|
Hang the unhung.
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2023 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
all goons wiped out overnight
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 00:05
|
|
|
the hung shall inherit the earth
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 00:08
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:the hung shall inherit the earth 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 00:28
|
|
|
ephori posted:It's only 'hanged' if it's from the Nuremburg region in Germany. Cannot let this die on the bottom of a page goddamn
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
V-Men posted:Dammit, i meant to say that he didn't communicate it the mobs that attacked the capitol outside of his tweets and speeches and they didn't communicate an understanding back that he received and understood. I’d bet money that Trump coordinated through Stone. Not in direct statements maybe, but Stone knew what was up and made sure the oath keepers and proud boy’s knew what was expected to make the Eastman plan go forward.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 00:55
|
|
|
Murgos posted:I’d bet money that Trump coordinated through Stone. Not in direct statements maybe, but Stone knew what was up and made sure the oath keepers and proud boy’s knew what was expected to make the Eastman plan go forward. If I was like a Bond villain or whatever, the first thing I’d do is hire Roger Stone, give him a budget for bribes and henchman, and then tell him to stay as far away from my plans as possible because that dude is just a bunch of red flags that collapsed into a black hole of skullduggery.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 01:05
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:If I was like a Bond villain or whatever, the first thing I’d do is hire Roger Stone, give him a budget for bribes and henchman, and then tell him to stay as far away from my plans as possible because that dude is just a bunch of red flags that collapsed into a black hole of skullduggery. This reminds me of how Trump acted like a movie mob boss the entire time he was in office. Complete with cartoonish threats and throwing plates at the wall. Also read somewhere that during the Speaker negotiations McCarthy had to meet with the heads of the various House GOP factions, who call themselves "The Five Families". This stuff really explains a lot. The whole party is a bunch of cosplayers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 01:36
|
|
|
Trump spent four years in office telling every camera that would listen exactly what he was planning, every second of every day. When they didn't listen he told Twitter. When that got boring he started making demands of other officials in other countries, was observed, recorded, impeached. The criminal behavior continued. Now suddenly on November 10 Trump develops a magical power of indirection --- despite literally requesting illegal assistance from multiple officials --- resulting in a coordinated, multi-front attack that started with weapons at his speech, a crowd that marched from there to the Capitol, and proceeded to charge up the event by systemically starting altercations that engaged the entire body into the eventual attack. Trump was so indirect and uninvolved he wanted to drive there from the speech and was unavailable to perform his duties for several hours. Conveniently for just these two months everything Trump did and said was miraculously irrelevant or ambiguous. If he was actually insane at the time he would have been telling people to commit more physical crime and making statements like "I can go shoot Pelosi and nothing will happen". If he was dumbfounded, mentally incapable, depressed, he would have ordered all the video from the 2016 election to celebrate his success and been unable to pick through the competing ideas to effect treason. Instead, he was operating normally and consistently. Every request was in furtherance of crime, getting around laws and policies for his own ends. Instead of a grand documented letter of intent, Trump's treason was revealed in its usual way: He sat in meetings and stood at the podium telling everyone exactly what he wanted, but he's too stupid to know how to be subtle or clever, so his speeches are a stream of consciousmess where he's truly unable to find the words to say "go axe Pence", but he knows he can't say that so instead it's five minutes of him trying to come up with something subtle and failing, "well see Pence, if Pence does, well doesn't do the right thing, Pence should do the right thing, we'll go make sure Pence, or... someone else could, you could, we'll be there, and you fight, and I'll be there with you, to make sure they count our votes...". People hear "treason" and think it must be a line of colonial musketeers with their general sitting at front on a white horse, when that's not what the supreme court opinions say whatsoever. One need not be part of the action to be guilty. The witness requirement is even easier since thousands witnessed his words and actions, but not one deposition has turned up the slightest hint of Trump telling his people "stop, this is crazy, people are going to get hurt, maybe we shouldn't do this, we should hold our rally farther away to deescalate, or just do it by video to avoid a mob". Months of consistency; he knew what he was doing. Treason. Guilty. Which is not to say that the sentence will or should be death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 03:51
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Trump spent four years in office telling every camera that would listen exactly what he was planning, every second of every day. When they didn't listen he told Twitter. When that got boring he started making demands of other officials in other countries, was observed, recorded, impeached. The criminal behavior continued. The treason statute and jurisprudence disagree.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 04:02
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:If I was like a Bond villain or whatever, the first thing I’d do is hire Roger Stone, give him a budget for bribes and henchman, and then tell him to stay as far away from my plans as possible because that dude is just a bunch of red flags that collapsed into a black hole of skullduggery. never trust a man who willingly wears a top hat if his surname is not Norton
