Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 279
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70795
biomed163283
Yssup Rider61003
gman4453295
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48665
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42682
CryptKicker37220
The_Waco_Kid37070
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-09-2023, 01:05 PM   #1
1blackman1
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Nov 16, 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,065
Encounters: 41
Default The Indictment

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...648653.3.0.pdf

Anyone interested can read for themselves. I’ll just say it differs from anything the Trumpys and Trump have said. The details are amazing.
1blackman1 is offline   Quote
Old 06-09-2023, 01:21 PM   #2
1blackman1
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Nov 16, 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,065
Encounters: 41
Default

Those photos. Lol.

The best one is the one with docs from other countries spilled across the floor. How stupid is the dude that takes care of that stuff. I think his name is Donald or Donnie. Maybe Trump is his last name.

This is too funny. Republicans will likely not even read it at all.
1blackman1 is offline   Quote
Old 06-09-2023, 01:22 PM   #3
1blackman1
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Nov 16, 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,065
Encounters: 41
Default

The convo with the lawyers. That’s simply amazingly dumb. The stable genius is dumb as fuck. He asked them to facilitate him committing more crimes and thought they’d do it. No wonder they keep quitting.
1blackman1 is offline   Quote
Old 06-10-2023, 05:48 AM   #4
1blackman1
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Nov 16, 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,065
Encounters: 41
Default

This is a well written document. They have all the goods on Trump. He simply is an idiot. I know you Trumpys won’t read it but you really should. He doesn’t have any good defenses to his actions.
1blackman1 is offline   Quote
Old 06-10-2023, 05:43 PM   #5
1blackman1
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Nov 16, 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,065
Encounters: 41
Default

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/...nt-is-damning/

Damning according to the national review. They are left wing media though so I’m sure they are biased against Trump.
1blackman1 is offline   Quote
Old 06-10-2023, 10:35 PM   #6
Tiny
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,924
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1blackman1 View Post
https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...648653.3.0.pdf

Anyone interested can read for themselves. I’ll just say it differs from anything the Trumpys and Trump have said. The details are amazing.
I read the indictment. Regrettably I have to admit I should not argue with you about legal issues.

If politics weren't a consideration, most Americans would believe that the alleged actions and behavior in the indictment merit jail time. Not necessarily the possession of the documents, but rather the cover up. If the allegations are true, and it sounds like they are, Trump was moving boxes around to deceive his attorneys, the FBI and the DOJ, and retaining the top secret, secret and classified documents he wanted to keep. He undoubtedly committed perjury.

It was interesting reading about his questions for his attorneys, perhaps more like suggestions, that they tell the FBI they don't have the documents. And, more so, his nonverbal cue to Attorney 1 to pluck any problematic documents out of whatever was being turned over to the FBI and DOJ. I read Michael Cohen's book, Disloyal, and it described similar behavior. Trump wouldn't out and out tell Cohen to do something that might result in civil or criminal liability for Trump. Instead he'd make suggestions or communicate with head nods and the like. From that Cohen knew what to do.

It doesn't sound like mens rea will be a defense, unless you can successfully argue that Trump is so narcissistic that he didn't realize he was committing crimes. Based on his past comments, he knew keeping documents of the sort he had was illegal. But, being a narcissist, the same rules that apply to other people don't apply to him. I don't imagine that's a winning strategy.

Trump's facing up to 100 years in jail, if you add the maximum penalties together. And his poor assistant and Navy veteran Waltine Nauta's looking at 90 years.

So based just on what I've read, if I were a member of the jury, would I vote to convict? I really don't know. I suspect I wouldn't, for these offenses, if I figured he were going to spend years behind bars. Anyway I guess I'm an agnostic on this now.
Tiny is offline   Quote
Old 06-10-2023, 10:47 PM   #7
Bighawg11
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: May 7, 2010
Location: Tulsa Area
Posts: 1,060
Encounters: 90
Default

Trump can't shut his mouth. His chances of slipping out of the noose are decent if he could.



Normal people? This is a slam dunk conviction. But Trump isn't "normal people" - he will spend enormous amounts of money to contest, extend, delay, or cajole his way out of it.



And, those that already adore him won't be impacted. They adore him because he violates so many social norms. What is one more? Those that already shudder at the mention of his name are already preparing themselves for disappointment - he may be convicted, but the sentence will be a shadow of what normal people would get.
Bighawg11 is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 09:59 AM   #8
Why_Yes_I_Do
Valued Poster
 
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 26, 2013
Location: Railroad Tracks, other side thereof
Posts: 7,147
Encounters: 14
Default Some forgot about this binder




Why_Yes_I_Do is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 10:21 AM   #9
Tiny
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,924
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1blackman1 View Post
https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...648653.3.0.pdf

Anyone interested can read for themselves. I’ll just say it differs from anything the Trumpys and Trump have said. The details are amazing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny View Post
It was interesting reading about his questions for his attorneys, perhaps more like suggestions, that they tell the FBI they don't have the documents. And, more so, his nonverbal cue to Attorney 1 to pluck any problematic documents out of whatever was being turned over to the FBI and DOJ. I read Michael Cohen's book, Disloyal, and it described similar behavior. Trump wouldn't out and out tell Cohen to do something that might result in civil or criminal liability for Trump. Instead he'd make suggestions or communicate with head nods and the like. From that Cohen knew what to do.
Blackman, a CNN legal analyst this morning was questioning the propriety of including Trump's lawyer's comments in the indictment. She didn't appear to be partisan. The comments for me were perhaps the most damning part of the document.

Anyway, was she wrong? In the legal issues threads, Shyster Jon, an attorney, advises us never to answer questions posed by the police. Does that extend to our attorneys now to, to some extent? That is, should people watch what they say to their attorneys, because it could be used against them in a court of law?
Tiny is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 11:57 AM   #10
1blackman1
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Nov 16, 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,065
Encounters: 41
Default

The judge and the 11th Circuit would have to articulate why Trump wasn’t using actions to involve the lawyer or the lawyers advise in a criminal scheme.

The DC district court and the DC Circuit court addressed this so it’s a hard hill to climb to exclude that information.
1blackman1 is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 01:38 PM   #11
Jackie S
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 31, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 15,054
Encounters: 15
Default

Trumps best defense might be that due to the Governments past behavior toward him, (lying and simply making shit up for close to six years), he didn’t trust any of them with anything that pertained to him.

He would have a pretty good case in front of the right kind of jury.
Jackie S is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 03:16 PM   #12
cc314
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Jan 31, 2017
Location: Texas
Posts: 544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post
Trumps best defense might be that due to the Governments past behavior toward him, (lying and simply making shit up for close to six years), he didn’t trust any of them with anything that pertained to him.

He would have a pretty good case in front of the right kind of jury.

The Defendant currently has the "right kind" of judge for the current federal charges, so we'll see.


Can you provide some examples (maybe just the big ones) of the lying and made up shit? 6 years is a lot to cover, and I'd rather work off your list than make one of my own. If you can't provide specific examples, with credible sources, it's more of an over-used talking point than anything else.
cc314 is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 04:32 PM   #13
Salty Again
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 26, 2021
Location: down under Pittsburgh
Posts: 10,097
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cc314 View Post
The Defendant currently has the "right kind" of judge for the current federal charges, so we'll see.


Can you provide some examples (maybe just the big ones) of the lying and made up shit? 6 years is a lot to cover, and I'd rather work off your list than make one of my own. If you can't provide specific examples, with credible sources, it's more of an over-used talking point than anything else.
... I can do it.

But let's not attempt to hi-jack this thread.
You can start another thread and I'll surely
give you a lot of examples.

#### Salty
Salty Again is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 04:58 PM   #14
cc314
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Jan 31, 2017
Location: Texas
Posts: 544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salty Again View Post
... I can do it.

But let's not attempt to hi-jack this thread.
You can start another thread and I'll surely
give you a lot of examples.

#### Salty

The trial relates to the indictment. The person I asked the question brought up a possible defense (6 years of lies and made up shit) for the trial (which relates to the indictment, the title of the thread). No hijacking here.



I'll save both of you some time and keep it general...


Boo hoo. The Defendant has been (allegedly) profiled for 6 years. Some of us on this board can beat that by decades (and without any indictments too). Sorry, but the current indictment isn't about the Defendant's past grievances. The Defendant is presumed innocent and currently has a friendly judge. We shall see what we shall see.
cc314 is offline   Quote
Old 06-12-2023, 05:39 PM   #15
Salty Again
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 26, 2021
Location: down under Pittsburgh
Posts: 10,097
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cc314 View Post
The trial relates to the indictment. The person I asked the question brought up a possible defense (6 years of lies and made up shit) for the trial (which relates to the indictment, the title of the thread). No hijacking here.



I'll save both of you some time and keep it general...


Boo hoo. The Defendant has been (allegedly) profiled for 6 years. Some of us on this board can beat that by decades (and without any indictments too). Sorry, but the current indictment isn't about the Defendant's past grievances. The Defendant is presumed innocent and currently has a friendly judge. We shall see what we shall see.
... OK ... If you say so, mate...

You're the fellow who asked to see examples.
And I was ready to show you some.

#### Salty
Salty Again is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved