What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Savonarola]

I have been reading "*they* will poison him and replace him with Vance halfway in" conspiracies since the day after he was elected. 

You know, I feel retroactively guilty for thinking all the conspiracy paranoia in the X-Files/Matrix/etc... and shit in the 1990s was fun and cool. I feel we planted the cultural seeds of something that's become a monster.

You don't need to feel guilty. We've always had conspiracy paranoia in the United States. Our first serious third party was the Anti-Masonic Party, which was dedicated to preventing Masonic conspiracies.

[DGuller]

On the Luigi case...
It does indeed seem the police managed to mishandle all evidence so it's invalid?

Suppression hearing is still ongoing; not aware of any rulings yet.

One thing I've been wondering for a while:  how many criminal cases can actually survive OJ-style lawyering by the defense?  It seems like few prosecution cases can do everything by the book, and do enough of it, to survive a determined challenge.  The reason convictions still happen is because most defendants can't muster the resources to find holes that are almost always going to be there.

[The Minsky Moment]

One thing I've been wondering for a while:  how many criminal cases can actually survive OJ-style lawyering by the defense?  It seems like few prosecution cases can do everything by the book, and do enough of it, to survive a determined challenge.  The reason convictions still happen is because most defendants can't muster the resources to find holes that are almost always going to be there.

A lot of cases can survive that; a lot do.  Even a significant violation of the rules doesn't doom a prosecution because of judicial escape hatches like the inevitable discovery doctrine or - on appeal - the harmless error doctrine.  Good representation means turning an almost certain outcome of conviction into a decent underdog's fighting chance. The government still has very powerful advantages and at least until early 2025, it also had access to top tier lawyers of its own.

[Razgovory]

I have been reading "*they* will poison him and replace him with Vance halfway in" conspiracies since the day after he was elected. 

You know, I feel retroactively guilty for thinking all the conspiracy paranoia in the X-Files/Matrix/etc... and shit in the 1990s was fun and cool. I feel we planted the cultural seeds of something that's become a monster.

Yeah, I know what you mean.  Back in the 1990's there was a role playing game called Dark*Matter that was about conspiracies.  Evil Masons, Lizard people, UFOs etc.  Later on, I found it disturbing that people actually believed in it.  Like discovering that people actually believed in Orcs and Hobbits.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

I have been reading "*they* will poison him and replace him with Vance halfway in" conspiracies since the day after he was elected. 

You know, I feel retroactively guilty for thinking all the conspiracy paranoia in the X-Files/Matrix/etc... and shit in the 1990s was fun and cool. I feel we planted the cultural seeds of something that's become a monster.

You don't need to feel guilty. We've always had conspiracy paranoia in the United States. Our first serious third party was the Anti-Masonic Party, which was dedicated to preventing Masonic conspiracies.

They succeeded given the amount of houses that are just plywood 

[crazy canuck]

On the Luigi case...
It does indeed seem the police managed to mishandle all evidence so it's invalid?

Suppression hearing is still ongoing; not aware of any rulings yet.

One thing I've been wondering for a while:  how many criminal cases can actually survive OJ-style lawyering by the defense?  It seems like few prosecution cases can do everything by the book, and do enough of it, to survive a determined challenge.  The reason convictions still happen is because most defendants can't muster the resources to find holes that are almost always going to be there.

One thing I've been wondering for a while:  how many criminal cases can actually survive OJ-style lawyering by the defense?  It seems like few prosecution cases can do everything by the book, and do enough of it, to survive a determined challenge.  The reason convictions still happen is because most defendants can't muster the resources to find holes that are almost always going to be there.

A lot of cases can survive that; a lot do.  Even a significant violation of the rules doesn't doom a prosecution because of judicial escape hatches like the inevitable discovery doctrine or - on appeal - the harmless error doctrine.  Good representation means turning an almost certain outcome of conviction into a decent underdog's fighting chance. The government still has very powerful advantages and at least until early 2025, it also had access to top tier lawyers of its own.

