Trump’s Legal Team Just Blew a Big Hole in His Third Indictment Defense
Trump’s Legal Team Just Blew a Big Hole in His Third Indictment Defense
Trump lawyer John Lauro responded to the indictment news by admitting the crimes that Trump is charged with.
Trump lawyer John Lauro responded to the indictment news by admitting the crimes that Trump is charged with.
EDIT: Removed comment as requested.
You're viewing a single thread.
they're doing their best to cause as much chaos as possible, yeah.. that's all they've got.. like comic book villains throwing babies out windows so Spidey can't end their reign of terror..
Elections 101: at all costs, avoid an informed and rational electorate
It's the right play politically. Consider if the roles were reversed.
If Bernie Sanders was arrested for breaking into Walmart headquarters and demanding they unionize, he'd absolutely say something like "It's not about breaking the law, it's about standing up for the millions of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet while the Walton family continues to amass wealth. That's what this is about. It's not about me, it's about us."
His supporters believe in his cause and they'd absolutely eat that up. I can understand why people support unionization and don't really get why people are so into thuggish authoritarian rule - but if that's what gets you up in the morning, then seeing Trump admit to this is surely exciting.
Why the fuck would Sanders break into Walmart hq? This is the dumbest both sides I've seen in a while
But it's not a "both sides" argument. It's an analogy intended to represent the thought process of Trump, his team, and the shitheads that follow him and may see this the same way a Bernie supporter might see Bernie doing something that he believes in. Obviously, what Trump did is a crime, and @grahamsz is just trying to point out what that might look like from another perspective. It seems you've jumped on this and feel as though he is trying to make an argument that both sides are shitty. It's pretty clear just by reading it that he is not (assuming a user called graham is a "he"). You are arguing against something he's not saying.
Thank you!
I also see a lot of gloating among the left wing that "haha, even trump's lawyers admit he broke the law" like that means anything at all. This is a calculated move that tries to control the narrative and play into his delusion that he's a poor oppressed hero who won't give up the good fight.
Maybe that's extreme, but i could totally have imagined him chaining himself to oil refinery gates or similar shenanigans (at least when he was younger).
I was trying to make the point that if you believe in a politician's end goal, then the means are often justified. Trump's supporters (for the most part) don't want to see him weasel out of this by saying he didn't try to subvert the election, they want him to say that it was imperative for the country that he do what he did, laws be damned.
I doubt it's the best legal defense, but realistically he's going to either be re-elected and pardon himself or he'll drag this out until he dies. I don't see any world in which he's likely to wind up in prison.
There’s a massive difference between fighting for rights of the oppressed and having your sad wittle feewing huwt, and throwing a violent tantrum.
Bernie has historically fought for civil rights, and the rights of the underrepresented. Cheeto supreme and his idiot followers have nothing to be offended about so they fabricate drama. On top of the hate anything that isn’t white/me factor.
Not the same at all. Not even close. Good try though.
Oh absolutely agree 100%.
But if you do believe that Trumps end goals are laudable, then you are of course going to believe that it's justifiable that he'd break the law to achieve them.
There are, undoubtedly, millions of people in this country who believe that thwarting the peaceful transfer of power is a small price to pay for their authoritarian dipshit leader... and it makes sense that he'd play to that population.
That's a fair point, my mistake
Who are you arguing with?
Do you not have nested comments? Are you unclear on how forums work?
If they're on kbin, I only recently - like yesterday - found the nested comments option. I've been using "classic" mode for months, where it is genuinely difficult to follow conversations. I could believe they don't have nested comments like you're asking and that the question was genuine.
Or they are just being obstenate like you implied.
Maybe that's extreme, but i could totally have imagined him chaining himself to oil refinery gates
you're unhinged and you're unaware of it.. if this news about Trump has you imagining Bernie doing crazy shit, you ARE the sickness.. this isn't Alex Jones' Discord server you're on here..
I read it as an analogy elsewhere that made a lot of sense to me.
I'd personally love to see trump in an orange jumpsuit for the rest of his life. However I genuinely believe that he'll manage to convince millions of people that his means justify his goal.
It's easy to look at the string of charges and indictments and assume he's unelectable, but a lot of people are going to look at this like it's a legitimate form of civil disobedience. I'm not, in any way, trying to suggest that his actions are comparable to "unlawful" climate protests or civil rights protests. But I do think he's posturing to make that claim and continue his narrative of persecution.
i'm just going to throw holy water on you and tell you to begone
It's fun to completely make shit up about other people, isn't it?
I was trying to come up with a hamfisted analogy and clearly missed the mark.
I'm pretty sure Bernie has actually been arrested at civil rights protest, so that's probably a better example. I actually think that makes him more qualified to be president.
Presumably trump enthusiasts feel similarly about his mounting list of felonies. I think that should immediately disqualify him from being considered as a candidate, but a lot of people obviously don't and I have to assume that's because they believe in authoritarian psuedo-dictatorship in the same way I believe in civil rights.
I think it was a good point. It was just misinterpreted by someone who is hoping to get into an argument, I think. :)
Consider if the roles were reversed.
i won't consider any of that, because it's completely divorced from reality
I think you have your head in the sand.
In a rational world this would completely shatter his chances for any presidential nomination from a major party (or probably the first indictment would)
However, there are a good number of people who believe so firmly in trump that they'll view this in exactly the same light as a left wing leader being arrested at a civil rights protest or admitting they smoked weed. To them this is a feather in his cap, it burnishes his credentials as being anti-establishment and proves whatever batshit conspiracy theories he's spouting.
I think democrats are too quick to overlook that risk and I think that's dangerous.
you have your head in the sand.
son, your head is inside a bucket of crabs, riding a Tilt-o-Whirl
It isn’t really .
.
It’s a good point clumsily made.
We all know that Bernie’s arguments have always been sincere and fact based. We know that Trumps are dishonest and held for his convenience, but the magas Don’t know or don’t care
It’s a good point clumsily made.
i disagree