Trump legal cases

[Jamie_B]

2 minutes ago, cnbengal said:

But that's not what he is being charged with, it's possession same as Biden.

Do you know that Jack Smith's high profile cases all have been overturned for legal Inproprieties. He has a history.  So we'll see. 

 

The Feds have a 90% conviction rate.

 

 

Here are the charges. (Notice wilful retention, ie: not giving them back when he was asked)

 

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-are-the-classified-documents-in-the-trump-indictment

 

 

Like all indictments, this indictment includes some mandatory redactions (names of countries and individuals not charged), as well as listing 31 specific classified documents obliquely. We can do a bit of digging to de-anonymize or reasonably guess the contents of some of those.

The Charges

• 31 counts of Wilful Retention of National Defense Information — 18 USC 793(e)

• Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice — 18 USC 1512(k)

• Withholding a Document or Record — 18 USC 1512 (b)(2)(A), and abetting

• Corrupting concealing a Document or Record — 18 USC 1512[c](1), and abetting

• Concealing a Document in a Federal Investigation — 18 USC 1519, and abetting

• Scheme to Conceal — 18 USC 1001(a)(1), and abetting

• False Statements and Representations — 18 USC 1001(a)(2), and abetting

The first group (wilful retention) relate to the actual holding and retention of specific classified documents. The final group of charges all relate to Trump’s conspiracy to hide them from government investigators and the Grand Jury during the investigation generally.

 

[cnbengal]

4 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

 

What rights were violated?

1st and 6th are the big ones from what I've heard, and an argument can be made for 4 and 5.

[Jamie_B]

1 minute ago, cnbengal said:

1st and 6th are the big ones from what I've heard, and an argument can be made for 4 and 5.

 

How was his 1st violated? The gag order? Surely you don't believe a gag order violates a defendant's 1st amendment right? That would be a reach as it would remove the idea of gag orders altogether.

 

The 6th? Bias, to which there were right-leaning people on the jury too,  are not the same as proving that someone used their biases rather than followed the facts of the case. Everyone has biases, everyone is not allowed to ignore the facts and lean into those biases. If the Trump team believes that happened and can prove it, he may have a case. Personally, I doubt that happens.  

 

4th? In the NY case? What was the unreasonable search? In the FBI thing they had a warrant, so no.

 

5th? Speedy trial? There is a lot of leeway in that, cases take time to build and bring to trial after all.

[cnbengal]

The judge would not allow defense witnesses except one and that one he would not allow half of his testimony, threatened to throw him in jail if he spoke out of turn. This from the same judge who allowed stormy to talk about everything including stuff not related to this case or any other for that matter. 5 witnesses weren't allowed. Thus violating his rights to fair trial. And no, no Republicans on the jury, the district is 95% democrats. 

[Jamie_B]

15 minutes ago, cnbengal said:

The judge would not allow defense witnesses except one and that one he would not allow half of his testimony, threatened to throw him in jail if he spoke out of turn. This from the same judge who allowed stormy to talk about everything including stuff not related to this case or any other for that matter. 5 witnesses weren't allowed. Thus violating his rights to fair trial. And no, no Republicans on the jury, the district is 95% democrats. 

 

Judges have every right to allow or not allow evidence or testimony, when the appeal happens the other judge will have to decide if they agreed with that judge or not. That's not a violation of rights.

 

I hardly think someone who gets his news from Truth Social is not right-leaning or Republican. 

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/meet-the-first-7-jury-members-as-trumps-hush-money-trial-progresses-rcna148198

The jurors in Trump’s New York criminal trial

Juror 1

A man who lives in West Harlem and works in sales. He is married, likes to do "anything outdoorsy," and gets news from The New York Times, Fox News and MSNBC.

Juror 2

A man who works in investment banking, follows Twitter as well as Truth Social posts from Trump and said, “I don’t have any beliefs that might prevent me from being fair or impartial.”

Juror 3

A young man who has lived in Chelsea for five years, works as an attorney in corporate law, and likes to hike and run. He gets news from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and Google.

Juror 4

A man who’s a security engineer and likes woodworking and metalworking.

Juror 5

A young woman who is a Harlem resident and works as a teacher. She lives with her boyfriend, loves writing, theater and traveling. She gets news from Google and TikTok and listens to podcasts on relationships and pop culture.

Juror 6

A young woman who lives in Chelsea and works as a software engineer. She gets news from The New York Times, Google, Facebook and TikTok.

Juror 7

A man who lives on the Upper East Side and works as attorney as a civil litigator. He enjoys spending time in the outdoors and gets his news from The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and the Washington Post.

Juror 8

A man who’s retired but worked for a major wealth manager. He said he enjoys skiing, fly fishing and yoga.

Juror 9

A woman who is a speech therapist, gets news from CNN and likes reality TV podcasts.

Juror 10

A man who works in commerce, reads The New York Times and listens to podcasts on behavioral psychology.

Juror 11

A woman who works as a product development manager and watches late-night news and reads Google, business and fashion news.

Juror 12

A woman who is a physical therapist who likes running and tennis and listening to podcasts on sports and faith.

Alternate 1

A woman who works as an asset manager and likes to run, hang out with her friends and eat.

[Jamie_B]

And as far as the gag order this is what the judge had to say ..... and seeing as Trump supporters are openly calling for the jury to get doxxed and making violent threats about them, the judge was right to do so.

 

 

“Defendant violated the Order by making public statements about the jury and how it was selected,” Merchan wrote. “In doing so, Defendant not only called into question the integrity, and therefore the legitimacy of these proceedings, but again raised the specter of fear for the safety of the jurors and of their loved ones.”

The ruling also makes clear the possibility of jail time going forward.

 

“(B)ecause this is now the tenth time that this Court has found Defendant in criminal contempt, spanning three separate motions, it is apparent that monetary fines have not, and will not, suffice to deter Defendant from violating this Court’s lawful orders,” Merchan wrote. “THEREFORE, Defendant is hereby put on notice that if appropriate and warranted, future violations of its lawful orders will be punishable by incarceration.”

[T-Dub]

Remember when he got a list of CIA informants and then he met with Putin and then a bunch of those informants started dying?

 

So patriotic.

[Shebengal]

Much as I would love to see the Cheeto sporting an orange jumpsuit to match his orange hair, I think putting him in prison would be the dumbest thing the judge could do. Trump thinks he’s a martyr now?? Putting him in jail would make his incessant whining 10 times worse than it already is, and would make his MAGA supporters even angrier. 
 

I’m curious to see if all the Republicans who say they won’t vote for Trump if he’s convicted stick to their guns. That will be interesting. I’ll also be curious to see the polls if they ask the question “Now that he has been convicted, will you vote for him anyway?”

[Jamie_B]

7 minutes ago, Shebengal said:

Much as I would love to see the Cheeto sporting an orange jumpsuit to match his orange hair, I think putting him in prison would be the dumbest thing the judge could do. Trump thinks he’s a martyr now?? Putting him in jail would make his incessant whining 10 times worse than it already is, and would make his MAGA supporters even angrier. 
 

I’m curious to see if all the Republicans who say they won’t vote for Trump if he’s convicted stick to their guns. That will be interesting. I’ll also be curious to see the polls if they ask the question “Now that he has been convicted, will you vote for him anyway?”

 

I doubt he goes to prison over this NYC case.

 

The others wont happen till after the election. If he wins the federal cases go away because he can pardon himself, leaving the GA fake electors case as the only one

[Homer_Rice]

10 hours ago, T-Dub said:

Remember when he got a list of CIA informants and then he met with Putin and then a bunch of those informants started dying?

 

So patriotic.

I'd like to see some evidence of this. I'm aware that this claim has been made, but I've never seen actual proof, just innuendo. I do know that the CIA blamed itself for having some of it's networks rolled up during the Trump presidency.

 

This obsessive need to continually associate Trump with Russia, and Putin in particular, is, in itself, mostly misinformation.

[T-Dub]

5 hours ago, Homer_Rice said:

I'd like to see some evidence of this. I'm aware that this claim has been made, but I've never seen actual proof, just innuendo. I do know that the CIA blamed itself for having some of it's networks rolled up during the Trump presidency.

 

This obsessive need to continually associate Trump with Russia, and Putin in particular, is, in itself, mostly misinformation.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/17/russian-sources-disappeared-after-trump-declassified-ex-spys-evidence-uk-court-told

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2018-01-18/trump-had-ties-to-russian-mob-figures-fusion-gps-founder-testifies

 

https://fortune.com/2017/05/17/donald-trump-russia-2/

 

https://www.amazon.com/House-Trump-Putin-Untold-Russian/dp/152474350X

 

And then there's the odd coincidence of Trump often posting Russian propaganda almost verbatim on Twitter, or the question of why he was meddling in Ukraine.

 

"Russia, if you're listening" Really though? They were, and he knew that quite well.

 

If the guy isn't a Russian asset he sure does a convincing impression of one. But, I mean, he clearly is.. IDK if it's all the money laundering that's compromised him or something much worse but they've got him by the balls.  I really thought this was common knowledge by now, to see you call it "misinformation" surprises me.

 

 

 

[Homer_Rice]

Let me read through this material and I'll get back to you. At a glance, I don't see where this ties in to Putin, at least in a way that justifies the venom that many folks bring when they try to insinuate that Trump is a traitor.

[Shebengal]

11 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

I doubt he goes to prison over this NYC case.

 

The others wont happen till after the election. If he wins the federal cases go away because he can pardon himself, leaving the GA fake electors case as the only one

From what I’ve read, he can’t pardon himself on this case because it’s not federal, either.

[T-Dub]

2 hours ago, Homer_Rice said:

Let me read through this material and I'll get back to you. At a glance, I don't see where this ties in to Putin, at least in a way that justifies the venom that many folks bring when they try to insinuate that Trump is a traitor.

 

Insinuate? He lead a coup attempt because he lost an election.  He's a traitor for that alone, never mind his decades long financial ties to Russian oligarchs.

 

I do get worked up over people calling themselves "patriots" that just tried to overthrow the government because their guy lost.  Same mofo's that were telling everyone to "get over it" when Trump won. It's absurd.

[Jamie_B]

11 hours ago, Shebengal said:

From what I’ve read, he can’t pardon himself on this case because it’s not federal, either.

 

Correct

[T-Dub]

8 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

Correct

 

That is assuming he's in any way constrained by what the law says he can or can't do.  He could declare himself a bald eagle once elected and make people carry him around on their shoulders & the Democratic leadership would still be sitting on their hands talking about "unity".  I suspect because they're almost as compromised as he is & don't want to be exposed.  Corruption breeds corruption and Trump (or more accurately his handlers) have done a masterful job of exploiting it.

 

If he gets back in the White House he's going to do whatever the hell he wants and dare anyone to stop him. 

[Homer_Rice]

On 6/2/2024 at 12:24 AM, T-Dub said:

Remember when he got a list of CIA informants and then he met with Putin and then a bunch of those informants started dying?

On 6/2/2024 at 2:33 PM, T-Dub said:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/17/russian-sources-disappeared-after-trump-declassified-ex-spys-evidence-uk-court-told

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2018-01-18/trump-had-ties-to-russian-mob-figures-fusion-gps-founder-testifies

 

https://fortune.com/2017/05/17/donald-trump-russia-2/

 

https://www.amazon.com/House-Trump-Putin-Untold-Russian/dp/152474350X

 

And then there's the odd coincidence of Trump often posting Russian propaganda almost verbatim on Twitter, or the question of why he was meddling in Ukraine.

