Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 61

Thread: Capitol Violence Judge Raises Potential Charge For Trump

  1. #46 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Flash,

    The only reason he is not being prosecuted for it is because the law is difficult to prove, and prosecutors don't want a loss or to set a precedent that the law is meaningless.
    My point exactly. However, the precedent was sent years ago which makes it difficult to prove. For example, those accused of inciting a riot during Vietnam War protests or civil rights marches already established the difficulty of showing a person's actions/speeches was the cause of the crowd's violence.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    PoliTalker (11-27-2021)

  3. #47 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Flash,

    I presume the 'zero chance' is your opinion?

    Certainly you don't have evidence to support that claim.

    What if we get to a point where many cases of capitol violence have court records of the convicts testifying that they did what they did because of Donald Trump's Big Lie?

    Is that not evidence that he incited the insurrection?
    Inciting a riot is a different charge than treason and easier to prove. The Big Lie did not incite a riot because it occurred over 2 months before the riot. Inciting a riot must be the immediate result of the speech--not something than happened previously.

    Treason requires giving aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war. There is no war. So my opinion is that there is zero chance of that charge but it is based on previous court decisions. The Rosenbergs were executed for giving the Soviets American secrets but were not charged with treason because we were not at war.

  4. #48 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    21,174
    Thanks
    3,418
    Thanked 7,931 Times in 5,908 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 444 Times in 424 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    no
    "Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything." Joseph Stalin
    The USA has lost WWIV to China with no other weapons but China Virus and some cash to buy democrats.

  5. #49 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Flash,

    Direct evidence of a conspiracy to disrupt our government.

    That is an insurrection.
    That is why those Oath Keepers were charged with conspiracy, but so far not any others. But, they were not charged with insurrection.

  6. #50 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
    I'm curious -- what are your thoughts on #TRE45ON being indicted/imprisoned on the tax evasion and other charges that NYS has been looking into?
    I don't know anything about the tax laws or Trump's tax issues. They are probably more complicated than insurrection or treason laws.

  7. #51 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,523
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 24,567 Times in 17,094 Posts
    Groans
    5,280
    Groaned 4,575 Times in 4,254 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    Inciting a riot is a different charge than treason and easier to prove. The Big Lie did not incite a riot because it occurred over 2 months before the riot. Inciting a riot must be the immediate result of the speech--not something than happened previously.

    Treason requires giving aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war. There is no war. So my opinion is that there is zero chance of that charge but it is based on previous court decisions. The Rosenbergs were executed for giving the Soviets American secrets but were not charged with treason because we were not at war.
    Which big lie? He repeated it over and over to anyone who would listen. However, he organized the insurrection and selected the speakers at the rally. The speakers were easy to read and then Trump closed it out by elaborately using the big lie and inciting the riot. Trump is a mafia chief at heart. He uses descriptors without saying exactly what he wants you to do. I don't see how he can beat the rap because he talks too damn much.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Nordberg For This Post:

    PoliTalker (11-27-2021)

  9. #52 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    Which big lie? He repeated it over and over to anyone who would listen. However, he organized the insurrection and selected the speakers at the rally. The speakers were easy to read and then Trump closed it out by elaborately using the big lie and inciting the riot. Trump is a mafia chief at heart. He uses descriptors without saying exactly what he wants you to do. I don't see how he can beat the rap because he talks too damn much.
    So far, there is no rap to beat. He got acquitted by the Senate and as far as we know there are no charges for the insurrection thing.

  10. #53 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Ravenhenge in the Northwoods
    Posts
    88,303
    Thanks
    145,721
    Thanked 82,528 Times in 52,745 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 4,657 Times in 4,376 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    I don't know anything about the tax laws or Trump's tax issues. They are probably more complicated than insurrection or treason laws.
    By several orders of magnitude, no doubt.

    Hope you and yours are having a pleasant holiday weekend, Flash.
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals." -- Mark Twain

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to ThatOwlWoman For This Post:

    Flash (11-26-2021)

  12. #54 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Flash,

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    Inciting a riot is a different charge than treason and easier to prove. The Big Lie did not incite a riot because it occurred over 2 months before the riot. Inciting a riot must be the immediate result of the speech--not something than happened previously.
    That is simply an interpretation. The law does not specify that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    Treason requires giving aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war. There is no war. So my opinion is that there is zero chance of that charge but it is based on previous court decisions. The Rosenbergs were executed for giving the Soviets American secrets but were not charged with treason because we were not at war.
    That case and treason bear little relevance. This is the law which I believe applies:

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Flash,



    He incited an insurrection.

    I would like to see him charged with that.

    18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection:

    "Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
    (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)"

    US Code
    We could see a situation where multiple individuals testify in court that they took part in an insurrection because they believed they were doing what Donald Trump urged them to do.

    That makes Donald Trump guilty of 18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection.

