The Trump Card...

[ATeam]

He doesn't know anything about the copyright law, and says as much in the interview. "we don't know, we'll leave that up to the legal beagles...".

Exactly.

Actions speak louder and more clearly than the vagaries of a CNN interview, and so far the "legal beagles" have served no notice to the Trump campaign about copyright infringement;

Yet. No action today does not mean no action ever. For a very long time, there was no action to indict Trump, but here we are.

that's because there is none.

The sheriff's office owns the copyright. What he/they intend to do with those rights, if anything, remains to be seen.

What's more they knew when they made the decision about taking the mug shot that Trump would use it for campaign purposes and made no effort to intercede on those efforts ahead of time.

True. But that does not change the fact that the sheriff's office owns the copyright. And, once again, that is the sole point I have made about this matter. You continually want to talk about additional topics, actions, aspects whatever. That's fine. I'm content to make my sole point, which is:

The Fulton County Sheriff's office owns the copyright to the Trump mug shot photo.

 

[ATeam]

There doesn't appear to be any court case precedent either of a local government claiming ownership of the mugshot and litigating it to recoup profits.

So, since there are no court cases that apply, there are no court cases that apply. We do not have that information because there is no information. And even if there were court cases, it does not change the SOLE point I am making. The sheriff's office owns the copyright to Trump's mug shot.

 

[ATeam]

Their thoughts are only known to them, and are meaningless anyway. What counts is their actions, or lack thereof in this case.

So, since someone does nothing, it must mean something, and you know that meaning, and no one else is allowed to speculate on other meanings since speculating is all you are doing?

Yesterday, one of my employees did not show up for work and I did not know the reason why. By your logic, since she did nothing (as in not appear where and when she was expected), it empowers me to me make up what that means. I do not need to know her thoughts, feelings, whereabouts, status or what's going on behind the scenes in her life. Her "nothing" empowers me, and me alone, to make up anything I wish to say what her absence means.

That's attractive logic because it is convenient, but it is a poor way to navigate in the real world. Baseless assumptions lead to errors you would otherwise not make. (She had jury duty and I forgot she told me that last week.)

Does any serious person think that Garland and Smith would have passed on the opportunity to indict Trump for insurrection or incitement if there was even the slightest chance that they could make either charge stick?

I'm a serious person and I absolutely believe that. The reason DOJ has a conviction rate over 95% is precisely because they do not bring cases to court that they do not believe they can win. If they thought they had an 80% or even 90% chance of winning a conviction on an insurrection charge, they would not bring it to court because the win-certainty is not there.

Also note that the investigation is continuing and a lot of new information will become available to DOJ as the four Trump trials proceed. Additional charges can be filed at any time.

They made the decision to indict on a lot of other flimsy charges, but not those two. They evidently determined the legal and constitutional standards of insurrection had not been met on Jan 6th.

No, they did not evidently determine that at all.

 

[ATeam]

How are you privy to what they knew ?

What sort of mental gymnastics are involved in obtaining such insights ?

He does tend to assume he knows a lot about what is in other people's hearts and minds, doesn't he?

 

[ATeam]

A group of voters in Minnesota has filed a legal challenge with the state Supreme Court asking that the Secretary of State be directed to exclude Trump from the ballot there ABC News reports ... on account of all the insurrectioning he done.

A similar lawsuit was filed in California today also. Similar suits in multiple states increase the likelihood the US Supreme Court will take it up.

 

[muttly]

The 14th Amendment scheme is a loser. It looks of desperation too. Pathetic…

 

[Pilgrim]

The Fulton County Sheriff's office owns the copyright to the Trump mug shot photo.

For the sake of argument, suppose the Fulton County Sheriff's office does own the copyright to a mug shot? Unless they establish that the photo qualifies for copyright protection, said copyright is worthless and may as well not exist. Until the sheriff's dept files suit against the Trump campaign for copyright infringement it's reasonable to conclude they have no legitimate reason or legal basis to sue, and the claim of ownership is meaningless.

 

[muttly]

And even if the 14 Amendment did apply to Presidents, which it doesn’t, Trump was acquitted in the Senate in the second Impeachment.

 

[ATeam]

Meadows Suffers Second Defeat in Court

The first defeat was when Meadows' bid to have his GA RICO case removed to federal court was denied.

Today's defeat came when U.S. District Court Judge Steve Jones denied Meadows' bid to stay legal proceedings against him in Fulton County as he appeals his federal removal bid to the 11th Circuit.

Meadows is expected to make a third attempt to avoid trial. He will seek a stay from the 11th Circuit Court. That bid will fail too because the law is clear as two previous judges have found.

As things stand now, Meadows will stand trial in Georgia on a date and with other co-defendants to be determined by Fulton County Judge Macafee. It seems quite likely that Trump and Meadows will be tried together with a number of other co-defendants.

 

[ATeam]

Judge Cannon Sets Limits on Trump

"A federal judge on Wednesday issued an order setting limits on where and how former President Donald Trump can discuss classified information with his defense lawyers for the criminal case where he is charged with retaining classified documents after leaving the White House.

"The protective order by Judge Aileen Cannon instructing Trump and his lawyers to discuss that information in a secured location endorsed limitations sought by prosecutors from the office of special counsel Jack Smith over the objections of Trump." (Source)

This was a very simple decision to make but Cannon took weeks to make it. It seems clear to me that she intends to assist Trump by dragging this case out as long as possible so there is no verdict before the Nov. 2024 election. She may pull that off, as long as she does nothing too far afield that would give DOJ grounds to appeal to the 11th Circuit to have her removed from the case.

Had this been Trump's only indictment, Canno's slow-walking the case would have greatly troubled me. But with the Washington case having Trump as the sole defendant and only four counts, Cannon is actually doing DOJ a favor by keeping the Florida case delayed so the Washington case can quickly proceed.

