Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Trump to be indicted - again.

Trump to be indicted - again.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
191 Posts 17 Posters 4.8k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • G George K
    16 Jun 2023, 12:21

    @Jolly said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

    He thought he had the right to keep them.

    Scharf addresses the mens rea aspect in the long twitter thread I posted - under #1.

    J Offline
    J Offline
    Jolly
    wrote on 16 Jun 2023, 12:25 last edited by
    #100

    @George-K said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

    @Jolly said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

    He thought he had the right to keep them.

    Scharf addresses the mens rea aspect in the long twitter thread I posted - under #1.

    Yep.

    BTW, Scharf is right.

    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

    1 Reply Last reply
    • T Offline
      T Offline
      taiwan_girl
      wrote on 16 Jun 2023, 16:31 last edited by
      #101

      @George-K I will have to go back and read your reference.

      But, ignorance or your (possibly incorrect) interpretation of the law is no excuse and does not make you less guilty.

      "Oh, my drunk brother in law mentioned at a family picnic that the drug trials his company was doing did not do very well. So, I sold all my stock before the price crashed. I am not guilty of insider trading, because....." etc.

      G 1 Reply Last reply 16 Jun 2023, 16:41
      • T taiwan_girl
        16 Jun 2023, 16:31

        @George-K I will have to go back and read your reference.

        But, ignorance or your (possibly incorrect) interpretation of the law is no excuse and does not make you less guilty.

        "Oh, my drunk brother in law mentioned at a family picnic that the drug trials his company was doing did not do very well. So, I sold all my stock before the price crashed. I am not guilty of insider trading, because....." etc.

        G Offline
        G Offline
        George K
        wrote on 16 Jun 2023, 16:41 last edited by
        #102

        @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

        But, ignorance or your (possibly incorrect) interpretation of the law is no excuse and does not make you less guilty.

        THat's right, in most cases. However, I was assured by (then) Attorney General Comey that though reckless, such behaviors did not convey an intent, so it's all right, dontcha know.

        Of course, previously excused bad behavior is not an excuse for present bad behavior. It does, however, make one question the legitimacy of the process and the system.

        "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

        The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

        T 1 Reply Last reply 17 Jun 2023, 02:55
        • M Offline
          M Offline
          Mik
          wrote on 16 Jun 2023, 17:23 last edited by
          #103

          There are no heroes here. But I hope some semblance of a legitimate justice system prevails.

          “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

          1 Reply Last reply
          • J Offline
            J Offline
            Jolly
            wrote on 16 Jun 2023, 18:17 last edited by
            #104

            Once weaponized, you can only destroy the system or live with it.

            If you live with it, it will get worse.

            “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

            Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

            1 Reply Last reply
            • H Offline
              H Offline
              Horace
              wrote on 16 Jun 2023, 18:29 last edited by
              #105

              There's no going back as a society from TDS.

              The TDS sufferers would frame that as, there's no going back from the election of Donald Trump.

              Personally I don't give Trump that much power. I do give the society-wide mobs and their socially encouraged hatred and disgust, that much power. Because mobs like that have been fundamentally powerful forces through all of history. No reason to expect that to stop now, even with a very strong constitution.

              Education is extremely important.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • G George K
                16 Jun 2023, 16:41

                @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                But, ignorance or your (possibly incorrect) interpretation of the law is no excuse and does not make you less guilty.

                THat's right, in most cases. However, I was assured by (then) Attorney General Comey that though reckless, such behaviors did not convey an intent, so it's all right, dontcha know.

                Of course, previously excused bad behavior is not an excuse for present bad behavior. It does, however, make one question the legitimacy of the process and the system.

                T Offline
                T Offline
                taiwan_girl
                wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 02:55 last edited by
                #106

                @George-K said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                But, ignorance or your (possibly incorrect) interpretation of the law is no excuse and does not make you less guilty.

                THat's right, in most cases. However, I was assured by (then) Attorney General Comey that though reckless, such behaviors did not convey an intent, so it's all right, dontcha know.

                Of course, previously excused bad behavior is not an excuse for present bad behavior. It does, however, make one question the legitimacy of the process and the system.

