Judge rules Trump's efforts to overturn election likely criminal

What's the wager you propose? Whether the person who plead guilty to "seditious conspiracy" is a nobody without any significant political connections or not? Whether they held a prominent position in the Trump administration?

 

Here you go

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oat...tious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947

Thanks for wasting time and bandwidth. !!!

Just for you I am going to be redundant, Trump will go down worse than Benedict Arnold, and his supporters too. !!!

 

LOL! I knew it! It's a nobody from some of podunk town in Alabama with no official connection to the Trump administration. LOL! You lefties are so predictable. As soon as you chose to hide who he was, I knew why. LOL! Oh yeah, you'll surely nail Trump to the wall with this: some guy he's never heard of or talked to before in his life.

 

Snark aside... Opinions are like a 'brown eyed pea', just leave it, I think that we would be much better for it....

 

Sure, that explains the missing nearly 8 hrs of white House logs.

Once again Trump supporters have hit rock bottom and are breaking out the picks and shovels.

Here's some more, let's juxtapose the evidence of a stolen election with trump's deliberate steps of obstruction.

 

It's not my opinion. It's the law. Trump doesn't think the rules apply to him and those of you that minimize his flagrant disregard for our laws are complicit in his efforts to destroy our Constitution. Good luck with that.

 

No, all we have is a judge, sending a 'nudge' to Garland, that, 'hey, we know indicting a former president is a historical, and dangerous, step, but, just wanted you to know you have the court's blessing', --- that's what is going on here, nothing more. After all, this is the president of the united states, it's unprecedented, and we expect more from a president, he really needs to be prosecuted. He's committed lots fo crimes, not just what the NYC DA is investigating him for. If one indicts, others will jump into the fray, and what is happening is prosecutors are basically afraid to do it. Trump has many millions of fans, many of whom will threaten anyone who indicts him. Takes cajones, to do it. The judge is just trying to nudge Garland, that's all.

 

looks like someone hiding something

"White House records turned over to House show 7-hour gap in Trump phone log on Jan. 6"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-calls-seven-hour-gap-january-6/

 

Which is not his role, because if public pressure is all it takes to indict someone then the judicial system is ****ed. Put it this way, if Trump were still president and a Republican judge 'urged' the prosecution of FMR. Secretary Clinton, how would that have gone for you back then? The judge's role, is not to opine on anything that is not on his docket. His role doesn't get to 'expand' with the societal cues of the time. His role is a very narrow one, that is why it is supposed to be the last interview of their lives(for SCOTUS nominees).

So, are you telling me that our judicial system is beyond repair, with public intrigue replacing the integrity and indifference of the court system?

 

I hope you are right!!!!!!!

 

What does any of that have to do with some dude from Arab, Alabama (population 8,461) that nobody had heard of before last year? Because the apparent answer is "nothing at all".

 

Let's apply oceam's razor. One hand, it could be that Trump(or cronies for Trump) erased this 7-hour gap that surely if it had been kept, would have revealed Trump's criminality!(this would also be a clear obstruction of justice incident as well.) Now, there's another equally plausible explanation for the gap: Maybe there weren't any calls in those 7 hours? Did anyone consider that?


Nah, that'd be way too reasonable, sensible and pragmatic and it doesn't help fuel the desire to prosecute Donald. J. Trump LMAO.

 

we know there were calls to members of congress, thus we know there were calls

 

What does "Hunter" have to do with this? The judge was handed a case, brought through legal means to his court for him to determine.
The judge himself said "The illegality of the plan was obvious". What do you think the judge was supposed to do? Are you angry because you disagree with it, or that you don't like the outcome? The only one who put down the railroad tracks was Trump himself. You obviously hold Trump to a different standard than you do for everyone else.
How do I come to that conclusion? Because you would rather deflect than debate the facts, which you have the inner sense that aren't looking good for the "Trump" team.
By the way, I say the whole Hunter Biden laptop thing needs to be investigated thoroughly. Find out the truth, no matter where it leads. I have a feeling that Rudy Giuliani doesn't really want the ENTIRE story to come out. There are computer forensics experts who might be able to shed some light on the subject.......

 

Damn dude, sometimes you make a lot of sense, then other times you come up with something like this. Sure, that's plausible.............
What a HUGE coincidence. I like it better when you forget you're a Trump fan. But, then again, who cares what I think, right?

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...inds_evidence_of_2020_voter_fraud_147378.html I think this sums up what we've been telling the thieves and traitorf for the last year and a half.. aqnd oddly enough, or not, grad students and those making over $200K a year still dispute that the Election was stolen.. guess it depends on how the corruption effects ones wallet.

 

I'm not a Trump fan, I just don't give a **** about Donald Trump. What is it about that that people don't get? i'm sure @HurricaneDitka gets it. I don't care to prosecute the guy, unless it can be shown that he should and is indicted, then we can talk about the next phase; The trial where he gets the right to his defense and we'll see how a jury rules the case. That's if there ever is a case.

 

Sorry to make assumptions, but here's what you typed: "
Let's apply oceam's razor. One hand, it could be that Trump(or cronies for Trump) erased this 7-hour gap that surely if it had been kept, would have revealed Trump's criminality!(this would also be a clear obstruction of justice incident as well.) Now, there's another equally plausible explanation for the gap: Maybe there weren't any calls in those 7 hours? Did anyone consider that?
Nah, that'd be way too reasonable, sensible and pragmatic and it doesn't help fuel the desire to prosecute Donald. J. Trump LMAO."
If Occam's razor were applied to this situation, it would indicate that someone deleted the data for those 7 hours. Why? It's a simpler theory than Trump had no contact for those particular seven hours.
Regardless of how the razor cuts, c'mon man! (NFL Today version, not Biden version)
What are the odds that Trump had no contact with anyone for that time period, on that day, during that "event"?
Which brings up another question: you seem to be a bastion for equality and transparency, I would think you would be outraged that the records were hidden like that. Do you only like some transparency, depending on who it is or when it is? I honestly am surprised at you defending this.

 

I think there are hundreds, if not thousands of public officials who committed many, many serious crimes that should be way ahead in line of those that need to be investigated and prosecuted

 

Dems in Congress have tried to get electors disqualified and replaced as has been cited over and over.

 

You really think it's implausible that a human being wouldn't use the phone for 7 hours? I don't know, I guess i'm too much of an IRL shut in.

 

What might explains th emissing eight hours are the demonrat dog and pony shows regarding Russia Collusion ... and Ukrainian meddling empeachments... if they can take that garbage not telling what they would try to peal out of eight hours "would you get me a soda please " would be construed as absolute proof Trump does coke. (he's a teetotaler.. and he hit a hole in one! LOL )

 

"In other words, Congress cannot use its subpoena authority to put someone on trial for a crime or wrongdoing, nor does Congress have the “power to expose for the sake of exposure.” Slip Op. at 12. Indeed, the Court confirmed that congressional investigations used solely to “punish” those investigated would be “indefensible.” Not only that, the Court reinforced the limitations to the subpoena power, including that the subpoena must serve a “valid legislative purpose,” and is proper only if it is “related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of Congress.”

Congress cannot engage in a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OR A TRIAL PERIOD. They cannot investigate to try and find evidence for a criminal trial or expose just to expose. I gave you the court cases since you are ignoring the Constitution and the separation of powers it dictates.

Benghazi was not about some crime, what on earth are you talking about. The SecState and Department of State come under oversight of the Congress, the SecState must be confirmed by the Congress. Benghazi was about a failure of the Department of State and the SecState in their official actions. Same with the IRS. Both had legislative and oversight purposes.

 

I re-read your post and I think I understand a little bit, you are fed up with people (Dems, progs, never-Trumpers) piling on Trump for every little thing, seems like.
I actually agree to a point. I saw a lot of over-exaggeration for the last 5-6 years when it comes to Trump. They picked on everything, and it did get a little old.
But after awhile I realized why that was. One reason was that Trump wanted it that way. I believe that he decided that he could get away with a lot of things by doing a lot of outrageous things. I know someone very well who doesn't like to worry about following the rule of law. He just does what he wants, drinking and driving, car wrecks, totaled cars, drugs, stolen property, etc etc. When he gets busted, it looks bad, all these charges.
Because he has such a long record and gets in so much trouble, he has a lot of charges dropped. Sometimes it's because he has a good lawyer, but a lot of it is that he has done so many things wrong, and keeps doing them, it diminishes the shock of each one, and many things that you or I would be in a lot of trouble for get swept under the rug. I don't know if that makes any sense to you, but I thought I would offer that.
Trump sometimes was "harrassed" needlessly. But he brought a lot of it on himself, and I would submit the theory that some of it, or a lot of it, was on purpose.

 

And fraud and the media will carry him over the finish line.