News Trump: Mar-a-Lago just raided by FBI

[Dave_5k]

Yeah, yeah. I agree with the High Court. But I still do not see any handcuffs in Trump's future. Would be nice though.

Now, to the other matter. The Jan. 6 Committee subpoenaed Trump to testify. Does anyone think he will actually show up? Will he demand to testify off site?

He’ll probably demand to testify on live TV camera so he can rant publicly, while ignoring all questions.

 

[Brainonska511]

I stand by my previous prediction that Trump will be indicted by the end of the year. Maybe it goes as late as early next year but I would be very surprised if Trump has not been indicted by say, March.

I wouldn't be surprised. The DOJ is generally very tight-lipped about these high profile investigations and indictments.

And if tweets like this are to be believed, people are working very hard behind the scenes:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1580320680620756992

 

[woolfe9998]

I stand by my previous prediction that Trump will be indicted by the end of the year. Maybe it goes as late as early next year but I would be very surprised if Trump has not been indicted by say, March.

Not at all certain on this one, but I'll say it happens between the day after elections and 12/1. Because I think the case is likely ready today, probably has been for weeks. And after the election there isn't much reason for delay.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Not at all certain on this one, but I'll say it happens between the day after elections and 12/1. Because I think the case is likely ready today, probably has been for weeks. And after the election there isn't much reason for delay.

My vote is two weeks after elections, but early 2023 isn't totally out this world either

 

[pete6032]

Yeah, yeah. I agree with the High Court. But I still do not see any handcuffs in Trump's future. Would be nice though.

Now, to the other matter. The Jan. 6 Committee subpoenaed Trump to testify. Does anyone think he will actually show up? Will he demand to testify off site?

He told Fox News that he "loves the idea of testifying," which means he will probably ignore the subpoena.

 

[zinfamous]

So unlike the 1/6 matter, this case is simple enough. DoJ should already be ready to prosecute. So will we see an indictment just shortly after the mid terms? Or will it take a lot longer?

Trump: "sorry, no time for your indictment right now, I got this subpoena from...your congress right now to deal with so, no time for that. no time for indictments. subpoena. what a stupid name. subpoena. what even is that?

and the IRS is still auditing me, so until I can clear this audit, I can't really do a subpoena or an indictment."


/literally exactly what he will claim.

 

[zinfamous]

So if some dude steals tools/materials from your job site. You have him and his license plate on camera. He then posts online "yeah I have Greenman's stuff, but that is because I actually own them." You would still say "no way to know if he did anything wrong, he hasn't been convicted yet. And the police can't do an investigation because they have to assume he is innocent."

Hitler was never convicted for like, WW2 and the genocide stuff. It was all hearsay.

Just saying is all

 

[Pens1566]

But would a Repugican POTUS offer a pardon as their first presidential act? I’d think DeSantis would be evil enough to let him get convicted and sentenced and serve time before pardoning

Absolutely they would. In a heartbeat. Immediately after the inauguration. Along with pardoning all the J6 folks. They're already talking about it.

I think it is extremely likely that any future Republican president will order the DOJ to drop the case if he’s not convicted yet or pardon him if he is.

One big problem with this plan is that Trump may also be convicted in Georgia and there’s no easy way to pardon Trump there.

Yeah, anything in progress would immediately be killed by the new POTUS/AG.

 

[SMOGZINN]

One big problem with this plan is that Trump may also be convicted in Georgia and there’s no easy way to pardon Trump there.

It is also probably impossible to convict him there. Georgia's governor might not love Trump, but almost half it's population wear red hats.

 

[hal2kilo]

Now that I'm in the right place in the thread.

Judge Cannon gets a smackdown. Only she thinks that everyone is in on the fix.

“Not even Clarence Thomas”: Trump judge Aileen Cannon “humiliated” after Supreme Court rebuke | Salon.com

 

[fskimospy]

It is also probably impossible to convict him there. Georgia's governor might not love Trump, but almost half it's population wear red hats.

I'm skeptical of the idea that if you get a Trump supporter on the jury they would refuse to convict him. If anything the evidence so far indicates the opposite.

Sure there are some crazies out there like that but they can be kept off the jury.

 

[soundforbjt]

I'm skeptical of the idea that if you get a Trump supporter on the jury they would refuse to convict him. If anything the evidence so far indicates the opposite.

Sure there are some crazies out there like that but they can be kept off the jury.

One will get in, the defense will see to that.

 

[fskimospy]

One will get in, the defense will see to that.

Well in all the other criminal cases involving Trump associates they were unsuccessful. What makes you think they will be more successful this time?

 

[soundforbjt]

Well in all the other criminal cases involving Trump associates they were unsuccessful. What makes you think they will be more successful this time?

You said it in your reply, they were associates. They don’t matter to trump. And he pardoned them.

 

[fskimospy]

You said it in your reply, they were associates. They don’t matter to trump. And he pardoned them.

Not sure how pardons are relevant as Trump has no power to pardon in this case.

I get the argument that Trump is even more special than his associates and that Republicans would be more willing to convict them than Trump. I think in some small way that's true but I see little evidence that juries are getting infiltrated with MAGA types who will refuse to convict no matter what.

I think people here live in a bit of a bubble where they think everyone is as super into politics as we are but really lots and lots of people don't care. I do not think it would be difficult to find an impartial jury in any state, or at least a jury as impartial as they usually are.

 

[BoomerD]

Not sure how pardons are relevant as Trump has no power to pardon in this case.

I get the argument that Trump is even more special than his associates and that Republicans would be more willing to convict them than Trump. I think in some small way that's true but I see little evidence that juries are getting infiltrated with MAGA types who will refuse to convict no matter what.

I think people here live in a bit of a bubble where they think everyone is as super into politics as we are but really lots and lots of people don't care. I do not think it would be difficult to find an impartial jury in any state, or at least a jury as impartial as they usually are.

A mis-trial only requires one not guilty vote...would the prosecution choose to re-try Trump following a mis-trial? Possibly...but that would end up with the same result.

For me, perhaps the ideal result of Trump being indicted would be that he resists arrest...and is shot and killed by the cops for resisting.

 

[fskimospy]

A mis-trial only requires one not guilty vote...would the prosecution choose to re-try Trump following a mis-trial? Possibly...but that would end up with the same result.

For me, perhaps the ideal result of Trump being indicted would be that he resists arrest...and is shot and killed by the cops for resisting.

This thinking reminds me of the 'he will never be indicted' thing. And while it's certainly true he hasn't been indicted yet the odds of it happening look pretty strong to me.

Then it will change to 'he will never be convicted'. I think people will be similarly surprised, assuming he doesn't die and isn't pardoned before his trial concludes.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I think people here live in a bit of a bubble where they think everyone is as super into politics as we are but really lots and lots of people don't care.

Living in Texas I know a lot of Republicans, and many of them don't care about politics, but one thing they almost all have in common is they believe with all their heart that Trump is a great person and that all the evidence against him is made up by Democrats because they are jealous of how great he is. These are people that can't even tell you who their senator is, but they know Trump is a great man that 'those mean Dems' are trying to take down.
My 76 year old mother, who hates politics, told me the other day that it is a damn shame what those democrats are doing to Trump and that someone should stop them.

 

[fskimospy]

Living in Texas I know a lot of Republicans, and many of them don't care about politics, but one thing they almost all have in common is they believe with all their heart that Trump is a great person and that all the evidence against him is made up by Democrats because they are jealous of how great he is. These are people that can't even tell you who their senator is, but they know Trump is a great man that 'those mean Dems' are trying to take down.
My 76 year old mother, who hates politics, told me the other day that it is a damn shame what those democrats are doing to Trump and that someone should stop them.

Well there's no way to prove it either way, just saying prepare to be surprised.

 

[BoomerD]

Well there's no way to prove it either way, just saying prepare to be surprised.

I certainly hope you're right and I'm wrong...but I don't think so. The country is too divided.

 

[QueBert]

This thinking reminds me of the 'he will never be indicted' thing. And while it's certainly true he hasn't been indicted yet the odds of it happening look pretty strong to me.

Then it will change to 'he will never be convicted'. I think people will be similarly surprised, assuming he doesn't die and isn't pardoned before his trial concludes.

Trump has gotten away with God knows how many things over his life, but none of them involved top-secret documents and nuclear secrets. This time around it's kinda different than his usual tax fraud or numerous other shady doings. Not that he should have gotten away with anything at all. The documents are much much more serious though, and I don't see the GOP being able to save his ass here.

Conviction? I'd hope but who knows? But if he doesn't at least get indicted I'll be beyond shocked.

 

[Zorba]

Living in Texas I know a lot of Republicans, and many of them don't care about politics, but one thing they almost all have in common is they believe with all their heart that Trump is a great person and that all the evidence against him is made up by Democrats because they are jealous of how great he is. These are people that can't even tell you who their senator is, but they know Trump is a great man that 'those mean Dems' are trying to take down.
My 76 year old mother, who hates politics, told me the other day that it is a damn shame what those democrats are doing to Trump and that someone should stop them.

Yeah, but it'll be harder for them to hand wave the evidence when it is presented to them in a trial. Sure there are some that would never convict trump on anything. I think there are lot more that once they are actually presented evidence in a court setting would start to believe it.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Yeah, but it'll be harder for them to hand wave the evidence when it is presented to them in a trial. Sure there are some that would never convict trump on anything. I think there are lot more that once they are actually presented evidence in a court setting would start to believe it.

But there is a major problem, well actually two major problems:
1) people now days, even those on a jury, judge on feelings and not evidence. Specially when it's a political figure of their political party. Kind of like how the Senate chose not to convict Trump in his impeachment trial, citizens may fail in the same way.

2) you have those that may not judge on feelings, but have been brainwashed into believing that all evidence against Trump is manufactured. How do you combat that level of brainwashing?

edit: spelling

 

[Thump553]

But there is a major problem, well actually two major problems:
1) people now days, even those on a jury, judge on feelings and not evidence. Specially when it's a political figure of their political party. Kind of like how the Senate chose not to convict Trump in his impeachment trial, citizens may fail in the same way.

2) you have those that may not judge on feelings, but have been brainwashed into believing that all evidence against Trump is manufactured. How do you combat that level of brainwashing?

edit: spelling

Please post some empirical evidence for your assertion that jurors are rampantly ignoring the oaths they give when they are sworn in as jurors. And please don't cite recent Alex Jones verdict as proof-from what I saw that jury acted well within their duties.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Please post some empirical evidence for your assertion that jurors are rampantly ignoring the oaths they give when they are sworn in as jurors. And please don't cite recent Alex Jones verdict as proof-from what I saw that jury acted well within their duties.

We saw it ramped in Trump's impeachment trial(s). All though it's not a criminal trial, it demonstrates how people (senators in this case) who ignore evidence, which Trump Blatantly did in front of the whole US, and still don't vote guilty, even after admitting that the house proved their case. These very people swore to uphold the constitution, yet didn't. If you believe that it won't happen, and doesn't happen in the normal court setting you are naïve, ignorant and blind. Specially, as I already stated, when it is dealing with political figures. January 6 demonstrated just how far people will go, ignoring the facts.. and you think the general population will be any better in a court room setting as a juror.. wake the fuck up!

The fact that you brought Alex Jones into this, which has zero to do with anything I said, shows just how naïve and ignorant you are.