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

scottsins

scottsins 2047

Posted
Posted
As I understand it, Willis has knowledge of Trump's presence in the Oval Office when this plan to get county election officials to allow a peek under the voting systems hood was *successfully* launched.  That's gonna leave a mark.  He can assert that it was his campaign lawyers, that he had nothing to do with it, but if he was in the room and he knew of the plan, then his failure to put an end to it makes him complicit.  (Disclosure:  not a lawyer.)

It’s an interesting issue, because generally, there is no criminal responsibility for not acting to stop a crime that you are aware someone else is going to commit.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 28.5k
  • 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

The Royal We

The Royal We 3100

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I still can’t figure out why, if the courts and various state and local governments won’t take a look at all of this evidence and proof, that they don’t just release it to the public for us all to see how corrupt the system is that is protecting all of this election interference/fraud. 

Pfffft. Do you even 2000 Mules bro!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 47295

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, scottsins said:


It’s an interesting issue, because generally, there is no criminal responsibility for not acting to stop a crime that you are aware someone else is going to commit.

Is this true when the crime is beneficial to the person who doesn't act to stop it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 53581

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, scottsins said:


It’s an interesting issue, because generally, there is no criminal responsibility for not acting to stop a crime that you are aware someone else is going to commit.

Isn’t that to protect people like neighbors watching a house get burgled from being held at fault for not attempting to stop it?

as opposed to someone acting criminally on your behalf with your knowledge of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 78737

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

Because Twitter is half-fucked this morning:

 

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/13/politics/coffee-county-georgia-voting-system-breach-trump/index.html

 

 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Together, the text messages and other court documents show how Trump lawyers and a group of hired operatives sought to access Coffee County’s voting systems in the days before January 6, 2021, as the former president’s allies continued a desperate hunt for any evidence of widespread fraud they could use to delay certification of Joe Biden’s electoral victory. 

 Last year, a former Trump official testified under oath to the House January 6 select committee that plans to access voting systems in Georgia were discussed in meetings at the White House, including during an Oval Office meeting on December 18, 2020,  that included Trump. 

Six days before pro-Trump operatives gained unauthorized access to voting systems, the local elections official who allegedly helped facilitate the breach sent a “written invitation” to attorneys working for Trump, according to text messages obtained by CNN. 

Investigators have scrutinized the actions of various individuals who were involved, including Misty Hampton, a former Coffee County elections official who authored the letter of invitation referenced in text messages and other documents that have been turned over to prosecutors, multiple sources told CNN. 

They have also examined the involvement of Trump’s then attorney Rudy Giuliani – who was informed last yearhe was a target in the Fulton County investigation – and fellow Trump lawyer Sidney Powell as part of their probe, according to people familiar with the matter. 

A spokesperson for Willis’ office declined to comment.

The letter of invitation was shared with attorneys and an investigator working with Giuliani at the time, the text messages obtained by CNN show. 

A ‘written invitation’ to access voting systems 

On January 1, 2021 – days ahead of the January 7 voting systems breach – Katherine Friess – an attorney working with Giuliani, Sidney Powell and other Trump allies shared a “written invitation” to examine voting systems in Coffee County with a group of Trump allies. 

That group included members of Sullivan Strickler, a firm hired by Trump’s attorneys to examine voting systems in the small, heavily Republican Georgia county, according to text messages obtained by CNN. 

That same day, Friess sent a “Letter of invitation to Coffee County, Georgia” to former NYPD Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik, who was working with Giuliani to find evidence that would back up their baseless claims of potential widespread voter fraud, according to court documents filed as part of an ongoing civil case. 

Friess then notified operatives who carried out the Coffee County breach and others working directly with Giuliani that Trump’s team had secured written permission, the texts show. 

CNN has not reviewed the substance of the invitation letter itself, only communications that confirm it was provided to Friess, Kerik and Sullivan Strickler employees. 

Friess could not be reached for comment.

The messages and documents appear to link Giuliani to the Coffee County breach, while shedding light on another channel of communication between pro-Trump attorneys and the battleground state operatives who worked together to provide unauthorized individuals access to sensitive voting equipment. 

