Trump Indictment Watch
- Thread starter cajunrevenge
- Start date
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
They are just using the Chewbacca defense at this point.
The argument should be that presidents have immunity within the scope of their job, like congressmen and judges do.
Trump trying to delay certification to have the states that asked for the delay should qualify for immunity. Regardless of the nonsense some of you believe Trump wasn't doing a coup.
They're trying to stop all of the silly lawfare but that won't work.
Some form of immunity must exist or we will be able to sue every living president for their actions on the job. Biden will be able to be sued for the border and Obama will be hauled in for the murder of two Americans on one of his drone strikes. It would be absolute chaos.
Trump trying to delay certification to have the states that asked for the delay should qualify for immunity. Regardless of the nonsense some of you believe Trump wasn't doing a coup.
They're trying to stop all of the silly lawfare but that won't work.
Some form of immunity must exist or we will be able to sue every living president for their actions on the job. Biden will be able to be sued for the border and Obama will be hauled in for the murder of two Americans on one of his drone strikes. It would be absolute chaos.
Last edited:
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
To some of us it looked like he was trying to do an illegal and extraconstitutional end run around a valid election that he lost. Fortunately, Mike Pence listened to Dan Quayle and Judge Luttig and told him to stuff it.
ymmv
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Trump was denied being able to make closing arguments because he failed to agree to keep his statements about the evidence and relevant facts of the case. His lawyers will still be able to give closing arguments. Trump just wants to rant and rave like a lunatic about how he is a big baby and the Judge is a big poopy head. Do you honestly think that would help his case? You can't tell me you think Trump not being able to whine at the end of the case is a difference maker in the verdict of the case. He will still give the same speech to the media outside the courtroom anyways and the Judge isn't the intended audience for the speech anyways.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Presidents do have immunity within the scope of their work. Trump's actions in question were for the benefit of his campaign.
No states asked for a delay in certification. A couple state legislatures members who voted for Trump asked for a delay but they do not speak for the entire state. No state legislature passed anything supporting a delay. There is a mechanism to have a delay to look at alleged irregularities in the vote. If an objection is raised to a states electoral votes that is in writing and signed by a member of the House and Senate they both meet to determine what to do. Just because you know that's not going to get the results you desire doesn't mean that you can circumvent it by making **** up.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
He has a right to give a closing arguments relevant to the facts and evidence of the case. He was denied because he failed to agree to stick to that. You do not have any right to waste the courts times with the rantings and ravings of a lunatic. Similarly if I wanted to give closing arguments in my trial and my plan was just to read from the phone book I would also be denied.
Stopping election fraud is within his duties.
More than a couple members. Here's one example.
"President Pro Tempore Jake Corman (R., Centre) and Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward (R., Westmoreland), joined by all but seven members of the caucus, said certain “inconsistencies” with how the election was run in Pennsylvania still need to be investigated."
https://www.spotlightpa.org/news/20...jection-donald-trump-joe-biden-2020-election/
Last edited:
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I am more than satisfied that when the facts are laid out it is clear Trump had no genuine interest in stopping voter fraud and was just trying to subvert the election results. You have to be a very naive person to think what he was doing wasn't about stopping voter fraud and not attempting to help his campaign. His refusal to accept what his own people who voted and supported his reelection were telling him is damning. His only defense is that he is a delusional narcissist incapable of believing results he doesn't like. Which may be true, but I think he would rather go to prison than admit that.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Not his AG, FBI director, VP, Republican SoS, White House counsels, Republican state house/Senate leaders. After he started trying to destroy the career of any of them that didn't tell him what he wanted to hear some started saying what they were told.
Like I said, you have be really naive to think this was anything but an attempt to subvert the election. Many of the alleged issues raised were court cases he lost before the election and was trying to raise again after the election that has no chance of winning.
Like I said, you have be really naive to think this was anything but an attempt to subvert the election. Many of the alleged issues raised were court cases he lost before the election and was trying to raise again after the election that has no chance of winning.
None of those people were in his inner circle. A bunch of idiots worried about their social standing in DC than worrying about doing the right thing. Most of his lawyers agreed with Trump.
Trump had a right to challenge the election. You have zero proof that he was trying to do a coup but the media says it's true so you believe it like a good lemming. Democrats have used alternate electors for decades and even used faithless electors in 2016 but yet nobody accused them of a coup. Alan Dershowitz admits he and Gore did the exact same thing as Trump and he was called brilliant.
The court cases he lost there were mostly lost by lack of standing or laches or some other excuse. They wouldn't even hear evidence.
Like I've said before if you think a system that has little to no transparency ran by the government is somehow honest you're pretty clueless.
Trump had a right to challenge the election. You have zero proof that he was trying to do a coup but the media says it's true so you believe it like a good lemming. Democrats have used alternate electors for decades and even used faithless electors in 2016 but yet nobody accused them of a coup. Alan Dershowitz admits he and Gore did the exact same thing as Trump and he was called brilliant.
The court cases he lost there were mostly lost by lack of standing or laches or some other excuse. They wouldn't even hear evidence.
Like I've said before if you think a system that has little to no transparency ran by the government is somehow honest you're pretty clueless.
Last edited:
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
They were his own supporters and voted for him. This **** you just make up to discredit them is BS. In a court of law Trumps own people telling him his claims were BS and his refusal to even consider they might be right is good evidence to his state of mind. Trump chose his lawyers based on who told him what he wanted to hear. He even acknowledged this. He said he didnt listen to the lawyers who told him claims were BS because he "didnt respect them". And he only lost respect for them when they told him what he didnt want to hear.
Trump does have a right to challenge the election. He can file any lawsuit he wants. He can have Congressmen object to the certification of the votes. He tried to defraud and intimidate states with red legislatures that Biden won into not certifying their vote to deny Biden 270 electoral votes to send it to the House where Republicans hold the voting advantage. If trying to subvert the will of the voters after losing an election isnt a coup I dont know what is. You can make whatever false equivalencies you want about past events but no candidate has endorsed subverting the will of the voters. Some people have been dumbasses on both sides with faithless electors but none was ever any serious threat to change the outcome or supported by the candidate. Al Gore conceded. Hillary Clinton conceded. That made any dumbass thing anyone else did irrelevant.
Trump lose his court cases for various reasons. One reason was because you cant change the rules AFTER the election to disenfranchise voters. So that kind of case was pointless to go forward. Another reason was because he made baseless claims with no evidence and wanted discovery to go on a fishing expidition for evidence. Thats not going to fly in a court of law either. That you dont like that you cant win in court doesnt mean you can do whatever the hell you want. You know who does have standing? Criminal courts. All these made up claims Trump saw from AssBlaster69420 on twatter never amounted to one criminal conviction for any voter fraud despite all the kool aid drinking Republicans in law enforcement. You just accept whatever the Teflon Don says as fact. He pisses in your mouth and and tells you its raining and you lap it up like the good little lemming you are.
Trump does have a right to challenge the election. He can file any lawsuit he wants. He can have Congressmen object to the certification of the votes. He tried to defraud and intimidate states with red legislatures that Biden won into not certifying their vote to deny Biden 270 electoral votes to send it to the House where Republicans hold the voting advantage. If trying to subvert the will of the voters after losing an election isnt a coup I dont know what is. You can make whatever false equivalencies you want about past events but no candidate has endorsed subverting the will of the voters. Some people have been dumbasses on both sides with faithless electors but none was ever any serious threat to change the outcome or supported by the candidate. Al Gore conceded. Hillary Clinton conceded. That made any dumbass thing anyone else did irrelevant.
Trump lose his court cases for various reasons. One reason was because you cant change the rules AFTER the election to disenfranchise voters. So that kind of case was pointless to go forward. Another reason was because he made baseless claims with no evidence and wanted discovery to go on a fishing expidition for evidence. Thats not going to fly in a court of law either. That you dont like that you cant win in court doesnt mean you can do whatever the hell you want. You know who does have standing? Criminal courts. All these made up claims Trump saw from AssBlaster69420 on twatter never amounted to one criminal conviction for any voter fraud despite all the kool aid drinking Republicans in law enforcement. You just accept whatever the Teflon Don says as fact. He pisses in your mouth and and tells you its raining and you lap it up like the good little lemming you are.
Tapate50
Well-known member
The last year has seen exactly this illustrated in real time.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
lol
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Trump ended up making his closing whinings anyways. Let me sum it up for you "wahhhhhhhhh, everyones so mean to me, wahhhhhhhh, the Judge is a big dumb poopey head, wahhhhhhhh". He was surely going to be found guilty, not sure now after these profound arguments from Trump.