Yes and the cases that proceed to trial have normally already been tested so that only those that would likely result in conviction proceed. 

Here there is the added test that it must be in the public interest to obtain that conviction.

But of course the system relies on prosecutors like BB who discharge their ethical obligations, something that is becoming less common in the US.

[Razgovory]

It seems hard to argue that it is not in the public interest to prosecute murderers.  The motion to suppress evidence is grasping at straws.  Police don't have to give you a Miranda warning before arresting you.

[Savonarola]

From CNN

Kennedy Center board votes to rename it 'Trump Kennedy Center'


President Donald Trump looks down from the Presidential Box in the Opera House at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts as he participates in a guided tour on March 17, 2025 Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images/File
The board of trustees of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts voted Thursday to rename the facility after both the former president and President Donald Trump.

"The Kennedy Center Board of Trustees voted unanimously today to name the institution The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts," center spokeswoman Roma Daravi said in a statement.

"The unanimous vote recognizes that the current Chairman saved the institution from financial ruin and physical destruction. The new Trump Kennedy Center reflects the unequivocal bipartisan support for America's cultural center for generations to come," she added.

The vote took place during a board meeting, according to a source familiar with the matter, during which Trump called in.

The president, who was elected chair by a newly constituted board in February, has frequently joked about calling the performing arts center the "Trump Kennedy Center," and it appears his handpicked board has approved his wishes.

Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty, an ex-officio member of the board, attempted to object to the vote but was muted. The meeting is now adjourned, the source said.

"Congratulations to President Donald J. Trump, and likewise, congratulations to President Kennedy, because this will be a truly great team long into the future! The building will no doubt attain new levels of success and grandeur," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote on X.

Days after returning to office, Trump announced an aggressive plan to gut the existing board of trustees and oust its chairman, the billionaire philanthropist David Rubenstein. Since then, he's led an effort to reshape the institution to his tastes.

 
It's Trump's world, we're just here to pay rent and buy tickets. 



(There really wasn't a plan to demolish The Building Formerly Known As The Kennedy Center, right?)

[Zoupa]

 

Une fois qu'on a passé les bornes, il n'y a plus de limites.

[grumbler]

Somebody's gonna have to do it. And I don't wanna spell out what IT is. And I'm not saying "go out and do it!". And I don't encourage it. But someone's gonna have to just take one for the team and do it. I just think it needs to be done, the quicker the better, for everyone on the planet really.

Somebody's gonna have to do it.

But that someone isn't going to be you, because you'd have to leave your couch to do it.

[Zoupa]

Somebody's gonna have to do it. And I don't wanna spell out what IT is. And I'm not saying "go out and do it!". And I don't encourage it. But someone's gonna have to just take one for the team and do it. I just think it needs to be done, the quicker the better, for everyone on the planet really.

Somebody's gonna have to do it.

But that someone isn't going to be you, because you'd have to leave your couch to do it.

My Canadian couch, yes.

[crazy canuck]

It seems hard to argue that it is not in the public interest to prosecute murderers.  The motion to suppress evidence is grasping at straws.  Police don't have to give you a Miranda warning before arresting you.

Normally the determination of whether someone is a murder occurs at the conclusion of a trial.

[viper37]

I have been reading "*they* will poison him and replace him with Vance halfway in" conspiracies since the day after he was elected. 

I still think they're waiting for their opportune moment to have him declared unfit to govern.  Right now, he still has lot of support and he's useful.

[Razgovory]

It seems hard to argue that it is not in the public interest to prosecute murderers.  The motion to suppress evidence is grasping at straws.  Police don't have to give you a Miranda warning before arresting you.

Normally the determination of whether someone is a murder occurs at the conclusion of a trial.

I'm struggling to grasp your point on this topic.  Is it not in the public interest to attempt to obtain a conviction of a man who is on video shooting another man in the back?