 

“Rudy Giuliani had nothing to do with this,” said Robert Costello, Giuliani’s attorney. “You can’t attach Rudy Giuliani to Sidney Powell’s crackpot idea.”

“Just landed back in DC with the Mayor huge things starting to come together!” an employee from the firm Sullivan Strickler, which was hired by Sidney Powell to examine voting systems in Coffee County, wrote in a group chat with other colleagues on January 1. 

Former New York Mayor Giuliani was consistently referred to as “the Mayor,” in other texts sent by the same individual and others at the time. 

“Most immediately, we were just granted access – by written invitation! – to Coffee County’s systems. Yay!” the text reads. 

Breaking into Coffee County

Shortly after Election Day, Hampton – still serving as the top election official for Coffee County – warned during a state election board meeting that Dominion voting machines could “very easily” be manipulated to flip votes from one candidate to another. It’s a claim that has been repeatedly debunked. 

But the Trump campaign officials took notice and reached out to Hampton that same day. “I would like to obtain as much information as possible,” a Trump campaign staffer emailed Hampton at the time, according to documents released as part of a public records request and first reported by the Washington Post. 

In early December, Hampton then delayed certification of Joe Biden’s win in Georgia by refusing to validate the recount results by a key deadline. Coffee County was the only county in Georgia that failed to certify its election results due to issues raised by Hampton at the time. 

Hampton also posted a video online claiming to expose problems with the county’s Dominion voting system. That video was used by Trump’s lawyers, including Giuliani, as part of their push to convince legislators from multiple states that there was evidence the 2020 election results were tainted by voting system issues. 

Text messages and other documents obtained by CNN show Trump allies were seeking access to Coffee County’s voting system by mid-December amid increasing demands for proof of widespread election fraud. 

Coffee County was specifically cited in draft executive orders for seizing voting machines that were presented to Trump on December 18, 2020, during a chaotic Oval Office meeting, CNN has reported. During that same meeting, Giuliani alluded to a plan to gain “voluntary access” to machines in Georgia, according to testimony from him and others before the House January 6 committee. 

Days later, Hampton shared the written invitation to access the county’s election office with a Trump lawyer, text messages obtained by CNN show. She and another location elections official, Cathy Latham, allegedly helped Trump operatives gain access to the county’s voting systems, according to documents, testimony and surveillance video produced as part of a long-running civil lawsuit focused on election security in Georgia. 

Latham, who also served as a fake elector from Georgia after the 2020 election, has come under scrutiny for her role in the Coffee County breach after surveillance video showed she allowed unauthorized outsiders to spend hours examining voting systems there.

 

 

the current trump lawyer's ....

A Christmas Story Fudge GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 28243

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Isn’t that to protect people like neighbors watching a house get burgled from being held at fault for not attempting to stop it?

as opposed to someone acting criminally on your behalf with your knowledge of it?

Potato potahto 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30783

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

CNN runs their story.  As expected, he simply complained:

 

Screenshot2023-08-13at11_50_30AM.thumb.png.a2f14ecf4d03e4a6355b0315c11eb3ff.png

Quote

Chutkan:

Whether or not Trump’s public statements are covered by the protective order that’s issued, she said, if they result in the intimidation of a witness or the obstruction of justice, “I will be scrutinizing them very carefully.”

Trump’s lawyer John Lauro said: “President Trump will scrupulously abide by his conditions of release.”

Later on, Chutkan said that “even ambiguous statement from either party or counsel … can threaten the process.”

“Also, as in Manhattan, the corrupt DOJ is pushing hard, trying to keep Biden in office. The whole system is dishonest and broken.”

Not ambiguous that Jack Smith is “corrupt”.  As any judge presiding over a Trump criminal case is part of the criminal justice system, that must mean Judge Chutkan is also dishonest and broken.  There is a short video clip at some campaign speech where Trump declared he would not give up his free-speech rights.   Not sure of the date of that. Continually banging the drum saying that the DOJ is corrupt is an absolute attempt to taint the trial pool.  

Damn, I wish an Article III Judge would. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30783

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

As I understand it, Willis has knowledge of Trump's presence in the Oval Office when this plan to get county election officials to allow a peek under the voting systems hood was *successfully* launched.  That's gonna leave a mark.  He can assert that it was his campaign lawyers, that he had nothing to do with it, but if he was in the room and he knew of the plan, then his failure to put an end to it makes him complicit.  (Disclosure:  not a lawyer.)

Jimmy, talking about Misprision of a Felony.

Quote

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 684; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

This statute is not something they use a ton.   You can charge somebody with this if you want them to flip, but the max is three years in prison, and they probably won’t get that in a case not as straightforward as this one, with many moving parts.  Fuck, even if clearly criminal. 

As to which application, think about every single civil rights abuse/ cop killer/cop beating case you read about on Surly.   That would mean that every asshole cop who watched it and did not report their fellow cop would be charged with this felony. They aren’t.
 
But it is one of the reasons why I say that any  LEO being a non-criminal is almost impossible to find. Every single cop who watched another cop do something wrong and didn’t report it is - by federal criminal law definition - in violation of federal criminal law, even if never indicted. 
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lurch

Lurch 5951

Posted
Posted
“Also, as in Manhattan, the corrupt DOJ is pushing hard, trying to keep Biden in office. The whole system is dishonest and broken.”
Not ambiguous that Jack Smith is “corrupt”.  As any judge presiding over a Trump criminal case is part of the criminal justice system, that must mean Judge Chutkan is also dishonest and broken.  There is a short video clip at some campaign speech where Trump declared he would not give up his free-speech rights.   Not sure of the date of that. Continually banging the drum saying that the DOJ is corrupt is an absolute attempt to taint the trial pool.  
Damn, I wish an Article III Judge would. 
 
 
 

Your confused on which indictment this is. Manhattan is Bragg, not Smith.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28940

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Red Five said:

She's all eyes and tits. Wheelhouse. 

She’s got nice cheekbones too. She’s not a 10 but she’s fine enough. I’m in love with Nicolle Wallace and look forward to her return. But Alicia is a decent interviewer and she’s been a capable substitute during Nicolle’s absence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 55888

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, scottsins said:


It’s an interesting issue, because generally, there is no criminal responsibility for not acting to stop a crime that you are aware someone else is going to commit.

I'm sorry, but you don't seem to know the slightest thing about law!

Seinfeld-Court.jpg

 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38130

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

“Also, as in Manhattan, the corrupt DOJ is pushing hard, trying to keep Biden in office. The whole system is dishonest and broken.”

Not ambiguous that Jack Smith is “corrupt”.  As any judge presiding over a Trump criminal case is part of the criminal justice system, that must mean Judge Chutkan is also dishonest and broken.  There is a short video clip at some campaign speech where Trump declared he would not give up his free-speech rights.   Not sure of the date of that. Continually banging the drum saying that the DOJ is corrupt is an absolute attempt to taint the trial pool.  

Damn, I wish an Article III Judge would. 

 

 

 

 

22 minutes ago, Lurch said:


Your confused on which indictment this is. Manhattan is Bragg, not Smith.

You’re confused by the use of a simile 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goredho

Goredho 17663

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I still can’t figure out why, if the courts and various state and local governments won’t take a look at all of this evidence and proof, that they don’t just release it to the public for us all to see how corrupt the system is that is protecting all of this election interference/fraud. 

At the very least, it should help bolster his defense when it’s presented at trial, right?  He’s gonna present it as his trial, right?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nbmishoid

nbmishoid 989

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Isn’t that to protect people like neighbors watching a house get burgled from being held at fault for not attempting to stop it?

as opposed to someone acting criminally on your behalf with your knowledge of it?

RICO.  Eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19458

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

dumbest series finale ever

you shut your whore mouth!  Larry David just got too clever and too loyal.  He wanted to find a way for more bit characters to come back on so they'd be due more residuals from the pending syndication deal, serving as trial witnesses was a good excuse for dozens of them to be in the same room at the same time.  Either that, or an orgy.  Which is basically kinda the same premise as Trump's trial.  A bunch of New Yorkers coming out of the woodwork to discuss what a piece of shit he is and then me, in real life, am going to join in on some kinda orgy after he's found guilty.  It's really very simple.  

Plus, Larry both embraced and despised the show's label as "being about nothing."  So his final denouement was to have the four of them put on trial for being about nothing, for doing nothing.  In the face of helping humanity with a small gesture, they chose nothing.  

Trump is about nothing.  He's a famous businessman who didn't really do any business.  He just put his name on shit for a fee and then helped drive those companies/products/properties into the fucking ground.  He's a famous parent who didn't really do any parenting to give of the most fucked up young Americans.  He's a famous sports franchise owner who didn't really do anything for his team.  He's a famous gameshow host who didn't really do anything but read a few lines off a teleprompter each week and then came up with a cute little hand gesture with his tiny clown hands.  He's a famous ex-President who didn't really do any Presidenting except nod and sign off on a list of judges and a stack of tax cuts.  He never really did anything his whole life but he's made a fantastic career and big name doing that nothing.  His achievements at being average to below average are so far above average, it challenges everything we know about averages.  And his knowledge of averages is just mean.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30783

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Goredho said:

At the very least, it should help bolster his defense when it’s presented at trial, right?  He’s gonna present it as his trial, right?!

Here in the real world, at least in the civil litigation world, there are motions in limine to prevent substantiated shit like that from reaching the jury and confusing them.   So if this were a civil trial, there would be hearings in advance to determine if his proffered evidence is typical Trump lie bullshit, or has at least an arguable amount of meat on the bone. After 70 odd trials, his bullshit about the stolen election would never see a jury in a civil trial.

I would imagine that the scope of bullshit allowed as in a criminal trial is far greater - if a defense is that aliens came down and were the actual murderers, I guess a defendant might be allowed by a gleeful prosecutor to present it - on that defendants way to prison.   A worry here would be if Trump is allowed to present his completely false bullshit, as it would require the marshaling of forces to show that it’s false. That is a tremendous time waster (and money and evidence gathering resources), all of which deflects from the criminal issues at hand.     

This is really one of the big issues that I do not know how the courts will handle, and I’d love to hear from someone who practices in federal criminal Court, or criminal court in general, about the bounds of defense evidence submitted.   OTOH, the court may disallow some of the more easily disprovable as a lie bullshit, and Trump cannot put on his 2000 mules type bullshit. Which will make his followers cry that it is a rigged trial as the evidence of the rigged election is being suppressed by the deep state.

They will not reflect upon the fact that the impeachment prosecutors were prevented from putting on testimony or obtaining evidence. Because hypocrisy is Trump’s right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Born to Run

Born to Run 6601

Posted
Posted
The joke was he wanted Harrison Ford to be the pilot. He’s a notoriously “error-prone” pilot and should’ve had his license taken away. I think he’s landed twice on the taxiway and multiple other fuckups.
https://www.wideopencountry.com/rare-harrison-ford-airplane/
He was forthright about being able to fly a plane. Land? No
  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14645

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Wait, he has "conclusive" proof that he actually won the 2020 election, and that he should still be president? And two and a half years later hasn't shown it to anyone yet?

He hasn't gotten it back from Mike Pillow yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27820

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

dumbest series finale ever

Not even close. It's gotten better on repeats IMO. It's not great but I think it gets a bad rap. I love the very last scene with them in jail and George and Jerry start the discussion about the first button on a shirt can ruin the shirt. They ask each other if they've already talked about this before. They had -- in the very first scene of the series premiere.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19458

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, dcbc said:

He hasn't gotten it back from Mike Pillow yet.

Yeah, your mom got it back from Mike's Pillow.  Wait.  Hang on.  Dammit, I had something for this.  Give me two weeks.  

 

I know this has been talked about upthread, but I really just started picking up on it in the last week or so.  Everybody I know that loves Trump has suddenly gotten real fucking quiet.  It went from "Witch Hunt" or "False Indictments" to radio silence.  Maybe they're still clamoring on and on to their own like-minded circle.  But it got real marked in my world, which is very politically engaged, in the last 5-10 days.  I'm guessing it's a little of both---but what's y'all's take?  Is it some kinda Parallel Thinking where a lot of these folks are suddenly coming to the conclusion that he's probably done something so wrong, that they can't look the other way no matter what's done for them politically?  And/Or...are they finally so humiliated by the ruse that they will silently support him but no longer passionately defend him because to do so would be to debase themselves and risk damage to reputation (as if that's fucking possible).  I guess the third wild card is they figure between convictions or death, he actually won't wind up the nominee so they don't want to tie themselves to the sinking ship again.  I know polls say otherwise, but these are slightly more intelligent Republicans (I know, I know...oxymoron) that have two brain cells to rub together.  It's just the most hushed and writ-large than anytime since 2015.  For me anyway.  

I guess I'm a bit bummed out because it's gonna make my oxycontin-fueled prank calls to them after he's convicted and/or loses the election again much less fun and satisfying.  I mean it's just awkward when a relative or friend calls you to ask, "Did you shit on my front yard last night?"  And you laughing reply, "fuck yeah I did, as soon as they called Arizona again for Biden, I drove straight over!" And they mumble, "I didn't even end up voting, I was so disappointed in Trump."  And then you feel like an asshole like, "Shoot man, I'm sorry.  I guess I should have gathered you weren't into him any more since you're a good guy otherwise.  Now I feel bad.  Well, best to your family and the nation.  I'm sure you'll find another candidate someday to get excited about.  Also, I would not look under your front doormat if I were you." 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19458

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Come At Me Bring It On GIF by Travis
 

 

IMG_6314.jpeg

To continue/berate the Seinfeld parallels…

attorney: “Mr Trump.  These veiled public threats to judges and prosecutors and their families is not wise.  If you continue this unethical behavior, I’ll be forced to resign as counsel.”

Trump: “resign?  But I’m not even really paying you.”

attorney: “and that’s what makes this so difficult.”  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chewbacca

Chewbacca 7830

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

I mean she still has one today. What this mess has taught me is that lawyers get a bad rap for a good reason. Your profession has taken 'a vigorous defense' and turned it into a free for all. And if I had a law license, I'd be mad as hell about the damage this is doing to my profession, not crowing that she'll finally lose her license upon conviction.
39B9E6A8-7AED-45F3-8F6F-13A8AFABAE16.gif.0f23a1c2e4416bda96390d9699bb05c0.gif
Twice just explained that it’s pretty cut and dried when there’s a felony conviction. As yet there is no felony conviction. This seems to offend you. You are also complaining about nothing being done after Twice posts actual pleadings from the actual proceedings to disbar her.   Which, I guess, means you do not really want a longer due process proceeding, just an instant disbarment when someone on a football forum demands a person lose their license.  (note: we all agree she should lose her license)
As I recall, you were also one of the people here whose perspicacity told you that Donald Trump would never be indicted by anyone.    We said these things take time.   Indictment Four drops this week.  
This is sort of like that.

Why does it take a felonly conviction?  That's the issue here.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32104

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Captainant said:

Goddamn every single disbarment is for mishandling of client funds or failing to be responsive to clients. Powell did neither of these things. I'd bet the SBOT finds a way to just oopsie whoopsie poopsie this one too, just like they already did. 

Well that has been pointed out several times. 

 

Exactly how many members of the Texas bar do you think are out there "subverting democracy" ? 

 

One of the problems here is that the Powell case is different from the usual disbarment proceeding. So it's testing the competence of the bars lawyers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30783

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

Why does it take a felonly conviction?  That's the issue here.  

 It doesn’t.  See the currently on-going disciplinary proceeding in Texas that does not involve a felony conviction as grounds. We seem to be talking past each other.

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...