Posted on Aug 2, 2023
Trump charged with 4 felony counts for attempt to overturn the 2020 election
1.09K
45
22
7
7
0
Former President Donald Trump was indicted Tuesday by a federal grand jury on four counts related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, according to court documents.
Former President Donald Trump was indicted Tuesday by a federal grand jury on four counts related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, according to court documents.
Trump was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, witness tampering, conspiracy against the rights of citizens, and obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.
The charges were unsealed two weeks after the former president said he had learned he may be indicted by a federal grand jury investigating the siege of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. That's when protesters loyal to Trump stormed the Capitol in an attempt to prevent then-Vice President Mike Pence from performing his ceremonial role of certifying the presidential election in favor of the winner, Joe Biden.
Former President Donald Trump was indicted Tuesday by a federal grand jury on four counts related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, according to court documents.
Trump was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, witness tampering, conspiracy against the rights of citizens, and obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.
The charges were unsealed two weeks after the former president said he had learned he may be indicted by a federal grand jury investigating the siege of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. That's when protesters loyal to Trump stormed the Capitol in an attempt to prevent then-Vice President Mike Pence from performing his ceremonial role of certifying the presidential election in favor of the winner, Joe Biden.
Trump charged with 4 felony counts for attempt to overturn the 2020 election
Posted from kcur.org
Donald Trump
Crime
Law
Election 2020
Posted 1 y ago
Responses: 3
5
5
0
Two Grand Juries passed the indictments, not Jack Smith, not the Democratic party, not President Biden. Why can't the Trump supporters understand that. Instead they just mimic Trump.
(5)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel - Chip, you notice on RP no one from the right wants to address the Grand Jury issue?
(3)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
MSG Stan Hutchison - They will tell you that a good lawyer can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich, but then one may notice Hillary Clinton was never indicted. Maybe they just don't know any good lawyers?
(3)
(0)
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
0
0
0
These indictments will forever change the future of US politics. This approach to indict, as a blatant or otherwise means to suppress political opposition, opens up Joe and all other future presidents to the same sort of scrutiny and tactics.
Even in mature democracies like our own, prosecutors or judges can abuse prosecutions. The more political or biased the more beholden the judiciary becomes. This makes it rather easy for leaders to exploit the system, either to expand their own power or to take down an opponent. Once this happens these democracies just become an ever increasing powder keg as the pendulum of political suppression swings back and forth until it results in civil unrest. Jan 6th was the result of the lies being told in regards to the Russian collusion narrative that was being propagated by our intelligence community as well our Justice Department and political opposition to Trump. In response to the lies - like Hunter's laptop - people began to push back against the lies - and right or wrong - Jan 6th was a result. This is were this sort of tactic is leading America. I get it why they are pursuing this tactic. Its a rather dangerous game of lets see if we can get them to revolt - then we can lock them (the deplorables) up in prison. If nothing else maybe something will stick either way it clears the way to political power. The danger lies in it resulting in a full blown civil war - if nothing else large swaths of civil unrest. Even if nothing happen - no arrest nor violence in the streets - this weakens our elections and democracy and diminishes the US's sphere of influence. No matter which way it goes it helps China and Russia. Very troubling times ahead for America as this will only amplify the already heated polarized politics.
Brazil embodies this dilemma. Ex-President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva, the popular leftist, was jailed in 2018 for accepting bribes. Many Brazilians thought his prosecution was a politicized effort to end his career. These guys are mimicking our behavior to the extreme - Jan 6th 2012 has become Jan 8th 2023.
