GDT: 11/3/20, Election Day, Donald J. Trump vs. Joseph R. Biden

Status
Not open for further replies.
[tw]1346141332704808960[/tw]

It’s crazy looking at the past and see how many described him perfectly and predicted the future

Most of us already knew it was true
 
Man, it’s wild to see a republican stand up for facts and truth and not go along with this criminal and lair

[tw]1346184101838127104[/tw]
 
There so much uproar about the Trump call being criminal that I think people are missing an important part of it. Trump seems to legitimately believe he won and that he's being cheated out of the election. That would make Trump's call to Raffensperger much less a criminal thing. If he legitimately believes he won Georgia, it takes much of the mens rea away. To him, he's not trying to steal an election, he's trying to set it right.

I think the problem here is that Trump is a narcissist. And not like a run of the mill narcissist. Like a clinical narcissist. Mental illness level narcissism. He can't comprehend a world in which he didn't win the election. His brain literally will not let him consider that as a possibility. So the only conclusion is that the Democrats are trying to steal the election from him. So to him, he's fighting to preserve the legitimacy of the election because, to him, any legitimate election he wins by a landslide.

We're seeing delusions at work here, not some evil coup attempt.
 
There so much uproar about the Trump call being criminal that I think people are missing an important part of it. Trump seems to legitimately believe he won and that he's being cheated out of the election. That would make Trump's call to Raffensperger much less a criminal thing. If he legitimately believes he won Georgia, it takes much of the mens rea away. To him, he's not trying to steal an election, he's trying to set it right.

I think the problem here is that Trump is a narcissist. And not like a run of the mill narcissist. Like a clinical narcissist. Mental illness level narcissism. He can't comprehend a world in which he didn't win the election. His brain literally will not let him consider that as a possibility. So the only conclusion is that the Democrats are trying to steal the election from him. So to him, he's fighting to preserve the legitimacy of the election because, to him, any legitimate election he wins by a landslide.

We're seeing delusions at work here, not some evil coup attempt.

Question for you and other legal eagles. If sincere belief in an alternative narrative works as a defense, where does that leave the law.

In this particular situation, Raffensperger and others have laid out the facts to very poorly chosen one. But he chooses an alternative narrative. Is that all it takes to get away with a crime.

By the way I agree that he suffering from delusional thinking driven by his narcissism. It must be nice to be like that if the end result is you can get away with behavior that gets the rest of us locked up.
 
Last edited:
There so much uproar about the Trump call being criminal that I think people are missing an important part of it. Trump seems to legitimately believe he won and that he's being cheated out of the election. That would make Trump's call to Raffensperger much less a criminal thing. If he legitimately believes he won Georgia, it takes much of the mens rea away. To him, he's not trying to steal an election, he's trying to set it right.

I think the problem here is that Trump is a narcissist. And not like a run of the mill narcissist. Like a clinical narcissist. Mental illness level narcissism. He can't comprehend a world in which he didn't win the election. His brain literally will not let him consider that as a possibility. So the only conclusion is that the Democrats are trying to steal the election from him. So to him, he's fighting to preserve the legitimacy of the election because, to him, any legitimate election he wins by a landslide.

We're seeing delusions at work here, not some evil coup attempt.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/vincent-gigante-the-oddfather
 
There so much uproar about the Trump call being criminal that I think people are missing an important part of it. Trump seems to legitimately believe he won and that he's being cheated out of the election. That would make Trump's call to Raffensperger much less a criminal thing. If he legitimately believes he won Georgia, it takes much of the mens rea away. To him, he's not trying to steal an election, he's trying to set it right.

I think the problem here is that Trump is a narcissist. And not like a run of the mill narcissist. Like a clinical narcissist. Mental illness level narcissism. He can't comprehend a world in which he didn't win the election. His brain literally will not let him consider that as a possibility. So the only conclusion is that the Democrats are trying to steal the election from him. So to him, he's fighting to preserve the legitimacy of the election because, to him, any legitimate election he wins by a landslide.

We're seeing delusions at work here, not some evil coup attempt.

This is insane reasoning
 
Question for you and other legal eagles. If sincere belief in an alternative narrative works as a defense, where does that leave the law.

In this particular situation, Raffensperger and others have laid out the facts to very poorly chosen one. But he chooses an alternative narrative. Is that all it takes to get away with a crime.

By the way I agree that he suffering from delusional thinking driven by his narcissism. It must be nice to be like that if the end result is you can get away with behavior that gets the rest of us locked up.

Most crimes require both mens rea (criminal intent) and actus reus (criminal act) to be a crime. If you have a sincere belief that is incorrect but, if correct, your actions would not be criminal, then you have no mens rea.

For example, suppose I see a wallet sitting on a table and I think it's my wallet. I pick it up and put it in my pocket. The police stop me and take the wallet and determine it's not mine. I've not committed a crime. I had no criminal intent as had my mistaken belief been correct, I wouldn't be stealing.

With Trump, whether or not the call was actually criminal would depend on the specific statutes involved and what elements are required. I haven't researched that exhaustively enough to speak on it. I will say the fact that he seems to think he's fighting to ensure a result he believes is correct reduces the culpability. It doesn't make the situation better as a narcissist operating under delusions is hardly a better person to have as a president than a criminal.
 
This is insane reasoning

How so? If he knows he lost and is trying to steal the election, that's one level of evil. If he believes he won due to narcissistic delusions and so is trying, in his mind, to keep the election from being stolen. Mental state is extremely important when discussing crimes.

Again, I don't think either situation is good for us. A criminal or someone operating under a delusion isn't a great choice.
 
How so? If he knows he lost and is trying to steal the election, that's one level of evil. If he believes he won due to narcissistic delusions and so is trying, in his mind, to keep the election from being stolen. Mental state is extremely important when discussing crimes.

Again, I don't think either situation is good for us. A criminal or someone operating under a delusion isn't a great choice.

So does his asking that a specific number of votes be found for him tip the scales one way or another?

"So what are we going to do here folks? I only need 11,000 votes. Fellas, I need 11,000 votes. Give me a break."

"All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes."
 
Last edited:
The right wing idiotic lunatic is gonna be a darling for the radicals

[tw]1346215088429162497[/tw]
 
until the return of the thethe i'm going to post a couple random Lin Wood posts now and then...it is a poor substitute but the best i can do

[tw]1346246003767312386[/tw]
 
The right wing idiotic lunatic is gonna be a darling for the radicals

[tw]1346215088429162497[/tw]

This is my district so I watched the primary closely. I voted for the other guy. I think Greene is somehow both crazy and a fake. She reminds me of when some on the Right briefly embraced Roseanne Barr. This will end badly.
 
Most crimes require both mens rea (criminal intent) and actus reus (criminal act) to be a crime. If you have a sincere belief that is incorrect but, if correct, your actions would not be criminal, then you have no mens rea.

For example, suppose I see a wallet sitting on a table and I think it's my wallet. I pick it up and put it in my pocket. The police stop me and take the wallet and determine it's not mine. I've not committed a crime. I had no criminal intent as had my mistaken belief been correct, I wouldn't be stealing.

With Trump, whether or not the call was actually criminal would depend on the specific statutes involved and what elements are required. I haven't researched that exhaustively enough to speak on it. I will say the fact that he seems to think he's fighting to ensure a result he believes is correct reduces the culpability. It doesn't make the situation better as a narcissist operating under delusions is hardly a better person to have as a president than a criminal.


My thoughts on this in my untrained legal opinion.


- "my client is a delusional nutjob" is a tough defense for the President of the United States.

- His delusions are a part of his persona. He is unable to accept that he lost anything ever. If this was an isolated incident I think there would be a strong case that he actually believes it but when its his everyday behavior not convicting him is giving him a license to break the law. I like to watch/study sovereign citizens a lot and this reminds me a lot of them. That they legitimately believe their BS doesnt help them one bit.


- When Trump tells Raffensperger to "just say you recalculated" that is soliciting election fraud.

- Trump continues to make the same accusations after they were shown to him to be false.

- His aids have leaked to the media that he knows he lost. Would be interesting to subpoena them to testify.


- If he thought he won why did he demote Brad Parscale? I think they could subpoena records from the Trump campaign that show he was informed of how bad he was doing. Its not like he was polling well and severely under performed the polls which would be a reason to think there was fraud.


- Then theres also the issue of his actual attempted voter fraud using DeJoy and the Post office and what he was impeached for. His plan with the post office was thwarted because Democrats sued to and the courts ordered DeJoy to ensure the election mail was delivered on time but Trump did exactly what we thought his plan was and sued to not allow ballots received after 8 pm on election night. Had DeJoy not been sued by Democrats this could have flipped PA. Then there was the attempted extortion of Ukraine to help his campaign cheat. I dont think he can claim he legitimately believes he was screwed when he was actively trying to commit voter and election fraud. A person doesnt do those types of things if they think they are going to win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top