 

"Russia, if you're listening" Really though? They were, and he knew that quite well.

 

If the guy isn't a Russian asset he sure does a convincing impression of one. But, I mean, he clearly is.. IDK if it's all the money laundering that's compromised him or something much worse but they've got him by the balls.  I really thought this was common knowledge by now, to see you call it "misinformation" surprises me.

 

On 6/2/2024 at 11:42 PM, T-Dub said:

 

Insinuate? He lead a coup attempt because he lost an election.  He's a traitor for that alone, never mind his decades long financial ties to Russian oligarchs.

 

I do get worked up over people calling themselves "patriots" that just tried to overthrow the government because their guy lost.  Same mofo's that were telling everyone to "get over it" when Trump won. It's absurd.

The articles you list (I didn't read the book, naturally) don't make your case, they just repeat the original Clintonite/Deep State allegations made in the aftermath of Hillary's loss. The FusionGPS outfit and its Steele Dossier is an intel op designed to go after Trump. That said, the way this stuff is done is to find a weak link and manipulate it via the media until it becomes "truth." It's what was done to President Clinton/ President Nixon (what were their weaknesses?) and even to people like Eugene Debs over 100 years ago.

 

I'll follow up more on this later, if you wish. The point here is, you have accepted, and repeated, stories that are politically motivated, not necessarily stuff that would stand up in court.

 

Now, to the stuff I've bolded:

 

1) "Bunch of CIA..." Posting The Hill's story here because the Times story is paywalled. This is more accurate:

CIA admits to losing dozens of informants around the world: NYT

 

Now there is a more credible case of Trump using classified info in an exchange with Lavrov, et al (but not {Putin) in a very specific circumstance re Syria. I suspect this is more due to the fact that Trump is an ignorant person and not because he is some kind of nefarious agent giving payback because he got caught having some Russian honey-potted whore piss on him. More like some payback because he fired Comey.

 

Trump revealed intelligence secrets to Russians in Oval Office - officials

 

2) "And then there's the odd coincidence..." I don't even know what the intent is here. Are you trying to punish Trump because his views of foreign policy did not coincide with the MIC/NATO push east into Ukraine? If so, then you are really mistaken here. We could dive into Ukraine policy in detail later if you wish. Short story is that "this war is brought to you by the people who gave you Iraq." And wasn't that a model of statecraft and probity.

[Homer_Rice]

3) "If the guy isn't a Russian asset he sure does a convincing impression of one. But, I mean, he clearly is." Really? Do you know of anyone who has "receipts"--as the kids say nowadays? This is what I requested proof of. I thought that the article regarding his dealings with Russian oligarchs was interesting, and damning in some ways, but it was not conclusive. But, isn't this what oligarchs do--make deals with other oligarchs? And when you toss in NYC real estate to boot, then you are dealing with some of the scummiest people on earth, no matter their country of origin. Remember when I said that I knew Trump to be a complete piece of shit back in the 80s? This was the milieu to which I was referring.

 

Now, if you instead chose to consider Trump as an "agent" instead of an "asset" you could possibly make a slightly better case if you take a broader definition of agency to include some symmetry in goals and operating principles between the shitstains in Russia and the shitstains in the USA. Not the same thing as being an intel asset. If you don't know the difference, you should. In any case, there is nothing "clear" about it. Not how that world works. Unless you are willing to takes leaps of reasoning which parallels the similar leaps from the other side of the aisle. If this is the case, you are accepting MIC/Deep state propaganda with respect to Russia as a geopolitical "enemy."

 

4) "He lead a coup attempt because he lost an election.  He's a traitor for that alone, never mind his decades long financial ties to Russian oligarchs."

 

I try to be very careful and precise when it comes the the uses of some words. Fascism is one of those words, which is why I almost always qualify that term with "pre" or "proto", etc... IMO, we are definitely headed in that direction, and in some respects we may already be there. But it pays to be cautious and rigorous. Just saying a thing don't make it so.

