Saturday, June 29, 2024

I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong.

Email to Alabama TV stations
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: shannon.isbell@wbrc.com <shannon.isbell@wbrc.com>; Susana Schuler <susana.schuler@hearst.com>; brendan.kirby@fox10tv.com <brendan.kirby@fox10tv.com>; jama.killingsworth@waff.com <jama.killingsworth@waff.com>; Mike Wright <mwright@waaytv.com>; Kay Norred <knorred@wvua23.com>; rmartin@cbs42.com <rmartin@cbs42.com>; Baylor Long <blong@hearst.com>; dwingard@wsfa.com <dwingard@wsfa.com>; news@mynbc15.com <news@mynbc15.com>; "randy.merrow@fox10tv.com" <randy.merrow@fox10tv.com>; gmcdonald@waka.com <gmcdonald@waka.com>; comments@abc3340.com <comments@abc3340.com>; newstip@abc3340.com <newstip@abc3340.com>; wvtm13@wvtm.com <wvtm13@wvtm.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 at 11:08:36 AM CDT
Subject: Does your TV station know how to tell the truth? Does it know right from wrong?
Biden in North Carolina on Friday: "I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong."
Biden acknowledges weak debate performance as Democratic questions swirl over whether he’ll stay in the presidential race | CNN Politics
Does your TV station know how to tell the truth? Does your TV station know right from wrong? Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com).

Email to Dem organizations re how Biden should not drop out at this time
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: contact@aldemocrats.org <contact@aldemocrats.org>; houstoncountydems@gmail.com <houstoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@baldwindemocrats.org <chair@baldwindemocrats.org>; info@chiltoncountydems.org <info@chiltoncountydems.org>; chair@limestonedemocrats.org <chair@limestonedemocrats.org>; chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com <chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@mobiledems.org <chair@mobiledems.org>; shelbycountydems65@gmail.com <shelbycountydems65@gmail.com>; cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com <cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com>; tuscaloosadems@gmail.com <tuscaloosadems@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 at 12:34:29 PM CDT
Subject: How Biden should not drop out at this time
Biden should not drop out at this time and should make a statement along the lines of the following:
I hear the call that there should be a contested convention to determine who is the Democratic candidate.
Here is what I propose to the country.
I will continue campaigning for now.
My main message to the country, as I continue campaigning, will be based on what I said in North Carolina on Friday, to wit, my main message will be, "I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. Donald Trump does not know how to tell the truth and Donald Trump does not know right from wrong."
If I cannot get my poll numbers up in July, I will agree to having a contested convention.
I invite others to begin campaigning right now to be the Democratic candidate if there should be a contested convention.
Such others should start raising money right now to fund their campaigning they are starting right now to be the Democratic candidate if there should be a contested convention.
If it turns out there is not a contested convention, hopefully those who have undertaken campaign fundraising will turn over left over funds to the Democratic National Committee. If there is a contested convention, hopefully those who have undertaken fundraising and who do not become the Democratic candidate in the contested convention will turn over left over funds to the Democratic National Committee.
Thank you, and I hope, in the course of July, I prove myself worthy to be the Democratic candidate and that this will be reflected in the polls.
(For filing in Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com))

Email to Alabama law profession re do you know how to tell the truth
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: Brannon Buck <bbuck@badhambuck.com>; Terri B. Lovell <terri.lovell@alabar.org>; mckinney@watsonmckinney.com <mckinney@watsonmckinney.com>; suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org <suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org>; flatta@burr.com <flatta@burr.com>; wbrewbak@law.ua.edu <wbrewbak@law.ua.edu>; sgarrett@bsol.com <sgarrett@bsol.com>; ccampbell@faulkner.edu <ccampbell@faulkner.edu>; blakehudson@samford.edu <blakehudson@samford.edu>; christy.crow@jinkscrow.com <christy.crow@jinkscrow.com>; richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com <richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com>; daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov <daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov>; baldwinDA@baldwincountyal.gov <baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov>; "baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov" <baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov>; bob@schreiberadr.com <bob@schreiberadr.com>; jvance@law.ua.edu <jvance@law.ua.edu>; jws@willsellers.com <jws@willsellers.com>; cdobson@maynardnexsen.com <cdobson@maynardnexsen.com>; jwilson@birminghambar.org <jwilson@birminghambar.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2024 at 07:02:18 AM CDT
Subject: Do you know how to tell the truth? Do you know right from wrong?
Dear Alabama law profession representatives:
Biden in North Carolina on Friday: "I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong."
Biden acknowledges weak debate performance as Democratic questions swirl over whether he’ll stay in the presidential race | CNN Politics
Do you know how to tell the truth? Do you know right from wrong? Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com).

Email to Alabama political reporters
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: Brian Lyman <blyman@alabamareflector.com>; tstacy@aptv.org <tstacy@aptv.org>; bbritt@alreporter.com <bbritt@alreporter.com>; jsharp@al.com <jsharp@al.com>; csmith@al.com <csmith@al.com>; jmoon@alreporter.com <jmoon@alreporter.com>; sbritt@alreporter.com <sbritt@alreporter.com>; arocha@alabamareflector.com <arocha@alabamareflector.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2024 at 04:45:43 PM CDT
Subject: How Biden should not drop out at this time
Email to Democratic organizations re how Biden should not drop out at this time
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: contact@aldemocrats.org <contact@aldemocrats.org>; houstoncountydems@gmail.com <houstoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@baldwindemocrats.org <chair@baldwindemocrats.org>; info@chiltoncountydems.org <info@chiltoncountydems.org>; chair@limestonedemocrats.org <chair@limestonedemocrats.org>; chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com <chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@mobiledems.org <chair@mobiledems.org>; shelbycountydems65@gmail.com <shelbycountydems65@gmail.com>; cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com <cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com>; tuscaloosadems@gmail.com <tuscaloosadems@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 at 12:34:29 PM CDT
Subject: How Biden should not drop out at this time
Biden should not drop out at this time and should make a statement along the lines of the following:
I hear the call that there should be a contested convention to determine who is the Democratic candidate.
Here is what I propose to the country.
I will continue campaigning for now.
My main message to the country, as I continue campaigning, will be based on what I said in North Carolina on Friday, to wit, my main message will be, "I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. Donald Trump does not know how to tell the truth and Donald Trump does not know right from wrong."
If I cannot get my poll numbers up in July, I will agree to having a contested convention.
I invite others to begin campaigning right now to be the Democratic candidate if there should be a contested convention.
Such others should start raising money right now to fund their campaigning they are starting right now to be the Democratic candidate if there should be a contested convention.
If it turns out there is not a contested convention, hopefully those who have undertaken campaign fundraising will turn over left over funds to the Democratic National Committee. If there is a contested convention, hopefully those who have undertaken fundraising and who do not become the Democratic candidate in the contested convention will turn over left over funds to the Democratic National Committee.
Thank you, and I hope, in the course of July, I prove myself worthy to be the Democratic candidate and that this will be reflected in the polls.(For filing in Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com)) Email to former Senator Doug Jones and Tuscaloosa Mayor Maddox
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: Dougjones Info <info@dougjones.com>; MAYOR@TUSCALOOSA.COM <mayor@tuscaloosa.com>
Cc: contact@aldemocrats.org <contact@aldemocrats.org>; houstoncountydems@gmail.com <houstoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@baldwindemocrats.org <chair@baldwindemocrats.org>; info@chiltoncountydems.org <info@chiltoncountydems.org>; chair@limestonedemocrats.org <chair@limestonedemocrats.org>; chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com <chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@mobiledems.org <chair@mobiledems.org>; shelbycountydems65@gmail.com <shelbycountydems65@gmail.com>; cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com <cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com>; tuscaloosadems@gmail.com <tuscaloosadems@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2024 at 06:59:44 PM CDT
Subject: A different suggestion for what Joe Biden should do now
Hello Doug and Mayor Maddox:
I saw Doug on Morning Joe this morning (https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/-biden-must-address-his-age-and-ability-publicly-if-he-stays-in-race-says-congressman-214011462002) and Mayor Maddox's views reported at Tuscaloosa Mayor Walt Maddox on Biden debate disaster: 'Voters cannot unsee what they saw nor will it be forgotten' (1819news.com).
Below is what I am purveying about what Joe Biden should do now, in the form of an email to Alabama Democratic party organizations regarding how Biden should not drop out at this time.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
[referenced email to Alabama Democratic party organizations is the email above under the caption Email to Dem organizations re how Biden should not drop out at this time]
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, June 13, 2024

Presidential debate should be done without moderators

June 13th email to Alabama TV stations
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: shannon.isbell@wbrc.com <shannon.isbell@wbrc.com>; Susana Schuler <susana.schuler@hearst.com>; brendan.kirby@fox10tv.com <brendan.kirby@fox10tv.com>; jama.killingsworth@waff.com <jama.killingsworth@waff.com>; Mike Wright <mwright@waaytv.com>; Kay Norred <knorred@wvua23.com>; rmartin@cbs42.com <rmartin@cbs42.com>; Baylor Long <blong@hearst.com>; dwingard@wsfa.com <dwingard@wsfa.com>; news@mynbc15.com <news@mynbc15.com>; Randy.Merrow@fox10tv.com <randy.merrow@fox10tv.com>; "randy.merrow@fox10tv.com" <randy.merrow@fox10tv.com>; gmcdonald@waka.com <gmcdonald@waka.com>; mscarano@sbgtv.com <mscarano@sbgtv.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 at 06:58:39 PM CDT
Subject: Presidential debate should be done without moderators
For what it's worth I wish to suggest to Alabama TV stations that the Presidential debate would be better done without moderators.
Consider how a format without debate moderators would work.
For the 90 minute debate, Trump and Biden would take turns speaking, for say 3 minutes, and be free to say whatever the candidates choose.
The microphone of the candidate who is not speaking would be off, and the speaker's microphone would be turned off at the end of his three minutes.
In this format each candidate would have the opportunity to tell the American people, in a personal and direct way, why the American people should want him to be President in preference to the other candidate.
The format of no moderators would allow each candidate, in choosing what to speak about, to reveal to the American people what the candidate thinks is important to the American people, and to say what he has done (or not done) and he will do (or will not do) if he is elected President, regarding those important things. The American people would then judge for themselves what a candidate thinks is important to the American people and what the candidate says about those important things.
In this format, each candidate would be free to comment on anything that the other candidate says and be free to criticize or ask questions of the other candidate. That other candidate, during his speaking time, may respond or not respond to such comments, criticism and questions, all as that other candidate chooses, The American people would judge for themselves what they think about the comments, criticism and questions that are posed by one candidate to the other candidate and about the response or non-response by that other candidate.
In the format, each candidate would be free to make such assertions of fact as he chooses. These assertions would be subject to the other candidate agreeing with or contradicting, or not saying anything about, such assertions of fact, as the other candidate chooses. The American people would judge for themselves whether they think asserted facts are important to them or not and judge for themselves their interest in knowing the truth or falsity of asserted facts that they consider important, and, after the debate, make such efforts as they choose to learn about such truth or falsity.
After the debate, the media would spend much time investigating, determining and commenting on the truth or falsity of the factual assertions that the candidates make in the debate, and this would help the American people who are interested in such truth or falsity to satisfy themselves about such truth or falsity.
It is submitted that not having debate moderators is superior to having debate moderators for helping the American people decide which candidate they prefer to be President of the United States.
If Alabama TV stations think this is good idea that the Presidential debate should be done without debate moderators, I hope the TV stations will pass the idea on to their national networks and others who might have influence about the debate format.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
Mountain Brook
[for filing in Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Presidential debate should be done without moderators (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com)]

Email question for moderator Jake Tapper, Dartmouth class of 1991
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
Cc: Robert B. Coates <robert.b.coates@dartmouth.edu>; Linda L. Fowler <linda.l.fowler@dartmouth.edu>; Jeff Carton <jcarton@denleacarton.com>; Neal K. Katyal <neal.katyal@hoganlovells.com>; cborton@maynardnexsen.com <cborton@maynardnexsen.com>; ddowd@burr.com <ddowd@burr.com>; President Sian Leah Beilock <president's.office@dartmouth.edu>; editor@dartreview.com <editor@dartreview.com>; editor@thedartmouth.com <editor@thedartmouth.com>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2024 at 11:10:38 AM CDT
Subject: A question for Jake Tapper, Dartmouth '91
Dear Jake,
I think the Presidential debate would be better if there were no moderators.
I am trying to make the case for this at Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Presidential debate should be done without moderators (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com).
I hope you might consider this suggestion.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
Dartmouth '69
[If anyone seeing this email is in a position to forward the email to Jake Tapper, that would be wonderful.]

Email to Alabama political news reporters
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: kwhitmire@al.com <kwhitmire@al.com>; Jon Anderson <janderson@starnesmedia.com>; bbritt@alreporter.com <bbritt@alreporter.com>; Dale Jackson <dale@yellowhammernews.com>; Brian Lyman <blyman@alabamareflector.com>; yaffee@yellowhammernews.com <yaffee@yellowhammernews.com>; csmith@al.com <csmith@al.com>; jsharp@al.com <jsharp@al.com>
Cc: jvance@law.ua.edu <jvance@law.ua.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2024 at 04:55:57 PM CDT
Subject: FWIW, I think Presidential debate should be done without moderators
FWIW, I am trying to make the case that the Presidential debate should be done without moderators. Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Presidential debate should be done without moderators (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com).
FWIW, i have suggested that to Alabama TV stations and for them to pass the idea on to their national networks and others who might have influence about the debate format.
FWIW, I have emailed Dartmouth contacts urging, if they are in a position to get the idea to debate moderator Jake Tapper, Dartmouth class of 1991, to do so.
FWIW, I am sending you this email about this.
FWIW. From a Facebook commenter:
I’m not a fan of your proposal. I think it would end up being a platform for the candidates to spurt out their topics/ideas, with little or no challenge to their rhetoric. Such information can easily be relayed via their websites or TV ads. It’s called a “Debate” for a reason – to exchange information and challenge each other’s positions.
About debates, there’s plenty of evidence that moderators are biased. If it’s mainstream media doing the moderating (and this upcoming one is), it would be fairer if they have something like an ombudsman to keep them honest and on track. The profession of journalism has violated their own true purpose – to do true, honest and unbiased reporting. It’s obvious to any news junkie that the left-leaning news reporters (ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, etc.) weed out or slant many stories/reports/events that may reflect poorly upon the democrat party or individuals. And they choose to avoid or bury many topics/stories that would shed a positive light on the Republican party.
I’ve been a long-time proponent of turning off the mics for those not speaking at the debates. As that’s to be tested in the debate this month, let’s see how it works out. I’m not optimistic.

Response to above Facebook comment [DRAFT]
The American people, practically wherever they turn, are bombarded by candidates, their surrogates and biased news reporting and commentators, spewing out the candidates' 'topics/ideas, with little or no challenge to their rhetoric."
This is exacerbated by millions of the American people wanting to hear, and in fact hearing, only one side's spewing of such "topics/ideas with little or no challenge to their rhetoric."
One of the rationales for a "no moderator" debate is to avail of the "debate" being one time when all of the American people who watch to at least be exposed at the same time to both sides spewing of their "topics/ideas" (to the extent it takes place in an unmoderated "debate").
In such debate, the candidates will be confronted with an audience in which there are millions of voters who are not the candidate's supporters and whether to moderate the candidate's "spewing of topics/ideas," in order for the candidate to try to gain voters for the election. This by itself should curtail the "spewing" to some extent.
Beyond that curtailment, there is the question of how well the candidate's "rhetoric" will be "challenged" in a moderated debate versus an unmoderated debate.
In an unmoderated debate, each candidate will be free, during his speaking times, to challenge the other candidate's rhetoric as much as the first candidate desires.
In a moderated debate, the moderators can be expected to challenge a candidate's rhetoric in the debate.
I think the American people will be better served leaving it to the candidates to challenge each other's rhetoric.
Challenging of a candidate's "rhetoric" in a moderated debate by moderators is subject to the infirmity mentioned by the above Facebook comment that the moderators are biased, or that millions in the audience will think the moderators are biased, and the "challenging" done by the moderators will be disregarded by those millions in the audience.
In the unmoderated debate, there is a question of whether the challenging that is done by one candidate of the other candidate's rhetoric will have more effect on supporters of the latter than challenging that is done by moderators who are viewed as biased. I think challenging done by one candidate of the other candidate has more potential for consideration by supporters of the latter, than challenging done by moderators who are viewed as biased.
Further, challenging done by one candidate of the other candidate is itself revelatory about the first candidate's understanding of the matter at hand, that is useful to a viewer in evaluating the candidate, and the viewer is likely to give more attention and thought to what the viewer is hearing, compared to challenging done by a moderator that lacks this informative aspect about the candidate doing the challenging.
The foregoing comment can be generalized. What the candidates choose to talk about is itself informative to viewers about the candidates, in a way that moderators deciding what the candidates shall talk about lacks that informative aspect. By the same token, how much time candidates choose to spend talking about particular topics is informative to viewers about the candidates regarding such topics, and time limits on answers and rebuttals that are imposed by moderators deprives viewers of this informative aspect.
Overall, an unmoderated debate bespeaks "let each candidate choose how he thinks is best to try to persuade the American people that he rather than the other candidate should be President,, let each candidate speak directly and personally to the American people without interference by moderators, and let the American people judge for themselves and make up their own minds about what they hear directly and personally from the candidates in the debate untainted by moderators injecting anything into the debate.
Finally, I offer my view that, if the debate is a moderated debate, the candidates can be expected to avoid making reasonably responsive answers to questions the moderators ask and instead will answer the questions in unsatisfactory ways. 
[DRAFT, SUBJECT TO REVISION] 

Another Facebook commenter
Another Facebook commenter said, "Moderators ask questions on subjects the candidates want to avoid." In an unmoderated format, in the 90 minutes of the debate, I think it can be expected that one candidate or the other will bring up the issues that are important to the American people and moderators are not needed to bring up issues. As to each issue that is brought up, I think the American people can think for themselves about what the candidates say and ask each other about issues and don't need moderators to ask questions.

How Jake Tapper and Dana Bash should introduce "unmoderated" debate [DRAFT]
Good evening.
We hope this presidential debate has the largest audience ever for a presidential debate.
CNN and we have decided that the American people will be best served by this debate if the two of us do not ask any questions and we leave it up to the candidates to say whatever they want.
For the next 90 minutes, the candidates will take turns speaking for 5 minutes. During each 5 minutes, the microphone of only the speaking candidate will be turned on and only he will be shown on the TV screen.
The speaking candidate's microphone will be turned off exactly at the end of his 5 minutes, even if he is in mid-sentence.
The candidates are under strict rules to stay at their respective podiums and, while it is the turn of the other candidate to speak, not to make any sounds or gestures that would be distractive to the speaking candidate.
A speaking candidate may address comments to or ask questions of the other candidate, and the other candidate may respond to such comments or questions during the other candidate's speaking times and not while the first candidate is speaking.
The candidate who will go first has been determined by a flip of a coin, and it is [President Biden] [Former President Trump].
[President Biden] [Former President Trump], please go ahead. You have 5 minutes speaking time.
[END OF DRAFT]
Follow up of above post on "X'"
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: todd@aldailynews.com <todd@aldailynews.com>
Cc: Neal K. Katyal <neal.katyal@hoganlovells.com>; jvance@law.ua.edu <jvance@law.ua.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2024 at 05:05:05 PM CDT
Subject: Following up to Margaret Hoover & you re Presidential debate being done without moderators
Todd,
This email follows up my post on "X" yesterday to Margaret Hoover and yourself, asking whether the American people would be better served if the CNN Presidential debate was done in an unmoderated format, compared to a moderated format.
Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Presidential debate should be done without moderators (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com) tries to argue for an unmoderated format (subject to strict rules that are indicated in the foregoing link).
I am very interested in getting the idea passed on to Jake Tapper and Dana Bash.
Both Margaret Hoover and her husband John Avlon are contributors to CNN and, if they are persuaded by the idea of an unmoderated debate, they should be able to pass the idea to Jake Tapper and Dana Bash. I don't have an email address for Margaret Hoover to use to follow up my post to her on "X" yesterday, so this email is not being sent to her.
I am copying Neal Katyal and Joyce Vance on this email because I have previously emailed them about the debate being unmoderated, and because, if they are persuaded by the idea, they are in a good position to reach out to Jake Tapper and Dana Bash.
If anyone believes that an unmoderated debate would not better serve the interests of the American people, compared to a moderated debate, I would be very interested in learning the reasons for such belief.
Thank you for reading this email.
Rob Shattuck___________
[I received an automated reply from Neal Katyal's email address, saying Neal was in Japan until June 23rd and giving a name to contact if matter "urgent." I forwarded my email to the named person.] 

Email I sent to a friend
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: 
Cc: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2024 at 06:33:53 PM CDT
Subject: Fw: Following up to Margaret Hoover & you re Presidential debate being done without moderators
[first name of friend],
Below is an email I just sent to Todd Stacy, who is the host of Capitol Journal | June 14, 2024 (aptv.org).
I just see it this way:
Take any question Jake Tapper and Dana Bash ask of Trump.
Take, for example, "You say the 2020 election was rigged/stolen from you. [Jake or Dana recounts court challenges, etc.] Don't you accept those?" Trump: "No, everyone knows our court system is totally corrupt and rigged., etc." Jake or Dana tries to argue the point with Trump. Trump just lays on more bombast.
Or do you think Trump, in answering the question, is going to back off from the bombast he spews at his rallies, and his rally goers hear in the debate something different from what Trump tells them at his rallies?
Run through other questions Jake and Dana may choose to ask, and tell me Trump doesn't run over Jake and Dana, and then backs up and runs over them again.
Jake and Dana just need to pull in their heads and let Biden and Trump have at it in front of the American people, and let the American people decide for themselves who they want for President.
Rob
Email to Alabama GOP and Democratic party organizations
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: john@algop.org <john@algop.org>; contact@algop.org <contact@algop.org>; contact@aldemocrats.org <contact@aldemocrats.org>; pfoster@algop.org <pfoster@algop.org>; houstoncountydems@gmail.com <houstoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@baldwindemocrats.org <chair@baldwindemocrats.org>; info@chiltoncountydems.org <info@chiltoncountydems.org>; chair@limestonedemocrats.org <chair@limestonedemocrats.org>; greaterbhamyrs@gmail.com <greaterbhamyrs@gmail.com>; aucollegerepublicans@gmail.com <aucollegerepublicans@gmail.com>; info@mobilegop.com <info@mobilegop.com>; crfachairman@gmail.com <crfachairman@gmail.com>; lawrencealgop@yahoo.com <lawrencealgop@yahoo.com>; lcgop@limestonegop.org <lcgop@limestonegop.org>; tuscaloosagop@yahoo.com <tuscaloosagop@yahoo.com>; Info@mcyrs.com <info@mcyrs.com>; chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com <chair.jeffersoncountydems@gmail.com>; chair@mobiledems.org <chair@mobiledems.org>; shelbycountydems65@gmail.com <shelbycountydems65@gmail.com>; cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com <cleburnealdemocrats@gmail.com>; tuscaloosadems@gmail.com <tuscaloosadems@gmail.com>; autaugagop@gmail.com <autaugagop@gmail.com>; aprilweaver@att.net <aprilweaver@att.net>; jeandanderson@att.net <jeandanderson@att.net>; president@republicanwomenofhuntsville.com <president@republicanwomenofhuntsville.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 at 05:23:18 PM CDT
Subject: American people would be better served if Presidential debate was done without moderators
Dear Alabama GOP and Democratic party organizations,
I think CNN's Presidential debate next Thursday would better serve the interests of the American people if it was done in an unmoderated format, compared to a moderated format.
If this idea interests you, please read Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Presidential debate should be done without moderators (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com).
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
Mountain Brook
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, June 4, 2024

Supercharging the "rule of law" debate in Alabama

[For relevant previous blog entries, go to Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Interim Alabama report to ABA Task Force for American Democracy (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com)]

Email to Alabama law profession
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: Brannon Buck <bbuck@badhambuck.com>; Terri B. Lovell <terri.lovell@alabar.org>; Jennifer Buettner <jbuettner@birminghambar.org>; mckinney@watsonmckinney.com <mckinney@watsonmckinney.com>; suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org <suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org>; flatta@burr.com <flatta@burr.com>; wbrewbak@law.ua.edu <wbrewbak@law.ua.edu>; sgarrett@bsol.com <sgarrett@bsol.com>; ccampbell@faulkner.edu <ccampbell@faulkner.edu>; blakehudson@samford.edu <blakehudson@samford.edu>; christy.crow@jinkscrow.com <christy.crow@jinkscrow.com>; ajoseph@maynardnexsen.com <ajoseph@maynardnexsen.com>; richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com <richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com>; daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov <daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov>; baldwinDA@baldwincountyal.gov <baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov>; "baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov" <baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 06:31:22 PM CDT
Subject: Supercharging the "rule of law" debate in Alabama
Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Supercharging the "rule of law" debate in Alabama (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com)

Email interschange with Supreme Court Justice Will Sellers
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: jws <jws@willsellers.com>
Cc: Brannon Buck <bbuck@badhambuck.com>; Terri B. Lovell <terri.lovell@alabar.org>; Jennifer Buettner <jbuettner@birminghambar.org>; mckinney@watsonmckinney.com <mckinney@watsonmckinney.com>; suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org <suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org>; flatta@burr.com <flatta@burr.com>; wbrewbak@law.ua.edu <wbrewbak@law.ua.edu>; sgarrett@bsol.com <sgarrett@bsol.com>; ccampbell@faulkner.edu <ccampbell@faulkner.edu>; blakehudson@samford.edu <blakehudson@samford.edu>; christy.crow@jinkscrow.com <christy.crow@jinkscrow.com>; ajoseph@maynardnexsen.com <ajoseph@maynardnexsen.com>; richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com <richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com>; daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov <daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov>; baldwinDA@baldwincountyal.gov <baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov>; bob@schreiberadr.com <bob@schreiberadr.com>; jvance@law.ua.edu <jvance@law.ua.edu>
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2024 at 06:16:08 PM CDT
Subject: Re: The Magna Carta’s Constitutional Tradition
Dear Supreme Court Justice Sellers:
Thank you for replying to me.
If I may, I will avail of your declining to speak about the "rule of law" and the "weaponization of the justice system" debate that is engulfing the United States, in order to do some speaking of my own.
In the justice system and its "rule of law", judges and prosecutors have much discretion that they are supposed to exercise in "unbiased" ways and not to serve partisan political purposes. Judges and prosecutors frequently do internal wrestling with themselves in trying to exercise their discretion properly.
It is easy for outsiders to charge that judges and prosecutors have exercised their discretions improperly, but it is difficult to be able to "prove" improper partisan political purposes.
In the Trump cases, Trump and the Republicans are charging that the January 6th case, the documents case, the Georgia election interference case, and the New York hush money case, have all been brought by prosecutors for improper partisan political purposes and that the cases are not defensible applications of the rule of law to Trump.
The happenstance that the New York hush money case has been tried first and that the result was Trump convictions is causing all-out political war to erupt and an all-out attack by Trump and Republicans on the justice system.
Since you decline to speak, I don't know what your views are on whether this all-out attack on the justice system by Trump and the Republicans threatens destruction of the justice system and the rule of law. The matter is being momentously played out in this 2024 election year.
It should be kept in mind that the all-out attack of Trump and the Republicans on the justice system is in the context of Trump's absolute immunity claim before the United States Supreme Court, and Trump's chief argument for absolute immunity being that the justice system is so defective in subjecting the President to the rule of law that, as a result, the President must have absolute immunity.
In my view, the Alabama law profession's unwillingness to engage in discussion about this lends support to Trump's claim that the justice system is so defective that it cannot be relied on to properly and fairly apply a rule of law to Presidential actions and, as a result, the President must have absolute immunity.
That is a very drastic consequence of the silence of the Alabama law profession.
I will keep up my badgering about this in such ways and such quarters in Alabama and outside of Alabama as I am able to arouse myself to do.
Again, thank you for replying to me.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck______
On Wednesday, June 5, 2024 at 06:34:16 PM CDT, jws <jws@willsellers.com> wrote:
In short, no._________
On 06/05/2024 7:04 PM EDT Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com> wrote:
Dear Supreme Court Justice Sellers:
Today Alabama Daily News published your commentary Will Sellers: The Magna Carta’s Constitutional Tradition - Alabama Daily News (aldailynews.com).
Is there any chance you can speak to the debate over the "rule of law" and the "weaponization of the justice system" that is engulfing the United States? Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Weaponization of justice system (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com); Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Interim Alabama report to ABA Task Force for American Democracy (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com); Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: Supercharging the "rule of law" debate in Alabama (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com).
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
Mountain Brook

Email to Alabama law profession: N.B. Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: Brannon Buck <bbuck@badhambuck.com>; Terri B. Lovell <terri.lovell@alabar.org>; Jennifer Buettner <jbuettner@birminghambar.org>; mckinney@watsonmckinney.com <mckinney@watsonmckinney.com>; suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org <suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org>; flatta@burr.com <flatta@burr.com>; wbrewbak@law.ua.edu <wbrewbak@law.ua.edu>; sgarrett@bsol.com <sgarrett@bsol.com>; ccampbell@faulkner.edu <ccampbell@faulkner.edu>; blakehudson@samford.edu <blakehudson@samford.edu>; christy.crow@jinkscrow.com <christy.crow@jinkscrow.com>; ajoseph@maynardnexsen.com <ajoseph@maynardnexsen.com>; richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com <richard.raleigh@wbd-us.com>; daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov <daoffice@baldwincountyal.gov>; baldwinDA@baldwincountyal.gov <baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov>; "baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov" <baldwinda@baldwincountyal.gov>; bob@schreiberadr.com <bob@schreiberadr.com>; jvance@law.ua.edu <jvance@law.ua.edu>
Cc: jws@willsellers.com <jws@willsellers.com>
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2024 at 05:04:43 PM CDT
Subject: To Alabama law profession: N.B. Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon
In my email yesterday to Supreme Court Justice Will Sellers, on which you were copied, I said, "In the justice system and its 'rule of law"' judges and prosecutors have much discretion that they are supposed to exercise in 'unbiased' ways and not to serve partisan political purposes."
It is becoming clear that Trump wants judges and prosecutors to start exercising their discretion in 'biased" ways and to serve his personal and partisan political purposes.
This past week Trump's minion Stephen Miller urged Republicans to get “off the sidelines” and target Democrats, publicly putting to the Republicans the question: "Is every Republican DA starting every investigation they need to right now?" 'Get In The Game': Stephen Miller Urges GOP To Use 'Power' On Democrats In Bonkers Rant (msn.com)
And Trump's minion Steve Bannon puts it as, “There are dozens of ambitious backbencher state attorneys general and district attorneys who need to ‘seize the day’ and own this moment in history.” The G.O.P. Push for Post-Verdict Payback: ‘Fight Fire With Fire’ - The New York Times (nytimes.com).
So, Alabama law profession, be silent as you choose, and then prepare for the reaping of a whirlwind.

Email updating what Sec. Allen is and is not doing re election integrity concerns
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: Brannon Buck <bbuck@badhambuck.com>; Terri B. Lovell <terri.lovell@alabar.org>; mckinney@watsonmckinney.com <mckinney@watsonmckinney.com>; suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org <suzanneduffey@mc-ala.org>; flatta@burr.com <flatta@burr.com>; jwilson@birminghambar.org <jwilson@birminghambar.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2024 at 06:15:12 PM CDT
Subject: Updating what Sec. Allen is and is not doing re election integrity concerns
In Be An Alabama Rootstriker* with Rob Shattuck: So, here we Alabamians are in the 2024 elections (al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com), I charge that Secretary of State Allen has failed to do things he should have done to help allay huge concerns about election integrity that have been caused by four years of Trump charging that the 2020 elections were rigged and tens of millions of Americans believing Trump, and that, instead, Secretary Allen has covered himself by doing insignificant things in the name of improving election integrity, which things will not bother Trump.
I have previously informed you, as representatives of the Alabama law profession, about the foregoing, in the course of my efforts to get the profession to participate in a public airing of the election integrity issue. You have declined to participate.
Your declining to participate contributes to Secretary Allen being able to go unchallenged in how he addresses election integrity concerns.
The article Sec. of State Allen: Biden trying to win election ‘by attempting to legitimize illegal immigrants’ (1819news.com) reports on Secretary Allen's latest addressing of election integrity concerns.
It is not too late for the Alabama law profession to participate in a public airing in Alabama of the election integrity issue.
Thank you.
Rob Shattuck
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)