Trump Investigations Thread

[Rocinante]

So the case just got blown wide open it appears. The defense has just made a court filing containing a lot of evidence re:cell phone location data of Nathan Wade. Specifically, a ton of texts, about 2k phone calls, him visiting her house over night, etc, all prior to his hiring.

Even the Daily Beast is noting that Fani's kinda fucked:

Trump Team Releases Eyebrow-Raising Phone Data in Fani Willis Case

The data raises questions about the timeline of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ relationship with Special Counsel Nathan Wade.

www.thedailybeast.com

Yeah I've seen left wing sources even saying she'll probably be disbarred after this

 

[Abhorsen]

Yeah I've seen left wing sources even saying she'll probably be disbarred after this

Man, I don't know how Trump keeps doing it. Things just keep falling his way. Like, by all rights, this is a fine enough prosecution legally speaking. All Fani had to do was not hire exactly one person, and she could have had her politically motivated hit job. But what happens? She makes the one mistake she couldn't afford to make, and the whole thing collapses.

 

[Skallagrim]

Man, I don't know how Trump keeps doing it. Things just keep falling his way. Like, by all rights, this is a fine enough prosecution legally speaking. All Fani had to do was not hire exactly one person, and she could have had her politically motivated hit job. But what happens? She makes the one mistake she couldn't afford to make, and the whole thing collapses.

It's not Trump doing it. They are doing it. To themselves.

Because they're corrupt. They try to get Trump for being corrupt -- and some segment of those accusations are probably even valid -- but they are far more corrupt than he is. They are so corrupt that they can't hide it. And they are used to getting away with it. They are used to "one rule for me, another for thee". They've never had to answer for their crimes. But now they've gone too far. It's too obvious. The charges against Trump are so evidently disproportionate that anyone except a complete TDS patient can see it. Their own corruption is so obvious that anyone except a complete TDS patient can see that, too.

The time of "just getting away with it" is coming to an end. It's not Trump doing that. Trump's emergence is a result of it, and so is the fact that all this long-hidden corruption is getting exposed.

It's not Trump doing it. It's the simple fact that if you sweep crap under the rug for long enough... you run out of space under the rug. And that's when someone comes around and makes sure the room gets cleaned. We're still in the denial-and-tantrum phase of it -- "I'm not on trial here!!!" -- but the rug can't really hide the truth anymore.

 

[Blasterbot]

All trump is is a target that drives them insane. that is sufficient.

 

[Vyor]

Man, I don't know how Trump keeps doing it. Things just keep falling his way. Like, by all rights, this is a fine enough prosecution legally speaking. All Fani had to do was not hire exactly one person, and she could have had her politically motivated hit job. But what happens? She makes the one mistake she couldn't afford to make, and the whole thing collapses.

Yeah no, most lawyers will think the bolded is a fucking lie. There is no reasonable world that what Trump and allies did falls under fucking RICO of all things.

 

[Bigking321]

Yeah...

Trying to investigate a fraudulent election shouldn't come with felony charges.

 

[Abhorsen]

Yeah no, most lawyers will think the bolded is a fucking lie. There is no reasonable world that what Trump and allies did falls under fucking RICO of all things.

Eh, I'd say it's fine enough, but overall not great. Obviously it's only done because it's politically motivated, and there's some BS mixed in etc. But as far as the cases against Trump goes, you can at least make a case here. Trump did ask for votes to be found, and with a lucky jury you could get a conviction by implying the request to find votes was meant as a request to forge votes. Basically, this at least had a chance, unlike the colorado BS, and the civil stuff which is ultimately just money sapping.

Here's a good look into why RICO was used (Fani) and whether it should have been (prob not, but it isn't the craziest thing either), by someone who has some minor TDS but is very good about knowing how RICO works:

Overt Acts and Predicate Acts, Explained

No, Fani Willis Is Not Making Tweets Or Phone Calls Into Crimes. But Maybe Her Indictment Is A Bit Indulgent And Gratuitous.

popehat.substack.com

As for Trump's team, I think he's doing a ton better than his former team. This team of lawyers are slowrolling evidence. Obviously they had the phone data prior to the hearing. But they only released it after so that Wade would fall into traps. My guess is that they have more info they plan on releasing later, after there's more responses from the State.

 

[Vyor]

Eh, I'd say it's fine enough, but overall not great. Obviously it's only done because it's politically motivated, and there's some BS mixed in etc. But as far as the cases against Trump goes, you can at least make a case here. Trump did ask for votes to be found, and with a lucky jury you could get a conviction by implying the request to find votes was meant as a request to forge votes. Basically, this at least had a chance, unlike the colorado BS, and the civil stuff which is ultimately just money sapping.

Here's a good look into why RICO was used (Fani) and whether it should have been (prob not, but it isn't the craziest thing either), by someone who has some minor TDS but is very good about knowing how RICO works:

With a "lucky jury" you can convict anyone of any crime for any reason. That does not make that conviction nor the prior prosecution legally sound.

 

[Abhorsen]

With a "lucky jury" you can convict anyone of any crime for any reason. That does not make that conviction nor the prior prosecution legally sound.

Things just keep falling his way. Like, by all rights, this is a fine enough prosecution legally speaking.

A fine enough prosecution != legally sound. I was talking more "is the prosecution itself a complete fucking joke" (see the colorado stuff for an example) versus this, where at least a case could be made. Basically, you can get to a probable cause standard here.




Also, on a more up-to-date summary, apparently, the in camera interview went well. According to sources, there could now be another public hearing of Terrence Bradley, in which not everything is blocked by Attorney Client privilege.

Nathan Wade’s divorce lawyer must testify on relationship timeline with Fulton Co. DA Fani Willis: judge

The judge presiding over Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s case has announced that the former law partner of Nathan Wade will have to testify in court.

nypost.com

The hearing might even be tomorrow. Now we don't know this for sure, apparently a source in one of the law teams relayed to a journo that the judge sent the law team an email to this effect, so there's no link to an actual court order. But it is probably correct.

 

[Vyor]

Basically, you can get to a probable cause standard here.

You can't. What was done that leads to that? What conspiracy to defraud was there?

 

[Abhorsen]

You can't. What was done that leads to that? What conspiracy to defraud was there?

The phone call asking to find votes very neatly does that. Doing it with other people involved makes it legally a conspiracy.

Listen, had Biden made a phone call asking to 'find votes' in a close race, we'll call him for cheating, easy as, because he'd have done it in a bad context. That's the stream of logic being used. And before you say "but the election was stolen via voting fraud" very few non-Republicans/conservatives believe that. His defense (that Trump believed that the election was stolen) fortunately doesn't rely on that, so you can dodge that potentially fatal bullet. But that's effectively an alibi, and the strength of that alibi is how much you trust Trump, basically. And prosecutors prosecute people with a claimed alibi all the time.

This was by far the scariest case legally speaking. It's a criminal case, with state jurisdiction so it doesn't matter who's president pardons don't work (and Georgia pardons only are allowed after a sentence is served), with an actual alleged crime. Now the New York stuff is scary, but that's not for any legal reason, just that politically we all know the system in NY is mounds of BS piled atop each other.

Do I think Trump's actually guilty? Fuck no. Do I think Trump fell into a trap of his own making here? Fuck yes. Had he not said those exact words "find votes", etc, there's no way this proceeds. He got in his own way here, and he's gotta know that with even the slightest stumble all Dems everywhere will attack with no mercy. Fortunately, the Dems fucked up so bad this is likely going to be a Trump victory, better for Trump than if he hadn't been prosecuted in Georgia.

 

[Vyor]

The phone call asking to find votes very neatly does that. Doing it with other people involved makes it legally a conspiracy.

It doesn't though.

Accusing a group of fraud does not a conspiracy make.

 

[Abhorsen]

It doesn't though.

Accusing a group of fraud does not a conspiracy make.

Legally, it does. Do you know what a legal conspiracy is? It's any group of people planning something illegal. You and me plan to go graffiti a bridge tomorrow, then buy spraypaint? Criminal Conspiracy.

Criminal conspiracy is any group of two or more people, who agree to do something, and make some overt act towards it. They don't even need to have accomplished anything.

The crazy thing? The crime doesn't even need to be accomplished. We could find out later that there's no way we could spraypaint the bridge and give up on the idea, going back to being law abiding. We'd still be guilty of conspiracy to vandalize if found out. It doesn't have to be an explicit agreement either.

Basically, conspiracy in law isn't the same, normal definition of a conspiracy. So a group of people doing fraud together is actually always also conspiracy to commit fraud.

So, if you take Trump's request to find more votes as fraud (which it would have been had he not believed the votes existed), then anyone who knew what he was going to say, thought that the votes didn't exist, and helped facilitate that phone call is guilty of conspiracy to commit fraud.

 

[Vyor]

So, if you take Trump's request to find more votes as fraud (which it would have been had he not believed the votes existed), then anyone who knew what he was going to say, thought that the votes didn't exist, and helped facilitate that phone call is guilty of conspiracy to commit fraud.

So, essentially: "It's fraud because there is no voter fraud and asking for voter fraud to be investigated is fraud because there is not voter fraud and asking for voter fraud to be investigated is..."

 

[Abhorsen]

So, essentially: "It's fraud because there is no voter fraud and asking for voter fraud to be investigated is fraud because there is not voter fraud and asking for voter fraud to be investigated is..."

That was just me talking about the conspiracy stuff. But no, actually. Trump is actually probably fine even though the Judge and jury don't believe voter fraud happened.

Fraud is a crime that requires bad intent. Regardless of if there was voter fraud, if Trump honestly believes there was voter fraud, he's innocent (and he definitely does). But, as a side note, if one of the advisors doesn't believe there's voter fraud but aided him, then that advisor is guilty, even if there was voter fraud. This is because that advisor believed they were doing fraud.

Moreover, it's not about voter fraud generally. If the call had been even slightly different, e.g. "I'm sure there was voter fraud, why haven't you found it yet, etc", Trump would have been fine. But because, by coincidence (though the state is saying it was on purpose), Trump's statement about finding votes can be interpreted as asking for those votes to be manufactured, the whole prosecution actually has a leg to stand on. But only one leg, not two, so you can't really get far with the argument.

This is in complete contrast to all the other cases, which have a huge legal issues and no legs to stand on.

Basically, you gotta understand how bad of a situation it was to understand how big of a win this is going to be. IMO, this was easily the biggest case. The rest barely rate at all legally, with the NY stuff only surviving because of bias.

 

[Cherico]

It's not Trump doing it. They are doing it. To themselves.

Because they're corrupt. They try to get Trump for being corrupt -- and some segment of those accusations are probably even valid -- but they are far more corrupt than he is. They are so corrupt that they can't hide it. And they are used to getting away with it. They are used to "one rule for me, another for thee". They've never had to answer for their crimes. But now they've gone too far. It's too obvious. The charges against Trump are so evidently disproportionate that anyone except a complete TDS patient can see it. Their own corruption is so obvious that anyone except a complete TDS patient can see that, too.

The time of "just getting away with it" is coming to an end. It's not Trump doing that. Trump's emergence is a result of it, and so is the fact that all this long-hidden corruption is getting exposed.

It's not Trump doing it. It's the simple fact that if you sweep crap under the rug for long enough... you run out of space under the rug. And that's when someone comes around and makes sure the room gets cleaned. We're still in the denial-and-tantrum phase of it -- "I'm not on trial here!!!" -- but the rug can't really hide the truth anymore.

Id feel bad for them if they were not so deliberately horrible to us.

 

[ATP]

It's not Trump doing it. They are doing it. To themselves.

Because they're corrupt. They try to get Trump for being corrupt -- and some segment of those accusations are probably even valid -- but they are far more corrupt than he is. They are so corrupt that they can't hide it. And they are used to getting away with it. They are used to "one rule for me, another for thee". They've never had to answer for their crimes. But now they've gone too far. It's too obvious. The charges against Trump are so evidently disproportionate that anyone except a complete TDS patient can see it. Their own corruption is so obvious that anyone except a complete TDS patient can see that, too.

