Jump to content

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


webfact

Recommended Posts

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.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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/

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by thaibeachlovers
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by ozimoron
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...