|
The stupidity of these people is astounding.
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:04 |
|
|
Memnaelar posted:He'd recuse and it'd be a 5-3 ruling. C'mon now. On the other hand the supreme court is on a real 'you can't loving tell us to have ethics' binge as of late. I agree with the other poster tho. 5-4 with Roberts desperately trying to cling to the concept of legacy and legitimacy. Lammasu posted:The stupidity of these people is astounding. John Oliver quoted it for a completely different scandal but 'stupid watergate' really is the catch all for every trump scandal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
DTurtle posted:There is a sentence on page 25 that could be read to mean that Co-Conspirator 6 is male, so not Ginni Thomas. No, unless, I'm missing another sentence that references #6, that preceding 'him' refers to Co-conspirator #1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
Trump has lost all his Supreme court election cases by 7-2 or 8-1. Why would this be different?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
DTurtle posted:There is a sentence on page 25 that could be read to mean that Co-Conspirator 6 is male, so not Ginni Thomas. No there isn’t. I just checked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:45
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Trump has lost all his Supreme court election cases by 7-2 or 8-1. Why would this be different? Because it would involve criminal charges against a sitting Justice's wife. To be real, I don't think that they'd actually do it. I really would like to think it'd be 7-1 or whatever slam dunk with Thomas recusing, but the fact that I'm nervous when I make the joke is unsettling in the same way that I feel weird thinking back to dinner with my parents where I joked about how trump should win the nomination for the easy slam dunk victory.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Trump has lost all his Supreme court election cases by 7-2 or 8-1. Why would this be different? also, to be clear, a conviction by a jury in the most significant political trial (in possibly all of american history? up there, at least) is not just a thing to arbitrarily overturn even for those people. the ways you can do it are a lot tougher than some general case about constitutional or administrative law where the president's authority is being tested
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:47
|
|
|
Was Guiliani always this stupid? I mean he looked kind of competent during 9/11. But I couldn't sleep so I stayed up all night watching Animal Planet so my perceptions could be skewed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:47
|
|
|
#6 is either Stone or Bannon and I know which one is more likely to have the private numbers of the five most relevant GOP senators
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
What is the deal with this Mystery 6 nonsense anyway? Why are they anonymous and why are they unindicted? Does it mean they won't be indicted, that they're still being investigated (which can't be true since the grand jury wrapped up, didn't it), that they might be, is it a "hey fuckers we know who you are and we're coming for you, last chance to flip" warning shot?Lammasu posted:Was Guiliani always this stupid? I mean he looked kind of competent during 9/11. But I couldn't sleep so I stayed up all night watching Animal Planet so my perceptions could be skewed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
With how blatant Clarence Thomas has been in the past is there really any consequence if it does end up being his wife and for whatever reason the thing ends up in the supreme court and he doesn't recuse himself. It seems he thinks of himself as untouchable and able to do whatever the gently caress he wants and no one has really proven him wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
Lammasu posted:Was Guiliani always this stupid? I mean he looked kind of competent during 9/11. But I couldn't sleep so I stayed up all night watching Animal Planet so my perceptions could be skewed. at one point he was a very competent lawyer/prosecutor but at some point some combination of age, brain problems, alcohol, and drugs melted his brain and here we are E: some of the unindicted conspirators have to be indicted in the future, this poo poo is bonkers. I guess they didn't want to give Trump warning about the details of this bombshell?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:51
|
|
|
Lammasu posted:Was Guiliani always this stupid? I mean he looked kind of competent during 9/11. But I couldn't sleep so I stayed up all night watching Animal Planet so my perceptions could be skewed. He literally has brain damage from hitting his head after a fall while drunk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:51
|
|
|
Lammasu posted:Was Guiliani always this stupid? I mean he looked kind of competent during 9/11. But I couldn't sleep so I stayed up all night watching Animal Planet so my perceptions could be skewed. Yes. He went after the Italian mafia because he was conspiring with the Russian mafia. He put his disaster emergency command centre at the same block that was the site of the biggest disaster in US history in the 21st century.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:52
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:at one point he was a very competent lawyer/prosecutor but at some point some combination of age, brain problems, alcohol, and drugs melted his brain and here we are
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:
Link to this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:What is the deal with this Mystery 6 nonsense anyway? Why are they anonymous and why are they unindicted? Does it mean they won't be indicted, that they're still being investigated (which can't be true since the grand jury wrapped up, didn't it), that they might be, is it a "hey fuckers we know who you are and we're coming for you, last chance to flip" warning shot? Unindicted co-conspirator just means they haven't been charged with a crime, but they were involved with the criminal acts and their statements can be used as evidence against the indicted conspirator. There have been court rulings that say that naming them without charging them is a violation of their due process, so they don't explicitly name co-conspirators if they aren't being indicted as part of the same charges.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:No, unless, I'm missing another sentence that references #6, that preceding 'him' refers to Co-conspirator #1. Xiahou Dun posted:No there isn’t. I just checked. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Lammasu posted:Was Guiliani always this stupid? I mean he looked kind of competent during 9/11. But I couldn't sleep so I stayed up all night watching Animal Planet so my perceptions could be skewed. Jules used to have a bit of a brain in him, yeah. He was always a bit of a clown once you scraped away the topmost layer, but the man just imploded in the mid 2000s and I am convinced he suffered serious psychic damage from being burned, by Joe Biden of all people, with the whole 'it takes him three things to make a sentence, a noun, a verb, and 9/11" Realtalk though he appears to have serious substance abuse issues and I'd feel sorry for him if he wasn't trying to walk the us into a fascist dictatorship.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:54
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Unindicted co-conspirator just means they haven't been charged with a crime, but they were involved with the criminal acts and their statements can be used as evidence against the indicted conspirator.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:54
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:Yes, I know what an unindicted co-conspirator is, sorry. "Why aren't they being indicited as part of the same charges" is what I was trying to ask. Nobody knows! The usual reason is because they are immunized through cooperation and testimony, but I don't think that applies to any of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:55
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Link to this? 18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured— They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. - I doubt it meaningfully applies here since no way they charge that, but you can make the direct argument that traitor lady died as a result of his actions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:56
|
|
|
DTurtle posted:This is what I meant: That he doesn't necessarily refer to #6.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:56
|
|
|
Caros posted:18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights Well... https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1686501910298361859
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:57
|
|
|
Don't threaten me with a good time. Edit:  - Your Honor... Insurrection? DEATH.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:58
|
|
|
Caused 5 deaths and there was attempt to kidnap... just saying
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 00:59
|
|
|
Lammasu posted:Was Guiliani always this stupid? I mean he looked kind of competent during 9/11. But I couldn't sleep so I stayed up all night watching Animal Planet so my perceptions could be skewed. He was always incompetent. The reason you saw him at all during the morning of 9/11 was because he incompetently put the emergency crisis center in the WTC, against good advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:00
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Caused 5 deaths and there was attempt to kidnap... just saying Also that law reads like it's anti-Klan legislation, which, lmao, so loving fitting. Independence posted:He was always incompetent. The reason you saw him at all during the morning of 9/11 was because he incompetently put the emergency crisis center in the WTC, against good advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:07
|
|
|
The conspirators are not indicted in this case because if they were all included it would never make it to trial before the election. This indictment is strictly USA vs. Trump, not "Trump et. al. Expect them to be charged separately but definitely expect them to be charged with something. Also, woo motherfucking hoo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:The conspirators are not indicted in this case because if they were all included it would never make it to trial before the election. This indictment is strictly USA vs. Trump, not "Trump et. al. Or all or some of them have completely flipped
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:11
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:The conspirators are not indicted in this case because if they were all included it would never make it to trial before the election. This indictment is strictly USA vs. Trump, not "Trump et. al. yeah given the gravity of the crimes described here (and my assumption that prosecutors don't describe crimes in indictments they wouldn't really, really like to prosecute later), it seems like the easiest answer is severing their cases from Trump's is economical. at least 2-3 of them also have unique questions of law/fact about their status as his attorney (and if they were his attorneys) that would only slow poo poo down
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:16
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:Multiple attempts to kidnap. If you want to go for the death penalty, which I somewhat doubt they do, it looks like there's ample justification. yeah the odds of the death penalty actually being imposed are nil but I mentioned it because it's going to come up until this all plays out it's a reconstruction era law because white people were constantly trying to overthrow elections by force and, well, frequently succeeded post Andrew Johnson
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:21
|
|
|
Nice https://twitter.com/MattLaslo/status/1686523764975058945
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:25
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:What is the deal with this Mystery 6 nonsense anyway? Why are they anonymous and why are they unindicted? Does it mean they won't be indicted, that they're still being investigated (which can't be true since the grand jury wrapped up, didn't it), that they might be, is it a "hey fuckers we know who you are and we're coming for you, last chance to flip" warning shot? he was never an 'incredibly skilled politician' and not even people who like the guy would've said that about him lol, he was always a walking pile of bad judgement. extremely mentally sharp is also kind of a stretch. his main virtue as a public servant, such as he was, was that he was effective at a handful of specific things for a while. maybe he was 'extremely mentally sharp' in the 80s, albeit idk how much mental sharpness was the key ingredient of some high profile mob cases at a time when nyc was particularly over dealing with mob bullshit, but by the 90s eh all the seeds of modern giuliani were already in the soil growing. he was however extremely in the right place at the right time to become briefly nationally prominent Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Aug 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:27
|
|
|
WaPo has their list of conspirators up. They are going with  on 6, but the other five are as expected. Giuliani, Eastman, Powell, Clark, Chesebro, and ????
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:29
|
|
|
this is a very fun interview btw
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:36
|
|
|
cr0y posted:Or all or some of them have completely flipped Every single one of the 6. I might be wrong about one (who actually is #6?) but given the crimes in this speaking indictment (not to mention those that may come out later in a superseding indictment like just happened in the Espionage Act case) I am confident they are all going to face charges.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:43
|
|
|
#4 definitely has to be indicted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:45
|
|
|
Stan Woodward is about to be representing a lot more folks
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:04 |
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:#4 definitely has to be indicted. That's Clark, he's cooked
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2023 01:45
|
|