He was directly involved with putting together a team to create a false certificate that said he won the 2020 presidential election.
Saved you a click.
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
418 points (97.3% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2610 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Nothing will come of it.
Saved you another click
Nothing except 90+ felony indictments? This dude was never charged with a crime before and this year he got hit with a ton of bricks. People like you would be watching the Nixon resignation saying "he got away with everything".
Do you not understand the gravity of these charges? He's almost guaranteed to be guilty of something, there's so many options. Once he loses the election he'll probably plead to whatever just to get house arrest and end the trials.
People like you would be watching the Nixon resignation saying “he got away with everything”.
I mean... yeah? You think his resignation and pardon WASN'T him getting away with everything?
I'm as hopeful as the next guy that the supreme court won't just rule that nothing bad happened on Jan 6th and that Trump is allowed to be prosecuted, but 3 years on, it seems pretty reasonable to doubt it until it's done.
deleted by creator
Another thing you haven't mentioned is that Nixon had destroyed McGovern in the 72 election. He won every state but MA!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_United_States_presidential_election
It was insane how far he fell. Watergate proved all his opponents right. And yes, his party turned on him. Half of Republican voters still liked him after his resignation but he literally couldn't get another job anywhere.
I recommend going to the Nixon presidential library. They really try to whitewash the events but it literally stops listing things he did after Watergate. Other presidents didn't even hang out with him.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
And Nixon getting away with everything, is also why we are where we are now too.
If the judges don’t fuck up the timeline and he loses, we’re probably ok for 4 more years (maybe longer if the trials scare off future fascist wannabes), but we need better voting rights, Supreme Court oversight and smarter voters before we can relax and not worry as much.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Lol Nixon did get away with everything though? And the precedent is what has allowed Trump to trample on our laws.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
You can screech all about what he did, but if we ultimately aren't going to stop him from running, then what's the point of the circus?
Watch and learn how this is theatre and you have no actual say.
Maybe we should consider other ways to regain control for the benefit of the 99.99%
Your comment seems to imply that you think an armed uprising is the solution you're suggesting. Is that the case?
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Because if he loses, he's going to face the consequences of his crimes. That has to matter. The rule of law has to matter.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
They’ve flipped Meadows. Some random fake elector giving up his handler in the campaign is helpful, but not exactly crucial.
Jack Smith has a mountain of evidence. He has everything. The cases just need to go to trial before the election.
I really hope the Supreme Court doesn't rule on his criminal case.
I honestly don't think they will. Because if they rule that Trump couldn't commit any crimes while president, it also means that Biden can't. Which means Biden can do whatever the hell he wants. I don't think SCOTUS will go for that.
I would hope at least one justice would be smart enough to figure out that if presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for deeds while in office, the President could just kill a couple Supreme Court judges and install their own people.
Or the VP could walk down the hall, shoot the president and then, as president, be immune from criminal prosecution. It's absurd on its face.
She could also do the same thing if presidents are allowed to pardon themselves.
Exactly. The person I'm talking to seems to think it's a foregone conclusion that Trump will win the presidency, which is why they would rule in his favor. I do not think they believe it's a foregone conclusion.
Yeah but they know Biden won't do whatever he want in that way, and that Democrats will willingly hand over power to Trump if he legitimately wins (which he still could).
Then once that happens, no more elections.
I don't think they do know that, nor do they want to risk it. Especially if Trump doesn't win. And they know that's a possibility.
load more comments
(32 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
What's her face testified that she saw the crossfire hurricane folder go with meadows
Meadows has the folder. Or, more correctly, he had it.
He keeps saying that he did not mishandle classified info. I think Trump declassified the whole thing, specifically so Meadows could either destroy all copies outright, or destroy all but the one Trump sold to to Lavrov. Either way, he insures that nobody in the US will ever see it in its unredacted form.
I don't think there's paperwork of him declassifying it, bringing it up at this point probably wouldn't help your case. Paperwork for that specific folder being declassified would prove that Meadows and Trump are traitors but their paperwork is in order? Meadows is working for Jack Smith now, so I'm going with the "who cares if there's paperwork" side.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Republicans in Michigan testified in a Lansing court that Donald Trump's campaign was directly involved with putting together a team to create a false certificate that said he won the 2020 presidential election.
Former Michigan Republican Party Communications Director Tony Zammit said he thought people such as Trump lawyer Shawn Flynn had taken advantage of people who ended up signing the document.
"I thought they were going along with what the lawyers were telling them," he said in a preliminary hearing Thursday, according to The Detroit News. Zammit said the meeting took place on December 14.
So senior Republican party officials in Michigan are just in the habit of signing their name to legal paperwork without asking what it means? If we can't trust your signature how can we trust anything you say?
No, the Trump campaign was a bunch of criminals who came to you with the idea of doing a crime, but MI Republicans knew or should have known what was being asked of them. Everyone involved in this on the Trump campaign side and Republican party side belongs in prison.
Exactly. Every single person involved in this should be charged with treason.
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Republicans in Michigan testified in a Lansing court that Donald Trump's campaign was directly involved with putting together a team to create a false certificate that said he won the 2020 presidential election.
Zammit's testimony came in the preliminary hearings of six Republican electors charged with "intent to defraud" by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's office.
The 16, all charged with criminal forgery, signed a document that falsely said Trump won Michigan and was filed to the National Archives and Congress.
Upon reviewing evidence and testimony, Judge Kristen Simmons will rule at the end of the hearings if there is enough to send the cases to jury trial.
During the hearings this week, former state GOP Chair Laura Cox testified she approved a document that Republican electors would cast votes for Trump if the election result was overturned.
Also in Michigan this week, the state Court of Appeals confirmed that it would not prevent Trump from appearing on the presidential ballot in 2024.
The original article contains 435 words, the summary contains 163 words. Saved 63%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›