Jump to content

45 indicated


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

It's a TV show in this stupid simulation.

The simulation isn't stupid.  It's actually quite erudite and pithy.  We, however, are fucking beyond moronic.  

If you count all primary candidates for each major party plus the third party/independents who have the requisite number of signatures...you're looking at about 30 official candidates.  And according to the outstanding fucking logic of some truly impressive dipshits who share a diploma with me...you can't be held criminally liable for anything if you're one of those 30 because you're running for President.  Even if the charges involve selling state secrets to foreign adversaries or attempting to overthrow our own government at its seat while you are its Head of State.  This is the defense of 30-35% of our nation?  You can't bother this man because he's busy attempting to be elected again so never mind that other shit?  Fucking pile of moronic shit this website has turned into.  We used to beat people this fucking stupid but now we have to nurture safe spaces because people might get butthurt.  Fuck off.  This fucking board is a fucking embarrassment to our alma mater, we're one notch above texags which isn't saying much.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Objectively there is no reason Trump should be allowed to walk around freely.  I mean, stealing national secrets and conspiring to lead a violent overthrow of the federal government should land you in jail immediately right?!?  Like, he’s clearly insanely dangerous to all of us.  I feel like I’m taking crazy pills! 

For what's it worth I've always thought you were taking crazy pills.

  • Haha 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

What is that gif from?  I've tried so many times to figure it out.

Malhari Dance, also known as Bollywood Soldier Dance, is a reactionGIF featuring Indian actor Ranveer Singh (who portrays Bajirao I) dancing alongside several armor-clad soldiers from the 2015 Bollywood film Bajirao Mastani. The GIF is pulled from one of the movie’s songs called “Malhari” that includes a lengthy dance sequence between the famous Indian commander and his troops. It’s typically used to express excitement, happiness or reactions involving intense hype for a wide variety of situations.”

  • Hook 'Em 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

do not fall for the republican talking points.  this is not a free speech case.  this is not a "what did he actually believe" case.  it's not about what he thought or said, it's about what he did.  go read the indictment.  it seems like they were very careful about that.

trump's lawyers and supporters are spinning their own bullshit to try and win in the court of public opinion.  pay them no mind.

you're changing the subject

that's not what I'm saying

what I'm saying is that it's very possible for Trump to use the defense of "i genuinely believed the election was stolen despite what everyone told me"

Edited by Rimbo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

you're changing the subject

that's not what I'm saying

what I'm saying is that it's very possible for Trump to use the defense of "i genuinely believed the election was stolen despite what everyone told me"

i hope he does.  nothing he's accused of hinges on what he thought about the validity of the results.

Edited by henrygandorf
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Red Five said:

That might require an insanity plea.

or just an "I'm the boss around here" plea

which fits Trump perfectly

Just now, henrygandorf said:

i hope he does.  nothing he's accused of hinge on what he thought about the validity of the results.

Then why does that feature so prominently in the indictment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Then why does that feature so prominently in the indictment?

they establish that plenty of people told him he lost, so there shouldn't have been any confusion about it.  but the shit he did (or conspired with others to do) is illegal whether he won, lost, or lost but thought he won.  i'm happy to look at some snippets that you're talking about.  i just read it as them building the story to make it easy to follow.  i skimmed through it pretty quickly. 

i thought they pretty clearly avoided charging him with anything that could be explained by "he has the legal right to make his case that he won".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump could use the "I truly believe I won" defense but to do that wouldn't he almost HAVE to get on the stand to assert that.  And if he gets on the stand to assert that it's going to be fun reading about (cause we ain't getting to watch this) how he is utterly torn to pieces. 

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

4 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

they establish that plenty of people told him he lost, so there shouldn't have been any confusion about it.  but the shit he did (or conspired with others to do) is illegal whether he won, lost, or lost but thought he won.  i'm happy to look at some snippets that you're talking about.  i just read it as them building the story to make it easy to follow.  i skimmed through it pretty quickly. 

i thought they pretty clearly avoided charging him with anything that could be explained by "he has the legal right to make his case that he won".

Ok maybe so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Surly Bevo said:

Trump could use the "I truly believe I won" defense but to do that wouldn't he almost HAVE to get on the stand to assert that.  And if he gets on the stand to assert that it's going to be fun reading about (cause we ain't getting to watch this) how he is utterly torn to pieces. 

I bet he does it.

Just like with the second Bob Woodward book, he thinks he can talk his way out of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

or just an "I'm the boss around here" plea

which fits Trump perfectly

Then why does that feature so prominently in the indictment?

Whether or not he truly believed he won is completely irrelevant. Trump can and should try that defense, but I think other J6 defendants tried it and it didn't help them out in the least.

Maybe this thread from a law professor at NYU and Harvard will help? Lots of good examples with cites to the indictment included in the thread.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

F2nZb6UXMAAcUji?format=jpg&name=900x900

 

 

Well, sure.  Unless the accused gets to, you know, get elected to President and have the power to pardon himself, his superfriends, get any investigations into him shut down, fire the AG, dismiss the special prosecutor's office, and hell, probably get an impeachment of any federal judge that dare to oversee a trial that goes against him.

So, yeah, the DOJ has an incredible conviction rate in other cases with other defendants who aren't named Trump.

Cautiously optimistic, but sadly, pessimistic all the same.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Even if he truly thought he won, his legal remedies for addressing that don’t include conspiring with and/or blackmailing the Vice President, Congress, the various states, etc. to overturn the election without due process.  He had legal avenues to challenge the election.  He in fact tried those, and he lost repeatedly.  He doesn’t get to do illegal vigilantism just because he thinks he was wronged.

It’s like saying you really thought your neighbor stole something from your yard, so it’s ok that you murdered him and took all the stuff you thought was yours instead of getting the police involved.  It doesn’t matter if you believed he had it coming.  There are still rules.

His defense is going to boil down to mostly irrelevant word salad nonsense, and ultimately when pressed his real argument is just going to be the defense Saddam Hussein used in his trial, i.e., it’s impossible for me to commit crimes because I’m the ruler and anything I do is the law.

It’s not going to work.  Hoping a MAGA fanatic or two gets onto the jury and refuses to convict is his only real play.  

on cnn, they actually brought up the oj case (not the murder case) where he tried to get "his stuff" back by using a gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

It’s like saying you really thought your neighbor stole something from your yard, so it’s ok that you murdered him and took all the stuff you thought was yours instead of getting the police involved.  It doesn’t matter if you believed he had it coming.

Season 7 Oops GIF by Workaholics

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

What is that gif from?  I've tried so many times to figure it out.

I see it has been answered, but it really is worth a few minutes of your time.

edit: seems youtube has purged a lot of the 'full scene' stuff, sorry.

Edited by MC Fresh Breath
stupid youtube
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Js1 said:

I mean, since Trump left office and SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade:

  • 4 House special elections swung 12, 11, 6 and 9 points to the left
  • Dems WON the Alaska House race special election and held it in the midterms
  • Dems overperformed the 2022 midterms, narrowly losing the House when they should have lost 20+ seats, picked up a seat in the Senate and picked up 2 governor's seats, including winning yet another run-off in Georgia for the Senate seat.  Oh yeah and flipped 5 chambers from the GOP, including in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Minnesota
  • Crushed anti-abortion ballot measures in Kansas, Kentucky and Montana
  • Flipped the Wisconsin Supreme Court 


Several state GOP’s are broke and/or bankrupt’d !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Well, sure.  Unless the accused gets to, you know, get elected to President and have the power to pardon himself, his superfriends, get any investigations into him shut down, fire the AG, dismiss the special prosecutor's office, and hell, probably get an impeachment of any federal judge that dare to oversee a trial that goes against him.

Yep.  And if that happens I don't think the populace at large will take it well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

you're changing the subject

that's not what I'm saying

what I'm saying is that it's very possible for Trump to use the defense of "i genuinely believed the election was stolen despite what everyone told me"

 

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

i hope he does.  nothing he's accused of hinges on what he thought about the validity of the results.

 

1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

or just an "I'm the boss around here" plea

which fits Trump perfectly

Then why does that feature so prominently in the indictment?

 

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

they establish that plenty of people told him he lost, so there shouldn't have been any confusion about it.  but the shit he did (or conspired with others to do) is illegal whether he won, lost, or lost but thought he won.  i'm happy to look at some snippets that you're talking about.  i just read it as them building the story to make it easy to follow.  i skimmed through it pretty quickly. 

i thought they pretty clearly avoided charging him with anything that could be explained by "he has the legal right to make his case that he won".

 

1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

Ok maybe so.

let's not forget that there are other conspirators in the indictment who are unnamed, even if we know who most of them are.

establishing a fact pattern of these co-conspirators knowing and telling trump that he lost the election, and then still went ahead and did this shady shit...

they aren't just making one case, even though it's the biggest. they establish these airtight cases against the co-conspirators, and people start to flip, right?

i dunno.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

His lawyers will never allow him to testify under oath. They know he’s incapable of opening his mouth without lying. 

It's not their call.  If he wants to take the stand, he takes the stand.  They can likely resign, although that may be a limited option, too, the lawdogs can speak to that.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • blacklab changed the title to 45 indicated


×
×
  • Create New...