified in 1868, reads:

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

On August 14 an article forthcoming from the University of Pennsylvania Law Review by William Baude of the University of Chicago Law School and Michael S. Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas School of Law became available as a preprint. It argued that the third section of the Fourteenth Amendment is still in effect (countering arguments that it applied only to the Civil War era secessionists), that it is self-executing (meaning the disqualification of certain people is automatic, much as age limits or residency requirements are), and that Trump and others who participated in trying to steal the 2020 presidential election are disqualified from holding office.

This paper was a big deal because while liberal thinkers have been making this argument for a while now, Baude and Paulsen are associated with the legal doctrine of originalism, an approach to the law that insists the Constitution should be understood as those who wrote its different parts understood them. That theory gained traction on the right in the 1980s as a way to push back against what its adherents called “judicial activism,” by which they meant the Supreme Court’s use of the law, especially the Fourteenth Amendment, to expand the rights of minorities and women. One of the key institutions engaged in this pushback was the Federalist Society, and both Baude and Paulson are associated with it.

Now the two have made a 126-page originalist case that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits Trump from running for president. Their interpretation is undoubtedly correct. But that interpretation has even larger implications than they claim.

Moderate Republicans—not “Radical Republicans,” by the way, which was a slur pinned on the Civil War era party by southern-sympathizing Democrats—wrote the text of the Fourteenth Amendment at a specific time for a specific reason that speaks directly to our own era.

When John Wilkes Booth assassinated President Abraham Lincoln in April 1865, Congress was not in session. It had adjourned on the morning of Lincoln’s second inauguration in early March, after beavering away all night to finish up the session’s business, and congressmen had begun their long journeys home where they would stay until the new session began in December.

Lincoln’s death handed control of the country for more than seven months to his vice president, Andrew Johnson, a former Democrat who wanted to restore the nation to what it had been before the war, minus the institution of slavery that he believed concentrated wealth and power among a small elite. Johnson refused to call Congress back into session while he worked alone to restore the prewar system, dominated by Democrats, as quickly as he could.

In May, Johnson announced that all former Confederates except for high-ranking political or military officers or anyone worth more than $20,000 (about $400,000 today) would be given amnesty as soon as they took an oath of loyalty to the United States. He pardoned all but about 1,500 of that elite excluded group by December 1865.

Johnson required that southern states change their state constitutions by ratifying the Thirteenth Amendment prohibiting enslavement except as punishment for a crime, nullifying the ordinances of secession, and repudiating the Confederate war debts. Delegates did so, grudgingly and with some wiggling, and then went on to pass the Black Codes, laws designed to keep Black Americans subservient to their white neighbors.

Under those new state constitutions and racist legal codes, southern states elected new senators and representatives to Congress. Voters put back into national office the very same men who had driven the rebellion, including its vice president, Alexander Stephens, whom the Georgia legislature reelected to the U.S. Senate. When Congress reconvened in December 1865, Johnson cheerily told them he had reconstructed the country without their help.

It looked as if the country was right back to where it had been in 1860, with legal slavery ended but a racial system that looked much like it already reestablished in the South. And since the 1870 census would count Black Americans as whole people for the first time, southern congressmen would have more power than before.

But when the southern state delegations elected under Johnson’s plan arrived in Washington, D.C., to be seated, Republicans turned them away. They rejected the idea that after four years, 600,000 casualties, and more than $5 billion, the country should be ruled by men like Stephens, who insisted that American democracy meant that power resided not in the federal government but in the states, where a small, wealthy minority could insulate itself from the majority rule that controlled Congress.

In state government a minority could control who could vote and the information to which those voters had access, removing concerns that voters would challenge their wealth or power. White southerners embraced the idea of “popular sovereignty” and “states’ rights,” arguing that any attempt of Congress to enforce majority rule was an attack on democracy.

But President LIncoln and the Republicans reestablished the idea of majority rule, using the federal government to enforce the principle of human equality outlined by the Declaration of Independence.

And that’s where the Fourteenth Amendment came in. When Johnson tried to restore the former Confederates to power after the Civil War, Americans wrote into the Constitution that anyone born or naturalized in the U.S. was a citizen, and then they established that states must treat all citizens equally before the law, thus taking away the legal basis for the Black Codes and giving the federal government power to enforce equality in the states. They also made sure that anyone who rebels against the federal government can’t make or enforce the nation’s laws.

Republicans in the 1860s would certainly have believed the Fourteenth Amendment covered Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of a presidential election. More, though, that amendment sought to establish, once and for all, the supremacy of the federal government over those who wanted to solidify their power in the states, where they could impose the will of a minority. That concept speaks directly to today’s Republicans.

In The Atlantic today, two prominent legal scholars from opposite sides of the political spectrum, former federal judge J. Michael Luttig and emeritus professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School Laurence H. Tribe, applauded the Baude-Paulsen article and suggested that the American people should support the “faithful application and enforcement of their Constitution.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Heather Cox Richardson #Letters From An American #history #Civil War #Insurrection #J. Michael Luttig #Laurence H. Triube #Baude-Paulsen #the U.S. Constitution #the Presidency #violation of oath of office

7 notes · View notes

gusty-wind · 9 days

Text

CONGRESS IS PROTECTING UKRAINE'S BORDER NOT THE US BORDER. THE OATH OF OFFICE HAS BEEN VIOLATED. IT'S TREASON!!!!

#the great awakening #war is real #ncswic #treason

409 notes · View notes

reasonsforhope · 9 months

Text

Donald Trump charged in Georgia for efforts to overturn the 2020 election

Link here, because WaPo's security measures stop Tumblr previews. Non-paywall link here.

