As I’ve always understood it, on the basis of “Innocent until proven guilty”, the initial burden is on the prosecution to prove their case. In cases where they fail to meet that burden, the only “defense” needed is to point out that evidence is insufficient to support a finding of guilt.
Since Trump insists he did nothing wrong, and this is all just a Witch Hunt™, why are they so worried about “providing an adequate defense”? Isn’t that tantamount to them admitting that the evidence is, at least on its face, somewhat convincing? Kind of puts the lie to the whole “Witch hunt” narrative.
They tend to abandon their passionate but crazy defenses when they see they aren’t convincing to anyone except the crazies. I haven’t heard the whole “FBI planted secret docs at Mar-a-lago” defense lately, for example. I’m sure there are Maga-nuts who still believe that whopper but back on Earth One, the Trumpers have given up on that one. They’ll never apologize for impugning the reputation of the agents who did the search of course–they just stop talking that particular line of shit they threw against the wall hoping we’d mistake it for spaghetti.
Rumors are that it’s certainly possible, but rumors are that I use voice to text almost exclusively to post on the dope, and rumors are that all three times I’ve used it in this sentence, voice to text has interpreted it correctly.
Your thinking goes at least one layer too deep for MAGAt brains. For them it isn’t about evidence, it’s about UNFAIR. The fact that Trump has been charged at all is of course UNFAIR, but now that his request for more time has been denied, it’s even more UNFAIR.
(For MAGATs, as for four-year-olds, anytime they’re forced to do something they don’t like it’s just so UNFAIR.)
How drunk was Rudy, and did Donald Trump know?
This could seriously undermine his “relied on advice of counsel” defense:
Who doesn’t want to rely on an attorney’s advice when they are three sheets to the wind? Particularly when it relates to trying to overthrow the outcome of the POTUS election.
The adequate defense would rest on the attorneys’ ability to shoot holes in the evidence the prosecution presents, finding ways to undermine witness credibility and relevance and/or meaning of exhibits. That requires time to study the pretrial disclosures by the prosecutors and investigate possible lines of rebuttal. They don’t have to prove their client’s innocence; they only have to raise enough reasonable doubt about the government’s case to lead to acquittal.
Exactly.
Looks like Trump Employee No. 4, Yuscil Taveras, has agreed to cooperate with the Special Counsel’s office in exchange for not being prosecuted:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/06/politics/mar-a-lago-it-worker/index.html
From the item:
That’s a different case, that has nothing to do with election interference.
Apologies for that. It was my mistake; I guess I got confused, with so many of these Trump/legal
threads occurring.
It is confusing. I just keep thinking it would be more confusing if we blended them all together. But maybe I’m wrong about that.
I agree with you. It’s easy to mix them up, I do it too though I try not to. But if we had them all in one thread, it would be hard to keep track of which post referred to which case.
Maybe we need some distinctive hashtags for each of the cases. Distinctive as in they aren’t at all like another one, so there’s little chance of mixing them up. Of course, sometimes people will still get the wrong one, but there’s only so much we can do to make things clear.
Maybe changing the thread titles to be as clear as possible. For example:
Trump Mar-a-Lago Documents Case Discussion Thread
Trump+18 Georgia Election Subversion Case Discussion Thread
Trump New York E. Jean Carroll Defamation Case Discussion Thread
. . . and so on.
At any rate, being as plain and clear as possible seems to me would help settle any confusion.
Hell, at this point, we practically need a new forum category.
So you don’t find the following titles to be clear enough?
-
DOJ/Jack Smith Investigation into Trump and Election Interference, January 6th Insurrection (Indicted 08-01-23)
-
What happens if Trump is indicted in Georgia? (Indicted on August 14, 2023)
-
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump’s Mar-A-Lago Residence (August 8, 2022)
-
Manhattan Prosecutors file criminal charges for Trump re Stormy Daniels case - ongoing discussion here
-
7 Jan 2021 and beyond - the aftermath of the storming of the Capitol
-
Civil Trial: Trump v E. Jean Carroll (Carroll wins, awarded $5 million
I have tried hard to make the titles as descriptive and clear as possible. I put emphasis on the important aspects of each case. I fear changing them will make them harder to identify for posters who are already used to looking for the above titles as they are. Honestly, most of your proposed titles have the same information in them as the existing titles, don’t they?
I also prefer to not change the titles other posters chose except to add clarifying information.
I understand why posters are sometimes confused, but really, IMHO, a quick glance at the thread titles should clarify which case is being discussed if a poster is following the cases much at all. When people post in the wrong thread, it’s almost always due to simply not paying attention to which thread they’re in. They’re in a Trump crime thread and they just post what they want to post. I fear your proposed changes will help little with those oversights.
I think you’re joking (I hope you’re joking!), because @What_Exit just put in a whole lot of time and effort to add ‘Trump’ tags to all recent cases Trump so posters can use that to create their own personal sub-forum if they wish.
Whether we like it or not, we’re in a Trump-intensive era in our politics, so a P&E forum covers it well. We just have to live with it for the foreseeable future, I’m afraid.
I’d prefer further discussion on this issue to take place in a different thread. Thanks.
Fair enough, @Aspenglow; nothing more on this from me here. But I do want to thank you for taking the time to post your comments regarding my idea. They are much appreciated. Thanks again!