Traitor Watch - The 45 & 47 Thread

Pocket

jumbled pile of person
Citizen
Nope, because this is a state matter and not a federal matter. The states can choose to not allow extradition in much the same way nations can: if they feel the district will not properly follow the law or honour the requirement for a fair and impartial trial.

So not obstruction until after the subsequent investigation into the refusal to allow extradition shows that it was entirely biased in favour of trump, but by then: no one will care.
And history will remember Merrick Garland as an accessory to America's downfall for not prosecuting Trump's very obvious federal crimes and instead leaving it up to the states. Possibly a willing one, if history is feeling particularly sassy.
 

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
And history will remember Merrick Garland as an accessory to America's downfall for not prosecuting Trump's very obvious federal crimes and instead leaving it up to the states. Possibly a willing one, if history is feeling particularly sassy.
I'm of two minds on merrick garland. Part of me does indeed think he's a ******* coward.

But... part of me also thinks that he's waiting for the state level stuff to start before indicting because then it wasn't the federal government that arrested trump. His cult is armed to the ******* teeth and so hopped up on propaganda and lies that they are literally bleeding coolaid. They're also some of the stupidest folks on the continent and with just a little misdirection: they won't even notice or care when the alphabet soup steps in because they'll be entirely focused on new york for daring to stop great leader.
 

The Mighty Mollusk

Scream all you like, 'cause we're all mad here
Citizen
I wonder what the record is for most pleading of the Fifth in one trial. I feel like we're about to see it broken.
 

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
He ought to be able to pay for a lawyer smart enough to keep him off the stand. But maybe he’ll insist. That would be good for a laugh. He doesn’t even know what the truth is.
He's been indicted: the only way he doesn't get questioned under oath now is if he runs away. It's already game over: we're just waiting for the cut scene to end.
 

DefaultOption

Sourball
Citizen
And history will remember Merrick Garland as an accessory to America's downfall for not prosecuting Trump's very obvious federal crimes and instead leaving it up to the states. Possibly a willing one, if history is feeling particularly sassy.
This is a silly take. The Watergate case took three years to put together, and that was stealing cookies from Girl Scouts compared to the breadth of the former guy's criming.
 

Axaday

Well-known member
Citizen
He's been indicted: the only way he doesn't get questioned under oath now is if he runs away. It's already game over: we're just waiting for the cut scene to end.
No, you have the explicit right not to testify in your own criminal case.

This is a silly take. The Watergate case took three years to put together, and that was stealing cookies from Girl Scouts compared to the breadth of the former guy's criming.
Watergate wasn't about breaking into a hotel. It was ALSO a broad, multi-faceted conspiracy to stay in office. Not stealing cookies at all.
 

Axaday

Well-known member
Citizen

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
And yet he'll hire the very finest... looking traffic lawyer in southern florida late night television.
 

DefaultOption

Sourball
Citizen

Plutoniumboss

Well-known member
Citizen
He ought to be able to pay for a lawyer smart enough to keep him off the stand. But maybe he’ll insist. That would be good for a laugh. He doesn’t even know what the truth is.
If he listened to the few smart lawyers he had, he wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. And the dumb ones are going on the stand, attorney-client privilege doesn't work when the attorney and client are complicit in the crime.
 

The Mighty Mollusk

Scream all you like, 'cause we're all mad here
Citizen

I'm conflicted. On the one hand, I'd love to see someone tell him to shut up for once and actually have it enforced by tossing him in jail for contempt, but on the other, he's sure to incriminate himself more and more if allowed to ramble.
 

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
oooohhhh, 30 days in jail (which he will never get.) and 1K fine.

"Punishable by fine" means "legal with fee". Charge him 1% gross based on his taxes for every infraction and watch how fast he actually shuts up, because trump is STILL fund raising faster than he can talk about it and some shmuck in florida or georgia will be paying his one time fine.
 

The Mighty Mollusk

Scream all you like, 'cause we're all mad here
Citizen
At this point, just shutting him up for a month would be worth it to me. The American legal system is a bad joke anyway, so I'll take what I can get.
 

Axaday

Well-known member
Citizen
I hope and expect to never be indicted for any crime. But if I do, I'm definitely switched lawyers the night before arraignment. I think something like that should always be done with fresh eyes.
 


Top Bottom