And look who been indicted, just to round out the day
Trump, the real villain, is indicted for J6:
The 45-page indictment charges Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
“This is nothing more than the latest corrupt chapter in the continued pathetic attempt by the Biden Crime Family and their weaponized Department of Justice to interfere with the 2024 Presidential Election, in which President Trump is the undisputed frontrunner, and leading by substantial margins,” the Trump campaign said in a statement received by PJ Media.
Donald Trump teased the indictment Tuesday afternoon, questioning the timing and calling it election interference and prosecutorial misconduct …
As Trump points out, the timing of this indictment is extremely suspicious. Not only could this have happened any time over the past two and a half years, but it comes a day after Hunter Biden’s former best friend and business associate Devon Archer’s bombshell testimony
Trump couldn’t be more correct.
The trial will be in the kangaroo court capital otherwise known as Washington DC.
Here’s Jonathan Turley:
…I felt that the Mar-a-Lago indictment was strong. This is the inverse. This is closer to the case against former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell where Smith was overturned by an unanimous Supreme Court…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 1, 2023
…The press conference held by Smith only deepened the unease for some of us. Smith railed against the January 6th riot and made it sound like he was indicting Trump on incitement. He didn't. The disconnect was glaring and concerning.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 1, 2023
As early as January 7, 2021, I and many others started comparing the events of the previous day to the Reichstag Fire in the way that the Nazis used the latter as a pretext to blame and suppress their opponents, and to grab more power. And indeed, it has played out in just that manner.
“The press conference held by Smith only deepened the unease for some of us. Smith railed against the January 6th riot and made it sound like he was indicting Trump on incitement. He didn’t. The disconnect was glaring and concerning.”
—–
I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, to find a Democrat legal operative telling the public they are doing one thing while actually doing something else!
So we have one solid indictment for activities that the 2016 Democratic nominee also engaged in, but was not charged. And now two abusive indictments for activies that either are not crimes or are (at best) time-barred misdemeanors.
Yes, this is abusive and getting Democrats out of the White House is an imperative.
But – Doesn’t this mean that we should nominate a candiate who is NOT going to go down in a blaze of ignominy in November of next year?
“The indictment handed down by a grand jury is not yet available for public scrutiny at the demand of Joe Biden’s Department of Justice.” per mxmnews.
Justice as KlownShow. How fitting.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
• The Obama DOJ – Jack Smith – prosecuted Gov. McDonnell because he was successful and a threat to win higher office.
• The fact that his case was flawed and convoluted did not prevent him from getting a conviction in front of a Dem friendly jury.
• The fact that the Supreme Court unanimously overturned the conviction in 2016 did not mean that the Obama DOJ was not successful (i.e., they kept McDonnell from running for higher office).
Most citizens can see that the Biden DOJ is attempting to keep Trump from running. For the same reason they went after McDonnell – because Trump was successful and is a threat to win, again.
Trump committed the unforgiveable sin of not acknowledging that Joe Biden was rightfully elected. A lot of us have done that unforgiveable sin. I stand by it 2.5 years later.
IMO, they are baiting us. They want a violent reaction. This is so outrageous, it’s hard to see any other motive. Most conservative lawyers are saying that this cannot stand up on review by SCOTUS.
The one good thing about this is that Trump and his legal team will be able to show their evidence as to why they believe the election weas rigged. This was something they weren’t allowed to do after the election. Now the evidence can be shown in a court of law.
It’s unbelievable that Jack Smith believes that claiming election fraud is illegal when the Democrats have done it after every POTUS election won by a Republican in the last 23 years. Did not Hillary go on TV claiming the election was stolen with Russia’s help? Why yes, yes she did.
“Failed former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday that Russian President Vladimir Putin helped to rig the 2016 election against her — and then claimed that people who dispute the 2020 election results are working on behalf of Russia.
“Putin is the great disrupter. He has a clear mission to undermine democracies, first and foremost, the United States,” she told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Wednesday morning in a lashing of former President Donald Trump and his supporters.” She knew that was not true when she claimed it. Why hasn’t she been indicted?
Did the Democrats not try to send alternate electors when Trump was elected? Yep.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/12/17/how-democrats-attempted-a-2016-electoral-college-coup/
It makes you want to pick up a pitchfork and torch and head for D.C. Legal remedies are still possible, but the Biden kleptocracy is making it hard to have faith in our legal system.
Well on our way to third world banana republicdom.
And they did this to keep Tom Delay from winning and Ted Stevens too. Of course I won’t be surprised if a DC jury votes to convict since they don’t care, they hate any Republican. (Makes me wonder if it’ll have to get appealed to the supreme court and what they’ll do if it does. I wouldn’t want to bet on either out come from them.)
JJ: The one good thing about this is that Trump and his legal team will be able to show their evidence as to why they believe the election was rigged.
I had the same thought as I heard the news this evening. But the actual or alleged evidence of election fraud (take your pick) for 2020 is complicated, multi-state, often legalistic, and hard to convey clearly even in detailed essays, let alone in a fly-by news cast. Seems like few LIV’s will really come to understand these details, or believe them even if they do “sorta” understand.
Trump cannot be relied upon to convey the believable depth and breadth, either, beyond simple assertions of having been wronged, at his rallies, interviews, etc.
Despicable!
“There must be a reckoning. Accountability now lies in the hands of the voters. The Durham Report has made the stakes abundantly clear, and now the choice is ours: either the Deep State destroys America, or we destroy the Deep State.”
–President Donald J. Trump
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-real-victim-russiagate-hoax-wasnt-me-it-was-american-people-opinion-1816466
Sorry, professor Turley, you’re too hung up on forms. The Mar-A-Lago indictment was humbug.
Again, these indictments are another argument for a radical reduction in the verbiage of the federal penal code, radical revisions in the federal rules of criminal procedure, an end to comprehensive immunity for judges and prosecutors, a general purge of the population of lawyers working for the Department of Justice, and a lustration law which prohibits such people from working for the federal government ever again. None of this will happen, of course.
JJ – To the extent that Trump hires lawyers who actually know their heads from a hole in the ground, they are going to be focused on keeping him out of jail for the rest of his life, not relitigating the 2020 election. Unless Trump wants to rot in prison, his defense is going to be based on first amendment issues and misapplication of the relevant statutes, not proving the truth of his claims about the 2020 election.
Regarding evidence that the 2020 election was stolen, you really have to consider how much of the purported “evidence” that the Trump team has produced since 2020 turned out to be lies, the Dominion stuff, the purported evidence of fraudulent votes in MI and other states. You also have to consider the difference between the public and private rhetoric of the Trump lawyers. In public, they boasted that they had mountains of evidence showing fraud. In their actual court filings (where deliberate falsehoods can get the lawyers disbarred), the mountains of evidence never materialized. (Sometimes because judges ruled before the evidence could be presented, but there were a number of cases where Trump’s team were permitted to present evidence, and the results were underwhelming to say the least.)
There is a very good chance that Trump does not have evidence to show that he was the rightful winner of the 2020 election. I believe it is a near certainty that he does not.
That’s not to say that there isn’t voluminous evidence of malfeasance in the administration of the 2020 election, but it is mostly related to special COVID rules applied outside of the normal legal process and the official suppression of Biden’s corruption issue. As awful as it is, the courts ruled that most of the special COVID rules were legal. And, as awful as it is, the official suppression of Biden’s corruption is not actionable. You cannot challenge an election by arguing that a bunch of people would have voted differently if they had know how corrupt Biden is.
Trump is a fool, but I doubt that he wants to be a martyr. Frankly, if they offered him a lenient plea on the condition that he not seek public office, I think he would take it. I don’t think that kind of plea is going to be on the table, though, and the state prosecutions complicate the matter. I think Trump is being deliberately maneuvered into a position where his only option to avoid the equivalent of a life sentence is to win the presidency again. That’s (almost certainly) not going to happen, but the end result of the maneuver will be four more years of Biden/Harris.
hohum, is this again, it only shows the fraudulency of the system, where actual crime is excused and thought crime is punished,
the fact that they picked a coverup artist like chutkin, awan brothers, chadoury et al is evidence of this,
Richard Cook on August 1, 2023 at 11:35 pm said:
Well on our way to third world banana republicdom.
_______
It’ll be a while before we can rise to that level.
more of a bronze age, like the conan tales,
https://twitter.com/Doc_0/status/1686715817826598912
elaborating, judge chutkin meted out draconian terms against delta house protesters, she will not allow a pretense of justice in her court room, I haven’t seen the appeals court, make any appreciable progress on that score, and the dems countenance assasination of justices, to nudge to the right conclusion, they will not risk a reversal as with mcdonnell, so this is a very dark day for anyone who believes in the rule of law, this is the logic extent of the red wedding tableau of nearly a year ago, in the city of Mordor, I mean Philadelphia,
Um, Bauxite, they stole it.
Fair and square.
But keep ventilating.
It’s heathier to let it all out.
Art Deco is right both times. Didn’t read Bauxite’s.
“Baiting us”? The time is fast approaching where we are going to have to choose to fight or America dies. What legal remedies are there for the stolen 2020 election? There were none. What legal remedies are there for the inevitable 2024 fraud?
What steps can we take before violence?
