|
Charlz Guybon posted:Those are pretty weak charges if that's all they're thinking of. Be careful, that's a load-bearing if.
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Be careful, that's a load-bearing if. They tend to be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 05:25
|
|
|
Murgos posted:It’s amazing how he can’t help but suck his own dick in the middle of trying to make a statement about being arrested. It's great because by the time he gets to the object of that sentence you've forgotten how its started;. It looks like he's saying 'I'm leading Joe Biden in the polls, HORRIFYING NEWS' which, yeah we agree 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 08:06
|
|
|
Am I crazy in thinking that a trial starting in March or April of next year is actually the worst timing for Trump and Republicans? It puts the trial right in the middle of primary season. Now this may not actually hurt Trump’s chances at winning the nomination, but what does the GOP do if Trump wins enough delegates and then gets convicted? They’re going to have to face a choice of still officially nominating him at the convention, and putting a convicted felon on the ballot, or somehow revoking all the delegates he won and nominate someone the old fashioned way. Running Trump after he was convicted would be disastrous for them in the election, but so would nominating someone else because the Trump fanboys would riot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 12:29
|
|
|
Not even a situation worth thinking about. Unless Trump is finally relieved of this mortal coil by one, final, filet-o-fish he will be the nominee and honestly even then I peg it as a "maybe". All the rest of that stuff won't be taken in to consideration by the rabid base.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 12:34
|
|
|
Maybe the RNC convention will have its own Jan 6. I'm not wishing for such violence, of course, but at this point it wouldn't surprise me. MAGA is a cult.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 13:09
|
|
|
That's only really possible if Trump doesn't win the nomination. At this point, him dying seems to be the only thing that *might* do it. The base is so crazy that they may not believe news of him dying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 13:42
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Those are pretty weak charges if that's all they're thinking of. The actual target letter would generally cite specific or general US Code sections and we are getting that translated into layman speak. Also lol that witness tampering by the former president is now a “weak charge”.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 13:44
|
|
|
smackfu posted:The actual target letter would generally cite specific or general US Code sections and we are getting that translated into layman speak. He tried to overthrow the government. Treason, insurrection, conspiracy to commit murder, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 13:50
|
|
|
Feds don’t bring charges that are hard to convict against former POTUS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 13:54
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Am I crazy in thinking that a trial starting in March or April of next year is actually the worst timing for Trump and Republicans? It puts the trial right in the middle of primary season. Now this may not actually hurt Trump’s chances at winning the nomination, but what does the GOP do if Trump wins enough delegates and then gets convicted? Would it? What's the profile of a voter who would vote for Trump now but not then?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 14:30
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Cannon has provided an unprecedented amount of poo poo to quote:PAPERLESS Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Aileen M. Cannon: Pretrial Conference Pursuant to Section 2 of CIPA held on July 18, 2023. The Court heard argument from the parties on the Government's Motion for Continuance and Request for Proposed Revised Scheduling Order 34 . The Court denied the Government's Motion for Protective Order 79 without prejudice for lack of meaningful conferral. quote:Upon motion of the United States, the court shall issue an order to protect against the disclosure of any classified information disclosed by the United States to any defendant in any criminal case in a district court of the United States. From the government's motion: quote:5. On July 12, 2023, the Government sent to counsel for the Defendants the proposed protective order. On July 14, 2023, counsel for the Defendants informed the Government that they intend to object to certain provisions of the proposed protective order, but did not specify any such provisions.1 Because the entry of a protective order is necessary to provide any classified discovery to the Defendants, the Government respectfully requests that the Court require the Defendants to file on an expedited schedule any objections to the proposed protective order. Paracaidas fucked around with this message at 14:44 on Jul 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 14:42
|
|
over, you needn't invent new ones.
|
Senor Tron posted:Would it? It's probably more a matter of motivating Biden voters than discouraging trump ones.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 14:53
|
|
|
Haystack posted:It's probably more a matter of motivating Biden voters than discouraging trump ones. I honestly think that it would be impossible to say whether Trump being convicted would motivate or demotivate conservatives at this point. And I think Dems are about as motivated as they will be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Would it? There is a small but significant percentage of independents who indicate that they would not be willing to vote for Trump if he was convicted (but would be willing to vote for him for anything short of a conviction) because "voted for a convicted criminal" doesn't line up with how they see themselves and sitting out one election is easy. It's an open question how truthful they are, but I think there's good reason to believe they are, and if it is true it would swing the direction wildly in favour of Biden. Even if those folks are lying or don't really exist, voting against a convicted criminal seems at least someone motivating for non-Trump folks who don't want one of them as president. It's not a guaranteed boost to his opposition (propaganda can do a lot to twist narratives and turn such things around) but its a reasonable thing to believe imo. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Jul 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 15:07
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Speaking of! If they have to, they can just go to the 11th circuit for a writ of mandamus along with a motion to expedite. She can't gum up the works more than a couple days with this, if even that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 15:18
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Would it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 15:22
|
|
|
You can now go on Tv and call Trump a rapist. https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1681655281724342273
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 15:25
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:You can now go on Tv and call Trump a rapist. Trump will sue the judge for defamation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
smackfu posted:It’s a good sentence diagramming exercise. Just Obama: https://thegrammarvandal.wordpress.com/2009/03/06/diagramming-obamas-sentences/ I don't know if diagramming even applies to common T stuff. Isn't most of it like a closed loop of repeated nonsensical adjectives and adverbs? Nephthys posted:I honestly think that it would be impossible to say whether Trump being convicted would motivate or demotivate conservatives at this point. And I think Dems are about as motivated as they will be. Most voters (survey?) seems to care about the presidential election... when it's time for the loving election. This nonsense of "I might run for president in 2068 makes everything interference!" is just getting really old. Meanwhile the 35% that think he's still president are just sitting there waiting to go check the box to "make it official". Accidents also happen to good people. EG suppose the D candidate dies 5wk before the election. That might cause moderates to stay home, then the R+7 is a guaranteed win. Just look at the margin because of the October Hillary email claims. (I'm no good at history, what's the closest to election a candidate has died?).
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 16:11
|
|
|
gregday posted:Trump will sue the judge for defamation. Judge: A-ha! I now activate my trap card, Absolute Privalage! It shields me from making defamatory statements if made during the course of my duties! And it affords me a full defence against your law suit!! I now attack you for legal costs directly against your wallet!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:(I'm no good at history, what's the closest to election a candidate has died?).
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 16:52
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:There is a small but significant percentage of independents who indicate that they would not be willing to vote for Trump if he was convicted (but would be willing to vote for him for anything short of a conviction) because "voted for a convicted criminal" doesn't line up with how they see themselves and sitting out one election is easy. The dave_o's of the world? There can't possibly be that many voters that fit this criteria
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:If they have to, they can just go to the 11th circuit for a writ of mandamus along with a motion to expedite. She can't gum up the works more than a couple days with this, if even that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:Accidents also happen to good people. EG suppose the D candidate dies 5wk before the election. That might cause moderates to stay home, then the R+7 is a guaranteed win. Just look at the margin because of the October Hillary email claims. (I'm no good at history, what's the closest to election a candidate has died?). His wife was appointed in his place at the decision of the Lt. Gov (who was elevated to governor after Carnahan's death and had promised to appoint her should Carnahan have won) until such time a special election could be held (which was 2002, when his wife lost to Jim Talent by 20,000 votes). He was the first US Senate candidate to posthumously win an election. There had been three House candidates who had done so previously.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:11
|
|
|
Just imagine being so unlikable for Missouri that a dead man beats you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Just imagine being so unlikable for Missouri that a dead man beats you. Oh I remember perfectly well how unlikable John Ashcroft was.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Oh I remember perfectly well how unlikable John Ashcroft was. I mean, sadly he'd probably get elected no problem today. Republicans in 2000 still had a sense of shame and a conscience
