Friday: Hili dialogue

October 14, 2022 • 6:45 am

Good morning at the end of the work week: Friday, October 14, 2022. Once again I ask readers, as I get back on schedule, to supply us with a couple of notable events, births, or deaths that occurred on this day; these you can find on the October 14 Wikipedia page.

Two pieces of Trump related Nooz, neither particularly propitious for the Orange Man. First, the House panel investigating the January 6 Capitol insurrection has voted unanimously to subpoena Trump himself. (Remember that when Steve Bannon didn’t honor his own subpoena, he was found guilty of contempt of Congress.

Trump will fight it, of course, and as time passes the elections loom. If the House becomes Republican, the committee may not be able to continue as it is.

Nooz #2 is that the Supreme Court has delivered a back-of-the-hand slap to Trump, rejecting his appeal that the “Special Master” be allowed to review the classified documents found by the FBI in its raid on Mar-a-Lago. The Justice Department will still be able to use those documents in a criminal investigation of Trump and his cronies, and Trump will not be able to see them.

Here’s the Supremes’ one-sentence ruling, which came with no dissents:

“The application to vacate the stay entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit on Sept. 21, 2022, presented to Justice Thomas and by him referred to the court is denied.”

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is worried about Polish currency:

A: What are you looking at so intently?
Hili: I’m watching how the value of the zloty is falling.
In Polish:
Ja: Czemu się tak przyglądasz?
Hili: Patrzę jak spada wartość złotówki.
And here’s a photo by Paulina of Szaron and Kulka, all cuddled up.

 

40 thoughts on “Friday: Hili dialogue

      1. Not SCOTUS refusing Trump’s request, but SCJ Thomas not issuing a stay while the SC considered Trump’s request.

        I wonder if Thomas ended up on the couch for a few nights?

      2. “The application to vacate the stay entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit on Sept. 21, 2022, presented to Justice Thomas and by him referred to the court is denied.” Can one actually address an application to a specific SC Justice, and not to the SC as a whole? (please forgive me my ignorance).
        If even Justice Thomas denied the application, it does not really look good for Trump, or am I mistaken?

        1. Emergency motions filed with the Supreme Court are referred, in the first instance, to the justice who sits as the “circuit justice” for the federal circuit court of appeals in which the case arose. Florida is within the territorial jurisdiction of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia). Justice Clarence Thomas serves as the “circuit justice” for the Eleventh Circuit.

          Unless a request involves a dire emergency, it is common practice for the circuit justice to refer the request to SCOTUS sitting as a whole. In this case, Justice Thomas ordered the federal prosecutors to respond to Trump’s emergency request, then referred the request to the Court sitting as a whole, which summarily denied Trump’s request in the language you quote above.

          You are correct that it does not look good for Trump. He has no avenue of relief available to prevent the Justice Department from proceeding with it criminal investigation of Trump’s possession of the 103 documents seized from Mar-a-Lago marked classified.

  1. The recent announcement by the January 6 committee that it would not publish its report before the election is a tacit admission that there is nothing earth-shattering in it. The subpoena of Trump is their last gasp to keep the pot boiling, but also suggests that they can’t make their case. It’s probably not a good idea for them to give him a forum. If he appears before the election, it will be because he wants to, otherwise the mechanics won’t have time to work out.

    1. Did you actually watch the J6 hearing yesterday, DrB? Have you actually watched any of the nine J6 subcommittee hearings?

    2. A “tacit admission that there is nothing earth-shattering…” What a silly, uninformed statement. You really should inform yourself before commenting on things you know nothing about.

      For your enlightenment:

      The committee must shut down within 30 days of the final report being issued. So they don’t want to dissolve the committee too quickly as to maximize their time. Thompson said they did want to push out some information before the midterms- I gather, a smaller interim report.

        1. Love ya, boss, though I just can’t apologize for my tone here. I’m simply tired and intolerant of bullshit, and DrB is a consistent distributer of bs. My opinion of course, and I’m not standing apart of your readership on that.

    3. “The recent announcement by the January 6 committee that it would not publish its report before the election is a tacit admission that there is nothing earth-shattering in it.” I strongly doubt that, it might just as well be because they don’t want to appear partisan, just before the mid-terms. I think your speculation is not really warranted.

  2. … the House panel investigating the January 6 Capitol insurrection has voted unanimously to subpoena Trump himself.

    I took the issuance of the subpoena to be made in the same spirit in which federal prosecutors will, before presenting an indictment to a grand jury, send a letter to anyone who has been identified as the “target” of investigation letting them know that the investigation is wrapping up and inviting them to come testify before the grand jury if they wish to. This serves a dual purpose: first, if the target is foolish enough to testify, he or she will likely bury themself deeper; second, it precludes the target from arguing after the indictment is returned that the grand jury would not have charged the target if the grand jurors had had the opportunity to hear the target’s side of the story.

