Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, April 16, 2018

OTP 2018 Apr 16: Beto strikes out but is a hit at baseball fundraiser

“I guarantee you he didn’t just get three pitches and three strikes like his old man,” said O’Rourke.

He can afford a laugh, since he has dusted Cruz in fundraising by taking in an eye-popping $6.7 million in the first three months of this year. That’s more than twice the $3.2 million gathered by Cruz, whose tally counted money from multiple campaign entities including a political action committee.

O’Rourke won’t take PAC money, a stand that’s expected to put him at a fundraising disadvantage as the general election nears. He said Saturday that he and his supporters are “doing this 100 percent the right way. There are no political action committees, no corporations.

 

“It’s just the people, the people of Texas, and you all look awesome,” O’Rourke told supporters who filled The Long Time grounds with a laid-back vibe as they sipped beer, wine, lemonade or water, sitting on blankets, a small stand of bleachers and scattered chairs; children and amiable dogs milling around.

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 16, 2018 at 08:18 AM | 1328 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics, strikeouts, texas

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 14 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 12 13 14
   1301. Stormy JE Posted: April 22, 2018 at 11:34 PM (#5658289)
I'm serious. Why do we need this talking point?
The usual suspects are fond of accusing critics of Comey and/or McCabe of trying to undermine everyone in the law enforcement and intelligence communities.
   1302. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 22, 2018 at 11:34 PM (#5658290)
In stark contrast we see that Mueller -- the one conducting a real investigation -- has twice now pressured a lawyer to turn against his or her own client.

Not sure what this refers to.


? You laid it out in your next breath:

He once got a judge to order Manafort/Gates's lawyer to testify to a grand jury about what they had told her, in a classic crime-fraud exception situation.¹ But there was no "pressure" on the lawyer to turn against them; it wasn't like, e.g., flipping Manafort to testify against Trump. And what's the second time? If it's referring to Cohen, then (a) Mueller wasn't involved, and (b) while one might assume that various prosecutor-type people would love it if Cohen flipped on Trump, we have no evidence that any such attempt has been made yet. Is there some other instance that has escaped my mind at the moment?


And as to (a) "Mueller wasn't involved": Please.

As to (b) they're certainly trying to get Cohen to flip on Trump. Why deny that this is how any competent prosecutor would proceed?
   1303. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 23, 2018 at 12:18 AM (#5658294)
? You laid it out in your next breath:
? No, in my next breath I explained why you misunderstood the first instance and misdescribed the second. (Or maybe it's misdescribed the first instance and misunderstood the second?) (Or maybe it's that you misunderstood and misdescribed both instances?))

Mueller put no pressure on Melissa Laurenza; that's a mischaracterization of what happened. And as for Cohen, I have no idea what your "please" is. Mueller could very easily have conducted these searches of Cohen's property if he wanted, but he didn't; he left it to the USAO-SDNY. And saying that you think Mueller will do something is not remotely evidence that Mueller has done it, which is what your claim was.
   1304. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 23, 2018 at 12:50 AM (#5658296)
? You laid it out in your next breath:

? No, in my next breath I explained why you misunderstood the first instance and misdescribed the second. (Or maybe it's misdescribed the first instance and misunderstood the second?) (Or maybe it's that you misunderstood and misdescribed both instances?))

Mueller put no pressure on Melissa Laurenza; that's a mischaracterization of what happened.


I can only conclude that you're playing word games with the word "pressure," or you're arguing that Mueller getting a judge to turn Manafort's own lawyer into a witness against him was something THE JUDGE did, not Mueller. You're being ridiculous here.

First, here's what I initially wrote:

In stark contrast we see that Mueller -- the one conducting a real investigation -- has twice now pressured a lawyer to turn against his or her own client.


And here's how Turley characterized the situation in a very long post back in November:

A Question of Privilege: How Mueller Used Manafort’s Own Lawyer As A Witness Against Him
November 3, 2017


Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the highly controversial move of Special Counsel Robert Mueller to use Paul Manafort’s own lawyer as a witness against him. What is most striking about this move is that it was entirely unnecessary given the other evidence of alleged violations of federal law governing foreign agents. The case against Manafort is strong but the denial of attorney-client protections in the case should be a matter of great concern for all citizens — regardless of your view of the underlying merits of the Russian investigation.

-

While his indictment last week likely came as little surprise to Paul Manafort, one of the key witnesses used against him surprised and worried not just Manafort but many in the legal bar. The star witness on some of the allegations was none other than Manafort’s own lawyer, Melissa Laurenza of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. While Mueller and his team have previously been criticized for strongarm tactics, those allegations pale in comparison to to using Manafort’s own lawyer as a witness against him.

In fairness to Mueller and Laurenza, the compulsion of the testimony was reviewed by U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Chief Judge Beryl Howell, who granted a motion to compel the testimony after a series of hearings. In an Oct. 2 opinion, Howell found that representations in letters denying lobbying efforts in the United States were “false, a half truth, or at least misleading.”

...

The use of Manafort’s own lawyer as a witness against him presents a particularly chilling tactic for counsel and their clients. Attorneys routinely convince clients to comply with the law and often prevent violations that might be contemplated by ill-informed or unthinking clients. Such counseling only occurs because people feel free to discuss their concerns and plans under the guarantees of attorney-client privilege.

...

Generally, courts reject the use of the exception with regard to past crimes and more often will allow the exception to be used when the attorney is an active vehicle or facilitator of a crime or fraud. This year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected the use of the exception in a length[y] memorandum. Although the court found compelling evidence of fraud in the case, it refused to breach the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship.

...

In Manafort’s case, Laurenza only joined his legal team after the government had started to investigate Manafort for, among other things, the failure to register as a foreign agent. This filing violation has long been viewed as a matter handled as a simple administrative matter rather than a criminal matter. Many violators simply retroactively register. Manafort retroactively registered, as did Tony Podesta, founder of the powerful Podesta Group lobbying shop and brother of Hillary Clinton campaign manager John Podesta, who was also linked to Ukrainian interests as a result of the Mueller investigation. Only six cases have ever been prosecuted under the modern Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

More importantly, the Justice Department’s FARA office raised the issue last September with Manafort and his associate, Richard Gates. That is when Laurenza was retained.


Check out the rest of Turley's post to see just how honorable some people in Mueller's profession find him, or what they think of his dirty tactics, or of his penchant of stretching the criminal code. I remember when even you cared about the government overcharging people.

--

David:

And as for Cohen, I have no idea what your "please" is. Mueller could very easily have conducted these searches of Cohen's property if he wanted, but he didn't; he left it to the USAO-SDNY. And saying that you think Mueller will do something is not remotely evidence that Mueller has done it, which is what your claim was.


Mueller is working hand in hand with the SDNY. If he's not calling the shots in the investigation he's consulting on it, or is at least being informed of every step of it. Either way, any evidence the investigation turns up will certainly be delivered to Mueller. They clearly want Cohen to flip on Trump. That's the whole effing point of the entire investigation. Why you're denying that is an exercise left to the (sane) reader.

Or do you think Mueller has said to the SDNY, "I stumbled upon evidence of criminal activity by Michael Cohen but he's entirely incidental to my investigation and thus he's all yours; I don't know or care what you do with him, or what evidence comes out of that. I don't care if you pressure him to flip on Trump or not. I am not concerned about Michael Cohen or any evidence he may have that may relate to Trump or Russia collusion." Please.
   1305. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 23, 2018 at 02:02 AM (#5658300)
Two details worth remembering: Innocent people can't flip. Guilty people can't flip on innocent people.
   1306. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 23, 2018 at 05:56 AM (#5658302)
Speaking of the Kenyan precedent, will the DNC be citing it in its opposition brief to the virtually certain order to dismiss?

It's like FLTB is a FL. Hint: one doesn't write an opposition brief to an order. One writes an opposition brief to a motion. It's the kind of mistake that someone who once saw a tv show with law-talking people might make


Now you’re going to get one of the junior Fake Lawyers in trouble at the Fake Law Firm.
   1307. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 23, 2018 at 06:10 AM (#5658303)
Two details worth remembering: Innocent people can't flip


A damning indictment of gymnasts if there ever was one.
   1308. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:15 AM (#5658305)
It's like FLTB is a FL. Hint: one doesn't write an opposition brief to an order. One writes an opposition brief to a motion. It's the kind of mistake that someone who once saw a tv show with law-talking people might make.


LOL. It's actually the kind of thing someone writing really fast for free might make. (*) But when I don't write for free, suffice it to say that I've taken on far more sophisticated and on-point motions than the vast majority of even the nation's real lawyers.

But maybe the "gotcha" will gull the target demo. You'd know that far better than I.

(*) Hint.
   1309. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:21 AM (#5658307)
"No reasonable prosecutor" would bring such a case.


Completely untrue. Reasonable prosecutors bring more challenging, less winnable, cases every day of the week and have for decades. It's an even stupider idea given the unique fact pattern the case presented. Given the unique facts, it's highly unlikely that there would be a case right on point. It isn't often, after all, that a very senior USG official in a position that routinely handles classified info, decides to take her communications en masse outside secure channels.

And there have been gross negligence prosecutions under that statute. If those didn't have the aggravating factors Comey cited, so what? The aggravating factors go to the sanction, not to whether to prosecute.
   1310. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:22 AM (#5658308)
But when I don't write for free, suffice it to say that I've taken on far more sophisticated and on-point motions than the vast majority of even the nation's real lawyers.


Total Comments: 37819
   1311. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:24 AM (#5658309)
Well, I can't come up with a straight-face explanation as to why Hillary's former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, who seemed to know about the Secretary's server arrangements, was allowed to claim attorney-client privilege and represent the candidate at the FBI interview. Can you?


The investigation was tanked. As a simple example, a real investigation even of the Weiner emails would have consisted of far more than just reading the emails, and would have included trying to figure out how Weiner got them. Yet it appears that no investigative steps beyond reading the emails was undertaken.
   1312. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:28 AM (#5658310)
They clearly want Cohen to flip on Trump. That's the whole effing point of the entire investigation. Why you're denying that is an exercise left to the (sane) reader.


The target demo. Helping them keep their hope alive.
   1313. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:33 AM (#5658311)
LOL. It's actually the kind of thing someone writing really fast for free might make. (*) But when I don't write for free, suffice it to say that I've taken on far more sophisticated and on-point motions than the vast majority of even the nation's real lawyers.


Not just a Fake Lawyer. A Fake Top Lawyer. Where’d ya get the degree? Fauxlombia? Emorube? Philanderbilt?
   1314. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:42 AM (#5658312)
Where’d ya get the degree?


Who cares?
   1315. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 23, 2018 at 07:42 AM (#5658313)
LOL. It's actually the kind of thing someone writing really fast for free might make. (*) But when I don't write for free, suffice it to say that I've taken on far more sophisticated and on-point motions than the vast majority of even the nation's real lawyers.

Not just a Fake Lawyer. A Fake Top Lawyer. Where’d ya get the degree? Fauxlombia? Emorube? Philanderbilt?

Two things we'll never see: Donald Trump's tax returns and FLTB's law degree.
   1316. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:12 AM (#5658315)

LOL. It's actually the kind of thing someone writing really fast for free might make.
This is like someone claiming to be a professional baseball player running the bases clockwise and saying that he was in a hurry and so he got confused.

But when I don't write for free, suffice it to say that I've taken on far more sophisticated and on-point motions than the vast majority of even the nation's real lawyers.
He is Elmer J. Fudd, millionaire. He owns a mansion and a yacht.
   1317. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:13 AM (#5658316)
I see you boys are still whacking 'em out in this circle.
   1318. DavidFoss Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:13 AM (#5658317)
The investigation was tanked. As a simple example, a real investigation even of the Weiner emails would have consisted of far more than just reading the emails, and would have included trying to figure out how Weiner got them. Yet it appears that no investigative steps beyond reading the emails was undertaken.

His wife had an account on Clinton's server. She used the home laptop to access her email on that server. Most email clients will cache emails locally for performance reasons. There. Investigation complete.

Two details worth remembering: Innocent people can't flip. Guilty people can't flip on innocent people.

Dershowitz was on Stephanopoulos this weekend and someone brought this up. It was Dershowitz's claim that *everyone* with 'complex' business dealings in major metropolitan areas is guilty of significant crimes and that the justice system selectively investigates and prosecutes people like this for political reasons. The former SDNY member of the panel thought that was way too cynical.
   1319. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:14 AM (#5658318)
This is like someone claiming to be a professional baseball player running the bases clockwise and saying that he was in a hurry and so he got confused.


Keep hope alive!!
   1320. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:16 AM (#5658319)
His wife had an account on Clinton's server. She used the home laptop to access her email on that server. Most email clients will cache emails locally for performance reasons. There. Investigation complete.


The emails were on Weiner's computer.

Dershowitz was on Stephanopoulos this weekend and someone brought this up. It was Dershowitz's claim that *everyone* with 'complex' business dealings in major metropolitan areas is guilty of significant crimes and that the justice system selectively investigates and prosecutes people like this for political reasons. The former SDNY member of the panel thought that was way too cynical.


It is. That's Dershowitz's blind spot. But if you're going to err and oversell and have blind spots, best to have them be underpinned by civil libertarianism.

   1321. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:27 AM (#5658322)
If retyping "target demo" and "keep hope alive" and "LOL" and "target demo" counts as writing really fast for free, you're being overpaid.
   1322. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:35 AM (#5658324)
Completely untrue. Reasonable prosecutors bring more challenging, less winnable, cases every day of the week and have for decades.
Who are you going to believe, a guy who was a federal prosecutor for 13 years and Deputy Attorney General of the U.S. for a couple more, and who then headed the FBI for four years -- or a guy who watched Matlock at a bar last night with the sound off?

And there have been gross negligence prosecutions under that statute. If those didn't have the aggravating factors Comey cited, so what?
They did have the aggravating factors Comey cited; Hillary's case did not. I guess you were writing fast for free and got confused again.
The aggravating factors go to the sanction, not to whether to prosecute.
Tell us more about how all your elementary legal mistakes are the fault of your imaginary associates.
   1323. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:43 AM (#5658326)
A couple points catching up from a busy day yesterday doing other things.

Clapper again mistook a post from someone else as one of mine? That is at least three times now. Weird trend. But hey he apologized, so no worries. I also like the off topic culture thread, but there is not a ban on cultural references here, so I hope people feel free to insert the occasional one if they want. Finally I submitted a new thread for the week.

   1324. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:47 AM (#5658327)
Clapper again mistook a post from someone else as one of mine? That is at least three times now.


Dementia is a sign of demise. We can hope.
   1325. Count Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:48 AM (#5658328)
JE again demonstrating that facts have no bearing on his theories. Repeatedly shown that the misconduct alleged with regard to Comey and McCabe were for actions that hurt Clinton he uses that as evidence they tanked an investigation into the server (which netted out to Clinton having several emails on a private server that were later marked classified, btw- I think she was trying to avoid FOIA which is a political scandal but the idea she should have been prosecuted is ridiculous). Now he's on board with other efforts to prosecute anyone who has the gall to investigate the President or his associates. (I don't mean to harp on JE here but he really is emblematic of a big part of the conservative base, media, and congress, who went from criticizing Trump as a wannabe authoritarian during the primaries to following his lead when he acts exactly as would be expected).

edit: to be more clear she wasn't prosecuted because of the intent requirement, but the clamoring for it when the actual exposure of classified material was so minor and the potential effect on national security so, so remote is really absurd.
   1326. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:58 AM (#5658331)
And in record time ... the new thread is up and running.

Now go away from this thread! :)
   1327. Stormy JE Posted: April 23, 2018 at 09:01 AM (#5658333)
JE again demonstrating that facts have no bearing on his theories. Repeatedly shown that the misconduct alleged with regard to Comey and McCabe were for actions that hurt Clinton he uses that as evidence they tanked an investigation into the server (which netted out to Clinton having several emails on a private server that were later marked classified, btw- I think she was trying to avoid FOIA which is a political scandal but the idea she should have been prosecuted is ridiculous). Now he's on board with other efforts to prosecute anyone who has the gall to investigate the President or his associates. (I don't mean to harp on JE here but he really is emblematic of a big part of the conservative base, media, and congress, who went from criticizing Trump as a wannabe authoritarian during the primaries to following his lead when he acts exactly as would be expected).
Dude, you're flailing. If you want to make the case that McCabe's sorry CYA leak was really an effort to hurt anybody, it was Obama's DoJ, since it looked like Lynch, Yates, and others were trying to tank the CF investigation.

Which brings us back to the questions I posed to shipman in #1289. He refused and then stormed off but who can blame him, considering how invested he is in the Hillary D'Arc narrative. So why don't you give it the ol' college try?
   1328. -- Posted: April 23, 2018 at 09:19 AM (#5658344)
Who are you going to believe, a guy who was a federal prosecutor for 13 years and Deputy Attorney General of the U.S. for a couple more, and who then headed the FBI for four years -- or a guy who watched Matlock at a bar last night with the sound off?


You mean the guy who had "gross negligence" changed to "extremely careless" as the drafts progressed? That guy?

They did have the aggravating factors Comey cited; Hillary's case did not. I guess you were writing fast for free and got confused again.


Nope. I made a distinction that appears to be outside your scope of competence. Happens a lot around here.
Page 14 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 12 13 14

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Infinite Yost (Voxter)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogLEAGUE CHAMPION SERIES OMNICHATTER! for the 2018 Playoffs!
(2155 - 10:37pm, Oct 18)
Last: SteveF

NewsblogCatch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (October 2018)
(347 - 10:28pm, Oct 18)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(679 - 10:26pm, Oct 18)
Last: SPICEY WITH A SIDE OF BEER ON A BABYYYYYYY

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-17-2018
(32 - 10:25pm, Oct 18)
Last: bobm

NewsblogFan interference negates Jose Altuve home run
(46 - 10:18pm, Oct 18)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogRustin Dodd on Twitter: "Here’s the space between the yellow line and the first row in right field at Minute Maid Park:… "
(18 - 10:11pm, Oct 18)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogTexas Rangers Asking Taxpayers To Cover 60% Of Bribes Related To New Stadium
(1 - 9:42pm, Oct 18)
Last: ajnrules

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 15: The shift in focus from sport to politics
(1168 - 9:42pm, Oct 18)
Last: Zonk just has affection for alumni

NewsblogRed Sox Voice Joe Castiglione Falls Off Chair Calling Game 4 Final Out | Boston Red Sox | NESN.com
(19 - 8:46pm, Oct 18)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogBryce Harper’s Future in the League
(9 - 8:24pm, Oct 18)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogMore questions after Astros get free pass on dugout spying
(16 - 7:22pm, Oct 18)
Last: The Duke

NewsblogDave Littlefield latest candidate to interview for Mets' GM role
(15 - 6:27pm, Oct 18)
Last: PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina

NewsblogMLB playoffs 2018: Brewers used a fake starter, Dodgers used Clayton Kershaw - SBNation.com
(70 - 5:51pm, Oct 18)
Last: --

Sox TherapyALCS Thoughts
(94 - 5:37pm, Oct 18)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogOT - 2018 NFL thread
(59 - 5:14pm, Oct 18)
Last: PepTech, the Legendary

Page rendered in 0.4035 seconds
46 querie(s) executed