"Former president Donald Trump and 18 others were criminally charged in Georgia on Monday in connection with efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in the state, according to an indictment made public late Monday night [on August 14, 2023].

Trump was charged with 13 counts, including violating the state’s racketeering act, soliciting a public officer to violate their oath, conspiring to impersonate a public officer, conspiring to commit forgery in the first degree and conspiring to file false documents.

The Recap

The historic indictment, the fourth to implicate the former president, follows a 2½-year investigation by Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis (D). The probe was launched after audio leaked from a January 2021 phone call during which Trump urged Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) to question the validity of thousands of ballots, especially in the heavily Democratic Atlanta area, and said he wanted to “find” the votes to erase his 2020 loss in the state.

Willis’s investigation quickly expanded to other alleged efforts by Trumpor his supporters, including trying to thwart the electoral college process, harassing election workers, spreading false information about the voting process in Georgia and compromising election equipment in a rural county. Trump has long decried the Georgia investigation as a “political witch hunt,” defending his calls to Raffensperger and others as “perfect.”

The Details

“Trump and the other Defendants charged in this Indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump,” the indictment states.

A total of 41 charges are brought against 19 defendants in the 98-page indictment. Not all face the same counts, but all have been charged with violating the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Willis said she has given those charged until Aug. 25 to surrender.

Among those charged are Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor who served as Trump’s personal attorney after the election; Trump’s former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows; and several Trump advisers, including attorneys John Eastman, Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro...

Prosecutors brought charges around five subject areas: false statements by Trump allies, including Giuliani, to the Georgia legislature; the breach of voting data in Coffee County; calls Trump made to state officials, including Raffensperger, seeking to overturn Biden’s victory; the harassment of election workers; and the creation of a slate of alternate electors to undermine the legitimate vote. Those charged in the case were implicated in certain parts of what prosecutors presented as a larger enterprise to undermine the election."

-via The Washington Post, August 14, 2023

#trump #donald trump #trump indictment #fani willis #district attorney #united states #us politics #good news #2020 election #january 6 #georgia #fulton county #criminal justice #racketeering #rudy giuliani #sidney powell #john eastman #fuck trump

762 notes · View notes

senatortedcruz · 8 months

Text

Me if Racketeering, Solicitation of violation of oath by public officer, and Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree were illegal

521 notes · View notes

gwydionmisha · 8 months

Text

#Chicago #Police Impunity #Perjury #Police Criminals #News

282 notes · View notes

maklodes · 2 months

Text

I feel like I barely have the right to get into “Star Wars would be so good if it were good” posting given that I haven’t actually watched VII-IX, but I keep thinking about the myriad plots and subplots that could follow VI, after the fireworks stop, all without slamming the reset button.

Like, as of Episode VI’s end, Emperor Palpatine, Darth Vader, and Grand Moff Tarkin are all dead, but much of the rest of the Imperial bureaucracy and military are still intact. Maybe there’s a legal chain of succession that establishes who’s next, but probably it’s pretty weak, because tyrants generally don’t like saying “you know who would benefit greatly if I were to ‘accidentally’ drink poisoned blue milk and die? That guy!” So there’s a likelihood of power struggles, different factions emerging among moffs and admirals. How would the Alliance respond to two moffs waging a brutal war against each other, extorting civilians to death for supplies, bombarding civilian population centers that are not logistically accessible enough for their side to extort but that they think the other side will, etc? Can the Alliance afford to intervene to help the innocents suffering in this conflict, or is it best to just let their enemies weaken themselves and clean up afterwards?

Meanwhile, some moffs and governors see the writing on the wall, and are approaching the Alliance and saying “Yes, I was a high official in the Empire, but I was one of the good ones, working within the system to make it as humane and decent as possible. Now I am preparing to join the New Republic, and preparing to hold free elections on my planet(s) (supervised, of course, by the erstwhile-Imperial bureaucracy under my control – who else is around that could competently manage such an affair?) Yes, there are a few incidents during my reign that can be classified as atrocities, but I can assure you that if anyone else in the empire had been in charge, they would have been more numerous and severe (anyone harsher than me would’ve been worse, and anyone gentler would’ve been force-choked to death by Darth Vader and replaced), so let’s just leave those in the past and work together toward a better future.” Can the Alliance accept such a defector on those terms? Can the Alliance afford not to?

At the same time, former members of the senate – dissolved at the beginning of IV – are saying “Alright! With that tyrannical emperor gone, we are ready to get back into the action and help rebuild the Republic,” while more radical members of the Alliance are like “no, FUCK those old senators. Those were the guys who elected Palpatine chancellor. Then they kept giving him more and more emergency powers. Then they voted to make him emperor. Then they stuck around as a rubber stamp Imperial Senate for like fifteen years legitimizing the Empire, before the emperor finally dissolved the senate. A few of them may be okay, but they are all on probationary status in the politics of the New Republic at best, and many of them should be charged with corruption/oath violation/etc and barred from politics and maybe incarcerated/executed.”

Some people might even question the whole idea of One Galaxy Government going forward. Sure, there are advantages to having a singular Republic/Empire coordinating things, but there are risks. Maybe local control – with the risk of the occasional local dictator, or local border war – is safer than putting all eggs into one basket? Coordinating the resources of a galaxy has proven useful in destructive massive scale projects like planet-killer battle stations. Is there a more productive use case for that much broad scale coordination?

