this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
219 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10187 readers
194 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump announced plans to hold a press conference next week to present a "conclusive report" proving that the 2020 election in Georgia was rigged. This comes after Trump was recently indicted by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for attempting to overturn the election results in Georgia. Trump claims the report will show election fraud and lead to "a complete exoneration" of all charges against him. However, critics argue it has been over two years since the election and Trump has not previously provided evidence of widespread fraud. The announcement also comes just hours after Trump lashed out at Willis for indicting him now rather than earlier. It remains to be seen whether Trump's promised report will actually contain new evidence that could substantively challenge the prior investigations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 44 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Isn’t doubling down on this with the indictment in hand especially stupid? Surely opening him to further charges?

[–] 0110010001100010@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And what, exactly, has he faced in terms of consequences for anything during his 77 years on this rock? There is pretty much zero chance he sees any jail time and he's well aware of this. So what has he got to loose? Might as well stir up shit in prep for a Jan 6 v2 in 2025.

[–] TipRing@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't see how this isn't a brazen attempt to taint the jury pool. If he has evidence exonerating him he just needs to present it in court.

[–] dhork@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

It's like every time Trump opens his mouth, he shows us his taint....

[–] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

He's already set up his base to think the charges are fraudulent. Any additional charges will just compound their irrational beliefs.

[–] bradinutah@thelemmy.club 9 points 1 year ago

Absolutely. Stupid is as stupid does. The narcissist can't help himself, especially after drowning in his own Kool-aid. Hopefully the judge will revoke his bail and incarcerate him until trial, you know, like how any other defendant would be. Please! Prove to us that there's no separate treatment for the rich, even an ex-president! This is what we need!

[–] mookulator@mander.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. It’s stupid shit like this that got him indicted in the first place.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

"I'd love to show you the report, it's beautiful, and perfect, and it shows in so many ways how I'm innocent of all charges. My lawyers wept when they, true story! My lawyers were VISIBLY WEEPING as they read it. VISIBLY! But now, on the advice of those lawyers, I can't release it to you. I CAN'T! I want to, but I can't. They tell me it would tell these evil, nasty, prosecutors too much about our defense, so, you know, we can't have that."

[–] whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Someone bet him he couldn’t get to 100 indictments by Wednesday, and he said, “hold my diet Coke!”

[–] roguetrick@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not further charges but it can be referenced to furthering the conspiracy for the RICO charges. Overall that is a hard case to figure out though.

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

RICO charges in Georgia are far easier to prove than federal RICO charges.

[–] roguetrick@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, but first amendment issues and generally proving something is not sincerely held seems difficult to me. The former is something appeals courts will decide while the latter is something a jury will decide.

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

"First Amendment issues" is a non starter and a Trump lawyer talking point. As Judge Chutkan so aptly said, "Mr. Trump, like every American, has a First Amendment right to free speech, but that right is not absolute." There are lots of kinds of speech which are illegal all by themselves. With respect to a RICO case, when acts of speech are "overt actions in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy," even otherwise benign speech can be illegal. Conspiring to commit a crime, and taking overt action to further that conspiracy, is a crime all by itself, even if the crime being conspired does not come to fruition.

Whether or not the conspirators' "sincerely held belief" was that "the election was stolen" is irrelevant. If that is what you sincerely believe, there are already legal procedures to deal with that; take your case(s) to court. Which the Trump team did, with zero success. Just because you don't like the outcome does not make doing an end run around the law and conspiring to change election outcomes in illegal ways "suddenly legal."

[–] linuxgator@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

I don't think he knows what next week means.