DC - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 4 federal counts in 2020 election interference, 1 Aug 2023, Trial 4 Mar 2024

[TootsieFootsie]

Wow Nancy really did strike a nerve

 

[ilovewings]

To be fair I do wish the trial were moved to a court that is not in DC. Reading those stats just assures more claims of unfairness with the results. If the goal is to get Trump it needs to be by a court that is unbiased and a jury of his peers - these are not his peers if there's only 5.40% that voted for him in DC. I am not saying move it to WV, is there a state that doesn't lean one way or the other? I want this to be a fair trial and the truth to come out and no political agenda. We all should want that.

There is no reason to move the trial from Washington DC where much of the allegations occurred. This case will not be moved cause Trump wants everything his way--- tough toenails tootsie for him---- always trying to get his way- he will be, and should be treated like any other defendant- not like he is special--

 

[vls12345]

Donald Trump snaps back at Nancy Pelosi over "mean" comments

Former House Speaker Pelosi said that Trump resembled "a scared puppy" during his Thursday arraignment hearing.

www.newsweek.com

On Sunday, Trump took to Truth Social to hit back against Pelosi's MSNBC comments.

"I purposely didn't comment on Nancy Pelosi's very weird story concerning her husband, but now I can because she said something about me, with glee, that was really quite vicious," the former president's post read. "'I saw a scared puppy,' she said, as she watched me on television, like millions of others, that didn't see that. I wasn't 'scared.' Nevertheless, how mean a thing to say! She is a Wicked Witch whose husbands journey from hell starts and finishes with her. She is a sick & demented psycho who will someday live in HELL!"

Ever the victim, he is.

His logic:
"I saw a scared puppy" = "She is a Wicked Witch whose husbands journey from hell starts and finishes with her. She is a sick & demented psycho who will someday live in HELL!"

Idk. To me those don't seem quite equal in tone. Really tired of an obnoxious bully having a pulpit. MOO.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

It's actually horrifying to think that a person like him would have peers.

You mean there are others like him

 

[TootsieFootsie]

And calling someone a scared puppy could be a sign of sympathy.

His response is just plain nasty.

 

[ilovewings]

And calling someone a scared puppy could be a sign of sympathy.

His response is just plain nasty.

The real point is this: he could not let her comments go- he is so thin-skinned he must respond to criticism- and the media of course jumps on it- they keep giving him what he craves: ATTENTION

His response isn't even worth printing: "Trump says-- Trump lashes out"- what else does he ever do but lash out? the media makes me sick

 

[scapa]

AUG 6, 2023

Donald Trump's lawyer claims efforts to overturn 2020 election were only 'aspirational,' not criminal

John Lauro, an attorney representing Donald Trump in his 2020 election case, said Trump's pressure campaign on Pence was merely "aspirational."

www.usatoday.com

John Lauro, one of Donald Trump’s attorneys in the federal case over his attempts to overturn the 2020 election, vehemently defended the former president against allegations Trump knowingly spread false claims of election fraud to remain in power and claimed Trump's efforts were merely "aspirational," not criminal.

“The defense is quite simple,” Lauro said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “President Trump believed in his heart of hearts that he had won that election.”

[...]

Referring to Trump’s now-infamous phone call in 2021 with Georgia's Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger where Trump appeared to threaten him with a criminal charge and asked him to “just find 11,780 votes,” Lauro argued it was just an "ask" from Trump.

[...]

“The defendant had a right, like every American to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won,” read the indictment.

[...]

I'm always a bit puzzled at the "truly believed in one's heart of hearts" defence, esp in a court of law. People "believe in their hearts" all kinds of things that aren't remotely true, and DT had the benefit of many legal, electoral, constitutional and other experts who were telling him that he hadn't won and offering plenty of solid evidence to back up those facts in ways he chose to ignore.

There are personal "truths," which can have important utility, and there are facts of a matter, and while these can coincide they don't always. Generally such divergences don't occasion actual harm on a person, let alone a nation and the world.

Reminds me of Tony Blair who "really believed" that Iraq were prepared to unleash WMD, despite substantial ongoing evidence that this was highly unlikely to be the case. They invaded anyway. And it turned out, of course, that TB's belief was unfounded.

DT's lawyer did not include the common phrase "in good faith" as part of the defence. I wonder why.

 

[Maat99]

Donald Trump snaps back at Nancy Pelosi over "mean" comments

Former House Speaker Pelosi said that Trump resembled "a scared puppy" during his Thursday arraignment hearing.

www.newsweek.com

On Sunday, Trump took to Truth Social to hit back against Pelosi's MSNBC comments.

"I purposely didn't comment on Nancy Pelosi's very weird story concerning her husband, but now I can because she said something about me, with glee, that was really quite vicious," the former president's post read. "'I saw a scared puppy,' she said, as she watched me on television, like millions of others, that didn't see that. I wasn't 'scared.' Nevertheless, how mean a thing to say! She is a Wicked Witch whose husbands journey from hell starts and finishes with her. She is a sick & demented psycho who will someday live in HELL!"

Hmmm. Is it just me or does this lack his usual panache? I really don’t think he is putting forth his best effort.

 

[musicaljoke]

DT should demonstrate his "belief" that he won the 2020 election by asking for a change of venue to GA or AZ.

The whole idea that some states are more or less likely to convict is quite a dangerous concept that has really taken root among Americans. The law should be the same law all across the country, but the many American people have learned to distrust the judicial system, largely as a result of the tirades of T and the Republic party.

The danger is that the people may decide that the justice system is not reliable, and therefore elected officials should have the final say over how the law is applied. I can see this as an easy move on the part of the government and the people.

When the president interfered in the decisions of the CDC during the Covid pandemic, people were surprised, but there was nothing done to stop the interference. Suddenly political leaders with no expertise in public health, were undermining the authority of the most highly respected organization that was in the best position to manage the pandemic.

I can foresee that the same thing can happen with the justice system. The Republican party has already stated that they intend to limit the independence of some federal systems, and I believe that the justice system will be the first to fall. I believe that if T gets into power he will attempt to set himself up as the ultimate judicial authority. If he doesn't get into power, then it's only a matter of time when "judicial reform" will take place and the deed will be done with the blessing of the American people.

And that will be the end of democracy in the US.

jmo

 

[Cubby]

Wow Nancy really did strike a nerve

Actually, I wish she would stay quiet. She's just stoking the fire and it's unnecessary.

 

[crussell821]

Wow Nancy really did strike a nerve

And he took the bait, like he always does.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Actually, I wish she would stay quiet. She's just stoking the fire and it's unnecessary.

Yeah Nah. It's about time someone stood up to him.

 

[Cubby]

Yeah Nah. It's about time someone stood up to him.

I hear ya, but at this point, it's tit for tat. Let justice take it's course and stand up to him.

Nancy responding shows him he's still important to her, somehow. She has better ways to spend her time.

 

[Inthedetails]

The whole idea that some states are more or less likely to convict is quite a dangerous concept that has really taken root among Americans. The law should be the same law all across the country, but the many American people have learned to distrust the judicial system, largely as a result of the tirades of T and the Republic party.

The danger is that the people may decide that the justice system is not reliable, and therefore elected officials should have the final say over how the law is applied. I can see this as an easy move on the part of the government and the people.

When the president interfered in the decisions of the CDC during the Covid pandemic, people were surprised, but there was nothing done to stop the interference. Suddenly political leaders with no expertise in public health, were undermining the authority of the most highly respected organization that was in the best position to manage the pandemic.

I can foresee that the same thing can happen with the justice system. The Republican party has already stated that they intend to limit the independence of some federal systems, and I believe that the justice system will be the first to fall. I believe that if T gets into power he will attempt to set himself up as the ultimate judicial authority. If he doesn't get into power, then it's only a matter of time when "judicial reform" will take place and the deed will be done with the blessing of the American people.

And that will be the end of democracy in the US.

jmo

I sometimes wonder who would want to undermine our confidence in our own systems and who would be comfortable with a long-term approach to bit-by-bit erosion? Hmm..

Well, whatever the answer(s) to that may be, sticking to the established judicial system under the Constitution is what should be done, without jury and judge shopping. (I half-way suspect he is looking ahead for appeal, kicking the case up in the court system where he thinks he might have better luck. Could his current antics be pressure on the judge to do something that could be appealed?)

jmo

 

[ilovewings]

I hear ya, but at this point, it's tit for tat. Let justice take it's course and stand up to him.

Nancy responding shows him he's still important to her, somehow. She has better ways to spend her time.

I'm not real fond of tit for tat and wish she would just be quiet- let him rant away- that is what he does- His rants are boring and irrational---

 

[Fairy1]

I sometimes wonder who would want to undermine our confidence in our own systems and who would be comfortable with a long-term approach to bit-by-bit erosion? Hmm..

Well, whatever the answer(s) to that may be, sticking to the established judicial system under the Constitution is what should be done, without jury and judge shopping. (I half-way suspect he is looking ahead for appeal, kicking the case up in the court system where he thinks he might have better luck. Could his current antics be pressure on the judge to do something that could be appealed?)

jmo

I don't wonder at all! One side has stacked the courts, school boards and are now vowing to weaken federal law enforcement. They are also notorious for judge shopping. If judge shopping is allowed for some, it should be allowed for all. It's quite frightening to see such a blatant determination to ensure certain people will be able to act with impunity.

 

[Bounceycat]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/06/politics/trump-fair-trial-court-case-dc-venue-change/index.html

"If he were to ask in court to move his federal criminal case out of Washington, DC, the former president would join three dozen January 6, 2021, riot defendants who have asked to move their cases out of DC.

No judges – even those appointed by Trump – have ever agreed. And appeals courts and other judges have overwhelmingly kept high-profile cases in the districts where charges are filed.

Several January 6 defendants have argued that there’s been too much pretrial publicity in DC for a fair trial and that the jury pool in the city would be too biased.

But the Supreme Court has previously held that trials can still be fair even if they have received widespread publicity, and the DC District Court has used specific questioning of potential jurors and instructions to try to ensure fair trials for January 6 defendants.

Just last week, prosecutors argued against a Capitol riot defendant’s change of venue request in the DC federal court, arguing that many politically known defendants, including Trump’s adviser Roger Stone, have been fairly tried in the downtown Washington courthouse.

The court also refused to move the trial of the co-conspirators of Richard Nixon in the Watergate scandal, at a time when the city was also voting heavily Democratic."

 

[Ursamajr]

Donald Trump snaps back at Nancy Pelosi over "mean" comments

Former House Speaker Pelosi said that Trump resembled "a scared puppy" during his Thursday arraignment hearing.

www.newsweek.com

On Sunday, Trump took to Truth Social to hit back against Pelosi's MSNBC comments.

"I purposely didn't comment on Nancy Pelosi's very weird story concerning her husband, but now I can because she said something about me, with glee, that was really quite vicious," the former president's post read. "'I saw a scared puppy,' she said, as she watched me on television, like millions of others, that didn't see that. I wasn't 'scared.' Nevertheless, how mean a thing to say! She is a Wicked Witch whose husbands journey from hell starts and finishes with her. She is a sick & demented psycho who will someday live in HELL!"

Imagine having an ego this fragile.
It also makes me think of all the people who said they voted for Trump back in 2016 because "women are too emotional".

 

[Arkay]

I'm always a bit puzzled at the "truly believed in one's heart of hearts" defence, esp in a court of law.

WHAT? Donald has a heart??????

Is it just me or does this lack his usual panache

WHAT? Donald has panache?????

 

[Ursamajr]

And calling someone a scared puppy could be a sign of sympathy.

His response is just plain nasty.

I agree but then we know how many times he uses the word "dog" to describe people he doesn't like - and he does it often.

‘Like a dog’: Trump has a long history of using canine insults to dehumanize enemies

No wonder it struck a nerve in him.