you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

You think prosecuting the crimes laid out in such detail is malicious prosecution?

I'm not following your reasoning. Do you think the 41 counts of crimes in it, including 13 against Trump, aren't crimes?

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

If they specified a different count for every letter of e.g. the tweet where he told people to watch the news in furtherance of the conspiracy it could be 41,000 counts

It's bullshit and you're not smart enough to smell through it.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

If they specified a different count for every letter of e.g. the tweet where he told people to watch the news in furtherance of the conspiracy it could be 41,000 counts

If.

It's bullshit and you're not smart enough to smell through it.

Okay. Let's start at the top.

Introduction

Defendant Donald John Trump lost the United States presidential election held on November 3, 2020. One of the states he lost was Georgia. Trump and the other Defendants charged in this Indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump. That conspiracy contained common plan and purpose to commit two or more acts of racketeering activity in Fulton County, Georgia, elsewhere in the State of Georgia, and in other states.

That's the introduction to count 1 of 41, the VIOLATION OF THE GEORGIA RICO (RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS) ACT, O.C.G.A. 16-14-4(c).

What's the bullshit here? The crime exists.

The False Statements to and Solicitation of State Legislatures happened. We have records of the hearings.

The False Statements to and Solicitation of High Ranking State Officials happened. We have testimony of those officials.

The Creation and Distribution of False Electoral College Documents happened. We have the false electoral college documents.

The Harassment and Intimidation of Fulton County Election Worker Ruby Freeman happened. That's why she had to move house.

The Solicitation of High-Ranking United States Department of Justice Officials happened. We have recordings of the conversations.

The Solicitation of the Vice President of the United States happened. We have testimony.

The Unlawful Breach of Election Equipment in Georgia and Elsewhere happened. We have electronic forensic evidence and video footage.

The Obstructive Acts in Furtherance of the Conspiracy and the Cover Up happened. The details of the acts are laid out in the following 51 pages.

So I'm having trouble understanding what the bullshit is in the case of the first of the 41 crimes. Can you elaborate, what your specific problem with it is?

Or do you want to concede that that one isn't bullshit, and we should go on to count 2?

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

let's not start at the top. I don't need to read any of it, though I did. It's an orangemanbad suit and political. If it weren't political it wouldn't have been timed to "hurt' him during the primaries.

The fun part comes in discovery, if it gets as far as that. You're gonna feel pretty stupid when you realize there's no ham in your ham sammich hahaha

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

let's not start at the top. I don't need to read any of it, though I did.

Is there anything you can say to support your view that its' bullshit?

If it weren't political it wouldn't have been timed to "hurt' him during the primaries.

That's your evidence. That the investigation took time?

The wheels of justice do turn slowly. But they're going as fast as they can because the american people have a right to know before the primaries.

It won't hurt trump in the primaries. He fundraisers off these things.

The fun part comes in discovery, if it gets as far as that.

The prosecution has all the evidence that they have laid out in the indictment. What do you think happens in criminal discovery?

You're gonna feel pretty stupid when you realize there's no ham in your ham sammich hahaha

Is there any of those points making up count 1 that didn't happen?

I can't see it, and there's 40 other counts.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

You're asking me to debunk the number of times they stirred your orangemanbad flavored kool-aid bro it's literally only worth the effort to poke at you for being a retard on this subject, not actually engage in counting stirs of the orangemanbad spoon

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

No, I'm asking you to point out anything in this indictment that's "bullshit".

I'm asking you because it's all well above-board, and you've claimed that it's bullshit.

So I would expect you to avoid answering, because you've got nothing if you're intentionally lying. Or if you really think that it's bullshit, I would expect you to take a look at any of it and discover how legitimate it is, and change your position.

I guess we're landing of the former?

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

bullshit

it's all well above-board

they indicted him for telling people to watch the news. that's not a meme, that's the persecution in Georgia in %currentyear%

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

they indicted him for telling people to watch the news.

I missed the one about telling people to watch the news. Could tell me which page it's on?

There were a lot of allegations in all the crimes and all the details of those crimes in the indictments. So he may that may well have been amongst the allegations. An act committed in furtherance of an illegal conspiracy is illegal, whether or not the act itself is illegal.

It's not illegal to buy a gun, but if you make a plan to kill someone with a gun, and that you will buy a gun for that purpose, then buying a gun is illlegal.

It's not illegal to drive a car, but if you make a plan to drive a getaway vehicle after your colleagues rob a bank, then driving that car in furtherance of that plan is illegal.

It's not illegal to tell people to watch the news of itself. But point me to the part in the Georgia indictment that mentions that, and we can discuss why the prosecution thought that it was illegal. If indeed it is amongst the acts enumerated in the indictment.

Edit: I just searched the indictment for the word "news", and come up with one hit.

Act 100.

On or about the 30th day of December 2020, DONALD JOHN TRUMP caused to be tweeted from the Twitter account @RealDonaldTrump, "Hearings from Atlanta on the Georgia Election overturn now being broadcast. Check it out. @OANN @newsmax and many more. @BrianKempGA should resign from office. He is an obstructionist who refuses to admit that we won Georgia, BIG! Also won the other Swing States." This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Is this the one you mean?

It appears that Trump is repeating knowingly false claims about the election in order to recruit people for the insurgency.

But it's also one of 161 acts in furtherance of a conspiracy that any one of would prove the first charge against at least some of the people charged. And that's only the first of the 41 counts brought in the indictment.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

If one of your acts is "he tried to change the outcome of an election by telling people to watch the news" then the rest of the acts are, necessarily, worth less than toilet paper. This is lawfare and you are a victim of it.

And you like it.