Florida Man and associates indicted for conspiracy to steal data, software

Authorities in the US state of Georgia have indicted a famous Floridian and his loyal associates on counts including theft of data, software, and personal information. The celebrity defendant, a 77-year-old whose career has spanned real estate development, reality television, wagering, and a four-year term as president of the …

[DS999]

This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Not only is it a state charge, which federal pardons cannot touch (and the governor can't issue pardons in Georgia, and probably wouldn't anyway since he's not one of Trump's brainwashed lackeys) but all those other people indicted are a HUGE problem for him.

Because they can't think like they can with a federal indictment "well I can play a waiting game, and if Trump or a republican lackey gets in the White House they can make these charges go away or pardon me". Now they are faced with the prospect that if they are convicted they will serve their full sentence, and for some of them that will be akin to a life sentence. There is now tons of pressure on them to cooperate against Trump, and with so many co-conspirators it is a sort of a race because the first ones to cooperate get better deals than those who wait.

The beer is for me to enjoy while watching Trump and those who helped him attempt to overthrow our democracy get some long overdue accountability, and the mad scramble as word gets out that one or two have cooperated and then the rest break down the door of the prosecutor all wanting their chance to testify against each other and against Trump. Rudy already said some stuff last weekend trying to implicate a couple of the others and downplay his own role, so that might already be starting!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

People also misunderstand the Stormy Daniels case. The Florida business man isn't being prosecuted for paying Storny some hush money: He's being prosecuted for lying on his financial declarations about where his election money was spent. (Paying hush money from election funds isn't legal. Paying hush money from your own bank account is perfectly legal)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Didn't Hillary do the same with the money she paid to get the Steele dossier made up?

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/clinton-dnc-steele-dossier-fusion-gps/index.html

Appears she did, but as she is part of the swamp all she got was a small fine.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me just correct the record here.

That's false. The majority of the fine was paid by the DNC, not Hillary and it was done to ensure the security of the United States, not keep a prostitute quiet.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

Hillary got a small fine, just as I said. I never mentioned the DNC. So your statement is false.

"The DNC was fined $105,000 and the Clinton campaign was fined $8,000"

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

You're burying the lede. It's a minor fine because her individual campaign contribution was minor. This isn't embezzlement, it's just a difference of opinion on what investigating an opponent (of both the party and of democracy) is doing with a known enemy of the nation.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

Indeed, what was Hillary doing with the Russians? And what is Sleepy Joe doing with China and Ukraine?

The known enemy of the nation is the great DC uniparty.

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

The enemy of the nation is the Republican Party in its current incarnation.

[Robin]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

Thanks for including the phrase "Sleepy Joe", it means I don't have to bother reading any more of this thread.

[Snake]

Re: not bothering reading any more

Oh, if any politician on the "blue" side were guilty of even 1/2 of what Florida Man was accused of, holy hell would break out.

[DS999]

Re: not bothering reading any more

Oh, if any politician on the "blue" side were guilty of even 1/2 1/100 of what Florida Man was accused of, holy hell would break out

FIFY

[MrDamage]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

Whataboutism from someone too cowardly to use their name. Fuck off. And when you get there, fuck off again.

[Anonymous Coward]

One AC for another

Do not hate them for what their name is or isn't, hate them for blindly recycling conservitard talking points. As a conservative that hates the Clintons, I rate his attempted whataboutism as a 1.5 out of 10. Even an intentionally misleading and innacurate Ken Star or whitewater quip would have gotten a 3.

A real conservative might ding her on the shady west coast campaign finance connections out of Stanford, or her husband selling missile technology to the Chinese. For those that insist on whataboutism, how about the last minute pardons? (And yes, I thinks the Ginni/Clarence power couple of crime is just a jointly liable as Hillary and Bill. Or Trump and his ill-bred offspring)

The less air we give either of these has-beens (Trump or Hilary) the better, but let's remember them for their greatest crimes and failures, not last weeks Fox talking points.

[georgezilla]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

Okay, sense you seem to know what she was doing, how about some actual proof? You know, the kind that will actually stand up in a Court of Law?

Wait. Hang on. You don't have any? Well no shit!

Biden, China and the Ukraine? Same question. And the same answer. You don't have shit.

Then there's the fact that this is a piss poor attempt at distracting from a 4 time indicted, liable for sexual abuse ( Judge used the word RAPE! ), twice impeached, election loser.

And that neither of them is relevant to the fact that this is about The State of Georgia vs. Donald John Trump. About The Government of the United States vs. Donald J. Trump. And ONLY about Trump.

< shakes head > Try to keep up and stay subject.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Let me just correct the record here.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/jury-reaches-verdict-e-jean-carroll-rape-defamation-case-trump-rcna82778

"A New York jury found former President Donald Trump liable Tuesday for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll in a Manhattan department store in the 1990s but not liable for her alleged rape. "

Jury says not liable. By the logic used by others here that makes him innocent of that. The judge can use the word all he likes, doesn't change the outcome. He wasn't even found liable of assault.

[jmch]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"Didn't Hillary do ", Didn't Biden do, didn't who else do.....

Whataboutism just intended to muddy the waters. Trump's justice department had plenty of time to build a case against Hilary if indeed such a case existed. Remember "Lock her up"?? The fact that no such charges were ever brought is a clear indication that there were no charges to answer. Instead of telling us how the evil democrats got away with bla bla bla, how about trying to argue that your favourite orange man is innocent??? Perhaps you're not doing it because that's a far more difficult argument to make???

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

The 'Trump' DOJ was actively working against him at the direction of the uniparty. They did find that Hillary had broken laws relating to her usage of private email but dropped it claiming 'no jury would find her guilty'.

[lglethal]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

If No jury would find her guilty then by definition she is Innocent. Or have you forgotten that a jury of your peers are the only ones who can determine if you are guilty or innocent.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

A jury does not rule someone innocent. Only 'not guilty'.

Maybe if they had moved the case to Montana or another deeply red state.

[Pascal Monett]

Well they didn't do that, now did they ?

[lglethal]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Ahh I see your going with the "Everyone's guilty of something!" mindset. How very Police state of you.

There is a little thing written in your constitution called Presumption of Innocence. Or to put it another way Innocent until proven Guilty.

Trump is at present considered Innocent, as he has not been found guilty of anything (which is something we should all keep in mind)(well apart from the sexual assault case where he was found guilty), however, charges have been brought before the Courts on this indictment (and a host of others), which means that that Innocence can be considered suspect. Still until he is found Guilty by a jury of his peers, he should be considered innocent.

Since no charges were ever even brought before the Courts on Hilary, her Innocence on your grand conspiracy case is not suspect. She was found guilty of using an unauthorised email server and received the appropriate court decided punishment. On that she can be considered Guilty, on everything else she is and can be considered Innocent.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

You might want to remind the dems and their rabid supporters of that point.

Nancy Pelosi saying that Trump will get a chance to 'prove innocence' is the exact opposite.

You've also fallen victim to this:

"well apart from the sexual assault case where he was found guilty"

No, it was a civil trial and he was found liable. You can't be found 'guilty' in a civil trial, that is for criminal trials only.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/may/10/e-jean-carroll-v-donald-trump-how-civil-court-case-unfolded

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Why do you expect her to moderate her tone when she's talking about someone who's murderous thugs conducted the worst act of terrorist subversion in US Capitol history, including breaking into her office before trying to pardon the attackers? That Trump could claim any innocence and try to issue pardons shows how utterly unfit he is to do any leading as there's no sane reason why someone guilty of that should ever see the light of day.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Bahahahahaha!!! Oh wait, you're serious!

You are aware that in 1971 a far left group planted a bomb in the capitol that actually exploded? No, probably not. The same group managed to blow up a bathroom in the pentagon a year later. They wanted to overthrow the government.

Jan 6th started as a legitimate protest as legally allowed by the first amendment. Sadly it was used as a false flag by those who opposed Trump as their own 'Reichstag fire' moment. Nancy just happened to have a camera crew following her and someone just happened to unlock the huge security doors to let the capitol police give tours. If the Jan 6th protestors were serious the capitol building would not be standing today.

[Casca]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Wow, must be some nice drugs your on...

Try post with your name instead

[HausWolf]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

You won't even get a handle from them, that's where the coward part comes in

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

They weren't far left, they were Puerto Rico nationalists and nationalism is a far right activity. Your date is also wrong, it was 1954 (do you read anything at all?) Also, they only shot a senator non fatally, while there was a fatal shooting (and 5 other fatalities) at Trump's insurrection.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Err Wut?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground

"The Weather Underground was a far-left Marxist militant organization"

"On March 1, 1971, members of the Weather Underground set off a bomb on the Senate side of the United States Capitol"

"On May 19, 1972, Ho Chi Minh's birthday, the Weather Underground placed a bomb in the women's bathroom in the Air Force wing of the Pentagon."

Hmm.. *checks what I typed* yup, 1971, far left, bombed the capitol, I was correct.

"nationalism is a far right activity"

Tell that to the SNP ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

The right wing fascists still lie, they called Weather Underground a terrorists organisation, which Snopes completely debunked:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/blm-terrorist-rosenberg/

"In the absence of a single, universally-agreed definition of "terrorism," it is a matter of subjective determination as to whether the actions for which Rosenberg was convicted and imprisoned — possession of weapons and hundreds of pounds of explosives — should be described as acts of "domestic terrorism.""

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Oh dear, you believe that?

Of course snopes will twist it to make her look good, she was working for <current thing> at the time.

This is like how the definition of vaccine changed between 2019 and 2022.

To quote snopes:

"What's True

she was an active member of revolutionary left-wing movements whose illegal activities included bombing U.S. government buildings"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Rosenberg#Activism_and_imprisonment

" Rosenberg was convicted in March 1985 by a federal jury"

So yes, she was convicted of a federal crime (something that hasn't happened to Trump yet)

This snopes deboonking is not the win you think it is. They agree she was convicted of the things she was convicted of, they just use a bit of twisted logic to weasel out of calling her what she is.

[OhForF']

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

The wikipedia article is an interesting read but i'm not sure why you bring this up in the current dicussion. According to the article law enforcement went after them using not only legal but althogh "extralegal" means to "protect the greater good" - do you want that to happen again?

As the illegal stuff the FBI did stopped sucessful prosecution in those cases they'll probably not doing that again.

It shouldn't however be a suprise that law enforcement attempts to throw the book at anyone that uses violent means in capitol in an attempt to stop the normal rightful transfer of power from an outgoing government to the newly eletected one.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

There is a huge trove of evidence showing that the US govt at local, state, national and supranational levels has been using quasi-legal and extra-legal means 'to protect the greater good' (roughly translated into 'to project themselves') against pretty much anyone they can. So long as it results in more money to the relevant department and more laws they are happy.

Look into things like civil asset forfeiture and eminent domain as just some truly horrific things they do to ordinary people. A small newspaper in Kansas has had its office and homes of reporters raided by the police in a blatant violation of 1A due to the newspaper publishing publicly available information about a local businessman.

[jmch]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Whatever happened 50+ years ago had nothing to do with pretty much anyone who is alive today. The indictments being referenced are for events that happened 2 years ago and with full involvement of the people accused. Whether they are guilty or not is for the courts to say, but if to make a point, you have to dig up an incident from before the vast majority of people alive today were of voting age, that probably means it's not very relevant to the discussion at hand.

[EvilDrSmith]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

While I have no desire to be associated with Orange Man or his supporters, it does seem fair to point out that the fatal shooting was of a protestor by a security officer, and that based on the video evidence of the event (Victim posing no threat to life, and uniformed, armed and armoured, police about 5 yards behind her and possibly visible to the shooter at the time he took the shot), there is cause to consider that the shooting may have been unjustified.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Huh. So I understand that "stand your ground" allows you to shoot someone simply because you fear for your safety and/or your life. Which is what this person did. And not only for their safety, but the lives of elected officials that they were charged to protect.

So I'm just going to call ............. BULLSHIT! On you argument.

[EvilDrSmith]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Well, I'm in the UK, so I admit I'm viewing it from a UK legal perspective, not a US one, but there was a door (apparently locked and barricaded) between shooter and victim.

The shooter appears to be some form of official security or law enforcement officer - they should be trained to deal with public order issues.

From the videos (which are, of course, an incomplete record), there is no imminent threat to life, or even of harm, to anybody.

Other officers were approaching the scene (only seconds away), and were possibly (possibly, not definitely) visible to the shooter

To my mind, that is sufficient for the shooter to be formally held to account for their actions in a court of law.

It doesn't mean the action was unlawful, just that due process should be followed.

[Rich 2]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

“If the Jan 6th protestors were serious…”

People died. How serious do you need to be?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

A protester shot by police, a protester beaten by the police and died, a couple of protesters died of medical issues, a policeman died of unrelated issues a day or so later and a couple of police later died of unrelated self induced means.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled

[martinusher]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

>What about 1971? Or 1860-something-or-another? Or 1932?

1971 was a generation or so ago and back then there were a whole lot of different groups 'plotting to overthrow the government'. The difference between 'then' and 'now' is that back then the groups didn't operate under the umbrella of a major political party so whatever impact they had was most definitely a fringe activity. January 6th was part of a coordinated plan to subvert the constitutionally mandated process for selecting a government, it wasn't just a bunch of fringe revolutionaries (I hope) but a serious, calculated and coordinated plan.

As for the 'uniparty' for better or worse those people are "us". All of "us", including a whole bunch of people who have taken an explicit oath to protect and uphold the Constitution. There's no "ifs", "ands and "buts" here -- for better or worse the constitution is what it is. Its like I said to a poll watcher during the 2020 election -- outside the 100 foot mark we may be deadly enemies, each rooting for our own people, but as soon as we cross that line into the polling place we're on the same team. Or should be. (So this is the Orange One's problem -- meddling with the process with the goal of cooking the result. That puts him and his friends outside the pale.)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"explicit oath to protect and uphold the Constitution"

Oh you're funny! The US govt telling big tech who to censor is a violation of the first amendment. And that is one of their lesser violations.

"for better or worse the constitution is what it is"

Shall not be infringed. I'd bet you don't like that bit :)

[cmdrklarg]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"The US govt telling big tech who to censor is a violation of the first amendment."

That is true. Asking them to take down unauthorized private explicit photos isn't. Next!

