Judge Officially: Trump likely broke the law!

[Luckyone]

One more nail in the Trump coffin?

Trump probably broke the law in an effort to obstruct Jan. 6 proceedings, judge says​

"The illegality of the plan was obvious," Judge David Carter wrote in a ruling shooting down lawyer John Eastman's bid to keep Jan. 6 documents private.

March 28, 2022, 12:51 PM EDT

A federal judge presiding over a civil suit involving the House committee investigating the riot at the U.S. Capitol found Monday that then-President Donald Trump "likely attempted to obstruct the joint session of Congress" on Jan. 6, which would be a crime. "The illegality of the plan was obvious," Judge David Carter wrote of Trump and lawyer John Eastman's plan to have then-Vice President Mike Pence determine the results of the 2020 election.

 

[jnug]

What ya' gonna' do now Garland? Oh let me guess, NOTHING!!!!!

When and how did DA's offices and AG's offices get so gutless?

I am beginning to wonder if the real issue in these DA and AG offices is that they believe they have whack job Trumphumpers within their own ranks just as the Military has whack job Trumphumpers in their ranks and they just do not know what to do about it.

 

[Luckyone]

What ya' gonna' do now Garland? Oh let me guess, NOTHING!!!!!

When and how did DA's offices and AG's offices get so gutless?

I am beginning to wonder if the real issue in these DA and AG offices is that they believe they have whack job Trumphumpers within their own ranks just as the Military has whack job Trumphumpers in their ranks and they just do not know what to do about it.

Don't sell Garland short. He is a slow in doing the job as he does not want to make any mistakes (he wants to get it right and with Trump, that is never easy). I think he will surprise you and end up putting Trump in jail, but later (rather than sooner).

 

[Showtime586]

One more nail in the Trump coffin?

The judge was appointed by Clinton. That's enough for the Trump cult members to claim "witchunt".

 

[jnug]

Don't sell Garland short. He is a slow in doing the job as he does not want to make any mistakes (he wants to get it right and with Trump, that is never easy). I think he will surprise you and end up putting Trump in jail, but later (rather than sooner).

I would have tended to agree with you UNTIL:
- the Manhattan DA who should be anything but a shrinking violet turned into a wet noodle
- a Federal District Court Judge used the Eastman/Trump attorney client privilege claim over documents to the Select Committee to so obviously kick Garland in the rear end.

Like a posted, I am beginning to wonder if these DA and AG offices believe they have Trumphumpers in their ranks and are worried about how they go forward just as the Military is clearly perplexed about what they should do with the Trumphumpers in their ranks.

 

[jotathought]

One more nail in the Trump coffin?

Sigh ... Likely .. Probability .. other term that equates to something many would like, yet .. isn't objective enough to prove.

 

[Luckyone]

I would have tended to agree with you UNTIL:
- the Manhattan DA who should be anything but a shrinking violet turned into a wet noodle
- a Federal District Court Judge used the Eastman/Trump attorney client privilege claim over documents to the Select Committee to so obviously kick Garland in the rear end.

Like a posted, I am beginning to wonder if these DA and AG offices believe they have Trumphumpers in their ranks and are worried about how they go forward just as the Military is clearly perplexed about what they should do with the Trumphumpers in their ranks.

Because of this post of yours, I decided to do a bit more research and I certainly found several articles that support your view that Garland is failing to prosecute Trump. For a second there, I started to shift toward your point of view but then found this article that upon reading it, made a whole lot of common sense.

Here is the key point of the article. I will let you read it and you can then give me your comment afterward

"If Trump were charged, it’s unlikely he would negotiate a plea deal. Instead, he would go to trial and make every step of the process a platform to cast himself as a victim of a vindictive Biden administration. He would use the renewed attention to spew lies about the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. And he would raise money, lots of money, to fund his anticipated 2024 presidential campaign.

But most important, despite a mountain of evidence that would convict most people many times over, Trump would not be convicted. Criminal convictions require a unanimous verdict. On a 12-person jury, there are going to be Trump supporters."

 

[The AntiDonald]

Sigh ... Likely .. Probability .. other term that equates to something many would like, yet .. isn't objective enough to prove.

It didn't need to be proved in this proceeding. The judge is clearly sending a signal to the DOJ. And no doubt, they heard it.

 

[HenryChinaski]

Don't sell Garland short. He is a slow in doing the job as he does not want to make any mistakes (he wants to get it right and with Trump, that is never easy). I think he will surprise you and end up putting Trump in jail, but later (rather than sooner).

You're more optimistic that I. He should be held accountable, but I suspect he won't be.

 

[The AntiDonald]

Because of this post of yours, I decided to do a bit more research and I certainly found several articles that support your view that Garland is failing to prosecute Trump. For a second there, I started to shift toward your point of view but then found this article that upon reading it, made a whole lot of common sense.

Here is the key point of the article. I will let you read it and you can then give me your comment afterward

"If Trump were charged, it’s unlikely he would negotiate a plea deal. Instead, he would go to trial and make every step of the process a platform to cast himself as a victim of a vindictive Biden administration. He would use the renewed attention to spew lies about the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. And he would raise money, lots of money, to fund his anticipated 2024 presidential campaign.

But most important, despite a mountain of evidence that would convict most people many times over, Trump would not be convicted. Criminal convictions require a unanimous verdict. On a 12-person jury, there are going to be Trump supporters."

Not necessarily. In Stone's and Manafort's case, they were both found guilty. And I'd bet my bottom dollar there were Trumpers in those juries. It is possible to support Trump's policies and not his crimes.

 

[jnug]

Because of this post of yours, I decided to do a bit more research and I certainly found several articles that support your view that Garland is failing to prosecute Trump. For a second there, I started to shift toward that your point of view but then found this article that upon reading it, made a whole lot of common sense.

Here is the key point of the article. I will let you read it and you can then give me your comment afterward

"If Trump were charged, it’s unlikely he would negotiate a plea deal. Instead, he would go to trial and make every step of the process a platform to cast himself as a victim of a vindictive Biden administration. He would use the renewed attention to spew lies about the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. And he would raise money, lots of money, to fund his anticipated 2024 presidential campaign.

But most important, despite a mountain of evidence that would convict most people many times over, Trump would not be convicted. Criminal convictions require a unanimous verdict. On a 12-person jury, there are going to be Trump supporters."

That may well be. However, the plain truth of it is that if Trump is not stopped he will likely run again in 2024 and may just win. All of that money we are worried will go to his defense fund will go to his re-election campaign. If he is elected again, he will be a lame duck. At that point there is nothing he will not do to remain in power including turn this country into the kind of country Russia has become. Will any Republican contest his nomination???? Not likely. Do any of them appear to have the fortitude to stare down the whacko physical threats of the Trumpist White Supremacists and contest Donald???? NOT LIKELY!!!!

That said, Federal Prosecution is a meticulous process and the prosecutors hardly ever go to trial unless they are very sure of their ground. That does suggest that Garland's caution is not misplaced but simply par for the course. I was willing to believe that all the way up until the Judge who has seen all of the email correspondence between Eastman and Trump made such a strong statement from the bench regarding possible criminality. That was in fact the strongest statement the Judge could have made having actually seen the emails and memos.

I don't buy the idea that there would surely be trumpists incapable of reaching a correct verdict in a jury of 12. Depends on where the trial occurs. Would a Trump defense team look for a change of venue and would they actually be able to mount an argument for change of venue and the jury selection process? In any event, IMO, the chance that Trump takes advantage of a not guilty verdict to make his case for re-election sounds painfully weak to me. Worse than seeing the country fundamentally change due to an election would be DOJ getting buffaloed into a fundamental change to the country. Somehow this country has to find its fortitude and strength again, the strength it had to throw off monarchy. The strength to survive a Civil War, the strength to survive the Depression, the strength to as citizen soldiers get on and off those Higgins Boats at Normandy Beach, the strength to understand the true nature of Watergate and toss the most powerful man in the world out of office peacefully.

If not, frankly, the country is not worth saving and is doomed anyway.

 

[jnug]

I should also add that there is no way that a DOJ investigation in progress would allow the Select Committee to take the lead on SCUMBAG's like Eastman. Eastman is a big fish. The Select Committee can't prosecute anybody. Makes me wonder why DOJ did not ask the Select Committee to back off Eastman. In fact, I don't recall a single character other than total whacks like Sydney Powell and Pillow Boy that the Committee has backed off on. Makes no sense if DOJ is at least actually investigating as is clearly warranted.

 

[The AntiDonald]

I should also add that there is no way that a DOJ investigation in progress would allow the Select Committee to take the lead on SCUMBAG's like Eastman. Eastman is a big fish. The Select Committee can't prosecute anybody. Makes me wonder why DOJ did not ask the Select Committee to back off Eastman. In fact, I don't recall a single character other than total whacks like Sydney Powell and Pillow Boy that the Committee has backed off on. Makes no sense if DOJ is at least actually investigating as is clearly warranted.

I believe the committee and the DOJ can work together as long as no immunity is offered by either side without proper discussion. The DOJ can get a lot of information out of a committee like this. The committee, on the other hand, can't prosecute crimes. So, they really don't get much from the DOJ.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Again, someone wake me up when we see an indictment.

 

[The AntiDonald]

Again, someone wake me up when we see an indictment.

The wheels of justice take time. Many said no way we would ever see sedition charges. We have them now, 11 people charged with seditious conspiracy. And those are at the bottom of the ladder. Typical of how a very large serious DOJ investigation works. Have faith.

 

[jnug]

I believe the committee and the DOJ can work together as long as no immunity is offered by either side without proper discussion. The DOJ can get a lot of information out of a committee like this. The committee, on the other hand, can't prosecute crimes. So, they really don't get much from the DOJ.

That is just it. It does not look like they are working together. Every bit of public information out of the Committee makes it more difficult for DOJ to get to trial without eventually running into issues in the Jury selection process. Some of the people identified by the Committee as witnesses don't interest me with regard to prosecution. Eastman does interest me with regard to prosecution as it would appear that the entire Coup d'tat playbook came out of the Eastman emails and memos. Throw Navarro to the Committee if you have to throw anybody to them. Navarro is an idiot anyway. It does not appear that DOJ has asked the Committee to back off of Eastman.

For example, if a Judge had been called upon to determine if the Eastman memo's and emails or some number of them did not qualify to be withheld under rules of attorney/client privilege based on an FBI warrant of DOJ investigation there would not have been these bombshell comments in the Judge's ruling about probable criminality. A warrant would have been issued or not and that is all we would know.

In this case the Judge having read the memos and emails appeared compelled to kick Garland in the rear end in spite of the consequences.

 

[VanceMack]

🤣

Stupid Trump deranged leftists...

“The facts we’ve gathered strongly suggest that Dr. Eastman’s emails may show that he helped Donald Trump advance a corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power"

this from a collective of Trump hating politicians as a result of their witch hunt.

Trump held a rally. Nowhere did Trump tell them to commit an illegal act. In facy the evidence is clear he told them to PEACEFULLY protest. Of course....these are the same idiot leftists taht fabricated lies in their impeachment of Trump in their similar fits of TDS poutrage.

 

[The AntiDonald]

🤣

Stupid Trump deranged leftists...

“The facts we’ve gathered strongly suggest that Dr. Eastman’s emails may show that he helped Donald Trump advance a corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power"

this from a collective of Trump hating politicians as a result of their witch hunt.

Trump held a rally. Nowhere did Trump tell them to commit an illegal act. In facy the evidence is clear he told them to PEACEFULLY protest. Of course....these are the same idiot leftists taht fabricated lies in their impeachment of Trump in their similar fits of TDS poutrage.

No where in the judges ruling does he refer to the riot at the capitol. You are trying to change the subject here. This is about Trump and Eastman conspiring to obstruct congress with a plan to have Pence do things that are unconstitutional. You will go to any length to protect the Trump crime crew.

 

[Michael Cole]

🤣

Stupid Trump deranged leftists...

“The facts we’ve gathered strongly suggest that Dr. Eastman’s emails may show that he helped Donald Trump advance a corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power"

this from a collective of Trump hating politicians as a result of their witch hunt.

Trump held a rally. Nowhere did Trump tell them to commit an illegal act. In facy the evidence is clear he told them to PEACEFULLY protest. Of course....these are the same idiot leftists taht fabricated lies in their impeachment of Trump in their similar fits of TDS poutrage.

Wrong thread. Slow down maybe?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”
“When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules."
“We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”
"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We are going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
***********************************************************************************************Donald J. Trump, Jan. 6, 2021

The Times reports, "A federal judge ruled on Monday that former President Donald J. Trump and a lawyer who advised him on how to overturn the 2020 election most likely committed felonies, including obstructing the work of Congress and conspiring to defraud the United States.

"The judge’s comments marked a significant breakthrough for the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, which had laid out in a civil filing the crimes it believed Mr. Trump might have committed as it weighs making a criminal referral to the Justice Department.

“The illegality of the plan was obvious,” wrote Judge David O. Carter of the Central District of California. “Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for democratic elections. Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the vice president to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election.”

"The Justice Department has been conducting a wide-ranging investigation of the Capitol assault but has given no public indication that it is considering pursuing a criminal case against Mr. Trump. A criminal referral from the House committee could increase pressure on Attorney General Merrick B. Garland to do so."

While we are on the subject, the reader will be amazed at this. This guy is truly unbelievable.

At a campaign rally in Georgia over the weekend, the former President, again, praised Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“The smartest one gets to the top,” Trump told the crowd. “That didn’t work so well recently in our country. But they ask me, ‘Is Putin smart?’ Yes, Putin was smart. And I actually thought he was going to be negotiating. I said, ‘That’s a hell of a way to negotiate, put 200,000 soldiers on the border.’”

Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, and many Republicans seek and enjoy his endorsement. Trump is the leading Republican candidate for the Presidency in 2024.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

At a campaign rally in Georgia over the weekend, the former President, again, praised Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“The smartest one gets to the top,” Trump told the crowd. “That didn’t work so well recently in our country. But they ask me, ‘Is Putin smart?’ Yes, Putin was smart. And I actually thought he was going to be negotiating. I said, ‘That’s a hell of a way to negotiate, put 200,000 soldiers on the border.’”

Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, and many Republicans seek and enjoy his endorsement. Trump is the leading Republican candidate for the Presidency in 2024.

As expected, not a peep out of Republicans.