Did you Hear That Trump was indicted in 2020 election interference case in Georgia?

[msc545]

Updates

+1 y

Former President Donald J. Trump and 18 others, including Rudolph W. Giuliani and Mark Meadows, face conspiracy charges related to attempts to overturn the state’s results and subvert the will of voters

[RainbowMarinade]

It’s fucking hilarious how many Trump worshippers here want so bad to minimize the charges against him.
Comparing his current legal situation to mattress tag removal and jaywalking is rather pathetic tbh.
I understand why they are so compelled to defend him no matter what, but how far does that go?
Guess we’re gonna find out.

[goaded]

Did you see the one who said "the prosecutor said they know it has no merit and will get overturned on appeal"? It's utterly insane.

[msc545]

Yeah trumpers will be arguing that he's innocent even while he sits in prison.

[Anonymous]

The prosecutor said they know it has no merit and will get overturned on appeal but that will be after the election. The prosecutor should be disbarred for that.

[goaded]

Wow, that's a hell of a lie.

[exitseven]

Yes, I still say there will be a total of 6 indictments. Next they will get him on cutting off the tags on furniture that say "Do Not Remove This Tag Under Penalty of Law"

[goaded]

Funny. Try reading an indictment or two.

[exitseven]

@goaded I read the one today. Totally pathetic

[goaded]

In what way? Where is it incorrect?

[exitseven]

@goaded how can anybody be charged with expressing a belief? The whole premise is ridiculous

[goaded]

Nobody has been charged with "expressing a belief", Trump's being charged with illegally acting on those beliefs. Believing that a bank owes you money doesn't give you the right to rob the bank.

[msc545]

@goaded Well said.

[exitseven]

@goaded He is being charged on exercising his First amendment rights.

[goaded]

No, he's not. In the DC case, the indictment explicitly states (on page two, iirc) that Trump is entitled to lie until he's blue in the face about the election, he's not allowed to break all the laws it then lists.

Yes, on page 2:
"3 . The Defendant had a right, like every American , to speak publicly about the
election and even to claim , falsely , that there had been outcome -determinative fraud during the
election and that he had won. He was also entitled to formally challenge the results of the election
through lawful and appropriate means , such as by seeking recounts or audits of the popular vote
in states or filing lawsuits challenging ballots and procedures. Indeed, in many cases , the
Defendant did pursue these methods of contesting the election results. His efforts to change the
outcome in any state through recounts , audits , or legal challenges were uniformly unsuccessful.
4. Shortly after election day , the Defendant also pursued unlawful means of
discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results. In so doing , the Defendant
perpetrated three criminal conspiracies "
int.nyt.com/.../full.pdf

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

Yes, just heard that on the noon news

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

Thanks for MHO :)

[Iron_Man]

Yeah, I’m watching it live sabotage sabotage sabotage they’re really trying to stick it to him. Who does that woman think she is talking and with her deep anger this makes me angry. They’re doing all this right now because he’s got a big lead and they’re trying to stop him from running but all these years later they never did nothing until now.

[goaded]

Why wouldn't an officer of the court be angry about so many crimes being committed, especially ones designed to eliminate the will of the people in their state?

[slatyb]

Wow! That's big. Banner headline on the New York Times.

[Anonymous]

Honestly I'm really not listening why anymore. I fully expect to hear next "Trump is being indicted again because he hurt somebody's feelings". I'm not defending Trump in any way. But the ones that are doing this are the same corrupt mothef***ers that they accuse Trump of being. Weilding the justice system to settle a political score.

[OddBeMe]

What? Such a pleasant gentlemen! Cuffaw! Balderdash, I say

[OddBeMe]

https://youtu.be/1l4nJrzzS5I

[JoeMichael67]

He gets indicted every week. It's become a joke at this point and no longer breaking news.

[Anonymous]

Again lining up charges just b4 the election to stop him running. Why now? Why not 3 years ago?

Laws are subjective. Only enforced on the little guys.

[goaded]

Because indicting a former president is no small thing. Because it takes time to make a watertight case. Because, every crime of Trump's they investigate, they expose more criminality. Do you think RICO cases are made overnight?

[msc545]

Trump is not a "little guy" except in terms of his alleged "ethics" since he has none.

[WhitneySnow]

No. That’s like four indictments now.

[goaded]

Yep, four grand juries of American citizens finding probable cause that Trump committed the crimes.

[Wallythewalrus]

@goaded lol! I could get a grand jury to indict my dog. It doesn't mean much.

[goaded]

@Wallythewalrus No you couldn't, and the indictments speak for themselves. I don't suppose you've read any of them?

[Wallythewalrus]

@goaded Indictment's are written by prosecutors. A grand jury only hears evidence from prosecution witnesses, which means they're is no cross examination. Surly you've heard the term, "You can indict a ham sandwich". I know how the process works.

[goaded]

@Wallythewalrus So what? If there was no evidence of a crime, there wouldn't be an indictment. If the indictments were so ridiculous, Trump would be demanding a trial as soon as possible to clear his name. Did you read any part of any of the indictments?

[Wallythewalrus]

@goaded You just don't get it do you? I don't have to read them, although I've read a few, to realize it sounds very incriminating. However, you're only seeing the prosecution's case. The grand jury only saw the prosecution's case. You think he's guilty, that's fine but you're making it sound like a "grand jury" indictment is the end all. A grand jury indictment doesn't mean much and I think you pretty much admitted that.

[RainbowMarinade]

@Wallythewalrus
“I could get a grand jury to indict my dog.”
You should train your dog better.

[goaded]

@Wallythewalrus I know what a grand jury indictment is, citizens deciding that the indicted probably committed a crime. Claiming that Trump somehow has a reasonable defence (that no-one can see) is worse than claiming he's clearly guilty, in my opinion.

@rainbowmarinade Sorry for hijacking your opinion. And LOL!

[goaded]

@WhitneySnow Sorry for hijacking *your* opinion!

[Wallythewalrus]

At least you said it's your opinion. I can argue against an opinion. My opinion is he's innocent until proven otherwise.

[Wallythewalrus]

*can't*

[goaded]

I was wrong, earlier, it was five grand juries of American citizens finding it probable that Trump committed the crimes. Georgia needed to convince two.

[msc545]

@goaded yes. Trumpers will keep arguing it is meaningless nonetheless.