The Trump Indictment Thread

[MEJHarrison]

There is a recent Harvard/Harris (so not some RW polling outfit) that found that 57% of respondents think the charges against Trump are political. How do you reconcile that?

I believe you're inferring (wrongly) that the 57% are votes for him. It's possible to think the charges are political and still have no intention of voting for him. Obviously I don't have that article in front of me, but based on what you shared, I'm not seeing evidence that his support (people willing to vote for him) is increasing because he's been charged with crimes. I'm not hearing about a large group of voters who supported Biden up until the point charges were filed, then switched teams. I'm sure there are examples out there, but not in the numbers needed to change the outcome of an election.

If Trump were not Trump and just a normal citizen, do you think he would really be facing these charges?

I don't know enough details of the case. I presume a grand jury already looked at the evidence and decided it was worthy of going to trail. I have no clue if they would have said the same thing for a different person with the same crimes. That's for a jury to decide I guess. Since I don't have access to the same evidence presented to the grand jury, I can't really answer that question without guessing.

I will say that my position is the same it's been the whole time. I think he should be treated the same way I'd be treated for those crimes. If I'd get away with it, then he should get away with it. What I can say is that if a grand jury said I had to go to trial, I'd go. So he's being treated the same in that respect. I do know normal people can't hold a press conference and declare their innocence to the end the trail. So he seems to be getting treated fairly there. Innocent people are accused and have their lives turned upside-down all the time, and sometimes are still found guilty. So even if he's innocent, he seems to be getting the same shaft as the normal citizen. I'm quite happy to let the jury decide at this point, just like they would for an average Joe. They might find him innocent or guilty, which isn't proof of either. It's not a perfect system. But since he's been accused of the crimes, and a grand jury agreed, he should have to deal with the same system we do. That's all I've ever asked for.

 

[Eric]

Any previous politician who did a fraction of what Trump did would long ago have been prosecuted, convicted, and jailed. For that matter, they would never have made it to the Oval Office if something like the Access Hollywood tape came to light.

I'm tired of the refrain "we can't punish him because he'll fundraise." All the kid glove handling he gets just makes him appear stronger and further above the law to his supporters.

Ever notice how the only time he cites polls in when they favor his view at the moment? Anytime it swings the way of Democrats he shuts down and never says a word.

 

[Huntn]

he would be behind bars waiting trial on stealing top secrets.

I understand the concept that Presidents could be subject to petty politics as far as being charged by a hostile Congress which is now well founded, at the same time this country has a serious issue with giving Presidents a pass. We saw it with Nixon, Reagan, and W, all Republicans. There was an assumption that our Democratic representation actually believes in the system. This theory was shown to be liable when Trump was impeached twice, but not convicted. Politics “Trumps” the law and neutral just judgement.

The huge issue is we have a Congress who is half composed of members who are hostile to the idea of Congress, Democracy, and the Constitution, if it stands away of their power, and the system depends on honorable people who took oaths to the Constitution and really mean it. I’ll submit, this is no longer the case at least with 49%.

Our Democratic Republic is in serious danger at this point. The only thing that will fix it is when MAGA starts losing elections, and Trump Co-conspirators are not allowed to reject elections they don’t like the results of, or another possibility will be a civil war.

 

[GermanSuplex]

There is a recent Harvard/Harris (so not some RW polling outfit) that found that 57% of respondents think the charges against Trump are political. How do you reconcile that?

He's a politician, everything involving politicians is political.

The polls need more context. You can think something is both political and valid, so unless there's more info to dissect, its meaningless.

If Trump were not Trump and just a normal citizen, do you think he would really be facing these charges?

People go to jail for fractions of what Trump has done. Every day, all over the country. Seriously?

Yes, he'd be charged if he weren't Trump, and also given less time, less chances, and he'd already have taken a weekend trip to Rikers.

Just google "Business Fraud Sentencing" and you can see cases from all over the country, past and present. You can even add "Manhattan DA" and see all the people who didn't get the special treatment Trump got.

I mean seriously, fatass is not a victim here. At the rate we're going, I wouldn't be surprised to see you sitting in jail before Trump, the man apparantly can do no wrong and will be defended until the end. I truly don't get it.

 

[Cmaier]

I truly don't get it.

I keep explaining it. If you are a racist homophobic anti-semite who doesn’t want women to have any right to control their bodies, then you want the guy who will deliver that agenda to be in office. Whatever crimes he has committed don’t really matter - they are rich old white guy crimes, not “inner city” “hoodlum” crimes that, you know, undesirables commit. Let commander orange cash in his white guy privilege and let’s get back to putting migrant children in camps, deporting young adults who came here when weeks old who know no other country and don’t speak any language other than perfect english, and installing christian nationalists on the supreme court.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Trump's lawyers just asked for the gag order to be changed so Trump could testify - outside of court to the cameras.

He doesn't want to testify in court, but wants to skirt the gag order and "testify" in public, which means he wants to be able to trash witnesses like usual.

What a joke. It was denied.

 

[Cmaier]

Trump's lawyers just asked for the gag order to be changed so Trump could testify - outside of court to the cameras.

He doesn't want to testify in court, but wants to skirt the gag order and "testify" in public, which means he wants to be able to trash witnesses like usual.

What a joke. It was denied.

 

[fooferdoggie]

Trump's lawyers just asked for the gag order to be changed so Trump could testify - outside of court to the cameras.

He doesn't want to testify in court, but wants to skirt the gag order and "testify" in public, which means he wants to be able to trash witnesses like usual.

What a joke. It was denied.

ya so pathetic so he could cuss her out sure thats ok. Hey now he can testify on the stand let him say what he wants.

 

[Yoused]

If Trump were not Trump and just a normal citizen, do you think he would really be facing these charges?

That is an unreachable absurdity. The charges he faces are per se because he is not an "ordinary citizen", and could not possibly make sense if the were. You would have to gin up an amazingly good analogous situation to support that question. Very few people are so serious a danger to the stability and sovereignty of the US, which is one reason the charges are being pressed, and the fact that they are "political" is kind of the opposite of a bad thing. He is not being prosecuted for being in the wrong party/ideology, he is being prosecuted for being a bad person who wants to end democracy.

POTIUS

"President of the Idiot US"?

 

[GermanSuplex]

A similar question would be “Would the defense lawyers be this awful if they had a more stable client, like an axe murderer?”

I’m going to say no. Trump’s lawyers did horrible today, they made Stormy Daniels - who they trashed - look good, and her story was pretty consistent. I don’t think the jury will look kindly on that. To her credit, she held her own and I think made the defense look bad. No spin needed, just read the transcripts or quotes.

“Isn’t it a fact that you keep posting on social media that you would be instrumental in putting President Trump in jail?” defense attorney Susan Necheles asked Stormy Daniels.

“Show me where I say I would be instrumental in putting President Trump in jail,” Daniels replied.

Necheles displayed for the court a social media post Daniels made responding to a message calling her a “TOILET,” that read: “”Exactly! Making me the best person to flush the orange turn down.”

“I don’t see the word ‘instrumental’ or ‘jail,'” Daniels said. “You’re putting words in my mouth

Trump trial live updates: Judge won’t modify gag order following Daniels’ testimony

SimpleImages/Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- Former President Donald Trump is on trial in New York City, where he is facing felony charges related to a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. It marks the first time in history that a fo...

southernillinoisnow.com

Stormy Daniels caught Trump's attorney in multiple lies during trial: reporter

www.rawstory.com

 

[Cmaier]

A similar question would be “Would the defense lawyers be this awful if they had a more stable client, like an axe murderer?”

I’m going to say no. Trump’s lawyers did horrible today, they made Stormy Daniels - who they trashed - look good, and her story was pretty consistent. I don’t think the jury will look kindly on that. To her credit, she held her own and I think made the defense look bad. No spin needed, just read the transcripts or quotes.

“Isn’t it a fact that you keep posting on social media that you would be instrumental in putting President Trump in jail?” defense attorney Susan Necheles asked Stormy Daniels.

“Show me where I say I would be instrumental in putting President Trump in jail,” Daniels replied.

Necheles displayed for the court a social media post Daniels made responding to a message calling her a “TOILET,” that read: “”Exactly! Making me the best person to flush the orange turn down.”

“I don’t see the word ‘instrumental’ or ‘jail,'” Daniels said. “You’re putting words in my mouth

Trump trial live updates: Judge won’t modify gag order following Daniels’ testimony

SimpleImages/Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- Former President Donald Trump is on trial in New York City, where he is facing felony charges related to a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. It marks the first time in history that a fo...

southernillinoisnow.com

Stormy Daniels caught Trump's attorney in multiple lies during trial: reporter

www.rawstory.com

the attorney apparently did this multiple times. I’m looking forward to reading the official transcript in the next day or so.

 

[Citysnaps]

At the end of the day... With trump claiming he never had sex with Daniels, why did he pay her $130,000 to keep quiet? That makes no sense.

With news reports saying the jury is paying very close attention to the testimony, I suspect they're no doubt asking that question.

 

[Cmaier]

At the end of the day... With trump claiming he never had sex with Daniels, why did he pay her $130,000 to keep quiet? That makes no sense.

With news reports saying the jury is paying very close attention to the testimony, I suspect they're no doubt asking that question.

Part of my closing argument will be:

”ladies and gentlemen, we know there are three situations where the Defendant paid out in order to hide stories that he felt would hurt his candidacy. We have the doorman story, the McDougall story, and the Stormy Daniels story. Everyone agrees the doorman story was false. But, afraid it would hurt his candidacy, the Defendant paid $30,000 to keep it quiet.

How much did McDougall get? $150,000. And Ms. Daniels? $130,000. So there’s at least $100,000 difference between the false doorman story and the other two. Why? You can infer, from the evidence, that the price to quash a false story was $30,000, and the price to quash a true story was a lot more.

And, if the evidence tells you that Mr. Trump’s lawyers aren’t telling the truth when they tell you that nothing happened in that hotel room, can you believe anything else they tell you?”

 

[Yoused]

Part of my closing argument will be: …

The closing argument for the defense will be

​

 

[Cmaier]

The closing argument for the defense will be

​

we’ve already seen two members here float that.