Convicted Felon Donald Trump Legal Troubles: Trump Wins Unanimous Vote

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Convicted Felon Donald Trump Legal Troubles: Trump Wins Unanimous Vote

«‹›642 »

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Main Paineframe posted:

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.

In my experience, they generally do understand that nobody else buys into this. This is just their way of justifying to themselves that they were railroaded and they are actually a good person. Trying to have long process arguments about why the court order to pay child support is invalid makes you feel like less of a bad person than trying to argue on the merits that you just don't care about your child and don't want to pay. They are explicitly obsessed with process and not on the specifics of their situation because they feel much more comfortable arguing on those grounds and there is a theory that they might wear out the other people/stumble upon that 1% chance that someone else does actually mess up the process and retroactively justify all their previous actions.

Some of them are also just legitimately mentally ill. I don't know how you want to define mental illness, but I think if you genuinely believe in stuff like sovereign citizenship, lizard people, or JFK still being alive are true, then you are pretty far off into delusional territory.

Granted, my experience is a sample size of maybe 7 or 8 people. But, it has been pretty consistent and is probably 7 or 8 more sov cits than the average person runs into.

# ? Jul 19, 2023 20:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 6, 2024 10:56

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; This does not make sense when, again, aggregate indicia also indicate improvements. The belief that things are worse is false. It remains false.

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?

Yes, it works or worked, along three basic patterns:

a) jury nullification. Rare but possible.
b) the vexatious filings are so severe and continuous that the court or prosecutors drop things or move to a lesser charge because it's burning up so many resources that could go into other cases. The judicial and prosecutorial systems are overburdened and in a state of triage like everything else.
c) occasionally the prosecutors or officials gently caress up in trying to cut through all the bullshit and an actual violation occurs. This is rare, but it makes other courts paranoid about repeating it...so they bend over backwards to avoid such issues...which gives the sovcit leverage and burns more resources.

In practice, any individual case of this working feeds back into the cycle of scam artists who sell sovcit concepts, becoming permanent influential examples of how these things "work". I don't have the article onhand, but case b happened in Baltimore in, iirc, the early 90s and the result was to greatly spread belief in the practice.

edit: it was 2008, here's the article.

quote:

None of these arguments had a prayer of overturning the charges. But they had an impact nonetheless. They made a long, complex trial longer and more complex still. Seeking the death penalty is rightfully arduous�it requires legal justifications for the penalty itself, enhanced scrutiny over jury selection, an additional penalty phase after a conviction, and so on. Conspiracy charges create further legal burdens. And the way Mitchell et al chose to deal with their attorneys� not dismissing them outright, but asking them to sign a peculiar �contract� that would essentially prohibit them from mounting a defense�created more problems. If the defendants weren�t dealt with carefully, they might be able to appeal by claiming that they had been inadequately represented. The last thing Judge Davis wanted was for an appellate court to throw out a verdict and send the case back to Baltimore to start all over again. According to a source close to the court, dealing with the flesh and blood defense has been �one of the greatest challenges Davis has faced in twenty years as a judge, by far.�

By mid-2007, the federal prosecutors were starting to run low on a vital resource: time. As years go by, memories fade, police officers retire or transfer, informants change their mind, and juries wonder, why, if the case is so straightforward, it took so long to make. On September 6, 2007, prosecutors withdrew the death penalty for all four defendants.

Crucially, like all scams, delusions and falsehoods, the gurus and jailhouse attorneys who promote these practices generally at least partially believe in them, themselves. Ultimately, what's being "sold" or taught is a way out, a way to relieve the fear, anxiety, desperation, inevitability and seeming inscrutability of a legal outcome. Motivated reasoning and a desire to believe that you are somehow going to be in the right can make almost anyone stupid if they're under enough pressure.

The caveat to all of this is that court systems have developed practices and toolsets in response. Procedural standards for "vexatious litigants" and similar terms let the court stop handling sovcit and pro se actors with kid gloves and shut down these practices more quickly. Sovcit filings are thus far less "effective" or disruptive than they used to be.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Jul 19, 2023

# ? Jul 19, 2023 20:44

PhantomOfTheCopier: Aug 13, 2008; Pikabooze!

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

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.

Half jokingly, if they aren't citizens then they are officially war criminals, right? :11tea:

"Foreigner attacks Capitol, sentenced to 43 years".

# ? Jul 19, 2023 20:47

Ynglaur: Oct 9, 2013; The Malta Conference, anyone?

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

Half jokingly, if they aren't citizens then they are officially war criminals, right? "Foreigner attacks Capitol, sentenced to 43 years".

Off to Guantanamo, then!

# ? Jul 19, 2023 20:55

Murgos: Oct 21, 2010

Tayter Swift posted:

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.

Yeah, but Trump is going to Trump so he�s going to Truth out some nonsense about the indictment which effectively waives his right to privacy and forces the DOJ to ask to unseal it to correct his false claims.

So, by Friday evening we will all be reading it.

# ? Jul 19, 2023 21:16

Bird in a Blender: Nov 17, 2005; It's amazing what they can do with computers these days.

Senor Tron posted:

Would it?

What's the profile of a voter who would vote for Trump now but not then?

I�m still assuming that there�s still some soft support for trump that would deteriorate if they were forced to vote for a convicted felon. That and a bunch of people who would likely stay home, which would affect down ballot too. Even just 3-4% of republicans staying home would result in some significant shifts in congress.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 00:02

BiggerBoat: Sep 26, 2007; Don't you tell me my business again.

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?

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.

Kind of beaten but like others have said.

I don't think it will matter much because the GOP mob has already done all in on Trump and most of them just dig in further the more criminal charges are brought. They see it as a weird form of validation of the deep state and continue, for some reason, to support this god damned idiot.

At this stage of the game, they see it as a badge of honor to be selectively indicted by the out of control deep state liberal FBI and weaponized justice department. In their minds, it proves they're scared of him and will stop at nothing to take him down. Never mind that, sometimes, in a Witch Hunt, the person might really be a witch. We've all seen and heard his crimes with our own eyes, unfiltered, and read his own tweets but it's fake news.

Reminder that something like 70% - 80% of registered Republicans still think the election was stolen.

BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Jul 20, 2023

# ? Jul 20, 2023 00:03

Murgos: Oct 21, 2010

BiggerBoat posted:

Kind of beaten but like others have said.

I don't think it will matter much because the GOP mob has already done all in on Trump and most of them just dig in further the more criminal charges are brought. They see it as a weird form of validation of the deep state and continue, for some reason, to support this god damned idiot.

At this stage of the game, they see it as a badge of honor to be selectively indicted by the out of control deep state liberal FBI and weaponized justice department. In their minds, it proves they're scared of him and will stop at nothing to take him down. Never mind that, sometimes, in a Witch Hunt, the person might really be a witch. We've all seen and heard his crimes with our own eyes, unfiltered, and read his own tweets but it's fake news.

Reminder that something like 70% - 80% of registered Republicans still think the election was stolen.

A judge just ruled in clear unambiguous English that a jury found that Trump is a rapist. Not some colloquial definition either but the federal statute definition.

I would bet that the number of republican voters who will change their vote because of that is effectively zero.

Murgos fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Jul 20, 2023

# ? Jul 20, 2023 00:30

cr0y: Mar 24, 2005

Bird in a Blender posted:

I’m still assuming that there’s still some soft support for trump that would deteriorate if they were forced to vote for a convicted felon. That and a bunch of people who would likely stay home, which would affect down ballot too. Even just 3-4% of republicans staying home would result in some significant shifts in congress.

It's this, presidential elections are won around the margins nowadays. A 1% boost in turn out for the Democrats and a 1% suppression for the Republicans locks it up.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 01:49

The Artificial Kid: Feb 22, 2002; Plibble

BiggerBoat posted:

Kind of beaten but like others have said.

I don't think it will matter much because the GOP mob has already done all in on Trump and most of them just dig in further the more criminal charges are brought. They see it as a weird form of validation of the deep state and continue, for some reason, to support this god damned idiot.

At this stage of the game, they see it as a badge of honor to be selectively indicted by the out of control deep state liberal FBI and weaponized justice department. In their minds, it proves they're scared of him and will stop at nothing to take him down. Never mind that, sometimes, in a Witch Hunt, the person might really be a witch. We've all seen and heard his crimes with our own eyes, unfiltered, and read his own tweets but it's fake news.

Reminder that something like 70% - 80% of registered Republicans still think the election was stolen.

I think Trump himself said he got 85% in a ranked choice poll at whatever that big GOP event was recently. To me 85% in a ranked choice poll at an event for diehards smells like electoral suicide if he�s convicted.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 02:10

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1681823740592640001?s=20

# ? Jul 20, 2023 02:36

GlyphGryph: Jun 23, 2013; Down came the glitches and burned us in ditches and we slept after eating our dead.

Murgos posted:

A judge just ruled in clear unambiguous English that a jury found that Trump is a rapist. Not some colloquial definition either but the federal statute definition.

I would bet that the number of republican voters who will change their vote because of that is effectively zero.

But not, and this is important, a criminal. He was found to be a rapist in a specifically non-criminal way. To the conservatives I know, categorical differences like that are really important in weird non-obvious ways (and they will avoid switching the category of someone they've categorized until they have no other choice, so criminals they've simply decided are criminals will stay criminals forever even if they never did a crime, but people they like can only become criminals by being convicted)

Sure, the vast majority of conservatives won't care, but you only need a small minority to care (even in a "I don't want to be publicly seen as supporting a convicted criminal" kind of way) in order for it to have a huge impact.

GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 02:53 on Jul 20, 2023

# ? Jul 20, 2023 02:50

Rakeris: Jul 20, 2014

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

In my experience, they generally do understand that nobody else buys into this. This is just their way of justifying to themselves that they were railroaded and they are actually a good person. Trying to have long process arguments about why the court order to pay child support is invalid makes you feel like less of a bad person than trying to argue on the merits that you just don't care about your child and don't want to pay. They are explicitly obsessed with process and not on the specifics of their situation because they feel much more comfortable arguing on those grounds and there is a theory that they might wear out the other people/stumble upon that 1% chance that someone else does actually mess up the process and retroactively justify all their previous actions.

Some of them are also just legitimately mentally ill. I don't know how you want to define mental illness, but I think if you genuinely believe in stuff like sovereign citizenship, lizard people, or JFK still being alive are true, then you are pretty far off into delusional territory.

Granted, my experience is a sample size of maybe 7 or 8 people. But, it has been pretty consistent and is probably 7 or 8 more sov cits than the average person runs into.

In my experience; I've probably talked to a few dozen about it at a casual convo level, and dealt with hundreds of them on lesser levels over the years. (Granted all in prison or being arrested) I really think a lot of them believe it. (Could very well be because of mental illness however) When I worked at a prison (state and fed) we saw a lot of them especially at the fed level. (at least where I worked anyhow)

They seem to often think they are being targeted for knowing about and standing up for their "rights".
Here is a video about their beliefs that they shoved when I was going through the academy. (This was like a decade or so ago fysa) https://youtu.be/USvJd8iVeXQ

It's kinda crazy seeing the lengths they will go through. Had one create an LLC (I think it was an LLC anyhow) to put a lien on the wardens house, which I actually thought it was kind of funny in a messed up sorta the way, and he didn't find out till he went to sell and it showed up. long story short: he thought the gov owed him money for time spent in prison.

A number of them I have talked to really think most people are too stupid/ignorant to stand up for their "rights" and are just letting the .gov walk all over them.

E: Probably a bad choice finding and watching some of that video logged into my account... comments are kind of amusing though, also kinda sad.

Rakeris fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Jul 20, 2023

# ? Jul 20, 2023 04:59

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; This does not make sense when, again, aggregate indicia also indicate improvements. The belief that things are worse is false. It remains false.

Time to link Meads v Meads

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

and after the hammer

https://www.canlii.org/en/commentar...W1SYAEbRS2ONWpA

# ? Jul 20, 2023 05:20

Main Paineframe: Oct 27, 2010

Rakeris posted:

In my experience; I've probably talked to a few dozen about it at a casual convo level, and dealt with hundreds of them on lesser levels over the years. (Granted all in prison or being arrested) I really think a lot of them believe it. (Could very well be because of mental illness however) When I worked at a prison (state and fed) we saw a lot of them especially at the fed level. (at least where I worked anyhow)

They seem to often think they are being targeted for knowing about and standing up for their "rights".
Here is a video about their beliefs that they shoved when I was going through the academy. (This was like a decade or so ago fysa) https://youtu.be/USvJd8iVeXQ

It's kinda crazy seeing the lengths they will go through. Had one create an LLC (I think it was an LLC anyhow) to put a lien on the wardens house, which I actually thought it was kind of funny in a messed up sorta the way, and he didn't find out till he went to sell and it showed up. long story short: he thought the gov owed him money for time spent in prison.

A number of them I have talked to really think most people are too stupid/ignorant to stand up for their "rights" and are just letting the .gov walk all over them.

E: Probably a bad choice finding and watching some of that video logged into my account... comments are kind of amusing though, also kinda sad.

It's classic conspiracy thinking: they know the dark secrets all us other plebes are too dumb to realize, they have all kinds of special powers we don't have because they know the right magic words.

It's an inherently self-contradictory ideology, which spawns all sorts of weird cognitive dissonance stuff. It's based on two fundamental ideas:

the government and legal system have no power over Americans, unless those Americans surrender their immunity and grant the government power over them
literally the entire government, all of our laws, the entire court system, and most of the law enforcement system are all just an incredibly elaborate ruse to trick people into surrendering their immunity and granting the government power over them

The contradiction is pretty obvious - they think that the entire government is a massive conspiracy constructed over centuries with the direct purpose of circumventing their supposed rights, but at the same time, they think that their imaginary laws will protect them from that conspiracy. Who's going to enforce those supposed rights of theirs if both law enforcement and the entire court system are part of the conspiracy to deprive them of those rights? Who knows! They get arrested and put in jail and scream the whole time about how it's illegal and the judge is going to get in trouble for it. In trouble with who? The entire court system's part of it.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 06:03

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

Interesting article on the civil rights aspect of the potential upcoming charges along with some media introspection

Lots of embedded links inside
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/20/trumps-attack-on-black-votes-was-there-the-whole-time-we-just-didnt-call-it-a-crime/

quote:

As I noted in an update to this post, NYT and the Guardian have clarified that the third charge mentioned in Trump�s target letter was 18 USC 241, Conspiracy against Rights, not � as Rolling Stone originally reported � 18 USC 242.

This piece, from November 2021, explains why 241 is such a good fit to Trump�s efforts to discount the votes of 81 million Biden voters.

quote:
The Supreme Court has stressed that Section 241 contains �sweeping general words� and directed courts to give the provision �a sweep as broad as its language.� In United States v. Classic it established that the statute protects not only the right to vote but the right to have one�s vote properly counted. Classic upheld an indictment of officials who sought to aid one candidate by refusing to count votes cast for his opponent.

The broad language of Section 241 clearly encompasses the actions of those involved in Trump�s coup attempt, and the Court�s precedents support that conclusion. Evidence currently available shows that the conspirators agreed to a common scheme to overthrow the results of the 2020 presidential election, took innumerable acts designed to accomplish that goal, and intended thereby to effectively deprive millions of voters in half a dozen states�and the rest of the 81 million Americans who voted for Joe Biden�of their right to vote and have their votes properly counted.

In Anderson v. U.S. the Court explicitly held that Section 241 reaches conspiracies designed �to dilute the value of votes of qualified voters.� It requires only an intent to prevent votes from being �given full value and effect,� an intent that includes an intent �to have false votes cast.� Evidence suggests that Trump and his supporters attempted exactly that in Georgia. They pressured local officials to somehow, some way magically �find� 11,780 additional votes to give Trump victory there and negate the votes of nearly two and a half million Georgia voters.

And it�s not just the concerted effort to eliminate the votes of 81 million Biden voters on January 6.

The recent news that Jack Smith has subpoenaed the security footage from the State Farm arena vote count location in Georgia, taken in conjunction with Trump�s efforts in places like Michigan � where his efforts focused on preventing a fair count of Detroit, where he had actually performed better than in 2016, rather than Kent County, the still predominantly white county where he lost the state � is a reminder that Trump and his mobs, many associated with overt white supremacists like Nick Fuentes, aggressively tried to thwart the counting of Black and Latino people�s votes. It was the same play Roger Stone used when he sent �election observers� to Black precincts in 2016, just on a far grander scale, and backed by the incitement of the sitting President.

As I said in the other post, we�ll see how Jack Smith charges this soon enough.

For now, I want to talk about how the press cognitively missed this � myself included. I want to talk about how the press � myself included � didn�t treat an overt effort to make it harder to count the votes of Black and Latino voters as a crime.

In its piece (including Maggie, but also a lot of people who aren�t as conflicted as she is), NYT points to both Norm Eisen (who didn�t see this, either, and whose recent prosecution memo on the charges we did expect didn�t even cite the pending decisions in the DC Circuit) and the January 6 Committee as if they are where this investigation came from.

quote:
Two of the statutes were familiar from the criminal referral by the House Jan. 6 committee and months of discussion by legal experts: conspiracy to defraud the government and obstruction of an official proceeding.