 

Same with the notion of treason, a term I also think requires rigor. My baseline? If John Marshall decided to acquit Aaron Burr of treason, for the reasons he did, then anything subsequent to that ruling has to meet the same high standards. Anyhow, your statement that Jan 6th was an actual attempt at a coup makes him a traitor doesn't meet the kind of standard that a properly run republic demands. Personally, I think Jan 6th was a riot turned into a coup by selective evidence of the Dem party/establishment and that the real danger comes from the feeble attempts to gin up false electors, etc... But even that doesn't convict Trump of treason. Or, if it does, then Trump gets the Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis exemption.

 

Insofar as his relations to Russian oligarchs being treasonous goes: in addition to my comments above, one has to consider that in order for Trump to be treasonous, he has to transgress against the accepted policy of the USA government. Yet, at the time of his so-called treasonous interactions with said Russians, informal and formal policy was to more or less force neoliberalism down the throats of the recently fallen Soviet Union. In fact, the primary reason the USA hates Putin nowadays (they didn't always when they thought he was a pushover) is because Putin has tried to resurrect his country. We may not like his methods, but then again, who is calling who's kettle black?

[Homer_Rice]

I've got more, but it'll have to come later. Been a rough couple of days, health-wise, and I'm really tired.

[T-Dub]

16 hours ago, Homer_Rice said:

I've got more, but it'll have to come later. Been a rough couple of days, health-wise, and I'm really tired.

 

Appreciate the response & I'll dig into it later.  On the surface I'd offer this as well:

 

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-trump-property/

 

Follow the money, it's hardly limited to that Steele dossier (though I do strongly suspect Maxwell/Epstein were running a honeypot to gather kompromat on whoever they could - I think Elon Musk is another one that's being pulled around by the short hairs.)

 

Quote

Remember when I said that I knew Trump to be a complete piece of shit back in the 80s?

 

Seems clear that Cohn linked Trump up with the NYC mob he represented.  This was probably a necessity for any real estate developer in that era & the money laundering commonplace.  I can accept that's just how things were done in the then & there, but it becomes an issue when that person is running for President - on an anti-corruption platform.

 

Also want to make the clear distinction that Russia invaded Ukraine. We can talk about Iraq in comparison, we can definitely talk about why we even give a shit as opposed to so many other situations but Putin's goals and ambitions are pretty clear.

[Jamie_B]

Do we think that Putin invades if we aren't insisting that Ukraine gets to be in the UN? 

[T-Dub]

5 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

Do we think that Putin invades if we aren't insisting that Ukraine gets to be in the UN? 

 

 

Yes.  Appeasement doesn't work with his type, he'd take it as weakness and make fresh demands.

[Homer_Rice]

On 6/5/2024 at 5:46 PM, T-Dub said:

Also want to make the clear distinction that Russia invaded Ukraine. We can talk about Iraq in comparison, we can definitely talk about why we even give a shit as opposed to so many other situations but Putin's goals and ambitions are pretty clear.

???? Did not the USA invade Iraq? What's the diff insofar as this goes? My point was more precise: a lot the same folks that gave us Iraq gave us Ukraine. I'll put something together today or tonight which ties all this stuff up.

[Homer_Rice]

On 6/5/2024 at 6:19 PM, Jamie_B said:

Do we think that Putin invades if we aren't insisting that Ukraine gets to be in the UN? 

Not necessarily. In fact, Russia went to great lengths to avoid going into the Donbass before they actually did so. Crimea? Maybe a little different story.

[Jamie_B]

54 minutes ago, Homer_Rice said:

Not necessarily. In fact, Russia went to great lengths to avoid going into the Donbass before they actually did so. Crimea? Maybe a little different story.

 

Thats what I think too. Crimea has a port so I see the reason Putin wanted it.