Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Endus]

Now I'll ask @cubby as always, but the real "danger" here is for the rabid fanbase. This case is about to tip the first domino. Once this case's crime and sentence has been decided -- apparently obstruction of Congress -- it will apply to the dozens already arrested and hundreds more who could be. They could all become federal felons, and lose 18 months of their freedom, which honestly for attacking the Capitol in one of the biggest terrorist acts the US has ever seen (and anyone who even tries to deny that doesn't know what the word "terrorism" objectively means and is therefore trolling) seems pretty light.

The court is about to do what the riot could not: set President. Prescedent. Shit, this pun doesn't work typed out.

Not cubby, but I'd like to point out that they can always add additional charges, like seditious conspiracy, after conviction. Conviction just prevents double indemnity on the particular charges in question; guilty plea deals generally come with some blanket protections as well. But straight convictions? Nope. If they're convicted of, say, B&E at the Capitol, that does not in any way prevent the feds from filing sedition charges at a later date for the same event. They can, in fact, cite the B&E conviction as evidence in that later trial.

The same way if you get convicted of murdering a girl, you can still be tried and convicted for any other murders you might've done, even if it was a twofer where you killed a second girl at the same time as the first you were convicted for. You just can't be charged with murdering that first girl a second time. That's all double indemnity applies to.

We could see a case where a lot of these people go to prison for 18 months, and then the federal courts get around to prosecuting their big sedition case against a major player, and subsequent to that conviction, all those prisoners get new sedition charges filed, where the prosecution is going to boil down to "You were there on Jan 6, part of the crowd? Yes? Guilty as charged, here's another 10 years."

Seriously, it won't be hard to convict for sedition after they've established that it was seditious, as a matter of precedent. Once that's determined once, it's precedent that can be presumed in every subsequent trial.

[Kaleredar]

WaPo reports that the first felony sentencing for the murderous insurrection is due to happen tomorrow.

Prosecutors are asking for 18 months of actual prison time.

Lawyers for the defense are saying "Lincoln forgave the Confederates, you should forgive these murderous insurrectionists". Because in the case of this defendent, there is proof they were caught red-handed breaking into the Capitol, proof they knew what they were doing, and no proof they were too stupid to be charged -- which, yes, apparently Trump supporters are doing successfully. Not the option I would pick, barring a death sentence.

"Your Honor, I thought I was in the White House."
"You were at the rally where Trump said 'let's go to the Capitol' and everyone cheered and went to the building that doesn't look like the White House, and broke through the gate -- and you thought you were at the White House?"
"On pain of perjury, Your Honor, yes."
"Holy shit, very few people would admit under oath in public that they're that stupid. I think that admission hanging over your head for the rest of your life is suitable punishment."

Yeah, no.

Now I'll ask @cubby as always, but the real "danger" here is for the rabid fanbase. This case is about to tip the first domino. Once this case's crime and sentence has been decided -- apparently obstruction of Congress -- it will apply to the dozens already arrested and hundreds more who could be. They could all become federal felons, and lose 18 months of their freedom, which honestly for attacking the Capitol in one of the biggest terrorist acts the US has ever seen (and anyone who even tries to deny that doesn't know what the word "terrorism" objectively means and is therefore trolling) seems pretty light.

The court is about to do what the riot could not: set President. Prescedent. Shit, this pun doesn't work typed out.

Not going to lie, I'm a bit disappointed about the "18 months" part. This should easily be a 5-10 year stint, if not more.

Unfortunately it speaks to a system where even a crime as heinous as invading the capitol building is passed off as a "well they were white just thinking they were exercising their freedoms, so we're just gonna give em a slap on the wrist. We don't want to make too many waves."

[Breccia]

Not going to lie, I'm a bit disappointed about the "18 months" part. This should easily be a 5-10 year stint, if not more.

I believe @Endus discussed that. I don't know what other charges could be brought, but if more evidence leads to a large organized conspiracy (see also: text messages) then, yes, it could get worse.

[Ursus]

They could all become federal felons, and lose 18 months of their freedom, which honestly for attacking the Capitol in one of the biggest terrorist acts the US has ever seen (and anyone who even tries to deny that doesn't know what the word "terrorism" objectively means and is therefore trolling) seems pretty light.

I don't know, 18 months for terrorism and insurrection sounds about white.

[Azadina]

Prosecutors are asking for 18 months of actual prison time.

Lawyers for the defense are saying "Lincoln forgave the Confederates, you should forgive these murderous insurrectionists". Because in the case of this defendent, there is proof they were caught red-handed breaking into the Capitol, proof they knew what they were doing, and no proof they were too stupid to be charged -- which, yes, apparently Trump supporters are doing successfully. Not the option I would pick, barring a death sentence.

18 months? For something that should have one be put between a wall and a firing squad. Seems like a complete joke, while some get decades over posession of MJ. Also, the lawyers argument sucks. Why should such a major fuck up be repeated? The Confederates learned absolutely nothing from the forgiveness and appeasement.

[Endus]

I believe @Endus discussed that. I don't know what other charges could be brought, but if more evidence leads to a large organized conspiracy (see also: text messages) then, yes, it could get worse.

I'm hoping they're getting these people incarcerated with simple-to-prosecute charges and to lay the groundwork for more. If this is all they're gonna get, it's a mistake on the scale of the near-complete immunity the Confederates received.

I don't know, 18 months for terrorism and insurrection sounds about white.

He wasn't charged with terrorism or insurrection, here, though.

He pled guilty to "one felony count of entering the Capitol to obstruct Congress", according to the WaPo article above. That's a much lesser charge, and the federal advisory on sentencing for that is 15-21 months, meaning 18's right in the middle. If you walked in as a tourist and then snuck into the Senate chambers and started shouting slogans and waving signs, it'd be the same charge; it doesn't carry any component of violence.

The thing is, if they determine this legally qualifies as an insurrection, and apply that law later on, there's no double indemnity protection for people like this; they can be charged separately for each. It's trickier to establish that, though, so they may be setting up their landmark central cases with a lot more care, and getting these minor players in with smaller charges and pressuring them for plea deals to garner more evidence against the major players. If they weren't compliant or useful, they're going to remain vulnerable to higher charges being pressed down the line.

If greater charges don't come down for at least some of these folks, though, yeah. Then we can definitely talk about white privilege, when contrasting it against black teens put in prison for decades over marijuana possession that would be legal in some states today.

[Kaleredar]

I'm hoping they're getting these people incarcerated with simple-to-prosecute charges and to lay the groundwork for more. If this is all they're gonna get, it's a mistake on the scale of the near-complete immunity the Confederates received.

I would certainly hope for more charges to be coming down the pike. My reticence is based on people like the Bundys who effectively launched armed takeovers of federal land because they felt it was a form of "protest" against laws they didn't like basically getting away scot-free or slipping through cracks to freedom.

[Poopymonster]

I don't know, 18 months for terrorism and insurrection sounds about white.

Qwhite so.

[Forogil]

Not to mention that their plan involves electing someone as Speaker of the House, and then electing Trump after them. Rather than just electing Trump in the first place as Speaker.

At first I also had that reaction.

However, the first speaker was supposed to be a "trusted Conservative" - that doesn't seem like Trump.

And thinking more that part actually makes more sense than the rest: another person revealing that Trump won and then stepping down as speaker gives it more legitimacy than Trump revealing that he won himself.

- - - Updated - - -

Video of Pelosi and Schumer drinking baby blood. Duh.

That would be too sane.

It's actually about Pelosi blocking investigation of the secret satanic sacrifices of MLK, JFK Jr, and the Virgin MaryJo Kopeche by Ted Cruz the "Original Zodiac Killer" in relation to the moon landing (or possibly by Ted Kennedy - or a teddy bear I couldn't really follow it); and about Pelosi having ties with the Jim Jones and the Jonestown Massacre - which they claim killed 600 African American women, and that BLM is just Black Liberation Army reborn.

Seriously - that's the kind of card they intend to play.

(I'm also unsure what the results of those satanic sacrifices were.)

[Draco-Onis]

I don't know, 18 months for terrorism and insurrection sounds about white.

Sounds about right it's not like they did something serious like voting while black.

[Poopymonster]

(I'm also unsure what the results of those satanic sacrifices were.)

He answered those sacrifices.
And Trump won in 2016.
Someone didn't read the fine print.

[Breccia]

So we have another surprising/not surprising poll. Trump's numbers are down from...sorry, force of habit.

No, this time it's how
32% of Republicans believe there's microchips in vaccines, and
29% of Republicans say they won't get vaccinated.

Those figures are combined "strongly agree" and "agree".

As always, I find it interesting that Trump's rabid fanbase and other conspiracy theorists believe there's microchips in vaccines when they could, you know, just grab ten of them and a microscope. And aren't there Republican medical professionals? Why hasn't literally a single one said "Hold on, I believe this vaccine I'm supposed to administer has a microchip. Well, here I am with all this medical equipment. It should be trivial to find the microchip with these and my years of training," looked at their stock and found nothing? More to the point, why would they continue to administer vaccines when they think there's microchips in them? Don't they have a duty to inform their patient? I find it hyperbolically unrealistic to think there are zero Republican doctors.

