EX-PRESIDENT INDICTED

[davidscott]

I'll believe it when I see it. This guy should have been in federal prison years ago. It's sad that it is just as likely for him to be reelected president as doing any real time. Just like the Brooks and Dunn song.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I woke up from a nap to hear this news!

Did I hear correctly that Mike Pence is a major witness?

Well, he did testify at the grand jury and is mentioned in the indictment.
Oh, and I was taking out some recycle containers for tomorrows pickup.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Without proof of intent I don't think you can convict Trump. However, I was LOL when the Fox legal guests said Smith didn't include Trump saying during his speech to protest patriotically and peacefully. For me it had about as much meaning as a man yelling for 70 minutes, which has been his appeal as well as his problems throughout his time. What Trump's motives were on the lead up is difficult to say, but his editing out certain lines in his post-address suggests to me he had some sympathies with the rioters. This to me is along the lines of Trump during Charlottesville where he said, "There were good people on both sides." Getting himself into hot water when all he had to do was denounce the entire event. I'm guessing Smith's aim is to exclude intent because he's going along the lines of Trump was advised by his legal members and refused to listen and continued to spread lies which ended with democracy being threatened.

I also was LOL with the recent video of Trump fuming at his rally saying, "I said to protest peacefully.'

 

[Trell]

Without proof of intent I don't think you can convict Trump. However, I was LOL when the Fox legal guests said Smith didn't include Trump saying during his speech to protest patriotically and peacefully. For me it had about as much meaning as a man yelling for 70 minutes, which has been his appeal as well as his problems throughout his time. What Trump's motives were on the lead up is difficult to say, but his editing out certain lines in his post-address suggests to me he had some sympathies with the rioters. This to me is along the lines of Trump during Charlottesville where he said, "There were good people on both sides." Getting himself into hot water when all he had to do was denounce the entire event. I'm guessing Smith's aim is to exclude intent because he's going along the lines of Trump was advised by his legal members and refused to listen and continued to spread lies which ended with democracy being threatened.

I also was LOL with the recent video of Trump fuming at his rally saying, "I said to protest peacefully.'

I'm not so sure that Faux News is a reliable place to get your information from.

As for Smith not including something from his [edit: Trumps] speeches he also avoids a pitfall of any First Amendment issues arising from that, according to credible legal experts on other channels.

Obviously many people are working through the indictment and it is after all 45 pages or so long.

 

[Dude#1279435]

I'm not so sure that Faux News is a reliable place to get your information from.

As for Smith not including something from his speeches he also avoids a pitfall of any First Amendment issues arising from that, according to credible legal experts on other channels.

Obviously many people are working through the indictment and it is after all 45 pages or so long.

I think you might be right. They replayed large pieces on Hugh Hewitt. First they said it was for Congress to decide, or the people. Then that Smith doesn't have the statutes to file. Then Trump has a right to challenge the election outcome. That's not the point though. The point being his advisors told him no evidence of fraud. Unlikely Trump was going to ever acknowledge he lost.

 

[Trell]

I think you might be right. They replayed large pieces on Hugh Hewitt. First they said it was for Congress to decide, or the people. Then that Smith doesn't have the statutes to file. Then Trump has a right to challenge the election outcome. That's not the point though. The point being his advisors told him no evidence of fraud. Unlikely Trump was going to ever acknowledge he lost.

It’s worth noting that the witnesses in the indictment are Republicans with many of them hired or appointed by Trump who would benefit professionally from a Trump 2020 victory. A number of other Republicans were state officials/elected that supported Trump. Similar for the bi-partisan January 6 Commission.

So the indictment is not something cooked up by Democrats in a smear campaign.

 

[lovinthehd]

It’s worth noting that the witnesses in the indictment are Republicans with many of them hired or appointed by Trump who would benefit professionally from a Trump 2020 victory. A number of other Republicans were state officials/elected that supported Trump. Similar for the bi-partisan January 6 Commission.

So the indictment is not something cooked up by Democrats in a smear campaign.

That wouldn't stop Faux News to claim such.....

 

[Trell]

That wouldn't stop Faux News to claim such.....

And this [edit: added word] is in part why Faux News is so toxic and dangerous to democracy.

Yesterday I searched on YouTube for the indictment and happened to click on The Five (or similar name) on Faux News. Oh my, that was a few minutes of unhinged ranting about the just released indictment that would make a QAnon supporter proud.

 

[Dude#1279435]

And is in part why Faux News is so toxic and dangerous to democracy.

Yesterday I searched on YouTube for the indictment and happened to click on The Five (or similar name) on Faux News. Oh my, that was a few minutes of unhinged ranting about the just released indictment that would make a QAnon supporter proud.

I'll take what ever small victories I can. Seeing The Five's reaction yesterday was priceless.

 

[Trell]

I'll take what ever small victories I can. Seeing The Five's reaction yesterday was priceless.

I found it disturbing the part I watched. Completely unhinged.

 

[Dude#1279435]

I found it disturbing the part I watched. Completely unhinged.

They don't have law experts on, and it showed.

 

[Trell]

They don't have law experts on, and it showed.

I don’t think that matters at all as this is a deliberate performance of lying and deceiving their viewers. One of the big public benefits of the Dominion suit is showing just this.

Edit: I’m quite sad this suit did not go to trial as this would have given much more information about Fox News awful behavior. On the other hand the plaintiffs got close to $800 millions…

 

[isolar8001]

I don’t think that matters at all as this is a deliberate performance of lying and deceiving their viewers. One of the big public benefits of the Dominion suit is showing just this.

I give Fox News credit for one thing...achieving their goal.

Ever since the birth of Fox, their goal was to create a militant subsection of the public to blindly follow wherever their warped agenda was heading.
They achieved this to a tee....good going Fox !!

 

[Dude#1279435]

I don’t think that matters at all as this is a deliberate performance of lying and deceiving their viewers. One of the big public benefits of the Dominion suit is showing just this.

Edit: I’m quite sad this suit did not go to trial as this would have given much more information about Fox News awful behavior. On the other hand the plaintiffs got close to $800 millions…

The Five is like the conservative version of The View. They are opinion hosts.

 

[Trell]

The Five is like the conservative version of The View. They are opinion hosts.

I had to Google for “The View” but surely you don’t think they’re on the same very low level? Just from what I quickly could read about it.

Being an opinion host is not automatically the same as a lying scumbag that is the hall mark of Faux News.

 

[panteragstk]

The Five is like the conservative version of The View. They are opinion hosts.

Both of those shows sound like what my version of hell would play 24/7

 

[mtrycrafts]

...
Obviously many people are working through the indictment and it is after all 45 pages or so long.

Yes, but. It is a legal document that is double spaced.

 

[Trell]

Yes, but. It is a legal document that is double spaced.

Easily overcome with a small font.

That said, it’s a legal document that will keep many schooled in law quite busy for some time. It will generate thousands upon thousands of hours of guesses, some more qualified than others.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I think you might be right. They replayed large pieces on Hugh Hewitt. First they said it was for Congress to decide, or the people. Then that Smith doesn't have the statutes to file. Then Trump has a right to challenge the election outcome. That's not the point though. The point being his advisors told him no evidence of fraud. Unlikely Trump was going to ever acknowledge he lost.

Not in public he will not. But plenty of close staff told him he lost, and he even acknowledged but no, He keeps on lying.

Many of the other issue you mention from that show is wrong as well.
Yes, Trum has a right to appeal the elections and he did. States recounted and still lost. Trump decided conspiratorially to hold on to power. That os what he is charged with, I believe.
Not sure what was up to congress or the people. Crimes are adjudicated by DOJ. Of course, Smith has the statutes to investigate and charge.

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

So the indictment is not something cooked up by Democrats in a smear campaign.

Absolutely.
DOJ has the legal mandate to investigate crimes, possible crimes, etc. Smith was tasked to investigate. He has. Results are in.