As more systems democratize and lift censorship and restrictions on holonet, you get paranoia and rumors going around that this or that office-seeking politician is the Next Palpatine. When a planet’s leading candidate for senator faces rumors of being a Dark Sider, the runner-up currently polling at 48% clears her throat and says “The threat of the Dark Side is too serious to be turned into a political issue, and unfounded rumors and partisan smears do nothing to help us re-establish our still-fragile democratic norms. At the same time, any credible allegations of Dark Side influence merit a thorough and independent investigation. After all, recent experience has shown just how destructive the Dark Side can be: whole inhabited planets got destroyed! Once we establish a transparent, impartial process to examine these claims, we can move beyond all this baseless speculation about my opponent (and the baseless speculation that the first anonymous rumors were traced to a holonet account belonging to my campaign’s chief of staff).” You could have HUAC / McCarthy hearings type shit.

You could have some genuine (aspiring) Dark Side guys – no one who knows the true Sith teachings, but maybe some force sensitives who see the force as a Will To Power thing. (The Jedi haven’t been abducting children who show force potential for decades, and the Sith had no room beyond two, so I guess force sensitives have mostly sorta been figuring out what they could of this stuff themselves for a few decades? Most of them are probably pretty weaksauce compared to trained Sith/Jedi like Yoda or Palpatine, but maybe they can influence weak minds and shit) You could have any combination of actual Dark Side influence and rumors: have some people correctly accuse real Dark Side guys, have Dark Side guys spreading false rumors that their innocent opponents are on the Dark Side, have two different candidates both being Dark force sensitives, spreading rumors about each other (or one spreading rumors, being a down and dirty political fighter, and the other refusing to stoop to that and going for the Stately Above the Fray vibe, but secretly being comparably ruthless), or (perhaps most common) rumors of Dark Side influence being spread in politics when no one involved is actually even Force sensitive let alone in touch with the Dark Side.

You could go a little deeper: some people in the aftermath of the Empire might think that the Force – both the Dark and Light sides – has held the galaxy kind of kind of technical and moral cul-de-sac, accounting for the ways in which the whole setting combines backwardness and advancement:

Why is it that in spite of having overcome the light barrier many millennia ago and being able to build small planet-sized battle stations, they seem to have made negligible progress against senescence and death generally? Because the Force provides a frame in which you either embrace the Dark Side, in which case triumph over mortality is a personal achievement to be hoarded and lorded over your inferiors, or you adhere to the Light Side, in which case you reject the “unnatural abilities” of Dark immortality. Progress against mortality at a collective, civilizational level doesn’t make sense from either of those perspectives.

Why is it that in spite of apparently being fully sentient in many cases, droids are still treated as chattel property without rights? Why is it that they still seem to have widespread animal agriculture? Maybe because the Force doesn’t notice forms of sentience that have no or negligible midichlorian counts or force sensitivity or whatever. Obi-Wan could probably walk past a droid refurbishing facility where droids are getting reset to factory settings, or a slaughterhouse, and not feel any “disturbance in the force, voices crying out in terror and suddenly being silenced” etc, and when the Light Side is treated in some respects as the moral arbiter of the setting, and when a big part of the Light Side is “trust your feelings,” and when the “force feelings” don’t really apply to beasts or droids, they don't get a lot of consideration.

Why is it that the only visions of authority are somewhere on a spectrum from “centralized, despotic autocracy” (the Empire) to “decentralized, semi-feudal oligarchy” (the Republic, with a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth-style weak senatorial authority, proliferation of local nobles like counts and princesses, etc, and, perhaps to an even further extent along that spectrum, the Confederacy of Independent Systems)? Maybe because it reflects how the Force tends to structure itself: the Dark Side tends to concentrate power in the hands of a couple of megalomaniacs. The Light Side tends to distribute it across a broader order of Force-wielding elites, but still very rare as a fraction of the population.

You might say that these ideas don’t really get to the essence of the core appeal of Star Wars, which is more like stuff like starfighter battles and lightsaber duels and such, but I’m not saying these themes would necessarily be debated in great detail to the exclusion of action and stuff. They just could be the reason for the lightsaber duels and starfighter battles and such. Consider: in Episode I, the pretext for a lot of the action was a dispute over tariffs. Stated baldly, I think that’s drier than anything I mentioned.

#star wars

68 notes · View notes

batboyblog · 9 months

Text

The Charges against Donald Trump in Georgia:

Violation of the Georgia RICO Act: Serious Felony

Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer: Felony

Conspiracy to Commit Impersonating a Public Officer: Felony

Conspiracy to Commit Forgery in the First Degree: Felony

Conspiracy to Commit False Statements and Writings: Felony

Conspiracy to Commit Filing False Documents: Felony

Conspiracy to Commit Forgery in the First Degree: Felony

Conspiracy to Commit False Statements and Writings: Felony

Filing False Documents: Felony

Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer: Felony

False Statements and Writings: Felony

Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer: Felony

False Statements and Writings: Felony

if this is accurate to the charges that are brought against Trump it would bring to 91 the number of felonies Trump is facing in Federal and State Courts.

#donald trump #Trump #Georgia #Crime #politics #2020 election #trump indictment

82 notes · View notes

reasoningdaily · 8 months

Text

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/09/03/beverly-hills-police-lawsuit/

A Beverly Hills police task force arrested 106 people. All but one were Black, lawsuit claims.

Beverly Hills Police targeted Black people with harassment and arrest for low-level or nonexistent violations in an effort to keep them away from Rodeo Drive, according to a class-action racial discrimination lawsuit filed in California Superior Court Monday by civil rights attorneys Ben Crump and Bradley Gage.

youtube

The complaint centers on the Beverly Hills Police Department’s “Operation Safe Streets,” a campaign to address safety on the city’s famed luxury shopping destination of Rodeo Drive.

The suit claims that between March 2020 and July 2021, the task force made 106 arrests — 105 of whom were of Black people.