"Shall not be infringed. I'd bet you don't like that bit"

Most of us like that just fine. It's the ignoring of "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State" part that annoys us.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Those photos are of public interest and were only a small part of what the white house and other govt officials were trying to get blocked, next!

The 'well regulated' is in a different line of text and separate from the 'shall not be infringed'. And I'm sure the proud boys are far more regulated than antifa. Certainly more diverse. Next!

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

" ... A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ... "

Huh. It appears to be all one sentence. So no, you're wrong.

Okay, just one thing wrong with the "Proud Boys" "antifa" analogy". The Proud Boys are actually a militia, they freely admit that they are. And antifa actually isn't even an organized group.

Oh and then, just how did this bogie man you call antifa try to overthrow the Government? Violent protests in the streets? Versus the storming of the Capital, trying to stop the peaceful transition of the duly elected Government?

Hint: They're not the same fucking thing. Not even close.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Oh and then, just how did this bogie man you call antifa try to overthrow the Government? Violent protests in the streets? Versus the storming of the Capital, trying to stop the peaceful transition of the duly elected Government?

Pretty much. The mob did the usual thing. Attacked and burned Federal buildings, assaulted police officers, looted stores in what CNN famously described as 'firey, but mostly peaceful protests'. Oh, and demanding that Trump be removed because he wasn't the legitimate President, and the Blessed Hilary won that election. Some event went as far as occupying the Capitol (Hill) and declaring it independent from the United States. Or just Seattle.

But that's how the US works in the 21st Century. If you want well ordered, well run states and cities, look no further than California. They're world leaders now in pioneering cashless shopping. The Nancy Pelosi Federal building in SF has just annnounced a new home working policy for all employees in the building.. Because they don't think it's safe enough for them to come into the office. Newsom for President! Anybody...?

[Casca]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Yea, had nothing to do with cops shooting black people.

And now you dont like California. Let me guess that you live in florida?

[Casca]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Anonymous Coward is really a very cowardly way to post. Keep up the moronic posting!

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Actually I do like that bit. One problem with you comment. The "Government" at the time was Trump. And Trump's Government actually did try to do what you claim. Where as Biden WASN'T in Government. And as a private citizen violate the Constitution by asking. The amendment ONLY prevents the Government from doing it. I can do it all I want. I'm not prohibited by the Constitution.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

So several dead cops and one dead protester ISN'T serious?

Okay.

Were the bombers caught? Did they stand trial? Were they found guilty? But because the Jan. 6th protesters DIDN'T burn down the Capital means that shouldn't be brought to justice?

Okay.

It would be nice if you could stay on topic. And the topic here is .................. The State of Georgia vs. Donald John Trump. And NOTHING else.

This is just another piss poor attempt to yell ............................ LOOK A RABBIT!!!

And it ain't going to work here. Sorry.

[Someone Else]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

No, it was a civil trial and he was found liable. You can't be found 'guilty' in a civil trial, that is for criminal trials only.

A conspiracy theorist mincing words. How quaint!

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

< shakes head > So you are incapable of understanding that in both cases, liable and guilty, are both in the same Court of Law, both in front of a jury and that both mean that YOU DID what you are accused of.

Okay. I don't know what planet you are from, or in what reality you are from, but it sure as shit isn't the same one the rest of us live in.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/verdict/

I'd suggest some research on civil vs criminal. This is not the win you think it is.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"Or to put it another way Innocent until proven Guilty."

Just for clarification and completeness, the word is "unless", not "until". "Until" implies they ARE guilty, we just ain't tried hard enough yet :-)

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

If you follow the arguments of the Republican coward who is trolling this discussion, Democrats are Guilty until proven even more Guilty...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Hate to break it to you but I'm a centrist leaning libertarian.

[Casca]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

So just another moron

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Ah, the 'I've lost the argument so now must resort to insults' response.

[Casca]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

What argument? You post as Anonymous Coward and get the answers you deserve.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

How do we know it's the same one if they post A/C?

[Casca]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Its the same hive mind?

[collinsl]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

How do we know you are they? Anyone can tick the Anonymous Coward box

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

But neither you or I use it. We identify ourselves. Yes, yes it is a made up name. But the George part of mine is actually name. And separates me from every other asshole like me named George.

And that's the difference between me and Anonymous Coward. I neither anonymous or a coward. I own the things I say. They don't.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

So you're a confused conservative?

How nice.

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

I'm a centrist

Before or after Americans forgot where the political centre is?

If you claim/pretend to sit between the USA's two major parties idologically, you lie somewhere between "right" and "ultra right".

[Sherrie Ludwig]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Hate to break it to you but I'm a centrist leaning libertarian.

Yeah, yeah, LOL. You're a centrist. And I'm Beyonce's younger, cuter, richer and more talented younger sister. Calling yourself one doesn't make you one. ("I WON, BIGLY", for example) I think the majority of El Reg readers have formed their own opinions of this tiresome AC.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

https://www.politicalcompass.org/

Your Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: -0.25

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.56

I told you I was a filthy centrist!

[aerogems]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"Ahh I see your going with the "Everyone's guilty of something!" mindset. How very Police state of you."

Innocence proves nothing!

-- Warhammer 40,000

[LybsterRoy]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

-- Or to put it another way Innocent until proven Guilty. --

Just in case no one further down corrects you

Or to put it another way Innocent UNLESS proven Guilty.

[localzuk]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

As the presumption is "innocent until proven guilty", a ruling of not guilty by definition means "innocent".

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"A jury does not rule someone innocent. Only 'not guilty'."

Maybe you need to understand the concept of presumption of innocence. Under English, Welsh and N Irish law (not sure about Scotland with their "not proven") one is assumed to be innocent* until pronounced guilty. I tale it the US adheres to the same principle. There is, therefore, no need for a jury to rule someone innocent - in fact it would be meaningless. If they are not guilty they remain innocent.

* Successive governments have been working on this in regard to justifying surveillance over the last few years but it still just abut stands.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

I'll ask you this then. OJ Simpson was found not guilty in a criminal trial. Does that mean he is innocent of killing 2 people?

[Roj Blake]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

It makes him not guilty of murder.

[DS999]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

They can't move it to Montana or whatever. A federal crime has to be charged in the district in which it occurred. That's why Trump was charged in the documents case in Florida, because that's where he kept the documents after he illegally retained them and refused to return them.

So if Hillary had been charged it would have had been in either DC (because that's where she was based at when she was Secretary of State) or New York (because that's where her email server in her house was located)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Exactly. No DC or NY jury would vote to convict a dem in those states. A dem could do something like have sex with an intern in the oval office and they'd just turn a blind eye.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Absolute fucking bullshit. Founded not on fact, but ignorance, fear, hate and intolerance.

[DS999]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Ah yes someone from the dumbfuck Trump cult who believes only MAGA judges and juries should be allowed to judge republicans, and also should only be allowed to judge democrats.

I'm sorry that your orange jesus is going to prison, but I'm sure you'll get over it and find a new moron to worship.

[localzuk]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

I think you're just projecting there. It isn't the Dem side who has been arguing against clear and simple facts constantly lately.

You know that second bit? It isn't a crime...

[jmch]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"A dem could do something like have sex with an intern in the oval office and they'd just turn a blind eye."

Seeing that it is absolutely legal for 2 (or indeed, any number of) consenting adults to have sex in any private space to which they legally have access, including the oval office, there is no 'blind eye' needed to be turned by any jury, because it's none of the jury's business, nor indeed that of any policeman, district attorney, investigator or private busybody.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

So you're unable to understand that "not guilty" means that they are innocent?

Wow! Okay.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

https://www.amacdonaldlaw.com/blog/2016/may/what-is-the-difference-between-innocent-and-not-/

https://legalblaze.com/what-is-the-difference-between-not-guilty-and-innocent/

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Oh I don't know. Maybe because the alleged crime didn't take place there? So it had no jurisdiction to take place there?

That's why Trump was indicted and charged in Florida instead of D.C. . Because the crime was committed in Florida. And the crimes that were charged in D.C. took place in D.C..

See how that works?

Well shit. Apparently you don't.

[aerogems]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

To be fair, there is a big difference between "Not Guilty" and "Innocent". The former basically means that the prosecution didn't meet the required legal threshhold as set out in the legal statute while the latter isn't really a legal term at all.

[aerogems]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

You have GOT to share whatever it is you're smoking. It seems to be some premo stuff.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

So the reality of the fact that no jury would find her guilty is beyond your ability to understand?

Why would you take someone to trial if you knew before hand that they wouldn't find them guilty?

Why is it that simple shit is beyond your ability to understand?

[Jonathan Richards 1]

Whataboutism↓

+1, I wanted to say the same thing. "Yabbut, what about..." is a pervasive tactic in all sorts of political debate everywhere these days, the participants seeming never to have grown out of the phase in their lives where it sort of worked, i.e. the primary school playground. The grown-ups would usually say "Two wrongs don't make a right".

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: Whataboutism↓

Someone, somewhere, is making a lot of money providing all that straw these men are being rapidly manufactured from...

[katrinab]

Re: Whataboutism↓

Someone in St Petersburg I think?

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: Whataboutism↓

What has Ron DeSantis done this time?

[Jedit]

"Yabbut, what about...""

It's never just "but what about...?" though. When the far right attack someone it's always for doing something that they themselves have done. Their every accusation is a confession.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "Yabbut, what about...""

"When the left attack someone"

FIFY

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: "Yabbut, what about...""

You just proved the point...

[georgezilla]

Re: "Yabbut, what about...""

Actually, no. No you didn't.

You just proved them correct. And don't have a clue that you did.

[Casca]

Re: "Yabbut, what about...""

Yea, they are very alike the russians in that sense.

[cmdrklarg]

Re: "Yabbut, what about...""

AKA "projection"

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Your idea of "the same" appears to be different than most.

[aerogems]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

You mean the dossier that was originally funded by a conservative newspaper? Funny how that detail always seems to be conveniently forgotten by people of a certain persuasion. Just like how a dossier isn't the same as a report, it's a just a collection of notes, which was then turned over to the FBI to do with what they will.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Uh huh.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-dossier-was-originally-funded-by-conservative-website-washington-free-beacon-report-2017-10-27

“All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier,”

And of course this had nothing to do with that newspaper being funded by a supporter of one of orange man's rivals for the 2016 nomination.

The issue is it was turned over to the FBI in such a manner as to obscure the people who funded the research. They didn't give it to the FBI and say 'we are running against trump and here is a dossier of stuff we paid for that says trump did bad things'. It was done along the lines of 'I have no connection to Hillary/DNC and I just happen to have this dossier that was produced by people with no connection to Hillary/DNC and just happens to contain stuff about trump, oh and BTW can we have a warrant to wiretap trump please?'.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

No. Well sort of.

Originally is was commissioned by and paid for by, wait for it .......................................... REPUBLICANS! OOPS!

Did Clinton the pay for copies of the dossier? Maybe. But that's relevant to............... ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING!

This is about The State of Georgia vs. Donald John Trump. Period. And nothing else. Why is that such a hard fucking concept to understand?

Swamp? And you think that Trump drained, or tried to drain it? Lol. Nope. Just brought in bigger gators to make the swamp look smaller and that he tried to drain it. Proof? Just look at the indictments against him. 6 un-indicted co-conspirators in one, and 18 in this one. Or any or the many, many other Trump people that were convicted or plead guilty. Lol. Drained the swamp. What a fucking joke!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

OK, lets just re-post this from earlier as you are wrong. This seems to be a running theme with TDS sufferers.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-dossier-was-originally-funded-by-conservative-website-washington-free-beacon-report-2017-10-27

“All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier,”

And of course this had nothing to do with that newspaper being funded by a supporter of one of orange man's rivals for the 2016 nomination.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

This is about The State of Georgia vs. Donald John Trump. Period. And nothing else. Why is that such a hard fucking concept to understand?

Nah. It's about Trump questioning the election integrity, and by extension the integrity of some Fulton County officials. This is obviously criminal behaviour, and totally unacceptable in a free & fair democracy. So of course a Fulton County DA decided that because Atlanta's crime rate is essentially zero, the best use of her and her office's time was to indict the ex-President for daring to challenge the authority and integrity of Fulton County.

There is absolutely no real or apparent conflict of interest here, and Fulton County is obviously the perfect venue for a fair trial by a jury of Trump (and his co-defendents) peers. Alternatively, all the defence team has to do is use disclosure to show that there were issues with Fulton County's processes and procedures. Again Willis has opened the door to re-litigate the original dispute. And even if Willis manages to win her case, the defendents will be able to appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Just look at the indictments against him.

Ok!

On or about the 21st day of November 2020, MARK RANDALL MEADOWS sent a text message to United States Representative Scott Perry from Pennsylvania and stated, “Can you send me the number for the speaker and the leader of PA Legislature. POTUS wants to chat with them.” This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

I'm shocked! I'm outraged! And I guess I'm also a little confused why Willis deems this relevant, ie a text from Washington to Pennsylvania doesn't appear to touch Fulton County.

On or about the, 11th day of December 2020, DAVID JAMES SHAFER reserved Room 216 at the Georgia State Capitol in Fulton County, Georgia, for the December 14, 2020, meeting of Trump presidential elector nominees in Fulton County, Georgia. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

This is even more outrageous! They dared to BOOK A ROOM! This is obvious a clear and present danger to the entire United States!

And if you actually bother to read the indictment, there's an awful lot more like this. But given the lack of crime in Fulton County, this is the most effective use of Georgia taxpayer's money.

[Casca]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Keep on drinking the cool aid...

[Flocke Kroes]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

I hope so, but I would prefer a few more problems. Convicted criminals are still eligible to run for president (Eugene Debs) and could be president while in prison - until he works out how to use presidential authority to get out. If the hearings do not complete before becoming president he could appoint an attorney general to dismiss them.

To get barred from office using article I, section 3, clause 7, Florida Man would have to get impeached by congress (already done twice), convicted by the senate (they didn't) then barred from office by another senate vote and finally there would be some sort of court room battle to decide if barred from office includes the presidency.

To be disqualified by section 3 of the fourteenth amendment, he must swear an oath to support the constitution (already done) then rebel against the United States (indicted is a step towards conviction, but chickens have not yet hatched). After that, more litigation to decide if this rule applies to presidents.

Using the twenty-second amendment (limit of two terms in office) would require insane troll logic. Two years of acting president count as a term. He claims to have won 2020 but has not been in office. It is a matter of opinion where he ever acted like a president - depends on which president you choose as a model.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

I hope so, but I would prefer a few more problems. Convicted criminals are still eligible to run for president (Eugene Debs) and could be president while in prison - until he works out how to use presidential authority to get out.

Simplest way would probably be to declare the Whitehouse as a prison, and have an Epstein-like work-release program as part of his sentence. The Whitehouse is arguably more secure than most prisons, although like many prisons, it does appear to have problems with drugs being smuggled inside it. The prisoners are also usually well guarded while inside, or out, although this may require some bureaucratic hoop jumping to allow the Secret Service to officially act as prison guards.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"the Secret Service to officially act as prison guards."

Would a prison guard "take a bullet" for a prisoner they are guarding? :-)

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

If it was part of an oath they took, yes. As they swore to do by taking said oath.

I took an oath, twice, to protect and defend the Constitution. Which included taking a bullet, or being blown into so many fucking pieces.

And that includes even the ignorant fucking Trump supporters. In this case it's the Trump supporters that my oath requires me to protect the Constitution from.

[jmch]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"If the hearings do not complete before becoming president he could appoint an attorney general to dismiss them."

In this case, as mentioned in the article, the charges are at state level. Not sure florida man could do anything about it even from the white house. (Also, Republicans are strong champions of states' rights, aren't they??)

[Pascal Monett]

Apparently, Republicans are strong champions of whatever they think is favorable to them at the time you ask them the question.

Fifteen minutes later, it can change.

[John Brown (no body)]

"Fifteen minutes later, it can change."

That long? Things are improving?

[Someone Else]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Also, Republicans are strong champions of states' rights, aren't they??

Yes, transactionally, when it suits their immediate purpose.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

"Convicted criminals are still eligible to run for president (Eugene Debs) and could be president while in prison - until he works out how to use presidential authority to get out."

Just for shits and giggles, I think I'd quite like to see that happen! He gets sworn in and then other world leaders start inviting him to their countries for state visits etc and he has to make his excuses!

[Someone Else]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Or, a visit by some foreign head of state to Georgia State Prison.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

It isn't that problematic for Trump, but it might be problematic for democracy. The charges seem to be based mostly on this call-

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html

Between team Trump and Georgia officials, where Trump lays out claims regarding potential voting irregularities. It includes stuff like this-

Trump: When are you going to do signature counts, when are you going to do signature verification on Fulton County, which you said you were going to do, and now all of a sudden you’re not doing it. When are you doing that?

Germany: We are going to do that. We’ve announced —

Hilbert: To get to this issue of the personal information and privacy issue, is it possible that the secretary of state could deputize the lawyers for the president so that we could access that information and private information without you having any kind of violation?

Trump: Well, I don’t want to know who it is. You guys can do it very confidentially. You can sign a confidentiality agreement. That’s OK. I don’t need to know names. But we go the information on this stuff that we’re talking about. We got all that information from the secretary of state.

And maybe all the counts of conspiring to access personal information, IT systems etc vanish, because Trump (and Team Trump) say a couple of times that they don't want that information, just to verify that votes were valid. Then maybe Team Trump files a SLAPP lawsuit against Georgia for conspiring to prevent him running in an election.. Which is kind of a big bitch-SLAPP given the flurry of litigation is to prevent the leading Republican candidate from publicly participating in an election.

But ahead of all that is the prospect of discovery and disclosure, including all exculpatory evidence to Trump's defence team. And because Georgia's decided to invoke RICO, his co-defendent's legal teams as well. So an opportunity for Team Trump to re-litigate the claims made regarding voting irregularities in Georgia. And perhaps that will show that there were irregularities, and Georgia did not investigate those claims thoroughly. Which then I guess could get constitutionally interesting if it ends up that Trump might have won Georgia.

But such is politics. This sort of thing has happened before, eg-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore

Where Gore was convinced he won in Florida's 2000 election and was robbed of his victory by a bunch of hanging chads. Gore took that all the way to the Supreme Court in strong echoes of Georgia. Democrats generally overlook that election dispute. Or the way Clinton's been whining for years that Trump stole the election from her.

So I expect a bunch of downvotes from people who confuse supporting a free & fair election system and democracy with support for Trump. Having an election system voters can rely on is, after all one of those fundamentals that you really need in any representative democracy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

The dems were very vocal about not wanting to certify Bush Jr and Trump. Didn't they also try to get officials to change the electoral college votes in 2016?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/18/how-the-electoral-college-works-donald-trump

Yup.

[georgezilla]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Nope. And if you like I provide a url to some bullshit opinion too.

But that won't make it true either.

[Pascal Monett]

Re: Gore took that all the way to the Supreme Court

Yes, but he did not arrange and incite an insurrection when he shown the door.

He did things the legal way, and it was handled legally. He might not have liked the decision, but he abided by it.

Trump abides by nothing as long as he can get away with it.

It is high time he is stopped from getting away with it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Gore took that all the way to the Supreme Court

We watched 4 years of dem incited insurrection after Trump won.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurrection

"an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government"

Yup, that is what they did.

Cities burned to the ground while the dems encouraged it. The right finally gets pissed off and has ONE protest where they actually took their grievance to the government (which is entirely legal under the constitution) and it is treated like the end of the known world.

We had to listen to insufferable media pundits saying such crap as 'show me where it says protests have to be peaceful'. Um, it is in the text of the first amendment!

[Casca]

Re: Gore took that all the way to the Supreme Court

Sure MAGA sure. Now go away or put your name on the post...

[georgezilla]

Re: Gore took that all the way to the Supreme Court

Okay. Exactly which cities "burned to the ground"? Portland? Seattle? Nope. I can promise that they were and are still standing in spite your bullshit claims.

And people were killed, while morons stormed, broke into the Capital and damaged property while trying to kidnap and/or assult Congress people. While trying to stop the peaceful transfer to the duly elected Government all because some egomaniac whined because he couldn't accept the fact that he had his ass handed to him in the election. A free and fair election.

[aerogems]

Re: Gore took that all the way to the Supreme Court

It's also worth noting that after Gore lost his SCOTUS case, as VP his job was to preside over the Congress as it certified the election results where he shut down some objections from his own party on his behalf. He didn't throw an epic tantrum like a petulant child, he accepted his loss with the grace and dignity expected of someone in that position.

[Casca]

Re: Gore took that all the way to the Supreme Court

trump probably believes that grace and dignity is some kind of sandwich

[Jedit]

"and was robbed of his victory by a bunch of hanging chads"

Actually Gore was robbed of victory by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, who stopped two recounts in Democratic strongholds before they were completed and declared the state for Bush by 537 votes.

There were also irregularities on the Florida ballot that caused a number of confused Gore voters to accidentally vote for Pat Buchanan. Many of those voters were black, and Buchanan himself acknowledged that black voters were very unlikely to have voted for him - what with him being a massive racist and all.

[DS999]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

The charges are based on FAR more than that call. That call was why the DA began her investigation but she's heard testimony from dozens and dozens of people, almost certainly had multiple people flip and more will flip now that they are indicted (or are one of the 30 unindicted co-conspirators) Trump is already laying the groundwork to try to blame some of them, so if they are smart they will beat him to the punch and tell their lawyer they want to get a cooperation agreement.

Maybe right wing media is telling people it is all based on that one phone call to make their viewers feel better, but that's not the case at all. Perhaps you might want to read the indictment, and see the full list of crimes committed by Trump in the name of the people who voted for him. Wait no, that's wrong. He didn't do it for them, he did it for himself, and only for himself.

[Pete Sdev]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

If I've understood correctly (IANAL) Georgia's anti-racketeering law (RICO) specifies a non-suspendable prison sentence.

So if found guilty, go straight to jail.

[jmch]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

You got the wrong icon there!!! Go straight to jail! Do NOT pass Go, do not collect £$200

[DS999]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

While I could believe the federal government could find a way to imprison a former president while maintaining their secret service protection commitment, I don't think a state government could or would even want to. I expect he would be remanded to federal custody. Though it may not matter, since he's likely to be convicted of federal crimes as well and be sentenced to enough years in federal custody that with all the big Macs and KFC flowing through his clogged arteries he'll never again be a free man.

Of course that assumes he doesn't flee the country once it looks like a trial is going badly enough for him, which I think there's better than 50/50 odds of. He could be sheltered by one of his autocrat friends like MBS.

[aerogems]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Several of the fake electors have already turned state's evidence in that case. So, I think that particular window is already closed and those indicted are essentially the ones left holding the bag. Though there is speculation that Meadows has flipped in one of the cases being tried by Special Counsel Smith's office. No doubt Giuliani and the rest all had ample opportunity to negotiate some kind of deal, but fucked around and now are finding out. That's assuming they was ever an option for some of the supporting cast to make a plea deal.

[DS999]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

That's assuming they was ever an option for some of the supporting cast to make a plea deal

I think that's always an option, at least until the night before opening arguments are made in court. Having guys who were hip deep in it like Guliani testifying against Trump only makes the case stronger especially to prove a conspiracy. Guys near the top like him would be testifying for a reduced sentence, not for probation like some of the lower level folks like the fake electors.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

" the fake electors."

The funny thing is in 2016 after all those videos of celebs calling on the electoral college electors to vote for someone other than Trump, only TWO changed their vote. However EIGHT changed their vote away from Hillary to a different person, not Trump, with some going for Bernie.

This shows that Hillary was seen as pretty toxic. Had it been pretty much any other democrat on the ticket the grand cheeto would have lost.

[DS999]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

Had it been pretty much any other democrat on the ticket the grand cheeto would have lost

That is likely true. Both parties have a pretty terrible leadership. Look at all the terrible candidates on the republican side, no wonder Trump is still leading. The main reason why Biden is running again is that there's no choice - there isn't anyone else the democrats could nominate who they could sure would beat Trump.

It is a pretty sad state of affairs all around. I hope once the republican party crashes and burns after a couple more election shellackings like the last one (where they took the house but not by the 40 seats or so they would normally have been expected to based on backlash against a new president's party historically) hopefully it is replaced by something better, and after it wins handily a few times the democrats will be forced to reinvent themselves as well. Or better yet, install ranked choice voting everyone so people can vote for third and fourth parties!

[Potemkine!]

Re: This is the most problematic indictment for him, by far

with so many co-conspirators it is a sort of a race because the first ones to cooperate get better deals than those who wait.

That kind of race comes to mind (fits well with 'Rudy' too!)

[A Non e-mouse]

Love how you didn't mention the "T" word once in the article. From now on, can we also use the phrase "South-African born spoilt child" instead of the "E" word in El Reg articles?

[Pete Sdev]

"Son of former apartheid-era South African diamond mine owner".

It's a bit of a mouthful so perhaps an abbreviation would be in order.

[Pascal Monett]

I've got one : bullshitter.

[DS999]

I've got a better one, in light of his dodging the cage match with Zuck:

Coward.

Or would we prefer chickenshit? Pussy??

[aerogems]

It's emerald, not diamond, but why not just call him Apartheid Bro Space Karen?

[AnotherName]

Every time I see the phrase 'Florida Man' it brings to mind the naming of our prehistoric ancestors. May be, like Plitdown Man, this one is a fake too?

[Blazde]

For some reason my mind conjures up a cartoonish orange juice salesman. Like a cross between the Lilt Man and the Man from Del Monte?

Maybe when he's in prison he can work the drinks trolley.

[Doctor Syntax]

Tango?

[Roj Blake]

Worst superhero name ever.

[nautica]

"I can never forget that one of the most gifted, best educated nations in the world, of its own free will, surrendered its fate into the hands of a maniac."--Eric Hoffer

[b0llchit]

"All of this has happened before, and it will happen again."... see history.

[lglethal]

"best educated nations in the world"

Umm have you seen the state of general education in the US recently?

[Strahd Ivarius]

this is like most "world championship" the USA takes part in: limited to USA (and Canada, if they ask nicely)

[georgezilla]

Yep. And have done so for ....... Ummmmmmm ..............................OH SHIT! ......... 52 YEARS!

Any other questions?

[CrazyOldCatMan]

most gifted, best educated nations in the world

I assume he's not talking about the US - very, very far from being the 'best educated' and have been for quite a while.

[Anonymous Coward]

Equiibrium

it's a physics thing.

[Dinanziame]

bankruptcy law aficionado

I'll reuse that

[nautica]

"...the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."

"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."

"I did," said Ford. "It is."

"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't people get rid of the lizards?"

"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."

"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"

"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course..."

..."Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happened to them," he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it."...

― Douglas Adams, So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish

[Elongated Muskrat]

"But," said Arthur, going in for the big one again, "why?"

"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in.”

[jake]

Obvious tedious trolls are obvious.

Please don't feed them.

Ta.

[jmch]

Election Integrity

" the Republican Party – which mentions "ensuring the integrity of our elections" as part of its platform."

When the Republican Party says "ensuring the integrity of our elections", that's a coded language that means "we're going to make voting as difficult as possible for people who we don't think will vote for us". Fairly contesting, and then accepting the outcome of democratic elections should be / used to be one of the pillars of modern liberal democracy, sad to see that it's in decline in one of the countries that pioneered the concept.

One of the terrible consequences of both sides moving to the extreme (not only in the US) is that losing an election is no longer an inconvenience by which you have to push your agenda from the opposition side, work on compromises with the ruling party, and work toward winning the next elections.... losing an election is now seen as an extinction-level event where your opponent will use their term in office to radically and permanently change the countries direction in ways that you think aren't simply bad, but immoral, catastrophic and irreversible. Of course a lot of that is projection, because they know that's what they would do when they are in power.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

Most of the developed and developing world requires voter ID. In the US you usually need ID to buy booze and cigs. All this claptrap about 'our democracy' is just the uniparty running scared that they might not be able to wield ultimate power anymore.

The dems have historically screeched and screamed and more recently called for rioting whenever they've lost. Protesters burn and loot cities, show up at the white house with a guillotine, but that is all fine because they are supporting 'our democracy'.

[Graham Cobb]

Re: Election Integrity

Most of the developed and developing world does not have fascists owning guns.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

Or a good chunk of people, who have a high probability of belonging to a single political party, who think that violence is an acceptable way to resolve political differences. People who also have a high probability of owning guns.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

You do know a lot of left leaning people own guns?

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/john-brown-gun-club-armed-anti-fascist-1234733200/

But then they also line up with your statement about people who think violence is acceptable for political means. More so than the group I assume you were referring to.

[Pete Sdev]

Re: Election Integrity

"Most of the developed and developing world requires voter ID"

Germany for example doesn't require id at the ballotbox, and that's a country with a compulsory id card.

Introducing a voter id requirement in a country without a compulsory id card scheme simply disenfranchises the poor. Which sounds like a good idea for some people but not democracy.

[collinsl]

Re: Election Integrity

Which is what the UK did at the last local elections, which has now been shown by studies to disenfranchise people because not everyone in the UK has an ID card because they are not compulsory.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

I'm sure you would have been very happy in 2016 if something similar had been done to keep leave voters away from the polls.

(I voted remain cos I knew that no government could be trusted with actually doing anything remotely sensible or of benefit to the general public)

[Roj Blake]

Re: Election Integrity

The rules are set up so that it's easier for old people to use their ID than young people.

For example, a Senior Citizen's Railcard can be used as ID at the polling station, but a Young Person's Railcard cannot.

It's pure coincidence that older people are more likely to vote Tory of course, and the same would have applied to the Brexit referendum.

[Stork]

Re: Election Integrity

In a lot of those places you also more or less automatically get on the electoral register, and can expect to vote without long queues.

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Re: Election Integrity

Most of the developed and developing world requires voter ID.

Really?

[lglethal]

Re: Election Integrity

A 2 party state is no better than a 1 party state, for precisely the reasons you mention. Indeed a 1 party state is better, as they can move agenda forward consistently, and do long term planning.

The BEST solution is having multiple parties across the entire political spectrum. This allows people to choose the party that best represents them, and because it's rare for one party to take ultimate control, coalitions and compromise are required. It's not perfect, but it is the best way to get the will of the people actually in operation. That and compulsory voting, taking place on weekends, in non-gerrymandered districts...

The US loses on all accounts...

[Big_Boomer]

Re: Election Integrity

100% with you there. Best of all, extremists get side-lined where they belong and those who shout loudest don't get any more exposure than they deserve. Multi-party Prop-Rep isn't perfect but it's head and shoulders better than the shite systems that the US/UK use.

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: Election Integrity

Of course, this is still open to corruption, if you don't have strict limits on election spending, as most real democracies do. In the US, it's pretty much down to who can get the most donations towards their election campaign, which pretty much by definition corrupts the candidates, because those donors are going to want something for their money, even if it is as "innocent" as a candidate who agrees with them. What you end up with is a plutocracy, because whoever has the most money to throw at the campaign has an unfair advantage.

I'd go so far as to say that all campaigning should come from a relatively small budget, and that budget should be funded from a grant of public money where the candidate does not have the funds to cover it. Candidates who fail to reach a voting threshold don't get their deposit refunded, which goes some way to reduce the number of purely frivolous candidates.

You might then say, "with so many candidates on the ballot paper, how do I know which one to vote for". The answer to that is, of course, if you don't know what the candidates stand for, after you have read the list of candidates and their positions, why are you voting at all?

[jmch]

Re: Election Integrity

"In the US, it's pretty much down to who can get the most donations towards their election campaign"

This issue will only get worse in the US, since their democracy was torpedoed by the Supreme Court decision that donating money to a campaign counts as "free speech" protected under the first amendment, which means that the highest court in the land has interpreted their constitution in a way that any campaign finance restrictions are unconstitutional.

[ITS Retired]

Re: Election Integrity

In the United States, lies, innuendo, propaganda and even outright slander are considered proper campaign strategies.

Good, honest people are buried under so much of the lies, innuendo, propaganda and even outright slander, they never run again.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Election Integrity

"Best of all, extremists get side-lined where they belong and those who shout loudest don't get any more exposure than they deserve."

Great idea but N. Ireland has shown it not to work. When PR was introduced I hoped and expected to see the moderates such as Alliance hold the balance Instead the Unionist vote migrated from the more moderate parties to the DUP and the SDLP vote to Sinn Fein. The result was power sharing between the two extremes.

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: Election Integrity

I would agree that the DUP are extremists, with some pretty fundamentalist religious ideology that has no place in the political sphere, and hard-right political stance, but I'd question whether this applies to Sinn Féin; they may have originated as what was essentially the political arm of the IRA (because the British government would not deal directly with the IRA), but as far as I can see, they have morphed into what is essentially a moderate centre-left pro-reunification party.

Whilst the reunification standpoint might arguably be said to favour the Irish Catholic part of the population, it might shock you to learn that most people in the Republic are not deeply religious, and many do not identify with any religious beliefs at all, let alone Catholicism, so as a result, there is little evidence of religious fundamentalism in Sinn Féin's politics.

Arguments about reunification aside (as I think we can all agree, we're not going to settle that one on an internet message board), it comes down to the DUP being a right-wing pro-England status-quo party (and I say pro-England, not pro-UK, as I doubt they give half a shit about Wales or Scotland), and Sinn Féin being the default opposition to this, of a moderate progressive centre-left party with some pro-republican tendencies. I know which of these I’d characterise as extremists, and it's not both of them.

edit - I'd also point out that power-sharing only seems to have worked for as long as the DUP had the majority, and as soon as they lost it, they threw their toys out of the pram and refused to form an assembly in Stormont, thus actively preventing power-sharing. In my mind, that should disqualify them from taking part at all, and the remaining parties should be allowed to form the assembly without them.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

When the Republican Party says "ensuring the integrity of our elections", that's a coded language that means "we're going to make voting as difficult as possible for people who we don't think will vote for us". Fairly contesting, and then accepting the outcome of democratic elections should be / used to be one of the pillars of modern liberal democracy, sad to see that it's in decline in one of the countries that pioneered the concept.

I think every election since 2000 and Gore's hanging chads has been contested. Politics has either gotten dirtier, or I've gotten older and wiser. Or more cynical. Here's an example-

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/08/14/hillary-clinton-gop-needs-to-be-held-accountable-for-supporting-trumps-lies-and-divisiveness/

Clinton added, “That is almost impossible to imagine today because of what has happened and what they have allowed to happen to themselves. I hope that we won’t have accountability just for Donald Trump and if there are others named in the indictments along with him for their behavior, but we will also have accountability for political party that has just thrown in with all of the lies and divisiveness and lack of any conscience about what was being done to the country.”

Which is classic projection from the woman who lost & found Whitewater docs, wiped a server 'with a cloth', nobbled Sanders for daring to challenge her, and created her fair share of lies commissioning the dodgy Steele 'dossier' and the whole 'Russian influence' fiasco she thinks cost her the election. Rather than the ordinary Americans realising she's someone who clearly lacks a conscience. But like any true democracy, America seems intent on using lawfare to eliminate their political opponents rather than leaving it to the electorate to decide who should run the country.

But that's really the key. The US, and many countries rely on elections for a slew of official positions, or decisions. That process needs to be fair, and seen to be fair.. Which aren't always the same thing. Countries decide who's allowed to vote, then let those people vote, count up the results and declare winners. In theory, that should be simple. In practice, it's not always that way, and there's been a long and sordid history of people trying to rig votes. Technology and 'voting reforms' simply create new opportunities to try and rig the process.

[Stork]

Re: Election Integrity

Downvoted for the lawfare comment. I have lived in Denmark, Germany, Britain, Switzerland and Portugal and did not see lawfare to be a major part of the electoral process in those places.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

You sure? Germany is busy trying to outlaw AfD.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

You sure? Germany is busy trying to outlaw AfD.

Yup, That's a curious state of affairs for a supposed democracy. I'm suprised the EU hasn't chimed in and threatened sanctions against Germany for abusing democracy.. As they've done with Hungary, Poland etc. But at least they've not gone so far as Ukraine has in banning oppositition parties. Yet.

I guess it's not suprising that so many migrants are desperate to escape France and the EU. Many will have fled from oppressive regimes that crushed political dissent, so it can't be much fun to see the same thing happening again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

I'm not sure why they'd want to come to the UK ;)

Seriously though, the laws passed of late surrounding protests are not at all good. It was some very bad optics seeing the met holding women face down on the ground trying to stop them protesting about the murder of a woman by a met officer. Supposedly in the name of 'covid'....

And some of the usual midwittery where people support JSO blocking roads but get all bent out of shape when people get arrested for chucking eggs at king charlie or holding up blank sheets of paper. Funnier too that this happened in Scotland, the supposed left wing counter to the evil tories from westminster. Chucking eggs, especially at recent prices, probably not a good idea. But you should be allowed to have signs or use other methods of voicing your opinion as long as you can keep it civil and are not doing damage or trespassing.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

And some of the usual midwittery where people support JSO blocking roads but get all bent out of shape when people get arrested for chucking eggs at king charlie or holding up blank sheets of paper.

But JSO are useful idiots that serve a political purpose, ie they're aligned to nutty Net Zero policies, along with most of our politicians and media. So those terrorists provide useful oxygen for publicity, even though they're obstructing the highways and preventing the public from going about their lawful business. Compare and contrast with dire threats made to Londoner's who are going around sabotaging the Mayor's traffic cameras.

But I digress. It's rather amazing to see TDS in full force though. Orange man bad! Weaponising the justice system to prevent a political opponent from participating in democracy is somehow safeguarding democracy. Oddly enough, every time some DA fancies their 13 minutes of fame for being the one to finally bring down Trump.. Trump's poll ratings improve. I think they're 70%+ in the primaries right now, but that may just be due to the lack of effective competition. General polling also seems to put him ahead. But Americans are funny like that. A lot of the media is about how the little guy triumps against the 'machine', or the bully, and Americans tend to like the plucky under dog who just keeps fighting. A Georgia cop seemed excited earlier today that they'd take Trump's mugshot when he's arrested. Trumps PR team is also probably excited because a mugshot of an ex-President and Presidential candidate will sell very well on t-shirts, hats, coffefe mugs etc etc.

Here's photo evidence of the depths the Dems will sink to to keep their candidate safe from Trump..

[cmdrklarg]

Re: Election Integrity

TDS - an affliction affecting people that cause them to support the Florida Orange Man regardless of what he's done.

Orange Man *is* bad! That the GOP hasn't figured that out yet is their biggest problem. He's lost 3 elections in a row (2018, 2020, and 2022). Doubling down on the tRumpism will not change that.

The GOP candidates can't win without him in the primaries, but can't win with him in the generals outside of the heavily gerrymandered areas. Sure the GOP loves him and the Dems hate him, but the key is that independents don't like him either. He can't win the general without independents.

Oh, and polls that say he'll win? They also claimed that 2022 was going to have a red wave.

Good day, and good luck!

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

TDS - an affliction affecting people that cause them to support the Florida Orange Man regardless of what he's done.

One version.

Trump Derangment Syndrome hasn't officially entered the DSMV (yet), but give it time. But it's a syndrome transmitted by a memetic virus, carried along the airwaves and our communications system. The symptoms manifest in many ways, but are generally triggered by the word 'Trump', which then leads to the person so triggered acting irrationally, and frequently violently. When the infected group up, the symptoms generally become more exagerated and pronounced, and can lead to billions of dollars in property damage. Another feature of the syndrome, like many similar psychiatric disorders is the refusal of the afflicted to recognise their illness. THEY don't suffer from TDS, everyone else does, which is a form of mass formation psychosis. But that's also not defined in the DSMV (yet), although was famously described under another name in Charles Mackay's famous 1841 publication.

(It really is weird the effect TDS has on some people. Locking up political opponents in the name of 'democracy' is just fine, and even essential for national security in the minds of TDS sufferers. Personally, I think it's an extremely slippery slope, but not being an American, I don't really have much skin in the game.)

[Casca]

Re: Election Integrity

Yea, and the moronic defending of the orange muppet isnt a virus? Mostly spread in florida and swamp states. Seems like Anonomous cowards are most inflicted for some reason.

But you are the only one who has seen the light?

[Stork]

Re: Election Integrity

If you consider the last hundred years or so of German history, it may not surprise you that German law (constitution I think) takes a dim view of organisations that attempt to change the democratic order. There are authorities (Verfassungsschutz/Verfassungsgericht) tasked with checking what organisations are up to.

They have looked at various organisations left and right in the past as is their legal duty, do you have any indication it’s not what has happened here?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

"takes a dim view of organisations that attempt to change the democratic order"

So they have a government organisation that is tasked to stop any other organisation that might change the democratic order. I'm trying to work out if this is an anti-democratic paradox or some odd statist authoritarianism. It is certainly a way to keep yourself in a job.

I suppose Germany did have an emperor for a long time before lurching into some sort of quasi-democracy for a few years.

[Stork]

Re: Election Integrity

It is a paradox of democracy. How do you deal with groups whose aim is to abolish or ignore it? Germany had it with Baader-Meinhof, Algeria with islamists. Do you tolerate the intolerant?

To me it is quite understandable that the framers of the German constitution wanted to avoid a repeat of the end of the Weimar Republic.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

So you abolish democracy so that no-one else can abolish it, sounds sane.

The start of the Weirmar era sounds just about as bad... Chaos into chaos into utter chaos. Which is probably why they are happy with statism. Sadly that is what led them down the path of very close ties with Russia.

I will give one credit to Germany, they do not tolerate antifa either. There would be utter outrage if the UK or USA sent out the riot police and water cannons against them.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

It is a paradox of democracy. How do you deal with groups whose aim is to abolish or ignore it?

Not really a paradox, just a side-effect of having a representative democracy. If the majority decide to elect a fascist government, well, that's the will of the people. The UK kinda worked around the problem by seperating the powers between Crown and State. Alternatively, you don't allow the government to do too much damage. Like rewrite the Constitution to 'modernise' it, or make it gender neutral.

Do you tolerate the intolerant?

Sadly many people never bothered to read past that quote. Or realise that they themselves are the intolerant..

[Stork]

Re: Election Integrity

In the case of Germany, the Nazi party didn’t win a parliamentary majority. They only got one after ganging up with a conservative party to expel the communists.

It is good you write kinda worked around. The episode with mr Johnson sending parliament home after lying to Lizzie showed that system to be rather weak, and everybody seemed okay with internment in NI back in the day.

If you dig into details of how democracy works, I am not sure current Britain has much to lecture Germany on.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

In the case of Germany, the Nazi party didn’t win a parliamentary majority. They only got one after ganging up with a conservative party to expel the communists.

Not really. The NSDAP kinda started off slowly, aided by a weak German President and at a time when Germany was still reeling from the after effects of WW1, and the post-war punishments. Much of it's messaging was pretty simple and populist. It was focused on anti–big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, much as left-wing politics is today. Tax the rich. Crush the middle classes. Rise up and seize the wealth you are entitled to from your oppressors. It was of course helped along by Himmler collecting muscle, and then using that as a way to eliminate political opponents by locking them up 'for their own protection'. That accelerated after Hitler was appointed Chancellor, and the eliminations became more permanent.

Eventually, it did win parliamentary majority-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party#Election_results

But obviously that becomes easier when you're the uniparty. But people can still vote, so it's still democratic.. right? And of course those that ignore history are condemned to get cancelled.. or repeat it. But then Joseph Goebbels greatly influenced modern political thinking, propaganda and psyops. Control the narrative, seize the power. Anyone who defies the authority of the state or dissents must be ruthlessly crushed. Part of this is weaponising language. Fascism is not uniquely right-wing, it's frequently been used by those on the left. Much of the NSDAP's ideas are more left than right-wing. But if you convince people that being right-wing automatically means they're also fascists, Nazis, racists etc, you spread the meme. You can also help this along with a bit of muscle, and it doesn't really matter if they're wearing brown or black shirts.

But history is repeating itself. In Ukraine, it's OUN or 'Right Sector' aligned parties typically did very badly in their elections, but they've seized power anyway and banned or jailed their political opponents. Defying the government, the ironically named 'Freedom Party' will get you locked up. The US has been busily locking up their political opponents. Germany's talking about banning a party for becoming too popular.. So people are right when they say that democracy is under threat. It's just sad that many people don't seem to recognise where the threat is coming from.

[Casca]

Re: Election Integrity

Oh, and there you got Ukraine involved in this thread. You really are a russian bot...

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

Oh, and there you got Ukraine involved in this thread. You really are a russian bot...

Huh? Earlier you seemed to think I was a Floridian swamp dweller. But you seem.. confused. This is understandable, depending on where you get your 'facts' from, your knowledge of history, or just how advanced your TDS is. Ukraine is held up by both Zelensky and the EU as a bastion of democracy that is under attack by the evil Russians. Yet Zelensky (and his post-2014 predecessors) locked up political opponents, banned opposition parties, eliminated their free press and media and will jail anyone critical of Zelensky or his government. Much of the Russophobia was stoked by Clinton and the DNC who saw reds under every bed, although not the ones waving flags for the American Communist Party(s) during the American 'fiery, but mostly peaceful' protests. She spent a lot of money compiling her dodgy dossier 'proving' Trump was a Russian pawn.. Although investigations showed the dossier was pretty much entirely false, and a lot of the 'facts' came from.. Ukraine. Much the same with the rest of the alleged influence campaign. But then when we're demanding the removal of Putin and promoting alternatives like Navalny, why shouldn't Russia respond in kind? Navalny has very little support inside Russia, and their Communist Party is the leading opposition party.

But that's just one of the ways democracy is under attack. We repeatedly interfere in other country's elections, yet get upset when people interfere in our own. The UK did a bit of democracy to prevent foreign interference resulting in a bit less than half the population insisting we made the wrong decision, and we should ignore the democratic process. Again, one of those snags with a representative democracy. Sometimes people will vote for stuff you don't agree with.

Problem is our politicians, being politicians understand the political process far better than most voters. So they also understand how to abuse it. Sometimes there are checks and balances, like the election laws, procedures and Election Commissions. In theory, that provides a sense of security and fairness.. But if you can control those, it does the opposite. Which is really the issue here. Trump thought Georgia, and especially Fulton County's election had problems. Fulton County has retaliated and is trying to throw Trump and his 'co-conspirators' in jail for the rest of their lives. But since that fateful election, Dems have pretty much consistently claimed the election was run perfectly. There were no issues, errors or omissions. Not like in Florida where hanging chads robbed Gore of his rightful place on the throne.

Same thing will happen in Georgia where these issues will be re-litigated. All Trump needs to do is show that there were problems in Fulton County, and those weren't properly investigated. Like with Gore, this will probably end up being appealed, especially as the prosecutor is also pretty much the defendent. But such is politics. Biden came to power allegedly to 'heal the divide' in American politics, but has pretty much done the exact opposite by constantly attacking his opposition. Well, we can assume that's Biden, but yesterday it turned out KJP was really POTUS, at least in the Twitterverse or X-space.

It's quite sad so many are so confused. I'm critical of Ukraine, therefore I must be a Putin trollbot. I'm critical of the Democrats and the way they're attacking democracy, therefore I must be a Trump supporter. I'm actually something far, far more evil in that I'm a libertarian and (mostly) a fan of democracy. It's an imperfect system, but it's the best we've got.

[Casca]

Re: Election Integrity

Including you it seems

[jmch]

Re: Election Integrity

" If the majority decide to elect a fascist government, well, that's the will of the people. "

Yes, BUT it is "the will of the people" for that political term, not forever. After they take up power, the fascist government still has to rule within the 'rules of the game' (limits set by the constitution), and once the political term is up, the fascist government still has to organise free and fair elections, and transfer power if they don't win. There's nothing unfair or undemocratic with excluding from the democratic process any party that is unwilling to conform to the basic rules of the democratic 'game'. That is why changing the rules of the game (constitutional amendment) requires more than a simple majority.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Election Integrity

and once the political term is up, the fascist government still has to organise free and fair elections, and transfer power if they don't win

Or just lock up political opponents, ban political parties or fiddle with the voting procedures to make sure you keep winning. Vote for the uniparty, because it's the only party! It's an entirely free & fair election, it's just they're the only party left on the ballot.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Election Integrity

"The US, and many countries rely on elections for a slew of official positions, or decisions."

Whoever you vote for you always get a politician. Having politicians make political decisions is inevitable. Having them rather than competent people implement the decisions is madness.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Election Integrity

Having them rather than competent people implement the decisions is madness

I always thought that the US habit of electing sherrifs was a recipe for corruption and nepotism.. Would you trust a politician to be fair and evenhanded in the application of the law?

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

That's just phase 1. The GOP, as it exists today, is a post-democracy party. The idea is to keep the country on an accelerating march to a fascist dictatorship. They may keep the republican elements in name only, like China or North Korea. Technically the people can elect representatives, but they have to be approved by the central authority, and of course all real power rests with the party elite.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

And that is different from the dems how?

Sanders was a viable candidate in 2016 and Trump V Sanders would have been epic, but the DNC picked Hillary as she was far more establishment.

The issue in CA with Feinstein where Gov Gav wants to appoint his preferred candidate for the senate seat but the Washington dems want Schiff.

The AOC from the NYC is now a loyal party lapdog.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

I'm talking about like how the Republicans were trying to rig the game in Ohio by raising the threshhold needed to get items on the ballot for the state constitution, or the efforts of Republican legislators in Oklahoma and Alabama to dilute the power of black voters. Or all the efforts by Republican legislatures across the country to do things like limit mail-in voting and early in-person voting. Also efforts to do things like banning people from being able to hand out slices of pizza or bottles of water to people standing in line. Or all the Voting ID laws where the forms of acceptable ID tend to favor older white people.

That's all before we get to the coordinated conspiracy to completely subvert the 2020 election and install their own personal dictator that resulted in a mob of people storming the US Capitol building literally looking to execute the VP -- erecting a gallows out in front and people inside walking around with zip-tie handcuffs -- literally attacking the police officers, stealing things from the offices of Congressional members, smearing feces on the walls, etc.

There are literally hundreds of other examples that are of trivial difficulty to find if one but looks. The MAGA version of the GOP is a post-democracy party that only cares about holding onto power as their voting base of old racist white men is starting to die off. They are working to rig elections so that they retain power even if the majority of voters in a given state are Democrats, and they've been adopting dangerous rhetoric more and more that has resulted in a large increase in the number of people who commit acts of political violence or even just think violence is an acceptable way to settle political differences.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

We've been over this before. The ones committing the violence in the name of politics is the far left. This has been the way throughout history as no-one willingly wants to live in such a world.

And I'm sure if it was a republican or someone in a MAGA hat handing out water and pizza to people queuing to vote you'd be apoplectic.

Still waiting to see a photo of the poop smeared walls in the capitol. That appears to be very much a leftist fever dream as that is usually what they do. There are however photos of the aftermath of the bomb planted by far left extremists.

And lets not forget the guillotine brought to the white house.

I would suggest some professional help as your TDS seems terminal. Trump is living rent free in your head.

[Someone Else]

Re: Election Integrity

The ones committing the violence in the name of politics is the far left.

Soooo many Lefties were found (and arrested) at the Jan 6 Capitol insurrection.

You know, just because you say a thing doesn't make it a fact. (Although doing that does appear to be a hallmark of fascists in general, and MAGAts in particular.)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

As said earlier, if it was an insurrection do you really think they would have come unarmed? You've fallen hook, line, sinker, rod, tackle box and boat for a false flag.

If the authorities thought it was going to be actually violent then they would have brought out the national guard or at least had more police.

The poop on the walls claim appears to be a 'sources close to someone who was told by someone else' type story. Not a single photo and all the stories reference in a circle.

Its all fake.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

Plenty of them WERE armed. The Secret Service collected literally HUNDREDS of weapons at Trump's little pre-insurrection rally. There were people who stashed big arsenals of guns in their hotel rooms as well. The Secret Service probably saved a lot of lives that day.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

>>Its all fake.

The cry of many so-called "patriots" who found themselves on the side of facistic traitors.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

So... whataboutism and alternate reality bullshit is all you've got. Noted.

[Casca]

Re: Election Integrity

At least people you say has TDS manage to post not as Anonymous Coward. You really are a coward it seems.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

And when you think about it, TDS would apply to Trump supporters.

For a behavior to be deranged, it has to be somehow outside of the norm. Supporting a narcissistic, philandering, racist, xenophobic, serial grifter, and convicted rapist blindly is NOT normal behavior in the 21st century.

For behavior to qualify as a syndrome it would have to be sustained over a period of time.

Trump supporters meet both criteria, while Trump detractors are simply acting in a way consistent with social norms.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

"convicted rapist "

Citation needed.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

LOL! That's the part you take issue with? I'd ask for citations for things you say, but that would be entire posts, and you're too cowardly to even put your name to your comments so I can't be sure I'm even talking to the same coward each time. Either way, even excluding that one it wouldn't change the conclusion that your support for a man who has a decades long history of lying and cheating to/on everything from romantic partners to taxes, and a similarly long history of racist and xenophobic actions -- he and his father have been cited by NYC multiple times for racial discrimination in housing developments -- is deranged, and that your continued support over a sustained period of time makes it a syndrome.

But... Since you asked...

Judge Lewis Kaplan said the jury's finding "implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her" with his fingers.

"[I]n other words, that Mr. Trump in fact did 'rape' Ms. Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside New York Penal Law," Kaplan wrote in granting Carroll's motion to dismiss Trump's counterclaim.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-rejects-trumps-counterclaim-jean-carroll/story?id=102076228

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

Did you even read the article you linked? I'm starting to think that TDS eats IQ points....

"In her media appearances following the verdict, Carroll insisted that Trump had raped her despite the jury finding Carroll did not prove Trump raped her as the term is defined in New York penal law. "

This is still related to a CIVIL case and you cannot be 'convicted' in a civil case. And that article was specifically related to a claim brought by Trump AFTER the first trial as E Jean Carroll kept claiming that she had been raped AFTER the jury finding that there was not enough evidence to substantiate that claim.

The judge can say what he likes, the jury delivered its verdict and it was accepted.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

> Did you even read the article you linked?

Did you?

>I'm starting to think that TDS eats IQ points....

I agree. You seem to get dumber by the post.

And the fact remains that Trump was found liable for raping Ms. Carrol, and when he tried playing the same stupid red herring game you are, he got slapped down in epic fashion by the judge. As the judge said, under a common definition of the term "rape" Trump was found to have raped Ms. Carrol. It's also funny how our Freeze Peach aficionado thinks that it's somehow a violation of his rights to be ordered not to talk about a pending case, to prevent witness tampering and other issues, but he's only too happy to try to infringe -- using his definition of the term -- on other people's rights with lawsuits.

>The judge can say what he likes, the jury delivered its verdict and it was accepted.

Indeed. The jury said Trump RAPED Ms. Carrol.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

The hand written jury verdict clearly says NO to the claim of rape.

And as we all know, No means No.

So feel free to have a temper tantrum at being told you are wrong, again.

[jmch]

Re: Election Integrity

"The ones committing the violence in the name of politics is the far left."

Plenty of violent political extremists on both the far left and the far right. Saying the far left does it does not excuse the far right. Jan 6th was far right, and whether they smeared shit on the walls was irrelevant - they were there to intimidate or force legislators to overturn the result of a free and fair election. And in the context of current US politics, Mr Orange was right there instigating the crowds to violence. Saying 'oh I told them not to' because of one tweet, after having spent literally months spouting off about stolen election, ways to get back into power, shows of force..... In fact I'm not even sure anyone is surprised, since this is someone who publicly declared *before he even got elected in 2016* that he wouldn't necessarily respect an election result in which he lost.

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: Election Integrity

The ones committing the violence in the name of politics is the far left. This has been the way throughout history

Well, to disprove that argument takes only a single counter-example doesn't it?

Here's a few:

Hitler

Mussolini

"The Proud Boys"

Oswald Mosley

The city state of Sparta

I could go on, but I think it might exhaust your brain cell.

[DS999]

Re: Election Integrity

People who believe only the far left is committing political violence have a host of excuses, like calling Nazis "far left" (because they are "socialists" lol) and will claim the Proud Boys aren't violent "they're just defending themselves against BLM" and other crazy lies.

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: Election Integrity

To anyone who claims that National Socialism was socialist, I point out that North Korea's actual name is "the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," despite being neither democratic nor a people's republic (like the Nazis, it is socialist in name only too).

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Election Integrity

Technically the people can elect representatives

The whole US Electoral Colleage thing baffles me - the state votes for a party but the representative electors are *not* bound by the decision that their state made at the ballot box.

How is that democracy? It's more akin to the system that elected emperors of the Holy Roman Empire [1] - rife with corruption, backstabbing and, sometimes, outright murder.

[1] As Gibbon (?) remarked - neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

"How is that democracy?"

Very simple, it isn't. The US isn't a democracy by the definition us right-pondians use. They use a mostly democratic process for voting, except in the one party states.

[aerogems]

Re: Election Integrity

The US is a republic, not a democracy first off. If you want to get into the weeds you could say we're a democratic republic, but that's neither here nor there.

The electoral college is an anti-democratic idea and that was always the whole point. When the founders of this nations set it up, the whole idea was to dilute the power of the uneducated farmer. You can argue whether the idea was a bad one from the start or simply one that has long since outlived its usefulness, but the fact remains that it was deliberately anti-democratic. Always has been, always will be.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Election Integrity

And now the system protects the US from undue influence from the densely populated cities. Which is no bad thing.

In the UK the complaint is that politics is London-centric as it is, by UK standards, a very densely populated area and does get a good share of the available money.

[codejunky]

The smell of desperation

Another! No way! I am shocked! The guy who has so far been constantly attacked with the desperate lawfare effort to keep him from running again has yet another one to the collection. Is it any wonder he is leading the polls to be the republican candidate? And if he is facing off with Biden I would be shocked if it was even a contest.

I do understand the fear of Trump winning the presidency though. They spent so much time and effort trying to damage the guy that he would be fully justified to tear his way through the corruption and kick them out hard if not have them all on charges.

They are already trying to prepare for such a situation with Hunters plea deal trying to pardon him for all his crimes not just the one he was being charged with. Luckily it didnt seem to work.

[jmch]

Re: The smell of desperation

"... if he is facing off with Biden..."

It's terrible for the state of US democracy that the 2 presumed candidates would potentially be 82 and 79 if taking office in 2026, with a term running until they would be 86 and 83. Trump has a litany of health problems, don't know about Biden but he comes across as rather frail. There's a strong possibility that their respective vice-presidents would end up as unelected president-by-default. It's not just an issue of their potentially being incapable of acting (or actually dying) while in office, it's having people in charge whose whole worldview is obsolete.

Are there really no competent politicians under the age of 70 in the whole of the US, on either side of the divide????

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Rather frail? I think you need to take off the TDS tinted glasses. Biden is a walking corpse, as are most of the senior members of the US establishment. Heck we witnessed Moscow Mitch have a minor neurological glitch live on TV. And we are also witnessing what could become a fairly major spat in the dem party as Gov Gav wants to replace Dianne Feinstein with his favoured candidate while Nancy Pelosi wants to install Shifty Schiff instead.

If RBG had stepped down due to her ill health then Obama could have appointed her replacement. Instead we've got the rather useless ACB.

[codejunky]

Re: The smell of desperation

@jmch

"t's terrible for the state of US democracy that the 2 presumed candidates would potentially be 82 and 79 if taking office in 2026"

I am not sure it is so terrible if they are in fit enough health to go ahead. I dont know of Trump suffering any particular problems and the democrats keep telling us Biden is in good health. While there are problems of older ages there is also the knowledge that comes with experience. But I do understand your point.

"Are there really no competent politicians under the age of 70 in the whole of the US, on either side of the divide????"

The democrats seem to throw themselves behind a single candidate and the others are just filler. I doubt they consider Biden to be a good runner but who is there to replace him? As for republicans there seems to be a field of people the GOP would like to race and Trump who is the popular candidate that people would actually want. In 2016 there was a race on the republican side and the dems chose Hillary even though Sanders was popular with the democrat voters. This time there seems less choice.

*dunno who downvoted but upvote from me

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

"dems chose Hillary"

That is being generous :) Pretty much the entire DNC hated Sanders and rigged the system against him. All the establishment is doing is pissing off the middle ground voters.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

>Pretty much the entire DNC hated Sanders and rigged the system against him

How unlike a (nominally) left wing party

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

The impression that they give off of being 'left wing' is thinner than petrol station bog paper.

Hawaii burns and the dems are more interested in funding their boy in Ukraine cos that is more profitable.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: The smell of desperation

It's terrible for the state of US democracy that the 2 presumed candidates would potentially be 82 and 79 if taking office in 2026, with a term running until they would be 86 and 83.

But this is democracy. The US system has term limits, but doesn't have age limits. Thanks to the miracles of medical science, people live longer. So in theory, you could end up with leaders who've gained decades of political experience running the country. Which could be a GoodThing(tm). Alternatively, you end up with people that aren't physically or mentally fit to hold office, although they can perhaps follow an autocue. But they won the vote, so get the job. There is a process, sort of by which they can be declared unfit to hold office, but there may be challenges invoking that process. The Dems tried it against Trump and failed, and are shielding Biden from that process knowing that if it succeeded, they'd end up with Harris.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

The only term limit is for the president. Either that needs to go OR everyone else needs term limits. The latter being the far better solution.

The 'old guard' have blocked the entry for any new blood for decades.

[lglethal]

Re: The smell of desperation

That would be a good solution. Maximum 3 terms in office for any candidate. Maximum 3 terms for holding an executive position within a political party.

You would see a steady stream of new faces, and new ideas coming through, and perhaps even some adults!

Lets keep going - firms not allowed to donate to political parties (they're not people who can vote after all!), maximum limits on what people can donate, full list of donors must be published (or at least provided to electoral commission/Tax authorities for review).

I'd also personally add, no political science majors allowed in parliament, and no lawyers. But then again, not all political science majors are evil... Lawyers on the other hand... :P

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Getting the money out of politics would be epic but it will never happen. Too many people have lined their pockets.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

>You would see a steady stream of new faces, and new ideas

Or since you couldn't be a career politician you would have the party doners drop in their people for a term. So the cabinet would be GS VPs on secondment for 4 years.

And none of the politicians would have the experience or contacts to get anything done so would just do as their told.

[jmch]

Re: The smell of desperation

"Or since you couldn't be a career politician..."

I don't see why not, if the term limits are for a specific position. Candidates can progress from the State parliament to the state senate or national parliament and eventually run for state governor / vice-president / president. If you've been in any institution for 2-3 terms (that's 8-12 years) and aren't capable of getting elected to a more senior position, your time is up. If you progress through the ranks, you can build up valuable experience at every level

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

>firms not allowed to donate to political parties

We tried that. Independent people can donate upto their personal $5k limit. Mining and oil companies employ a lot of contractors who all got a $5k contract payment before the election

[Jellied Eel]

Re: The smell of desperation

You would see a steady stream of new faces, and new ideas coming through, and perhaps even some adults!

Terrible idea. Sort of. So not long ago, one John Fetterman got elected-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fetterman

Generally described as a progressive and a populist, Fetterman advocates healthcare as a right, criminal justice reform, abolishing capital punishment, raising the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour, and legalizing cannabis.

So plenty of ideas there. Unfortunately, due to some rather serious medical complications, he struggles to articulate them. Ok, so not necessarily a problem because technology can enable communication. Except politics is a blood sport, an adversarial system and requires debate. Complete with an odd time system where speakers are given minutes (or sometimes seconds) to make their points. Even though he was elected, and disabled people shouldn't be discriminated against.. He can't really be very effective in the current system.

But in modern politics, this is less of an impediment. Fetterman is a Democrat +1, and like Feinstein demonstrated recently, can just be told to say "Aye". But then that's how the system works. Congress critters may arrive with all sorts of bold ideas, but then find the system will dicate the bills they propose, staffers will write them, and they'll be instructed on how to vote. And with 8-10,000 page bundles of bills dropped off the night before, it's not like many congress critters actually get a chance to read, understand and amend any of those documents. Especially if they're juniors, and hope to get seats on any of the important committees.

So it's not really a representative democracy, more a rubber stamping exercise controlled by the party machinery on both sides.

I'd also personally add, no political science majors allowed in parliament, and no lawyers. But then again, not all political science majors are evil... Lawyers on the other hand...

I dunno.. I'm catching up on Charles Stross's Laundry files and got to where we're given a new PM. He makes the rather elequent point that the UK's House of Lords reforms meant people with business and other specialised skills & experience could get enobled and given a seat in the Lords. Given the Lord's job to scrutinise legislation coming from the rabble in the other place, it's a rather important function. In theory anyway, or it's another way to stack the decks. But given politicians job is to create legislation, lawyers become rather important, as well as constitutional experts. See Biden's attempt to erase student debt as an example. Sorry, Mr President, that's unconstitutional. Or unconstitutional in it's current form, so please try again. Lawyers caught that one, and are a necessary evil when it comes to drafting and proposing legislation.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: The smell of desperation

"He makes the rather elequent point that the UK's House of Lords reforms meant people with business and other specialised skills & experience could get enobled and given a seat in the Lords."

I'd like to see an arrangement where the president, or whatever the title might be, of the chartered professional institutions* automatically became members. Also far fewer political retreads and definitely no Dorries.

* The Royal Society, the various medical Royal Colleges etc.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: The smell of desperation

I'd like to see an arrangement where the president, or whatever the title might be, of the chartered professional institutions* automatically became members. Also far fewer political retreads and definitely no Dorries.

* The Royal Society, the various medical Royal Colleges etc.

We've been there, done that, sort of. So the good'ol Invisible College, which may or may not have been connected to the Royal Society. But the UK was a bit simpler in those days, at least until (or because of?) Cromwell's parliamentary reforms. But the various CPIs already consult (or lobby) government, it's just the government (or Parliament) doesn't have the knowledge to know they're being sold a bill of goods. Or government can just ignore any advice because the advice doesn't come with directorships, consultancy payments etc.

Could work though. Make the upper house an elected chamber, but seats are divvied up amongst the various CPIs to nominate candidates. Which would be mostly democratic I guess. Chuck in a few lay people to balance things out a bit and call it good. Would still need legal support. That part the Crown seems to have got right, ie standard advice is don't sign anything important without running it past a lawyer, and the Crown has KCs to call on to help with that.

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: The smell of desperation

The VP is elected at the same time as the President.

(and you may remember that the GOP supporters complained a lot having a woman as VP because they expected Biden to die ASAP)

The only case of someone becoming President without being elected VP before is Gerald Ford, nominated to VP by Nixon when the previous VP had to resign.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: The smell of desperation

Are there really no competent politicians under the age of 70 in the whole of the US or the UK?

FTFY

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: The smell of desperation

Is it any wonder he is leading the polls to be the republican candidate?

There's an obvious conclusion to draw from that, and it's not that the guy is being victimised. It includes the word "fuckwits".

[jmch]

Re: The smell of desperation

" it's not that the guy is being victimised. It includes the word "fuckwits"."

There is, actually, an underlying topic that very few are willing to discuss because of rank partisanship. Lets get the obvious out of the way - Trump is a narcissist egomaniac, he is never wrong, what he says now is always right even if it contradicts what he said 5 minutes ago, laws do not apply to him, he does whatever he wants, and he projects himself as some sort of super-competent businessman when in fact he got a bunch of startup capital from his family, which makes it relatively easy to do well in real estate when markets are booming, and he managed to bankrupt casinos which are basically money-printing machines. Neither by temperament nor by competence is he remotely fit to chair a PTA meeting, let alone be president of the USA.

Also, though....

Many Americans (and, I am sure, people all over the world) are effing sick of being told what's best for them by the unelected government-managerial technocrats who actually run countries nowadays. Candidates can only get elected if (a) selected by a party and (b) they get the funding, which makes them beholden to not 1 but 2 sets of unelected* power-brokers. Governments farm out many tasks to supposedly independent bodies whose members are nevertheless dependent on the people in power to give them their jobs. The same select group of people rotate in and out between regulatory bodies and directorships of the big corporations they are supposed to regulate. Lobbyists write laws wholesale and then dump thousand-page white papers onto parliamentarians who lack the time to read them and the capacity to understand them. News and social media keep getting consolidated into fewer and fewer hands, each pushing their own agenda. And while there is very little transparency into the details of all of this shit, a huge number of people are seeing their quality of life stagnate, and feel powerless to do anything about it.

In that context, I can see the attraction of voting for someone who is coming completely from outside the usual circle of same-old usual career politicians. And I also understand the confirmation bias of people seeing what they want to see - an outsider who will make real changes to a broken system - rather than the reality of a fuckwit who is all bluster and no substance.

*to be fair, party officials are often elected but only from within the party ranks, or from within a small closed section of the party ranks

[Casca]

Re: The smell of desperation

The trump supporters has awaken I see...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

The guy who has so far been constantly attacked

Criminals get investigated and prosecuted all the time. "Lock him up. Lock him up!" to paraphrase the mob.

[codejunky]

Re: The smell of desperation

@AC

"Criminals get investigated and prosecuted all the time."

How about have fabricated dossiers, The FBI breaking procedure to investigate and wire-tap including altering an email to directly change its meaning to get permission to spy on a political candidate. That was 2016. In the recent ellection the FBI spread misinformation (aka pushed lies) as exposed by the twitter files while actively protecting his opposition from criticism of crimes in the family. You say criminals get investigated and prosecuted all the time but this is against a political opponent, seemingly not against a criminal.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Was that when a week before the election the FBI announced they were going to investigate the leading candidate for a national security leak, but after she lost they decided there was no evidence?

[codejunky]

Re: The smell of desperation

@Yet Another Anonymous coward

"Was that when a week before the election the FBI announced they were going to investigate the leading candidate for a national security leak, but after she lost they decided there was no evidence?"

And what was that an investigation into?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Was it Pizzagate or Flat-earth? Remind us.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Ooh, ooh! How about Birthergate? As pushed by [check notes] a Mr D. Trump

Trump lost. Get over it. (If he'd gotten over defeat he wouldn't be in this pickle, would he, hmm?)

Trump and his conspiratorial cabal of elites are going down. The irony.

[Someone Else]

@ codejunky -- Re: The smell of desperation

"How about...". "What about..." But didn't they...". Blah, Blah, Blah. Yadda, yadda, yadda. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!

This has nothing to do with Hunter, or Hillary, or Dianne, or Nancy, or Richard M., or (either) George, or whatever weak straw- or bogeyman you wish to present. It has to do with Donald, (a.k.a. Florida Man), period. A salient debate would be as to whether he did the things he was charged with, and what the evidence shows about this case, and no other. So you trolls could raise your game, and dig into that. That you won't, but insist on playing the "look over there...Squirrel!" game, tends to imply that you can't. Go ahead, prove me wrong by raising your game, and providing cogent debate. I'll hang up and listen for my answer.

