• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Trump indicted for 2020 election interference

best to wait to see what his co-conspirators had to say about his intentions in their depositions
 
So if Trump gets in again we just roll over and play dead.
What part of "Trump has pretty much said if he gets in again he will make himself a dictator" don't you get?

If he could have, he would have last time. There is no Trump army. There is a Trump mob but those are not the same things.
 
To be fair, Trump thought last time there were no checks and balances, he was God-Emperor. He found out there were some checks and balances that creaked, groaned and almost snapped under his pressure. What he is now stating is he sees those checks and balances and will have them removed so he can rule as he wants, and he has a pretty compliant Republican party to assist him in this.
 
I wonder if the MAGAts understand that they are not the only Americans who can buy guns...

If dudalb's "civil war" really does break out, there is plenty of well-armed opposition to these hillbillies, many of them with recent military training. Just one well-aimed sniper shot from a convenient grassy knoll, or a drone strike controlled from further afar, and Donny's "reign" will come to a sudden and irreversible Sopranos-style end.

So what then, MAGAts? The core of your belief system, the god-king whose ascendancy was your only goal, is dust. Still fight on? If so, what for? He ain't coming back, so there's nothing to gain! Is there another "Trump" in the wings to take up the fight? Not if they saw what happened to the last one!
 
With these Trump threats against prosecutors (he will come "after them") wouldn't it be best to just arrest him? He after all agreed to no threats. That would speed up getting his case to court.
 
I wonder if the MAGAts understand that they are not the only Americans who can buy guns...

If dudalb's "civil war" really does break out, there is plenty of well-armed opposition to these hillbillies, many of them with recent military training. Just one well-aimed sniper shot from a convenient grassy knoll, or a drone strike controlled from further afar, and Donny's "reign" will come to a sudden and irreversible Sopranos-style end.

So what then, MAGAts? The core of your belief system, the god-king whose ascendancy was your only goal, is dust. Still fight on? If so, what for? He ain't coming back, so there's nothing to gain! Is there another "Trump" in the wings to take up the fight? Not if they saw what happened to the last one!

What the Trumptrash don't understand, nor do those wringing hands about a civil war is that a gun isn't combat power. Combat power is lethality in an organized, trained, disciplined force. They're still a domestic enemy but they aren't an army.

As the enemy learned from the enemy in Michigan, they lack cohesion, discipline and training. Once they did anything above a few people they got infiltrated and fell apart.

The members of the enemy with gun tend towards the unintelligent, lack training, have no discipline and have to organizational skills of a chimp on acid. They can't bring their individually armed and equipped members together and strike a center of gravity.

When the enemy mob attack the Capitol, they stopped when they encountered a smaller force that was disciplined and organized. That force only fired a few rounds (too few, Ashley Babbit was a good start).
 
What the Trumptrash don't understand, nor do those wringing hands about a civil war is that a gun isn't combat power. Combat power is lethality in an organized, trained, disciplined force. They're still a domestic enemy but they aren't an army.

As the enemy learned from the enemy in Michigan, they lack cohesion, discipline and training. Once they did anything above a few people they got infiltrated and fell apart.

The members of the enemy with gun tend towards the unintelligent, lack training, have no discipline and have to organizational skills of a chimp on acid. They can't bring their individually armed and equipped members together and strike a center of gravity.

When the enemy mob attack the Capitol, they stopped when they encountered a smaller force that was disciplined and organized. That force only fired a few rounds (too few, Ashley Babbit was a good start).

The assumption here seems to be that Trump’s supporters will try to start a civil war by opposing the lawful election of Biden. What about the converse scenario, where Trump is elected and installs loyalists in every post he can, who then proceed to dismantle the machinery of democracy, followed by Trump calling off the 2028 election on the pretext of a manufactured crisis? Would anyone rebel? Might that be the start of a civil war?

Dave
 
The assumption here seems to be that Trump’s supporters will try to start a civil war by opposing the lawful election of Biden. What about the converse scenario, where Trump is elected and installs loyalists in every post he can, who then proceed to dismantle the machinery of democracy, followed by Trump calling off the 2028 election on the pretext of a manufactured crisis? Would anyone rebel? Might that be the start of a civil war?

Dave

That scenario, yes. However, the people he'd be displacing spent 20 years fighting two asymmetric wars. The mid career leadership would not go along with Trump en mass. Some would but not everyone. DoJ would be crippled as would much of DHS, the DoD and State.
 
And how were these people supposed to get into the Senate chamber - where they were not legally allowed and was guarded by law enforcement - non-violently?

