Author Topic: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War  (Read 80018 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #500 on: October 17, 2024, 02:39:22 PM »
Thanks for noting this.   I have been getting "I'm getting fuct" emails from Rudy.   Donald seems to have left him hanging?   Or did Rudy get himself where he finds himself?

Dunno.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19889
    • View Profile
Shysters lawyers already scheming to bring down Musk
« Reply #502 on: October 25, 2024, 12:20:37 PM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-forecast-plan-to-go-after-high-profile-trump-supporters-starting-with-elon-musk/ar-AA1sVFVz?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=aa4aa3b2e4a44c4b9b476b0efe74cb57&ei=12

same as they are doing to Trump.

Funny they don't figure out same for Soros or Clinton org. or Zuckerberg, or even how about some of the DC law firms.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
VDH
« Reply #504 on: October 31, 2024, 06:46:19 AM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19889
    • View Profile
VDH prescription for Dem warfare
« Reply #505 on: October 31, 2024, 07:43:17 AM »
Yes.
How can we stop the lawfare or control it?

VDH says we can retaliate in kind or lose nobly.

Agree, there is only one way and we have no choice. 

Just like the Israelis  - > fight back with vigor and furor or get killed.


I listen to most of his podcasts.

His family disowns Victor because they are Leftists and think he has hurt the family name.  I think he even stated his own twin as well.

He lost a daughter to leukemia, I think.

Very nice, classy man.




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #506 on: November 01, 2024, 08:01:51 AM »
That has to be tough.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
All roads lead through the DOJ
« Reply #507 on: November 01, 2024, 08:36:23 AM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19889
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #508 on: November 06, 2024, 05:44:37 AM »
here they come.   I could just picture Elias Tribe and Obama addressing their army and saying :

It all is all up to you now!

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=W4sHAQJu&id=61497A94EDE5E061E494A837D9F7A697CB5FFBEB&thid=OIP.W4sHAQJu_EEnt9IbuYMTOwAAAA&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.miraheze.org%2Fallthetropeswiki%2F0%2F08%2FMarching_lawyers_3144.jpg&cdnurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.5b8b0701026efc4127b7d21bb983133b%3Frik%3D6%252ftfy5em99k3qA%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0&exph=262&expw=350&q=army+of+lawyers&simid=608017720493029633&FORM=IRPRST&ck=5BCE1D5EC5DBE235826B4F2CEB474DE2&selectedIndex=1&itb=0&cw=967&ch=537&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0

------

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=1r4Cy2Zw&id=F780BAF74209B85BA0BD278AD310D0715CE3942D&thid=OIP.1r4Cy2ZwDs-KaAEPT-E9MAAAAA&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.d6be02cb66700ecf8a68010f4fe13d30%3Frik%3DLZTjXHHQENOKJw%26riu%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252f3.bp.blogspot.com%252f-nl_bEbFt_K4%252fUXk4pFcHzCI%252fAAAAAAAAH6E%252fTtT3V0e4Hxs%252fs1600%252farmy%252bof%252blawyers.JPG%26ehk%3DrNHcklm7KBMuFr7KY5OwSbrcdPZucpLrZac8wYwE7TA%253d%26risl%3D%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0%26sres%3D1%26sresct%3D1%26srh%3D799%26srw%3D1160&exph=253&expw=367&q=army+of+lawyers&simid=608032456499947580&FORM=IRPRST&ck=C5A46A575768F7D8F0ED75D76B9995A9&selectedIndex=3&itb=0&cw=967&ch=537&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0

------------

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=Z5a3bfFk&id=CF34B0DAF2E694511788CAFA1A1CAD85D08D244F&thid=OIP.Z5a3bfFkadDAsYcOE5Bu6gHaEK&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2Fpi0dayYjB1M%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&cdnurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.6796b76df16469d0c0b1870e13906eea%3Frik%3DTySN0IWtHBr6yg%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0&exph=720&expw=1280&q=army+of+lawyers&simid=607998423189166715&FORM=IRPRST&ck=8FB5643BE054D30285DB9070BEEB72D3&selectedIndex=2&itb=0&cw=967&ch=537&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19578
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19889
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #510 on: November 06, 2024, 06:12:45 AM »
" Stand down isn't in their DNA "

And not all ideological either  - think of the ocean liners full of money they make from the DC etc gigs.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19889
    • View Profile
DOJ winding DOWN lawfare against sitting president
« Reply #511 on: November 06, 2024, 12:11:21 PM »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Re: Mark Penn, Dems need to stand down their lawfare
« Reply #512 on: November 06, 2024, 02:19:08 PM »
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/11/06/mark_penn_democrats_must_understand_trump_won_and_stand_down_their_lawfare.html


[Doug] Stand down isn't in their DNA.

Standing down would require them to look at how their tactics lead to the outcomes they see as horrifying. An honest review of their tactics would require that they acknowledge the hypocrisy, falsehoods, hubris, illegality, and politics of personal destruction they tightly embraced. and gazing into that mirror would reveal a root ugliness they can’t bear to behold. Thus the worst of ‘em will stay the course, double down where they can, and hopefully serve to shine a light on the ugliness embrace of “Progressive” Puritanism leads to, while the ones lead astray by egalitarian pie in the sky and related sophistries sold to ‘em will find a mental fetal position from which to fend off the cognitive dissonance coming their way. Hopefully they will eventually note the prevarications, lawfare, unlawful, and unconstitutional tenets and actions they’ve been fed for what they are and eventually and likely partially come around.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #514 on: November 07, 2024, 06:57:39 AM »
I am torn on this-- certainly these folks deserve the Rule of Law be applied to them, but OTOH I wonder about the political capital that this will cost.

Perhaps this should be left to a well chosen Attorney General?

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #515 on: November 07, 2024, 10:55:59 AM »
I am torn on this-- certainly these folks deserve the Rule of Law be applied to them, but OTOH I wonder about the political capital that this will cost.

Perhaps this should be left to a well chosen Attorney General?

I could live with that, or some sort of truth seeking commission that would waive any sort of prosecution/penalty if full and unambiguous testimony is provided. I don't want to be draconian, but unvarnished accountability should be the bare minimum expected or accepted.

But those that thumb their nose at whatever is created should be landed on. Hard. A smart AG would figure out who was the weakest, most arrogant, polemic link out there and make an example of 'em, then wait for the rest to trample each other as they try to get in line to cop to their acts and avoid a similar fate.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #516 on: November 07, 2024, 02:24:41 PM »
Well said.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Mr. Smith Goes to Wind Things Down
« Reply #517 on: November 09, 2024, 03:46:14 PM »
Trump will have to be careful here—the left will twist his every action—but the scope of the effort to sideline him by any means they could get away with needs to be known:

Hit the Road, Jack. But Don't Go Too Far
After spending at least $50 million in tax dollars to bring two unprecedented indictments against Donald Trump, Special Counsel Jack Smith should get his turn under prying eyes.

JULIE KELLY
NOV 07, 2024


Jack Smith lurched into a Washington courtroom in September, fully aware all eyes had turned to him.

Declassified with Julie Kelly is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Surrounded by a team of federal prosecutors and guarded by a government-paid security detail, Smith, a lanky man with a scruffy beard and ill-fitting suit, stood behind the government’s table with arms folded. He slowly turned around with a partial scowl to appraise the audience—mostly reporters and D.C. residents eager to watch the restart of his January 6-related case against Donald Trump—to make sure he was noticed. He did not speak during the proceedings.

That appearance, perhaps unbeknownst to him at the time, looks like Smith’s last time in a federal courtroom as the special counsel prosecuting Trump. Citing Department of Justice rules that prohibit the prosecution of a sitting president, Smith reportedly is working with his bosses at the DOJ to figure out how to drop both the D.C. case and the classified documents in case in Florida; Smith has appealed Judge Aileen Cannon’s order dismissing the indictment based on the special counsel’s unconstitutional appointment.

The move represents another political fatality tied to Trump’s resounding victory on Tuesday. It also represents another humiliating defeat for the man the media portrayed as a steely war-crimes prosecutor plucked off a high profile international trial at the Hague by Attorney General Merrick Garland in November 2022 to finally realize a longtime DOJ dream: put Donald Trump behind bars.

Stone Cold Loser Loses Again

But the hagiography about Smith—reporters swooned over the silent-type injured triathlete, even covering his stop at a DC sandwich shop in 2023 as “breaking news”—never matched his record. The Supreme Court in 2016 unanimously vacated the bribery conviction of former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell, a case brought by Smith when he led the DOJ’s public corruption office during the Obama administration. Following Smith’s appointment, McDonnell told Mark Levin that Smith would “rather win than get it right.”

Smith, however, usually does neither. In fact, his prosecutorial resume is a long list of courtroom losses, which makes one wonder why Garland chose him for the job. (More here).

Smith failed to win a single conviction in his prosecution of former Senator John Edwards on campaign finance charges in 2012. One DOJ watchdog group slammed Smith for using an “overly aggressive approach” in pursuing Obama’s 2008 Democratic primary rival and for relying on a “novel interpretation of campaign finance laws” to put Edwards behind bars.

It is an approach he repeated in his two unprecedented criminal indictments of Trump. The four counts in his J6-related case rely on vague conspiracy and obstruction statutes; two of the charges involve 18 USC 1512(c)(2), the post-Enron tampering with documents statute. In June, the Supreme Court reversed how the DOJ had applied that law in hundreds of January 6 cases and the court would have reached the same conclusion about Smith’s interpretation of the law if the case ever made it there.

In fact, the court this year rebuked Smith twice—by denying his highly unusual request to bypass the D.C. appellate court to immediately consider the presidential immunity question and by rendering its landmark decision in Trump v US, which largely gutted the J6 indictment.

Evidence of Misconduct in Classified Docs Case Demands Investigation

Smith’s classified documents case consisted of a hodgepodge of allegations about Trump’s possession of alleged national defense papers after he left office and accusations that he and two aides attempted to obstruct the investigation, which began in February 2022. But the DOJ’s handling of the case represents the best opportunity for a Trump DOJ to turn the tables and investigate main Justice and Special Counsel’s office for numerous offenses.

The case was tainted from the start. Although the alleged crimes occurred in Palm Beach, the DOJ conducted the entire investigation in the Trump-hating courthouse in Washington. This permitted unabashed Trump hater Chief Judge Beryl Howell to act as a rubber stamp for the DOJ’s requests including authorizing grand jury subpoenas and piercing attorney-client privilege claims between Trump and his lawyer, Evan Corcoran, under the rarely-used crime fraud exception.

Smith transferred the case to the proper jurisdiction in southern Florida at the last minute to get an indictment and then ran into a buzzsaw named Judge Aileen Cannon.

Thanks to Cannon’s fierceness—her concerns over the dirty nature of the case dates back to September 2022 when she appointed a third party to vet the items collected during the FBI’s armed raid of Mar-a-Lago the month before—the special counsel’s office was forced to disclose instances of tampering with and perhaps destroying evidence, intimidating witnesses, withholding discovery, and misleading the court.

Court proceedings also revealed egregious misconduct related to the unprecedented armed raid of Mar-a-Lago; agents working out of the Washington and Miami FBI field offices breached the broad terms of the search warrant by ransacking the bedrooms of Melania and Barron Trump. The FBI’s plan included the bureau’s use of lethal force policy, underscoring the excessiveness of the raid, which was altogether unnecessary considering Trump and his lawyers had been cooperating with authorities for months.

Prosecutors later admitted in court that some of the records seized during the raid were not properly handled by investigators; defense attorneys claimed documents were missing.

Defense attorneys also obtained communications between the DOJ, the National Archives, and the Biden White House that demonstrated a behind-the-scenes effort to concoct a documents case as early as May 2021. A Trump DOJ should haul before a grand jury everyone from Biden’s general counsel Jonathan Su to deputy attorney general Lisa Monaco and top NARA officials involved in the scheme.

Conspiracy to defraud, anyone?

Show Us the Money

A full-blown audit into the special counsel’s expenditures should be conducted by either a Trump DOJ or a Republican Congress. Smith’s prosecutors often bragged about “the permanent, indefinite appropriation for independent counsels” allowed under 28 U.S.C. § 591 note, a claim Judge Cannon also doubted.

According to required financial reports, Smith’s team spent at least $35 million in the first 14 months of his investigation, a figure that includes additional support from main Justice. But those costs only cover the period from November 2022 through March 2024; it’s likely Smith blew through another $15 million or so over the last several months, bringing the total to over $50 million.

Expenses include a protective detail for Smith; travel expenses; and millions in unspecified “contractual services.”

Time to see who and what companies profited off the special counsel grift.

Weak Republicans in Congress undoubtedly will resist efforts to investigate and audit Smith but Trump should ignore them.

The American people—as well as Trump himself and his co-defendants—deserve a full accounting of this dirty, rogue, secretive process. And Smith and his accomplices need to be held accountable.

https://www.declassified.live/p/hit-the-road-jack-but-dont-go-too


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Got Yer Deep State Right Here
« Reply #519 on: November 12, 2024, 11:46:10 AM »
Trump, the Senior Exectutive Service, & (hopefully) rippiing the Deep State out by its roots:

Never Underestimate the Power of Unfinished Business
Take Schedule F, for example

ROBERT W MALONE MD, MS
NOV 12, 2024

The fathomless bottom of the deep state.

The Senior Executive Service (SES) class of federal employees was created under President Carter through the passage of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. The SES was established to “...ensure that the executive management of the Government of the United States is responsive to the needs, policies, and goals of the Nation and otherwise is of the highest quality.” Another Carter-created component of the State, as is the Department of Education. The SES employees were supposed to ensure top performances in all the various agencies. That was the theory, but the reality is something entirely different, as is so often the case with these initiatives such as the “Department of Homeland Security”.

Members of the SES serve in the key positions just below the top Presidential appointees. SES employees are the major link between these appointees and the rest of the Federal workforce. They operate and oversee nearly every government activity in approximately 75 Federal agencies. They are referred to as members by the Office of Personnel Management and are considered above “employee” designation. They are members of the SES, and don’t you forget that! Today’s SES runs the country.

The SES even has its own flag (which has been largely removed from the government webpages since I last wrote about the SES in June of 2022). and their own non-profit agency called the Senior Executive Association (SEA), whose stated goal is to protect the rights of SES members - which lists both lobbying Congress and instituting legal action to protect SES member status. This non-profit acts like a union.


SES members operate and oversee nearly every government activity in approximately 75 Federal agencies and serve in key positions just below the top Presidential appointees. Thus positioned, the SES bosses enforce political orthodoxy and fidelity to the deep state. They can act in this manner because their employment is virtually guaranteed. An SES employee’s job is so secure that an Agency Head cannot terminate an SES employee unless the Commissioner issues a certificate stating that the termination is in the public interest. Even then, the termination is subject to litigation.

Barack Obama believed that the SES program should be expanded and, through a 2015 executive order, “Strengthening the Senior Executive Service,” sought to expand and “facilitate career executive continuity between administrations.” But more than that, his executive order implemented:

“a comprehensive, integrated, and strategic focus on diversity and inclusion as a key component of the recruitment, hiring, retention, and development of their SES cadre.”

Yep - the federal government has been using DEI-based hiring and promotions for the SES instead of merit, well… ever since Obama’s presidency.

By May 31, 2016, agencies with 20 or more SES positions were tasked with developing a plan “to increase the number of SES members who are rotating to improve talent development, mission delivery, and collaboration.”

Obama’s other objective, other than securing more DEI employees, was to secure more loyal troops for the administration of his chosen successor, Hillary Clinton. Luckily, she then lost to Donald Trump. However, the increased number of SES employees, strengthening their stranglehold on government power and over the presidency, remained.

As it turns out, the Justice Department includes those elite, highly paid bosses from the Senior Executive Service. So does the Department of Homeland Security, from which the SES also deploys personnel into the Secret Service. As does just about every agency in the US government. As of 2018, there were almost 8,000 SES employees.

The other important point about the SES is that the president has no role in choosing them; he can’t re-assign them or fire them. The SES comprises the non-transparent group of managers and elites who run the country from within. They are the employees who quietly block, slow-walk, and defer presidential orders. What President Trump and Kash Patel might call the “deep state.” In effect, our democracy has been turned upside down while being captured by bureaucratic and corporate interests that endorse authoritarian policies - hence, we are now living under a system of “inverted totalitarianism.” The United States has been co-opted into a managed democracy, thanks to Carter and Obama.

President Trump was stymied in his efforts to reform the government due to the SES cadre, and then he finally hit upon a solution. That is an executive order known as “Schedule F,” which he signed in October 2020, just prior to leaving office. Biden canceled the Schedule F executive order on the first day of his presidency.

This new employee classification system would have included federal workers in "confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character," which are "not normally subject to change as the result of a presidential transition."

The “Schedule F” executive order would have allowed agencies to reclassify policy jobs under a new employment schedule and had proposed to give senior managers greater flexibility in hiring candidates and firing employees. Hence, the SES employees would have functionally become “at will” employees. At-will employment means that an employer can dismiss an employee for any reason, without having to establish "just cause" for termination, as long as the reason is not illegal. At-will employment is the law of the land in all states except Montana.

President Trump stated that this executive order would be reinstated on day one.

But not so fast!

On January 22, 2021, shortly after taking office, President Biden repealed the Schedule F executive order. This action prevented Schedule F from being implemented, as it had not yet taken effect when Trump left office.

