The complete story of the illegal coup plot by Donald Trump

Jan 6th

sad how the right still defends him....

yep, Hillary never used personal email either, no convictions... right?

 

I accept your surrender...lol

 

Nothing that Trump did was outside of legal scrutiny. There is nothing illegal about asserting a legal maneuver that gets shot down as unconstitutional. It happens all of the time. That is how our system is designed to work. Asserting those legal maneuvers is neither a coup nor illegal.

Now you have relegated yourself to arguing that the "committee" says he broke laws as if the "committee" is somehow a legitimate judicial arm as opposed to the reality that it is simply a political kangaroo court pushing a political agenda that actually has no teeth whatsoever.

 

Judge: Trump signed court document that knowingly included false voter fraud stats

Former President Donald Trump signed legal documents describing evidence of election fraud that he knew were false, a federal judge indicated on Wednesday.

U.S. District Court Judge David Carter wrote in an 18-page opinion that emails from attorney John Eastman, an architect of Trump’s last-ditch effort to subvert the 2020 election, needed to be turned over to the Jan. 6 select committee. Those emails, Carter wrote, “show that President Trump knew that the specific numbers of voter fraud were wrong but continued to tout those numbers, both in court and to the public.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/...gly-included-false-voter-fraud-stats-00062577


Trump probably broke the law in an effort to obstruct Jan. 6 proceedings, judge says
"The illegality of the plan was obvious," Judge David Carter wrote in a ruling shooting down lawyer John Eastman's bid to keep Jan. 6 documents private.

A federal judge presiding over a civil suit involving the House committee investigating the riot at the U.S. Capitol found Monday that then-President Donald Trump "likely attempted to obstruct the joint session of Congress" on Jan. 6, 2021, which would be a crime.

"The illegality of the plan was obvious," U.S. District Judge David Carter wrote of Trump and lawyer John Eastman's plan to have then-Vice President Mike Pence determine the results of the 2020 election.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...t-tried-illegally-disrupt-electoral-rcna21857

 

Off topic.

This is a discussion about the supposed "plan" that the OP falsely called an illegal coup.

 

OP knows its BS, hence why he was very careful to call it a "STORY" instead of "FACTS".
Don't take the bait folks!
These people are not half as smart as they pretend to be.

 

No, it's a fair request.

I engage with substantive replies.

 

You've made an error of semantics.

Stories can be fiction, they can be true, as in 'a true story'.

No, only facts are given. But, the video is now been rendered to private viewing, si I'll have to find another similar link.

 

There is no such thing as a democrat or republican crime.

The DOJ pursues criminals in which they believe they can convict, and that is that.

 

none of the investigations thus far have been completed.

If you imply a democrat, as mentioned, is corrupt, please supply evidence.

It's not that they cannot convict, it's that prosecuting a president has never been done before, and many stones have to be overturned before a conviction is assured, if ever.

Hell, it took years for folks like Gotti and Capone to be convicted, so, don't assume that the time that is passed is an indication of anything.

 

The scheme to overthrow the government and usurp Biden's victory was a conspiracy by Trump, Bannon, Eastman, Clark, Navarro, Guiliani, et al, and some100 plus congresspersons and senators, and several dozen fake electors spanning many months up and to 1/6, to subvert the election, as laid out in the Eastman Memo,

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21066248-eastman-memo

which expands upon the 'Greenbay Sweep' plan by Navarro, which is explained here:

A number of crimes were committed in the scheme.

the actual plan is articulated with much greater detail and robustness by Ari Melber

Evidence provided in the video, but you have to watch it. I've given my summaries, but they are no where near is beautifully articulated as by Melber

 

It's not about the attack, it's about the 8 point subversion scheme involving Trump, Bannon, Giuliani, Clark, Eastman, Navarro, et al, and numerous republicans in the legislature who conspired to overturn Biden's win by (in one of the 8 schemes) delaying the Joint Session via objections to each of the certifications of the votes in the swing states, the last hope of which was Trump's pressure on Pence to remand those votes back to the states, in an overall attempt to delay final certification long enough to through the vote to the house, where Repubs have a two state majority. There were other paths, it was hoped, which didn't require the remanding votes objected to back to the states, but............

It's robustly articulated here in much greater detail, with evidence, by Ari Melber

 

Will you never tire of throwing snowballs at the sun?

 

DOJ has a boss. That boss is Democrat Biden. The boss sets objectives and goals. The goal is to convict Trump of SOMETHING... ANYTHING.

 

Paranoid much? Oh wait... liberals are a cult dedicated to finding Trump supporters guilty of SOMETHING... ANYTHING.

 

Will you ever tire of sticking your balls up your bum?

 

I can't take you seriously. Congratulations, you've earned the ignore function

I'm here to debate. Clearly, you are here for purposes of mental masturbation.

 

incompetent rebuttal

 

Continuing with the alternate electors scheme past the juncture where Trump lost all the lawsuits, were illegal at that point onward. An attorney testifying before the 1/6 committee confirmed this.

Trump's pressuring states to decertify, that's illegal in some states.

Trump pressuring Pence to remand contested votes back to the states in a scheme to delay certification past the deadline so as to trigger a house vote where republicans have a two state majority is, as far as I know, illegal.

Trump's scheme , nicknamed 'The Greenbay Sweep' (sorry Packers) as told by Navarro, expanded upon by Eastman in the Eastman memo, include the above and numerous illegal aspects.

Since all of the above attempts had one singular objective to deny Biden's electors he won legitimately and for Trump to retain the presidency, which, according to some attorneys, constitutes an illegal coup.

the plan was legal up to a point, but they, Trump and the conspirators, went way past it.

Whether or not Trump incited the riot, that wasn't part of the 'plan', and was, in point of fact, a fumble on the plan, though Trump appeared to enjoy his fans roughing up the capitol, and it took him 3 hours to end it. If that isn't criminal, there is a cause of action for a few people, those who were injured.

 

At last, someone finally acknowledged that the criminal riots weren't part of the plan! I actually read the whole PDF when it was first released. But honestly, none of the facts pertaining to the case actually matter. What matters(particularly to those in the justice system who now have the power of judgment over the incarcerated and soon to be charged individuals) is how they view the case.

Which gives me a depressed outlook on the state of our judiciary as a whole. It's supposed to be independent and impartial, free of political taint, clout and bias. The very fact that the riots and the plan were convulted, and turned into this thing is proof that our judiciary is unhealthy.

And at this, I put blame at the entire judicial structure itself. Judges who are either appointed by poliitcal hacks, or elected in elections. Prosecutors, whose goal is never to look at the entirety of the facts but to stretch them in support of a guilty verdict, and vice versa for a defense attorney and then to make matters worse our misguided opinion that this fundamentally flawed, broken adversarial system actually brings any truth to light is laughable.

Both prosecutors and defense attorneys are empowered to stretch the truth in their favor. The Judge, who, we all WISH was impartial but in reality has his or her own view of the case instructs the jury in such a way that it can hopefully sway the jury to rule in accordance with the judge. We have to legislatively reform the entire judiciary from scratch. Starting with the connection between the DOJ and the legislative as well as executive branches.

The DOJ was created with the goal of creating a degree of separation of the judiciary from the government(as Mr. Rosenstein elaborated) but this has never materialized. With the government appointing its own employees, and with the Senate's 'advise and consent' rule being turned into more of a way to coerce would be nominees into voting a way that they want to, no one on the left and right can call this system healthy.

I call for the creation of an independent Board of Justice, to directly oversee and implement the DOJ. The Board of Justice will be ran as a non-profit organization, and it will be this board that will confirm the appointment of judges. There will no longer be a need for prosecutors or defense attorneys, instead jurors will be hired to serve for a duration of 10 years. This means juries will no longer be random citizens, but will be educated on the matters of law and order. Since the jurors are now perfectly educated on the spirit and facts of law, the facts will be impartially laid out in a simple reading of them by an appointed 'Officer of the Court', and the jurors can begin immediate deliberations. The Judge no longer has any influence on 'instructions', and instead we will allow law, as it is to take its course.

 

That is the most jaded summation of the Justice System, that has served our Nation for 240 years, I have ever heard.

The "individuals" have been charged or they wouldn't be incarcerated and facing trial.

How were the "riots and plan convoluted and turned into, what, thing"?

Are you saying that everyone the holds political office is a hack and that there is something wrong with choosing a judge by election? Both sides, prosecution AND defense, are sworn to do their best for their client; prosecution "the people", defense "the accused"; it's always been that way. Are you saying that paradigm, that has served us for so long has always been corrupt?

Until tRaitor tRump and Bill Barr the DOJ has ALWAYS operated independently from the Executive, who it is under in the organizational chart ... established by the Constitution and it's ALWAYS been totally independent of the Legislature.

I call for free ice cream on Tuesdays. You can call for anything but an independent board of justice, and ALL you envision for it, to oversee the DOJ would take a Constitutional Amendment. These perfectly educated jurors? How did they become "perfect"? Do you have any idea of the breadth and depth of law that these "perfect jurors" would have to be educated in? Your plan to replace a system that has done a remarkable job, as long as we've been a Nation, is the most ... well it's not even half baked ... it's ludicrous.

You want to throw the baby out with the bath water because you think a louse like Rhodes got a raw deal? I hope they lock him up and lose track of the key. But that wouldn't be justice either so "I" will accept the sentence prescribed by law.

 

It's jaded, because it's factual. The key evidence that everyone got to read said one thing, and the jury partially if not mostly agreed with the evidence but felt bad, so they decided to instead say 'well, this guy and girl did it so there'. And that is not only a miscarriage of justice, it's pathetically absurd. Yes, the two defendants in this case did get a raw deal because they weren't viewed equally and impartially under the law.

It didn't serve us well(see: The Salem witch hunt of the 1600's). It's something that we merely accepted. That's how I feel about our political system and everything we live under. We accept it, begrudgingly flaws and all with not even the tiniest inspiration to improve it. With the Board of Justice, jurors will be educated and nominated based on their education of the law. Basically, it'll have the same standards as a lawyer to become a juror.

I never used the word 'perfect', I used the word 'educated' and their educated opinions will lead to educated decisions. How many times have we heard a juror after the fact anonymously say they were scared, or pressured or unsure. There's no reason for us to keep such a broken system. And if the country maintains such a system, then we shouldn't take it seriously. We should of course obey it, lest we end up like the others but I'm not lawfully obligated to take it seriously.

 

That is obvious. I feel I must point out that These United States aren't the only place in the world to live.

Yes you did, from your post:

"Since the jurors are now perfectly educated on the spirit and facts of law,"

 

The words 'perfect' and 'perfectly' hold different grammatical functions. Whereas 'perfect' implies that the jurors would indeed be perfect, perfectly implies they would have completed let's say the required course time and were judged to have been capable of graduating. They would still have their errors, but I believe said errors would be reduced by 90%.

 

Horseshit, no graduate i know believes they have perfectly completed their coarse work "perfectly". They may have gotten "perfect" scores, but that still doesn't mean they have attained perfection.

Their errors would be reduced by 90%? From what?