Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

[YGIFS 19458]

We went over this either in some UT undergrad GOV course or a side conversation in 1L CivPro or ConLaw after that.  

But it was something in that 1915 Burdick v. U.S. case that gave Ford the leeway to grant the blanket pardon for past offenses, even Nixon wasn't yet under indictment for them.  Because the strict constructionist interpretation of pardon powers had never really been tested, but just that issue skirting 60 years prior, Ford had that wide berth available.  I think it was originally intended for more specific crimes at some advanced level of prosecution.  But again, it was either Sager maybe at UT or some 1L or 2L professor I had who would have obviously know what the fuck they were talking about (although I did go to the lone 'right-leaning' law school in Northern California).  But that's how I remembered it.  One thing is for sure, there is about to be a deluge or legal experts coming out of the woodwork in droves to tell us exactly what another Presidential term for Trump would mean in powers to pardon himself (also never even been close to being tested in western history), what could another GOP president do in terms of pardons for the 4 main trials in myriad stages of prosecution, what if anything can be done to Manhattan or Georgia D.A.'s cases, etc.  

Yet another thing there aren't really any experts in because nobody really ever saw this as being even a remote possibility.  So much of what Trump is attempting to get away with technically does have a specific letter of the law prohibiting it simply because it never occurred to rational lawmakers and judges that a President would steal classified documents, hide them from NARA and DoJ for 18 months in golf course bathrooms, claim he de-classified them with mind control parlor tricks, and then stonewall investigators by moving them to another bathroom at another golf course in New Jersey.  Technically that's not illegal, but it is criminally fucking insane.  

[Gatorubet 30811]

I never got around to posting my thoughts about RICO in Georgia.   So quickly, the RICO (Racketeer Influenced  and Corrupt Organizations Act)  statute in Georgia has problems for Donny.

So, you need an enterprise theory and two predicate acts to file a RICO claim.  Think of the enterprise as the thing you want to influence.  Like the Mob infiltrating a labor union to steal the pension money and control the docks.   Or taking over the Georgia elections from the lawful government authorities.  

The "predicate acts" are crimes.   Almost always the crimes are wire fraud  - interstate phone calls or mail or email that are fraudulent. 

WIRE FRAUD - ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME

In a nutshell, fraud means knowingly or recklessly disseminating a lie for the sole purpose of depriving an unsuspecting victim of money, property, or something else that is valuable.

In order for a federal prosecutor to prove that wire fraud took place, they must demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant did all of the following:

• Engaged in a scheme to commit fraud, such as making a “material misrepresentation” or “deceitful omission” about something
• Utilized some sort of wire mechanism, such as a television, radio, or the internet, to  further the scheme; and
• Possessed the necessary “mens rea,” or mental state

 The same acts of mail and wire fraud that qualify as predicate acts under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) also qualify as predicate acts under Georgia's RICO.  

 To establish a statutory mail or wire fraud claim, a plaintiff need only show that the defendant (1) intentionally participates in a scheme to defraud another of money or property and (2) uses the mails or wires in furtherance of that scheme; reliance is not a required element.   This is key! You do not have to prove that anyone relied on your lying bullshit to their detriment, just that they said lying bullshit.  Trump is a lie factory.  So it is easy to find the acts.  Calls from Trump to Georgia officials will suffice.  Fake Elector schemes will suffice.  The fucking with the Georgia Grand Jury by going on TV and trying to delegitimize the Grand Jury Proceedings might suffice.  Going on Truth Social or Twitter to spread your lies about Georgia will meet that requirement.  And that culpability applies to anyone and everyone in the conspiracy, so a single call from Senator Ladybugs and a single call from Trump will suffice to meet the two acts.  The acts need to be in furtherance of a crime - and a felony.    

These are my best guesses:

§ 21-2-566  Interference with Primaries and Elections 

Under the Georgia Election Code—specifically, Ga. Code Ann. § 21-2-566—it is a felony to interfere with elections by engaging in one of eight enumerated acts: Any person who:

(8) Willfully tampers with any electors list, voter’s certificate, numbered list of voters, ballot box, voting machine, direct recording electronic (DRE) equipment, electronic ballot marker, or tabulating machine shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.

