Trump indicted...again

[*Nately120*]

(06-09-2023, 01:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Your answer is a non-answer.  It's a simple question, if you definitively knew that this action would result in massive civil unrest and thousands of deaths, minimum, would you still be in favor of it?  If people do get violent over this it will be under the genuine belief that our government has become tyrannical.  Is it not American tradition to revolt against tyranny?  You don't get to determine the perception of others, and you seem willfully blind to it as well.  So instead of tap dancing around the questions, kindly answer it.

We can let Trump skate on this, but his followers will be satisfied until he gets on the internet and declares something else to be a threat to the country and liberty and an obvious sign of tyranny.  I just can't see a situation where Trump stops throwing gas on the fire and/or his followers who want a civil war calm down.

He's going to run in 2024 and if he loses I don't see why he wouldn't just call for a full on civil war at that point.  We've shown we have no ability to actually hold him accountable for anything.  Maybe if he wins in 2024 his followers are happy and accept him leaving office in 2028?

[GMDino]

(06-09-2023, 01:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You again, rather predictably, ignore evidence given before Congress that W invaded Iraq under deliberately false pretenses.  This dwarfs anything Trump has ever done by a significant margin.



Not if we're talking about a current or former POTUS.



Your answer is a non-answer.  It's a simple question, if you definitively knew that this action would result in massive civil unrest and thousands of deaths, minimum, would you still be in favor of it?  If people do get violent over this it will be under the genuine belief that our government has become tyrannical.  Is it not American tradition to revolt against tyranny?  You don't get to determine the perception of others, and you seem willfully blind to it as well.  So instead of tap dancing around the questions, kindly answer it.

If it was the right thing, the legal thing then yes.  If I thought these charges were trumped up, or it was the FBI doing the direct arrest without the indictment I'd have a bigger problem with it.   

I cannot be responsible for someone else's violent tendencies.  I can't help it that if their minds obeying the law is a step to far so they have to violently respond against everyone they disagree with.

Trump has been indicted.  He is presumed innocent until proven guilty.  He will have another opportunity to defend himself.

If the legal system is now "tyranny" because of political party then we were right about Trump and his supporters all along. 

If even the INDCTMENT is too much for his cult of supporters than I cannot stop them from doing whatever they want.  They have already shown to be violent and that was ignored by the right.  So it wouldn't change anything in my mind.

But again, who are they going after?  Me?  The state of Pennsylvania?

Will they attempt to raid congress again?

Spreading the fear that they will do something is not a good point, especially when talk like that in the past was ignored and blamed on partisan politics.

You're right.  I don't get to tell anyone else how to feel about something.  All I can do is try to educate them to what is really going on outside their bubble of information.

[GMDino]

(06-09-2023, 02:04 PM)Nately120 Wrote: We can let Trump skate on this, but his followers will be satisfied until he gets on the internet and declares something else to be a threat to the country and liberty and an obvious sign of tyranny.  I just can't see a situation where Trump stops throwing gas on the fire and/or his followers who want a civil war calm down.

He's going to run in 2024 and if he loses I don't see why he wouldn't just call for a full on civil war at that point.  We've shown we have no ability to actually hold him accountable for anything.  Maybe if he wins in 2024 his followers are happy and accept him leaving office in 2028?

Exactly.  Don't hold him accountable so that no one gets hurt sounds like a gateway to Trump doing anything he wants a long as we have the fear of his supporters getting violent.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-09-2023, 02:04 PM)Nately120 Wrote: We can let Trump skate on this, but his followers will be satisfied until he gets on the internet and declares something else to be a threat to the country and liberty and an obvious sign of tyranny.  I just can't see a situation where Trump stops throwing gas on the fire and/or his followers who want a civil war calm down.

He's going to run in 2024 and if he loses I don't see why he wouldn't just call for a full on civil war at that point.  We've shown we have no ability to actually hold him accountable for anything.  Maybe if he wins in 2024 his followers are happy and accept him leaving office in 2028?

