‘Biased.’ ‘Corrupt.’ ‘Deranged.’ Trump’s Taunts Test Limits of Release.

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, wwest5829 said:

Cute

perhaps, but accurate nonetheless.

Think about it. (now that was cute) 

In the US , and I think any civilized country, when someone is indicted, and meets certain baseline criteria, a person is released on bail until trial. The release is conditional, and such conditions are set at a bail hearing,  if such person fails to adhere to such bail conditions, there is a hearing and based on the bail infraction either a warning is issued (one was already issued.), or punishment is issued.

 Punishments can range from incarceration at a state facility , to house arrest, with a few other  options in-between. 

It is in a "Banana republic"  that the above procedure is not enforced. and not the other way around as you argued. 

I mean think about it. If a crime against you was committed, and the perpetrator was arrested and released on bail, wouldn't you want some protections from such person?  Wouldn't you want that such person was prevented from threatening your witnesses and yourself with violence if you testified against him? And if you do, which I think you would, how would you propose the system protects you from such person? 

[bendejo]

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

Most likely, house arrest wouldn't mean access to cons any more than if he were incarcerated.. Access would be denied as part of the court order.

Of course you know he'll violate, right?

 

[eisfeld]

4 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

Are you fully aware that the 11.5 million documents the prosecution want to use if printed out, would be 5,000 ft high ! and to view them it would be the same as reading war and peace 78 times a day prior to trial date set by the mad Georgia woman ? ? There is no way on earth that any trial could start before they have been read and this is why Trump is proposing 2026. The daft woman in Georgia has made any guilty verdict completely overturnable by not allowing time to present a defence if it goes ahead

 

The paperwork needing to be reviewed by EACH defendant prior to trial is EIGHT times the height of the Washington monument ! Let that sink in !

 

11.5 million documents! Wow! What an insane number to ask the defense to review. Clearly impossible right? Hm but wait. Wouldn't it also be clearly impossible for the prossecution to come up with an amount of documents like that? Have they had thousands of people working on those for years? How did they file this amount of documents with the court?

 

Maybe when completely ridicolous numbers are thrown around stop and think if it makes any sense.

 

My guess Trumps lawyer is just making a laughable play by counting all documents in some kind of document archive that is available or referenced. Like an archive of all election related documents for the whole history of the US or some such. And it's disingenuous to claim they'd need to review all of those in order to prepare for the case. Curiously enough this number of documents matches the so called Panama Papers.

Edited August 19, 2023 by eisfeld

[wwest5829]

36 minutes ago, sirineou said:

perhaps, but accurate nonetheless.

Think about it. (now that was cute) 

In the US , and I think any civilized country, when someone is indicted, and meets certain baseline criteria, a person is released on bail until trial. The release is conditional, and such conditions are set at a bail hearing,  if such person fails to adhere to such bail conditions, there is a hearing and based on the bail infraction either a warning is issued (one was already issued.), or punishment is issued.

 Punishments can range from incarceration at a state facility , to house arrest, with a few other  options in-between. 

It is in a "Banana republic"  that the above procedure is not enforced. and not the other way around as you argued. 

I mean think about it. If a crime against you was committed, and the perpetrator was arrested and released on bail, wouldn't you want some protections from such person?  Wouldn't you want that such person was prevented from threatening your witnesses and yourself with violence if you testified against him? And if you do, which I think you would, how would you propose the system protects you from such person? 

If conditions are broached, it is up to the Judge to call the perp to task. Hmmm, I do need to further read if, indeed, “house arrest” has been used in the USA. I am aware of ankle bracelets constricting movement but am not sure that this is “house arrest” as used in some other countries. You either mis understand or misconstrue my meaning if you come to the conclusion that I do not want legal proceedings, normally used in the USA to be applied. Did further reading … I was not aware that we use “house arrest” the same as other third world countries. I stand corrected in my ignorance of this.

Edited August 19, 2023 by wwest5829

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, wwest5829 said:

If conditions are broached, it is up to the Judge to call the perp to task. Hmmm, I do need to further read if, indeed, “house arrest” has been used in the USA. I am aware of ankle bracelets constricting movement but am not sure that this is “house arrest” as used in some other countries. You either mis understand or misconstrue my meaning if you come to the conclusion that I do not want legal proceedings, normally used in the USA to be applied. Did further reading … I was not aware that we use “house arrest” the same as other third world countries. I stand corrected in my ignorance of this.

Yes perhaps do some further reading, ankle bracelets are often used to detect house arrest violations

[placeholder]

58 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Of course you know he'll violate, right?

 

I guess it depends on how strictly his confinement is enforced. If he's confined to a small area, with limited visitation right and no access to communications, he could be stymied. Of course, there would have to be someone there to enforce the restrictions at all times. I doubt that  Secret Service  agent would play the role of prison guard. Not in their remit. 

[wwest5829]

31 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Yes perhaps do some further reading, ankle bracelets are often used to detect house arrest violations

Done and further educated. My knowledge with our criminal Justice system on this level is limited by not having had experience.

[candide]

7 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

I think people wanting this to go bad for Trump should be very very worried about freedom of speech in the USA.

 

Any prosecution of anyone for political reasons or political interference is severely risking the USA freedom of party not in charge. If you can start raising prosecutions on your opponents in your state that voted 96% say against your opponent then any prosecution should ultimately go through. 

 

The only way that any ex president can get a fair trial is by appointing both democrat AND republican voters on any jury - and not have it that the total dems out number the reps so much any partial verdict could go through just based on political voting. Ultimately a jury should really only vote Trump guilty if they can persuade Trump voters on the jury that Trump is guilty

 

In any normal country the jury would be 50/50 as that would represent the country in total.

 

Anyone that thinks Trump would get a fair trial with 12 democrats on the jury and a democrat judge would be saying they would fully support a black man being tried by  a jury of 12 white KKK'ers and a KKK judge !

 

Lastly this mad prosecution of 19 defendants is mad - each defendant will probably have 4 lawyers - so 50 lawyers in the room, all of which can object to any question. It's going to be a farce - but great TV.

 

 

"In any normal country the jury would be 50/50 as that would represent the country in total."

And what are these countries requiring juries to be composed according to the political orientation of people?

Just one baseless claim picked up among others in your post......

Edited August 19, 2023 by candide

[JJGittes]

On 8/17/2023 at 1:08 PM, Isaan sailor said:

Democrat judge and jury—sounds fair, right?

Considering the current condition of the Republican party, yes, it does.

[ozimoron]

 

[Tropposurfer]

On 8/17/2023 at 4:08 PM, Isaan sailor said:

Democrat judge and jury—sounds fair, right?

As opposed to what you're promoting?

[Tropposurfer]

On 8/17/2023 at 10:26 PM, ozimoron said:

Where's your evidence that the jury were democrats? Just the fact that they found reason to indict is proof enough for you, right?

 

Do you believe everyone makes life decisions based on their political affiliations?

Spot on my Oz cobber!

It was a 12 person jury of citizens (not the BS conspiracy nutjob palava being spouted) that recommended the governments indictments be ratified and taken forward to trial. 

But as you and I, and all sane critical thinking adults know, cultist, white-supremacist bigots aren't at all interested in the truth or the inconvenience of facts.  

And lets be crystal clear if anyone thinks and believes Trump is a good and decent man, a patriot, and not a monumental crook and traitor then you are at the very least one or both of the descriptors I posted in the previous sentence.

Edited August 19, 2023 by Tropposurfer

[sirineou]

2 hours ago, wwest5829 said:

I stand corrected in my ignorance of this.

IMO, it takes a big man to say that.

It's not like we have never been wrong, why can't we be now? Is there anyone among as who has never been wrong?

I know I have , more times than I am willing to admit LOL

Then why can't we say "Fair enough I stand corrected" as you did? 

Many just double down and engage in cognitive gymnastics trying to defend the indefensible. 

Even when we disagree, I appreciate people such as you.

Chears !!

 

[ozimoron]

26 minutes ago, Tropposurfer said:

Spot on my Oz cobber!

how old are you? 90? ????

 

26 minutes ago, Tropposurfer said:

 

It was a 12 person jury of citizens (not the BS conspiracy nutjob palava being spouted) that recommended the governments indictments be ratified and taken forward to trial. 

But as you and I, and all sane critical thinking adults know, cultist, white-supremacist bigots aren't at all interested in the truth or the inconvenience of facts.  

And lets be crystal clear if anyone thinks and believes Trump is a good and decent man, a patriot, and not a monumental crook and traitor then you are at the very least one or both of the descriptors I posted in the previous sentence.

They think he's a patriot because he's a racist, nationalist. The two usually go hand in hand. White supremacists are not good people despite what Trump says. They love him because he said they were.

[rudi49jr]

Biased. Corrupt. Deranged. Sounds about right, and it all applies to Trump himself. To those he accuses of being corrupt, biased, and deranged: not so much.

[wwest5829]

38 minutes ago, sirineou said:

IMO, it takes a big man to say that.

It's not like we have never been wrong, why can't we be now? Is there anyone among as who has never been wrong?

I know I have , more times than I am willing to admit LOL

Then why can't we say "Fair enough I stand corrected" as you did? 

Many just double down and engage in cognitive gymnastics trying to defend the indefensible. 

Even when we disagree, I appreciate people such as you.

Chears !!

 

Na, nothing more than admitting when .I lack knowledge of something. In line with my background. The more I have learned, the more I realize I still have much to learn.

[GroveHillWanderer]

10 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

Are you fully aware that the 11.5 million documents the prosecution want to use if printed out, would be 5,000 ft high ! and to view them it would be the same as reading war and peace 78 times a day prior to trial date set by the mad Georgia woman ? ? There is no way on earth that any trial could start before they have been read and this is why Trump is proposing 2026. The daft woman in Georgia has made any guilty verdict completely overturnable by not allowing time to present a defence if it goes ahead

You're getting your cases mixed up. The case being pursued by the "woman in Georgia" does not involve 11.5 million discovery documents. It hasn't even reached the discovery stage yet.

 

The one with the 11.5 million documents is the Jan 6 case being pursued by the "man in Washington," Jack Smith.

[BusyB]

Biased, corrupt and deranged all give us a good look into the true person of Donald Trump. The man will be used for decades to come in psychology seminars on projection.

 

I think it is fantastic that this disgraceful mysoginist, sexually abusive and racist bully is being brought to book by a black woman. Imagine what that does to his brain cells. Or better not unless you have a strong stomach.

[Irish star]

On 8/17/2023 at 1:08 PM, Isaan sailor said:

Democrat judge and jury—sounds fair, right?

I smell a Cultist 

[Irish star]

17 minutes ago, mushroomdave said:

LOCK HIM UP, LOCK HIM UP, LOCK HIM UP....Hillary says!  

????????????????????

Everybody says except his gullible sheep 

[rudi49jr]

1 hour ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

You're getting your cases mixed up. The case being pursued by the "woman in Georgia" does not involve 11.5 million discovery documents. It hasn't even reached the discovery stage yet.

 

The one with the 11.5 million documents is the Jan 6 case being pursued by the "man in Washington," Jack Smith.

The one is Washington DC is also done by judge Chutkan. Who has been threatened by MAGA Trump supporters so much that she now needs to be protected by a detail of US Marshals. 
A Texas woman (no doubt a huge Trump fan) was recently arrested for threatening to kill judge Chutkan. She left a voice message on Chutkan’s phone, in which she called Chutkan a ‘slave n-word’ and threatened to kill her. This is what she also said:

“You are in our sights, we want to kill you…If Trump doesn’t get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you, so tread lightly, bitch. You will be targeted personally, publicly, your family, all of it.”

If you want to talk deranged, this is a prime example.

Edited August 19, 2023 by rudi49jr

[bendejo]

11 hours ago, placeholder said:

I guess it depends on how strictly his confinement is enforced. If he's confined to a small area, with limited visitation right and no access to communications, he could be stymied. Of course, there would have to be someone there to enforce the restrictions at all times. I doubt that  Secret Service  agent would play the role of prison guard. Not in their remit. 

Yeah, same thing they gave Manafort.  He spent most of his days on the phone, but it was the usual "ooo, he's not supposed to do that!" and didn't get much further.  Maybe now that there is an adult on the case it will make a difference.  Anything regarding "honor system," respect for law, decency etc has been flushed down the golden toilet, how can you not see that?

But you bring up a question I've been asking for years now: will his security detail become his captors?

 

 

[bendejo]

4 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

She left a voice message on Chutkan’s phone, in which she called Chutkan a [ . . . ]

Talk about stupid!

Prepare for what the guy who organized the Charlottesville tiki-torch rally said when they caught up with him: hey, i didn't mean any of that!

 

[heybruce]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Wow, a CNN TV host admits that he was wrong, you should formatted the text far larger because its such a scoop. I've book marked it for reference.

Shocking!  You'd never catch a far right news source admitting to error.

[Danderman123]

On 8/17/2023 at 12:53 PM, JonnyF said:

Yeah who needs a trial? It's not like due process is really important anyway. 

 

I mean, he's clearly guilty of wrongthink and wrongspeak so why waste the money on a fair trial? Just lock him up already. Burma style ????.

Do you think Trump is guilty of any of the charges against him?

 

Or do you think it's irrelevant, Trump should not be put on trial?

[ballpoint]

19 hours ago, candide said:

"In any normal country the jury would be 50/50 as that would represent the country in total."

And what are these countries requiring juries to be composed according to the political orientation of people?

Just one baseless claim picked up among others in your post......

They're trying for a jury of his peers, but all his peers have also been indicted in the same case.