PBP: P01135809 Trump Espionage, Coup, Conspiracy, Racketeering, Fraud & Obstruction Trial Thread

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by The Jitty Slitter, Jun 10, 2023.

?

What will be the outcome?

  1. Guilty

  2. Not guilty

  3. Pardons himself

  4. Goes into exile in Snowden's flat

  5. Some other fascism

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Smurfquake

    Smurfquake Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 8, 2000
    San Carlos, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The way that it works for people who aren't Donald Trump is generally, you get a judgement from the courts, the defendant refuses to pay and doesn't put up the bond for appeal, and you go to the county sheriff where the property is located with your court order, the sheriff confiscates the property and holds an auction and you get the proceeds. Repeat until your judgement is satisfied. This is where you see those shady ads for "government auction! cars, boats, houses!" - that's property that has been confiscated and is being sold to satisfy a judgement. It's entirely unclear if this is how it will work against Donald Trump, and some sheriffs may choose to insert their own political beliefs into the process, and there may be an appeal process for that, but it usually doesn't happen, except it also hasn't happened to Donald Trump before and special rules do seem to apply to him (looking at the Supreme Court here). But I did look up and verify back when the E. Jean Carroll judgement was announced, that the sheriff of Palm Beach County, Florida is a Democrat, and obviously so is the sheriff of New York City (they appear to have one sheriff for all five boroughs instead of five sheriffs, one for each borough) - but they're also cops, so you never know. Uncharted waters!
     
    soccernutter and dapip repped this.
  2. dapip

    dapip Member+

    Sep 5, 2003
    South Florida
    Club:
    Millonarios Bogota
    Nat'l Team:
    Colombia
    Should have pleaded the fifth…

     
    usscouse and Cascarino's Pizzeria repped this.
  3. soccernutter

    soccernutter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Tottenham Hotspur
    Aug 22, 2001
    Near the mountains.
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Lawfare

    On Immunity
    They were surprised it took 2 weeks, but had said they think it might be because somebody was writing a descent. Seems it is more than that...
    The question, as we have noted above, is what will be the focus? The notice of taking on the appeal was short and unclear.
    As has been noted previously, the opinion is likely to come out in June, which pretty much means the trial/jury selection starts October? Parloff said he thing it will be really optimistic to end the trial before the election (he noted Nov 1 as the date the trial could be turned over to the jury).
    Wittes optimistically - SCOTUS is being professional in not taking up Smith's urgency request
    Wittes pessimistically - SCOTUS is kind of being fast
    Wittes cynically - SCOTUS is delaying for Trump, though he things SCOTUS will rule against Trump. (Personally, I am no longer convinced this will happen based on them actually take this up.)
    Quinta said that Smith might not push for a trail date because of DoJ policy (60 day prior to election), though others pushed back on that. Regardless, Chutkin is giving the defense 88 days (7 months) to prepare.
    On an audience question, Wittes thinks that SCOTUS will make some distinction between official acts and non-official acts for the purpose of immunity. Both Parloff and Quinta though that would be difficult because many acts a President takes are unique to that President.

    Related to Immunity is Fischer v. US
    Bascially, this is a J6 issue related to a corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding. What SCOTUS is looking at is "corrupt," which is pretty clearly defined as property destruction (documents, computers, etc.). Less clear is what an "official proceeding" is. And they kind of thing that because "corrupt" is about documents, more or less, then and "official proceeding" would mean an investigation, which is not what was being "obstructed" here. Parloff seems to be suggesting that SCOTUS will rule against the government in these J6 hearings, and that will effect hundreds of cases along with two of Trumps DC charges.

    Documents
    As noted in a prior post, no change on the trial date. At the moment, it is still May (June?), but really should be late in the year if not into 2025.
    Jencks Act - basically, it means that the prosecution has to give the defense any material that could possibly discredit a witness the prosecution uses. This is for federal cases. (Added to my definitions post on page 1). Normally, this is given after the witness testifies. But, here, Smith gave all the information ahead of time. The issue is that it was supposed to under seal, but Cannon wants to make it public, and that we all know that will mean a whole host of safety issues for the witnesses, whether or not they actually testify. Or at least she wants to make that information far more visible than it is.
    Additionally, she denied Trump's request for immunity, writing 9 pages in his favor, and 1 page saying the 11th will overrule her if she rules in his favor.
    And there are a lot of motions filed, which have been discussed upthread.

    GA
    Not going to brief as that is heavily discussed here.

    In other news
    Meadows removal to federal court has been denied. On to SCOTUS.

    And Illinois has removed Trump from the ballot.
     
  4. diablodelsol

    diablodelsol Member+

    Jan 10, 2001
    New Jersey
    Again…he got a sweetheart plea deal (11 weeks…he was looking at 15+ years) in EXCHANGE for testifying truthfully in this trial. If all they are doing is tacking on perjury I’m going to lose my ********ing mind.
     
    Mike03, bigredfutbol, dapip and 2 others repped this.
  5. roadkit

    roadkit Greetings from the Fringe of Obscurity

    Jul 2, 2003
    Fornax Cluster
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I've come to the conclusion that he will walk away scot free from all of this. He won't be convicted, he won't do jail time, and somehow he'll end up with more money than he started with.
     
    Phillyspur, ShayG, Sounders78 and 4 others repped this.
  6. roadkit

    roadkit Greetings from the Fringe of Obscurity

    Jul 2, 2003
    Fornax Cluster
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The only problem with your idea is the assumption that the government will actually use the proceeds for the things you mention. Which we know they won't. Look at California -- they're constantly coming up with some new tax to fund a progressive cause and they never seem to get around to actually spending the money on that thing. Now, if you said you could will your property to a charity of your choice and they would receive 100% of the proceeds without any tax, count me in.
     
    celito and Deadtigers repped this.
  7. roadkit

    roadkit Greetings from the Fringe of Obscurity

    Jul 2, 2003
    Fornax Cluster
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    A "descent"? Is "Lawfare" actually a reputable source?
     
  8. The Jitty Slitter

    The Jitty Slitter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Bayern München
    Germany
    Jul 23, 2004
    Fascist Hellscape
    Club:
    FC Sankt Pauli
    Nat'l Team:
    Belgium
    Note that the DOJ policy is to do with indictments. It has nothing to do with a trial that is already underway.

    The Judge sets the timetable, and frankly it would be odd if she delayed it for the election
     
  9. The Jitty Slitter

    The Jitty Slitter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Bayern München
    Germany
    Jul 23, 2004
    Fascist Hellscape
    Club:
    FC Sankt Pauli
    Nat'l Team:
    Belgium
    it looks like he has corrupted the courts just enough to get away with it.
     
    edcalvi repped this.
  10. The Jitty Slitter

    The Jitty Slitter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Bayern München
    Germany
    Jul 23, 2004
    Fascist Hellscape
    Club:
    FC Sankt Pauli
    Nat'l Team:
    Belgium
    i listened to Wittes on Bulwark and he hasn’t completely give up on a trial. its worth a listen if you want the quick take

    or strict scrutiny also have a review.
     
    soccernutter and charlie15 repped this.
  11. yossarian

    yossarian Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jun 16, 1999
    Big City Blinking
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think he's referring to the mis-spelling of "dissent."
     
  12. Deadtigers

    Deadtigers Member+

    Jul 23, 2015
    Independent Republic of the Bronx, NY
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Ghana
    It all depends on November. As Garland, like most institutionalists, weren't prepared for a fascist president, he didn't go after on Jan 21. This is the issue. Now, if he loses, he has pending cases and there will be no waiting.
     
  13. The Jitty Slitter

    The Jitty Slitter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Bayern München
    Germany
    Jul 23, 2004
    Fascist Hellscape
    Club:
    FC Sankt Pauli
    Nat'l Team:
    Belgium
    I'm still really despondent about all this. Murray was so clear this Court is in the tank for Trump I think they will make sure there is no J6 trial before the election - so once again there will be a huge election tilt for Mango.
     
    rslfanboy, Phillyspur, Mike03 and 6 others repped this.
  14. The Jitty Slitter

    The Jitty Slitter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Bayern München
    Germany
    Jul 23, 2004
    Fascist Hellscape
    Club:
    FC Sankt Pauli
    Nat'l Team:
    Belgium
    Unfortunately instiututions haven't met the moment. As with Mueller, the corruption was already worse than imagined.
     
    Quakes05 and bigredfutbol repped this.
  15. usscouse

    usscouse BigSoccer Supporter

    May 3, 2002
    Orygun coast
    Just one of the people who went to jail for Trump. While Trump just mocks and makes fun of the law. He’ll play for time like some soccer player until he claims he’s won the next election in November. Then all hell will rain on the country.
     
  16. diablodelsol

    diablodelsol Member+

    Jan 10, 2001
    New Jersey
    Last week Trump’s lawyers to the court:freeing up a half billion in cash to post bond will do irreparable harm to Trump’s business. Please accept a bond for 25% of the award.

