doublejj
Well-Known Member
she knew she had 0 chance of winning her primary and did it anyway. Why not continue in 2024?
Examples of GOP Leadership
- Thread starter injinji
- Start date
doublejj
Well-Known Member
Really Arizona?....
Planned surf and water park with hotel, retail gains momentum in Arizona city
A new 71-acre surf and water park with lagoons and a retail and hotel district has been proposed for the city of Maricopa, a small city located about an hour south of Phoenix.
The new "world-class entertainment and lifestyle venue" will comprise a large water park, two surf lagoons, a retail and hotel district, surf villas and a surf center and academy, according to documents obtained by the Phoenix Business Journal.
www.abc15.com
Planned surf and water park with hotel, retail gains momentum in Arizona city
A new 71-acre surf and water park with lagoons and a retail and hotel district has been proposed for the city of Maricopa, a small city located about an hour south of Phoenix.
The new "world-class entertainment and lifestyle venue" will comprise a large water park, two surf lagoons, a retail and hotel district, surf villas and a surf center and academy, according to documents obtained by the Phoenix Business Journal.
Planned surf and water park with hotel, retail gains momentum in Arizona city
A new 71-acre surf and water park with lagoons and a retail and hotel district has been proposed for the city of Maricopa, a small city located about an hour south of Phoenix.
www.abc15.com
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
He quit the GOP shortly after Trump arrived and has been unrelenting in his attacks on him and his cult. He brings a conservative perspective and shows how the brains and talent have left the GOP. Most have quit outright, but some are still members of the party. He grew up with, and knows the kinds of people who are the issue in America, those who should know better. He is an example of a whole generation of educated Reagan republicans who have left the GOP and most figure it is poisoned beyond redemption.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
money? running a campaign ain't cheap...who is going to donate to a sure loser?
doublejj
Well-Known Member
Me.....
doublejj
Well-Known Member
Georgia can ban people handing out food and water to voters, federal judge rules
Voting rights groups warn criminalising relief in long Election Day lines disproportionately impacts Black voters and could suppress turnout
www.independent.co.uk
Voting rights groups warn criminalising relief in long Election Day lines disproportionately impacts Black voters and could suppress turnout
Georgia can ban people handing out food and water to voters, federal judge rules
Voting rights groups warn criminalising relief in long Election Day lines disproportionately impacts Black voters and could suppress turnout
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
fucking morons...what will they do in a couple of years when there is NO fucking water?...the entire town should be forced to stay there till they die of thirst....Really Arizona?....
Planned surf and water park with hotel, retail gains momentum in Arizona city
View attachment 5183727
A new 71-acre surf and water park with lagoons and a retail and hotel district has been proposed for the city of Maricopa, a small city located about an hour south of Phoenix.
The new "world-class entertainment and lifestyle venue" will comprise a large water park, two surf lagoons, a retail and hotel district, surf villas and a surf center and academy, according to documents obtained by the Phoenix Business Journal.
Planned surf and water park with hotel, retail gains momentum in Arizona city
A new 71-acre surf and water park with lagoons and a retail and hotel district has been proposed for the city of Maricopa, a small city located about an hour south of Phoenix.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
just exactly what kind of fucking loser fucking douchebag assholes criminalize giving someone water? oh yeah, shitbag republicunts, that's who.Georgia can ban people handing out food and water to voters, federal judge rules
Voting rights groups warn criminalising relief in long Election Day lines disproportionately impacts Black voters and could suppress turnout
Georgia can ban people handing out food and water to voters, federal judge rules
Voting rights groups warn criminalising relief in long Election Day lines disproportionately impacts Black voters and could suppress turnout
someone should be appealing that all the way to the piece of shit biased fuckbag supeme court...they'll vote against it, but at least it will take up a bit of the time they would otherwise be using to fuck over more American citizens...
doublejj
Well-Known Member
Liz Cheney Already Has a 2024 StrategyMe.....
To save the Republican Party, the defeated Wyoming representative may first have to destroy it.
Liz Cheney Already Has a 2024 Strategy
To save the Republican Party, the defeated Wyoming representative may first have to destroy it.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
orrrr....they could just let the sick beast die, and start raising a new, healthy beast that isn't infested with parasitesLiz Cheney Already Has a 2024 Strategy
To save the Republican Party, the defeated Wyoming representative may first have to destroy it.
