|
Main Paineframe posted:Do you have any proof that backs up this assertion? I find it hard to see how you could, given that it concerns the future of a very unprecedented event, but you seem pretty confident. Proof? Obviously not, no. I can't prove the future. Maybe I'll I reword it and say that I am almost 100% confident that Donald Trump will never see the inside of a jail cell. I am basing this on what I know about United States history, how power functions and a whole host of other things because I live and breathe. I even toxxed on it a while back and I'll stand by my assertion. I will gladly eat the ban if I'm wrong but, oh man, are we ever in for a ton of other poo poo if I am and it aint going to be pretty.
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 01:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
trump is not really facing jailtime over this unless he's indicted and a judge decides he's a flight risk. prison time is the much more real threat given the crimes in question
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 01:20
|
|
|
Rigel posted:The government at all levels is pretty much preparing the public for the reality of a criminal prosecution, felony conviction, and prison sentence of a former president (hung MAGA juries aside). There are a couple things that could go wrong here, but the DOJ is going to take a real swing at it. It can't be oversold how historic such a thing would be in the U.S.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 01:22
|
|
|
I feel like house arrest and forfeiture of passports is a much more realistic outcome of a former President being convicted of a crime.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 01:23
|
|
|
Simplex posted:I feel like house arrest and forfeiture of passports is a much more realistic outcome of a former President being convicted of a crime. This isn't 'Nam, Simplex, this is U.S. Code Title 18, there are rules.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 01:44
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Can't prove a negative. Can you provide proof that he will be going to jail? Yes you can prove a negative and we do it all the time. “No triangle has 4 discrete vertices,” bingo bango, the proof trivially reduces to the definition of triangle and really basic Euclidean axioms. I hate how that silly phrase has wormed its way into discourse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 02:44
|
|
|
I got worried that folks would argue what Trump did wasn't big enough to prosecute, so I looked up the case of Sandy Berger for comparison. Berger was the National Sec Advisor, and he deliberately stole classified material from NARA. Berger's case is much less severe, IMO, in that he took 5 classified copies of one report. Not clear to me what level it was classified or why he'd do that, maybe it was different parts of the same report so he could study for an investigation? Berger plead guilty, fined $50k, 100 hours community service, probation, and no security clearance or license to practice law. What Trump did was far worse. Worth saying what Hillary did, sending 36 secret topics, 8 top secret docs on a secure but not gov't controlled server, is far less bad. Mueller posted:All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 03:18
|
|
|
Well at least we've identified one question they'll be asking during jury selection. "Raise your hand if you feel a past president should receive special treatment if found guilty of a crime".
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 03:58
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:They can hang out right outside the cell like any other guards I mean for the SS that would be pretty much the ideal person to keep safe. know where they are all the time, don't have to deal with the general public, large events or anything like that. Just need to vet the guards and any other -of probably very limited- amount of other prisoners he interacts with, and done. Like most of their job would be done for them. PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Well at least we've identified one question they'll be asking during jury selection. "Raise your hand if you feel a past president should receive special treatment if found guilty of a crime". Oh god jury selection on a case like this would be insane. Reminds me the SNL sketch regarding OJ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSahneOul10 dr_rat fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Sep 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 05:12
|
|
|
tldr. Please move without delay, DOJ. If they don't prosecute, the country is done. I don't like to "doom!" but January 6 is already beyond preponderance of evidence, the documents are beyond all shadow of doubt, and even if they only bring twenty charges overall there are a solid dozen felonies racked up here. The Quacks will take over all media if all this fizzles, and they'll be nothing much to stop them because people aren't going to bother voting if the Democrats can't make this right. With prosecution the Quacks will go back to digging up dirt on anyone who ever said something bad about him, and a few MAGA will get shot trying stupid poo poo, but mostly they'll see all the sentences from 1/6 and decide to lay low. If he's not convicted, most on the left and some moderates are going to be pissed, probably lose some voters for a decade. Republicans in general will start up a scorched earth policy and one half of every branch of government will primarily switch to criminal activities to get what they want. With all the overwhelming evidence, if they can't make it stick then there's nothing "legal" at the federal level anymore. And here's an important bit. If he dies otherwise before being convicted, we'll hear about how he outsmarted everyone, and they'll be spouting him as their martyr for 50yr. They have to take care of this and soon. dr_rat posted:Oh god jury selection on a case like this would be insane. Reminds me the SNL sketch regarding OJ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSahneOul10 Seriously you'd think it would have to be jurored by retired circuit court judges, or lawyers, or children, or a professional jury. Everyone has background bias, and most people are awful at switching off. poo poo that means they'll seat a jury of mathematicians and I will be chosen. But this is what the "he can still be charged as a private citizen" Senate wanted. We wouldn't be here if the Senate had done their job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 07:20
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Seriously you'd think it would have to be jurored by retired circuit court judges, or lawyers, or children, or a professional jury. Everyone has background bias, and most people are awful at switching off. poo poo that means they'll seat a jury of mathematicians and I will be chosen. But this is what the "he can still be charged as a private citizen" Senate wanted. Lawyers and judges are the last people anyone wants on a jury, because they're likely to have opinions on the law and not just listen to what's being said in court. They told me in law school that the easiest way to get off a jury is to say you've been to law school.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 08:30
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Lawyers and judges are the last people anyone wants on a jury, because they're likely to have opinions on the law and not just listen to what's being said in court. They told me in law school that the easiest way to get off a jury is to say you've been to law school. More than "I hate cops and don't trust a single word they say"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 09:00
|
|
|
Depends on which side is dropping you, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 09:11
|
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:I'm waiting for the "the folders were empty! Innocent!!" defense The next stage in the cunning plan is to find a bunch of jurors who don't understand the concept of object permanence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 09:46
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:More than "I hate cops and don't trust a single word they say"? Saying poo poo like this just means some rear end in a top hat that loves cops and believes everything they say replaces you on the jury and votes to convict. If you hate cops you should keep it to yourself and participate in the jury trial
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 15:49
|
|
|
Kernel Monsoon posted:The next stage in the cunning plan is to find a bunch of jurors who don't understand the concept of object permanence. They're going to have to do that anyway to get him a jury of his peers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:They're going to have to do that anyway to get him a jury of his peers. Twelve former presidents from around the world. Enough of them will be senile enough to fit the first criteria too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 17:15
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Republicans in general will start up a scorched earth policy and one half of every branch of government will primarily switch to criminal activities to get what they want. With all the overwhelming evidence, if they can't make it stick then there's nothing "legal" at the federal level anymore. To be honest, I don't see a path forward where this doesn't happen regardless of the outcome, at least in the short-medium term. Trump and co. have already gotten away with so much and reaped such apparent benefits from doing so that there's no real reason for future rightists not to try, plus their violence and force-obsessed mindset already predispose them to just smash poo poo and take what they want, metaphorically and also literally. Umbra Dubium posted:Twelve former presidents from around the world. Credit where credit is due, I would never have though Jimmy Carter's vengeance would be this long coming, or so carefully planned out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 17:56
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Credit where credit is due, I would never have though Jimmy Carter's vengeance would be this long coming, or so carefully planned out. He did publish a book of poetry under the title Always a Reckoning.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 18:10
|
|
|
Jimmy Carter, the instrument of God's Wrath.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 19:41
|
|
|
It occurs to me that in an insane world, Trump could have loaned out those documents for 'donations'. And that at the time of the raid they may not have been given back in time. Meaning that, in this insane world, somebody is out there holding classified documents they're absolutely not supposed to have with no way to give them back without admitting what happened. But we can assume in our sane, totally normal timeline that the documents are all there, only disorganized.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 20:21
|
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:It occurs to me that in an insane world, Trump could have loaned out those documents for 'donations'. And that at the time of the raid they may not have been given back in time. Meaning that, in this insane world, somebody is out there holding classified documents they're absolutely not supposed to have with no way to give them back without admitting what happened. What exactly are you trying to suggest?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 20:35
|
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:It occurs to me that in an insane world, Trump could have loaned out those documents for 'donations'. And that at the time of the raid they may not have been given back in time. Meaning that, in this insane world, somebody is out there holding classified documents they're absolutely not supposed to have with no way to give them back without admitting what happened. If you were going to rent out classified documents, you could just simply sell pdf's instead. You don't need to let someone else have physical custody of documents that you consider to be valuable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 20:38
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:More than "I hate cops and don't trust a single word they say"? I had a guy on my jury who was like "I will absolutely not pay attention or do any work" and he still got on. They know you don't want to be there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:It occurs to me that in an insane world, Trump could have loaned out those documents for 'donations'. And that at the time of the raid they may not have been given back in time. Meaning that, in this insane world, somebody is out there holding classified documents they're absolutely not supposed to have with no way to give them back without admitting what happened. I guarantee you that Trump was not "loaning" out the actual paper copies of the documents For one thing, if the "borrower" refuses to return the copy, what the heck is he gonna do about it - call the cops and tell them they won't return the documents he stole?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I had a guy on my jury who was like "I will absolutely not pay attention or do any work" and he still got on. I just had jury duty last month. I wanted to participate! Instead whoever the defendant was pleaded out before it even came up to us. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I had a guy on my jury who was like "I will absolutely not pay attention or do any work" and he still got on. I always just figured saying something that blatant would piss off the judge and get you held in contempt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
yeah, one of the two times i've actually gotten to the jury selection stage some woman came in with "gently caress cops" and "trump maga" written in sharpie on her arms like tattoos. the judge told her it looked like an obvious attempt to get dismissed. she started arguing with him and ended up getting held in contempt. and this was from an otherwise affable judge
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 21:51
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:yeah, one of the two times i've actually gotten to the jury selection stage some woman came in with "gently caress cops" and "trump maga" written in sharpie on her arms like tattoos. the judge told her it looked like an obvious attempt to get dismissed. she started arguing with him and ended up getting held in contempt. and this was from an otherwise affable judge I think what makes this hilarious is that they're taking the "Ted Nugent Dodges The Draft" tact and getting in trouble for it, in a situation where all you need to do is tell the judge upfront that as a free american, you sincerely believe in and will educate all your fellow jurors explicitly in their right of jury nullification and most judges will have you rushed out the door and on your merry way before you even get through all those syllables
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
The further along we get with this and the more I learn about it, it's becoming harder and harder for me to convince myself of anything other than that Trump straight up grabbed all those documents to sell them to the highest bidder. I've looked at it from the carelessness and narcissist angles and considered that as a possibility but the more I think about it and consider everything I know about Trump, this is some straight up Art of the Deal poo poo and he was going to sell out the United States because someone somewhere would pay for the things he stole. Why else would he bother? He never cared much about the demands and responsibilities of the office when he served so what's so important in those boxes? In his mind, Trump IS the United States anyway and in many ways he's actually right. He's practically the living embodiment of what we've become and a rather perfect totem of what we stand for, value and strive to be in all its obese, orange, ugly, greedy glory. Some horrible golem that symbolizes the final manifestation of selling out America's promise and the perfect symbol of a country built on slavery that worships Kardashians. Same with Reagan to some extent as long as I'm thinking about it. One could say similar things about Obama I suppose, in terms of symbolism anyway, who represents a different element of the possibilities of the American Dream and also Clinton, who stands for the sleazier third rail centrism of whatever passes for leftism in this country anymore but Trump has that greasy, shallow, superficial used car salesman vibe going on - along with the TV/celebrity worship that's just so god damned perfectly ugly in a world where someone like Nixon almost seems trite, the lessons of Vietnam and Iraq are long forgotten and no one cares to remember any more how god awful W was. Hunter Thompson once asked around 2000 I think it was "God drat. How low does a person have to sink to become president in this loving country?" and we certainly have our answer it seems. ... I honestly think Trump's plan was to sell those loving secrets. I really do. And for that matter, he may already have. He thought they were worth money, period.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 22:13
|
|
|
Thompson famously hated every president besides Jimmy Carter, he would have double super hated the gently caress out of Trump I'll amend, he was fine with Clinton too until he met the guy, realized the folksy hillbilly thing was an act and he had bought it wholesale DeathChicken fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Sep 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 22:27
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:The further along we get with this and the more I learn about it, it's becoming harder and harder for me to convince myself of anything other than that Trump straight up grabbed all those documents to sell them to the highest bidder. I've looked at it from the carelessness and narcissist angles and considered that as a possibility but the more I think about it and consider everything I know about Trump, this is some straight up Art of the Deal poo poo and he was going to sell out the United States because someone somewhere would pay for the things he stole. Why else would he bother? He never cared much about the demands and responsibilities of the office when he served so what's so important in those boxes? My money's on extortion - "If you try to prosecute me for all the poo poo I did, I'll release all this secret stuff."
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 22:28
|
|
|
Kavros posted:I think what makes this hilarious is that they're taking the "Ted Nugent Dodges The Draft" tact and getting in trouble for it, in a situation where all you need to do is tell the judge upfront that as a free american, you sincerely believe in and will educate all your fellow jurors explicitly in their right of jury nullification yeah, though now that i think back on it, there was a clear example of how tiered every aspect of our society is, because a lawyer on that same jury panel came in on the second day of jury selection and said "whoops i thought recognized the defendants name (the defendant was a former third string nfl player), and one thing led to another and i accidently looked up everything about this guy last night" and the judge sighed, said something about it being a very questionable choice given the perspective jurors legal background, and then dismissed him so you can get away with going for an obvious dismissal if you're the right sort doing it in the right way. which leads us back onto the topic of trump and his seeming life long impunity before the law
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 22:36
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:My money's on extortion - "If you try to prosecute me for all the poo poo I did, I'll release all this secret stuff." Maybe, but that doesn't add up for me. Trump has never faced any consequences for the poo poo he gets up to and for the most part just games the legal system. I don't think he ever thought he'd even win the presidency and once he did just looked at it like another reality TV show for the most part and where the only way he thought it meant anything was how to monetize it. Just more branding as far as he was concerened. I doubt he really thought that far ahead, in regards to what you suggest. He's not a deep thinker and seems to view anything and everything as MONEY, where winners have it and losers don't. He's surely got dirt on all the people he's dealt and those who have noped out on him with but near as I can tell all he does is call them losers, coffee boys and claim he barely knew them. I've never seen any clever Godfather style maneuvering from him. I'm fairly certain he has the goods on Pence or Burr, for instance, but I haven't seen anything from Donald that might be keeping them in line. Trump is just "Money Good" and having it and showing it off, however garishly, means you are Great and fame is its own reward. Especially if it's garish in fact. That's it. It's why his whole thing is just selling HIS NAME in shiny gold letters on steaks, casinos, books, hotels, schools, social media...The White House. He's not any sort of clever mastermind plotting out ways to leverage folks and do chess moves beyond simply Not Paying Them for their work and bad mouthing them when they scatter. He's totally shallow and stupid as loving hell. I think this whole thing is "I am President. Look at these things I get access to. I bet they're worth money. Why, I'd be stupid NOT to sell them."
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 23:09
|
|
|
I don't really buy it. It's not the 50s any more, you don't need to steal physical papers and lock them in your basement. Even Trump knows you can just scan the secret documents with an iphone. He's a stupid narcissist and thinks/was told he can just keep his records. Because he's just that presidential.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 23:48
|
|
|
tldr. Stream of... goonsciousness.Kavros posted:all you need to do is tell the judge upfront that as a free american, you sincerely believe in and will educate all your fellow jurors explicitly in their right of jury nullification There are so many ways juries can screw up it's... sad I suppose. Some jurors just won't participate or otherwise they sabotage the outcome, which is pragmatically equivalent to nullification since justice isn't being done. In "my" trial, after three days of deliberations one of the jurors claimed racism and everything stopped immediately. The jury was mixed/multiple race, there were tons of voir dire questions to weed out race related issues, and still juror #1, one of two jurors who shared the defendant's race, couldn't persevere. (I wasn't on the jury and can't know what happened in deliberations, but the selected jury was certainly not extreme, or were lying.) A Trump-espionage jury could hang half a dozen times per count. "But he's a good Christian, they should have asked him if he's received gds forgiveness!" "But his aides carried the boxes!" "But Obama must have had documents!" "But it will make the country look bad!" "But he'll die without cheeseburgers if we put him in prison!" "But I voted for him, I can't be wrong!" These people have publicly demonstrated since 2020 (and earlier for some) that they can't understand how to filter for data that is relevant. Everything is distraction and misdirection. Finding twelve random people without at least one loon will be tough. It would be really cute if they filed every single count (out of... 50?) separately. One each week. Different court/judge. 50 different juries, increase the odds of at least one conviction. Need some way to make justice truly blind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
Also the lawyers are babbling nonsenses:Trusty posted:To have -- I mean, I have been around prosecution and * An executive branch official should not have free reign to make a document public? * Such an official cannot make a document public even if it is within their stated powers to do so? * Such an official in exercise of their powers shall not make a document public if it causes offense (to at least one party)? * It would be amazing if an official ever did this? * You are representing someone who did this weekly or daily when in office, but claiming they aren't guilty, but this other (unnamed) official is? * You are representing someone whose defense is literally what you're claiming here is unprecedented and illegal? * Your client is... Marginalized?  https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22274704/trumphearingtranscript.pdf ps "Jim Trusty was added to Trump's Mar-a-Lago legal team after the former president saw him on television". https://www.salon.com/2022/08/30/hired-attorney-he-saw-on-tv-amid-trouble-finding-lawyers-to-represent-him_partner/ PhantomOfTheCopier fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Sep 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2022 00:18
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Finding twelve random people without at least one loon will be tough. That's a good point. Also, given the appeals process, finding one judge out of three that's not a MAGA chud is a problem too. quote:To have -- I mean, I have been around prosecution and I can't parse this in the slightest. This is some next level Sarah Palin poo poo right here. Someone explain to me what that says that's not "guy on a meth bender" BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Sep 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2022 00:43
|
|
|
I think they should just lean into it being a reality TV plot that's a complete farce and seat a jury of "peers" who all have equal or greater net-worth. It's also probably the only imaginable set of jurors who'd trump would give a poo poo about
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2022 01:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:I think they should just lean into it being a reality TV plot that's a complete farce and seat a jury of "peers" who all have equal or greater net-worth. Personally, I'm ready for the TV event of the century: the Masked Juror.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2022 01:56
|
|
