One of my wife’s friends was pulled over, tested to show about the same, then charged anyway because apparently the cop (at least in that county in CA) can just say “No, they were drunk.” And that was enough. Lost her job over it.
13 Likes
About 30 years ago, my mom, driving from NY to PA, was stopped by a NJ state cop. She told us he didn’t say anything about any infraction. Just told her that he’d give her a ticket if she didn’t give him $20. She paid him (which pissed me off). Her reasoning: “You never know with those people.”
New Jersey, folks.
8 Likes
“everything is legal in New Jersey” - - Alexander Hamilton
6 Likes
7 Likes
Turns out she was one of those kids who wore a Naruto headband in school hahah
11 Likes
1 Like
Throughout the past several days I kept hearing how R Senators were meeting with Trump’s impeachment lawyers and was wondering how in the fuck this wasn’t disqualifying. I mean, how in the fuck can you be considered an impartial juror while meeting with defendant’s counsel at the same time?
Well…
ETA:
22 Likes
Breathalyzers aren’t even that accurate. They don’t have precision down to 0.02. If you want to get to that level of precision, you need to get a blood test.
5 Likes
Unfortunately the system our founders created for impeaching a President apparently never considered the possibility that many of the jurors would also be co-conspirators.
I think I’ve actually come to hate Lindsey Graham even more than I hate Trump. Trump is a malignant force of incompetence, greed and malice but he lacks the capacity to consider the impact of his own actions. Graham knows exactly what is at stake here—was one of the few Republicans to openly articulate it during Trump’s rise to power—yet supports him anyway.
17 Likes
I can’t fathom that our legislators (I won’t even attempt to use the word “leaders”) have not yet learned that relying on common decency is not a sufficient check against seizing unbridled power.
I mean, I feel stupid even typing that, let alone making a decision based on that belief.
10 Likes
So he still hasn’t learned yet, then. Got it.
12 Likes
True, but no matter how many rules decent people make, the scoundrels always find the loopholes. In this case, make a rule about senators colluding with the defense and they’ll just send surrogates. I mean, no matter what, they have made an art of sidestepping law and order. It’s fucking maddening.
13 Likes
First, I think there’s a vast field of possibilities to explore between “we made no rule” and “they worked around every rule we made.”
Second, though, this is the group of people who we elected to specialize in making rules. It’s not like this is all going down on January 7th, accelerated due to the gravity of the situation and the need for a quick and decisive resolution, and some things are just going to slip between the cracks. This whole thing is moving as slow as molasses and they still can’t get it right. It’s the Democrats once again showing that they don’t even know how to play the game, let alone win at it. Frustrating. Grr.
5 Likes
As it the past eternity with McTurtle running things didn’t provide enough clear indicators about the kind of shit these people pull. It’s like Trump’s favorite “scorpion and the frog” tale - it’s just in these people’s nature. They simply can’t be trusted.
8 Likes
What makes you think they haven’t gotten it right? The Republicans are going to acquit him, no matter how amazing of a story and retelling of Nov 3rd-January 6th they put up. I want to hear something to back up your assertion that this is bumbling on the Dems’ part. I’m not seeing what you are seeing.
I’m seeing the Republicans duck and weave, but this vote and its run-up are fracturing that party. It’s a slow, glacial process that might take a year to play out, but I am seeing a steady chipping and crumbling of the Republicans. They are tying their rafts to a sinking ship. Trump has a dozen lawsuits against him that are about to fire off as soon as this is over. That dozen could turn into a hundred. He will claim victory with this acquittal, but the avalanche is coming for him. He’s fucked and so are all the short-sighted senators who are following him.
7 Likes
I also think they’re doing a good job at the trial.
I think the comment you’re responding to was specifically about how the Dems “set the rules of the game” though. Personally, I don’t know that it would’ve made any difference in the long run, but it is horribly frustrating, after all this time, to hear that Schumer didn’t think he needed to lay down the law about not colluding with the defense because he “didn’t think anyone would so blatantly break the norms of propriety,” to paraphrase.
That kind of thinking needs to end now.
9 Likes
I agree with that - they need to expect treachery 100% of the time and not give any R the benefit of any doubt. The other factor at play is the Dems only hold a razor-thin majority in the Senate. Just because they have Harris as the tiebreaker for any regular vote does not mean they can just steamroll the R’s all the time, like the R’s have done for years. This is a different situation and the D’s DO have to play the game carefully. They cannot go stomping around right now. Every little thing needs to be a calculation, including the time it takes to do something. This trial was already delayed, but could delay no longer. It has to get done NOW or Biden will not be able to move anything forward. So, there are bound to be some missteps and rough edges.
At this point, Schumer overlooking creating more rules is beside the point and they just need to get this thing done, vote, and move on with their other business. Let the AG and states hold the rest of the Retrumplicans accountable after this, and don’t tie up the senate with it. We have bigger fish to fry, and that is Coronavirus vaccinations and economic relief and then social justice and inequality, the climate (which is elephant-fucking us RIGHT NOW @Papasan ) and health care. Yes, the Republicans need to be held to the fire, but right now, the senate needs to put its spotlight on more serious issues.
3 Likes
agreed. they’ve got three compelling arguments in my opinion.
- there shouldn’t be a “january exception” ( nor a resign and get out scot-free exception. )
- trump has repeatedly praised and encouraged violence, knew that violence was planned, and then not only encouraged it, did nothing to stop it.
- what happens when he runs and loses the next time.
the third one is a cincher for me. the worry isn’t when he wins - the worry is when he loses.
re: the whole schumer thing. a rule wouldn’t have prevented the republicans from colluding, and it only would have been fuel for the false argument that dems are stifling free speech. it was all downside, so why bother.
4 Likes
“It is very very difficult to make things idiot-proof, due to the fact that idiots tend to be so ingenious.” – Unknown, corollary to Murphey’s Law
7 Likes