Liz Cheney Already Has a 2024 Strategy
To save the Republican Party, the defeated Wyoming representative may first have to destroy it.www.theatlantic.com
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Yeah you're right I has to be Fox if anyone's going to actually see it ratings wise.
Oh noes the FBLie. The raid is Spygate 3.0. Same 5 brass did Spygate, Russiagate and now Raidgate while they're currently under investigation in a criminal probe for the first two. A majority of American voters think Biden is using the FBI and DOJ as his personal partisan army. Don't you look at American polls?
printer
Well-Known Member
The top story today on Newsmax.
Sen. Rick Scott Urges Homeland Security Committee to Probe Hunter Biden
Like the US will really be affected by Hunter Biden as compared to all the other troubles?
On Newsmax being a place that does not put out real news,
Appeals Court: DOJ Must Release Memo on Trump Prosecution
The Department of Justice must release the secret memo it prepared in 2019 discussing whether then-President Donald Trump obstructed a special counsel probe into his campaign's dealings with Russia during the 2016 presidential election, a federal appeals panel ruled Friday.
The Hill reported Judges Sri Srinivasan, Judith Rogers and David Tatel held that the DOJ failed to meet its legal burden to show that the memo was protected because it concerned internal deliberations advising then-Attorney General William Barr over whether to charge Trump with obstructing special counsel Robert Mueller's probe of the Trump-Russia relationship.
Trump was never charged in Mueller's probe — a longstanding DOJ legal opinion rules out federal criminal charges against a sitting president.
"Because the department did not tie the memorandum to deliberations about the relevant decision, the department failed to justify its reliance on the deliberative-process privilege," Chief Judge Srinivasan wrote.
Liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking the DOJ memo in 2019. District Judge Amy Berman of the District of Columbia ordered the agency to release the memo, but paused that ruling while the DOJ appealed her decision.
Srinivasan said that the DOJ's claim that it was intended to counsel Barr on what public statements to make about the case came too late in litigation.
"Ordinarily, the government would have little difficulty establishing that a prosecutor's views about the sufficiency of the evidence form part of a privileged decisional process about whether to initiate or decline a prosecution," wrote Srinivasan, an appointee of President Barack Obama. "This, however, is the rare case that falls outside of that typical understanding," the judge added.
Tying to spin it as 'an appointee of President Barack Obama' being the problem though.
Sen. Rick Scott Urges Homeland Security Committee to Probe Hunter Biden
Like the US will really be affected by Hunter Biden as compared to all the other troubles?
On Newsmax being a place that does not put out real news,
Appeals Court: DOJ Must Release Memo on Trump Prosecution
The Department of Justice must release the secret memo it prepared in 2019 discussing whether then-President Donald Trump obstructed a special counsel probe into his campaign's dealings with Russia during the 2016 presidential election, a federal appeals panel ruled Friday.
The Hill reported Judges Sri Srinivasan, Judith Rogers and David Tatel held that the DOJ failed to meet its legal burden to show that the memo was protected because it concerned internal deliberations advising then-Attorney General William Barr over whether to charge Trump with obstructing special counsel Robert Mueller's probe of the Trump-Russia relationship.
Trump was never charged in Mueller's probe — a longstanding DOJ legal opinion rules out federal criminal charges against a sitting president.
"Because the department did not tie the memorandum to deliberations about the relevant decision, the department failed to justify its reliance on the deliberative-process privilege," Chief Judge Srinivasan wrote.
Liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking the DOJ memo in 2019. District Judge Amy Berman of the District of Columbia ordered the agency to release the memo, but paused that ruling while the DOJ appealed her decision.
Srinivasan said that the DOJ's claim that it was intended to counsel Barr on what public statements to make about the case came too late in litigation.
"Ordinarily, the government would have little difficulty establishing that a prosecutor's views about the sufficiency of the evidence form part of a privileged decisional process about whether to initiate or decline a prosecution," wrote Srinivasan, an appointee of President Barack Obama. "This, however, is the rare case that falls outside of that typical understanding," the judge added.
Tying to spin it as 'an appointee of President Barack Obama' being the problem though.
doublejj
Well-Known Member
Do you mean the trump appointed head of the FBI?....
printer
Well-Known Member
Appeals court says DOJ improperly redacted memo to AG Barr on Trump obstruction
The Department of Justice (DOJ) improperly shielded portions of a memo to Attorney General William Barr that concerned whether former President Trump obstructed a special counsel probe into his campaign’s dealings with Russia during the 2016 presidential election, a federal appeals court in Washington ruled on Friday.
