Miles ArcherMiles Archer's Journal
It's not that I have a fragile ego or are easily triggered. It's that I'm honest enough with myself, and i can also look back over a lifetime and see situations where I could have taken the coward's way out, OR fought back, and I fight back.
In case you're wondering why I'm posting this, it's in regard to this piece:
Here is why Trump is cleaning his opponents' clocks
...and excerpts from it like this:
As Linkins wrote, Republicans continue to sit on their hands while a twice-impeached former president surges ahead despite 34 felony indictments and the "dark cloud" of his inciting an insurrection on Jan. 6 hovers over him.
Looking back, he wrote, "In 2016, the Republicans in the field allowed Trump to seize a surfeit of unearned alpha mystique by largely failing to retaliate not with equal force, anyway when he landed his crude and sometimes shocking blows. They treated him on the debate stage like an interloper with poor manners, and begged whatever referee happened to be standing by to please enforce the Marquess of Queensbury rules tout de suite, like a gang of gilded fops from some forgotten Molière comedy."
See, I DO NOT THINK REPUBLICANS ARE "HELPLESS" against Trump.
Why do I say that? When Alvin Bragg announced his indictment, there was REASONABLE CONCERN that New York might face another January 6th. Maybe NOT so reasonable in that I do not believe for a second that the NYPD would have allowed it. So the concern WAS reasonable, but...a handful of MAGAts showed up, along with a healthy helping of Anti-Trump protesters, most likely because the MAGAts had seen their compatriots thrown down the dungeon hole as a reward for loving their bloated orange messiah.
So Republicans are cowering in fear over what "COULD" happen if they crossed Trump, rather than storming that fucking hill and planting that flag and being FREE OF THIS ASSHOLE ONCE AND FOR ALL.
Hey...I'm Italian. Sometimes we sit around the table for hours and think things through. Other times, we charge. Republicans apparently lack the spine for option 2.
No, I'm just gonna bury my head in the sand, because we are the SCOTUS, and we are ABOVE any kind of ethics concern.
Meanwhile, Whistleblower raises alarm over John Roberts' wife making $10.3 million in legal commissions: 'I knew immediately that it was wrong'
...and this is NOT "new" news. BEFORE Clarence's little escapades became public, I knew NOTHING about Roberts' wife.
It's at times like this when I know Merrick Garland, Jack Smith and Fani Willis really ARE three-dimensional chess masters, and I'm just another working class guy who doesn't understand the judicial system. So when I click on something like this:
Expect decisions soon: Experts say Pences sharply incriminating testimony is bad news for Trump
...and I read:
"President Trump was wrong. I had no right to overturn the election," Pence said during a speech last month. "And his reckless words endangered my family and everyone at the Capitol that day, and I know history will hold Donald Trump accountable."
...I say YES, we should take ANOTHER two and a half years to look for "SOME KIND OF EVIDENCE," some kind of HIDDEN MYSTERY MOTIVATION, to know beyond the shadow of a doubt whether Trump "knew he lost" or if he "believed the election was stolen."
We need to do this for the same reason that people BELIEVED HIM at the time of the "birther" nonsense when he said "My investigators just got back from Hawaii and you won't believe what they found," except there WERE no investigators and NO ONE went to Hawaii.
So please, take another two and a half years and leave no stone unturned. I'd hate for you to miss anything, any crucial detail, like what Trump had for lunch on January 6th.
The single most aggravating and annoying aspect of Trump coverage in the media...and this ranges from radical right crap on Newsmax, OAN, Fox, to so-called "liberal" media like MSNBC, is an almost child-like fascination and hypnotic addiction to telling the world about developments that "are not making him happy" or are causing him to "have a bad day."
He's a freaking CAREER CRIMINAL who has INVITED everything that is happening to him right now, and more.
The fact that he is BEGGING Congressional Republicans to drive a wedge behind him and Alvin Bragg and shut him down is NOT A SIGN OF STRENGTH, it is the ULTIMATE PROOF of his WEAKNESS.
And yet, one news anchor after another is compelled to comment on how he is "feeling."
Remember when he was elected? It was something like 30 seconds later when his followers deployed their favorite call for unity with Democrats: "Fuck Your Feelings." IT WAS ALMOST INSTANTANEOUS, and yet SOMEHOW, we are supposed to give a RAT'S ASS about what an elderly sociopath is "going through" at his country club.
The judge was clearly peeved with Joe Tacopinas cross-examination of E. Jean Carroll.