We are going backwards not forwards IMHO.
https://theconversation.com/brazil-election-how-the-political-violence-of-the-countrys-history-has-re-emerged-190937
Even in mature democracies like our own, prosecutors or judges can abuse prosecutions. The more political or biased the more beholden the judiciary becomes. This makes it rather easy for leaders to exploit the system, either to expand their own power or to take down an opponent. Once this happens these democracies just become an ever increasing powder keg as the pendulum of political suppression swings back and forth until it results in civil unrest. Jan 6th was the result of the lies being told in regards to the Russian collusion narrative that was being propagated by our intelligence community as well our Justice Department and political opposition to Trump. In response to the lies - like Hunter's laptop - people began to push back against the lies - and right or wrong - Jan 6th was a result. This is were this sort of tactic is leading America. I get it why they are pursuing this tactic. Its a rather dangerous game of lets see if we can get them to revolt - then we can lock them (the deplorables) up in prison. If nothing else maybe something will stick either way it clears the way to political power. The danger lies in it resulting in a full blown civil war - if nothing else large swaths of civil unrest. Even if nothing happen - no arrest nor violence in the streets - this weakens our elections and democracy and diminishes the US's sphere of influence. No matter which way it goes it helps China and Russia. Very troubling times ahead for America as this will only amplify the already heated polarized politics.
Brazil embodies this dilemma. Ex-President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva, the popular leftist, was jailed in 2018 for accepting bribes. Many Brazilians thought his prosecution was a politicized effort to end his career. These guys are mimicking our behavior to the extreme - Jan 6th 2012 has become Jan 8th 2023.
We are going backwards not forwards IMHO.
https://theconversation.com/brazil-election-how-the-political-violence-of-the-countrys-history-has-re-emerged-190937
Brazil election: how the political violence of the country's history has re-emerged
Political violence that has broken out during the rule of Brazil’s president Bolsonaro draws on a long history of attacks.
(0)
(0)
SPC David S.
MSgt Steve Sweeney This is actually what I am talking about. Let's say a thumb drive is found with a classified email addressed to Hillary and some politically motivated prosecutor sits on to this and waits for when this could be advantages and then decides to charge her with crimes or even maybe Obama with crimes for political motives. This is what I fear is happening to our justice department. Then it becomes a matter of staying in power. Hillary wiped her server and smashed her phones FBI didn't have a problem with it. Hunter laptop in FBI's control for year and knew it was real yet went around telling big tech look out for the laptop. Suppress it. Now Biden has classified docs all over the place and no problem. This all started with a phoney dossier being used as a reason to investigate. I'll work on the docs tomorrow. I'll have to take a look at what is classified and find redacted copies but will do my best to show C 1 a and FB 1 knew what Hillary was up to..
(0)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
SPC David S. - Are you implying politically motivated people did not try to indict Hillary for political purposes? McCarthy basically came out and said that all the investigations into Hillary were expressly for that purpose. And yet, after numerous investigations, they did not have enough evidence to indict... so when you say "Hillary wiped her server and smashed her phones", is that what you know to be true, or only what you have been told... and how do you know it to be true? Besides, if someone sends Hillary a classified email (email addressed to Hillary), what is she guilty of exactly?
And what do you mean "phoney [sic] dossier"? Are you saying it was not a dossier? What would make it "unphony"? If they knew the allegations to be true... and how would they determine if the allegations are true or not unless they investigate? If someone told you someone was coming to harm your family, would you wait for more information before you started to investigate, or would you start investigating immediately? Would you not expect the same if there is even a remote chance that the President of the United States is compromised by a foreign government? And given the number of Russians in Trump's orbit....
But we are a bit far afeild. How do you propose to hold politicians accountable if even investigating is considered political persecution? And if those investigations have merit and enough evidence is found to convene a Grand Jury and secure an indictment, what then? Refuse to prosecute the politician because they will claim they are being persecuted? Just let them go?
Remember, the Mueller investigation resulted in a number of indictments and convictions.
What you may want to start asking yourself is why, after decades, the right-wing establishment has claimed Democrats have committed crime after crime, a never ending litany of alleged law breaking, and YET their allegations never seem to hold up in a court of law. Are they simply incompetent? Do they not know or employ any good lawyers? Why can they not make a case? Or is it possibly that they are only doing this to lay out in the court of public opinion knowing that the standards for evidence are far less taxing... in short, have they been playing you when they can never seem to have a case hold up in a court of law? Or maybe they are just bringing things to your attention with no real intention of prosecuting or holding anyone accountable... because that would be "political persecution". Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.... that must be it.
