Trump INDICTED

[IGotWorms 3,315]

21 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Or bring it up to drag Trump through the mud. And you think this is about justice.   But you hate the defendant so you’ll excuse any and all prosecutorial malfeasance.  

Drag him through the mud where? The jury ain’t gonna hear it, that’s been decided. The public has known about it all along — it wasn’t exactly a well hidden secret!

You're grasping at straws here, bud 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

2 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Drag him through the mud where? The jury ain’t gonna hear it, that’s been decided. The public has known about it all along — it wasn’t exactly a well hidden secret!

You're grasping at straws here, bud 

It’s not about the jury. This is about the election. If you don’t see that you need to call that Cracker Jack box you got your law degree out of and ask for a refund. 

[IGotWorms 3,315]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s not about the jury. This is about the election. If you don’t see that you need to call that Cracker Jack box you got your law degree out of and ask for a refund. 

Okay — you think that access Hollywood tape wasn’t coming back up in the election?

[Ron_Artest 681]

28 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Okay — you think that access Hollywood tape wasn’t coming back up in the election?

Has anyone not heard this recording?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

30 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Okay — you think that access Hollywood tape wasn’t coming back up in the election?

Not really. I don’t recall it being a factor in 2020. 

[IGotWorms 3,315]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Not really. I don’t recall it being a factor in 2020. 

So in a presidential election where abortion is going to be a key issue, the democrats are not going to reference a famous statement, by the guy who took away abortion rights, that he likes to “grab em by the pvssy”?

You serious??

You’re flailing man. Need to go back to the well and find something better than Barron’s quinceanera and Billy Bush 

[Dozer FBG 244]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

why did the prosecution want the access Hollywood tapes introduced as evidence?

The prosecutors in Manhattan say the Access Hollywood tape rocked the campaign, and led to Trump agreeing to pay off Stormy Daniels.

[Maximum Overkill 645]

 

[Dozer FBG 244]

BREAKING:

Arizona Grand Jury INDICTS more than a dozen people, including fake electors, for conspiracy, fraud and forgery. Donald Trump named unindicted coconspirator.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

On 4/16/2024 at 5:46 AM, Maximum Overkill said:

 

 Forgot Wall Street and corporations and Real Tim 

[Dozer FBG 244]

NBC News Article:

Trump’s 2020 'fake electors' charged with state crimes in Arizona

A state grand jury in Arizona on Wednesday indicted so-called "fake electors" who backed then-President Donald Trump in 2020, following a sprawling investigation into the alleged efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s win in the presidential election in the state. 

[Ron_Artest 681]

Michigan too.

 

[Dozer FBG 244]

Politico Article:
 

Arizona has charged a long list of Trump allies for their roles in seeking to subvert the 2020 election, including:

-Rudy Giuliani
-Mark Meadows
-John Eastman
-Christina Bobb
-Jenna Ellis
-Mike Roman
-Kelli Ward

 

[shadrap 117]

53 minutes ago, Dozer FBG said:

Politico Article:
 

Arizona has charged a long list of Trump allies for their roles in seeking to subvert the 2020 election, including:

-Rudy Giuliani
-Mark Meadows
-John Eastman
-Christina Bobb
-Jenna Ellis
-Mike Roman
-Kelli Ward

 

 noting your hard on for Jan. 6 maybe put this in the appropriate thread.  the one where , my god, we almost lost our country that day!!!!  we came this close!

thanx

[Ron_Artest 681]

Trump denying he had anything to do with the inquirer stories that helped him.

 

[Maximum Overkill 645]

I love this for the Racist Pedocrat Cultists.  

[squistion 896]

 

[squistion 896]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1783515113741287765

Justice Jackson tells Trump's lawyer that he seems to be "worried about the president being chilled." She argues that, in reality, a "really significant opposite problem" would emerge:

"If the president wasn't chilled, if someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority, could go into office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes, I'm trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the Oval Office into, you know, the seat of criminal activity in this country."

[Fnord 1,141]

2 minutes ago, squistion said:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1783515113741287765

Justice Jackson tells Trump's lawyer that he seems to be "worried about the president being chilled." She argues that, in reality, a "really significant opposite problem" would emerge:

"If the president wasn't chilled, if someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority, could go into office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes, I'm trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the Oval Office into, you know, the seat of criminal activity in this country."

Oh, the one that people around here claim was a DEI hire?

Seems pretty cogent to me. Go get em, Justice Jackson! Miss Jackson if you're nasty!

[squistion 896]

 

[squistion 896]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1783518878892442005

Justice Sotomayor:

The president is only explicitly mentioned in a few federal statutes. "Justice Barrett made the point that if we say a president can't be included in a criminal law unless explicitly named, then that would bar the Senate from impeaching him for high crimes or misdemeanor because that means that he's not subject to the law at all."