The time of "just getting away with it" is coming to an end. It's not Trump doing that. Trump's emergence is a result of it, and so is the fact that all this long-hidden corruption is getting exposed.

It's not Trump doing it. It's the simple fact that if you sweep crap under the rug for long enough... you run out of space under the rug. And that's when someone comes around and makes sure the room gets cleaned. We're still in the denial-and-tantrum phase of it -- "I'm not on trial here!!!" -- but the rug can't really hide the truth anymore.

They would fall - but how many would die becouse of them,how many would be brainwashed,and which countries do not survive their mistakes?
I fear scenario,when they fall,but USA and Europe fall to migrants/China/Moscov as a result.

 

[Terthna]

That was just me talking about the conspiracy stuff. But no, actually. Trump is actually probably fine even though the Judge and jury don't believe voter fraud happened.

Fraud is a crime that requires bad intent. Regardless of if there was voter fraud, if Trump honestly believes there was voter fraud, he's innocent (and he definitely does). But, as a side note, if one of the advisors doesn't believe there's voter fraud but aided him, then that advisor is guilty, even if there was voter fraud. This is because that advisor believed they were doing fraud.

Moreover, it's not about voter fraud generally. If the call had been even slightly different, e.g. "I'm sure there was voter fraud, why haven't you found it yet, etc", Trump would have been fine. But because, by coincidence (though the state is saying it was on purpose), Trump's statement about finding votes can be interpreted as asking for those votes to be manufactured, the whole prosecution actually has a leg to stand on. But only one leg, not two, so you can't really get far with the argument.

This is in complete contrast to all the other cases, which have a huge legal issues and no legs to stand on.

Basically, you gotta understand how bad of a situation it was to understand how big of a win this is going to be. IMO, this was easily the biggest case. The rest barely rate at all legally, with the NY stuff only surviving because of bias.

Regardless of whether or not Trump is technically guilty of any sort of crime, the legal system is blatantly being used as a weapon against him; and that's going to have serious ramifications going forward.

 

[Vyor]

That was just me talking about the conspiracy stuff. But no, actually. Trump is actually probably fine even though the Judge and jury don't believe voter fraud happened.

Fraud is a crime that requires bad intent. Regardless of if there was voter fraud, if Trump honestly believes there was voter fraud, he's innocent (and he definitely does). But, as a side note, if one of the advisors doesn't believe there's voter fraud but aided him, then that advisor is guilty, even if there was voter fraud. This is because that advisor believed they were doing fraud.

Moreover, it's not about voter fraud generally. If the call had been even slightly different, e.g. "I'm sure there was voter fraud, why haven't you found it yet, etc", Trump would have been fine. But because, by coincidence (though the state is saying it was on purpose), Trump's statement about finding votes can be interpreted as asking for those votes to be manufactured, the whole prosecution actually has a leg to stand on. But only one leg, not two, so you can't really get far with the argument.

This is in complete contrast to all the other cases, which have a huge legal issues and no legs to stand on.

Basically, you gotta understand how bad of a situation it was to understand how big of a win this is going to be. IMO, this was easily the biggest case. The rest barely rate at all legally, with the NY stuff only surviving because of bias.

Ah, I see. It was less "this is a perfectly legitimate legal avenue" and more "compared to all the other shit sandwiches, this one at least has bread"

 

[Abhorsen]

Regardless of whether or not Trump is technically guilty of any sort of crime, the legal system is blatantly being used as a weapon against him; and that's going to have serious ramifications going forward.

Oh, definitely.

Ah, I see. It was less "this is a perfectly legitimate legal avenue" and more "compared to all the other shit sandwiches, this one at least has bread"

Exactly this. Basically, if you ignore two HUGE problems (that Fani Willis is a partisan hack going after Trump on a vendetta, and the various stuff she's going to get DQ'd for) you can at least see a case, one that's doomed to lose before any fair jury, but it would at least get to a jury, and there's always a chance for a bad jury. This is why it was Trump's worst problem, and it getting solved is so huge.


Also, there seems to be another hearing today around 2 pm EST/11 am PT, where Terrence Bradley will be testifying with much less shield from attorney client privilege.