ChiGoose

1. The overwhelming evidence points to the current front runner for the GOP as having committed a myriad of crimes and his motivation for running is to avoid being held accountable. I feel like this is bad. 2. I’ll give you just one: A couple years back, a woman was elected to the IL legislature. She had gone through fertility struggles and found the experience of dealing with insurance awful. So she pushed through changes that expanded what insurance had to cover and made fertility treatment easier to access. Had she been elected a little earlier, it would have saved my wife and I considerable heartache, pain, and money. More people like her in government would be great. 3. Mostly just explaining complicated stuff and legal issues. The news is bad at covering it so I thought I’d try to give some explanations of what’s going on. 4. Not really. At the local level, there are some good ones. And I honestly really like my governor, but the national political scene is a mess.

For people who think Trump is simply being prosecuted for challenging the election, here's why that is false: Imagine you believe your neighbor stole some of your stuff. You are 100% sure they did and you want it back. So you decide to take action by doing the following: You tell them you know they have your stuff and you want it back but they deny it You tell everyone who listens that they are a thief and have stolen your things You call the police on them but the police do not find your stuff when they search your neighbor's place You sue your neighbor, but you lose in court because you cannot prove they have your stuff At this point, you have done absolutely nothing illegal. Even if you *still* believe your neighbor has your stuff and still talk crap about them, you have acted within the bounds of the law. But then, because it has not resulted in the outcome you wanted, you: Talk to your friends about getting your stuff back Organize a plan for your friends to break into your neighbors house to get your stuff back Call your neighbor and threaten them if they don't return your stuff Per your plan, some of your friends then actually try to break into your neighbor's home to retrieve your stuff but are unsuccessful At this point, you've broken the law. It doesn't matter if your neighbor has your stuff. You've gone beyond your legal rights to recourse and have engaged in a crime. Trump had legal ways to challenge the election. He tried them and he lost. Then he moved on to illegal means and is now facing the consequences.

Haven’t read through the indictment yet but I’m guessing the Speech and Debate clause makes prosecution tricky.

Trump, 18 others indicted for trying to overthrow 2020 Georgia election Former President Donald Trump and 18 allies were charged on Monday with conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia. In a sweeping 98-page indictment handed up by a Fulton County grand jury, Trump was charged with racketeering and a dozen other felonies, such as solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer, conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree and false statements and writings. The indictment contained 41 criminal counts. It marks the fourth time that Trump has been criminally charged ― and the second time this August the former president has been indicted for his attempts to cling to power. The Georgia case is unique because in addition to Trump, it also charges a cast of supporting players— from former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to then White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and former Georgia Republican Party Chairman David Shafer. The long-anticipated indictment, which came after the grand jurors heard roughly 10 hours of testimony on Monday, will place Atlanta at the center of an historic legal battle that could be bitterly waged in court as Trump campaigns to return to the White House. He has strongly denied any wrongdoing in Georgia after the 2020 election. Also indicted Tuesday were Trump co-defendants: state Sen. Shawn Still; attorneys John Eastman, Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis, Bob Cheeley, Ray Smith III and Kenneth Chesebro; former assistant U.S. attorney general Jeffrey Clark; GOP strategist Michael Roman; former Coffee County elections supervisor Misty Hampton; former Coffee County GOP chairwoman Cathy Latham; Atlanta bail bondsman Scott Hall; publicist Trevian Kutti; Illinois pastor Stephen Cliffguard Lee; and Harrison Floyd, who briefly ran for a suburban Atlanta U.S. House seat before serving as director of Black Voices for Trump. The charges are the culmination of a 2 1/2-year criminal investigation launched by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis shortly after Trump’s leaked Jan. 2, 2021, phone call with Brad Raffensperger, during which he asked the Georgia secretary of state to “find” him 11,780 votes.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that the person with the intellectual capacity of 1st grader wouldn’t know what the word “lie” means, but you never seem to find a bottom to your ignorance. A commendable commitment to stupidity.

https://x.com/reporterblayne/status/1691238673717526528?s=46&t=Jf_5fQharG6pLsB8ACvvjQ

I don’t lie. I don’t see the point of lying on a message board. Seems pathetic. Almost as pathetic as spending your time being an internet troll, but to each their own I suppose.

Don’t know what you’re talking about. I’m a capitalist. Maybe lay off the paint chips for a bit.

So do space aliens, unicorns, and Roger Goodell’s brain.

That probably has more to do with the GOP fumbling the bag than grand strategy by the Dems. There’s a large segment of the GOP that is very online and wrongly thinks the average voter is too. Non-Trumpy GOP candidates did fairly well in 2022 while Trumpy candidates underperformed. I will say that the Wisconsin Dems are run very well and if Ben Wikkler was in charge of the national party, I might be more inclined to agree with you.

Lol. I wish the Dems were half as crafty and capable as people here seem to believe.

Mar A Lago documents case has the strongest evidence. Like, hilariously one sided and literally anyone else would have plead out. Fulton County is #2 though. And can’t be pardoned by the President.

This isn't a mystery. The alleged crimes occurred in DC, so the indictment needs to be filed there and would be assigned to one of the sitting justices. There are 12 justices in the DC district, so it's not a 1 in 670 chance to get a specific judge, it's 1 in 12. I believe justices in the DC district are assigned randomly. If there truly was some conspiracy to rig the judge selection against Trump, Smith would not have filed in Florida and risked getting the dumbest judge in the federal courts.

What the hell are you even talking about? Universal Healthcare? Adam Schiff? Complaining about having to read? Are you starting to recognize that your position is so bad that you are just throwing out random crap to distract from the facts?

This flies in the face of facts and reality. Biden was the VP. He was acting on the authority of the President. Basically every reputable source rejects your position. Logic rejects your position. I have no idea why you bring up universal healthcare except maybe as a distraction because your position is based on feelings instead of facts. The whole theory requires not only that Joe Biden is so devious and cunning that he went against US policy but somehow then got Obama and all our allies to pretend that was the plan all along and then, instead of keeping quiet about his corruption, he literally goes on stage and brags about it. It makes absolutely no sense unless you start with the conclusion you want and ignore everything that contradicts it, no matter how overwhelming. But sources ranging from former Obama administration officials to an anti-corruption advocate in Ukraine say the official, Viktor Shokin, was ousted for the opposite reason Trump and his allies claim.  It wasn't because Shokin was investigating a natural gas company tied to Biden's son; it was because Shokin wasn't pursuing corruption among the country's politicians, according to a Ukrainian official and four former American officials who specialized in Ukraine and Europe.  Shokin's inaction prompted international calls for his ouster and ultimately resulted in his removal by Ukraine's parliament. *** Republicans asked Archer if he was aware that Shokin was investigating Burisma, and Archer said he had actually heard from associates in Washington, D.C., that “Shokin was under control” from Burisma’s persective and that whoever might replace him would be a bigger threat to the company.  “I was spun a narrative that Shokin was good for Burisma,” Archer said.

And what do you believe? That Joe Biden conned Obama and the entire western world and Hunter’s business partner? There’s an entire other thread here with people complaining about corruption in Ukraine and you’re incredulous that the US would condition aid on combating corruption?

1. Whataboutism. You’re just ignoring evidence because it’s inconvenient and throwing out strawman arguments because the facts don’t fit your narrative. 2. As a former Soviet Republic, Ukraine had a serious problem with corruption. The policy of the United States and its allies was that aid should be conditioned on combating corruption. Since Shokin was corrupt (per the GOP witness), they wanted him gone before they would render more aid. That being said, they did not (to my knowledge) have a Time Machine that would allow them to know that firing Shokin would solve all corruption in Ukraine. What they knew was that the top prosecutor was not interested in fighting corruption so they wanted him gone. Your argument is equivalent of saying that Doug Marrone wasn’t fired for incompetence because Rex Ryan ended up sucking. If your argument requires people being able to see the future or travel through time, it might not be a good argument. Maybe try to look at the facts as they were known at the time that action was being taken.

No, I try to find the actual facts. To believe that this was actually Joe Biden doing it on behalf of his son, you have to ignore that he was doing it on orders from the President, that our allies were all in support and that even the GOP witness said that Shokin was good for Burisma. “Archer’s congressional testimony mostly supported this claim. He claimed that he was told by others in Burisma’s D.C. office “that the firing of Shokin was bad for Burisma because he was under control.” So what’s more likely: 1. Hunter and Joe Biden tricked the entire western world into supporting firing Shokin so they could make money and then everybody decided to lie about it afterwards because… reasons?; or: 2. Occam’s Razor: Biden acted to enact US policy at the behest of the President and our allies.

I honestly have a hard time understanding why anyone still believes this is evidence that Biden was trying to help Hunter. All of the public evidence goes against it and firing Shokin meant it was *more* likely that Burisma would face investigations. It’s just willful ignorance at this point.

Isn’t the House investigating this? They can subpoena Biden’s financial records. They even have a very recent SCOTUS decision that gives them ammo to do so.

I think you may be misunderstanding the main reason why the plea deal fell apart. It is not uncommon for plea deals to have a non-prosecution clause that says the person pleading cannot be charged from crimes covered by the plea deal as long as they abide by the deal’s terms. Here, we would expect that to cover tax crimes and the gun crime. But for some reason, Hunter’s attorneys thought it covered *all* crimes, including potential FARA violations. The government clearly did not feel that was correct. The FARA investigation was ongoing and they didn’t think it should be covered in the non-prosecution agreement for tax and gun crimes. If the government was trying to give Hunter a sweetheart deal, they wouldn’t have objected to his attorney’s interpretation of the non-prosecution clause. They could have wrapped up all of Hunter’s potential crimes in this plea deal and called it a day.

The fact that so many of them are *still* listening to that Julie Kelly idiot tells you that they don’t care about facts. They just want someone to pat them on the head and tell them how smart they are while they are getting everything wrong.

Seems like the opposite to me. Most cases never go to trial, they either plead out or are dropped. Special counsels are very rare. Up until it was clear this was going to trial, this played out pretty much how it would if any of us were the target.* The Feds investigate, the US Attorney indicts, the parties negotiated, and a plea was reached. The situation changes when it is going to trial. Because Weiss cannot charge outside of Delaware, he needed Special Counsel powers. Because he’s taking the son of the president to trial, he probably should have Special Counsel independence. Also, since the investigation was so far along that it almost ended in a plea, it wouldn’t make much sense to bring in a whole new team, which would likely cause significant delays. It would also mean that Biden’s appointee Garland would be handpicking the Special Counsel which I doubt MAGA people would be very happy about. *The only difference really is that Biden didn’t replace the US Attorney when he came into office. Normally, all of the US Attorneys resign when a new president comes in. But since Trump’s appointee Weiss was investigating Biden’s son, it would have been inappropriate (though well within Biden’s authority) to replace him with a hand picked US Attorney.

I think it’s just the collapse of the plea deal. Without the plea deal, you’re headed to trial against the son of the President. Aside from the jurisdictional issues I mentioned before, elevating Weiss to Special Counsel gives him a level of independence he doesn’t have as a US Attorney. If the DoJ is going to prosecute the President’s kid, having as much independence as possible from main Justice is a good idea. That wasn’t necessary when he was just going to plead out, but it’s the right thing to do now that they are moving to a trial.

Part of the plea deal was that Hunter waived his right of venue. They could settle the tax and gun charges in Delaware. With the plea deal blown up, the crimes will have to be prosecuted in the venues in which they occurred. As the US Attorney for the District of Delaware, Weiss can only charge in Delaware. He needs Special Counsel status to charge Hunter outside of Delaware. I believe he has already filed a motion to withdraw the information filed in Delaware so that he can file indictments for the same crimes in other jurisdictions.