US Politics V - now with 20% more echo chamber - Page 48 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-25-2018, 07:33 PM   #941
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,170
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Show me a legal scholar who disagrees with me on this point. You haven't so far. You think you have, but you haven't.

As to what I was saying about still being able to assert your 5th Amendment privilege, and refuse to testify, after a Federal pardon, if you're still under legal jeadpordy for a related matter in state court...



Since you're so enamoured of legal scholars, Eugene Volokh is one of the best.

BTW, none of what I, or Volokh is saying here, contradicts what Professor Tribe wrote (that you quoted out of context). No one denies that once criminal jeopardy is no longer an issue, in any venue, whether via a pardon or otherwise, you lose your right against self-incrimination. I said as much. Tribe just wasn't addressing the issue of dual sovereignty or continued legal jeopardy in state court.

So, yeah sorry. We're all in agreement. Except you, that is.
Pleading the 5th, or the inability to do so, was never about state court.

Let's say Trump pardons a high ranking official from any and all matters pretaining to Russian interference in the election. Let's say his name rhymes with Mushner, just as a hypothetical.

It doesn't prevent Mushner from being charged in state court, but he could certainly plead the 5th. But that's meaningless, because it's highly unlikely that Mushner would be put on the stand by his lawyer anyways, and Schneiderman would have mountains of evidence.

So Mush is facing conviction of the same crime, or of other crimes connected to money laundering in New York.

Fucked.

Then Big ole Bob Mueller comes along and summons Mushner as a witness in the federal case another guy - let's call this one Drumpf. Mushner can't plead the 5th and has to testify. Or he could refuse and be jailed on contempt, or maybe he lies and is charged with perjury.

Conceivably Drumpf could pardon him again for those crimes, but he'd still be fucked by the state.

Or... perhaps those state charges miraculously go away, or a sentence lessened if he simply testifies.

Or maybe they don't.

Either way everyone's fucked.
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 07:35 PM   #942
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,963
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Let's just skip ahead

I'll post like a dozen different articles by different legal scholars, Nick will come faults in everything one, done others will post things, Nick will point out something silly like with the "pardon block" thing, this will go on for 20 or so posts and get nowhere.

So let's just call it legal scholars vs Nick and see who ends up being right
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Show me a legal scholar who disagrees with me on this point. You haven't so far. You think you have, but you haven't.

As to what I was saying about still being able to assert your 5th Amendment privilege, and refuse to testify, after a Federal pardon, if you're still under legal jeadpordy for a related matter in state court...



Since you're so enamoured of legal scholars, Eugene Volokh is one of the best.

BTW, none of what I, or Volokh is saying here, contradicts what Professor Tribe wrote (that you quoted out of context). No one denies that once criminal jeopardy is no longer an issue, in any venue, whether via a pardon or otherwise, you lose your right against self-incrimination. I said as much. Tribe just wasn't addressing the issue of dual sovereignty or continued legal jeopardy in state court.

So, yeah sorry. We're all in agreement. Except you, that is.
__________________

DaveC is online now  
Old 01-25-2018, 07:53 PM   #943
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 04:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Pleading the 5th, or the inability to do so, was never about state court.

Let's say Trump pardons a high ranking official from any and all matters pretaining to Russian interference in the election. Let's say his name rhymes with Mushner, just as a hypothetical.

It doesn't prevent Mushner from being charged in state court, but he could certainly plead the 5th. But that's meaningless, because it's highly unlikely that Mushner would be put on the stand by his lawyer anyways, and Schneiderman would have mountains of evidence.

So Mush is facing conviction of the same crime, or of other crimes connected to money laundering in New York.

Fucked.

Then Big ole Bob Mueller comes along and summons Mushner as a witness in the federal case another guy - let's call this one Drumpf. Mushner can't plead the 5th and has to testify. Or he could refuse and be jailed on contempt, or maybe he lies and is charged with perjury.

Conceivably Drumpf could pardon him again for those crimes, but he'd still be fucked by the state.

Or... perhaps those state charges miraculously go away, or a sentence lessened if he simply testifies.

Or maybe they don't.

Either way everyone's fucked.
You're getting a couple things crossed...its not about pleading the 5th in state or federal court...it's about the right against self-incrimination.

Where you're wrong is that Kushner could still claim the 5th, even to the special counsel, as long as what Mueller wants to him to "testify" to could incriminate him in state court. Whether Kushner would take the stand in state court is irrelevant; whether NY had a mountain of evidence already is irrelevant. You can't compel someone to testify on matters they have potential or continuing legal jeopardy on. Because anything that Kushner said to Mueller would be on the record, under oath, and could be used by NY. THAT's where the self-incrimination comes in. So if Kusher was still in legal jeopardy in NY, he can absolutely continue to plead the 5th to Mueller.

Here's an example. Money laundering is both a Federal and State Crime.

Suppose the Feds charge you with money laundering. The President, who likes money launderers, pardons you. Feds drop all charges b/c of the pardon.
Then NY, where you did the money laundering, charges you instead.
The Feds want you to snitch on all the guys who you did your money laundering with. They still want to bust up your ring. And tell you "since you have a pardon, you're not under legal jeopardy, so you have to spill the beans on your whole operation". Which do you (because you have a bad lawyer) and tell all to the FBI.
Then NY says "Wow, look at this. This idiot admitted to everything, under oath, to the FBI. We've got everything we need. This guy is fucked." And proceed to use everything you said to the Feds against you in state court.

See how that works? That's why you don't lose your right of self-incrimination as long as long as you face legal jeopardy, on a related matter, in any venue.

Now, if what NY has Kushner on has nothing to do with what Mueller wants him to talk about, that's another story. Or if Kushner were granted immunity that anything he said to Mueller, and information potentially gleaned from it, wouldn't be used against him in NY (and this is very hard to do) that might be another matter also and he might be able to be compelled since immunity would remove the legal jeopardy in state court. This can be tricky though which is why I said earlier it was getting into the weeds. Or, as I said earlier, forget trying to compel Kushner's testimony. Mueller simply offers him a straight up deal deal "Give up Trump voluntarily and I'll make sure my friends in NY make the charges go away". (this IMO is the most likely scenario, but it's hard to imagine Trump's family turning against him this way, but who knows).

Or, as you alluded to, even if Kushner could theoretically be compelled to testify after a pardon (let's say there's no potential charges in NY), Trump could just pardon them again. If Kushner, after getting the pardon, was ordered to cooperate by a Federal Judge with the special counsel, and he refused, all the Judge could do is cite him with contempt and throw him in jail. And Trump would just issue a pardon for that. There's some question as to whether the pardon power extends this far (as it's being clearly used to obstruct justice), but remember it was contempt that Trump pardoned Arapaio for. So THAT would have to work it's way through he courts also.

So yes, if NY had anyone in Trump's circle for criminal activity, they could go to jail, no matter what happens with the special counsel. That's a given. And the AG and Mueller can certainly work together to apply pressure, where they're able. And everyone knows they're working together. All that's going on already with Manafort.

But a lot has to happen for any of these "NY" scenarios with Trumps kids (and Kushner) to work out in the event of a pardon...starting with them actually being investigated and charged with a crime. I'm not saying that's not happening or couldn't happen, but there's been no reports of that yet, so it's all speculation. And in any event, none of them can be compelled to testify if they have continuing legal jeopardy in NY or anyplace else on a related matter (absent a specific immunity deal).
Nick66 is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 08:05 PM   #944
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,170
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Let's just skip ahead

I'll post like a dozen different articles by different legal scholars, Nick will come faults in everything one, done others will post things, Nick will point out something silly like with the "pardon block" thing, this will go on for 20 or so posts and get nowhere.

So let's just call it legal scholars vs Nick and see who ends up being right
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 08:15 PM   #945
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,465
Local Time: 11:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
Do you agree that's likely to happen?



I'd be genuinely surprised if I saw anyone in this investigation actually go to jail. At this point, I'd just be satisfied to see them all forced to leave the White House. But if there's any chance that at least some, if not all, of these people could actually serve time for their crap, that would be good to see.



I do agree with BEAL's concerns about how Trump supporters would respond if such a thing were to happen, though.


I honestly don’t know.

A lot of it may come down to who controls Congress. The GOP obviously sees Trump as an idiot who will sign anything, so long as he doesn’t fuck it all up via ignorance, stupidity, and mendacity. They will want their useful idiot until he becomes unuseful.

Firing Mueller will be a moment.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 08:18 PM   #946
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,170
Local Time: 10:51 PM
WASHINGTON — President Trump ordered the firing last June of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation, according to four people told of the matter, but ultimately backed down after the White House counsel threatened to resign rather than carry out the directive.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 08:36 PM   #947
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,465
Local Time: 11:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
WASHINGTON — President Trump ordered the firing last June of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation, according to four people told of the matter, but ultimately backed down after the White House counsel threatened to resign rather than carry out the directive.


No obstruction!
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 08:37 PM   #948
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 04:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Nick66 is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 08:46 PM   #949
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,170
Local Time: 10:51 PM
I didn't even read your last response, cause


Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Let's just skip ahead

I'll post like a dozen different articles by different legal scholars, Nick will come faults in everything one, done others will post things, Nick will point out something silly like with the "pardon block" thing, this will go on for 20 or so posts and get nowhere.

So let's just call it legal scholars vs Nick and see who ends up being right
So sure, feel free to put that notch on your victory belt. I just don't feel like running in circles with people anymore. It's tiring.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 08:48 PM   #950
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,170
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
No obstruction!
Only the best obstruction
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-25-2018, 11:44 PM   #951
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,465
Local Time: 11:51 PM
So how long do we think the Russians have had leverage over Trump? Was the racist birth certificate nonsense their first assignment for their orange-faced asset? The timing seems right, no? He was sent to be a disrupter.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 02:38 AM   #952
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,170
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
So how long do we think the Russians have had leverage over Trump? Was the racist birth certificate nonsense their first assignment for their orange-faced asset? The timing seems right, no? He was sent to be a disrupter.
Welp... The Trump SoHo was announced in 2006.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 09:45 AM   #953
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 04:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
I didn't even read your last response
No worries. I'll try to keep it under 140 characters next time.
Nick66 is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 09:51 AM   #954
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,170
Local Time: 10:51 PM
It's 280 now - do try and keep up
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 10:10 AM   #955
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
gareth brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 6,593
Local Time: 02:51 PM
Trump requests Van Gogh painting for the white house and is offered gold toilet instead.
gareth brown is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 11:31 AM   #956
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,465
Local Time: 11:51 PM


No gold shower?
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 04:33 PM   #957
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 11:51 PM
Haha, perfect
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 04:41 PM   #958
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 11:51 PM
I don't understand why these shows are paying Stormy Daniels to say nothing (because of her non disclosure settlement). She's going to be on Kimmel the night of the SOTU.

She was on Inside Edition too.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 04:45 PM   #959
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 64,498
Local Time: 08:51 PM
Ratings.
corianderstem is offline  
Old 01-26-2018, 05:04 PM   #960
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 11:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post
Ratings.
Just to look at her I guess, because she's not saying anything. All she said on Inside Edition was telling Jim Moret that he's pretty.
__________________

MrsSpringsteen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×