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

[struth]

The dude has been a liberal all his life. Same with Dershowitz. Problem is that there are very few liberals left in Congress or on the left in general.

They put their country and the rule of law ahead of the demafacist agenda…now they are public enemies

 

[NotfooledbyW]

12 biased people in DC will convict Trump,

I’m glad you know that Trump will be convicted already.

Trump may be convicted in the court of public opinion before the criminal trial ever gets started. One of the contenders may overcome Trump and his DOJ election interference diversion dries up.

Think about the prosecutor’s star witness who is running against Trump. He is a real evangelical Christian who never grabbed women by the pussy or boinked a pornstar while his wife was giving birth and nursing his newborn son, or raped a woman in a dressing room.

I’m gonna buy a Pence campaign “Too Honest” T-shirt and wear it when I see Trump in an Orange Jumpsuit and permanently fired from freedom.

Millions of Orange Evangelicals can be turned against the pussy grabbing messiah if “Too Honest” Pence seeks and gets some TV Bible Thumping celebs and higher-ups in the churches and the hillbilly Christian media machine to back him and dump Trump.

Pence has already started - he found he has sone balls since Jack Smith showed hi how it’s done.

gdby.23.08.04 #9
nf.23,08.04 #82

 

[NotfooledbyW]

It also will tie up Trump’s resources and impede his ability to run a successful campaign.

But the law is based on Christian-Judeo value

Are you a Trump supporting evangelical Christian?

That helps Pence. See post #82

lvsv.23.08.04 #20
lvsv.24.08.04 #660
nf.23.08.04 #83

 

[lantern2814]

YOUR truth. Orange truth.

Tough shit.

Well stupid, LIBERAL attorney Alan Dershowitz says you have no case as well. Tough shit for you. Now you cry that Dershowitz isn’t a real liberal......

 

[lantern2814]

History shows trumpian lawyers do not do well in front of leftest judges, rightist lawyers, trump appointed lawyer or the Supreme court on trump election filings.

Too bad for you and your TDS that your boy Smith has no case.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Trump didnt do what youre accusing him of. The election was certified. His office didnt reverse it.

Butbutbutbut his thoughts were crimes!

 

[lantern2814]

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

The same way they cry about Dershowitz because he puts the law first, and being a liberal is way down the list. The left can’t stand that.

 

[Marener]

LOL So that's why Congress is re-writing the law. For the non-real lawyers in the DOJ. JFC

Well yeah. There’s a lot of crazies out there that might try really stupid shit, as we saw in 2021.

Nope. Again, which words are you having problems with? Only one co-conspirator cited and s/he wrote noting about "violating the law." You should really stop pretending to understand the law, you making quite the ass of yourself.

How would you know what they wrote? John Eastman wrote a two page memo that the indictment references where he admits they’re asking Pence to violate the law.

Have you seen the memo? Be honest.

 

[Marener]

Well that’s problem for Eastland not his client that trusted his advice

His advice was to violate the law. If a lawyer advises you to break the law, you don’t get to do it.

 

[struth]

His advice was to violate the law. If a lawyer advises you to break the law, you don’t get to do it.

Sure, it’s a defense if you don’t know what is being adviced is a legal.

If what he advice s was against the law then why did the dems attempt to change the law after the fact?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Well that’s problem for Eastland not his client that trusted his advice

You should really stop pretending to understand the law,

Well that’s problem for Eastland not his client that trusted his advice

Have you seen the memo? Be honest.

His advice was to violate the law. If a lawyer advises you to break the law, you don’t get to do it.

Sure, it’s a defense if you don’t know what is being adviced is a legal.

Eastman knew when he wrote it the plan was not legal when he (see bold below) writes “This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.”

The act is the law . Break with the act is to break the law - Trump acted on this break when he pressured Pence to break the law for him. Pence’s Council will testify that Trump was told he was asking Pence to break the law.


I posted this over a year ago.

READ: Trump lawyer's memo on six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election

By: CNN Updated 8:20 AM EDT, Tue September 21, 2021​

John Eastman, a conservative lawyer working with then-President Donald Trump's legal team, outlined in a two-page memo a scheme to try to persuade then-Vice President Mike Pence to subvert the Constitution and throw out the 2020 election results on January 6.​

​

1. VP Pence, presiding over the joint session (or Senate Pro Tempore Grassley, if Pence recuses himself), begins to open and count the ballots, starting with Alabama (without conceding that the procedure, specified by the Electoral Count Act, of going through the States alphabetically is required).​

​

2. When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.​

3. At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States. That means the total number of “electors appointed” – the language of the 12th Amendment -- is 454. This reading of the 12th Amendment has also been advanced by Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe (here). A “majority of the electors appointed” would therefore be 228. There are at this point 232 votes for Trump, 222 votes for Biden. Pence then gavels President Trump as re-elected.​

4. Howls, of course, from the Democrats, who now claim, contrary to Tribe’s prior position, that 270 is required. So Pence says, fine. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, no candidate has achieved the necessary majority. That sends the matter to the House, where the “the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote . . . .” Republicans currently control 26 of the state delegations, the bare majority needed to win that vote. President Trump is re-elected there as well.​

5. One last piece. Assuming the Electoral Count Act process is followed and, upon getting the objections to the Arizona slates, the two houses break into their separate chambers, we should not allow the Electoral Count Act constraint on debate to control. That would mean that a prior legislature was determining the rules of the present one — a constitutional no-no (as Tribe has forcefully argued). So someone – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, etc. – should demand normal rules (which includes the filibuster). That creates a stalemate that would give the state legislatures more time to weigh in to formally support the alternate slate of electors, if they had not already done so. 6. The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission – either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court. Let the other side challenge his actions in court, where Tribe (who in 2001 conceded the President of the Senate might be in charge of counting the votes) and others who would press a lawsuit would have their past position -- that these are non-justiciable political questions – thrown back at them, to get the lawsuit dismissed. The fact is that the Constitution assigns this power to the Vice President as the ultimate arbiter. We should take all of our actions with that in mind. TRUMP-Jan6-COUPattempt - see “”” 21SEP21-EASTMANplan-00 TRUMP-Jan6-COUPattempt “””​

nf.22.07.12 #255 “Do I have a constitutional right as an American citizen to have my vote counted in a presidential election in the version of America that you envision under trump?”

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Well that’s problem for Eastland not his client that trusted his advice

His advice was to violate the law. If a lawyer advises you to break the law, you don’t get to do it.

Trump is the fucking President of the United States and you have it struth that he had no idea reading this that something is fuckef up about it:

2. When he {Pence} gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.​

​

See the word “multiple” struth in “multiple slates of electors” ???? There are no lawful slates of electors other than the one slate that was certified by law on December 14 2020. Trumps conspiracy required fake electors from Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Georgia, Michigan and Nevada.

It is not free-speech to act in the commission of fraud, counterfeiting a document that will be sent to Congress, the archives, the governors as official Constitutional documents. As you can see if you have an honest cell in your body that trumps conspiracy that he and others acted through Rudy Giuliani to seven states where Rudy. Giuliani knew it was wrong because he lied to the potential fake electors who balked that they only wanted them to do it in case they win litigation before January 6. That was a lie a criminal lie. It is fraud. They had no litigation pending prior to January 6. Jack Smith had all this in writing.

Just the facts. Do you want more? There’s tons more.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Free-speech defense? Give me a break!

You can walk around wearing your fake Rolex and telling everybody that your 1952 Studebaker is a Porsche. That is a lie but it’s a free speech protected lie.

But when you alter the title and the mileage to read that it’s a 2022 Porsche and try to sell it is such then you are committing fraud. A crime.

 

[struth]

Eastman knew when he wrote it the plan was not legal when he (see bold below) writes “This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.”

The act is the law . Break with the act is to break the law - Trump acted on this break when he pressured Pence to break the law for him. Pence’s Council will testify that Trump was told he was asking Pence to break the law.


I posted this over a year ago.

READ: Trump lawyer's memo on six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election

By: CNN Updated 8:20 AM EDT, Tue September 21, 2021​

John Eastman, a conservative lawyer working with then-President Donald Trump's legal team, outlined in a two-page memo a scheme to try to persuade then-Vice President Mike Pence to subvert the Constitution and throw out the 2020 election results on January 6.​

​

1. VP Pence, presiding over the joint session (or Senate Pro Tempore Grassley, if Pence recuses himself), begins to open and count the ballots, starting with Alabama (without conceding that the procedure, specified by the Electoral Count Act, of going through the States alphabetically is required).​

​

2. When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.​

3. At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States. That means the total number of “electors appointed” – the language of the 12th Amendment -- is 454. This reading of the 12th Amendment has also been advanced by Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe (here). A “majority of the electors appointed” would therefore be 228. There are at this point 232 votes for Trump, 222 votes for Biden. Pence then gavels President Trump as re-elected.​

4. Howls, of course, from the Democrats, who now claim, contrary to Tribe’s prior position, that 270 is required. So Pence says, fine. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, no candidate has achieved the necessary majority. That sends the matter to the House, where the “the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote . . . .” Republicans currently control 26 of the state delegations, the bare majority needed to win that vote. President Trump is re-elected there as well.​

5. One last piece. Assuming the Electoral Count Act process is followed and, upon getting the objections to the Arizona slates, the two houses break into their separate chambers, we should not allow the Electoral Count Act constraint on debate to control. That would mean that a prior legislature was determining the rules of the present one — a constitutional no-no (as Tribe has forcefully argued). So someone – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, etc. – should demand normal rules (which includes the filibuster). That creates a stalemate that would give the state legislatures more time to weigh in to formally support the alternate slate of electors, if they had not already done so. 6. The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission – either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court. Let the other side challenge his actions in court, where Tribe (who in 2001 conceded the President of the Senate might be in charge of counting the votes) and others who would press a lawsuit would have their past position -- that these are non-justiciable political questions – thrown back at them, to get the lawsuit dismissed. The fact is that the Constitution assigns this power to the Vice President as the ultimate arbiter. We should take all of our actions with that in mind. TRUMP-Jan6-COUPattempt - see “”” 21SEP21-EASTMANplan-00 TRUMP-Jan6-COUPattempt “””​

nf.22.07.12 #255 “Do I have a constitutional right as an American citizen to have my vote counted in a presidential election in the version of America that you envision under trump?”

The Constitution is the law, federal laws have to follow the constitution. breaking “procedure” with a act doesn’t equate to being illegal, If in fact it the constitution allows it

 

[struth]

Trump is the fucking President of the United States and you have it struth that he had no idea reading this that something is fuckef up about it:

2. When he {Pence} gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.​

​

See the word “multiple” struth in “multiple slates of electors” ???? There are no lawful slates of electors other than the one slate that was certified by law on December 14 2020. Trumps conspiracy required fake electors from Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Georgia, Michigan and Nevada.

It is not free-speech to act in the commission of fraud, counterfeiting a document that will be sent to Congress, the archives, the governors as official Constitutional documents. As you can see if you have an honest cell in your body that trumps conspiracy that he and others acted through Rudy Giuliani to seven states where Rudy. Giuliani knew it was wrong because he lied to the potential fake electors who balked that they only wanted them to do it in case they win litigation before January 6. That was a lie a criminal lie. It is fraud. They had no litigation pending prior to January 6. Jack Smith had all this in writing.

Just the facts. Do you want more? There’s tons more.

Yeah and the president is allowed to follow legal advice of his lawyers


But if the president was doing this act as president as you suggest you have a bigger problem, as then he would be immune from criminal liability because of sovereign immunity

So make up your mind which theory you are going with

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Sure, it’s a defense if you don’t know what is being adviced is a legal.

The plot Trump received from Eastman to hang on to power put it in writing that it was illegal.,

The Eastman coup plot included an expectation there’d be riots in big cities when Pence if the plot went as planned, That the kind of lawyers Trump conspired with at the end.

Eastman remains a senior fellow at the institute, which, after decades on the geographical and intellectual fringes of the right, found new prominence during the Trump years. The think tank’s embrace of upheaval and crisis as necessary to usher in America’s renewal aligned neatly with the norms-busting president. ​

​

“Claremonsters,” as they call themselves, use apocalyptic rhetoric to convey the staggering stakes, as they see them, or to at least get people’s attention.​

​

That cataclysmic viewpoint spilled into the Jan. 6 hearings, when former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann said in a deposition that he had warned Eastman his scheme to have the vice president invalidate the election would “cause riots in the streets.”​

​

And [Eastman] said words to the effect of, ‘There has been violence in the history of our country, Eric, to protect the democracy or protect the republic,” Herschmann said.​

​

Eastman was so committed to this line of thinking that he continued to seek avenues to overturn Trump’s loss, even in the immediate aftermath of the attack on the U.S. Capitol. He unsuccessfully sought a pardon from Trump and now finds himself potentially in criminal jeopardy.​

​

​

strth.23.08.04 #90
nf.23.08.05

 

[Mac1958]

Well stupid, LIBERAL attorney Alan Dershowitz says you have no case as well. Tough shit for you. Now you cry that Dershowitz isn’t a real liberal......

I don't have ANY cases. Try to focus.

 

[struth]

The plot Trump received from Eastman to hang on to power put it in writing that it was illegal.,

The Eastman coup plot included an expectation there’d be riots in big cities when Pence if the plot went as planned, That the kind of lawyers Trump conspired with at the end.

Eastman remains a senior fellow at the institute, which, after decades on the geographical and intellectual fringes of the right, found new prominence during the Trump years. The think tank’s embrace of upheaval and crisis as necessary to usher in America’s renewal aligned neatly with the norms-busting president. ​

​

“Claremonsters,” as they call themselves, use apocalyptic rhetoric to convey the staggering stakes, as they see them, or to at least get people’s attention.​

​

That cataclysmic viewpoint spilled into the Jan. 6 hearings, when former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann said in a deposition that he had warned Eastman his scheme to have the vice president invalidate the election would “cause riots in the streets.”​

​

And [Eastman] said words to the effect of, ‘There has been violence in the history of our country, Eric, to protect the democracy or protect the republic,” Herschmann said.​

​

Eastman was so committed to this line of thinking that he continued to seek avenues to overturn Trump’s loss, even in the immediate aftermath of the attack on the U.S. Capitol. He unsuccessfully sought a pardon from Trump and now finds himself potentially in criminal jeopardy.​

​

​

strth.23.08.04 #90
nf.23.08.05

I really hope Xiden’s DOJ has more then your theory…I really do.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Sure, it’s a defense if you don’t know what is being adviced is a legal.

The plot Trump received from Eastman to hang on to power put it in writing that it was illegal.,

The Eastman coup plot included an expectation there’d be riots in big cities when Pence if the plot went as planned, That the kind of lawyers Trump conspired with at the end.

Eastman remains a senior fellow at the institute, which, after decades on the geographical and intellectual fringes of the right, found new prominence during the Trump years. The think tank’s embrace of upheaval and crisis as necessary to usher in America’s renewal aligned neatly with the norms-busting president. ​

​

“Claremonsters,” as they call themselves, use apocalyptic rhetoric to convey the staggering stakes, as they see them, or to at least get people’s attention.​

​

That cataclysmic viewpoint spilled into the Jan. 6 hearings, when former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann said in a deposition that he had warned Eastman his scheme to have the vice president invalidate the election would “cause riots in the streets.”​

​

And [Eastman] said words to the effect of, ‘There has been violence in the history of our country, Eric, to protect the democracy or protect the republic,” Herschmann said.​

​

Eastman was so committed to this line of thinking that he continued to seek avenues to overturn Trump’s loss, even in the immediate aftermath of the attack on the U.S. Capitol. He unsuccessfully sought a pardon from Trump and now finds himself potentially in criminal jeopardy.​

​

​

strth.23.08.04 #90
nf.23.08.05

 

[struth]

The plot Trump received from Eastman to hang on to power put it in writing that it was illegal.,

The Eastman coup plot included an expectation there’d be riots in big cities when Pence if the plot went as planned, That the kind of lawyers Trump conspired with at the end.

Eastman remains a senior fellow at the institute, which, after decades on the geographical and intellectual fringes of the right, found new prominence during the Trump years. The think tank’s embrace of upheaval and crisis as necessary to usher in America’s renewal aligned neatly with the norms-busting president. ​

​

“Claremonsters,” as they call themselves, use apocalyptic rhetoric to convey the staggering stakes, as they see them, or to at least get people’s attention.​

​

That cataclysmic viewpoint spilled into the Jan. 6 hearings, when former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann said in a deposition that he had warned Eastman his scheme to have the vice president invalidate the election would “cause riots in the streets.”​

​

And [Eastman] said words to the effect of, ‘There has been violence in the history of our country, Eric, to protect the democracy or protect the republic,” Herschmann said.​

​

Eastman was so committed to this line of thinking that he continued to seek avenues to overturn Trump’s loss, even in the immediate aftermath of the attack on the U.S. Capitol. He unsuccessfully sought a pardon from Trump and now finds himself potentially in criminal jeopardy.​

​

​

strth.23.08.04 #90
nf.23.08.05

Hahaha again I hope I really do, that Jack has more then a lawyer giving legal advice that they disagree with