Trump Investigations Thread

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
If the judge was a coward, then yes. If there was a fix, then no. This tells us that there isn't some deep control of the court systems in Georgia (outside of the Republicans nominating everyone). There is democratic control over the counties where democrats have a majority of, just like everywhere else. That's what happened here, and I expect things to be fine going forward.

Also important to note is that this is about another month and a half of delay on any trial, a trial for which Jury selection would take months. I don't think the trial could conclude prior to the General Election even if everything from now on goes more or less Fani's way.

Also, the delay gives Georgia time to use it's other method to stop this, something Kemp has been behind: a new law where the Georgia state government gets some control over local DAs and can dismiss them or some such.
 

DarthOne

☦️
19 Retired Generals, Admirals File Supreme Court Brief Against Trump Immunity Bid

More than a dozen former Defense Department officials, generals, and admirals filed a brief with the Supreme Court arguing against former President Donald Trump's presidential immunity arguments.

It comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on the former president's assertions that he should enjoy immunity from prosecution for activity that he carried out while he was president. The former president invoked that argument after he was accused by federal prosecutors of attempting to illegally overturn the 2020 election results.

The amicus brief's signatories include former CIA Director Michael Hayden, retired Admiral Thad Allen, retired Gen. George Casey, retired Gen. Charles Krulak, and more.

They claimed that granting President Trump immunity against criminal claims could lead to activity that put U.S. national security at risk.

"The notion of such immunity, both as a general matter, and also specifically in the context of the potential negation of election results, threatens to jeopardize our nation's security and international leadership," their brief stated. "Particularly in times like the present, when anti-democratic, authoritarian regimes are on the rise worldwide, such a threat is intolerable and dangerous."

The arguments submitted by President Trump will "risk jeopardizing America's standing as a guardian of democracy in the world and further feeding the spread of authoritarianism, thereby threatening the national security of the United States and democracies around the world," the group added.

The former secretary of Defense under President Trump, Mark Esper, was critical of their submission to the Supreme Court, arguing during a CNN interview that he "would prefer to see retired admirals and generals not get involved."

But President Trump's lawyers have contended that the president's office cannot function without immunity from the threat of prosecution because it could "incapacitate every future president with de facto blackmail and extortion while in office and condemn him to years of post-office trauma at the hands of political opponents," arguing that such a phenomenon is playing out right now after the former president was indicted multiple times last year.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had earlier issued a ruling against President Trump's arguments that he should be declared immune from prosecution. The appeals process, meanwhile, has put on hold the former president's trial in Washington.

When the CIA barks, its' minions jump!
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul
19 Retired Generals, Admirals File Supreme Court Brief Against Trump Immunity Bid



When the CIA barks, its' minions jump!
This seems just like something else I saw before...51 former intel people lying about something...oh yeah! Russian Collusion!

Paid schills gonna schill.
 

DarthOne

☦️


New York Judge Merchan to Trump: "If you do not show up, there will be an arrest."

During peak election season, Trump will be forced to appear in court every day.

To be clear this is infinitely worse election interference than anything that the MSM accused Russia/Putin of doing in 2016.




They arrested Trump
They arrested Trump's lawyers
They arrested Trump's advisors
They arrested Trump's supporters
They arrested Trump's chief of staff
They arrested Trump's chief strategist
They arrested Trump's security advisor

If this was happening in a foreign country, America would have invaded by now.
 

Vyor

My influence grows!
How is it not legal?
There are strict requirements that need to be met for such an order to be carried out.

First, the person must be a flight risk.

Second, the court must be unable to extract the judgement in any other way (ie: being fani willis and having all of your transactions in cash makes extracting a monetary judgement hard if you aren't actually around).

Third... I can't remember the third requirement, but since the first two aren't met...
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
There are strict requirements that need to be met for such an order to be carried out.

First, the person must be a flight risk.

Second, the court must be unable to extract the judgement in any other way (ie: being fani willis and having all of your transactions in cash makes extracting a monetary judgement hard if you aren't actually around).

Third... I can't remember the third requirement, but since the first two aren't met...
From what I gather yhe judge can make the decision without the two if they want too.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul

Yeah, for a few thousand dollars. I'm not worried about this, it hardly matters. What shocks me is that the case is going forward and wasn't dismissed. I'm expecting a conviction here, unless the judges get in the way, because of the juror pool. The best shot Trump has is a dismissal of charges after the prosecution rests. The next best shot is a hung jury because a Trump fan got in, which despite being in a very liberal district, there's a good chance because you only need 1 of 12.
 

