Opinion The Adelaide Board Politics Thread Part 4

[The Perfect Stranger]

So Trumps off to jail.....again - lol. What a bunch of braindead, brainwashed losers the Left are.

All that education - completely wasted.

 

[The Perfect Stranger]

Going to be really interesting to see how it plays out. That was worth watching

OneGreatClub likes your posting. Speaks volumes.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Lol that dumb incompetent Cannon judge. Bet Trump won’t complain about her being on the case.

 

[OneGreatClub]

OneGreatClub likes your posting. Speaks volumes.

Ask CTID about the BIG RED WAVE lol

 

[Slippery Pete]

 

[Slippery Pete]

Ask CTID about the BIG RED WAVE lol

Speaking of waves, you had your updated clot shot yet?

Australia's on the brink of a fifth COVID wave. Here's how to prepare

Australians are being urged to get their COVID-19 booster and flu vaccine at the same time, ahead of a new wave of infections.

www.sbs.com.au

 

[PeterSalt]

Volume up fellas .. and grab your favourite pillow

 

[OneGreatClub]

So Trumps off to jail.....again - lol. What a bunch of braindead, brainwashed losers the Left are.

All that education - completely wasted.

the cult mind control works well on the MAGA

 

[PeterSalt]

The NY Times article is worth reading:

After reviewing the indictment, one verdict is indeed quite clear: The Justice Department had little choice but to charge Trump. The evidence of intentional misconduct and comprehensive obstruction of justice is just too strong. Any other decision would place presidents outside the rule of federal law and declare to the American public that its presidents enjoy something akin to a royal privilege. But this is a republic, not a monarchy, and if the Justice Department can prove its claims, then Donald Trump belongs in prison.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Yes it’s weird how the MAGA mind works.

They call themselves the party of Law and Order but they want violence on the streets ( and in the Capitol) for their indicted leader.

They don’t want the weaponisation of gov departments but at the same time they want Biden Clinton and Obama put in GITMO and their constant cries of Lock Her Up pervaded the days leading up to the 2016 election.
They decry Fake Media yet constantly drink the Fox and Tucker cool aid and almost every word out of their own leaders mouths is a lie.
Hypocrites much?
Hypocrites. Yes.

How do they get their convoluted thinking around that?

 

[ad victoriam]

The most hyperpartisan jack smith. Lost 8-0 in the supreme court last time he tried to take down a republican.

That would have been Robert McDonnell, who won in the supreme court,
Tell us about Rick Renzi who was Pardon By Trump in his last days as president
Smith leads Justice Department’s public integrity unit. and bought down a few high-profile Dems,

 

[1970crow]

The NY Times article is worth reading:

After reviewing the indictment, one verdict is indeed quite clear: The Justice Department had little choice but to charge Trump. The evidence of intentional misconduct and comprehensive obstruction of justice is just too strong. Any other decision would place presidents outside the rule of federal law and declare to the American public that its presidents enjoy something akin to a royal privilege. But this is a republic, not a monarchy, and if the Justice Department can prove its claims, then Donald Trump belongs in prison.

are the bolded actual charges though or is he just describing how he views his actions?

 

[ad victoriam]

Why dont you explain what you think on those 34counts. Very slowly for us please.

Alan Dershowitz: Trump indictment doesn't pass the Richard Nixon test

Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz says he hasn't seen "any indication" that Republicans agree with the latest federal charges brought against former President Donald Trump.

www.foxbusiness.com

The left has weaponized the legal system | Gregg Jarrett

Gregg Jarrett and Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz evaluate investigations into President Biden on 'Hannity.'

thegreggjarrett.com

Donald Trump’s Surprisingly Good Odds against the DOJ | National Review

Donald Trump has been indicted again, this time over the classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

www.nationalreview.com

well, mate I only waiting for someone to correct me and say it was 37 counts. anyone who has attempted or tried to read the indictments should have corrected me.
And it's a big No to adding my views as it will only make one side happy while the other side will not believe what I have said,
it is best in this case or all parties to do their own reading and make their own judgments.

But one thing I will mention is some of those documents relate to the 5eyes treaty and defence regarding Australia,

 

[PeterSalt]

are the bonded actual charges though or is he just describing how he views his actions?

He's been charged under the Espionage Act. In short from WAPO:

 

[1970crow]

He's been charged under the Espionage Act. In short from WAPO:

View attachment 1709623

so a single count relating to obstruction of justice. I'd argue that the bolded bits are just that bloke applying a bit of mayo based upon his opinion of how Trump acted, as opposed to the legality of actions themselves. What he did, he did with fervour, but that in and of itself is irrelevant if the actions themselves aren't proven illegal. It read a bit like a reverse puff piece.

 

[Crow till I die]

Trump won't go to jail as he will do a plea deal but Bill, Hillary, Barack, Biden should all be locked up for what they have done. Biden the worst of them all and should be charged with Treason for conspiring with China.

Unless its a corrupt judge and jury, it wont even get that far, it will be dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct

 

[Crow till I die]

He can’t read he only likes picture books.

But not the sexually explicit ones your side like to bring into kids schools in tge name of diversity

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Yeah but who cares about national security when you can own the libs?

 

[Crow till I die]

Perhaps you need to watch this -

Yes we know they mass produce fake ballots...next?

 

[Crow till I die]

Yeah but who cares about national security when you can own the libs?

National security??..like storing confidential docs at the chinese ccp funded Penn centre. You guys are so dumb

 

[PeterSalt]

so a single count relating to obstruction of justice. I'd argue that the bolded bits are just that bloke applying a bit of mayo based upon his opinion of how Trump acted, as opposed to the legality of actions themselves. What he did, he did with fervour, but that in and of itself is irrelevant if the actions themselves aren't proven illegal. It read a bit like a reverse puff piece.

The obstruction relates to trump and his aide moving documents around Mar-A-Lago to avoid discovery. The aide has also been charged.

They seem to have evidence that this actually happened. The grand jury seemed to think the evidence was strong enough to proceed.

I guess we'll have to wait and see when it's tested in court

 

[PeterSalt]

Lol right .. because I always go to my mechanic when I need financial advice

 

[1970crow]

Yeah but who cares about national security when you can own the libs?

we'll find out whether he actually broke the law at some point. If he hasn't, then I'd guess they don't. Just the fact that there's a discussion around whether ex-presidents can retain any form of classified documents suggests they are a bit loose in this area.

 

[1970crow]

The obstruction relates to trump and his aide moving documents around Mar-A-Lago to avoid discovery. The aide has also been charged.

They seem to have evidence that this actually happened. The grand jury seemed to think the evidence was strong enough to proceed.

I guess we'll have to wait and see when it's tested in court

i get all that, his actions in terms of retaining/handling of the documents will be tested against relevant laws. But whether he did it with a grin or solemn look on his face won't be relevant. That bloke seems to be using emotive language whilst putting the cart before the horse.

 

[ad victoriam]

you keep posting the bolded bit, but the likelihood of you understanding it based upon the relevant laws is less than nil. How about you give us one example of a count, your understanding and quote the relevant law that your learned view is based upon. I don't care either way re that piece of crap person, but you post like you're some kind of constitutional and criminal law expert. These are complex issues and your belief that you 'know' anything as fact is laughable.

Mate suggests you attempt to read from page 28, as you don't seem too interested in the build-up and some of the damming evidence on show,
And Just a quick glance from page 28 will be enough to put a hole in your comment.

it well laid out and starts with indictments 1-31,
But I believe it counts 32 to 37 that going to nail him, (starting on page 34)

Maybe you should have attempted to read the indictment before you commented.

Just for info, Australia gets a mention as well,