Frei and Barnes on the Chauvin trial
This is a bit old because it’s a recap of last week’s developments in the Chauvin trial, but it has so much good stuff in it that I’m putting it up now anyway. My guess is that they’ll make a new podcast each week, commenting on the trial, so I’ll be checking in regularly with them. Barnes in particular has some unique and trenchant observations based on his experience as a trial lawyer:
Barnes chews more than he bites off. Said about Henry James, I believe.
The knee on the shoulder, should it prove true, would not compress the lungs. So we’re left with leaving the guy on his face.
Face up, he strangles on his vomit.
On his side is best, presuming no concerns with violence, either purposeful or “excited delirium”.
In addition, we don’t know the amount of pressure on the shoulder from the knee. Could it be heavy? Just enough to be prepared to lean on it if necessary? Like to know.
Sunday, in a park, I saw a figure stumbling around and then collapsing. I went to render aid. Called 911. Answered the questions, breathing yes/no? How fast? Count it. Touched the ear. She twitched but did not awake. No obvious trauma, no smell of alcohol. Was in classic sleep position on side with hands under head. Did not respond to verbal attempts to wake.
Cops arrived with fire truck. They were having trouble getting her to respond. I left and returned to the picnic table. By the time I got there and turned around, she was flouncing down the street.
Point is you can never tell.
Andrew Branca’s coverage, takes, and recaps over at Legal Insurrection have been excellent. I would prefer a more neutral tone, but that’s a nitpick.
What cop will now risk imprisonment just for doing their job?
Even should they escape imprisonment, their lives are destroyed.
Nor is this a case of unintended consequences. Once things get bad enough, the public will yield up their liberties for the ‘peace and order’ that tyrants always offer…
Liberals are enabling the fashioning of the future chains of their enslavement.
Excellent commentary. I was interested in the books in the background. Two of them are by James Elroy and I’ve put them on my reading list. On the viewer’s right is Reptile: The 2009 Manual of the Plaintiffs Revolution by David Ball. That looks very good. Unfortunately it’s not available on kindle and a hard copy will set you back 500 bucks. The one on the viewer’s left fascinates me but I can’t figure out what it is.
Second the motion on the excellence of Andrew Branca’s coverage, and also would like to see his bias a little more neutral. It’s clear that he thinks the Prosecution is arguing as if it has no opposition, and also clear that he sees the Defense as an avenger.
An honest question: In cases where the jury overrides the prosecution’s case and finds the defendant ‘Not guilty’, even in spite of strong evidence to the contrary, this is called Jury Nullification. A repudiation of the prosecutorial authority, or the severity of the punishment, or the law itself, and maybe a strong social statement.
In this case, the jury may be compelled to find for a ‘Guilty’ verdict for various reasons that do not pertain to compelling evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, perhaps because of the toxic social environment being created on this subject since last May – or perhaps even out of self-preservational fear, or of not wanting to be the cause of the expected social upheaval associated with a ‘Not guilty’ verdict. What would this kind of verdict be called, in this case? ‘Jury facilitation’? What?
From comments at Instapundit:
https://nypost.com/2021/04/07/chauvin-lawyers-discovered-george-floyd-speedball-in-squad-car/
Can someone clue me in? When did Dwight Schrute transition to female?
On Sunday’s Viva Frei and Barnes does a two hour podcast starting around 7 pm called “Live Stream with Robert Barnes”. Viva then cuts them down into the HL episodes and posts like above. They cover various topics during the longer podcast. I listen to them and pass on relevant commentary to my email group. The election shenanigan’s commentaries were particularly good. One thing in the past two months, Barnes has been very critical of Trump’s governing style with good reason.
What I wish to also point out is that Barnes also does a podcast with Robert Baris of “The People’s Pundit” called “What are the Odds”. That is a podcast worth listening too. This past Monday they discuss a poll they did regarding the hot button issues. I particularly recommend the discussion of Ukraine starting at 55:00 mark through 1:19:25. I am reading “Prisoner of Geography” by Tim Marshall who is taking various countries and critiquing how geography impacts them. What he says about Russia mirrors what Barnes talks about in this podcast. I HIGHLY recommend this segment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbB0HeGeVKE&list=RDCMUCWubnBV028_4rVoDPt7FpNQ&start_radio=1&ab_channel=People%27sPunditDaily
Other segments that aren’t part of the poll discussion but interesting are:
29:00 – 30:20 – critique of Republican Party messaging (due to the struggle between the Corporatist Globalists or GOPe vs. Economic Nationalists. (Democrats have a struggle between Tech Corporatists vs. Totalitarians).
30:20 – 48:30 – Matt Gaetz deep state attempt to take him down with an extortion attempt but it backfired because the Gaetz family didn’t react according to their playbook. When the local actors that the DC FBI used to entrap the Gaetz’s would have exposed, the DC FBI leaked the meet to the NYT to warn them not to go through it. Then Matt went on air to expose them. Really interesting. The discussion moves through how the Deep State works. When you hear it, think what happened to Kavanaugh. The Conservative Treehouse had a deep dive analysis of what happened. Note the parallels. It makes my blood boil. With Hunter Biden, Comey, McCabe et al. walking free thanks to Trump and Bill Barr’s DOJ we do have two systems of Justice.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/09/16/transparent-political-hit-job-kavanaugh-accuser-christine-ford-blasey-activated-to-advance-35-year-old-accusations/
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/10/03/retired-fbi-agent-doj-lawyer-ms-monica-mclean-attended-kavanaugh-hearing-with-blasey-ford/
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/10/03/christine-blasey-ford-friend-in-delaware-was-career-fbi-agent-and-likely-together-during-accusation-letter-construct/
From 48:30 to 56:00 – there is a discussion of the current political leadership. The discussion of Obama is really interesting. I had come to the same conclusion much earlier. Obama was America’s Vanity Project much to our detriment. The only good thing is it exposed the Deep State much earlier.
The discussion before these segments and afterwards are about the poll results and how it was put together. The end result is that what we think the majority of people think also. Don’t let the deep state legacy media gaslight you.
Another article about Ukraine. Like WWII where Britain and France gave security guarantees to Poland and ignited WWII.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/skeptics/joe-biden%E2%80%99s-ukraine-policy-repeat-george-w-bush-georgia-182036
Money graf:
Yet the Biden administration seems intent to blunder onward. There is now the risk of two unfortunate outcomes from this approach: one bad, and one horrendous. The most likely outcome is a repetition of the Georgia episode, in which a country Washington encouraged to take a confrontational stand against Russia acts on an exaggerated assumption of U.S. backing, suffers a decisive military defeat and is humiliated, while U.S. leaders, for all their verbal posturing, prudently refrain from going to war. The United States would come away looking both feckless and irresponsible.
But one alternative outcome is even worse. There is a danger that the Biden administration concludes that it must honor the implicit commitment to Ukraine’s security and actually adopts a military response to an outbreak of fighting between Russian and Ukrainian forces. It would be the ultimate folly, since it could culminate in nuclear war, but given the intense level of hostility toward Moscow evident in the administration and much of Washington’s political elite, it is a possibility that can’t be ruled out.
Re Andrew Branca’s coverage of the chauvin trial. If you think Andrew is partisan you should read Ann Coulter’s covrage.
Branca and Coulter are looking at the trial with 20/20 eyesight.
“…and ignited WWII.”
Um, guess again.
But you’re correct regarding “Biden” ‘s foolishness, though I wonder how much of it is simply theater.
“Biden” does, after all, have to show how much “he” is “anti-Russia” (just like the “we’ll have more flexibility” administration for which he served as VPOTUS)—as opposed to, you see, OrangeManBad, who was Putin’s Poodle(TM) or whatever.
There’s also the Ukraine angle for “Biden” and I wouldn’t be surprised if he were eager to have any and all evidence evemntually blown up….
Barnes is great. And enough for me, tho Branca’s daily coverage could be a bit more comprehensive; yet I only read the written summary.
https://www.y2mate.com/youtube-mp3/Pm2LL4SflPQ
I did an mp3 converted download using y2mate so as to listen as I walked, and recommend it — they asked me to share. And they earned this note.
I can’t help but imagine an emotional To Kill a Mockingbird in reverse over the Chauvin case. He’s not innocent. He’s likely guilty of other things, BUT he’s NOT guilty of murder.
This show trial is a state sponsored lynching. Not so different in its evil process as Democratic KKK trials that got Blacks lynched 70-80-100 years ago.
Somebody who is not guilty is accused of a crime they didn’t commit, and is lynched without a fair trial.
Will you, the jury, join the lynch mob? Will you lynch this man who is not guilty? The state wants you to, the city wants you to, the police chief and top officers want you to. Because he’s the scapegoat. Lynch him, and the police won’t do much more real reform, the real problems won’t be solved.
Lynch him, they all say.
But he’s not guilty, I say.
What do you say?
Not Guilty of all charges.
Branca, Barnes, and Scott Johnson have somewhat different takes, so it’s useful to consult all three.
He’s not innocent. He’s likely guilty of other things, BUT he’s NOT guilty of murder.
Of what?
The federal government is going after him and his estranged wife on tax charges. They’re contending the two of them concealed $70,000 a year in off-the-books income over a period of six years. And I am Marie of Roumania.
Well if they can get Judge Emmet Sullivan (aka Capt. Ahab) to preside over the case, you indeed are Marie of Romania.
Not so different in its evil process as Democratic KKK trials that got Blacks lynched 70-80-100 years ago.
There are examples of people lynched after trials (Leo Frank in Atlanta in 1913). Generally, it was an act of riot which occurred before any legal process could take place and at times undertaken before an individual had been taken into custody. Prior to about 1925, there were masses of lynchings out west in places where the infrastructure of law was skeletal.
NB, the 1st incarnation of the KKK evaporated around 1877. Lynching was at its most common in 1892 / 93, when there was no Klan. The KKK was refounded in 1915 and with some changes in membership screens the membership exploded during the period running from 1919 to 1924 (then rapidly imploded). There was no corresponding surge in lynchings. The frequency of lynching actually declined by about 2/3 during the period running from 1920 to 1935.