Defunct Interwebs

Seems like it was just yesterday that @RepThomasMassie and @RoKhanna had to force almost the entire Republican party to vote to release this….remember their names who wouldn’t sign or vote until forced to

@JimLaPorta @mikefreemanNFL Also, Trump fucks kids

Bob Mueller was a Marine. He served in the Vietnam War where he earned a Bronze Star with Valor and a Purple Heart. cbsnews.com/news/robert-mu…

Marc, I need you to be honest with the people. Is everything for nothing with the pardon in play. Claude says they can do anything. This is a genuinely complex constitutional law question. Here’s how the relevant legal principles interact: The Pardon’s Validity A presidential pardon, once granted, is generally considered valid and irrevocable — even if the president who issued it is later convicted of related crimes. The pardon power under Article II, Section 2 is extraordinarily broad, and courts have historically been very reluctant to invalidate pardons. Key legal considerations: 1. Pardons don’t require a conviction to be valid. The Supreme Court established in Ex parte Garland (1866) and affirmed through Murphy v. Ford (1975, re: Ford’s Nixon pardon) that pardons can be granted before any charges or conviction. So the timing isn’t inherently a problem. 2. A corrupt pardon is still likely a valid pardon. Even if the pardon was issued as part of a corrupt scheme — essentially to silence a witness or cover up crimes — courts have generally held that the recipient of the pardon still benefits from it. The remedy for pardon abuse lies with Congress (impeachment), not the judiciary. 3. The “fruit of the poisonous tree” argument is weak here. That doctrine applies to evidence in criminal proceedings, not to pardons. There’s no well-established legal mechanism to claw back a pardon because the grantor was later found guilty of related conduct. 4. However, there are some counterarguments: Some legal scholars argue that a pardon issued as part of a criminal conspiracy (e.g., obstruction of justice) could theoretically be challenged, since it would represent an abuse of a constitutional power. This is largely untested territory. A court willing to be aggressive could potentially frame the pardon itself as an overt act in a criminal conspiracy — but this would be unprecedented. 5. The perjury itself is not pardoned away. Worth noting: if Bondi perjured herself after receiving the pardon, the pardon wouldn’t cover it (pardons only cover past acts). If the perjury preceded the pardon, then the pardon would likely cover it, depending on how broadly it was written. Bottom line: In all likelihood, the pardon would stand. The U.S. legal system currently has no clear, tested mechanism to invalidate a pardon simply because the president who granted it was later convicted — even of related crimes. It would take either a Supreme Court willing to venture into completely uncharted territory, or a constitutional amendment, to change that outcome. It’s worth noting this is an area where the law has significant gaps, and a case like this would almost certainly end up before the Supreme Court.

Republicans are most certainly not pushing back on Trump's attacks on mail-in voting. I started Democracy Docket because you deserve better. Subscribe to independent, pro-democracy media. bit.ly/4a7l1TR

@RaheemKassam @gregkellyusa @MichaelRCaputo I don’t like the smears either but I also am very concerned… Feels like another Vance Plant by Thiel

@gregkellyusa @MichaelRCaputo Disgusting tweet, Greg. Just utterly disgusting.

JOE KENT (Career Politician Wannabe) pulled a “John Kerry”—masquerade as a warrior, get ticket punched in a “War Zone” —then Publicly OPPOSE War. Kerry rode that SCAM all the way to the Senate. Personal AMBITION disguised as “Truth to Power”-FAKE NEWS Falls for it Every Time. Stay tuned for Joe Kent’s THIRD Unsuccessful run for Congress

@Parodyjeffx @TrumpSimp4Putin Move to Gaza…oh wait

Many Israelis in Tel Aviv no longer have homes. They want to leave the country now.

This needs to be understood on what is NOT going to happen with all this shit… I asked Claude if Trump can pardon people and if it will stand even if he is impeached and convicted…. This is a genuinely complex constitutional law question. Here’s how the relevant legal principles interact: The Pardon’s Validity A presidential pardon, once granted, is generally considered valid and irrevocable — even if the president who issued it is later convicted of related crimes. The pardon power under Article II, Section 2 is extraordinarily broad, and courts have historically been very reluctant to invalidate pardons. Key legal considerations: 1. Pardons don’t require a conviction to be valid. The Supreme Court established in Ex parte Garland (1866) and affirmed through Murphy v. Ford (1975, re: Ford’s Nixon pardon) that pardons can be granted before any charges or conviction. So the timing isn’t inherently a problem. 2. A corrupt pardon is still likely a valid pardon. Even if the pardon was issued as part of a corrupt scheme — essentially to silence a witness or cover up crimes — courts have generally held that the recipient of the pardon still benefits from it. The remedy for pardon abuse lies with Congress (impeachment), not the judiciary. 3. The “fruit of the poisonous tree” argument is weak here. That doctrine applies to evidence in criminal proceedings, not to pardons. There’s no well-established legal mechanism to claw back a pardon because the grantor was later found guilty of related conduct. 4. However, there are some counterarguments: Some legal scholars argue that a pardon issued as part of a criminal conspiracy (e.g., obstruction of justice) could theoretically be challenged, since it would represent an abuse of a constitutional power. This is largely untested territory. A court willing to be aggressive could potentially frame the pardon itself as an overt act in a criminal conspiracy — but this would be unprecedented. 5. The perjury itself is not pardoned away. Worth noting: if Bondi perjured herself after receiving the pardon, the pardon wouldn’t cover it (pardons only cover past acts). If the perjury preceded the pardon, then the pardon would likely cover it, depending on how broadly it was written. Bottom line: In all likelihood, the pardon would stand. The U.S. legal system currently has no clear, tested mechanism to invalidate a pardon simply because the president who granted it was later convicted — even of related crimes. It would take either a Supreme Court willing to venture into completely uncharted territory, or a constitutional amendment, to change that outcome. It’s worth noting this is an area where the law has significant gaps, and a case like this would almost certainly end up before the Supreme Court.

An FBI intake report from 2019 says an MCC officer saw bags of shredded documents being taken out after Epstein’s death, with inmates helping move them during an active investigation.

@TimHannan @CarolLeonnig Trumps response

.@CarolLeonnig is reporting Robert Mueller has passed away at age 81. Rest in peace.

Trump: "Robert Mueller just died. Good, I’m glad he’s dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people!"

Dem here, there is no way over the 30 plus years this has been happening that the Clinton’s not only knew what was going on but evidence their relationship wasn’t just happenstance. There have to be people in the 1000s that directly were involved in hundreds of cases that actively were told to shut it down or covered it up themselves. IT’S ALL OF THEM!

$7,000 checks are being sent out

The truth doesn’t even fucking matter if there are no mechanism in place to enforce the laws on those who perjured themselves. I still can’t get a straight answer on if a presidential pardon allows them to be immune? My guess is they would not be IF the president was impeached and removed for the crimes they cover up but I haven’t found one credible source to confirm

Put a lie detector machine on her! It’s the only way we can get the truth.

@Conservative2TX It was a misunderstanding…

HahahhahahahhHahahhahahhhVa HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA LOL

@CattardSlim Keep talking

Top Trump advisor, Kevin O'Leary, who says Trump needs to worry about keeping big business owners happy, not the little guy.

Fox news 2002

@jen3034 @MeidasTouch @1zzyzyx1 Well there’s no evidence they are a bunch of unhinged psychopaths right? lol

@DefunctWebs @MeidasTouch @1zzyzyx1 😂 I shouldn’t be laughing at this. Funny and scary that it could be true

Trump threatens to have ICE do airport security

@misfitpatriot_ It’s so predictable with you mindless drones. I can tell you exactly how you’ll react to any fucking news. Exactly

OH MY GOD GAS IS MORE EXPENSIVE 🥴🥴🥴

@grok @devinremikerwi @BadgerStew Is Steven miller his son?

@DefunctWebs @devinremikerwi @BadgerStew

Weird hit from a guy who still has vanity pictures from his failed acting career online.

@grok @devinremikerwi @BadgerStew Oof

@buckwhe42527694 @WisGOP @grok due to the flip in Democrat and Republican ideologies, would the republicans of 1854 ideologies be more closely aligned with current democrats or current republicans?

@WisGOP Same day this was the democrat party 👇👇

On March 20th, 1854 patriots gathered and founded the Republican Party to advance freedom for all Americans. We continue to honor that legacy today!

@WisGOP @grok due to the flip in Democrat and Republican ideologies, would the republicans of 1854 ideologies be more closely aligned with current democrats or current republicans?