409
submitted 11 months ago by TheJims@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] chillhelm@lemmy.world 185 points 11 months ago
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 105 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If you're trying to keep track of where we're at in the Trump prosecutions:

Updated 01/08/2024

Washington, D.C.
4 federal felonies
January 6th Election Interference

Investigation
Indictment
Arrest  <- You Are Here
Trial - March 4th, 2024, one day before Super Tuesday primaries.
Jack Smith had requested that the Supreme Court immediately rule on Trump's immunity defense, the Court rejected the request, requiring it to go through the usual appeals process first.
Conviction
Sentencing

New York
34 state felonies
Stormy Daniels Payoff

Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - March 25th, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing

Florida
40 federal felonies
Top Secret Documents charges

Investigation
Indictment
Original indictment was for 37 felonies.
3 new felonies were added on July 27, 2023.
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - May 20, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing

Georgia
13 state felonies
Election Interference

Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
All 19 defendants have surrendered.
Trial - A trial date of Aug. 5, 2024 has been requested, not approved yet.
Three defendants, Kenneth Chesebro, Sidney Powell, and bail bondsman Scott Hall, have all pled guilty and have agreed to testify in other cases.
The judge in the case has set a deadline of December 1st for all motions to be filed, expect a trial date at some point after that.
Conviction
Sentencing

Other grand juries, such as for the documents at Bedminster, or the Arizona fake electors, have not been announced.

The E. Jean Carroll trial for sexual assault and defamation where Trump was found liable and ordered to pay $5 million before immediately defaming her again resulting in a demand for $10 million is not listed as it's a civil case and not a crimimal one. That trial date is currently set for January 15th, the same day as the Iowa caucus. and has now been determined to be for damages only as Trump was already found liable.

As a function of the January 6th and Georgia trials, there are now lawsuits in two states to bar Trump from the primary ballot based on the insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment.

Colorado:

12/19/23 - The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that Trump is not eligible for the primary ballot due to being barred by the 14th Amendment as an insurrectionist.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments starting Thursday, February 8th.

Minnesota:

11/8/2023 - State Supreme Court denies challenge, allows ballot access.  

Maine:

12/29/2023 - Maine's Secretary of State has ruled that Trump is not qualified for the ballot., which is now being challenged.

A long-shot write in candidate for President has also filed suits seeking to bar Trump from the ballot in Florida, Kansas, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

His cases in Arizona, California, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,  and West Virginia have been thrown out:

https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/federal-judge-dismisses-trump-eligibility-challenge-in-arizona/

https://ballot-access.org/2023/12/17/john-anthony-castro-voluntarily-dismisses-his-california-anti-trump-ballot-access-lawsuit/

https://ballot-access.org/2023/10/12/john-anthony-castro-dismisses-his-idaho-lawsuit-on-trump-ballot-access/

https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-donald-trump-ballot-lawsuit-dismiss/45682757

https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/politics/2023/11/27/trump-keeps-right-to-be-on-presidential-ballot-in-ri/71720185007/

https://wvmetronews.com/2023/12/22/lawsuit-to-boot-trump-off-west-virginia-ballots-is-dismissed-because-plaintiff-lacks-standing/p

[-] Killer_Tree@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago

Thank you for collecting all this information in one place, it is appreciated! Does a website or blog exist where this information is posted and updated? If not, there should be.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Not to my knowledge. I started putting it together on reddit because there were enough investigations going on, any time there was news, people would complain "why isn't he in jail already!!?!" and I'm like "No, no, you don't get it... this isn't a TV show, it's a whole PROCESS..."

So I set out to show the process:

Investigation
Indictment
Arrest
Trial
Conviction
Sentencing

For crimes of this magnitude it takes YEARS.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 103 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

That’s not how the legal system works. If you come at the king you best not miss and jack has no interest in missing.

I’d rather have an air tight case given how slippery Trump has been. You clearly understand how difficult this is yet here you are advocating for a rush job.

Let him cook.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 58 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's been three fucking years. I strenuously object to the notion that building even an airtight case for crimes we all witnessed live on national fucking TV really needed to take this goddamn long!

For perspective, by this amount of time had passed after the Beer Hall Putsch, Hitler had been arrested, tried, convicted, imprisoned, wrote a shitty book, and pardoned and released again. If even the Weimar fucking Republic -- damn near a failed state -- could manage that, what do these ridiculous delays say about us?!

[-] kralk@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

Remind me what happened to Hitler after that prosecution?

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

He was convicted and imprisoned. Are you implying the fact that he got pardoned means that wasn't what they should have done? Do you think if they moved slower or did something else different Hitler wouldn't have been pardoned somehow?

[-] stown@sedd.it 3 points 11 months ago
[-] Hylactor@sopuli.xyz 44 points 11 months ago

In principle I agree. But the truth is the GOP has gone fully rogue. They aren't even playing the same game, let alone by the same rules. The more latitude Trump and those in thrall to him are afforded, the more likely an actual, effective, coup is executed. The deeper into the process Trump gets, the more legitimaized he becomes. The more legitimaized he becomes the more the "implications" increase. Basically he needs to be removed from the game as soon as possible because time is a huge factor. He's very good at stall tactics, and he is very good at making sure things do or do not stay in the public consciousness. In short, the most dangerous thing you can give Trump to play with is time.

[-] phx@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago

Or just stringing it out and managing to win the next election (probably by more effective cheating)

[-] ook_the_librarian@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'm with you on the legal side, but on the media side, wtf. I'm tired of having to check whether each piece of new, devastating evidence is in fact a) new and not some new wrapper around an article from yesterday b) actually devastating, not routine filing and c) relevant at all.

