She immediately caught the eye of the campaign press corps when at age 26 in 2015, Hope Hicks became Donald Trump’s press secretary on his campaign for the presidency. It emerged that she had no experience in politics and had never worked in a political campaign.
How a woman, ANY woman, could attach herself to that pile of rotting pigshit, is beyond my understanding. What does (or did) she see in him? And then there are the abusive, cruel men with whom she had affairs…. I wonder how long her upcoming marriage will last? She's pretty, but inside she is one Twisted Sister!
Yea but even the money starts to mean a whole lot less when you have to wake up next to them every day. Lawrence eviscerated her last night after a day of fawning by the media over the fact that “Hope cried”. She knew the truth about the insipid bastard from before he became president and she was just fine with it, that’s who Hope Hicks is.
There have been many women (and men, for that matter) both famous or ordinary who have a habit of picking toxic mates. I should know. I went through three of them. After the third, I threw in the towel.
Methinks the” willowy” aide that steamed Trumps pants while he was wearing them is an actress and her tears while on the witness stand the other day were of the crocodile variety.I hope her testimony made a difference.
Trump legal news brief: Citing witness death threats, Jack Smith asks Judge Cannon to reconsider ‘clear error’ in ruling
Yahoo News' succinct daily update on the criminal and civil cases against the 45th president of the United States.
David Knowles
David Knowles·Senior Editor
Updated February 9, 2024·13 min read Excerpt:
Government prosecutors ask Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider her ruling allowing Trump's lawyers to reveal the identities of certain witnesses in the classified documents case.
Special counsel Jack Smith's team reveals the Justice Department has opened an investigation into online death threats made against one of the government's witnesses in the case.
Judge Arthur Engoron defends his request to lawyers in the New York financial fraud case for information about plea deal negotiations for Trump witness Allen Weisselberg on charges he committed perjury during the trial.
Are these AI-created takeaways helpful?
Government prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith’s team file papers asking Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider her “clear error” in granting a request from lawyers for former President Donald Trump to reveal the identity of certain witnesses in the classified documents case. Here are the latest legal developments involving the Republican frontrunner seeking to be reelected to the White House in 2024.
Jan. 6 election interference
Smith asks Cannon to reconsider ‘clear error’ in ruling in classified documents case
Key players: Special counsel Jack Smith, Judge Aileen Cannon
In court papers filed late Thursday, government prosecutors on Smith’s team asked Cannon to reconsider her ruling that would allow Trump’s lawyers to identify some witnesses in the case by name despite the possible risks doing so would pose to those witnesses, Salon reported.
"That discovery material, if publicly docketed in unredacted form as the Court has ordered, would disclose the identities of numerous potential witnesses, along with the substance of the statements they made to the FBI or the grand jury, exposing them to significant and immediate risks of threats, intimidation, and harassment, as has already happened to witnesses, law enforcement agents, judicial officers, and Department of Justice employees whose identities have been disclosed in cases in which defendant Trump is involved," prosecutors wrote in the filing.
Citing past court precedent on naming witnesses who faced security risks, Smith’s team said in the filing that Cannon, who was appointed to the federal bench by Trump, “applied the wrong legal standard” and that “reconsideration is warranted to correct clear error."
On Wednesday, Smith’s team revealed the Justice Department had opened an investigation into online death threats made against one of the government’s witnesses. That disclosure, however, was not enough to sway Cannon to keep the identities of other witnesses sealed.
In response to the filing, Cannon paused her ruling from taking effect and asked Trump's lawyers for a response.
If Cannon ends up standing by her earlier ruling allowing the identities of certain witnesses to be revealed, Smith could appeal that decision with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Why it matters: Legal experts have long noted Cannon’s history of controversial rulings in the case that have benefited Trump. By flagging Cannon’s “clear error” in their latest filing, Smith’s team could be laying the groundwork to try to have her removed from the case.
Thanks for this update on the ongoing saga in Miami. It's little wonder that we have such a low regard for the judicial system. Absolutely disgusting that Cannon ended up with this case. The term, "justice moves slowly", is more than appropriate here or more like "not moving at all"?
True enough but then she willing decided to participate in tRuMp world. My sympathy goes to people like Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss who got sucked under the bus for just doing their jobs.
OK, the thing is my comment has nothing to do with Hope Hicks per se; I expressed no "sympathy for her," but merely noted her hedonistic calculus might have led to certain intentional acts. That also doesn't mean I am indifferent in any way to any hypothetical death threats (!) against her or anyone else - these are separate if related issues, related only because she IS Hope Hicks and decided as you describe, while Freeman and Moss really do get my deepest sympathy and hopes for recovering "heavy, heavy damages," in their litigation!
The felicific calculus is an algorithm formulated by utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) for calculating the degree or amount of pleasure that a specific action is likely to induce. Bentham, an ethical hedonist, believed the moral rightness or wrongness of an action to be a function of the amount of pleasure or pain that it produced. The felicific calculus could in principle, at least, determine the moral status of any considered act. The algorithm is also known as the utility calculus, the hedonistic calculus and the hedonic calculus.
To be included in this calculation are several variables (or vectors), which Bentham called "circumstances". These are:
Intensity: How strong is the pleasure?
Duration: How long will the pleasure last?
Certainty or uncertainty: How likely or unlikely is it that the pleasure will occur?
