|
bird food bathtub posted:How many of them did more than pay some fines? Not even ruin-your-life level fines that can happen to normal people, just fines.
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2023 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
Murgos posted:CNN and others are reporting that a Save America PAC aide copied many classified documents to a laptop and thumb drive while at Mar-a-lago. I could see it if they just grabbed literal stacks of papers and ran it through an auto document feeder to scan all the docs and make one giant pdf. And some 21 year old intern/staffer knows just enough to not say anything that could land them in hot water because they're just a staffer who doesn't anything about classified document handling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 10:04
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:How many of them did more than pay some fines? Not even ruin-your-life level fines that can happen to normal people, just fines. Being a convicted felon is a significant punishment
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 15:17
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:Being a convicted felon is a significant punishment He did a short amount of time in federal prison, which arguably matched what he pled guilty to. But it seems small in view of the larger scope of the crimes he did. And being a convicted felon is a significant punishment for people who apply to jobs who screen people with convictions, or rely on sorts of government welfare, etc. But is it a significant punishment for a guy who already makes around 100k from his pensions alone? His being a convicted felon won't ever block him from accessing anything he wants.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 15:42
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:How many of them did more than pay some fines? Not even ruin-your-life level fines that can happen to normal people, just fines. Of the five that I listed, four of them were sentenced to prison time, although one of them was pardoned before his sentence started. Of those five, the longest sentence was Steve Stockman's ten-year prison sentence for money laundering, fraud, tax evasion, and making false statements to assorted federal agencies. He only served two years before Trump pardoned him, but it's not like that's the investigators' fault.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
V-Men posted:He did a short amount of time in federal prison, which arguably matched what he pled guilty to. But it seems small in view of the larger scope of the crimes he did. And being a convicted felon is a significant punishment for people who apply to jobs who screen people with convictions, or rely on sorts of government welfare, etc. But is it a significant punishment for a guy who already makes around 100k from his pensions alone? His being a convicted felon won't ever block him from accessing anything he wants. Just because someone is able to survive or even do well in the aftermath of a criminal sentence doesn't mean the sentence wasn't significant. In fact the number of lives destroyed by criminal sentences in the USA is a critical flaw in the US justice system that needs to be addressed immediately. The solution isnt to make the system more punitive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2023 19:39
|
|
|
V-Men posted:I could see it if they just grabbed literal stacks of papers and ran it through an auto document feeder to scan all the docs and make one giant pdf. And some 21 year old intern/staffer knows just enough to not say anything that could land them in hot water because they're just a staffer who doesn't anything about classified document handling. I saw some reporting today that maybe the PAC staffer just copied over Trumps calendar from the period when he was president which would have been classified and if true I could see that being inadvertent. However, I don’t buy that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 01:53
|
|
|
Murgos posted:I saw some reporting today that maybe the PAC staffer just copied over Trumps calendar from the period when he was president which would have been classified and if true I could see that being inadvertent. Wouldn't that just be "one" document, though, not "many"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 02:15
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Wouldn't that just be "one" document, though, not "many"? Depends on how they count individual entries on the calendar. I would imagine invites referencing different classified info would likely count as individual instances. Or maybe they scanned and attached the pdb to the invites lol … oh Jesus they probably did didn’t they.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 03:57
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Depends on how they count individual entries on the calendar. I would imagine invites referencing different classified info would likely count as individual instances. Or maybe they scanned and attached the pdb to the invites lol There were reports the PDB was just on an iPad and everyone in the WH would just pass it around without any regard for its classified status.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 09:42
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:There were reports the PDB was just on an iPad and everyone in the WH would just pass it around without any regard for its classified status. *trump immediately exits the app and opens Twitter*
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 13:33
|
|
|
mdemone posted:*trump immediately exits the app and opens Twitter* Really the PDB should have just had a Twitter share button
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 15:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1625313879655063554?s=20&t=VO9eGZLoq0GObdgEx6be3w Maybe a big deal? Maybe give us some idea if anything matters? I didn't see it discussed much here E: supposed to be released Thursday
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 20:25
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Of the five that I listed, four of them were sentenced to prison time, although one of them was pardoned before his sentence started. He was also a literal Corruption Elemental
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 20:43
|
|
|
We will see what it says once it’s released. I think we’re just getting the introduction and the conclusion scrubbed of any details that could affect the defendants rights and a section on obstruction of Justice about people lying to the grand jury*. The speculation is that the regular grand jury sits in March (I think?) and we should see the indictments soon after. * It will be very funny if some of the fraudulent electors managed to turn a misdemeanor charge of filing a false document into felony obstruction of Justice charges with a 5 year sentence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
Seems like Pence is going to challenge Jacks subpoena on the grounds that in his role as president of the senate he is immune by reason of the speech and debate clause. Since he’s was neither a congressman or a senator this seems tenuous. Also, as we’ve seen recently with graham there is already a pretty substantial amount of precedent about what does and does not get covered by that clause so this seems like a fairly low probability play.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 01:20
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Seems like Pence is going to challenge Jacks subpoena on the grounds that in his role as president of the senate he is immune by reason of the speech and debate clause. Cheney tried an argument along these lines when he was VP as I recall, though I don't remember in regards to what. Basically he tried to dodge some manner of executive oversight by claiming as president of the senate he was actually part of the legislative branch (in that and only that specific instance).