(Looking to the statutory text, the felony of willful tampering under Section 21-2-566(8) has two elements: (i) tampering with the specified materials and (ii) willfulness. Although “tampering” is not defined in this provision, Georgia law elsewhere explains that tampering with evidence occurs when a person (with the intent to obstruct justice) “knowingly destroys, alters, conceals, or disguises physical evidence or makes, devises, prepares, or plants false evidence.”)

 

§ 16-10-97. Intimidation or obstruction of jurors or court officers

(a) A person who by threat or force or by any threatening action, letter, or communication:

(1) Endeavors to intimidate or impede any grand juror or trial juror or any officer in or of any court of this state or any court of any county or municipality of this state or any officer who may be serving at any proceeding in any such court while in the discharge of such juror's or officer's duties;

 

§ 16-10-20. False statements and writings; concealment of facts

A person who knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; makes a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or makes or uses any false writing or document, knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of state government or of the government of any county, city, or other political subdivision of this state shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years, or both.

§ 16-10-93. Influencing witnesses

(a) A person who, with intent to deter a witness from testifying freely, fully, and truthfully to any matter pending in any court, in any administrative proceeding, or before a grand jury, communicates, directly or indirectly, to such witness any threat of injury or damage to the person, property, or employment of the witness or to the person, property, or employment of any relative or associate of the witness or who offers or delivers any benefit, reward, or consideration to such witness or to a relative or associate of the witness shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.

(b)(1) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to use intimidation, physical force, or threats; to persuade another person by means of corruption or to attempt to do so; or to engage in misleading conduct toward another person with intent to:

(A) Influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding;

(B) Cause or induce any person to:

(i) Withhold testimony or a record, document, or other object from an official proceeding;

(ii) Alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding;

(iii) Evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness or to produce a record, document, or other object in an official proceeding; or

(iv) Be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process; or

(C) Hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer, prosecuting attorney, or judge of this state of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a criminal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings.

 

§ 16-11-37. Terroristic threats and acts

(a) As used in this Code section, the term “hazardous substance” shall have the same meaning as set forth in Code Section 12-8-92.

(b)(1) A person commits the offense of a terroristic threat when he or she threatens to:

(A) Commit any crime of violence;

(B) Release any hazardous substance; or

(C) Burn or damage property.

(2) Such terroristic threat shall be made:

(A) With the purpose of terrorizing another;

(B) With the purpose of causing the evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation;

(C) With the purpose of otherwise causing serious public inconvenience; or

(D) In reckless disregard of the risk of causing the terror, evacuation, or inconvenience described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of this paragraph.

 (xxv) Perjury and other related offenses in violation of Article 4 of Chapter 10 of this title   - You know his crew will obstruct and lie.

 Finally, two points: 1)  Defendants may be liable for conspiracy to violate Georgia's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) if they knowingly and willfully join a conspiracy which itself contains a common plan or purpose to commit two or more predicate acts.  That means if Ladybugs or Rudy were working with Trump to get Georgia to go for Trump, just one phone call by them to Georgia Officials about the effort to change the vote for Trump, and they are co-conspirators under RICO.  2) Georgia has no continuity requirement.   By that I mean, if Big Joey the Crime Boss kills some union leader as a warning, that is just one murder. True, it is murder, but it is not RICO.  If Big Joey and his crew engage over a period of time in numerous acts to take over the union, eventually there are enough violations over enough time to meet the RICO continuity standard.  Plaintiffs do not have to show continuity to establish a pattern of racketeering activity under Georgia's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), unlike for federal RICO claims.    IOW, the shorter timeframe of the November to January effort to infiltrate the legitimacy of the Georgia Election is enough to satisfy the Georgia RICO statute. 

Even though Trump’s calls to Raffensperger, Watson, and Carr failed, that only hardened his resolve to keep trying, as evidenced by his recurring calls to Georgia officials, his consistent attempts to get the U.S. Department of Justice to intervene, and his advancement of the false electors plan.  The intricacy of the plan by the Trump campaign to solicit and submit false electors also evidences Trump’s intent. Memos from Trump attorneys—Eastman, Chesebro, and Ellis— all describe in detail how “alternate slate  of electors” could overturn the election and allow Trump to retain the presidency. In the weeks after the election, Trump personally called the head of the RNC and had Eastman ask for their help assembling groups of false electors in Georgia and other swing states that Trump had lost. Emails from his staffers bluntly describe the purpose as being “so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted.

I think it will be a wide ranging indictment, as every Trump loving asshole involved in Trump's false criticism of the Georgia election - and any plans to overturn Georgia's election thru calls or fake electors, makes each person who made just one call or who sent one email to anyone across state lines to help Trump with his attempt to overturn the Georgia election can be added as a co-conspirator for that single act - and have to lawyer up and defend the RICO conspiracy claim.  

 

Edited July 28, 2023 by Gatorubet
strike thru gremlins

[Js1 87319]

I ain’t reading all that. He boned or what?

[Gatorubet 30811]

I ain’t reading all that. He boned or what?

Georgia DA has statutes that can fuck Trump & Co as far as indictment.  One phone call to fuck with Georgia elections could get you charged.  Sort of a scary abuse of rights, actually, but it was designed to get the mob. 
I think lots of trumps friends will be included in a conspiracy case. Could be wrong. Just my wild ass guess. 

[tx 3 putt 78810]

👀👀👀

 

[Biff Tannen 46224]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

👀👀👀

 

Poor Eric.  Just being set up to take the fall.

[jimmyjazz 47361]

You don't know what's in those boxes.  Advantage, Trump.

[Hermanator 7716]

8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Poor Eric.  Just being set up to take the fall.

Is that the one that the indictment named as female trump relative?

[Brandywine 1330]

20 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Georgia DA has statutes that can fuck Trump & Co as far as indictment.  One phone call to fuck with Georgia elections could get you charged.  Sort of a scary abuse of rights, actually, but it was designed to get the mob. 
I think lots of trumps friends will be included in a conspiracy case. Could be wrong. Just my wild ass guess. 

That’s great! Now arrest him already!!! What the hell is taking so long?

[Biff Tannen 46224]

1 hour ago, Hermanator said:

Is that the one that the indictment named as female trump relative?

Oh, maybe actually.  Ivanka it is!

[Satchel 6983]

Still amazed at how fake alpha man can get so many schlubs with exotic last names to go to jail for him.

[C-Man 27843]

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-calls-for-jack-smith-and-meritless-garland-to-be-jailed/

Is this the Trump thread we were discussing his ridiculous nicknames for opponents? Well, here's one I haven't seen before -- Meritless Garland.

[YGIFS 19458]

25 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Still amazed at how fake alpha man can get so many schlubs with exotic last names to go to jail for him.

My god, they're gonna pin this on the 4th accomplice, Tavares.  It's true then, HEaven Must be missing an Angel

[Pods 7638]

50 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

👀👀👀

 

It's obviously Melania. The Trump kids are stupid, but they don't use that much broken English. 

"I saw you put boxes to Potus room. Just FYI and I will tell him as well. 

Not sure how many he wants to take on Friday on the plane. We will NOT have a room for them. Plane will be full with luggage."

Nauta thanks her and says "Good Afternoon Ma'am"

[Gil Bang 26272]

 

2 hours ago, Lurch said:

Probably not referring to legal rights, but rather IT permissions

Narrator:  The conversation did not remain between the two of them.

[Longhorn_Fan68 34108]

28 minutes ago, Pods said:

It's obviously Melania. The Trump kids are stupid, but they don't use that much broken English. 

"I saw you put boxes to Potus room. Just FYI and I will tell him as well. 

Not sure how many he wants to take on Friday on the plane. We will NOT have a room for them. Plane will be full with luggage."

Nauta thanks her and says "Good Afternoon Ma'am"

had the same thought. she's looking for a golden parachute at this point.

[Mdhorn 6166]

59 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Still amazed at how fake alpha man can get so many schlubs with exotic last names to go to jail for him.

It's fluid as to whether they even get paid. 

[WhatTheBuck 28943]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

that's in 3 weeks, holmes.

Shit, you’re right.  I was thinking next year for some reason.  Or just thinking relative to May without really thinking about a year. If the Georgia indictments come a week before the first debate, maybe they won’t go to trial before the end of the debates?

I don’t know how it will all shake out. I’ve been on record that Trump won’t show up at the debates. In light of what Claire McCaskill said, I’m inclined to agree that Trump would show up if the timing coincided with any of his trials so he could cause a delay in court.

Christ, fuck Cannon for scheduling the stolen documents case almost a year out. And no, Twice, I’m in no mood to hear how that’s perfectly normal and reasonable. I don’t care. It still blows. 

[atomheartbevo 90692]

6 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Re Trump showing up at the Republican debates.

Claire McCaskill made a good point on Deadline White House yesterday. If the timing of the debates coincides with Trump’s trial at all, Trump will definitely use the debates as an excuse to delay the trial(s) so he can participate. That’s the best predictor I’ve heard because he will definitely do anything he can to delay justice as long as possible. That would raise problems for the debate moderators because Trump would go with the intention of ranting about his victimhood, how the indictments are a hoax and politically motivated and blah, blah, blah. Then he’d put his GOP opponents in a position of either having to defend him or risk losing the support of the MAGA base. We could see who would be the first one on the debate stage to swear that if they’re elected President, they’ll pardon Trump for his crimes. I don’t know whether the moderators would try or even want to get Trump to only speak about the issues (like he’s ever done that before) and leave the grandstanding out of it.

I see the first debate is scheduled for August 23. That’s only three months after the scheduled start of the stolen classified documents trial and we know Trump will try to delay that. It’s right around the time we’re expecting indictments from Fani Willis in the case of trying to overturn the election in Georgia. We’re expecting indictments in the Jan. 6 insurrection/coup plot case any day now. We don’t know when that trial will occur but it’s reasonable to assume the debate schedule will present time conflicts that Trump could exploit in that case too. So while I don’t think Trump cares about debating his opponents at all, I could see him using the debates as an excuse to fuck with the schedules of his various court cases. 

He's a lot of things, but lest we forget, he's a reality TV star, who understands image/appearance.  Plus, he believes he's always the smartest guy in the room.

The debate is hosted/moderated by Fox News, and it's just over 3 weeks from now.  HIs rallies have been shit.  His reach on social media has been shit, but his pride won't let him back on twitter.  He knows he'll have fans there who will cheer him on.  He knows if he's not there, he will probably get trashed by one or more of them. At the very least, he knows it'll look like he's a afraid.

More importantly, this is a chance for him to completely take some/all of his competitors off the board and that he cannot risk anybody getting traction from the first debate and being portrayed as the anti-Trump. He has a serious fear of somebody being anointed as the alternative to Trump, which is why he's currently fixated on Meatball. 

And again, it's Fox News, and he's not pleased with them and their potential promotion of other GQP candidates. This is a way for him to get in there and shit on them and the other candidates.

[YGIFS 19458]

I know this is a meta-strawman, and I guess a judge could conceivably pay some credence to a "I need a week delay so I can participate in our democracy via Super Tuesday primaries"...but when you break it down...to miss a court appearance for a debate is basically saying, "I cannot be arraigned, and thus cannot be placed on trial because I have go make some jokes about 'Meatball Ron' and 'Chris Crocker Croc Christie' in front of some camcorders so my friends will send me $20, kthxbai."  

[atomheartbevo 90692]

4 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

I think there are two distinct groups within that 70 million.

One of them knows he did all this shit and they do not care.  They love him for it because he owns the libs and lets them be as awful as they want to be and they have found their tribe, so to speak.  The other one is made up of the morons.  They are easily deceived and they surround themselves in an echo chamber with others who think like they do.  They truly believe he is innocent and this is all politically motivated to take him down.

3 hours ago, C-Man said:

There is another group who supports him but maybe it's a subset of the group who knows he's crooked as shit but have no fucks to give. It's the Harlan Crows and other uber-rich who Trump makes policy to help because that's who he is. Granted, just about any Republican is going to do things to help this group but they've got to win first. Maybe they think Trump is the only one who can win on that side at this time.

I'm with C-Man, but I'd say the third group is bigger than just the rich, and I'd argue that it's the largest group within the 70 million - those who don't care as long as the candidate has an (R) next to their name. They would not have cared if Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz had won in 2016.

The true crazies (mentally ill - Qanon, etc.) and the ones that found their tribe because he lets them be awful and say shit that they would not have said publicly before he came along, they are the ones who showed up in 2020, who hadn't been voting in 2016. I know several of these people, and checking their voting records online, they weren't showing up and voting reliably prior to 2020.

My groups would be:

1. The largest group - people who don't care as long as there's an (R) next to the name. They probably don't show up reliably in primaries, but they do in the general.
2. Moderates, unenthusiastic types who maybe vote for Dems as much as Republicans, all coming down to who is on the ballot and who they hate the least. 
3. The ones who found their tribe after his election in 2016.  Many of them were not voting reliably prior to 2020. He lets them be awful, and they don't care what he did.
4. The mentally ill (anybody believing in Qanon is mentally ill) and the morons who are easily swayed and want to hear that everything bad in their lives is because of liberals.

My problem is that the last two groups have a lot of overlap, and both really came to prominence thanks to Trump encouraging them and their shitty behavior, and their connecting with like-minded people on social media.  You could argue that the last two groups should be treated the same - they won't show up unless somebody like Trump is there lighting their fuses and showing them the way - Ted Cruz or Meatball or Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney are not going to get these people excited.

The GOP recognizes that it can easily get the last two groups by just saying stupid shit, but at the cost of the second (moderates, etc.) who will flip over to (D) if the (D) is palatable to them (Biden was).  And the GOP needs Trump on the ballot for those last two groups.

I think Trump's indictment won't affect #1, #3, #4 at all.

[TexasEd 8271]

21 hours ago, BamaATL said:

My guess is that Smith would have rather had Carlos as a witness, gave him some time to come the conclusion that it would be in his best interests, and when he choose not to went ahead and indicted him as well, hence the delay on the charges with Nauta and Trump, which were inevitable.  If there is anyone else out there that hasn't turned states evidence, this ought serve as a wake up call that if don't, odds are the DOJ knows about you, has recordings/texts of criminal acts, and you will be charged for it.  It helps to have more witnesses.  

Exactly my take.  They tried to nudge him into going state's witness but he refused so they indict him to provide more incentive.  My guess is that was the same plan with Nuata but he clammed up.  The new guy is on video moving the boxes and his testimony under oath is that he never saw anything.  This is a slam dunk conviction.

They want Carlos to sing because he had the first hand convo with Trump.  Right now they have second hand info from Employee #4 that they were Trump's orders.  If Carlos flips they have 1st hand.

Edited July 28, 2023 by TexasEd

[BamaATL 16593]

So I've been thinking for a while that the initial crime of stealing the documents at Trump's direction, after he was informed it was illegal, and supervised by Meadows will eventually be charged.  For a while I've thought that eventually it will be tied to the rest of the document case but now I am beginning to believe that I've had that wrong.  Meadows is believed to now being a cooperating witness, and the initial theft of the documents came up in the Jan 6th investigation almost as a sidebar, if memory serves.  He was also seen at the grand jury all the way back in March or April.  Is it possible that Trump has long been indicted under seal for the initial theft, say all the way back in March or April?  The reason it hasn't been unsealed is because they wanted anything to do with Meadows sealed until the Jan 6th indictment?  

My thought process on this is that it would be a very straight forward case, with teeth.  Basically, the could easily prove Trump was advised what he was doing was illegal, he did it anyway, and they have multiple witnesses that are states evidence that confirm this, in addition for photos, etc,.  Additionally, because this isn't a complex legal case, but rather straight forward, the legal ability to kick the can down the road for discovery purposes would be more or less out the window, and he would have to face trial on it fairly quickly?  Also, for the prosecutor, this would result in this portion of the crime spree being dealt with in DC, while the additional crimes can be dealt with in Florida.  

 

[Biff Tannen 46224]

1 hour ago, BamaATL said:

So I've been thinking for a while that the initial crime of stealing the documents at Trump's direction, after he was informed it was illegal, and supervised by Meadows will eventually be charged.  For a while I've thought that eventually it will be tied to the rest of the document case but now I am beginning to believe that I've had that wrong.  Meadows is believed to now being a cooperating witness, and the initial theft of the documents came up in the Jan 6th investigation almost as a sidebar, if memory serves.  He was also seen at the grand jury all the way back in March or April.  Is it possible that Trump has long been indicted under seal for the initial theft, say all the way back in March or April?  The reason it hasn't been unsealed is because they wanted anything to do with Meadows sealed until the Jan 6th indictment?  

