Notices by I moved to Mastodon.social (teri_kanefield@law-and-politics.online), page 9

@LGsMom

I don't believe we know.

I have wondered how that conversation went down.

But just consider the dynamics of the situation: One lawyer didn't do a complete search and had another lawyer sign an affidavit that the search was compete "as far as she knows."

Plus you know that Trump sets people against each other and demands "loyalty" and expects other to take the fall.

You could almost have a situation where the defense lawyers are all co-conspirators.

My mind just exploded so I have to go think this over.

Me: 🤔 💥

4/

. . . we have something else going on.

Defense lawyers and prosecutors talk the way opposing counsel in civil cases talk, with a big difference: There is a power imbalance: The prosecutor has the power.

But the defense lawyers are not normally witnesses. They are not "interviewed" and they don't testify.

Parlatore Alina Habba and Christina Bobb testified to the grand jury.

Evan Corcoran was ordered to testify.

Epshteyn was "interviewed" by the special counsel.

2/

I've characterized the infighting as a division between acting like this is a normal case and offering Trump a normal defense, or considering Trump's political needs, which are opposed to his legal needs.

Another thing seems to be going on: You have to worry you're the fall guy. You have to worry about what the others are saying.

There are legal issues that come into play when a lawyer has to be a witness against a client . . .

3/

I guess this week the news is all about Trump's lawyers.

This, all by itself, is nuts. I mean, just not normal.

"Trump lawyer Jim Trusty’s frustrations with the legal team emerged over dinner at the five-star Breakers hotel hours after the special master hearing. He was overheard by a guardian
reporter who happened to be sitting at the table next to them."

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/01/trump-lawyers-resign-criminal-investigation

While it's normal for defense lawyers to talk to prosecutors . . .

1/

So remember when a week or so ago, when Parlatore quit the Trump legal team and appeared on CNN and talked about how he left because of infighting . . . and lawyers everywhere were like, "Gee the gossip is fun but . . . lawyers are not supposed to do this."

Privilege or not, you're not supposed to go on TV and talk about the inner workings of your former's clients legal team.

Well, I guess Team Trump is angry:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-lawyers-consider-revenge-for-former-colleague?ref=home?ref=home

1/

The part Team Trump is angry about is this:

Parlatore said "Boris Epshteyn, used his authority to run interference and halt legal cooperation with the feds."

Big surprise: Epshteyn didn't like being thrown under the bus.

Epshteyn caught the drift; Parlatore was accusing him of using his position of influence to obstruct the DOJ special counsel’s investigation.

Translation: Epshteyn was looking out for Trump the politician. Parlatore was acting like this was a normal criminal probe.

2/

One problem with Parlatore trying to say, "I was trying to do this all by the book and Epshteyn disregarded the book," is that Parlatore really shouldn't have been on CNN with his story.

Even though it is totally fun to see the infighting happening in public.

Now Trump's legal team is considering complaining to the bar about Parlatore's ethical lapse.

Trump's legal team reporting someone to the bar for ethical lapses means irony is dead.

3/

This is hilarious.

So the big launch for DeSantis with Elon Musk isn't happening because of technical difficulties.

Then, Biden threw some shade by saying "this link works" and giving a link to donate to his campaign.

(H/t Ben Collins)

I just checked, and yup: A technical disaster on Twitter just when Musk needs it to work.

@feditips I tried an app but didn't like it. If I don't log on for more than a day, I have to scroll through hundreds of posts to get to the post recent.

Is there a favorite?

By the way, this is how to get rid of the electoral college without a Constitutional amendment:

See: https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

If states that have a combined electoral count of more than 270 amend their own constitutions to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, the national popular vote winner becomes president.

It would be "tough but plausible" to have this in place by 2028.

Still easier than amending the constitution.

And see: https://www.rgj.com/story/news/2023/05/18/nevada-legislature-takes-step-toward-joining-national-popular-vote-compact/70234121007/

Enough technology (a foreign language to me).

Back to law.

I have this week's blog post ready:
https://terikanefield.com/trump-was-found-liable-for-sexual-abuse-and-defamation-and-hes-appealing-now-what/

Trump was Found Liable for Sexual Abuse and Defamation — and He’s Appealing. Now what?

Basically, Appellate Law 101 🤓

I see lots of comments saying that Trump's game is to delay.

To begin with, appealing doesn't "delay" because his loss isn't on hold while the appeal pends.

He still lost. He is trying to overturn that loss, but until (or unless) he does, he still lost.

More importantly, I challenge the talking point that Trump's aim is to delay.

That was often what he accomplished, but I maintain that was not (and never was) his goal:

See:
https://terikanefield.com/trump-is-not-trying-to-delay-he-is-trying-to-obstruct-and-destroy/

If you missed it, I did a thread earlier about the history of rape laws in response to a comment about the E. Jean Carroll case.

This may be what drew their ire.

I think we can safely assume that racists are also misogynists (since their second favorite word had 4 letters and started with "c.")

Anyway, if you're interested in a brief history of rape laws.

Did you know rape was originally a property crime?

https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_Kanefield/110304873440510592

Over the past few hours, my timeline was descended upon by very ugly users who have been spewing profanity and vulgar language.

They obviously have a network and descended en mass.

I just blocked 5 domains and didn't lose a single follower.

Later I'll try to figure out how to remove their posts.

Hopefully I got them all. Apologies if you see something vulgar.

Adding: Blocked three more domains. Didn't lose a single follower.

Thanks to the people who said we can probably remove them because we own the server.

I will call a meeting with my technical support staff (my husband) as soon as he is available.

I just blocked a few people who left very offensive comments after I said people who don't like my content should block me.

One involved the 'n' word and other showed a vulgar image. I wish I could remove them.

One feature I miss from Twitter is the ability to remove offensive comments from my timeline.

I am sorry if some of you have to see them.

Most of the comments I receive are interesting and worth reading.

My personal website seemed to have gone down temporarily.

My technical support staff (my husband) came to look. By the time he got here, the website was back up.

He is looking for technical causes. My theory is that my computer is haunted by gremlins and I will not believe anything else without solid evidence.

Anyway, it's back up. Thank you to people who told me.

A journalist just asked to talk to me about my comments about Mastodon. I'll reveal who and the piece she writes when it comes out.

Meanwhile, the same publication said this last year:

"But Mastodon’s model comes with its own risks. If the server you join disappears, you could lose everything, just like if your email provider shut down."

Is that true, or can you move first?

Adding: I'd think the reputable admins should never do that, but can they?

@feditips

There are a lot of words in his article dancing around what I think is a simple, obvious dilemma for the GOP:

? The GOP base wants hard-core Trump-Kari Lake candidates.

?The general electorate doesn't.

So the candidates who win GOP primaries are likely to lose in general elections.

The problem gets worse for the GOP with each election cycle as the electorate grows more diverse, and more of the generation that came to the polls in Wisconsin are eligible to vote.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/10/politics/senate-republicans-primary-challenges-trump/index.html