Bump for Hercules56.

I’m still wondering how your scenario of the Trump mob getting past armed law enforcement and accessing the Senate chamber plays out non-violently.
 
And how were these people supposed to get into the Senate chamber - where they were not legally allowed and was guarded by law enforcement - non-violently?

Do we know for a fact that the electoral count was not normally open to public viewing?
 
I am thinking more of armed resistence to Trump trying to make himself a dictator if he gets back in..which he has pretty much said he will do.

So if Trump wins the election the Democrats should stage an armed coup to depose him? Why wait for him to win the election why not just arrest him now? Did Trump say that if he is re-elected he would institute martial law and dissolve Congress??
 
Last edited:
Do we know for a fact that the electoral count was not normally open to public viewing?

I think it's next to the rule that says the President taking a dump in the morning is not normally open for public viewing.

Eta: the public viewing galleries are not open to the public during joint meetings or joint sessions. Even during normal public viewing times for the galleries, a pass is required and secured in advance. No, Trump did not think they had secured passes. Yes, he knew he was inciting imminent lawless action.

https://www.visitthecapitol.gov/visit/know-before-you-go/watching-congress-in-session
 
Last edited:
I think it's next to the rule that says the President taking a dump in the morning is not normally open for public viewing.

Eta: the public viewing galleries are not open to the public during joint meetings or joint sessions. Even during normal public viewing times for the galleries, a pass is required and secured in advance. No, Trump did not think they had secured passes. Yes, he knew he was inciting imminent lawless action.

https://www.visitthecapitol.gov/visit/know-before-you-go/watching-congress-in-session

Good to know. This info will be used to refute any claims that he wanted his fans to go to the Senate and House chambers and peacefully make their feelings heard.
 
Good to know. This info will be used to refute any claims that he wanted his fans to go to the Senate and House chambers and peacefully make their feelings heard.

Honestly, I think Trump and company thought this would all fly as...an acceptable form of American protest, if not conventional, if you take my meaning. Like, he thought that the tradition of respecting protesters who bend the rules would lend credibility to VP Pence "honoring the wishes of the people".

Lucky for us, Pence showed some backbone on J6, and realized that a handful of criminal actors did not reflect the will of the people. He did the right thing on game day, and for that, he will always have my respect. If he had played along (and he could have plausibly done so), the endgame might not have been pretty.
 
Trump has pled not guilty.

<snip>
With no intention of being a grammar scold, I’ve long found it interesting that the past tense of some verbs is somewhat counterintuitive. The correct form of the above should actually be “Trump has pleaded not guilty.”

There are exceptions galore. The past tense of “Trump drinks Not Guilty IPA” is not “Trump drinked” but “Trump drank a pint of that frosty beverage.”

A reminder to be careful. You’ll want to say Trump was hanged, not hung.
 
The arguments Trump's lawyer made on FOX was ridiculous with absolutely no support in law. It also was tantamount to a full confession.

The lawyer was right only about one thing. Trump had every right to avail himself to the courts. And he did that sixty four times with only one single insignificant win. The rest he lost. They weren’t even close.

He didn’t have a right to petition elections officials to change the outcome. He didn’t have the right to arrange slates of phony electors. He didn't have a right to petition Congress to pause certification of the vote.

Finally the argument that Trump's indictment that he attempted to overturn the last election is tantamount to election interference in a future election is absurd. The election isn't for 15 months. One cannot use the excuse they are running for office as a loophole to avoid accountability.
 
Good to know. This info will be used to refute any claims that he wanted his fans to go to the Senate and House chambers and peacefully make their feelings heard.

Which brings us back to the question of how “fight like hell” in the specific context that Trump used it could be interpreted non-violently.
 
With no intention of being a grammar scold, I’ve long found it interesting that the past tense of some verbs is somewhat counterintuitive. The correct form of the above should actually be “Trump has pleaded not guilty.”

There are exceptions galore. The past tense of “Trump drinks Not Guilty IPA” is not “Trump drinked” but “Trump drank a pint of that frosty beverage.”

A reminder to be careful. You’ll want to say Trump was hanged, not hung.

According to Stormy, Trump is definitely "not hung."
 
With no intention of being a grammar scold, I’ve long found it interesting that the past tense of some verbs is somewhat counterintuitive. The correct form of the above should actually be “Trump has pleaded not guilty.”


Dictionary.com says, "pleaded or pled." Ahddictionary.com says "pleaded, pled, or plead."
 
With no intention of being a grammar scold, I’ve long found it interesting that the past tense of some verbs is somewhat counterintuitive. The correct form of the above should actually be “Trump has pleaded not guilty.”

There are exceptions galore. The past tense of “Trump drinks Not Guilty IPA” is not “Trump drinked” but “Trump drank a pint of that frosty beverage.”

A reminder to be careful. You’ll want to say Trump was hanged, not hung.

Plead or pled is acceptable. However, 'hanged' vs 'hung' is one of my grammar pet peeves! As is the past tense of drag is not drug; it's dragged. He wasn't 'drug' across the floor.
Off topic done, mods!
 
- He also used phrases like "fight like hell", and "you won't have a republican party if you don't get tougher". Phrasing like 'fight' and 'tough' are contradictory to the phrasing of 'peaceful'.

- He suggested they disconnect the metal detectors at his rallies (because "they aren't here to hurt me", hinting that he knew the crowd had weapons)

- He knew what his supporters were like (remember, once of them sent a pipe bomb to media organizers after all his "fake news" claims). "My pit bull has rabies, but I told him to sit and be good, so I can't be blamed if he attacks someone"

- He has called for violence in the past (for example telling people that if the assault protestors at his rallies he will pay for their defense). Even if he called for "peace" THIS time, some of his supporters probably remember the times where he did say "violence is good'.

- once violence DID occur he did nothing to curtail it for over an hour (no tweets asking people to pull back, no emergency new broadcast asking people to leave the capitol building, etc.) despite being urged to by multiple people. Which means that at the very least he approved of the violence while it was happening. "I didn't initially want them to beat up police but its cool that they did" isn't a very good defense.

- At the very end, after multiple police officers were assaulted, after windows were smashed and feces smeared on the walls, he told the protestors he "loved them". And he has suggested he will pardon some/all of the terrorists.
Turn off the metal detectors, they aren't after me.

And the clincher, waiting almost 3 hours to put a stop to it.

Oh, and there was a purposeful effort to limit police backup IIRC from the committee testimony.
Point 87 of the indictment document has Trump repeatedly urging his supporters in late December to go to Washington on Jan 6 to protest the "stolen election". "Will be wild".

The "fight like hell" is not a lone item, which is good for the prosecution.
My favorites are the fact that he not only didn't call on the coup-attempters to stop at first, but was giggling with giddy glee as he watched it on TV, plus some more things from his background before his speech there that day. Along with his history of repeatedly advocating for violence in his previous public appearances on his endless campaign even while he was already President, there's also the time he predicted that his side would win a civil war because they're the ones with the guns, and, best of all, his idea, before he got elected, of how to solve the problem if Hillary had won: that it could be handled by the "Second Amendment people".

Even if he or his writers had carefully written his January 6th speech to be non-violent for a change, there would still be the fact that he was the same person who'd spent years advocating for violence including with deadly weapons before that, and that his audience was people who'd spent those years lapping it up.

You can lead a horse to a punchline…
After doing so, would you have led the horse, or would you have lead the horse?

Seeing the extremely common "lead" for the past always grates on my nerves, but it's understandable in a way. The past form of "read" isn't "red".
 
Apparently Judge Chutkan ordered Trump to respond to Jack Smith’s Motion for Protective Order by 5 pm on Monday, August 7.
 
No doubt the Trump cultists will use the statements in Trump's January 6th speech about being "peaceful" etc., has a way of getting Trump off the hook for being responsible.

However the rest of Trump's speech certainly was very much a rabble rousing speech about "taking back our country" etc, etc. So bluntly in context all the peaceful remarks strike me has little more than attempts at plausible deniability.

Oh and the main reason I do not take those peacful statements seriously is Trump's behavior after the mob stormed the Capital. He refused to do much of anything and when he did it was half assed ineffectual, while at the same ti me tweeting his anger at Mike Pence disapointing him among other crap. The only effective intervention was when Trump told them to leave after the whole thing had clearly failed from his point of view, but he still told them he loved them.

Afterwards Trump continued to be miffed about how various Republicans, (Mike Pence for instance), had failed him.
 
Tweet with summary

1. Yambo issues a threat on Social Media.

2. Within hours, DOJ seeks a protective order to prevent Yambo from leaking sensitive discovery materials to the public.

3. Judge orders Yambo to respond to the protective order by Monday.

4. Yambo quickly files to seek a delay in responding to the protective order, claiming he doesn’t have the time to review it.

5. DOJ claps back at Yambo, stating he found time to file for a delay, but not time to review a 5-page order.

You’re all caught up

https://twitter.com/7Veritas4/status/1687919300248498176?t=v-4SgFZxVMRR6mlwBZVW1Q&s=19
 
Yes, there's also "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
I don't believe (I could be wrong) that initiating the riot is key to the charges.

Newsweek summary
... four felony charges in this case, for conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; conspiracy against rights and obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.

Obstructing the official proceeding includes a wide range of acts:
The whole fake electors scheme
Successfully pressuring Senators to refuse to certify the electors
Unsuccessfully pressuring Pence to refuse to certify the electors
Pressuring Raffensperger to fake the vote count in Georgia
There might be evidence Trump called other election officials in other states
Not acting to stop the Capitol riot​
The evidence he recruited the mob and riled them up might be there. But it's clear to me that inciting the riot is not needed to convict Trump of obstructing the official proceeding.
 
I don't believe (I could be wrong) that initiating the riot is key to the charges. Newsweek summary


Obstructing the official proceeding includes a wide range of acts:
The whole fake electors scheme
Successfully pressuring Senators to refuse to certify the electors
Unsuccessfully pressuring Pence to refuse to certify the electors
Pressuring Raffensperger to fake the vote count in Georgia
There might be evidence Trump called other election officials in other states
Not acting to stop the Capitol riot​
The evidence he recruited the mob and riled them up might be there. But it's clear to me that inciting the riot is not needed to convict Trump of obstructing the official proceeding.

I agree.
 
With these Trump threats against prosecutors (he will come "after them") wouldn't it be best to just arrest him? He after all agreed to no threats. That would speed up getting his case to court.

And I wonder why they don't. Trump is intimidating. Not his physical threat or even the threat of his gazillion lone wolves out there, but it appears a lot of people are afraid of taking that huge step of actually locking up a former POTUS. Our country has simply never had this happen before.

It has some echoes of the Civil War, not the war itself. I don't believe for a minute Trump controls a very big army of minions. It might be an issue if too many of his minions are in the police, nat'l guard and the military branches. That remains to be seen.

But at the moment, what is causing so many officials to walk on eggshells around the man? Maybe it's because he has a significantly amplified voice.I think no one wants to be the one to take the first step.
 
Last edited:
Tweet with summary

1. Yambo issues a threat on Social Media.

2. Within hours, DOJ seeks a protective order to prevent Yambo from leaking sensitive discovery materials to the public.

3. Judge orders Yambo to respond to the protective order by Monday.

4. Yambo quickly files to seek a delay in responding to the protective order, claiming he doesn’t have the time to review it.

5. DOJ claps back at Yambo, stating he found time to file for a delay, but not time to review a 5-page order.

You’re all caught up

https://twitter.com/7Veritas4/status/1687919300248498176?t=v-4SgFZxVMRR6mlwBZVW1Q&s=19

Interesting, but who is Yambo?
 
Apparently Judge Chutkan ordered Trump to respond to Jack Smith’s Motion for Protective Order by 5 pm on Monday, August 7.

So the threat is not immediately urgent though it is apparently somewhat urgent. And even with that the defense team wants an extension? For what? :rolleyes:


The federal government is looking for this order to be put in place before turning information over to Trump’s legal team as part of the discovery process. ...

The judge ordered Trump’s team to respond by Monday, but they responded with a motion Saturday asking for an extension of their time to file a response.

PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING DISCOVERY AND AUTHORIZING DISCLOSURE OF GRAND JURY TESTIMONY

It's instruction, no specific consequences. The judge looks to be relying on implicit threat to the defense attorneys. Basically anything disclosed to Trump must be done in a secluded location and Trump can't have any copies :sdl: (sorry that made me laugh) and can't take notes.
 
Last edited:
So the threat is not immediately urgent though it is apparently somewhat urgent. And even with that the defense team wants an extension? For what? :rolleyes:
Judge just denied Trump's attorneys request for a 3 day extension. Monday's deadline still stands.
 
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.

No, trying to subvert the democratic and Constitutional process for choosing our leaders, is what is dangerous to our democracy. Trump definitely committed election fraud and crimes.
 
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.

What? Holding Trump accountable for attacking democracy is dangerous to our democracy?

Seems to me Trump is the real danger to our democracy. But feel free to explain what you mean.
 
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.


Of course it is. Trump's a joke, but we mustn't let the fact that he's completely, fantastically ridiculous, blind us to the fact that he does pose a very real threat to democracy.

I can excuse those who originally voted for him, absolutely. But those who still, even now, support him, should be thoroughly ashamed. There can be no excuse, short of being literally retarded, for still continuing to support this ...grotesquerie.
 
Back
Top Bottom