Trump 2024 ???

[jamil]

This is disinformation.

Oh. And "disinformation" is retarded. I refuse to knowledge the word even exists. Probably invented by Millennials. If you're talking about spreading falsehoods for the purpose of changing public opinion, we already have a word for that. Propaganda.

 

[BugI02]

Did anyone bother to sue the state before the election?

I thought you were better informed. Many of the changes were formally implemented only a few days before extended early voting commenced, deliberately leaving no time to challenge the procedures before they were put into effect

It has been a while, but I believe the changes in either Michigan or Wisconsin were enabled three days before the start of early voting of which two of those days were a weekend. The machinery necessary to carry out the agenda was clearly pre-positioned, but no court challenge was possible until the changes were actually made - and that window was made as small as possible

 

[Ingomike]

You keep saying it was something it wasn’t. They’re not alleging that Trump merely pressured Pence to challenge the legitimacy of the certification of the votes transmitted to him as President of the Senate.

The plan was to have Trump’s slate of electors send in fake certifications where ultimately, Pence would choose Trump’s electors to count, and then Trump would be declared the winner of the electoral college.

So I think it’s irrelevant to claim that Pence has the power to contest the legitimacy of the certifications when that’s not what’s alleged. So defend Trump for that. Either make the case that the allegation is false, that there was nonsuch plan underway, or defend the idea that Pence had constitutional authority to do it, so therefore, Trump wasn’t asking Pence to go against the constitution.

Got any proof that happened? That is not what Eastman and others are saying in court…

 

[Ingomike]

Did it start in the state courts? I would think that would be a State issue, not a federal one.

Not sure but it is a constitutional issue therefore it belongs in federal court by my understanding.

 

[Ingomike]

It's in the indictment. So if you're finding that part not to be true, you haven't read it. If you're not finding facts which support the allegations, I'd say it's probably too soon to say. You don't know what the prosecution's evidence is for it. I suspect that Pence is a major source for the government's case.

Russian collusion was alleged and found not true also. The track record is very poor…

 

[jamil]

jamil is only interested in gaming some potential negative prospects of if Pence/VP has the powers that he (jamil) does not want him to have

I said the allegations are that Pence was ultimately pressured to pick a different slate of electors. I quoted an excerpt from the indictment earlier in the thread to that point.

I do want the VPOTUS to have the power to dispute the validity of the certifications. But, that's not what is alleged. So let's stick with is rather than ought.

He fails to extend his extrapolation to what the situation would be if just about anyone in state.gov can change election rules on voting periods, verification requirements and acceptance standards during a ginned-up 'emergency' without the legislature
serving as the primary check and balance on fraud

More "is" vs "ought" Again. I don't dispute any of those things. But back to the indictment, if Trump did what they're alleging, that's no better than what was done to him.

If no one but the courts have the power to limit such activities, and the courts have shown they are unwilling to intervene in such a way as to determine an electoral outcome after the election is certified, then you have a recipe for endless emergencies with attendant rule changes to aid one partisan group or another. You will never get to good government if one side can just use raw power to gain or keep authority. That way lies madness

Again, I'm not arguing against that.

 

[BugI02]

Quite so. I would expect that most of the information presented in the various indictments are fabricated from half-truths and whole cloth at best - and the more sensationalized the better as far as DoJ is concerned

jamil, you have made no secret in your unwillingness to further trust news organizations who you feel have lied to you and may be subject to bias

Why is that not just as true for you with Willis and Bragg and Smith? Is it not apparent that they have lied to you and are subject - nay, consumed - by bias?

The players you wish to give the benefit of the doubt I just don't understand

 

[jamil]

Yes. They were told no harm had yet occurred and to come back later by Alito but later, they then turned it down on standing…

Hold on. Different cases were tossed out for different reasons. Texas doesn't have standing to sue for Pennsylvania's ****ed up rule changes especially when Pennsylvania's highest court ruled it was fine. Why didn't the Pennsylvania GOP sue the state? Then let that percolate up to SCOTUS? And the part about being turned down because of no harm, I don't remember that one.

 

[BugI02]

I said the allegations are that Pence was ultimately pressured to pick a different slate of electors. I quoted an excerpt from the indictment earlier in the thread to that point.

The claims made in any indictment are not any more proven than claims of a Kraken. The prosecution alleges that it can prove its assertions later. Given the record of the government bringing those allegations I rate them as Kraken 2.0

Before you tell me that indictments are somehow more truthful for having been presented to a Grand Jury, consider the ham sandwich

 

[Ingomike]

I said the allegations are that Pence was ultimately pressured to pick a different slate of electors. I quoted an excerpt from the indictment earlier in the thread to that point.

Why do you **** around with indictments when the actual record is there for all to read. Have you read it? Seems unlikely. Please show where “Pence was ultimately pressured to pick a different slate of electors“ in the actual memo from Eastman. They have suckered you again with their made up allegations…

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

 

[jamil]

Quite so. I would expect that most of the information presented in the various indictments are fabricated from half-truths and whole cloth at best - and the more sensationalized the better as far as DoJ is concerned

jamil, you have made no secret in your unwillingness to further trust news organizations who you feel have lied to you and may be subject to bias

Why is that not just as true for you with Willis and Bragg and Smith? Is it not apparent that they have lied to you and are subject - nay, consumed - by bias?