Propinquity or remoteness: How soon will the pleasure occur?
Fecundity: The probability that the action will be followed by sensations of the same kind.
Purity: The probability that it will not be followed by sensations of the opposite kind.
Jeremy Bentham (/ˈbɛnθəm/; 4 February 1747/8 O.S. [15 February 1748 N.S.] – 6 June 1832) was an English philosopher, jurist, and social reformer regarded as the founder of modern utilitarianism.[1][2][3][4][5]
Bentham defined as the "fundamental axiom" of his philosophy the principle that "it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong."[6][7] He became a leading theorist in Anglo-American philosophy of law, and a political radical whose ideas influenced the development of welfarism. He advocated individual and economic freedoms, the separation of church and state, freedom of expression, equal rights for women, the right to divorce, and (in an unpublished essay) the decriminalising of homosexual acts.[8][9] He called for the abolition of slavery, capital punishment, and physical punishment, including that of children.[10] He has also become known as an early advocate of animal rights.[11][12][13][14] Though strongly in favour of the extension of individual legal rights, he opposed the idea of natural law and natural rights (both of which are considered "divine" or "God-given" in origin), calling them "nonsense upon stilts".[3][15] Bentham was also a sharp critic of legal fictions. [More]
She has terrible taste in men for starters and appeared comfortable being Trump’s dry cleaner and all around gal Friday. She liked the proximity to Trump, the visibility and attention he lavished on her. I guess she has about as much integrity as all the others. Which is to say none. As naive as her girlish voice makes her sound, she sure seemed to like dimple it up. Not moved by her tears.
😂😂😂 you know she must have an iron stomach, the stench from his diaper had to have been revolting, they talk about how bad it is in the courtroom and nobody in the press is anywhere’s near him.
There's a photo of him with an attorney sitting to his left that appears to be rather recent. The expression on the attorney's face as he looks at tfg is worth 1000 words and it is noteworthy that he is actually leaning to HIS left, as if to get as far away from him as possible!
I'm getting a little confused here and feel like I wandered into the wrong room. We still want Trump to be convicted, right? So it is important that the jury believe her. Is that still correct? So it would be a good thing if she was not offered a deal to testify because it makes her testimony more believable, right?
Also, what the heck business would the DA have offering her a deal because she was involved in January 6? That's completely out of his jurisdiction. I feel like I just fell off a Hearse.
I may have misspoken. This is a state level trial. That said it wouldn’t surprise me if the federal and state DAs shared notes with each other.
We just don’t know what the confidential files say about Ms Hicks. The federal cases may well have had a conversation with her council to point out that cooperating with the state case would be viewed favorably.
We just don’t know what the federal investigations have on her. My bet is that it isn’t favorable for innocence.
I don't really see what the tears were supposed to get her. Sympathy for or from the mango? Why would that impress a jury, What was the thinking with the fake tears?
You and Lawrence O'Donnell have the same opinion of Ms. Hicks. He said, on his show, "The question should not be, 'Why is she crying?' but "Why didn't she quit?"
Her father is rich, and when things started unraveling for Trump, he lawyered her up and she left Mr. Trump's employ. Her taste in men seems questionable, since she dated Corie Lewandowksi (sp?) and another staffer who was known to have beaten up his wife. However ... she just became engaged to a former co-head of Goldman-Sachs, and since they're both Catholic be on the lookout for an annulment from Rome, four kids not withstanding. (Though John Kerry tried that, and it didn't work.)
"Hopey" was, of course, not qualified to be head of Coms, either at the Trump org. *or* the campaign, but Lardass loves him his eye candy.
Anyone want to bet on how long this upcoming marriage will last? Good Catholic husband with FOUR kids getting his marriage annulled so he can marry Hope??? Good luck with that-- but of course with enough money to grease the spiritual skids, any annulment can happen.
Where did you learn that Hicks is Catholic, Margo? I can't find a word about her religion in Wikipedia or anything else online including a Vanity Fair 'Seven Things You Didn't Know' ab HH.
Donovan (not Sullivan).. I'm going to separate the Catholic claim into a column under a big ? till I can confirm that info. I had searched Donovan-Hicks clips before and have more extensively since, and nada. You're in Boston, right? Maybe it was in something local. Donovan has a huge sordid family melodrama that overshadows anything else personal about him. You must know about his filthy-rich MIT prof father shooting himself in the stomach and accusing his five sons of attempted murder? The Globe covered it of course, but I can't find a reliable unpaywalled report. The best I could do: https://heavy.com/news/2020/03/jim-donovan-hope-hicks-boyfriend/ (Maybe heavy is one of those social media aggregators I used to hear about.)
via Globe: (Nice family. Hamilton, btw, is horsey suburb.)
By COLLIN BINKLEY, Associated Press
December 28, 2017
BOSTON (AP) — A former Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor who was once convicted of staging his own shooting is now accused of forging part of his dead son’s will to gain possession of several properties in Massachusetts.
John J. Donovan Sr., a 75-year-old who built a fortune in technology, was indicted by a grand jury in Salem on Thursday on seven counts of forgery, along with other charges including attempted larceny, witness intimidation and obtaining a signature by false pretenses.
He could not be reached for comment Thursday. It was unclear if he has obtained a lawyer.
Prosecutors say Donovan, of Hamilton, Massachusetts, schemed to obtain at least four properties in northeast Massachusetts that had been left by his youngest son, John Donovan Jr., who died in April 2015 at age 43 after being diagnosed with a rare form of cancer.