My thought process on this is that it would be a very straight forward case, with teeth.  Basically, the could easily prove Trump was advised what he was doing was illegal, he did it anyway, and they have multiple witnesses that are states evidence that confirm this, in addition for photos, etc,.  Additionally, because this isn't a complex legal case, but rather straight forward, the legal ability to kick the can down the road for discovery purposes would be more or less out the window, and he would have to face trial on it fairly quickly?  Also, for the prosecutor, this would result in this portion of the crime spree being dealt with in DC, while the additional crimes can be dealt with in Florida.  

 

I have no idea how realistic this is, but I fucking like it.

[Gatorubet 30811]

Also, Trump says that the FBI planted the documents, but he is on video telling crowds that he had every right to take them, and he wants them back and they should give them back because they’re his.  

[Gatorubet 30811]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Christ, fuck Cannon for scheduling the stolen documents case almost a year out. And no, Twice, I’m in no mood to hear how that’s perfectly normal and reasonable. I don’t care. It still blows. 

I honestly don’t get why everyone is so obsessed with the timing of this. And if somehow the trial happens quickly, and he is convicted, then you have the threat of an ex president being able to surrender a passport and be on bond pending his appeal. And even if they don’t let him out pending appeal, if all of the Republicans running for president have pledge to pardon him if they were elected, then he won’t have been in jail that damn long. What we need is a Democrat to win the presidential election in 2024. That fixes everything.  if the GOP wins POTUS in 2024, then it makes very little difference when his trial happens because he will be pardoned immediately .

If anything, we need the feds to step back, and let Georgia convict his ass on the state charge, for which nobody can pardon him.   Actually, as I type this, I wonder whether the asshole governor of Georgia can pardon Trump for state offenses.  

[Pato del Muerto 53615]

And then after they pardon him, they can make him speaker of the house and then the potus and vpotus resign. 
 

assuming he doesn’t just win the nom and general despite the legal goings on, and pardon himself for any crimes accused by libs against him past, present, and future. 

Edited July 28, 2023 by Pato del Muerto

[Beau Vine 55901]

 

[Red Five 41797]

It's funny, you never hear an actual defense for any of his crimes from these people. Just generic stupid bullshit and lies. 

 

[BamaATL 16593]

19 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I honestly don’t get why everyone is so obsessed with the timing of this. And if somehow the trial happens quickly, and he is convicted, then you have the threat of an ex president being able to surrender a passport and be on bond pending his appeal. And even if they don’t let him out pending appeal, if all of the Republicans running for president have pledge to pardon him if they were elected, then he won’t have been in jail that damn long. What we need is a Democrat to win the presidential election in 2024. That fixes everything.  if the GOP wins POTUS in 2024, then it makes very little difference when his trial happens because he will be pardoned immediately .

If anything, we need the feds to step back, and let Georgia convict his ass on the state charge, for which nobody can pardon him.   Actually, as I type this, I wonder whether the asshole governor of Georgia can pardon Trump for state offenses.  

Honestly, I'm not sure what Brian Kemp would do.  On the one hand, party line stuff.  On the other, if he truly has no plans in national politics (which I don't buy), he might not grant a pardon.  There isn't much love lost on the personal side between the two.   I would guess he likely would pardon.  

3 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

 

Kim hasn't made anyone harder in years.  

[Longhorn_Fan68 34108]

Just now, Red Five said:

It's funny, you never hear an actual defense for any of his crimes from these people. Just generic stupid bullshit and lies. 

 

because they know he's guilty as hell. they're just hoping he gets away with it. they have no backup plan. and that's why it's imperative he be punished.

[Gatorubet 30811]

9 minutes ago, Red Five said:

It's funny, you never hear an actual defense for any of his crimes from these people. Just generic stupid bullshit and lies. 

 

[atomheartbevo 90692]

31 minutes ago, Red Five said:

It's funny, you never hear an actual defense for any of his crimes from these people. Just generic stupid bullshit and lies. 

30 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

because they know he's guilty as hell. they're just hoping he gets away with it. they have no backup plan. and that's why it's imperative he be punished.

Yeah, they don't want to say anything concrete that could be easily disputed or would look even worse down the road depending on the court cases - better to just toss out generic bullshit.