DarthOne

☦️




https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1780394222148878594/video/1…
Holy Shizzles!

Trumps legal team Discovered some of the Jurors Were Planted Undercover Activists! — 7 Jurors Selected

Some of these activists were trying to sneak onto the jury!

• One Juror "couldn't recall any anti-Trump feeling"
— The defense busted him with posts saying Donald Trump should be locked up!

• Another Juror said they didn't recall any anti-Trump feelings
— The defense busted him with posts of a Picture which said "Trump invites Tie Boys to the Whitehouse"

• These Two Radical Liberals were almost seated on the Jury…

This is the type of bullshit Trump has to deal with.

The 7 Selected Jurors

1. Harlem salesman, loves outdoors, gets news from NYT, Fox, Dailey Mail, MSNBC

2. Nurse, not married, no kids, gets News form Google, NYT, CNN
— she said she doesn't have an opinion on Trump, but no one is above the law"

3. Asian male, Oregon Lawyer, WSJ, NYT, Google news sources…
— his corporate law firm features DEI on his homepage

4. Puerto Rican man, fascinated with Trump, Daily mail, NYT, Google,
— married with grandkids

5. Black woman, 20's, teacher, no kids, Gets news from TikTok, Google, and Charlamagne

6. Woman, 20's, works for Disney… not married, no kids.. NYT, Google, Facebook, TikTok

7. Middle aged white guy, lawyer, NYT, NYP, WAPO, NPR. Married, two kids.
— his firm is big into DEI and ESG

The Judge whose overseeing the selection process is a Biden donor, whose family was paid by the Biden campaign.



Jury Selection for Trump's Hush Money Trial Is a Total Trainwreck



The first six jurors were selected for Donald Trump's hush money trial Tuesday amid a battle over prospective jurors' old Facebook posts and calls to "lock him up" and a judge's warning that the former president should not try to intimidate the panelists who will be deciding his fate.
"I will not have any jurors intimidated in this courtroom. I want to make this crystal clear," Judge Juan Merchan told Trump and his lawyer Todd Blanche outside of the juror's presence. The judge told Blanche his client was "audibly" saying something in the direction of the juror while she was "12 feet away from your client."
Merchan said he didn't know what Trump was saying, but that he'd been "muttering" and "gesturing" at the juror, and directed Blanche to talk to his client about his behavior. Blanche then whispered something into Trump's ear.
[…]
The current drama came on the second day of jury selection, as six jurors were selected for the case. The jury is anonymous so their names weren't used in open court, but panelists include a salesman, an oncology nurse, an IT consultant, a teacher and a software engineer. The six were sworn in and told to return to court on Monday.
[…]
There's a number of the jurors that we have social media posts for that are very much contrary" to what they said while they were being asked if they could be impartial, Blanche told the judge, and he sought to have them struck for cause.
He noted one potential juror had posted a video from the day where Joe Biden was declared the winner of the 2020 election.
In the video, the woman says, "I have to get in the car and spread the honking cheers. There's an actual dance party on 96th Street."
Trump's lawyers contended the video would have been referring to an anti-Trump rally. The woman had denied taking part in any rally or campaign events during her initial round of questioning.
Called in for individual questioning, she said it was a "celebratory moment" in the city and that she could be impartial.
After chiding Trump for his behavior towards her, Merchan said he found her "credible" and refused to strike her for cause.


First, I love how we don't know the names, but we do know their professions, which means their identities are probably going to be leaked eventually. It might not be as bad as the Ferguson grand jury, which leaked like a sieve, but it wouldn't shock me if names were revealed. It's how things go in these high-profile cases.

Second, did I read that right: the woman claimed she didn't participate in any political gatherings or rallies, only to have a video of her celebrating in the streets upon news of Joe Biden's win in 2020. So, she lied, but this is deep blue New York, the capital of jokester judges, where a quick glance from the bench could peer into people's very souls. You cannot make this stuff up.

It's the weakest case against Trump, but as we saw with the civil fraud case against the former president, we're bound to witness lunacy on a grand scale.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top