ChiGoose

Discharge paperwork when my wife had to be treated for miscarriages: “Spontaneous Abortion” Discharge paperwork when my wife thought she was having a miscarriage (but thankfully wasn’t): “Threatened Abortion” Basically every hospital looking at these laws: “life of the mother” means we are potentially liable if we terminate a pregnancy with a “heartbeat” (even if it’s nonviable) when the mother’s life is not at risk. Basically every lawyer looking at these laws: “life of the mother” means you are potentially liable if you terminate a pregnancy with a “heartbeat” (even if it’s nonviable) when the mother’s life is not at risk. MAGA: “nuh uh. Everyone is wrong except me, facts and logic be damned.”

I see that the usual crowd has gotten their talking points ready

They cannot, under any circumstances, say that anything is ever good if a Dem is president.

Remember that for almost a year, there wasn’t a big concern from the government. They found out Trump had the docs and they asked for them back. Trump wrongfully claimed that they were all his, but the government simply continued to negotiate with him to return the documents. Eventually, Trump told the government he’d return the documents. He gave them several boxes of documents and his lawyer signed a letter stating that these were all of the documents. Had that been it, Trump would have been fine. For all of the problems of walking away with the documents and refusing to return them, the government just wanted to get them back. As far as I can remember, the whole thing was still being handled by NARA at this point, not federal law enforcement. However, the government then learned that Trump had lied. He had removed documents prior to his lawyer examining all of the boxes, causing his lawyer to falsely claim they had returned everything. He had also told his staff to tamper with the security cameras for the room that housed the documents. It was only at this point that the government decided to take real action, referring the case to the DoJ which then executed a search warrant and later indicted Trump. If you want to argue that the controls and laws around the handling of sensitive documents by electeds are broken and need fixing, I’m 100% with you. But it is simply false to paint Trump’s situation as him being treated differently. They gave him every opportunity to avoid trouble (opportunities that everyone else in his shoes gladly took) and he decided to obstruct instead. Also, I’m no “true believer.” I don’t like Hillary, I didn’t vote for her in 2016 (voted for Gary Johnson). I didn’t want Biden to be the Dem nominee in 2020 and I certainly didn’t want him to be the nominee in 2024. I’m just trying to explain what’s going on with these cases.

I don’t expect people to understand all of the legal ins and outs so I’m happy to explain it. But after some point the ignorance goes from understandable to willful.

I’m saying that if a former elected has government docs in their possession, they do not get charged if they cooperate and turn them over when asked. Like it or not, that’s just how it works. If you actually read Hur’s report, the evidence they could use to charge Biden for willful possession was a single comment he made. In all of the tapes with his ghostwriter, he never again mentioned them, none of the information ended up in the book. The documents were not even found in the house he was in when he made the comment (and they were in a “badly damaged box surrounded by household detritus”), and he had been out of office for barely a month (while in office, he was permitted to keep such files at his home). No jury would convict on that fact pattern. If the Trump case had the same facts, Trump wouldn’t have been charged because there would be no likelihood of a conviction. He got charged because, unlike Biden or Pence, Trump obstructed the investigation and lied to the Feds. That’s certainly enough to be able to prove intent to a jury. The thing that has the right so made is that they mistakenly believe the cases are the same and Trump is being treated differently. They are not because Trump ensured his indictment by his own actions after the documents were discovered by the Feds.

I’m not ignoring it. Like I said, electeds get away with a lot around this stuff, likely because the laws were written with the millions of public and private sector employees in mind, not former elected officials. Had Trump taken the documents and forgotten about them and they were discovered years later, he still wouldn’t get charged *unless* he refused to return them when asked. That’s the difference. It remains the difference. All of this other nonsense is just to deflect from the fact that it was Trump’s actions *after* he was asked to return them that got him charged.

You keep ignoring that Trump obstructed the investigation. That’s the crucial difference between the two. Had he just done what Biden did, he wouldn’t have been charged.

I appreciate you proving my point that you are incapable of reading comprehension and instead just pretend you know what people said regardless of the actual text, so long as it meets your preconceived notions. You don’t live in the real world. You live in a pretend world that brings you comfort and tells you that you were always right all along despite the evidence to the contrary. I would laugh, but it’s actually quite sad.

I don’t want to be a jerk, but is English not your native language? Or do you have some learning issue? You keep claiming I said things that I’ve never said and I don’t want to embarrass you if there’s something else going on here.

I’m sorry you have such reading comprehension problems but maybe take some time to get professional help before continuously embarrassing yourself.

Yes, we all understand that you struggle to grasp basic concepts. You don't need to keep pointing it out to everyone.

If anyone is looking for a perfect example of Dunning-Kruger, this is it.

This is just factually incorrect. Instead of taking the very simple and correct explanation (leeway is granted to electeds if they don't obstruct), it paints Trump as a victim of a vast conspiracy that just does not exist. The idea that there is a "protected class" of powerful people who are above the law that exists but doesn't include the guy with a golden toilet is laughable. If Trump had intentionally taken the documents, told his people that he did so to sell them to Iran for cash, but the government asked for them before he did so and he returned them all, he'd be fine. It's not some grand conspiracy, it's an idiot being an idiot and causing himself problems. FYI: If you hire a lawyer, listen to them...

Yeah, unfortunately Aileen Cannon seems to have an incredibly poor grasp on the PRA. Under her theory, the president of the United States can take a sensitive document prepared by the intelligence community as a "personal document" and therefore treat it as if it were a box of White House jelly beans. That's obviously ludicrous and why Smith replied the way he did.

While I don’t agree with most of your characterizations (and that’s fine, we can agree to disagree) I do agree with this. The controls around handling of sensitive documents by electeds are seriously broken. They seem so lax that you’d expect to be walk out of a White House tour with a top secret document unwittingly stuck to your shoe. Aside from the national security implications, you’re correct that this impacts the narrative for the average person. Does everybody leave the office with national security documents? If so, why punish one guy when everyone does it? That, combined with how poorly the media covers politics, the law, and especially the intersection of politics and the law, leads to people believe that the facts of the Biden and Pence cases are the same as the Trump case. The Feds generally seem content to let things slide in these cases so long as the documents are returned. Trump lied to them about returning the documents, lied to his lawyer, causing him to lie to the Feds, and orchestrated several obstructive acts. Had he just done what Biden and Pence did, he’d be fine. We’d still have an issue with document control, but he wouldn’t have an issue with this indictment. But because of the narrative issues you pointed out, a lot of people are incorrectly conflating his case with Biden’s.

https://unusualwhales.com/politics/article/congress-trading-report-2023 Nancy doesn’t hold a candle to Brian Higgins. Members of Congress should be barred from trading stocks. Though that’s obviously irrelevant to this thread.

Two plead guilty to insider trading related to Trump Media merger "NEW YORK, April 3 (Reuters) - Two men pleaded guilty on Wednesday to insider trading in securities in the company that ultimately took former U.S. President Donald Trump's media business public. Michael Shvartsman, 53, head of Miami-based venture capital firm Rocket One Capital, and his brother Gerald Shvartsman, 46, each pleaded guilty to one count of securities fraud before U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman in Manhattan. Rocket One's chief investment officer, Bruce Garelick, is scheduled to face trial on related charges on April 29. Prosecutors charged the trio last year with illegally trading on inside information about Trump Media & Technology Group's (TMTG) (DJT.O), opens new tab plan to go public through a merger with a blank-check company. TMTG operates Truth Social, Trump's main social media platform. Prosecutors said the trio signed confidentiality agreements in June 2021 when they were approached to become early investors in Digital World Acquisition, the blank-check company. The agreements required them to keep information they learned confidential and not trade the company's securities in the open market, prosecutors said. After hearing the company was in merger talks with TMTG, prosecutors said the trio tipped others and bought Digital World securities, selling them after the deal was announced on Oct. 20, 2021, to make a total of $22 million in illegal profit. Michael and Gerald Shvartsman said in court that they knew what they were doing was wrong when they traded on nonpublic information. "I've made a terrible mistake," Gerald Shvartsman said at the hearing. "Insider trading is cheating, plain and simple," U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement after the pleas. The Shvartsmans are scheduled to be sentenced on July 17. Securities fraud carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, but any sentence would be imposed by the judge based on a range of factors. The average prison sentence in federal fraud cases in the U.S. last year was around two years. TMTG was publicly listed in late March, and its shares have been on a wild ride fueled by speculators betting on enthusiasm for Trump, the Republican presidential candidate in November's election. The stock shed early gains this week as Truth Social's parent company disclosed it had lost more than $58 million in 2023. TMTG shares were trading at around $51.60 on Wednesday morning, making Trump's stake worth about $4 billion, though he is not allowed to sell or borrow against it for six months. Trump Media is also embroiled in legal battles in Delaware and Florida with co-founders Wesley Moss and Andrew Litinsky, who have accused the company of trying to improperly dilute their stake. Trump Media has argued they failed to earn their shares and seeks to strip them of their ownership." Man, who could have seen this coming...?

