The (many) indictments of Donald Trump

#6,631
#6,631
lawgator1 said:
In order,

I don't know enough about the NY tax evasion charges to know if they "have legs."

I think, and have always thought actually, that the documents charge was the cleanest cut, easiest to prove, slam dunk of all of them.

The most recent indictment my concern, as above, is awfully hard to prove state of mind in a vacuum and circumstantially relying on how others perceived what he knew and did not know. Much easier to prove that in the documents case, especially with the audio tape.

Caveat: a number of prosecutor experts on shows last night commented that they suspect that the prosecution has some cards yet to play, and they may get at that specific issue. If there is some irrefutable proof that he acknowledged that he lost and he continued the charade anyway (not thought he may have lot, probably lost, but definitely lost) then the people that should be really angry with him are sitting in jail cells right now for their roles in 1/6.
Click to expand...

You seem to have said the same thing over (that only 1 of these cases seems legit). Without really addressing the question.

It seems it should be greatly troubling to everyone that 2/3 cases seem to lack substance. If they have cards to play, they need to play them. Otherwise people will be (rightfully so) losing what little trust remains in our justice system
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#6,632
#6,632
RockyTop85 said:
After reading the indictment I think they are a tossup, or that Trump may be favored to win.

He can say he listened to his lawyers, he can say he really believed he won, he can say that he never intended that the fake electoral ballots be submitted unless he won in court and somebody took it upon themselves to do that.

Maybe they have evidence to refute all of that and it just isn’t in the indictment, but just based on what is there those seem like plausible defenses.

Proof and seriousness are two “no ****” metrics for evaluating a criminal case. This is more serious than the Mar-A-Lago case, in my opinion, but less clear that the elements of a crime can be proven.
Click to expand...

Does it concern you that only 1/3 of these cases is clear cut? It seems if you’re going to go after the main opposition to the current president, that you should have something substantial. I agree they have that in the classified documents case, but substance seems to be greatly lacking in the other two
 
#6,637
#6,637
GAVol said:
The boys and I have been fine since the end of last week. Wife is much better but still fighting a cough.
Click to expand...
Saw a friend last week at Publix. He had a mask on and was obviously distancing himself from me while we talked. A little into the conversation, he told me he had COVID. My first thought was, "that's why you wear a mask". Glad to hear all are recovering well with your family. I had it twice, both completely different symptoms, but neither was too rough. I did develop a cough with the first round, and it's now just going away. Funny thing, no lung damage nor a drop in my stat
 
#6,639
#6,639
Vol8188 said:
Does it concern you that only 1/3 of these cases is clear cut? It seems if you’re going to go after the main opposition to the current president, that you should have something substantial. I agree they have that in the classified documents case, but substance seems to be greatly lacking in the other two
Click to expand...


I'd prefer it if they did Mar A Lago only (unless they have other stuff where he's on record for sure saying he knew he lost but continued to seek to stay in office anyway, which changes things). The documents case is the clear, clean cut, ABC case.
 
#6,640
#6,640
lawgator1 said:
I'd prefer it if they did Mar A Lago only (unless they have other stuff where he's on record for sure saying he knew he lost but continued to seek to stay in office anyway, which changes things). The documents case is the clear, clean cut, ABC case.
Click to expand...

It seems you’re wanting to agree with me, without outright saying it. The other two cases seem to be very political in nature. Which is not good for the country
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64 and OrangeBoro
#6,643
#6,643
The emails that were circulating around at the end of 2020 between Trump Republicans are amazingly juicy with details of how, in a fraudulent manner, the election could be overturned. Read it. It's in the indictment. For as sloppily irresponsible as it was to be doing it, they had to believe they had some sort of executive privilege. Maybe why some of them asked for pardons??? As Deep Throat said in 1972, "frankly, these aren't smart people" When speaking of Haldeman, Erlichman and Mitchell
 
#6,647
#6,647
BernardKingGOAT said:
The emails that were circulating around at the end of 2020 between Trump Republicans are amazingly juicy with details of how, in a fraudulent manner, the election could be overturned. Read it. It's in the indictment. For as sloppily irresponsible as it was to be doing it, they had to believe they had some sort of executive privilege. Maybe why some of them asked for pardons??? As Deep Throat said in 1972, "frankly, these aren't smart people" When speaking of Haldeman, Erlichman and Mitchell
Click to expand...

Did they say “fraudulent manner” or are you editorializing? It seems you’re editorializing and the emails merely said “this is how we can do this” not “this is what we can do, but it’s fraudulent”
 
#6,648
#6,648
lawgator1 said:
There is a limit to the litigation privilege and she's headed for sanctions-ville (yet again).

Luckily, I am sure Fox will hire her down the road as she fits the bill -- so good looking it does not matter how foolish her comments.
Click to expand...
She right. This is all political and election interference by the communists
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#6,649
#6,649
Vol8188 said:
It seems you’re wanting to agree with me, without outright saying it. The other two cases seem to be very political in nature. Which is not good for the country
Click to expand...

Nice try. I never said they were political. I said I did not know enough about the NY tax case to have an opinion about how strong it is and that the third indictment, while absolutely true and justified, will be harder to prove than the documents case.

I see a lot of value to the country in going for the sure win versus the tougher to prove ones because if he prevails on those -- even if he loses badly in the documents case -- he will bash people over the head witrh the others and ignore the documents case.
 
#6,650
#6,650
OrangeBoro said:
She right. This is all political and election interference by the communists
Click to expand...

98f3f4d39dee23d94493ce1a31924da3_w200.gif
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top