Special Counsel January 6 conspiracy case against Trump in DC (Update: Trial set for March 4, 2024) (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

Trump and Eastman appear to be preparing to be indicted. It’s probably better to have a new, separate thread for this case.

 

[MT15]

As per usual no answers from SFL.

 

[bird]

As per usual no answers from SFL.

That a feature, not a bug for Traitorous Trumpers.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Special counsel Jack Smith's team has uncovered previously undisclosed details about former President Donald Trump's refusal to help stop the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol three years ago as he sat watching TV inside the White House, according to sources familiar with what Smith's team has learned during its Jan. 6 probe.

Many of the exclusive details come from the questioning of Trump's former deputy chief of staff, Dan Scavino, who first started working for Trump as a teenager three decades ago and is now a paid senior adviser to Trump's reelection campaign. Scavino wouldn't speak with the House select committee that conducted its own probe related to Jan. 6, but -- after a judge overruled claims of executive privilege last year -- he did speak with Smith's team, and key portions of what he said were described to ABC News.

New details also come from the Smith team's interviews with other White House advisers and top lawyers who -- despite being deposed in the congressional probe -- previously declined to answer questions about Trump's own statements and demeanor on Jan. 6, 2021, according to publicly released transcripts of their interviews in that probe.

Sources said Scavino told Smith's investigators that as the violence began to escalate that day, Trump "was just not interested" in doing more to stop it.

Sources also said former Trump aide Nick Luna told federal investigators that when Trump was informed that then-Vice President Mike Pence had to be rushed to a secure location, Trump responded, "So what?" -- which sources said Luna saw as an unexpected willingness by Trump to let potential harm come to a longtime loyalist..........

Special counsel probe uncovers new details about Trump's inaction on Jan. 6: Sources

Special counsel Jack Smith has uncovered previously undisclosed details about former President Trump's refusal to help stop the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, sources say.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

As per usual no answers from SFL.

Twitter dump coming...

 

[MT15]

You can listen to audio of the immunity argument live. The Trump lawyer is very difficult to listen to, his voice is completely raspy and he talks as fast as a slimy used car dealer. He is also arguing a ridiculous case.

 

[MT15]

 

[MT15]

 

[V Chip]

You are missing the part about getting a slap on the wrist. She got almost 5 years and he got only 6 months. Your example doesn't apply.

I ignored which one about Trump?

Did she get charged with the same exact crimes as Epps? No. Therefore the sentence should be based on the crimes committed and if the person pled guilty or fought the charges.

 

[MT15]

 

[coldseat]

It's not like Republican's would have held him responsible or accountable if he had done that. No doubt Libs, Antifa and FBI/CIA would have been blamed regardless of how much Trump bragged (and you know he would do so) that he had done it.

 

[MT15]

 

[FullMonte]

I’m still trying to figure out how:
—Pressuring state officials to find more votes for him.
—Telling his DOJ to just say there was fraud and let “me and R congressmen handle it.”
—Telling his VP to simply reject the votes from states he lost.
—Trying to submit falsified electoral certificates

Are, in any way, “official acts” by the President of the United States.

 

[MT15]

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[superchuck500]

 

[efil4]

Just saw segment where attorney formerly with Smith office echoed same. They wanted to bypass the DC and go to SC. SC said let DC review.

Her summation was it's possible SC wanted to see the DC opinion and go from there.

Either way, this is a travesty.

 

[SaintForLife]

Just saw segment where attorney formerly with Smith office echoed same. They wanted to bypass the DC and go to SC. SC said let DC review.

Her summation was it's possible SC wanted to see the DC opinion and go from there.

Either way, this is a travesty.

Yeah what a shame that yall can't jail the Democrat's political opponent.

The Democrats plan to jail Trump is falling apart. It doesn't look like any of the trials will happen before the election except for Stormy Daniels.

They waited 3 years to charge Trump so the trial would happen during the campaign. Why should Jack Smith expect the judicial system to bypass normal procedures and speed up because Biden knows he can't beat Trump and he needs him in jail.

And the Democrats claim that they are the ones who are protecting democracy. What a joke.

 

[superchuck500]

Yeah what a shame that yall can't jail the Democrat's political opponent.

The Democrats plan to jail Trump is falling apart. It doesn't look like any of the trials will happen before the election except for Stormy Daniels.

They waited 3 years to charge Trump so the trial would happen during the campaign. Why should Jack Smith expect the judicial system to bypass normal procedures and speed up because Biden knows he can't beat Trump and he needs him in jail.

And the Democrats claim that they are the ones who are protecting democracy. What a joke.

And when the Republicans say "law and order" they mean for everyone else - they're easily willing to subvert law and ignore crimes when their cult leader committed them.

Do you know why no other Republican presidential candidate in the last 100 years has been charged with crimes? I do. We all do, except for the cultists.