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/dsamuelsohn/status/1681731436972261396
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:39
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:I mean, sadly he'd probably get elected no problem today. Republicans in 2000 still had a sense of shame and a conscience I think the GOP base has moved well past Ivy League-educated neocons. Were Ashcroft (or someone like him) to win a primary yeah the GOP base will vote for him but Ashcroft would lose a primary fight to a car dealership owner present at 1/6 promising to purge the deep state and posing with their family of 7 all wielding AR-15s in mailers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:40
|
|
|
PhantomOfTheCopier posted:I'm here to say Yay, though I await the actual indictment. Two weeks? Friday? I've heard as early as tomorrow but probably not later than Monday. Idk how realistic that is
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:46
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:I think the GOP base has moved well past Ivy League-educated neocons. Were Ashcroft (or someone like him) to win a primary yeah the GOP base will vote for him but Ashcroft would lose a primary fight to a car dealership owner present at 1/6 promising to purge the deep state and posing with their family of 7 all wielding AR-15s in mailers. I think Ashcroft could have potentially pivot to them, mainly by bragging up how involved he was in illegal torture of Muslim detainees. But yeah, he's one of yesterday's monsters, not today's.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
The indictment is almost assuredly already written, so there probably isn't anything stopping Smith from filing it after tomorrow when Trump doesn't show up to respond to the target letter. Ben Wittes of Lawfare notes that it will probably be filed under seal so as to allow an orderly process for Trump to show up for surrender and arraignment—as happened with the Mar-a-Lago indictment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:I think the GOP base has moved well past Ivy League-educated neocons. Were Ashcroft (or someone like him) to win a primary yeah the GOP base will vote for him but Ashcroft would lose a primary fight to a car dealership owner present at 1/6 promising to purge the deep state and posing with their family of 7 all wielding AR-15s in mailers. I didn't know Darrel Issa had moved to Missouri 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
One of the Jan 6th defendants is a sovereign citizen who demanded to be paid $75,000 an hour from the court for providing his own legal defense and is currently wanted for skipping his court date. https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1681450031885287426
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 20:12
|
|
|
Has sovereign citizen stupidity ever worked? Like, has it worked even once in modern history? How are there so many people so stupid that they gently caress around like this in such a high risk situation?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 20:27
|
|
|
PoopShipDestroyer posted:Has sovereign citizen stupidity ever worked? Like, has it worked even once in modern history? How are there so many people so stupid that they gently caress around like this in such a high risk situation? It worked for the Malheur Terrorists. Ok to be fair that was more because the FBI utterly botched their investigation and arrest process (this is why it's important to do things right and not fast) but still.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
Does the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge standoff with the Bundys count (as being efb)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
PoopShipDestroyer posted:Has sovereign citizen stupidity ever worked? Like, has it worked even once in modern history? How are there so many people so stupid that they gently caress around like this in such a high risk situation? Depends what you mean by "worked." I was helping someone in a civil case and their ex-husband claimed they were "bound by Moorish law" and had a passport he made saying he was granted Moorish citizenship by some treaty that exempted him from U.S. civil law. He wasted a huge amount of time and delayed things by not providing process servers with accurate addresses. He could have accomplished the same thing by just dodging the servers and being a jerk without claiming Moorish citizenship, though. It also made him eventually get a default judgement and lose all of his cases, but he was extremely difficult to enforce a judgement against because he had no official address or job and was just being paid in cash after moving to another state.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
PoopShipDestroyer posted:Has sovereign citizen stupidity ever worked? Like, has it worked even once in modern history? How are there so many people so stupid that they gently caress around like this in such a high risk situation? No, it's universally ineffective in court. It wastes time and annoys everyone involved, which draws out the case but also basically ensures that no one's feeling sympathetic when sentencing time comes around. The people who do it generally don't know that, though. Moreover, sovereign citizen communities usually assure people that if sovereign citizen stupidity isn't working, it's because the diabolical prosecutor or judge is breaking the law in attempts to intimidate them into surrendering their rights, but can't really hurt them as long as they maintain those rights. As such, they're convinced that as long as they stick to sovcit tactics and don't give in to the pressure of the legal system, everything the prosecutor or judge does to them will eventually be overturned and then they will be rewarded with absurdly huge piles of cash as restitution for the government's misdeeds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2023 20:36
|
|