This is what lawfare looks like.

[westwall]

Nope. If Biden fired a US Attorney because he was unable to find a sufficient predicate to charge a political adversary...........then appointed someone on his personal staff to bring charges........followed by members of the US Attorney's office giving a memo to said appointee stating their collective opinion was that the facts did not warrant prosecution..........and Dem's had no problem with it, that would be a double standard.

The evidence is overwhelming, the corrupt piece of shit refused to indict because the deep state protects their own.

 

[j-mac]

Berg80, I told you repeatedly, be careful what precedents you’re setting, you wouldn’t like them when it was your turn….

 

[midcan5]

Trump is a felon, a rapist, a draft dodger, a liar, etc etc etc. But like Hitler or Stalin or any demagogue or criminal politician he has fans that don't care. Blind adherence to a party or gang or club brings along with it a lack of mind and honor. No need to bring up reality, it has no place for followers. They kowtow and obey.

Trump's 88 criminal charges and where they stand - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

We're tracking the status of each of the indictments against Trump and his co-defendants.

www.citizensforethics.org

 

[Meathead]

Trump may be off the hook for his 2020 election plot, but his allies aren’t​

Donald Trump’s victory in 2024 largely shattered the efforts to prosecute him for his efforts to subvert the 2020 election.

But dozens of his allies still face state-level criminal charges for their roles in the plot. The five cases against them have plodded along for years, mired in procedural gridlock, prosecutorial bungles and appellate review.

None of those cases is anywhere near a trial, yet they all remain pending — a state of legal limbo that exemplifies the nation’s halting struggle to reckon with, and achieve accountability for, Trump’s failed bid to seize a second term despite Joe Biden’s victory nearly five years ago.

On Wednesday, one of the cases will be at the Nevada Supreme Court for arguments on a key procedural issue. Two others, after long stretches of dormancy, could be revitalized in the next several months. The upcoming developments could determine whether any of the defendants ever have to face a jury for meddling in the election — even as Trump uses his office to perpetuate the bogus claim that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

At the core of all the cases is the effort, in December 2020, to assemble false slates of Trump electors in states he narrowly lost. Dozens of the Republicans activists who posed as electors remain under indictment. But some of the cases also sweep in more prominent Trump allies, like his former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and conservative attorneys John Eastman and Rudy Giuliani.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/05/trump-fake-electors-cases-00494884

trump devotees go to their happy place when the subject of the plot to steal the 2020 election comes up. Pretending it never happened with a combination of denial, misinformation, and a steadfast refusal to recognize demonstrable truths.

They aren't alone. The conservatives on the SC waved their magical wand of fabricated immunity for all the dealings trump had with DoJ officials while he was conspiring to steal the election. Forcing Jack Smith to amend his indictment. Leaving plenty of meat on the bone for a conviction had the trial proceeded.

If I've learned any lesson from trump's use of lawfare to avoid accountability for his crimes it is the glacial way our system of justice works can be enormously problematic in the pursuit of justice. A lesson his co-conspirators have apparently learned well.

We've had 10 years of lawfare and all of a sudden you've just discovered it?!

 

[Marener]

Berg80, I told you repeatedly, be careful what precedents you’re setting, you wouldn’t like them when it was your turn….

The problem is that you guys think prosecuting rioters who beat cops with baseball bats constitutes “lawfare”.

You’re incapable of admitting that your side deserves prosecution because your side has criminals.

 

[j-mac]

The problem is that you guys think prosecuting rioters who beat cops with baseball bats constitutes “lawfare”.

You’re incapable of admitting that your side deserves prosecution because your side has criminals.

Oh please…you freaks went on a campaign to jail people who disagree with your ideology…That’s it…you should be ashamed.

 

[berg80]

Berg80, I told you repeatedly, be careful what precedents you’re setting, you wouldn’t like them when it was your turn….

What are you referring to? What precedents?

 

[j-mac]

What are you referring to? What precedents?

Your typical authoritarian tendencies…As usual the biggest gaslight of all is you people projecting your actions, and thoughts onto us.

 

[berg80]

Your typical authoritarian tendencies…As usual the biggest gaslight of all is you people projecting your actions, and thoughts onto us.

I'm going to need you to be specific.

 

[Marener]

Oh please…you freaks went on a campaign to jail people who disagree with your ideology…That’s it…you should be ashamed.

You mean the people beating the cops with baseball bats?

No we went on a campaign to jail people who committed felonies. It had nothing to do with “agreeing” with anyone.

 

[j-mac]

I'm going to need you to be specific.

Not my problem your too stupid to see it.

 

[j-mac]

You mean the people beating the cops with baseball bats?

No we went on a campaign to jail people who committed felonies. It had nothing to do with “agreeing” with anyone.

Yep, those 72 year old grannies were real mean with baseball bats…fool.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You mean the people beating the cops with baseball bats?

No we went on a campaign to jail people who committed felonies. It had nothing to do with “agreeing” with anyone.

1600 people did not attack cops you went way overboard and jailed innocent people.

 

[Marener]

Yep, those 72 year old grannies were real mean with baseball bats…fool.

You guys are so sad that you convinced 70 year olds to riot for you.

Then you whine when they’re charged with rioting.

Has nothing to do with agreeing. It has everything to do with committing crimes.

 

[Marener]

1600 people did not attack cops you went way overboard and jailed innocent people.

Hundreds of them did attack cops and hundreds more were never charged.

People that stormed the capitol were not innocent. Sorry. You don’t get to pretend that’s okay.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Hundreds of them did attack cops and hundreds more were never charged.

People that stormed the capitol were not innocent. Sorry. You don’t get to pretend that’s okay.

you don't get to lie about it.

 

[Marener]

you don't get to lie about it.

No lies here. You’re the liar pretending that the rioters were innocent.

Indeed, Trump pardoned the man who beat cops with an aluminum baseball bat. You cant unring that bell.

 

[berg80]

Not my problem your too stupid to see it.

Well, you just lost the tiny bit of credibility you had. Don't be afraid. Write down the precedents you think are being established. I promise not to humiliate you.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No lies here. You’re the liar pretending that the rioters were innocent.

Indeed, Trump pardoned the man who beat cops with an aluminum baseball bat. You cant unring that bell.

you convicted people of crimes they didn't commit

 

[Marener]

you convicted people of crimes they didn't commit

Such as?