- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
3 questions about Trump J6 case that don't make sense
Posted on 8/9/23 at 6:48 am
Posted on 8/9/23 at 6:48 am
A) In the scenario, an election was either stolen or rigged (let's just say it was), how should a canidate attempt to adjudicate or correct this? Not say anything at all? Republican or Democrat, what is the proper process for challenging an election if it was indeed fraudulent? (Again, just pretend it was even if you don't think it was)
B) Did Trump believe the election was stolen? This seems pretty important, if he "believes" it was stolen, then shouldn't we say all the principles for point A should apply to point B. (Whether he was right or wrong, if that is his belief)
C) How does Jack Smith prove what Trump was thinking? What level if burden of proof would he need to show to say Trump was lying intentionally with the direct purpose of defrauding or inciting a riot?
B) Did Trump believe the election was stolen? This seems pretty important, if he "believes" it was stolen, then shouldn't we say all the principles for point A should apply to point B. (Whether he was right or wrong, if that is his belief)
C) How does Jack Smith prove what Trump was thinking? What level if burden of proof would he need to show to say Trump was lying intentionally with the direct purpose of defrauding or inciting a riot?
23
Posted on 8/9/23 at 6:53 am to burger bearcat
quote:
Did Trump believe the election was stolen?
No honest person thinks Trump isn't convinced he won,
by a lot.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 6:56 am to burger bearcat
quote:
How does Jack Smith prove what Trump was thinking?
He can’t
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:00 am to TrueTiger
quote:
No honest person thinks Trump isn't convinced he won,
Why wouldn't he? I'm convinced Trump won.
The courts may have blocked cases from coming forward with evidence but NOW, the Trump team can compel testimony.
Let's see if the Democrats get what they really wanted.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:09 am to Revelator
in a D.C. courtroom, he can prove what trump was thinking.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:10 am to burger bearcat
I think what your doing is drilling down into the fundamentals of rationality vs gestapo type evil. Yes it shows how twisted their side is, but they don’t give a shite. They have tunnel vision towards their ‘government is always right’ goals.
The best way to understand them is to know that government is always right, even when it’s wrong, and it’s sacrilegious to question it.
The best way to understand them is to know that government is always right, even when it’s wrong, and it’s sacrilegious to question it.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:13 am to burger bearcat
quote:
A) In the scenario, an election was either stolen or rigged (let's just say it was), how should a canidate attempt to adjudicate or correct this? Not say anything at all? Republican or Democrat, what is the proper process for challenging an election if it was indeed fraudulent? (Again, just pretend it was even if you don't think it was)
You go to court and proceed through the court system which Trump tried and failed on. I would also think you should present the evidence that clearly shows you won to the American people. You are the President and have the bully pulpit. Use it. You do everything in the open about what you are doing. You do not try to secretly subvert the will of the voters.
quote:
B) Did Trump believe the election was stolen? This seems pretty important, if he "believes" it was stolen, then shouldn't we say all the principles for point A should apply to point B. (Whether he was right or wrong, if that is his belief)
Yes, the principles of A would apply here. You are not allowed to illegally subvert the will of the voters.
quote:
C) How does Jack Smith prove what Trump was thinking? What level if burden of proof would he need to show to say Trump was lying intentionally with the direct purpose of defrauding or inciting a riot?
Prosecutors prove state of mind all the time. I really don’t believe this is the insurmountable burden you think it is. Also, he’s not charged with inciting a riot, so that’s not something to prove.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:23 am to texas tortilla
quote:
in a D.C. courtroom, he can prove what trump was thinking.
We have discovered people who can read minds.
This is amazing.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:26 am to burger bearcat
Well this shows that you don’t think like a lying democrat
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:26 am to burger bearcat
1) Go to court--without Rudy and Sidney
2) Don't go to Capitol and tell your least common denominators to march on capitol
3) You always know what he's thinking he says it all day
It's not terribly disciplined or bright
2) Don't go to Capitol and tell your least common denominators to march on capitol
3) You always know what he's thinking he says it all day
It's not terribly disciplined or bright
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:29 am to TrueTiger
hey, in a D.C. courtroom with that judge, trump doesn't have a chance.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:30 am to burger bearcat
quote:What level of burden, you ask? Well, given his selected judge and jury pool, the answer is "none". The only burden establishing non-left wing guilt in DC courts seems to be the rendering of an accusation.
What level if burden of proof would he need to show to say Trump was lying intentionally with the direct purpose of defrauding or inciting a riot?
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:32 am to texas tortilla
quote:
hey, in a D.C. courtroom with that judge, trump doesn't have a chance.
Pretty much what most legal experts are saying.
And they also say he will have to wait to get it all straightened out at the SCOTUS.
But no one is talking about how broken the DC courts are.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:34 am to burger bearcat
quote:
A) In the scenario, an election was either stolen or rigged (let's just say it was), how should a canidate attempt to adjudicate or correct this? Not say anything at all? Republican or Democrat, what is the proper process for challenging an election if it was indeed fraudulent? (Again, just pretend it was even if you don't think it was)
There is zero evidence that the election was stolen, so Trump’s responsibility was to take his defeat like a man and turn the presidency over like every president did before him. Could he do that, though? No. He whined and moaned like a petulant child and should have invalidated himself completely in the process. Little did we know that his cult following wouldn’t care what the man did, they would follow him like the Lemmings they are wherever he led them.
Trumpkins proved they don’t care about the constitution at all.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:39 am to Original Bayou Boy
quote:
the Trump team can compel testimony.
can they? "i cannot recall"
"that report was lost in a tragic boating accident"
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:41 am to CollegeFBRules
quote:
There is zero evidence that the election was stolen,
That is an inaccurate statement. Stay tuned, Trumps lawyers will demonstrate evidence in this trial.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:41 am to CollegeFBRules
quote:
There is zero evidence that the election was stolen
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:45 am to burger bearcat
quote:
In the scenario, an election was either stolen or rigged (let's just say it was), how should a canidate attempt to adjudicate or correct this? Not say anything at all? Republican or Democrat, what is the proper process for challenging an election if it was indeed fraudulent? (Again, just pretend it was even if you don't think it was)
This is more of a state-level issue, since they run the elections. Each state has a process to challenge elections.
quote:
Did Trump believe the election was stolen? This seems pretty important, if he "believes" it was stolen, then shouldn't we say all the principles for point A should apply to point B. (Whether he was right or wrong, if that is his belief)
As I said yesterday, he would likely have to go for the "I'm dumber than Joe Biden" defense and you're summing up why.
quote:
How does Jack Smith prove what Trump was thinking?
You misunderstand the process. He doesn't "prove" this to some absolute certainty. It's his burden to show the jury evidence where no other reasonable factual scenario exists. It's up to the jury to decide if he did this.
quote:
What level if burden of proof would he need to show to say Trump was lying intentionally with the direct purpose of defrauding or inciting a riot?
Beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard for criminal prosecution.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:46 am to CollegeFBRules
quote:
There is zero evidence that the election was stolen,
I am curious what evidence Trump is going to claim he relied on in November and December of 2020. I don't think much was in the ether at all, at that point.
Posted on 8/9/23 at 7:48 am to CollegeFBRules
I didn't mind some of the legal challenges, mainly the one that states weren't supposed to be able to change their voting procedures administratively. But, he should have called off the dogs by Christmas or so. His legacy would be totally different.
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News