Jack Smith files superceding indictment against Trump in Jan. 6 case

[RaleBulgarian]

The case was brought a year ago.

Exactly.

 

[JasperL]

Smith had a legal plan, Trump's team had a legal plan. Now the SC has made a ruling and you'd think Smith would move on. I wonder why he doesn't?

Did you read the ruling? It doesn't absolve Trump or determine that all of the acts charged are acts for which Trump has absolute or even presumptive immunity. It's one of MANY problems with that ruling, because SCOTUS defined official and core acts so broadly that no one knows what acts are official or core and what immunity attaches to anything, other than perhaps consulting with DoJ personnel.

Anyway, it's not worth any time arguing with people who think it's fine that a sitting POTUS quite literally tried to nullify the votes of 10s of millions of citizens to stay in power. That was the plan, we know this, and then to send the election to the Congress or back to the state legislatures who would decide whether or not to abide by the votes of the people.

 

[CaughtInThe]

 

[Ikari]

It's almost as if it's the exact opposite of his official duty!

I suppose that depends on who you ask. If you ask a MAGA than Trump definitely has the official power to overturn an election and any attempts to prosecute for crimes committed is lawfare.

 

[SkyChief]

You literally just lied about what the charges are. In Trump land, that's proof I guess.

You literally just lied about what the charges are. The charges I posted were provided in a link by another ignorant poster who didn't even read his link. I only rewrote them. Stop lying, please.

Right wingers lie about everything.

Lefties are notorious for their ignorance and stupidity. Always have been.

 

[Deuce]

You literally just lied about what the charges are. The charges I posted were provided in a link by another ignorant poster who didn't even read his link. I only rewrote them. Stop lying, please.


Lefties are notorious for their ignorance and stupidity. Always have been.

What charge one says: "Conspiracy to defraud the United States 18 U.S.C. 371"
What you said charge one says: "Count 1) Trump has been charged with losing the 2020 election."

Please, engage in some mental gymnastics for us

 

[RedFishBlueFish]

This could backfire, as it did with Biden.

Too many Americans see this as politically motivated 'lawfare', and that played to Trump's favor in polling.

I'd have told Jack to cool it until after the election, but you can't really do that with Special Prosecutors.

We'll likely know soon, September 18th and afterwards will tell the tale as to if more Americans see this as lawfare or justice.

They'll be plenty of polling and if we see Trump doing better, not worse, then this thing has backfired again and may yet cause Harris to lose.

Smith was approaching a 60 day before election deadline. It was either file soon or wait until after the election (we're at 69 days).

His filing doesn't give us certainty, but it does let the US public know that the SC didn't void the charges against Trump.

 

[hooligan]

...it does let the US public know that the SC didn't void the charges against Trump...

Some of the posters in this forum seem to be in desperate need of that very information, based on appearances.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

You literally just lied about what the charges are. The charges I posted were provided in a link by another ignorant poster who didn't even read his link. I only rewrote them. Stop lying, please.


Lefties are notorious for their ignorance and stupidity. Always have been.

Traitor Trump would proud of your audacity in continuing to double, triple, and quadruple down on your initial obvious to any literate person, lie.

There isn't a shred of evidence that Trump had anything to do with the J6 incursion - - if there were, it would have surfaced by now.

 

[Athanasius68]

Anyway, it's not worth any time arguing with people who think it's fine that a sitting POTUS quite literally tried to nullify the votes of 10s of millions of citizens to stay in power. That was the plan, we know this, and then to send the election to the Congress or back to the state legislatures who would decide whether or not to abide by the votes of the people.

The issue isn't whether this is"fine."
The issue is whether this is a crime, and if so how serious it really is, whether the court system is best for dealing with the problem, what are the precedents being established in such a prosecution etc.

 

[TamleeB]

...First, getting 125,000 people out in retreat as the government was collapsing, while losing only 13 lives is not a failure. It could have been cleaner, but it also could have been a lot worse. But at least Biden has something to show for those deaths --- we are no longer in Afghanistan.

Second, only 13 soldiers died in Afghanistan under Biden's watch, all in connection with the exit. Compare that to the 65 soldiers that died during the Trump administration because he could not figure out how to get us out. What did Trump accomplish in Afghanistan that justifies the 65 deaths? (hint: nothing is likely the correct answer)

We should have left in 2004 as the US, like other invaders of Afghanistan in world history, accomplished nothing. Bush, Obama and Trump all have blood on their hands for needless loss of American lives in connection with this ill-conceived, ill-designed disaster.

It was a failure. So…only Bush, Obama and Trump have “blood on their hands”? You cannot be serious.

 

[upsideguy]

It was a failure. So…only Bush, Obama and Trump have “blood on their hands”? You cannot be serious.

I am serious.. Biden actually got us out. The other POTUS' perpetuated a meaningless war. 65 people died needlessly under Trump. What did the US get for their lives? Ending a failure is always preferable to continuing it.

 

[TamleeB]

Shit Happens in war. Blaming an American President for every death that occurs in war is ridiculous. Since you hold Biden responsible for those deaths on his watch, do you blame Trump for the deaths on his?

