18 USC 371
So let’s take this one at a time.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
18 USC 371
Read the indictment, its followed up by pages of specifics that back up the above generalizations.
If I have time later Ill add some of them to this thread to see if I can get some of you intentionally ignorant idiots to read it.
Yakuda
Verified User
No tell us...what is trump guilty of? You don't even fucking know do you?
Yakuda
Verified User
The only intentional idiot here is you. What is trump guilty of?
In the first count of the D.C. indictment quoted above... He is guilty of...
“If two or more persons conspire, either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof an any manner for any purpose, and one or more of such a persons do at any act, to affect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned, not more than five years or both.”
18 USC 371
He is one of a group who conspired to defraud the United States, and at least one person took action toward that conspiracy.
Yakuda
Verified User
What is he guilty of?
Check out the Kenneth Chesebro memo.
https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...trump-campaign-wisconsin-November-18-2020.pdf
Pretty good evidence there...
https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...trump-campaign-wisconsin-November-18-2020.pdf
Pretty good evidence there...
The Indictment accuses him of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States under criminal statute 18 USC 371, that's just one of the three counts.
He is one of two or more people who planned to defraud the United States with regard to presidential electors.
He conspired to set up fake electors to go vote for him instead of Biden on January 6.
I have a hard time believing you are that dumb.
Yakuda
Verified User
I was waiting for you to actually articulate what he is guilty of. You FINALLY did it. So he's guilty of working with others to lie.
Not to lie, but to execute a plan to cause fake electors to vote.
Yakuda
Verified User
Correct. A lie.
No an action. Are you so stupid? They planned to, and did... go to the states and set up fake electors. That is not a lie, but an action.
Yakuda
Verified User
Who is "they"? Lying is an action dumbo.
Lying is speech, which in one sense could be considered an action, but under the meaning of Conspiracy Law it is not considered an action, an action other than speech is required.
"They" are Trump and his listed co-conspirators as listed in the indictment.
Yakuda
Verified User
You guys know about lies dont you? The bogus Steele dossier. Good luck getting trump. You know you won't get him right?
So you are punting on the discussion about your misconceptions about the indictment?
Does this mean you concede the indictment does allege a real crime that is more than "asperational speech"?
I guess I accomplished my goal, I got at least one MAGA to see reality... Even if you wont specifically admit it. Running is enough.
Yakuda
Verified User
No it's all based on lyng. that's still true. That's what defraud means. You can't seem to comprehend it.
The person who has to claim they've won has already lost.
I mention the Steele dossier as part of your affinity for lying. You people do it all the time. If you told me grass was green I'd look out the window to verify. Nothing leftists say is true.
The Conspiracy does include a lie, but that is just part of the crime. The first part of the indictment points out that Trump had a constitutional right to speech, and a constitutional right to lie; not a constitutional right to engage in a conspiracy to defraud the United States.
Fraud is often a part of illegal activity.
In this case, the lie was an element of a criminal conspiracy. You see, speech can be part of a crime. I understand this is more complex than you are used to, but lets compare it to something more basic.
If I go to a few of my friends and say...
'We all agree Bank of America stole money from me (a lie) and I want it back.'
Then the group and I plan to hack the Bank and extract money, then we have committed FRAUD based on a lie.
Can you see that its still a crime to hack the bank?
Used knowingly false claims? Who says that? Jack Smith? The Democrats of the January 6th inquisition? This is not merely an attack on first amendment rights, its actually laughably stupid because it requires one to determine what was in the mind of the person who said it.
It requires one to agree to the claim that the 2020 election was indeed without fraud, without inconsistencies and without interventionist jurists determining law from the bench.
Reading through this portion of the FAKE indictment, it reads like the Mueller report. With a lot of innuendo and hyperbole which the January 6th inquisition is famous for.
In addition, forcing an attorney to violate the privacy rule is criminal in and of itself. Forcing testimony from Trumps inner advisors and VP is a violation of Executive privilege.
So not only is Jack Smith merely copying and pasting the claims of the January 6th inquisition, he has also violated the law and our Constitution to even obtain what he believes is evidence of what was in the mind of Trump.
Only a really dumb person, or a glaring, dishonest partisan hack can buy this malarky.
What offense? What fraud?