January 6th hearings on Trump's failed insurrection.

Oldone57

Active Member
do you have a somehow reduced regard for homosexuals? You are using the terms in an apparent attempt to insult those of us who have made it out because you have thrown us out.
Ejecting us isn’t dignified, but it is kind. No longer bound by the unredeemed sadism of the megacongregation and their distilled spirit of hate, we can recover. I extol their ironic kindness to
all
who
watch

Believing in a benignly negligent god is not a problem. Believing in the impossibility of a god who directs you to
war with those who do not submit -
that is an open-eyed choice to follow a cartoon of Moloch. If there really is something like a final judgment, the zealous are gonna have the surprise of their afterlives.

gonna be some damned long faces in the crowd.
I have nothing against gay people, you do you. I personally have never thrown anyone out, come out on your own. I just don't agree with every sexual issues that others are stating to be normal. Even trying to push Pedo's as a norm is BS. I see 2 gays making out in the street, its what they like to do. Why they do it, idk. but nothing against gays.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Donald takes more assholes down with him, destruction of evidence is a serious crime and a lot of people deleted texts from government phones. Many in the Watergate scandal went to prison over the cover up, not the original crimes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pre-Jan. 6 Text Messages Missing For Key Trump Officials
70,199 views Jul 29, 2022 The Washington Post’s Carol Leonnig joins MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell to discuss her new reporting that "text messages for former President Donald Trump’s acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf and acting deputy secretary Ken Cuccinelli are missing for a key period leading up to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.”
 

printer

Well-Known Member
Trump again tries to get immunity from Jan. 6 civil suits
Former President Trump on Wednesday urged a federal appeals court in Washington to rule he is “shielded by absolute presidential immunity” from civil lawsuits related to his attempts to remain in the White House despite losing the 2020 election.

Trump is reviving his sweeping assertion of immunity on appeal after the claim was shot down by a district court judge, who refused to dismiss Trump as a defendant in multiple civil suits seeking to hold him liable for his efforts surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

In a February ruling, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, an Obama appointee, held that Trump could be sued for helping to incite the riot at the Capitol last year because his efforts to undermine President Biden’s victory, including his speech at the “Stop the Steal” rally just before the Capitol was breached, could not be considered official acts.

The ruling prompted Trump’s appeal in March to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The panel of judges presiding over the former president’s appeal has not been selected yet.

In court papers filed Wednesday night, Trump’s lawyers urged the appellate court to find that the lower court judge erred in ruling against Trump’s immunity claim.

“President Trump is shielded by absolute presidential immunity because his statements were on matters of public concern and therefore well within the scope of the robust absolute immunity afforded all presidents,” reads Trump’s brief. “No amount of hyperbole about the violence of January 6, 2021, provides a basis for this Court to carve out an exception to the constitutional separation of powers.”

The former president faces multiple civil suits stemming from his effort to overthrow the 2020 election, including legal actions brought by U.S. Capitol Police officers and Democratic House members. The suits claim in part that Trump violated the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act, a civil rights law that prohibits conspiracies against the federal government or to deprive people of their rights.

Mehta, in his 112-page opinion rejecting Trump’s claim of absolute immunity, said the former president’s post-election effort did not concern official acts, but rather a personal attempt to remain in the White House.

“After all, the President’s actions here do not relate to his duties of faithfully executing the laws, conducting foreign affairs, commanding the armed forces, or managing the Executive Branch,” Mehta wrote. “They entirely concern his efforts to remain in office for a second term. These are unofficial acts, so the separation-of-powers concerns that justify the President’s broad immunity are not present here.”

In his ruling, Mehta dismissed the cases against Rudy Giuliani, one of the figures that the plaintiffs alleged had participated in the conspiracy. He also narrowed the claims against Trump, but upheld the count brought under the Ku Klux Klan Act.
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
I'm sure trying to avoid prosecution for his many crimes has something to do with it too, that and the fact he discovered what a great money making scam it was to fleece his suckers with.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to write to Mr. Raskin and tell him the real reason- THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND..everyone thinks it's safe but I bet you there are some who believed our Capitol to be safe, too.
 
Last edited:

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
I'm going to write to Mr. Ruskin and tell him the real reason- THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND..everyone thinks it's safe but I bet you there are some who believed our Capitol to be safe, too.
The more democrats that are elected, the further to the left the country moves. First gain enough power to make changes, then level the playing field with HR1 and anti terrorist laws along with passing popular things with broad support while preparing for 2024. Dust off the independent special prosecutors law and appoint Frankenstein to go after those in the senate and congress who supported the insurrection and big lie. Congress has lot's to do and that is what they law was for, busting politicians, not just presidents, with public hearings and indictments, do to them, what they did to Clinton right up to 2024. With luck Trump will help you to keep the house and have a useful majority in the senate, FFS don't lock him up too soon, there are still plenty of GOP primaries for him to fuck up! :lol: Donald is gonna be real desperate real soon and the republican base is all he has left, besides, it's his cash cow! If he's running around with his fake rallies running on the big lie and attacking republicans who don't, you might just have a chance. Donald might be a moron, but he's a moron who can make history!
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
The more democrats that are elected, the further to the left the country moves. First gain enough power to make changes, then level the playing field with HR1 and anti terrorist laws along with passing popular things with broad support while preparing for 2024. Dust off the independent special prosecutors law and appoint Frankenstein to go after those in the senate and congress who supported the insurrection and big lie. Congress has lot's to do and that is what they law was for, busting politicians, not just presidents, with public hearings and indictments, do to them, what they did to Clinton right up to 2024. With luck Trump will help you to keep the house and have a useful majority in the senate, FFS don't lock him up too soon, there are still plenty of GOP primaries for him to fuck up! :lol: Donald is gonna be real desperate real soon and the republican base is all he has left, besides, it's his cash cow! If he's running around with his fake rallies running on the big lie and attacking republicans who don't, you might just have a chance. Donald might be a moron, but he's a moron who can make history!
Donald's+ is that he has a $100M and pumps out donations like a queen bee's larvae.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
Trump's legal team just used a line of defense that it's likely to make if he's criminally charged
  • Donald Trump's lawyers released a 282-page document threatening to sue CNN.
  • The lawyers say Trump "subjectively believes" he lost the 2020 election because of voter fraud.
  • This could lay out Trump's legal strategy as investigations into him ramp up.
Former President Donald Trump's legal team threatened to bring a defamation lawsuit against the cable network CNN, and the letter from his attorneys signals a strategy that is likely to be a central defense should he ever face criminal charges related to his role in attempts to cling to power despite losing his 2020 reelection bid.

In the 282-page document, his lawyers said the television network repeatedly said Trump was "lying" and "fed a narrative that denounced President Trump's legitimacy and competency" following the presidential election.

The lawyers said CNN's portrayal of Trump was inaccurate because Trump "subjectively believes" there was election fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

The lawyers' July 21 email to the television network offers a glimpse of how Trump's defense team might respond should the former president be criminally charged. Several investigations into him and his business practices are ongoing. The Justice Department and the Atlanta-area district attorney, Fani Willis, are examining allegations that Trump and his closest allies illegally tried to overturn the 2020 election.

Insider previously reported that Trump could have violated five federal and three Georgia state laws following the election including wire fraud, witness tampering, racketeering, and election interference.

One strategy available to Trump's lawyers would be to argue that he genuinely believed there was election fraud and didn't have the intent to commit a criminal act.

For instance, in the document, the lawyers use the definition of "lie" to argue Trump didn't do it with his election-fraud claims.

"Webster's Dictionary defines a 'lie' as an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive," they wrote. "The definition, then, is not limited to simply being wrong about an assertion; it instead requires the speaker to know he or she is speaking falsely and to specifically harbor an intent to mislead."

The Trump lawyers also argued that numerous claims after the election suggested there were problems with vote counting — assertions that would prove baseless and failed in courts when they were presented there at all.

"Substantial numbers of Americans shared President Trump's genuinely-held view that voter fraud affected the results of the 2020 election," the lawyers wrote.

Prosecutors would have a counter, however. Top Justice Department officials and state elections officials have testified to the House select committee investigating the Capitol riot that they told Trump directly that election-fraud claims were baseless or "bullshit" — assessments that would seek to undercut whether it would've been reasonable for Trump to believe in widespread fraud.

Legal experts previously told Insider the prosecutors could also try to paint the picture that Trump's actions were part of a bigger strategy to pressure Republican officials across the US to overturn the 2020 election.

Trump's legal team could also try to blame other people in Trump's inner circle for his actions around the 2020 elections, a blame-the-lawyer strategy that can be effective.
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Trump's legal team just used a line of defense that it's likely to make if he's criminally charged
  • Donald Trump's lawyers released a 282-page document threatening to sue CNN.
  • The lawyers say Trump "subjectively believes" he lost the 2020 election because of voter fraud.
  • This could lay out Trump's legal strategy as investigations into him ramp up.
Former President Donald Trump's legal team threatened to bring a defamation lawsuit against the cable network CNN, and the letter from his attorneys signals a strategy that is likely to be a central defense should he ever face criminal charges related to his role in attempts to cling to power despite losing his 2020 reelection bid.

In the 282-page document, his lawyers said the television network repeatedly said Trump was "lying" and "fed a narrative that denounced President Trump's legitimacy and competency" following the presidential election.

The lawyers said CNN's portrayal of Trump was inaccurate because Trump "subjectively believes" there was election fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

The lawyers' July 21 email to the television network offers a glimpse of how Trump's defense team might respond should the former president be criminally charged. Several investigations into him and his business practices are ongoing. The Justice Department and the Atlanta-area district attorney, Fani Willis, are examining allegations that Trump and his closest allies illegally tried to overturn the 2020 election.

Insider previously reported that Trump could have violated five federal and three Georgia state laws following the election including wire fraud, witness tampering, racketeering, and election interference.

One strategy available to Trump's lawyers would be to argue that he genuinely believed there was election fraud and didn't have the intent to commit a criminal act.

For instance, in the document, the lawyers use the definition of "lie" to argue Trump didn't do it with his election-fraud claims.

"Webster's Dictionary defines a 'lie' as an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive," they wrote. "The definition, then, is not limited to simply being wrong about an assertion; it instead requires the speaker to know he or she is speaking falsely and to specifically harbor an intent to mislead."

The Trump lawyers also argued that numerous claims after the election suggested there were problems with vote counting — assertions that would prove baseless and failed in courts when they were presented there at all.

"Substantial numbers of Americans shared President Trump's genuinely-held view that voter fraud affected the results of the 2020 election," the lawyers wrote.

Prosecutors would have a counter, however. Top Justice Department officials and state elections officials have testified to the House select committee investigating the Capitol riot that they told Trump directly that election-fraud claims were baseless or "bullshit" — assessments that would seek to undercut whether it would've been reasonable for Trump to believe in widespread fraud.

Legal experts previously told Insider the prosecutors could also try to paint the picture that Trump's actions were part of a bigger strategy to pressure Republican officials across the US to overturn the 2020 election.

Trump's legal team could also try to blame other people in Trump's inner circle for his actions around the 2020 elections, a blame-the-lawyer strategy that can be effective.
No standing. Media Morons have nothing to talk about said 'we'll maybe he really did believe it' (even though boy who cried rigged for a year prior) so he's picked up on it- it was only a matter of time.

He's upset because of what Merrick Garland has been saying and his anus puckered.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Donald's+ is that he has a $100M and pumps out donations like a queen bee's larvae.
Trump only spends money to primary his enemies inside the GOP, he won't spend a dime on the general election He will try to steal all their small donor money that house candidates depend on though, with rallies and appeals to the base. He will spend money on rallies to make himself appear a candidate, but he's 2 years away from his party's nomination, with DeSantis breathing down his neck, the new anointed one. Dump Donald, or Dump Trump, both work well, rhyme and can fit on a sign.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
McCarthy says he does not recall Jan. 6 Cassidy Hutchinson call on Trump going to Capitol
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said that he did not remember talking to former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson on Jan. 6, 2021, about the prospect of former President Trump going to the Capitol that day as Congress certified the 2020 Electoral College results.

“I don’t recall talking to her that day,” McCarthy said in a press conference Friday. He added that he did recall talking to former White House deputy chief of staff Dan Savino, and Trump’s son-in-law and former White House adviser Jared Kushner, as well as Trump himself, on Jan. 6 as the Capitol attack was underway and he and his staff were removed from his office.

“If I talked to her, I don’t remember it. If it was coming up here, I don’t think I wanted a lot of people coming up to the Capitol. But I don’t remember the conversation,” McCarthy said.

Hutchinson, who was an aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, testified under oath in a House Jan. 6 select committee hearing last month that McCarthy angrily called her after Trump urged supporters to march to the Capitol in his speech at the Ellipse and that he would go with them.

“He then explained, ‘The president just said he’s marching to the Capitol. You told me this whole week you aren’t coming up here, why would you lie to me?’” Hutchinson recalled during the hearing.

McCarthy said in his press conference Friday that he did not remember being specifically concerned about Trump marching to the Capitol.

“I didn’t watch it, so this is what is so confusing,” McCarthy said about Trump’s speech at the Ellipse. “I didn’t watch the speech. I was working. So I didn’t see what was said, I didn’t see what went on, until after the fact.”

“I had no idea he would come to the Capitol. I had no idea that he was even going to come to the Capitol,” McCarthy said.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Trump's legal team just used a line of defense that it's likely to make if he's criminally charged
  • Donald Trump's lawyers released a 282-page document threatening to sue CNN.
  • The lawyers say Trump "subjectively believes" he lost the 2020 election because of voter fraud.
  • This could lay out Trump's legal strategy as investigations into him ramp up.
Former President Donald Trump's legal team threatened to bring a defamation lawsuit against the cable network CNN, and the letter from his attorneys signals a strategy that is likely to be a central defense should he ever face criminal charges related to his role in attempts to cling to power despite losing his 2020 reelection bid.

In the 282-page document, his lawyers said the television network repeatedly said Trump was "lying" and "fed a narrative that denounced President Trump's legitimacy and competency" following the presidential election.

The lawyers said CNN's portrayal of Trump was inaccurate because Trump "subjectively believes" there was election fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

The lawyers' July 21 email to the television network offers a glimpse of how Trump's defense team might respond should the former president be criminally charged. Several investigations into him and his business practices are ongoing. The Justice Department and the Atlanta-area district attorney, Fani Willis, are examining allegations that Trump and his closest allies illegally tried to overturn the 2020 election.

Insider previously reported that Trump could have violated five federal and three Georgia state laws following the election including wire fraud, witness tampering, racketeering, and election interference.

One strategy available to Trump's lawyers would be to argue that he genuinely believed there was election fraud and didn't have the intent to commit a criminal act.

For instance, in the document, the lawyers use the definition of "lie" to argue Trump didn't do it with his election-fraud claims.

"Webster's Dictionary defines a 'lie' as an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive," they wrote. "The definition, then, is not limited to simply being wrong about an assertion; it instead requires the speaker to know he or she is speaking falsely and to specifically harbor an intent to mislead."

The Trump lawyers also argued that numerous claims after the election suggested there were problems with vote counting — assertions that would prove baseless and failed in courts when they were presented there at all.

"Substantial numbers of Americans shared President Trump's genuinely-held view that voter fraud affected the results of the 2020 election," the lawyers wrote.

Prosecutors would have a counter, however. Top Justice Department officials and state elections officials have testified to the House select committee investigating the Capitol riot that they told Trump directly that election-fraud claims were baseless or "bullshit" — assessments that would seek to undercut whether it would've been reasonable for Trump to believe in widespread fraud.

Legal experts previously told Insider the prosecutors could also try to paint the picture that Trump's actions were part of a bigger strategy to pressure Republican officials across the US to overturn the 2020 election.

Trump's legal team could also try to blame other people in Trump's inner circle for his actions around the 2020 elections, a blame-the-lawyer strategy that can be effective.
wow...something slimier than trump...trump's lawyer...didn't think that was possible.
it doesn't really matter any more, trump will never set foot in the white house again, his power is falling, his allies are deserting him, he donations will dry up, his "business acumen" won't carry him half an inch...he's done, he's just a corpse that refuses to lay down and rot.
whether he rots in a cell or in a room over his daughter's garage, who fucking cares?
i want the freedumb train fucks investigated, indicted, and prosecuted, with the harshest sentences possible handed down to each and every one of them. i want the fake electors and everyone involved in that whole scheme prosecuted, convicted, and barred from any, ANY kind of government service...every fucking one of them.
that would set their fucked up plan back by decades...the next time they get into power, the entire world will be different, and their shitty plans just won't fly
 

printer

Well-Known Member
Expanding Jan. 6 Probe Stretches DOJ Resources
Federal officials are raising concerns that the Justice Department's expanding investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol could bring the already stretched probe to a breaking point, according to NBC News.

Cases against Capitol rioters are making their way through the court systems as a federal grand jury is hearing testimony about the role then-President Donald Trump may have played that day.

The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the Justice Department is investigating Trump's actions in a criminal probe of the former president's attempts to overturn his 2020 election defeat.

More than a dozen sources expressed concern to NBC News that the department's resources may be stretched too thin.

NBC News noted law enforcement agents have made about 850 arrests since the riot. It noted, however, that represents only a sliver of the more than 2,500 people who entered the Capitol.

In addition, the U.S. Attorney Office in Washington, which is directing the riot investigations, is also looking at a number of other related issues, including whether there was a conspiracy to obstruct the electoral vote certification on Jan. 6, according to NBC News.

In a budget request for 2023, the Justice Department has asked Congress for more than $34 million to fund 130 employees, including 80 federal prosecutors, to aid the "extraordinary" investigation.

Still, Attorney General Merrick Garland told NBC News he is "confident" that the Justice Department could handle the workload regardless of what Congress does.

"Of course, we'd like more resources, and if Congress wants to give that to us, that would be very nice," Garland said Tuesday. "But we have people — prosecutors and agents — from all over the country working on this matter, and I have every confidence in their ability, their professionalism, their dedication to this task."

Others are not as certain.

"We don't have the manpower," an official said.

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance said: "People are concerned about the resources. It's an enormous amount of cases, and that puts pressure not just on DOJ, but on the courts and probation. It puts pressure on the entire system."

Without the extra funding from Congress, the Jan. 6 investigation will take away resources from other unrelated investigations.

"This will have a detrimental impact on the United States Attorneys' ability to backfill vacancies and prosecute important cases in other jurisdictions," the Justice Department said in its budget request to Congress.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Expanding Jan. 6 Probe Stretches DOJ Resources
Federal officials are raising concerns that the Justice Department's expanding investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol could bring the already stretched probe to a breaking point, according to NBC News.

Cases against Capitol rioters are making their way through the court systems as a federal grand jury is hearing testimony about the role then-President Donald Trump may have played that day.

The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the Justice Department is investigating Trump's actions in a criminal probe of the former president's attempts to overturn his 2020 election defeat.

More than a dozen sources expressed concern to NBC News that the department's resources may be stretched too thin.

NBC News noted law enforcement agents have made about 850 arrests since the riot. It noted, however, that represents only a sliver of the more than 2,500 people who entered the Capitol.

In addition, the U.S. Attorney Office in Washington, which is directing the riot investigations, is also looking at a number of other related issues, including whether there was a conspiracy to obstruct the electoral vote certification on Jan. 6, according to NBC News.

In a budget request for 2023, the Justice Department has asked Congress for more than $34 million to fund 130 employees, including 80 federal prosecutors, to aid the "extraordinary" investigation.

Still, Attorney General Merrick Garland told NBC News he is "confident" that the Justice Department could handle the workload regardless of what Congress does.

"Of course, we'd like more resources, and if Congress wants to give that to us, that would be very nice," Garland said Tuesday. "But we have people — prosecutors and agents — from all over the country working on this matter, and I have every confidence in their ability, their professionalism, their dedication to this task."

Others are not as certain.

"We don't have the manpower," an official said.

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance said: "People are concerned about the resources. It's an enormous amount of cases, and that puts pressure not just on DOJ, but on the courts and probation. It puts pressure on the entire system."

Without the extra funding from Congress, the Jan. 6 investigation will take away resources from other unrelated investigations.

"This will have a detrimental impact on the United States Attorneys' ability to backfill vacancies and prosecute important cases in other jurisdictions," the Justice Department said in its budget request to Congress.
there are some problems i mind less than others...if the DOJ is strapped because they're investigating SO many criminals, then they deserve more funding, but as Garland said, they'll get the job done with what they have, if that's all they get, and they'll know it's the obstructionist republicans making them work that much harder, so they'll feel that much more of a sense of accomplishment for every one of the crooked fuckers they lock up
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
McCarthy says he does not recall Jan. 6 Cassidy Hutchinson call on Trump going to Capitol
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said that he did not remember talking to former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson on Jan. 6, 2021, about the prospect of former President Trump going to the Capitol that day as Congress certified the 2020 Electoral College results.

“I don’t recall talking to her that day,” McCarthy said in a press conference Friday. He added that he did recall talking to former White House deputy chief of staff Dan Savino, and Trump’s son-in-law and former White House adviser Jared Kushner, as well as Trump himself, on Jan. 6 as the Capitol attack was underway and he and his staff were removed from his office.

“If I talked to her, I don’t remember it. If it was coming up here, I don’t think I wanted a lot of people coming up to the Capitol. But I don’t remember the conversation,” McCarthy said.

Hutchinson, who was an aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, testified under oath in a House Jan. 6 select committee hearing last month that McCarthy angrily called her after Trump urged supporters to march to the Capitol in his speech at the Ellipse and that he would go with them.

“He then explained, ‘The president just said he’s marching to the Capitol. You told me this whole week you aren’t coming up here, why would you lie to me?’” Hutchinson recalled during the hearing.

McCarthy said in his press conference Friday that he did not remember being specifically concerned about Trump marching to the Capitol.

“I didn’t watch it, so this is what is so confusing,” McCarthy said about Trump’s speech at the Ellipse. “I didn’t watch the speech. I was working. So I didn’t see what was said, I didn’t see what went on, until after the fact.”

“I had no idea he would come to the Capitol. I had no idea that he was even going to come to the Capitol,” McCarthy said.
Under oath?' McCarthy gave deposition? When? <shrug>
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
there are some problems i mind less than others...if the DOJ is strapped because they're investigating SO many criminals, then they deserve more funding, but as Garland said, they'll get the job done with what they have, if that's all they get, and they'll know it's the obstructionist republicans making them work that much harder, so they'll feel that much more of a sense of accomplishment for every one of the crooked fuckers they lock up
TBH and I really have to be, but I think he'll die first before we get our pound of flesh. I feel we are in for big disappointment. I hope I'm wrong because everyone involved needs to be accountable- for we will have it again.
 
Top