I had hoped for something better out of Georgia. It is important for the country to get Trump, but it is also important for the country that he be gotten in a way that is fair and square. The indictment in New York is ridiculously lame and counterproductive. Both sets of Smith’s indictments are competently and professionally done and deal only with real and serious crimes Trump committed. In the indictment for January 6th, Smith makes it explicit that Trump is not being charged for his statements, opinions, lawsuits, or rants. The indictments in Georgia use stupid RICO tricks to rope in people who are not criminals and punish people for actions that are not crimes, making it easier for Trump and his public relations people in conservative media to sell their stories of political witch hunts. I really think Sean Hannity and Mark Levin should send that DA flowers. A simple charge tied to Trump’s attempt to pressure officials into manufacturing enough votes for him to win the state would have been better.
Generally, i think the notion of a "living Constitution" makes the whole idea of a Constitution useless nonsense, but desperate times may call for desperate measures. We're facing the near certainty of one of our major parties nominating someone who has been indicted, that is, charged with probable cause, of extraordinary crimes threatening the overthrow of our government. I know the Constitution provides only two qualifications for the office of President, and I know there's some antique legal maxim - in Latin, of course - to the effect an expression of one thing excludes any other, but I hope our legal scholars will prepare a convincing case for a sort of "common law" of qualifications for the office of President that would exclude anyone indicted for a felony charge of the sort pending against Trump. It might provide grounds for a Secretary of State to bar him from the ballot or perhaps for a lawsuit against the Secretary requiring that. An objection at the Congressional counting of the EC votes would be in order. The analogy I 'd draw would be the nomination or vote for someone who was not a natural born citizen.
I wonder if Fani WIllis is a Shakespearean scholar. If Rudi does flip (as his statement in his own defamation case admitting he lied about Ms. Freeman and her daughter being involved in election fraud could well suggest) then indicting on the Ides of August would suggest to an educated accused (OK, that is obviously a stretch too far) to comment, "et tu Rudi, then fall Caesar".
My background-military vet, hunter, competitive shooter (starting in high school where my high school actually had a rifle team), military history/technology nerd, gun owner since forever (including right now).
My initial response is people are such tools. Both the people that made the ads and the products and the people who think this is a good idea... and who would buy one.
I saw an interesting ad the other day on (IIRC) Youtube, wish I could find it and link it.
Starts off with a fellow in his bedroom talking about guns and preparedness and about how a gun is useless if it isn't within easy reach, loaded and ready to go (as he puts his locked and loaded semi-auto handgun in the nightstand) so he is prepared...
As his sun walks in takes the gun out and shoots himself and the guy deals with that (he is prepared, after all) which segues to his daughter sitting on the floor with the gun laying there saying she thinks she hurt mommy (and the guy is prepared because he knows how to CPR... and you get the picture.
Smart and interesting, but probably not effective because the isue is niot one that is rooted in actual logic, data, or rational argument.
Your comments section could use some moderating. I'm going to quit reading comments until there is some reassurance of a return to adult, polite commentary by all. That said, the adults in this room continue to do well. I would prefer to just read them. Please see the National Review's comments sections, which are doing fairly well nowadays.
He can continue to do whatever he wants unless someone stops him. Indictments? Meh. Steve Bannon still walking around free. Our justice system is a joke.
Charlie, re: Ruth Marcus's concern, I think she's missing the forest for the tree here. In the indictment, the speech isn't presented in isolation, it's linked to messages and meetings on October 31st with it appears Tom Fitton to discuss the draft of this speech ahead of the actual election results. Trump was determined to promote the big lie when, not if he lost.
I get why press-based pundits are p
articularly concerned about free speech, but as several legal analysts have noted, yes, you can say what you want, but your speech can be part of a criminal act.
And someone might want to tell Trump his promised Monday press conference to reveal all (let's see if that actually happens) may be used as evidence furthering the conspiracy - Fani Wills already cited ongoing statements well past January 6th in her indictment.
Will Selber's piece is devastating. My sons have both served--one a field artillery officer in the Army, the other still on duty as an aviation officer in the Marines. Both are good men--stalwart Milwaukee boys who inherited from their mother a calling to servant leadership. Through them, I can imagine, perhaps a little more vividly than many, LTC Selber's agony at our betraying his Afghan brothers--at our betraying HIM. I hope he will find comfort in the faith that he did his duty to his oath and his best to honor his sense of right-ness.
I keep thinking about various resolutions. I doubt Trump would take a plea deal before trial, but it's possible; then there's deciding the punishment if Trump is found guilty. It's not something I have any knowledge of or experience, so this is all up to our judicial system.
BUT there should be no talk of pardons. None. Not now, and honestly, not ever. Incarcerating a former President would require all sorts of hurdles to jump, but we are a nation of LAWS and it's more than imperative that our laws apply to EVERYONE. If former President Trump is convicted of committing the crimes he is alleged to have committed, he should be punished accordingly.
But here is one thing that IS imperative to me if any sort of plea deal is discussed:
Trump must admit, in court and under oath, that he lost the 2020 election. Our country has been torn in two by this lie, and Trump needs to come clean to the American people, particularly his supporters. He must clearly state that he lost the election, tried to reverse the result and that he was wrong to do so. He also has to admit that the outcomes of elections are final and he must respect those results like everyone else.
As part of any sentencing, or as part of a plea deal, we really need to get this sort of unequivocal statement, including consequences if he walked it back in future statements.
Our nation needs to heal, and a winking way crimes against the constitution is not the right way to do it -- total honesty must be part of any deal.
Well, speaking as one of those GA voters from whom tfg tried to steal votes, I am THRILLED with Fani Willis and this indictment. So DAMN satisfying hearing "criminal enterprise."
I'm wondering if a Hospital for the Crinally Insane isn't the best place for dump. 🤔
I'd love to listen to an audio version of the Fulton County indictment published on this site.
I had hoped for something better out of Georgia. It is important for the country to get Trump, but it is also important for the country that he be gotten in a way that is fair and square. The indictment in New York is ridiculously lame and counterproductive. Both sets of Smith’s indictments are competently and professionally done and deal only with real and serious crimes Trump committed. In the indictment for January 6th, Smith makes it explicit that Trump is not being charged for his statements, opinions, lawsuits, or rants. The indictments in Georgia use stupid RICO tricks to rope in people who are not criminals and punish people for actions that are not crimes, making it easier for Trump and his public relations people in conservative media to sell their stories of political witch hunts. I really think Sean Hannity and Mark Levin should send that DA flowers. A simple charge tied to Trump’s attempt to pressure officials into manufacturing enough votes for him to win the state would have been better.
Yes! Which leaves me with a very real sense of foreboding about the immediate future….
Graham is a hack, and pisses into the wind whichever way it blows.
Generally, i think the notion of a "living Constitution" makes the whole idea of a Constitution useless nonsense, but desperate times may call for desperate measures. We're facing the near certainty of one of our major parties nominating someone who has been indicted, that is, charged with probable cause, of extraordinary crimes threatening the overthrow of our government. I know the Constitution provides only two qualifications for the office of President, and I know there's some antique legal maxim - in Latin, of course - to the effect an expression of one thing excludes any other, but I hope our legal scholars will prepare a convincing case for a sort of "common law" of qualifications for the office of President that would exclude anyone indicted for a felony charge of the sort pending against Trump. It might provide grounds for a Secretary of State to bar him from the ballot or perhaps for a lawsuit against the Secretary requiring that. An objection at the Congressional counting of the EC votes would be in order. The analogy I 'd draw would be the nomination or vote for someone who was not a natural born citizen.
I wonder if Fani WIllis is a Shakespearean scholar. If Rudi does flip (as his statement in his own defamation case admitting he lied about Ms. Freeman and her daughter being involved in election fraud could well suggest) then indicting on the Ides of August would suggest to an educated accused (OK, that is obviously a stretch too far) to comment, "et tu Rudi, then fall Caesar".
