The Arizona "audit"

Different strokes, man… I like her.

Indeed.
I have MSNBC on my youtube rotation as I like their content. But I can’t listen to Rachel Maddow. There’s a certain smugness, and the faux laughing just annoys me.

She’s obviously done a lot of great work, so it’s just an irrational bias on my part.

(sorry for continuing the hijack but it doesn’t seem there’s any audit updates at the moment)

Or, even worse…“watch this space.” (Which is code for, “we’ll cover that in a later show.”)

I think she’s a great story teller. However, that example is a good one when she really fell flat. No one bats 1,000.

Ewww… Not sure if I need to clean my keyboard now.

Fair enough, I really don’t watch any of them. Very occasionally if someone links here, I may watch, but I generally prefer a transcript, and even then, prefer an actual article.

But, when I have watched Maddow, it has seemed as though she has quite a bit of filler before she is willing to divulge her nugget of news.

Yeah I can’t watch her. It’s not like I dislike her, I just find her annoying. It’s subjective and irrational but it is what it is.

Hey, I like her too! She just has a few habits that I personally find a bit annoying.

I’m now regretting starting this hijack with what I thought would be a throw away line.

Some details on the slowly turning (grinding?) wheels of justice in the Cyber Ninjas case.

Might those records be stored at a “data center” in a remote cabin in the backwoods of Montana? From the article:

I found this amusing little snippet in your second link (underlining mine)

Cyber Ninjas’ lawyer Jack Wilenchik last week asked for a new judge in The Republic’s records case following a highly contentious hearing during which Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah imposed a $50,000 a day fine against the company and rejected Wilenchik’s request to abandon his client, who he said wasn’t paying him.

I almost feel sorry for the poor guy. He has clients who are idiots and don’t pay him but he can’t even quit.

Reminds me of the phrase “Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.”
Every decent person who got sucked into this mess has had their life disrupted or ruined. Many . . . . not so decent people are building a career on it however; check out Kari Lake’s campaign for Governor for example. (She co-headlined the Trump rally in Florence AZ a weekend or two ago.)

Back on topic, those communications must be full of incriminating material the way they are protecting them! If they ever materialize I halfway expect them to contain e-mails from Meadows and Trump explicitly saying: “We are counting upon you to overturn the election we all know we lost at the ballot box.” And maybe some financing from Trump University that was supposed to be refunded to fraud victims.

I’m figuring that they show that a bunch of public money and donations were directly funneled into places that they shouldn’t have been. Basically that the whole thing was a scam from beginning to end, and if all was revealed the instigators would be facing a decade or two in prison for fraud.

First rule of Grift Club:

Don’t let the marks know you’ve grifted them, as you want to go the well many more times.

Maybe, maybe not. After the J6 committee got that dumpster-load of documents just last week that the Supreme Court wouldn’t protect (or am I mixing this up with whatever Letitia James recently got?), I quickly saw some headlines to the effect that there were no really serious smoking guns there – much to the disappointment of us anti-Trumpers who were just drooling over the prospect!

This latest dump might not be much different than that.

Perhaps you are correct, but Trump always behaves that way: fight, delay, take it to absurd lengths. For this one company to be fighting as hard as Trump does just through routine manner of proceeding seems to suggest there is more to it.

This seems most likely to me, if they ever are revealed-- which I very much doubt. If they are going to go to prison over this, it might as well be for contempt of court as for sedition or fraud or whatever would be revealed if they comply. Better for them to never turn them over.

Reminds me of advice I often receive: “Stay silent and let others assume you are ignorant rather than opening your mouth and removing doubt.” If they were completely innocent the docs would have been turned over long ago. If they were just a little guilty – after fifty grand a day they would have been turned over now. Now, the only logical conclusion is that the documents will reveal worse than what they are suffering currently.

For refusing to obey a court order there is, to some extent, no limit to how long you serve in jail.

Proverbs 17:28 King James Version (KJV)
Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: And he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding.

The ‘Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt’ phrasing has been attributed to Abraham Lincoln, and cited in the companion book on Ken Burns’ documentary about Mark Twain in the section What Twain Didn’t Say. There are many others.

[/Hijack]

Thank you for this!
It is rewarding to know that when I run at the mouth I am not only defying my loving and long dead father, but Lincoln, Twain, two men I hold in quite esteem*. Not only men I admire, but Holy Writ informs me to sit down, shut up and hold on.

  • I am currently re-reading A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court and I defy anyone to read the criticism of government in those times and not be reminded of Trump and his allies. Especially Morgan Le Fay reminds me of the modern Republican Party in the administration of her household and I say that as a someone who was a dedicated registered Republican for decades. (And only now will I take the advice of my betters and shut up.)

Not sure how I missed this post before, but thank for enlightening me. Would not cause me to lose sleep at all if Logan and the other actors in this “Fraudit” broke Chyadwick’s record.

The term-limits on contempt that you may be thinking of arise with grand juries or Congressional contempt. As I understand it, contempt of a grand jury only lasts for the duration of that jury. When the jury expires, any existing contempt for it expires too.

Same with Congress. As I understand it, when each two-year Congress ends, all existing contempts for that Congress also expire with it.