The Jan 6 Investigation (2) - Page 9

Shalamar · 14th July 2022, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

I just posted a factual account of what is entailed in prosecuting someone in a court of law.

I find your drama queen emotional response quite amusing.

It's not a court of law. it's an investigation.

Your dismissal at President Trumps inciting a riot in an attempt to overturn a fair election is telling though.

JoeMorgue · 14th July 2022, 09:16 AM

I love being told I'm "emotional" because I don't want the guy from the Apprentice to destroy Democracy in my country like I'm a fainting Victorian War Widow.

Shalamar · 14th July 2022, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I'm sick of people told how Trump's coup didn't break any rules.

First it's a lie.

Second it's not the point.

"It's only wrong when a Democrat does it."

JoeMorgue · 14th July 2022, 09:17 AM

Donal · 14th July 2022, 09:27 AM

I agree with Iamafalser. Trump should stand trial in a criminal court.

slyjoe · 14th July 2022, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

Of course I know the answers to those questions. They were meant for you, not me.

Here's the question I don't have and answer to: What specific laws did Trump violate (please cite federal code) and what specific actions did he take to violate them?

Why do you think I need to answer those questions?

Regarding specific laws, start with Seditious Conspiracy and throw in some Obstruction of Justice.

JoeMorgue · 14th July 2022, 09:43 AM

Again this is that "You loose the conversation by even having it" trap.

"Prove me stealing an election is against the law" is not statement you can actually answer without going so far down a rabbit hole you'll never get out.

slyjoe · 14th July 2022, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Again this is that "You loose the conversation by even having it" trap.

"Prove me stealing an election is against the law" is not statement you can actually answer without going so far down a rabbit hole you'll never get out.

Yea, I get it. I'll just leave the list here - caution: it's 6 pages of charts showing which criminal code is specifically referenced.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/re...al-misconduct/

Stacyhs · 14th July 2022, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

"Were it a court of law:"

a) There would be actual charges against Trump citing specific statutes and specific allegations of how said statutes were violated. (Something missing from the J6 Committee so far.)

b) Full discovery regarding all evidence with respect to what transpired on January 6. (Not just what Pelosi & Co. care to show.)

c) Rules of evidence. (Hearsay and edited/manipulated evidence wouldn't be allowed.)

d) ALL witness testimony would be part of the public record. (Unlike the
J6 Committee's closed door interviews.)

e) A defense presented which would include defense evidence to contradict said allegations as well as defense witnesses. (Something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.)

f) Cross examination of witnesses. (Again, something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.)

g) The prosecution would have the burden to prove a) beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do you want to hazard a guess as to why DOJ will probably never file charges against Trump, much less get a conviction?

Military dereliction of duty? WTF? Have you never heard of The Posse Comitatus Act?

As Shalamar said, the J6C isn't holding a trial; it's an investigation. And a very revealing one considering the information coming from the witnesses, the majority of whom are Republicans and past or present Trump supporters.

If the DOJ doesn't file charges against Trump, it won't be because he hasn't broken any laws; it will be for political reasons. There's a reason he pardoned Stone, Flynn, Bannon, Manafort and Papadopoulos and it's not because they were innocent.

Take the blinders off: Trump is a lying, sociopathic POS who tried to stay in power despite losing a fair election because the worst thing in the world to him is being a loser. Which he is.

johnny karate · 14th July 2022, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

As Shalamar said, the J6C isn't holding a trial; it's an investigation. And a very revealing one considering the information coming from the witnesses, the majority of whom are Republicans and past or present Trump supporters.

If the DOJ doesn't file charges against Trump, it won't be because he hasn't broken any laws; it will be for political reasons. There's a reason he pardoned Stone, Flynn, Bannon, Manafort and Papadopoulos and it's not because they were innocent.

Take the blinders off: Trump is a lying, sociopathic POS who tried to stay in power despite losing a fair election because the worst thing in the world to him is being a loser. Which he is.

Iamafalser has actually expressed concern about attempted coups in the past:

Quote:

Democracy is respecting the office of the president even if you don't like the person who wins the election. It's not a bunch of asshats who think they know better staging a coup.

This comment, however, was made in reference to Trump administration officials who didn't do his bidding.

Actual coups in which a violent attempt is made to overthrow the government are apparently not as much of a concern as when a cabinet member doesn't capitulate to Trump's every sociopathic whim.

ferd burfle · 14th July 2022, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by Shalamar

It's not a court of law. it's an investigation.

Your dismissal at President Trumps inciting a riot in an attempt to overturn a fair election is telling though.

"Posse Comitatus" told me all I needed to know.

Stacyhs · 14th July 2022, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by ferd burfle

"Posse Comitatus" told me all I needed to know.

Speaking of:

Quote:

How have these loopholes in the Posse Comitatus Act been exploited?

In the summer of 2020, Pres*id*ent Trump deployed the DC National Guard into Wash*ing*ton to police mostly peace*ful protests against law enforce*ment brutal*ity and racism. Simul*tan*eously, over the objec*tions of DC’s mayor, the admin*is*tra*tion asked state governors to deploy their own Guard person*nel into Wash*ing*ton in Title 32 status, and 11 governors did so. Although these out-of-state forces were nomin*ally under their governors’ control, it was later revealed that they were report*ing up through the DC Guard’s chain of command for “coordin*a*tion” purposes. That meant they were ulti*mately taking orders from the pres*id*ent. In this way, the Trump admin*is*tra*tion brought a large, feder*ally controlled milit*ary force into Wash*ing*ton and used it for civil*ian law enforce*ment, all while skip*ping over the proced*ures in the Insur*rec*tion Act and evad*ing the polit*ical costs of invok*ing it. That is exactly what the Posse Comit*atus Act is meant to prevent.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-wo...-act-explained

This loophole needs to be closed.

smartcooky · 14th July 2022, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

Military dereliction of duty? WTF? Have you never heard of The Posse Comitatus Act?

The most relevant military dereliction of duty I am seeing here is the failure of the Army to call Michael Flynn back into active service (which is well within their legal purview) and then to court martial him under Article 94 of the UCMJ (10 USC § 894 - Mutiny or Sedition)

Stacyhs · 14th July 2022, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

The most relevant military dereliction of duty I am seeing here is the failure of the Army to call Michael Flynn back into active service (which is well within their legal purview) and then to court martial him under Article 94 of the UCMJ (10 USC § 894 - Mutiny or Sedition)

MRC_Hans · 14th July 2022, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

What law is violated by kicking someone out of a meeting?

Just curious.

Depends on what kind of meeting.

Quote:

You can't "sneak" into The White House. There's pretty tight security as well as logs of who enters.

This is the reason we know about it.

Quote:

What's the difference between overturning an election and contesting an election?

The difference is whether you use legal means.

Quote:

Is it illegal to try to endeavor to find legal means to contest an election?

Not at all. Sending a mob to the Capitol is not a legal means. ... Do I need to explain why not?

Hans

gnome · 14th July 2022, 01:22 PM

Regarding needing a "smoking gun":

SNL Twin Peaks parody

Quote:

SHERIFF TRUMAN
Cooper, listen. Leo confessed. Leo turned himself in.

COOPER
Well that's good news Harry. Another piece of the puzzle. It won't be long now.

SHERIFF TRUMAN
No-no no-no. Leo confessed. He really did, honest. Its over. We found the murder weapon in the truck. His fingerprints match. We even have a video tape of it.

TRUMAN reaches into coat pocket, pulls out a video tape and shows it to COOPER.

COOPER
Harry, in the FBI we're trained in one very important thing, to look beyond the obvious. Now this video tape is helpful but last night I had a dream. In that dream I saw a hairless mouse with a pitchfork singing a song about caves. I surmised these are the same caves at the Packard Saw Mill. Harry, tonight you and I are going to do a little spelunking.

MRC_Hans · 14th July 2022, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

"Were it a court of law:"

a) There would be actual charges against Trump citing specific statutes and specific allegations of how said statutes were violated. (Something missing from the J6 Committee so far.)

b) Full discovery regarding all evidence with respect to what transpired on January 6. (Not just what Pelosi & Co. care to show.)

c) Rules of evidence. (Hearsay and edited/manipulated evidence wouldn't be allowed.)

d) ALL witness testimony would be part of the public record. (Unlike the
J6 Committee's closed door interviews.)

e) A defense presented which would include defense evidence to contradict said allegations as well as defense witnesses. (Something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.)

f) Cross examination of witnesses. (Again, something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.)

g) The prosecution would have the burden to prove a) beyond a reasonable doubt.

All the above are requirements of a court case, not of an investigation committee.

Will there be a court case? Probably not because the US democracy is headed down the drain. If you think that is a good thing, just wait; you ain't seen nothing yet.

Hans

smartcooky · 14th July 2022, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

Here's the question I don't have and answer to: What specific laws did Trump violate (please cite federal code) and what specific actions did he take to violate them?

18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings
He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused.

18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering
He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act.

18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses
He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial

18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government
He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them.

18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy
He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes.

Enough?

Stacyhs · 14th July 2022, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings
He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused.

18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering
He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act.

18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses
He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial

18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government
He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them.

18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy
He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes.

Enough?

Stop being dramatic!

TheGoldcountry · 14th July 2022, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Stop being dramatic!

That, or just bring up the Clintons out of nowhere.

SQUIRREL!

dudalb · 14th July 2022, 03:06 PM

Trump needs to be indicted, at least, and if Garland won't do it fire him and bring in somebody who will.

dudalb · 14th July 2022, 03:13 PM

I now think appointing Garland as AG was a mistake by BIden.

Stacyhs · 14th July 2022, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

I now think appointing Garland as AG was a mistake by BIden.

I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence.

Bob001 · 14th July 2022, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence.

That's a fair point, except that Justice could have and should have been investigating and interviewing all these people for the last year and a half. After all, they have legal powers that the committee doesn't have. If the committee is uncovering information that's new to the JD, that reflects very badly on the JD.

dudalb · 14th July 2022, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence.

The rumors that Trump is going to announce his candacy soon might make Garland move up his schedule.

Stacyhs · 14th July 2022, 04:03 PM

CNN is reporting that a DC police officer in Trump's motorcade has corroborated Hutchinson's account of Trump's behavior in the Beast when leaving the Ellipse.

They also are discussing having the driver testify with him. Apparently, the SS also deleted messages after they were asked for them.

In the last hour, all nine J6C members have gone to Pelosi's office.

Skeptic Ginger · 14th July 2022, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

"Were it a court of law:"

a) There would be actual charges against Trump citing specific statutes and specific allegations of how said statutes were violated. (Something missing from the J6 Committee so far.)

You are so not paying attention. Liz Cheney has on multiple occasions cited the specific laws Drumpf has violated including the evidence the charges are based on.

Quote:

b) Full discovery regarding all evidence with respect to what transpired on January 6. (Not just what Pelosi & Co. care to show.)

c) Rules of evidence. (Hearsay and edited/manipulated evidence wouldn't be allowed.)

d) ALL witness testimony would be part of the public record. (Unlike the
J6 Committee's closed door interviews.)

e) A defense presented which would include defense evidence to contradict said allegations as well as defense witnesses. (Something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.)

f) Cross examination of witnesses. (Again, something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.)

It is all part of the public record and will be disclosed in its entirety when the committee is finished.

All this bull **** about no ability for the Trump sycophants is just that, bull ****.
It's like the constant claim of the GOP having a better health care plan but they never told anyone what it was. Then when they were able to replace the ACA, surprise surprise there was no plan.

Nothing is stopping anyone from providing evidence the election was stolen. But they can't because there isn't any.

Quote:

g) The prosecution would have the burden to prove a) beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do you want to hazard a guess as to why DOJ will probably never file charges against Trump, much less get a conviction?

Gawd if you are going to post here, please at least CHECK YOUR FACTS. This is a Congressional hearing. All the evidence is being shared with the DoJ. It is the DoJ that files charges and proves beyond a doubt Drumpf and his cult followers are guilty.

Quote:

Military dereliction of duty? WTF? Have you never heard of The Posse Comitatus Act?

Again try to keep up. The POTUS had a duty to stop the mob breaking in the Capitol. He didn't do so for ~4 hours.

Oh look, there are a bunch of people who already answered.

dudalb · 14th July 2022, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

CNN is reporting that a DC police officer in Trump's motorcade has corroborated Hutchinson's account of Trump's behavior in the Beast when leaving the Ellipse.

They also are discussing having the driver testify with him. Apparently, the SS also deleted messages after they were asked for them.

In the last hour, all nine J6C members have gone to Pelosi's office.

More bobmshells on the way.
I have to admit, the J6C is certainly delieveing on the promise of dynamite revelations bigtime.

smartcooky · 14th July 2022, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by Bob001

That's a fair point, except that Justice could have and should have been investigating and interviewing all these people for the last year and a half. After all, they have legal powers that the committee doesn't have. If the committee is uncovering information that's new to the JD, that reflects very badly on the JD.

Do we know they haven't been?

Skeptic Ginger · 14th July 2022, 05:10 PM

Re armed protestors, these were radio transmissions from the police on Jan 6 that were played in the hearing:

Quote:

“Three men walking down the street in fatigues carrying AR-15s... at 14th and Independence,” a voice says in one transmission.

“White male... stock of an AR-15,” someone can be heard saying in another recording. “Green fatigues... Glock-style pistols in their waistband.”

“Elevated threat in the trees... American flag face mask... weapon on the right-side hip,” a third transmission says.

Skeptic Ginger · 14th July 2022, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Iamafalser has actually expressed concern about attempted coups in the past:

This comment, however, was made in reference to Trump administration officials who didn't do his bidding.

Actual coups in which a violent attempt is made to overthrow the government are apparently not as much of a concern as when a cabinet member doesn't capitulate to Trump's every sociopathic whim.

Skeptic Ginger · 14th July 2022, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings
He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused.

18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering
He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act.

18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses
He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial

18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government
He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them.

18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy
He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes.

Enough?

We can probably add retaliation against Comey and McCabe via in depth tax audits. That investigation is in progress.

Crazy Chainsaw · 14th July 2022, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

I just posted a factual account of what is entailed in prosecuting someone in a court of law.

I find your drama queen emotional response quite amusing.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

acbytesla · 14th July 2022, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings
He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused.

18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering
He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act.

18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses
He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial

18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government
He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them.

18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy
He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes.

Enough?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

We can probably add retaliation against Comey and McCabe via in depth tax audits. That investigation is in progress.

The problem isn't that Trump isn't guilty of multiple crimes. The problem is having a fair trial that doesn’t have a jury committing jury nullification. You know, like the US Senate did in two impeachment trials.

Lurch · 14th July 2022, 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence.

And while he waits, the master baits. 😀

The polapsed orange anus will announce its candidacy, and then the DOJ will not/can not indict because it will be perceived as 'political.'

The US is fracked.

Bob001 · 14th July 2022, 11:36 PM

Secret Service erased Jan. 5 and 6 texts that were requested by investigators.

Quote:

A government watchdog accused the U.S. Secret Service of erasing texts from Jan. 5 and 6, 2021, after his office requested them as part of an inquiry into the U.S. Capitol attack, according to a letter sent to lawmakers this week.

Joseph V. Cuffari, head of the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General, wrote to the leaders of the House and Senate Homeland Security committees indicating that the text messages have vanished and that efforts to investigate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack were being hindered.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...-texts-erased/

Stacyhs · 15th July 2022, 12:41 AM

Not that this will matter to Trump loyalists who are gullible enough to swallow the Big Lie:

Quote:

New Report from Prominent Conservatives Reaffirms Trump's Loss and Warns of Danger to Democracy from Baseless Claims of Fraud

After reviewing every claim of fraud and irregularities brought by Donald Trump and his supporters in all 64 cases challenging the 2020 election, a group of notable conservatives has reached the "unequivocal" conclusion that Trump's claims of election fraud are unsupported by evidence.

The group also examined all post-election reviews and audits in six battleground states. "Donald Trump and his supporters had their day in court and failed to produce substantive evidence to make their case," Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election states.

The 72-page report is signed by retired federal appeals court judges Thomas B. Griffith, J. Michael Luttig and Michael W. McConnell, former Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson, Senators John Danforth and Gordon H. Smith, longtime Republican election lawyer Benjamin L. Ginsberg and veteran Republican congressional chief of staff David Hoppe.

Quote:

The report's conclusion of insufficient evidence to support charges that the 2020 results were fraudulent came after a review of all 187 counts in the 64 cases Trump and his supporters filed in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

smartcooky · 15th July 2022, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Not that this will matter to Trump loyalists who are gullible enough to swallow the Big Lie:

They don't need no stinkin' evidence!

eerok · 15th July 2022, 04:23 AM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

I just posted a factual account of what is entailed in prosecuting someone in a court of law.

That's nice. With any luck we'll see Trump and his cronies prosecuted in court soon.

That's not what the January 6 hearings are, though. They're part of an investigation that should lead to indictments.

varwoche · 15th July 2022, 06:18 AM

Originally Posted by Iamafalser

What law is violated by kicking someone out of a meeting?

Just curious.

You can't "sneak" into The White House. There's pretty tight security as well as logs of who enters.

What's the difference between overturning an election and contesting an election?

Is it illegal to try to endeavor to find legal means to contest an election?

A prime example of Just Asking Questions, otherwise known as JAQing off.

14th July 2022, 09:16 AM	#321
Shalamar Dark Lord of the JREF Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Somewhere Else Posts: 5,635	Originally Posted by Iamafalser I just posted a factual account of what is entailed in prosecuting someone in a court of law. I find your drama queen emotional response quite amusing. It's not a court of law. it's an investigation. Your dismissal at President Trumps inciting a riot in an attempt to overturn a fair election is telling though.
	__________________ "The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."

14th July 2022, 09:16 AM	#323
Shalamar Dark Lord of the JREF Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Somewhere Else Posts: 5,635	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I'm sick of people told how Trump's coup didn't break any rules. First it's a lie. Second it's not the point. "It's only wrong when a Democrat does it."
	__________________ "The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."

14th July 2022, 09:17 AM	#324
JoeMorgue Suspended Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 42,380
	Last edited by jimbob; 15th July 2022 at 05:53 AM. Reason: Large image

14th July 2022, 09:27 AM	#325
Donal Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 5,230	I agree with Iamafalser. Trump should stand trial in a criminal court.
Donal Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 5,230	__________________ SuburbanNerd A blog for making tech make sense

14th July 2022, 09:34 AM	#326
slyjoe Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 3,430	Originally Posted by Iamafalser Of course I know the answers to those questions. They were meant for you, not me. Here's the question I don't have and answer to: What specific laws did Trump violate (please cite federal code) and what specific actions did he take to violate them? Why do you think I need to answer those questions? Regarding specific laws, start with Seditious Conspiracy and throw in some Obstruction of Justice.
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

14th July 2022, 09:16 AM	#322
JoeMorgue Suspended Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 42,380	I love being told I'm "emotional" because I don't want the guy from the Apprentice to destroy Democracy in my country like I'm a fainting Victorian War Widow.

14th July 2022, 09:43 AM	#327
JoeMorgue Suspended Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 42,380	Again this is that "You loose the conversation by even having it" trap. "Prove me stealing an election is against the law" is not statement you can actually answer without going so far down a rabbit hole you'll never get out.

14th July 2022, 09:49 AM	#328
slyjoe Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 3,430	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Again this is that "You loose the conversation by even having it" trap. "Prove me stealing an election is against the law" is not statement you can actually answer without going so far down a rabbit hole you'll never get out. Yea, I get it. I'll just leave the list here - caution: it's 6 pages of charts showing which criminal code is specifically referenced. https://www.citizensforethics.org/re...al-misconduct/
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

14th July 2022, 10:18 AM	#329
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 28,669	Originally Posted by Iamafalser "Were it a court of law:" a) There would be actual charges against Trump citing specific statutes and specific allegations of how said statutes were violated. (Something missing from the J6 Committee so far.) b) Full discovery regarding all evidence with respect to what transpired on January 6. (Not just what Pelosi & Co. care to show.) c) Rules of evidence. (Hearsay and edited/manipulated evidence wouldn't be allowed.) d) ALL witness testimony would be part of the public record. (Unlike the J6 Committee's closed door interviews.) e) A defense presented which would include defense evidence to contradict said allegations as well as defense witnesses. (Something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.) f) Cross examination of witnesses. (Again, something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.) g) The prosecution would have the burden to prove a) beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you want to hazard a guess as to why DOJ will probably never file charges against Trump, much less get a conviction? Military dereliction of duty? WTF? Have you never heard of The Posse Comitatus Act? As Shalamar said, the J6C isn't holding a trial; it's an investigation. And a very revealing one considering the information coming from the witnesses, the majority of whom are Republicans and past or present Trump supporters. If the DOJ doesn't file charges against Trump, it won't be because he hasn't broken any laws; it will be for political reasons. There's a reason he pardoned Stone, Flynn, Bannon, Manafort and Papadopoulos and it's not because they were innocent. Take the blinders off: Trump is a lying, sociopathic POS who tried to stay in power despite losing a fair election because the worst thing in the world to him is being a loser. Which he is.

14th July 2022, 10:33 AM	#330
johnny karate ... and your little dog too. Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 15,919	Originally Posted by Stacyhs As Shalamar said, the J6C isn't holding a trial; it's an investigation. And a very revealing one considering the information coming from the witnesses, the majority of whom are Republicans and past or present Trump supporters. If the DOJ doesn't file charges against Trump, it won't be because he hasn't broken any laws; it will be for political reasons. There's a reason he pardoned Stone, Flynn, Bannon, Manafort and Papadopoulos and it's not because they were innocent. Take the blinders off: Trump is a lying, sociopathic POS who tried to stay in power despite losing a fair election because the worst thing in the world to him is being a loser. Which he is. Iamafalser has actually expressed concern about attempted coups in the past: Quote: Democracy is respecting the office of the president even if you don't like the person who wins the election. It's not a bunch of asshats who think they know better staging a coup. This comment, however, was made in reference to Trump administration officials who didn't do his bidding. Actual coups in which a violent attempt is made to overthrow the government are apparently not as much of a concern as when a cabinet member doesn't capitulate to Trump's every sociopathic whim.

14th July 2022, 11:53 AM	#331
ferd burfle Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Just short of Zeta II Reticuli Posts: 1,582	Originally Posted by Shalamar It's not a court of law. it's an investigation. Your dismissal at President Trumps inciting a riot in an attempt to overturn a fair election is telling though. "Posse Comitatus" told me all I needed to know.
	__________________ What are the odds something bad will happen to a submarine in a Godzilla movie?-Brandon

14th July 2022, 12:08 PM	#332
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 28,669	Originally Posted by ferd burfle "Posse Comitatus" told me all I needed to know. Speaking of: Quote: How have these loopholes in the Posse Comitatus Act been exploited? In the summer of 2020, President Trump deployed the DC National Guard into Washington to police mostly peaceful protests against law enforcement brutality and racism. Simultaneously, over the objections of DC’s mayor, the administration asked state governors to deploy their own Guard personnel into Washington in Title 32 status, and 11 governors did so. Although these out-of-state forces were nominally under their governors’ control, it was later revealed that they were reporting up through the DC Guard’s chain of command for “coordination” purposes. That meant they were ultimately taking orders from the president. In this way, the Trump administration brought a large, federally controlled military force into Washington and used it for civilian law enforcement, all while skipping over the procedures in the Insurrection Act and evading the political costs of invoking it. That is exactly what the Posse Comitatus Act is meant to prevent. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-wo...-act-explained This loophole needs to be closed.

14th July 2022, 01:04 PM	#333
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 22,889	Originally Posted by Iamafalser Military dereliction of duty? WTF? Have you never heard of The Posse Comitatus Act? The most relevant military dereliction of duty I am seeing here is the failure of the Army to call Michael Flynn back into active service (which is well within their legal purview) and then to court martial him under Article 94 of the UCMJ (10 USC § 894 - Mutiny or Sedition)
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

14th July 2022, 01:17 PM	#334
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 28,669	Originally Posted by smartcooky The most relevant military dereliction of duty I am seeing here is the failure of the Army to call Michael Flynn back into active service (which is well within their legal purview) and then to court martial him under Article 94 of the UCMJ (10 USC § 894 - Mutiny or Sedition)

14th July 2022, 01:21 PM	#335
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 24,286	Originally Posted by Iamafalser What law is violated by kicking someone out of a meeting? Just curious. Depends on what kind of meeting. Quote: You can't "sneak" into The White House. There's pretty tight security as well as logs of who enters. This is the reason we know about it. Quote: What's the difference between overturning an election and contesting an election? The difference is whether you use legal means. Quote: Is it illegal to try to endeavor to find legal means to contest an election? Not at all. Sending a mob to the Capitol is not a legal means. ... Do I need to explain why not? Hans
	__________________ Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.

14th July 2022, 01:22 PM	#336
gnome Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 13,505	Regarding needing a "smoking gun": SNL Twin Peaks parody Quote: SHERIFF TRUMAN Cooper, listen. Leo confessed. Leo turned himself in. COOPER Well that's good news Harry. Another piece of the puzzle. It won't be long now. SHERIFF TRUMAN No-no no-no. Leo confessed. He really did, honest. Its over. We found the murder weapon in the truck. His fingerprints match. We even have a video tape of it. TRUMAN reaches into coat pocket, pulls out a video tape and shows it to COOPER. COOPER Harry, in the FBI we're trained in one very important thing, to look beyond the obvious. Now this video tape is helpful but last night I had a dream. In that dream I saw a hairless mouse with a pitchfork singing a song about caves. I surmised these are the same caves at the Packard Saw Mill. Harry, tonight you and I are going to do a little spelunking.
	__________________

14th July 2022, 01:26 PM	#337
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 24,286	Originally Posted by Iamafalser "Were it a court of law:" a) There would be actual charges against Trump citing specific statutes and specific allegations of how said statutes were violated. (Something missing from the J6 Committee so far.) b) Full discovery regarding all evidence with respect to what transpired on January 6. (Not just what Pelosi & Co. care to show.) c) Rules of evidence. (Hearsay and edited/manipulated evidence wouldn't be allowed.) d) ALL witness testimony would be part of the public record. (Unlike the J6 Committee's closed door interviews.) e) A defense presented which would include defense evidence to contradict said allegations as well as defense witnesses. (Something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.) f) Cross examination of witnesses. (Again, something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.) g) The prosecution would have the burden to prove a) beyond a reasonable doubt. All the above are requirements of a court case, not of an investigation committee. Will there be a court case? Probably not because the US democracy is headed down the drain. If you think that is a good thing, just wait; you ain't seen nothing yet. Hans
	__________________ Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.

14th July 2022, 01:47 PM	#338
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 22,889	Originally Posted by Iamafalser Here's the question I don't have and answer to: What specific laws did Trump violate (please cite federal code) and what specific actions did he take to violate them? 18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused. 18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act. 18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial 18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them. 18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes. Enough?
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

14th July 2022, 02:36 PM	#339
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 28,669	Originally Posted by smartcooky 18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused. 18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act. 18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial 18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them. 18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes. Enough? Stop being dramatic!

14th July 2022, 03:01 PM	#340
TheGoldcountry Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 7,379	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Stop being dramatic! That, or just bring up the Clintons out of nowhere. SQUIRREL!
	__________________ I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten I sometimes think the Bible was inspired by Satan to make God look bad. And then it backfired on Him when He underestimated the stupidity of religious ideologues. -MontagK505

14th July 2022, 03:06 PM	#341
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,259	Trump needs to be indicted, at least, and if Garland won't do it fire him and bring in somebody who will.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

14th July 2022, 03:13 PM	#342
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,259	I now think appointing Garland as AG was a mistake by BIden.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

14th July 2022, 03:19 PM	#343
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 28,669	Originally Posted by dudalb I now think appointing Garland as AG was a mistake by BIden. I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence.

14th July 2022, 03:54 PM	#344
Bob001 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 16,336	Originally Posted by Stacyhs I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence. That's a fair point, except that Justice could have and should have been investigating and interviewing all these people for the last year and a half. After all, they have legal powers that the committee doesn't have. If the committee is uncovering information that's new to the JD, that reflects very badly on the JD.

14th July 2022, 03:57 PM	#345
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,259	Originally Posted by Stacyhs I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence. The rumors that Trump is going to announce his candacy soon might make Garland move up his schedule.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

14th July 2022, 04:03 PM	#346
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 28,669	CNN is reporting that a DC police officer in Trump's motorcade has corroborated Hutchinson's account of Trump's behavior in the Beast when leaving the Ellipse. They also are discussing having the driver testify with him. Apparently, the SS also deleted messages after they were asked for them. In the last hour, all nine J6C members have gone to Pelosi's office.
	Last edited by Stacyhs; 14th July 2022 at 04:14 PM.

14th July 2022, 04:13 PM	#347
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,022	Originally Posted by Iamafalser "Were it a court of law:" a) There would be actual charges against Trump citing specific statutes and specific allegations of how said statutes were violated. (Something missing from the J6 Committee so far.) You are so not paying attention. Liz Cheney has on multiple occasions cited the specific laws Drumpf has violated including the evidence the charges are based on. Quote: b) Full discovery regarding all evidence with respect to what transpired on January 6. (Not just what Pelosi & Co. care to show.) c) Rules of evidence. (Hearsay and edited/manipulated evidence wouldn't be allowed.) d) ALL witness testimony would be part of the public record. (Unlike the J6 Committee's closed door interviews.) e) A defense presented which would include defense evidence to contradict said allegations as well as defense witnesses. (Something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.) f) Cross examination of witnesses. (Again, something not included in the J6 Committee hearings.) It is all part of the public record and will be disclosed in its entirety when the committee is finished. All this bull ** about no ability for the Trump sycophants is just that, bull . It's like the constant claim of the GOP having a better health care plan but they never told anyone what it was. Then when they were able to replace the ACA, surprise surprise there was no plan. Nothing is stopping anyone from providing evidence the election was stolen. But they can't because there isn't any.** Quote: g) The prosecution would have the burden to prove a) beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you want to hazard a guess as to why DOJ will probably never file charges against Trump, much less get a conviction? Gawd if you are going to post here, please at least CHECK YOUR FACTS. This is a Congressional hearing. All the evidence is being shared with the DoJ. It is the DoJ that files charges and proves beyond a doubt Drumpf and his cult followers are guilty. Quote: Military dereliction of duty? WTF? Have you never heard of The Posse Comitatus Act? Again try to keep up. The POTUS had a duty to stop the mob breaking in the Capitol. He didn't do so for ~4 hours. Oh look, there are a bunch of people who already answered.
	Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 14th July 2022 at 04:15 PM.

14th July 2022, 05:03 PM	#348
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,259	Originally Posted by Stacyhs CNN is reporting that a DC police officer in Trump's motorcade has corroborated Hutchinson's account of Trump's behavior in the Beast when leaving the Ellipse. They also are discussing having the driver testify with him. Apparently, the SS also deleted messages after they were asked for them. In the last hour, all nine J6C members have gone to Pelosi's office. More bobmshells on the way. I have to admit, the J6C is certainly delieveing on the promise of dynamite revelations bigtime.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

14th July 2022, 05:08 PM	#349
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 22,889	Originally Posted by Bob001 That's a fair point, except that Justice could have and should have been investigating and interviewing all these people for the last year and a half. After all, they have legal powers that the committee doesn't have. If the committee is uncovering information that's new to the JD, that reflects very badly on the JD. Do we know they haven't been?
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

14th July 2022, 05:10 PM	#350
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,022	Re armed protestors, these were radio transmissions from the police on Jan 6 that were played in the hearing: Quote: “Three men walking down the street in fatigues carrying AR-15s... at 14th and Independence,” a voice says in one transmission. “White male... stock of an AR-15,” someone can be heard saying in another recording. “Green fatigues... Glock-style pistols in their waistband.” “Elevated threat in the trees... American flag face mask... weapon on the right-side hip,” a third transmission says.

14th July 2022, 05:59 PM	#351
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,022	Originally Posted by johnny karate Iamafalser has actually expressed concern about attempted coups in the past: This comment, however, was made in reference to Trump administration officials who didn't do his bidding. Actual coups in which a violent attempt is made to overthrow the government are apparently not as much of a concern as when a cabinet member doesn't capitulate to Trump's every sociopathic whim.

14th July 2022, 07:55 PM	#352
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,022	Originally Posted by smartcooky 18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused. 18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act. 18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial 18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them. 18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes. Enough? We can probably add retaliation against Comey and McCabe via in depth tax audits. That investigation is in progress.

14th July 2022, 08:42 PM	#353
Crazy Chainsaw Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 7,232	Originally Posted by Iamafalser I just posted a factual account of what is entailed in prosecuting someone in a court of law. I find your drama queen emotional response quite amusing. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

14th July 2022, 08:52 PM	#354
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,383	Originally Posted by smartcooky 18 USC § 1505 Obstruction of Congressional or Administrative Proceedings He planned to stop the congressional certification of the 2020 election by stopping the Electoral College vote. His intention was use a slate of fake electors after pressuring state legislatures in six key battleground states with Republican-dominated legislatures – Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada – to de-certify election results, with the intended outcome that Trump would have more certified electoral college votes than the election's actual winner. The plan only failed because it required the co-operation of the vice president, and he refused. 18 USC § 1512 Witness Tampering He directed others to contact witnesses against him. It doesn't matter whether they threatened the witnesses or not, merely contacting them at all is a criminal act. 18 USC § 1513 Retaliation against witnesses He retaliated against Colonel Alexander Vindman for testifying against him in the first impeachment trial 18 USC § 2102 Inciting Insurrection or Rebellion Against the U.S. Government He summoned a violent mob of his supporters to Washington DC and directed them to march to the Capitol to stop the counting of Electoral College votes - this was even after he knew they were armed with firearms and other weapons. he also tried to order the metal detectors to be turned off to allow even more of the armed mob to join them. 18 USC § 2384 Seditious Conspiracy He conspired with Peter Navarro, Rudi Giuliani, Sydney Powell, John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, Mo Brooks, Brian Babin, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz , Louie Gohmert, Paul Gosar, Andy Harris, Jody Hice, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannan and Roger Stone (and probably et al we haven't even heard about yet) to overthrow and even destroy by force the incoming Government of the United States by preventing, and/or hindering, and/or delaying the execution of the counting of electoral college votes. Enough? Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger We can probably add retaliation against Comey and McCabe via in depth tax audits. That investigation is in progress. The problem isn't that Trump isn't guilty of multiple crimes. The problem is having a fair trial that doesn’t have a jury committing jury nullification. You know, like the US Senate did in two impeachment trials.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

14th July 2022, 11:33 PM	#355
Lurch Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Ottawa Posts: 2,318	Originally Posted by Stacyhs I suspect Garland is waiting for the end of the J6C investigation before filing charges which is understandable. I think it would be a bad move to do so before it's concluded and we have all the evidence. And while he waits, the master baits. 😀 The polapsed orange anus will announce its candidacy, and then the DOJ will not/can not indict because it will be perceived as 'political.' The US is fracked.