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Seems like Pence is going to challenge Jacks subpoena on the grounds that in his role as president of the senate he is immune by reason of the speech and debate clause. He successfully argued to Congress that he was part of the executive branch that day, now he's claiming in court to have been part of the legislative branch that day. It's ridiculous but that doesn't mean it won't work. This delineation has never been made clear by the judiciary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
Exclusive: Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows subpoenaed by special counsel in Jan. 6 investigationquote:Donald Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows has been subpoenaed by the special counsel investigating the former president and his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection, a source familiar with the matter told CNN.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 02:23
|
|
|
Well, if nothing else we’re going to get a pretty clear definition of what is and is not executive privilege after this is all over. I’m thinking the courts almost have to side with DoJ here as almost their whole article 3 purpose is to try criminal cases and if you make a group unable to be investigated as criminals then they are limiting their own authority which seems unlikely. Grand Jury subpoenas are court orders and signed by a judge after all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 02:50
|
|
|
! So Smith subpoenaed Meadows in January. He has also called on Pence. His J6 investigation can't really go much higher, can it? This is pretty much exactly the way we were advised the Garland DOJ would work, too. Pence and Meadows, both. I do not think either one will get out of testifying, even if it's just to plead the fifth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 02:51
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:His J6 investigation can't really go much higher, can it? This is pretty much exactly the way we were advised the Garland DOJ would work, too. Not much higher, those two are probably the most informed as to trumps full intentions other than maybe Roger Stone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 02:55
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Well, if nothing else we’re going to get a pretty clear definition of what is and is not executive privilege after this is all over. If DOJ can't investigate, then it would be saying the US does not have a President, but an elected dictator.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 03:39
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:Pence and Meadows, both. I do not think either one will get out of testifying, even if it's just to plead the fifth. Now if the question is "did you call (on behalf)" or "did you advise", that seems covered, but from the 1/6 depositions it sure seems like a great deal isn't covered. But we be not lawyers so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 03:59
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:(Not my brain's best day for some reason but) isn't the fifth only pertinent to self incrimination, so if I ask "Dr Faustus, did Trump call the national guard from the oval office between &c?", is there even a fifth protection? Even with the phrase "did you witness" added, while it's about the questioned individual, what is self incriminating about an affirmative? IANAL, but there are situations where observing something could be incriminating. For example, a mandated reporter who observes child abuse me fails to report it could be found guilty of a crime. But I don't think mandated reporting fits this situation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 04:52
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:(Not my brain's best day for some reason but) isn't the fifth only pertinent to self incrimination, so if I ask "Dr Faustus, did Trump call the national guard from the oval office between &c?", is there even a fifth protection? Even with the phrase "did you witness" added, while it's about the questioned individual, what is self incriminating about an affirmative? I can't remember if it was explained in this thread or the USCE thread, but often times if someone is going to plead the fifth to anything, they'll be advised to plead the fifth to everything. Basically, while under oath, you have no idea what the questioning attorney is going to ask, and you don't want to say anything that might contradict others' testimony, or even your own statements outside of court/deposition. Here's another quote on the subject: Rigel posted:Just to clarify, you cant ignore a summons from congress to testify, but you can just show up to "testify" and then plead the 5th to every single question asked. We saw that a few times with the 1/6 committee.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 06:27
|
|
|
While generally true, you can't plead the fifth in cases where you don't think what you're testifying to may be incriminating. It's a bit of an academic distinction and a good lawyer will probably try to get you to over apply the right but if a judge really believes you're simply using the fifth to avoid answering questions which wouldn't cause you legal jeapordy (thinking of examples like 'please confirm your name') then they probably can punish witnesses. Of course that's rare since it is a right you've got and there may be some reason unknown to the court why you are taking the fifth (maybe nobody knows you've been committing identity fraud for the last 20 years).
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 11:01
|
|
|
https://news.yahoo.com/messages-officer-often-fed-information-215958032.html Messages: Officer often fed information to Proud Boys leader quote:WASHINGTON (AP) — A police officer frequently provided Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio with internal information about law enforcement operations in the weeks before other members of his far-right extremist group stormed the U.S. Capitol, according to messages shown Wednesday at the trial of Tarrio and four associates. BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 13:38 on Feb 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 13:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AnnaBower/status/1626250276540760065?t=vYoq8cuyFgpmGq5FwOgSHg&s=19 Haven't read through it yet but wanted to share that it dropped. E: most interesting part so far, from the limited pages that were released  What I can't ascertain is if they are only recommending indictments for the people that lied or if there is more to it that just is not unsealed, I can't remember what this particular GJ's edict was cr0y fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Feb 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 17:08
|
|
|
He also told Tarrio about a warrant for his arrest; that's a straight up mole
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
Xand_Man posted:He also told Tarrio about a warrant for his arrest; that's a straight up mole That officer is going to plead the Fifth, and/or has already done so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 18:24
|
|
|
cr0y posted:What I can't ascertain is if they are only recommending indictments for the people that lied or if there is more to it that just is not unsealed, I can't remember what this particular GJ's edict was Is the introduction section I? Otherwise by the way the last page is formatted it looks like there are either 7 or 8 sections not shown so other recommendations could be anywhere in there. The conclusion doesn't summarize the findings of the Jury or it may be redacted. I don't think we are going to know until the DA issues indictments that aren't perjury or the final report is released.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 20:30
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:https://news.yahoo.com/messages-officer-often-fed-information-215958032.html 🎶Some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses 🎶
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2023 21:51
|
|
|
Lol, Evan Corcoran who has been representing Trump in the documents case went in to talk to the grand jury. Apparently he citied Attorney-Client privilege for something dubious and Smith has asked the judge to rule on crime fraud exception in this matter. Which has caused Corcoran to have to lawyer up since apparently he’s now a subject of interest. HAHAHA! Get da fuq outta here
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Lol, Evan Corcoran who has been representing Trump in the documents case went in to talk to the grand jury. Apparently he citied Attorney-Client privilege for something dubious and Smith has asked the judge to rule on crime fraud exception in this matter. Which has caused Corcoran to have to lawyer up since apparently he’s now a subject of interest. quote:
Dr. Faustus fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Feb 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Lol, Evan Corcoran who has been representing Trump in the documents case went in to talk to the grand jury. Apparently he citied Attorney-Client privilege for something dubious and Smith has asked the judge to rule on crime fraud exception in this matter. Which has caused Corcoran to have to lawyer up since apparently he’s now a subject of interest. My attorneys got attorneys
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
That's possibly the best thing I've read all week. The fact it not only demolished this lawyer but also warned all others immediately not to play with fire and continue to obstruct justice because there will be consequences? Chef kiss. What a brilliant move.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2023 12:22
|
|
|
cr0y posted:https://twitter.com/AnnaBower/status/1626250276540760065?t=vYoq8cuyFgpmGq5FwOgSHg&s=19 Tbh, this makes me slightly concerned that any recommended indictments will be about obstruction/perjury rather than the election interference. But I'm a huge pessimist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 10:41
|
|
|
V-Men posted:Tbh, this makes me slightly concerned that any recommended indictments will be about obstruction/perjury rather than the election interference. But I'm a huge pessimist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 11:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
Finally, someone unbiased will get to the bottom of this. https://twitter.com/mikeallen/status/1627678784718610433?s=46&t=Qg0L_0BnrIkDuWn4gdetnA
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:27
|
|
