Trump Indicted For 2020 Post-Election Shenanigans

[Mega Hertz]

I believe you just won your case.

https://youtu.be/xs3_hNYAVRw?t=82

It really is shocking the disdain that so many people have for due process rights. The most some peabrains can some up with is "TRUMP BAD! LOCK HIM UP!" Except that we've moved on past arguing whether what Trump did was bad or unethical or whatever negative word you want to use here. We're now on to arguing whether what Trump did was criminal and in violation of specific federal statutes. This is where due process rights come into play and being proven guilty of a crime in a court of law is very different from someone dislking or despising Trump for how he handled his electoral loss. I've long said Biden won fair and square - in fact, I think I said as much in this forum a day or 2 after the election. I think Trump's behavior was childish at best. But I haven't seen anything that, beyond a reasonable doubt, rises to the level of criminal conspiracy. And again, we'll wait and see what actually comes out at trial.

Trump deserves due process for what he's been accused of, but he doesn't deserve support to regain an office that he's shown to be incapable of faithfully exercising the duties of the position. How many elections does this guy have to lose (or cause Republicans to significantly underperform) for everyone to cut bait?

None of that matters. The fix is always in. They don't see him doing anything wrong. That's why it never waivers. But I get it. We've all been there. I've known girls that have walked in on their boyfriends screwing another girl and still went back because "he's a really good guy, he's just confused". You hate to see it.

Perhaps the question should be, "what did he do right?" Supreme Court nominations that he was spoonfed do not count.

We both know the answer to that.

"Make Liberals Cry Again". Not jobs, not the economy, not nation relationships, just upsetting another group of people.

[Bryce]

Coronations are about the rigid transfer of unquestioned authority. Historically, going back to the beginning of our representative republic, elections have not been. Not once has anyone been charged.

Alas, no one studies history anymore. Check out the Presidential election of 1876 where Rutherford B. Hayes faced Democrat Samuel J. Tilden.

How's your chad hanging?

Good job though DNC operatives. Haven't heard a darn thing about the Joe Biden Crime Organization for days now.

[bmw]

Notice too that Trump hasn't been charged with inciting a riot. He hasn't been charged with treason. He hasn't been charged with inciting a rebellion or an insurrection. Instead he's been charged with lesser conspiracies. Why is that?

§2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Everybody in here who believes Trump should go to prison argues that he incited an insurrection. So why not charge him under Section 2383? Seems to me that the underlying conduct supporting the charges in the most recent indictment would also support this charge. And this charge would have the added benefit of Trump being barred from being President the moment he's found guilty. Lastly, this statute is written in plain English in a way that anybody can understand. Seems to me this one would be easier to explain to a jury as opposed to all the "Trump conspired with 6 different people behind the scenes to violate people's rights and interfere with official proceedings" line of convoluted BS.

And regarding the added penalty of Trump being unable to hold office - if such a conviction were obtained after Trump became the nominee but prior to the election, that would seal the victory for the Democrat. Frankly I'm outright surprised that Trump wasn't charged under this statute and charges brought a year or more ago. The fact that prosecutors apparently don't think they can get a conviction under this statute tells me the can't get a conviction on anything else based on the same underlying conduct.

[Rate This]

Notice too that Trump hasn't been charged with inciting a riot. He hasn't been charged with treason. He hasn't been charged with inciting a rebellion or an insurrection. Instead he's been charged with lesser conspiracies. Why is that?

§2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Everybody in here who believes Trump should go to prison argues that he incited an insurrection. So why not charge him under Section 2383? Seems to me that the underlying conduct supporting the charges in the most recent indictment would also support this charge. And this charge would have the added benefit of Trump being barred from being President the moment he's found guilty. Lastly, this statute is written in plain English in a way that anybody can understand. Seems to me this one would be easier to explain to a jury as opposed to all the "Trump conspired with 6 different people behind the scenes to violate people's rights and interfere with official proceedings" line of convoluted BS.

And regarding the added penalty of Trump being unable to hold office - if such a conviction were obtained after Trump became the nominee but prior to the election, that would seal the victory for the Democrat. Frankly I'm outright surprised that Trump wasn't charged under this statute and charges brought a year or more ago. The fact that prosecutors apparently don't think they can get a conviction under this statute tells me the can't get a conviction on anything else based on the same underlying conduct.

You make the assumption Jack Smith is all done charging…. That seems unwise.