Trump indicted for 2020 election interference

Because there are a million documents to go through in pre-trial discovery, and there is no way around the fact that it all has to be read and understood.

In the real legal world, things don't happen as fast as they do in all those legal shows. Takes much longer in real life to prepare a run of the mill criminal case then it does on "Law and Order".
 
OK, taking bets as to how long until Trump violates the Judge's order......

I think she played a brilliant move in that department. Rather than threaten Trump with jail, she said something to the effect of, if he pushed his luck, she'd move the trial date up significantly. So rather than putting it off as long as he can, she'd make it happen much, much sooner.
 
I think she played a brilliant move in that department. Rather than threaten Trump with jail, she said something to the effect of, if he pushed his luck, she'd move the trial date up significantly. So rather than putting it off as long as he can, she'd make it happen much, much sooner.

I agree. If there's one thing Trump and his lawyers don't want, it's for the trial to be held sooner rather than later. She doesn't have to use jail time to enforce her orders. Since she handed down this order, Trump has kept his mouth shut and his fingers off his phone.
The judge also told Trump and his team to avoid making any public statements that could impact the integrity of the case. She warned that the more a party makes public statements that could influence potential jurors, the faster the case will head to trial.

“Even arguably ambiguous statements by the parties or their counsel, if they could be reasonably interpreted to intimidate witnesses or to prejudice potential jurors, can threaten the process,”
she said.
 
I agree. If there's one thing Trump and his lawyers don't want, it's for the trial to be held sooner rather than later. She doesn't have to use jail time to enforce her orders. Since she handed down this order, Trump has kept his mouth shut and his fingers off his phone.

But only until tomorrow. "That edict? That's in the past. Forgot about it already. I'll do whatever I want now."

If he's having another rally it will be impossible for him to STFU.
 
OK, taking bets as to how long until Trump violates the Judge's order......

I think that shipped sailed.

CNN
Trump responded with a furious post on his Truth Social network, blasting Smith as “deranged” and arguing that while the trial should not be taking place at all, it should only happen after the 2024 election. “Only an out of touch lunatic would ask for such a date, ONE DAY into the New Year, and maximum Election Interference with IOWA!,” he wrote.


On a related note, same link:
But Trump’s 2024 calendar is already filling up with court dates. He is due to go on trial in March in Manhattan in a case arising from a hush money payment to an adult film actress. A judge in Florida has set a May target for a trial arising from his mishandling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort after leaving the White House. That date might slip after Smith last month brought three new charges against the ex-president and added another co-defendant to the case...

He is expected to find out as early as next week whether he will also be indicted over his pressure on officials in Georgia to overturn Biden’s 2020 victory there. ...
Then there is the refiling of the E Jean Carroll case with an upcoming trial date. And yesterday on MSNBC (forgot which talking head) it turns out he has an older case coming up where he is accused of fraud. I'll have to hunt it down for specifics.


But this is too much for poor widdle Trumpy, how can he meet all these court dates and his campaign schedule in the coming months. Maybe he can take some advice from Biden on how to keep up a rigorous schedule at his age. :p
 
I think she played a brilliant move in that department. Rather than threaten Trump with jail, she said something to the effect of, if he pushed his luck, she'd move the trial date up significantly. So rather than putting it off as long as he can, she'd make it happen much, much sooner.
:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
I agree. If there's one thing Trump and his lawyers don't want, it's for the trial to be held sooner rather than later. She doesn't have to use jail time to enforce her orders. Since she handed down this order, Trump has kept his mouth shut and his fingers off his phone.

He did? :confused:

Maybe ranting about deranged Smith which could affect the jury pool was before court this morning but it looked like it was after.

Perhaps Trump thinks attacking judges and prosecutors is exempt.... forever pushing that envelope.
 
Last edited:
He did? :confused:

Maybe ranting about deranged Smith which could affect the jury pool was before court this morning but it looked like it was after.
Perhaps Trump thinks attacking judges and prosecutors is exempt.... forever pushing that envelope.

Trump's rant was before as your link was updated at "7:01 AM EDT, Fri August 11, 2023". The judge's decision and order was this afternoon.
 
Cases like these, where the crime is very serious and guilt is perfectly obvious but admitting or denying that fact can be driven by political motivations, make me worry about the concept of relying on a jury where unanimity is required so it only takes one liar to ruin it all.

Ya think "I'm the guy that caused the mistrial" will go un-noticed or un-rewarded?

Or voted guilty and my docs are suddenly public knowledge?

When ya vote a second rate mob boss president this is what ya get.
 
It seem Trump's legal counsel has a mathematics weakness.

Special Counsel Jack Smith has called out Donald Trump’s defence team for appearing to forget how long ago the January 6 Capitol riots took place.

In a new legal filing, the prosecutor criticised the former president’s attorneys for writing that Mr Smith’s team “has been investigating this matter for three and a half years, while the defense is starting with a blank slate”.

Maybe in Trumplandia, Jan. 6. 2021 is 3.5 years ago?
 
It seem Trump's legal counsel has a mathematics weakness.

Maybe in Trumplandia, Jan. 6. 2021 is 3.5 years ago?

or, to put it another way - what did Trump do in early 2020 that his lawyers think is worth investigating ?
I was going to say that Trump was already in legal hot water throughout his presidency. So his lawyers probably know full well WTF he has been doing for decades.

But since Trump changes lawyers as often as he changes his tan, this latest mob of shysters probably do NOT know what he was doing in early 2020. And they are going to pretend they didn't know what he was doing in Jan 2021 as well.

Hopefully the judge will encourage them to redouble their efforts at recall. ;)
 
but a visible and noisy one.

The USA is the only country that fought fascism successfully in WW2 without ever experiencing fascism on its own soil. (The UK saw the Channel Islands occupied, and caught Nazi hell first hand.) That may have something to do with the undoubted attraction fascism has for certain thin-witted types in America.

Unfortunately the UK isn't as vaccinated against this threat as you seem to suggest, our government is going down this path at an alarming rate too. Some of the drive for this descent is coming from the same sources driving it in the US too.
 
On the UK the judge can ask the jury for a majority verdict, one hold out doesn't mean a mistrial. Isn't that a thing in the USA?

It was in some states for a while but has been rolled back. At the moment the UK is the outlier in allowing 10/12 convictions. It was discussed on "The NewsAgents" podcast from LBC a couple of days ago in an interview with a case review charity in the context of the recent overturning of rape conviction where an innocent man spent 17 years in prison.
 
Haven’t we all been repeatedly reminded that Uncle John Trump, who famously went to MIT, was a math genius, and was known as a famous math genius who went to MIT?

Not many people know that.
 
It's very likely that Trump will die in jail, if he has to do any significant amount of time.
His fans will see that as Dems having assassinated their savior.

We have to face the fact that Trump will become a martyr - expect to see shrines dedicated to him.

There is a very good chance he will in fact die of something within 5 years. Joe Biden may have memory issues, but he is with heavy guards at all times and any health issues will take him to Walter Reed quickly.

In this sense it will be interesting who Trump's VP pick is. If he makes it to 2025 January, Trump.
 
Haven’t we all been repeatedly reminded that Uncle John Trump, who famously went to MIT, was a math genius, and was known as a famous math genius who went to MIT?

Not many people know that.

Is he the one that knew nuclear?
 
Holy Cow - Federalists have turned on The Fat Orange Turd

https://www.meidastouch.com/news/fe...cholars-say-trump-is-disqualified-from-office

This is not some pair of left-wing progressive professors. These are the rightest of the right wing, leading professors in the Federalist Society, and what are known as "Constitutional Originalists". From the right wing viewpoint, I would have expected people like these to, at best - be in favor of what The Fat Orange Turd did, at worst - to just keep silent. If you are right-wing and/or conservative, if you've lost these people, you're effectively goneburger.

The abstract is here https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751

The PDF (1.2MB) is here https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID4532751_code398074.pdf?abstractid=4532751&mirid=1


This document is 126 pages - some of the things that stood out to me are as follows..

"Taking these events as a whole, and judging them under the standard of Section Three, it is unquestionably fair to say that Trump “engaged in” the January 6 insurrection through both his actions and his inaction. Officials—administrators, courts, legislators—whose responsibilities call upon them to apply Section Three properly and lawfully may, indeed must, take action within their powers to preclude Trump from holding future office. Moreover, if one accepts the broader argument that the entire campaign to overthrow the results of the 2020 election was a form of constitutional rebellion, then Trump’s complicity is even more obvious—as the leader, motive force, and chief attempted perpetrator of that rebellion. Indeed, it would not be going too far to say that Trump, having previously sworn a constitutionally required oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States knowingly attempted to execute what, had it succeeded, would have amounted to a political coup d’etat
against the Constitution and its system of elections and overturn the results of the constitutional process, in order to maintain himself in office as President contrary to law. If that itself constitutes “rebellion” against the Constitution, Trump’s overall
course of conduct disqualifies him under Section Three, even apart from the specific incitement to storm the Capitol on January 6.
The bottom line is that Donald Trump both “engaged in” “insurrection or rebellion” and gave “aid or comfort” to others engaging in such conduct, within the original meaning of those terms as employed in Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment. If the public record is accurate, the case is not even close. He is no longer eligible to the office of Presidency, or any other state or federal office covered by the Constitution. All who are committed to the Constitution should take note and say so.

Donald Trump is at the top of the list of Section Three disqualifications, but the list does not end with him. The public record to date shows many others who are or may be connected to either the insurrection of January 6 or to a possible broader
rebellion.

Consider first those who marched with—who rose up with—the January 6 mob itself. Some of these folks, such as Couy Green of New Mexico, and Derrick Evans of West Virginia, have already been stripped of or resigned from their state offices

But many more cases follow. Consider those who were not part of the uprising itself, but who provided planning, encouragement, assistance, or other material support to those who rose up on January 6. Recent proceedings against U.S. Representatives Biggs, Gosar, and Greene, for instance, raise this as a serious possibility. Pennsylvania State Senator Doug Mastriano—who is also a retired military officer and recent gubernatorial candidate—is said to have transported busloads of people to what became the insurrection and “was near the Capitol during the attack.” Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani worked extensively to overturn the election, and likewise riled the mob at the Ellipse on January 6. Trump Chief of Staff (and former legislator) Mark Meadows planned and organized parts of the January 6 rally and apparently also “directed that [Giuliani] be allowed to speak” to the Crowd. These current and former officeholders are also subject to serious challenge under Section Three.

And if one entertains the argument that the entire course of conduct to overthrow the 2020 election was a broader rebellion, the list just grows longer and longer. According to the public record: Former National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn proposed a plan to seize voting machines, invalidate election results, and rerun the vote in swing states won by Biden. Would-be Trump electors (some of whom came from state political offices covered by Section Three) met on December 14 even in states where Biden’s electors had been chosen, thus laying the groundwork for Trump’s schemes. Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark sought to use the power and authority of the Department of Justice to fraudulently upend state election results. At least one member of Congress pressed for the removal of more senior Department of Justice officials who opposed Clark’s scheme, and lobbied for the appointment of Clark as Acting Attorney General, thus providing aid and comfort. These officials, too, would be subject to challenge.​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Federalist Society doesn't need Trump. They were happy to use him to get three SC Justices appointed along with many other federal judges; but they'd have gotten exactly the same results from any of the other Klowns in the 2016 Kar. And will get the same results from any of those in the 2024 Kar as well. As far as judicial nominations go, they own the Republican Party. And in lots of other ways as well.

Oh, and Legal Eagle is on the case!
 
This is not some pair of left-wing progressive professors. These are the rightest of the right wing, leading professors in the Federalist Society, and what are known as "Constitutional Originalists". From the right wing viewpoint, I would have expected people like these to, at best - be in favor of what The Fat Orange Turd did, at worst - to just keep silent. If you are right-wing and/or conservative, if you've lost these people, you're effectively goneburger.

The PDF (1.2MB) is here file:///D:/This%20PC%20Folders/Downloads/SSRN-id4532751.pdf

Thanks for this. Can you expose your D: drive to the internet at large so I can grab a copy?
:D
 

Back
Top Bottom