Trump indictment #4: 2020 election RICO conspiracy [Fulton county GA]

Ever read Sinclair Lewis?

41HaajDjtLL.jpg


When fascism consumes America it will come wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross. And most Republicans will welcome it with open arms, as the compromise with a lesser evil that may save a lot of children from getting sexually mutilated, if they keep their word this time.

It's a good thing then, that as you point out, Trump is not a Christian, and his supporters have no love for the Republican party. The flag might be an issue, because they do love the flag.
 
It's a good thing then, that as you point out, Trump is not a Christian, and his supporters have no love for the Republican party. The flag might be an issue, because they do love the flag.

Except, I can’t tell you how many flag carrying republicans I’ve come across who claim that he was “Sent by God”.
 
Except, I can’t tell you how many flag carrying republicans I’ve come across who claim that he was “Sent by God”.

Biden was sent by God as punishment for abandoning the first guy he sent. :p

They tried to wrap him in the flag too, but the visuals were pretty bad:

1420018789.0.jpg


And let's not forget what happened when Senator Fetterman tried to wrap himself in the flag:

 
Last edited:
The only difference I see is that theye will, if pushed to that point, kill us all with a bio-weapon virus.

COVID was the beta test to prove they could do it.

<Eris variant considers entering the chat>

naa crazy talk, going into the fall....
 
The Constitution also says that a President cannot be convicted of crimes that occurred during their term - the only remedy for that is impeachment and prosecution by the Senate.

While Department of Justice policy says that a sitting President can't be tried or convicted of a crime, there's nothing the Constitution that says so, and the Supreme Court has never said so. See the following articles:

https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/2...professor-explains-differing-visions-immunity

https://academic.oup.com/book/32574/chapter/270366527
 
While Department of Justice policy says that a sitting President can't be tried or convicted of a crime, there's nothing the Constitution that says so, and the Supreme Court has never said so. See the following articles:

https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/2...professor-explains-differing-visions-immunity

https://academic.oup.com/book/32574/chapter/270366527

Can you name a specific action that Trump took that you believe is the strongest evidence that he has committed a crime related to any of his four indictments?
 
We got Covid in late 2019/early 2020 because of Trump. I'm only saying that the timing of the pandemic was due to getting rid of Trump. They had many other objectives as well, it was a global pandemic. But they were more broad goals and less timely.

COVID was to get Trump out, but then they also stole the election to get Trump out?
 
COVID was to get Trump out, but then they also stole the election to get Trump out?

Wouldn't have been able to change all the election rules in just about every state over night without "an emergency".

Quit being stupid. It's idiotic questions like that that actually make me MORE sympathetic to Trump.
 
Wouldn't have been able to change all the election rules in just about every state over night without "an emergency".

Quit being stupid. It's idiotic questions like that that actually make me MORE sympathetic to Trump.

Oh wow, well good thing we don't have to worry about that anymore now that the "emergency" is over. Dannno definitely won't call the next election rigged.
 
Oh wow, well good thing we don't have to worry about that anymore now that the "emergency" is over. Dannno definitely won't call the next election rigged.

So, have they returned the election rules to their pre-covid state?? No?? Well, then the same problems will continue to exist.

Funny that you think just because the "emergency" is over that the rules set up during that emergency would also be over. So funny.
 
Oh wow, well good thing we don't have to worry about that anymore now that the "emergency" is over. Dannno definitely won't call the next election rigged.

So, have they returned the election rules to their pre-covid state?? No?? Well, then the same problems will continue to exist.

Funny that you think just because the "emergency" is over that the rules set up during that emergency would also be over. So funny.

Not to mention, they have already cheated in 2024 by indicting Trump over BS charges.. novel legal theories with evidence that is full of Constitutionally protected speech.
 
So, have they returned the election rules to their pre-covid state?? No?? Well, then the same problems will continue to exist.

Funny that you think just because the "emergency" is over that the rules set up during that emergency would also be over. So funny.

First, which election rule is it that was changed during covid that you're concerned hasn't gone back?


Second, "emergency rules" aren't really a requirement for someone who thinks that US black ops special forces raided a German datacenter to recover servers hosting Venezuelan software that stole the election.
 
Well, welcome back...and only some of us do.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, I was not before, nor am now, a huge fan of Trump, but I know this: he drives my enemies stark raving mad.

I'll vote for him just because of that.

That is also what complies me to consider him. Lol.
 
First, which election rule is it that was changed during covid that you're concerned hasn't gone back?

It'd be easier to go the other way...

Here's a list from a left-wing site of all the covid-related changes - some permanent, some temporary that were subsequently made permanent, some that went back.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-2020-0

States That Took Substantial Legislative Steps to Support Voting During the Pandemic
Among the 29 states and the District of Columbia that enacted expansive voting laws, seven states stand out for particularly ambitious legislative action to protect the right to vote in the face of significant constraints posed by the pandemic. These measures aimed to smooth election administration and protect voters and election workers from Covid-19. California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Nevada, Utah, and Virginia all made substantial changes to their election laws this year to preserve safe access to the ballot box.

California passed legislation to affirmatively mail ballots to all voters and set strict standards for polling place closures.footnote2_kq74lif2
Connecticut passed a broad bill to expand absentee access, allow drop boxes, authorize preprocessing of mailed ballots, and expand options for early in-person voting. Only the early voting provisions, however, are permanent.footnote3_zqh0mny3
Massachusetts expanded options and eligibility for absentee and in-person early voting, set temporary standards for polling place closures that required election officials to look at disparate racial impact, and mailed absentee ballot applications to all voters. These changes were largely temporary; the only significant permanent reform was the expansion of in-person early voting options.footnote4_f10y9t34
New York made a range of temporary and permanent changes to their mail and absentee ballot processes so that every New Yorker could vote by mail during the pandemic. The permanent changes included a notice and cure opportunity for rejected absentee ballots and a statutory presumption that ballots lacking a postmark were returned on time.footnote5_ln0sxn45
Nevada enacted new legislation requiring counties to keep a certain number of polling places open and mailed ballots to all voters. Nevada’s automatic voter registration (AVR) and same-day registration (SDR) statutes were also in place for the first time this year.footnote6_345x51s6
Utah passed a number of permanent reforms in an omnibus elections bill aimed at responding to Covid-19, including creating online voter registration, authorizing mail ballot drop boxes, and expanding the voter registration deadline.footnote7_5ecqrt87
Virginia took the most ambitious steps to pass expansive legislation. After flipping the state House of Delegates and gaining a trifecta in 2019, Virginia Democrats enacted legislation to adopt automatic voter registration and same-day registration, repeal the photo ID requirement, allow no-excuse absentee voting, create a permanent absentee voter list option, and expand options for in-person early voting. These changes were made largely before the worst impacts of Covid-19 took hold.footnote8_lhzxscu8
Laws enacted to expand voting access were passed primarily in states where Democrats have full control of state government. (Democrats in Massachusetts have legislative supermajorities that allow them to override the Republican governor’s vetoes.) The notable exception is Utah, where Republicans passed a number of important pro-voter reforms.

Types of Legislation That Enabled Voting During Covid-19
As highlighted below, and contrary to expectations, states with varying partisan makeups also enacted laws to facilitate voting during the pandemic. Indeed, three states with divided government broke years of partisan gridlock on election law issues to pass voting legislation that protected voters from Covid-19: Louisiana, Michigan, and North Carolina.

Louisiana passed 10 bills that included both expansive and restrictive voting provisions. Expansive provisions included allowing preprocessing of absentee ballots, loosening the witness requirement for mail ballots, expanding early in-person voting, implementing standards for closing or consolidating polling places, and increasing poll worker pay. Louisiana also passed two restrictive provisions limiting who could witness absentee ballot applications and allowing police at polling places. Michigan passed four bills, including legislation to allow mail ballot preprocessing the day before Election Day and to create a notice and cure opportunity for mail ballots. North Carolina passed four bills, one of which authorized online mail ballot requests.

Broadly, pandemic-driven voting legislation focused on three themes: expanding access to or altering the mail voting process, instituting new standards for polling places, and strengthening poll worker recruitment.

1. Vote By Mail
Eight states expanded eligibility to vote by mail. Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, Virginia, and South Carolina all enacted legislation to expand vote-by-mail eligibility in some way. Only Virginia expanded eligibility permanently, and only New Hampshire did so in a divided government.
Four states enacted new notice and cure processes. Michigan, New Jersey, New York, and Virginia all created or expanded notice and cure processes through new legislation. In contrast to the expanded eligibility statutes, three of these four statutes were permanent reforms. Virginia is the only state of the four that didn’t face litigation in 2020 related to its notice and cure policy (or the absence thereof). And Michigan is the only state of these four without a Democratic trifecta in state government.
Four states and the District of Columbia provided prepaid postage for all mail ballots. D.C., Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia passed new legislation to provide prepaid postage for mail ballots. Only Maryland’s statute was a permanent change.
Four states extended ballot receipt deadlines. California, Massachusetts, Mississippi, and New York extended their mail ballot receipt deadlines via statute. This lineup of states is notable in that it includes Democratic trifectas, a Republican trifecta, and a state with divided government; however, only New York’s change was permanent.
Five states permitted preprocessing of mail ballots. Connecticut, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, and Vermont passed legislation authorizing election officials to begin processing mail ballots at some point before Election Day. These states represent Democratic trifectas, Republican trifectas, and divided governments.
2. Polling Places
Long lines and confusion during the primary elections conducted during the early months of the pandemic led several states to take legislative action to ensure polling places stayed open during early voting and on Election Day. Nine states and the District of Columbia instituted new standards for polling place closures and consolidations to guaranty a minimum number of polling places remained open.footnote9_9lfy4cs9 These reforms happened in states with Democratic trifectas, Republican trifectas, and divided government. And most of these reforms were permanent — only D.C., California, and Massachusetts’s legislation was temporary.

Five states and D.C. set specific quotas for the number of open polling places. These were California, D.C., Iowa, Massachusetts, Nebraska, and Nevada. The most common reform was a statute requiring a specific number of polling places to be open on Election Day. Some states used a raw number, while others used a ratio of registered voters per polling place. Massachusetts’s temporary legislation was unique in that it specifically required election commissioners to consider whether polling place changes would have disparate adverse impacts based on race, national origin, disability, income, or age.
Four states required election officials to follow specific processes for closing or consolidating polling places. Delaware, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Virginia passed legislation requiring election officials to use specific processes and pre-election timelines when closing or consolidating polling places.
Tennessee and D.C. established notice procedures for election officials when closing or consolidating polling places. These procedures minimize voter confusion by ensuring voters know where to go to vote.
3. Poll Workers
Seven states passed new legislation focused on poll worker recruitment, which became a particular challenge during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Four states and D.C. relaxed standards for who may serve as a poll worker. D.C., Illinois, Massachusetts, Utah, and Virginia expanded poll worker eligibility requirements by lowering age restrictions or eliminating county residency rules.
Three states increased poll worker compensation. Louisiana, Mississippi, and North Carolina used legislation to bolster poll worker recruitment efforts by increasing poll worker compensation temporarily.

Note that when they say: "Protect the right to vote" or "Support voting" or things like that, what they really mean are steps to rig the voting process to advantage a certain party over another.
 
Can you name a specific action that Trump took that you believe is the strongest evidence that he has committed a crime related to any of his four indictments?

Several. For starters:

Obstruction of the government's efforts to recover the presidential records that Trump had no right to possess. Whether they were classified is immaterial.

Divulging classified defense information to persons without the clearance to view them.

After the safe harbor date in the Electoral Count Act had passed attempting to have the Georgia Secretary of State "find" additional votes for him after being told by the Secretary that Trump's claims of election fraud never happened.

Having his agents (e.g., Giuliani) lie to the Georgia subcommittee about irregularities in the Fulton County vote counting in an attempt to change the final count.

Of course none of this has anything to do with whether the Constitution prohibits trying a sitting President for a crime.
 
Several. For starters:

Obstruction of the government's efforts to recover the presidential records that Trump had no right to possess. Whether they were classified is immaterial.

Highly debatable. Also, if convicted, we better be able to see what records Trump "took" that "he had no right to possess".. at minimum, let somebody like Rand view them in a SCIF so he can tell us what his opinion is on it.


Divulging classified defense information to persons without the clearance to view them.

This one is total fake news.. Trump wasn't holding up classified defense information, he was holding up a newspaper article that discussed said information, and said he should have declassified it. He only told the person what was publicly known, which was in the news article.

After the safe harbor date in the Electoral Count Act had passed attempting to have the Georgia Secretary of State "find" additional votes for him after being told by the Secretary that Trump's claims of election fraud never happened.

Total bullshit. He wasn't asking to find votes FOR him, he was asking them to find fraudulent votes that they could subtract out. There is nothing wrong with that, it's totally normal. Also specifically part of the first amendment, the right to redress grievances.

Having his agents (e.g., Giuliani) lie to the Georgia subcommittee about irregularities in the Fulton County vote counting in an attempt to change the final count.

What evidence do you have they were lying? You don't even have evidence they were wrong..
 
Last edited:
Several. For starters:

Obstruction of the government's efforts to recover the presidential records that Trump had no right to possess. Whether they were classified is immaterial.

Divulging classified defense information to persons without the clearance to view them.

After the safe harbor date in the Electoral Count Act had passed attempting to have the Georgia Secretary of State "find" additional votes for him after being told by the Secretary that Trump's claims of election fraud never happened.

Having his agents (e.g., Giuliani) lie to the Georgia subcommittee about irregularities in the Fulton County vote counting in an attempt to change the final count.

Of course none of this has anything to do with whether the Constitution prohibits trying a sitting President for a crime.

Are you better versed in Constitutional Law than Alan Derschowitz?

“I predict there’ll be some convictions,” Dershowitz said during an appearance on “Bannon’s War Room,” a podcast hosted by former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon. “I think the strategy is to get bad convictions, but to get them fast in New York and Florida, in Washington, and in Fulton County.”

Dershowitz argued these convictions will be reversed, but not until after the election.


https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...me-convictions-after-fourth-trump-indictment/
 
As Jimmy Dore pointed out recently, there's been a longstanding "honor among thieves" practice of not prosecuting your political opponents, which kind of calls into question why they broke that tradition in Trump's case.

It doesn't have to be a good reason, but I'm guessing there is (at least) one.
 
Back
Top