Trump Investigations Thread

A lot of people pursue cases they are told they can't win, you realize that right?
Right, that's why you'd have to prove he knew it was bullshit rather than just he was told it was bullshit but didn't believe it.
And on top of that you'd have to prove a connected criminal conspiracy, or else it's at most a frivolous lawsuit.

All I'm saying is that while what you quoted is a fact that is innocuous in and of itself it could nevertheless hypothetically be connected to a criminal conspiracy and the fact that it happened could be material to proving the conspiracy. That's why it's in there, not because "filing lawsuits is illegal" or whatever the fuck. I'm not trying to defend the conspiracy allegation either, just the logic being presented.
 
Right, that's why you'd have to prove he knew it was bullshit rather than just he was told it was bullshit but didn't believe it.
And on top of that you'd have to prove a connected criminal conspiracy, or else it's at most a frivolous lawsuit.

All I'm saying is that while what you quoted is a fact that is innocuous in and of itself it could nevertheless hypothetically be connected to a criminal conspiracy and the fact that it happened could be material to proving the conspiracy. That's why it's in there, not because "filing lawsuits is illegal" or whatever the fuck. I'm not trying to defend the conspiracy allegation either, just the logic being presented.

Filing lawsuits and asking lawyers for advice on how to do them has never been in a RICO charge before. Seriously, it's completely unheard of.
 
Filing lawsuits and asking lawyers for advice on how to do them has never been in a RICO charge before. Seriously, it's completely unheard of.
That's not what this case is about though.

In a nutshell Trump and his cronies are being charged with attempting to convince public officials to commit crimes ... which is you know, kinda illegal in and of itself.
 
The have been accused of doing illegal things in the aftermath of an election result which wasn't "Trump wins".

Did they? That's for the jury to decide.

You do realize any jury in a liberal city cannot be trusted to render a just verdict?

There is no legitimacy to any of this and in a just nation everyone involved in the upcoming trials from the grandy jury to the bailifs to the judges and Prosecutors would all lose their citizenship and be exiled from the US.

Or else put in gitmo.
 
Last edited:
You do realize any jury in a liberal city cannot be trusted to render a just verdict?

There is no legitimacy to any of this and in a nust nation everyone involved in the upcoming trials from the grandy jury to the bailifs to the judges and Prosecutors would all lose their citizenship and be exiled from the US.

Or else put in gitmo.
Tbc, I doubt a conservative jury would either. Like say he had done illegal stuff, he ain't getting convicted in most counties of Georgia.
 
Tbc, I doubt a conservative jury would either. Like say he had done illegal stuff, he ain't getting convicted in most counties of Georgia.
Conservatives at least in theory believe in holding everyone equally accountable. In a morality where the ends does not justify the means.

Modern leftists believe the intended ends is the *only* thing that matters in whether or not the means is justified.
 
Conservatives at least in theory believe in holding everyone equally accountable. In a morality where the ends does not justify the means.

Modern leftists believe the intended ends is the *only* thing that matters in whether or not the means is justified.
Eh, people believe that their side is good and the other side is bad. Also, that being bad means you are on the other side, and being good means you are on their side.

It's basic tribalism that won't be escaped by just by what they in theory believe. Also, note that most of the people aren't going to be modern leftists but just run of the mill liberal leaning independents/democrats and run of the mill conservative leaning independents/republicans. The thing is, Trump polarizes everyone (which is why he will win the primary and at best squeak out a win vs Biden, he's by far the weakest republican candidate in the general). There will be no fair trial involving him, regardless of where it's held.
 
Eh, people believe that their side is good and the other side is bad. Also, that being bad means you are on the other side, and being good means you are on their side.

It's basic tribalism that won't be escaped by just by what they in theory believe. Also, note that most of the people aren't going to be modern leftists but just run of the mill liberal leaning independents/democrats and run of the mill conservative leaning independents/republicans. The thing is, Trump polarizes everyone (which is why he will win the primary and at best squeak out a win vs Biden, he's by far the weakest republican candidate in the general). There will be no fair trial involving him, regardless of where it's held.
I wish it were that simple, but an even remotely well-read left-wing dialectical materialist/Marxist would never dispute what LordsFire said in that post you quoted. The entirety of ideas like base & superstructure, cultural hegemony, bourgeois morality, etc. comes down to 'capitalism & capitalists engineered concepts like individual morality, love of family, patriotism, the drive for self-improvement & hard work, etc. to generate false consciousness in the masses and suppress revolution'. The fundamental axioms of the dialectical materialist worldview inevitably and inescapably lead to power politics being their entire 'moral' foundation.

Basically, anything resembling idealism is a bourgeois spook and there is no such thing as a universal morality in the materialist worldview: in fact one's duty as a leftist (and thus a materialist by default) is to reject concepts like 'morality' and 'ethics', all creations of the bourgeois oppressor, and to focus entirely on realpolitik which puts & keeps the Left in power through whatever means you deem necessary. You can deploy whatever propaganda and justification you can think of for any particular action in that action's specific context & time, but none of it really matters - what matters is the Revolution and the only 'right' thing to do is to support the Revolution in the first place. This is, for example, why their violence is speech while your speech is violence; why Antifa will riot and howl ACAB all night but run to the cops the instant non-Antifa (not even necessarily right-wingers) fight back, or why they decry the state and all its institutions & laws but have spent so much time infiltrating said institutions and keep the National Lawyers' Guild on retainer to help them out of any & every jam; why they'll call Catholics pedos with every breath they take and defend troons & non-trans (but also non-Catholic!) child predators alike with every other breath, and so on.

Going of their way to prosecute Trump for any reason they can think of and deploying every means they can imagine to hinder him, probably up to & including kicking him off the ballot for 2024 in every key state they can reach? (Which I believe to be the ultimate endgame of convicting him) That completely falls in line with that leftist 'realpolitik'. It might backfire, but then the same was true of the OG Antifa's antics in Weimar Germany, and they didn't let the 'maybes' and 'is this a really good idea' intrusive thoughts stop them from doing what they thought was best to serve the cause of Revolution either. What seems like the hard but necessary and pragmatic thing to do and actual pragmatism tend to get muddled in the eyes of ideological drones, IIRC this was what SB termed the 'hard man doing hard things' a while before that site got pozzed completely.

Tl;dr The left's morality, such as it is, is entirely tribal. That's why calling them out for hypocrisy can really only be done for the benefit of third-party observers (to get them to realize the leftist is a savage tyrant who only desires power over them and you) and not to convince the leftist xirself that they're wrong, the often very blatant contradiction between their words and actions only constitute hypocrisy if you hold an Enlightenment/individualist moral perspective to begin with - they themselves only really care about dismantling 'capitalism' (fundamentally meaning any system they don't control) and getting the Left into power.

Yes, a 19-year-old radical activist on the college campus probably doesn't believe or even know about 90%+ of the above and think they signed on to a 'human rights and empathy' worldview, but that's why they're called 'useful idiots' and never get to run anything of importance before or after the Revolution (usually they also end up getting purged if the Left wins). The people who do run things, like the Bill Ayers (Weatherman)-educated Barack Obama or the BLM leadership who literally described themselves as 'trained Marxists' on video, however...(Anyway, even shorter tl;dr, never ever give leftists the benefit of the doubt. If you aren't one of them, they will only ever try to destroy you.)
 
The people who do run things, like the Bill Ayers (Weatherman)-educated Barack Obama or the BLM leadership who literally described themselves as 'trained Marxists' on video, however...
Sure, but then they are a very small subsection not likely to be a jury. I'm talking about who's going to be selected on a jury. I.e. not the people deep into marxism, because Trumps lawyer will use their strikes on them if they can't get the juror tossed.
 
Sure, but then they are a very small subsection not likely to be a jury. I'm talking about who's going to be selected on a jury. I.e. not the people deep into marxism, because Trumps lawyer will use their strikes on them if they can't get the juror tossed.
I'm reminded of that guy who boasted of lying about his neutrality & lack of partisan affiliation to get on Chauvin's jury, after of course getting him convicted. I would certainly hope Trump's got better lawyers but realistically, if 95%+ of the political establishment and institutions in the country want you convicted, they'll probably find ways to get it done no matter how skillfully you work to refute the charges. And oh, if there's one thing the American establishment & institutions have for once been honest about, it's their thirst for the blood of the Bad Orange Man and all who would follow him.
 
Sure, but then they are a very small subsection not likely to be a jury. I'm talking about who's going to be selected on a jury. I.e. not the people deep into marxism, because Trumps lawyer will use their strikes on them if they can't get the juror tossed.
and when the judge says just because they are a trained marxist doesn't give you cause to strike them? or that they voted for biden? or theat they have made 78 posts saying the jan 6ers all committed treason and should be hanged? how many of those can be gone through then? will it be enough if that same judge says that if you voted for him you are clearly too tribal to participate?
 
and when the judge says just because they are a trained marxist doesn't give you cause to strike them? or that they voted for biden? or theat they have made 78 posts saying the jan 6ers all committed treason and should be hanged? how many of those can be gone through then? will it be enough if that same judge says that if you voted for him you are clearly too tribal to participate?
A) That's appealable, and guess who controls the supreme court. B) you have free strikes as well, that no one can question.
 
A) That's appealable, and guess who controls the supreme court. B) you have free strikes as well, that no one can question.
That would be the same supreme court that has chickened out due to political pressure? And the same useless Republicans who’ve allowed this to happen and badly want populists like Trump out of the way so they can go back to being Uniparty neo-cons?
 
A) That's appealable, and guess who controls the supreme court. B) you have free strikes as well, that no one can question.
and if the courts decide again they don't want to be too political and take a case?

yup they have some. but they are limited in numbed and so does the prosecution. so if you are drawing from a 70% or more liberal area and the 30% get removed out of hand while you can only get rid of the worst biased jurors? it isn't hard for a judge to put their finger on the scale if they decide to.
 
and if the courts decide again they don't want to be too political and take a case?

yup they have some. but they are limited in numbed and so does the prosecution. so if you are drawing from a 70% or more liberal area and the 30% get removed out of hand while you can only get rid of the worst biased jurors? it isn't hard for a judge to put their finger on the scale if they decide to.
This is a pretty prominent case that really goes the other way in terms of what 'not being political is'. There will be plenty of ways to challange the case legally, not just on the basis of jurors.
That would be the same supreme court that has chickened out due to political pressure? And the same useless Republicans who’ve allowed this to happen and badly want populists like Trump out of the way so they can go back to being Uniparty neo-cons?
No. Last time Trump brought them a shit case they really couldn't do anything with. Courts are not of use unless you can tell them exactly how something happened. You tell them "Someone ballot stuffed" and their response is: Who? and Can we isolate those ballots from the real ones? And the answer was dunno, and likely not anymore. At that point, the court is kinda helpless.

This, however, is precisely what the courts are designed to handle, a legal case. It won't be mooted/dismissed for unripeness, as that's not how the courts work.

As for the other republicans, Republican justices are very different from republican politicians, in both what type of person they are and what their incentives are.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top