716er Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 But I had been assured this was all just a partisan witch-hunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 Drag it all out till November.......2024!!!!! Woooooooooo hooooooooooooooo!!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
716er Posted July 5, 2022 Author Share Posted July 5, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 7 minutes ago, 716er said: For all of the talk about incitement for the events of Jan 6th, this is actually where Trump himself probably had the greatest legal exposure. They have him on tape breaking the law and if they can get testimony on top of that from people close to him, it might make a successful prosecution very likely. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 No really. It's this time. We've got him. The walls are closing in.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 6 minutes ago, DRsGhost said: No really. It's this time. We've got him. The walls are closing in.... Quick, before November, a THIRD Impeachment !! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
716er Posted July 5, 2022 Author Share Posted July 5, 2022 14 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: For all of the talk about incitement for the events of Jan 6th, this is actually where Trump himself probably had the greatest legal exposure. They have him on tape breaking the law and if they can get testimony on top of that from people close to him, it might make a successful prosecution very likely. Good point. Agree there, though I would not bet on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 9 minutes ago, B-Man said: Quick, before November, a THIRD Impeachment !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 25 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: For all of the talk about incitement for the events of Jan 6th, this is actually where Trump himself probably had the greatest legal exposure. They have him on tape breaking the law and if they can get testimony on top of that from people close to him, it might make a successful prosecution very likely. If he’s on tape breaking the law, why would any additional testimony be required for success? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said: If he’s on tape breaking the law, why would any additional testimony be required for success? It's just like J6. They need to investigate things for years upon years just to make sure it's not the farce it appears to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: If he’s on tape breaking the law, why would any additional testimony be required for success? Juries are fickle and prosecutions of politicians are tricky. If you are going to come for the king, you best not miss. So you get every single piece of evidence you can to ensure a successful prosecution. Not to mention prosecutors generally don’t like to bring cases unless they are confident they can win. It would be a dereliction of duty to not get every piece of ammo they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 29 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: For all of the talk about incitement for the events of Jan 6th, this is actually where Trump himself probably had the greatest legal exposure. They have him on tape breaking the law and if they can get testimony on top of that from people close to him, it might make a successful prosecution very likely. This feels like a legal dead end. If he was deluded that he won and in that delusion believed he was just asking for help arriving his delusional outcome what’s the crime?? Being a delusional narcissist? I mean guilty there but that’s not a violation of any law… 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 1 minute ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: This feels like a legal dead end. If he was deluded that he won and in that delusion believed he was just asking for help arriving his delusional outcome what’s the crime?? Being a delusional narcissist? I mean guilty there but that’s not a violation of any law… That’s why the call is problematic for him. He tells Raffensberger that he won by more than 400,000 but he just wants Raffensberger to change the tally by 11,000. So even if he is delusional in thinking he won, he is telling the Secretary of State to certify a number Trump himself believes is incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 16 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Juries are fickle and prosecutions of politicians are tricky. If you are going to come for the king, you best not miss. So you get every single piece of evidence you can to ensure a successful prosecution. Not to mention prosecutors generally don’t like to bring cases unless they are confident they can win. It would be a dereliction of duty to not get every piece of ammo they can. It was, and has been, your declaration that a crime was clearly committed that caught my eye here. I still am uncertain why a prosecutor would have any concerns about a conviction if it was so painfully obvious for all the world to see. On the other hand, in a legitimate criminal investigation you’re obviously correct. I guess it’s up to each individual to consider the legitimacy of each of these investigations. It’s funny that you mention not missing when the king is targeted. While that may have been true, or may be true for the Washington insider crowd, the reality is it doesn’t apply in this case. The dem Russia play reveals all you need is a good story and a hostile crowd of spectators to kill the king piece by piece by piece. We’ll see, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 32 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: It was, and has been, your declaration that a crime was clearly committed that caught my eye here. I still am uncertain why a prosecutor would have any concerns about a conviction if it was so painfully obvious for all the world to see. On the other hand, in a legitimate criminal investigation you’re obviously correct. I guess it’s up to each individual to consider the legitimacy of each of these investigations. It’s funny that you mention not missing when the king is targeted. While that may have been true, or may be true for the Washington insider crowd, the reality is it doesn’t apply in this case. The dem Russia play reveals all you need is a good story and a hostile crowd of spectators to kill the king piece by piece by piece. We’ll see, I guess. So, the call itself meets the elements of a crime under Georgia law, meaning you have a prima facie case and could proceed with an indictment. However, because juries are made of people, and people are fickle, you may not feel that the call alone will give you an airtight case. If the call is the smoking gun, then prosecutors also will want to present to the jury the shooter’s partners testifying that they planned the shooting and that they were there and saw the defendant shoot the victim, as well as the victim testifying that they were shot by the defendant. That being said, even if they get all of that, they still may be hesitant to be the first prosecutor to ever charge a former president with a crime (at least as far as I’m aware). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 Wouldn’t it be way easier to reverse the results of an election by having the legislature boycott an inauguration, lie to the American people about false collusion with a foreign advisory, humiliate the President by tearing up the State of the Union address on national TV, and ram rod not one but two impeachment hearings? Isn’t that the civilized way to do it? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Wouldn’t it be way easier to reverse the results of an election by having the legislature boycott an inauguration, lie to the American people about false collusion with a foreign advisory, humiliate the President by tearing up the State of the Union address on national TV, and ram rod not one but two impeachment hearings? Isn’t that the civilized way to do it? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 12 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: No. You are correct. It takes way way more of my tax dollars to do it your way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 16 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: You are correct. It takes way way more of my tax dollars to do it your way. What is my way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts