WrestlingRasta

First- I never shared the opinion that he should go to prison because he lied, so there’s that. And neither is this indictment. In fact, it starts out making that point very clear, so there’s that too. Second- number one you don’t know how much I know about the law. I’m not saying I know a lot, or know a little….but to say your friend knows more than you and I combined…..how can you possibly know that? (This lends to my opinion that people will come up with ‘facts’ they know nothing about to try and sell their point) You can’t know that, yet you say it so matter of factly. But moving on…..what the charges are and what the evidence is, is not a matter of opinion. Sure, everyone can have an opinion on how strong the evidence is, how strong the testimony is, etc etc. But what the actual charges are, is not a matter of opinion. Again, it’s kind of like me saying “it’s my opinion rain water is not liquid”. Well, okay. Me stating that then automatically makes it a valid opinion? No, of course not. And no matter what anyone will admit, these charges are not for thoughts and words, but for actions. The lying part comes in to show the motivation for his actions. Do I believe Trump would have still faced charges had he went away and not run for president, yes I do. Because I believe the purpose of this is to make sure it never happens again. And finally as for Biden/Trump. A few things. 1) unlike many….I don’t automatically relate Biden and trump together whenever the topic of one of them comes up. Each are their own individuals. Each of their ‘cases’ are individual cases. I’ve paid close attention to both. In the case of Trump, I’ve seen strong evidence, and I think it’s important to note I don’t count media influencers commentary as evidence. And with trump, a lot of that evidence and testimony comes from his inner circle, not from people hell bent on bringing him down. Some even his own words (keep an Eye out for dissemination case coming out of NJ) With Biden, I’ve seen a lot of smoke, but that smoke is coming from people who are hell bent on bringing down. And when it comes time to present actual real hard evidence….well….we have seen a developing pattern here. I definitely think Biden is guilty of some scrupulous activity. Do I believe it is anything more than the standard M.O. from DC? At this point it doesn’t appear so. Do I think the allegations against Biden are as dangerous to our country as the allegations against Trump…..not even close.

The Supreme Court thing yeah

Trump is calling on the supreme court to halt all of his cases because he is having to spend money on his defenses that should be going to campaigning. He has also filed a motion in his case with Cohen that Cohen should not be able to use evidence in that trial that may incriminate him in his criminal trials. But, this guy doesn't have an authoritative mentality at all.

Which brings up a good point. And I'm just looking for clarification here.......If Trump is being the most persecuted president ever because he is being indicted for his free speech, how is Biden the most corrupt president ever for saying hi on the phone? I don't really have an opinion one way or the other, I'm just trying to square the two.

It’s insane. She has to go.

Even though you think I’m stupid because of this weird concept that actually reading the document would be a good way to form an opinion on it, I’m going to ask again anyway….you still haven’t read it yet, have you? Because if you had it would be very clear to you that the charges are nothing about inciting the rioters to storm the Capitol. The charges are about his actions, not just on the state on Jan6, but in the months leading up to it. We all know the other presidents lied. We all know Trump was attacked a lot. Neither has anything to do with this case what so ever. But those of us that understand that will just go back to being stupid now.

Confirmation bias is a powerful thing. Why should I put effort and go seek out the actual information on my own, when I know there’s a safe space right over here where they will tell me exactly what I want to hear about it. It’s become even more powerful in the app age, and there are people who make millions off of it.

Because you’re too busy going to see what other people are telling you to think about it, then coming to places like here and arguing what other people are telling you to think about it, from a stance that ‘I am right and any other thought is just stupid’. God forbid you actually read the thing you are arguing, to see if you might have your own opinion about it. Honestly I didn’t read the rest of your message after that, it’s telling enough. Lawyers lie, political lawyers lie (and here’s a surprise, it’s not only those on the left). Political lawyers who lied about a particular election…may….juuuuust may….focus on an aspect he deems favorable for the person he was lying for, even if that aspect has nothing to do with the charges laid out, but will play loudly with those who are too busy waiting to be told what to think to bother going to read it for themselves.

I think I covered what you’re getting at in the paragraph above that question. And yes, when you admittingly haven’t read it but instead are arguing what someone else told you to think about it, it changes my perspective when listening to you.

In that statement by Turley, why does he not speak to the actions by Trump, and not the speech, from Nov-Jan? Why does he emphasize the free speech ‘aspect’, when the charges and supporting evidence are for actions? And I’ll ask again, did you read all of the indictment?

He is a known Constitutional attorney, also a known strong partisan. He helped push the rigged voting machines stuff.

I’ve read a lot of stuff of and about Prouty, interesting as hell. Had the pleasure of meeting Robert Groden in Dallas during the ‘00 trials. Interesting cat

Didn’t bother to read the indictment at all either did you?

I think maybe you left out a few allegations on your ‘list’ for #1, no?

I’m referring to the crimes alleged in the indictment from Nov - Jan.

Gotcha Nov 2020-Jan 2021 would have still happened. I don’t think there’s any problem criticizing the security plans on that particular day, but I think it is a problem when people (and I am not saying you are doing this) try to use security failures to make light of the actions for two months leading up to the breach.

Just curious, how is that not the point when the charges specifically relate to what (allegedly) took place in that time frame?

I've always had trouble connecting how it was a both massive security failure to allow all of that violence, but also merely a peaceful protest with the exception of a handful of rogue agents.

That is a great show. Love me some JFK talk.

Looks like Georgia indictment about to drop anytime. Statement from Willis: The work is accomplished. We’re ready to go. The perimeter is secure: Orange barricades have been installed outside the entrance to the Fulton County courthouse. Numerous other measures have been taken to enhance safety and security—in preparation for high-profile legal proceedings. I wonder if they will wait until Congress is back so they can file right after the next dick pic hearing......or if they will just go on about their business?

I see some of us went through Capitol security school last night. Nice!

Everyone will have their opinion on her recusing. Personally I’m okay that a judge who ten years ago worked at the same law firm (in two totally different areas) with someone who has zero connection to this case other than his father beat the defendant in the election in which he is accused of trying to overthrow, not recusing herself. Likewise, I’m okay with a judge who was directly appointed by the defendant, not recusing herself.

I agree in theory what Turley is saying, and agree it is really hard to prove what someone does or does not believe, but a couple things interesting in regard to what he said: 1) the indictment lays out in the beginning they are conceding he has the right to say whatever he wants, true or not…then goes on to lay out how and why they are charging him for his actions, and (some of) the evidence they have to support it. 2) Yes jurors are going to hear from/about a couple lawyers he brought in late in the game that told him yeah you can do this. But those jurors are also going to hear from, in many cases directly from sitting ten feet away, his appointed White House counsel, his appointed senior Justice officials, his appointed state department officials, Republican secretaries of state, who told him he had zero legal basis. The electors scheme is a big part of this. If they are able to prove that, that has nothing to do with ‘freedom of speech’. And they are going to hear this at a time they are sequestered away from media and social media and talking points from either side. It’s not a slam dunk by any means, no matter what the evidence is…..it’s Trump. But it doesn’t seem flimsy at all.

More on the judge in DC. You can’t make this shit up, a female black immigrant. (A sistren from Kingston no less) I don’t think it has any bearing on the outcome, just the theatre of it is amazing. Apparently she has a reputation of decorum too that his history of berating prosecutors and witnesses on social media may not be allowed.

I mostly agree with you, except for the part they are laid out to make the charged looked as guilty as possible. There is a lot of evidence that comes out at trial that isn’t included indictments. They’re meant to look just guilty to justify going to trial. I used to think some kind of agreement to effectively ‘go away’ would be the goal with these. After reading this one and (a decent part of) the Florida one, I don’t know that’s the case anymore. They appear to be set on sending him to prison.