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed a federal judge’s May 2021 decision that the DOJ had improperly redacted parts of the Trump-era legal memo that should have been made public as part of a government watchdog’s records request lawsuit.
The memo at issue was prepared at Barr’s request by the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in March 2019, ostensibly to provide legal advice that would go on to guide Barr’s decision not to charge Trump with obstruction of justice related to his alleged interference with former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into his 2016 campaign’s contacts with Moscow.
The DOJ, responding to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking disclosure of the memo, argued that virtually the entire memorandum and related records should be shielded under a FOIA exemption that protects internal government deliberations.
But the D.C. Circuit Court panel on Friday, affirming the lower court’s decision, ruled that the DOJ had failed to prove that the so-called deliberative-process privilege justified keeping the records under wraps.
The panel said the OLC memo did not in fact contain a legal analysis of whether Barr should pursue charges against Trump, but rather what, if anything, Barr should say to Congress and the public about Mueller’s voluminous findings.
“Because the Department did not tie the memorandum to deliberations about the relevant decision, the Department failed to justify its reliance on the deliberative-process privilege,” Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan wrote for the panel.
The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Whether the full memorandum is released soon likely depends on if the DOJ pursues an additional appeal, either to the full bench of the D.C. Circuit Court or to the Supreme Court.
This tees up another politically fraught decision for Attorney General Merrick Garland, whose earlier move to appeal the judge’s ruling ordering his department to release the document disappointed Trump critics and prolonged the FOIA battle that was initiated by the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).
That earlier appeal followed a May 2021 decision by U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who ordered the DOJ to release the legal memo. She reached her decision, she said, after concluding that the DOJ’s privilege claims were not consistent with her own review of the unredacted memo or the timeline revealed by internal emails among top Justice Department officials.
In a scathing 41-page decision, she accused Barr and agency lawyers of creating the misleading impression that the former attorney general had been much more open-minded when weighing whether to recommend obstruction charges against Trump than the actual memo shows.
“The agency’s redactions and incomplete explanations obfuscate the true purpose of the memorandum, and the excised portions belie the notion that it fell to the Attorney General to make a prosecution decision or that any such decision was on the table at any time,” she wrote.
The controversy burst into public view as a result of a lawsuit CREW filed in May 2019 seeking internal DOJ documents regarding Barr’s public statements around the release of the Mueller report.
On March 24, 2019, Barr sent a four-page letter to Congress purportedly summarizing the conclusions of the investigation that had just recently been concluded by then-special counsel Mueller into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Barr was later widely criticized for spinning the investigation’s findings — which would not be made public for another three weeks — in a way that cast Trump in a positive light.
In his letter to Congress, Barr said that he had determined after consulting with the OLC that the facts of the investigation did not support bringing obstruction of justice charges against the president, regardless of what the office had previously said about whether such a prosecution would be constitutional.
But Jackson, in her decision, said it appeared that it was a foregone conclusion among DOJ leadership that there would be no prosecution against Trump. In affirming her decision on Friday, the D.C. Circuit emphasized the narrowness of its ruling.
“Nothing in our decision should be read to suggest that deliberative documents related to actual charging decisions fall outside the deliberative-process privilege,” the panel wrote.
“We hold only that, in the unique circumstances of this case, in which a charging decision concededly was off the table and the agency failed to invoke an alternative rationale that might well have justified its invocation of the privilege, the district court did not err in granting judgment against the agency.”
thehill.com
The Department of Justice (DOJ) improperly shielded portions of a memo to Attorney General William Barr that concerned whether former President Trump obstructed a special counsel probe into his campaign’s dealings with Russia during the 2016 presidential election, a federal appeals court in Washington ruled on Friday.
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed a federal judge’s May 2021 decision that the DOJ had improperly redacted parts of the Trump-era legal memo that should have been made public as part of a government watchdog’s records request lawsuit.
The memo at issue was prepared at Barr’s request by the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in March 2019, ostensibly to provide legal advice that would go on to guide Barr’s decision not to charge Trump with obstruction of justice related to his alleged interference with former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into his 2016 campaign’s contacts with Moscow.
The DOJ, responding to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking disclosure of the memo, argued that virtually the entire memorandum and related records should be shielded under a FOIA exemption that protects internal government deliberations.
But the D.C. Circuit Court panel on Friday, affirming the lower court’s decision, ruled that the DOJ had failed to prove that the so-called deliberative-process privilege justified keeping the records under wraps.