[codejunky]

Re: @ codejunky -- The smell of desperation

@Someone Else

"Blah, Blah, Blah. Yadda, yadda, yadda. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!"

Keep your panties on. Read the comment before wetting them please.

"This has nothing to do with Hunter, or Hillary, or Dianne, or Nancy, or Richard M"

None of whom were in the comment you responded to.

"or whatever weak straw- or bogeyman you wish to present"

Come back... Earth to someone else... You are the one bringing in weak straw and bogeymen that YOU mention.

"A salient debate would be as to whether he did the things he was charged with, and what the evidence shows about this case, and no other."

Nope. In blind isolation to just this case would be ignorance of the lawfare effort against him. The fact that he has multiple charges of varying desperation in an obvious effort to try to damage his reputation with voters or preferably stop him from being eligible to run. Hence why I brought up the fact of fabricated evidence previously and the abuse and misuse by the state security services.

"That you won't, but insist on playing the "look over there...Squirrel!" game, tends to imply that you can't."

You might want to take your own advice. Come back when you raise your game

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @ codejunky -- The smell of desperation

covfefejunky> lawfare

Doesn't Mr Trump SLAPP people a lot? Lawfare indeed.

You've coming across as a sad little digital-"soldier"/useful-idiot there, partner.

[Someone Else]

Re: @ codejunky -- The smell of desperation

Nope. In blind isolation to just this case would be ignorance of the lawfare effort against him.

OK, bring it on, junky. Where's the evidence of the newly neologized phrase "lawfare"? Per wikipedia, the term means the "use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter individual's usage of their legal rights." Well, show me the money. For example, explain to the class where Florida Man's legal rights are being deterred? One could easily make the case that he is getting special treatment beyond that over which you and I would be afforded in similar, or even lesser, circumstances. (No travel restrictions, still got his passport, no ankle bracelet GPS tracker, no monetary bond, etc.). Or, perhaps you'd like to take a shot at the crux of your claim, that the shady "deep state conspiracy" (or, if you'd like bonus points, you could use proper names), is primarily out to "damage or delegitimize" Florida Man. To do that, you'd have to demonstrate that F.M. was not guilty of any of the things he's been charged with¹, and that these were indeed trumped-up charges (see what I did there?). All the while ignoring the fact that he continues to poll very well with the MAGAts, and certainly has not been hobbled in his fund raising efforts, either.

So you'll pardon me if I'm not willing to believe your cry of "lawfare" on face value. Now if you could come up with some credible evidence of lawfare, we could have a conversation at a level that transcends the "Neener, neener" level that you seem to want to degrade this to. But in the absence of any such evidence, one can only perceive that your bumper-sticker responses are merely the bleatings of one whose hero has been shown to not be of the character and moral fiber that one so desperately insists his hero must have.

Looking forward to your response, junky. Will be interesting to see if you can indeed meet the challenge. (Popcorn is at the ready, incase you can't).

_{¹But, of course, that is the job of a jury to determine. Do you not have faith in the American system of justice; that you would supplant it with your own dictums?}

[codejunky]

Re: @ codejunky -- The smell of desperation

@Someone Else

"OK, bring it on, junky. Where's the evidence of the newly neologized phrase "lawfare"?"

I aint a real fan of the phrase but it applies accurately. The Steele dossier and the actions taken by security services in an abuse of power to open an investigation but also hold the investigation open even after they knew it fake. The twitter files exposed the security services spreading misinformation (lies). Hunters laptop was concealed and the investigation hush hushed. 2 impeachments, one concerning the Bidens interference (as VP) in protecting his son from investigation in Ukraine which Trump wanted the investigation reopened (Hunters activities now coming to light with the 'big guy' being more involved than he originally claimed). Even when the FBI raided Trumps home they leaked photo's of an active investigation.

The J6 garbage showed how desperate they were to go after Trump even though he did nothing wrong and the event was self inflicted leading to conspiracy claims (amazing how many 'conspiracy theories' have come true though). We have Alvin Bragg bringing a case he decided against previously but the timing is great. Fulton County uploaded publicly a grand jury indictment of Trump, before the grand jury met to vote! Then released a document that looks eerily similar to the one they prepared earlier.

This is a start.

"For example, explain to the class where Florida Man's legal rights are being deterred?"

It would be interesting to see you hold up against this kind of action. We look down on countries where the state is used as a weapon against political opponents but now it is happening in the US.

"One could easily make the case that he is getting special treatment beyond that over which you and I would be afforded in similar, or even lesser, circumstances. (No travel restrictions, still got his passport, no ankle bracelet GPS tracker, no monetary bond, etc.)"

Actually a recent stupidity was to use the argument that Trump is a flight risk' to grab his data. That is the level of moron and desperation going after him. The special treatment he is getting is his opponents using the power of the state to go after a political opponent.

"To do that, you'd have to demonstrate that F.M. was not guilty of any of the things he's been charged with"

Really? So instead of the actions which have been proven and public must be ignored because for some reason we have to demonstrate Trump isnt guilty of... how many crimes are they trying for now? Noting more keep coming all the time.

I am not defending Trump as having not done anything, I dont know. But using the state as a weapon against a political opponent is corrupt and we typically look down on such behaviour.

"So you'll pardon me if I'm not willing to believe your cry of "lawfare" on face value."

You dont have to. The evidence isnt difficult. Its actually amazing to claim ignorance of it.

"bleatings of one whose hero has been shown to not be of the character and moral fiber that one so desperately insists his hero must have."

And here is the stupid tribal response. Nope. Here is a hypothetical scenario for you. Imagine Trump did break the law. Imagine he actually, wilfully and even with malicious intent did something criminal. Imagine they try to prosecute him and actually succeed in a guilty verdict. Doesnt matter the punishment but they actually get him for an actual real crime and convict.

In that scenario anyone but an irrational, hatred blinded anti-Trumper (and even then) to not have any doubt that the evidence wasnt fabricated, the security services were honest about it, that this wasnt just another attempt by the state to take out their political opponent. And of course this stands in direct contrast with the investigations for the Bidens which is/should have been conducted.

[Casca]

Re: @ codejunky -- The smell of desperation

You really are funny, tragic but funny

[ssharwood]

Re: The smell of desperation

OK I'll bite. I'll regret it, but here goes.

I just don't get the logic behind the "lawfare" argument. The defendant literally asked Georgia's governor to find him some votes, and has failed to produce any evidence that the election was "rigged". The Georgia indictment points out that his associates tried to mess with voting machines. How is that stuff NOT worthy of investigation? Or condemnation?

I gather another strand of the "lawfare" argument is that the timing of the cases is suspicious given campaigning season has commenced. Yet I suspect that if the indictments had been made earlier, critics would have dismissed them as the result of rushed investigations ... seems there's no way to win against this argument.

I say from a distance and without a vote to cast - but as an increasingly stunned observer of US politics which from down here looks to be dominated by ideology rather than a genuine interest in governance.

[codejunky]

Re: The smell of desperation

@ssharwood

"I just don't get the logic behind the "lawfare" argument. The defendant literally asked Georgia's governor to find him some votes, and has failed to produce any evidence that the election was "rigged". The Georgia indictment points out that his associates tried to mess with voting machines. How is that stuff NOT worthy of investigation? Or condemnation?"

The lawfare argument is the many legal attacks to try to harm and stop Trump. Also how can Trump provide evidence of a rigged election when attempts to do so were blocked? Maybe it was or not but the desperation to stop such challenges didnt look good. The Georgia indictment has an interesting issue that it was posted up before the grand jury even met to vote. Oops. Want to know something more embarrassing? Emily Kohrs the forewoman for the special grand jury apparently said in an interview that she wanted to subpoena Trump because she gets to swear everyone in and it would be cool to get 60 seconds with Trump! CBS and I even stopped it at the right time for you-

https://youtu.be/8LhqUHDO-8E?t=63

"I say from a distance and without a vote to cast - but as an increasingly stunned observer of US politics which from down here looks to be dominated by ideology rather than a genuine interest in governance."

I am in the same position with the same opinion

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Also how can Trump provide evidence of a rigged election when attempts to do so were blocked?

There were plenty of attempts at feeding "evidence" talked-up by the conspiracy wackos into the attempt to overturn the election. All of it turning out to be wacko conspiracy nonsense. Each time it had "The smell of desperation." And I thought, "Another! No way! I am shocked!"

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

It is worth casting your mind back a few years to when several prominent democrats warned that voting machines may be vulnerable to hacking and/or other means of not registering votes.

https://www.warren.senate.gov/oversight/letters/warren-klobuchar-wyden-and-pocan-investigate-vulnerabilities-and-shortcomings-of-election-technology-industry-with-ties-to-private-equity

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Yes, yes they did. What did the now defunct "Cyber-Ninjas" find in Arizona, hmm?* What did all the ballot recounts reveal? Hmm? (Apart from more votes for Biden, LOL.)

*And how much money did those grifters make from that farce?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

IIRC from a fair list of investigations into voting machine security and potential election fraud in both the US and a scattering of cases in Canada...

... that altogether too many such machines are in fact variously insecure, but ALSO that nobody had in fact taken advantage of said insecurity to actually meddle, at least so far as the operation of said machines is concerned.

[ssharwood]

Re: The smell of desperation

So here's the thing. When a public figure says "Russia, if you're listening", later tries to induce a foreign power to interfere in domestic politics, tells a zillion lies about an election, and refuses to assist in retrieval of classified documents, I don't see investigations as attacks - I see them as necessary and appropriate. And just the sort of thing that a mature democracy with a strong rule of law encourages and can tolerate.

S.

[codejunky]

Re: The smell of desperation

@ssharwood

"So here's the thing"

Care to come back? Where the hell are you running off to?

"When a public figure says "Russia, if you're listening", later tries to induce a foreign power to interfere in domestic politics"

Hillary has a private server and wipes evidence. Trump asking if foreign hackers have the contents would only make you squeal like a girl with her knickers in a twist if there was a possibility that those emails could have got out, and squeal they did. Imagine all that evidence that was deleted appearing.

"tells a zillion lies about an election"

A zillion! Biggly number? Wtf are you on about? If its about the inconsistencies of the election then its not really lies is it. Its his opinion which might be right or wrong but say lies is to exaggerate. This being at a time when actual lies were being told by the FBI and Biden but also blue states relaxing the rules for casting votes in ways that affected the election and integrity, It is an honest question to ask how much of an affect in what way the drop boxes, postal votes and in some cases not even verifying the signature had. Remember Trump was clearly winning, until suddenly and magically extra votes were found.

"I don't see investigations as attacks - I see them as necessary and appropriate"

Awesome. So lets imagine you want to get a job. And some malicious group fabricate a dossier of lies against you. Say they get a corrupt law enforcement agency to investigate you even though they establish the dossier is a lie. You speak the truth and they censor and flag supporting comments as lies just to discredit you. You get taken to court over and over again with more and more desperate charges filed against you while lies are constantly spread about you. You have the money and time costs of dealing with all these scum while trying to get the job. And all this because the scum dont want you to get the job but the other guy in the running.

Yes necessary and appropriate. To help the other guy win.

"And just the sort of thing that a mature democracy with a strong rule of law encourages and can tolerate."

So lawfare against a political candidate is ok in a mature democracy with strong rule of law. Are you in Russia? N.Korea? Which glorious democracy that persecutes a political opponent are you referring to?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

" And some malicious group fabricate a dossier of lies against you."

That's no way to talk about the conservative, Republican financed Washington Free Beacon.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

I'll just leave this here, again....

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-dossier-was-originally-funded-by-conservative-website-washington-free-beacon-report-2017-10-27

“All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier,”

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Why are you hiding the origins of that (Trump supporting) New York Post piece behind a more neutral MarketWatch source link, hmm?

This report previously appeared at NYPost.com

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Um, you did read the NYP article didn't you? Both articles say the same thing.

It also quotes the Free Beacon:

“All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier,”

I'm not hiding the origins of the dirt digging on Trump by the Free Beacon and later the DNC/Hillary. It is simply that the made-up stuff that went into the 'Steele dossier' was all done AFTER, not before, the DNC/Hillary started funding it.

Now please take yourself over to the tantrum corner, it should be free after aerogems.

Anyway, Trump is not an actual republican. This is why he is hated as much by the RINOs as he is by the Dems. Trump was the president of MAGAstan but then he pissed us all off by not building his really great wall and then pushing the vaxx. Sadly he is really the only viable alternative to the establishment as there is no way RFK Jr or Vivek Ramaswamy could get on the ticket. And even worse is that the establishment parties keep pushing the worst candidates possible.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

Awesome. So lets imagine you want to get a job. And some malicious group fabricate a dossier of lies against you. Say they get a corrupt law enforcement agency to investigate you even though they establish the dossier is a lie. You speak the truth and they censor and flag supporting comments as lies just to discredit you. You get taken to court over and over again with more and more desperate charges filed against you while lies are constantly spread about you. You have the money and time costs of dealing with all these scum while trying to get the job. And all this because the scum dont want you to get the job but the other guy in the running.

With your panties in such a bunch, maybe you could use them to climb out of that rabbit hole you've fallen into?

Or perhaps with that biggly strawman you've constructed, you could set it alight and signal for help?

[Someone Else]

Re: The smell of desperation

The lawfare argument is the many legal attacks to try to harm and stop Trump Hillary...and Hunter.

There, FTFY.

_{Hey, this 'whataboutism' game is fun...I can see why so many of the wingnuts like to play.}

[codejunky]

Re: The smell of desperation

@Someone Else

"There, FTFY."

So you are using whataboutism because you have no answer? And you fixed nothing did you, what you wrote is actually directly wrong and the opposite of the truth. Be careful there is a wingnut in your mirror

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The smell of desperation

codejunky> So you are using whataboutism because you have no answer?

DANGER, DANGER !!! Irony overload!

What a donut!

[Someone Else]

Re: The smell of desperation

I say from a distance and without a vote to cast - but as an increasingly stunned observer of US politics which from down here looks to be dominated by ideology rather than a genuine interest in governance.

+1 - insightful!

[Jonathon Green]

I like Americans…

…they’re funny.

[Casca]

Re: I like Americans…

More tragic than funny in most cases

[phuzz]

Re: I like Americans…

Yeah, but you've gotta laugh, because the only other option would be crying.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: I like Americans…

More tragic than funny...for the rest of us.

