ChiGoose

Well, it’s helpful if your base will believe any lie you tell them. Right off the bat, the indictment states that Trump isn’t being indicted for his speech but for his actions. You look at the statutes he allegedly violated and the facts being alleged, and it’s clearly not about speech. But feelings are more important than facts.

If you’re going to make a specific allegation, then do so. I’m not here for games. But I would say getting legal ”insight” from someone with no experience or background in law is quackery.

I don’t know who you were specifically referencing but your point that the board has a lot of quacks is correct and explains why so many of them follow this quack.

You’re not wrong. Maybe that’s why they like her. She’s a kindred spirit in quackery

I don’t understand why anyone listens to her if they want to be informed about legal matters. As far as I can tell, she has no training, background, or experience. I guess it just because she tells them what they want to hear. Feelings always over facts for them.

Facts just don't matter to these people. You could have Trump telling people that he didn't think he won the election, that the same election theories he was putting out there were crazy nonsense, and they would still believe he won the election. Feelings over facts. No matter what Trump does or says, they will never believe he ever did anything wrong.

Just for the adults capable of reading, a quick reminder: There are legal ways to contest an election. Trump is not being charged for those. There are illegal ways to contest an election. Trump is being charged for those.

Because she tells them what they want to hear. It doesn’t matter that she has no relevant background or experience; or that she has no idea what she’s talking about; or that she’s constantly wrong. She validates their feelings. And feelings are all that matters to them. It’s why they reject facts and seek the comfort of morons and grifters.

I see you still are huffing glue.

Aaaaaaah. You're one of those people living in a fantasy world. Carry on with your nonsense then.

Lol. Maybe you should try reading more than two paragraphs. The indictment lays out the challenges to the election and statements by Trump there were legal, and therefore are not charged. It then goes on to explain the actual crimes he committed. It would be third world country ***t to not indict someone who did this.

It's almost as if he has no idea what he's talking about... For any adults, here is what is being charged and the alleged facts of the case.

Conspiracy to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371) Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding (18 U.S.C. § 1512(k)) Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(c)(2),2) Conspiracy Against Rights (18 U.S.C. § 241) (Here ya go)

Text of the indictment for anyone who wants to read it.

Irrelevant. There is overwhelming evidence that he committed crimes. Anyone else who did what he did would have been indicted a while ago. It would be a political act not to indict him.

Maybe, just maybe, an electoral system designed to protect slavery that had state legislatures electing senators and has resulted in elite capture of our government isn’t the best way to do things… You do you, though.

That would likely require fixing our electoral system. Which I’m all in favor of but has little chance of happening.

I hope that’s a joke…. What if instead we strengthened the controls around classified documents and how electeds are moved out of office?

Trump lied and told the government he turned them over when he hadn’t. As part of the negotiations with NARA, Trump had agreed to move the documents into a locked storage room. His lawyer was tasked with going in there and sorting through the boxes, removing anything that belonged to the government so it could be turned over. Prior to his lawyer doing the review, Trump instructed his employee to go into the room and remove some of the boxes still containing classified materials. So when Trump’s lawyer did the review, he sealed all of the government docs in a container and taped it closed. Trump then had his lawyers send a letter to NARA saying that they had returned ALL of the documents, even though he knew they hadn’t. When NARA discovers the deception, they bring in law enforcement and that’s when we get the search (done reportedly low key without even the FBI jackets). So Trump is given the opportunity to review the materials in his possession, but decides to deceive the government anyway, and you think it was wrong for the government to stop trusting him?

What’s the “real” conversation? That it is political to enforce the law? Or that we should let ex-presidents break the law with no recourse?

They brought law enforcement against him because he told them he turned over everything when in fact he had secretly had his people hide many of the documents. At that moment, it’s clear to anyone that he would never willingly turn everything over and simply asking was not going to work.

Whatever procedure or controls there are for moving electeds out of office are clearly deficient in terms of handling sensitive material and government property. That doesn’t mean this is a political prosecution. Anyone other than a politician would have been charged earlier but here the government bent over backwards for Trump. It wasn’t until he intentionally deceived him (and his own lawyer) that they brought law enforcement against him.

It’s punishment for unlawful behavior. Not seeking an indictment just means that elected officials can do whatever they want with government property and refuse to return it (and even show classified materials to those without clearance) with no punishment whatsoever. Joe Biden could order that he gets a copy of every classified document sent to Hunter’s house and there would be absolutely nothing the next president could do to stop it if Biden didn’t want to cooperate. Is that the kind of precedent you want to set?

The system was designed so that once an elected official finishes their term of service, they return to being a regular citizen. While future presidents may grant them access to information to get their informed perspective, they retain zero personal right to government materials or secrets. That being said, I don’t think the PRA really has criminal enforcement mechanisms. That’s why they were negotiating with Trump to get the documents back for most of a year. Law enforcement wasn’t involved until it was clear that Trump still had classified documents and was refusing to return them. All Trump had to do was just cooperate. That’s it. But if you have someone with government property that they aren’t supposed to have and then they obstruct and deceive law enforcement, what kind of precedent are you setting if your *don’t* charge them with a crime.

Nah, we can address climate change without degrowth. We have the technology. We just need the willpower.