Listening to Michael Moore, former US Attorney really scares me and leads me to believe that
there will be no criminal charges against Trump or his enablers in Congress. He's talking about what Trump "believed." It appears that intent will be difficult to prove since his supporters are saying that Trump actually believed that the election was stolen. WTF!
Now you know why Trump and his cult are still swearing that the elections was stolen. Someone has told them the plea this (fake claim since there is a shitload of evidence proving that the election wasn't stolen) in order to avoid "criminal" charges. This why they are still stuck on a "stolen election" despite the overwhelming evidence against it.
What a crock. Trump was told numerous times by numerous of his inner circle and other supporting enablers that their was no evidence of a stolen election. He well knows that as long as he insists that the election was stolen his chances of being charged with criminal actions are reduced. I call BULLSHIT He was told enough times by people he respected that he lost a free and fair election that he knew or SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that saying the election was stolen was and still is a big lie!
That's how he got his initial group of Brown Shirts and built on that. He believed it and so did they because he did.
Hitler and his minions (read, Army) toppled the Weimar Republic and they never intended to leave.
Cant call yourself a genius and then claim ignorance about your very own activities that your own trusted minions explained to you numerous times.
The fact they were telling all the fake electors to keep their actions secret and that he said to Just say it and leave the rest to the Republican Congress Doesnt that all say he knew Biden won and it was a legit election result?
for King Shit any time soon, but all I can do is hope to be wrong.
Have you heard any CNN anchors say, "The Big Lie" lately? I don't watch CNN.
With that said, evidence is not the issue, there is plenty of evidence to prove criminal intent. The problem is time, and DOJ finally deciding whether to even investigate a former president.
I heard a former judge say yesterday that Garland made a mistake investigating from the bottom up because of the time factor. She said DOJ should have investigated the same way the J6 committee investigated, investigating crimes at all levels. Garland used the pyramid strategy, investigating from the bottom of the pyramid to the top. The judge said it takes too long to investigate that way. Garland should have investigated using the wheel with a hub method, with Trump being the hub.
If Garland does decide to make Trump a target when would his trial occur? 2024? 2025?
Our best hope to hold Trump accountable lies with Fani Willis, and her timeline is cutting it close, but she is far ahead of DOJ. Her term expires Dec. 31, 2024.
sounded trite and unserious after a while.
I agree with the rest of what you wrote.
... (which, of course, he didn't), that has sweet fuck-all to do with the events of January 6th.
Since when is "I believed I was wronged, therefore I was justified in inciting an armed insurrection against the US" an acceptable defense in any court of law?
What that fool "believed" is a moot point.
that showed that he absolutely intended for the events of 1/6. Then he stoked them and watched the chaos burn.
What the DOJ will do with that is anyone's guess. If they don't prosecute, it may very well be because of this issue (if they give us a reason at all - because, ya know, i's and t's and all that). But we will know that is bullshit. Because the Committee showed them exactly how to prove intent.
Didn't work for the j6 assholes who were convicted and did or will serve time. Fuck. Even poor Stevie got convicted yesterday and he believed he had immunity to not show up for Congress.
Is it legal to shoot the neighbor?
Even though the neighbor made no actual threat?
Ill have to remember this
It is still a crime to incite a mob to attack the Capitol. It is still a crime to incite an already riled up mob to kill the Vice President.
But there is evidence that he did not believe his own lies. There is the tape of Bannon from days BEFORE the election bragging about how Trump would handle the outcome by denying the loss.
I don't think it matters what he thought. He put peoples lives in danger. It was at the very least reckless endangerment. As a matter of fact, even if he thought the election was stolen, that shows criminal intent because it was already settled; all of the states had been certified by the respective entities.
It matters not a wit to what he claims to "believe". He directed his followers to impede the certification by use of violent force.
All clearly done in plain sight captured on tv cameras not, telephone calls etc etc etc.
There is no justification whatsoever in regards with "intent" in terms of what he believed.
He can try to use it as a defense, but it could not possibly stand.
You can believe the earth is flat....
So sick and tired of these ridiculous defense arguments.
...if he commits a crime. Son of Sam thought a dog was the Devil. Didn't keep his ass out of jail.
...a speeding ticket, but wasn't intending to go too fast? Did they go to the judge and say "I didn't intend to speed," and then got the ticket thrown out? I doubt it.
The intent thing seems way overstated as it doesn't apply to most crimes except in how it relates to the severity of the charge. (Murder 1 vs. manslaughter for instance, but the charge for killing someone is still extant.)
Now that they know he will turn his back on them, leaving them to rot in jail while he skips free for a crime he plotted. Letting them be branded for life as traitors against their country, marking them and everything they do as works of a traitor. Ironic isn't it, when you consider that Trump's big fixer was Roy Cohen. The man that demanded that even Ethel Rosenberg, get the chair and pay the ultimate price for treason, but Trump, Putins angry dragon can remain free and keep planning his plots against America.