The panel said the OLC memo did not in fact contain a legal analysis of whether Barr should pursue charges against Trump, but rather what, if anything, Barr should say to Congress and the public about Mueller’s voluminous findings.
“Because the Department did not tie the memorandum to deliberations about the relevant decision, the Department failed to justify its reliance on the deliberative-process privilege,” Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan wrote for the panel.
The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Whether the full memorandum is released soon likely depends on if the DOJ pursues an additional appeal, either to the full bench of the D.C. Circuit Court or to the Supreme Court.
This tees up another politically fraught decision for Attorney General Merrick Garland, whose earlier move to appeal the judge’s ruling ordering his department to release the document disappointed Trump critics and prolonged the FOIA battle that was initiated by the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).
That earlier appeal followed a May 2021 decision by U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who ordered the DOJ to release the legal memo. She reached her decision, she said, after concluding that the DOJ’s privilege claims were not consistent with her own review of the unredacted memo or the timeline revealed by internal emails among top Justice Department officials.
In a scathing 41-page decision, she accused Barr and agency lawyers of creating the misleading impression that the former attorney general had been much more open-minded when weighing whether to recommend obstruction charges against Trump than the actual memo shows.
“The agency’s redactions and incomplete explanations obfuscate the true purpose of the memorandum, and the excised portions belie the notion that it fell to the Attorney General to make a prosecution decision or that any such decision was on the table at any time,” she wrote.
The controversy burst into public view as a result of a lawsuit CREW filed in May 2019 seeking internal DOJ documents regarding Barr’s public statements around the release of the Mueller report.
On March 24, 2019, Barr sent a four-page letter to Congress purportedly summarizing the conclusions of the investigation that had just recently been concluded by then-special counsel Mueller into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Barr was later widely criticized for spinning the investigation’s findings — which would not be made public for another three weeks — in a way that cast Trump in a positive light.
In his letter to Congress, Barr said that he had determined after consulting with the OLC that the facts of the investigation did not support bringing obstruction of justice charges against the president, regardless of what the office had previously said about whether such a prosecution would be constitutional.
But Jackson, in her decision, said it appeared that it was a foregone conclusion among DOJ leadership that there would be no prosecution against Trump. In affirming her decision on Friday, the D.C. Circuit emphasized the narrowness of its ruling.
“Nothing in our decision should be read to suggest that deliberative documents related to actual charging decisions fall outside the deliberative-process privilege,” the panel wrote.
“We hold only that, in the unique circumstances of this case, in which a charging decision concededly was off the table and the agency failed to invoke an alternative rationale that might well have justified its invocation of the privilege, the district court did not err in granting judgment against the agency.”
Appeals court says DOJ improperly redacted memo to AG Barr on Trump obstruction
The Department of Justice (DOJ) improperly shielded portions of a memo to Attorney General William Barr that concerned whether former President Trump obstructed a special counsel probe into his cam…
thehill.com
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
i'm not quite sure of the significance of this?Appeals court says DOJ improperly redacted memo to AG Barr on Trump obstruction
The Department of Justice (DOJ) improperly shielded portions of a memo to Attorney General William Barr that concerned whether former President Trump obstructed a special counsel probe into his campaign’s dealings with Russia during the 2016 presidential election, a federal appeals court in Washington ruled on Friday.
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed a federal judge’s May 2021 decision that the DOJ had improperly redacted parts of the Trump-era legal memo that should have been made public as part of a government watchdog’s records request lawsuit.
The memo at issue was prepared at Barr’s request by the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in March 2019, ostensibly to provide legal advice that would go on to guide Barr’s decision not to charge Trump with obstruction of justice related to his alleged interference with former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into his 2016 campaign’s contacts with Moscow.
The DOJ, responding to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking disclosure of the memo, argued that virtually the entire memorandum and related records should be shielded under a FOIA exemption that protects internal government deliberations.
But the D.C. Circuit Court panel on Friday, affirming the lower court’s decision, ruled that the DOJ had failed to prove that the so-called deliberative-process privilege justified keeping the records under wraps.
The panel said the OLC memo did not in fact contain a legal analysis of whether Barr should pursue charges against Trump, but rather what, if anything, Barr should say to Congress and the public about Mueller’s voluminous findings.
“Because the Department did not tie the memorandum to deliberations about the relevant decision, the Department failed to justify its reliance on the deliberative-process privilege,” Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan wrote for the panel.
The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Whether the full memorandum is released soon likely depends on if the DOJ pursues an additional appeal, either to the full bench of the D.C. Circuit Court or to the Supreme Court.
This tees up another politically fraught decision for Attorney General Merrick Garland, whose earlier move to appeal the judge’s ruling ordering his department to release the document disappointed Trump critics and prolonged the FOIA battle that was initiated by the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).
That earlier appeal followed a May 2021 decision by U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who ordered the DOJ to release the legal memo. She reached her decision, she said, after concluding that the DOJ’s privilege claims were not consistent with her own review of the unredacted memo or the timeline revealed by internal emails among top Justice Department officials.
In a scathing 41-page decision, she accused Barr and agency lawyers of creating the misleading impression that the former attorney general had been much more open-minded when weighing whether to recommend obstruction charges against Trump than the actual memo shows.
“The agency’s redactions and incomplete explanations obfuscate the true purpose of the memorandum, and the excised portions belie the notion that it fell to the Attorney General to make a prosecution decision or that any such decision was on the table at any time,” she wrote.
The controversy burst into public view as a result of a lawsuit CREW filed in May 2019 seeking internal DOJ documents regarding Barr’s public statements around the release of the Mueller report.
On March 24, 2019, Barr sent a four-page letter to Congress purportedly summarizing the conclusions of the investigation that had just recently been concluded by then-special counsel Mueller into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Barr was later widely criticized for spinning the investigation’s findings — which would not be made public for another three weeks — in a way that cast Trump in a positive light.
In his letter to Congress, Barr said that he had determined after consulting with the OLC that the facts of the investigation did not support bringing obstruction of justice charges against the president, regardless of what the office had previously said about whether such a prosecution would be constitutional.
But Jackson, in her decision, said it appeared that it was a foregone conclusion among DOJ leadership that there would be no prosecution against Trump. In affirming her decision on Friday, the D.C. Circuit emphasized the narrowness of its ruling.
“Nothing in our decision should be read to suggest that deliberative documents related to actual charging decisions fall outside the deliberative-process privilege,” the panel wrote.
“We hold only that, in the unique circumstances of this case, in which a charging decision concededly was off the table and the agency failed to invoke an alternative rationale that might well have justified its invocation of the privilege, the district court did not err in granting judgment against the agency.”
Appeals court says DOJ improperly redacted memo to AG Barr on Trump obstruction
The Department of Justice (DOJ) improperly shielded portions of a memo to Attorney General William Barr that concerned whether former President Trump obstructed a special counsel probe into his cam…
they say "DOJ did this"...but the DOJ is a government body, you can't charge it with anything as if it was an individual, you have to go after the people who made those decisions. Barr was the head of the DOJ at the time, it seems all such decisions would ultimately be his to make.
so is this saying that they actually should have charged trump after the Mueller report? or that they didn't even consider it, just wrote it off to protect trump, and their own positions?
and what is the point of it now? isn't it a little late for all of this? can they retroactively charge trump over something revealed that long ago?
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Yeah and I see them shifting to the democratic side as independents walk away from the GOP as they nominate lunatic candidates and deal with Donald's fall out. Trump is fucked and he is gonna take the GOP down with him and fuck them out a midterm election they could have easily won. Abortion will help a lot too, as women get mobilized and hit the neighborhoods in a ground game. If they win, they will fuck the republicans and their terrorist wing so bad they will need to grow new assholes to take a shit and they will do it inside 2 years.
Last edited:
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
So, let's see, where does the line officially end, and if you are in line to vote blocks away from the polling station, you are under the control of the state. If you are in line when the polls close, you have special statues then and they must keep the polls open for days if required. I mean if they can arrest you for receiving water you are in their custody and control and with that comes rights. Will they deprive you of water all day and then deprive you of your vote when the polls close while you are in line and under semi arrest all day?Georgia can ban people handing out food and water to voters, federal judge rules
Voting rights groups warn criminalising relief in long Election Day lines disproportionately impacts Black voters and could suppress turnout
Georgia can ban people handing out food and water to voters, federal judge rules
Voting rights groups warn criminalising relief in long Election Day lines disproportionately impacts Black voters and could suppress turnout
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Yep. Just two more weeks! You're going to need a Copium refill.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Brian Auten, Jay Bratt, Alan Kohler, Timothy Thibault, Anthony Riedlinger.