Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Recommended Posts

Posted
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
Posted (edited)
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
Posted
Just now, Rimbo said:

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"

That might require an insanity plea.

Posted (edited)
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
Posted
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?

Posted
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".

Posted

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
Posted
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.

Posted
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.

Posted
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
Posted
1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Lulz, the judge told Dotard that he can't commit any crimes, or tamper with witnesses.

Guess what Melania? The Judge won't let us go to Tampa.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
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.

 

 

 

Posted
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.

Posted
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
Posted
15 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

 

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.  

In which case I hope the DOJ puts 12 more in the box and tries again.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
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
Posted
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 !

Posted
Not that it matters what Trump tweets (or whatever), but he wasn't arrested today.
True, but the MAGATs don't know the difference between indicted and arrested, but they know they need to sign over their social security check to him so they're not arrested next.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
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.

Posted
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.

Posted
1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

I bet he does it.

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

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

Posted
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
Posted

I’d rather you donate to my Colorado / Caribbean retirement plan Mr. Trump, probably cheaper than getting arrested for me, kthx. 

Posted
31 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. 

And do you know what Trump does to lawyers that don't let him do what he wants, or tell him what he wants to hear?

I mean, besides not paying them. He does that to ALL his lawyers.

That's right: He fires them.

I mean, who do you think this is? Someone who hires smart attorneys, and then listens to them? Because if this, in any shape or form, described Trump, he wouldn't be in this shit. Because he wouldn't have done any of it.

That's why he's got the bottom-barrel team of nitwits running his show right now. Between those he didn't pay, those who are now under charges of their own, and those who gave him actually good advice, there just aren't many left who'll take the job. And those who have the job ought to be smart enough to know that they're riding a gravy train that's about to hit the terminal real quick, so they might as well milk it for all it's worth and suck up to him.

If he wants on the stand, he's going on the stand.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

I want to see them argue in court that the President of the United States legitimately thought an election had been stolen from him, because Rudy told him he saw it on Facebook. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

And do you know what Trump does to lawyers that don't let him do what he wants, or tell him what he wants to hear?

I mean, besides not paying them. He does that to ALL his lawyers.

That's right: He fires them.

I mean, who do you think this is? Someone who hires smart attorneys, and then listens to them? Because if this, in any shape or form, described Trump, he wouldn't be in this shit. Because he wouldn't have done any of it.

That's why he's got the bottom-barrel team of nitwits running his show right now. Between those he didn't pay, those who are now under charges of their own, and those who gave him actually good advice, there just aren't many left who'll take the job. And those who have the job ought to be smart enough to know that they're riding a gravy train that's about to hit the terminal real quick, so they might as well milk it for all it's worth and suck up to him.

If he wants on the stand, he's going on the stand.

I made myself chuckle today when CNN was interviewing the lawyer for John Eastman.  For a second, I thought to myself, wait, isn't Eastman a lawyer himself...oh wait.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I made myself chuckle today when CNN was interviewing the lawyer for John Eastman.  For a second, I thought to myself, wait, isn't Eastman a lawyer himself...oh wait.

MAKING 

ATTORNEYS

GET

ATTORNEYS 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
His lawyers will never allow him to testify under oath. They know he’s incapable of opening his mouth without lying. 

His lawyers do not get to make that decision.
  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...