Sasse To Leave Senate. Could RWNJ Gov. Pete Ricketts name himself to replace him?:
Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, a prominent voice in the Republican Party who voted to convict former President Donald Trump in his second impeachment trial, plans to resign from the Senate by the end of the year to take a job as the president of the University of Florida, according to a source familiar with the deliberations.
The move caught Republicans off guard given that he was just reelected in 2020 and will give the state’s GOP governor a chance to make an appointment to fill the vacancy. Sasse, a conservative member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, often votes with his party, but emerged as a leading Trump critic in the aftermath of the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol by a mob of pro-Trump supporters.
University of Florida, eh? A DeSantis shot across the bow of the SS Trump?
Trump Hiding More Documents? DOJ Thinks So:
A top Justice Department official told former President Donald J. Trump’s lawyers in recent weeks that the department believed he had not returned all the documents he took when he left the White House, according to two people briefed on the matter.
The outreach from the official, Jay I. Bratt, who leads the department’s counterintelligence operations, is the most concrete indication yet that investigators remain skeptical that Mr. Trump has been fully cooperative in their efforts to recover documents the former president was supposed to have turned over to the National Archives at the end of his term.
The outreach from the department prompted a rift among Mr. Trump’s lawyers about how to respond, with one camp counseling a cooperative approach that would include bringing in an outside firm to conduct a further search for documents and another advising Mr. Trump to maintain a more combative posture.
The more combative camp, the people briefed on the matter said, won out. (Dog bites man.)
Federal agents investigating Hunter Biden believe they have enough evidence to charge him with lying on his taxes and on an application to purchase a gun, according to the Washington Post.
But as the Post notes, it’s Justice Department prosecutors, not federal agents, who will determine whether charges are filed — and it’s not clear what they’re thinking. The decision will ultimately rest with David C. Weiss, the U.S. Attorney for Delaware, who was appointed by Donald Trump in 2017.
One possible tax charge would likely stem from Biden’s failure to declare income related to his nebulous lobbying work in Ukraine and China. An investigation into his taxes has been ongoing for many years; as the New York Times reported earlier this year, that probe took on a broader scope during the Trump years. Biden made a $2 million tax payment earlier this year that he might have hoped would forestall any charges.
The possible gun charge involves Biden’s answer on a federal firearms-licensing form that asks if the applicant is “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance.” He reportedly answered “no” when purchasing a firearm in 2018 despite having chronicled his addiction to crack cocaine. The Post notes that it is “relatively rare” for such gun cases to be prosecuted and that prosecutors have wide discretion on whether to pursue them.
I don’t care what the Feds do with this pampered Son of Privilege. However, the false equivalency that the Rethugs have used to try to make this seem even worse than the historic crimes committed by Trump and his henchpersons is disingenuous. It could only work at a time when people are bereft of critical thinking skills, and the press dutifully churns out copy without context. In other words, a time such as now.
The Biggest Greenhouse Gas Emitter In The World Is The Pentagon. How it happened, and what can be done about it. Well worth reading.
The ‘Gee, That’s A Relief’ Headline Of The Day.
Twitter Acquires A Musky Odor. Elon claims that Twitter won’t take ‘yes’ for an answer. Trial on hold:
Why did Musk seek a delay?
Musk’s representatives argued in a filing on Thursday that Twitter would not “take yes for an answer” and would not agree to put the trial on hold. His lawyers said progress was under way to finalise a $12.5bn debt funding package integral to sealing the purchase but it would not be ready before 17 October. The judge has given both sides until 5pm on 28 October to close the deal or else the trial is back on at some point next month.
Why did Twitter want the trial to proceed?
It appears Twitter does not trust Musk at all. In its filing on Thursday arguing against a delay, the company said the Tesla chief had spent months trying to delay a trial to derail the deal but now suddenly wants a delay to complete it. The filing says, scathingly, that Musk is promising “‘Trust us, … we mean it this time’”.
The social media platform says the request for a delay contains provisions that are an “invitation to further mischief and delay”, including the right to pursue all “claims and defences in the event a closing does not occur”. This appears to refer to Musk’s lawsuit against Twitter claiming it has deliberately miscounted spam accounts on its platform.
I’m rooting for a trial. Perhaps if enough people and press flock to Delaware for it, the state’s coffers will swell, and Carney and DeMatteis will deign to toss some crumbs to state retirees. Not.
What do you want to talk about?