"Maybe the Republican doctors are in the 70-ish percent who say there's no microchip. The survey does say the percent drops with college degrees, after all."

Yeah, could be, but why hasn't it happened at least once? Why isn't there a single Republican nurse or pharmacist or doctor or someone, out of what must be hundreds of thousands of them, who actually looked?

"Because it's the Maricopa recount."

...what?

"If they publicly said there were microchips and publicly said they'd look, they'd have to find them, or else admit their no-evidence intentionally ill-informed pre-conceived beliefs were incorrect. That's like the GOP equivalent of a Yakuza cutting their finger off. It's far more likely that such doctors who actually believe that, don't say so publicly, because they know their ass would get fired for objectively lying about medical advice. Alternatively, their boss could say 'fine, why don't you personally inspect every single one, and if you find a microchip don't inject it and also tell every news organization on Earth because that'd be a big deal' which would be a yuge bigly hassle and result in nothing."

"Or worse, they'd have to manufacture evidence -- and instantly lose their license. It'd be a lot like you giving out failing grades to everyone on the baseball team, just to prove that baseball players are worse students. You get caught, goodbye career."

Fine. But you can't possibly be the only person who thought of this. According to this poll, there are tens of millions of Americans who think there's microchips in vaccines but also know nobody's found any and nobody they trust has even looked. It's not just about why they still think so. It's about why they haven't looked themselves yet. The Maricopa recount itself is proof that such a "vaccine audit" could actually happen. Why haven't these tens of millions of people demanded a vaccine examination? Surely they're the majority in at least one county?

"We are talking about the Republican Party. Well, former Republican Party. They don't do climate change studies because they'd rather just believe they're right, and even when studies are thrown in their face they refuse to accept them. It's also why they continue to push trickle-down economics, while trying to deny the tax cut for the rich is driving inflation. You see the same sort of behavior in Nazis and white supremacists. 'White people are just better,' they say, 'because we said so that's why'."

Well, the study is pretty specific about pointing out this is a Republican-led issue. I don't have to go out and look for vaccines with no microchips in them, but our resident Trump defenders are now called upon to take a stand.

MMO-C Trump supporters, do you believe vaccines contain microchips? I feel it's safe to ask this because (a) the issue is clearly political and (b) there's a 70% or so chance you'll say "no, of course not" and we can get on with our lives. But...I think you gotta answer this one.

[cubby]

WaPo reports that the first felony sentencing for the murderous insurrection is due to happen tomorrow.

Prosecutors are asking for 18 months of actual prison time.

Lawyers for the defense are saying "Lincoln forgave the Confederates, you should forgive these murderous insurrectionists". Because in the case of this defendent, there is proof they were caught red-handed breaking into the Capitol, proof they knew what they were doing, and no proof they were too stupid to be charged -- which, yes, apparently Trump supporters are doing successfully. Not the option I would pick, barring a death sentence.

"Your Honor, I thought I was in the White House."
"You were at the rally where Trump said 'let's go to the Capitol' and everyone cheered and went to the building that doesn't look like the White House, and broke through the gate -- and you thought you were at the White House?"
"On pain of perjury, Your Honor, yes."
"Holy shit, very few people would admit under oath in public that they're that stupid. I think that admission hanging over your head for the rest of your life is suitable punishment."

Yeah, no.

Now I'll ask @cubby as always, but the real "danger" here is for the rabid fanbase. This case is about to tip the first domino. Once this case's crime and sentence has been decided -- apparently obstruction of Congress -- it will apply to the dozens already arrested and hundreds more who could be. They could all become federal felons, and lose 18 months of their freedom, which honestly for attacking the Capitol in one of the biggest terrorist acts the US has ever seen (and anyone who even tries to deny that doesn't know what the word "terrorism" objectively means and is therefore trolling) seems pretty light.

The court is about to do what the riot could not: set President. Prescedent. Shit, this pun doesn't work typed out.

They are more than likely pushing the easiest (and hopefully "lightest") cases first, to see how they play out and what jail time the Insurrectionists receive. This will set a kind of precedence for the remaining blanket cases - those that rose above the Misdemeanor charges. I will be curious to see what some of the planners get - if their sentences are more severe.

It looks like "terrorism" and "sedition/treason" aren't going to make a showing at these trials. We'll have to see if there are any big ticket defendants out there who actually might go to trial. I hope there are - especially someone who directly states they were emboldened by Trump, which might be enough to get him on the stand under oath (dare to dream).

[Breccia]

I love the 3% who believe they’re going to be chipped and are doing it anyway.

Yeah there's some interesting crossover there that needs to be looked at.

[cubby]

@Breccia I love the 3% who believe they’re going to be chipped and are doing it anyway. Courageousness right there.

I love anyone who is afraid of "chipped vaccines" or whatever nonsense posting pics of themselves protesting from their smart phones....

[Edge-]

I love anyone who is afraid of "chipped vaccines" or whatever nonsense posting pics of themselves protesting from their smart phones....

"I ain't gonna let the gub'mint track me with a Bill Gates microchip!"

Said a man currently charged with trespassing on Capitol grounds after his phone was pinged as connected to the in-building Capitol network and he posted geotagged photos and videos of himself inside the building to social media.

[Kaleredar]

I love anyone who is afraid of "chipped vaccines" or whatever nonsense posting pics of themselves protesting from their smart phones....

Also invites the question of why, under trump, was this supposedly insidious vaccine allowed to be developed?

[Elegiac]

Also invites the question of why, under trump, was this supposedly insidious vaccine allowed to be developed?

Or why we don't have better computers if we legitimately had batteries and chips that small, lol.

[Zan15]

So we have another surprising/not surprising poll. Trump's numbers are down from...sorry, force of habit.

No, this time it's how
32% of Republicans believe there's microchips in vaccines, and
29% of Republicans say they won't get vaccinated.

Those figures are combined "strongly agree" and "agree".

As always, I find it interesting that Trump's rabid fanbase and other conspiracy theorists believe there's microchips in vaccines when they could, you know, just grab ten of them and a microscope. And aren't there Republican medical professionals? Why hasn't literally a single one said "Hold on, I believe this vaccine I'm supposed to administer has a microchip. Well, here I am with all this medical equipment. It should be trivial to find the microchip with these and my years of training," looked at their stock and found nothing? More to the point, why would they continue to administer vaccines when they think there's microchips in them? Don't they have a duty to inform their patient? I find it hyperbolically unrealistic to think there are zero Republican doctors.

"Maybe the Republican doctors are in the 70-ish percent who say there's no microchip. The survey does say the percent drops with college degrees, after all."

Yeah, could be, but why hasn't it happened at least once? Why isn't there a single Republican nurse or pharmacist or doctor or someone, out of what must be hundreds of thousands of them, who actually looked?

"Because it's the Maricopa recount."

...what?

"If they publicly said there were microchips and publicly said they'd look, they'd have to find them, or else admit their no-evidence intentionally ill-informed pre-conceived beliefs were incorrect. That's like the GOP equivalent of a Yakuza cutting their finger off. It's far more likely that such doctors who actually believe that, don't say so publicly, because they know their ass would get fired for objectively lying about medical advice. Alternatively, their boss could say 'fine, why don't you personally inspect every single one, and if you find a microchip don't inject it and also tell every news organization on Earth because that'd be a big deal' which would be a yuge bigly hassle and result in nothing."

"Or worse, they'd have to manufacture evidence -- and instantly lose their license. It'd be a lot like you giving out failing grades to everyone on the baseball team, just to prove that baseball players are worse students. You get caught, goodbye career."

Fine. But you can't possibly be the only person who thought of this. According to this poll, there are tens of millions of Americans who think there's microchips in vaccines but also know nobody's found any and nobody they trust has even looked. It's not just about why they still think so. It's about why they haven't looked themselves yet. The Maricopa recount itself is proof that such a "vaccine audit" could actually happen. Why haven't these tens of millions of people demanded a vaccine examination? Surely they're the majority in at least one county?

"We are talking about the Republican Party. Well, former Republican Party. They don't do climate change studies because they'd rather just believe they're right, and even when studies are thrown in their face they refuse to accept them. It's also why they continue to push trickle-down economics, while trying to deny the tax cut for the rich is driving inflation. You see the same sort of behavior in Nazis and white supremacists. 'White people are just better,' they say, 'because we said so that's why'."

Well, the study is pretty specific about pointing out this is a Republican-led issue. I don't have to go out and look for vaccines with no microchips in them, but our resident Trump defenders are now called upon to take a stand.

MMO-C Trump supporters, do you believe vaccines contain microchips? I feel it's safe to ask this because (a) the issue is clearly political and (b) there's a 70% or so chance you'll say "no, of course not" and we can get on with our lives. But...I think you gotta answer this one.

They have the proof but its the mainstream something something that is something something keeping the information something something....CIA...Hillary will kill them!!!

- - - Updated - - -

Also invites the question of why, under trump, was this supposedly insidious vaccine allowed to be developed?

How dare you try to throw logic into this discussion

[Kaleredar]

They have the proof but its the mainstream something something that is something something keeping the information something something....CIA...Hillary will kill them!!!

- - - Updated - - -



How dare you try to throw logic into this discussion

Also, isn’t trump trying to take credit for the vaccine being developed “under his watch?”