The players you wish to give the benefit of the doubt I just don't understand

I don't trust Willis. The RICO case is absurd on its face. I don't trust Brag. he is way out there to try to make a felony out of what is at most a misdemeanor. I don't trust Smith either. I think he's a partisan hack.

But, again, I'm talking about is not ought. What IS: the indictment makes the allegations we've been talking about. I neither believe nor disbelieve them at this point. I haven't seen any prosecutions or defense at this point. We'll just have to wait and see how strong the case is.

That said, I do suspect that Pence is the source the Smith is using for the basis of his allegations. I base that on the fact that the indictment pretty much spells out Trump's plan to stay in office, which Pence was a part of in terms of being pressured to play his part. If Pence is not the source, and that information in the indictment is false, I would think Pence should set the record straight. To the contrary, he all but has confirmed it on the interview circuit. We'll have to wait and see what evidence is presented.

 

[jamil]

Why do you **** around with indictments when the actual record is there for all to read. Have you read it? Seems unlikely. Please show where “Pence was ultimately pressured to pick a different slate of electors“ in the actual memo from Eastman. They have suckered you again with their made up allegations…

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

Part of it is out there. The indictment addresses that too and says that there was nothing wrong with that. But the plan changed. We don’t yet know what evidence they have that the plan changed. As I said I suspect Pence’s testimony is the source for that allegation.

So. Just to nail it down, you are saying that Trump never asked or demanded that Pence choose different electors. That right?

 

[KG1]

Supreme Court to decide whether to kick Trump off ballot

Castro v. Trump, a case challenging Trump's candidacy with the 14th Amendment, is expected to decided by the justices on or before October 9.

www.newsweek.com

The legal debate about whether or not former President Donald Trump should be allowed to appear on the 2024 ballot has made its way before the Supreme Court.

The court distributed John Castro v. Donald Trump to the justices for conference on Wednesday ahead of the upcoming term, which will begin on October 2. Conference is to take place on September 26 and the case is expected to be decided on or before October 9.

Castro, a tax attorney running for the Republican nomination next year, sent his petition to the Supreme Court last month, asking the justices to answer whether political candidates can challenge the eligibility of another candidate of the same party running for the same nomination "based on a political competitive injury in the form a diminution of votes."

 

[BugI02]

But, again, I'm talking about is not ought. What IS: the indictment makes the allegations we've been talking about.

The point is that an indictments relation to the truth is undetermined and likely tangential if not asymptotic - especially in this case. It seems like you wish to cite the indictment as evidence of something. Until proven in court and initial verdict surviving all appeals, it is just an opinion

I'm looking for some statement by Trump before witnesses (plural) or in writing that that was his plan. Just some random dude with an axe to grind saying it to sell books or solicit campaign donations or to placate the mob isn't good enough - either for me or for a conviction

 

[BugI02]

So. Just to nail it down, you are saying that Trump never asked or demanded that Pence choose different electors. That right?

How about we haven't seen proof that that was so. Pence saying something was so without corroboration just isn't enough, no better than testimony from Schiff or Pelosi - people supposedly in possession of privileged knowledge but of questionable integrity

 

[Ingomike]

Part of it is out there. The indictment addresses that too and says that there was nothing wrong with that. But the plan changed. We don’t yet know what evidence they have that the plan changed. As I said I suspect Pence’s testimony is the source for that allegation.

So. Just to nail it down, you are saying that Trump never asked or demanded that Pence choose different electors. That right?

Sounds like a classic he said-he said. You and the media will go with Pence because it fits the narrative but as you are fond of saying Pence was feathering his post VP nest…

 

[KLB]

Not sure but it is a constitutional issue therefore it belongs in federal court by my understanding.

I'm pretty sure it is up to the state's legislatures how they choose they electors. That would make it a state issue.

 

[indyartisan]

That said, I do suspect that Pence is the source the Smith is using for the basis of his allegations. I base that on the fact that the indictment pretty much spells out Trump's plan to stay in office, which Pence was a part of in terms of being pressured to play his part. If Pence is not the source, and that information in the indictment is false, I would think Pence should set the record straight. To the contrary, he all but has confirmed it on the interview circuit. We'll have to wait and see what evidence is presented.

Maybe we will hear what was said/allegedly said in private at trial.

Screenshots of Trump’s Jan 6 speech from NPR, of all places.

 

[LeftyGunner]

Sounds like a classic he said-he said. You and the media will go with Pence because it fits the narrative but as you are fond of saying Pence was feathering his post VP nest…

Credibility matters.

Trump is a liar.

 

[Ingomike]

Credibility matters.

Trump is a liar.

Like all politicians cannot be accused of the same. BUT TRUMP…