Trump on Trial (Trump indicted for a fourth time in Georgia. Expands his record of most indictments by a former president)

[Darrell Green Fan]

13 hours ago, tshile said:

Yup. 
 

They’re working with what they got. Delays, generic be arguments about first amendment and politicization of DOJ. 
 

that’s really all they seem to have at the moment. 

And that sad part is it may be enough.  You guys are more confident than I am. I see Team Trump delaying it past the election. If he wins, and recent polls indicate that's a very real possibility, all these current indictments go away.  Georgia however may be a different matter.  What happens if he wins the election but is convicted on state charges?  

[LadySkinsFan]

Just look at the turnout in Ohio to stop the Fascist Party from subverting their Constitution into a supermajority rule of voting from a simple majority rule of voting any changes. 

 

We the People are fed up with the Fascists and so what if TFG has 30% of the vote? It's not 50% by any number.

 

The polls that say Trump and Biden are running neck and neck are bogus. Don't believe them. 

[EmirOfShmo]

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

[tshile]

4 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

And that sad part is it may be enough.  You guys are more confident than I am. I see Team Trump delaying it past the election. If he wins, and recent polls indicate that's a very real possibility, all these current indictments go away.  Georgia however may be a different matter.  What happens if he wins the election but is convicted on state charges?  

well. I’m trying to avoid figuring out how confident I am. I’m just trying to watch and understand what’s going on. 
 

as far as delays - what I’m seeing is a judge that has no interest in playing games nor allowing someone to make a circus out of this. 
 

I think there’s been a few things to suggest this - but the latest is where she asked them to confer to find a day/time to have the hearing no later than Friday. Trumps team seems to have asked for a day next week. So the judge scheduled it for this week 😂 

 

I view that as sort of a shot across the bow - you will either follow my general guidance, or I’ll make these decisions on my own if you can’t figure out how to do that. 
 

as for the DOJ’s case - my confidence only comes from understanding the DOJ doesn’t **** around. I think the default assumption should be that if they bring charges against a former president, it’s because they have absolute confidence they have a case they will win. 
 

where I have zero confidence is what a judge will do for punishment. Simply referring to federal sentencing guidelines is foolish - the judge ultimately has complete discretion to venture outside of those if they are capable of justifying why in their ruling. 
 

And despite what everyone here thinks about trump - there is a real issue with putting a former president in prison. An issue I think many here are ignoring or grossly overlooking. But just my opinion 

[Bang]

I'm not confident in anything. I have hope, more than before that some sort of justice will be done, but I can't be sure yet.
Fool me once, shame on me.
Fool me twice, uh. shame on, m.. uh, you.  uh,  

can't get fooled ag'in.

 

~W

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

3 minutes ago, Bang said:

Fool me once, shame on me.
Fool me twice, uh. shame on, m.. uh, you.  uh,  

can't get fooled ag'in.

 

~W

In W’s defense, I used to make fun of him for this one too but I moved to TX 5 years ago and down here, the saying actually is “Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, uh. uh,  well if you fool me can't get fooled ag'in.”

[skinsmarydu]

38 minutes ago, tshile said:

well. I’m trying to avoid figuring out how confident I am. I’m just trying to watch and understand what’s going on. 
 

And despite what everyone here thinks about trump - there is a real issue with putting a former president in prison. An issue I think many here are ignoring or grossly overlooking. But just my opinion 

I don't believe anyone is ignoring or overlooking the possibility, but we're not there yet. To date, there hasn't been a trial, much less a verdict. 

We've got a long way to go unless he pleads. 

[Switchgear]

48 minutes ago, tshile said:

And despite what everyone here thinks about trump - there is a real issue with putting a former president in prison. An issue I think many here are ignoring or grossly overlooking. But just my opinion 

I'm curious, what is the issue?

[tshile]

4 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

I don't believe anyone is ignoring or overlooking the possibility, but we're not there yet. To date, there hasn't been a trial, much less a verdict. 

We've got a long way to go unless he pleads. 

Plenty of people are. When they complained about how long this has taken. Or that they let him turn himself in on his own without handcuffs. Or when they complain about delays or timelines. Or that he’s allowed out while trial is pending. Or any other things that have happened along the way in any of these cases. 
 

I’ve pointed out several times that going after a former president, running for re-election, is an incredibly sensitive task that raises the bar for everything. An objective person understands this. 
 

yet many responses to that have been complains about him being above the law, or a rigged justice system. 
 

so plenty of people seem to not understand the gravity of going after trump right now and what that means. It’s been demonstrated from the start with the initial announcements of investigations and grand juries, and it’s continued throughout 

[Bang]

Crime is crime. This isn't some white collar stuff, things like enriching himself aren't what is so serious, even though it is.
He more than likely committed treason many times, he has committed serious crimes against this country, among wich is trying to actually overthrow it.
I am blustery but i do get the need to make sure every end is tied up.

This sets a precedent regardless because it is thoroughly unprecedented in our history.

If we're worried it sends a message to the MAGAts that the course of usual politics is jailing opponents, well, they have been there for years.
Playing with them lightly has made it worse.
 

Thing is, conflict isn't going to be avoided either way.
So do the right thing. 

 

~Bang

Edited August 9, 2023 by Bang

[tshile]

12 minutes ago, Switchgear said:

I'm curious, what is the issue?

Putting a former president in jail in a democracy is a really big deal. It’s a very sensitive thing. And it’s never happened here before. 
 

the fact that he’s running for re-election adds to it. The fact he’s still seemingly wildly popular adds to it. 
 

when Nixon was going through this we had a situation where there was significant support for him at the start. But as the process moved forward support faded. Eventually reaching a point where if the DOJ wanted to go after him, the risk to democracy and civil peace was probably minimal. It was also egregious what he did and there’s a solid argument to make the DOJ ****ed up in not pursuing it because they had an opportunity to set a standard and they punted on it. Which makes what we’re dealing with today more difficult. 
 

but we have none of that this time. Support for trump, support for the idea the DOJ has been weaponized for political purposes, support for the idea the election was stollen, has grown as this has marched on. 
 

if you don’t see the threat to democracy, the threat to civil peace, if trump is sentenced to live the rest of his life in prison, I don’t know what to tell you. 
 

simply not winning re-election sparked an insurrection that led to where we are now. How anyone has any confidence there is not a potential for severe fall out of he is sentenced to life in prison, is just utterly naive to me. 

6 minutes ago, Bang said:

Thing is, conflict isn't going to be avoided either way.
So do the right thing. 

Agree completely. 
and doing the right thing the right way means recognizing the bar is raised. Delays, timeline, and other things should be expected. 
 

not ranted and raved about as if there is some miscarriage of justice occurring, or that it shows how the laws don’t apply to everyone or nonsense about above the law 

Edited August 9, 2023 by tshile

[Larry]

55 minutes ago, tshile said:

as for the DOJ’s case - my confidence only comes from understanding the DOJ doesn’t **** around. I think the default assumption should be that if they bring charges against a former president, it’s because they have absolute confidence they have a case they will win. 

 

That's me.  

 

They HAVE to know what the effect would be, if they go to court with this, and lose.  The effect on the country, and on their careers.  The OJ verdict would pale in comparison.  

 

And they know that they have to be prepared for Trump judges, and Trump jurors.  

 

I surely hope that their standard was "don't go to court, unless your case is good enough to win, despite those factors."  

 

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I don't get the impression that the DoJ gives one flying **** about any message sent to MAGA outside of "Don't **** around." But I do get the impression that the DoJ understands the ramifications of them ****ing this up. This is not an "Oh, well, we tried" type of case, and as Bang pointed out this is setting a precedent moving forward both in terms of how the DoJ should approach this type of crime, and especially how future politicians should view Trump's actions. I can't imagine a more important criminal case taking place in terms of the country's future than this one. The absolute most important thing here is to get as much irrefutable proof as possible, construct as airtight a case as possible, and abso-****ing-lutely obtain a guilty verdict...because a not-guilty verdict will sink our democracy. I honestly believe that. So I've been good with the DoJ (and the courts in general) taking more time and extra precautions in how they deal with an ex-president. Just get that conviction, that matters more than adhering to any imagined timeline people on Twitter think up.

[Switchgear]

16 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

if you don’t see the threat to democracy, the threat to civil peace, if trump is sentenced to live the rest of his life in prison, I don’t know what to tell you. 
 

simply not winning re-election sparked an insurrection that led to where we are now. How anyone has any confidence there is not a potential for severe fall out of he is sentenced to life in prison, is just utterly naive to me. 

Agree completely. 
and doing the right thing the right way means recognizing the bar is raised. Delays, timeline, and other things should be expected. 
 

not ranted and raved about as if there is some miscarriage of justice occurring, or that it shows how the laws don’t apply to everyone or nonsense about above the law 

So the heart of the issue is, if he goes to prison, his supporters will cause civil unrest, and potentially civil war. I don't disagree with that. But where I think we diverge is in the effectiveness of the DOJ approach to this point. Do you know any Trump supporters that are ok with the DOJ bringing charges against him? I don't. They uniformly think it's "political" and "a weaponized DOJ". My point is, no matter how airtight the case is, no matter how slowly DOJ moves and how professional they are, in the end Trump people are going to be convinced a conviction was rigged, unfair, and invalid. Whatever is going to happen will happen, all that the slow movement has done has created an aura of invincibility around the guy.

I don't want civil war, or civil unrest even, but I don't see Trump people being reasonable about the outcome, if he's convicted, no matter how well the case is made.

[Bang]

There's a solid chance of civil war or civil unrest if they lose the next election, anyway.
Or if they win it, for that matter.

 

~Bang

[TradeTheBeal!]

I see “Trump people” being loudmouth ****roaches that will scurry back under the fridge when the lights come on.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

25 minutes ago, tshile said:

simply not winning re-election sparked an insurrection that led to where we are now.

 

 

I agree with most of what you've said but not this one sentence here...it wasn't simply losing an election that caused the events on Jan. 6th. It was a months-long concerted effort to embed in his millions of supporters that the election was being illegally stolen from him, and he started that in the Spring of 2020 and kept repeating it long before the election even took place. Plus the plan to announce himself as winner on election night no matter what the results said, which was mentioned by Bannon or the other weird dude in Trump's circle (or probably both). The insurrection attempt was planned out well in advance of the election. If Trump had been gracious and conceded on election night and congratulated Biden, Jan 6th never occurs. It took far more than simply losing the election. It took purposeful advanced planning between multiple people and groups.

[tshile]

8 minutes ago, Switchgear said:

So the heart of the issue is, if he goes to prison, his supporters will cause civil unrest, and potentially civil war. I don't disagree with that. But where I think we diverge is in the effectiveness of the DOJ approach to this point. Do you know any Trump supporters that are ok with the DOJ bringing charges against him? I don't. They uniformly think it's "political" and "a weaponized DOJ". My point is, no matter how airtight the case is, no matter how slowly DOJ moves and how professional they are, in the end Trump people are going to be convinced a conviction was rigged, unfair, and invalid. Whatever is going to happen will happen, all that the slow movement has done has created an aura of invincibility around the guy.

I don't want civil war, or civil unrest even, but I don't see Trump people being reasonable about the outcome, if he's convicted, no matter how well the case is made.

the conversation is bigger than what trump supporters will think. There is no control over that and we will have to deal with whatever that is. 
 

but the point is the way things have gone are a reflection of the overall importance of this specific case and situation, as others have outlined. 
 

no one’s suggesting the trump supporters be catered to. Or that trying to “reach” them is something worthy of doing. 
 

but the sensitivity and gravity of this situation is incredible. It’s real. And it seems some people don’t get it. And if at this point if a person doesn’t get it, they’re never going to get it, and there’s a reason for that (bias, being intellectually limited, etc)

[PleaseBlitz]

25 minutes ago, tshile said:

Putting a former president in jail in a democracy is a really big deal. It’s a very sensitive thing. And it’s never happened here before. 
 

the fact that he’s running for re-election adds to it. The fact he’s still seemingly wildly popular adds to it. 
 

when Nixon was going through this we had a situation where there was significant support for him at the start. But as the process moved forward support faded. Eventually reaching a point where if the DOJ wanted to go after him, the risk to democracy and civil peace was probably minimal. It was also egregious what he did and there’s a solid argument to make the DOJ ****ed up in not pursuing it because they had an opportunity to set a standard and they punted on it. Which makes what we’re dealing with today more difficult. 
 

but we have none of that this time. Support for trump, support for the idea the DOJ has been weaponized for political purposes, support for the idea the election was stollen, has grown as this has marched on. 
 

if you don’t see the threat to democracy, the threat to civil peace, if trump is sentenced to live the rest of his life in prison, I don’t know what to tell you. 
 

simply not winning re-election sparked an insurrection that led to where we are now. How anyone has any confidence there is not a potential for severe fall out of he is sentenced to life in prison, is just utterly naive to me. 

 

These are all extremely valid points, and I agree that civil unrest is a near certainty as it stands now.  That said, given the huge volume of evidence already on the public record that Trump intentionally broke numerous very serious laws, our nation's institutions cannot set the precedent that someone is above the law if (1) their supporters will engage in violence (2) they are a former President or (3) they are running for President again.  Much like January 6, the people that choose to engage in violence should be prosecuted for any crimes that they commit. 

[tshile]

Just now, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

I agree with most of what you've said but not this one sentence here...it wasn't simply losing an election that caused the events on Jan. 6th. It was a months-long concerted effort to embed in his millions of supporters that the election was being illegally stolen from him, and he started that in the Spring of 2020 and kept repeating it long before the election even took place. Plus the plan to announce himself as winner on election night no matter what the results said, which was mentioned by Bannon or the other weird dude in Trump's circle (or probably both). The insurrection attempt was planned out well in advance of the election. If Trump had been gracious and conceded on election night and congratulated Biden, Jan 6th never occurs. It took far more than simply losing the election. It took purposeful advanced planning between multiple people and groups.

But the root of people joining an insurrection was the belief that he won the election and it was stolen from him. We’re talking about 4 years of someone else being in control as the fundamental outrage that caused it all. 
 

and the point of outlining that was to ask - how exactly do you think “spending the rest of his life in prison” is going to resonate with these people? Do you think it’s likely to increase or decrease outrage? I think it’s incredibly obvious what the answer is. 

[LadySkinsFan]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

 

And despite what everyone here thinks about trump - there is a real issue with putting a former president in prison. An issue I think many here are ignoring or grossly overlooking. But just my opinion 

 

I'd be happy if they confined him to only one of his properties, ankle monitor, only out for court, doctors only. He's basically retired, he doesn't have to work. Also no access to phones with internet access, no computers, etc. So essentially prison without an actual prison. He can't communicate with anyone outside except his lawyers and doctors. 

[tshile]

2 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

These are all extremely valid points, and I agree that civil unrest is a near certainty as it stands now.  That said, given the huge volume of evidence already on the public record that Trump intentionally broke numerous very serious laws, our nation's institutions cannot set the precedent that someone is above the law if (1) their supporters will engage in violence (2) they are a former President or (3) they are running for President again.  Much like January 6, the people that choose to engage in violence should be prosecuted for any crimes that they commit. 

agreed. My only point is it explains a number of things like delays, how the warrants took time and played out, why he wasn’t reacted down and paraded in cuffs. Why we don’t have a mugshot. And a ton of other things

 

becsuse if I did 1/3 of things he did they’d break my door down in the middle of the night with a swat team and parade me around in cuffs everywhere. I’d have a mugshot on every newscast talking about it. 
 

And I’d probably be sitting in prison awaiting my trial. 
 

the bar is set way higher here. And it’s not because he’s above the law and it’s not because the system is rigged

 

its because putting a former president in jail is incredibly sensitive and has a potential for very bad things. That’s all

[Larry]

1 minute ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

I agree with most of what you've said but not this one sentence here...it wasn't simply losing an election that caused the events on Jan. 6th. It was a months-long concerted effort to embed in his millions of supporters that the election was being illegally stolen from him, and he started that in the Spring of 2020 and kept repeating it long before the election even took place. Plus the plan to announce himself as winner on election night no matter what the results said, which was mentioned by Bannon or the other weird dude in Trump's circle (or probably both). The insurrection attempt was planned out well in advance of the election. If Trump had been gracious and conceded on election night and congratulated Biden, Jan 6th never occurs. It took far more than simply losing the election. It took purposeful advanced planning between multiple people and groups.

 

Just observing.  That belief that the election was being stolen was the result of a plan by Trump and the entire Republican Party, and their propaganda network.  

 

[Jumbo]

Tshiles comments on the gravity of the matter are reasonable. The concerns are valid and the likely response of the cult should be carefully considered.

 

My hope is that the prosecution and the judge take all of those points seriously and then runs over them like a D3 over a flower bed, and that all following violent protests of trumpets are met with lethal consequences delivered by appropriate entities in law enforcement and any other legally applied government armed forces as necessary.

 

But that is just my wish and my sentiment, not my expectation.

 

Added-- what lady skins fan just posted about punishment is something I could live with.