Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   TFG wins another grand jury investigation into TFG. So tired of winning   (nbcnews.com) divider line
    More: News, Grand jury, Joe Biden, special grand jury, Subpoena, Judge, Jury, Donald Trump, United States  
•       •       •

4798 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Jan 2022 at 11:15 PM (16 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



66 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-01-24 7:26:04 PM  
State charges are just so, SO tasty.

/book him!
 
2022-01-24 7:51:42 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-24 8:10:11 PM  
He's gonna run out of Fifths to plead.


Maybe get going on the drinking kind.
 
2022-01-24 8:54:43 PM  
Don't the Republicans control the state? They're rigging the elections easily enough, why don't they put a stop to this?

Odd that they're just kind of letting it proceed.
 
2022-01-24 9:18:20 PM  

Ishkur: Don't the Republicans control the state? They're rigging the elections easily enough, why don't they put a stop to this?

Odd that they're just kind of letting it proceed.


Yeah, it's Georgia. He'll get an insta-pardon before the ink is dry on the indictment.
 
2022-01-24 9:54:58 PM  
I wonder if a certain ladybug is feeling a bit nervous tonight.
 
2022-01-24 10:22:12 PM  
Where's Ivanka?
Where's the Jarret?
 
2022-01-24 11:16:18 PM  
non-story.  Criminalization of crime.
 
2022-01-24 11:20:46 PM  
He has the best juries. The grandest juries.
 
2022-01-24 11:23:48 PM  
TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.
 
2022-01-24 11:24:10 PM  
images.gawker.comView Full Size
 
2022-01-24 11:26:41 PM  

Ishkur: Don't the Republicans control the state? They're rigging the elections easily enough, why don't they put a stop to this?

Odd that they're just kind of letting it proceed.


I can think of two reasons; first, he made them look bad publicly. They want revenge.
Second, they can tilt it just enough that no charges of consequence come from it resulting in; "Hey, look, they cleared him of everything! Totally innocent!"
 
2022-01-24 11:27:49 PM  
Will anyone care though? I mean I will, but will enough people actually give a f*ck
 
2022-01-24 11:34:56 PM  
I'd like to see Arizona or Wisconsin nut up like this.
 
2022-01-24 11:35:59 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-24 11:40:29 PM  
Good.

Keep piling them up.

Every day of his "retirement" that turnip gets to spend in court blubbering to defend the indefensible instead of lounging around on the golf course is a small win for us.
 
2022-01-24 11:47:19 PM  

meat0918: Will anyone care though? I mean I will, but will enough people actually give a f*ck


If you want non political people in Georgia to start caring, tell them Trump is friends with a man who destroys peaches out of spite.

I don't mean a few fruit baskets either, he destroys peaches by the truckload.
 
2022-01-24 11:51:55 PM  
I really hope The Weight of these investigations start getting to this bloated POS.

FTFAThe grand jury requested by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis will have the power to subpoena witnesses in an investigation that focuses on any "coordinated attempts to unlawfully alter the outcome of the 2020 elections" in Georgia.

Take a load off, Fani!
 
2022-01-24 11:55:09 PM  

skinink: TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.


I'm not sure why it's hard for you to understand things, princess. Here's yet another explanation.

"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence. A crime has to be one that is enumerated in a state's penal code, or in the US code, and the action has to fulfill all the elements of that crime to be charged as such. "Not only does [Willis] need to show that former President Trump made this call and made those statements, she needs evidence of what was his intent," said Page Pate, a trial lawyer in Georgia. "I think, especially if she really wants to move forward with a prosecution, she wants more than just his voice on a phone call." https://www.npr.org/2022/01/20/1074417449/district-attorney-in-georgia-asks-for-a-special-grand-jury-for-trump-election-pr

So if the crime is, let's say, 21-2-567 - Intimidation of electors, which is probably what's going on here, then let's take a look at the definition and elements:

(a) Any person who uses or threatens to use force and violence, or acts in any other manner to intimidate any other person, to:
(1) Vote or refrain from voting at any primary or election, or to vote or refrain from voting for or against any particular candidate or question submitted to electors at such primary or election; or
(2) Place or refrain from placing his or her name upon a register of electors
shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.
(b) As used in this Code section, the term "acts in any other manner to intimidate" means to undertake or pursue a knowing and willful course of conduct which causes emotional distress by placing another person in reasonable fear for such person's safety or for the safety of another person and which serves no legitimate purpose.

So we need evidence, either testimonial or circumstantial, that shows Trump knowingly and willingly undertook acts intended to put another person in reasonable fear for their safety.
What did he do? He made a phone call. To whom? In the presence of who else? Under what circumstances?
Did the recipient REASONABLY BELIEVE he was being threatened, and why?
Was that the INTENT OF THE CALL? What led the recipient to believe that that was the intention, and not just Trump throwing a patented Trumpertantrum?

Is there other corroborating evidence that links the recipient and Trump in such a way that both ends of those links are connected? i.e. an email from Trump to his pet lawyer to the recipient's lawyer to the recipient promising he'd never work in this town again? Did the recipient get that email, and what was his response?

Just because Trump "schemed a plan" doesn't mean it's criminally actionable. The DA has to be able to prove each of those steps, and show that Trump meant every single thing he did to be in furtherance of that scheming plan, and if she can't, then she hasn't got a criminal case.

The grand jury had to be convened because they can issue subpoenas, and Raffensperger has said he will not cooperate without a subpoena, probably for reasons related to the nature of his job. But those little details matter when all you have is a scheming plan and not much else.
 
2022-01-25 12:01:55 AM  

Sin'sHero: He's gonna run out of Fifths to plead.


Maybe get going on the drinking kind.


"My fellow Patriots, I need more 5's in order to fight the evil liberal witch hunt. Please send me all of you $5 bills!"
 
2022-01-25 12:04:24 AM  
my dick is hard lol
 
2022-01-25 12:04:48 AM  

skinink: TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.


The clock is ticking.  The GOP revealed themselves to be beyond Nixonian corruption, McCarthyist lying, to being full blown traitors.  This means they should NEVER EVER be able to take back the House, the Senate or the White House.  To allow either of those to happen would be detrimental to our society.   The only cure at this point is widespread justice, that demolishes the GOP / Trump house of cards and shatters their political backbone for generations if not forever.  Justice needs to come soon, and WAY before the 2022 elections.

Those 11 charged with sedition recently was very well needed, I cried with some relief, similar to when Paul Manafort was indicted in 2017.  But it's not even close to enough of what I or our country needs. We know the DOJ is hard at work....just....ugh, those guys are just low level pawns and we need some serious accountability at much higher levels.
 
2022-01-25 12:16:23 AM  

Gyrfalcon: skinink: TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.

I'm not sure why it's hard for you to understand things, princess. Here's yet another explanation.

"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence. A crime has to be one that is enumerated in a state's penal code, or in the US code, and the action has to fulfill all the elements of that crime to be charged as such. "Not only does [Willis] need to show that former President Trump made this call and made those statements, she needs evidence of what was his intent," said Page Pate, a trial lawyer in Georgia. "I think, especially if she really wants to move forward with a prosecution, she wants more than just his voice on a phone call." https://www.npr.org/2022/01/20/1074417449/district-attorney-in-georgia-asks-for-a-special-grand-jury-for-trump-election-pr

So if the crime is, let's say, 21-2-567 - Intimidation of electors, which is probably what's going on here, then let's take a look at the definition and elements:

(a) Any person who uses or threatens to use force and violence, or acts in any other manner to intimidate any other person, to:
(1) Vote or refrain from voting at any primary or election, or to vote or refrain from voting for or against any particular candidate or question submitted to electors at such primary or election; or
(2) Place or refrain from placing his or her name upon a register of electors
shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.
(b) As used in this Code section, the term "acts in any other manner to intimidate" means to undertake or pursue a knowing and willful course of conduct which causes emotional distress by placing another person in reasonable fear for such person's safety or for the safety of another person and which serves no legitimate purpose.

So we need evidence, either testimonial or circumstantial, that shows Trump knowingly and willingly undertook acts intended to put another person in reasonable fear for their safety.
What did he do? He made a phone call. To whom? In the presence of who else? Under what circumstances?
Did the recipient REASONABLY BELIEVE he was being threatened, and why?
Was that the INTENT OF THE CALL? What led the recipient to believe that that was the intention, and not just Trump throwing a patented Trumpertantrum?

Is there other corroborating evidence that links the recipient and Trump in such a way that both ends of those links are connected? i.e. an email from Trump to his pet lawyer to the recipient's lawyer to the recipient promising he'd never work in this town again? Did the recipient get that email, and what was his response?

Just because Trump "schemed a plan" doesn't mean it's criminally actionable. The DA has to be able to prove each of those steps, and show that Trump meant every single thing he did to be in furtherance of that scheming plan, and if she can't, then she hasn't got a criminal case.

The grand jury had to be convened because they can issue subpoenas, and Raffensperger has said he will not cooperate without a subpoena, probably for reasons related to the nature of his job. But those little details matter when all you have is a scheming plan and not much else.


The intent of the call was for Raffensperger to "find" - create, forge, or eliminate a sufficient number of votes for Biden - so that TFG would win the state. Of this there is no doubt because the call was recorded. You can listen to it on YouTube.

Did Raffensperger have reason to believe failing to find those votes might lead to violence against him or his family? That's for him - and him alone - to confirm or deny, and he had made public claims that he felt threatened at the time.

As such, TFG is guilty of the crime you described.
 
2022-01-25 12:18:37 AM  

Gyrfalcon: skinink: TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.

I'm not sure why it's hard for you to understand things, princess. Here's yet another explanation.

"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence. A crime has to be one that is enumerated in a state's penal code, or in the US code, and the action has to fulfill all the elements of that crime to be charged as such. "Not only does [Willis] need to show that former President Trump made this call and made those statements, she needs evidence of what was his intent," said Page Pate, a trial lawyer in Georgia. "I think, especially if she really wants to move forward with a prosecution, she wants more than just his voice on a phone call." https://www.npr.org/2022/01/20/1074417449/district-attorney-in-georgia-asks-for-a-special-grand-jury-for-trump-election-pr

So if the crime is, let's say, 21-2-567 - Intimidation of electors, which is probably what's going on here, then let's take a look at the definition and elements:

(a) Any person who uses or threatens to use force and violence, or acts in any other manner to intimidate any other person, to:
(1) Vote or refrain from voting at any primary or election, or to vote or refrain from voting for or against any particular candidate or question submitted to electors at such primary or election; or
(2) Place or refrain from placing his or her name upon a register of electors
shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.
(b) As used in this Code section, the term "acts in any other manner to intimidate" means to undertake or pursue a knowing and willful course of conduct which causes emotional distress by placing another person in reasonable fear for such person's safety or for the safety of another person and which serves no legitimate purpose.

So we need evidence, either testimonial or circumstantial, that shows Trump knowingly and willingly undertook acts intended to put another person in reasonable fear for their safety.
What did he do? He made a phone call. To whom? In the presence of who else? Under what circumstances?
Did the recipient REASONABLY BELIEVE he was being threatened, and why?
Was that the INTENT OF THE CALL? What led the recipient to believe that that was the intention, and not just Trump throwing a patented Trumpertantrum?

Is there other corroborating evidence that links the recipient and Trump in such a way that both ends of those links are connected? i.e. an email from Trump to his pet lawyer to the recipient's lawyer to the recipient promising he'd never work in this town again? Did the recipient get that email, and what was his response?

Just because Trump "schemed a plan" doesn't mean it's criminally actionable. The DA has to be able to prove each of those steps, and show that Trump meant every single thing he did to be in furtherance of that scheming plan, and if she can't, then she hasn't got a criminal case.

The grand jury had to be convened because they can issue subpoenas, and Raffensperger has said he will not cooperate without a subpoena, probably for reasons related to the nature of his job. But those little details matter when all you have is a scheming plan and not much else.


"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence

All those people in jail for conspiracy charges surely wish they had you for a lawyer.
 
2022-01-25 12:20:37 AM  
Meat.

Now this is some meat. This is farking flesh, fat and bone.

There is enough shiat out there that they (the GQP & Trump) don't want out there that this is meat. This opens the meat locker doors.

And meat from this bone is gonna lead to meat from other state's bones, Federal & Congressional meat and bones too.

Meat.
 
2022-01-25 12:30:40 AM  
Everything Trump touches dies. He should continue to touch himself.
 
2022-01-25 12:36:11 AM  

IRestoreFurniture: Gyrfalcon: skinink: TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.

I'm not sure why it's hard for you to understand things, princess. Here's yet another explanation.

"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence. A crime has to be one that is enumerated in a state's penal code, or in the US code, and the action has to fulfill all the elements of that crime to be charged as such. "Not only does [Willis] need to show that former President Trump made this call and made those statements, she needs evidence of what was his intent," said Page Pate, a trial lawyer in Georgia. "I think, especially if she really wants to move forward with a prosecution, she wants more than just his voice on a phone call." https://www.npr.org/2022/01/20/1074417449/district-attorney-in-georgia-asks-for-a-special-grand-jury-for-trump-election-pr

So if the crime is, let's say, 21-2-567 - Intimidation of electors, which is probably what's going on here, then let's take a look at the definition and elements:

(a) Any person who uses or threatens to use force and violence, or acts in any other manner to intimidate any other person, to:
(1) Vote or refrain from voting at any primary or election, or to vote or refrain from voting for or against any particular candidate or question submitted to electors at such primary or election; or
(2) Place or refrain from placing his or her name upon a register of electors
shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.
(b) As used in this Code section, the term "acts in any other manner to intimidate" means to undertake or pursue a knowing and willful course of conduct which causes emotional distress by placing another person in reasonable fear for such person's safety or for the safety of another person and which serves no legitimate purpose.

So we need evidence, either testimonial or circumstantial, that shows Trump knowingly and willingly undertook acts intended to put another person in reasonable fear for their safety.
What did he do? He made a phone call. To whom? In the presence of who else? Under what circumstances?
Did the recipient REASONABLY BELIEVE he was being threatened, and why?
Was that the INTENT OF THE CALL? What led the recipient to believe that that was the intention, and not just Trump throwing a patented Trumpertantrum?

Is there other corroborating evidence that links the recipient and Trump in such a way that both ends of those links are connected? i.e. an email from Trump to his pet lawyer to the recipient's lawyer to the recipient promising he'd never work in this town again? Did the recipient get that email, and what was his response?

Just because Trump "schemed a plan" doesn't mean it's criminally actionable. The DA has to be able to prove each of those steps, and show that Trump meant every single thing he did to be in furtherance of that scheming plan, and if she can't, then she hasn't got a criminal case.

The grand jury had to be convened because they can issue subpoenas, and Raffensperger has said he will not cooperate without a subpoena, probably for reasons related to the nature of his job. But those little details matter when all you have is a scheming plan and not much else.

"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence

All those people in jail for conspiracy charges surely wish they had you for a lawyer.


And let me rephrase this, I am not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure that "Scheming a plan" to commit a crime is illegal.  If I'm wrong, let me know.  And I think your argument is that there isn't a clear idea that what he was scheming to do was a crime?
 
MFK
2022-01-25 12:40:13 AM  

Ishkur: Don't the Republicans control the state? They're rigging the elections easily enough, why don't they put a stop to this?

Odd that they're just kind of letting it proceed.


Here's the thing: Stacey Abrams is running for governor and the GOP is having an ugly primary fight. It is not a foregone conclusion that Brian Kemp will be governor by the time this trial is over.
 
2022-01-25 12:48:32 AM  

Gyrfalcon: skinink: TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.

I'm not sure why it's hard for you to understand things, princess. Here's yet another explanation.

"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence. A crime has to be one that is enumerated in a state's penal code, or in the US code, and the action has to fulfill all the elements of that crime to be charged as such. "Not only does [Willis] need to show that former President Trump made this call and made those statements, she needs evidence of what was his intent," said Page Pate, a trial lawyer in Georgia. "I think, especially if she really wants to move forward with a prosecution, she wants more than just his voice on a phone call." https://www.npr.org/2022/01/20/1074417449/district-attorney-in-georgia-asks-for-a-special-grand-jury-for-trump-election-pr

So if the crime is, let's say, 21-2-567 - Intimidation of electors, which is probably what's going on here, then let's take a look at the definition and elements:

(a) Any person who uses or threatens to use force and violence, or acts in any other manner to intimidate any other person, to:
(1) Vote or refrain from voting at any primary or election, or to vote or refrain from voting for or against any particular candidate or question submitted to electors at such primary or election; or
(2) Place or refrain from placing his or her name upon a register of electors
shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.
(b) As used in this Code section ...


Relax, this is just one of the Eyores posting words instead of the Keenan gif.
 
2022-01-25 12:51:12 AM  

MFK: Ishkur: Don't the Republicans control the state? They're rigging the elections easily enough, why don't they put a stop to this?

Odd that they're just kind of letting it proceed.

Here's the thing: Stacey Abrams is running for governor and the GOP is having an ugly primary fight. It is not a foregone conclusion that Brian Kemp will be governor by the time this trial is over.


Don't give me hope.
 
2022-01-25 12:54:22 AM  
Conspiracy is "two or more people agreeing to commit an illegal act, or a legal act in an illegal manner, plus one overt act in furtherance of the crime."

Both people have to agree to commit the illegal act. Therefore, if one person does not agree, the conspiracy did not take place.

So if Trump called Raffensperger and said "Find me 11,000 votes" and Raffensperger said "No" then there IS NO CRIME if that's all that happened. If Trump called him and said "Find me 11,000 votes or I'll send someone to 'help' you," and Raffensperger wasn't intimidated and said "No" then there was no conspiracy.

What has to happen here to make the "schemed plan" an actual crime is that Trump had to have said to some third party that we haven't met yet, in Raffensperger's presence "Find me 11,000 votes or [unnamed co-conspirator #1] is going to come down and help you," and this third party said "Yes I am" and Raffensperger believed that this third person was going to do that. NOW we have an actionable conspiracy.

Since Raffensperger has indicated he will not cooperate without a subpoena, but has likewise indicated he will cooperate with a subpoena, I suspect that in fact there was such a third party present and there was a conspiracy as described. However if not, if it was just Trump on the phone with someone who didn't cooperate, then it was not a conspiracy. At best it was solicitation.

You can scheme all day long to commit all kinds of crimes if you want to. Hell, if "scheming" was a crime, Stephen King would have been in the electric chair in a dozen states. Lawyers don't throw around terms like mens rea and actus reus for nothing.
 
2022-01-25 12:54:33 AM  

OhioUGrad: Gyrfalcon: skinink: TFG is winning. He should have been arrested and charged with something by now. Screw the "These things take time!!!!" explanations. A sitting President schemed a plan to overturn an election should he lose it, and almost succeeded. People in his former Administration need to be charged and arrested as well. Doing the same to Congressmen involved would be tough, but they should not feel they have some type of immunity.

I'm not sure why it's hard for you to understand things, princess. Here's yet another explanation.

