demagogue on 27/1/2024 at 07:53
Let's just say he often goes on roof you say in german.
The word the inside source used was "livid" though.
The TV lawyer people were talking about how an appeal would work. He's already completely conceded the substantive trial on both the facts and law, so the only thing he could appeal is the award, and on that, the only thing that would allow him to appeal is some manifest corruption by the judge or jury, and there was nothing even approaching that. It was one of the most watched trials this year, so I think someone would have noticed if the corruption were really that manifest.
I guess in his imagination the judge and jury members were all paid Biden apparachiks, but his imagination has never had anything to do with reality.
Tocky on 3/2/2024 at 03:10
He did an excellent job. The information he put together shows Trumps guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. You see, one side provides evidence and one side tries to find a way to weasel out. You can't figure out which and that is no surprise.
Sulphur on 3/2/2024 at 04:20
Vae's trolling for your reaction, man. The only thought process there is how to get his (or whatever's) kicks by maximising this forum's left-leaning partisan incredulity. Don't pay it any heed.
Cipheron on 3/2/2024 at 08:36
Just laugh at it. Character assassination is what they have to rely on when there's zero line of defense for anything Trump did on any factual basis.
Starker on 3/2/2024 at 12:35
I've completely lost the track of all the court cases against him at this point, to be honest. Was the Georgia case the one where he pressured the election official to find him more votes or was it the one where they forged election documents to make it seem as if Lord Dampnut had won and sent out fake electors?
DuatDweller on 3/2/2024 at 13:35
Well just as a different scenario, a friend back in 2004, said he voted the first time for W. Bush and the second time against W. Bush, the machine however did not acknowledge his vote and put a vote in favor of W. Bush. Boy he was pissed off, they had rigged the damn machines.
demagogue on 3/2/2024 at 14:35
Here's an (
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/01/donald-trump-legal-cases-charges/675531/) article on all of the cases happening.
The Georgia case is on the conspiracy to overturn the election results of Georgia, so the charge requires multiple actions by multiple parties, including those two and more, as part of a coordinated plan towards criminal ends. There definitely was coordinated action, so that element is trivial to meet.
The main legal question is on the criminal end, if the actions amount to an intentional effort to overturn the election results through fraud, which has its own elements.
Mistake of fact might be a conceivable defense, or part of one. First, I can't imagine them convincing anyone that they had a reasonable basis to mistake what was happening in Georgia's election. Like they claimed a mother handing a daughter a breath mint was evidence of voter fraud, and the claims get wilder from there.
But it's not even that straightforward. Even if someone did believe their mistake of fact was a reasonable conclusion, you still have to take legal actions to respond. The action they could take is bringing litigation to challenge the results in a court. They did that. They lost. That loss is a massive blow to the entire mistake of fact line of defense, because you already have another court giving a formal declaration of the facts on the ground they have to hear in court. Any action they take after that (1) you can't say they didn't know they were mistaken on the facts, and (2) even if they could convince someone of that, they're now taking actions beyond the legal route to challenge. And then (3) if they think the decision of that court itself was fraudulent, there was an appeals procedure for that, and they already lost that as well.
So I don't think that charge is looking good for Trump et al, from the perspective of a lawyer thinking about how conspiracy charges work. It seems the prosecutor was boinking her assistant at some point, but that doesn't really speak to anything legally relevant to the above.
The Georgia case was postponed I think 2 weeks in March from starting. I'm not sure how far it'll get before the November election.
Incidentally, the DOJ is considering its own charges for election fraud as a federal crime.
Other things coming up... He's going to try to appeal the $80 award in the E. Jean Carroll defamation suit, but there's no basis for an appeal.
They say the case for the hush money payments charges to Stormy Daniels (illegal use of campaign funds) is the one criminal charge that has the chance to come to a conclusion before the election, although it's the weakest of the bunch, relatively speaking.
The other cases going were the New York State business fraud case and Trump's taking of confidential documents down to Mar-a-Lago.
Also, while it's not a criminal or civil charge, there's also like 30 states going through a process to get Trump off of their ballots under Art. 25 of the constitution for having committed insurrection, which I think will go to the Supreme Court soon, and I imagine they'll stop that effort in a weaselly way like they did to stop the 2000 recount, just to stay out of the way of the election process as much as possible.
Anarchic Fox on 5/2/2024 at 22:16
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Vae's trolling for your reaction, man. The only thought process there is how to get his (or whatever's) kicks by maximising this forum's left-leaning partisan incredulity. Don't pay it any heed.
Yep. It has worked on me multiple times, evoking my incredulity. Intellectual integrity is an attribute I cultivate. It makes me vulnerable to those who do the opposite.
DuatDweller on 6/2/2024 at 16:39
"Court rules Trump does not have immunity from 2020 election subversion prosecution"
(
https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-court-ruling-immunity-election-subversion-prosecution/index.html)
Quote:
The latest: Donald Trump is not immune from prosecution for alleged crimes he committed during his presidency to reverse the 2020 election results, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.
The charges against Trump: The ruling is a major blow to Trump's key defense thus far in the federal election subversion case brought against him by special counsel Jack Smith. Trump faces four counts from the case, including conspiring to defraud the United States and to obstruct an official proceeding, and he has pleaded not guilty.
Quote:
"An unprecedented assault": Judges issue scathing opinion on Trump's behavior in 2020
From CNN's Hannah Rabinowitz
Throughout their opinion, Judges J. Michelle Childs, Florence Pan and Karen LeCraft Henderson repeatedly eviscerated former President Donald Trump's behavior after the 2020 presidential election as unpresidential and constituting an assault on an American institutions.
“Former President Trump lacked any lawful discretionary authority to defy federal criminal law and he is answerable in court for his conduct,” the panel of judges wrote.
Their scathing opinion describes the former president as using his seat of power to “unlawfully overstay his term as President and to displace his duly elected successor,” all which would violate “generally applicable criminal laws.”
