Something I don't understand is why the GOP people are still going on about Hillary Clinton not being indicted. Trump was president for 4 years, and the GOP held the House & Senate for 2 years of that. If there was a case to answer by Clinton, why didn't they direct the DOJ to open a case against her? And I don't want to hear that the GOP are noble and didn't want to divide the country. Trump has made a political career out of dividing the country.
you see - Trump had them all on the run, as soon as he was elected the RINO traitors scuppered his efforts to make america great again, so despite the fact that he had the white house, the house and the senate for two whole years, meant he lost the house in 2018. Then the people he replaced them with.. get this! - turned out to be incompetent RINOs too! So when he ran in 2020, they were working against him, so he lost - but here's the thing - He didn't really! So then he went to the courts - and wouldn't you know it, even those appointed by his nibs, ruled against him! Imagine that? How ungrateful!? Do they not understand the term "quid pro quo"? Not that I've ever done one of those cough. So anyway...
Your logic is useless against these bozos. You can't reason someone out of something they weren't reasoned into.
They DID direct MULTIPLE cases open against her. They all whiffed.
Trump aquittal would be "corrosive" to national security (and international image too)
https://youtu.be/GHjtyG5Ou2k
Y'know, the most startling thing about that post is that it IS what trump thinks. It really is. And the pic is perfect (I can hear Charlie's voice saying it). Not only is it what he thinks, it's what he SAID. It IS what the trumpbutts and buttrumps have said on this very thread before. Anyone who is not a trumpette is a RINO who is working to take him down. Remember when they said Liz Cheney is a RINO? Fun times...... idiots.
Bolton makes some interesting points
He does, but, and if I can use some unparliamentary language, as far as I am concerned, he can go **** himself.
He had the opportunity to testify and he didn't.
He decided instead to write a book, so he can take his book and shove it.
Nazis, stand back and stand by.
Not sure what "deep commo" is supposed to mean yet.
Accusing the FBI of setting a trap for them because, they themselves said things like "Buckle up. 1/50K know your bridges. Rock steady calm. That is all."
The chucklefux wanted there to be riots in Miami tomorrow until a couple nights sleep over the weekend had them realizing hey, there might be direct consequences for that, and it won't get you anything you want anyway. This isn't Congress, or January 6, this isn't a constitutionally appointed day or session that will throw us into a crisis if a bunch of Nazis set the courthouse on fire and delay the proceedings for a day or a week or even a month, the justice department and the courts will still be waiting to process the indictment. If anything violence on their end would only ensure it all but certainly changes venues to somewhere more secure, and along with it would probably see the removal of the case under Trump-appointed and captured judge, Aileen Cannon.
How on earth of all the possible judges that could have been appointed Aileen Cannon was selected?
If this case is so political, such a hitjob, a witch hunt, and legally defective: why can't he find any lawyers? Most Republican politicians, are lawyers. A fair number of pundits and Trump surrogates, are lawyers.
I'm sure 'teflon don' will have some excuse for his cult about why that is the case, but it's not a good look.
@Overheal
I noticed something funny in the right wing spin. They’re like ah if they prove even one charge he will “die in prison”
They almost say that like it's a bad thing.
Interesting question, actually, because it would potentially be a good opportunity for a sycophant to get themselves a bit of notoriety within the Trump cult. OK, maybe they'd know they're fighting a losing battle, but it's not really them in the firing line. Did Trump's previous legal team quit because they thought the case was unwinnable? Couldn't be that simple because you'll get lawyers representing even people who go on a shooting spree and other very obvious crimes. You still need to have someone to test the case against a defendant, even a slam dunk one. Were Trump's previous legal team afraid of being implicated in his doings in some way?
This article would give at least some weight to the idea above. Not as if it would be the first time that Trump's associates were as dirty as he was. Still, there's an opportunity for some industrious young lawyer to take up Trump's case, if only for the money. Just be sure to ask for it up front.
He's in Miami now.
Reportedly will be flying back to Bedminster NJ after the arraignment,
This indictment indicated he used Bedminster in his conspiracy to keep the government from getting its national security information back.
In the news - people who Trump would never allow into Mar a Lago are showing their support for Trump outside Mar a Lago.
Republican media has done the look-over-there key-jingle about a Chinese spy base in Cuba.
They're really trying to make it out like 'really, this base they've had since at least the trump administration, and upgraded it during trumps administration somehow, it's all Joe Biden's fault, more on the Hannity program tonight!'
Just been listening to Alan Dershowitz' opinion on this case. He believes that it's likely Trump will be convicted, but less likely to actually face jail time. I didn't know that according to the US Constitution, someone could run for president and even become president whilst in jail, even after being convicted of a federal crime.
Dershowitz even voted against Trump twice, but argues that the Democrats are making a mistake by uniquely going after the frontrunner in an election race against the incumbent.
I agree with him.
If the shoe was on the other foot and the Democratic frontrunner was targeted by a Republican establishment, we can all see how wrong that would be.
It's the kind of thing we'd see in Russia or China.
So the authorities should ignore Trump committing these offences... even though he is actually guilty of them... because not ignoring then is something something Russian or Chinese.
Even though EU countries have brought charges against former Presidents or PMs. But nobody says... its the kinda thing we would see in France. Even thouse who pretend to be neutral "objective" commentators. Strange that.
So it is absolute nonsense to suggest that to ignore actual offences is somehow a hallmark of Russia or China.
And its not "the Democrats"... it is the legal authorities of the US carrying out their duties. You dont get a free pass because you are an ex President or a candidate. What would be "American" about that... nothing.
Could you give us a list of offences Trump should be exempt from and above the law? Or for that matter what offences does a Presidential candidate get to commit before prosecuting them becomes "American" again?
The moral bankruptcy of this argument is obvious.
Like it did with the Clintons, and Obama? And now the Bidens? It's like you forgot Impeachment One was about The Republican Establishment trying to rope the head of Ukraine into helping them target the Democratic frontrunner, Joe Biden, with a load of bullshit conspiracy theories.
As has been said repeatedly: bring it on, if there are crimes, bring them forward, prove them, prosecute them. There are active investigations into the Bidens. And?
A trumper in more bling than I could count in Miami told CNN, "you can indict a ham sandwich!" So that begs the question, why so many investigations through Durham, they hand selected John Huber too, and not an indicted ham sandwich in sight, I have to say.
I'm not sure on what basis you say he will face no jailtime.
If he is convicted, he's 'Toast' period, according to his own personal attorney general (Republican Establishment, nuking your Democrat establishment logic)
These charges are being brought by the DOJ not The Democratic Party. The only person to blame here is Donald Trump. Anything else is just disingenuous partisan bullshit.
And the indictment was brought by the People of Miami.
Not just ignore Trump committing these offences, but potentially result in him being in a position to pardon himself for it so he never faces consequences, and where he could very likely do the same thing again but after some sort of executive order or other wrangling to enable him to do it again.
I mean, the authorities not prosecuting someone who broke various laws because it's politically inconvenient and allowing him to pardon himself and others, as well as change laws to protect himself from future legal troubles, coupled with him now publicly saying that because of all this if he gets back into office he'll launch investigations into Biden's family..... that's like what you'd see in Russia or China....
Dershowitz pi55ed his own reputation down the drain, just like everyone else, by hitching his cart to trump.
He's a shadow of his former professional self.
The 37 count indictment documents case filed by Smith caused me to pause. Why would Trump fight so hard for months to keep, and allegedly hide, classified documents after leaving the presidency? Consequently resulting in these felony charges. When all he had to do was to simply return them to the national archives when asked; e.g., which is what Pence and Biden did when such documents were also found, returning them without all the Trump fuss.
Like his lieutenants all ignoring subpoenas even in the face of federal contempt charges: the sentencing for contempt is far less severe than the charges for insurrection, rebellion or treason. So Bannon not talking for example, made sense from that cynical view.
From the same view it must mean that, he is trying to cover up for something far worse by not turning back in documents. Trump was known to destroy a lot of notes etc. when he was in office (violations of the PRA, incidentally) and its possible returning them without incident would lead to them discovering, eg. this page with this watermark was found in a Saudi database, or something to that effect. The ability to proof-positive selling US intelligence to foreigners. Treason, in other terms. Would explain all the saudi slush money, but at the bare minimum, we know he wanted to do absolutely everything he could, at minimum out of spite, to frustrate the peaceful transition of power: president elect biden didn't get intel briefings, Trump tried to order massive withdrawals of US forces abroad in the last couple weeks, and then takes half a ton of govt and white house operational documents home with him, which any reasonable outside assessment I think would conclude would have directly impaired the smooth transition of government and military operations. It's not unfathomable to think Trump might have worried in that mountain of paperwork from his administration there would be yet more evidence that might have been used against him with regard to illegalities, 2020, and Jan 6. Whatever frying pan he's happy to sit in here, it's possible the fire outside is worse if he were to just hand them over the risk of them finding something that proved eg. potential insurrection conspiracy or treason charges.