In September 2023, the Biden administration, through the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), began working on new regulations to make it difficult to reintroduce Schedule F policies.

On April 4, 2024, OPM issued a final rule aimed at stopping potential future attempts to implement Schedule F or something similar. This rule ensured that the new civil service job protections couldn't be removed by reimplementing schedule F.

However, all of these political machinations may come to naught.

Remember the Chevron deference?

The Chevron deference was a key principle in U.S. administrative law for nearly 40 years, established by the Supreme Court in 1984 in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. It directed courts to defer to a federal agency's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute that the agency administers.

This doctrine significantly empowered federal agencies by giving them considerable leeway in interpreting and implementing ambiguous statutory provisions. It essentially allowed the administrative state to create laws without congressional oversight.

However, in June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Chevron doctrine in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. The Court ruled that the Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency's interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous.

The end of Chevron Deference represents a major shift in administrative law, reducing the power of federal agencies and increasing judicial scrutiny of agency actions. One of the the implications of the Chevron deference is the reduced power for federal agencies in interpreting laws.

How does this affect schedule F?

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) may need to provide more robust justifications for its new policies regarding Schedule F, as they can no longer rely on the Chevron deference to support their interpretations of federal employment laws.

The truth is that as soon as President Trump implements Schedule F, the Senior Executives Association may challenge it in court, and the OPM will use their new rules to fight it tooth and nail.

Due to the Chevron deference, this legal fight may be aborted or short-circuited. Time will tell.

On the Legislative side

In 2023, the House adopted an amendment to the annual defense authorization bill for 2023 that would prevent future administrations from reviving Schedule F or similar measures. However, during the reconciliation process between the House and Senate versions of the bill, the Schedule F ban was omitted from the final compromise version. The final version of the 2023 NDAA that was signed into law did not include the language banning future attempts at creating Schedule F, but congress may pull those clauses out of the Democrat party bag of tricks at any time.

The easiest way out of this quandary in the long term is for Congress to amend the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 to clarify the role of the SES employee and other employees within the federal government. This would be a permanent solution instead of a temporary bandaid.

https://www.malone.news/p/never-underestimate-the-power-of

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
Re: Politics by Lawfare, Bureaufare, and the Law of War
« Reply #520 on: November 12, 2024, 03:26:41 PM »
Goodjob by Malone of going into the weeds on this vital issue.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: November 13, 2024, 11:48:25 AM by Body-by-Guinness »


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Smith to Resign Before Trump is Sworn In
« Reply #523 on: November 13, 2024, 12:19:20 PM »
So what says the hive mind? Will Smith go out with a whimper or instead try to further impugn Trump by indicting “co-conspirators?

https://www.newsweek.com/jack-smith-resign-before-trump-office-1984953?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1731496854

At the end of the day it’s clear to me his specific goal was to keep Trump from being reelected. He not only failed that task, but arguably enhanced Trump’s chances by so clearly seeking to drop his thumb on justice’s scale. Perhaps that is so obvious he is unable to escape it, but my guess is he’s an ideologue attack dog and will go out with his teeth gnashing.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3263
    • View Profile
Federal Hammer Drops on FEMA Re Order to Avoid Homes w/ Trump Signs
« Reply #524 on: November 14, 2024, 04:30:44 PM »


Florida's Lawsuit Against FEMA Over Discrimination Against Trump Supporters

The Volokh Conspiracy / by Eugene Volokh / Nov 14, 2024 at 3:16 PM

You can read the Complaint (filed yesterday) in Moody v. Criswell (S.D. Fla.); there are all sorts of interesting federal civil rights litigation and federal courts issues, such as parens patriae, the scope of § 1985(3) liability, the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine, and more. And of course the case raises the factual question of whether the discrimination was the work of a rogue employee (as FEMA seems to argue) or was endorsed by higher ups (as the employee has claimed, and as Florida is asserting). An excerpt from the Complaint:

"[A]void homes advertising Trump." This was the directive that Defendant Marn'i Washington gave to federal relief workers responding to Hurricanes Helene and Milton in Lake Placid, Florida.

While the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has fired Defendant Washington and called her behavior "reprehensible," Defendant Washington insists that she is a "patsy" and that FEMA made her a "scapegoat." Defendant Washington says that similar conduct occurred in North Carolina and throughout areas affected by Hurricanes Helene and Milton. And she represents that senior FEMA officials claiming not to know that the agency was discriminating against Trump supporters are promoting a "lie."

While the facts will continue to come out over the weeks and months, it is already clear that Defendant Washington conspired with senior FEMA officials, as well as those carrying out her orders, to violate the civil rights of Florida citizens.  This conspiracy is actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1985, which creates a cause of action for "[c]onspiracy to interfere with civil rights." See Smith v. Meese, 821 F.2d 1484, 1492 n.5 (11th Cir. 1987) (suggesting that "selectively enforc[ing] a law" by "prosecuting only Republicans" would violate § 1985 (quotations omitted)); accord Lyes v. City of Riviera Beach, 166 F.3d 1332, 1338 (11th Cir. 1999) (en banc) (discussing legislative history suggesting that "actionable conspiracies" under § 1985 "would include those against a person because he was a Democrat" (quotations omitted)); United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., Loc. 610, AFL-CIO v. Scott, 463 U.S. 825, 836 (1983) (suggesting that § 1985(3) "was intended to" protect "Republicans" because Republicans "championed the[] cause" of Black Americans after the Civil War).

Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody sues Defendants under § 1985(3). See Alfred L. Snapp & Son, Inc. v. Puerto Rico, 458 U.S. 592, 607 (1982) (recognizing a State's ability to sue in a parens patriae capacity based on discrimination against its residents); Abrams v. 11 Cornwell Co., 695 F.2d 34, 38–40 (2d Cir. 1982) (applying Alfred L. Snapp to a claim under § 1985(3)), vacated in part on other grounds, 718 F.2d 22, 25 (2d Cir. 1983).


General Moody seeks nominal damages, punitive damages, and a declaration that Defendants conspired to interfere with the civil rights of Florida citizens.

I'm not an expert on the federal statutory questions here (or on the parens patriae doctrine), and I'm too slammed right now to research further, so I thought I'd just pass along the Complaint, which sets forth the state's argument; I'll also pass along any motion to dismiss when and if that's filed.

The one thing I can say substantively is that, even if FEMA employees had faced hostility  from some conservative or pro-Trump householders, that can't justify an "avoid homes advertising Trump" directive—just as the misconduct of some Jews or Catholics couldn't justify an "avoid homes displaying mezuzahs or crucifixes" directive, or the hostility of some Black Lives Matter supporters to the police couldn't justify the police denying services to homes displaying Black Lives Matter flags.

The post Florida's Lawsuit Against FEMA Over Discrimination Against Trump Supporters appeared first on Reason.com.

https://reason.com/volokh/2024/11/14/floridas-lawsuit-against-fema-over-discrimination-against-trump-supporters/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19889
    • View Profile
Trump Stormy case looks like to be dismissed
« Reply #526 on: November 22, 2024, 12:55:00 PM »
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/donald-trump-jr-new-york-da/2024/11/22/id/1189089/

I can't believe we are even talking about this nonsense anymore?

No case, never was, twisting of a Fed law in a state jurisdiction, by a Dem prosecutor who was out to get Trump, in front of a Dem majority jury, in front of a Dem judge in a Dem city.



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19889
    • View Profile
Dersh on the Trump lawfare
« Reply #527 on: November 27, 2024, 12:08:45 PM »


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
FO: DOJ Civil Rights Division
« Reply #529 on: December 10, 2024, 09:31:34 AM »


A National Treasury Employees Union spokesman said the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division and Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) will begin votes to unionize on 12 December. (The unionization votes are scheduled to end on 8 and 9 January. However, disputes over the votes could push certification months past Trump’s 20 January inauguration, giving Trump time to reimplement “Schedule F” allowing the Trump administration to fire the DOJ employees. – R.C.)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile
FO:
« Reply #530 on: December 13, 2024, 07:52:54 AM »


(2) CURRENT AND FORMER DOJ OFFICIALS PREPARE LEGAL DEFENSE: Defense attorneys said they have fielded calls from current and former Department of Justice (DOJ) officials, career federal prosecutors, and FBI agents over concerns that the incoming Trump administration will target them with investigations. Sara Kropf, a partner at law firm Kropf Moseley, said criminal prosecutions are unlikely due to a higher burden of proof but the incoming Trump administration could use “the low hanging fruit” of DOJ Inspector General investigations against current and former DOJ officials to “destroy their career prospects.” (The high cost of legal defense was weaponized against Trump administration officials during Trump’s first term. Current and former Biden DOJ officials are concerned they will face high legal defense costs, and are in talks with defense lawyers over free and discounted legal representation. – R.C.)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72722
    • View Profile