1. Massive protest that gridlocks the entire country?
2. ? I’m looking for suggestions. Because I see violence in the storm clouds and the hurricane is a category 5.
In the end, Democrat voters hold the key. As I have written repeatedly before. If they aren’t capable of seeing the evil that they support, violence WILL happen. It boils down to that simple question.
I don’t believe that conservative voters will meekly accept subjugation to a fascist state run by Democrats. Maybe they will, but I just don’t see it.
stan:
“Massive protest that gridlocks the entire country” would be a good start.
As in the Canadian truckers, a movement that actually ended up more successful than it initially seemed to be. The real question is how far is each side willing to go. The government has many many tools through which to crack down hard.
There is only one non-violent way out of this.
The Republican nominee has to call for the electoral wipeout of the Democrats, and explain that if we don’t clear them out now, we are condemning our children and grandchildren to doing it in a much harder way, after there are no more real elections!
We have the opportunity to do what the early 1930s Germans didn’t try – throw Hitler out, before it becomes impossible. It is unlikely we will get another chance.
Of course, Russia and China are relishing the destruction of conservatism being effected by the Democrats – they probably won’t miss the opportunity to destroy freedom somewhere while we desperately try to save our own!
Bauxite:
Trump is far from perfect, but he is hardly a fool.
And they have already made him a martyr.
Ray van Dune:
You write, “We have the opportunity to do what the early 1930s Germans didn’t try – throw Hitler out, before it becomes impossible.” You seem to be positing that the Germans had some non-violent way to have done this. How? Hitler was not elected, as you may be aware. He was appointed through what is known as a backroom deal. By the time he was in power it was already too late to do anything non-violent to remove him – right from the start when he was in power he used violence, imprisonment, and the threat of violence to deal with anyone who was against him.
Yes you are right neo, but my point was not to claim it was possible to get rid of Hitler, it was to illustrate the impact of not doing so. And we do have the opportunity – for now!
Ps. I have read Shirer’s “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”… I have no illusions about the Nazis.
The communist partisan clashed with the nazis think antifa and their phantom rivals stalin had already taken out the social democrat breuning had neutered the catholic center what result were you expecting.
I don’t know neo – waving top secret Iran battle plans in front of journalists without clearances, bragging to them that you used to be able to declassify the documents, but can’t anymore, all while allowing the whole thing to be taped?
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.
Bauxite: “JJ – To the extent that Trump hires lawyers who actually know their heads from a hole in the ground, they are going to be focused on keeping him out of jail for the rest of his life, not relitigating the 2020 election.”
The main charge is that Trump said the election was fraudulent when he KNEW it wasn’t. Smith has to prove Trump KNEW this.
Just the statistical aberrations of the 2020 election would show that a reasonable person could believe the election was fraudulent. Here’s a sample article:
https://www.tnonline.com/20201214/election-anomalies-deserve-scrutiny.
There’s no way Smith can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump believed the election was fair.
These charges by Smith are so flimsy that even you should be outraged. As usual, your TDS is affecting your thinking.
Bauxite:
You’re making many unproven assumptions there. We have the audio, but we don’t know what he waved, or whether they saw them, or how classified that particular document was. The prosecution has never found a document in his papers that fit that description.
Concerned Conservative™ has bought another OMB bridge. So sad.
Top Secret, classified documents! Waving them! In front of “journalists” too!
Are there any other bridges you plan to buy CC™?
So, so, sad.
Trump has been indicted on conspiracy charges.
It takes at least two to conspire.
So who will be indicted along with Trump?
No one, that’s who.
This tells you all you need to know about these “conspiracy” charges.
neo – The superceding indictment says the prosecutor can prove that Trump had the Iran document in New Jersey at the time of the recording. I suppose it is conceivable that Trump had the document in his possession, but showed another document the reporters and lied about it. It is also conceivable that the proseuctor is lying. We’ll have to wait for the evidence. (Although the incentives for the prosecutor to lie on purely factual matters are not that that. There are much more artful ways for a prosecutor to lie.)
But consider the best case for Trump, he bragged on tape about showing classified information to reporters without clearances. In my book, that’s quite a lot of quacking in and of itself.
Bauxite:
If your question is whether I think what Trump seems to have done as evidenced by that audio is smart, I definitely think it’s not smart. He’s done plenty of things I wish he hadn’t done. But I would never call him a fool – he does more good things by far. A person who does some foolish things is not a fool because of that.
The prosecutor may indeed be lying or simply insinuating something for which he has no proof.
Something else Trump can be indicted for, no doubt:
Conspiring to take down the country financially….
“Biden Blames USA Downgrade On Trump”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/biden-blames-downgrade-trump
(I mean, why not?)