    Trump today on Fox: of course I have the cash to post bond…I just don’t want to because it’s not fair and that black lady was mean to me.



    I wonder how this is going to work out for him.
     
  17. diablodelsol

    diablodelsol Member+

    Jan 10, 2001
    New Jersey
    On the plus side…NBC is reporting that the investigation into the SA deleted texts is now a criminal investigation

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/dh...tion-jan-6-secret-service-text-mess-rcna39392

    I think I know who Trumps secret service detail will be voting for in Dec.

    edit: I hate the ********ing internet. And I hate X when people share two year old info as new. So now I can go back to being outraged that nothing became of this.
     
    The Jitty Slitter repped this.
  18. soccernutter

    soccernutter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Tottenham Hotspur
    Aug 22, 2001
    Near the mountains.
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    To me, all three were there, but Murry was the most forceful in her review. They really had a great dismantling of the opinion, and continued on with the "Kagan isn't giving any ********s" line. And, to that, I think it is notable that there was mention in the Lawfare pod that there are fissures appearing in the Court, specifically with regards to Roberts' leadership. Apparently both Kagan and Sotomayor have spoken out publicly against him, which is very unusual at the start. And Thomas recently did as well, and more bluntly. This was said in the context of Thomas speaking more, and how he sees questioning as being rude to interrupt his fellow Justices or those making arguments. (It was suggested that as Roberts has allowed the first question to go to the most senior member - Thomas - to be more favorable to him.)
     
  19. cliche_guevara

    Jun 1, 2004
    San Francisco, CA
    ONISHI: The Seven Mountains mandate is a particular form of understanding human society that says that Christian people are not called to persuade their neighbors to practice the Christian faith, to demonstrate to their fellow Americans that the Christian faith is the faith of love and truth. The Seven Mountains Mandate is, as my colleague Matthew Taylor says, a mandate to colonize the Earth for God. The seven domains as you listed them - arts and leisure and the economy and the government, the family - are seen as mountains of conquest. The goal is not dialogue with neighbors who may be Muslim or atheist or Hindu. The goal is not to simply reflect the character of Christ on earth by way of living a life that upholds his glory and his teachings. The goal is to have absolute authority and power over every facet of human society.

    And so we can see here what I take to be a very dangerous approach to practicing Christianity in the public square. It is not one that recognizes democracy or dialogue, pluralism as sacred values. The goal is power. The goal is conquest. And so when one hears about a politician or a leader or anyone in influence, especially as part of our government, who adheres to the Seven Mountains Mandate, that should set alarm bells off immediately.

    GROSS: What is the strategy for fulfilling the Seven Mountain Mandate?

    ONISHI: When it comes to government, I think we're seeing the strategy play out in real time. The goal is to institute people at every level of government who will either act as Christians carrying out God's mission on earth, this mission to colonize or take dominion of every part of human society, or to elect and work with those who are going to carry out that mission, whether or not they are doing so as conscious purveyors of God's plans themselves.

    https://www.npr.org/2024/02/29/1234...tionalism-from-trump-to-the-ala-supreme-court
    https://www.bradonishi.com/

    There's hope for you yet.
     
    luftmensch, xtomx, Mike03 and 6 others repped this.
  20. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The Supremes have scheduled the immunity case for April 25.
     
  21. ToMhIlL

    ToMhIlL Member+

    Feb 18, 1999
    Boxborough, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So on April 26, Biden can send out the Seals to do his dirty work :whistling:
     
  22. diablodelsol

    diablodelsol Member+

    Jan 10, 2001
    New Jersey
    Not quite. They still can take until the end of their term (or session,,,or whatever they call it) to issue a ruling. But the day after…yeah…pretty much.
     
    dapip repped this.
  23. Cascarino's Pizzeria

    Cascarino's Pizzeria BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Apr 29, 2001
    New Jersey, USA
    I have a long list that I will be sending to Generalissimo Biden
     
    dapip repped this.
  24. Yoshou

    Yoshou Fan of the CCL Champ

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You can generally tell how SCOTUS will rule based on the questions by the Justices. If it is clear from the questions that they are leaning towards total immunity, Biden is probably safe to fire up seal team 6.
     
    dapip repped this.
  25. Cascarino's Pizzeria

    Cascarino's Pizzeria BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Apr 29, 2001
    New Jersey, USA
    Is that true? Wow - seems outlandish. But OK - I gotta get crackin on that list. Michael Flynn - crimes against the United States. Dishonoring the Army. Steve Bannon - election fraud, wire fraud, numerous fashion crimes
     
    QuakeAttack and dapip repped this.

Share This Page