Fox Host Laura Ingraham Triggers John Eastman Into Possibly Making a Serious Confession on Live TV (1 Viewer)

[LouC]

But didn't she and other Fox News hosts actively entertain voter fraud conspiracy nonsense until they, uh, got their tit stuck in a ringer?

Yes.

 

[LouC]

Cases rejected as lacking standing do not have evidence examined

And?
Find standing and then present the evidence, if it exists.

That doesn't mean there was no evidence.

They obviously did not have adequate evidence to present any qualifying standing.

Read post #36 the court cases were cited as proof the Eastman indictments were justified, they weren't.

The poster of Post #36 had an opinion.
So?
The justification implied in the Eastman Indictment can be found in the Eastman Indictment.

 

[American]

Having J6 defendants on a biased tv network could be hazardous to certain defendant's trial case. In this case, J6 defendant John Eastman. TV cameras + Fox Network are mysteriously mesmerizing to MAGA Heads.

MSN

When host Laura Ingraham asked what his “constitutional” plan was on 6 January 2021 — as Mr Trump and his allies sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election — Mr Eastman admitted that he tried to stop the certification of the election results and wanted then-Vice President Mike Pence to at least halt Congress from certifying them for a week.

“Some people had urged that Vice President Pence simply had power to reject electors whose certification was still pending,” he said.

“I explicitly told Vice President Pence in the Oval Office on January 4, that even though it was an open issue, under the circumstances we had I thought it was the weaker argument, and it would be foolish to exercise such power.

“What I recommended, and I’ve said this repeatedly, is that he accede to requests from more than 100 state legislators in the swing states, to give them a week to try and sort out the impact of what everybody acknowledged was illegality in the conduct of the election.”

This was already online, what's new about it?

 

[HumblePi]

So suggesting is now a crime?

Yes, suggesting people march to the capital to “save our country “is inciting violence, which is clearly a crime.

 

[PoliSciPulse]

These fools don't realize you DON'T talk about the charges against you because you might incriminate yourself?
Shit, a 19 yr old knows better. Seriously.

The Alpha Strike Force Team, or otherwise known by everyone else in the Trump Campaign, "the worst lawyers ever," everyone.

 

[PoliSciPulse]

Yes, suggesting people march to the capital to “save our country “is inciting violence, which is clearly a crime.

If you can prove he knew they would be violent. If the goal was to have a peaceful protest, as he claims, then he's innocent. What needs to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt is that he "knew or should have known" (legal standard) that the protest would be violent. I found a document in the Jan. 6th archives as early as December that the White House was aware of death threats against Michigan politicians, and I found in another document that the Alpha Strike Force Team knew that what they were doing in regards to the electors was illegal.

 

[AZRWinger]

And?
Find standing and then present the evidence, if it exists.

They obviously did not have adequate evidence to present any qualifying standing.

The poster of Post #36 had an opinion.
So?
The justification implied in the Eastman Indictment can be found in the Eastman Indictment.

The 63 cases rejected by the courts mostly for standing were cited as proof of no election fraud. Never mind that the evidence wasn't examined, Trump should have heeded the cases as prohibiting protesting the election.

Please do some research on the concept of legal standing. It's different from evidence. There is no evidence of standing.

Just like the failure to understand the concept of standing. There is a misrepresentation of the indictment text. It specifies the legal offenses the grand jury believes the defendant should be charged with. There is no justification just specification.

 

[The AntiDonald]

John Eastman faces 9 felony charges in Georgia....

Violation of the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
Solicitation of violation of oath by public officer
Conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer
Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree (2 counts)
Conspiracy to commit false statements and writings (2 counts)
Conspiracy to commit filing false documents
Filing false documents

Eastman is also currently undergoing disbarment proceedings in California.

And is one of the co-conspirators in Trump's DC election case. Many expect Smith to indict the rest of them in due time.

 

[PoliSciPulse]

And is one of the co-conspirators in Trump's DC election case. Many expect Smith to indict the rest of them in due time.

Unless they turn and give Smith higher-hanging fruit, yes, this will happen.

 

[ouch]

How is that a confession?

Already discussed post #6

 

[Fletch]

Yes, suggesting people march to the capital to “save our country “is inciting violence, which is clearly a crime.

Odd that neither Trump nor anyone else was charged with inciting violence, isnt it.

 

[Hatuey]

There is nothing in the constitution or US law that would have allowed a VP or Eastman to hold up Congress from certifying the election. There is no precedent for a process they made up to overturn the election.

It's incredibly how many coup defenders posing as intellectual cowards there are on this thread that reject this statement of fact.

 

[Fletch]

The Vice President of the United States has no power to stop Congress from certifying an election. Any argument to the contrary is just gibberish speak by coup defenders.

Correct. And gibberish speak is not a crime.

 

[Hatuey]

Correct. And gibberish speak is not a crime.

Trying to overturn the election by imposing a process not in law or the constitution is definitely a crime. That process entailed demonstrations, illegal demands from state election runners, and literal efforts to intimidate election workers, all which Eastman tried to coordinate and has been documented in a number of states (Georgia being the most prominent).

Double down and say it isn't. I want to see you go full stupid today.

 

[ouch]

This was already online, what's new about it?

Stated before Laura Ingraham live on Fox Network.

​

 

[ColdHardTruth]

And how is this admission of his evidence of a crime?

He admitted to attempting to unlawfully interfere in the certification of the election results.

 

[Fletch]

Trying to overturn the election by imposing a process not in law or the constitution is definitely a crime. That process entailed demonstrations, illegal demands from state election runners, and literal efforts to intimidate election workers, all which Eastman tried to coordinate and has been documented in a number of states (Georgia being the most prominent).

Double down and say it isn't. I want to see you go full stupid today.

Nothing was 'imposed' and suggesting that the VP delay certification is not a criminal act no matter how much you lie about it.

 

[Fletch]

He admitted to attempting to unlawfully interfere in the certification of the election results.

Unlawfully? What specific law did he break?

 

[Hatuey]

Nothing was 'imposed' suggesting that the VP delay certification is not a criminal act no matter how much you lie about it.

Asking someone to break the law by delaying a ceremonial role, and allow you time to challenge the results of an election they have no power to delay certification of is indeed a crime. It's not free speech to suggest people commit crimes to help you out.

Try it locally, statewide, it will be a crime. It's also a crime federally. Lol. You're going full stupid today, aren't you?

 

[Fletch]

Suggesting someone break the law by delaying a ceremonial role, and allow you time to challenge the results of an election they have no power to delay certification of is a crime.

Try it locally, statewide, it will be a crime. It's also a crime federally. Lol. You're going full stupid today, aren't you?

Its not a crime. It is the left trying to make it a crime and every idiot leftist falling right in line.

 

[HumblePi]

Odd that neither Trump nor anyone else was charged with inciting violence, isnt it.

Odd that not one of the more than 1,000 insurrections who took part in the Jan 6 insurrection weren't charged with 'conspiracy to defraud the U.S.' or 'attempts to threaten and intimidate'. Unfortunately for Trump, Jack Smith has chosen to streamline the indictments, making if far easier to prove in court and get a conviction for decades behind bars. Trump not being charged with 'seditious conspiracy' (yet), has no bearing on the outcome or convictions based on the evidence on the four charges that Jack Smith already has in his pocket.

• one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States applies to Trump's repeated and widespread efforts to spread false claims about the November 2020 election while knowing they were not true and for allegedly attempting to illegally discount legitimate votes all with the goal of overturning the 2020 election, prosecutors claim in the indictment.
• one count of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding was brought due to the alleged organized planning by Trump and his allies to disrupt the electoral vote's certification in January 2021.
• one count of obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding is tied to Trump and his co-conspirators' alleged efforts after the November 2020 election until Jan. 7, 2021, to block the official certification proceeding in Congress.
• one count of conspiracy against rights refers to Trump and his co-conspirators alleged attempts to "oppress, threaten and intimidate" people in their right to vote in an election.

 

[Hatuey]

Its not a crime.

Eastman's and Trump's mugshot beg to differ.

People will go to prison for "suggesting" crimes be committed in order to change an election, and then actioning multiple illegal steps to change that election.

If Trump dies before the trial, all his friends will still be on the hook for their crimes too.

You better throw your "I'm not a Trump supporter but.." tantrum now.

 

[HumblePi]

Nothing was 'imposed' and suggesting that the VP delay certification is not a criminal act no matter how much you lie about it.

How many times can you throw out a guess and have it actually be correct? The chances are low. Spelled out in the Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term to be January 20 of the year following a general election. Also spelled out in our Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term on January 20 of the year following a general election.

Certification of the electoral votes must be completed by Jan 21.

So yes, intentionally delaying certification of the election would be illegal, no matter how much you try to make it not so.

 

[Fletch]

Eastman's and Trump's mugshot begs to differ. People will go to prison for suggesting crimes be committed in order to change the election, and then actioning multiple steps to change that election.

If Trump dies before the trial, all his friends will still be on the hook for their crimes too. You better throw your tantrum now.

There is no crime here. That is why they had to get creative and use Rico statutes and lots and lots of conspiracy charges. None of these people will be convicted of anything.

 

[Fletch]

How many times can you throw out a guess and have it actually be correct? The chances are low. Spelled out in the Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term to be January 20 of the year following a general election. Also spelled out in our Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term on January 20 of the year following a general election.

So yes, intentionally delaying certification of the election would be illegal, no matter how much you try to make it not so.

And?? Delaying it a week from December 6 to December 13 would violate the Constitution how, exactly?