Law Professor Jonathan Turley Dismantles the Trump Indictment: ‘The American People Aren’t Buying It’

[Godboy]

Pence for one.

"Pence, i think the election was stolen. Look at all this stuff coming out in the news. You shouldnt certify it."

Are you under the impression that saying the above is illegal?

 

[Rawley]

NEWS FLASH:

A 12 member jury of "American People" will decide Trump's innocent or guilt - Not Jonathan Turley.

In addition, the bulk of witness's against "The Donald" will be his own Republican staff members that will testify Trump was told over and over that what he was doing on Jan 6th and Georgia was illegal. So, don't start icing the champagne yet. These cases will be decided in courts of law, not on talk shows, and Trump's defense team will be hard pressed to shake the testimony of Trump's own staff - all of whom will face severe penalties if they don't tell the truth.

News flash - There really isn't much dispute over the facts. The dispute will be whether it's a crime or not. And that will be decided by lawyers and judges, not by a jury. I'd bet good money that this latest bullshit never gets to trial.

 

[Rawley]

The DoJ is enforcing the law. Biden has nothing to do with it.

LOL His administration is going to criminally indict a former President and his leading political opponent, and you don't think they are going to consult him first? LOL

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What's banana republic about charging an alleged criminal with his crimes and going to trial, with a jury and judge, and giving the defendant his due process rights?

Law and order, and justice is not associated with Banana Republics.

If Trump is innocent, he'll be found not guilty by the jury.

The shit being done to Trump you idiot. Don't worry the supreme court is going to kill your set dream. Hopefully you'll have a mental breakdown and kill yourself

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Funny how all of a sudden they are banana republic laws now, but these same laws have been incarcerating folks in this country since it was taken. Now your Orange God is above the law.

Conman Biden was a segregationist in the 80s

 

[Rawley]

He tried to reverse it. He didn’t care if it was certified. He was leaning on the people that certified the election to give him the presidency.

That seems just as bad to me.

WTF does it mean to "lean on" someone? Are you saying he threatened them? Why didn't Comrade Smith charge him with that?

 

[Marener]

WTF does it mean to "lean on" someone? Are you saying he threatened them? Why didn't Comrade Smith charge him with that?

No threats. Just coercion and compelling using verifiably false information.

Although his conversation with Raffensperger he made vague allusions that he’d potentially be criminally culpable if he didn’t do hat he said.

Still. Seems like a president shouldn’t be allowed to reverse the outcome of an election he lost.

 

[Marener]

LOL His administration is going to criminally indict a former President and his leading political opponent, and you don't think they are going to consult him first? LOL

No. They aren’t going to consult with him first.

Why would they? That’s a terrible idea.

 

[Rawley]

No threats. Just coercion and compelling using verifiably false information.

So nothing illegal

Although his conversation with Raffensperger he made vague allusions that he’d potentially be criminally culpable if he didn’t do hat he said.

Still. Seems like a president shouldn’t be allowed to reverse the outcome of an election he lost.

What if he lost it due to fraud? He should be allowed to contest it try and have it reversed? Seems like that's his Constitutional duty, no?

 

[Rawley]

No. They aren’t going to consult with him first.

Why would they? That’s a terrible idea.

You're so cute when you play the naive waif.

 

[Marener]

So nothing illegal

It is illegal based on what he was asking him to do.

What if he lost it due to fraud? He should be allowed to contest it try and have it reversed? Seems like that's his Constitutional duty, no?

There are perfectly ways for him to contest it. This is not one of those ways.

The president has no constitutional duty in the election process.

 

[Leo123]

What's banana republic about charging an alleged criminal with his crimes and going to trial, with a jury and judge, and giving the defendant his due process rights?

Law and order, and justice is not associated with Banana Republics.

If Trump is innocent, he'll be found not guilty by the jury.

Questioning an election is not a crime.

 

[Leo123]

they attempted to rob us voters of our vote and illegally steal the election to keep the Big Loser in power.

the definition of that is called an attempted Self Coup.

Perfect example of you blaming others for what you yourself did.

 

[struth]

When the article started with Turley as a Liberal, I knew it was propaganda.

Jonathan Turley - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

For Turley to be a Liberal the scale for Moderate has to start with say Kaiser Wilhelm and position Genghis Khan as a RINO Conservative.

He was a mainstay on Rachael Maddow and Keith Oberman for years…he’s only consider a conservative by the demafasict because he’s called out their assault on the republic and rule of law

 

[Rawley]

It is illegal based on what he was asking him to do.

??? There is no criminal aspect to the ECA. And the Senate, Dems included has admitted that the statute was ambiguous enough to allow for the Presidents' interpretation.

Which certainly raises the question of the wisdom of indicting the former President, the leading political opponent of the sitting president with extremely dubious legal charges based on a novel and extremely dubious legal theory.

There are perfectly ways for him to contest it. This is not one of those ways.

The president has no constitutional duty in the election process.

???? full circle. Seems the President had the duty to bring charges against election officials using the very statute you and Comrade smith has charged the former President with - depriving me of my Constitutional rights.

 

[Rawley]

He was a mainstay on Rachael Maddow and Keith Oberman for years…he’s only consider a conservative by the demafasict because he’s called out their assault on the republic and rule of law

Makes you wonder if some are truly ignorant, or just playing the part.

 

[struth]

Makes you wonder if some are truly ignorant, or just playing the part.

The dembots are truly ignorant people, that’s why they are easily for the demafasict party to control

 

[Marener]

??? There is no criminal aspect to the ECA. And the Senate, Dems included has admitted that the statute was ambiguous enough to allow for the Presidents' interpretation.

Which certainly raises the question of the wisdom of indicting the former President, the leading political opponent of the sitting president with extremely dubious legal charges based on a novel and extremely dubious legal theory.

There's no criminal charge for violating the ECA. The Senate Dems did not admit the statute was ambiguous enough to allow for the President's "interpretation" and even the president's co-conspirators admitted in writing that they would be asking Pence to violate the law.

???? full circle. Seems the President had the duty to bring charges against election officials using the very statute you and Comrade smith has charged the former President with - depriving me of my Constitutional rights.

No one can bring charges against anyone based on fraud. Bringing fraudulent charges against people would be actually depriving them of their constitutional rights.

Do you really want to live in a country where the former president can change the outcome of an election to stay in office? Is that really what you want?

 

[Rawley]

The dembots are truly ignorant people, that’s why they are easily for the demafasict party to control

A good chunk are. But I think, for the most part, the ones here are simply hyperpartisan.

For example, they all realize it's patent absurd to argue that Hunter called his daddy dozens of times on the speakerphone during business meetings. But, they'll repeat the argument out of partisanship, not ignorance.

 

[Leo123]

There's no criminal charge for violating the ECA. The Senate Dems did not admit the statute was ambiguous enough to allow for the President's "interpretation" and even the president's co-conspirators admitted in writing that they would be asking Pence to violate the law.

No one can bring charges against anyone based on fraud. Bringing fraudulent charges against people would be actually depriving them of their constitutional rights.

Do you really want to live in a country where the former president can change the outcome of an election to stay in office? Is that really what you want?

Challenging the outcome of an election is not automatically changing it. All Trump wanted is a fair accounting in light of the obvious changing of normal States election procedures.