[Someone Else]

Re: I like Americans…

How are we funny? Do we amuuuuse you?

[Uncle Slacky]

Re: I like Americans…

Funny ha ha or funny peculiar?

[Boris the Cockroach]

The true test will

come if orange gizmo gets the nomination and then wins the presidency

And then pardons himself for anything he (and his cohorts) have done

Rather like a king would... a king... above and beyond the law. which rather goes against everything the founding fathers of the US wanted after their break with Britain

But then we had a king many many years ago who ignored the people, their representatives and believed himself above the law. we cut his head off.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: The true test will

The consequence of our history is that the King is not above the law. Recent governments have tried to reign in the courts in an effort to be so.

[Uncle Slacky]

Re: The true test will

Except he can't pardon himself from offences against a state, and in Georgia, not even the governor can pardon him.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: The true test will

And then pardons himself for anything he (and his cohorts) have done

He can't pardon himself for the Georgia stuff - firstly, the Georgia constitution doesn't allow it and, secondly, they are State charges and, as far as I know, beyond the remit of the POTUS' remit. Not that that fact would stop the GOP trying it, even though nominally they are the party of "States Rights"

As to the other stuff - there's a lot of legal debate at the moment as to whether the president can pardon himself - if they could then, surely, old Tricky Dickie would have done it and not waited for his successor to do it.

[wub]

Best free pubilcity in the world

I hear complaints from various places, initially the Candidate/Defendant himself, that all of these legal travails are purely intended to nobble him during the campaign. But why doesn't anyone ask about the absolutely unprecedented free international publicity he has been given? Did I remember to mention that it is completely free?

One detail that was mentioned by PBS at the time the indictment was announced is that in Georgia the entire trial could be televised?? My first thought was, "Who-hoo! where's my popcorn??" But my second thought was, "Holy Shit!! No other candidate will get anything like that amount of free publicity in any campaign during the remainder of the United States of America, however short that time may be. So I deeply and sincerely hope that the proceeding will be closed. We'll get the juicy bits quickly enough, and at least the publicity he gets won't include so much screen time.

[train_wreck]

Re: Best free pubilcity in the world

It’s pretty unlikely that the trial will be televised IMO.

[Ryan D]

Wow, just wow.

Apparently today must be a special day. It seems AC is now a euphemism for Arse Clown(s)

[Fat Guy In A Little Coat]

What does this have to do with tech?

Is this The Register or Democratic Underground?

Go ahead and resume your circle jerk now.

[Scott 26]

Re: What does this have to do with tech?

did you RTFA?

[ssharwood]

Re: What does this have to do with tech?

Charges of computer trespass and theft of data seem to me, prima facie, to have quite a bit to do with tech.

[Jim Birch]

Thankyou, Mr President

He really needs to win the presidency now, to pardon himself. Should we expect fireworks?

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: Thankyou, Mr President

The reason why this indictment is important, is that it is a state-level one in Georgia, not a federal one. My understanding is that the president does not have the power to pardon convictions of this type, and that the governor of Georgia does not either (and would not in the case of Trump, even if he had the powers to do so, as he is a political opponent).

This is the analysis I have read, anyway. It might not be correct, and as always, IANAL, and I also don't have either the time or will to delve that deeply into US politics, which seems primarily to be a demonstration of how to subvert and corrupt representative democracy through the judicious application of large amounts of money. Not that our own politics int he UK isn't also this, but in a slightly different way.

[KLane]

What does this story have to do with Technology?

Also, why the cuteness in always saying 'Florida Man' instead of Donald Trump when doing these stories? Does it really improve the story?

[Elongated Muskrat]

Re: What does this story have to do with Technology?

Yes.

In case you hadn't noticed, El Reg is, and always has been, irreverent. Scientists are referred to as "boffins", Trump is "Florida Man" (tying in with other pre-Trumpian Florida Man memes), Apple is "the fruity company", and so on.

The light-hearted writing style is part of the charm, especially when some of the material is otherwise very dry.

[codejunky]

It is time

Ok I think it has been long enough and maybe I have just missed the article, but I have been waiting for the vultures to 'bite the hand that feeds IT'. You didnt seem to have an issue chewing what you have been fed about indicting Trump but missed the huge oopsie that is even more IT relevant- the sealed indictment was handed to the clerks office and posted online with a judge and a case number assigned before the special grand jury met to vote on it!

Isnt this where beaked scavenger would be pecking over the security implications and theorising how Fulton County could violate procedure and maybe the legal procedure was but a theatrical step to what was already in motion? This coming from a group claiming to have security and integrity when it comes to the election.

Maybe the feathered ones have mentioned this and I missed it? Or as would typically be the norm, to dedicate an article to the failings?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It is time

Trump lost. He's being indicted on several counts. Get over it.

Lock him up! Lock him up!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It is time

Does the same apply to Hillary? Al Gore? Stacey Abrams?

Can we say 'get over it' to all the people demanding reparations for historic slavery?

[jake]

Re: It is time

"but missed the huge oopsie"

Not so huge when you report the facts and stop the speculation and conspiracy shit. Here's what happened:

Reuters picked up a "test" docket that was inadvertently published on a live web page.

Reuters published it without checking the veracity, as any well trained chimp would do.

Che Alexander, the clerk whose office made the mistake, has put controls in place to ensure it can't happen again..

The list of names and charges was widely guessed before this happened. It wasn't exactly difficult to figure out.

The kicker: That test document had a completely different case number than the actual case. Reuters published anyway.

Basically, a made-up test went awry. As happens every day when humans interact with computers.

[codejunky]

Re: It is time

@jake

"Not so huge when you report the facts and stop the speculation and conspiracy shit. Here's what happened:"

Honest. Nice that the 'test' docket (glad you used quotes because it is a poor lie) was using real data such as Trump and the charges against him. Instead of test data.

Also there is a slight problem with calling things conspiracy now, because in the case of Trump too many have been the truth.

[jake]

Re: It is time

But it wasn't using real data. It was clearly labeled with a case number which doesn't exist, which Reuters' editors should have noticed prior to publishing. Publishing retractions doesn't work very well when certain parties ignore convenient facts that don't match their rhetoric, especially not when the targets of that rhetoric are too fucking stupid to look up the facts for themselves.

"Also there is a slight problem with calling things conspiracy now, because in the case of Trump too many have been the truth."

Yep. FAR too many have been the truth. That's why Trump has been indicted. Four times, and counting. Because that's what happens when you break the law. Glad you agree on this point, at least.

[codejunky]

Re: It is time

@jake

"But it wasn't using real data"

Apart from the name, charges, basically a new case number. But its not real data?? Maybe you are right and some tester is a malicious anti-Trumper who couldnt help themselves but write this out and accidentally post it publicly.

"Publishing retractions doesn't work very well when certain parties ignore convenient facts that don't match their rhetoric, especially not when the targets of that rhetoric are too fucking stupid to look up the facts for themselves."

Or when lawfare efforts are stupidly obvious currently and so damn stupid and desperate that it makes Trump look good (not the purpose of the justice system) an incident like this looks like another contender for damn stupid and desperate. Note these are the same morons demanding a $200,000 bond because Trump is a flight risk! How is that for stupid and desperate?

"Yep. FAR too many have been the truth. That's why Trump has been indicted. Four times, and counting. Because that's what happens when you break the law. Glad you agree on this point, at least."

Great trolling but looks pretty stupid. And are you seriously missing the repeated 'conspiracy theories' that came true? The FBI listening in on Trump for 2016. The Steele report being fabrication. Security services telling social media to lie. The Biden laptop. Hunters criminal actions. Covid came from a lab. We can debate the validity of the Fulton County efforts, but this tangent wont help you any.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It is time

Any comment on this website posting, hmm?

Threats, slurs and menace: Far-right websites target Fulton County grand jurors - NPR

[codejunky]

Re: It is time

@AC

"Any comment on this website posting, hmm?"

If someone actually does something criminal to affect the jury then there are laws against that. This isnt a partisan issue

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It is time

"there are laws against that."

And the same applies to any criminal conspiracy to subvert an election. Or acts in a manner that comes under racketeering, using Influence or running corrupt organizations. Yes?

[codejunky]

Re: It is time

@AC

"And the same applies to any criminal conspiracy to subvert an election. Or acts in a manner that comes under racketeering, using Influence or running corrupt organizations. Yes?"

That depends. How many have been prosecuted for those actions for the 2016 and 2020 election? And it is public knowledge that in the fight against Trump the above was done.

And my primary issue is the lawfare effort against Trump which means if he actually has intentionally broken the law in some way, if with malice as some corrupt monster of a man, practically the devil himself- who outside extremist nutjob would believe beyond doubt that the result was honest? Outside of extremist anti-Trump mindless amoeba there would certainly be doubt because of the conduct of his opposition so far.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It is time

Is that gorilla[sic] lawfare?

[jake]

Re: It is time

"That depends."

No, it does not. Period.

The fact that you think otherwise really says it all about you, IMO.

Are you a wannabe crook, just fucking ignorant, or a really, really bad troll? Because you're one of the three.

[codejunky]

Re: It is time

@jake

"Are you a wannabe crook, just fucking ignorant, or a really, really bad troll? Because you're one of the three."

Now you are just trolling. Why bother misrepresenting my comment in this pathetic response that shows you 'fucking ignorant, or a really, really bad troll' and yet respond to the actual comment separately? idiot

[jake]

Re: It is time

"How many have been prosecuted for those actions for the 2016 and 2020 election?"

None, because there is nothing to prosecute. If you can prove otherwise, please present your information to the court system so it can be handled appropriately. If you do not have this proof, what the fuck are you babbling about, and why the fuck are you still babbling about it years later? Does it make you feel important? Because quite frankly all it makes you look is fucking stupid.

"And it is public knowledge that in the fight against Trump the above was done."

Which public? The inbred, toothless mouthbreathing, anti-American, fully-payed-up MAGA club members who agree with everything their lord and master Trump says? Because they hardly hold a non-biased opinion. Nor an educated one, for that matter.

"And my primary issue is the lawfare effort against Trump which means if he actually has intentionally broken the law in some way, if with malice as some corrupt monster of a man, practically the devil himself- who outside extremist nutjob would believe beyond doubt that the result was honest? Outside of extremist anti-Trump mindless amoeba there would certainly be doubt because of the conduct of his opposition so far."

Late for your pills? Might want to get Nursie to wipe the dribble from your chin, so the keyboard doesn't get sticky again.

[codejunky]

Re: It is time

@jake

"None, because there is nothing to prosecute"

Read AC's comment and come back. After you take your pills. Actually read your response where you bash npr which was the source of this side thread you jumped into to babble stupidly.

"Which public? The inbred, toothless mouthbreathing, anti-American, fully-payed-up MAGA club members who agree with everything their lord and master Trump says? Because they hardly hold a non-biased opinion. Nor an educated one, for that matter."

Did you get that from Hillary? Great way to turn away people who may have considered voting for her but pretty stupid to do. You really are tribal with this aint you? Agree with you or be a mouth breather. How very... educated.

"Late for your pills? Might want to get Nursie to wipe the dribble from your chin, so the keyboard doesn't get sticky again."

I like how the most neutral part of my comment pointing out the problem with the noise of lawfare damaging the credibility of anything legitimate has you spitting your soup out as you scream for nurse to sedate you. You might want to calm down and you might feel better. Drop the tribal glasses for a moment and you might realise I dont claim to know if Trump did or not do anything criminal but its hard to believe due to the noise of lawfare. You really seem to over stress yourself with this. Do you feel important with all your babbling?

[jake]

Re: It is time

"If someone actually does something criminal to affect the jury then there are laws against that. This isnt a partisan issue"

Not just the Jury. Also the Judge, and anybody else involved with the justice system. Which Trump has clearly done.

Face it, if *I* had acted the way Trump is acting since unceremoniously getting booted out of the White House by the majority of Americans who bothered to vote, I'd have been cooling my heels in jail these last couple years. We truly do have a two tier justice system, and Trump is getting molly-coddled.

[codejunky]

Re: It is time

@jake

"Not just the Jury. Also the Judge, and anybody else involved with the justice system. Which Trump has clearly done."

When? Honestly I might have missed that.

"Face it, if *I* had acted the way Trump is acting since unceremoniously getting booted out of the White House by the majority of Americans who bothered to vote, I'd have been cooling my heels in jail these last couple years. We truly do have a two tier justice system, and Trump is getting molly-coddled."

Eh? Is that with the fabricated dossier? Security services telling social media to lie. Security services protecting the Bidens from investigation and scrutiny. I assume you are joking or severely anti-Trump that nothing else could reach you. Yes there is a two tier justice system, and Trump has been targeted and this is seriously public knowledge to the point your comment looks insane. And yes if you were in Trumps position (as would most people) you probably would be jailed, for falsified evidence and blazing lies from your opposition. You and most people would have been shafted long ago for even any of the attention Trump is getting because he is being pursued by the state!

Corrupt sections of government going after this one man to stop him becoming president. That isnt even in question so I have no idea if you are just trolling with your comment or actually believe so extremely.

[jake]

Re: It is time

NPR.

Take it with a grain of salt. They are about as far left as Trump's supporters are far right ... and in recent years, about equally skilled in fact checking. That is to say not. For example, in that article they either called 4chan a far-right web site (WTF‽) -or- they don't know where q-anon started (probable).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It is time

Wasn't an armed far left activist arrested very close to a supreme court justices house and didn't they admit to wanting to murder said justice?

It seems the likes of NPR don't bat an eyelid when people they dislike get doxxed.

[Daedalus]

Wouldn't it be funny if.....

Florida Man, in addition to his other mistakes, has "sold" his Fortress of Floritude to a company "controlled" by none other that Florida Man Junior. With the expressed agreement, no doubt, that he be allowed to reside and continue all his activities, legitimate or otherwise, in that place. This is evidently to prevent said Fortress from being breached by the Evil Empire of the Law. As a bonus, he gets funds which will aid him in "campaigning" (no doubt against his imminent incarceration).

Of course, Junior, being a chip off the old block, may have ideas of his own. Including, possibly, deciding that Florida Man needs a dose of what King Lear got, sent off on his wanderings, perhaps with New York Mayor Emeritus as Fool (a part he appears to have rehearsed for in recent years).

Looking forward to Florida Man and Fool braving the blasted heath in a storm. In orange, of course.