Trump indicted in classified documents case in Florida

originally posted by: frogs453

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Threadbare

There are also additional charges against Trump. I haven't read the full superseding indictment yet. The pdf can be downloaded here

I did catch that Carlos was to delete surveillance video because the "boss" wanted it gone. I'll post the relevant texts that were sent from phones, soon from the indictment

Why isn't Mr. Trump Already in Jail Yet ? Could it Maybe be His Innocence , or Lack of Convicting Evidence Against Him ? ......Hmm.. Seems People Still Wanna KNOW What's Up with that.................

The logistics of imprisoning someone with Secret Service is not as easy as you seem to believe. I mean I don't have an issue with them not locking up a former President before his trial, but apparently you do?

Apparently the judges disagree with you in regard to lack of evidence, as we have indictments. I mean though really, it is hard to disregard his own attorneys testified evidence of a crime, audio, text messages, etc seem to support it was well.

He will get his day in court to prove his innocence. The DOJ will get their day to prove his guilt. It's the way the Justice system works.

I think I am as anti-Trump as anyone. IF he is found guilty, and I think the evidence is overwhelming, he definitely should go to jail, and he will. He has essentially admitted to committing multiple felonies and then his defense seems to be that the laws don't apply to him for various reasons. He is not smart enough to understand how wrong he is or to keep his mouth shut. And most of his supporters are not bright enough to understand how dumb Trump is.

But locking up someone like him pretrial makes no sense. He is not a flight risk. Where would he go? I don't even think bail should have been set as high as it was but then again, none of the defendants got a bail amount that they couldn't handle.

Let's also remember that Trump's track record in court is poor to say the least. He has lost in almost every court battle he has ever waged in at least the last decade or two. Even the Supreme Court that he stuffed is having none of his shenanigans.

a reply to: moscowbell

He has essentially admitted to committing multiple felonies and then his defense seems to be that the laws don't apply to him for various reasons.

Sometimes it's okay to commit what may seem like a crime, in order to stop someone else from commiting an initial and often worse crime.

An example would be that in Florida a person can use deadly force against another person that is engaged in a "forceful felony".

It could be argued that, if the election was stolen, high crimes against our nation were committed and Trump as President was doing his duty to investigate, expose, prevent, and reverse such crimes. He was doing the right and honorable things in his position.

a reply to: IndieA

Ive said this from the beginning. Millions of Amercans do not believe in the integrity of the last election. For whatever reason, these Americans are not satisfied their case has been heard. Additionally, these Americans are not satisfied that the next election, or any after are fair and secure.

This is a problem that a good POTUS would be expected to explore, validate, investigate, audit, insure and make it the countries number one priority until faith in the system is restored by those Americans getting an actual fair hearing.

But I know there will be people here that fear truth, that fear the outcome of 'fair' and they will shut this discussion down by asking for proof that they know any of us peons cant possible have. Peon beliefs and concerns don't matter in the slightest.

a reply to: IndieA

It could also be argued, as per the charges against him, that he was committing a crime by trying to unlawfully influence an Official to subvert the decision of the electorate but let's see how that goes.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Let me guess. Indictments 98 through 126?

originally posted by: IndieA
a reply to: moscowbell

He has essentially admitted to committing multiple felonies and then his defense seems to be that the laws don't apply to him for various reasons.

Sometimes it's okay to commit what may seem like a crime, in order to stop someone else from commiting an initial and often worse crime.

An example would be that in Florida a person can use deadly force against another person that is engaged in a "forceful felony".

It could be argued that, if the election was stolen, high crimes against our nation were committed and Trump as President was doing his duty to investigate, expose, prevent, and reverse such crimes. He was doing the right and honorable things in his position.

Except the constitution makes it Congress's job to certify the election of the president based on state results. If there had been fraud in any state, and every court and investigating authority that has looked into it has concluded there was not, the president has absolutely no authority to investigate or interfere in state matters.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: IndieA

Ive said this from the beginning. Millions of Amercans do not believe in the integrity of the last election.

Millions of Americans are also idiots.

And the intersection of those two sets is large.

a reply to: moscowbell

I agree. Millions of Americans are complete idiots. I don't think you and I are on the same half. See ya' round, my friend.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: moscowbell

I agree. Millions of Americans are complete idiots. I don't think you and I are on the same half. See ya' round, my friend.

Clever comeback. I guess you are not in the idiot set. But I doubt we will ever agree.

While I think it was pretty obvious, in a filing today, Woodward confirmed that Taveras flipped on Trump and his co-defendants in exchange for immunity.

and everyone has plead not guilty so what are they going to get him to flip to?

a plot involving Trump to delete potentially incriminating surveillance video

The part I like the most....

Woodward wrote in the filing Wednesday that he “played no role” in Taveras’ cooperation and said that prosecutors did not offer Taveras the cooperation deal until after Taveras got a different lawyer. Woodward asked the judge to block Taveras from testifying in any eventual tria

so it could mean nothing in the end.

Now, hearing Weiss will indict Hunter by the end of the month is a better story. At least there will be some crazy..

a reply to: matafuchs

As I've pointed out before, Woodward is panicking. He knows if a conflict-of-interest hearing is convened there's a good chance it comes out that he instructed Taveras to lie to investigators.

The simple fact of the matter is that Woodward did represent Taveras at one point in this investigation. Taveras is a key witness in the DOJ's case and will be called to testify. It would be a conflict of interest to have Woodward cross-examine his old client.

originally posted by: Threadbare
While I think it was pretty obvious, in a filing today, Woodward confirmed that Taveras flipped on Trump and his co-defendants in exchange for immunity.

Looking forward to Taveras taking the blame for everything then, no one else helped....


I mean, that's what the precedent and history says...

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Threadbare
While I think it was pretty obvious, in a filing today, Woodward confirmed that Taveras flipped on Trump and his co-defendants in exchange for immunity.

Looking forward to Taveras taking the blame for everything then, no one else helped....


I mean, that's what the precedent and history says...

Oops
Did that just happen?

a reply to: JinMI

Why would Taveras recant the testimony he's already given?

originally posted by: moscowbell

Millions of Americans are also idiots.

And the intersection of those two sets is large.

Which group are the idiots then?

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI

Why would Taveras recant the testimony he's already given?

What testimony has he given exactly?

How is all this not MaCarthism on crack? People here cheer this on, and cheer on events like with Enrique Tarrio was sentenced to 22 years, for what? Look up Proud Boys and the narrative is " far-right neo-fascist militant organization" which they are neither...

Liberals hooting and hollering for all this, but you did let the junkyard dog out and once out it starts to bite everyone. Every time the left plays these silly games it ends up imploding inward on themselves.

a reply to: Xtrozero

There's at least two ways this turns out.

A. They are so shortsighted that they truly believe that this will not be done to them in the future. That this genie may be able to be beckoned upon their will and only their will.

B. They know full well of something in the future that there is no coming back from to where it doesn't matter anyway.

a reply to: JinMI

Paragraphs 83 & 84 of the superceding indictment.