Former President Donald Trump was indicted for an unprecedented third time on August 1, adding another set of serious federal charges to the mounting legal issues he faces.

  • PoppinKREAM@sh.itjust.works
    3584·
    1 year ago

    Trump pushed the big lie that the election was stolen. Trump lost in the courts[1](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/25/us/elections/trump-campaign-lawsuits.html) including the Supreme Court.[2](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55283024) Then he tried to pressure state officials.[3](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2021/01/03/trump-pressured-georgia-election-official-call-washington-post-report-says/4119948001/) He tried to pressure Pence.[4](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/05/trump-pressures-pence-election-results-455069)

    So what does Trump do after exhausting all nonviolent methods of overturning the election? He turns to his supporters and lights them up making inflammatory statements such as;

    • We are going to fight for the survival of the nation.

    • Now is not the time to retreat, its to fight harder.

    • We will never give in, never back down, never surrender.

    • We will fight like hell.

    • You have to get your people to fight.

    He primed them for weeks.

    State officials had started getting death threats weeks before the attempted insurrection following the general election.[5](https://www.npr.org/sections/biden-transition-updates/2020/12/01/940961602/someones-going-to-get-killed-ga-official-blasts-gop-silence-on-election-threats) Trump saw first hand what violence was being created as his supporters rioted and vandalized black churches in Washington back in December.[6](https://www.thestar.com/news/world/us/2020/12/13/black-churches-vandalized-four-stabbed-dozens-arrested-at-pro-trump-rallies-in-washington.html)

    Trump didn’t stop his incitement after the initial violence, he got more specific. He told his supporters how, when, and where. He gave them 18 days notice inviting them to the rally telling them to be there, that it will be wild.[7](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-trump-supporters.html) And on the day of the insurrection Trump told his supporters to march on the Capitol and fight like hell.

    Following the riot Trump continued to promote the big lie that had incited the insurrection. After the mob was dispersed, Trump praised and sympathized with the mob in a video he released, claiming once again that the election had been stolen.[8](https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-tells-rioters-i-know-how-you-feel-draws-bipartisan-condemnation-11609977209) Then he praised the insurrection in a tweet after the mob had been dispersed. He told his mob to remember Jan. 6 forever. He said that he loved the insurrectionists and that the violent mob were special people.

    1. New York Times - Over 30 Trump Campaign Lawsuits Have Failed. Some Rulings Are Scathing.

    2. BBC - US Supreme Court rejects Trump-backed bid to overturn election

    3. USA Today - Trump is heard on audiotape pressuring Georgia secretary of state to ‘find’ votes to overturn Biden’s win

    4. Politico - Trump pressures Pence to throw out election results — even though he can’t

    5. NPR - ‘Someone’s Going To Get Killed’: Georgia Republican Official Blasts GOP Silence On Election Threats

    6. Toronto Star - Black churches vandalized, four stabbed, dozens arrested at pro-Trump rallies in Washington

    7. New York Times - 'Be There. Will Be Wild!’: Trump All but Circled the Date: Inside Trump supporters’ online echo chambers, the chaos of Jan. 6 could be seen coming. People posted their plans to come to Washington — and showed the weapons they would carry.

    8. Wall Street Journal - Trump Tells Rioters, ‘I Know How You Feel,’ Draws Bipartisan Condemnation

    1. [1] ↩︎

    2. [2] ↩︎

    3. [3] ↩︎

    4. [4] ↩︎

    5. [5] ↩︎

    6. [6] ↩︎

    7. [7] ↩︎

    8. [8] ↩︎

    • Kinyutaka@lemmy.world
      721·
      1 year ago

      Even after he is behind bars. Crazy as it sounds, he can run for President from prison.

      Not very effectively, but he can run.

      • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
        23·
        1 year ago

        One presidential candidate got 3.4% (more than all 3rd party candidates in 2020 combined) of the vote (over 1million votes) as a third party candidate while in prison in 1920.

          • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
            12·
            1 year ago

            It makes sense though. Think about it like this, A politician that wanted to stay in power could disqualify his opponents by wielding the DOJ as a personal tool and nailing them with felony charges. Trump could have placed a more loyal attorney general, nailed Biden on some bullshit petty offense that technically qualifies as a felony, and have his name removed from the ballot shortly before the election. Allowing felons to run for president defangs that particular power move. To disqualify someone the 14th amendment would have to be invoked, and should be in Trump’s case.

            • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
              3·
              1 year ago

              A politician that wanted to stay in power could disqualify his opponents by wielding the DOJ as a personal tool and nailing them with felony charges

              It’s how Putin and other despots have been doing it for a very long time.

            • Coelacanth
              2·
              1 year ago

              While I do see the validity of this argument, it still feels like treating the symptoms rather than the cause. If the fear is a sitting president welding his personal power to imprison (and thus disqualify) a political rival, isn’t the bigger problem that a sitting president has the power to do this in the first place?

              • BlinkAndItsGone@lemmy.world
                3·
                1 year ago

                The Justice Department has to be able to indict people, that’s part of its function. And the DoJ is part of the executive branch. A good President will not use the DoJ for his personal political purposes, but the incentive to do so, if it was there, would be extremely powerful. I think it’s probably a good idea to remove it. If the people can’t be trusted not to vote for a criminal or a traitor, we have bigger problems.

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            1·
            1 year ago

            I’ve heard the logic is to prevent people from wanting to retroactively legalize shit to secure votes from felons, which doesn’t make a lot of sense tbh

      • rollerbang@lemmy.world
        16·
        1 year ago

        Weird. I’ve heard of Americans losing their right to vote when imprisoned and yet they could run for office?

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          3·
          1 year ago

          Probably just an overlooked aspect, it woulf be too much of a pain to run for office while im prison. Even for a lot of the rich and powerful.

        • FarceMultiplier@lemmy.ca
          30·
          1 year ago

          If he wins, he pardons himself from federal crimes then uses his powers as Commander in Chief to break himself out of prison for state crimes, thereby creating the ultimate constitutional crisis and tearing the country apart.

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.ca
            63·
            1 year ago

            Whether or not he can pardon himself is up for debate. So if the founding fathers intended that you can assume office from prison there would be a more defined method.

            • Neoncamouflage@lemmy.world
              36·
              1 year ago

              Or we need to admit that the founding fathers may not have predicted literally every possible circumstance to arise in the future hundreds of years.

            • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
              10·
              1 year ago

              It was intentional that you can run and be elected as president from prison. It’s written about contemporaneously. They knew the risk of allowing a president, or administration, jailing their political opponents.

              What’s not clear is if it was meant for a president to be able to pardon themselves. I personally would think not, but many think it’s permissable.

    • ChrisLicht@lemm.ee
      111·
      1 year ago

      It’ll be ~5 years before all appeals are exhausted. I’d be shocked to see that he ever eats a final conviction, and any Republican president will pardon him, living or dead.

      And, even if he is convicted and not pardoned, the functional challenges of managing Secret Service protection in a white-collar prison would be daunting, not to mention that his SS detail seems to have been easily corrupted to lie for him. The SS leadership, a locus of supreme bootlickers, would likely tell an inquiring judge that it’s too difficult to protect him in any penal institution for white-collar criminals, which will force the court to choose house arrest at most.

      So, it’s probable that he’ll never serve a day in jail or prison.

      • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
        3·
        1 year ago

        Lots of rich people convince judges they aren’t safe in prison without the help of the Secret Service. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump could get house arrest instead of prison even without being reelected.

          • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
            4·
            1 year ago

            No, maybe not a US declared war. That being said, North Korea seems pretty happy to shout death threats at you guys.

            If I was living in the US, I don’t think that I would want those guys to have any top-secret information that could effect the country I lived in.

            • ChrisLicht@lemm.ee
              3·
              1 year ago

              To clarify: treason requires a declared war against an external entity. Sedition is what Trump did.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              3·
              1 year ago

              It’s ok, he was probably only selling info to the Saudis, not the North Koreans.

              And it’s not like Saudi Arabia ever attacked the U.S., right? Right?

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        1·
        1 year ago

        Also there is a VERY high chance he just straight up dies before he goes to prison, or even before the court date. Which might be the worst possible scenario, as the right wing crazies will go fucking ballistic with conspiracy theories blaming the deep state or the clintons or whoever the current boogeyman is and we will literally never hear the end of it

  • Raging LibTarg@lemmy.world
    671·
    1 year ago

    There are many who choose not to celebrate until the Orange One has had “actual repercussions”.

    Me? Well…

    To each their own. 🥂🍻🍸🍷

    • Elderos@sh.itjust.works
      211·
      1 year ago

      Yep, I get why some would be pessimistic after years of nothing happenning to the man, but this is kinda it. I mean, what else do people expect, no due process and straight to prison? This is the worst actual outcome for him right now, and possibly the best for America. I figure he could be considered a flight risk and be put in jail pending process, but I figure this would be a worst outcome for America, considering his deathcult. You’re 2 fox news articles away from them claiming be died in jail and resurrected like Jesus.

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        10·
        1 year ago

        For me, he has to either die, or be banned from holding any political position again.

        The level of incredibly pissed me off.

        He’s garbage, and needs to be treated as such.

      • PutangInaMo@lemmy.world
        61·
        1 year ago

        The Jan 6 stuff might not stick, and even if it does his supporters have plenty of mental hoops they can jump through to justify.

        Those classified documents though… he ain’t getting out of any of those. He fucked up big time with that bullshit. He’s going down for it hard.

        • dudinax@programming.dev
          9·
          1 year ago

          It’s about more than Jan 6. It’s about an attempt to replace the electoral college with phonies. Jan 6 was just the most public part of the plan.

    • Goblin_Mode@ttrpg.network
      51·
      1 year ago

      To each their own indeed. If you want see this as cause to celebrate who am I to rain on your parade, I truly hope you have the right of it.

      I’m just exhausted from all of the "final nail in the coffin"s this guy has had. Ive gotten excited for some actual justice just to be disappointed 1 too many times I guess. Even now, any federal charges are gonna just get pardoned as the first act of the next republican president for some quick and easy brownie points amongst their base.

      The only hope for lasting consequences is realistically Georgia and even ignoring that they are pretty deeply purple, the Secret Service has pretty explicitly said they will not allow Trump to go to prison… Now I personally am of the belief that they can pound sand since they have no jurisdiction over this. However I do not get to make the call, and as stated above I have been let down too many times…

      Maybe this is actually it and maybe I’m just too jaded and not seeing the big picture… I just can’t bring myself to be optimistic anymore man

      • Raging LibTarg@lemmy.world
        2·
        1 year ago

        the Secret Service has pretty explicitly said they will not allow Trump to go to prison…

        Woah woah woah woah, did they say this? A cursory Google search only came back with results stating he won’t lose their protection in prison, not that they won’t allow him to be put away.

        As I have the right to celebrate all the recent unprecedented actions by DOJ (I must concede that DOJ dragged their feet on a lot of this, and that it’s pretty clear there’s a two-tiered system for the rich “important” types and the rest of us plebs), you certainly have the right to doubt that this all will lead to anything significant. I have nothing to support my belief that the Orange One has finally reached the “FO” stage of FAFO but the indictments that have occurred thus far. However, I will say with confidence that these indictments aren’t entirely meaningless (particularly the docs case), and that their unprecedented nature should be celebrated. The DOJ has taken steps that have literally never been taken before in our history as a country (the indictment of a former president), and while some might say justice delayed is justice denied, I still think that a slow response is better than no response at all.

        That all said, I understand feeling skeptical or even hopeless at this point (I certainly felt that way after Impeachment Trial 2). Here’s hoping, though, that we’ll at least get to witness justice finally being served and that any pardons will be moot (I mean, c’mon, the guy’s old!) if a Republican president is elected again any time soon!

        • Goblin_Mode@ttrpg.network
          3·
          1 year ago

          It’s possible I’m misremembering. I thought in their initial statement about his not losing protection while incarcerated they had mentioned that it would be impossible to protect him while he’s in an open cell block but perhaps that was my dumb lizard brain saying the quiet part out loud. Either way I don’t think they would just let that happen without significant uproar.

          Idk maybe I can allow myself to feel an ounce of optimism. I do like the idea of something actually good happening for once lol

          • flop_leash_973@lemmy.world
            2·
            1 year ago

            It just means that IF he manages to get found guilt, and that is a BIG if, he will not go into prison like you or I think of it. He will get some sort of special consideration as part of some sweetheart deal to be confined to house arrest in Mara-la-go except for “special supervised outings related to ex-president business”. Which will really just turn out to be whenever he wants to go somewhere.

            So he will be convicted, but functionally it will only be on paper and just a technicality. All because no one is going to want to deal with the real world outcomes of an ex-president being sentenced to real hard time like not as well connected people.

            But I will be shocked if they can find 12 jurors that a good lawyer on either side would not be able to argue are truly impartial to even have a valid trial to begin with.

    • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
      4·
      1 year ago

      I just keep imagining that he’s currently crying into a big mac right now. “Do you think they have Diet Coke in prison?”

    • VCTRN@lemm.ee
      55·
      1 year ago

      Nobody knows more about prison than me. I’m the best inmate they ever had. They love me here. I have the best cell, the best food, the best friends. I’m very popular. The guards respect me. They know I’m innocent. The fake news media and the crooked Democrats put me here. They’re very jealous of me. They’re losers. They’re afraid of me. They know I won the election by a lot. I’m still your president. I’ll be out soon. You’ll see. It’s going to be huge.

    • qooqie@lemmy.world
      296·
      1 year ago

      I know this is a common sentiment amongst a lot of people, but the reality is he will never see prison time before he dies of old age. He will do everything in his power to draw it out and when he can’t he will flee the country

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        17·
        1 year ago

        It was “common knowledge” that he wouldn’t ever be charged too. The Senate and Mike Pence were pissed at him because he made them look weak. That’s why no one is really defending him right now. He has so many charges that people are going to abandon him just so they don’t have to answer questions about the cases.

        Remember the OJ trial? This is the former president in three courtrooms (and counting!). It’s going to make him look so guilty.

        • VCTRN@lemm.ee
          5·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think anyone ever cared about him in the GOP, they used him as a tool, a pawn to get the presidency; he got it but still fucked it, and now they have not use for him anymore. DeSantis may be the next one. That’s my highly intellectual political analysis. Emphasis on “high”.

      • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
        3·
        1 year ago

        Problem is, he’s losing a lot of that power now. He doesn’t have many friends in high places these days, even the supreme court has done things to rule against him. I don’t doubt he’ll try to draw it out, but ultimately it’s not up to him anymore.

      • Elderos@sh.itjust.works
        1·
        1 year ago

        I wonder though, everyone keep saying no prison because of the SS, ex-president and all, but what mecanism would actually prevent the court from going there? Like, if the judge goes for prison or death penalty, what is gonna happen exactly? What branch of the government, and who exactly would block it, assuming the judge gives no fucks?

        • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
          3·
          1 year ago

          It’s not possible for him to receive the death penalty for these charges, the max is 20 years per count. On top of that, the fed doesn’t have the death penalty anymore, as far as I understand.

          That being said, it is very possible he will go to prison in some fashion. Of course he will never be with the gen pop, but just because he has an SS detail doesn’t mean he can’t go to prison. Also, it could be possible to strip him of the detail, but I’m pretty sure that will be figured out if the time comes.

          • Elderos@sh.itjust.works
            2·
            1 year ago

            Isn’t that possible if he’s judged responsible of the deaths on Jan6?

            *They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. *

            • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
              4·
              1 year ago

              While that may be the explicit language for the charge, the feds don’t really tend to execute people in the modern post-Gregg era, with a notable exception: Donald Trump restarted executions from the feds when he took office. So, slight correction to my OP. I guess it would be possible, but I highly doubt the US Government would do something as drastic as executing a previous president.

              On a personal level here, I am 100% against the death penalty. Even for fucks like this. What’s worse, death, or living your final years in a concrete box and dying there instead? I’d much rather people like him get lost in their own thoughts.

    • smokestack@lemmy.world
      48·
      1 year ago

      12 jurors will decide on his guilt (the standard is proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case) after reviewing evidence during his trial which will probably happen next year. If found guilty, the judge will choose a sentence that’s within guidelines outlined in law. Then he’ll be pardoned by the next Republican president.

      • LastSprinkles@lemm.ee
        8·
        1 year ago

        Unless he’s the next Republican president and pardons himself, I wouldn’t be so sure that he’ll be pardoned.

        • TechnoBabble@lemm.ee
          16·
          1 year ago

          Trump has such a large fanatical following that it’s almost certain the next Republican president will use a Trump pardon as a poker chip for gaining party support on whatever plan he needs pushed.

          So personally I think it’s almost certain Trump will be pardoned.

          But it’s possible he could die in prison before that happens.

      • randon31415@lemmy.world
        7·
        1 year ago

        The real weirdness happens if he is found guilty under state charges (in New York) and wins the presidency. The federal president can’t pardon state charges - he would take the oath in prison!

      • player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        7·
        1 year ago

        The jury selection process will need to be particularly thorough for this trial to avoid a bias one way or another. It would be interesting to hear what questions they ask of potential jurors.

    • betheydocrime@lemmy.world
      17·
      1 year ago

      The difference between “charged” and “indicted” is who finds probable cause that you committed a crime. If it was a prosecutor, you are charged. If it’s a jury, you’re indicted.

      Accused, legally speaking, is a noun meaning a person who has been arrested for or charged with a crime

    • Plaid_Kaleidoscooe@lemmy.world
      13·
      1 year ago

      Money seems to be the difference. I’ve been through the legal system and let me tell you that I wouldn’t be out campaigning if I had three indictments. I’d be sitting in a cell waiting for trial or a plea deal. The fact that he has been spared the same humiliation that anyone else would have been is a crime in and of itself.

    • mycroft@lemmy.world
      71·
      1 year ago

      I’m not American, and I don’t know exactly what the legal differences are between “indicted”, “charged” and “accused”. When is he going to be put in handcuffs and detained in a jail cell like a normal person would be if they were suspected of committing a crime (like stealing a handbag for example) but not convicted yet?

      He is getting slightly better than normal rich person with expensive lawyer treatment.

      America, as a pure service economy has prices for bribery and extortion as well as minimum service levels for the legal system. If you pay for economy (with your life) you get a defense attorney appointed by the state who sits across from the judge and DA you’re going to have to deal with, and has lunch with them, or makes deals in the bathroom… They’ll fight to make sure their life doesn’t get disrupted a whole lot and they can keep defending the endless stream of defendants.

      The middle tier is the “hire a reptable firm, and get a junior associate” level of service, that’s where you get someone who’s overworked, and desperately trying to keep all their partner’s cases going, and they can spend 1/10th of their time on your case, they don’t have any worries about not having a job though so they can dedicate the time in court to defending you.

      The top tier is the “hire a reputable firm, and you get a named partner” they care about their reputation, and make sure they only take cases that will make them look good. And they look good by doing the best damn job they can in front of the cameras, in their filings, and in front of their client. You get the white glove treatment, and 90% of the time of the junior associates helping the partner.

      It’s no wonder why you typically only get the “Go home and sleep it off” result from an indictment from the highest tier of service.

    • Laticauda@lemmy.ca
      17·
      1 year ago

      It means he’s being charged with the crime by a grand jury, as opposed to a prosecutor. So he’ll be going on trial to see if he gets convicted.

      • Wrench@lemmy.world
        20·
        1 year ago

        A little easier to understand the significance:

        A grand jury has ruled that the evidence presented is sufficient enough to warrant a trial to determine if a crime has been committed.

        Typically grand juries are either random citizens (selected via jury duty), or volunteers within the community, depending on the city rules. They are not elected positions, nor are any legal qualifications required. It’s simply high level evidence, and descriptions of laws that may have been violated.

        It’s not an indication of guilt, just that there’s enough of a question that is worth holding a trial to determine guilt.

        Edit - at least, that’s what a grand jury usually is. I wouldn’t be surprised if federal charges on a former president requires more qualified grand jurors than the baker down the street, or retired carpenter with time to kill that comprises your typical grand jury

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          313·
          1 year ago

          We aren’t the media here. We don’t have to play the “innocent until proven guilty or else he’ll sue us” game. The man clearly committed the crimes. He did it on national television. You can watch him tell people to “fight like hell” and tell them to march to the Capitol. It is an indisputable fact that he then did nothing to stop the insurrection until hours later.

          Why the hell do you need a judge to rule to determine that he’s a criminal? The judge is there to tell us what, if any, punishment he’ll get.

          This is just like people claiming he isn’t a rapist because the ruling in the Carroll case didn’t explicitly call it rape, when any reasonable person with a basic understanding of what rape is would understand that it’s rape even if that doesn’t fit the strict legal definition.

          Trump is a criminal. He hoarded documents. He showed classified information to people who were not qualified to see it. He raped at least one woman. He fomented an insurrection. He tried to rig an election.

          And you want a guilty verdict before admitting all of that? SMH.

          • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
            91·
            1 year ago

            I think he is guilty as sin as well, however we still have to prove it on a court of law and hope the judge is not lenient and throws the book at him.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              41·
              1 year ago

              In this case, it’s a D.C. court with a judge appointed by Obama, so I don’t think lenience is going to happen.

              • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
                9·
                1 year ago

                We definitely do. We can’t eschew due process. It’s integral to our society.

                Everyone, everyone deserves the opportunity to defend themselves.

                That being said, he’s guilty as shit and I hope they throw the book at him. He wanted to steal the election and then invoke the military under the insurrection act to start putting down the resulting riots with gunfire. The man was going to kill Americans to keep his grip on power. It’s all outlined in the indictment documents.

                • Stanwich@lemmy.world
                  4·
                  1 year ago

                  Once again, “everyone” just means those who can afford it. Don’t think for a second is fairness for all. You would not be judged the same.

  • ZestycloseReception8@sopuli.xyz
    313·
    1 year ago

    yeah and only in our wonderful country this schmuck is allowed to run for office from jail. I thought you can’t run for president after ur third indictment which he certainly has.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      161·
      1 year ago

      There’s nothing in the Constitution that says you can’t run from prison (Eugene V. Debs did it in 1920), and it also says nothing about three indictments.

    • Godric@lemmy.world
      3·
      1 year ago

      For some reason the founding fathers didn’t anticipate that someone running from prison could ever become president. To be fair, before this fuckin clown, nobody else did either.

      • ZestycloseReception8@sopuli.xyz
        2·
        1 year ago

        lol it was one of those things that was just assumed by the general population that was never gonna happen so why worry about putting laws in place to prevent it. I think it’s safe to assume that we need to put laws into to. prevent this from happening before 2027

      • Piecemakers@lemmy.world
        2·
        1 year ago

        Incorrect. There was one other, technically, and they got a sizeable amount of votes considering they were incarcerated at the time — not enough to win or even skew the election numbers, but still. It happened.

  • CuriousLibrarian@lemmy.world
    25·
    1 year ago

    I am so relieved that the special prosecutor is defending the rule of law with these indictments. If the Republicans (and not just Trump) got away with trying to overturn the election we could lose our democracy. We still can, but at least they are going to trial against this would-be tyrant and some of the people who helped him.

    • Square Singer@feddit.de
      71·
      1 year ago

      You kinda already did when the founding fathers wrote checks and balances into the constitution conveniently forgot that political parties are a thing.

      There are no checks and balances if the ones that are supposed to check and balance you are on your team.

  • geekworking@lemmy.world
    299·
    1 year ago

    The next republican president or governor in states where he is convicted at state level will just pardon everything.

    The constitution, rule of law, and will of the people means nothing to people who just want power.

  • MiddleWeigh@lemmy.world
    14·
    1 year ago

    Look at that man’s face.

    The living embodiment of everything I despise about my own self, distilled and propped up, for us all to marvel at. What a time to be alive.

    Dear aliens,

    I’m sorry. My species is a stain upon an otherwise beautiful nothing.

  • mrginger@lemmy.world
    11·
    1 year ago

    We need to handle this carefully. I feel martyr vibes coming from all of this bullshit if he is found guilty. Maybe it’s the part of the US I live in, and the political slant of the people therein, but I see him and his supporters using this to do something even more epically stupid than trying to invade the capital.

    • DreadPirateShawn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      7·
      1 year ago

      On the other hand, if we’re afraid to prosecute insurrection leaders because of fear of resulting violence, that’s kinda definitionally terrorism (and specifically losing to the terrorists).

    • Lord_McAlister@lemmy.world
      4·
      1 year ago

      Honestly good.

      The dipshits of the republican party are already committing acts of terror in the name of protecting insert fake concern here

      Like I don’t know why we’re treating them like a volcano about to blow, it’s been blowing for years now.

    • hairinmybellybutt@lemmy.world
      41·
      1 year ago

      I’m not American, but I’ve been imagining a world where magas would take over Washington with guns.

      I don’t want it to happen, but I see it happening. Republicans are anti government.

      It would be quite entertaining, though. Not great, but still entertaining.

    • SamC@lemmy.nz
      2·
      1 year ago

      I agree, but I don’t know what could be done differently? If people refuse to acknowledge a single thread of evidence that Trump tried to overturn a legitimate election, what can be done to reassure them if he’s put in prison for doing it? The options are give him a fair trial, and sentence him if found guilty or just ignore his crimes completely.

    • Raging LibTarg@lemmy.world
      24·
      1 year ago

      He was! He now has three indictments under his belt.

      1. New York State hush money payments
      2. Classified Documents Case
      3. January 6 Insurrection

      If you ask me, now we throw a few back tonight and wait for the fourth indictment coming from Georgia this month. 😎

    • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
      1·
      1 year ago

      …aight so I’m fucking stupid or something and can’t figure out how to link to another user’s comment (it’s just the chain link icon literally on the comment right? …but when I click that it directs to a different comment… is this a bug or am I really just stupid?) but I don’t want to just steal this guy’s work, some I’m linking to his profile instead:

      https://lemmy.world/u/jordanlund@lemmy.one

      In the comments tab, do a Ctrl+F search for “you are here” and you’ll find a map of exactly what happens next in this and every other trump case.

  • TheDudeV2@lemmy.ca
    9·
    1 year ago

    I just finished reading every last word of the indictment. Interesting read. Trump and several of his co-conspirators are absolutely fucked (IMHO; I’m no lawyer).

    When I got to the end of the document I noticed a particularly poetic coincidence: “45”. As in, forty-five pages. President Forty-Five, the worst president this country has ever seen, and the first nail in his treasonous and metaphorical coffin ends with a sort of signature from the Defendent himself… 45.