And what do you mean "phoney [sic] dossier"? Are you saying it was not a dossier? What would make it "unphony"? If they knew the allegations to be true... and how would they determine if the allegations are true or not unless they investigate? If someone told you someone was coming to harm your family, would you wait for more information before you started to investigate, or would you start investigating immediately? Would you not expect the same if there is even a remote chance that the President of the United States is compromised by a foreign government? And given the number of Russians in Trump's orbit....
But we are a bit far afeild. How do you propose to hold politicians accountable if even investigating is considered political persecution? And if those investigations have merit and enough evidence is found to convene a Grand Jury and secure an indictment, what then? Refuse to prosecute the politician because they will claim they are being persecuted? Just let them go?
Remember, the Mueller investigation resulted in a number of indictments and convictions.
What you may want to start asking yourself is why, after decades, the right-wing establishment has claimed Democrats have committed crime after crime, a never ending litany of alleged law breaking, and YET their allegations never seem to hold up in a court of law. Are they simply incompetent? Do they not know or employ any good lawyers? Why can they not make a case? Or is it possibly that they are only doing this to lay out in the court of public opinion knowing that the standards for evidence are far less taxing... in short, have they been playing you when they can never seem to have a case hold up in a court of law? Or maybe they are just bringing things to your attention with no real intention of prosecuting or holding anyone accountable... because that would be "political persecution". Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.... that must be it.
(1)
(0)
SPC David S.
This goes both ways - I never said it didn't. Muller indictments did not pertain to collusion. Tax crimes which were being leveraged to get people to turn - no one did as there was no collusion. Trust me when I say many within the C1 a knew what was going on in regards to the dossier and the Clinton campaign.
As I stated a lot of information regarding any FBI investigations is classified/redacted but here is the redacted version on the BleechBit. However page 24, third paragraph, 2nd sentence in the linked file. As well it mentions the use of a flash drive (thumb drive).
https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/Hillary%20R.%20Clinton%20Part%2003
Brennon's memo is so heavily redacted not really worth posting a link but here is a link on how this all started - Jake Sullivan and Hillary's Russia plan.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/06/breaking-dni-declassifies-handwritten-notes-from-john-brennan-2016-cia-referral-on-clinton-campaigns-collusion-operation/
Hey believe what you want and I'll know what I know.
Neither will deter the current political resolution underway.
As I stated a lot of information regarding any FBI investigations is classified/redacted but here is the redacted version on the BleechBit. However page 24, third paragraph, 2nd sentence in the linked file. As well it mentions the use of a flash drive (thumb drive).
https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/Hillary%20R.%20Clinton%20Part%2003
Brennon's memo is so heavily redacted not really worth posting a link but here is a link on how this all started - Jake Sullivan and Hillary's Russia plan.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/06/breaking-dni-declassifies-handwritten-notes-from-john-brennan-2016-cia-referral-on-clinton-campaigns-collusion-operation/
Hey believe what you want and I'll know what I know.
Neither will deter the current political resolution underway.
Hillary Rodham Clinton served as U.S. Secretary of State from January 21, 2009 to February 1, 2013. The FBI conducted an investigation into allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
SPC David S. - The Mueller report very clearly lays out what was being investigated. Far more than "tax crimes", which are still crimes.
As for Hillary's emails (again), looks like some pretty routine server and document maintenance. You know every SCIF and almost every office working with classified material has a shredder, right? Document cleanup is pretty routine, and the same goes for email, regardless of the software used. I know "BleachBit" sounds pretty exciting and makes for good fodder in the media, but it is no different that a lot of cleanup software on the market. Overall, pretty thin. If there was anything to it, then I imagine someone in the Trump administration would have pressed charges... but they didn't. That should tell you something.
As for Hillary's emails (again), looks like some pretty routine server and document maintenance. You know every SCIF and almost every office working with classified material has a shredder, right? Document cleanup is pretty routine, and the same goes for email, regardless of the software used. I know "BleachBit" sounds pretty exciting and makes for good fodder in the media, but it is no different that a lot of cleanup software on the market. Overall, pretty thin. If there was anything to it, then I imagine someone in the Trump administration would have pressed charges... but they didn't. That should tell you something.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google