ADVERTISEMENT

Trump 2024!

The records case is the most important to me because I care very much about protecting national security information and that wasn't it. I think the second federal case is next important and legit. There is no doubt Trump explored every possible avenue to overturn the results of a legitimate election (the Democratically expressed will of the people) and that should never be allowed to happen again. Seems to me extremely illegal. The indictments for both of those are good reads.

Don't care so much about the state cases. Though I do think it's likely that Trump will be found guilty of some of the charges in one or both of those. Clearly the investigations and the prosecutions were at least started for political reasons. That doesn't mean the ultimate prosecution is entirely illegitimate but can't deny the political aspect. I think the claim that the federal investigation and pending prosecutions is political is ridiculous.

I don't think we should allow Presidents or former Presidents to get a pass on criminal behavior. They were preparing to indict Nixon after he resigned. Ford was aware and pardoned him. Which, I've gone back and forth on whether that was the right thing to do. I think Clinton probably should have been prosecuted for his perjury, but he lost his license to practice law instead. Obviously, that was nothing more than a slap on the wrist since he was never going to practice law again anyway.
The records case is legit because aTrump is charged under a statute that directly pertains to the way he handled the records.

All other cases are garbage. Challenging a legitimate election must never be criminalized, and it isn’t. To do so will put us in Putin’s camp. Trump is charged under a different statutes that have nothing to do with challenging an election. The statutes are abused by the government to get Trump.

I posted about all of this months ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
The records case is legit because aTrump is charged under a statute that directly pertains to the way he handled the records.

All other cases are garbage. Challenging a legitimate election must never be criminalized, and it isn’t. To do so will put us in Putin’s camp. Trump is charged under a different statutes that have nothing to do with challenging an election. The statutes are abused by the government to get Trump.

I posted about all of this months ago.
He's not charged with anything related to the Records Act. He's charged with 31 violations of the Espionage Act (the Top Secret documents, because he had over 100 classified documents in total), conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false statements to investigators. As I said this is the case I think is most important and looks like almost a slam dunk conviction.

I don't agree that the election related case is garbage. I think it's pretty clear he was illegally trying to overturn the results of an election. He wasn't challenging it, he was doing all he could to overturn it by any means necessary.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
He's not charged with anything related to the Records Act. He's charged with charges 31 violations of the Espionage Act (the Top Secret documents, because he had over 100 classified documents in total), conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false statements to investigators. As I said this is the case I think is most important and looks like almost a slam dunk conviction.
Right. He is charged under a statute that pertains to his conduct. The judge tossed the PRA defense yesterday. But she might still instruct about it because it could play a role in scienter.

I don't agree that the election related case is garbage. I think it's pretty clear he was illegally trying to overturn the results of an election. He wasn't challenging it, he was doing all he could to overturn it by any means necessary.
Don’t agree. He was within the system the whole time. Yeah, his arguments were frivolous or worse, but that must not be a crime.
 
He's not charged with anything related to the Records Act. He's charged with charges 31 violations of the Espionage Act (the Top Secret documents, because he had over 100 classified documents in total), conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false statements to investigators. As I said this is the case I think is most important and looks like almost a slam dunk conviction.

I don't agree that the election related case is garbage. I think it's pretty clear he was illegally trying to overturn the results of an election. He wasn't challenging it, he was doing all he could to overturn it by any means necessary.
Overturn, or challenge so it could have more time to be reviewed?
Hmmm damnit adam, you need to dimmer down a bit.
 
Overturn, or challenge so it could have more time to be reviewed?
Hmmm damnit adam, you need to dimmer down a bit.
Read the indictment. The sore loser wasn’t charged for challenging. I don’t know why the hard core Trumpsters don’t read those indictments. They could possibly put forward a defense that doesn’t sound totally ridiculous.
 