                I undestand (and kind of agree with) what you are saying. But again, like Ambassador Bolton said (and I am certainly no fan of his, but agree with this),

                "Does that mean you give Donald Trump a free pass? Is your answer to the double standard problem to have no standard at all?"

                In any case, I think that judges are required (maybe obligated is a better word) to look at each case indvidiaully. I think they have to build a silo, and just look at the evidence in THIS case. The fact that President Biden or Secretary Clinton have not (yet) been charged is not evidence in this case as to whether President Trump is guilty or not.

                T 1 Reply Last reply 17 Jun 2023, 02:56
                • T taiwan_girl
                  17 Jun 2023, 02:55

                  @George-K said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                  @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                  But, ignorance or your (possibly incorrect) interpretation of the law is no excuse and does not make you less guilty.

                  THat's right, in most cases. However, I was assured by (then) Attorney General Comey that though reckless, such behaviors did not convey an intent, so it's all right, dontcha know.

                  Of course, previously excused bad behavior is not an excuse for present bad behavior. It does, however, make one question the legitimacy of the process and the system.

                  I undestand (and kind of agree with) what you are saying. But again, like Ambassador Bolton said (and I am certainly no fan of his, but agree with this),

                  "Does that mean you give Donald Trump a free pass? Is your answer to the double standard problem to have no standard at all?"

                  In any case, I think that judges are required (maybe obligated is a better word) to look at each case indvidiaully. I think they have to build a silo, and just look at the evidence in THIS case. The fact that President Biden or Secretary Clinton have not (yet) been charged is not evidence in this case as to whether President Trump is guilty or not.

                  T Offline
                  T Offline
                  taiwan_girl
                  wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 02:56 last edited by
                  #107

                  @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                  @George-K said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                  @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                  But, ignorance or your (possibly incorrect) interpretation of the law is no excuse and does not make you less guilty.

                  THat's right, in most cases. However, I was assured by (then) Attorney General Comey that though reckless, such behaviors did not convey an intent, so it's all right, dontcha know.

                  Of course, previously excused bad behavior is not an excuse for present bad behavior. It does, however, make one question the legitimacy of the process and the system.

                  I undestand (and kind of agree with) what you are saying. But again, like Ambassador Bolton said (and I am certainly no fan of his, but agree with this),

                  "Does that mean you give Donald Trump a free pass? Is your answer to the double standard problem to have no standard at all?"

                  In any case, I think that judges are required (maybe obligated is a better word) to look at each case indvidiaully. I think they have to build a silo, and just look at the evidence in THIS case, and this case alone. The fact that President Biden or Secretary Clinton have not (yet) been charged is not evidence in this case as to whether President Trump is guilty or not. In fact, it really has nothing to do with it.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • J Offline
                    J Offline
                    Jolly
                    wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 03:03 last edited by
                    #108

                    In most countries...Unequal treatment under the law is sowing the seeds of upheaval and revolution.

                    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • L Offline
                      L Offline
                      LuFins Dad
                      wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 03:09 last edited by
                      #109

                      @taiwan_girl Ignorance of the Law is no defense in almost all cases, but the difference between a misdemeanor and Espionage Charges is specifically about intent, which presupposes awareness of the law, but even more, it presupposes purpose. Espionage implies a nefarious purpose. That’s a hard row to hoe in this case…

                      The Brad

                      T 1 Reply Last reply 17 Jun 2023, 03:21
                      • L LuFins Dad
                        17 Jun 2023, 03:09

                        @taiwan_girl Ignorance of the Law is no defense in almost all cases, but the difference between a misdemeanor and Espionage Charges is specifically about intent, which presupposes awareness of the law, but even more, it presupposes purpose. Espionage implies a nefarious purpose. That’s a hard row to hoe in this case…

                        T Offline
                        T Offline
                        taiwan_girl
                        wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 03:21 last edited by
                        #110

                        @LuFins-Dad I believe that there is about a 0% chance President Trump will be convicted. i think that there will at least be one person on the jury (I assume this would be a jury case) who would vote against conviction no matter what.

                        I think with 12 people, the odds will be pretty good.