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 04:04
|
|
|
I guess I've just given Ed a pass to be a supervillain but eh, he's cute
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 04:05
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:I guess I've just given Ed a pass to be a supervillain but eh, he's cute Not even Ed Norton can protect you
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 05:27
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:I guess I've just given Ed a pass to be a supervillain but eh, he's cute Super villain, weird rear end in a top hat narcissist, what's the difference, really?  I'll never forget Jeff Ross's burn on him and the roast of Bruce Willis, flat out saying "Edward Norton is the only man alive who could show up to someone else's roast and spent 10 minutes talking about himself instead." nine-gear crow fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Feb 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 05:37
|
|
|
I witnessed Donald Trump commit treason on Jan 6th, and i would testify to it under oath.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 08:44
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Trump spent four years in office telling every camera that would listen exactly what he was planning, every second of every day. When they didn't listen he told Twitter. When that got boring he started making demands of other officials in other countries, was observed, recorded, impeached. The criminal behavior continued. "I voted for Trump because he means what he says." "Oh come on, he didnt mean that" --Republicans
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 14:09
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:The treason statute and jurisprudence disagree. “Shall consist in levying war against them” He did exactly that. He gathered an army and attacked the US.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 00:15
|
|
|
Murgos posted:“Shall consist in levying war against them” I'm not saying you're wrong but they just cannot claim that in federal court, it will not fly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 00:17
|
|
Murgos posted:“Shall consist in levying war against them” That didn’t happen. War has a structured meaning.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
Murgos posted:“Shall consist in levying war against them” wikipedia posted:Levying war means the assembly of armed people to overthrow the government or to resist its laws. Treason does not distinguish between participants and accessories; all persons who rebel or intentionally give aid to hostilities are subject to the same charge. Let's not slippery slope in either direction here. We shouldn't be hanging people for treason who "resist" by not paying taxes for decades (20yr prison seems to work), but neither should we permit clear attempts to violate state and federal constitutions when it comes to offices and voting. vvv Wikipedia includes the actual legal references. PhantomOfTheCopier fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Indeed, particularly based on the definitions. Wow I’m sure the federal government will listen if wikipedia says it. The law is very clear that they mean an opposing nation-state. You’re talking about sedition. Which is the thing he might be charged with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 01:00
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:The law is very clear that they mean an opposing nation-state. Which law? Because Mitchell and Philip Weigel were sort of the defining case of what constitutes treason, they never had anything whatsoever to do with an opposing nation state, and they were nonetheless convicted without any major issues. And John Fries, obviously, was convicted twice. The traditional legal standard is, or at least was, that any "combining to defeat or resist a federal law" qualifies as levying war (States v. John Fries). Nothing that required a foreign power. Maybe it was changed at some point, but I don't recall any amendment covering this, and we do have a court that believes in the importance of Originalism... Discendo Vox posted:That didn’t happen. War has a structured meaning. Sure, and in the context of the treason statue, what exactly is that structured meaning? Make sure to explain how that works with how treason convictions have traditionally been achieved. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 01:28
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:
By this definition the revolutionaries in 1776 didn’t commit treason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 02:42
|
|
|
Murgos posted:By this definition the revolutionaries in 1776 didn’t commit treason. Would you please just pivot to "seditious conspiracy" because that's what actually happened and also "treason" is not even achievable because no state of war has existed since WWII
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 02:47
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Would you please just pivot to "seditious conspiracy" because that's what actually happened and also "treason" is not even achievable because no state of war has existed since WWII The US congress doesn’t have to declare war for another entity to wage war on it. That’s absurd. That’s not how anything works.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 02:49
|
|
|
Murgos posted:The US congress doesn’t have to declare war for another entity to wage war on it. That’s absurd. Yes, it is absurd. The law is absurd. I agree with you. A federal judge will not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 02:53
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Yes, it is absurd. The law is absurd. I agree with you. I get that the justice system is incapable of delivering justice. Dude still committed treason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 04:21
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Which law? Because Mitchell and Philip Weigel were sort of the defining case of what constitutes treason, they never had anything whatsoever to do with an opposing nation state, and they were nonetheless convicted without any major issues. And John Fries, obviously, was convicted twice. You're bring up 200+ year examples of people who were pardoned. Can you think of something that might have happened between then and now that might have changed it? Like maybe a time when half the country committed treason? Murgos posted:By this definition the revolutionaries in 1776 didn’t commit treason. Those people wrote the US treason laws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 04:48
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:You're bring up 200+ year examples of people who were pardoned. And they were convicted first. So saying "The law is very clear that they mean an opposing nation-state" is stupid as gently caress, because it very clearly did not mean that. quote:Can you think of something that might have happened between then and now that might have changed it? Like maybe a time when half the country committed treason? Sure, maybe! Why don't you actually mention the change, if so, instead of being deliberately obtuse? Except it couldn't have changed too much, considering Walter Allen was convicted of treason over purely domestic activity 60 years later. Look, if you want to make actual, substantial arguments, feel free, obviously there's a reason we don't try people for treason anymore, but that aint it. The stuff you're saying is just factually untrue, and you saying that, or other people saying things like ""treason" is not even achievable because no state of war has existed since WWII" without any grounding as to why, isn't gonna get you to a coherent argument. So why don't you actually provide some, any, evidence that Xiahou Dun posted:The treason statute and jurisprudence disagree. Xiahou Dun posted:Gender-neutral version of sir, I think you might need to do a better job reading usernames. While you're at it, why don't you explain this no-content post. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 05:42
|
|
|
Does anyone actually believe Trump will go to prison? Not in a theoretical "Yes, it's imaginable" way but in a way where you believe you might actually see Donald Trump as a convicted criminal in an American prison? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 05:50
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Does anyone actually believe Trump will go to prison? Not in a theoretical "Yes, it's imaginable" way but in a way where you believe you might actually see Donald Trump as a convicted criminal in an American prison? No
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 06:10
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Does anyone actually believe Trump will go to prison? Not in a theoretical "Yes, it's imaginable" way but in a way where you believe you might actually see Donald Trump as a convicted criminal in an American prison? About as likely as Bill Cosby going to prison
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 06:33
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:About as likely as Bill Cosby going to prison The first time, or a second time?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 07:01
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:The first time, or a second time? Yes.  And then getting overturned four years later on a technicality requiring tortured interpretations of the law and circumstances sounds about right, too
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 07:13
|
|
|
ephori posted:It's only 'hanged' if it's from the Nuremburg region in Germany. Otherwise it's Old Sparky-ing time
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 08:02
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Does anyone actually believe Trump will go to prison? Not in a theoretical "Yes, it's imaginable" way but in a way where you believe you might actually see Donald Trump as a convicted criminal in an American prison? I envision home arrest at MAL but honestly who knows? But they have proof of everything straight to mens rea if you ask me and they are just taking their time making sure they don't swing and miss. The evidence is loving ubiquitous and unlike the doomers I am still confident his day in court(s) is coming, and he and MANY OTHERS will be convicted. While the rest of the posters have been coming around, I was the first here posting the mattering is assured and I stand by that still.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 08:33
|
|
|
Wait what, nobody with secret service protection should ever go to prison because they'd lose that perk? That is insane. Trump could shoot someone on fifth Avenue and he wouldn't go to prison? I have to be reading you wrong. How would this even play out, we get to the sentencing hearing and his lawyer says "your honor if you imprison my client his secret service detail would have to go too" and the judge is like "oh ok you're free to go but you've been very bad and don't do it again." What if he commits a crime with a mandatory minimum sentence? Does the collision of an unstoppable legal force with an immovable legal object rip a hole in the fabric of space-time? What if he shot up a school could anyone even stop him or would his SS detail have to protect him. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:43
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Wait what, nobody with secret service protection should ever go to prison because they'd lose that perk?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:47
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:It was something Glenn Kirschner (ex fed prosecutor) said. I don't know it for fact. Trump's an ex-President, and they get a SS detail, I think even if they are convicted of a crime. Yeah I know ex-presodents get SS protection but does that mean he can't go to prison for anything? What if he commits a crime with a mandatory minimum sentence?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
Trump's secret service driver wouldn't bring him to the Capitol during the insurrection and endured Trump trying to choke him for refusing while still driving the limo, so yeah they have to protect him. I'm guessing they'd be an excellent getaway team if he did shoot someone, but he'd have to be sneaky so they don't realize he is trying to put himself in danger and intervene.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:52
|
|