“If 2 percent of the residents of Beverly Hills are Black but almost 100 percent of the arrests are Black [people,] that’s a pretty clear indication something’s wrong,” Gage told The Washington Post Thursday.

“The women and men of BHPD take an oath to protect human life and enforce the law — regardless of race,” Beverly Hills Police Chief Dominick Rivetti said in a statement Wednesday. “Any violation of this pledge is contrary to the values of this department. We take all concerns regarding the conduct of our officers very seriously.“

During a Wednesday news conference announcing the lawsuit, Crump — the attorney best-known for representing the family of George Floyd — framed the alleged racial bias in Beverly Hills as a national scourge that has led to the death or injury of people whose names are now synonymous with racially biased and violent policing.

“If implicit bias goes unchecked and discrimination goes unchecked, it leads to what happened to George Floyd in Minneapolis; what happened to Breonna Taylor in Louisville; what happened to Jacob Blake Jr. in Kenosha, Wis.,” he said. “That’s what happens if the actions of the Beverly Hills Police Department goes unchecked.”

Rivetti in his Wednesday statement said he formed the “Rodeo Drive Team” to address complaints from businesses about a rise in burglary, shoplifting and nuisances such as public intoxication. Rivetti touted the success of the task force, noting that officers arrested individuals with “fraudulently obtained state unemployment benefits” and seizing $250,000 in cash and “ill-gotten debit cards.”

The police did not respond to The Post’s request for the number of arrests or their racial breakdown.

Gage said his team corroborated the figure through a variety of sources, including Beverly Hills police officers who were troubled by the trend that resulted from the 16-month safety operation.

The more than 100 arrestees were cited for a range of noncriminal behaviors such as roller skating or riding a scooter on the sidewalk to low-level infractions such as jaywalking. None of the same behaviors and infractions were enforced against White people, the lawsuit claims.

“The way [police] stop them for trivial things is troubling as well,” Gage said, alleging that Black people questioned by police would face four or five officers or have guns drawn on them. “White people don’t have that.”

The two named plaintiffs in the suit were not California residents but visiting from Philadelphia. During a visit to Beverly Hills last September, Khalil White and Jasmine Williams were arrested while riding scooters on the sidewalk and jailed for resisting arrest. The charges, like most of those that stemmed from the operation, were dropped.

The lawsuit claims that other incidents with police did not end in arrest but indicate a pattern of harassment and over-policing of Black people. Salehe Bembury, then the vice president of men’s footwear at Versace, was allegedly jaywalking and holding two shopping bags from his store last October when police stopped him, asked for his ID and ran his name for warrants.

Bembury filmed the encounter, which went viral.

“So I’m in Beverly Hills and I’m getting … searched for shopping at the store I work for and just being Black,” he said in an Instagram video.

“You’re making a completely different narrative,” a BHPD officer said in response.

The current iteration of the lawsuit focuses on the outcome of Operation Safe Streets, but Gage expects it will broaden to encompass a wider review of discriminatory policing by BHPD and expects the class of complainants to grow tenfold.

“I don’t think Ben or I have had five minutes since the press conference that we haven’t received phone calls. I’ve been getting them since midnight,” Gage said. Since Wednesday, he estimates the legal team has received at least 100 new complaints of racial profiling in traffic stops and other claims of discrimination from around the same period as Operation Safe Streets.

#beverly hills #racial profiling #cops are thugs #Black Lives Matter #california racism #A Beverly Hills police task force arrested 106 people. All but one were Black #lawsuit claims.#Youtube

63 notes · View notes

arizonaconservativegal · 4 months

Text

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Here's the thing with the push to remove Trump from the ballot on the grounds of committing an 'insurrection' - it's not just about Trump. Frankly I think it's a hell of a stretch to say that anything Trump has done qualifies as an insurrection or rebellion and I would argue that using this section against him when he has not been convicted of anything or even charged with insurrection is a violation of due process. But again, it's not just about Trump. If the left is allowed to remove Trump from the ballot because of January 6, they will try it on all Republican candidates, either on the grounds that they participated directly or that they gave 'aid and comfort' to those who did.

Did you donate money to a legal defense fund or to Trump's campaign after J6? Did you retweet something questioning the election? Did you like a post from someone who was at the Capitol that day? Did you vote for a politician who did? Will you refuse to formally denounce the protestors when the media questions you on it?

"Oh come on," you might say, "that's ridiculous. 'Aid and comfort' means something specific. They can't just apply to it everything like that." Yeah, I would have said the same about 'insurrection' a couple years ago. And yet here we are.

The worst part is they don't even have to win the lawsuits to win the fight. They just have to keep us tied up in never ending legal battles over it. Just think about what that means. They can drain our campaigns of resources and keep our candidates stuck in a courtroom all year instead of on the campaign trail. They'll scare off all potential supporters because no one wants to be the next one in the crosshairs. And judges apparently can put a gag order on you so you can't even defend yourself publicly while the media is free to write all the borderline libelous headlines they want. They don't have disqualify you to defeat you. The threat and accusation is enough.

I'm not generally prone to catastrophizing about politics but this is one that genuinely scares me. I'm not worried about losing an election, I'm worried about losing the country. If one party is allowed to do this to the other, what are we left with? Single-party rule until someone else decides to take control by methods more forceful than a ballot box. If the left thought what happened before was an insurrection, well... let's just say I don't want think anyone wants to see what a real insurrection looks like.

30 notes · View notes

robertreich · 1 year

Video

youtube

This One Thing May Stop Trump From Running For Re-Election

Far-right politicians are dragging America back to the 19th century.

Reproductive rights in Wisconsin are now governed by an abortion law passed in 1849 — and in Arizona, a judge recently reinstated a ban on abortion first adopted in 1864.

Well, if Republicans are so keen to wind back the clock, I suggest reviving a different 19th century provision of the Constitution : Section Three of the 14th Amendment.

It states that, anyone who has taken an oath to protect the Constitution can be barred from holding public office if they “have engaged in insurrection” against the United States.

Sound familiar?

A judge in New Mexico thought so — and recently used it to permanently ban an insurrectionist from ever holding any state or federal office again.

The official — Commissioner Couy Griffin — spent months normalizing violence to keep Trump in office and urged supporters to travel to Washington with him on January 6th.

Griffin also voted twice against certifying New Mexico’s 2022 primary election, fueled by conspiracy theories about the security of voting equipment.

His case proves that it is possible to expel public officials who violate their oaths to the Constitution.

Any lawmakers who engaged in insurrection on January 6th must be held accountable and barred from holding public office now and in the future.

And yes, that includes Donald Trump.

#youtube #donald trump #January 6th #videos #video #politics #election

221 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 6 months

Text

Donald Trump stormed out of a Manhattan courtroom Wednesday after a heated day in court that saw the former president called to the witness stand in his $250 million fraud case and fined $10,000 for violating a gag order.

Trump's abrupt departure appeared to surprise even his own lawyers and his Secret Service agents, who went scurrying after him. He returned to the courtroom after the court day ended, and after his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, finished his contentious testimony.

Judge Arthur Engoron handed down the financial penalty after calling Trump to testify under oath in the afternoon about who he was talking about when he told reporters earlier in the day that the person sitting next to the Judge was "very partisan."

Trump said he was referring to Cohen, who he's previously called a rat, a liar and a felon.

The Judge asked Trump if he'd previously referred to his law clerk as "partisan" and Trump said, "maybe" he had referred to her as not fair because she's "very biased."

But, Trump insisted, he was referring to Cohen when he told reporters earlier that Engoron is “a very partisan judge with a person who’s very partisan sitting alongside him, perhaps even much more partisan than he is.”

Engoron's law clerk sits next to him and has been the subject of complaints from Trump's team, including earlier Wednesday, when Trump lawyer Alina Habba asked that there be no eye-rolling or whispers from the bench during her questioning of Cohen.

Engoron said he found Trump's testimony "not credible." He fined Trump for violating the gag order he issued earlier this month after the former president had smeared his law clerk on social media.

Trump stormed out of the courtroom about 45 minutes later, after the Judge denied a motion from his lawyers on a separate legal issue. Trump lawyer Cliff Robert had seized on Cohen's testimony that Trump never explicitly instructed him to inflate his financial statements to ask the Judge for a directed verdict dismissing the AG's claims about the statements, which Engoron refused.

The abrupt departure appeared to catch even his attorneys by surprise and caused gasps throughout the courtroom.

"The witness just admitted that we won the trial and the Judge should end this trial immediately. Thank you," Trump told reporters after he left.

Under questioning from AG's office, Cohen testified later Trump didn't specifically tell him to inflate the numbers and said he was like a "mob boss" who tells you what he wants without directly telling you.

When Cohen wrapped up his fiery two days on the witness stand, Robert again asked the Judge for a directed verdict, a request he said was "absolutely denied."

"This case has credible evidence all over the place," the judge said. "There is enough evidence in this case to fill this courtroom."

“They wanted to make a motion to dismiss the case, to which the judge responded: ‘Yeah, absolutely not,’” Cohen told reporters after leaving the courtroom. “You know why? Because he will ultimately be held accountable.”

Trump's lawyer had earlier asked the Judge to reconsider the fine, again contending the "partisan" person Trump referred to was Cohen. The Judge denied the motion and told Trump, "Don't do it again." If he does, the Judge said, the penalty will be "worse."

This is the second time Engoron has fined Trump for violating the gag order.

#us politics #news #nbc news #2023 #republicans #donald trump #conservatives #Michael Cohen #Judge Arthur Engoron #gag order #fraud #Alina Habba #Cliff Robert #letitia james #new york

53 notes · View notes

fallout4-reacts · 11 months

Note

How about the fo4 companions (including DLC companions) reacting to a S.S. who was an Ex-Paladin for the BOS and had killed their team after being ordered to kill a synth child and went AWOL, taking the child under their care as a backstory?

I didn't do Ada or Longfellow because I didn't get to know them very well. We can imagine Ada didn't really give a shit and Longfellow just accepted it. He is old, he has wisdom... and he is probably drunk (for all I know of him)

Cait : "Bad-ass! I couldn't do better myself, kids not kids. But I take it's a warnin'. Dinnae violate yer morality by...not touchin' a child?"

Codsworth : "So this is what you were doing the entire time you were missing?"

"Yes. I was on the Capital side. I was completely disoriented after what happened to Nate/Nora. I had no idea what to do. And I couldn't bear seeing all I knew... altered in that way. I continued walking towards the capital without pausing. I couldn't find anything better on the road, so I decided to join the BoS. Seek out a place to live and some semblance of civilization. But they're all monsters in the end."

"Except for Danse..."

Sole tries to hide their smile, but they shake their heads and return to their solemnity.

"However, the reason I'm talking to you today is that my responsibilities as a General are taking up more and more of my time. I frequently put myself in dangerous situations. Also, the closer I go to the Institute, the more scared I am of never returning. I would not want my other child to be abandoned or without means."

"Do you still have him with you?"

"I hid him close to Sanctuary. I try to see him as much as possible, but it's becoming increasingly difficult. He requires a healthy environment, and Sanctuary has transformed into a haven of peace and tolerance..."