[snip]

The prospect of charging Mr. Trump under the other two statutes cited in the target letter is less novel, if not without hurdles. Among other things, in its final report last year, the House committee that investigated the events that culminated in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol had recommended that the Justice Department charge the former president under both of them.

Alan Feuer (who is bylined along with Maggie) knows as well as I do, neither ConfraudUS (18 USC 371) nor obstruction (18 USC 1512(c)(2)) came from the January 6 Committee. J6C � and people like Eisen � were still looking at insurrection long after I was screaming that DOJ would use obstruction. They � and people like Eisen � still hadn�t figured out how DOJ was using obstruction even after Carl Nichols specifically raised the prospect of using it with Trump.

NYT�s discussion of the pending appeal from Thomas Robertson in the DC Circuit (in the last paragraphs of the article) is as good as you�ll see in the mainstream press. They know well the obstruction charges builds on years of work by DOJ�s prosecutors, but nevertheless point to J6C�s fairly thin referral of it, as if that, and not the charges in 300 January 6 cases already, is where it comes from.

The reason we knew DOJ would use obstruction is because DOJ has been, overtly, setting that up for years.

In its description of the unexpected mention of 241, though, NYT describes that �prosecutors have introduced a new twist.�

quote:
Federal prosecutors have introduced a new twist in the Jan. 6 investigation by suggesting in a target letter that they could charge former President Donald J. Trump with violating a civil rights statute that dates back to the post-Civil War Reconstruction era, according to three people familiar with the matter.

Again, it was a surprise to me, too. I�m not faulting the NYT for being surprised. But that doesn�t mean prosecutors �introduced a new twist,� as if this is some loving reality show. It means journalists, myself included, either don�t know of, misinterpreted the investigative steps that DOJ has already taken, or simply didn�t see them � and I fear it�s the latter.

To be sure, in retrospect there are signs that DOJ was investigating this. In December, WaPo reported that DOJ had subpoenaed election officials in predominantly minority counties in swing states (notably, the journalists on the story were local reporters, neither Trump whisperers nor the WaPo journalists who�ve given scant coverage to the crime scene investigation).

quote:
Special counsel Jack Smith has sent grand jury subpoenas to local officials in Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin � three states that were central to President Donald Trump�s failed plan to stay in power following the 2020 election � seeking any and all communications with Trump, his campaign, and a long list of aides and allies.

The requests for records arrived in Dane County, Wis.; Maricopa County, Ariz.; and Wayne County, Mich., late last week, and in Milwaukee on Monday, officials said. They are among the first known subpoenas issued since Smith was named last month by Attorney General Merrick Garland to oversee Trump-related aspects of the investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, as well as the criminal probe of Trump�s possible mishandling of classified documents at his Florida home and private club.

The subpoenas, at least three of which are dated Nov. 22, indicate that the Justice Department is extending its examination of the circumstances leading up to the Capitol attack to include local election officials and their potential interactions with the former president and his representatives related to the 2020 election.

The virtually identical requests to Arizona and Wisconsin seek communications with Trump, in addition to employees, agents and attorneys for his campaign. Details of the Michigan subpoena, confirmed by Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, were not immediately available.

[snip]

Previous subpoenas, in Arizona and other battleground states targeted by Trump, have been issued to key Republican players seen as allies in his pressure campaign to reverse the results of the 2020 election. Maricopa County, the sprawling Arizona jurisdiction that is home to Phoenix and more than half the state�s voters, was among several localities on the receiving end of that pressure.

The Post could not confirm Tuesday whether the latest round of subpoenas went to local officials in any other states. The office of the secretary of state in Pennsylvania, another 2020 contested state, declined to comment. State and local election officials in another contested state, Georgia, said they knew of no subpoenas arriving in the past week. Officials in Clark County, Nev., the sixth contested state, declined to comment.

The Arizona subpoena was addressed to Maricopa County�s elections department, while the Wisconsin versions were addressed to the Milwaukee and Dane clerks. All seek communications from June 1, 2020, through Jan. 20, 2021.

These subpoenas asked for Trump�s contacts with local election officials, in the predominantly minority counties that Democrats need to win swing states, going back to June 2020, well before the election itself. By December 2022, DOJ was taking overt steps in an investigation that even before the election Trump had plans targeting minority cities.

And there may have been a still earlier sign of this prong of the investigation, from the NYT itself. Alan Feuer (with Mike Schmidt) reported in November that prosecutors were investigating Stone�s rent-a-mob tactics, going back to 2018 but really going back to the Brooks Brothers riot in 2000, the same loving MO Stone has adopted for decades, using threats of violence to make it harder to count brown people�s votes.

quote:
The time was 2018, the setting was southern Florida, and the election in question was for governor and a hotly contested race that would help determine who controlled the United States Senate.

Now, four years later, the Justice Department is examining whether the tactics used then served as a model for the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

In recent months, prosecutors overseeing the seditious conspiracy case of five members of the Proud Boys have expanded their investigation to examine the role that Jacob Engels � a Florida Proud Boy who accompanied Mr. Stone to Washington for Jan. 6 � played in the 2018 protests, according to a person briefed on the matter.

The prosecutors want to know whether Mr. Engels received any payments or drew up any plans for the Florida demonstration, and whether he has ties to other people connected to the Proud Boys� activities in the run-up to the storming of the Capitol.

Different prosecutors connected to the Jan. 6 investigation have also been asking questions about efforts by Mr. Stone � a longtime adviser to Mr. Trump � to stave off a recount in the 2018 Senate race in Florida, according to other people familiar with the matter.

[snip]

The 2018 demonstrations in Florida did not come close to the scale or intensity of the assault on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob, but the overlap in tactics and in those involved was striking enough to have attracted the attention of federal investigators.

Information obtained by investigators shows that some of those on the ground in 2018 called the protests �Brooks Brothers 2.0,� a reference to the so-called �Brooks Brothers riot� during a recount of the presidential vote in Florida in 2000. During that event, supporters of George W. Bush � apparently working with Mr. Stone � stormed a local government building, stopping the vote count at a crucial moment.

As I noted at the time, the NYT story ignored Stone�s 2016 efforts, but his efforts to intimidate Black voters at the polls in that year was the origin of the Stop the Steal effort that Ali Alexander was entrusted to implement in 2020 while Stone awaited his pardon.

And we know from evidence submitted at the Proud Boys trial that their role in mobs was not limited to January 6, but was instead mobilized on a moment�s notice immediately after the election.

Tarrio even indicated that he had gotten instructions from �the campaign.�

Finally, for all my complaints about the treatment of Brandon Straka, this prong may have � should have � gone back still earlier, to the belated discovery of Straka�s grift.

This investigation has been happening. It�s just that reporters � myself included � didn�t report it as such.

It�s not just the epic mob Trump mobilized on January 6, an attempt to use violence to prevent the votes of 81 million Biden voters to be counted. It was an effort that went back before that, to use threats of violence to make it harder for election workers like Ruby Freeman to count the vote in big cities populated by minorities.

One reason TV lawyers didn�t see this is they have always treated Trump�s suspected crimes as a white collar affair, plotting in the Willard, but not tasing Michael Fanone at the Capitol.

But it is also about race and visibility.

January 6 was spectacular, there for the whole world to see.

But those earlier mobs � at the TCF center in Detroit, the State Farm arena in Atlanta, Phoenix, Milwauke � those earlier mobs were also efforts to make sure certain votes weren�t counted, or if they were, were only counted after poorly paid election workers risked threats of violence to count them, after people like Ruby Freeman were targeted by Trump�s team to have their lives ruined.

And we, the press collectively, didn�t treat those efforts to disqualify votes as the same kind of crime, as part of the same conspiracy, as Trump�s more spectacular efforts on January 6.

Update: Added the campaign texts. Thanks to Brandi, who knew exactly where to find them.

Update: Ironically, Bill Barr�s testimony may be pivotal to prove that Trump targeted Detroit because of race. That�s because Barr specifically told Trump he had done better in Detroit than he did in 2016.

quote:
Trump raised �the big vote dump, as he called it, in Detroit,� Barr said. �He said �people saw boxes coming into the counting station at all hours of the morning� and so forth.�

Barr said he explained to Trump that Detroit centralized its counting process at the TCF Center downtown convention hall rather than in each precinct. For the November 2020 general election, Michigan�s largest city counted its absentee ballots at the convention center under the supervision of state Bureau of Election Director Chris Thomas. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, most ballots cast were absentee.

�They�re moved to counting stations,� Barr said. �And so the normal process would involve boxes coming in at all different hours.�

�I said, �Did anyone point out to you � that you did better in Detroit than you did last time? There�s no indication of fraud in Detroit,� Barr said he told Trump.

Everyone in MI knows � and I�m sure Trump knows � he lost MI because he lost Kent County, which as more young people move into Grand Rapids has been getting more democratic in recent years. That Trump targeted Detroit and not Kent (or Oakland, which has also been trending increasingly Democratic) is a testament that this was about race.

Charlz Guybon fucked around with this message at 13:40 on Jul 20, 2023

# ? Jul 20, 2023 12:18

Murgos: Oct 21, 2010

Main Paineframe posted:

Who's going to enforce those supposed rights of theirs if both law enforcement and the entire court system are part of the conspiracy to deprive them of those rights? Who knows! They get arrested and put in jail and scream the whole time about how it's illegal and the judge is going to get in trouble for it. In trouble with who? The entire court system's part of it.

This is usually where secret courts/tribunals enter the conspiracy.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 13:40

ben shapino: Nov 22, 2020

Is trump in jail yet

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Jul 20, 2023 13:55

happyhippy: Feb 21, 2005; Playing games, watching movies, owning goons. 'sup; Pillbug

Well the US is sort of an open air jail if you think about it.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 14:26

gregday: May 23, 2003

Trump is an idiot, but some of his lawyers are sometimes not. So I'm assuming he's not going to take the invitation to speak to the GJ today.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 15:07

Fork of Unknown Origins: Oct 21, 2005; Gotta Herd On?

Could the invitation have been a strategic thing where, even though they knew he wouldn�t go, the invite took away a talking point about the GJ being some secret thing that got together to mail him without a chance to defend himself? We all know it�s normal for a GJ to not hear testimony from a potential defendant but most people don�t, and given the nature of this case a good bit of it is being influenced by public opinion.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 15:26

Murgos: Oct 21, 2010

Fork of Unknown Origins posted:

Could the invitation have been a strategic thing where, even though they knew he wouldn�t go, the invite took away a talking point about the GJ being some secret thing that got together to mail him without a chance to defend himself? We all know it�s normal for a GJ to not hear testimony from a potential defendant but most people don�t, and given the nature of this case a good bit of it is being influenced by public opinion.

No, he's a former president so the DoJ is affording him every opportunity to cooperate and provide some modicum of a good reason why he shouldn't be charged because if they don't they are pretty likely to have that shoved in their face on appeal.

Trump will not take advantage of it because it's in front of a grand jury while under oath and he doesn't get his own counsel to provide cross examination for his answers and he doesn't get to make a statement. From my understanding its him (or his representative?) only answering questions by the prosecution or from the GJ under penalty of perjury so it's very much one sided.

Essentially, he would have to convince smith and the jury that everything they know about the case is wrong while only being able to answer the questions asked him and that his answers will be used against him in court.

It would be such a dumb move that Trump probably totally want's to do it but his lawyers are probably sitting on him.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 15:42

Main Paineframe: Oct 27, 2010

Fork of Unknown Origins posted:

Could the invitation have been a strategic thing where, even though they knew he wouldn’t go, the invite took away a talking point about the GJ being some secret thing that got together to mail him without a chance to defend himself? We all know it’s normal for a GJ to not hear testimony from a potential defendant but most people don’t, and given the nature of this case a good bit of it is being influenced by public opinion.

No, because (among other things) the letter was being sent privately to Trump and not released publicly. Trump himself was the one who publicly announced it.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 16:10

Xander77: Apr 6, 2009; Fuck it then. For another pit sandwich and some 'tater salad, I'll post a few more.

Just out of interest, when was the last time someone who lost a presidential election got another chance? Nixon?

Definitely not the most unprecedented thing about Trump (definitely) but still a bit weird that the American right tolerates this particular loser despite his entire image being built on being a big wet winner.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 16:18

Judgy Fucker: Mar 24, 2006

Xander77 posted:

Just out of interest, when was the last time someone who lost a presidential election got another chance? Nixon?

Definitely not the most unprecedented thing about Trump (definitely) but still a bit weird that the American right tolerates this particular loser despite his entire image being built on being a big wet winner.

Assuming you're not counting third party or independent candidates, yeah Nixon. Adlai Stevenson before him.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 16:19

Charliegrs: Aug 10, 2009

Xander77 posted:

Just out of interest, when was the last time someone who lost a presidential election got another chance? Nixon?

Definitely not the most unprecedented thing about Trump (definitely) but still a bit weird that the American right tolerates this particular loser despite his entire image being built on being a big wet winner.

Chuds don't think he lost in 2020.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 16:23

BigBallChunkyTime: Nov 25, 2011; Kyle Schwarber: World Series hero, Beefy Lad, better than you.; Illegal Hen

gregday posted:

Trump is an idiot, but some of his lawyers are sometimes not. So I'm assuming he's not going to take the invitation to speak to the GJ today.

He wouldn't speak to the Gj today no matter who his lawyers are because he's a loving coward.

And he USED to be able to get good lawyers but he never paid them so now he's stuck with the bottom -tier, last in their class, barely passed the bar group of winners he has today.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 16:59

Pillowpants: Aug 5, 2006

I mean� isn�t Grover Cleveland really the only comparable person - non consecutive terms?

# ? Jul 20, 2023 17:14

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

Pillowpants posted:

I mean… isn’t Grover Cleveland really the only comparable person - non consecutive terms?

Also he was a fat idiot jerk known both as "Uncle Jumbo" and "His Obstinacy" so yeah kinda.

But I guess he was considered effective and honest, so also no

# ? Jul 20, 2023 17:22

Fuschia tude: Dec 26, 2004; THUNDERDOME LOSER 2019

Pillowpants posted:

I mean� isn�t Grover Cleveland really the only comparable person - non consecutive terms?

At least he won the popular vote in his first reelection bid, despite losing the electoral college. Trump winning next would be an even bigger reversal.

# ? Jul 20, 2023 17:25

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

Fuschia tude posted:

At least he won the popular vote in his first reelection bid, despite losing the electoral college. Trump winning next would be an even bigger reversal.

Trump's never won the popular vote. Cleveland won the popular vote all three times he ran.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 00:30

Crows Turn Off: Jan 7, 2008

The popular vote doesn't matter.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 01:31

plogo: Jan 20, 2009

Failed Imagineer posted:

But I guess he was considered effective and honest, so also no

His second term went so badly because of the economic crisis his party turned against him and felt the need to coopt the populist movement and run williams jennings bryan in 1896. Pitchfork Ben Tillman, noted corrupt racist senator that clarence thomas loves to cite, got the nickname because he was gonna go to washington with a pitchfork and force grover cleveland to do something about the economic crisis.

Sometimes you will find progressive democrats counterpose grover cleveland to fdr- grover cleveland was the guy that did nothing and led to disaster for the american economy and loss for the party, fdr was the guy who used a crisis as an opportunity to reform american democracy.

he also had a rape scandal.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 01:42

Lord Hydronium: Sep 25, 2007; Non, je ne regrette rien

Failed Imagineer posted:

Also he was a fat idiot jerk known both as "Uncle Jumbo" and "His Obstinacy" so yeah kinda.

Man, insulting political nicknames were so much better back then.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 01:46

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

The go to fact for Cleveland has to be that in his first term he married his 21 year old ward that he'd raised from infancy and the press treated it as the fairy tale wedding of the century.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 01:53

Angry_Ed: Mar 30, 2010; Grimey Drawer

Charlz Guybon posted:

The go to fact for Cleveland has to be that in his first term he married his 21 year old ward that he'd raised from infancy and the press treated it as the fairy tale wedding of the century.

Given how some of the original versions of fairy tales are, that's probably not actually far off the mark just not in the way they meant.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 03:22

Mooseontheloose: May 13, 2003

plogo posted:

he also had a rape scandal.

Also surgery on the Presidential yacht that was withheld from the public.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 03:41

SpeakSlow: May 17, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

You bet that in all of the history of Presidents there is likely a non-zero chance of there being a sitting President's whose partner (wife or other) got an abortion.

Jimmy Carter, I have my eye on you...

# ? Jul 21, 2023 04:41

VideoGameVet: May 14, 2005; It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion. It is by the juice of Java that pedaling acquires speed, the teeth acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion.

SpeakSlow posted:

You bet that in all of the history of Presidents there is likely a non-zero chance of there being a sitting President's whose partner (wife or other) got an abortion.

Jimmy Carter, I have my eye on you...

Hillary was born in 1947. Bill took office in 1993. So she was 46.

Yeah possible and maybe not with Bill.

Then there are the daughters.

# ? Jul 21, 2023 05:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 6, 2024 10:56

gregday: May 23, 2003

Trial date set for May.

https://twitter.com/big_cases/status/1682381700272373761

gregday fucked around with this message at 14:59 on Jul 21, 2023

# ? Jul 21, 2023 14:45

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Convicted Felon Donald Trump Legal Troubles: Trump Wins Unanimous Vote

«‹›642 »