    Donald Trump plainly will never give substantive testimony before J6 subcommittee. Even if the subcommittee were to continue its work into next year and Trump were to exhaust whatever spurious legal challenges he might raise to the subpoena, Trump would eventually show up and claim (as he claimed in the NY Attorney General’s investigation into his fraudulent tax returns and other fraudulent financial records) his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination (as his cronies like Roger Stone and Mike Flynn, and the corrupt lawyers like John Eastman and Jeffrey Clark, have done in front of the J6 subcommittee).

    But when the J6 committee issues its final report, Trump will not be able to claim he was denied the chance to tell the public his side of the story.

      1. The J6 subcommittee can make a criminal referral to the Justice Department. But, at this point, such a referral would be largely ceremonial, since the DoJ quite clearly has already undertaken a criminal investigation into Team Trump’s efforts to subvert the legitimate results of the 2020 US presidential election.

        1. He said the same thing about wanting to talk to Mueller and his special council. One of his most common cons…

  3. What is clear from the January 6th hearings is that for more than three hours during the insurrection, Trump did not nothing to quell it. As shown in videos, members of Congress, huddled in a room for safety, called desperately to almost anyone but Trump to relieve the siege by bringing in more police and the National Guard. Trump reveled as his cult attempted to capture and perhaps kill members of Congress along with Vice President Mike Pence. If nothing else, the hearings revealed what a sociopathic, authoritarian fascist Trump was and is. The hearings also revealed that the danger to democracy is far from over as the Trump dominated Republican Party is on the verge of taking over Congress as well as controlling many state legislatures. No historical analogy is exact, but I keep thinking about the Weimar Republic.

      1. I would add that the hearings make clear that Trump knew he lost the election, but continued with the Big Lie to the present day. If Trump knows nothing else, he fully accepts the saying associated with P.T. Barnum (I’m not sure he actually said it) that a sucker is born every minute.

    1. Not to mention that the J6 committee has shown clear evidence, direct from the mouths of Trump and several of his RP sidekicks, that Trump planned to contest the election months before it happened and that Trump knew and repeatedly admitted that he had lost the election.

      I have no idea how folks like Dr. Brydon up above can continue their denial.

    2. No historical analogy is exact, but I keep thinking about the Weimar Republic.

      And the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, et al. are today’s version of the Brown Shirts.

  4. English cricketer Jack Crapp was born on this day in 1912. His name is curiously close the phrase I’d use to sum up my knowledge of cricket.

      1. Recently I learned that the face of God in Monty Python’s Holy Grail is cricketing legend W.G. Grace; the voice is the late Graham Chapman, who also played King Arthur. And that the film was financed in part by Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, and Jethro Tull. George Harrison famously financed Life of Brian, explaining (Liverpudlian accent) “I want to see the film”. So apparently Python has many fans in the Rock Royalty community.

        Jack Crapp nicely sums up my knowledge of cricket. A great mnemonic for the name, which will some day save my bacon in Final Jeopardy.

      2. All I really know about cricket is what little I’ve gleaned from comedy panel shows, Freddy Flintoff appearances, and programs like Downtown Abby, and Midsomer Murders. I did witness some guys playing in Overland Park, Kansas. Garmin is not too far away and attracts engineers from India & Pakistan, which explains how a match could pop up in a park in a midwestern suburb. I was fascinated but too shy to stick around for long or ask questions.

        1. I am of the opinion that cricket was a big historical mistake. They were clearly going for baseball but when they decided on a flat bat instead of a round one, the physics were wrong and the possibility of hitting a grand slam home run out of the park vanished and we are left with…well cricket.

    1. ¡ That, Mr Christopher, is truly hilarious !

      ¿ May I use said, same phrase ?
      ¿ for just ~ q misunderstood or unknown deal of mine ?

      like ” O yeah. About that, I know jackcrap, Friend. ”

      Also, today years’ time ago, these folks’ birthings = https://ffrf.org/news/day
      Ms ( Johanna ) Hannah Arendt // y1906
      Ms Katha Pollitt // y1949
      mr ( edward estlin ) e e cummings // y1894 ( same year as my Grandma Adeline )

      Blue

  5. If the House becomes Republican, the committee may not be able to continue as it is.

    The fate of the House won’t matter. The committee must disband by 12/31 when this congressional session expires. I don’t know if they can create a new committee if the House stays Democratic, but my assumption is that they won’t.

  6. A thousand & sixtysix I sing
    The bloody Duke became our king
    And pious folk beheld on high
    A boding comet in the sky.
    Callixtus’ feast, a day of fear
    Brought death unto that fateful year.

Leave a Reply to Mark R. Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *