trump has committed no serious crimes

Author: n8nrgim

Posts

Total: 38
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,023
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
usually what happens is liberals spout that trump has committed all these crimes, but if you notice, rarely can they back up what they are saying with specifics. 

often they're too subjective. things like inciting a riot, or campaign finance violations. 

or they're too hawkish instead of common sense. such as trump merely giving the benefit of the doubt of what his properties are worth for different reasons, such as taxes versus getting loans. 

there are some technical laws he may have violated, but they are not serious. such as lying about how big his properties are. it would be reasonable to disagree o this example and think it's a serious violation. 

so, what are your examples of trump breaking the law in a serious way... and can you back it up with specific facts and laws? 
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@n8nrgim
What happened to your main account?
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,073
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@n8nrgim
A Zedku for n8nrgim.


Laws are as Laws do.

And Attorneys work to a budget,

And the bigger the budget,

The less relevant the Law becomes.

Law is traded like any other commodity,

And legal reason and purpose,

Becomes largely inconsequential.

Other than as a media product,

And stock to trade.

Someone once said that,

Power corrupts,

And absolute power,

Corrupts absolutely.

Such are the workings of a society.

And the Law,

Becomes an Ass.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
So look. All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more then we have… there’s nothing wrong with saying, you know, um, that you’ve recalculated” - Donald Trump to the Georgia Secretary of State

Georgia Code TITLE 21 - CHAPTER 2 - Article 15 - § 21-2-562 - Fraudulent entries

(a) Any person who willfully:

(1) Inserts or permits to be inserted any fictitious name, false figure, false statement, or other fraudulent entry on or in any registration card, electors list, voter's certificate, affidavit, tally paper, general or duplicate return sheet, statement, certificate, oath, voucher, account, ballot, or other record or document authorized or required to be made, used, signed, returned, or preserved for any public purpose in connection with any primary or election;

shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years or to pay a fine not to exceed $100,000.00, or both.

Georgia Code Title 21 - Chapter 2 - Article 15 - § 21-2-604 - Criminal solicitation to commit election fraud

(a) (1) A person commits the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony under this article, he or she solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.

(b) (1) A person convicted of the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than three years.
Is that clear enough for you?
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Double_R
We don't know trumps state of mind... He might have actually thought his election numbers were accurate
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@n8nrgim
usually what happens is liberals spout that trump has committed all these crimes, but if you notice, rarely can they back up what they are saying with specifics. 
Well, Robert Mueller is a pretty traditional Conservative and his report very specifically documents 10 counts of felony obstruction of justice that would have put anybody except the POTUS in jail.  The fact that the Republican Party refused to investigate those crimes doesn't mean they didn't take place.

There are, of course, hundreds of accusations of misconduct of various strength and concern. 

The example I most often go back to is Michael Flynn because nobody denies the basic facts anymore. 

  • Michael Flynn was serving as a Russian and Turkish secret agent at the time Trump appointed him US National Security Advisor- making him the top spy in the US with more access to America's secrets than any other individual.  Trump was aware of Flynn's status as a foreign spy at the time of his appointment.  Knowingly, secretly giving foreign agents access to our most classified secrets is obvious criminal conduct as well as a "high crime and misdemeanor"  and when the facts are not in dispute (as is the case here) should always lead to a fast and furious impeachment for any President.
    • Michael Flynn was lying to the Federal Govt and to FBI investigators regarding his secret work for Russia and Turkey. 
    • The day after the 2016 election, Obama confidentially advised Trump that Flynn was under investigation for being a Russian secret agent
    • On Jan 4th, 2017 Flynn confessed to Trump that he was in fact a secret Russian agent. 
      • Trump decided to appoint Flynn as the top US spy in the US three weeks later knowing full well that Flynn was a foreign agent and under investigation. 
    • This action alarmed the FBI who immediately interviewed Flynn and put him on record as denying that was secretly taking Russian and Turkish money- a fact the FBI had already established.  The FBI Director then immediately put the Attorney General of the United States on notice that there was a Russian agent in the top spy job in the White House, the AG scheduled an emergency meeting with Trump's Chief of Staff and advised Trump that Flynn was a Russian spy. 
      • Trump fired the Attorney General within 24 hrs.  
    • Trump kept Flynn in office and stood by his appointment knowing full well that the accusations against him were true.  As late as Feb 12th, Trump issued statements affirming that he had full confidence in Flynn, aware that Flynn was actively lying to espionage investigators.  That's a felony all by itself but flat out lying to the American people about spies in the White House isn't a crime but it should get you fired instantly from any White House job for doing so. 
    • On Feb 13th, Flynn resigned from office. 
      • Trump said it was because Flynn lied to VP Mike Pence about working for the Russians but we now know that Trump had Flynn's confession 5 weeks earlier and was also lying to Pence.
    • Flynn affirmed the above facts in two guilty pleas so Flynn is not denying the truth of any of this.
    • Trump had to affirm Flynn's guilt in order to pardon him
    • Trump pardoned Flynn of lying to FBI and the White House about being a secret agent for the Russian and Turkish governments on Nov 25th, 2020.
    • By all accounts, Flynn spent most of his short tenure advising Russia regarding the border war in Ukraine.  Now with 8,500 US troops facing 100,000 Russian soldiers across that, I kind of wish our top Intelligence officer had not been advising Putin with Trump's full knowledge and approval.


FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,605
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@n8nrgim

In 2016, Donald Trump became the first major party nominee for president in 40 years to fail to release his tax returns for public inspection. As president, Trump has continued to take unprecedented steps to shield his taxes from disclosure.  Why?
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@n8nrgmi
The crime was his attempt to get Raffensberger to submit false numbers on his behalf. There is no legal argument that he did not do this. Why? Because in the call he made it blatantly clear (as if it were not already obvious enough) that the 11,780 votes he wanted him to recalculate to was “one more than we have”. In other words, recalculate to give me enough votes to win the state.
 
The defense against this would be to show where exactly this number comes from, which specific votes he was contesting. He didn’t. Every reference to votes he claimed should be recalculated were based on vague notions of fraud somewhere in Fulton Country or some other liberal county. In other words, even if he believed he won the election the number he was asking Raffensberger to recalculate to still had no factual basis, as in made up – aka false.
 
Regarding his state of mind, we absolutely do know what this was about. Trump did not pick up that call because he was a concerned US citizen trying to voice his concerns in an attempt to protect our elections. He was calling because he wanted to be declared president and didn’t care what had to be done to make that happen. The man declared the election stolen before a vote had ever been cast, he had been building this for months and we saw it in every way from that to his actions on election day to calling elections officials in multiple states to his fake electors scam and on and on.
 
The idea that we don’t know his state of mind isn’t an argument, it’s an admission of willful ignorance. The law doesn’t say we must know his state of mind beyond a shadow of a doubt, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt. And there is no reasonable case to be made that this was anything other than a crime.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
Because most politicians earn their income from their donors which doesn't show up on tax returns. It's in the form of things like 500,000 dollar paintings and contributions to tax sheltered foundations. Trump didn't have a donor class to cater to and take orders from.

You actually have to create or produce something of value to have a tax return longer than a few pages, so that disqualifies the majority of the DC swamp creatures.
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Double_R
I think its very reasonable to speculate that trump sincerely thinks he won the election. His thought might be due to mental disorder but its a realistic scenario. U assume trumps thoughts r rational... That seems like less of a reasonable view than my position
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@oromagi
If what u said of Flynn is factual and it was indeed illegal to appoint him u would have a serious crime. Not sure those assumptions r accurate tho
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
If what u said of Flynn is factual and it was indeed illegal to appoint him u would have a serious crime. Not sure those assumptions r accurate tho

All these facts are well documented.  Trump confirmed the facts in Flynn's pardon.  Flynn confirmed the facts in two written confessions.

The Judge in the case made clear his disappointment that Flynn was not charged with treason.

While Mueller’s prosecutors had argued Flynn’s decades of military service warranted a lenient sentence for the three-star general even after he had admitted lying to the FBI, it was Sullivan who, gesturing to the American flag beside him, accused Flynn of selling his country out. Minutes later, he ponderously asked the government’s lawyers whether they had ever considered charging Flynn with treason. (No, they later answered.)

“Arguably,” Sullivan said, describing how Flynn had secretly been working for the Turkish government before he joined the White House,that undermines everything this flag over here stands for.”

It was an unexpected moment that seemed to capture – perhaps for the first time – the depth of the betrayals at the heart of special counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal investigation. So far, the cast of characters that have been ensnared by the inquiry, from Trump adviser George Papadopoulos to Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort, have seemed relatively minor players on the world stage. But not Flynn, who had been entrusted with keeping the country’s most classified secrets and protecting its security.

And if you accept that Trump knowingly gave a Russian spy access to America's most secret documents on his first day in office, you have to start to accept the fact that Trump is compromised, as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was taped realizing in 2016  “There’s …there’s two people, I think, Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump … [laughter] … swear to God."  Paul Ryan immediately advises McCarthy to shut the fuck up.

The Mueller Report described a November 2017 voicemail Flynn's attorneys received from Trump's "personal counsel", reportedly John Dowd, who said: "[I]f... there's information that implicates the President, then we've got a national security issue ... so, you know ... we need some kind of heads up,"

That is, Trump thought a Russian Spy in his employ might have information that implicates him[Trump} and was reaching out to protect that information.

I don't really understand why these facts alone doesn't lose Trump all respect from any loyal Americans.  Whatever else, we Americans need to make sure our Presidents are working for us and us alone and when they aren't just working for America, we need to make sure those presidents are always swiftly brought to justice.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@n8nrgmi
I think its very reasonable to speculate that trump sincerely thinks he won the election.
I already explained this. The assumption that Trump believes he won the election changes nothing. The specific part of the law he violated was submitting or coercing someone else into submitting a false number. 11,780 is a false number. It was made clear that this number was based entirely on the fact that this is how many votes Trump needed to win. That's as clear an example of a corrupt act as one could ever concoct.

If Trump had said "here are 12,341 specific votes that I am contesting and I want you to look into them and toss them out" then you might have a case, but he couldn't even do that. He just pointed to vague irregularities and made clear he only cared about those priorities *to the point* where the outcome would be changed. There is no argument to make here that this was anything other than a corrupt act.

His thought might be due to mental disorder but its a realistic scenario. U assume trumps thoughts r rational... That seems like less of a reasonable view than my position
It's quite remarkable that in your attempt to excuse away his behavior you went down this path. You should really think about what that says regarding the weakness of the argument you're trying to make.

If a man is not capable of thinking rationally he shouldn't have accepted the nuclear codes. The idea that we would put a man in charge of our military and all of our government institutions and then let him get away with blatantly breaking the law because he's not capable of making his own decisions is patently absurd.
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Double_R
The law u cited says trump had to acted willfully. That's a term of art and I could be wrong but I would assume it's like the word intentionally, which is famous for how hard it us to divine what's in someone's head. I don't know how familiar u r wit the jargon but this is a mens rea

Trump should never have been president given his mental problems. But that don't mean he's guilty of this men rea
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Double_R
Lawyers r always fighting over words like willful so I doubt u have case specific knowledge... But it don't seem like the law would or should be trying to punish someone sincerely contesting the election
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@oromagi
Do u know which law specifically trump violated per Flynn?
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,023
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
if trump was sincere, then he didn't violate what you yourself quoted... "A person commits the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony under this article, he or she solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct."
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,605
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

Didn't Melania give the nuclear launch codes to her uncle (Putin)?
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@n8nrgmi
The law u cited says trump had to acted willfully. That's a term of art and I could be wrong but I would assume it's like the word intentionally, which is famous for how hard it us to divine what's in someone's head. I don't know how familiar u r wit the jargon but this is a mens rea
 What you're doing here is very common among Trump defenders and should once again, make you think about the weakness of your argument. And that is that you are simultaneously appealing to a false legal standard (beyond a shadow of a doubt) while offering an unfalsifiable proposition as your defense (that his mental state was not in violation of the law). If these two points were a valid defense then no crime involving the defendants state of mind could ever be prosecuted.

Fortunately that's not how the law actually works. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, and we don't need to *know* the defendant's state of mind, we just have to be able to infer it from the evidence such that it meats the legal standard.

On that note, there is no case to be made here. Again, you're arguing that the man is so mentality deficient that he is unfit to stand trial. As insane and even sick in the head as he is, there is no evidence that his mental state meets that threshold. The fact that he is to this day speaking at public events and doing nationally televised interviews continuing those very same efforts undercuts all of that. If he is fit to lead half the country down this rabbit hole then he is certainly fit to stand trial and be held accountable for his actions.
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,023
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
i agree that it's possible to infer from someone's actions that he actually did intend a mens rea even if you cant read their mind. i just dont think you have presented good enough arguments to make the case in this situation. i think trump lives in a fantasy world, perhaps you could compare it to being delusional where he believes his own tripe. 
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,023
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
i do think it would be reasonable for a jury to find him guilty based on what you've argued, but i could also see thinking trump is sincere in his election ideas
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@n8nrgim
i just dont think you have presented good enough arguments to make the case in this situation.
You asked for the law Trump violated which I provided. I assume you have no argument that his actions were not in violation of the law otherwise you would have offered them. Instead, you have gone down this path of 'we don't know what he was thinking therefore we can't prosecute him'. I already explained why this is a bogus argument to begin with and you have no response to that either. 