The senior Donovan is accused of forging his son’s signature to gain title to the property deeds, and of forging a variety of other documents related to his son’s final will.
Authorities began investigating after the local register of deeds raised concerns about the documents in March 2017 and referred the case to the district attorney’s office.
Donovan will be arraigned in Salem Superior Court.
He was found guilty in 2007 of staging his own shooting outside his business office in Cambridge. He said he was attacked by two Russian hit-men while getting into his car on the night of Dec. 16, 2005. He said his son James hired the men and denied any role in the shooting.
But prosecutors at the time said he shot himself in the stomach and fabricated the story to frame his son. He was accused of crafting the scheme to gain the upper in hand in a legal battle with his five children over control of trusts that were said to be worth $180 million.
He was convicted of filing a false police report and was sentenced to two years of probation.
His son James is a Goldman Sachs executive who was nominated for the No. 2 job in Republican President Donald Trump’s Treasury Department earlier this year but later withdrew from the process, citing personal reasons.
The senior Donovan was a wealthy businessman who made a name for himself as a technology guru, starting more than a dozen companies and publishing 11 books throughout his career. He taught business at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology from 1969 to 1997.
Who woulda guessed somebody close to the djt WH could be more pathological than the big liar? Thanks for digging this up, Margo. It's really eye-popping. With a father like that, to grow into functional men those boys must have had a helluva mother. I read that Papa was accused too of sexually abusing two? or one? daughter(s).
re horsey Hamilton, The Daily Mail's first news of the Hicks-Donovan romance included a posed shot of physical therapist Christine and Jack Donovan, their two daughters, and two sons astride horses.The family moved to Virginia (horse country) to distance themselves from Jack's flaky father. The DM persistently calls Donovan Hicks's "new man," making me wonder what became of her previous butlers. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8107185/Hope-Hicks-new-man-53-year-old-Goldman-Sachs-exec-Jim-Donovan.html
So, at least we know that scumbag Teflon Don surrounded himself with even more sleazy, slippery people than himself. she’ll get off and the reality is she’ll have a future. She doesn’t give a damn about him and she shouldn’t. He doesn’t give a damn about her.
I doubt the genuine part, she sought a good job and money, and he simply likes to surround himself with attractive young women who won't challenge him. Look at what happened to Ivana when she got older and started to have her own ideas.
"Genuine fondness," that's not a profound emotion in all circumstances - there was little if ANYTHING contradicting the aura of excitement hovering around their interactions that either of those two would likely have paid any attention to, call it a mutually deluded fondness - that is from an outsider's perspective, but within the delusion: genuine!
Let me add a brief edit, compare these examples:
"Linda told me she is genuinely fond of the view from her offices over Morningside Heights."
"Linda updated her views on her view from her offices at Columbia, she wasn't aware of the
history of the university's struggles with protests from the local community. Still likes the view,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathlyn_Platt_Wilkerson ***** [Excerpt, this is tragic history, profound youthful idealism gone terribly awry, of course with any luck none of the current protesters will spiral into the same maelstroms.]
Joining Weathermen
Wilkerson joined the Chicago Weatherman Collective during the summer of 1969.[18] She actively participated in riots during the Days of Rage that took place in Chicago on October 8–11, 1969 and was arrested for attacking a Chicago policeman with a club.[4] After spending two and a half weeks in jail, she was released on bail.[19] Wilkerson attended the WUO "War Council" in Flint, Michigan during December 1969.[1] In January 1970 she was sent to Seattle, Washington to join a local collective. After a few days in Seattle Wilkerson was invited by Terry Robbins to come to New York, New York.[20] After firebombing the home of New York State Supreme Court Justice Murtagh, who was presiding over the trial of the so-called "Panther 21" members of the Black Panther Party and few other unsuccessful fire bombings, the New York collective members decided to use dynamite in future actions. The bomb factory was set up in a townhouse owned by Wilkerson's father.[21]
Greenwich Village townhouse explosion
Main article: Greenwich Village townhouse explosion
On the morning of March 6, 1970, there was an explosion in the sub-basement of a townhouse owned by Wilkerson's father, located at 18 West 11th Street in Greenwich Village.[2] The blast killed three people, but Wilkerson and Kathy Boudin were helped from the rubble, and they immediately went underground.[2] The townhouse was being used by the Weather Underground to make bombs, in particular a nail bomb that was to be used against soldiers and their dates at a non-commissioned officer's dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey that night.[3] That evening, a man's body was found in the basement of the townhouse, and a short time later, a woman's torso was discovered on the first floor.[22] Police also found several handbags with personal identification that had been stolen from college students over the previous few months.[23] Over the next few days, police discovered at least 60 sticks of dynamite, a live military antitank shell, blasting caps, and several large metal pipes packed solid with explosives and nails as shrapnel.[22]
Three members of the WUO were killed in the explosion: Theodore Gold, the 23-year-old leader of a student strike at Columbia University in 1968; Diana Oughton; and Terry Robbins.[2][23] Wilkerson and Boudin stayed overnight at Boudin's parents' house a few blocks away on St. Luke's Place before they both went underground.[24] Wilkerson's father, who owned both houses, was on vacation in the Caribbean.[25] She was charged in absentia with illegal possession of dynamite and criminally negligent homicide and eluded capture for 10 years.[26]
Surrender
On July 23, 1970, Wilkerson and twelve other members of Weather Underground Organization were indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of conspiring to bomb and kill.[27] Placed on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List, some avoided capture for as long as ten years. On March 25, 1977, Phoebe Hirsch and Robert Roth became the first two WUO members to surrender.[28] Wilkerson stayed underground for three more years. She surrendered in 1980 and was tried and convicted of illegal possession of dynamite and sentenced to three years in prison. She was released on a sentencing technicality after serving 11 months, with the judge noting that "her conduct while in jail has been exemplary". New York State's Commissioner of Correctional Services was critical of the early release, calling the judge's action "mistaken". He maintained that many inmates with better disciplinary records remained behind bars because they did not have good lawyers and were black or Hispanic.[5]
There's absolutely NOTHING genuine about Trump. Superficially fond, perhaps...but not enough so that he wouldn't throw her under the bus if it would benefit his stenchy butt.
Yes, she moves around like her feet never touch the ground. She managed to stay within the good graces of the Trump regime while she enabled her boss, her mentor, to skate right into the Oval Office. I don’t give two shits about her or her fake tears but bravo for her performance, right?
I want to echo RH comment, because I knew nothing about Hope Hicks. So, Lucian brought the “paper doll” to life for me. None of the reporting I heard fleshed out her story, and it’s disgusting tangled Trumpness. Thank you LKTIV. 👍🏻
Mueller played it straight, the mistake was in letting Bill Barr seize the narrative and falsely claim "no evidence of collusion" which MAGA could them trumpet and bulldoze over his real findings that he found evidence of collusion but couldn't indict a sitting president. Plus his weak testimony was a disaster.
Bill Barr did what the author of the SC rules permitted. His iniids are NK are can be seen on MSNBC 5-7 days a week.
Personally read the Meuller Rpt. Is the worst piece of chit I ever read and that includes Atlas Shrugged and other right-wing nonsense. . Read like an 1L first shot at a paper, i.e. a poorly constructed Draft. My take is not important. However it took weeks for legal scholars to try to make heads or tails from it. Best examples are Law Professor appearing on the teevee with hundreds of post-it notes strewn through the report and looking at their own notes of how they interpreted what they found, aka guessing as to what Mueller meant. He sure didn't help making things clear/plain during his Congressional testimony.
How bad was the word product? Try finding someone who can name a memorable or quotable line. When preparing something that by regulation says goes to the AG, then Congress, and then to the American public it must be readable and understandable. It was niithah. Professor of Law, English, History, Literature would likely grade it somewhere between a Big Yawn and WTF
I agree re Mueller, Margo. I was massively disappointed at the whimper when I expected a bang, or at least a flash. Mueller is a big, rangy guy, a paragon of rectitude, from everything I’ve read, a former Marine who makes absolutely square corners. He left a lucrative job with a law firm to enter (or re-enter) government service for much less money, because it was “service” to the country and he didn’t like some of the tawdry specimens he’d had to represent in private practice. I had high hopes….well, we all did… but his testimony was weak and lifeless, and his report was quickly co-opted by the odious little bullfrog (then-AG Barr), who by the way is as good as Hope Hicks at tap dancing and saving his reputation. Mueller was definitely not at his best and maybe was fraying around the edges.
That was my thought as well. When he appeared before the senate committee, he seemed completely befuddled by what was in front of him, definitely off his game as it had been in the past. I think he was leaning towards dementia!
Changed my summary of the Mueller report: He didn't find a conspiracy, but he did find instances of collusion between Trump campaign and Russians.
Yes. Which should have been enough to oust his f.. ...
That and the scuffed knees on his suit after the Putin meeting...
How a woman, ANY woman, could attach herself to that pile of rotting pigshit, is beyond my understanding. What does (or did) she see in him? And then there are the abusive, cruel men with whom she had affairs…. I wonder how long her upcoming marriage will last? She's pretty, but inside she is one Twisted Sister!
Money, follow the money. Men like that attract young attractive women because they're rich, no secret there.
Yea but even the money starts to mean a whole lot less when you have to wake up next to them every day. Lawrence eviscerated her last night after a day of fawning by the media over the fact that “Hope cried”. She knew the truth about the insipid bastard from before he became president and she was just fine with it, that’s who Hope Hicks is.
Separate bedrooms.
Money ads inches....
There are plenty of wealthy men who are not evil, vicious monsters.
Watch out there - please don't insult the band Twisted Sister ;D
Grooming. . . Sociopathy. She could be Ivanka’s sister.
I agree! What anyone sees in him is beyond me! He doesn't even have money now, I think and whatever he does goes to Melania and Barron!
There have been many women (and men, for that matter) both famous or ordinary who have a habit of picking toxic mates. I should know. I went through three of them. After the third, I threw in the towel.
She reminds me of a character in 1960 comic books...Helga, She Wolf of the SS!
Methinks the” willowy” aide that steamed Trumps pants while he was wearing them is an actress and her tears while on the witness stand the other day were of the crocodile variety.I hope her testimony made a difference.
The image of her sitting in front of him to steam his pants made me wonder what else she was doing. Yecchhh.
Ugh!
No kidding. Once I think something like that, it's hard to un-think it.
They may not have been genuine tears but I hope the jury believes they were.