In addition to those 2 instances of Trump sharing classified documents with people without security clearance. Footage has resurfaced of Kid Rock talking about how good 'ol boy Donnie showed him "secret maps".
If you can't beat them, defund them
John Brennan: some of the documents Trump had were marked as coming from embedded human sources
Yes, he does.
The middle ground voters in a small number of swing states are the ones who will win the election for either side. Why do you think each party spends the vast majority of their campaigns in those states?
I'm really sorry, but if you genuinely believe Trump doesn't have to attract middle-ground voters then you haven't the slightest breeze what you are talking about. Every President has had to attract the middle ground voters.
Here's the comparisons of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconson from 2016 and 2020.
In 2016, the splits in the respective states among Independent voters was as follows:
2016 in MI (29% of all voters):
Trump 52%-36% Clinton
So, Trump picked up around 15% of his vote through the Independent voters. He won in Michigan by 0.2%
2020 in MI (23% of all voters)
Biden 51-45 Trump
So the number of Independent voters fell, but so did Trump's vote share. He went from getting circa 15% in 2016 to approx 10% in 2020. He lost Michigan in 2020 by 2.8%. If Trump runs up a similar number to what he did in 2016, he would have won by the most slender margins.
2016 in PA (20% of all voters)
Trump 48-41 Clinton
So again just under 10% of Trump's vote coming from indies, compared to 8% of Clinton's total vote. Trump won the state by 0.7% overall.
2020 in PA (19% of all voters)
Biden 52-44 Trump
So Biden secures just under 9.88 of his total vote through indies, compared to 8.36% for Trump, representing a gap of 1.52%. Biden won the state by 1.2%
2016 in WI (30% of all voters)
Trump 50-40 Clinton.
Trump gets 15% of the total vote from Indies compared to 12% for Clinton. Trump wins the state by 0.8%
2020 in WI (23% of all voters)
Biden 54-42 Trump
So Biden wins 12.54% of his total vote from Indies, whereas Trump secures 9.66%. Biden's winning margin? 0.6%.
---
Now if that isn't enough for you, let's go to Georgia which provided arguably the biggest surprises of the 2020 election, despite being well flagged that it could flip to the Democrats.
2016 in GA (30% of all voters)
Trump 52-41 Clinton
So Trump gets 15.6 percent of the vote compared to Clinton's 12.3. Trump won the state by 5.1 percent.
Aha! The theory is now bollocks, because Trump didn't need the Independent voters to win in Georgia in 2016 (not neccesarily true because if you reverse the percentage vote from indies then Clinton would win).
However, that didn't happen, so that's where 2020 comes into play:
2020 in GA (23% of all voters)
Biden 53-44 Trump
So Biden gets 12.19% of the vote from Independents, comapred to 10.12% from Trump. Biden won the state by 0.3%.
That represents a swing of 5.4%. And I would not that the percentage share of the vote for Biden actually went down slightly from Clinton at 0.11%, however Trump's fell from 15.6 percent to just 10.12% - a difference of 5.48%
That's why independent voters matter. And that's why Trump hasn't a chance in hell of winning the 2024 election. Republican/Democrat voters do not decide anything. It is independent voters in swing states and that is, and always will be, the end of it.
Also, voters in general won't be complacent. They learned that lesson very harshly in 2016. Trumps candidates in close contests during the midterms all lost and it was purely because he had his paws all over them.
Not to mention, abortion and other civil rights issues will play a big part in this election. Voters in deep red states are rejecting the stripping down of Roe, and whether Republicans like it or not it will harm them among independent voters no matter who the candidate is. The fact the very man that allowed this to happen is in the contest makes it an even bigger sticking point.
Nothing to worry about here, not enabling the vigilantes and giving them a target to aim at or anything /s
Fmr Trump lawyers react to indictment (look at that impressive beard):
Just wondering... If the prosecution is a nonsense, then why can't trump get a lawyer to represent him?
Possible reasons;
1) he never pays them
2) he tries to get them to commit illegal acts
3) he lies to them which makes them look foolish
4) he did exactly what he is accused of doing
5) all of the above
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/664b698b11ec85b4b0b9273f0c981eb9.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/7eb61b90d43b6a9f2815c2a58d0f497f.svg)