"Don't say anything else! I'd be delighted to look after this little one while you're away! We will always be at home to greet you back."

Sole expected nothing less from their butler, but seeing his joy warms their heart. The child does require a stable environment. Besides, having a location to return to and be welcomed back would be great for them.

Curie : "How dreadful. Betraying your vows by having to kill all of these individuals. Please be sure that I understand. But betraying a vow must be horrifying."

Sole sighs. Curie is only familiar with Hippocrates' oath. They are well aware that the synth cannot consider betraying it. But they appreciate how she handled the story. After all, these murders and betrayals have been weighing on them for a long time, and it feels nice to finally have someone to talk to.

Danse (Post BB) : "This story was told from time to time in the dorms. But I never imagined it was true, and I never suspected for a second that it was you. I now have a better understanding of your situation. But how is it that Maxson has never had a doubt? And why are you back?"

"It was another era, another time. They had not yet performed ADN testing, so how could they have known? And I needed the BoS to get into the Institute. But if you want a completely honest response, they are simply incredibly stupid."

"I recognize it now."

Deacon (romanced) : There were always moments. Sole vanished from his radar for a few days, then reappeared. They were impossible to trace. He now understands. Sole would never have allowed them to be followed in order to expose the location of this synth child's hiding place. And Deacon has more admiration than ever for this person to whom he has now dedicated his life.

Dogmeat : Love the child. Everything else is nonsense. It's a dog. He simply loves the child... and guards him like a mother wolf.

Elder Maxson (romanced) : Cade is formal. The soldier is the same. But how could it have taken him so long to identify them? How could his officer be so careless? He's not sure how to react now. To set an example, he must surely execute Sole immediately. But can he truly? He doesn't have a choice. As soon as Sole returns to the ship, he will arrest them and hand them over to a firing squad.

He doesn't have a choice...

But what if...

He makes an effort to think. He attempts to figure out who on his team could handle such a delicate mission for him. Then he finds out. Heylan, the scribe, came naturally in his mind. He is aware that she covered Danse. He had been aware of it, yet he accepted it since he himself was hesitant. Because a large part of him was hoping for a loophole in this tricky situation. Because he cared so much about Danse. And now, once again, a dossier in which his emotions and his responsibilities collide. Is this bad luck? When the scribe enters his quarters, he requests that she close the door behind her.

"This discussion never happened, and if you mention it, I will deny everything and you will face justice."

Haylen had not anticipated such a welcome. She was already worried about appearing before the Elder, her nerves had now reached new heights. But she nodded, waiting for what the leader of her organisation intended to do.

"You will return to the ground and follow Sole's trail, trying to find their allies and visiting their colonies. You must deliver a message from me: "I know, never come back."

Haylen cocks her head to the side, unsure, but she nods once more.

"Good, sir."

"Be really discreet. If you do not send this message before Sole returns to the airport, I will be forced to execute them. Do you realise the significance of what I'm asking?"

"Sir, yes. I completely understood."

"Danse trusted you, Sole trusted you, and so do I. Don't betray that trust."

"Never, sir."

And now all Maxson has to do is wait and hope. He did everything in his power. May fate now look after Sole.

Hancock : "Killing BoS? Help a child? And you were unwilling to brag about it?"

Sole frowns and shakes their head.

"There's more to it than that. I deserted my companions; I betrayed those who had placed their trust in me. They were under my command, and—

"You put your duties as they must be. This ends the debate. Is he all right, the kid?"

"Yes, yes, yes. He lives not far away. I hid him in... well, I hid him. I try to see him as frequently as possible."

Hancock's keen stare falls on them, becoming somber.

"Are you too afraid to tell me where he is?"

His friend, embarrassed, lowers their head.

"Understand! I… For so long, I've lived as a renegade, and I've kept our path hidden. It's difficult to put faith in anyone on this subject."

With a slight smile on his face, the mayor shakes his head.

"You've just pointed out your betrayal, your massacer, and its existence to me. It's odd that you paused right before asking me to send Fahrenheit to babysit."

"Pardon?" Sole and the bodyguard inquire.

"Yes, keeping him secure. So many sacrifices, why not give him a life worth saving?"

"Not in Goodneighbourhood! Never!"

"So what? Isn't this the town of outcasts and fugitives?"

Sole mulls on what Hancock has just said, but they sighs deeply.

"No. This is not the kind of life I want for him."

"So it's better to hide him?"

"I'm not sure, but your girlfriend doesn't appear to agree with your plans."

"Fah is my daughter, not my girlfriend."

Sole's eyes widen in disbelief. Hancock busts out laughing.

"A secret for a secret. Where do you plan on putting down roots, for the kid? I mean, seriously."

Gage : "What on earth does that have to do with conquering the Commonwealth?"

Sole grimace. That was something they should have expected. Gage is unconcerned about his last sock. The past is the past, the raiders are not children of the heart, and Gage's objectives are more essential than humans leaving by the side of the road. Sole does not and will never insist. But one day, like this, Gage returns to them, perplexed.

"You know, boss, I've been thinking about something. You betrayed your old patrol for a child who isn't even human. There may be children present when we invade the Commonwealth colonies. Are you sure you're not going to do it backwards?"

Sole's eyes widen in amazement. Then they softly shake their head and smile.

"No way, Gage, never."

But after that, their lieutenant was shot in the head the moment he turned his back.

MacCready : "Killing BoS and protecting a child synth. Yeah. You like risks, it’s twisted, but who am I to judge?"

He sighs and shrugs.

"Say, regarding the events in Vault 81... I hope you don't hold my view in the same regard, and that you're not planning to gut me in my sleep."

"Did you request that this child die? You were upset that I saved him, but you didn't ask for his death. That's not the same."

"No, I didn't... I didn't mind that you saved him! I'm disappointed that you didn't save yourself for whatever reason!"

MacCready is suddenly interested in his weapon, which he disassembles to lubricate the mechanism.

"However, I am not surprised. In fact, an imbecile capable of giving up healthcare in favor of a child's life may well debunk BoS without guilt in order to rescue one."

"It was my team..."

"That was the motto. The past is gone. Winlock and Barnes were both killed by me. You heard me; I don't pass judgement."

Nick Valentine (romanced) : He had a good time that evening. Conversations about the past, Sole in his arms, starry sky over their heads. But, for once, Sole didn't bring up the pre-war topic. They described this horrific event from their recent history nervously, almost fearfully.

"And the kid, what's he become?" The detective inquires flatly.

"Always safe and hidden. I try to pay him visits every few days. But I'm always worried that he'll be discovered."

Sole looks up to Nick, and he sees their anxiety. He strokes their cheek gently.

"Your secret is safe with me. I will never betray you. In the meanwhile, we'll consider where we can best place the child. Perhaps one of your settlements. I suppose he could be quiet at Sanctuary, and you could stop constantly glancing over your shoulder."

Sole's eyes are now bright with joy. They had already considered it, but because this secret had always been closely guarded, they frequently pondered if it was a poor idea without anybody else talking about it. The fact that Nick agrees with them gives them comfort. Yes, perhaps it's time for this poor child to resume his normal existence. And now that they're thinking about it, they're certain that Sanctuary would be the ideal location.

Piper : "Wow! What a tale! I'm not supporting genocide, but these Brotherhoods are viciously slaughtering anything that isn't like them."

"It was not a genocide."

"A slaughter? Don't try and tell me it wasn't a slaughter."

"Do you intend to write an article about this?"

"No! Absolutely not! I'm not stupid enough to put you and the boy in danger, and it could eventually lead to an open war with the Brotherhoods to expose to them that the Commonwealth Minutemen General is a former traitor to their organisation."

Sole gently shakes their head, a small smile on their lips. Piper's intelligence should never be underestimated. She comprehends things better than anybody else, and they were right to put their trust in her.

Preston : "But really, you had to kill these men back then?"

Sole sadly shakes their head.

"They refused to listen to reason. They'd track me down and kill me. I was his single chance to living a free and happy life. I had no choice."

The Colonel nodded slowly, his gaze fixed on the Prydwen.

"I see what you're saying. And I completely understand your distress at seeing this ship. Okay, if diplomatic visits are necessary, I will make them. Meanwhile, return this sad child to Sanctuary so he can have a decent home. It's a disgrace to keep him among the ruins, fearful, when we can give him a better future."

Sole can't keep a smile from appearing on their lips. They were completely right in telling Preston of everything.

Strong : “Boring. No need so much words. Protecting child. Good. Strong strong. Strong will protect child of human.”

Sole smiled slightly. It felt good to talk about it. And as usual, Strong’s simplistic philosophy reinforced their convictions. And now they have one more ally to protect their child.

X6-88 : Sole is sad now. They have since developed a trusting relationship with the Courser. They had placed their trust in his friendship. They assumed that X6 had progressed past certain phases of the Institute. That he had changed. So, they confided in him about everything. Their companion's reply did not take long. He demanded that Sole hand over the infant to the Institute. There have been relatively few synth children created, and they are extremely valuable for research advancement. Sole refused, as they had before refused to follow X6 in some "homework," but the Courser did not sweep the subject with the back of his hand this time. He made a threat against Sole. He threatened them, and everything about his demeanour indicated that he was serious. He stated thoroughly that it was the final straw. If Sole continued to refuse to behave in the Institute's best interests, they would be judged to have chosen to be an enemy. When Sole refused to cooperate, X6 opened fire, claiming that he didn't need Sole to find the child but couldn't afford to have them in his way. Sole is sad since they have to kill someone they thought a friend.

63 notes · View notes

cephalopodvictorious · 4 months

Text

When Oklahoma state Rep. John Talley brought forward a bill to ban corporal punishment for disabled students last year, he thought it would be a slam dunk. Oklahoma is one of only a handful of states where corporal punishment against disabled students is still legal, and he thought this would be an easy, bipartisan win all his colleagues could get on board with. That was not entirely accurate. To the surprise of many, certain lawmakers rallied against the bill. Among them was Oklahoma Rep. Jim Olsen, who cited scripture to back up his claim that the rod should not be spared. "God’s word is higher than all the so-called experts,” Olsen proclaimed. “Several scriptures could be read here. Let me read just one, Proverbs 29: ‘The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame,’” he offered. “So that would seem to endorse the use of corporal punishment.”

Look. everything else aside (and that's a lot to put aside), the Constitution explicitly states that Church and State are separate. The Oklahoma Oath of Office BEGINS WITH THE LINE

“I __________________________do solemnly swear (or affirm) that, I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma..." OATH OF OFFICE (51 O.S. § 2)

so all morality aside, Biblical interpretations aside, this man has already violated his oath of office. All of these Evangelicals who insist that the bible supersedes the Constitution are ineligible to hold office because they cannot uphold the oath of office. plain and simple.

21 notes · View notes

constantly-deactivated · 1 year

Text

Nancy Pelosi Military Tribunal, 👇 Part I

(Due to the length of this article, I am separating it into parts. I will try to get the 2nd part published this evening.)

Thirteen hours over two days is how long it took Vice Adm. Darse E. Crandall of the United States Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps to present evidence against former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom a 3-officer panel found guilty of treason, seditious conspiracy, and conspiracy to commit murder late Thursday afternoon.

