The fraud claims by the Trump administration are just like the Covid-19 vaccine reserve claims. Non-existent.

But there is little hope for a lot of people to come to their senses and see the truth. they've fallen far too deep into the bottomless pit.

I think they def want a jury. 43% of potential jurors support Trump and therefore are highly likely to support this

Ofc as Rococ et al are pointing out, the law dgaf and is absolutely designed to convict as easily and as many as possible

Right. I meant "can be tried to a judge only if the defendant waives his right to a jury trial and the government consents." My apologies.

Your Honor the President told us to have a revolution Sorry I didn't realize we couldn't do that

And I got maced!

Revolutionaries really aren't what they used to be.

I liked Colbert's take on it - "Awww, you got maced? That sucks, you should chat to all the other failed revolutionaries about that. Oh wait, you can't, because they've all had their heads chopped off".

Sure, but were they maced first? They may have been unhappy about that at the time, unless it was with an old school mace - in which case, less likely to voice a complaint.

The old school revolutionaries also did not have to endure having a musical soundtrack associated with them. That can leave some mental scars.

I couldn't find any reports of our Elizabeth being arrested.
It must be good to be Elizabeth from Knoxville Tennessee.
Elisha from Chicago would be on the electric chair by now.

For sure.

There was a time, not that long ago, that before you risked your life and freedom in a revolution someone had to wrong you in some way.

yeah, you pretty much always want a jury as a defense lawyer..

i laughed when defense attorneys would agree to non-jury trials while i was a prosecutor. ESPECIALLY on misdemeanor type **** that you dont think a jury is going to care about, but a judge specifically knows is against the law.

It's a lot easier to persuade 1 person out of 12 who was too ****ing dumb to get out of jury duty of whatever you want him or her to believe, than is to persuade one who was at least smart enough to get through law school.

I say this as someone who perjured himself in a friend's DUI trial as a favour. I was one of 2 defence witnesses, it was a bench trial in front of 3 magistrates, and he got off on insufficient evidence. They even came back and said "we know you're guilty, but there is insufficient evidence to convict". He was guilty as ****, but he was able to re-build his life and career from that verdict, so I'm not sorry.

I was reminded of a documentary about football( soccer) hooligans I saw when I was living in Germany. Contrary to the stereotypes some may have, a lot of hooligans are professional people. Doctors, lawyers etc.
Why did these types join the hooligans ranks? Reasons given were basically
- The rush and adrenaline kick of physical conflict
- The feeling of dominance over your opponent ( when you kick butt and not the other way around I guess).

So who knows what really motivates a lot of these people.

Maybe we need hooligans here in the u.s for people to live out their aggressive instincts.

Slighted,

In the trial of someone who entered the Capitol, do you believe that the defense attorney would be allowed to argue in an opening or a closing that (i) Trump in fact gave the defendant permission to storm the Capitol; or (ii) it was reasonable for the defendant to believe that Trump had given him permission to storm the Capitol.

I'm a lawyer, and I don't think this sort of thing would be allowed in a civil case, but I don't have a good feel for whether the result would be the same in a criminal trial.

Playbig,

Is today still the big day or has Q given you a new update on timing?

If you sign off with

"Best Wishes,

Rococo"

Then it will be complete.

You think I am turning into Monteroy?

For anyone who's interested. What happened was that he was at my place, and he insisted on leaving and driving home. I begged, pleaded with him not to drive. He didn't listen. I even followed him outside and literally put my glass behind his back wheel and said "you can't drive now". He didn't care, drove over the glass and took off.

5 minutes later, I get a call. Subdued tones - "dude the cops are here, I'm ****ed". I'm like "good for you, you ****ing deserve it". I didn't really know what was happening, only that he was about to get arrested.

In the morning I managed to get hold of him in the holding cells and got the story. He managed to make it as far as a roundabout like 3 minutes from my place, somehow stalled his car (a company car) climbed in the passenger seat, and passed out. And that's how the cops found him.

I told him to conduct a no comment interview and that I'd get him a lawyer, which I did. Then we concocted this story that there was a third guy (who wasn't even there, another friend of his) that was driving, the car broke down, third guy went off on foot to find help etc. I testilied that the third guy was at my place, I saw them both drive off.

He got off on the charge, that was like 15 years ago or so, he got fired from his job, got his company car taken etc. It was punishment enough. Because of the not guilty verdict, he was able to find another job, etc. He is now very happily married with 2 kids and probably making more money than I do. So, I feel justice was served.

Not sure why I typed all this out. I mean, maybe, not everyone who commits a crime is a bad person. Prisons are full of people who are decent people, but who just made a mistake.

Lol, no. I'm not going to say... you can probably figure it out if you think hard enough. Think, reds. As in, colours, not commies.

i can't imagine either would be allowed in. even in my backwoods conservative jurisdiction the judges would make you proffer that when the inevitable motion in limine was filed and what are you gonna say, that some vague speech is a license to enter as an affirmative defense, but then like you said in an earlier post even if you believe that the cops let them in or the president invited them in, their license was clearly revoked by the cops asking them to leave and the president tweeting to listen to the cops.

and also like you said, thats just an attempt at the trespassing charge, they will be facing more than that for sure.

That's what I assumed. Most non-lawyers assume that trials are an opportunity to argue whatever you feel like arguing. And that's of course not the case.

That was part of the whole plan of the military takeover of 2+2. Note, this will be complete on a Tuesday, but I refuse to commit to a specific Tuesday because that way I can simply extend it as long as I like until the Antifa Lizard People finally do their thing.

These Qdonks with their specific end dates are really violating the basic rule of Armageddon predictions. They should spend more time on proper vague planning and less on furry headgear purchases or something.

Seems like a reasonable fellow.

You been drunk before, bro? Different people handle it differently.

Not goign to condone anyones behavior here but it is an illustration of why why doing something bad and being found guilty shouldn't mean being unable to restart your life.