A Political Prosecution in Prime Time
Link to Quote: Live updates: Trump, 18 others charged in sweeping indictment in Georgia election probe - ABC News (go.com)
Last night the nation was treated to another bit of theatre from those who are part of the political prosecution of Donald Trump. Last night a Fulton County grand jury indicted former President Trump and 18 others on charges related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. The indictment could have been more easily have been handed down today, but that would have lacked all the drama we had last night as the Fulton Court House was kept open late and the nation was kept on the edge of its seat.
It was an incident that happened earlier in the day which captured the attention of the more attentive observers:
"On Monday afternoon, the Fulton County Court’s website posted a document listing the same charges included in the indictment released late Monday night. Reuters first reported on the document, before the Fulton County Court quickly removed it from the website."
Indictments returned in Trump-Georgia case | Live Updates from Fox News Digital
Later a Fulton County Clerk declared it to be fake and that people should look for the Fulton County Court letterhead. However when the indictment finally was released late into the night, because the grand jury supposedly rendered its verdict at around 8:00 PM the two documents appeared to be identical. How can that be? It seems every one of these prosecutions turns up another piece of questionable actions on the part of the prosecution.
The prosecution in this case is Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and she responded to questions about the odd circumstance with:
"No, I can't tell you anything about what you refer to," Willis said. "What I can tell you is that we had a grand jury here in Fulton County. They deliberated till almost 8:00, if not right after 8:00, an indictment was returned. It was true billed. And you now have an indictment."
Indictments returned in Trump-Georgia case | Live Updates from Fox News Digital
Willis delivered her presentation at around 11:30 PM EST last night before the entire nation.
"Former President Donald Trump was indicted for the fourth time, this time in Georgia, on Monday night along with 18 others who authorities say were involved in illegal efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election in the state.
In addition to Trump, who is facing 13 counts in the latest indictment, the 18 other people charged for alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia are:
Former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, lawyers John Eastman, Ray Smith III and Robert Cheeley, former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows, former Trump campaign attorney Kenneth Chesebro, former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, former members of Trump legal team Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell, ex-Trump staffer Michael Roman, former chairman of the Georgia Republican Party David Shafer, Georgia state. Sen. Shawn Still, Illinois police chaplain Stephen Lee, Black Voices for Trump executive director Harrison Floyd, Publicist Trevian Kutti, former Coffee County Republican Party in Georgia chairwoman Cathy Latham, 2020 Fulton County Republican poll watcher Scott Hall and former Coffee County, Georgia, election supervisor Misty Hampton."
Indictments returned in Trump-Georgia case | Live Updates from Fox News Digital
The Trump hating Willis cut her teeth using the RICO statute, so it is something she feels comfortable with. Her 98-page indictment contains 41 counts, 13 of which Trump faces, and alleges that Trump made 13 false statements in his effort to overturn the election results. For those who want to read the indictment, it can be found here:
Read the full Georgia indictment against Trump and 18 allies | PBS NewsHour
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz
"Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz, speaking to Fox News Digital, criticized the pending indictment, calling Trump’s actions "very similar" to that of Al Gore’s legal strategy in the Bush v. Gore case that decided the 2000 presidential election.
"We challenged the election, and we did much of the things that are being done today and people praised us. I wrote a bestselling book called ‘Supreme Injustice. Now they're making it a crime," Dershowitz said."
Dershowitz slams GA indictment, says Trump used same tactics as Al Gore in 2000: not a ‘crime' (msn.com)
Harvard Law Alan Dershowitz noted that the use of the RICO Act was one of the quickest/easiest ways to gain an indictment yet was also one of the most vulnerable to being overturned on appeal. Usually, such cases take a few years to adjudicate, thus Fat Fani Willis wanted to get the indictment out there last night. Right now, she is enjoying her minute of fame in the eyes of the radical left. However, these ideological prosecutors have done irreputable damage to our legal system. They have bastardized American law and anyone who is not a radical leftist can see it.
I can't help believing that there are independents out there who had no intention of ever voting for Donald Trump, now saying to themselves "hey, wait a minute...why are they coming after this guy this way?"
Tags
Who is online
68 visitors
I'm expecting another surge in the polls for Donald Trump.
Watching the news here in NC this morning and they reported he's polling far better now than he did in the last 2 elections.
I'm expecting a surge in squirrels, NT should be looking like Glendale, Ohio in short order.
in america, as seen on TV, the easiest targets are the first to threaten a civil war...
“Resist” lemmings have been surging for years now. Although the drop of the cliff they’ve been leaping off isn’t quite as far. The bottom is rising via all the lemming bodies that have been stacking up over the years ….
Oh I know, I just wonder why the 'right' adopted them and became a dysfunctional family of maga proportions.
It is vexing why so many of my lemming friends on the left insist on jumping off the TDS cliff of delusion. Perhaps like their namesake it’s just migratory behavior and Trump just happens to be a cliff in their migratory path.
Modern lemmings are equipped with both parachutes and bungee cords ... I am sure that is most vexing to you.
And yet, the bottom of the cliff keeps getting closer and closer each day.
Modern lemmings need a new rigger ….
Hilarious how they're all willing to go over the cliff for their loser hero.
I suggest a consultation with Warby Parker.
I think it is sad.
you'd think some people would be more appreciative of simplifying the GOP primary for them. it's now down to the short italian, the fat italian, and a handful of why did they even bother...
Not needed [deleted]
Look at the monster they created and now cannot get to shut the fuck up. I heard the former 'president' is giving a press conference about the latest indictment and charges and his lawyers and allies are asking him not to.
... courtesy of those that have a defective grasp of the constitution and american ideal of equal justice under the law.
the wannabe dictator is going to spend his last months of freedom traveling from one courtroom to another, burning thru the cash gathered from his legion of suckers, while attempting to stall his inevitable incarceration with bogus legal maneuvers, only to wind up in government housing without the benefit of a camera pointing at him and no access to to a cell phone. this isn't the last state or federal indictment coming down the pipeline...
Coming from someone that supports the Democrat Party that is pure hypocritical BS. Equal justice under the law means the law applies equally to everyone.
Hillary and her crew were let off the hook by Comey for mishandling classified documents over a private server; destroying government property; and destroying evidence by bleachbitting her server hard drives; and smashing government cell phones and tablets. Guess Comey was keeping in step with Bill Clinton being allowed to keep tapes containing information that was deemed classified.
Obama kept classified documents in an unsecured warehouse for 3 years- no FBI raid to reclaim them; and no charges from the DOJ.
Brandon has classified documents in unsecure locations since he was a Senator; and continued the practice while he was VP. The only thing coming from the Special Counsel Garland appointed is they are no where near ending their investigation. I am sure they can slow walk it for another 4 or 5 years before letting it die on the vine.
Let's not forget Hunter- who had the most serious charges against him have the statute of limitations run out; and the gun charge dropped in a sweetheart plea deal by a Federal DA stooge Brandon kept on- who was just named Special Counsel by Garland as a reward for slow walking and playing ball with the DOJ. Given how slow charges were brought on Hunter- expect something around 2027 or 2028.
Either the law applies to everyone or no one.
Democrats/leftists will be screaming the loudest when it applies to no one.
but, but, but what about...
Behind bars . . . . . . . . . . a lot of people have been waiting a long time to see that sight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Penniless (I hope) and behind bars!!!!!!!!!
Yep, even many, many Democrats are starting to turn MAGA.
Another day, another indictment. (Big Yawn!)
I'm getting a craving for a ham and cheese sandwich.
a totally delusional comment...
Careful....The last guy who used that phrase is among the missing.
I'm emulating you. Very little you post makes sense
I doubt that the Dems are gaining supporters from all these investigations.
They can lie, steal, and cheat in attempting to win elections. Once in power all they can do is investigate, impeach, and indict on baseless accusations. The one thing they can't do is govern wisely, and the voters are quickly becoming aware of that fact.
who are we talking about, again...?
wow, talk about projection . . .
Kind of suggests that these actions are more focused on the rule of law than on political gain.
No way in hell.
That's the worst insult in the world to sane, decent, thinking, intelligent people.
“I'm expecting anothe surge in the polls for Donald Trump.”
Saying just what?
That he has been denied? No. That he has a leg to stand on? No. That he could still be our next president? Unimaginable and sadly still stupidly possible. God damn us if it comes to pass.
It says that an obvious political prosecution backfires.
The left was too damn obvious...again!
“It says that an obvious political prosecution backfires.”
When will you acknowledge that this ‘man’ has no business in determining the course we as a nation should take?
Retribution does not a platform make.
I can't. He just had far too good a first term!
Enjoy your delusions. History will have a much different interpretation.
I doubt it.
Say what you will, Trump is the greatest reality television producer of all time. It's been running for over 7 years now on all networks. The news outlets report on it. Everybody is talking about it. New loves emerge and families fragment because of it and people fight over it. It looks like now they're releasing a new season that promises to be the best season yet.
I'm expecting to see him put into custody for violating the conditions of his DC release on bail.
Anything can happen in this era. The FBI just shot and killed an elderly man who could barely walk.
Will these rogue Democrats ever be held accountable for their illegal actions?
The fact that the document was released to the media before Trump's legal team is also illegal. Guess Willis, or one of the Fulton County Clerks, wanted to get a jump on the proceedings. Don't expect anyone to be held accountable. Democrats never are.
Yes, you are right. It is a felony in every state.
Don't expect anyone to be held accountable. Democrats never are.
Correct!
Just a further continuation of the rabid liberal left's campaign to get Trump at any cost.
And they, after all the publicity, HAD to absolutely jump on the bandwagon.
And it is a well-planned campaign, just like we see around here.
And Paranoia Derangement Syndrome is born. Yikes!
Remember: "mission accomplished!"
Just the one draped on the USS Abraham Lincoln. Is there another of 'historical' importance?
I expect there are scores of Fulton County Clerks and not all of them are democrats ... 'nice' try.
I am expecting only a TDS driven Democrat DA would have sent the charges to the clerk in advance; and only a TDS driven moron clerk would have processed and released them in advance.
Chances are the clerk was a Democrat. Either way TDS driven is a given.
You may be correct, 74,223,369 deranged sufferers voted for him in 2020.
never mind the charges, the search for a legal technicality to spring their fuhrer intensifies...
Google what TDS means.
Why do Democrats/Leftists always think they can redefine words?
Trump is entitled to the same protections under the rule of law and the Constitution as Brandon, Hillary, Bill, and Obama.
In fact we all are.
But it seems that Democrats/Leftists have no damn problem breaking the law in pursuit of what the deem justice.
Something along the lines of CDS, ODS or BDS? /S
trump was a democrat until he figured out that the majority of people that were ignorant enough to vote for him were republicans...
From CNN
I can't stand CNN, do I have to read it?
OK, out of friendship I read it. Alas it offered up zilch new.
It's a felony.
So I understand, but that is not a reason to blindly condemn.
Fanni Willis charged Trump before the Grand Jury in Georgia voted.
Get it?
that motion should stall trump's conviction and incarceration by a week... /s
He is looking at a thousand years for questioning election results. In Ecuador they simply assassinate political opponents.
Six Colombians Arrested in Assassination of Ecuador Presidential Candidate - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
We aren't far behind
uh yeah, the available evidence seems to show a bit more than that...
try again.
What evidence?
recorded phone calls, subpoenaed text messages, etc, etc...
sorry, I thought you were better informed...
You said evidence. The notorious phone call is evidence? Evidence of what?
The argument has been made that Willis simply charged everyone she could with everything she could and left it for the Court to sort out.
Is that supposed to be American justice?
Well obviously one of you isn't. That phone call?? LMAO
Let's toy with Hunter making a similar call ... there would not be enough tar and feathers.
Ah, Hunter would just end up with a sweetheart deal!
... from a trump appointee.
Whom Biden's AG just named as special counsel in the ongoing Hunter Biden investigation.
Y'all wanted him before y'all didn't want him ... flip flop ... flip flop.
Thank you for reading my comment.
My point was that it really doesn't matter who appointed him or when, now does it?
You have a pattern of ignoring all the details and recasting Trump's indictments in simplistic innocuous terms.
Few people are dumb enough to think that all Trump did was question election results. So who do you think is buying the bullshit you are peddling?
Trump engaged in specific acts and many of those acts were illegal. If a court finds that Trump did indeed act as alleged, he faces legal consequences.
Surely you can see that engaging in a lying campaign to coerce officials to take illegal / unethical actions and organizing fake electors in an attempt to steal an election is not simply "questioning election results".
"Jeffrey Dahmer got life for cooking and eating exotic meals."
No. The charges were written before the grand jury voted. That’s how it works. That’s how it has to work. Otherwise, there’s nothing to vote on.
The grand jury is just folks. They aren’t lawyers. They don’t sift through the evidence and figure out what to charge. The prosecutor, who is a lawyer, is the one who does that. The grand jury just deliberates, and then votes yes or no.
Then why did the clerk call it "fictitious?"
Prove that statement. You do realize that under American law we don't prove innocence. A prosecutor has to prove guilt. I will gladly give you the counter side (below) to the indictment but be careful with what you declare as bullshit. Everyone can clearly see that all of this is political, just like the non-investigation of Joe Biden is political. It stinks to the point that, as I said, those who would never vote for Trump might now consider it.
Surely you can see that engaging in a lying campaign to coerce officials to take illegal / unethical actions and organizing fake electors in an attempt to steal an election is not simply "questioning election results".
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who worked with Al Gore during the 2000 recount read the indictment. This is what he said:
"When I read the indictment, I said to myself, 'Oh, my God. I did some of those things during Bush vs Gore.' I did everything possible to try to get a recount. I called people and said, 'Look, it's only 600 votes. Can't we find 600 votes that were not properly counted?'"
"This RICO indictment could have been applied to us Democrats who challenged the Bush v. Gore election in Florida," Dershowitz said. "It could have been used against Thomas Jefferson in 1800. It could have been used in the Tilden Hayes election. It could have been used against John F. Kennedy's people in Hawaii. Election challenges are a central part of America."
Some of the charges that Trump and others such as Mark Meadows and Rudy Giuliani are facing include allegedly making false statements to officials and false statements in relation to voting machines and "false electors."
Trump is also receiving backlash due to a 2021 phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger where he asked him to help him "find 11,780 votes ."
Dershowitz said that that conversation was exculpatory, but not incriminating.
"You listen to that conversation from beginning to end and you read the transcript," he said. "It's clear what he was doing. He wasn't saying to manufacture or make votes. He was saying 'there are votes out there that haven't been counted. We have to find those votes.'"
"That's what I said in Florida in 2000," Dershowitz continued. "'We can find 600 votes-the butterfly ballots, the hanging chads. Come on, let's get to work. Let's find 600 votes and turn this election over to Al Gore.' I didn't do anything wrong, and certainly he didn't do anything wrong in this conversation. There may be more that we don't know about."
Dems could have been indicted for Bush v. Gore by Georgia DA's standards: Dershowitz | Just The News
And btw, Dershowitz never voted for Donald Trump.
My position is that Trump broke the law. For me to be wrong, Trump would have to be found not guilty on these indictments. Legal determination is the result of a court of law. That is when the proof comes. Right now we operate on the evidence. There is no question in my mind that Trump engaged in many specific acts (e.g. attempted coercion of Raffensperger, attempt to suborn Pence to table certified votes) that were wrong and we have indictments that map those and other acts to laws.
Is it your position that Trump did nothing wrong ... that he will be found not guilty of all the current charges?
See, Vic, you are whitewashing this situation. You are trying to spin reality to make it look as though all Trump did was question the election. That is such bullshit. Do you actually think you can get people to believe that all Trump did was question the election?
If Trump has simply done what Dershowitz described I am confident he would not be facing indictments. I personally would not consider this wrongdoing. But in reality Trump went way beyond the pretty picture painted by Dershowitz. Trump did not stop at legal actions and recounts and instead sought to coerce officials to deliver false results and take unconstitutional / unethical / illegal actions. (That is my position, proof comes from the lawsuits.) Gore engaged in legal and ethical acts (e.g. recounts) to challenge the election results because they were indeed razor thin and he did win the popular vote. But when Gore's practical legal challenges were exhausted (and I have always felt he went too far even though it was his right to do so) he conceded the election and moved on.
There is no comparing Gore's collective actions with Trump's. And the fact that Dershowitz is trying to compare Trump with history back to Jefferson (where history has no conclusion of corrupt attempts by Jefferson in the election) illustrates the tactic.
In other words:
Trump did far more than simply "challenge the results of an election".
Your attempt to recast reality in such simple and inaccurate terms will not persuade anyone who looks at this objectively.
Finally, is my question for you @13 too probative?
Well, I hate to sound like a democrat, but where is the "evidence?' Maybe you are just giving an opinion, which is fine with me, except when I do that I get called "hyper partisan."
There is no question in my mind that Trump engaged in many specific acts (e.g. attempted coercion of Raffensperger, attempt to suborn Pence to table certified votes) that were wrong and we have indictments that map those and other acts to laws.
That is why I posted the Dershowitz piece.
See, Vic, you are whitewashing this situation. You are trying to spin reality to make it look as though all Trump did was question the election. That is such bullshit.
Actually, I didn't argue the merits of this case, nor Bragg's case, nor Jack Smith's case. My position has always been that none of this should be connected to Biden's DOJ. From the day Trump was elected this has been going on. What you don't seem to understand is that there is a price to be paid for corruption and the blatantly partisan acts of DOJ/FBI which amounts to malfeasance, right from the beginning, discredit anything done now. Talk about bullshit! Do you think the American people don't know that all these prosecutions of a political candidate are anything but what they appear to be? You are easily going to get a conviction in left leaning shit holes like "Fulton County" GA or NYC or DC. None of it will matter to the general public, many of whom are wondering why this is all being done to a political candidate and former President.
If Trump has simply done what Dershowitz described I am confident he would not be facing indictments.
I absolutely disagree. Some of the prosecutors in these cases ran on getting Trump.
Gore engaged in legal and ethical acts (e.g. recounts) to challenge the election results because they were indeed razor thin and he did win the popular vote.
That's debatable too. You know he only contested ballots in heavy democrat districts and even tried to get military mail in ballots tossed if they weren't perfectly signed & certified. (Military ballots were regarded as heavily Republican). Think of how mail in ballots were treated in the last two elections.
But when Gore's practical legal challenges were exhausted (and I have always felt he went too far even though it was his right to do so) he conceded the election and moved on.
But then again, many democrats haven't conceded losses, Stacey Abrams being most notable.
Finally, is my question for you @13 too probative?
Ahh, no, educators must take all questions.
Do you think this indictment is without merit?
Do you think the documents and Jan 6th indictments are without merit?
The answer to the former is most likely and to the latter is totally without merit. The indictment that hasn't come yet may be closest to the mark. Unfortunately, the actions of the government both federal and state have "nullified" any and all verdicts of juries. One of those Simpson jurors might be able to explain what that means.
What, specifically, are you asking for? There is an abundance of evidence in public domain and then there is evidence that will only be delivered in a trial.
Irrelevant. What matters is what Trump actually did and how that relates to the law.
There is no way that someone would indict Trump for merely questioning the results and calling for a recount. No court would allow such a frivolous lawsuit and only a moron would attempt to bring it.
Who cares? Focus on what we are talking about.
Explain why you think the latest indictment most likely has no merit. You realize that you are stating these are frivolous lawsuits. That Trump did not engage in the stated actions. That the accusers invented actions by Trump.
There you go again. The burden isn't on the accused. You want to argue that he broke the law. Some might say make your case. I say the deep state has pulled too much shit already. They haven't faced any consequences. One that the American people can deliver would be a nullification of all verdicts via the ballot box.
Explain why you think the latest indictment most likely has no merit.
Because it conflates the questioning of an election with trying to overturn it.
The Constitution allows people/candidates to question election results :
Explaining how Congress settles electoral college disputes | Constitution Center
In 2016 there were democrats who did anything they could to change the outcome :
House Dems who challenged 2016 election results escalate fight with Republicans behind 2020 challenges | Fox News
Do I think Trump asked GA officials to manufacture votes? Of course not.
You realize that you are stating these are frivolous lawsuits.
I expect any convictions coming out of Fulton County to be overturned on appeal. You heard it here first.
Don’t know, don’t care, and that’s irrelevant. What the clerk may or may not have called it has no bearing on what I said about it. And I’m right. Focus on that.
The law requires that when you make complaints to the government about, well, anything, that you do so honestly - in good faith.
Think, for example, about filing a police report. We hear this kind of thing all the time. Filing a false police report is a crime. If you claim you’ve been wronged, when you know you haven’t, that’s a crime.
When there is a form involved, it typically has a place for a signature right under the words:
Or words to that effect. Hopefully, you get the idea. You can’t just jerk government officials around with bullshit hoping to make things go your way.
There is substantial evidence that Donald Trump made multiple claims of election fraud that he knew were false. That’s a crime. There are other allegations, of course, like conspiring to produce false electors, but when you say he “questioned election results” these phony claims of election fraud are what we are talking about.
No shit, Vic. I asked you to be specific and you engage in a strawman trying to make it look as though I have suggested that the burden of proof in a lawsuit is on the accused. Intellectual dishonesty.
The indictment does not charge Trump with questioning the results of the election, it charges him with trying to steal it. You keep doing this. Instead of being honest about the indictment you pretend it has no merit ... you falsely misrepresent it as charging Trump with merely questioning the results of an election.
Why engage in such obvious intellectual dishonesty? Do you think readers are so stupid that they actually will believe that Trump was indicted merely because he questioned the results of an election? And if you think this is the case I suggest you read the indictment before typing another word.
Fascinating.
So, you are back to name calling?
That didn't take long.
I'm cool with that
Gee, as one of our members has said, 'so what'?
Identifying intellectual dishonesty is not 'name-calling'.
Your entire post was nothing but deflection.
Yes indeed.
show us where TiG did that in his comment, vic...
Each time the former 'president' lied (knowing what he said was a lie) to his supporters/enablers on 1/6 was a count - in each state where he lost - each lie he told to the mob - knowing it was a lie - was a count - plus the fake electors - and some say there is no evidence.
Who gives a shit what Dershowitz has to say? Another former 'president' ass kisser who has something to hide regarding his relationships with the former 'president' and Jeffrey Epstein
tig doesn't 'name call'
that is the MO of the supporters/enablers of the former 'president' and what the former 'president' is also infamous for
He never voted for Trump and said he never would.
So why not listen to a Law Professor with principles?
TiG can speak for himself.
I did @2.2.41.
Post honest comments and I will not call out intellectual dishonesty. Trump did far more than merely question the results of an election.
And they will be crying the loudest if this indictment gets thrown out because of the way it was released.
There’s no reason it would be thrown out on that ground.
That remains to be seen.
Ok then, what could possibly be the reason?
From @2
What “document,” exactly? Something official or a draft?
Was it, though? Released to the media? Or was it accidentally posted to the county website and almost immediately taken down?
Explain how. Tie facts to elements of a statute.
No discussion of the indictment itself, just a sideshow of deflections.
another example of forget the crimes, find the legal technicality to get the criminal off the hook...
Which crimes?
The falsifying of a FISA application for which nobody went to jail?
find the legal technicality to get the criminal off the hook...
You mean like what was done for Daniel Ellsberg or Bill Ayers or Tony Podesta? It only seems to work one way.
sorry, I thought this article was about trump...
Maybe you should read it again.
Clue: The title gives it away.
here's a bucket, good luck bailing out the titanic...
I believe that's what they told Boris Berezovsky
It wasn’t released to the media. It appeared on the website, probably accidentally, and only for a brief time before it was caught and taken down.
How would that work? The bill can’t issue until the grand jury votes on it, and they were in court while this was going on, not watching TV. Regardless, all the document contained is the very charges they voted on. They were hearing about the charges at the same time it was “leaked.” It didn’t change anything.
Accountable for what? A harmless clerical error? What kind of accountability would you like?
The announcement of the supposed "Special Prosecutor" into Hunter and right on schedule - here is this "indictment".
You can tell by the woman's voice in the announcement that she is just giddy as hell to get her day in the sun. It had "if you guys can't get him, we will give it OUR shot" written all over it.
For those with at least a semi open mind, enjoy this little piece................
Attack if you will but NOT the source.
Oh ya, her voice kept rising.
I really wish I could say I'm surprised. But with the history of misinformation, misrepresentation and just flat out lies from the left, sadly I can't.
"The source" is a 6-month-old article from a low credibility, strongly-biased publication. I can definitely understand why you'd want to declare criticism of it off-limits, but it's fair game.
And quite accurate.............
Says the guy who believes a non-credible source and tried to pre-emptively censor criticism of it. It's a partisan opinion piece.
No one said it was prohibited to criticize. I just know how the site works when it comes to sources others don't like. And you proved it.............quite well and......in with both feet. I know all about the Federalist FFS. [deleted]
like Sandy said, the source is a non-credible and highly biased, so a non-credible and highly biased 'accurate' opinion????
Not remembering asking you for your opinion...............hmmmmmmm let me look.
Nope sure didn't. [deleted]
I guess you don't realize how forums like this work . . . project much?
Plus it's not a matter of 'not liking' the source, it's the lack of credibility of the source.
Funny how a single source can trigger so many but NONE of them can dispute the article itself.
From the transcript of the "perfect" phone call:
Let me emphasize the above. ⇡ If Trump's call was not intended to ask Raffensperger to get the votes he needed to be declared the winner then what, exactly, was Trump asking for?
What I find interesting about that 'perfect phone call' is that the former 'president' states often that 'EVERYONE KNOWS' - whatever subject he happens to be lying about at the moment - 'EVERYONE SAYS or EVERYONE KNOWS' . . . I note certain members here use that same language shall we say - when declaring certain things - it's immature, childlike, I don't know what words to use to describe it
Although I'm not Trump's lawyer my advice to him right now is to run like hell, and I don't mean as a candidate.
See comment #2 above and let's see if anyone else notices...................
And also from the article...........
Whether or not they've screwed this one up, he still has a few things to worry about. I guess what amazes me the most is that as the polls indicate, the American people support him more with every indictment. Makes me think that The Godfather could have been elected POTUS.
Jumping to conclusions on sparse evidence? Ah but for human frailty we could blame all upon the stars. (apol. to the bard)
Ignoring the evidence that the charges filed on the "fake" indictment are the same as what the actual indictment was?
It was all just a happy coincidence for TDS suffering leftists everywhere.
Rule of law means shit to Democrats.
I would not know, up here we're all a bunch of Trotskyite Monarchists.
trump will probably be in an orange jumpsuit by the end of the month for violating his DC bail conditions...
He has a 'knack' for hoisting himself up any available petard.
The facts are in or are you another who won't accept them?
meh, all of his legal representation contracts have escalation clauses written into them...
oh, the irony...
That's right and you spent all morning trying to obfuscate.
That is ironic.
at least a 5 year minimum sentence on the collected charges, mandatory incarceration, no federal pardons...
Surely you jest but hey, you made me laugh ... a first! Mark it down, it's probably the last.
Sure to get a conviction in a leftist shit hole like Fulton County and juat as certain to be overturned.
But hey, if we can only get a conviction before the election, it will be as one somebody here recently said "mission accomplished."
you keep forgetting that the majority of these charges are based upon the testimony of republicans and trump supporters...
why is that?
You see, the man who drafted the RICO Act was very close to the Kennedys and he was convinced that the mob assassinated John or Robert or both. ( a valid idea since the Kennedy brothers screwed the very people who once enriched Joe Kennedy) His name was Robert Blakey and he crafted that Act to toss a net over a bunch of people in hopes of getting them to testify against one another. Of course, the problem with all of that is that you sometimes encourage people to make stuff up to save their own skins. As a matter of fact, Paul Manafort was a guest on Hannity last night and he said that is exactly what the Mueller team tried to get him to do: lie about Trump.
it's funny that you put those in the same sentence...
Not really. They wanted him to compose. He served two years in prison (one in solitary confinement) for the same thing that Hunter Biden did.
pardoned = guilty
Hunter hasn't even been charged. He might be the only man who pleaded guilty while an investigation was supposedly still going on.
... disgraced gen. flynn.
LTG M Flynn retired as a three star.
His brother, GEN C Flynn is a 4 star.
oh sorry, the pardoned one...
Lets hope so. For the record, the investigations started long before little bitch donny announced he was running, so claiming this is all to interfere in the 2024 election is complete and utter bullshit.
Which 'facts'?
lol
So that means that the RICO Act is not valid at all? Your lack of logic with this statement is truly profound.
They (meaning Willis/Georgia) didn't screw up a damn thing Buzz.
tig provided an interview and I loved this part especially - 'she didn't charge him - she threw the book at him'
[removed]
Hope you're right.
That was you back on 2.1.5.
You mean in all my comments.
That is another issue. Is it really Constitutional? Guilt by association? Why was it so hard to figure out how to use it, Guiliani being the first? Why was it only used against the mob in the beginning? Why is it allowed to be used so broadly in the state of Georgia?
All those questions can be asked in another article. Here they would be misconstrued as a defense in this particular case and I am not doing that.
The ones in front of you.
Then why weren't the charges brought way back then?
This isn't the same Prosecutor who is 7 months into another RICO case and has sat a total of 0 jurors is it? 7 months and they can't pick a jury?
Another heroine for them.
Maybe she'll trap Trump by asking his opinion of the 2020 election?
pffft, after 3 years, everybody knows what his stock answer is...
And everyone know what her opinion is!
good luck in your search to find another typo in a sweeping RICO criminal indictment...
"Fulton County leaked the indictment before it was voted on, lied about it after they were caught, and then forgot to redact the names of the grand jurors trying to imprison Trump for tweeting. But I’m sure the 2020 election they ran was spotless."
(2) Sean Davis (@seanmdav) / X (twitter.com)
I think this appropriate to explain the circumstances.
The Dems continue to shoot themselves in the foot.
The Wizard Of Oz (1939) If I only had a Brain - YouTube
Yup, like our friends on the left Ray Bolger was quite a dancer.
ROFL. Way to grossly misrepresent what is happening.
Aaaand, neither grand jurors nor DAs nor criminal courts run elections.
Geez!
Ok. You tell us what is happening.
Seriously? You recast reality as:
And then you object when Tacos! observes that you are grossly misrepresenting reality.