The phone call *alone* tells us everything we need to know about his mindset. He literally told us, out loud, in his own words, what he wanted. There is no reasonable case to be made that his intentions were anything else. And the more you look around at what he was doing before, during, and after the election, it only becomes more and more obvious.

I mean, my God, what else could Trump have done to make his intentions clear that he didn't already try? He spent months before the election telling us the only way he could lose if it were stolen. Not a single vote had even been cast. He declared victory before the counts were even in and told the states to stop counting. He filled 60 lawsuits to stop the state certifications. He called local election officials in multiple states pressuring them to declare him the victor. He put together a fake electors scheme and told his VP to stop the certification. He tried to get the DOJ and HOS to seize voting machines around the country. And when it all failed he assembled the Mob outside the Capitol and unleashed them on Congress while watching the whole thing on TV for 3 hours before finally caving to his advisors and telling them to go home. You can't seriously be this blind to claim we don't know his mindset.

How about this, instead of just sitting back with your eyes closed and you're ears plugged screaming lalala... offer a counter argument. Ignorance is not a legal defense. Trump did not have to know that what he was doing was illegal to be prosecuted and it doesn't matter if he believed he really won. All we need to know is that he knew what he was trying to accomplish and took actions to make it happen, which he did and he did.
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,023
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
i could see your argument saying trump 'probably' committed a crime, but i'm not convinced it's beyond a reasonable doubt or more than a technicality. when he asked the dude for the exact number of votes he needed to win, it doesn't strike me more like he's trying to steal votes, it's that he's trying to win but he doesn't care how. the point being, if he genuinely thought he won the state, trump is just being trump in saying he doesnt care how he wins, but the fact remains he thinks he won. it would be a technical violation of law only. i know this argument probably sounds hokey, but i just can't get around how much trump seems to believe his own tripe, even his aids thought he was in a mentally disturbed state after the election such as how he was pacing around repeating to himself that he won. i can say maybe your argument is right, but trump is a disturbed individual so i dont know
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@n8nrgmi
-->@oromagi
Do u know which law specifically trump violated per Flynn?

There's probably hundreds of little laws.  But the big ones are probably at least:

Misprision of treason (7 years)
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

Aiding and abetting Flynn's falsification of Federal Security clearances (5 years)

Aiding and abetting Flynn defrauding the IRS (5 years)
(Flynn failed to declare at least half a million and probably much more than that in payments from Russia and Turkey)

Federal Obstruction of Justice (20 years)
For firing the Attorney General when she advised that Flynn was Russian Spy

Federal Obstruction of Justice (20 years)
For firing the FBI Director when he refused to drop the investigation into Flynn 

Federal Obstruction of Justice (20 years)
For contacting Flynn's attorneys and promising pardon if Flynn kept Trump out of it

Federal Obstruction of Justice (20 years)
For ordering the Attorney General to drop all charges against Flynn



Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
Trump is guilty of the felonious crime of of literally being Hitler. There, saved this thread from getting thousands of pages long full of bullshit.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Trump is guilty of the felonious crime of of literally being Hitler. There, saved this thread from getting thousands of pages long full of bullshit.
Also guilty of being the Anti-Christ
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,978
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
Also guilty of being the Anti-Christ

Well he was a registered Democrat, so yeah there is evidence for that crime as well.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
I definitely think the Flynn case is a "separate the men from the boys" kind of question.  There is no rational citizen in the world that would not object to foreign agents of hostile powers having unrestricted access to one's own country's state secrets.  There is no good reason in the world why any leader- King, Dictator, President, minister should not lose his job and freedom for such an act.  Specific personalities and party politics doesn't even enter it- objectively, traditionally such treason is handled with public execution.  Anybody pretending that the established facts of the Flynn case do not merit public outrage and alarm and swift justice is too corrupted by party politics do objectively evaluate our nation's fundamental security requirements.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,605
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

I think Trump will move to Moscow when charges are filed. Rember he was going to build a Trump Tower there, but Putin told him not to do it before the election.