Topic: Publicly held Trump trials - ongoing - page 14. (Read 4824 times)

Even poor blacks understand that the Dems are doing criminal activity in their attempt to take down the guy who will take down the Dem's criminal world.


The Rise Of Black Support For Trump

---

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/rise-black-support-trump
But others are becoming louder and prouder in voicing support for former President Donald Trump.

Mark Fisher, co-founder of a Black Lives Matter (BLM) group in Rhode Island, made waves recently with his endorsement of the former president.

"I knew I was going to pay a price for it," Mr. Fisher told The Epoch Times, "but I felt like the benefit of doing it far outweighed the cost of me playing it safe."

Mr. Fisher said he felt obligated "to clear a path" for those who think the way he does.

He and other pro-Trump black people are considered renegades.

That's partly because President Trump's foes have tried to brand him as a racist unworthy of votes from black Americans. But it's also because he's a Republican.

For generations, black leaders and churches have encouraged black people to vote for Democrats, including President Joe Biden.

But the tide seems to be turning. Opinion polls are showing that more black people are willing to break rank, as Mr. Fisher did.

Since President Trump's win in 2016, black support for him has more than tripled, now exceeding 20 percent in some surveys.

Polling suggests that black people and other minorities who once spurned President Trump now appear willing to give his candidacy a fresh look—a trend that could help spell the difference between victory and defeat in the 2024 election.

The Biden campaign didn't respond to a request for comment.

Three main factors appear to be spurring black people to pivot toward President Trump, according to Mr. Fisher and others who spoke to The Epoch Times: the economy, the criminal justice system, and the influence of other black people going public with their support.

Blacks for Trump are on fire outside the Fulton County Jail.
...

---

It is irrelevant if he was or not good. You run over a kid driving drunk - you go jail, even if you are Mother Theresa (not the case anyway).

I am aware there'll be appeals. I am aware that it is difficult that Judges elected by Republicans can actually do what is right in the US Supreme Court. They may choose to take the opportunity to open a new era for Republicans and that would be a good outcome. In any case, Biden is such a weak rival that probably anyone can beat the guy, so Trump is not really needed for the Reps - let's see if they can figure that out.

I know you are not going to read the Colorado ruling, probably not even the first page of the 300 odd... the ruling does have minority opinions - Some of the judges were not happy with the verdict, you will be glad to know.

However, you know what was their argument? None of them said Trump is not an insurrectionist. None of them disputed that Trump send a mob to interrupt democracy. They simply said that the court had no jurisdiction on deciding on "qualification to be a president" (in a much more elaborated fashion of course).

Oh, I forgot,... you are a dumbass publishing links to shit. Have you own view, do you think the Supreme court will say that it is ok what he did, so that anyone can do it too? Or will they just try to remove themselves from the equation saying "we cannot judge on this" - with the same result, anyone can send a mob to the Capitol and it is ok.

My bet is that none of those judges would choose to be in their seats on this one.

There is in any case a massive flaw to Trump's claims on the elections. If the case were so clear and there would be so many testimonies and evidence, someone in the judiciary, somewhere... I mean in any place at all... would have called for at least an investigation of short. There is nothing. Trumps knows it, you know it, most republicans know it. It is just the perfect excuse to stick to a looser - "he is not a looser".

Now relax. Someday you might even figure out that Trump hasn't been found guilty. You also might even figure out that there will be appeals if he is. And you don't even have to read between the lines to understand that this a Dem Colorado Supreme Court, which is against Trump simply because he is Republican. AND, their action is election interference, even if Trump is found guilty.

The Dems are running out of options. So, they are even willing to incriminate themselves just to attempt to keep Trump out of office.

If you really want to see how good Trump is as President, watch the two videos here http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/355556-2023-12-22-two-trump-speeches-to-the-united-nations.htm. Or do you simply like to blab, blab, blab?

Is not "anyone" dumbass, it is the Colorado Supreme Court. I know you are in the business of making any opinion or view count the same, but they are not. These are people who actually not only can read - which gives them an advantage over you - they have devoted their lives to understanding the law. You are not even a fly compared to them.

You do not need to read between the lines. Trump sent a murdering mob to the Capitol, it is recorded, it is illegal and in any other country he would be facing life sentence or death penalty.

did anyone force trump to send a violent mob to the Capitol? did anyone told him to interrupt a legal process, killing police in their way?

Reading and reading between the lines are two different things.

Anybody can write all kinds of things. Take a look at the science fiction that is written here - https://www.luminist.org/archives/. Sure, there might be a little truth in some of it. But if you want to gain anything of value, you need to read between the lines.

Regarding Trump and the situation in the US, you need to read between the lines to understand what is really going on. To say it plainly, all the things that Trump is being accused of, are exactly the things that the current administration is doing... including the Trump accusations and trials... and doing a lot more than Trump would/could ever think of doing. If he even thought like they are accusing him, he wouldn't be in this mess, because he would have figured a way out ahead of time.

You are kinda fun, though. So, I hope it doesn't hurt you too much when things straighten themselves out again.

Go to kindergaten and learn to read.

https://www.npr.org/2023/12/20/1220583273/trump-colorado-supreme-court-ruling









That is an armed assault, with the intent of overturn an election, resulting in the killing of several officers and a grave danger to the lives of Trumps political opponents.

This is not freedom, this is not "free man" crap, this is a mob overturning a democracy, get it into your head dumbass. You are the people trying to get a dictator into the White House, you are not defending "freedom" you are actually alienating the freedom of millions of voters of the democrat party.

^^^ Since Trump didn't do what you claim, above, what is happening is obvious. And it seems you are in favor of it... paxmao the world conqueror.

Below is why we need people like Alex Jones to show us what is really going on.


EMERGENCY BROADCAST: The Democratic Party Is Officially Establishing A Permanent Dictatorship...

---

https://banned.video/watch?id=65839589d73929b3eee2c3d0
EMERGENCY BROADCAST: The Democratic Party Is Officially Establishing A Permanent Dictatorship in America! This Coup Is Not Just Against Trump But the American People's Right to Elect Who They Want to Represent Them! — WEDNESDAY 12/20/23

Legal scholars across the political spectrum agree: Trump could not be barred from being on the ballot unless he had been convicted of insurrection. President Trump has been convicted of nothing! This fraudulent action convicts the Deep State of openly attempting to steal the 2024 election!
...

---

The usual play: Trump breaks the law and when there are consequences he plays the victim.

Trump has been declared an insurrectionist for sending a murdering mob to kill his political opponents. He is the only one who has excluded himself from the system by organising this.

Trump is the one who tried to make the votes of millions of democrat null and overtake the government of the US via a coup. It is as simple as that. You should not be allowed to try it twice.

https://youtu.be/b3_O91gyj9o?t=382



What are they saying here BA? what is it they want?

https://youtu.be/b3_O91gyj9o?t=526

Because it seems to me that they are either asking to hugh Nacy Pelosi or they want to take her for walk.

The Supreme Court of Colorado has simply given a verdict. You may call them whatever, they are not running for POTUS.

The States must have write-in places on their ballots.

The States are not necessarily the people. Rather, they are the so-called leaders.

If the people are not allowed to have their vote counted, there is election interference.

There is a long time,yet, before the elections. The corrupt State leaders are doing this against the will of many of their people. That's why they are doing it now... to see what will happen, rather than waiting until the last minute, and getting hurt by doing something that the Federal Supreme Court might consider illegal.

The people are getting fed up with the Dem and RINO leaders. They saw the good that Trump did while in office. And they see the mess that the Dem elect Biden has done.

Trump is now 'MORE likely to beat Biden' after Colorado ruling: - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12885509/trump-beat-biden-colorado-disqualification-supreme-court-decision.html.

This will backfire on State leaders who have done this.


Colorado Supreme Court launches actual INSURRECTION against America with election de-platforming of Donald J. Trump

---

https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-12-20-colorado-supreme-court-launches-actual-insurrection-against-america-election-de-platforming-trump.html
The following is a partial transcript of Brighteon Broadcast News for December 20, 2023, covering the breaking Colorado Supreme Court decision that deprives voters any ability to vote for Donald J. Trump for any political office. The full broadcast and interview will be found at this link: Brighteon.com/channels/hrreport

We now have an actual insurrection in America, with the traitors leading the charge from the Supreme Court of the state of Colorado. Welcome to today's broadcast of Brighteon Broadcast News. I'm Mike Adams. It's Wednesday, December 20 2023. And the biggest breaking news probably in the world right now is that the Supreme Court of Colorado has declared, completely outside of due process, they have declared that President Trump is guilty of insurrection, and therefore he is disqualified from even appearing on the ballot for the President of the United States in the state of Colorado.

So in one decision, the clearly treasonous insurrectionist Supreme Court of the state of Colorado has declared that the voters of Colorado have no right to choose Donald J. Trump to represent them as president. This is extraordinary. And this is the tip of the iceberg of the real insurrection that is taking place in America right now. By the way, also today, I have an amazing interview for you with Dr. Michael Nehls. He's the author of an extraordinary book that we have to talk about here. This book is called The Indoctrinated Brain, how to successfully fend off the global attack on your mental freedom. This book is amazing, and the interview with Dr. Nels was also amazing. He's an MD and a PhD. He's an expert in human neurology and brain disorders and mental health and so on.

What's also amazing, I did three interviews today. I also interviewed Liz Gunn, who is the journalist and attorney who helped blow the whistle for Barry Young, the New Zealand database administrator who is now facing prison time for telling the truth about how vaccines were killing New Zealanders. I'll play that tomorrow. And then I did the third interview today with another extraordinary man, a Qigong master, an author, someone who's an expert in what's called personal energy prepping. Francesco is his first time and we're gonna play that interview real soon. But I gotta say, it was probably the best day of triple interviews that I can remember. You've got to hear this interview with Dr. Nehls, who is German. This is coming up here today. And it's quite fitting, by the way based on today's news, which is, of course all about the assault on your mental freedom and the psyops that are being run against us by the establishment.

Trump the victim of "election de-platforming" - a form of political censorship that should be utterly intolerable in a so-called "democracy"

...

Democrats are terrified of allowing the American people to vote
...

---

Is not that some states will try, it is that the motions are already filled in many states:

I said that a few posts ago, it will end up in the SCOTUS, but you are too convinced that they are going to be ok with Trump running. My view:

Firstly, judges do not like to be cowed, threatened, called names and told what to do - and Trump has been doing a lot of that. In SCOTUS their appointments are for life, that gives them certain freedom.

Secondly, judges are about the law and order. In US an even in places that are not democratic... it is just why they are there. I am not sure how keen they are on letting a murdering mob sent to the Capitol be equal to nothing. If Trump is allowed, I do not see why the next ones cannot be anyone unhappy with the next election.

Lastly, there are many judges appointed by Bush, one by Biden, another by Obama,...  I would not take for granted that the Bush appointed ones will support Trumps behaviour -  and they are going to be deciding as the Trump appointees and the dems appointees are pretty much balanced. They could decide to close the Trump era and free the Republicans from his dictatorship - I am sure Trump is not the Bush's preferred candidate.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-04-20/george-w-bush-condemns-the-trump-era-republican-party


There seems to be an interest in equalling mobs to democracy and freedom to the "right to ignore the laws". This is the product of years of mis-education and frustration with the system that is failing many people in the US (Yes BA, that's you dumbass, the frustrated and mis-educated best example).

There could be other several states to try to pull off this, but let us be realistic. This legal issue on whether Trump is elegible to run for the charge of President of the United States again is going to be brought up to the Supreme Court itself sooner or later, and keeping in mind the political position of this SCOTUS, is almost guaranteed they are going to rule in favor of Trump.
In the midtime, these attempts to disqualify Trump from running for the presidency will likely just increase his popularity and polls numbers, in the same way it has already happen with all the indictments in the several jurisdictions he has been processed.
It has not even been a day yet and I already see a lot of people (most of them republicans) doing a very serious deal of this. (Well,.it is indeed serious and historical).
Even if the supreme court of the USA was not so obviously in favor of conservative ideas, it would take a lot of courage to rule against a leading candidate in a case like this, which could easily create civil unrest and get people killed.
Whatever happens, the people of the United States needs to wield their vote with wisdom.

Hey BA, look, someone in Colorado must have read the US Constitution...
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/19/politics/takeaways-trump-colorado-supreme-court-14th-amendment-insurrection/index.html



So Trump is not, as of now, in the primaries for Colorado, which is not that much... except that similar cases are filled all over the US.

I agree that people are and have been dumbed down regarding the ways they can use the Constitution and the laws. But I showed you a little of what the 6th and 7th Amendment say. And you even quoted them, but forgot to consider what they say. The Amendments are part of the Constitution.

Because of the way the people have been trained by the 'Perry Mason' show, and by the courts, themselves, it will be difficult for them to use the full law as they could if they simply knew how. So, let me explain it to you simply.

In the US, there are three basic things regarding the standard populace. They are written into the Constitution, underlying the whole thing:
1. The right to contract;
1. The right to own private property, including themselves;
3. The right to influence government in certain ways.
Everything that goes on in the country flows out of those 3 things. If it doesn't, it is criminal activity... sometimes by the general populace, and other times by government people.

All you need to do is read the Constitution, the laws, and the court cases, to see this. Of course, simply reading that stuff doesn't do anything. You have to think. And like many Americans, the evidence is that you are finding that thinking is difficult for you.

First of all, nothing of what you says in the constitution, at most is your interpretation or something coming from some shitty YouTube channel, probably paid for by Ruzzia and what you call "strike down a law" is simply "ignoring the law" dumbass.

So I am guessing right, you are banking on a jury declaring Trump innocent because it is Trump, and that has to happen for the tens of felonies that he is now indicted for - so any future president will know that it is ok to send murdering mobs, rant about judges, ...  Trump is the example of how liberties can be abused.

And, let's not forget, calling the army to kill their own citizens protesting:

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/24/politics/bender-book-trump-milley-protests/index.html


So much for liberty.

Not at all. But you seem to be confusing what I said with both, striking down laws, and jury nullification.