                        L J 2 Replies Last reply 17 Jun 2023, 03:47
                        • T taiwan_girl
                          17 Jun 2023, 03:21

                          @LuFins-Dad I believe that there is about a 0% chance President Trump will be convicted. i think that there will at least be one person on the jury (I assume this would be a jury case) who would vote against conviction no matter what.

                          I think with 12 people, the odds will be pretty good.

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          LuFins Dad
                          wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 03:47 last edited by
                          #111

                          @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                          @LuFins-Dad I believe that there is about a 0% chance President Trump will be convicted. i think that there will at least be one person on the jury (I assume this would be a jury case) who would vote against conviction no matter what.

                          I think with 12 people, the odds will be pretty good.

                          But there are charges that I don’t see him being able to walk away from… Obstruction…

                          The Brad

                          J 1 Reply Last reply 17 Jun 2023, 12:03
                          • L LuFins Dad
                            17 Jun 2023, 03:47

                            @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                            @LuFins-Dad I believe that there is about a 0% chance President Trump will be convicted. i think that there will at least be one person on the jury (I assume this would be a jury case) who would vote against conviction no matter what.

                            I think with 12 people, the odds will be pretty good.

                            But there are charges that I don’t see him being able to walk away from… Obstruction…

                            J Offline
                            J Offline
                            Jolly
                            wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 12:03 last edited by
                            #112

                            @LuFins-Dad said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                            @taiwan_girl said in Trump to be indicted - again.:

                            @LuFins-Dad I believe that there is about a 0% chance President Trump will be convicted. i think that there will at least be one person on the jury (I assume this would be a jury case) who would vote against conviction no matter what.

                            I think with 12 people, the odds will be pretty good.

                            But there are charges that I don’t see him being able to walk away from… Obstruction…

                            That will be the hardest one. But Trump or no, I have a really hard time seeing obstruction charges against anybody for a crime that doesn't exist. Gotcha law is bad law and carries a whiff of Stalinism.

                            “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                            Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • J Offline
                              J Offline
                              Jon
                              wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 14:26 last edited by
                              #113

                              Jolly you need to get out of your right wing fantasy land echo chamber.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • J Offline
                                J Offline
                                Jolly
                                wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 14:28 last edited by
                                #114

                                Yes sir, Biden Boy.

                                “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • T taiwan_girl
                                  17 Jun 2023, 03:21

                                  @LuFins-Dad I believe that there is about a 0% chance President Trump will be convicted. i think that there will at least be one person on the jury (I assume this would be a jury case) who would vote against conviction no matter what.

                                  I think with 12 people, the odds will be pretty good.

                                  J Offline
                                  J Offline
                                  Jon
                                  wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 14:29 last edited by
                                  #115

                                  @taiwan_girl

                                  Jack Smith has another charge, a very serious one, he could bring in New Jersey.

                                  NJ, where Trump’s summer home is, is where he was caught on tape showing highly classified documents to journalists with no clearance at all. He goes on to say that he could have declassified the docs as president but didn’t, so they’re still secret. Literally. On tape.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • J Offline
                                    J Offline
                                    Jolly
                                    wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 14:34 last edited by
                                    #116

                                    Now, depends on what the tape shows. If Trump is just waving a paper and the person in the room is unable to read it as Trump is talking did you know that does not meet the legal standard of passing on classified information?

                                    Go look up the statute.

                                    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • J Offline
                                      J Offline
                                      Jon
                                      wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 21:34 last edited by
                                      #117

                                      We shall see.

                                      The great thing about stories with so many witnesses is they’ve heavily disincentivized not to lie to the FBI.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • J Offline
                                        J Offline
                                        Jolly
                                        wrote on 17 Jun 2023, 21:36 last edited by
                                        #118

                                        True. The FBI seems to be the only person or entity lying nowadays...

                                        “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                        Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • L Offline
                                          L Offline
                                          LuFins Dad
                                          wrote on 20 Jun 2023, 03:03 last edited by
                                          #119

                                          The Brad

                                          G 1 Reply Last reply 20 Jun 2023, 12:26
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes

                                          109/191

                                          17 Jun 2023, 03:09


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          109 out of 191
                                          • First post
                                            109/191
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups