The Swamp

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:46 pm**

Giff wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:32 pm Hey look, Joe K defending trump again. It's a tradition I'll be sad to see go.

Good substantive response from you, as usual.

I’ll repeat my hypothetical: are you guys cool with the idea of right-wing protestors, who view abortion as a moral atrocity, picketing the homes of attorneys who represent Planned Parenthood?

Were you cool with it when Liz Cheney and Bill Kristol released adds attacking the attorneys who represented Gitmo inmates as terrorist sympathizers?

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:49 pm**

it's out of bounds to put political pressure on law firms who are hired to exert political pressure?

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:50 pm**

psunate77 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:42 pm Get Ready

Counterpoint to the last couple tweets you posted:

1. In the first one upthread from Michael Schmidt (not that one), you noted that the DOJ official in charge of overseeing elections resigned. That's a good thing. That means if Barr wants to have someone do Trump's bidding, he's going to have to find someone else. Which is just going to muck up the GOP's position more.

2. In the Pompeo one you cited now, Pompeo is a Rapturist that wants the world to end, so consider the source. It's not Pompeo's choice to have Trump come back for a second term. It isn't Trump's either.

I don't know if this is performance art by you, or you're doing this as satire, or if you're merely Chicken Little. Your predictions have been consistently wrong. I don't know why we should give this a second gander.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:56 pm**

Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:46 pm
Giff wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:32 pm Hey look, Joe K defending trump again. It's a tradition I'll be sad to see go.
Good substantive response from you, as usual.

I’ll repeat my hypothetical: are you guys cool with the idea of right-wing protestors, who view abortion as a moral atrocity, picketing the homes of attorneys who represent Planned Parenthood?

Were you cool with it when Liz Cheney and Bill Kristol released adds attacking the attorneys who represented Gitmo inmates as terrorist sympathizers?

1. No. Is that happening here? Oh, it isn't? What Jones Day partner's homes are being picketed?

2. Were those ads attacking individual attorneys or their law firms? Because if it was the law firms...then, no, I don't have a problem with it. Presumably you have the courage of your convictions as a firm. So I will assume Jones Day has the courage of its convictions here, but that doesn't mean that courage can't be tested.

C'mon JoeK, what the actual hell.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:01 pm**

New Barr memo. They are going to steal this.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:05 pm**

tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 1:56 pm
C'mon JoeK, what the actual hell.

I think you know.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:11 pm**

So I saw a video of Pompeo, and shock of shocks, he wasn't remotely implying what Nate thought he was implying. Pompeo said it with a smug grin, then said whoever is in power ay noon on January 20, 2021, you can be sure it will be a smooth transition. Poor taste and a bad time to make a joke, sure, but he wasn't making any kind of a statement. At worst, he didn't want to piss off Trump and say Biden won. Once again, complete non-story and Nate shitting his pants again by taking something out of context.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:12 pm**

Joe seems to think that the Lincoln Project is going to be doxxing these individual attorneys but I don't see anything wrong with highlighting the failings of the firm, no different than a business who chooses to advertise on Tucker Carlson. If groups on the right wanted to point out firms that do business with Planned Parenthood, that likewise would be their right as long as they're not highlighting individual attorneys.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:19 pm**

The Sybian wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:11 pm So I saw a video of Pompeo, and shock of shocks, he wasn't remotely implying what Nate thought he was implying. Pompeo said it with a smug grin, then said whoever is in power ay noon on January 20, 2021, you can be sure it will be a smooth transition. Poor taste and a bad time to make a joke, sure, but he wasn't making any kind of a statement. At worst, he didn't want to piss off Trump and say Biden won. Once again, complete non-story and Nate shitting his pants again by taking something out of context.

Not sure, on ANY level, that the SOS should be "joking" along these lines, in these circumstances. C'mon Sybian, be better than that.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:22 pm**

tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:19 pm
The Sybian wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:11 pm So I saw a video of Pompeo, and shock of shocks, he wasn't remotely implying what Nate thought he was implying. Pompeo said it with a smug grin, then said whoever is in power ay noon on January 20, 2021, you can be sure it will be a smooth transition. Poor taste and a bad time to make a joke, sure, but he wasn't making any kind of a statement. At worst, he didn't want to piss off Trump and say Biden won. Once again, complete non-story and Nate shitting his pants again by taking something out of context.
Not sure, on ANY level, that the SOS should be "joking" along these lines, in these circumstances. C'mon Sybian, be better than that.

I agree, maybe I jumped to conclusions that Nate was posting as more evidence of his belief Trump will succeed in staying in power.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:24 pm**

It's impossible to not know who the individual attorneys are.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:29 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:12 pm Joe seems to think that the Lincoln Project is going to be doxxing these individual attorneys but I don't see anything wrong with highlighting the failings of the firm, no different than a business who chooses to advertise on Tucker Carlson. If groups on the right wanted to point out firms that do business with Planned Parenthood, that likewise would be their right as long as they're not highlighting individual attorneys.

It’s very easy to find out who the individual attorneys on a case are, so I think the firm v. individual distinction is a bit artificial. I also don’t know much about Jones Day in particular but it’s a massive firm with thousands of employees. Large law firms like that tend to represent clients across the ideological spectrum. Take Gibson Dunn for example. They represented plaintiffs in some of the most important gay rights lawsuits. They also represented Chris Christie in Bridgegate.

ETA: I just ran a Google search and saw an article that individual attorneys at Jones Day donated 1,800x more money to Biden than to Trump. Apparently there are intense internal discussions there about the Trump representation, which is an appropriate way to handle it. But I don’t think oversimplistic calls for boycotts, etc. is helpful here.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:30 pm**

The Sybian wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:11 pm So I saw a video of Pompeo, and shock of shocks, he wasn't remotely implying what Nate thought he was implying. Pompeo said it with a smug grin, then said whoever is in power ay noon on January 20, 2021, you can be sure it will be a smooth transition. Poor taste and a bad time to make a joke, sure, but he wasn't making any kind of a statement. At worst, he didn't want to piss off Trump and say Biden won. Once again, complete non-story and Nate shitting his pants again by taking something out of context.

Pompeo wasn’t joking. He giggled that Trump would remain in power. Christ dude.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:33 pm**

Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:29 pm
brian wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:12 pm Joe seems to think that the Lincoln Project is going to be doxxing these individual attorneys but I don't see anything wrong with highlighting the failings of the firm, no different than a business who chooses to advertise on Tucker Carlson. If groups on the right wanted to point out firms that do business with Planned Parenthood, that likewise would be their right as long as they're not highlighting individual attorneys.
It’s very easy to find out who the individual attorneys on a case are, so I think the firm v. individual distinction is a bit artificial. I also don’t know much about Jones Day in particular but it’s a massive firm with thousands of employees. Large law firms like that tend to represent clients across the ideological spectrum. Take Gibson Dunn for example. They represented plaintiffs in some of the most important gay rights lawsuits. They also represented Chris Christie in Bridgegate.

ETA: I just ran a Google search and saw an article that individual attorneys at Jones Day donated 1,800x more money to Biden than to Trump. Apparently there are intense internal discussions there about the Trump representation, which is an appropriate way to handle it. But I don’t think oversimplistic calls for boycotts, etc. is helpful here.

I am fine with the notion that it's important for attorneys to represent disfavored clients who have legitimate claims and cannot otherwise have their day in court and due process of law.

This is not that.

These claims are frivolous, and their existence threatens to contribute to the end of our democracy. Not now, but in the not-too-distant future.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:39 pm**

This would mean Pelosi would be President right?

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:33 pm**

Biden may be uniquely situated for this moment. Because I feel like I would just spend all my time cussing if it was me:

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:56 pm**

psunate77 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:39 pm This would mean Pelosi would be President right?

If they mean certified by the states, DOJ has no power.

If they mean received as the legitimate votes when Congress meets in a joint session on January 6, it’s theoretically possible you could have an impasse that makes Pelosi the President.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:27 pm**

This fucking scumbag lowlife.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:31 pm**

"West Point" is trending.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:46 pm**

How close are we to the "who will the generals go with" point.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:56 pm**

tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:46 pm How close are we to the "who will the generals go with" point.

Maybe I'm on twitter too much today but everything today is super depressing and nerve-racking, and I don't see a way it will end well. I don't know what the solution is. I'd like to see Justice Roberts to tell everyone to tell everyone to cut the shit --the victory is becoming more lopsidedded everyday and there isn't a shred of evidence of fraud. Can Pelosi impeach Barr, Pence, or anyone else?

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:05 pm**

EdRomero wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:56 pm
tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:46 pm How close are we to the "who will the generals go with" point.
Maybe I'm on twitter too much today but everything today is super depressing and nerve-racking, and I don't see a way it will end well. I don't know what the solution is. I'd like to see Justice Roberts to tell everyone to tell everyone to cut the shit --the victory is becoming more lopsidedded everyday and there isn't a shred of evidence of fraud. Can Pelosi impeach Barr, Pence, or anyone else?

No.. Repubs have the Senate.

DT is putting his loyalist in charge to start a coup.

Is Pence really even a problem? Last word was he went on vacation yesterday. Which makes me wonder if there isn't talk of the 25th. Just seems odd the VP runs to vacation during all this. Is Pence getting tired of DT?

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:12 pm**

So. Fucking. Ethical.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:26 pm**

tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:12 pm So. Fucking. Ethical.

Fuck. I have no faith anymore

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:41 pm**

If you had faith in lawyers you were already fucked.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:42 pm**

Yeah, I have no issue holding a law firm accountable for what types of lawsuits they choose to accept. Not doing so provides too much cover for really smart people doing things they know are flat out wrong/harmful because there's money involved.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:45 pm**

Come on guys, every frivolous lawsuit to help erode public confidence in our main tenet of democracy even further than it already has been the last two election cycles deserves attorneys who shall bear no consequence for their actions.

Comparing this to attorneys protecting a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body is fucking infuriating if I'm being completely honest.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:00 pm**

I need Johnnie to blink in code about whatever is happening here:

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:17 pm**

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:19 pm**

Ok. That's...a little better. But just a little. Hope someone kept some back-ups of shit.

I do like this if Yglesias is characterizing it correctly:

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:21 pm**

tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:00 pm I need Johnnie to blink in code about whatever is happening here:

I'm currently in quarantine in Korea with meh internet. I couldn't help you if I tried.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:26 pm**

Gonna work hard to read into that stuff. Good code.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:34 pm**

Johnnie wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:21 pmI'm ... q... in ...a ... cou...p ...

NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:52 pm**

So they’re representing the Pennsylvania GOP (not Trump) in a lawsuit filed months before the election (not after Trump lost) addressing the constitutional question of who, as between the state legislature and state courts, has the power to set mail-in voting deadlines. And apparently at least a handful of Supreme Court justices have already said it’s a meritorious (and not frivolous) claim. What an unspeakable horror. But I’m glad I got to make some of you guys got feel all morally superior.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:53 pm**

mister d wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:34 pm
Johnnie wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:21 pmI'm ... q... in ...a ... cou...p ...
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

God dammit.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:54 pm**

LOL leaning on the US supreme court as making any of that legit. Fuck right off with that noise.

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:56 pm**

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:50 pm**

This entire thread from a professor of history at Yale is worth a perusal:

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:28 pm**

Is Pence turning??

Posted: **Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:58 pm**

This whole refusal-to-concede isn't about staying in office the next four years...it's about $$$ and opportunity after Trump is out of office and the proverbial "energize the base". The line about the purpose of legal action is to erode confidence in the electoral process is spot on. Trump and his allies can go on Fox, Newsmax, OANN, etc. for the next four years and bloviate about how he was robbed, etc. Keeps eyeballs on the screens and social media engagement up so they have a chance during the next election cycle.

The Swamp

The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration

Re: The WH Transition Thread --- all things Trump to Biden until Inauguration