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

[hornmpa96 2671]

7 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

How will we be able to differentiate his clothes from his skin?

I don’t think federal inmates are allowed to spray-on tan.

[speed817 19996]

4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Pence has stuff to say

 

 

Trump's reply to Pence.....

[WhatTheBuck 28941]

8 hours ago, hornmpa96 said:

I can’t wait for the day when I see Donald Trump making a court appearance in handcuffs and an orange jumpsuit. 

I want to see him wind up like Ohio Republican House Speaker Larry Householder, who was convicted of a $60 Million bribery scheme, and got sentenced to 20 years behind bars.

(If Trump were to win the election, I’d fully expect him to pardon Householder. Not because the two of them are connected at all, just because Trump has a soft spot for Republican corruption. And just to “own the libs.”)

[Fudge Nuggets 19478]

51 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

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.

Or... he sat on it for over a year. 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/report-says-doj-resisted-investigating-trumps-role-in-jan-6-for-over-a-year

Do you believe the states of New York and Georgia have the same level of resources available as the feds?

Your stanning for Garland is annoying.

[Francisco 2.0 32612]

Gift article:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/08/01/us/politics/trump-jan-6-indictment-2020-election-annotated.html?unlocked_article_code=Uk39IJIQ66_1Q92w5a3B9hVo39TJn8Yjxv18kNvcdqZwnRZGSs27xwqJqwKNfTDLyMOHzBce855oC6hVWND-F0115y3n92WUBswHfNAT0Ydq2O106Uj_5K_yua2wpDacSVn6a4o8jQENdRfrD6ZVT8FQ2_B7KzhDPZcQqmPD5cQYlzIe3FWprJCgo_tPwDnmDEEF8fkVTaUJ5m8KH1w_e-dcZlrGDLlfXlWdd2Uocik1odasOxDJCdr_n82sBFkAzH8F0NBvWOFwFSG2IjuMcSgLGTaWqijHgX934bMS-V0D31svLpHHCr8Aan-BgAPLZZgJsVAQ-i680g3XXBzoUu6OWhazUT5BdG60NwsY4G5eNEGm7_E8mCzcNbveVfgdc8fXcMUdCvspCFwn&smid=url-share

 

The Trump Jan. 6 Indictment, Annotated

 

 

 

[Bullneck 19574]

4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Pence has stuff to say: 

As Americans, his candidacy means less attention paid to Joe Biden's disastrous economic policies afflicting millions across the United States and to the pattern of corruption with Hunter.

 

Yeah, things are really falling apart economically.  And Hunter's dong.

[Fudge Nuggets 19478]

5 hours ago, Grade of D as in David said:

 

Psakibomb!

Lot of y'all need to go get your annual eye exam.

[Francisco 2.0 32612]

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/02/trump-judge-tanya-chutkan-00109342?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f0fd-dd93-ad7f-f8fde5bf0000&nlid=630318

 

 

Quote

When Judge Tanya Chutkan presides over the new criminal case against Donald Trump, it won’t be her first time tangling with the former president and his lawyers.

In fact, the U.S. district court judge already dealt the ex-president one of the most significant legal blows of his lifetime, triggering perhaps the greatest deluge of evidence about his bid to subvert the 2020 election — a scheme for which he now stands charged with serious crimes.

 

 

Quote

The Obama-appointed jurist ruled in fall 2021 that the House Jan. 6 select committee could access reams of Trump’s White House files — a ruling that was subsequently upheld by an appeals court and left undisturbed by the Supreme Court. That evidence — call logs, memos, internal strategy papers and more from the desks of Trump’s most trusted advisers — became the backbone of the committee’s evidence and shaped much of the public’s understanding of his effort to seize a second term he didn’t win.

Much of that evidence resurfaced Tuesday in special counsel Jack Smith’s four-count indictment of Trump, which referenced call logs and White House records that were already familiar to Americans who tracked the Jan. 6 committee proceedings. Chutkan was randomly selected Tuesday to preside over Trump’s latest criminal case, his third in the last four months.

 

 

Quote

“Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President,” Chutkan wrote in her 2-year-old ruling, a rebuke that is sure to echo as she prepares to preside over the newest criminal case against the current GOP frontrunner for the presidential nomination in 2024.

Chutkan, 61, was born in Kingston, Jamaica, and came to the U.S. for college as a teenager, attending George Washington University and then law school at the University of Pennsylvania. She spent more than a decade as a public defender in Washington, D.C. She later worked for the law firm Boies Schiller & Flexner before being confirmed as a federal trial judge in Washington in 2014.

 

Spoiler

Chutkan has avoided some of the most pointed criticisms of Trump that some of her colleagues on the federal bench in D.C. have delivered as they’ve sentenced defendants who participated in the Jan. 6 mob that attacked the Capitol as part of Trump’s bid to remain in power. Judge Reggie Walton has called Trump a “charlatan.” Judge Amit Mehta has said Jan. 6 defendantswere “pawns” of Trump and his allies. Judge Amy Berman Jackson has chastised Republicans for refusing to level with Trump about the 2020 election.

“It is not patriotism, it is not standing up for America to stand up for one man — who knows full well that he lost — instead of the Constitution he was trying to subvert,” Jackson said at a sentencing last year.

But Chutkan has delivered some of the harshest sentences to Jan. 6 defendants and made her disgust and horror over the attack clear, lamenting the prospect of renewed political violence in 2024 and noting that no one accused of orchestrating the effort to subvert the election had been held accountable.

“You have made a very good point,” she told Jan. 6 rioter Robert Palmer at his December 2021 sentencing, “that the people who exhorted you and encouraged you and rallied you to go and take action and to fight have not been charged.”

“The issue of who has or has not been charged is not before me. I don’t have any influence on that,” she said. “I have my opinions, but they are not relevant.”

But Chutkan also said that reality wasn’t a reason to go easy on those who bought into the election lies and acted upon that belief.

“The people who planned this and funded it and encouraged it haven’t been charged, but that’s not a reason for you to get a lower sentence,” she said. “I have to make it clear that the actions you engaged in cannot happen again. Every day we’re hearing about reports of antidemocratic factions of people plotting violence, the potential threat of violence, in 2024.”

Chutkan has alluded more specifically to Trump in other Jan. 6 sentences, including her first — to misdemeanor defendant Carl Mazzocco, who Chutkan said “went to the Capitol in support of one man, not in support of our country.”

During those early months of the Jan. 6 investigation, Chutkan also staked out territory that some of her colleagues were reluctant to tread: She pointedly rejected the equivalence some defendants were drawing between violence adjacent to Black Lives Matter protests and the riot at the Capitol.

One Trump-appointed judge, Trevor McFadden, had raised sharp questions about whether Jan. 6 defendants were being treated more harshly than people accused of similar conduct during the summertime violence of 2020.

“I think the U.S. attorney would have more credibility if it was even-handed in its concern about riots and mobs in this city,” McFadden said at the time.

Chutkan, while sentencing a defendant in a different case, appeared to allude to her colleague’s remark, before saying she “flatly” disagreed.

“People gathered all over the country last year to protest the violent murder by the police of an unarmed man. Some of those protesters became violent,” Chutkan said of the protests and rioting that followed George Floyd’s death. “But to compare the actions of people protesting, mostly peacefully, for civil rights, to those of a violent mob seeking to overthrow the lawfully elected government is a false equivalency and ignores a very real danger that the January 6 riot posed to the foundation of our democracy.”

 

 

[Horn Dogg 4315]

[Js1 87290]

[Hookah Horns 3089]

6 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

“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!”

I really enjoy informing bank tellers how they can survive the next few minutes. Gotta love Merica. 

[Celery Man 21106]

If he is elected president we should be allowed to pay our taxes in ramen seasoning packets.

[TwiceHorn 32108]

59 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Or... he sat on it for over a year. 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/report-says-doj-resisted-investigating-trumps-role-in-jan-6-for-over-a-year

Do you believe the states of New York and Georgia have the same level of resources available as the feds?

Your stanning for Garland is annoying.

I don't believe that reporting anymore than I believe what that "IRS Whistleblower" says about the Hunter Biden investigation.

Someone looking at an investigation can see what they want to see.

And, as to resources, DOJ has been busy securing convictions against 485+ out of 1033 arrested and charged on January 6.

Resources are relative.

Your bashing of Garland is annoying.  As I recalll, you were number one or close to it on the nattering nabobs of negativity.

Edited August 2, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[Neonmoon 38130]

@TwiceHorn what’s your take on the free speech defense?

