Jump to content

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

Cairn Horn88

By Cairn Horn88
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31453

Posted
Posted

This one, unlike the Mar A Lago case, is going to have some "presidential" shit in it.  Immunity, etc.  But, I don't see a First Amendment defense working at all.  If it was just the 1/6 speech, that might be a different story, but it's not.

Nor will an advice of counsel defense work, because he picked and chose his counsel and ignored the ones that told him what he didn't want to hear.  And, she's not going to let them re-litigate election fraud, unless they come up with something from prior to January 6 that's credible and was known to Trump at the time, which aint happening.

I don't expect Chutkan to tolerate much foolishness here.  This won't be burdened by CIPA and classified information.  It will be interesting to see when she sets a trial date, etc. and compare it to Cannon, but I think the two cases are pretty apples and oranges.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 28.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

HillCountryBevo
HillCountryBevo

Imagine your basis of hating Trump is because of mean tweets, January 6 and “hush money” trial all because liberal media is crooked. Fuck right off. This is my last post in this forum  dumb fucki

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

When you're a court, you just grab their asset, and they let you do it!

HillCountryBevo
HillCountryBevo

Bye bitch. Enjoy living in literal hell if your man Biden is re elected

Posted Images

Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45678

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

We all know that what they say among themselves, what they say to the public, and what they say to the courts are 3 independent lines of thought. 

In all reality, their argument is: well, it may be illegal, but it SHOULDN'T BE so therefore, it's ok for them and their god.  That's it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Constant

Constant 6731

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Conspiracy to defraud the United States….by a sitting president. A charge that could probably be applied to 1,000 other events that occurred over his time in office. Every single one of us ought to be bringing 10 people to the polls with us. This piece of shit can not win. 

  • Hook 'Em 15
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mchookem

mchookem 16330

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

I just want to say how fucking INSANE it is that we have to sit here and watch people try to justify any of this.

If I were a person on camera on any rational news network, I would not be able to not bury my head in my hands and just scream out, "WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE TALKING ABOUT!?!?!"

The Republican argument is fully irrational, disingenuous, and insane.  The media needs to (and I've been saying this since 2016) call people LIARS and FRAUDS.  We cannot continue down this path of "huh, well, maybe..."  NO!  This is fucking nuts.  Fuck these people.

 

giphy (1) (3).gif

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30226

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Weismann on MSNBC with the money observation: Trump has now been indicted for criminal conduct he did prior to being elected, his criminal conduct while he was President, and his criminal conduct after he left office.  

The hitherto unknown POTUS criminal Hat Trick. 

  • Hook 'Em 9
  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dnaguy

Dnaguy 11948

Posted
Posted
Just now, Gatorubet said:

Weismann on MSNBC with the money observation: Trump has now been indicted for criminal conduct he did prior to being elected, his criminal conduct while he was President, and his criminal conduct after he left office.  

The hitherto unknown POTUS criminal Hat Trick. 

spacer.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pods

Pods 7552

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Weismann on MSNBC with the money observation: Trump has now been indicted for criminal conduct he did prior to being elected, his criminal conduct while he was President, and his criminal conduct after he left office.  

The hitherto unknown POTUS criminal Hat Trick. 

tenor.gif?itemid=5662253&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76926

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

I just want to say how fucking INSANE it is that we have to sit here and watch people try to justify any of this.

If I were a person on camera on any rational news network, I would not be able to not bury my head in my hands and just scream out, "WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE TALKING ABOUT!?!?!"

The Republican argument is fully irrational, disingenuous, and insane.  The media needs to (and I've been saying this since 2016) call people LIARS and FRAUDS.  We cannot continue down this path of "huh, well, maybe..."  NO!  This is fucking nuts.  Fuck these people.

Mental gymnastics 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30226

Posted
Posted

This is probably a real reach, Double Jeopardy wise, but can a criminal law-dawg opine whether the elements of inciting an insurrection and sedition are so significantly different than the current charges - so that after this conviction, Trump could later be charged with his insurrection formenting?

It was entirely correct not to charge Trump with sedition or insurrection, as any charge that bars him from running for POTUS again would be seen as purely vindictive, and for a political purpose….like he bloviates all the time.  So I guess in my fever dream, after a few trials and convictions to show everyone what a piece of shit he is, and after a Democrat is elected in 2024, we do J6 Boogaloo, the revisit. 

It sort of looks like the more serious charges would be precluded, because the elements of his current charges appear pretty much lesser included offenses-ish.    But I don’t know shit about criminal law

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6938

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:


I love Watters question of “how are you gonna prove he knew there was no election fraud?” What. A fucking. Choad. The fucking indictment (and that’s just the indictment, there’s a lot more than that) is page after page of EVIDENCE that Trump 1) knew exactly that, and was told over and over and over again, and 2) he never had any contrary FACTS (that is, facts that actually supported fraud).
Trump had person after person telling him “sir, the moon is not made of cheese. It isn’t. We’ve had astronauts go there, they verify that it’s not made of cheese. There is zero evidence that it is made of cheese.” And Watters is asking “oh yeah, we’ll how can you prove that Trump knew the moon isn’t made of cheese?!?!” I mean, maybe their defense is “everyone knows he’s such a complete fucking moron that he wouldn’t believe water is wet even as he’s drowning in it.” Ok. Cool. Hook ‘em.

I think Smith has secured the cooperation of one or two within Trump’s orbit who will testify to the fact that he privately acknowledged losing the election.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BamaATL

BamaATL 16593

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Weismann on MSNBC with the money observation: Trump has now been indicted for criminal conduct he did prior to being elected, his criminal conduct while he was President, and his criminal conduct after he left office.  

The hitherto unknown POTUS criminal Hat Trick. 

It's a Presidential Switzer Slam!

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31453

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

This is probably a real reach, Double Jeopardy wise, but can a criminal law-dawg opine whether the elements of inciting an insurrection and sedition are so significantly different than the current charges - so that after this conviction, Trump could later be charged with his insurrection formenting?

It was entirely correct not to charge Trump with sedition or insurrection, as any charge that bars him from running for POTUS again would be seen as purely vindictive, and for a political purpose….like he bloviates all the time.  So I guess in my fever dream, after a few trials and convictions to show everyone what a piece of shit he is, and after a Democrat is elected in 2024, we do J6 Boogaloo, the revisit. 

It sort of looks like the more serious charges would be precluded, because the elements of his current charges appear pretty much lesser included offenses-ish.    But I don’t know shit about criminal law

 

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383 Rebellion or Insurrection

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384 Seditious Conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

Insurrection would probably not be charged because there are serious doubts that the statute excludes activity protected by the First Amendment, in a general case, and is thus unconstitutional.

The "by force" part of seditious conspiracy probably excludes Trump unless he gets closely connected to the individuals applying force or attempting to, e.g. Oath Keepers.

Obstruction is a 20 year felony, so "serious" is rather a matter of perspective.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8552

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

You know, I think I'd be ok with this sort of justice system if whenever someone was dead to rights on something, they at least got a broadside on the jaw from a waffle iron.  Like, immediately.  Oh, you were caught on camera?  WANG!  

Ok, now go get your trial.  

kabong-el-kabong.gif.feb2f59b346fa56eccf0b443526172da.gif

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30226

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

So no government entity should be able to punish anyone for anything they say? The first amendment is that broad, is it?

“Like I said to that lady, ‘take off your clothes and don’t make me have to use this pistol.’   It’s my right as an American to have free speech. How dare you,Jack Smith, deprive me of my free speech …you are unethical!”

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6938

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:


I love Watters question of “how are you gonna prove he knew there was no election fraud?” What. A fucking. Choad. The fucking indictment (and that’s just the indictment, there’s a lot more than that) is page after page of EVIDENCE that Trump 1) knew exactly that, and was told over and over and over again, and 2) he never had any contrary FACTS (that is, facts that actually supported fraud).
Trump had person after person telling him “sir, the moon is not made of cheese. It isn’t. We’ve had astronauts go there, they verify that it’s not made of cheese. There is zero evidence that it is made of cheese.” And Watters is asking “oh yeah, we’ll how can you prove that Trump knew the moon isn’t made of cheese?!?!” I mean, maybe their defense is “everyone knows he’s such a complete fucking moron that he wouldn’t believe water is wet even as he’s drowning in it.” Ok. Cool. Hook ‘em.

  • Trump appeared to privately concede that he lost the election three days before January 6.

  • In a meeting with Gen. Mark Milley, Trump said "it's too late for us" and "we're going to give that to the next guy."

  • According to special counsel Jack Smith's indictment, Trump had been informed that Inauguration Day was fast approaching.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-told-top-military-advisor-232732121.html

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19190

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Months ago, during the Committee hearings, I predicted the conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding much as it has been pled here.

Also, all you nattering nabobs of negativity can gobble my crank.  You can quibble with the timing, but here it is.  Fuckin told ya.

It's a shame that it took the Committee hearings spoon feeding this shit to Garland before he got off his ass and appointed Smith to get after it.

 

Quote

Granted, Garland didn't bring these charges himself, and he never would have, but he appointed the man who did and seems to have made a superlative choice. I think I was the only one defending him.

Once this is over, if Biden or another D is elected, Garland needs to step down and Smith needs to be AG.

  • Hook 'Em 9
  • Drool 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31453

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

It's a shame that it took the Committee hearings spoon feeding this shit to Garland before he got off his ass and appointed Smith to get after it.

 

Once this is over, if Biden or another D is elected, Garland needs to step down and Smith needs to be AG.

Pffft.

Garland doesn't control Alvin Bragg or Fani Willis, and, looky here, all these indictments are rolling in about the same time.

Maybe, just maybe, it takes some time to put together a criminal case.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...