[Js1 87319]

49 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Honestly, I'm not sure what Brian Kemp would do.  On the one hand, party line stuff.  On the other, if he truly has no plans in national politics (which I don't buy), he might not grant a pardon.  There isn't much love lost on the personal side between the two.   I would guess he likely would pardon.  

Isn’t it pretty much expected he will go for Ossoff’s seat in 2026? A Trump pardon after Georgia potential goes blue in 3 straight elections ain’t gonna win him no senate seat

Edited July 28, 2023 by Js1

[Willfully Horn 8294]

To the discussion of tfg supporters, I’d add that one grouping includes folks who actually want authoritarian rule. This group includes at least one billionaire, who is spending his wealth to facilitate that aim.

[Js1 87319]

14 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

To the discussion of tfg supporters, I’d add that one grouping includes folks who actually want authoritarian rule. This group includes at least one billionaire, who is spending his wealth to facilitate that aim.

Also includes Icono 

[Pato del Muerto 53615]

19 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

To the discussion of tfg supporters, I’d add that one grouping includes folks who actually want authoritarian rule. This group includes at least one billionaire, who is spending his wealth to facilitate that aim.

…from the correct authoritarian. 

[TwiceHorn 32121]

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

I honestly don’t get why everyone is so obsessed with the timing of this. And if somehow the trial happens quickly, and he is convicted, then you have the threat of an ex president being able to surrender a passport and be on bond pending his appeal. And even if they don’t let him out pending appeal, if all of the Republicans running for president have pledge to pardon him if they were elected, then he won’t have been in jail that damn long. What we need is a Democrat to win the presidential election in 2024. That fixes everything.  if the GOP wins POTUS in 2024, then it makes very little difference when his trial happens because he will be pardoned immediately .

If anything, we need the feds to step back, and let Georgia convict his ass on the state charge, for which nobody can pardon him.   Actually, as I type this, I wonder whether the asshole governor of Georgia can pardon Trump for state offenses.  

Yes, he can, but Kemp doesn't seem to be a Trump fan.  If he's still in office.

[The Dog 44874]

Fuck Trump:

Quote

This person also said that De Oliveria’s family was pretty certain that he did not realize the consequences of what Trump was telling him to do when he asked him to delete the security footage, and that given his lack of money, De Oliveria was probably just doing anything that Trump told him to do. 

“He isn’t familiar with how the government here works and he was probably just being loyal to his boss who is paying his bills,” the person told CNN. “The family feels like he got trapped.”

 

[TwiceHorn 32121]

2 hours ago, BamaATL said:

So I've been thinking for a while that the initial crime of stealing the documents at Trump's direction, after he was informed it was illegal, and supervised by Meadows will eventually be charged.  For a while I've thought that eventually it will be tied to the rest of the document case but now I am beginning to believe that I've had that wrong.  Meadows is believed to now being a cooperating witness, and the initial theft of the documents came up in the Jan 6th investigation almost as a sidebar, if memory serves.  He was also seen at the grand jury all the way back in March or April.  Is it possible that Trump has long been indicted under seal for the initial theft, say all the way back in March or April?  The reason it hasn't been unsealed is because they wanted anything to do with Meadows sealed until the Jan 6th indictment?  

My thought process on this is that it would be a very straight forward case, with teeth.  Basically, the could easily prove Trump was advised what he was doing was illegal, he did it anyway, and they have multiple witnesses that are states evidence that confirm this, in addition for photos, etc,.  Additionally, because this isn't a complex legal case, but rather straight forward, the legal ability to kick the can down the road for discovery purposes would be more or less out the window, and he would have to face trial on it fairly quickly?  Also, for the prosecutor, this would result in this portion of the crime spree being dealt with in DC, while the additional crimes can be dealt with in Florida.  

 

The statute for "removal" of classified information is https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1924, which provides:

(a)

Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

 

I don't know the case law on this, nor can I recall the facts of being "advised that what he was doing was illegal."  I think that really pertains more to those are Presidential Records and there is no criminal offense for removing Presidential Records.

 

So, again, intent is going to be tough, possibly.  First, you'd have to show that he knew that there were classified documents among the dozens of boxes that he took and that he intended to remove those.  Then, there may be a bit of a bomb in the "with the intent to retain."  Certainly, subsequent events show an intent to retain, but he may have needed that intention at the time he took the documents, and that could be a toughie.

 

In a case where someone removes discrete classified documents, as by shoving them down their pants to take them out of the building and home, that intent is not so problematic.  It could be here.

Edited July 29, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[BamaATL 16593]

54 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Isn’t it pretty much expected he will go for Ossoff’s seat in 2026? A Trump pardon after Georgia potential goes blue in 3 straight elections ain’t gonna win him no senate seat

I haven't heard anything local that would indicate he has Ossoff's seat in mind, of course that might be unsaid and his intent.  However, I am 2nd hand aware of one Kemp's best friends privately encouraging him to run for POTUS after the initial dust has settled from Trump and the other group of doofus candidates slug it out.  The thought is, why expose yourself to the general nonsense early in the game if you are serious and not trying to sell books.  Think early next year, when a lot of candidates have washed out.  I am only aware of one side of this, and it's certainly not Kemp's thoughts or thought process.  I am just saying I am very aware that there are people in his orbit encouraging this.  

I will say this, he is a dangerous radical right wing lunatic, do not fall for his aw shucks I'm just a country boy act; he's politically astute.  He will attract big dollars from the big boys if he does run because he is a popular Governor in a purple state, and after DeSantis has proven to be completely DOA there is a shit load of money out there waiting to find the next lunatic they think can have crossover appeal.  

To be honest, Trump as their nomination doesn't scare me because it will only further energize democratic voters; but a lesser known and largely unvetted right wing lunatic like Kemp scares me because he will do far more damage than an idiot like Trump ever could if elected (because he is politically astute), and it might be under the radar enough to not get our base motivated.  Therein lies the danger to me.  

[BamaATL 16593]

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The statute for "removal" of classified information is https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1924, which provides:

(a)

Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

 

I don't know the case law on this, nor can I recall the facts of being "advised that what he was doing was illegal."  I think that really pertains more to those are Presidential Records and there is no criminal offense for removing Presidential Records.

 

So, again, intent is going to be tough, possibly.  First, you'd have to show that he knew that there were classified documents among the dozens of boxes that he took and that he intended to remove those.  Then, there may be a bit of a bomb in the "with the intent to retain."  Certainly, subsequent events show an intent to retain, but he may have needed that intention at the time he took the documents, and that could be a toughie.

 

In a case where someone removes discrete classified documents, as by shoving them down their pants to take them out of the building and home, that intent is not so problematic.  It could be here.

Would each file be looked at as a criminal count?  372 counts or whatever would have a nice ring to it.  

I also feel like the Chief of Staff, the White House Lawyers, etc telling you that you can't take something and doing it anyway because you just want to ignore the law would constitute intent, but my beliefs aren't necessarily tied to legal provable intent.  

[tx 3 putt 78810]

Bold strategy …

 

[atomheartbevo 90692]

6 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Bold strategy …

 

 

[TwiceHorn 32121]

1 hour ago, BamaATL said:

Would each file be looked at as a criminal count?  372 counts or whatever would have a nice ring to it.  

I also feel like the Chief of Staff, the White House Lawyers, etc telling you that you can't take something and doing it anyway because you just want to ignore the law would constitute intent, but my beliefs aren't necessarily tied to legal provable intent.  

Counts don't really help much, except that each one represents an independent chance for conviction. 

Even if convicted on eleventy billion counts and sentenced on all of them the sentences would in all likelihood run concurrently, not consecutively. 

And, again, I am not sure the evidence is clear that those various parties were talking about classified material as opposed to presidential records. 

And they would have to show each document was knowingly removed, with the present (most likely) intention to retain. Subsequent discovery and retention violates 793 but not 1924.

[Neonmoon 38130]

[Longhorn_Fan68 34108]

sounds like a threat. lock him up!

but, really, who is he and why should I give a shit? also, what? the message makes no sense, other than the veiled threat

[BamaATL 16593]

4 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

You know, there are other ways to announce that you are Trump's new cocounsel.  

[Beau Vine 55901]

18 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Yes, that's the kind of message and twitter username that you'd expect from a stable, serious attorney.

Edited July 29, 2023 by Beau Vine

[Beau Vine 55901]

Speaking of stable and serious...