|
Post by averagejoe2021 on Apr 21, 2024 20:46:04 GMT
5 days ago. 5 years ago. Some things never change. Not like this would install a moment of reflection to the TDS cult. This serves mostly as a reminder to laugh at them.
I'm not hearing a lot of talk about the walls closing in on him for this case.
And RussiaGate did result in a dozen indictments including Trump's top guy Manafort.
I am. But I guess whatever gives them hope can be a good thing. But they couldn't trump up charges to remove him from office, couldn't get any evidence he backed/orchestrated an insurrection, to get him removed from a ballot, that he wants to be dictator, etc. I just see the bigger picture from years of accusations that have always turn into nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Rob801 on Apr 21, 2024 21:26:38 GMT
LOL... fat fuck is still trying to get it thrown out. Bet he's more worried about having to sit still and keep his trap shut (other tan if he wants to take the stand) for six weeks (like any other adult).
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Apr 21, 2024 21:31:54 GMT
I'm not hearing a lot of talk about the walls closing in on him for this case.
And RussiaGate did result in a dozen indictments including Trump's top guy Manafort.
I am. But I guess whatever gives them hope can be a good thing. But they couldn't trump up charges to remove him from office, couldn't get any evidence he backed/orchestrated an insurrection, to get him removed from a ballot, that he wants to be dictator, etc. I just see the bigger picture from years of accusations that have always turn into nothing. You left out the "documents" case, which is by far the strongest.
|
|
|
Post by dlancer on Apr 21, 2024 21:46:52 GMT
I'm not hearing a lot of talk about the walls closing in on him for this case.
And RussiaGate did result in a dozen indictments including Trump's top guy Manafort.
I am. But I guess whatever gives them hope can be a good thing. But they couldn't trump up charges to remove him from office, couldn't get any evidence he backed/orchestrated an insurrection, to get him removed from a ballot, that he wants to be dictator, etc. I just see the bigger picture from years of accusations that have always turn into nothing. Removing a president from office is impossible if the opposing party doesn't have the Senate. The level of charges doesn't matter.
As for insurrection, Trump's Senate said it was up to the courts to decide, and then later on the courts said it doesn't count as insurrection if there was no Senate conviction. So congrats on gaming the system I guess. Even still, the states that wanted him removed were voting Biden anyway, making the whole thing moot even if it succeeded.
The bigger picture is a sitting president is untouchable if they have the Senate. A better gauge is to look at the condition of the House that is doing the impeaching.
|
|
|
Post by averagejoe2021 on Apr 21, 2024 22:45:24 GMT
I am. But I guess whatever gives them hope can be a good thing. But they couldn't trump up charges to remove him from office, couldn't get any evidence he backed/orchestrated an insurrection, to get him removed from a ballot, that he wants to be dictator, etc. I just see the bigger picture from years of accusations that have always turn into nothing. Removing a president from office is impossible if the opposing party doesn't have the Senate. The level of charges doesn't matter.
As for insurrection, Trump's Senate said it was up to the courts to decide, and then later on the courts said it doesn't count as insurrection if there was no Senate conviction. So congrats on gaming the system I guess. Even still, the states that wanted him removed were voting Biden anyway, making the whole thing moot even if it succeeded.
The bigger picture is a sitting president is untouchable if they have the Senate. A better gauge is to look at the condition of the House that is doing the impeaching.
Nice premise and response. I'd favor justifying the 7 years of hysteria and take it more seriously if objective evidence was provided. Instead we get one baseless accusation after the other. And the media and Democrats are more than happy to fan the flames. As my first post demonstrated... they just move unto the next conspiracy... no growth or reflection. Can you really blame his supporters for not taking them seriously when they've offered nothing all this time 🤔?