    Note: There is not one word in that law about treason or enemies.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  13. #55 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Flash,

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    That is why those Oath Keepers were charged with conspiracy, but so far not any others. But, they were not charged with insurrection.
    That's the thing that makes this difficult to understand. I'm not a lawyer, but it certainly appears to me that the insurrection law applies. Why it has not been brought in court remains a mystery to this lay person.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  14. #56 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Nordberg,

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    Which big lie? He repeated it over and over to anyone who would listen. However, he organized the insurrection and selected the speakers at the rally. The speakers were easy to read and then Trump closed it out by elaborately using the big lie and inciting the riot. Trump is a mafia chief at heart. He uses descriptors without saying exactly what he wants you to do. I don't see how he can beat the rap because he talks too damn much.
    Well that's the thing. He says conflicting things. That always gives a lawyer an out. A lawyer can always selectively cherry-pick from Trump's speech and cause it to mean one thing and then the exact opposite. He said 'go peacefully' and also said 'If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country.' And he doesn't leave much of a paper trail. He is slicker than Al Capone was. Capone was never charged with murder, but you know he had many people killed.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  15. #57 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Living in rural America, "clinging to guns and religion"
    Posts
    43,021
    Thanks
    9,528
    Thanked 22,512 Times in 16,974 Posts
    Groans
    134
    Groaned 522 Times in 502 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Nordberg,



    Well that's the thing. He says conflicting things. That always gives a lawyer an out. A lawyer can always selectively cherry-pick from Trump's speech and cause it to mean one thing and then the exact opposite. He said 'go peacefully' and also said 'If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country.' And he doesn't leave much of a paper trail. He is slicker than Al Capone was. Capone was never charged with murder, but you know he had many people killed.
    Fuck you, you communist cunt!
    Common sense is not a gift, it's a punishment because you have to deal with everyone who doesn't have it.

  16. #58 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Flash,

    That is simply an interpretation. The law does not specify that.
    It is court rulings. A person can conspire to stage a rebellion, but that is different than "inciting" it.

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    That case and treason bear little relevance. This is the law which I believe applies:
    Right. The Rosenburg case is about treason, not insurrection or rebellion. Some posters said Trump was guilty of treason, and I was showing why treason does not apply.

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    We could see a situation where multiple individuals testify in court that they took part in an insurrection because they believed they were doing what Donald Trump urged them to do.
    Those rioters who claimed they were acting because they thought Trump wanted that found out that defense did not work. What they believed Trump wanted is not the same thing as being incited by him to do so.

    Trump has not been charged under this law. I agree with you that it is very hard to prove a person incited another to take violent actions; thus, he is unlikely to face this charge.

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Note: There is not one word in that law about treason or enemies.
    Right. I was replying to those who said Trump should be charged with treason. Treason is a different law than rebellion and insurrection. I used the Rosenberg case to illustrate it is not treason unless we are in a state of war. That is why they were charged with espionage rather than treason even though they gave the Soviets atomic secrets.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    PoliTalker (11-28-2021)

  18. #59 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Flash,

    That's the thing that makes this difficult to understand. I'm not a lawyer, but it certainly appears to me that the insurrection law applies. Why it has not been brought in court remains a mystery to this lay person.
    I think it is because they have evidence (communications) of prior planning by the Oath Keepers which proves a conspiracy.

    In Portland the rioters broke into a building with jail and courtrooms and set it ablaze. They attacked police with Molotov cocktails, fireworks, and IEDs. Many of these were charged with felonies but none for rebellion/insurrection.

    Like the D. C. rioters, it would be difficult to prove their intent was to overthrow civilian authority as opposed to getting caught up in a crowd of protestors who became violent.

  19. #60 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Flash,

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    I think it is because they have evidence (communications) of prior planning by the Oath Keepers which proves a conspiracy.

    In Portland the rioters broke into a building with jail and courtrooms and set it ablaze. They attacked police with Molotov cocktails, fireworks, and IEDs. Many of these were charged with felonies but none for rebellion/insurrection.

    Like the D. C. rioters, it would be difficult to prove their intent was to overthrow civilian authority as opposed to getting caught up in a crowd of protestors who became violent.
    Conspiracy / incitement of insurrection.

    It does not have to be an either/or situation.

    Both can exist simultaneously.

    "Intent to overthrow" does not have to be proven for a party to be guilty of insurrection.

    " incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, "

    That is what has to be proven.

    Looks like he is guilty of it to me. Can it be proven? Apparently the prosecutors either don't think so at this point, or they want more evidence before they go there.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

Similar Threads

  1. Capitol Police memo warns of potential for violence during September 18 rally
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 09-09-2021, 10:00 PM
  2. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 03-09-2021, 10:21 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-13-2021, 03:00 PM
  4. RNC meeting cheers Trump one day after Capitol violence
    By Guno צְבִי in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-07-2021, 04:51 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-01-2020, 07:31 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •