Trump’s lawyer John Lauro argued that even if Trump committed a “technical violation of the Constitution,” it does not necessarily mean he broke any criminal laws regarding pressuring Pence to overturn the 2020 election results. Lauro claimed Trump believed he had won the election and was exercising his First Amendment rights to express that opinion. However, critics say Trump’s actions went beyond free speech and he conspired to defraud the public and nullify lawful votes. Former Attorney General William Barr said the charges are legitimate and Trump’s actions went far beyond expressing an opinion. Trump has said he will seek to have the judge assigned to his case recused and request a change of venue, alleging unfairness.
That didn’t happen.
And if it did, it wasn’t that bad.
And if it was, that’s not a big deal. <– you are here
And if it is, that’s not my fault.
And if it was, I didn’t mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it
He may have committed some light treason, but it’s nothing to get all worked up about!
I posted this link with the hope someone would make this reference. 👩🍳🤌
The man is a living parody of an actual human being. I don’t care for him.
He’s got the worst fucking attorneys, too. So many references to be made!
“Just because it’s unconstitutional doesn’t mean it’s against the law” is an interesting attempt at a defense.
I don’t think judges and juries will see it that way. The “it’s not a crime when I do it” is a sign you’re fucked.
Well, does the Constitution anywhere state that it’s not allowed to break its rules? Check mate,
atheistsdeep state cabal.
That’s a desperate defense that Trump has already ruined by his recent words & actions.
I’d wager it has at least a 50/50 chance of working.
There are very few Trump statements that done also have a contradictory Trump statement.
/r/TrumpContradictsTrump has amassed a huge list of them.
So from now on, no one commits crimes, just technical violations of the constitution. 🤦♂️
Throw his orange ass in prison already!
Look even if he “technically” killed that guy it does not mean it was murder. He had no intention of killing him when he yelled out “your dead”, “your dead” and pulled out the pistal and shot him in the head. He was exersising his first amendment rights to shout and his second amendment rights to fire a gun. Clearly the family is just trying to warp the situation and ignore the fault of that guy putting his head in the path of the otherwise peaceful bullet going along just minding its own business.
So, if I become president and round up all the guns, I won’t have committed a crime? I guess the second amendment isn’t as protected as they think.
I hope people start using the excuses of the wealthy and we’ll connected in the future for their legal troubles. I’m sure it wouldn’t fly for them, but it still feels like these assholes are setting new low bars for get out of jail free cards. Terrorism = tourism. Crime is a technicality. Locker room talk, but you’re also actually a serial sexual harasser. All things to cover up the stink that is on the right in this country. People will hear whatever they need to until it’s all gone. They’ll let you do it!
History will not be kind to republicans and conservatives.
And watch them all deny any involvement when the time comes. But they know the are on the wrong side of history and will feel that pang of guilt, knowing they supported a fascist movement. Like supporters and members of the nazi party at the time, the black mark on their conscience will be impossible to suppress.
If you know of trump supporters and voters, never ever let up. Always push that fact in their face. Republicans deserve nothing but contempt of society.
History will not be kind to republicans and conservatives.
Unless they’re the ones writing history. Here in Finland our biggest extreme right wing party (yes, there’s more than one…) was the most popular party of the under 25’s in our recent parliamentary elections, followed by the “fiscal” conservatives (ie. the conservatives who’d be fine with concentration camps for leftists as long as the proposal came from an extremist party and the camps were run by private for-profit companies).
Doesn’t exactly spark hope for the future when Gen X / late Millennials are less conservative than Z’s
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
Lauro appeared to signal how he’d defend the former president in a trial that will stem from the four-count criminal indictment returned last week by a federal grand jury that had been examining Trump’s possible role in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and his alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election.
Pence elaborated on the subject Sunday, saying on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” that Trump, “from sometime in the middle of December” 2020 “began to be told that I had some authority to reject or return votes back to the states.”
The indictment cited contemporaneous notes Pence took about meetings in which Trump pushed him to reject the Electoral College votes in multiple states.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a member of the Jan. 6 committee who was lead manager in Trump’s second impeachment trial, slammed Lauro’s argument as “deranged” and “a grievous constitutional defense" in a separate interview Sunday on “Meet the Press.”
“He conspired to defraud the American people out of our right to an honest election by substituting the real legal process we have under federal and state law with counterfeit electors,” Raskin said.
“There is no way I can get a fair trial with the judge ‘assigned’ to the ridiculous freedom of speech/fair elections case,” Trump wrote in an all-capitalized post on his Truth Social platform.
spoiler
asdfasdfsadfasfasdf
Agreed. I appreciate the bot a lot, don’t get me wrong, but it can add clutter, for sure. I kind of wish there was a Lemmy-wide setting to auto-collapse bot comments, now.
spoiler
asdfasdfsadfasfasdf
Someone was quick on the draw: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3838
spoiler
asdfasdfsadfasfasdf
It was me (the bot author) at Beehaw’s admins request.
Thank you!
I give it funny that Trump decided this judge wouldn’t be fair, but his handpicked judge has no issues. What does fair even mean in his mind?
Fair means to him “be on his side and let him go free”
They may be right, but surely an admitted “technical violation of the Constitution” warrants a trial. The jury will decide if it’s a crime.