[squistion 896]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1783522633763496098

Alito: "Did I understand you to say, 'Well, you know, if he makes a mistake, he makes a mistake. He's subject to the criminal laws just like anybody else' You don't think he's in a peculiarly precarious position?"

Michael Dreeben, representing the U.S.: "He's under a constitutional obligation ... he's supposed to be faithful to the laws of the United States and the Constitution of the United States."

"And making a mistake is not what lands you in a criminal prosecution."

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

Sure sounds like Alito wants to give Trump immunity. 

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

This is already a huge victory for Trump. The Court won’t make a decision until July and they may very well throw it back. Either way no trial before the election which is all Trump wanted. 
 

 

[squistion 896]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1783527654970236975

Alito: "If an incumbent who loses a very close, hotly contested election and knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent, will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?"

Michael Dreeben, representing the U.S.: "I think it's exactly the opposite, Justice Alito. There are lawful mechanisms to contest the results in an election."

[Mike Honcho 4,035]

12 minutes ago, squistion said:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1783527654970236975

Alito: "If an incumbent who loses a very close, hotly contested election and knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent, will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?"

Michael Dreeben, representing the U.S.: "I think it's exactly the opposite, Justice Alito. There are lawful mechanisms to contest the results in an election."

I listened to Alito awhile yesterday asking questions in the Idaho abortion case---it's pains me thinking about how much he contorts himself to reach some of his conclusions.

[Mike Honcho 4,035]

21 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is already a huge victory for Trump. The Court won’t make a decision until July and they may very well throw it back. Either way no trial before the election which is all Trump wanted. 
 

 

The D.C. court decision was pretty decisive---just thinking throwing it back would be interesting on what they would ask them to reconsider. 

IMO, it's pretty pathetic that SCOTUS is even hearing this. If i were arguing this today, i would be tempted to show them the Declaration of Independence and remind them that want Trump is asking for is one of the reasons for our revolution against King George. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

1 hour ago, squistion said:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1783515113741287765

Justice Jackson tells Trump's lawyer that he seems to be "worried about the president being chilled." She argues that, in reality, a "really significant opposite problem" would emerge:

"If the president wasn't chilled, if someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority, could go into office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes, I'm trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the Oval Office into, you know, the seat of criminal activity in this country."

Impeachment? Being thrown out of office? She’s Fockin brilliant. 

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

Barrett seems to suggest they could immunize official acts of the President but not private acts, and that would allow the court case to continue? 

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

5 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Impeachment? Being thrown out of office? She’s Fockin brilliant. 

Kind of funny for you to be slamming a woman for her intelligence when she’s about a thousand times brighter and more educated on the law than you’ve ever demonstrated here. 

[Mike Honcho 4,035]

11 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

The D.C. court decision was pretty decisive---just thinking throwing it back would be interesting on what they would ask them to reconsider. 

IMO, it's pretty pathetic that SCOTUS is even hearing this. If i were arguing this today, i would be tempted to show them the Declaration of Independence and remind them that want Trump is asking for is one of the reasons for our revolution against King George. 

Apparently, I'm not the only one who had this thought.

 

Quote

 

Kagan: "The president was not supposed to be above the law"

From CNN's Hannah Rabinowitz

Justice Elena Kagan cited the framers of the US Constitution, saying they didn’t want a “monarch” to rule the country.

“They were reacting against a monarch who claimed to be above the law,” Kagan said.

“Wasn’t the whole point that the president was not a monarch, and the president was not supposed to be above the law?”

The justices have been forcefully questioning Trump’s attorney over what acts – if any – should be liable for criminal prosecution.

 

 

[Mike Honcho 4,035]

58 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is already a huge victory for Trump. The Court won’t make a decision until July and they may very well throw it back. Either way no trial before the election which is all Trump wanted. 
 

 

Updated to say it seems the court could throw it back to D.C. to come up with a test for what is official vs non-official acts. I would think that things that are against the law would be enough...but who am I to get in the way of delay tactics.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

28 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Kind of funny for you to be slamming a woman for her intelligence when she’s about a thousand times brighter and more educated on the law than you’ve ever demonstrated here. 

Really? Show what you have. I don’t know why I respond to a degenerate that thinks mutilating children in the name of politics is ok. You disgust. 

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

51 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Really? Show what you have. I don’t know why I respond to a degenerate that thinks mutilating children in the name of politics is ok. You disgust. 

Show what I have about what? 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Show what I have about what? 

What I’ve shown about the law around here that is wrong. Let’s see it big mouth 

[Maximum Overkill 645]