5 5
Phil1111

Post trump Legal Actions, Including his Enablers

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, ryoder said:

1.  "She didn't really admit it!  She never said the words 'I lied!' "
2. "OK so maybe she lied but she was really saying that Trump SHOULD have won.  Anyone without an agenda can understand that!"
3. "Clinton's laywer did it first."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, billvon said:

I found this fascinating.  FOX News is now editing down videos of Trump to take out the worst parts of what he says.

On Hannity's show Trump said that he could end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours, and "that’s without even negotiating a deal. I could have negotiated. At worst, I could’ve made a deal to take over something, there are certain areas that are Russian-speaking areas, frankly, but you could’ve worked a deal.”

When Hannity replayed that interview later, he edited out the part about giving Ukraine territories to Russia, making a seamless edit so that Trump seemed to say "that’s without even negotiating a deal. I could have negotiated.  China no longer respects the United States.”

FOX is now so desperate to make Trump look good that they are editing out the worst parts of what he says.  They are in an existential battle here; they cannot survive without Trump supporters, so they do everything they can to prop him up.

Of course, anyone with half a brain can get the original recording, but it's probably a safe bet that FOX viewers will not do that.

Most frustrating is that we are past two years and two months since Trump absolutely and certainly attempted to overthrow our government by suborning an insurrection that caused the deaths of Americans and we haven't so much as cancelled his paper delivery much less something as basic as bringing him in for a few questions. No, not at all, instead we let him run again for President on a platform that is essentially you ain't seen nothing yet. I get it that patience has never been one of my core strengths but goddamnit, it's time to shit or get off the pot. I had high hopes for Garland but now I see him as one of those guys who have velcro shoe closures because tying a bow is just too much of a decision. Yes, Jack Smith looks mean and we're supposed to be giddy because he has the reputation of being a hunter. But as any real hunter knows it ain't meat until it's in the pan and the reality is that every shot isn't a kill shot. On occasion you need to finish the hunt later. The bottom line is that it most certainly can get to where it's too late to make the right decision. Sometimes it gets to where it's time to do something even if it's wrong. If it's not yet that time it ain't far from it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Most frustrating is that we are past two years and two months since Trump absolutely and certainly attempted to overthrow our government by suborning an insurrection that caused the deaths of Americans and we haven't so much as cancelled his paper delivery much less something as basic as bringing him in for a few questions.

Did you see the other thread about hatred, and fear? Both are at work in America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

But as any real hunter knows it ain't meat until it's in the pan and the reality is that every shot isn't a kill shot.

One thing to be determined is the cost of bullets -- if they're expensive, then you really, really, want to be sure that your shot will be effective. In this legal climate, I think that's the case. Unlike, say, basketball, where the number of shots you take often is reflected in the number of shots you try.

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wmw999 said:

One thing to be determined is the cost of bullets -- if they're expensive, then you really, really, want to be sure that your shot will be effective. In this legal climate, I think that's the case. Unlike, say, basketball, where the number of shots you take often is reflected in the number of shots you try.

Wendy P.

There is also a potential terrible cost to not shooting, which is my point. If I'd have waited until every last fact was lined up, every last certainty was in hand, every last doubt was extinguished in my career I'd still be a packer or flying loads for someone else not living on a boat. It's not the best analogy but in my real estate deals and trading aircraft I am positive I have never once sold at the top of the market.  But, unlike others, I have never waited too long and lost the chance to profit. Sometimes it's just time to pull the trigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

 . . . and we haven't so much as cancelled his paper delivery much less something as basic as bringing him in for a few questions.

That may be changing.  He has been "invited" to appear before a Manhattan grand jury next week.  He doesn't have to appear, but that invitation means that the grand jury is preparing charges and are giving him a last chance to speak for himself before he is charged.

I can't wait to see his reaction.  "I Never even Knew her, I didn't pay her anything afterwards, and She was Lousy in bed anyway.  Witch hunt!"

https://www.reuters.com/legal/manhattan-prosecutors-signal-criminal-charges-likely-trump-nyt-2023-03-09/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, billvon said:

That may be changing.  He has been "invited" to appear before a Manhattan grand jury next week.  He doesn't have to appear, but that invitation means that the grand jury is preparing charges and are giving him a last chance to speak for himself before he is charged.

I can't wait to see his reaction.  "I Never even Knew her, I didn't pay her anything afterwards, and She was Lousy in bed anyway.  Witch hunt!"

https://www.reuters.com/legal/manhattan-prosecutors-signal-criminal-charges-likely-trump-nyt-2023-03-09/

Yes, I caught that today. No real consensus on the strength of the case but who cares? Maybe it'll inspire Fani Willis to jump in. It's time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, billvon said:

He doesn't have to appear, but that invitation means that the grand jury is preparing charges and are giving him a last chance to speak for himself before he is charged.

From the Reuter's article:

Quote

 "The invitation should mean the prosecutor is preparing to seek criminal charges."

Invitation? No. If there's a Grand Jury; the Judge signs a subpoena and you are compelled to come.  

 

Quote

"If he (Trump) does appear, he will have to waive immunity and answer the prosecutor's questions," he said.

Um. No again. One does not have to waive their immunity. They can take the 5th all day long. They may wind up in contempt, but they do not have to answer. 

This article "sounds like" someone is using the news to do some saber rattling and see what shakes out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BIGUN said:

From the Reuter's article:

Invitation? No. If there's a Grand Jury; the Judge signs a subpoena and you are compelled to come.  

 

Um. No again. One does not have to waive their immunity. They can take the 5th all day long. They may wind up in contempt, but they do not have to answer. 

This article "sounds like" someone is using the news to do some saber rattling and see what shakes out. 

The Grand Jury process is weird.

We don't have it in Wisconsin, so I'm not super familiar with it.

But, generally, the target of the investigation is rarely subpoenaed.

In this case, Trump has been ranting & raving about how it's a 'witch hunt' and the justice system is being 'weaponized' against him.

So the Grand Jury has invited (yes, nicely asked him) to come and explain why he shouldn't be prosecuted.

If he has 'super secret, earthshaking evidence' like he claims, he can go and tell them.
If he's full of shit, as everyone in touch with reality understands, he won't.

As noted in the articles, witnesses in the Grand Jury process are generally granted immunity for their testimony. That doesn't mean they can't be prosecuted, it just means that the particular testimony they give can't be used against them. It's why the 5th generally isn't an option for Grand Jury witnesses. Refusing to testify is considered contempt of court. That's one reason the target of the investigation is rarely subpoenaed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BIGUN said:

From the Reuter's article:Invitation? No. If there's a Grand Jury; the Judge signs a subpoena and you are compelled to come. 

I was on an accessory to murder grand jury, and the person targeted was 'invited' to come in to speak.  He did not.  The DA with us said that that was not proof of his guilt - but we could take his refusal as support that the case should go to trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, billvon said:

I was on an accessory to murder grand jury, and the person targeted was 'invited' to come in to speak.  He did not.  The DA with us said that that was not proof of his guilt - but we could take his refusal as support that the case should go to trial.

In other news a judge has ruled that Trump's grab 'em by the pussy Access Hollywood tape can be shown to the jury in the Carroll case. Ruh-roh.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump enabler Peter Navarro has been ordered by a Federal Judge to turn over hundreds of emails. That's good, I suppose. Certainly good, however, is considering Navarro's 2019 attack on the US Postal service against his Kentucky Executive Standard Briefcase on his way to testify.

"Remarks of Peter Navarro, Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, before the Universal Postal Union Third Extraordinary Congress

Geneva, Switzerland
September 24, 2019

We are here today because of the leadership of two individuals: My boss President Donald J. Trump and Director General, Ambassador Bishar Hussein.

I have no doubt that President Trump will go down as one of the greatest presidents in American history, and one of the many reasons is that he is a common sense president.  When he found out the United States is being forced to heavily subsidize the import of small parcels in a way that costs our Postal Service hundreds of millions of dollars a year and costs our economy tens of thousands of jobs, he called me into the Oval Office and simply said “fix it.”

So almost a year ago, the United States filed its intention to leave the Universal Postal Union and I have spent the better part of the last eleven months working with a top-level team preparing for a possible seamless exit."

Screenshot 2023-03-10 at 9.04.07 AM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

In other news a judge has ruled that Trump's grab 'em by the pussy Access Hollywood tape can be shown to the jury in the Carroll case. Ruh-roh.

Hi Joe,

That idiot Trump is his own worst enemy.

He just cannot shut up. *

Jerry Baumchen

* When my son was doing criminal defense work, he would constantly tell me how could not get his clients to just keep their mouths shut.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Joe,

That idiot Trump is his own worst enemy.

He just cannot shut up. *

Jerry Baumchen

* When my son was doing criminal defense work, he would constantly tell me how could not get his clients to just keep their mouths shut.

 

I know I’m like a broken record but somehow for some reason he needs to get nailed, and soon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, billvon said:

grand jury, and the person targeted was 'invited' to come in to speak.  He did not.  The DA with us said that that was not proof of his guilt - but we could take his refusal as support that the case should go to trial.

Perhaps you're right, Bill. Federal level is probably different than state level.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

It's why the 5th generally isn't an option for Grand Jury witnesses. Refusing to testify is considered contempt of court. That's one reason the target of the investigation is rarely subpoenaed.

I was speaking at the federal level and corrected myself to Bill. 

Quote

In order for someone to be indicted, the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution mandates the use of a grand jury for all capital and infamous crimes. In practice, all federal felonies must be indicted by a grand jury unless a defendant waives the right and instead pleads to a so-called “Information.” ~https://federal-lawyer.com/criminal-law/grand-jury-subpoena/

You can exercise your 5th amendment right in any Grand Jury. It "can" be considered contempt by the judge. [EDIT: In fact, you should exercise your right to shut the fuck up the minute you are detained. Emphasis on detained. You can keep your mouth shut (and should) from the beginning to the end and after. Let the attorneys do the talking. 

Edited by BIGUN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Perhaps you're right, Bill. Federal level is probably different than state level.  

It is, but the justice manual for federal grand juries also indicated that targets should only be subpoenaed after an effort has been made to secure the target's voluntary appearance. And only then after specific approval.

But even if the aboe isn't in play, the following would be:

"When a target is not called to testify pursuant to JM 9-11.150, and does not request to testify on his or her own motion (see JM 9-11.152), the prosecutor, in appropriate cases, is encouraged to notify such person a reasonable time before seeking an indictment in order to afford him or her an opportunity to testify before the grand jury, subject to the conditions set forth in JM 9-11.152."

 

 https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-11000-grand-jury

 

Separate to that, the 5th Amendment comment is interesting. My understanding is that the 5th Amendment pertains to situations where one might be compelled to testify. Not entirely clear to me if that applies when you volunteer to testify.

Edited by SkyDekker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

It is, but the justice manual for federal grand juries also indicated that targets should only be subpoenaed after an effort has been made to secure the target's voluntary appearance.

I can tell you from personal experience; there was no invitation. Just subpoena. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

I can tell you from personal experience; there was no invitation. Just subpoena. 

Was that the actual target of the investigation?
The person who would be facing the charges the Grand Jury would submit?

Or a person with information the Grand Jury wanted to hear (witness)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to trump himself on a Truth Social posting. trump will be arrested on Tuesday. He stated that George Soros is responsible for this whole investigation. So his elier claims that the Dem's were responsible must have been one more lies.

It should be interesting to see ho this is spun on FOX.

trump should be so proud. Arrest warrants for both himself and his bosom buddy Putin, in the same week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

5 5