A Deeply Fractured US

[Navy_Pete]

SCOTUS has announced that they’ll hear the Colorado appeal regarding the decision that Trump isn’t eligible in that state. Appellant’s (Trump’s) submission, respondents reply, and the appellant’s final reply are all due in the next month, with an oral hearing February 8th. SCOTUS should rule on the matter before the end of February.

There are about seven or eight individual issues that have been raised so far in the initial requests for SCOTUS to hear the matter. SCOTUS’ decision to take the case doesn’t narrow down what’s to be briefed, so we can expect pretty much all of the issues we’ve discussed arising out of the Colorado case to be argued.

The initial appeal has also been filed in Maine. That will take a bit longer to climb through the courts.

It will be interesting to see how that all shakes out, as the states appear to have different rules, so unless they have some kind of definitive ruling on whether or not he engaged in insurrection or if it would need to be separate state by state rulings.

Would be pretty crazy though if the SCOTUS ruled upheld the ineligibility but that didn't actually prevent him in other states. At the moment he's unable to run a business or charity in NY due to fraud, is charged with violating the secrets act, and somehow still the front runner. Which is crazy when he might not even be allowed in some countries normally if he is convicted on any of the 90 odd felonies he's facing.

 

[Remius]

It will be interesting to see how that all shakes out, as the states appear to have different rules, so unless they have some kind of definitive ruling on whether or not he engaged in insurrection or if it would need to be separate state by state rulings.

Would be pretty crazy though if the SCOTUS ruled upheld the ineligibility but that didn't actually prevent him in other states. At the moment he's unable to run a business or charity in NY due to fraud, is charged with violating the secrets act, and somehow still the front runner. Which is crazy when he might not even be allowed in some countries normally if he is convicted on any of the 90 odd felonies he's facing.

A good take i saw this morning on Smerconish is that it is likely that SCOTUS will rule that the 14th amendment was designed for a different time and rule against ineligibility but that they will define the President as an Officer of the state and likely rule against the president being immune from prosecution.

This would mean that Trump could still be found guilty in his various trials, could still run but would leave it to the people to judge by way of voting (with criminality or not).

 

[brihard]

Which is crazy when he might not even be allowed in some countries normally if he is convicted on any of the 90 odd felonies he's facing.

Conviction isn’t required. He would already be inadmissible to Canada under a.36(2)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, by reason of criminality. The standard of proof for that is “reasonable grounds to believe” a foreign national committed an offense that would be an indictable offense here in Canada. If you’ve been charged with a US felony, that standard is generally more than met.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

hmm I wonder why he got all of that...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1742984167670100280

Who cares why he got it? All that matters is if it was legal or not. I wouldn't be assuming too much. Just think about it for a second. If there was even the slightest whiff of impropriety obama would have garland all over this like white on rice. This is the biden friendly press trying to conjure a scandal out of nothing, IMO.

Sounds like Rattner is a little jealous that a neophyte kicked his ass at his own game.

 

[brihard]

Who cares why he got it? All that matters is if it was legal or not. I wouldn't be assuming too much. Just think about it for a second. If there was even the slightest whiff of impropriety obama would have garland all over this like white on rice. This is the biden friendly press trying to conjure a scandal out of nothing, IMO.

Sounds like Rattner is a little jealous that a neophyte kicked his ass at his own game.

This is not at all consistent with your expressed views on potential/perceived corruption or influence-peddling involving Hunter Biden trading on his last name or his father’s position. Your position on him suggest you should be very interested in potential corruption implicating Kushner, if in fact there is any.

You and I are in agreement that the business dealings surrounding a president or other senior officials and their close family deserve scrutiny, and any impropriety should be investigated. However, this should be consistent regardless of which party or which president.

 

[Lumber]

Obama would have garland all over this like white on rice.

What? Who know?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

This is not at all consistent with your expressed views on potential/perceived corruption or influence-peddling involving Hunter Biden trading on his last name or his father’s position. Your position on him suggest you should be very interested in potential corruption implicating Kushner, if in fact there is any.

You and I are in agreement that the business dealings surrounding a president or other senior officials and their close family deserve scrutiny, and any impropriety should be investigated. However, this should be consistent regardless of which party or which president.

Show me what Kushner did wrong. Change my mind.

H Biden has a slew of supposed evidence against him and real charges, brought by a special council(?) appointed by garland. He is still innocent til proven otherwise, of course.

Show me any impropriety on the part of Kushner. Other than Biden and Kushner, both being innocent until proven guilty, there is no similarity between the two.

This particular incident has all the earmarks of pelosi's wrap up smear tactic explanation, prompted by the media giving Rattner a chance to sow doubt. I will be wholly unsurprised if Garland doesn't now call for an investigation of Kushner, based on Rattners little whine.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Show me any impropriety on the part of Kushner.

Any situation in which well-connected people are receiving a lot of money (or other considerations) without exchanging something obviously worth the money has the appearance of impropriety. But, like all appearances, investigation is necessary if "proof" is required. Investigation, of course, is discretionary, and is a process, so like all processes, it can be stalled and strangled.

 

[dimsum]

…and now for something completely different (from 2020).

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/04/us/boy-pays-off-lunch-debt-trnd/index.html

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Another one bites the dust

TSA official accused of exploiting a family member with dementia is arrested at Atlanta airport

Maxine McManaman, the assistant federal security director of the TSA, was arrested at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport in Atlanta on a warrant out of Florida, police said.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Lumber]

Another one bites the dust

TSA official accused of exploiting a family member with dementia is arrested at Atlanta airport

Maxine McManaman, the assistant federal security director of the TSA, was arrested at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport in Atlanta on a warrant out of Florida, police said.

www.nbcnews.com

Another "one" what?

 

[brihard]

Another "one" what?

Not seeing how it ties in to the thread either. Shitty person committing elder abuse to the extend of crime? Absolutely arrest and charge as appropriate. It's not clear to me what this ties into, or what this is 'another' of that has been previously referred to in the thread.

 

[KevinB]

Not seeing how it ties in to the thread either. Shitty person committing elder abuse to the extend of crime? Absolutely arrest and charge as appropriate. It's not clear to me what this ties into, or what this is 'another' of that has been previously referred to in the thread.

You and me both. Maybe we are missing something ?

 

[RangerRay]

You and me both. Maybe we are missing something ?

C’mon guys! She’s a member of “The Deep State” (TM)! It’s obvious!

/sarcasm

 

[brihard]

You and me both. Maybe we are missing something ?

So, her title is "Assistant Federal Security Director - Mission Support", and she's in Atlanta. As near as I can tell from looking up LinkedIns of other people with that job title, her responsibility would be on the corporal side (HR, Admin, Finance etc) for a single airport, reporting to the Federal Security Director and Deputy Federal Security Director for the same airport/region- given Atlanta's size, probably that single airport. She'd be one of several AFSD's at that airport with different portfolios. So, mid level executive with a geographically local scope of responsibility. Certainly not super senior or in any way a political appointee. Here's a job posting for the same position at a different airport. The job is a GS-14 equivalent on the US government pay scale; that would be LCol or Col equivalent in terms of executive role. USAJOBS - Job Announcement

So yeah, good on police for catching her. I don't see the 'fractured US' relevance. Pretty sure everyone would be pretty agreed that she sounds like a POS.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Not seeing how it ties in to the thread either. Shitty person committing elder abuse to the extend of crime? Absolutely arrest and charge as appropriate. It's not clear to me what this ties into, or what this is 'another' of that has been previously referred to in the thread.

You and me both. Maybe we are missing something ?

It fit the 'Deeply Fractured US' theme. Or are we finally admitting this is strictly a Trump thread? I read it as any US official tied to malfeasance or repercussions for breech of policy.

Another one (biden appointee) in a relatively high end position. Is it any different than if it had been an assistant FBI director? I don't think so. The TSA fills a very important, tactical and commercial role.

Does it matter what the charge was? It goes to trust and competence.

'Another one bites the dust' is just a meaningless tag line. This has happened before. I don't like just posting a link without some sort of narrative. From now on I will. It would seem my style of sarcasm or narration isn't for, or understood by, everyone.

Apologies for the misunderstanding. Mea culpa.

 

[brihard]

It fit the 'Deeply Fractured US' theme. Or are we finally admitting this is strictly a Trump thread? I read it as any US official tied to malfeasance or repercussions for breech of policy.

Another one (biden appointee) in a relatively high end position. Is it any different than if it had been an assistant FBI director? I don't think so. The TSA fills a very important, tactical and commercial role.

Does it matter what the charge was? It goes to trust and competence.

'Another one bites the dust' is just a meaningless tag line. This has happened before. I don't like just posting a link without some sort of narrative. From now on I will. It would seem my style of sarcasm or narration isn't for, or understood by, everyone.

Apologies for the misunderstanding. Mea culpa.

She's not a Biden appointee. This isn't a politically appointed or confirmed position. In Canada it's equivalent to a hired public service EX-01 or or a LCol/Col. An FBI assistant director would be comparable to a CAF major general, so 2-3 pay grades higher than she is (and would also not be a political appointee or senate confirmed position).

This position - which as I said is mid level and local - is multiple levels below anyone who is an 'appointee'. Important in her specific workplace, lots of local responsibilities, but a number of levels below anything even passingly political. Think of her as like a CAF brigade chief of staff.

This story is pretty comparable to any of the mid level officers in the 'high ranking police behaving badly' thread, but that's about it.

 

[dimsum]

Trump cannot legally qualify for Nevada’s 2024 primary ballot - The Nevada Independent

The Nevada GOP, which decided the same primary election process that’s been used to select every other non-presidential Republican candidate in the state for decades is still not good enough for presidential candidates in 2024.

thenevadaindependent.com

No, Trump is ineligible for Nevada’s primary ballot because Trump’s campaign didn’t fill out an application to place him on Nevada’s primary ballot.

As hilarious as it would have been if this was the product of a paperwork snafu committed by an incompetently run campaign, Trump’s absence from Nevada’s primary ballot was wholly intentional. They merely followed the directions provided to them by a truly incompetently run organization — the Nevada GOP, which decided the same primary election process that’s been used to select every other non-presidential Republican candidate, including our current governor, in the state for decades is still not good enoughfor presidential candidates in 2024. In case anyone didn’t get the memo, the state party warned presidential campaigns that if it saw their candidates’ names on the primary ballot, those candidates would be ineligible to participate in and receive delegates from the caucus.

Oops.

 

[IKnowNothing]

You and me both. Maybe we are missing something ?

Yup. Thread isn't about a President's son in law recieving 2 billion dollars from a foreign state weeks after leaving a role as senior advisor (that he was wholly unqualified for and should have been a damning scandal in and of itself) where he worked directly with aforementioned foreign state anymore is it?

 

[brihard]

Trump cannot legally qualify for Nevada’s 2024 primary ballot - The Nevada Independent

The Nevada GOP, which decided the same primary election process that’s been used to select every other non-presidential Republican candidate in the state for decades is still not good enough for presidential candidates in 2024.

thenevadaindependent.com

Oops.

Weird but probably not consequential.

Fact check: Donald Trump wasn't left off the Nevada ballot, former president opting for caucus

mynews4.com