Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

Trump January 6th Indictment


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

you 

Look 

:roflcrying:

IDK if it's on Fox yet...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/01/politics/donald-trump-indictment-grand-jury-2020-election/index.html

1bee1b3b32352411e853e18d42949593.gif.a6e1ccc1e3e2582bbf323e0fdcf670e5.gif

Viper should be along soon to tell us how this will help him even more.  Wonder if he'll mail a check for his legal defense this time?  We all know Donny won't spend any of his personal billions for it.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/former-us-president-trump-has-spent-40-million-legal-fees-reports-2023-07-30/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
3 hours ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

IDK if it's on Fox yet...

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/01/politics/donald-trump-indictment-grand-jury-2020-election/index.html

1bee1b3b32352411e853e18d42949593.gif.a6e1ccc1e3e2582bbf323e0fdcf670e5.gif

Viper should be along soon to tell us how this will help him even more.  Wonder if he'll mail a check for his legal defense this time?  We all know Donny won't spend any of his personal billions for it.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/former-us-president-trump-has-spent-40-million-legal-fees-reports-2023-07-30/

 

Yup weaponized election interference......should be good for a couple points in the polls.... people have had enough of the nonsense. Only helping Trump at this point....

nothign-more.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

All three indictments came the day after revelations about Biden family corruption.   Nope nothing to see here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ViperGTS/Z1 said:

Yup weaponized election interference......should be good for a couple points in the polls.... people have had enough of the nonsense. Only helping Trump at this point....

nothign-more.jpg

mailing him a check today? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Highmark said:

All three indictments came the day after revelations about Biden family corruption.   Nope nothing to see here.

all aboard the great conspiracy theory train... 

giphy.webp?cid=6c09b9526vpamc7f5ot0l3wbw

 

 

 

 

 

y'all were lied to.... you poor gullible rubes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
3 hours ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

all aboard the great conspiracy theory train... 

giphy.webp?cid=6c09b9526vpamc7f5ot0l3wbw

 

 

 

 

 

y'all were lied to.... you poor gullible rubes.

Yeah what am I thinking...they waited 31 months from Jan 6 but drop this after Archer testifies about Joe.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highmark said:

Yeah what am I thinking...they waited 31 months from Jan 6 but drop this after Archer testifies about Joe.   

this has been coming for how long now?  

whatever dude... 9_9

if Biden's dirty, do him next as far as I'm concerned 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
43 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

this has been coming for how long now?  

whatever dude... 9_9

if Biden's dirty, do him next as far as I'm concerned 

 

 

Almost 3 years for those charges?   Those indictments they wouldn't have even needed to interview anyone.:lmao:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Almost 3 years for those charges?   Those indictments they wouldn't have even needed to interview anyone.:lmao:

and? 

maybe try refute the articles of the indictment.... or can't you?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

all aboard the great conspiracy theory train... 

giphy.webp?cid=6c09b9526vpamc7f5ot0l3wbw

 

 

 

 

 

y'all were lied to.... you poor gullible rubes.

You have got to be one of the dumbest fucks to ever grace this site. You easily give MC , Racer and Chinless a run for their money. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

You have got to be one of the dumbest fucks to ever grace this site. You easily give MC , Racer and Chinless a run for their money. 

for someone who on occasion shows a tidbit of common sense, you do come off as a brain dead twat at times. 

today's your day... wallow in it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

for someone who on occasion shows a tidbit of common sense, you do come off as a brain dead twat at times. 

today's your day... wallow in it

 

But but but January 6th derrrrddd derrrddd

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
17 hours ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

and? 

maybe try refute the articles of the indictment.... or can't you?

 

Would it make a difference to you?   I can post plenty of legal scholars talking about how wrong these indictments are and not all of them are known as right leaning.  I posted a 12 minute video of dems doing the same election denials in 2016.

I'm sure you have heard how when the govt doesn't have a solid case they use the old "conspiracy" angle.  Many legal scholars including Judge Nap thinks any "conspiracy" law/charge should be unconstitutional. 

I don't see anything in these indictments that would constitutionally stop Trump from running or becoming President.   Doesn't it make you think for a minute why they chose these charges when the goal from the previous impeachments was to make him ineligible.   They didn't charge because they didn't have the case for it so they threw up some charges that everyone in the legal system have always known as suspect. 

https://scholars.org/brief/why-criminal-conspiracy-prosecutions-can-be-unfair-–-and-how-fix-problems#:~:text=Criminal conspiracies are considered especially,become increasingly dedicated to achieving.

Specific Problems with Conspiracy Law and Prosecutions

Beyond questionable assumptions, conspiracy law raises constitutional questions and suffers from problems of valid evidence.

  • Conspiracy law tests the limits of First Amendment rights, because it allows prosecutors to use normally protected acts such as speech, attendance at meetings, and group ties against a defendant. How can we be sure that people are not prosecuted for unpopular ties or talk? 
     
  • Evidentiary rules can easily violate the core presumption in U.S. law that individuals are liable only for their own actions. Statements and actions may be attributed to an accused co-conspirator who has not directly said or done the criminal things alleged, because courts tend to be quite liberal in admitting evidence of association. In fact, prosecutors often file conspiracy charges in order to be able to use evidence only loosely connected to a particular defendant. 
     
  • Often, it is unclear whether particular defendants in a conspiracy case actually truly intended to commit the crime (or even to conspire with others about the crime). Charges may be pursued against “big talkers” or people who merely express unpopular opinions. Judges often issue instructions to juries that, to the delight of prosecutors, encourage convictions based on things said by defendants that are ambiguous and hard to interpret with certainty.

 

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1549&context=wmborj

Just do a bit of research on issues with conspiracy laws and you will see what I mean.   Actually some of what we do on here could probably be charged by the govt under conspiracy laws in one way or another. 

Well, there are basically 5 elements for the crime of Conspiracy. Those elements are: 1. You must have 2 or more persons who 2. Intentionally 3. make an agreement 4. to violate federal law or defraud the United states, and then 5. Commit some overt act in furtherance of the agreement. Based on these elements, we know that the crime of Conspiracy is a specific- intent crime. In other words Michelle, the government must prove that these 2 or more persons intentionally entered into an agreement to commit some criminal offense. This means that in proving that there are two (2) or more person involved, undercover officers and confidential informants would not count because they would not have the requisite criminal intent. Also, the overt act done in furtherance of the agreement must occur AFTER the agreement has been reached.

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:24 PM, ViperGTS/Z1 said:

Yup weaponized election interference......should be good for a couple points in the polls.... people have had enough of the nonsense. Only helping Trump at this point....

nothign-more.jpg

What fuckin bullshit.

IMG_1623.jpeg

Edited by Mainecat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

7 hours ago, Mainecat said:

 

What fuckin bullshit.

IMG_1623.jpeg

And what did they testify.?.... You actually think Steven Miller threw Trump under the bus... are you kidding me?    :lol:

Edited by ViperGTS/Z1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol



×
×
  • Create New...