Sure. I somehow believe if it were one your LOVED ones who died because of the Biden/Harris failed withdrawal you would feel differently. It was a disastrous withdrawal by all accounts. We still have American’s there. We left behind those who helped us as liaisons for years.

 

[TamleeB]

I am serious.. Biden actually got us out. The other POTUS' perpetuated a meaningless war. 65 people died needlessly under Trump. What did the US get for their lives? Ending a failure is always preferable to continuing it.

….and then of course there is this.

U.S. arms left in Afghanistan are turning up in a different conflict

Since falling into the hands of the Taliban, some of the weapons have been seized from militants in Indian-controlled Kashmir in what experts say could be just the start of their global journey.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[upsideguy]

….and then of course there is this.

U.S. arms left in Afghanistan are turning up in a different conflict

Since falling into the hands of the Taliban, some of the weapons have been seized from militants in Indian-controlled Kashmir in what experts say could be just the start of their global journey.

www.nbcnews.com

So, retreating from a battle zone is messy. So we left some rifles behind... most of the other stuff left behind was useless. Who cares? We should be sued for littering. The important is that we are out... no more needless deaths; nor most costs of running a pointless war.

It was a shame the 13 persons were killed providing cover for the exit, but their efforts worked to get 125,000 safely out in very short order. It was also a shame that the Afghan government was failing so we could not rely upon them for safety.

At least these 13 soldiers killed, died in a discernible effort to drive US interests forward. That is not so true with 2400 others that substantially died in vain of American delusion, most of them during the Obama years. We should have left in 2004. At least it is finally done.

I am far more concerned with the firearms in American cities (and rural areas) than I am with militants in Pakistan.

 

[JasperL]

The issue isn't whether this is"fine."

Anyone carrying water for Trump, and that person was, must believe it is in fact FINE for the POTUS to literally try to nullify the votes of 10s of millions of voters in several states.

The issue is whether this is a crime, and if so how serious it really is,

Yeah, right, let's discuss how "serious it really is" for a SITTING POTUS to try to STEAL AN ELECTION by nullifying 10s of millions of votes! Surely reasonable minds can differ on that.... After all, if Trump's efforts worked, all it meant was elections were no longer anything more than suggestions! What's the harm????!!! MAGA!!!

whether the court system is best for dealing with the problem, what are the precedents being established in such a prosecution etc.

I sure as hell hope the 'precedent being established' is when a sitting POTUS tries to steal an election, he faces SEVERE consequences. Seems appropriate, or we could shrug and wait till next time when the sitting POTUS doing the stealing is more competent than Trump and then we really WILL see our system collapse in the kind of corruption typical of banana republics.

 

[CaughtInThe]

 

[CaughtInThe]

 

[Grogu]

These arrogant rubes. They still insist on referencing Trump as “President Trump” when that is not proper. Certainly not on a filed, signed legal document as a defendant. Judges and prosecutors will probably let that slide, but I’ll bet the brazenness of it and the insistence of addressing him as “President Trump” isn’t lost on them.

So why do it? To suck up to Trump and make him feel better about himself? Todd Blanche is an idiot who apparently doesn’t get tired of losing, and has no problem projecting his ignorance by coddling his client, even on legal documents.

 

[WorldWatcher]

These arrogant rubes. They still insist on referencing Trump as “President Trump” when that is not proper. Certainly not on a filed, signed legal document as a defendant. Judges and prosecutors will probably let that slide, but I’ll bet the brazenness of it and the insistence of addressing him as “President Trump” isn’t lost on them.

So why do it? To suck up to Trump and make him feel better about himself? Todd Blanche is an idiot who apparently doesn’t get tired of losing, and has no problem projecting his ignorance by coddling his client, even on legal documents.

They do it in every court filing in both is civil & criminal cases and in any verbal communication in court where they work in "President Trump" as often as they can. While the prosecution and most of the judges (the exception being Judge Cannon) refer to him as "Mr. Trump", "the defendant", or "former president" - which has got to piss him off.

WW

 

[Grogu]

They do it in every court filing in both is civil & criminal cases and in any verbal communication in court where they work in "President Trump" as often as they can. While the prosecution and most of the judges (the exception being Judge Cannon) refer to him as "Mr. Trump", "the defendant", or "former president" - which has got to piss him off.

WW

I was taught that when I was having legal filings made, whether affidavits, declarations, proof of claims, etc., I needed to match my signature (blue ink original or electronic) to my full legal name as written on the document. Less for anyone on the other side to quibble with. If a paralegal got my name typed out wrong anywhere on the doc, I would have it corrected before signing it. My last name was easy to get wrong, to be honest.

Trump signs his name the same as evidenced in the above document filed. But it just looks sloppy to me for his attorneys to have his name under the signature line typed out as “President Donald J. Trump.” We have one president, and it’s not Donald J. Trump- it’s Joseph R. Biden.

I’m just a stickler for detail…

 

[hooligan]

 

[hooligan]

 

[hooligan]

Remember when all the Trumpies were saying "How come they blocked the windows at the counting center in Detroit?!?!?!?!?!?!"

Well..........











"Make them riot." "Do it!!"

 

[WorldWatcher]

Damn it.

I was contemplating buying stock in Heinz and Hunts last night but put it off.

WW