The Trump Arrest thread

I can see a strategy to overcharging on more questionable charges. Same as when a salesman tries to sell a lot of add-ons with a product, so the buyer almost feels like he's doing a good deed for the seller by buying something at least.

Not that I know if that is a possible reason.

Quote: rxwine

I can see a strategy to overcharging on more questionable charges. Same as when a salesman tries to sell a lot of add-ons with a product, so the buyer almost feels like he's doing a good deed for the seller by buying something at least.

Not that I know if that is a possible reason.

Lack of specificity required for those charges. Apparently kind of basic stuff.

She can appeal but every action likely delays trial.

Same for filing a new indictment on those charges.

More important part is coming up. Whether he disqualifies her.

Quote:

A panel of federal appeals court judges on Thursday unanimously rejected former Trump adviser Peter Navarro's bid to avoid reporting to prison next week as he works to overturn his conviction on two counts of contempt of Congress.
Navarro, 74, had sought to put his prison sentence on hold pending a longshot effort to overturn the charges, which stemmed from his failure to comply with a subpoena from the House select committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
MORE: Ex-Trump aide Peter Navarro sentenced to 4 months for defying Jan. 6 committee subpoena
Attorneys for Navarro have indicated they will take their appeal all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.
But on Thursday, a panel of three circuit court judges said Navarro "has not shown that his appeal presents substantial questions of law or fact likely to result in reversal," and he therefore must report to prison next week as scheduled.

Quote: rxwine

More important part is coming up. Whether he disqualifies her.

I am not sure anyone has explained well enough for me to "get" why the judge got rid of Wade and not Willis. Maybe I will read the ruling to try to understand better. Maybe not.

"Odor of Mendacity"...

I have no actual opinion at this point on what "should" have happened, it just seems like a weird decision.

Quote: RonC

I am not sure anyone has explained well enough for me to "get" why the judge got rid of Wade and not Willis. Maybe I will read the ruling to try to understand better. Maybe not.

"Odor of Mendacity"...

I have no actual opinion at this point on what "should" have happened, it just seems like a weird decision.

Skimming the decision, the judge stated he could not definitively determine when the romance started. He believed some witnesses and evidence, and completely disbelieved other witnesses and evidence. And since there is no evidence there was an actual conflict, but there was an appearance of conflict, in order to instill confidence in the proceedings and trial, this is the proportional remedy. The defense wanted both Willis and Wade booted. The DA's office wanted them both to stay. To avoid the further appearance of a conflict, one or the other has to go.

Since the judge in the Georgia trial dismissed some charges against several defendants but also provided a fairly reasonable remedy (since the charges did not contain enough information about the specifics of the allegations), does a new indictment on those charges give them another chance to have the defendants in court outside of the actual motions and trial process?

Kind of agree with the rights' complaint about questioning "bloodbath" when Trump says it. Because he says enough of actually shitty things, there no need to really go overboard looking to pin a questionable word usage on him.

Quote: rxwine

Kind of agree with the rights' complaint about questioning "bloodbath" when Trump says it. Because he says enough of actually shitty things, there no need to really go overboard looking to pin a questionable word usage on him.

Unless there is more at the end of the piece I just saw, they didn't show, now I'm sorry I said this.

Poor, Poor Drumph!
"Trump is unable to make $464 million bond in civil fraud case, his lawyers tell court"

Fair enough, neither could I, so I can't crow about that.

It was always going to happen.

Interestingly, bond underwriters won't issue big bonds secured against ANY property. Hardly surprising they won't secure them on property whose very valuation was the cause of the penalty.

So.... What now? Fire sale? Or seizure of properties? Or will he launch a GoFundMe.

Or maybe a mystery benefactor will lend it to him him in Roubles or Bitcoin?

Nobody seems to be asking why he won't front say $100,000,000 out of his own ample funds or from sale of equities. Why can't one of his companies borrow it and then lend it to him? Why has he not asked those 30 underwriters to chip in say 1/30 of the amount? A paltry 15,000,000 or so each?

Buy those trainers folks. Your leader needs your support.

Will this hurt his rep amongst his cult?

Now...... Does this make the underwriting industry an enemy, to be squished when he regains power? If so, will they retaliate first?