ChiGoose

We’ll I guess it’s good thing he isn’t being indicted for the lies he espouses, which have been proven wrong.

Don’t argue with an idiot. He’ll bring you down to his level and beat you with experience. This guy is probably the single dumbest person I’ve ever seen on the internet. Best to just remind everyone that he’s a moron and move on.

The rantings of a moron.

You can stop there because the answer is no. He has demonstrated time after time that he’s an idiot who can’t read.

Of course, you know that’s not what’s happening here. Trump’s lawyers told him he was wrong, even the ones who ended up advancing this BS told him it wouldn’t work because it was wrong. Why do you think the lawyers who pushed this stuff are getting disbarred? You don’t get disbarred for pushing a novel legal theory. And those who call him The King are just admitting they can’t read. So I commend you on your dedication to announcing your illiteracy.

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?