"Scheming a plan" isn't a crime, and it isn't evidence. A crime has to be one that is enumerated in a state's penal code, or in the US code, and the action has to fulfill all the elements of that crime to be charged as such. "Not only does [Willis] need to show that former President Trump made this call and made those statements, she needs evidence of what was his intent," said Page Pate, a trial lawyer in Georgia. "I think, especially if she really wants to move forward with a prosecution, she wants more than just his voice on a phone call." https://www.npr.org/2022/01/20/1074417449/district-attorney-in-georgia-asks-for-a-special-grand-jury-for-trump-election-pr

So if the crime is, let's say, 21-2-567 - Intimidation of electors, which is probably what's going on here, then let's take a look at the definition and elements:

(a) Any person who uses or threatens to use force and violence, or acts in any other manner to intimidate any other person, to:
(1) Vote or refrain from voting at any primary or election, or to vote or refrain from voting for or against any particular candidate or question submitted to electors at such primary or election; or
(2) Place or refrain from placing his or her name upon a register of electors
shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.
(b) As used in this Code section ...

Relax, this is just one of the Eyores posting words instead of the Keenan gif.


Do you honestly believe Trump will face any consequences for his crimes?


Adding you to the farkie list...
 
2022-01-25 12:55:46 AM  
Georgia is one of the states in which their governor does not have direct pardon authority.
 
2022-01-25 12:58:38 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Conspiracy is "two or more people agreeing to commit an illegal act, or a legal act in an illegal manner, plus one overt act in furtherance of the crime."

Both people have to agree to commit the illegal act. Therefore, if one person does not agree, the conspiracy did not take place.

So if Trump called Raffensperger and said "Find me 11,000 votes" and Raffensperger said "No" then there IS NO CRIME if that's all that happened. If Trump called him and said "Find me 11,000 votes or I'll send someone to 'help' you," and Raffensperger wasn't intimidated and said "No" then there was no conspiracy.

What has to happen here to make the "schemed plan" an actual crime is that Trump had to have said to some third party that we haven't met yet, in Raffensperger's presence "Find me 11,000 votes or [unnamed co-conspirator #1] is going to come down and help you," and this third party said "Yes I am" and Raffensperger believed that this third person was going to do that. NOW we have an actionable conspiracy.

Since Raffensperger has indicated he will not cooperate without a subpoena, but has likewise indicated he will cooperate with a subpoena, I suspect that in fact there was such a third party present and there was a conspiracy as described. However if not, if it was just Trump on the phone with someone who didn't cooperate, then it was not a conspiracy. At best it was solicitation.

You can scheme all day long to commit all kinds of crimes if you want to. Hell, if "scheming" was a crime, Stephen King would have been in the electric chair in a dozen states. Lawyers don't throw around terms like mens rea and actus reus for nothing.


Do you think Trump acted alone?  Apparently there are actual written plans.  Of a conspiracy.


Trump didn't act alone.  There are supposedly voluminous notes on his crimes written and agreed to by others.


But in the end, I hate to say it's ain't nothing gonna happen.

Trump will face no consequences of this.


I surely hope I'm wrong but I don't think so.


I'm just farkieing anyone who is truly invested in the dream of a perp walk for the eventual "I told you so" thread.


I hope you do the same for me, as well.  Of I'm wrong I'll fully admit it.

*Consequences meaning severe financial fines or incarceration or both.
 
2022-01-25 1:04:23 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Conspiracy is "two or more people agreeing to commit an illegal act, or a legal act in an illegal manner, plus one overt act in furtherance of the crime."

Both people have to agree to commit the illegal act. Therefore, if one person does not agree, the conspiracy did not take place.

So if Trump called Raffensperger and said "Find me 11,000 votes" and Raffensperger said "No" then there IS NO CRIME if that's all that happened. If Trump called him and said "Find me 11,000 votes or I'll send someone to 'help' you," and Raffensperger wasn't intimidated and said "No" then there was no conspiracy.

What has to happen here to make the "schemed plan" an actual crime is that Trump had to have said to some third party that we haven't met yet, in Raffensperger's presence "Find me 11,000 votes or [unnamed co-conspirator #1] is going to come down and help you," and this third party said "Yes I am" and Raffensperger believed that this third person was going to do that. NOW we have an actionable conspiracy.

Since Raffensperger has indicated he will not cooperate without a subpoena, but has likewise indicated he will cooperate with a subpoena, I suspect that in fact there was such a third party present and there was a conspiracy as described. However if not, if it was just Trump on the phone with someone who didn't cooperate, then it was not a conspiracy. At best it was solicitation.

You can scheme all day long to commit all kinds of crimes if you want to. Hell, if "scheming" was a crime, Stephen King would have been in the electric chair in a dozen states. Lawyers don't throw around terms like mens rea and actus reus for nothing.


That's funny.

You think the 1/6 commission thinks Raffensperger is the conduit to get to... Raffensperger.

And btw, him saying he will only cooperate via subpoena? That's called CYA. Also called, don't walk in and BE a snitch, make them force you to come in and BECOME a snitch.
 
2022-01-25 1:11:18 AM  
all right we got him
 
2022-01-25 1:22:58 AM  

IRestoreFurniture: Do you honestly believe Trump will face any consequences for his crimes?


Adding you to the farkie list...


I am hopeful that he will, Eeyore.

You know, there are some other people who kept "lists", not sure you want to align yourself with them.
 
2022-01-25 1:29:31 AM  
Proceed with the Probe is the name of my Atlanta warehouse krautrock sex-club house band.
 
2022-01-25 1:37:36 AM  

OhioUGrad: IRestoreFurniture: Do you honestly believe Trump will face any consequences for his crimes?


Adding you to the farkie list...

I am hopeful that he will, Eeyore.

You know, there are some other people who kept "lists", not sure you want to align yourself with them.


Why wouldn't you want to align yourself with Santa Claus?
 
2022-01-25 1:57:56 AM  

OhioUGrad: elax, this is just one of the Eyores posting words instead of the Keenan gif.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-25 2:08:02 AM  

Jemraine: OhioUGrad: IRestoreFurniture: Do you honestly believe Trump will face any consequences for his crimes?


Adding you to the farkie list...

I am hopeful that he will, Eeyore.

You know, there are some other people who kept "lists", not sure you want to align yourself with them.

Why wouldn't you want to align yourself with Santa Claus?


media-amazon.comView Full Size
 
2022-01-25 3:12:18 AM  

Farkin_Crazy: Gyrfalcon: Conspiracy is "two or more people agreeing to commit an illegal act, or a legal act in an illegal manner, plus one overt act in furtherance of the crime."

Both people have to agree to commit the illegal act. Therefore, if one person does not agree, the conspiracy did not take place.

So if Trump called Raffensperger and said "Find me 11,000 votes" and Raffensperger said "No" then there IS NO CRIME if that's all that happened. If Trump called him and said "Find me 11,000 votes or I'll send someone to 'help' you," and Raffensperger wasn't intimidated and said "No" then there was no conspiracy.

What has to happen here to make the "schemed plan" an actual crime is that Trump had to have said to some third party that we haven't met yet, in Raffensperger's presence "Find me 11,000 votes or [unnamed co-conspirator #1] is going to come down and help you," and this third party said "Yes I am" and Raffensperger believed that this third person was going to do that. NOW we have an actionable conspiracy.

Since Raffensperger has indicated he will not cooperate without a subpoena, but has likewise indicated he will cooperate with a subpoena, I suspect that in fact there was such a third party present and there was a conspiracy as described. However if not, if it was just Trump on the phone with someone who didn't cooperate, then it was not a conspiracy. At best it was solicitation.

You can scheme all day long to commit all kinds of crimes if you want to. Hell, if "scheming" was a crime, Stephen King would have been in the electric chair in a dozen states. Lawyers don't throw around terms like mens rea and actus reus for nothing.

That's funny.

You think the 1/6 commission thinks Raffensperger is the conduit to get to... Raffensperger.

And btw, him saying he will only cooperate via subpoena? That's called CYA. Also called, don't walk in and BE a snitch, make them force you to come in and BECOME a snitch.


No, I think you're dumb as a sack of hammers. This investigation is the Georgia Attorney General's not the 1/6 Commission.
 
2022-01-25 3:22:29 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Farkin_Crazy: Gyrfalcon: Conspiracy is "two or more people agreeing to commit an illegal act, or a legal act in an illegal manner, plus one overt act in furtherance of the crime."

Both people have to agree to commit the illegal act. Therefore, if one person does not agree, the conspiracy did not take place.

So if Trump called Raffensperger and said "Find me 11,000 votes" and Raffensperger said "No" then there IS NO CRIME if that's all that happened. If Trump called him and said "Find me 11,000 votes or I'll send someone to 'help' you," and Raffensperger wasn't intimidated and said "No" then there was no conspiracy.

What has to happen here to make the "schemed plan" an actual crime is that Trump had to have said to some third party that we haven't met yet, in Raffensperger's presence "Find me 11,000 votes or [unnamed co-conspirator #1] is going to come down and help you," and this third party said "Yes I am" and Raffensperger believed that this third person was going to do that. NOW we have an actionable conspiracy.

Since Raffensperger has indicated he will not cooperate without a subpoena, but has likewise indicated he will cooperate with a subpoena, I suspect that in fact there was such a third party present and there was a conspiracy as described. However if not, if it was just Trump on the phone with someone who didn't cooperate, then it was not a conspiracy. At best it was solicitation.

You can scheme all day long to commit all kinds of crimes if you want to. Hell, if "scheming" was a crime, Stephen King would have been in the electric chair in a dozen states. Lawyers don't throw around terms like mens rea and actus reus for nothing.

That's funny.

You think the 1/6 commission thinks Raffensperger is the conduit to get to... Raffensperger.

And btw, him saying he will only cooperate via subpoena? That's called CYA. Also called, don't walk in and BE a snitch, make them force you to come in and BECOME a snitch.

No, I think you're dumb as a sack of hammers. This investigation is the Georgia Attorney General's not the 1/6 Commission.


You think they don't share resources or won't be able to use statements and evidence in one case in another?
 
2022-01-25 3:33:25 AM  

Farkin_Crazy: You think they don't share resources or won't be able to use statements and evidence in one case in another?


Since one is a state criminal case and one is a Federal investigation, probably not, no.
 
2022-01-25 3:40:30 AM  
I really want to believe that his recent comments telling people to get vaccinated have soured his base and the GoP leadership sees this as an opportunity to take back the party and throw him under the bus.


I don't quite believe it yet, but I really want to,
 
2022-01-25 4:25:55 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Farkin_Crazy: You think they don't share resources or won't be able to use statements and evidence in one case in another?

Since one is a state criminal case and one is a Federal investigation, probably not, no.


They're also looking into very different things even if they are both related to Trump's efforts regarding the election
 
2022-01-25 4:40:44 AM  

Ishkur: Don't the Republicans control the state? They're rigging the elections easily enough, why don't they put a stop to this?

Odd that they're just kind of letting it proceed.


i.imgflip.comView Full Size
 
2022-01-25 5:51:52 AM  

Dare to keep slugs off kids: [Fark user image 630x407]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-25 6:46:02 AM  
Sound you just heard was Lindsey Graham fouling his petticoat.
 
2022-01-25 7:23:21 AM  

Excelsior: Good.

Keep piling them up.

Every day of his "retirement" that turnip gets to spend in court blubbering to defend the indefensible instead of lounging around on the golf course is a small win for us.


You're fine with him only being inconvenienced for a couple hours a day, 5 days a week?
Weaksauce
 
Displayed 50 of 66 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.