Trump Indicted!

[PPQ_Purple]

I was talking about US networks and satellite. To me, it matters not if people in Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America don't see a second of any trial or if they even care about the whole mess. Pretty sure Americans would tune in.

Do you realize how selfish that is?

 

[Edmund Ironside]

You're still not saying either whom nor what you consider to be ‘far left’.

Well in the video one of the example of far left they use is Bernie Sanders, so let's go with that. Though what could be considered far left may vary depending on country. Also if I called Bernie 'far left' I would not be using it as an insult, as I consider him one of the most honest and genuine politicians around.

 

[Narz]

Well in the video one of the example of far left they use is Bernie Sanders, so let's go with that. Though what could be considered far left may vary depending on country. Also if I called Bernie 'far left' I would not be using it as an insult, as I consider him one of the most honest and genuine politicians around.

He was on Joe Rogan's show so I think we can safely assume he's actually far right adjacent

 

[E.man]

Well in the video one of the example of far left they use is Bernie Sanders, so let's go with that. Though what could be considered far left may vary depending on country. Also if I called Bernie 'far left' I would not be using it as an insult, as I consider him one of the most honest and genuine politicians around.

I'd agree in American terms he's left. Greens party are left here.

 

[Takhisis]

Well in the video one of the example of far left they use is Bernie Sanders, so let's go with that. Though what could be considered far left may vary depending on country. Also if I called Bernie 'far left' I would not be using it as an insult, as I consider him one of the most honest and genuine politicians around.

That's not ‘far’ left. That's the farthest to the left that you can get in a country where they consider public healthcare to be all-caps COMMUNISM.

 

[E.man]

That's not ‘far’ left. That's the farthest to the left that you can get in a country where they consider public healthcare to be all-caps COMMUNISM.

Yes... with no idea what Communism, Socialism, or even Democratic Socialism are.

 

[Takhisis]

!!!

They're uttering the D-word!

Top Democrat says ‘powerful argument’ 14th amendment disqualifies Trump​

Tim Kaine says clause on ‘insurrection against the constitution’ could preclude ex-president from running in next year’s election

Spoiler :

Democratic senator Tim Kaine of Virginia said that he believes there is a “powerful argument” to be made that Donald Trump can be disqualified from running in the 2024 presidential elections under the 14th amendment.

“In my view, the attack on the Capitol that day was designed for a particular purpose at a particular moment and that was to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power as is laid out in the constitution,” he said in an interview with ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos on Sunday. “So I think there is a powerful argument to be made

Kaine, who in 2016 ran for vice-president alongside Hillary Clinton, said that the “language is specific”, referring to the third section of the 14th amendment. “If you give aid and comfort to those who engage in an insurrection against the constitution of the United States, it doesn’t say against the United States, it says against the constitution.”

According to the section, “no person shall be a[n] … elector of president and vice-president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

It adds that such a clause could be removed via a vote of two-thirds of each House.

Speaking to Stephanopoulos, Kaine said that he discussed the section with colleagues at the time of Trump’s second impeachment. He said: “I thought actually it might have been a more productive way to go than the second impeachment to do a declaration under that section of the 14th amendment.”

Kaine joins a growing number of legal experts looking to prevent Trump from running for office again under the 14th amendment. An article by two conservative law professors that is set to be published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review examines the clause in light of Trump’s involvement in the 2020 election subversion efforts.

The article, written by constitutional scholars William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, concludes: “Taking section 3 seriously means that its constitutional disqualifications from future state and federal officeholding extend to participants in the attempted overturning of the presidential election of 2020, including former president Donald Trump and others.”

Meanwhile, a similar article published last month in the Atlantic by retired conservative federal judge J Michael Luttig and Harvard law professor emeritus Laurence Tribe echoed similar sentiments.

“The clause was designed to operate directly and immediately upon those who betray their oaths to the constitution, whether by taking up arms to overturn our government or by waging war on our government by attempting to overturn a presidential election through a bloodless coup,” wrote Luttig and Tribe.

“The former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and the resulting attack on the US Capitol, place him squarely within the ambit of the disqualification clause, and he is therefore ineligible to serve as president ever again,” they added.

The 14th amendment was also brought up during the Republican primary presidential debate last month by former Arkansas governor Asa Hutchinson.

“More people are understanding the importance of that, including conservative legal scholars, who say he may be disqualified under the 14th amendment from being president, again, as a result of the insurrection. This is something that could disqualify him, under our rules, and under the constitution,” Hutchinson said.

 

[Core Imposter]

What insurrection?

 

[Birdjaguar]

What insurrection?

The one Trump has been indicted for and for which over 500 others have been convicted of crimes including trying to overthrow the the 2020 election.

 

[Core Imposter]

The one Trump has been indicted for and for which over 500 others have been convicted of crimes including trying to overthrow the the 2020 election.

Innocent until proven guilty.
Plus, he hasn't been charged with insurrection of seditious conspiracy. So even if he is convicted of one or more of the pending charges it might not rise to the level of the three crimes detailed in the amendment. Even if convicted of something, Trump has the right to appeal. This is going to the ballot box, hopefully, God help the country if not.

It's hard to see how Trump can get a fair trial in these jurisdictions. They could convict him of anything. It's a witch hunt. Not saying Trump isn't a witch, but it's not possible for him to get a fair trial.

Besides which, if you can rig a national election, how hard would it be to rig a jury trial?

The fact is that Democrats hate Trump so bad that if he died, they would want to dig him up, cut off his head, and display it on a pike in front of the Capitol for the next 30 years.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Innocent until proven guilty.
Plus, he hasn't been charged with insurrection of seditious conspiracy. So even if he is convicted of one or more of the pending charges it might not rise to the level of the three crimes detailed in the amendment. Even if convicted of something, Trump has the right to appeal. This is going to the ballot box, hopefully, God help the country if not.

He is innocent until proven guilty. I know you want to get all technical about what an insurrection is under law and use that to say "See, it wasn't an insurrection!" You seem to miss the point that he tried to overturn the actual election results to remain in power. What would you call that kind of activity? A coup?

A conviction is a conviction. If it were to be be successfully appealed, the conviction would stand until the appeal is granted, then decided, and then goes through the next level of appeal. He could be convicted for for many years before a final final resolution. He might even be dead before an appeal is heard.

The Proud Boys and Oath Keepers have been convicted of Seditious Conspiracy in regards to Trump's attempt to overturn the election results. Jack Smith's indictments (and Fani Willis') demonstrate the scope of Trump's conspiracy to stay in power. The courts will decide guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented and testimony of witnesses. In both cases Trump will have the opportunity to defend himself and present contrary evidence.

At the heart of the case against Stewart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers leader who was sentenced on Thursday to the longest prison term yet in connection with the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, was a rare and serious charge: seditious conspiracy.
Although people have sometimes colloquially used terms like sedition, insurrection, domestic terrorism and treason interchangeably when discussing the events of Jan. 6, 2021, seditious conspiracy is legally distinct from the other terms in subtle but important ways. Here is a closer look.

What is sedition?​

It is essentially the incitement of violent action against the government — some kind of communication or activity aimed at getting people to overthrow the state by force or to prevent it from carrying out its authority to enforce the law.

What is seditious conspiracy?​

It is a federal crime found in Section 2384 of Title 18 of the United States code. That law makes it a crime for two or more people to actively plot to overthrow by force the federal government, to levy war against it, to unlawfully seize federal property or “by force to prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” A conviction carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison.

In the Oath Keepers case, prosecutors marshaled text messages, videos and other evidence to argue that Mr. Rhodes and other militia members had agreed to take steps to block Congress from certifying Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s Electoral College victory, a crucial step in the constitutional system for the normal transfer of power. Mr. Rhodes received 18 years in prison, and one of his top deputies was sentenced to a 12-year term.

Is sedition the same thing as insurrection?​

While they clearly overlap, “sedition” centers more on plotting and incitement, whereas “insurrection” is generally understood to mean the actual violent acts of an uprising aimed at overthrowing the government.
That said, the federal law against insurrection, Section 2383, slightly blurs that line. It says that “whoever incites, sets on foot, assists or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto” is guilty of that offense. Its penalty is up to 10 years in prison and disqualification from holding federal office.
Insurrection charges are considered difficult to prove and are exceedingly rare. While many people have called the events of Jan. 6 an “insurrection,” the Justice Department has not charged any rioters with that crime. In addition to the handful of seditious conspiracy charges against members of two militias, the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, prosecutors have charged various rioters with such crimes as assaulting police officers, obstructing an official congressional proceeding and trespassing.

What about domestic terrorism?​

There is no stand-alone crime of domestic terrorism, but it still has a legal definition and consequences. In this case, the judge imposed a sentencing enhancement on Mr. Rhodes, ruling that the context of his crimes met the definition of terrorism: crimes of violence that are intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government policy.

The law that defines terrorism distinguishes between “international” terrorism, which must have a foreign or transnational nexus, and “domestic” terrorism, which occurs primarily on American soil. Only “acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries” are federal crimes.
For their domestic equivalent, law enforcement officials instead deal with such offenses using other laws that do not have “terrorism” in their labels — like seditious conspiracy. But at the sentencing phase, convictions for offenses that also qualify as terrorism prompt a longer prison term.

 

[Core Imposter]

He is innocent until proven guilty. I know you want to get all technical about what an insurrection is under law and use that to say "See, it wasn't an insurrection!" You seem to miss the point that he tried to overturn the actual election results to remain in power. What would you call that kind of activity? A coup?

A conviction is a conviction. If it were to be be successfully appealed, the conviction would stand until the appeal is granted, then decided, and then goes through the next level of appeal. He could be convicted for for many years before a final final resolution. He might even be dead before an appeal is heard.

The Proud Boys and Oath Keepers have been convicted of Seditious Conspiracy in regards to Trump's attempt to overturn the election results. Jack Smith's indictments (and Fani Willis') demonstrate the scope of Trump's conspiracy to stay in power. The courts will decide guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented and testimony of witnesses. In both cases Trump will have the opportunity to defend himself and present contrary evidence.

If the actual election results were rigged, who's coup?

 

[Core Imposter]

WSJ poll found Trump and Biden tied at 46%.

 

[Birdjaguar]

If the actual election results were rigged, who's coup?

But there is no actual evidence that any aspect of the election was rigged. There is evidence of Trump's attempts top overturn the results. "If wishes were were horses, then beggars would ride."

WSJ poll found Trump and Biden tied at 46%.

This week's polling is now. It is not 2020 nor is it 2024. It has no relevance to Jan 6th and all the events surrounding it.

 

[Core Imposter]

Known to be guilty of treason: George Washington, Ben Franklin, et al. Not on the list: Donald Trump.

Also from a recent poll, and relevant to NOW: Some 78 per cent of voters said that Mr Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election were legitimate attempts to ensure an accurate vote.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Known to be guilty of treason: George Washington, Ben Franklin, et al. Not on the list: Donald Trump.

So you are resorting to some sort of "whataboutism? I assume you are talking about them being part of the 1776 revolution against England. If you are thinking of some other treasonous act, please tell me. Trump has not been charged with treason.

Do you agree that Trump's actions were a coup attempt?

 

[Perfection]

Also from a recent poll, and relevant to NOW: Some 78 per cent of voters said that Mr Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election were legitimate attempts to ensure an accurate vote.

Elon Musk Twitter polls don't count

 

[Lexicus]

What insurrection?

The one he fomented on live television

 

[Core Imposter]

Just for the record I want to be clear that I do not support the violence to follow, and I blame it squarely on the conspiracy of the commons that is in mass hysteria mode. It's so sad. I pray anyone who passes by and might be thinking of anything violent, let it go. Vengeance is the Lord's.

 

[Perfection]

Just for the record I want to be clear that I do not support the violence to follow, and I blame it squarely on the conspiracy of the commons that is in mass hysteria mode. It's so sad. I pray anyone who passes by and might be thinking of anything violent, let it go. Vengeance is the Lord's.

I blame it on the liars who lied to the crowd to get them riled up