Donald J Trump

[TQR 14,384]

Seeks to prove wrong all the people who think the last election was a cake.

 

[lilham 752]

Fulton County Courthouse in Atlanta has barricades going up. The DA requested back in May that the judges not schedule any other in-person hearings in August, so indictments are imminent.

[maryportfuncity 10,639]

Re the post above, game on, or summat

 

Another fuck-tonne of legal trouble unleashes itself whilst Planet Trump rails online that either they're all mad, or he is - summat like that anyway. Thing is, these days, there's loads of "them!"

 

Link to breaking story, if anyone on here still gives a shit - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-66248859

[maryportfuncity 10,639]

Update - charged with four counts and these are mainly "conspiracy" charges. 

 

• Conspiracy to defraud the United States
• Conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding
• Obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding
• Conspiracy against rights

 

[Brad252 806]

 

[Joltin Joe 149]

39 minutes ago, maryportfuncity said:

Re the post above, game on, or summat

 

Another fuck-tonne of legal trouble unleashes itself whilst Planet Trump rails online that either they're all mad, or he is - summat like that anyway. Thing is, these days, there's loads of "them!"

 

Link to breaking story, if anyone on here still gives a shit - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-66248859

 

He is still facing state level charges in Georgia, these are yet more federal charges, in DC no less. Let's just say a jury selected from a jurisdiction where he couldn't get even 6 percent of the vote in the last presidential election is not going to buy into his wacky defense strategies. It looks like the judge overseeing his trial is a black immigrant woman, she won't be pulling him any favors. This is by far the most serious case against him yet, as far as conviction chances. He's lucky if he can afford his council with how fast he is burning through cash at this point. Funneling all his campaign funds into legal defense is just going to end up being a losing battle.

[TQR 14,384]

God, his next social media posts are going to have so much caps lock.

[maryportfuncity 10,639]

10 minutes ago, Joltin Joe said:

 

He is still facing state level charges in Georgia, these are yet more federal charges, in DC no less. Let's just say a jury selected from a jurisdiction where he couldn't get even 6 percent of the vote in the last presidential election is not going to buy into his wacky defense strategies. It looks like the judge overseeing his trial is a black immigrant woman, she won't be pulling him any favors. This is by far the most serious case against him yet, as far as conviction chances. He's lucky if he can afford his council with how fast he is burning through cash at this point. Funneling all his campaign funds into legal defense is just going to end up being a losing battle.

 

 

Well yeah, and since we gathered here originally for the purposes of dead pooling I'll maintain my usual rant. The man's a 77-year-old Jabba clone, fatter than his usual suits make him look, showing plenty loose flesh around his face, known to be evasive on his true medical history, fond for the last few decades of a generally shit (burgers and canned soft drinks) diet and likely internally imploding as the legal problems pile up. Summat in his system may well give out before the election or a jail term. If he's still beligerent and marching into 2024 let's see if he makes the DDP Drop 40. 

 

Significantly on a political point the Republican Party has aligned itself so closely to his fortunes that a disabled Trump or the American public steadily deserting him could leave the GOP similarly wounded on an epic scale. 

 

Oh aye, Trump's current schedule for next year - DDP gold, maybe

 

 

 

[LovelyVincent 25]

and yet Trump will still run throughout this. He's a petulant child and won't ever withdraw. what if he's in custody late in 2024 after hes won the election and cant attend the inauguration in person....im fairly sure that wont happen in a million years. But i wonder what would happen....

[maryportfuncity 10,639]

3 minutes ago, LovelyVincent said:

and yet Trump will still run throughout this. He's a petulant child and won't ever withdraw. what if he's in custody late in 2024 after hes won the election and cant attend the inauguration in person....im fairly sure that wont happen in a million years. But i wonder what would happen....

 

He'll have some health crisis - he's 77, fat, not athletic underneath that blubber and such a raving narcissist that the defection of his close coterie or significant figures in the Republican Party will only prompt a spiral down in his mental state. 

 

A while back someone accused me of posting irrelevent shite, pardon me if I'm the main voice on here consistently trying to drag this discussion back to basic biology and consider Trump's chances of seeing his ninth decade. 

 

[Charlotte's Controller 195]

So it looks like the shit is going to hit the fan, there is only so much that the P45 (Ex POTUS) has been able to defer, eventually the Trumper Lumpa will be able to bathe in a darker shade of brown. I am a great believer that all of his unpaid creditors should take action now that his true colours are being shown.

[YoungWillz 21,024]

Now, let's not be hasty here. The man is innocent until proven guilty.

 

Nonetheless, for the "greatest democracy in the world" to have no rule preventing a convicted felon running for or being able to be elected to the highest office. yet plenty of rules preventing convicted felons from voting even after they have served their sentence, it seems very strange indeed to me. This could mean that Trump, if convicted prior to the election, may have the right to stand but not be able to vote for himself.

[gcreptile 10,963]

23 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

This could mean that Trump, if convicted prior to the election, may have the right to stand but not be able to vote for himself.

Ha, indeed! He'll try though - and commit voter fraud.

[Grim Up North 3,725]

Trump and Biden best two people US can find to lead and represent their country?

 

Hardly a glowing recommendation for democracy.

 

EDIT: And UK Boris followed by Truss obviously no better - not a US bashing post but the current version of democracy bashing post.

[RoverAndOut 4,745]

On 01/08/2023 at 23:26, Joltin Joe said:

He is still facing state level charges in Georgia, these are yet more federal charges, in DC no less. Let's just say a jury selected from a jurisdiction where he couldn't get even 6 percent of the vote in the last presidential election is not going to buy into his wacky defense strategies. It looks like the judge overseeing his trial is a black immigrant woman, she won't be pulling him any favors. This is by far the most serious case against him yet, as far as conviction chances. He's lucky if he can afford his council with how fast he is burning through cash at this point. Funneling all his campaign funds into legal defense is just going to end up being a losing battle.

 

How do federal charges work, though? Is it just done in Washington as the capital? Or Washington because that's where the offences occurred? And does that just mean the jury is only made up of those living in DC rather than representatives from across the country? Seems odd that such an important case just occurs in a regular courtroom. I mean, I know the Supreme Court doesn't deal with criminal matters, but in the UK, a case of this magnitude would take place at the Old Bailey.

[TQR 14,384]

 

Says, in caps lock, that he’s being arrested “FOR YOU”, Americans. Funny, because I thought he was being arrested for being a fucking criminal?

[arrowsmith 444]

3 hours ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

How do federal charges work, though? Is it just done in Washington as the capital? Or Washington because that's where the offences occurred? And does that just mean the jury is only made up of those living in DC rather than representatives from across the country? Seems odd that such an important case just occurs in a regular courtroom. I mean, I know the Supreme Court doesn't deal with criminal matters, but in the UK, a case of this magnitude would take place at the Old Bailey.

Despite prosecuting crimes in the name of the citizens of the United States, as opposed to a particular state, federal courts are portioned into district courts. These districts cover a distinct geographic area (there are exceptions but they are not important here) and the state’s attorney for a given district prosecutes crimes committed in that district before jurors from within its confines. The charges being filed in DC have to do with the fact that the violation of federal law occurred within that district. I hope that clears it up. 

[RoverAndOut 4,745]

2 hours ago, TQR said:

Says, in caps lock, that he’s being arrested “FOR YOU”, Americans. Funny, because I thought he was being arrested for being a fucking criminal?

 

Also says he was challenging a "corrupt, rigged and stolen election". Which is funny, because his Attorney General has been on CNN today saying he knew all along that he was lying and that he is allowed to do that under the First Amendment, which is what Trump is arguing. The problem is, as Bill Barr put it, the First Amendment has nothing to do with charges of conspiracy. Suggesting Trump's fucked. But it doesn't matter now - he's a martyr to a good few million American psychos.

[RoverAndOut 4,745]

 

That moment when you realise that actions really do have consequences. My heart bleeds for him (not).

[RIP Wee Jum 1,559]

Send him to Cereso state prison, Mexicos most notorious prison.  He wont survive very long

[Joltin Joe 149]

9 hours ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

How do federal charges work, though? Is it just done in Washington as the capital? Or Washington because that's where the offences occurred? And does that just mean the jury is only made up of those living in DC rather than representatives from across the country? Seems odd that such an important case just occurs in a regular courtroom. I mean, I know the Supreme Court doesn't deal with criminal matters, but in the UK, a case of this magnitude would take place at the Old Bailey.

 

Arrowsmith did a good job explaining, I hope. Out of curiosity, how are crimes that cross boundaries within the UK treated? Which court would get say a case of treason, espionage, or the kingpin a drug ring or corrupt enterprise that operates in both England and Scotland for example. From what I see on Wikipedia, the Crown court seems like roughly the equivalent of US district court.

[lilham 752]

On 03/08/2023 at 10:24, YoungWillz said:

Now, let's not be hasty here. The man is innocent until proven guilty.

 

Nonetheless, for the "greatest democracy in the world" to have no rule preventing a convicted felon running for or being able to be elected to the highest office. yet plenty of rules preventing convicted felons from voting even after they have served their sentence, it seems very strange indeed to me. This could mean that Trump, if convicted prior to the election, may have the right to stand but not be able to vote for himself.

I believe the lack of disallowing a felon from running comes from the fact that our nation was founded on overthrowing a government.

Plenty of rules preventing felons from voting stems from racism and sexism (see Florida's new felony labels for women who have miscarriages).

[arrowsmith 444]

On 03/08/2023 at 07:24, YoungWillz said:

Now, let's not be hasty here. The man is innocent until proven guilty.

 

Nonetheless, for the "greatest democracy in the world" to have no rule preventing a convicted felon running for or being able to be elected to the highest office. yet plenty of rules preventing convicted felons from voting even after they have served their sentence, it seems very strange indeed to me. This could mean that Trump, if convicted prior to the election, may have the right to stand but not be able to vote for himself.

Eligibility rules for elected federal offices are written into the constitution. Any change would require an amendment; an arduous process which, even when most people would agree the stated change is a good idea, is too laborious to set in motion and complete for something so minor. Admittedly, it seems like a more glaring oversight now than in the past when it was basically unimaginable that someone with so few scruples and so little shame would stand for high office. 

[RoverAndOut 4,745]

3 hours ago, arrowsmith said:

Eligibility rules for elected federal offices are written into the constitution. Any change would require an amendment; an arduous process which, even when most people would agree the stated change is a good idea, is too laborious to set in motion and complete for something so minor. Admittedly, it seems like a more glaring oversight now than in the past when it was basically unimaginable that someone with so few scruples and so little shame would stand for high office. 

 

The simple fact is that the USA never thought they needed to worry about such a scenario. That the rule of law was so clear that Presidents wouldn't be able to ride roughshod over conventions and norms. When Nixon called Barry Goldwater to the White House during Watergate to assess his chances in impeachment proceedings, Goldwater told him he couldn't find 5 votes to acquit. The next day, Nixon resigned. Trump had no such sense of honour, doesn't care about trashing the constitution and has a Senate that twice let him get away with his conduct and acquiesced on every controversy. They have brought this entirely on themselves, and now 45% of Republican voters would still vote for Trump even if he had a criminal conviction! They're a banana republic!

[YoungWillz 21,024]

1 hour ago, RoverAndOut said:

They're a banana republic!

I wouldn't go that far tbh. Banana republics also lock up their political opponents. Which is what a lot of Republicans are claiming is occurring here.

 

Look, I'm no fan of Agent Orange and another 4 years of him should scare to death everyone in the free world. But he is entitled to due process. I believe there is absolutely no doubt that he would be convicted in many many courts in the USA, simply because he is incapable of taking the stand in his own defence - something which a political prisoner would be more than content to do to get his message to those who could protest his incarceration. And he would have to take the stand to rebut the charges against him.

 

What he has done is expose the horrendous gaps in the Republic - Executive privilege, the inability to prosecute except through a political process, the political appointment of judges, etc etc. As a still relatively young country, the USA is still to find its feet on its internal processes and demons. He can rightly claim the process is biased against him simply because of all the politics everywhere - and the mistrust of politicians in general.

 

The whole system needs to look at this aberration - for that is what it is - in its history and take steps to ensure this never happens again, removing the politics from a whole swathe of its establishment infrastructure.

 

On a further point, when you are the one complaining the system, the judges, the jury, the election process and everything else is against you, maybe you are the one in the wrong. Defendants in the Jan 6th prosecutions soon found that out and their main line of defence is they were duped. By this guy. They didn't get to fly in on their own plane, play golf 90% of the time, have state secrets in their home or rally hundreds of folk to their aid.