- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 952
I can't imagine why anyone would have any interest in convicting Trump if he showed no interest in running for president again, so...
Jan. 6th commission
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
My prediction was as to the documents case only. I don't think he ends up getting charged on the January 6th treasonyish stuff.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Every person charged with a crime should be asked if they are planning to run for President. If they so "no", then I can't imagine why anyone would have any interest in in convicting them.
Every person serving time in prison should be asked if they are planning to run for President. If they say "no", then I can't imagine why anyone would have any interest in keeping them locked up.
Every person serving time in prison should be asked if they are planning to run for President. If they say "no", then I can't imagine why anyone would have any interest in keeping them locked up.
Merrick "nobody is above the law" Garland will be neglectful if he doesn't bring charges on the Jan 6th referrals. He cannot run from the evidence.
Link to the 154 page Executive Summary:
I think it is significantly more difficult to get a conviction for January 6th than for the documents case or the Georgia case. I think Garland will do the documents case, not do January 6th, and Georgia will take on Trump for that nefarity.
We'll see. Garland might not go all in on all charges referred, but I still think he will choose one or two to chase.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 10,995
A mod, you say? You, perhaps? Are you telling us everything you know, Birdjaguar?
I agree that it's much harder to get a conviction on the insurrection than on the documents case. And it's risky in that, if Trump goes to trial and there is a hung jury because of one Trumper, then Trump will claim the legal system has proven him innocent, or more precisely PROVEN HIM INNOCENT. But the lining up of fake electors part of it strikes me as worth going for. About the mob, he can say, "I didn't know what they were going to do," but seeking out people in various states to certify false boards of electors can't be done with express intent. I hope Jack Smith goes for both. And that Willis goes after him for the Raffesberger call.
Yes, the betting pool concerns charging. As to whether he'll ever be "nailed"--i.e. see prison (even house arrest)--all bets are off, in that just a single juror inclined to cover for him is enough to derail the whole process.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 952
I need a table of contents just for that.
Wrong scene
I know, but I was too lazy to search for an accurate meme... I figured folks would get the point... but since somebody had to go all Star Wars nerd on me
... here you go Mr. McFussypants, enjoy:
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 952
it's all political. the Justice Department doesn't need Congress to tell them what to do; they have their mandate.
if Trump won't run there's going to be no reason to pursue him. And I imagine no small segment of Democrats would love to see him run just so this can hound him for his whole campaign leading to an absolute blow-out and...four more years of Joe Biden i guess *party horn*.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Actually, there is. Whether Trump will run or not is irrelevant.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 10,995
The reason to pursue him is the same reason for pursuing any criminal: so that justice can be served.
It's particularly important in the present context because of the political dimension of the crime. Trump exposed vulnerabilities in our system that a more competent and equally evil person will exploit, particularly if that person sees that Trump and his followers didn't experience consequences.
It's particularly important in the present context because of the political dimension of the crime. Trump exposed vulnerabilities in our system that a more competent and equally evil person will exploit, particularly if that person sees that Trump and his followers didn't experience consequences.
Lock him up!
Lindsey Graham saw it coming (6 mins)...
I have so many thoughts watching this... It's hilarious, in a bad way, and simultaneously chilling. It's easy to forget how anti-Trump Lindsey Graham used to be. He was an avid, outspoken "Never-Trumper"... one of the most outspoken... until he wasn't.
Where is the logic supposed to be in your argument?
Someone commits a crime, he needs to be held responsible. There is nothing whatsoever political about prosecuting Trump. In fact, the only way to make it political is by NOT prosecuting Trump. By letting him get away with it, you put him above the law, and no one is or should be above the law.
Anyone but Trump and this whole thing would have gone through courts ages ago, and the person would already sit in prison and would continue to do so for a very long time. It's only because certain people are seemingly too scared to do their job properly in fear of things looking "political" that a criminal is now likely getting away with his crime. This is a clear failure of the system, and in some ways a violation of the oath of the people who have sworn to defend the nation against all enemies. If a person tries to destroy the very foundations the nations is build on, and you don't do anything about it, you are betraying your country through gross negligence, period.
You seem to have this rather odd idea that "not running for president" is somehow a punishment for a crime, it isn't. If you don't punish those who break the law, why even have laws in the first place?
"No reason to pursue him", seriously? Trump didn't try to steal some candy, he tried to overthrow democracy itself!
LG is such a slime ball of southern charm. It reminds me of what was said about Talleyrand being "a silk stocking full of shet"
Similar threads
- Locked
