ryan cooper: "Because the politics of the indictment were so uncomfortable, emotional logic demanded that there must also have been something wrong with it legally." defector.com/the-doubts-w...

"Because the politics of the indictment were so uncomfortable, emotional logic demanded that there must also have been something wrong with it legally." defector.com/the-doubts-w...

The Doubts Were Not Reasonable | Defectordefector.com Welcome to Margin of Error, a politics column from Tom Scocca, editor of the Indignity newsletter, examining the apocalyptic politics and coverage of Campaign 2024. Donald Trump committed crimes and a...

i think this is so sharp, because it was clear to me so many of the knee jerk critical takes from libs were less rational and more emotional. just some vague sense something was *wrong* and then efforts to backfill that sense with legal rationalizations that really did not stand up to any scrutiny

i mean milhiser wrote an entire piece arguing the rule of lenity might apply to the case, which if you know anything about the rule of lenity is so embarrassing it would probably get a failing grade if handed in by a 1L.

One thing I keep going back to is that the evidence must have been overwhelming because each person on that jury had to know that a conviction was going to put them in danger. They had to all agree there was no option but to convict knowing this man has an angry, violent mob at his beck and call.

I think it's cousin to the panic attacks over Biden's polling and the dreams of replacing him somehow with The Perfect Candidate. chickenshits who can't deal with how deep in the shit we are all in

that is, nailing Trump on some sleazebag porn star hush money stuff is so uncouth and (supposedly) risky, we can't have that kind of thing in Exceptional America! we must have the Dignified Trial sanctified by the clerics on the Supreme Court

Yup, and the freakouts about Biden's polling have been less-than-helpful because the polls genuinely don't show that Biden is destined to lose, only that he will need to work hard to win. And a lot of these people are upset about doing that when they thought beating Trump should be easy.

"This SHOULDN'T be a toss-up!" Well, it is. What are you doing about it?

also, lots of people thought the work was done after biden was inaugurated and have since turned themselves into pretzels to avoid admitting that biden's DOJ absolutely fucked up and dumped him back in our lap to clean up their mess AGAIN. "how could it possibly be the case that we are back HERE?"

100%. It’s game time

And unfortunately for all of us, it was clear months ago that the answer CANNOT be “help kill more Palestinian civilians”

the implication was that white people crimes aren’t real crimes. financial fraud is uncouth, but prosecuting it is similarly impolite.

The sentence from the Defector article that sticks with me is "None of these people knew what they were talking about. They were holding forth with assurance, in tones of authority, about matters on which they were completely, professionally ignorant."

That same sentence (but maybe in active voice) should be at the top of every NYT editorial.

It was, I think, the weakest of the four on the merits. For it to succeed is therefore offensive to people who are having trouble accepting that the merits are not primarily how this game is being played.

on the legal merits, i kinda disagree. i think a much smaller lift than pursuing a massive RICO case like georgia or as we're seeing with obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights, testing completely new applications of laws. on the *political* merits i agree

Yeah, the Georgia trial is substantially overcomplicated, probably because *waves arms at prosecutor and her boy toy*

It's simultaneously the least obviously illegal conduct out of the indictments, but at worst the second most straightforward application of the actual law (document retention is first but the problems with that case have nothing whatsoever to do with the law)

There's also the center>right standard play here: take an ostensibly liberal principle and apply it in a bad faith way. In this case, they go low we go high. "Trump's behavior is crass and you're going to *lower yourself to his level* by punishing him for it instead of focusing on important things?"

Some still are apparently. nymag.com/intelligence...

Prosecutors Got Trump — But They Also Contorted the Lawnymag.com The Manhattan jury was thrown into a Frankenstein’s monster of a case.

Libs? Liberals overwhelmingly supported the prosecution and were incredibly frustrated by Vance spiking it to begin with.

if you’re suggesting there was not a wave of critical takes in the press and on social critical of the prosecution from self-described liberal pundits and law professors, you’re simply incorrect. if you’re instead talking about “liberals” generally I suggest re-reading the post you’re replying to

Okay, the description of Douthat was perfect

defector is cool. and good

📌

It's called selective prosecution. And Lawfare. And you know it. Biden has perpetrated genocide. They hanged the Nazis for genocide at Nuremberg. Oh, the good ol days...

Every time I see your name on my feed, for one second I always think “Wow, the director of Black Panther isn’t usually this vocally political in public”

This rules

“Trump's political career has been one long demonstration that the legal structures that were supposed to be the bedrock of the rule of law are worthless.“

Very well written, thanks for sharing.

Post