In an opening statement, the admiral said JAG and the Office of Military Commissions had copious evidence linking Pelosi to crimes dating back to 1987 but, for time’s sake, would focus only on her most recent and egregious offenses, starting with a 2016 murder-for-hire plot to assassinate then-presidential candidate Donald J. Trump. He said JAG was aware of many nefarious schemes to end Trump’s life–all of which were bungled or foiled–and had incontrovertible evidence tying Pelosi to four. Moreover, Adm. Crandall told the panel he would prove beyond reasonable doubt that Pelosi in 2018 hatched a plot to kidnap Barron Trump to force Donald Trump’s resignation, so Pence would be the new president. Pelosi, Vice Adm. Crandall said, had even considered having Melania or Ivanka murdered in hopes of forcing a tormented Trump from office.

Furthermore, he said Pelosi shared responsibility with the late Gavin Newsom in locking down California and enforcing draconian vaccine mandates that sickened or killed countless residents of the Golden State. Pelosi’s “Covid crimes,” he intoned, violated the Constitution of the United States; they affronted the very people she had sworn to serve. But as persons withered and died—not from Covid but from the clot shot —and families grieved, Pelosi grew in wealth and power, immeasurably so. When she wasn’t wielding an iron fist, she was clutching the bottle, Vice Adm. Crandall said, and informed the panel witness statements and Pelosi’s own documents would give credence to JAG’s allegations.

“This woman isn’t even vaccinated,” Vice Adm. Crandall said, pointing at Pelosi. “We know this because we pulled her blood, and we can test. She eschewed her own mandates. Why? Because she knew the vaccines were dangerous, and we’ll prove that.”

When offered a chance to give her own opening statement, Pelosi, appearing sans counsel, pursed her lips and kept quiet. She was disheveled and seemed distraught, her shriveled, bony fingers visibly trembling as bloodshot eyes scanned the court.

Vice Admiral Crandall introduced a witness, a 29-year-old Latin male named Xavier Ramirez, who, having been sworn in, described himself as Pelosi’s former gigolo and “boy toy.” He testified under oath that he had regularly “entertained” Pelosi between April and July of 2016, usually at upscale hotels in the San Francisco area. Mr. Ramirez said he hadn’t documented each meeting, but guessed he saw Pelosi 15 times.

“I hope you were paid well, Mr. Ramirez,” Vice Adm. Crandall quipped.

“Very well,” the witness replied.

“I’ve never seen this man before in my life,” Pelosi shouted at the top of her lungs, her voice gravelly and hoarse.

The admiral reprimanded her outburst, saying she could either exercise decorum or be physically restrained.

“Mr. Ramirez, when we first spoke, you mentioned a specific meeting on a certain date. If you would, would you please repeat what you said, to the best of your recollection,” Vice Adm. Crandall said.

“It was July 21, 2016. Nancy was in a bad way because Mr. Donald Trump just accepted the Republican nomination. Trump this, Trump that was all she talked about. She paid me, so I listened. She was drinking, of course. Nancy likes to drink. She is a big drinker, a habitual drinker, to say it in a nice way. So, the more she drinks, the more she talks—”

“—While we appreciate your colorful tale, could you please be briefer, come to the point,” Vice Adm. Crandall said.

“The point, yes; she said she wanted to kill Donald Trump,” the witness said.

“Kill or have killed?”

“Well, have killed; she certainly wasn’t doing it herself. Nancy asked me do I know someone, because I am Cuban, I must know someone, she told me. And there I am thinking to myself why I should know a hitman just because I’m Cuban. I thought maybe she joked and asked if she was kidding, but, no, Nancy was dead serious. She offered me $25k cash in advance to find someone. Nancy said if I did, and it got done, I’d get $225K more and the person who kill Trump get $250K. Then she laughs and says to me if Trump has too much protection, she can do the daughter—you know, tall, pretty blonde, Ivanka.”

Vice Admiral asked if Mr. Ramirez had seen or handled the $25,000.

“I saw it come out of her purse. Banded stacks $1000 each. I saw it, I touched it, but I did not take. I told her, ‘You’re Nancy Pelosi, you must have powerful friends. I want nothing to do with this,’ and she tells me, and this I remember very well, ‘This time it has to be an outside party.’ I tell her flatly that’s not why I am here,” Mr. Ramirez explained.

“And I assume, Mr. Ramirez, the ‘services’ you performed for the defendant didn’t cost 25 grand,” Vice Adm. Crandall said.

Mr. Ramirez laughed. “No, I wish, but much less, and she paid me in advance.”

“Did you bring your concerns to the Secret Service, to the police?”

“Are you crazy? No. If she could kill Trump, I could get killed like a fly on the wall. When I left, it was last time I saw her,” Mr. Ramirez said.

“Yet the defendant claims she’s never seen you before today. But we know that’s untrue,” Vice Adm. Crandall said.

He projected onto a large screen television digital images he had obtained from the witness. One clearly showed Pelosi and Mr. Ramirez hugging in a hotel room; another showed them standing side-by-side, smiling at a camera. “These are ‘selfies’ you took in the defendant’s company, is that correct?”

“That’s correct,” Mr. Ramirez said.

“Why did you take them?”

“Bragging rights.”

Vice Adm. Crandall snorted. “I really don’t think that’s something to brag about, Mr. Ramirez. You’re excused.”

The admiral addressed the panel: “This alone is solicitation for murder, which in traditional courts carries up to a 20-year sentence. In this case, we’re talking about a presidential candidate. And we’re by no means done.”

As Soon as I get more I will post it.🤔

It's coming in parts so bear with me.🙏

160 notes · View notes