January 6 committee considering asking DOJ to pursue at least two criminal charges against Trump

[thaibeachlovers]

On 12/20/2022 at 5:28 AM, banjobob said:

I have a poll for you to consider:

 

1. Will Trump be indicted? (for anything, jay-walking, spitting on the sidewalk,

insurrection)

 

2. No Indictment of Trump.

 

Pick 1 or 2. and please indicate what he will be indicted for.

2 qualified.

He may be indicted, but I reckon he won't be convicted.

Despite his almost total fail in the past election, IMO the Democrats still feel threatened by him, hence the overwhelming desire by them to render him unable to stand again.

To be convicted in a fair trial, it needs some actual words or deeds that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to overthrow the government, and that is very much lacking in an objective sense. Hopefully all the subjective ranting will be left at the courtroom door.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, Credo said:

I think the problem for the sycophants -- or should I say psychophants -- is that it's getting very difficult to endlessly defend his very obvious criminal activities.  They are running out of people to blame for his misdeeds.   They have blamed all the Democrats and lefties, they have blamed all the law enforcement (Capitol Riot) and FBI, the Media is always responsible.  They are either regrouping or they are at the point where they are going to drop the victim card and look at the real criminal, Trump.   

 

I see you can't refer to those that disagree with your side in a polite manner, but resort to childish insults.

Never mind, I have no problem defending him as IMO there is nothing to defend.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

What about Hillary?

Off topic.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, Onerak said:

FBI has looked at the corruption and the lap issue since Trumps' time. If there was an iota of corruption to prosecute him, Trump would have hauled them long time ago. The system through out the world is set up to facilitate powerful people to earn money without doing anything. It is a fact of life. But that does not mean they broke existing laws. In the USA you can't haul somebody on the whim of someone else because they convinced the public about some imaginary corruption. One needs  solid proof and then convince the jury that they in fact broke some laws to get an indictment. 

If not for the likes I wouldn't know who you were supporting, but I assume your "lap issue" is an off topic reference to Hunter Biden. Hopefully his turn will be coming post 3 January 2023.

[bendejo]

8 hours ago, ozimoron said:

It's been very quiet round these parts since criminal charges were referred against Trump. The Trump sycophants have largely been missing in action.

 

It looks like Fox isn't covering this.  Does omission fall into the same kind of egregiousness as fabrication? 

Just checked their site, the top story is a remark Harris made regarding the border.  I don't have the stomach to for the rest of the MAGA sites.

 

 

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Off topic.

 

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If not for the likes I wouldn't know who you were supporting, but I assume your "lap issue" is an off topic reference to Hunter Biden. Hopefully his turn will be coming post 3 January 2023.

So responding to a comment made about Hillary is off topic but responding to a comment made about Hunter is ok.

[thaibeachlovers]

58 minutes ago, stevenl said:

 

So responding to a comment made about Hillary is off topic but responding to a comment made about Hunter is ok.

Did you even read my reply before posting? I said "but I assume your "lap issue" is an off topic reference to Hunter Biden."

 

I bolded the relevant part so you can't miss it.

 

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did you even read my reply before posting? I said "but I assume your "lap issue" is an off topic reference to Hunter Biden."

 

I bolded the relevant part so you can't miss it.

 

Yes, I read. So you state it is off topic but replied. I presume you consider your post ok, so in your opinion responding to a comment about Hunter is ok.

End of, this is off topic and not ok 

[ozimoron]

Former aide saw Trump tearing up documents, per Jan. 6 panel deposition

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3782952-former-aide-saw-trump-tearing-up-documents-per-jan-6-panel-deposition/

[placeholder]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Never mind, I have no problem defending him as IMO there is nothing to defend.

Does this mean you think his record is perfect or that he's an absolute nullity?

[ozimoron]

The chair of the University of Colorado’s Board of Regents lashed out at lawyer and former Trump adviser John Eastman, calling him and "embarrassment" and endorsed the Jan. 6 committee's recommendation that he be prosecuted, The Denver Post reports.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/colorado-university-slams-john-eastman-for-his-role-in-jan-6-he-will-bear-the-shame-for-his-role/

[rudi49jr]

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The chair of the University of Colorado’s Board of Regents lashed out at lawyer and former Trump adviser John Eastman, calling him and "embarrassment" and endorsed the Jan. 6 committee's recommendation that he be prosecuted, The Denver Post reports.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/colorado-university-slams-john-eastman-for-his-role-in-jan-6-he-will-bear-the-shame-for-his-role/

There are many more who need to be prosecuted and thrown in jail, I have no idea why the DOJ isn’t much more pro-active in these cases. There are 34 senators and representatives who were texting then White House chief of staff Mark Meadows on or around January 6 that he (or Trump) needed to do something to overturn the result of the 2020 election, and some came up with some very clear ideas and suggestions to do so. That in itself is more than enough to prosecute them for treason and/or sedition, IMO.

Then there were countless people involved in the fake elector schemes in several states. Why are these people not charged yet, or in jail? Every last one of them knew what they were doing was highly illegal, yet they proceeded with it anyway.

Those present in the so-called war room on and before January 6 at the Willard Hotel, with just one goal in mind: overturning the result of the 2020 election. Why are they still free?

The DOJ really needs to get into gear and start going after ALL the culprits involved.

[ozimoron]

... one of the reports shows that a mandatory audit of Trump’s returns only occurred in one of the six tax years that should have been scrutinized," the Trump biographer continued, "What is new is the extent to which Trump and his cohorts may have run roughshod over institutional checks and balances designed to prevent presidents from grifting while in office — and to also help ensure that financial conflicts of interest don’t collide with sound public-policymaking."

 

https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-tax-returns-2658994221/

[ozimoron]

Informant warned FBI weeks before Jan. 6 that the far-right saw Trump tweet as 'a call to arms'

 

The email, which has not previously been made public, adds to the mounting evidence that the FBI had intelligence warnings that Jan. 6 was a major threat.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/informant-warned-fbi-weeks-jan-6-far-right-saw-trump-tweet-call-arms-rcna62683

[ozimoron]

Jordan is one of the reps referred to the ethics committee.

 

Republican ‘shadow committee’ issues counter-report on Jan. 6

 

But after Pelosi vetoed the appointment of Banks and Jordan, McCarthy pulled the rest of his picks.

 

Not included in the report is other public information about the activities of congressional leadership on Jan. 6 scrambling to try to get the National Guard to the Capitol, or any mention that there were hours of inaction from former President Trump.

 

It does include statements from Trump urging demonstrators to be “peaceful,” but omits other statements like telling his supporters to “fight like hell.”

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3784289-republican-shadow-committee-issue-counter-report-on-jan-6/

 

 

[placeholder]

On 12/21/2022 at 4:52 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

2 qualified.

He may be indicted, but I reckon he won't be convicted.

Despite his almost total fail in the past election, IMO the Democrats still feel threatened by him, hence the overwhelming desire by them to render him unable to stand again.

To be convicted in a fair trial, it needs some actual words or deeds that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to overthrow the government, and that is very much lacking in an objective sense. Hopefully all the subjective ranting will be left at the courtroom door.

I guess you're blissfully unaware that not only did Trump remove government documents to Mar a Lago and elsewhere without National Archives permission, he openly acknowledged it. A prosecution would have to work extra hard not to gain a conviction for that. And given that he actually lied about returning all the documents, that only makes it the kind of case that's virtually impossible to lose even if managed by 1st year law students.

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

There are many more who need to be prosecuted and thrown in jail, I have no idea why the DOJ isn’t much more pro-active in these cases.

If a ( IMO ) pro Biden DOJ is reluctant to prosecute could it possibly be that they don't have any actual evidence that would lead to a conviction?

Even the DOJ needs some hope that they will win cases before bringing prosecutions.

Edited December 22, 2022 by thaibeachlovers

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If a ( IMO ) pro Biden DOJ is reluctant to prosecute could it possibly be that they don't have any actual evidence that would lead to a conviction?

Even the DOJ needs some hope that they will win cases before bringing prosecutions.

That really isn't the test. They may have evidence but if there is a reasonable risk of losing the DoJ may not proceed to charge the hardest crime to prove. The DoJ may well settle on lesser charges. My take from watching various experts on TV is that they are not likely to charge insurrection, We will see. Charges relating to the stolen documents are quite likely. No charges at all is extremely unlikely.

Edited December 22, 2022 by ozimoron

[stevenl]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If a ( IMO ) pro Biden DOJ is reluctant to prosecute could it possibly be that they don't have any actual evidence that would lead to a conviction?

Even the DOJ needs some hope that they will win cases before bringing prosecutions.

The Trump era has gone, the DoJ is working again as it should, independently.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

The Trump era has gone, the DoJ is working again as it should, independently.

LOL. How about addressing the reason I gave about why they ain't prosecuting all those naughty people referenced in the post I quoted.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. How about addressing the reason I gave about why they ain't prosecuting all those naughty people referenced in the post I quoted.

Two minutes after the transcripts were release to the DoJ (and everybody else) you want action and suggest the lack of it is an indication of anything?

[ozimoron]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. You are confusing me with rudi49jr. I'm not calling for any action, but he was.

 

So, now you know who is calling for action you can address your post to him. I shan't hold my breath waiting for you to do so though.

Pretty sure i replied to you about your own comment.

[ozimoron]

J6 Committee reveals Paul Gosar was texting with 'Stop the Steal' group while locked down in Capitol

 

https://www.rawstory.com/paul-gosar-2658997666/

[Phoenix Rising]

54 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. How about addressing the reason I gave about why they ain't prosecuting all those naughty people referenced in the post I quoted.

LOL, when you say "addressing" you mean speculate wildly, just like you do?

[Eric Loh]

4 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

LOL, when you say "addressing" you mean speculate wildly, just like you do?

Is that akin to throwing ketchup on the wall and hope some stick ???? 

[Phoenix Rising]

3 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Is that akin to throwing ketchup on the wall and hope some stick ???? 

Ketchup?? That's very diplomatically put!

[ozimoron]

Jan. 6 report committee releases 34 transcripts of witnesses who pleaded the Fifth

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/21/jan-6-final-report-trump-election-lies-foreign-adversaries-00074965

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Is that akin to throwing ketchup on the wall and hope some stick ???? 

You should take up comedy, as you have a flair for it. Certainly gave me a laugh.

[ozimoron]

Revealed: Trump wanted 10,000 National Guard soldiers to protect him on walk to the Capitol on J6

 

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-truth-national-guard-jan6/

[ozimoron]

Nevada Republicans who submitted a fake slate of presidential electors to Congress after the 2020 presidential campaign were choreographed by members of Trump’s legal and campaign teams, according to information released by the House panel investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/nevada-fake-electors/

 

A group of Republican fake electors claimed that they were the true electors and signed letters to that effect that were then sent to Washington. The goal was to either get Vice President Mike Pence to accept the fake slate of electors or throw things into additional chaos.

The full report names the architects behind the strategy as Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani and former President Donald Trump.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/fake-electors-scheme-plot/

Edited December 23, 2022 by ozimoron