Where is Cleta Mitchell in this list of conspirators?
WRT Guns for Tots:
My background-military vet, hunter, competitive shooter (starting in high school where my high school actually had a rifle team), military history/technology nerd, gun owner since forever (including right now).
My initial response is people are such tools. Both the people that made the ads and the products and the people who think this is a good idea... and who would buy one.
I saw an interesting ad the other day on (IIRC) Youtube, wish I could find it and link it.
Starts off with a fellow in his bedroom talking about guns and preparedness and about how a gun is useless if it isn't within easy reach, loaded and ready to go (as he puts his locked and loaded semi-auto handgun in the nightstand) so he is prepared...
As his sun walks in takes the gun out and shoots himself and the guy deals with that (he is prepared, after all) which segues to his daughter sitting on the floor with the gun laying there saying she thinks she hurt mommy (and the guy is prepared because he knows how to CPR... and you get the picture.
Smart and interesting, but probably not effective because the isue is niot one that is rooted in actual logic, data, or rational argument.
Your comments section could use some moderating. I'm going to quit reading comments until there is some reassurance of a return to adult, polite commentary by all. That said, the adults in this room continue to do well. I would prefer to just read them. Please see the National Review's comments sections, which are doing fairly well nowadays.
I'm thinking the same. Sad that some of the worst are getting likes.
He can continue to do whatever he wants unless someone stops him. Indictments? Meh. Steve Bannon still walking around free. Our justice system is a joke.
Charlie, re: Ruth Marcus's concern, I think she's missing the forest for the tree here. In the indictment, the speech isn't presented in isolation, it's linked to messages and meetings on October 31st with it appears Tom Fitton to discuss the draft of this speech ahead of the actual election results. Trump was determined to promote the big lie when, not if he lost.
I get why press-based pundits are p
articularly concerned about free speech, but as several legal analysts have noted, yes, you can say what you want, but your speech can be part of a criminal act.
And someone might want to tell Trump his promised Monday press conference to reveal all (let's see if that actually happens) may be used as evidence furthering the conspiracy - Fani Wills already cited ongoing statements well past January 6th in her indictment.
Will Selber's piece is devastating. My sons have both served--one a field artillery officer in the Army, the other still on duty as an aviation officer in the Marines. Both are good men--stalwart Milwaukee boys who inherited from their mother a calling to servant leadership. Through them, I can imagine, perhaps a little more vividly than many, LTC Selber's agony at our betraying his Afghan brothers--at our betraying HIM. I hope he will find comfort in the faith that he did his duty to his oath and his best to honor his sense of right-ness.
Republicans for Ukraine has a nice ring to it. Thank you, Sarah and Bill.
I keep thinking about various resolutions. I doubt Trump would take a plea deal before trial, but it's possible; then there's deciding the punishment if Trump is found guilty. It's not something I have any knowledge of or experience, so this is all up to our judicial system.
BUT there should be no talk of pardons. None. Not now, and honestly, not ever. Incarcerating a former President would require all sorts of hurdles to jump, but we are a nation of LAWS and it's more than imperative that our laws apply to EVERYONE. If former President Trump is convicted of committing the crimes he is alleged to have committed, he should be punished accordingly.
But here is one thing that IS imperative to me if any sort of plea deal is discussed:
Trump must admit, in court and under oath, that he lost the 2020 election. Our country has been torn in two by this lie, and Trump needs to come clean to the American people, particularly his supporters. He must clearly state that he lost the election, tried to reverse the result and that he was wrong to do so. He also has to admit that the outcomes of elections are final and he must respect those results like everyone else.
As part of any sentencing, or as part of a plea deal, we really need to get this sort of unequivocal statement, including consequences if he walked it back in future statements.
Our nation needs to heal, and a winking way crimes against the constitution is not the right way to do it -- total honesty must be part of any deal.
Well, speaking as one of those GA voters from whom tfg tried to steal votes, I am THRILLED with Fani Willis and this indictment. So DAMN satisfying hearing "criminal enterprise."