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Apr 21, 2024 23:11:09 GMT
I am. But I guess whatever gives them hope can be a good thing. But they couldn't trump up charges to remove him from office, couldn't get any evidence he backed/orchestrated an insurrection, to get him removed from a ballot, that he wants to be dictator, etc. I just see the bigger picture from years of accusations that have always turn into nothing. You left out the "documents" case, which is by far the strongest. It's by far the weakest, since the president has the right to declassify documents and categorize them as personal. Biden, Clinton, and Pence had no such authority to take classified documents, and Judge Cannon is not amused by Jack Smith's vindictive prosecution and selective enforcement. But go ahead. Keep getting your legal analysis from the same hacks who were wrong about the Colorado ballot case.
|
|
|
Post by Fetzer Zinfandel ♀︎ on Apr 23, 2024 15:08:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Apr 23, 2024 16:32:13 GMT
You left out the "documents" case, which is by far the strongest. It's by far the weakest, since the president has the right to declassify documents and categorize them as personal. Biden, Clinton, and Pence had no such authority to take classified documents, and Judge Cannon is not amused by Jack Smith's vindictive prosecution and selective enforcement. But go ahead. Keep getting your legal analysis from the same hacks who were wrong about the Colorado ballot case. FACT-CHECKING: TRY IT JUST ONCE! OR WOULD IT BREAK YOUR BRAIN?"getting your legal analysis from the same hacks who were wrong about the Colorado ballot case"? Maybe you didn't read anything I wrote on that, or even more likely, those weird perceptual filters of yours kicked in. Now, on to the facts, imbecile. Let's look at what I actually did say about the CO ballot case, not what your "special invisible friends" told you: imdb1.freeforums.net/thread/42952/lawsuit-block-ballot-survives-challenge?page=2
You should have remembered that one; you "liked" it. Same page: imdb1.freeforums.net/thread/48116/colorado-disqualifying-trump-absolutely-right?page=3
On the similar Michigan proceedings: imdb1.freeforums.net/thread/44379/trump-sues-block-effort-ballot
On Maine: imdb1.freeforums.net/thread/48664/trump-removed-maines-2024-ballot?page=16You have your head so far up your own ass, your alleged "insults" have no contact with reality.
|
|
|
Post by mr_self on Apr 23, 2024 17:25:35 GMT
New York Election Law 17-152 is the predicate crime.
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Apr 23, 2024 17:37:00 GMT
New York Election Law 17-152 is the predicate crime. This seems like a federal/state pre-emption problem waiting to happen.
|
|
|
Post by mr_self on Apr 23, 2024 17:39:40 GMT
New York Election Law 17-152 is the predicate crime. This seems like a federal/state pre-emption problem waiting to happen. Violation of that law is a misdemeanor. How does that promote the other charges to felonies?
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Apr 23, 2024 17:59:12 GMT
This seems like a federal/state pre-emption problem waiting to happen. Violation of that law is a misdemeanor. How does that promote the other charges to felonies? Good question. This is looking more and more like Bragg is trying to stretch a single into a double.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Apr 23, 2024 18:07:04 GMT
New York Election Law 17-152 is the predicate crime. This seems like a federal/state pre-emption problem waiting to happen. Yep, this is (according to the experts) the unresolved legal question. And I've gathered that both sides can be plausibly argued. That's why I (a non-lawyer) was thinking that Trump could easily be convicted by a jury that is focused on the facts of the case, but that the real battle takes place on the appeals level, where it's not the facts, but the law on preemption that gets argued over. And Trump's conviction could well be overturned on that basis.
|
|
|
Post by jeffersoncody on Apr 23, 2024 19:09:24 GMT
Trump's defense stumbles out of the gate with interruptions to opening statement
jackspicer,
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Apr 23, 2024 19:15:01 GMT
This seems like a federal/state pre-emption problem waiting to happen. Yep, this is (according to the experts) the unresolved legal question. And I've gathered that both sides can be plausibly argued. That's why I (a non-lawyer) was thinking that Trump could easily be convicted by a jury that is focused on the facts of the case, but that the real battle takes place on the appeals level, where it's not the facts, but the law on preemption that gets argued over. And Trump's conviction could well be overturned on that basis. All along, I was operating under the assumption that the prosecution was trying to prove all of the elements of a federal crime in order to prove the state crime. Keeping in mind I do not know New York law, and this rule may be settled there, I would be very worried about the fact that the falsification felony language covers "crimes," and I do not know if a misdemeanor applies under NY State law.
|
|