Who do you think is stupid enough to buy the bullshit line that Trump was indicted for merely tweeting? Might as well claim that Trump was indicted for merely talking to people.
What is the point of making such obviously wrong claims?
First, show me the charge for Tweeting. Reproduce the allegation that says he violated the law by Tweeting. You said it. You can support it.
Additionally, the indictments (all of them in multiple jurisdictions) are matters of public record and available for you to read online. As with any criminal complaint, they detail specific actions the defendant took and tie those actions to specific and real criminal codes.
Please stop with childish bullshit like claiming they want to put him in prison for Tweeting. Holy shit, that’s stupid.
False. As has been reported time and time again now, this was a dummy document to make sure that when the real thing was posted, it would be seen. I used to make websites for people, this is what could be called a, "placeholder", or, "test document", to make sure the real documents are placed in the correct spot in the file tree. Sorry, total nothingburger.
geez, way to flush that promising conspiracy theory down the toilet.
It was not reported that way "time and time again. It was first reported to be fictitious.
That's actually the law in Georgia. It's all public record.
The key phrase there is:
After a grand jury votes to charge someone with a crime
The jury didn't vote until hours after their names were published on the County clerk's website.
Why do you think any of this is important?
At the very least it will add to the perception of corruption.
Yeah, I know. But I was responding to the part where the jurors names were published and that is not illegal under Georgia law. I didn't care all that much about a "test" document coming out accidently. And I see now that a clerk has come forward admitting to the mistake. IMO it's not that big a deal and I doubt if it will have any real impact on the trial. But then again, I'm not a lawyer so I could be wrong. Just my opinion.
Only if you’re willing to accept literally anything as evidence of corruption.
Funny how easily some find evidence for a desirable result while ignoring an abundance of evidence for an undesirable result.
Here is the latest:
"Fulton County clerk who leaked Trump charges says she accidentally hit ‘send’ instead of ‘save’"
Fulton County clerk who leaked Trump charges says she accidentally hit 'send' instead of 'save' | The Post Millennial | thepostmillennial.com
That's gonna leave a mark LMAO. Does a mistake make it any less illegal? And it was STILL before they voted was it not?
bfd, that certainly proves she's not a republican...
I'm not sure. Does one have to be inept to work for Fulton County?
it certainly helped open the door to the white house from 2017-2021.
Most of the time. Yes. Intent is a core element of most crimes.
There’s no reason that would have mattered. Perhaps if it had been released days before and discussed in the media, that might have some influence on the jury. But these people seem to have been in court when this happened, and they were already hearing the list of charges from the prosecutor, along with his evidence and arguments in support.
"GOP Rep. Ogles moves to defund salary for special counsel Jack Smith."
GOP Rep. Ogles moves to defund salary for special counsel Jack Smith | Just The News
Has Ogles figured out what kind of degree he has yet? Sheesh Vic!
Oh ya, Wikipedia. Do you read Wiki or write for them?
newt does his thinking so he doesn't need to...
Oh dear, you also suffer from Wikiphobia? The article has 59 references, are you going to condemn them also?
Factophobia . . . lol
Hey, they're having a tough day.
Such a shame
Don't like or want the truth? Hide it... The GoP playbook.
I'm looking forward to watching the low speed golf cart chase at bedminster prior to his televised trial in atlanta...
If I was you, I'd be a little concerned....
I'm not. I don't see anybody convicted of insurrection charges getting on the ballot in many blue states.
That would make for an interesting wager!
you're the one that's willing to bet on a lame plug...
Don't talk about yourself that way. You said blue states won't put Trump on the ballot. I CALL. HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO BET?
But there was no insurrection, let alone a conviction.
tick, tock, tick, tock...
It seems he doesn’t have the willingness to actually put any support to his beliefs.
It does!
He's hoping nobody will notice.
14th amendment, section 3. legal precedent already set in new mexico.
Trump joined the Confederacy?
he's the leader of the white supremacists, same thing...
That's very slanderous narrative of yours.
How about one that's accurate?
Try this on: Fani Willis is the daughter of one of the infamous Black Panthers.
the truth isn't slander
Prove it!
Also, the former 'president' lied and said she slept with 'a gang leader or a gang member' (he's so specific
in his SLANDER AND DEFAMATION OF MS. WILLIS).
I don't think she is going to sue him though she should.
Even if she is, even if you have proof, so what?
Why would I be concerned - what are you trying to say with this photo?
I'd be concerned if he fell on me, other than that?
It's not dev who doesn't have facts and truth and reality to support his 'beliefs'.
Being the daughter of a Black Panther, the probability exists wouldn't you say?
Ok:
Who is Fani Willis? Georgia prosecutor takes on new role leading Trump RICO case (yahoo.com)
It wasn't addressed to you. Hmmmm.
It gives us an idea of what went into the making of an individual. Don't you think?
cool, I hope she humiliates your POS seditious and racist hero on national TV for all to see.
I'm well aware of your sentiments.
not fully...
The former 'president' turd lied - this was someone she was prosecuting - EVERYONE KNOWS that everytime the former 'president' opens his big fat lying mouth more lies fall out.
The answer to your question is NO FUCKING WAY, EVERYONE KNOWS THAT'S NOT TRUE
You seem to forget, constantly, how forums like this work, Hmmmm
No, thinking people don't think such things.
From your own article - the last sentence states that 'last week the former 'president' BASELESSLY ACCUSED HER of sleeping with 'the leader of a gang' or a 'gang member' she was prosecuting'
Were you perhaps pointing to yourself when you posted this?
Looks like you should have been. You cannot POSSIBLY know what "everyone" knows or doesn't know, says or doesn't say.
Just using your own form of comments where others don't belong according to you. Sucks doesn't it.
Yea, she should have picked better parents. /eye roll/
To discredit the indictment you need to go to the content. Attempts to impugn the integrity of the agents is feeble.
Which charges are without merit? Why are they without merit in terms of facts, evidence, logic, and the law?
What the hell are you babbling about. Perhaps you need to look at 9.1.18 again?
So, now when you have no arguments or excuses you pretend you cannot read?
TiG's comment is written in plain English!
Not sure how to change my English so that you understand it. My comment seems perfectly clear.
You were piling on trying to discredit Fani Willis. Surely you recognize that.
My comment is that these attempts to discredit Fani Willis are wrong-headed. Instead focus on the content of her indictment. If there is something wrong with the indictment then that is where you go.
Thus: Which charges are without merit? Why are they without merit in terms of facts, evidence, logic, and the law?
Perhaps BOTH of you should reread the comment he responded to..........here let me help. Had not a fucking thing to do with any agents of anything.
And here was his...................
Now you were saying? Get off my fucking porch....
Do you not connect comments in a thread? A comment followed by a reply followed by a reply?
A string of comments are an exchange which produces a context. The context, in this case, is discrediting Willis to argue that her indictment is without merit (a mere political prosecution).
See? It all ties in with the thread and the seed.
And you said nothing about my comment concerning discrediting in your comment or I would have recognized it. I don't read minds my friend
Thanks but no thanks professor. Join jbb in the yard.
You do not need to be a mind reader to follow the very clear, very easy-to-follow context at play.
So do you hold that this indictment has merit or is without merit?
I'm still waiting for the Dems to start indictment proceedings against Trump for tying his left shoe first instead of his right shoe in the mornings, or for putting his left leg into his pants first instead of putting the right leg in, or for not eating as much ice cream as their faulty leader, or using an ink pen versus a ballpoint pen with an eraser.
I tell ya - it's gotta happen. Those are some pretty damning crimes - purely 'cause Trump does them?
Your comment suggests that you think the indictments are without merit. You compare the serious charges in these indictments with tying shoe laces improperly. That type of hyperbole accomplishes nothing.
Make a case 1st. It gets old watching people make vacuous, hyperbolic claims.
Illustrate based on the contents of the indictments, facts that are publicly known, evidence publicly known, and the ties in the indictment to US code that the indictments are, predominantly, without merit.
If you cannot do that, your eating ice cream level comments just illustrate that you are making emotional rather than factual claims.
Funny, the repubs went after Hillary for 25 years for far less. Never even came up so much as a parking ticket.
When did she have to drive?
How very misogynistic that comment was. You can't attack her actual competency at her job, so you go after what you would like to imagine is her sexual history. Pathetic, and misogynistic.
I didn't "go after" a fucking thing. I said it was a possibility FFS since her dad was a black panther. Anything to argue eh?
Oh, sure you did. You piled on to a misogynistic line of speculation. If you don't like being called out for it, don't do it.
How was Vic's comment misogynistic?
You tagged along on Trump's misogynistic rumormongering. Attacking a woman based on who you think she might have had sex with is misogynistic
I guess we can assume then that Ivanka Trump paid to have sex with porn stars.
You can assume whatever you like. Misogynistic or not..
The judge shall be:
Judge Scott McAfee
"McAfee was appointed to the court by Gov. Brian Kemp (R-GA) this year after serving as inspector general in the Georgia Office of the State Inspector General, according to the county court's website. He has experience as a prosecutor and in the county where the case resides, having served as an assistant U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia and a senior assistant district attorney in Fulton County in the Atlanta Judicial Circuit.
The Georgia judge will play a prominent role in the racketeering case, notably by picking the date when it will begin. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis said in a Monday night press conference she is seeking a trial "within the next six months," but it will ultimately be McAfee's decision. Trump has already slammed a proposal by special counsel Jack Smith in a separate case against him for that trial to begin early next year, stating it would interfere with the 2024 Republican presidential primary."
Donald Trump indicted: Who is Scott McAfee, the judge presiding over ex-president's Fulton County case? | Washington Examiner
Trump always had the option of not being a criminal, then these dates and times wouldn't be an issue.
He is a convicted criminal?
Where?
Do you really think the feds would indict that asshole 3 times with ZERO proof? Um, no.
They investigated him twice without a pretext. They spied on his campaign and lied about it. They lied to the FISA Court in order to get a FISA Warrant.
At this point they are like the "little bot who cried wolf:" They could be right but nobody believes them anymore.
The witnesses against Trump are Trump insiders who worked with or for Trump...
Does any of it matter at this point?
Although Willis may not have been a party to all the politically motivated attempts to first remove Trump from his elected office and later to prevent him from running for a second term, those inappropriate and unprofessional acts of malfeasance have taken their toll.
with enough evidence put before 6 different grand juries to compel 4 separate indictments and 91 charges between them, how many of those charges do you think trump may be guilty of?
You're singing to the choir. You could get a thousand indictments out of DC alone.
You've lost the public's trust.
again, how many of those charges do you think trump may be guilty?
the rat is cornered and the broomsticks are coming soon ...
Careful what you wish for..
the demise of all trump articles? again, answer the question...
Do you think the US should hold Trump accountable for trying to steal a US presidential election through coercion, filing false documents, etc.?
I already gave you an answer. The past actions of the DOJ and FBI should nullify the merits of the case.
Throw out all the indictments because they are all bogus? All the charges are made up and do not reflect reality? Trump did nothing wrong?
Is that your position, Vic?
Why did Bill Ayers walk?
In this case it isn't just that the FBI did something wrong, it is also that you have Biden's AG handling cases involving Biden.
Good grief, Vic, going back to Ayers? I am not entertaining deflection. We are talking about Trump.
Note that I am not arguing that our government is pure and clean. I am telling you that your view of corruption in the FBI and DOJ is irrational in its extreme.
You are categorically dismissing Trump's wrongdoing (it appears) based on an irrational, extreme position that the FBI and DOJ are thoroughly corrupt.
That is my argument. When the government does something wrong it nullifies their case and in the past 6 years the government has done A LOT wrong and have acted with malice.
I am telling you that your view of corruption in the FBI and DOJ is irrational in its extreme
I realize that. You think they are just a little rough around the edges. Do you really think it is ok for Garland to be handling cases involving both Biden's political opponents and his son?
4 TIMES AND COUNTING
Okay, Vic, you have it in your head that once the government does something wrong they always are wrong.
No reasoning with someone who thinks like that.
That big fat cornered filthy festering rat covered in filthy pestilent fleas and ticks who are deserting the sinking ship.
I mean who do they think all these testimonies are coming from?
JFC!
You seem not to understand how government works. No AG actually handles cases. The investigation and litigation of cases go to others. It's up the the Oversite Committee to find any fault and they haven't done so yet. Neither has the new weaponized Committee looking into how democrats supposedly weaponized government. Though to be truthful, I'm not sure Jim Jordan could find his asshole with a map app and a flashlight if it didn't donate to his election campaigned first.
he can't/won't answer a direct question about trump...
I fully expect to see that same behavior from all GOP partisans given they are likely realizing that they will be voting for Trump. They are stuck with defending an indefensible choice and the result will be irrational arguments and boatloads of intellectual dishonesty.
[deleted]
For the hundredth time, someone is a criminal because of what they do, not because of whether or not they were caught and convicted. Someone who burglarizes your house but never gets caught is still a criminal.
Trump being criminal is not solely based on if he has been convicted.
criminal
noun
Jack Smith has 87 witnesses, not one of them are Democrats. Might as well accept the fact that the GoP is responsible sinking the trump ship.
Oh sure, you can point fingers all ya want, but at the end of the day, trump did this to himself because his ego told him he is above the law and he cannot be touched... He's fucked.... He knows it, the GoP knows it and you know it. Being obtuse just shows your desperation.
The "Feds" didn't - the Dems/Libs did with joyful glee and a lot of malice and tons of false claims.
Just ask Schlitz and his "I've got all the evidence against him" (which never showed up) or Nodder/Nodler with the same idiotic statement over and over and over and over - and none ever showed up.
However, the hate, malice, jealousy, intimidation, tons of innuendo and pure lies got the indictments the Dems/Libs are so livid for.
It's gonna crumble - as are the Dems/Libs. It's gonna crumble.
list them.
Signed,
The My Pillow guy...
Who had proof of all kinds of election interference, voter fraud, (in the HUNDREDS MILLIONS), fake electors, etc.. Never showed up with even a shred of evidence.
The repubs/cons are convinced that Jan. 6th never happened, the phone call was really "perfect" and there was no fake elector scheme and trump never ever suggested that voting machines be seized so they could be, "independently verified".. <wink wink, nudge nudge>...
You go ahead and sit in that echo chamber while the rest of us watch trump implode under the weight of the law.
Boy are in for a long wait.
Not my job - that belongs to the Dem prosecution squad.
[deleted]
[deleted]
I see no evidence of that.
evidence of what?
Well, sure. Of course. Grand jurors are not the authors of the indictment. The prosecutor is. So, of course, the document existed before the grand jury voted on it. The prosecutor writes out the charges, and the grand jury votes on it.
Unless this somehow corrupted the grand jury process - and I’ve heard of no evidence that it did - this is really a non-issue. Honestly, I don’t even know how this could corrupt the process.
Do you think this indictment is without merit?
Do you think the documents and Jan 6th indictments are without merit?
( Addendum given no reply )
Very straightforward question that goes to the heart of this article yet no thoughtful reply.
One can argue that this and other indictments are strictly politically motivated. But to do that one must establish that the indictments are without merit.
Can you show that the charges in these indictments have no basis in evidence? That they are frivolous?
If so, let's hear your sound argument.
If not, your claim of political prosecution is bullshit.
So the phone call, where trump asked for 11,780 votes to, "be found", never happened? Interesting LOL
Off course it never happened, it was perfect.
And Jeffery Epstein lawyer and confidant.
Ah yes, the architect of all of this. The resist movement.
Only thing she wins is the “biggest piece of shit” contest …. And it isn’t even close.
Nope...
See 16.1, apply liberally, lather, rinse and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and …..
I like that "never pleaded the fifth" part. Got around that with "I don't recall". Same damned thing.
The premise of this article is spot on.
A political prosecution in prime time. If Trumps actions were so heinous why did it take this long? The timing of this is suspect at best. Now the Arizona governor is testing the TDS waters. Wouldn’t surprise me if Michigan follows.
It’s political “resist” politics plain and simple. History will see it that way regardless of this trials outcome. The left has opened this Pandora’s box in a time when it’s the last thing we need. Any hope for compromise is gone. Next up Bidens impeachment …. and Republicans have the excuse to just keep digging into Pandora’s box.
Yippie ky yay Hillary resist acolytes ….. get some ……
Investigations take time, and they stared long before Trump said he was running.
No more suspect than Comey announcing a new investigation involving Clinton literally days before the election... But I am sure you were totally fine with that...
CDS.
Comey did not announce any new investigation, it was a continuation of the old one.
And besides, Comey cleared Hillary.
What Comey did wasn't "done to" candidate Hillary it was "done for" president Hillary. Comey knew the material on that laptop existed since the end of August or early September that year, he waited on it to keep it from doing too much damage to Hillary's campaign and then exonerated her again before the election to keep president Hillary from facing possible impeachment hearings from a then hostile congress. Comey was in the bag for Hillary and using his position in the FBI he did what he could do to protect her AND everything he could do to harm Trump.
Frosty, if that’s all you think is at play here. You aren’t as smart as I’ve given you credit for.
You would be wrong. Comey was a complete failure leading the FBI. On more than one level.
Wow …. very original.
You would be totally fine if Biden behaved exactly as Trump did, and would be just as outraged if Biden were being accused?
[deleted]
Are you?
Just as we all knew, just a bit too much brain power required.
Sure but don't go beating yourself up over it....
Biden was a lying politician long before Trump. For decades. A serial liar by definition.
And you know precisely jackshit about what I would or wouldn’t do so stop acting the fool and thinking you do.
No comparison. Biden is a liar on the scale of most politicians. Trump is an order of magnitude worse.
True, one cannot know for certain. But we can all engage in a thought experiment:
If Trump was a D and Biden an R, would Sparty, et. al. support Biden and be critical of Trump — for example, view the indictments to be based on good evidence, solid reasoning and have merit?
Hmmmm. Interesting.
So I am wondering if conservatives think Donald trump actually broke the law or if everything he did was perfectly fine. And would they be totally cool with Joe Biden doing the exact same shit?
We all know that their views on Trump would be 180° opposite if Trump was a D. Look at how they rail on Biden for even the most petty of items.
there's a commercial in the middle that runs from 3:07 to 5:21 if you want to >>> thru it.