If the law in a school zone is 15mph, and a driver drives through at 120mph, and a cop pulls him over and it goes to court in a jury trial, the jury can strike down the law with regard to the driver so that he gets off totally free. Generally a jury won't do this, because the jury has friends and family with kids going to the school. But they can do it if they want, even if there is no good reason. It's up to them, totally. This does not strike down the law for anybody else, however. For every other person who breaks this law, it's a totally new court case.

If, however, there are bunches of people who drive 120mph through this school zone, and the juries for most of them declare these drivers innocent, the city or state just might change the law so that the speed limit for this school zone is no longer only 15mph. The reason might be that it's an old, condemned school that is not being used, and has a chain link fence around it, and the school zone speed limit SHOULD be removed.

The point is that the jury rules in a trial-by-jury court case. In general, when they strike down a law, it's for that court case only, not for the whole country... although other court decisions might base themselves on this one to some extent.

Yes, that is what he is doing.

In reality, dumbass BA thinks that a popular jury with 12 people will just say that Trump is innocent just because it is Trump. If that's where all the hopes of these people lie as of now, it is certainly a sign of how badly things are going for Trump in the legal front.

Anyway, in the end Trump may end up having his fate in the hands of the Supreme Court, some of them appointed by him. I think they may try to find some fine grain justification to say he is all right. I wonder how creative they may become on such justification.

You: "juries can strike down laws"
Me: "No they can't"
You: "Juries can vote how they want"
Me:


Are you confusing 'striking down a law' with jury nullification?  You know just because a guilty person is acquitted or has a hung jury doesn't mean that law they broke is struck down, right? 

Did OJs jury strike down the law that makes murder illegal?

I have never seen such as an amount of misreading. I though you needed a brain transplant, but it is much more simple: You need to go back to kindergarten and learn what words mean. There is absolutely nothing in the text saying what you say it says, absolutely nothing. And it is also absolutely out of any legal precedent or practice anywhere - I mean anywhere in the modern world, not just the US.

By the way, you are also a complete mess on the rest, it is just to boring to even discuss.

Now, let's talk about "Nullification", which is likely to be the topic of some video you must have seen in your shitty outlets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification#:~:text=The%20decision%20stated%20that%20%22juries,permit%20of%20no%20other%20course%22.

A jury cannot "strike down" a law. The law can be nullified, but is not just 12 persons saying so, there is a whole process to it. And it is something certainly contested.

Potentially, a jury may decide not to apply a law by reasons of conscience, declaring innocent to someone who is clearly breaking the law - veeery different of removing the law altogether and even that creates all short of fairness and consistency issues between different cases.

For some people juries are fact finders, while others pretend that they are also interpreters of the law. Another topic for discussion (how can someone who has no legal background interpret the law?)

Overall, dumbass BA is banking on a jury deciding to ignore the law for Trump. But you have to understand that:

a) A jury may no consider the facts as proven an acquit OR
b) A jury may disagree with the law and acquit.

For Trump to be acquitted for (a) is a possibility, but my guess is that the case presented will be factually strong.

For Trump to be acquitted for (b) the jury has to decide that the law that does not allow to, for example, send a murdering mob to the Capitol is wrong - so it would be OK to send murdering mobs to the Capitol .... for anyone.

or they may decide that the law that says that a president can't ignore the results of an election is wrong, so ANY president can ignore ANY future election.

do you see how stupid this is dumbass?

The reason it doesn't work most of the time is that the so-called defendant didn't go far enough. A man/woman can't accept being the defendant, and stand unrepresented at the same time. The two are contradictory. But that's what most of them try to do. So, most of them lose by contradicting themselves.



Ammon Bundy didn't know what he was doing in court. The jury simply liked what he did in the wildlife refuge takeover. The jury freed him. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/us/bundy-brothers-acquitted-in-takeover-of-oregon-wildlife-refuge.html.

The jury has the authority to vote how they want regarding any case they hear... provided it is a jury based on the 6th or 7th Amendments. There is evidence of court cases all over the place, where juries even reversed the charges in some cases, so that the plaintiff had to pay the fine.

This doesn't work.   It's been tried.

The judge would just deny his stupid request like all the stupid requests he's made before.  All the appellate courts would decline to intervene, including SCOTUS.  If your theory worked, nobody would ever be prosecuted by DOJ for breaking federal laws. It wouldn't be a secret nobody knew about.  It would just take one successful case, and then everyone would do it.



So how about some examples of a jury  "striking down a law".  

That's not how it works.

Congress (or state lawmakers) make laws.  If they want to get rid of a law, they have to pass a bill,

Judges interpret the laws.

Executive branch enforces the laws....wait you learn better from youtube videos...I have two perfect videos for you, please watch:  

3 Ring Government - Schoolhouse Rock
I'm just a bill - Schoolhouse Rock