Ridiculous performance on the stand, the crying and the apology to Trump in particular. Give me a break - she's 35 years old and is a phony.
Ok. Or she realizes the death threats would be aimed at her next, if they have not already arrived.
We do want the jury to believe her, don't we? I thought the goal was to get Trump convicted. Did I miss something?
Displaying a "skill" she learned from her former boss - Victimhood
Death threats from the MAGATS are a thing:
Trump legal news brief: Citing witness death threats, Jack Smith asks Judge Cannon to reconsider ‘clear error’ in ruling
Yahoo News' succinct daily update on the criminal and civil cases against the 45th president of the United States.
David Knowles
David Knowles·Senior Editor
Updated February 9, 2024·13 min read Excerpt:
Government prosecutors ask Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider her ruling allowing Trump's lawyers to reveal the identities of certain witnesses in the classified documents case.
Special counsel Jack Smith's team reveals the Justice Department has opened an investigation into online death threats made against one of the government's witnesses in the case.
Judge Arthur Engoron defends his request to lawyers in the New York financial fraud case for information about plea deal negotiations for Trump witness Allen Weisselberg on charges he committed perjury during the trial.
Are these AI-created takeaways helpful?
Government prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith’s team file papers asking Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider her “clear error” in granting a request from lawyers for former President Donald Trump to reveal the identity of certain witnesses in the classified documents case. Here are the latest legal developments involving the Republican frontrunner seeking to be reelected to the White House in 2024.
Jan. 6 election interference
Smith asks Cannon to reconsider ‘clear error’ in ruling in classified documents case
Key players: Special counsel Jack Smith, Judge Aileen Cannon
In court papers filed late Thursday, government prosecutors on Smith’s team asked Cannon to reconsider her ruling that would allow Trump’s lawyers to identify some witnesses in the case by name despite the possible risks doing so would pose to those witnesses, Salon reported.
"That discovery material, if publicly docketed in unredacted form as the Court has ordered, would disclose the identities of numerous potential witnesses, along with the substance of the statements they made to the FBI or the grand jury, exposing them to significant and immediate risks of threats, intimidation, and harassment, as has already happened to witnesses, law enforcement agents, judicial officers, and Department of Justice employees whose identities have been disclosed in cases in which defendant Trump is involved," prosecutors wrote in the filing.
Citing past court precedent on naming witnesses who faced security risks, Smith’s team said in the filing that Cannon, who was appointed to the federal bench by Trump, “applied the wrong legal standard” and that “reconsideration is warranted to correct clear error."
On Wednesday, Smith’s team revealed the Justice Department had opened an investigation into online death threats made against one of the government’s witnesses. That disclosure, however, was not enough to sway Cannon to keep the identities of other witnesses sealed.
In response to the filing, Cannon paused her ruling from taking effect and asked Trump's lawyers for a response.
If Cannon ends up standing by her earlier ruling allowing the identities of certain witnesses to be revealed, Smith could appeal that decision with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Why it matters: Legal experts have long noted Cannon’s history of controversial rulings in the case that have benefited Trump. By flagging Cannon’s “clear error” in their latest filing, Smith’s team could be laying the groundwork to try to have her removed from the case.
****** [MORE]
Thanks for this update on the ongoing saga in Miami. It's little wonder that we have such a low regard for the judicial system. Absolutely disgusting that Cannon ended up with this case. The term, "justice moves slowly", is more than appropriate here or more like "not moving at all"?
True enough but then she willing decided to participate in tRuMp world. My sympathy goes to people like Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss who got sucked under the bus for just doing their jobs.
OK, the thing is my comment has nothing to do with Hope Hicks per se; I expressed no "sympathy for her," but merely noted her hedonistic calculus might have led to certain intentional acts. That also doesn't mean I am indifferent in any way to any hypothetical death threats (!) against her or anyone else - these are separate if related issues, related only because she IS Hope Hicks and decided as you describe, while Freeman and Moss really do get my deepest sympathy and hopes for recovering "heavy, heavy damages," in their litigation!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felicific_calculus
The felicific calculus is an algorithm formulated by utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) for calculating the degree or amount of pleasure that a specific action is likely to induce. Bentham, an ethical hedonist, believed the moral rightness or wrongness of an action to be a function of the amount of pleasure or pain that it produced. The felicific calculus could in principle, at least, determine the moral status of any considered act. The algorithm is also known as the utility calculus, the hedonistic calculus and the hedonic calculus.
To be included in this calculation are several variables (or vectors), which Bentham called "circumstances". These are:
Intensity: How strong is the pleasure?
Duration: How long will the pleasure last?
Certainty or uncertainty: How likely or unlikely is it that the pleasure will occur?
Propinquity or remoteness: How soon will the pleasure occur?
Fecundity: The probability that the action will be followed by sensations of the same kind.
Purity: The probability that it will not be followed by sensations of the opposite kind.
Extent: How many people will be affected? [More]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Bentham
Jeremy Bentham (/ˈbɛnθəm/; 4 February 1747/8 O.S. [15 February 1748 N.S.] – 6 June 1832) was an English philosopher, jurist, and social reformer regarded as the founder of modern utilitarianism.[1][2][3][4][5]
Bentham defined as the "fundamental axiom" of his philosophy the principle that "it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong."[6][7] He became a leading theorist in Anglo-American philosophy of law, and a political radical whose ideas influenced the development of welfarism. He advocated individual and economic freedoms, the separation of church and state, freedom of expression, equal rights for women, the right to divorce, and (in an unpublished essay) the decriminalising of homosexual acts.[8][9] He called for the abolition of slavery, capital punishment, and physical punishment, including that of children.[10] He has also become known as an early advocate of animal rights.[11][12][13][14] Though strongly in favour of the extension of individual legal rights, he opposed the idea of natural law and natural rights (both of which are considered "divine" or "God-given" in origin), calling them "nonsense upon stilts".[3][15] Bentham was also a sharp critic of legal fictions. [More]
She has terrible taste in men for starters and appeared comfortable being Trump’s dry cleaner and all around gal Friday. She liked the proximity to Trump, the visibility and attention he lavished on her. I guess she has about as much integrity as all the others. Which is to say none. As naive as her girlish voice makes her sound, she sure seemed to like dimple it up. Not moved by her tears.
I've since cleaned my glasses, but at first glance I thought I read .."she'd sit in a chair and scream at trump's pants.....' wtaf.....
😂😂😂 you know she must have an iron stomach, the stench from his diaper had to have been revolting, they talk about how bad it is in the courtroom and nobody in the press is anywhere’s near him.
There's a photo of him with an attorney sitting to his left that appears to be rather recent. The expression on the attorney's face as he looks at tfg is worth 1000 words and it is noteworthy that he is actually leaning to HIS left, as if to get as far away from him as possible!
LOL!!!
Scream/steam. Both work!
"Stare" works, too. I'm sure he would love to have her stare at his pants for hours.
Very,very funny!
My mind wandered a bit on that one! <g>
She was testifying to save her own skin. I think there is evidence that she was up to her neck in 6 Jan plotting.
She took the testimony so she could be a little fish that was allowed to swim off.
(Definitely a phony. Unfortunately the true believers just won’t accept how sleazy 45 is as a person.)
I'm getting a little confused here and feel like I wandered into the wrong room. We still want Trump to be convicted, right? So it is important that the jury believe her. Is that still correct? So it would be a good thing if she was not offered a deal to testify because it makes her testimony more believable, right?
Also, what the heck business would the DA have offering her a deal because she was involved in January 6? That's completely out of his jurisdiction. I feel like I just fell off a Hearse.
I may have misspoken. This is a state level trial. That said it wouldn’t surprise me if the federal and state DAs shared notes with each other.
We just don’t know what the confidential files say about Ms Hicks. The federal cases may well have had a conversation with her council to point out that cooperating with the state case would be viewed favorably.
We just don’t know what the federal investigations have on her. My bet is that it isn’t favorable for innocence.
I don't really see what the tears were supposed to get her. Sympathy for or from the mango? Why would that impress a jury, What was the thinking with the fake tears?
You and Lawrence O'Donnell have the same opinion of Ms. Hicks. He said, on his show, "The question should not be, 'Why is she crying?' but "Why didn't she quit?"
Her father is rich, and when things started unraveling for Trump, he lawyered her up and she left Mr. Trump's employ. Her taste in men seems questionable, since she dated Corie Lewandowksi (sp?) and another staffer who was known to have beaten up his wife. However ... she just became engaged to a former co-head of Goldman-Sachs, and since they're both Catholic be on the lookout for an annulment from Rome, four kids not withstanding. (Though John Kerry tried that, and it didn't work.)
"Hopey" was, of course, not qualified to be head of Coms, either at the Trump org. *or* the campaign, but Lardass loves him his eye candy.
Not qualified to be head of Coms? I guess that’s why she was steaming his suit.
Jeez, I would think the "body man" did that.
Anyone want to bet on how long this upcoming marriage will last? Good Catholic husband with FOUR kids getting his marriage annulled so he can marry Hope??? Good luck with that-- but of course with enough money to grease the spiritual skids, any annulment can happen.
My guess, 666 days.
Where did you learn that Hicks is Catholic, Margo? I can't find a word about her religion in Wikipedia or anything else online including a Vanity Fair 'Seven Things You Didn't Know' ab HH.
I don't know from whence it came, but possibly in an article about Sullivan (the betrothed) it mentioned they were both Roman Catholic.
Donovan (not Sullivan).. I'm going to separate the Catholic claim into a column under a big ? till I can confirm that info. I had searched Donovan-Hicks clips before and have more extensively since, and nada. You're in Boston, right? Maybe it was in something local. Donovan has a huge sordid family melodrama that overshadows anything else personal about him. You must know about his filthy-rich MIT prof father shooting himself in the stomach and accusing his five sons of attempted murder? The Globe covered it of course, but I can't find a reliable unpaywalled report. The best I could do: https://heavy.com/news/2020/03/jim-donovan-hope-hicks-boyfriend/ (Maybe heavy is one of those social media aggregators I used to hear about.)
via Globe: (Nice family. Hamilton, btw, is horsey suburb.)
By COLLIN BINKLEY, Associated Press
December 28, 2017
BOSTON (AP) — A former Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor who was once convicted of staging his own shooting is now accused of forging part of his dead son’s will to gain possession of several properties in Massachusetts.
John J. Donovan Sr., a 75-year-old who built a fortune in technology, was indicted by a grand jury in Salem on Thursday on seven counts of forgery, along with other charges including attempted larceny, witness intimidation and obtaining a signature by false pretenses.
He could not be reached for comment Thursday. It was unclear if he has obtained a lawyer.
Prosecutors say Donovan, of Hamilton, Massachusetts, schemed to obtain at least four properties in northeast Massachusetts that had been left by his youngest son, John Donovan Jr., who died in April 2015 at age 43 after being diagnosed with a rare form of cancer.
The senior Donovan is accused of forging his son’s signature to gain title to the property deeds, and of forging a variety of other documents related to his son’s final will.
Authorities began investigating after the local register of deeds raised concerns about the documents in March 2017 and referred the case to the district attorney’s office.
Donovan will be arraigned in Salem Superior Court.
He was found guilty in 2007 of staging his own shooting outside his business office in Cambridge. He said he was attacked by two Russian hit-men while getting into his car on the night of Dec. 16, 2005. He said his son James hired the men and denied any role in the shooting.
But prosecutors at the time said he shot himself in the stomach and fabricated the story to frame his son. He was accused of crafting the scheme to gain the upper in hand in a legal battle with his five children over control of trusts that were said to be worth $180 million.
He was convicted of filing a false police report and was sentenced to two years of probation.
His son James is a Goldman Sachs executive who was nominated for the No. 2 job in Republican President Donald Trump’s Treasury Department earlier this year but later withdrew from the process, citing personal reasons.
The senior Donovan was a wealthy businessman who made a name for himself as a technology guru, starting more than a dozen companies and publishing 11 books throughout his career. He taught business at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology from 1969 to 1997.
___
Who woulda guessed somebody close to the djt WH could be more pathological than the big liar? Thanks for digging this up, Margo. It's really eye-popping. With a father like that, to grow into functional men those boys must have had a helluva mother. I read that Papa was accused too of sexually abusing two? or one? daughter(s).
Proving, I guess, my father's old saying: "Money doesn't care who has it."
re horsey Hamilton, The Daily Mail's first news of the Hicks-Donovan romance included a posed shot of physical therapist Christine and Jack Donovan, their two daughters, and two sons astride horses.The family moved to Virginia (horse country) to distance themselves from Jack's flaky father. The DM persistently calls Donovan Hicks's "new man," making me wonder what became of her previous butlers. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8107185/Hope-Hicks-new-man-53-year-old-Goldman-Sachs-exec-Jim-Donovan.html
So, at least we know that scumbag Teflon Don surrounded himself with even more sleazy, slippery people than himself. she’ll get off and the reality is she’ll have a future. She doesn’t give a damn about him and she shouldn’t. He doesn’t give a damn about her.
I beg to differ. I think they were genuinely fond of each other.
I doubt the genuine part, she sought a good job and money, and he simply likes to surround himself with attractive young women who won't challenge him. Look at what happened to Ivana when she got older and started to have her own ideas.
"Genuine fondness," that's not a profound emotion in all circumstances - there was little if ANYTHING contradicting the aura of excitement hovering around their interactions that either of those two would likely have paid any attention to, call it a mutually deluded fondness - that is from an outsider's perspective, but within the delusion: genuine!
Let me add a brief edit, compare these examples:
"Linda told me she is genuinely fond of the view from her offices over Morningside Heights."
"Linda updated her views on her view from her offices at Columbia, she wasn't aware of the
history of the university's struggles with protests from the local community. Still likes the view,
though. She's more ambivalent about it."
lithub.com/inside-the-occupation-of-columbias-hamilton-hall-1968-version/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Rudd
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_Oughton
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Robbins
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathlyn_Platt_Wilkerson ***** [Excerpt, this is tragic history, profound youthful idealism gone terribly awry, of course with any luck none of the current protesters will spiral into the same maelstroms.]
Joining Weathermen
Wilkerson joined the Chicago Weatherman Collective during the summer of 1969.[18] She actively participated in riots during the Days of Rage that took place in Chicago on October 8–11, 1969 and was arrested for attacking a Chicago policeman with a club.[4] After spending two and a half weeks in jail, she was released on bail.[19] Wilkerson attended the WUO "War Council" in Flint, Michigan during December 1969.[1] In January 1970 she was sent to Seattle, Washington to join a local collective. After a few days in Seattle Wilkerson was invited by Terry Robbins to come to New York, New York.[20] After firebombing the home of New York State Supreme Court Justice Murtagh, who was presiding over the trial of the so-called "Panther 21" members of the Black Panther Party and few other unsuccessful fire bombings, the New York collective members decided to use dynamite in future actions. The bomb factory was set up in a townhouse owned by Wilkerson's father.[21]
Greenwich Village townhouse explosion
Main article: Greenwich Village townhouse explosion
On the morning of March 6, 1970, there was an explosion in the sub-basement of a townhouse owned by Wilkerson's father, located at 18 West 11th Street in Greenwich Village.[2] The blast killed three people, but Wilkerson and Kathy Boudin were helped from the rubble, and they immediately went underground.[2] The townhouse was being used by the Weather Underground to make bombs, in particular a nail bomb that was to be used against soldiers and their dates at a non-commissioned officer's dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey that night.[3] That evening, a man's body was found in the basement of the townhouse, and a short time later, a woman's torso was discovered on the first floor.[22] Police also found several handbags with personal identification that had been stolen from college students over the previous few months.[23] Over the next few days, police discovered at least 60 sticks of dynamite, a live military antitank shell, blasting caps, and several large metal pipes packed solid with explosives and nails as shrapnel.[22]
Three members of the WUO were killed in the explosion: Theodore Gold, the 23-year-old leader of a student strike at Columbia University in 1968; Diana Oughton; and Terry Robbins.[2][23] Wilkerson and Boudin stayed overnight at Boudin's parents' house a few blocks away on St. Luke's Place before they both went underground.[24] Wilkerson's father, who owned both houses, was on vacation in the Caribbean.[25] She was charged in absentia with illegal possession of dynamite and criminally negligent homicide and eluded capture for 10 years.[26]
Surrender
On July 23, 1970, Wilkerson and twelve other members of Weather Underground Organization were indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of conspiring to bomb and kill.[27] Placed on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List, some avoided capture for as long as ten years. On March 25, 1977, Phoebe Hirsch and Robert Roth became the first two WUO members to surrender.[28] Wilkerson stayed underground for three more years. She surrendered in 1980 and was tried and convicted of illegal possession of dynamite and sentenced to three years in prison. She was released on a sentencing technicality after serving 11 months, with the judge noting that "her conduct while in jail has been exemplary". New York State's Commissioner of Correctional Services was critical of the early release, calling the judge's action "mistaken". He maintained that many inmates with better disciplinary records remained behind bars because they did not have good lawyers and were black or Hispanic.[5]
There's absolutely NOTHING genuine about Trump. Superficially fond, perhaps...but not enough so that he wouldn't throw her under the bus if it would benefit his stenchy butt.
He was genuinely fond of her snatch, that's about it.
It is believed he never was given the chance.
Yes, possibly the superficiality of the glamour rates first!
Another great 'news behind the news' article, almost like being there while all the Trumpian drama unfolded.
I guess she used the well worn term "I don;t recall" several times during her testimony in spite of her photographic memory.
First Place Winner for the “You’ve Got To Be Kidding” award
Yes, she moves around like her feet never touch the ground. She managed to stay within the good graces of the Trump regime while she enabled her boss, her mentor, to skate right into the Oval Office. I don’t give two shits about her or her fake tears but bravo for her performance, right?
Well, hopefully her performance will not get her an Emmy, but will get him a cell at Rikers Island
ZERO chance of that, but it’s a fun fantasy.
You're right.
Otisville will be just fine too.
Without hope we have nothing.
Lucian--superb reporting, even better analysis. A pleasure to read.
I want to echo RH comment, because I knew nothing about Hope Hicks. So, Lucian brought the “paper doll” to life for me. None of the reporting I heard fleshed out her story, and it’s disgusting tangled Trumpness. Thank you LKTIV. 👍🏻
She said, "we are all fucked. "
Appears she is still actively doing
"the thing."
Well, (A) I think a she was right and (B) at least it demonstrates she has some awareness of her surroundings. unlike poor, poor shivering Donny
Hick is well aware that her presence is likely to be her best performance in the history of stage craft called politics.
Mueller owed us so much more than shrugging his shoulders and walking away. He's every bit the traitor as tangeranus.
Mueller played it straight, the mistake was in letting Bill Barr seize the narrative and falsely claim "no evidence of collusion" which MAGA could them trumpet and bulldoze over his real findings that he found evidence of collusion but couldn't indict a sitting president. Plus his weak testimony was a disaster.
Bill Barr did what the author of the SC rules permitted. His iniids are NK are can be seen on MSNBC 5-7 days a week.
Personally read the Meuller Rpt. Is the worst piece of chit I ever read and that includes Atlas Shrugged and other right-wing nonsense. . Read like an 1L first shot at a paper, i.e. a poorly constructed Draft. My take is not important. However it took weeks for legal scholars to try to make heads or tails from it. Best examples are Law Professor appearing on the teevee with hundreds of post-it notes strewn through the report and looking at their own notes of how they interpreted what they found, aka guessing as to what Mueller meant. He sure didn't help making things clear/plain during his Congressional testimony.
How bad was the word product? Try finding someone who can name a memorable or quotable line. When preparing something that by regulation says goes to the AG, then Congress, and then to the American public it must be readable and understandable. It was niithah. Professor of Law, English, History, Literature would likely grade it somewhere between a Big Yawn and WTF
This is only my opinion, but I think Mueller was beginning to lose it, and no one on his team felt able to grab the reins or tell him what to do.
I agree re Mueller, Margo. I was massively disappointed at the whimper when I expected a bang, or at least a flash. Mueller is a big, rangy guy, a paragon of rectitude, from everything I’ve read, a former Marine who makes absolutely square corners. He left a lucrative job with a law firm to enter (or re-enter) government service for much less money, because it was “service” to the country and he didn’t like some of the tawdry specimens he’d had to represent in private practice. I had high hopes….well, we all did… but his testimony was weak and lifeless, and his report was quickly co-opted by the odious little bullfrog (then-AG Barr), who by the way is as good as Hope Hicks at tap dancing and saving his reputation. Mueller was definitely not at his best and maybe was fraying around the edges.
Russian Mob ties to Mogilevich made the FBI cower to the point that they “didn’t thoroughly vet” trump, as they later admitted.
That was my thought as well. When he appeared before the senate committee, he seemed completely befuddled by what was in front of him, definitely off his game as it had been in the past. I think he was leaning towards dementia!