Also, skimming the indictment, the funniest part was when Raffenberger tried to explain to Trump the State Farm video he watched was doctored, and he would send Trump a link to the undoctored video, Trump said I don’t need your link, I have a much better link. 😂 

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Neonmoon
to add screenshot

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13637]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

nattering nabobs of negativity.

[Pancho 46372]

[Lurch 5951]

[mention=248]TwiceHorn[/mention] what’s your take on the free speech defense?
 

DOJ made sure to put right at the top that they don’t challenge his rights to lie and complain

[TwiceHorn 32108]

33 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

@TwiceHorn what’s your take on the free speech defense?

Also, skimming the indictment, the funniest part was when Raffenberger tried to explain to Trump the State Farm video he watched was doctored, and he would send Trump a link to the undoctored video, Trump said I don’t need your link, I have a much better link. 😂 

 

 

Not going to work.  It might get a little traction if they hadn't alleged the conspiracy and were relying only on the 1/6 speech alone as some kind of incitement.

[WhatTheBuck 28941]

1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

Yeah, things are really falling apart economically.

If they just keep repeating it, people will believe them. Trump introduced this practice of just speaking whatever reality he wanted into existence and it worked for him. So now the whole party has adopted that strategy. Trump was campaigning in 2016 saying the economy was in the shitter when in reality it was doing fine. Just three weeks into his presidency a positive jobs report came out and he took credit for it, as if he had anything to do with those numbers, and said, “They may have been phony in the past, but it’s very real now.” Just speak whatever bullshit you want because the GOP base will fall for it  

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-monthly-jobs-numbers-sean-spicer-235936

[Genco 3058]

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Lot of y'all need to go get your annual eye exam.

[bolverk 30375]

12 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

If they just keep repeating it, people will believe them. Trump introduced this practice of just speaking whatever reality he wanted into existence and it worked for him. So now the whole party has adopted that strategy. Trump was campaigning in 2016 saying the economy was in the shitter when in reality it was doing fine. Just three weeks into his presidency a positive jobs report came out and he took credit for it, as if he had anything to do with those numbers, and said, “They may have been phony in the past, but it’s very real now.” Just speak whatever bullshit you want because the GOP base will fall for it  

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-monthly-jobs-numbers-sean-spicer-235936

 

It's been that way with Republican politicians for quite a while now, though I agree that Trump took "truthiness" as Colbert coined the term and shot the concept in the head.

You probably remember this passage in a famous piece by Ron Suskind:

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/faith-certainty-and-the-presidency-of-george-w-bush.html

['stache 22147]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

@TwiceHorn what’s your take on the free speech defense?

Also, skimming the indictment, the funniest part was when Raffenberger tried to explain to Trump the State Farm video he watched was doctored, and he would send Trump a link to the undoctored video, Trump said I don’t need your link, I have a much better link. 😂 

 

 

Free speech is a press conference at Four Seasons Lawncare and crying like a bitch titty baby that they cheated. Pressuring the Vice President and others in power to commit crimes to carry out your facist fantasyland isn’t free speech. It’s why it’s important they keep hammering that he knew that there was zero evidence of fraud.

Edited August 2, 2023 by 'stache

[tchookem 3986]

Not going to work.  It might get a little traction if they hadn't alleged the conspiracy and were relying only on the 1/6 speech alone as some kind of incitement.

Is that why we aren't seeing other Republicans who did make speeches on J6 (Cruz & Hawley) not getting any dirt on them?

[Red Five 41787]

9 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Free speech is a press conference at Four Seasons Lawncare and crying like a bitch titty baby that they cheated. Pressuring the Vice President and others in power to commit crimes to carry out your facist fantasyland isn’t free speech. It’s why it’s important they keep hammering that he knew that there was zero evidence of fraud.

Using fake electors and violence to stay in office after losing also isn't free speech. 

[jimmyjazz 47332]

It seems to me that arguing Trump's efforts to overturn the election were protected free speech is akin to arguing that armed robbery of a liquor store is legal because the thief held an open carry license.

Edited August 2, 2023 by jimmyjazz

[Chuckie Finster 23099]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Not going to work.  It might get a little traction if they hadn't alleged the conspiracy and were relying only on the 1/6 speech alone as some kind of incitement.

Also, they fuckin promoted it as the "Stop the Steal" rally for weeks in advance.  

This wasn't merely a mob caught up in someone's words.

[dcbc 14645]

Incitement of lawlessness (which likely will occur) and fraud are longstanding exceptions to the First Amendment's protection of speech.  

Edited August 2, 2023 by dcbc

[Brisketexan 107033]

2 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Lot of y'all need to go get your annual eye exam.

Dude.  Most of the posters here are in their late 30s to 50s (excluding Armybrat, who's from the 1750s).  If we were at a neighborhood pool party, and a gal who looked like Jen Psaki walked out onto the deck in a tight swimsuit and one of those gauzy wraps, her red hair shining in the sun.....every damned head here would damn well turn and smile to check her out.  She's not a 20 yr old Instagram model.  Cool.  She's a very attractive, smart, and witty 45 yr old woman.  Sign.  Me.  Up.

To get this back on topic....She is at least 90 IQ points too high for Trump to ever find attractive.  Trump's type is easy to figure out: moneygrubbing grifting whores, just like him.

[The Dog 44865]

 

['stache 22147]

21 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

It seems to me that arguing Trump's efforts to overturn the election were protected free speech is akin to arguing that armed robbery of a liquor store is legal because the thief held an open carry license.

More like claiming free speech when you asked a hit man to kill your wife.

[speed817 19996]

 

[Red Five 41787]

Now that I think about it, there are a lot of things I'd like to say to/about Trump that would definitely not be protected by free speech.

[dcbc 14645]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude.  Most of the posters here are in their late 30s to 50s (excluding Armybrat, who's from the 1750s).  If we were at a neighborhood pool party, and a gal who looked like Jen Psaki walked out onto the deck in a tight swimsuit and one of those gauzy wraps, her red hair shining in the sun.....every damned head here would damn well turn and smile to check her out. 

['stache 22147]

8 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Pence has stuff to say

 

 

This mother fucker really has a death wish. He'll be sucking that mushroom dick by this time next year, guaranteed.

[Js1 87290]

Pence and Barr: Trump is guilty for this one, there’s no denying it 

GOP voters:

[Neonmoon 38130]

 

I agree. I know why we can't, but I wish Trump was charged as a traitor. 

A democracy only exists if there is a peaceful transfer of power. The shared truth that there is a winner and there is a loser. Without that shared truth, there is war. Coups, military juntas, etc. The whole fucking point is both sides agree that admitting defeat is better for the country than civil war. He tried to stop that, and I wish he would be charged as a traitor. 

[Gatorubet 30789]

Some PAC should start running ads on sports events explaining how all of the Republicans told Trump he lost - and the Trumps lawsuits were dismissed by Trump judges because the lies told by him were not supported by the facts - which was known to all of the non-crazy GOP Trump lawyers. 

Then say Trump destroyed the lives of many Republicans at J6 because they believed his lies.

One Ad using the “conspiracy shit from the mothership” quote.   Another talking about the numerous GOP state election people saying their investigation showed no election changing fraud.  

One saying because of his lies the donations do not go to GOP campaigns - but to his lawyers and his wife ‘s hair stylist. 

One about Bannon grifting trump fans, being convicted, and Trump pardoning him while not pardoning J6 peeps when he had a chance. 

All on sports events they cannot self-ignore as effectively 

[TwiceHorn 32108]

1 hour ago, tchookem said:

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Not going to work.  It might get a little traction if they hadn't alleged the conspiracy and were relying only on the 1/6 speech alone as some kind of incitement.

Is that why we aren't seeing other Republicans who did make speeches on J6 (Cruz & Hawley) not getting any dirt on them?

Yeah, this has significant preparation and purpose, as well as specific intended unlawful result.

[Brisketexan 107033]

 
I agree. I know why we can't, but I wish Trump was charged as a traitor. 
A democracy only exists if there is a peaceful transfer of power. The shared truth that there is a winner and there is a loser. Without that shared truth, there is war. Coups, military juntas, etc. The whole fucking point is both sides agree that admitting defeat is better for the country than civil war. He tried to stop that, and I wish he would be charged as a traitor. 

HANGED as a traitor. You mean “hanged as a traitor.”
Otherwise, fantastic post. Trump’s conduct is the second most catastrophic assault on our survival as a nation ever, and the first ranked event was an actual civil war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans.

[bolverk 30375]

Much like DT posters, my FB feed is incredibly quiet about the indictment. Not a single Trumper I know has commented.

Anyone got anything good from pissed off Trumpers they could share?

[GhostOfTomJoad 9523]

1 hour ago, speed817 said:

 

What's the bigger lie in that tweet: his innocence, or dotard claiming to be 6'5" tall?

I'm surprised they didn't include an inset claiming his mushroom dick was 12" and thick as a beer can.

Edited August 2, 2023 by GhostOfTomJoad
Fuck trump

[scottsins 2047]

[mention=248]TwiceHorn[/mention] what’s your take on the free speech defense?
Also, skimming the indictment, the funniest part was when Raffenberger tried to explain to Trump the State Farm video he watched was doctored, and he would send Trump a link to the undoctored video, Trump said I don’t need your link, I have a much better link.  
 

Even though you aren’t asking me, my legal opinion is that the free speech “defense” doesn’t pertain at all to what the actual indictment is for at all, but instead, addresses what a huge chunk or folks (on both sides, TBH think the “January 6 case” is about. This whole free speech “thing” is, IMO, just a talking point to further the entire victim/pariah persona that TFG uses to raise funds.

[Beau Vine 55893]

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

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

Especially when you wait nearly two years to appoint someone to do it.

[The Dog 44865]

Just now, Beau Vine said:

Especially when you wait nearly two years to appoint someone to do it.

DOJ was investigating and Garland had to appoint the special counsel once the GOP took over the house. 

[Js1 87290]

1 minute ago, The Dog said:

DOJ was investigating and Garland had to appoint the special counsel once the GOP took over the house. 

Garland is never ever ever going to get credit because he didn't do it the day he was confirmed by the Senate.

Doesn't matter why.  He's an easy target.  WHY NOT DONE

[Beau Vine 55893]

9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Garland is never ever ever going to get credit because he didn't do it the day he was confirmed by the Senate.

Sure, because it's just absolute crazy talk to suggest that the USAG make investigating an attempted fucking coup a priority.  

[Js1 87290]

1 minute ago, Beau Vine said:

Sure, because it's just absolute crazy talk to suggest that the USAG make investigating an attempted fucking coup a priority.  

And if he rushed it to make you happy, and Trump gets off on a technicality...

There's no winning.  Engaging with people who just want to bitch about it is pointless.  Jack Smith is getting it done, after BEING APPOINTED BY GARLAND. 

[Beau Vine 55893]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

And if he rushed it to make you happy, and Trump gets off on a technicality...

Yes, because the only two choices were:

1.  Rush the investigation and be sloppy.

or

2.  Wait nearly two years to appoint a prosecutor.

It's like you're doing a slorch bit.

[C-Man 27834]

17 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

 

Unless Rudy is acting, guess we can assume he's not cooperating with Jack Smith and his team.

 

6 hours 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.

Jack Smith for VPOTUS.

 

5 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Lot of y'all need to go get your annual eye exam.

 

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude.  Most of the posters here are in their late 30s to 50s (excluding Armybrat, who's from the 1750s).  If we were at a neighborhood pool party, and a gal who looked like Jen Psaki walked out onto the deck in a tight swimsuit and one of those gauzy wraps, her red hair shining in the sun.....every damned head here would damn well turn and smile to check her out.  She's not a 20 yr old Instagram model.  Cool.  She's a very attractive, smart, and witty 45 yr old woman.  Sign.  Me.  Up.

To get this back on topic....She is at least 90 IQ points too high for Trump to ever find attractive.  Trump's type is easy to figure out: moneygrubbing grifting whores, just like him.

I'm 50 and I think she's ok. Smart AF, which is nice but nothing to garner the response given in last nights string of posts.

 

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

This mother fucker really has a death wish. He'll be sucking that mushroom dick by this time next year, guaranteed.

Is it wrong that sometimes I fantasize the insurrectionists HAD found Pence on J6? (Of course if they had, there's no telling how things might've gone in that alternate timeline.)

[MrBig 5652]

So Pence is throwing Trump under the bus. He sees how unappealing DeSantis is and decides to lean into the “they wanted to kill me” on J6 so he can have a better shot at the GOP nomination.