BY ROBERT KATZBERG
APRIL 28, 20237:30 AM
Trial lawyers are performance artists, very much like stand-up comedians. As I explain in my book, The Vanishing Trial, these seemingly disparate professions have much in common. First, it takes years to develop and hone the skills necessary to make people laugh or to effectively try cases. Second, the results of your work are immediate and clearpeople either laugh at your jokes or not, and the emotional impact of a summation or cross-examination is felt immediately by all those present in a courtroom. Finally, in both professions, kudos are directly bestowed on you for success, and if you bomb, there is no one else to blame.
The cross of Carroll was inherently loaded with land mines. First, she is an elderly woman whose direct testimony over the past two days on direct seems to have been effective. Her lawyer Mike Ferrara, not only took her and the jury through the painful detains of the assault itself, but very effectively had her address potential weaknesses in her story and explain them directly. In what trial lawyers call bringing it out on direct, you remove any surprise when the issue is raised on cross, provide in advance your best explanation, and eliminate the belief that you were too afraid to address the subject. In Carrolls direct examination, rational reasons were provided for a host of potential matters that might impeach her credibility, including the very long time interval between the event itself and when she made any public statements about it, her personal dislike of the former president, and her ability to make money out of the incident.
Tacopina was also boxed in by the need to show that an allegation made by a credible person wasas he described it in his opening statementunbelievable. While in an organized crime case, for instance, it may be necessary and appropriate to bludgeon a cooperating former mob member into admitting that at least part of his testimony is questionable, that tactic is hardly appropriate in this case. On Thursday, Tacopinas repeated attempts to get Carroll to give in to this approach were unsuccessful.
So, it came as no surprise that Judge Kaplan periodically intervened in the cross-examination, calling Tacopinas questions repetitive and argumentative. Judge Kaplans frustration seemed to increase as the day wore on. Weve been up and down the mountain. Move on. New York Times reporters in the courtroom noticed that just before the mid-day break, the typically attentive jury seemed to be losing steam. Late in the afternoon, when Tacopina asked Carroll to provide details about the dress she wore the day of the alleged assault, Judge Kaplan immediately interjected and excused the jury for the day. Not exactly the impression Team Trump wanted the jury to be left with on the way home.
All Trump wanted to do was overthrow our Democracy, and the weaponized government, which exists only to give Trump a bad day, forced Mike Pence to sit down and tell them all about how Trump wanted him to carry out that wish.
I HOPE YOU'RE HAPPY.
(I know I am)
2 minutes ago
Tacopina asked Carroll about the dress she was wearing on the day of the alleged rape. Judge Kaplan immediately interjected and dismissed the jury for the day. After the jury left, Judge Kaplan inquired about Tacopina's intentions with this line of questioning.
I won't share all of the NYT updates here...this one basically tells the story. He DID try to suggest Trump didn't know her at all, and Carroll's attorney held up the photo of her with Trump.
April 27, 2023, 2:36 p.m. ET7 minutes ago
7 minutes ago
Trumps lawyer is slowly building his line of questioning to lead to the encounter inside Bergdorf Goodman. Hes asking Carroll about what floor of the store they were on, and about how long she was on the escalators.
April 27, 2023, 2:38 p.m. ET6 minutes ago
6 minutes ago
Tacopina asked for details, such as whether she saw other people around them. Carroll said that she was likely paying attention mainly to Trump, because hes a very engaging conversationalist.
April 27, 2023, 2:35 p.m. ET8 minutes ago
8 minutes ago
Tacopina is calling the jurys attention to Carrolls memory lapses, questioning her about the Bergdorf Goodman encounter. He asked whether she first saw Trump through a revolving door. I know its a revolving door, Carroll said. Tacopina then displayed a book excerpt that says that it could have been a regular door at that time, I cant recall.
SO sad. SO unfair. WITCH HUNT!
You want someone who can give a first-hand account of the orders Trump was barking on January 6, look no further than Mike Pence.
The courts are finally saying "enough is enough" to Trump's attempts to run out the clock.
This is all that's currently on CNN:
By Aditi Sangal, Adrienne Vogt, Mike Hayes, Elise Hammond and Maureen Chowdhury, CNN
Updated 7:52 p.m. ET, April 26, 2023
Profile InformationName: Miles Archer
Hometown: Hamilton Massachusetts
Home country: USA
Current location: Nevada
Member since: Wed Oct 16, 2013, 06:49 PM
Number of posts: 18,837
- 2023 (147)
- 2022 (46)
- 2021 (111)
- 2020 (585)
- 2019 (2611)
- 2018 (3797)
- 2017 (3065)
- 2016 (1294)
- 2015 (723)
- 2014 (256)
- 2013 (73)