Only if someone else is paying.
The correction to the correction part has already been addressed. But …
However that in itself is some pretty scary prevaricating on Hutchinson’s part.
If trump is in her opinion the greatest threat to democracy, then how is his being the R nominee something less than catastrophic? After all that nominee (whoever it is) has not far off a 50% chance of being the next president.
That’s not too different from saying “I agree that dynamite is very dangerous. However holding a stick of dynamite in your hand and lighting the fuse is not inviting catastrophe, not even a little bit.”
ISTM what she meant was:
As an apologist for the 2023 version of the R party, I’m willing to go waaaay out on a limb here today and gently suggest I won’t vote for trump. But I’m unwilling to go any farther, lest I be torn to shreds by the MAGAt horde. Figuratively and perhaps literally.
In that cravenly cowardly attitude she has a lot of company all up and down the R party: pols, staffers, operatives, and pundits. Not to mention ordinary voters.
America: Land of the in-thrall-to-Fox/QAnon/Newsmax. Home of the ignorant cowardly.
Oh how the mighty have fallen.
I agree with you @LSLGuy, but you left out a small section in your otherwise perfect analysis of her real intent.
PS - I’m too young and too ambitious to accept being forcibly retired in the Republican political community the way EVERY other Republican who’s been honest about their feelings has been to date.
Legal Eagle explains why Engoron’s ruling is a “corporate death penalty” for the Trump Organization.
He doesn’t mention any possible appeal by Trump. Is there no avenue for Trump to appeal or otherwise delay before all his property is sold off?
fear not, he is appealing and trying to delay. i’m not sure how well things will go when you say things like this about the judge in charge of your case.
“engoron " clearly does not comprehend the scope of the chaos (his) decision has wrought,” trump lawyers clifferd robert, michael farina, and michael madaio wrote in a 41-page appellate brief filed as the non-jury trial entered its fifth day of testimony.
Cheesebro’s latest legal maneuver has failed. Too bad so sad.
Anyone know if there’s something like a law school equivalent of the Kobayashi Maru scenario from Star Trek, where a prospective attorney is given an absolutely unwinnable case and has to see it through moot court to the inevitable conclusion?
I imagine that’s what Kenneth Chesebro’s lawyers feel like they’re going through right now.
Yeah, it’s called “Criminal Law Clinic.” You have to learn to live with losing. The moot court problems are designed so both parties have something to argue.
I hacked into the AI judge to win my moot court problem…
I know, I didn’t get that either. She certainly wasn’t prevaricating when she called trump “the greatest threat to Democracy”. Why would she prevaricate by qualifying her statement that she wouldn’t vote for trump with the addendum “But I also do not want to sit here and catastrophize the scenario where he is actually the Republican nominee”.
Not sure what the heck that even means. My guess is pretty much the same as yours; she got nervous after having put the “trump is the greatest threat to Democracy” line on record, and was trying to backtrack a little to not rile up the mega MAGA crazies against her too much.
I don’t know, is it that, PL, which is a bit of a cynical reading, or is she genuinely backtracking out of fear? She was courageous to say what she said in the Jan. 6 hearings; she seems to me that she does feel a need to do the right thing and tell the truth, at least that’s what it seemed at the time of the hearings; so the ‘catastrophize’ comment is bizarre to me. Did she backtrack out of fear, or weaseling to keep a foot in Repub circles?
Well, given just how heavily armed and crazy some of the MAGAts are, I can’t really blame her for getting worried. No doubt she’s already been put on the up against the wall list by the more rabid of them.
Why only one when it’s more likely both? No one enters the circles she (and many others to be clear) joined out of pure altruism, unless for a brief moment before leaving or adapting. There was plenty of self-interest, enlightened or otherwise at every step of her political career.
Sure, she may be afraid of violence, but unless Trump is re-elected, it’s going to be more likely from one of the many lone-wolf individuals that are a threat to everyone when they finally decide to make a ‘statement’ and is likely far better protected than most.
Do I respect that she was one of the few that made an actual effort to speak out after Trump brought his worst face forward? Sure! Do I think she should have done so earlier? Damn straight. Do I want her dead? Emphatically not! Do I think that she should do more to work against what she enabled? Absolutely.
Do I think she’s hoping for a future where (echoing many current threads) Republicans try to get their act back together and she can point to being a loyal Republican who is still ethical and will stand up when needed? 110% Yes. Otherwise she wouldn’t be targeting -TRUMP- but talking just as much about the entire Republican structure that enabled, protected, and still supports him.
THEY’RE NOT LUMPY! You’re an asshole.
I can’t remember where I saw footage of that deposition; either here or on reddit. Too funny. If anyone didn’t see it, the above was Lindell’s reaction to someone at the deposition calling his pillows lumpy.
I saw that video, too, and I also can’t remember where. But, yeah, Lindell is not a well man.
And apparently not a financially solvent man, either.
word is - he just bought 6 pillows for mar-a-lago — so don’t say he doesnt support his friends
… paging @Lumpy … we need expert advice
I thought it odd when Mike said “Obviously you don’t have a mypillow too.” Well I just learned there’s a mypillow 2.0. Now it makes sense. When the fuck did pillows start having version numbers?
Clearly you missed … the headlines.
As I get older I’m avoiding pop culture, politics, and especially the intersection of the two. So no public pillow talk.
But he can’t later sue himself for malpractice when he loses his case.