The Manhattan case is already known to take back seat to the others. The Manhattan DA has said as much.

The Georgia case is also proceeding quickly, but with 19 co-defendants and the RICO charges, the case is highly complex and will take a long time to complete. I do not expect the GA case to conclude before the Nov. 2024 election.

For speed, we have the Washington case.
For a verdict that cannot be pardoned, we have the GA case.
For additional lengthy prison sentences, we have the Florida case.
For further proof that no one is above the law, we have the Manhattan case.

 

[Ragman]

And even if the 14 Amendment did apply to Presidents, which it doesn’t, ....

I guess the courts should refuse to hear the cases.
Our constitutional scholar has spoken.

 

[muttly]

For the sake of argument, suppose the Fulton County Sheriff's office does own the copyright to a mug shot? Unless they establish that the photo qualifies for copyright protection, said copyright is worthless and may as well not exist. Until the sheriff's dept files suit against the Trump campaign for copyright infringement it's reasonable to conclude they have no legitimate reason or legal basis to sue, and the claim of ownership is meaningless.

Mugshots have been around a long time too. But it never occurred to any of them with supposed copyrights to sue people making money off of them. Nothing, nada, no cases.

 

[muttly]

I guess the courts should refuse to hear the cases.
Our constitutional scholar has spoken.

Why waste their time?

 

[ATeam]

It Just Keeps Getting Worse and Worse for These People

Former Trump attorney Jenna Ellis, one of the co-defendants named in the Georgia RICO indictment, just settled a matter in Colorado in which she admitted under oath and on record that she lied when she said the 2020 election was stolen.

While the Colorado matter is of minor consequence to Ellis, it may be of grave consequence to her and her co-defendants in GA, because her admission under oath is admissible evidence available to Fulton County DA Fani Willis.

No matter what the defendants do, don't do, say and don't say, their situations continue to degrade. Why is that? Some would say it's because this is all one big witch hunt. I would say it's because they are guilty and their situations are degrading because more and more evidence comes to light. These people are on their way to prison, and each day brings them closer to their fate.

And even if this was a witch hunt, the witches are doing a piss-poor job of not getting caught. Team players they are not. Notice Ellis rising today for all to see, shouting as she waves her sworn statement; "Hey Fani! Do you see me! Do you see the lies I told? Hey Fani, look at me! Hey Fani, here I am!

Notice also it is not the DOJ drawing attention to Ellis. It is not the Democrats. It is not the liberal media. Republican Jenna Ellis herself is rising for all to see and hear. These people are all Republicans and they are turning on each other as they scramble to minimize their personal pain.

Rudy told the same lies, sometimes sitting in the same room beside Ellis. Imagine the joy of Rudy's attorneys as they see Ellis jumping up and down in public with her new sworn statement. As I said, this just keeps getting worse and worse.

 

[RLENT]

It Just Keeps Getting Worse and Worse for These People

... No matter what the defendants do, don't do, say and don't say, their situations continue to degrade. Why is that?

... maybe because they are all literal morons ?

 

[Ragman]

... maybe because they are all literal morons ?

Along with people on social media forums that continue to support and actually promote the actions of these nincompoops.

 

[ATeam]

Developments in the 14th Amendment Disqualification Question

Supreme Court to decide whether to kick Trump off ballot

Castro v. Trump, a case challenging Trump's candidacy with the 14th Amendment, is expected to decided by the justices on or before October 9.

www.newsweek.com

The case above referenced is not the lawsuit filed in Colorado or Minnesota. This plaintiff, presidential candidate John Castro, petitioned directly to the US Supreme Court. We'll soon learn what the Court will do with this petition, if anything. And if they do something, we'll soon learn what impact, if any, that will have on the other cases.

Top New Hampshire election official says he has no legal basis for keeping Trump off the ballot

Scanlan’s comments come a day after Trump, the current front-runner in the Republican primary, sent a letter to Scanlan's office signed by dozens of GOP lawmakers.

www.politico.com

Having read the New Hampshire Secretary of State's response to the 14th Amendment question he was urged to consider, I find his response to be reasonable and legally defensible. As a state official, he, in consultation the the State AG, finds nothing in NH law that would allow him to keep Trump off the state presidential primary ballot.

But that's not the end of the story. It actually clears the way for CREW or another credible entity to sue the Secretary as they have done in at least two other states. And that would give the Secretary some desirable political cover if the Court compels him to keep Trump off the ballot.

The suit would likely ask the court to compel the Secretary to keep Trump off the ballot on 14th Amendment grounds. The plaintiffs would likely argue that NH law never contemplated the possibility that the 14 Amendment would apply, but it should apply in this case. The fact that NH law is silent on the issue does not nullify what the US Constitution says and requires in a case like Trump's case today.

I do not know if that is how this will play out or not. And I'm certainly not a constitutional expert or an attorney. Just sharing my expectations here, while acknowledging subsequent developments may prove me wrong.

 

[muttly]

I thought it was 100 percent guaranteed that Trump won’t win the election? Some are trying really hard to not let the PEOPLE decide. Instead they’re scheming this 14th Amendment nonsense.

 

[coalminer]

I thought it was 100 percent guaranteed that Trump won’t win the election? Some are trying really hard to not let the PEOPLE decide. Instead they’re scheming this 14th Amendment nonsense.

Looks like they are taking a page from the GOP playbook, but instead of disqualifying voters, they are trying to disqualify the candidate. We lose either way.

If Trump wins next year, we wont ever get to vote for a president again, they will never give up their power.

 

[muttly]

No

Along with people on social media forums that continue to support and actually promote the actions of these nincompoops.

Now do the phony dossier with the pee pee tape that the nincompoops believed in.