Read the indictment. The sore loser wasn’t charged for challenging. I don’t know why the hard core Trumpsters don’t read those indictments. They could possibly put forward a defense that doesn’t sound totally ridiculous.
Correct, he wasn’t charged for challenging because challenging an election, even a frivolous challenge, must never be a crime if we expect democracy to survive. But I think it is clear these charges are all about his challenge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Correct, he wasn’t charged for challenging because challenging an election, even a frivolous challenge, must never be a crime if we expect democracy to survive. But I think it is clear these charges are all about his challenge.
He wasn’t strengthening our democracy by trying to overturn the outcome of a fair and legitimate election. He was doing the opposite. He’s continuing to do it by claiming once again the only way he’ll lose is if they cheat. Also by saying the members of the J6 committee should be prosecuted, that journalists he doesn’t like should be jailed and that he’d have his DOJ go after political opponents and others. None of that strengthens American Democracy, it undermines it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baller23Boogie
He wasn’t strengthening our democracy by trying to overturn the outcome of a fair and legitimate election. He was doing the opposite. He’s continuing to do it by claiming once again the only way he’ll lose is if they cheat. Also by saying the members of the J6 committee should be prosecuted, that journalists he doesn’t like should be jailed and that he’d have his DOJ go after political opponents and others. None of that strengthens American Democracy, it undermines it.
I guess we just hafta disagree. I think Trump’s bluster about all the government ills he sees or believes is good for democracy. The real threat to democracy would be trying to silence him. In many parts of the world, people go to gulags or prisons for saying that stuff, like they are trying to do with Trump.

I agree using the justice apparatus for political purposes is a concern. The FBI under J. Edgar have it in its DNA. It got worse with Bobby Kennedy and Mitchel under Nixon. The whole thing has gotten out of hand with the Patriot Act and the secret FISA courts. The IG noted hundreds of FBI FISA issues of varying degrees of severity. The Carter Page fiasco and falsifying the warrant affidavit is the only public violation, but there are others. The FBI got caught flagging Roman Catholics for investigations. I believe they used FISA warrants for that. Garland using the Patriot Act counter-terrorism apparatus in the school board issue is the worst that we know of. Trump just said the quiet part out loud. I don’t think we can put the genie back in the bottle.
 
I guess we just hafta disagree. I think Trump’s bluster about all the government ills he sees or believes is good for democracy. The real threat to democracy would be trying to silence him. In many parts of the world, people go to gulags or prisons for saying that stuff, like they are trying to do with Trump.

I agree using the justice apparatus for political purposes is a concern. The FBI under J. Edgar have it in its DNA. It got worse with Bobby Kennedy and Mitchel under Nixon. The whole thing has gotten out of hand with the Patriot Act and the secret FISA courts. The IG noted hundreds of FBI FISA issues of varying degrees of severity. The Carter Page fiasco and falsifying the warrant affidavit is the only public violation, but there are others. The FBI got caught flagging Roman Catholics for investigations. I believe they used FISA warrants for that. Garland using the Patriot Act counter-terrorism apparatus in the school board issue is the worst that we know of. Trump just said the quiet part out loud. I don’t think we can put the genie back in the bottle.
Countries where the Presidents bluster about rigged elections and try to change the outcome are called third world countries. I don't want us to be one of those.
 
Are there any provisions in the congressman records act of records removed from a sciff and stored for 40+ years next to the dog food that were illegal as hell the first second they were absconded with? That Trump could qualify for? The CRArfS (this does not qualify as billable hours for you Hoot !) PRO BONO baby.
Or use those records to write a book that got an $8 million advance, based on those documents that he stole when he was a Senator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Or use those records to write a book that got an $8 million advance, based on those documents that he stole when he was a Senator.
Every book written by a person that had access to classified information about his time in government or service, President to enlisted person, is reviewed and vetted to insure it doesn't contain classified information. Try again.
 
Right. He is charged under a statute that pertains to his conduct. The judge tossed the PRA defense yesterday. But she might still instruct about it because it could play a role in scienter.

No, she didn't toss it. She declined to dismiss the case based on the PRA, but is so far willing to allow it to be used and could even instruct the jury that it is applicable.
 
Iioooo
No, she didn't toss it. She declined to dismiss the case based on the PRA, but is so far willing to allow it to be used and could even instruct the jury that it is applicable.
she tossed the PRA-based MTD.

She signaled that she might instruct about the PRA but now it can only be used for the jury to find Trump didn’t have the required mens rea. That of course depends on the evidence and I think that would force Trump to testify.

Smith is beside himself. He won’t be able appeal.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
The records were very secure. Maralago is one of the most secure buildings in the world constantly guarded by the SS. Unlike Bidens garage that had them since the 1970s. Furthermore, Trump didn't box up any of those documents nor did he send them to Maralago. Likely had no idea they were even there and didn't want them. Obama had classified docs in an abandoned furniture store. Clinton had them in his sock drawer. Pence had them. Hillary had them in her house and ordered aids to destroy 13 iPhones containing classified information.

But let me guess. That's different.
lol sure it is. They have hundreds of people in there every weekend. Seriously? Oh and you actually believe Trump lost money while in office? My goodness , the lack of logic in Trump supporters is astonishing
 
Being incorrect in a way which is consistent with a history of their radical ideology to the extent that all people with legal trading know you are ignoring law = political operative.
 
Being incorrect in a way which is consistent with a history of their radical ideology to the extent that all people with legal trading know you are ignoring law = political operative.
To prove your point, you had to exaggerate too much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
To prove your point, you had to exaggerate too much.
A judges decisions are subjective. It takes a lot of factorsd to fall in place to reach the conclusion of bias. Cannon is one of the few federal judges to make the conclusion an absolute certainty.
 
A judges decisions are subjective. It takes a lot of factorsd to fall in place to reach the conclusion of bias. Cannon is one of the few federal judges to make the conclusion an absolute certainty.
"absolute certainty" **sigh**

Again, if you have to exaggerate this much to make your point, your point is weak.

Here's an article that has evidence to refute any "absolute certainty."


Specifically, (1) she hasn't ruled against DOJ at every turn; (2) her partisan critics have called her dumb and inexperienced. Anyone who has spent any time litigating knows that you should never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence; (3) legally trained people in the S. Florida community don't think she's a Trump plant (or dumb, by the way); and (4) she comes by her distrust for the government naturally (not through "radical ideology"): her family fled communist Cuba. I just interviewed another judge with the same history--escaped the Soviet Union because her parents were declared enemies of the state--and she has the same distrust.

So it's very possible that Judge Cannon realizes (1) this is a first-of-its-kind case; (2) this case has very serious ramifications; (3) she is inexperienced; and so (4) is taking her time, leaving things open, and acting cautiously.

Your posts, though, and your certainty are more proof for just how dangerous Dems are, too, in politicizing judges. It's creating an unwarranted feeling of illegitimacy about the courts that is very, very dangerous to our democracy. It's also giving crazy people a target--the article also discussed the death threats Judge Cannon has received.
 
Oh you mean like every crime Trump has
Not irrelevant to blinkered leftists. Every ruling they don’t like is political.
Kind of like every crime Trump has committed is being prosecuted because it’s political? Like that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sobester
Cannon is teetering on being removed by an Uber-conservative 11th Cir. My lord, how dim are you people?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
So it's very possible that Judge Cannon realizes (1) this is a first-of-its-kind case; (2) this case has very serious ramifications; (3) she is inexperienced; and so (4) is taking her time, leaving things open, and acting cautiously.

Valid points, except... you leave out the fact that she was slapped down early on by the 11th for her favorable-to-Trump (delaying tactics) rulings, not once but twice. That's given rise to the narrative that she's either in over her head or is giving the defense every benefit of the doubt no matter how ludicrous. Her giving credence to the use of the PRA as a legitimate defense follows the same pattern, and further inflames those who questioned her competence and/or impartiality. Her refusal to decide on the PRA aspect until after double jeopardy applies is yet another reason that many think she's doing whatever it takes to tilt things in Trump's favor.
 
Valid points, except... you leave out the fact that she was slapped down early on by the 11th for her favorable-to-Trump (delaying tactics) rulings, not once but twice. That's given rise to the narrative that she's either in over her head or is giving the defense every benefit of the doubt no matter how ludicrous. Her giving credence to the use of the PRA as a legitimate defense follows the same pattern, and further inflames those who questioned her competence and/or impartiality. Her refusal to decide on the PRA aspect until after double jeopardy applies is yet another reason that many think she's doing whatever it takes to tilt things in Trump's favor.
Could be worse. Her offspring could be raising millions of dollars for the Republican Party.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT