Trump Indictment Watch

Justified? The old saying in Washington is that the coverup is often worse than the crime. What he did wouldnt necessarily be a crime its the covering up where the crime comes in. It amounted to cheating in the 2016 election because it prevented a negative story about Trump from going public using illegal campaign donations. I was told that election integrity is super serious. Prosecute anyone who breaks election laws to the max the law allows. Do you not want people who rig elections prosecuted? He "won" based on 50k votes over about 3 states. Who knows how much this story would have changed votes.


I do not expect him to get prison time from this case even if he is convicted 34 times. By legal standards he has no prior criminal record with only some civil judgements of fraud on his record which wont matter. He is also a former President which will get him exceedingly favorable treatment. I expect the Judge to give him probation despite the attacks by Trump to hammer home her impartiality in the case although we know nothing but dismissing the case and ordering the immediate execution of Alvin Bragg will get the right to display the Judge as anything but Stalin reincarnated. The real threat of prison time comes from the 3 cases in Georgia and DC. If convicted in this case and then any of those, how do you not give prison time to a guy who is already a convicted felon. Even then I believe the Judge will grant an appeal bond solely because of his status as a former President.

If this case goes to trial after the others, he might be a convicted felon by the time a verdict is reached. And I can't think of actions that merit enhancement of the sentence more than the attempts so far to intimidate officers of the court. This judge is going to be his usual professional self, but he is also a direct witness of these attempts to intimidate and corrupt the administration of justice.
 
Last edited:
4 months

junior shouldn't have tweeted that picture of the judge's daughter...that and other attempts by the defendant himself to intimidate officers of the court call for an enhancement

He actually linked to a Breitbart article that had her picture on it. I guess you're not allowed to do that. lol. The article discusses the conflicts of interests he has in this case. The whole "picture" stuff was just another misdirection by the media to hide actual facts of the case.
 
You think they will be tougher because of his actions and I think they will give him slack for various reasons. I think the Judge throw an olive branch to Republicans with a light sentence which MAGA will do what they always do and turn around and spit in the Judges eye and STILL act like he was the most biased person ever against them to have ever biased.
 
He actually linked to a Breitbart article that had her picture on it. I guess you're not allowed to do that. lol. The article discusses the conflicts of interests he has in this case. The whole "picture" stuff was just another misdirection by the media to hide actual facts of the case.


The Judges daughter is not a relevant fact of the case. If Clarence Thomas doesnt have to recuse himself for cases involving his wife then why should this judge? Theres no judge your side is going to be happy with because the facts arent what you want them to be.
 
The Judges daughter is not a relevant fact of the case. If Clarence Thomas doesnt have to recuse himself for cases involving his wife then why should this judge? Theres no judge your side is going to be happy with because the facts arent what you want them to be.

The problem with you is that you don't see the difference between political hit job cases with a poor legal basis and real ones. It's whatever the MSM tells you to think on a case is reality to you. You found one lawyer that agrees with you but about every legal scholar out there agrees with me on this.
 
The problem with you is that you don't see the difference between political hit job cases with a poor legal basis and real ones. It's whatever the MSM tells you to think on a case is reality to you. You found one lawyer that agrees with you but about every legal scholar out there agrees with me on this.

The problem is we do. If you want a for real witch hunt involving politically-motivated prosecutions that would be the Durham cases, which both judge and jury foreman have indicated were incredibly weak. The judge all but announced before one of the cases he would throw it out if the jury reached a guilty verdict. He just felt it was better to let the process play itself out and have the jury reach the obvious conclusion. Which it did.
 
The problem is we do. If you want a for real witch hunt involving politically-motivated prosecutions that would be the Durham cases, which both judge and jury foreman have indicated were incredibly weak.

Weak? Even if you have absolute proof it's still weak ? Go read Jonathan Turley's legal opinion on this Sussman case. It was cut and dry. If Sussman was a republican they wouldn't have said the case was weak and he would have been convicted. Like I said before in DC you can get charged with trespassing after being invited in and seditious conspiracy for tough guy talk. Regardless of evidence you still can't figure out why DC is a problem.

Why am I arguing with the dude who got his ass owned by Sturg the other day and started using Bard to try to beat Sturg? lol
 
Last edited:
DJT hasn't plead his case yet and presumed innocent.
Next hearing is December ?

So, who knows

I believe the former speaker informed us that he is presumed guilty and will be able to prove his innocence

she is the anti-fascist, remember
 
He gets to defend himself against the evidence Bragg presents. Yes. We aren't like your side that presumes guilt even after they prove their innocence in court.
 
I was walking down the street the other day when this big tough guy, looked like a firefighter, came up to me with tears in his eyes and he said "sir, I am so happy Donald Trump is finally getting held accountable for his crimes".




Disclaimer for Garmel, I am mocking Trump, its sad I have to include this for you to know that.
 
You can tell how seriously Trump is taking a case by how attractive or not the his lawyers are.

Until the indictments come out, he has the models on tv but once it gets serious he brings in the real lawyers.
 
That’s literally the dumbest thing I’ve read on these boards^

Just when I thought he couldn’t get any more idiotic
 
Trump does place a high value on appearance. It's 99% of the reason his last lress secretary got the job. I think it's about how they look on TV not necessarily their appearance. He has told numerous people he rails against that they do a good job on TV when he actually meets them. He thinks everything is a big reality show.
 
I wonder what affect the FOX vs Dominion and FOX vs Smartmatic cases will have on the Trump indictments.

That's a lot of very damning corroborating evidence against "the big lie" and myriad of Trump/Maga crimes.

It looks like holding off the indictments for a while has been a smart play.
 
Back
Top