Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
From gold plating everything, to business and personal finances, to ketchup on steak, to his hair styling, to spooging out Don Jr., wouldn't it be easier to compose a list of things he hasn't crimed?
I am curious here.
The crime looks technical to me rather than dangerous for the nation.
Am I missing something?
Former President Trump on Thursday swiftly moved toward fundraising efforts after claiming he’s been indicted in connection with the Justice Department’s investigation into his handling of classified documents. “We are watching our Republic DIE before our very eyes. The Biden-appointed Special Counsel has INDICTED me in yet another witch hunt regarding documents that I had the RIGHT to declassify as President of the United States,” Trump wrote in an email message asking supporters to donate. “Please make a contribution to peacefully stand with me today and prove that YOU will NEVER surrender our country to the radical Left,” the note concludes, suggesting contributions between $24 and $250. The Hill news link
The problem is, in a case like this you have to deal with the first amendment and the issue of freedom of speech. (And the courts tend to be very cautious about applying any restrictions, especially to political speech.)Why is a specific command to be violent the key to his guilt? As for specifically telling the mob to stop the certification, I think he did just that.I don't think he is going to be charged with regards to January 6th.
He never specifically told anyone to be violent. He never specifically told anyone to stop the electoral college count. I think regarding this case he may have just saved himself by a hair. ...
Trump sent a mob to stop the certification of the election outcome. That is the crime re Jan 6th.
Well first of all, why does it have to be "dangerous for the nation" in order for it to be a crime worth prosecuting?I am curious here.
The crime looks technical to me rather than dangerous for the nation.
Am I missing something?
Just saw this. trump is fundraising off the federal indictments. Surprised? Not at all.![]()
From a news story posted on The Hill news site:
[IMGW=200]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=1457&pictureid=13524[/IMGW]
It'll be an honor to donate!!!
MAGA!!!!
"I'm really rich" -- Donald Trump.
Just saw this. trump is fundraising off the federal indictments. Surprised? Not at all.![]()
From a news story posted on The Hill news site:
"The Biden-appointed Special Counsel has INDICTED me in yet another witch hunt regarding documents that I had the RIGHT to declassify as President of the United States"
And, of course, his followers will ignore or never be aware that:
1. He's on tape admitting that he didn't declassify documents that he was showing off to someone.
2. Some of the documents (I think) are a type that he specifically didn't have the ability to declassify.
The problem is, in a case like this you have to deal with the first amendment and the issue of freedom of speech. (And the courts tend to be very cautious about applying any restrictions, especially to political speech.)
Thus, unless a person gives clear and direct instructions (such as 'push past the barriers, break windows, hurt the police officers') there is a chance the courts may simply view it as protected speech.
"I told them to stop the certification/take the country back/etc.. I thought mass protests outside congress would be enough. I didn't expect them to break in" would probably be his legal defense.
There is a difference between "will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" and "Here's a gun... go shoot that guy".
(Note: I am not trying to defend Trump's actions. I think he is guilty of inciting the Jan6 terrorist attack.. I'm just saying it might be tricky to get a conviction on it.)
Saw an interview with a Republican voter yesterday where he acknowledged it was pretty bad...then added 'but others have done much worse and they haven't gone after them.'
I'm going to assume that's a reference to 'Hilary's emails' or Biden / Pence's documents. Can these people really not see the difference between realising some documents haven't been handed in and then taking all the right steps to do so versus deliberately taking documents, lieing that you don't have them, hiding them etc?
Tunnel vision. What makes you think this is the only evidence against Trump?The problem is, in a case like this you have to deal with the first amendment and the issue of freedom of speech. (And the courts tend to be very cautious about applying any restrictions, especially to political speech.)
You aren't paying attention; I don't blame you. It's unhealthy to be a news junkie like I am.Thus, unless a person gives clear and direct instructions (such as 'push past the barriers, break windows, hurt the police officers') there is a chance the courts may simply view it as protected speech.
"I told them to stop the certification/take the country back/etc.. I thought mass protests outside congress would be enough. I didn't expect them to break in" would probably be his legal defense.
There is a difference between "will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" and "Here's a gun... go shoot that guy".
(Note: I am not trying to defend Trump's actions. I think he is guilty of inciting the Jan6 terrorist attack.. I'm just saying it might be tricky to get a conviction on it.)
No, because they're ******* morons.
No, because they're ******* morons.
No. Just being deliberately obtuse.
Just saw this. trump is fundraising off the federal indictments. Surprised? Not at all.![]()
Tunnel vision. What makes you think this is the only evidence against Trump?
You aren't paying attention; I don't blame you. It's unhealthy to be a news junkie like I am.
He didn't just tell them to protest though he's been gaslighting to convince people that was all he did.
Trump has been leading the effort to stay in power since before the election. Pence surely testified what Trump said to him about refusing to certify the election and not to worry his minions would do the rest.
It sounds like Meadows is testifying against Trump. The biggest thing as long as we are talking about 1/6 was Trump's refusal to make any effort to stop the violence for almost 3 hours. There could be a lot more evidence Smith has that we don't know about.
Tunnel vision. What makes you think this is the only evidence against Trump?
You aren't paying attention; I don't blame you. It's unhealthy to be a news junkie like I am.
He didn't just tell them to protest though he's been gaslighting to convince people that was all he did.
Trump has been leading the effort to stay in power since before the election. Pence surely testified what Trump said to him about refusing to certify the election and not to worry his minions would do the rest.
It sounds like Meadows is testifying against Trump. The biggest thing as long as we are talking about 1/6 was Trump's refusal to make any effort to stop the violence for almost 3 hours. There could be a lot more evidence Smith has that we don't know about.
For sure, any Trump lawyer valuing their job will document anything that looks slightly illegal going forward.
Any future prosecutor will attempt to get a Judge to rule for a crime fraud exception.
KW says it's not easy to do that, despite the pundits saying it is.
Also, sure doesn't have to be smart to beat them, just shameless. She's already shown she has plenty of that.
Came across this screencap during the breaking news yesterday:[imgw=750]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230610/b3efff66942a154d026b89a04b8cac6e.jpg[/imgw]
Two of these have dropped indictments so far, third one has a likely timetable later this summer.
I never denied the possibility that there is additional evidence out there. (Not everything gets reported in the media and I am sure there is some stuff Smith is keeping close to his chest.)Tunnel vision. What makes you think this is the only evidence against Trump?The problem is, in a case like this you have to deal with the first amendment and the issue of freedom of speech. (And the courts tend to be very cautious about applying any restrictions, especially to political speech.)
Actually I pay a lot of attention, thank you very much... My opinions on the problems with the "free speech" aspect of Trump's culpability come from a youtube video by the Legal Eagle.You aren't paying attention; I don't blame you. It's unhealthy to be a news junkie like I am.
I know Trump and his minions have been trying to undermine democracy for years... denying that he lost, attempts to convince officials in Georgia to "find votes" (something I hope he gets nailed for soon), his role (whatever it is) in the fake electors scheme..He didn't just tell them to protest though he's been gaslighting to convince people that was all he did.
Trump has been leading the effort to stay in power since before the election.
From a moral point of view, Trump's refusal to try calming the crowd is evidence of his guilt. The question is, from a LEGAL point of view, does failure to act count as something a person can be blamed for.The biggest thing as long as we are talking about 1/6 was Trump's refusal to make any effort to stop the violence for almost 3 hours.
We don't have the 1/6 indictment yet. I take any opinion that 'free speech/difficult to convict' before the actual indictment with a grain of salt. IOW that opinion by Legal Eagle isn't worth much. Sorry but I find these Debbie Downer posts annoying.I never denied the possibility that there is additional evidence out there. (Not everything gets reported in the media and I am sure there is some stuff Smith is keeping close to his chest.)
I'm just saying the issue of "free speech" makes conviction more difficult, and simply saying things that appeal to the MAGAchud alone would not secure a conviction. ....
Regarding the danger of Trump having classified documents: photos of stacks and stacks of the boxes on the ballroom stage of Mar a Lago show that they were not secured. The boxes were stored there from January to March 2021. He had boxes in his bedroom, a bathroom and a shower. I can't find info as to where this bathroom and shower were; in his private quarters or elsewhere in Mar a Lago.
Article and photos here.
Even if they're in his private quarters, there had to be a dozen staff in and out of there each day. I mean there must be a plumber in there to unclog the toilet at least twice a day.
LOL! True!
Every reference I can find says "his bedroom, but only "a" bathroom and "a" shower. Nothing says it was in his bathroom or shower. I'm just curious where these were.
His private quarters may have more than one shower.
His private quarters may have more than one shower.
His private quarters may have more than one shower.
Wonder if he ever uses them for their intended purpose.
more curious why he had classified documents in the shower at all
more curious why he had classified documents in the shower at all