Sunday, July 25, 2021

Briefly Noted: Legal Matters, Polling

Just some quick catch-up here.

From yesterday, James Bovard had an overall discussion of the DoJ prosecution of January 6 Event participants: The Coming "January 6" Train Wreck. It's worth some time if that interests you. Basically, Bovard is pointing out that, while the FBI is crowing over identifying particpants, DoJ is facing two problems. 

The first is that it appears from early cases that the trial judges are unimpressed with the cases and won't be handing out significant sentences. It's still a travesty of justice, but it's a passive-aggressive form of judicial pushback against a political witchhunt.

The second problem is that the case management--assembling evidence into coherent packages, managing discovery, etc.--is turning into a nightmare. Bovard concludes:

Will Justice Department prosecutors be caught in a Catch-22, pressured by the White House to harvest as many scalps as possible but crippled by the lack of proof that most of the accused were guilty of anything besides trespassing or “willfully and knowingly parading” in the Capitol? Political pressure for high-profile convictions resulted in disastrous courtroom defeats for federal attorneys prosecuting Ruby Ridge, the Branch Davidian standoff at Waco, and other cases. If juries rebuff prosecutors on more than a few January 6 cases, then the entire political storyline could quickly collapse.

Federal prosecutor Mona Sedky is calling for harsh punishment for January 6 defendants because of “the need to preserve respect for the law.” But at this point, “respect for the law” is a loss leader in this process. That won’t be remedied when people realize that taking selfies can result in a federal sentencing enhancement.

My take is that this legal jihad may backfire in the long term, even if DoJ gets convictions from DC juries. We already know that the public is more concerned about violence on the streets of our cities that they are with trespassers taking selfies in the Capitol. That effect and the impression it gives will continue to grow. Further, the result will be DoJ tying up enormous personnel resources for very doubtful benefits. The major benefit they were seeking was political rather than strictly prosecutorial, and that promise of benefit is slipping away.

The other FBI/DoJ case that's making news is the Whitmer kidnapping case--and all the news is very negative for the regime. Jonathan Turley has a full length article discussing the effect that the felony arrest of the FBI case agent, Richard Trask, is likely to have. He concludes--duh!--that no good is likely to come of it for the regime's case. Again, if you like a legal deep dive of this sort, Turley's got it for you: Could The Arrest of FBI Agent Undermine The Whitmer Kidnapping Case? While the conclusion may be a no-brainer, the discussion is shrewd, from an experienced defense lawyer. For example, despite the fact that Trask's state felony charges having nothing to do with the federal Whitmer case ...

As the author of the key affidavit, Trask could do considerable harm to the federal case. Even without such testimony in favor of the defense, his current status as an accused felon will likely be raised with the court. A judge could conclude that the two cases are unrelated and disclosure to a jury would be prejudicial and immaterial. However, the defense could argue that the pending charges could influence his testimony. He could seek to satisfy his former federal colleagues in the kidnapping case to improve his position in seeking a plea bargain with their state counterpart. Such testimony could also be cited to mitigate any sentence or charged the assault case. Finally, Trask’s FBI career is likely over even if he pleads guilty to a lesser charge.  However, any chance to stay a federal employee could depend on his federal testimony — a motivation that the defense could highlight in rebuttal if the court allowed it.

Any entrapment defense carries a very heavy burden that defendants can rarely shoulder successfully in federal cases. The advantage remains with the government in this case. However, this case has a credible claim of entrapment and one of the core witnesses for the government has suddenly become a liability. The Widner [sic] case is one o the “matinee” prosecutions of the Biden Administration but one of its stars may have just gone off-script.

Finally, ABC/Ipsos has new polling out on pessimism about the direction the country has taken; that's bad news for the Zhou regime. The Dems have been counting on distracting the public with legal circuses but, predictably, that's only working with the radical Left base. The rest of the public have lives to live. I quote here from the Red State account. It's obvious that economic woes would figure largely but, in what could prove significant as Dems threaten more lockdowns, it appears that the Covid Regime is increasingly unpopular. Could someone explain this to the GOPe?

[The public's] optimism about the direction of the country has plummeted almost 20 points since Mayaccording to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll. That’s a huge drop. Notice ABC even uses a picture of Biden when reporting this.

A majority — 55% — of the public say they are pessimistic about the direction of the country, a marked change from the roughly one-third (36%) that said the same in an ABC News/Ipsos poll published May 2. In the early May survey, Americans were more optimistic than pessimistic by a 28-percentage point margin. Optimism is now under water by 10 points. Looking ahead to the next 12 months, fewer than half — 45% — now report feeling optimistic about the way things are going, a significant drop from about two-thirds (64%) in the May poll.

The decline in optimism has occurred across the board among Democrats, Republicans and independents. Optimism is down about 20 points among Democrats and Republicans and down 26 points among independents.

Part of that is worry about how Baidan is dealing with the pandemic and concern about possible new lockdowns. Their feeling about how Baidan is dealing with the economy has also dropped seven points since March, with another rise in jobless claims.

Although he’s still above water on the pandemic and the economy, he’s underwater on every other issue, even with Democrats, according to ABC. One of the issues which is really resonating is the border, where fewer than 4 in 10 Americans approve of Baidan's immigration approach. Disapproval of his handling of gun violence has gone up to 61%.

These are things normal people with lives are worrying about. Instead of dealing with these issues the Zhou regime and Pelosi are trying to force feed Americans legal circuses and CTR. Republicans are on their own--if they intend to lose in Election 2022 they'll have to do it by themselves.


  1. I haven’t seen where ant defendant in the Jan 6 event has had a jury trial? Has one? And if not, why? Have they all coped a plea?

    1. What about habeous corpus? Cruel and unusual treatment? Why was/is Ashley Babbit's killer shielded? Most importantly, why is Pelosi determined to go ahead with her show trial? The facts seem to indicate a set-up, a staged 'insurrection' to cover up a stolen election. Why are they raising the stakes? In for a penny, in for a pound.

    2. The venue for all of them is DC, where the juries will reflexively convict them of worse than whatever they're pleading guilty to.

      The same juries who would never convict antifa or blm no matter what they did. That's justice these days, swamp-style.

    3. As Mark stated above "My take is that this legal jihad may backfire in the long term, even if DoJ gets convictions from DC juries....The major benefit they were seeking was political rather than strictly prosecutorial, and that promise of benefit is slipping away."

    4. If I recall correctly, there's only been a couple and both plea bargained. One even groveled an apology and committed to read some inane CRT books or whatever to understand better the nature of their thought crimes.

      What we need is for one of them to get a lawyer brave enough to force some press and comments, and to have that "defendant" go rogue from the plea model. Not only should they not be apologizing, I would give my paycheck to the gofundme of the political prisoner who declared how proud he/she was to have stood up to fascism in our time through a smuggled letter to his lawyer. And to commit to continue it until justice is done.


  2. Then there is President Trump out there pummeling the Biden disaster that is unfolding daily. Not just the economy, gas prices, CRT, the incessant 'pandemic' fear mongering - but Hunter's 'art' sales, Biden doing basically the same thing with Ukraine that Trump did, kowtowing to Russia on its pipeline, kissing Red China's ___, ransomware and other cyber attacks with no apparent response, and on and on. And Biden is unable to defend anything with his inexplicable responses to softball questions to the state approved media sycophants.

    I am just surprised 'Dr.' Jill thought it would be a good idea to leave the old lecher alone and unsupervised by her personally when she flew to Japan and the Biden CNN 'town hall' exploded all over the dinner table from his word salad plate...


    1. Jill and Joe probably fear a coupe if they leave the country for any length of time. BHO will have his feet up on the Lincoln Desk when they get back.

    2. Jill Biden is in this for Jill Biden. She loves the spotlight…and more. One writer described her as being “nakedly ambitious”.

  3. Even if, so far, judges aren't handing out significant sentences, what if that changes?
    How many defendants will be able to afford appeals?
    Is anyone moving to set up GoFundMe pages for them?
    Could the regime count on ScotUS to not hear such appeals?

    1. I am not a lawyer, but there is nothing easy about appeals. As I recall, the grounds narrow significantly - the emergence of evidence not available at the time of the original trial or judicial impropriety/error. Lawyers can tell us about this.

    2. Biden & Co. have to be causing fatigue in Dems as well as Republicans. Nothing positive is coming out of this expensive, wacko, punishing regime.

    3. Appeals usually fail, only 9% succeed.

      The case is not being retried. The appeals panel is making sure the judge followed the law.

      My take is if you have a smart judge, even with a horrible unethical biased decision, they can write the sentence in such a way it can’t be appealed successfully. Conrad Black is an example of that, where even after winning at Scotus, he still ended up in prison. What happened to Flynn is another example. Judges have a huge amount of power.

      And if you plea bargain what can you appeal? Since 97% of cases are plea bargained.

    4. Forget appeals or the wet noodle SCOTUS or a sympathetic DC jury..., how many Republicans have stood on the steps of the capitol and demanded the release of political prisoners?

      The time for decorum has passed.


    5. Hear, hear, @Bee! I appreciate the clear-minded observation, judgment, and incisiveness of this and your posts in general. Many have called out the Republicans on their failed promises over the years - but how have they ever responded beyond additional (apparently meaningless) rhetoric? Even those we applaud for their words do not act on them when given the chance to do so. Where were Trump's supposed supporters in Congress when the rubber hit the road after the election? Now we have (R) Governors falling into line blaming the unvaccinated, absent all evidence. (R)s, if you hope to continue to exist as a party, please give us at least just a tiny shred of evidence that you are not simply the flip side of the Uniparty coin! I do believe the days of false hopes and the efficacy of false words are virtually over, for good or ill.

  4. The Trask caper opens an interesting sideline: the agent’s (and the government’s) propensity towards violence. Someone who pummels the one they (should) love best in this world over bedroom antics, what might they do to a stranger for professional advancement?

  5. Only 3% if Federal Cases go to trial, 97% are plea bargained.

    Over charging is used to get a plea deal.

    Unfortunately prosecutors currently have “prosecutional immunity”, so no reason not to over charge, beyond ethics.

    I wish this entire immunity area would be found unconstitutional, or restricted to split second decisions, it covers up so much government abuse as the courts have created / interpreted currently.

  6. Three signs of pressure that may shatter the fbi insurrection narrative:

    1. Trump is finally weighing in. He had Ashley Babbit’s mom at his Phoenix rally.

    2. This article in the ny post.
    The FBI is made of snitches, often trapping Americans into committing crimes

    And Michael Walsh is an establishment Republican. To have him write this is major.

    3. Tucker Carlson has been mentioning issues.

    1. Re Ray’s #1:

  7. J Dyer talks about the Carlson/NSA shenanigans:

    whodunnit... her conclusion...probably FBI

    "...this whole event is starting to sound to me like an attempt to put NSA in the hot seat. It was always very unlikely that NSA – literally, NSA, per se, and not another agency – had a formal task to monitor Tucker Carlson. I never bought that that was going on."
    " It’s categorically very unlikely NSA was monitoring him – so perhaps he was told that by some third party, one with an agenda to get Carlson talking about NSA monitoring him."
    "None of that means that no one was ever monitoring Carlson’s own emails or texts. It does mean NSA wasn’t, which makes NSA’s statements to date true. That doesn’t leave very many options. The FBI would be the most likely agency for such monitoring."


    1. NSA has admitted he was monitored and his identity exposed.

    2. I agree, NSA had the data. Other people requested it. Providing it to the requestors required unmasking.
      Same as with General Flynn

      You can see who requested his unmasking.

      Seems just about anyone has the power to do it anytime.

  8. This is a pretty good, brief summary of where we are in the progressive takeover and how we got here:

    I just don't see how the America-hating, suicidal crazies can be stopped. Our side has things going on, the AZ audit, questions about the mRNA vaccines and the totalitarian push behind them, squeaks about the Jan 6th Gulag, but that's all.

    Hope is the thing with feathers.

  9. O/T, but on the progressive takeover, and much worth a look, by Bari Weiss today, at Substack, on tranny tyranny in med schools, e.g.

    < During a recent endocrinology course at a top medical school in the University of California system, a professor stopped mid-lecture, to *apologize* for something he’d said at the beginning of class....
    “I said ‘when a woman is *pregnant*,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant, and I *most sincerely* apologize to all of you.” >

  10. And, also on Higher Ed, see C.H. Smith yesterday, at , on
    "If America somehow managed to educate millions of college students, *without* burdening them with *$2 trillion* in debt in 1993, why is it now "impossible" to do so, even as America's wealth and gross national product (GDP) have both rocketed higher over the past 27 years?...."
    CHS then refers to Taibbi's post of days ago, on "The Trillion-Dollar Lie".

  11. And, GG today at Substack, on
    "Exploiting Police Emotions for Partisan Gain and Security State Power.... The *only unanswered* question answered about January 6 -- how embedded was FBI in the groups that planned it? -- is notably off the table....."