He might, but in so doing I think you'll peal off a lot more people that would be on his side based on the current events.  If something is inevitable then your goal should be to mitigate it as much as possible.  While I don't agree that this is inevitable, if it is this is the wrong way to deal with it.

[*Nately120*]

(06-09-2023, 02:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: Exactly.  Don't hold him accountable so that no one gets hurt sounds like a gateway to Trump doing anything he wants a long as we have the fear of his supporters getting violent.

I don't even know how a civil war would work.  I'm in my 40s, so am I still front-line eligible?  I'm in a red area of PA, so do I join the Trump Army here and march into Pittsburgh, or do we all get absorbed into the blue state army because Biden won the state in 2020?  Or are we just talking about allowing people to shoot and kill people they are pretty sure disagree with them politically, and avoiding the whole formality of the issue?

(06-09-2023, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: He might, but in so doing I think you'll peal off a lot more people that would be on his side based on the current events.  If something is inevitable then your goal should be to mitigate it as much as possible.  While I don't agree that this is inevitable, if it is this is the wrong way to deal with it.

Have we tried giving Trump and his supporters Poland and hoping that appeases them, yet?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-09-2023, 02:14 PM)GMDino Wrote: If it was the right thing, the legal thing then yes.  If I thought these charges were trumped up, or it was the FBI doing the direct arrest without the indictment I'd have a bigger problem with it.

Thank you for answering.  Now a second part, what if you knew that in so doing his supporters had a 50/50 chance of actually winning.  Same answer?   

Quote:I cannot be responsible for someone else's violent tendencies.  I can't help it that if their minds obeying the law is a step to far so they have to violently respond against everyone they disagree with.

As a pro 2A advocate I literally make this argument all the time.  

Quote:Trump has been indicted.  He is presumed innocent until proven guilty.  He will have another opportunity to defend himself.

If the legal system is now "tyranny" because of political party then we were right about Trump and his supporters all along. 

No, that's not quite accurate.  There's been so much illegal activity by former POTU'S's that this will look like selective prosecution for those inclined to think that way.  The problem is they won't be entirely wrong.

Quote:If even the INDCTMENT is too much for his cult of supporters than I cannot stop them from doing whatever they want.  They have already shown to be violent and that was ignored by the right.  So it wouldn't change anything in my mind.

But again, who are they going after?  Me?  The state of Pennsylvania?

Will they attempt to raid congress again?

Who knows?  Once that ball starts rolling where it stops becomes anyone's guess.

Quote:Spreading the fear that they will do something is not a good point, especially when talk like that in the past was ignored and blamed on partisan politics.

You're right.  I don't get to tell anyone else how to feel about something.  All I can do is try to educate them to what is really going on outside their bubble of information.

Being concerned for a very possible outcome that will roil this nation is not fearmongering, it's being realistic.  Whether you think the risks are worth taking is, of course, your decision.  When weighing the potential benefits of a Trump indictment/conviction versus the possible ramifications then the cost/benefit analysis is heavily skewed against this action.  Trump going to prison won't change a single thing about how POTUS's conduct themselves.  I don't see how you think this will be beneficial watershed moment for US politics.  If it is a moment, at all, it won't be in a good way.

[*Nately120*]

(06-09-2023, 02:28 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Being concerned for a very possible outcome that will roil this nation is not fearmongering, it's being realistic.  Whether you think the risks are worth taking is, of course, your decision.  When weighing the potential benefits of a Trump indictment/conviction versus the possible ramifications then the cost/benefit analysis is heavily skewed against this action.  Trump going to prison won't change a single thing about how POTUS's conduct themselves.  I don't see how you think this will be beneficial watershed moment for US politics.  If it is a moment, at all, it won't be in a good way.

I can't disagree with you in what might happen.  I'm not even being a smartass when I say that it may be a real risk to even have an election in 2024 and risk Trump not getting what he wants.  Thankfully, democrats have Biden who will surely fall down enough that the country will elect Trump, thus possibly sparing us from a civil war unless Trump just decides he wants one for the fun of it.

Democracy itself is putting us in harms way.  Democrats sticking with Biden is a real 2011 Indianapolis Colts kinda move, but still isn't guaranteed to work. 

[BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI]

(06-09-2023, 02:33 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I can't disagree with you in what might happen.  I'm not even being a smartass when I say that it may be a real risk to even have an election in 2024 and risk Trump not getting what he wants.  Thankfully, democrats have Biden who will surely fall down enough that the country will elect Trump, thus possibly sparing us from a civil war unless Trump just decides he wants one for the fun of it.

Democracy itself is putting us in harms way.  Democrats sticking with Biden is a real 2011 Indianapolis Colts kinda move, but still isn't guaranteed to work. 

Starting to come out Trump had classified documents regarding our troop movements and capabilities in foreign countries. Our nation's nuclear capabilities and limitations.  Why would he have these, and why would he want to have these other than to use them as leverage?  If this is the case, this can be viewed as an assault on our military and could be charged as treason if it's found out he's leaked this info to Putin or the Saudis.  Even the attempt or uttering a threat is just as bad as actually leaking the info.

They're saying it's a total of 38 counts of espionage. 

[Belsnickel]

(06-09-2023, 01:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: At the end of the day that's not relevant to the point I'm making as it won't matter at all to the people who are going to perceive this the way I described.

I'm aware that people will perceive it differently than I am stating it. I am just presenting the argument from a factual standpoint. I can't help it people are not thinking logically about it.

(06-09-2023, 01:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Why?  One of the main arguments in favor of this indictment is "no one should be above the law."  Why does that change when we're talking about actions taken by a sitting POTUS versus a former one?

I am saying they are treated differently because of how we compare these things and how the law perceives them. Official actions are seen differently in the law than others. It's similar to qualified immunity. Are you following policies? Then if bad shit happens, you aren't going to be punished for it. The reason is the same as for qualified immunity. Sometimes these officials have to make difficult decisions. Again, this covers official actions only. Personal actions they try to cloak in official status are fair game, IMHO.

[Arturo Bandini]

To be fair, who would have noticed ? That's careful handling of national secrecy in my books.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="zxx" dir="ltr"><a href="https://t.co/1gjBdb4K4S">pic.twitter.com/1gjBdb4K4S</a></p>&mdash; Acyn (@Acyn) <a href="https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1667235546861813765?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Witch Hunt all the way.

[BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI]

Read the 38-count espionage indictment of Donald J. Trump here.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000188-a12f-db74-ab98-b3ff4de50000

The right will try to spin this as a political hit job, but read the indictment and realize how serious this is in regards to our National security.  What strikes me as damning is that this indictment lists Trump's attorneys as Attorney 1, Attorney 2, and Attorney 3 he instructed them to conceal and to lie to the FBI that he did not have said documents.  Also, there is another who conspired with Donald Trump who will most likely flip.  

Remember a federal judge ruled b/c Trump instructed his lawyers 1, 2, and 3 to commit federal crimes by misleading federal investigators that he forfeited his 6th Amendment protection.  This ruling removed the attorney-client privilege aka 6th Amendment protections, and they testified under oath to the special DOJ council against Defendant Trump.

These are very serious charges that include documents that detail our troop movements and capabilities in foreign countries.  Also, documents regarding our nation's nuclear capabilities.  If this is proven, this is an assault on our military by giving away their positions and capabilities.  If it proven Trump was trying to use this as leverage to line his pockets by offering them to foreign countries (E.g., Putin or the Saudis) it will rise to the level of treason.

What I'm wondering is why would Trump want to have these and then want to hide these documents, claim that he didn't have them, and then instruct his lawyers to help him hide them.

[Vas Deferens]

But he so smart

[GMDino]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jack Smith: &quot;It is very important for me to note that the defendant in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/6Uk6tUVJc3">pic.twitter.com/6Uk6tUVJc3</a></p>&mdash; Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1667248598772318209?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2023</a></blockquote> 

[GMDino]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jack Smith: &quot;It is very important for me to note that the defendant in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/6Uk6tUVJc3">pic.twitter.com/6Uk6tUVJc3</a></p>&mdash; Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1667248598772318209?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2023</a></blockquote> 

[XenoMorph]

(06-09-2023, 04:35 PM)BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI Wrote: Read the 38-count espionage indictment of Donald J. Trump here.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000188-a12f-db74-ab98-b3ff4de50000

The right will try to spin this as a political hit job, but read the indictment and realize how serious this is in regards to our National security.  What strikes me as damning is that this indictment list Trump's attorneys as Attorney 1, Attorney 2, and Attorney 3 he instructed them to conceal and to lie to the FBI that he did not have said documents.  Also, there is another who conspired with Donald Trump who will most likely flip.  

Remember a federal judge ruled b/c Trump instructed his lawyers 1, 2, and 3 to commit federal crimes by misleading federal investigators that he forfeited his 6th Amendment protection.  This ruling removed the attorney-client privilege aka 6th Amendment protections, and they testified under oath to the special DOJ council against Defendant Trump.

These are very serious charges that include documents that detail our troop movements and capabilities in foreign countries.  Also, documents regarding our nation's nuclear capabilities.  If this is proven, this is an assault on our military by giving away their positions and capabilities.  If it proven Trump was trying to use this as leverage to line his pockets by offering them to foreign countries (E.g., Putin or the Saudis) it will rise to the level of treason.

What I'm wondering is why would Trump want to have these and then want to hide these documents, claim that he didn't have them, and then instruct his lawyers to help him hide them.

what are they doing about the documents everyone else has?

[Belsnickel]

(06-09-2023, 04:57 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: what are they doing about the documents everyone else has?

Well, they cleared Pence. There is still an ongoing special counsel investigation on Biden. Smith, though, was tasked with focusing on Trump.

[GMDino]

(06-09-2023, 04:57 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: what are they doing about the documents everyone else has?

What they've been doing:  Asking for them back and verifying they have them all.

That's why Pence didn't face charges.  He didn't obstruct.

[BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI]

(06-09-2023, 04:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jack Smith: &quot;It is very important for me to note that the defendant in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/6Uk6tUVJc3">pic.twitter.com/6Uk6tUVJc3</a></p>&mdash; Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1667248598772318209?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2023</a></blockquote> 

Read page 16.  There's a transcribed recording of Trump admitting he cannot declassify the information contained in these documents, and on Page 17 item 36, Trump kills himself with his own words.  

This guy is either beyond stupid, or he just really thinks he's above the law and rules don't apply to him.  We all know he's a malignant narcissist so I think it's the latter of the two. 

[GMDino]

(06-09-2023, 05:01 PM)BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI Wrote: Read page 16.  There's a transcribed recording of Trump admitting he cannot declassify the information contained in these documents, and on Page 17 item 36, Trump kills himself with his own words.  

This guy is either beyond stupid, or he just really thinks he's above the law and rules don't apply to him.  We all know he's a malignant narcissist so I think it's the latter of the two. 

It's both.  He's never been challenged.  If he had stayed in New York he could still be the agitator and grifter he always was...fooling enough people to stay rich.

His ego got the best of him and his inability to follow rules/laws is catching up with him because he let the big spotlight be turned on his dealings.

[BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI]

(06-09-2023, 04:57 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: what are they doing about the documents everyone else has?

As it was suggested,  please take the time to read the full indictment and then you'll answer your own question.  

Just a nugget for ya, in none of these other situations did anyone ask their lawyers to hide, lie, and obstruct federal investigators regarding information to our national security.  The cover-up is usually worse than the crime.