Doesn't he have like $30 million dead cap hit on the contract? Unless this is the first step of a bigger move like trading up in the draft or getting Jefferson or Aiyuk, I don't like it.

Apparently, abortion opponents will propose absolutely anything unless it addresses the root cause of the issue.

Do you believe that HAVV checks are actually registrations of people without IDs or can you admit that the tweet you quoted was clearly wrong?

The account is conflating verification checks with registrations, which are obviously not the same thing. The actually number of total new registrants for Texas this year is about 230k, Net new registrants (new registrants - people falling off the rolls) is about 190k according to the Texas Secretary of State.

Jack Smith is very good at his job

Good to see! Nevada abortion rights amendment surpasses signature threshold for ballot "The organization behind a proposed effort to enshrine abortion rights in Nevada's constitution says they've garnered enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot. Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom is pushing to change the state constitution to include the right to an abortion until fetal viability. In a release sent Tuesday, the campaign said they've gathered 110,000 signatures, which surpasses the 102,362 threshold to qualify for the ballot. Of those, 25,591 signatures need to be from each of the state's four congressional districts. The organization said they're actively collecting signatures from all congressional districts. Political groups often try to gather well over the minimum requirement of signatures because many signatures are invalid for various reasons. Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom says that the 110,000 signatures is 50% of their goal for this measure. “We are overwhelmed by Nevadans’ enthusiasm for protecting our reproductive rights and by the eagerness that voters across the political spectrum have shown for our petition. With more than 110,000 signatures gathered in less than six weeks, it’s a true testament to the fact that Nevadans recognize the importance in codifying reproductive freedom into our state constitution. As we continue to see new attacks on abortion access around the country, Nevadans recognize that there is real urgency to get this measure on the ballot and passed,” said president Lindsey Harmon. Abortion rights up to 24 weeks are already codified into Nevada law through a 1990 referendum vote, where two-thirds of voters were in favor. That can be changed with another referendum vote. Abortion rights have become a mobilizing issue for Democrats since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 court decision establishing a nationwide right to abortion. Public polling shows about two-thirds of Americans say abortion should generally be legal in the earliest stages of pregnancy. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade in June 2022, that sentiment has been underscored in elections both in Democratic and deeply Republican states. The standards are higher for amending the constitution, which requires either approval from two legislative sessions and an election, or two consecutive elections with a simple majority of votes. In Nevada, reproductive rights were central to Democratic campaigns in the 2022 midterms. It is set to be a central issue for Democratic U.S. Sen. Jacky Rosen as she looks to defend her seat in 2024. Another broader proposed ballot question seeking to enshrine various reproductive freedoms in Nevada's constitution is awaiting a decision from the state supreme court. The deadline to collect signatures is June 26 and then it will head to the Secretary of State's office for verification."

The Republican party has become a full-fledged anti-sex movement "The US supreme court justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas cited the Comstock Act, named after the 19th-century anti-vice campaigner Anthony Comstock, in last week’s case about access to the abortion pill mifepristone. If you don’t know who Anthony Comstock was or what his law did, that might not have alarmed you. But it should have." "Comstock was reputed to be driven by religious shame over ***** to become his era’s most extreme anti-sex crusader. He rose to prominence in the early 1870s, when he convinced Congress to make it a crime to advertise, sell or mail contraceptives or give out contraceptive information, even orally, or to mail anything “immoral” – a term whose vagueness allowed widespread prosecution, including of a feminist newspaper reporting on sexual abuse whose prominent publishers, Victoria Woodhull and Tennessee Claflin, he got sent to prison. Like modern-day rightwingers he was a book-burner, and he boasted that he had driven 15 people to suicide." "While the backlash to Roe’s June 2022 overturning has been spectacular, with Democratic election victories and blue-state legislation strengthening reproductive rights, that doesn’t spare women in red states from the horrific consequences of the decision. At this point we all know they include prosecution for miscarriages suspected of being abortions, let alone for actual abortions, and lack of timely care from medical providers, who, fearful of prosecution themselves, sometimes wait for miscarrying patients to go critical from infection or loss of blood before offering care. " "..[I]n May 2023, the Heritage Foundation declared on social media, “Conservatives have to lead the way in restoring sex to its true purpose, & ending recreational sex & senseless use of birth control pills.” "The Project 2025 agenda for a rightwing coup, should Trump win this November, declares that the USAid office of gender equality and women’s empowerment “should remove all ... language on USAid websites, in agency publications and policies, and in all agency contracts and grants that include” terms including “gender and gender equality” and should also remove references to “abortion”, “reproductive health” and “sexual and reproductive rights”"