That's no dig at this particular article, but these headlines are inducing a "shit or get off the pot" mentality as far as trying to keep up.

Edit: I would like to note that this headline engages in speculation (note the word "may"). That is some "shit or get off the pot" shit. I'm tired of what "may" happen. At least in the headline. Speculation has its place. It's in the body of a well-sourced article.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

The media has been milking the nations politics for a long time now. In 2016 CBS CEO was quoted saying Trump was making them lots of money. It’s the same thing here, they think they can outlast the fascism so they don’t seem to care about the damage it does

Not to say that those that write articles about how extra doomed Trump is this time for sure but probably not yet….. are hurting the nation like CBS did with Trump but it does have a negative effect.

I guess they don’t want people to forget but the fatigue is real. That’s part of trumps delay tactic and his bullshit as a whole for that matter

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If the legal system cannot hold Trump accountable before hes able to get elected president and make these investigations stop then the legal system doesn't work. A system that cannot protect itself from the people it's supposed to punish is fundamentally broken, and that's looking like where we are. Cling to the broken system and you should expect broken results.

[-] tacosplease@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

All that can be true and rushing it would still be a worse option.

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

We are nowhere near rushing it, its been three years. We are actively slow walking, all we need to do it treat him like we treat people without wealth, but we cannot. There's a massive amount of space between 'rushing it' and what we are doing right now.

[-] tacosplease@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Imagine if they miss just one little thing and he gets off on a technicality. He would absolutely escalate the dictatorship bs and justify it all by pointing to his non conviction or a successful appeal.

You say it is being actively slow walked. Based on what? Cannon is slow walking the FL documents case, but Jack Smith is running a "speedy trial" in DC. So is Willis in GA. Trump's NY fraud case is finishing up after a pretty standard length trial given the amount of info that needed to be presented.

If these are intentionally slow trials, then what should the timelines have been instead?

[-] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Wait, are we cooking or are we shitting? Because those are very different pots...

[-] protist@mander.xyz 14 points 11 months ago

Isn't the trial date already set? This is just an article about some random "expert opinion," not something actually from the case.

[-] WaxiestSteam69@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

I'm so tired of these that I'm nimb to it. I've resigned myself to a bleak Donald Trump filled future.

[-] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 11 months ago

Convict or I’ll lose whatever faith I have left in this shithole of a country.

[-] DrSleepless@lemmy.world 109 points 11 months ago

I'll believe it when I see it.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago
[-] RIPandTERROR 22 points 11 months ago

I asked. Stfu.

[-] aniki@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago

Any fucking day now......

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 56 points 11 months ago

Is this the relevant part?

Former Trump aide Nick Luna also shared that when the ex-president was told about Vice President Mike Pence’s need to be moved to a secure location, Trump responded by saying "So what?" Luna perceived this as an “unexpected willingness” on Trump's part to expose a longtime loyalist to potential harm.

“Indeed, Trump’s angry response to Scavino’s comment to him that there’s smoke coming out of the Capitol in effect was, ‘Let it Burn,’” Gershman said. “And his nonchalant indifference to Vice President Pence’s safety and welfare offers chilling proof that Trump’s conscious purpose, namely, his intent, was first to incite an insurrection and then by his inaction to demonstrate his intent that the insurrection effectively stop Congress from doing its constitutional duty to certify the election results.”

This proof would be “powerful circumstantial” evidence of Trump’s criminal intent underlying all the federal charges, he added.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 53 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

There have been rumors that Jack Smith has something up his sleeve since he presented an argument about Trump's claim of immunity. In it, he listed "hypothetical" crimes that could be committed where immunity couldn't apply. Which is odd. Accepting a bribe, ordering an FBI director to fake evidence against a political foe, ordering the military to murder critics, and even selling nuclear secrets to a foreign enemy—these are the particular and peculiar crimes that prosecutors say Trump could get away with if he succeeds in arguing that presidential immunity.

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 66 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Ordering the FBI to go after political opponents and fake evidence? That sounds really far fetched I don't know if...

The rogue department: how the Trump DoJ trashed legal and political norms

Former senior DoJ officials say the former president aggressively prodded his attorneys general to go after his enemies, protect his friends and his interests, and these moves succeeded with alarming results until Trump’s last few months in office.

Trump says he would weaponise DOJ and FBI against political enemies

Oh okay yeah that sounds pretty plausible

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Yes, this is certainly the first time the fbi has been used as a political weapon.

[-] Soulg@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

The first time someone could face consequences for it, for sure

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 27 points 11 months ago

This salon article is basically a re-posting of this article linked:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/special-counsel-probe-uncovers-new-details-trumps-inaction/story?id=106131854

Basically the tldr is it's testimony that was recently disclosed publicly for the first time in a new motion from someone around him as the insurrection was unfolding. Lots of details about his mindset and what he was doing at the time, but one particularly interesting one was apparently trump decided to make the tweet about "Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done" minutes after hearing he was in danger, some more solid evidence he was trying to get his coup followers to attack Pence and others. Interesting details about what went down that will no doubt be helpful in court, but the headline is a bit sensationalized I think.

[-] MyRobotShitsBolts@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

I have no faith in justice. I do have faith in strokes and heart attacks.

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago

Quick, someone order him some a few dozen more hamberders

[-] donslaught@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

I feel like Trump would have his blood scrubbed nightly to prevent just that kind of thing.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

I mean, if they properly constructed full presidential immunity on anything what's to stop B from having T executed?

[-] chocosoldier@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago

I keep seeing hypotheticals like this as if the Dems won't pull the same old "we go high" BS they've been pulling my entire life. They're all about positioning themselves as "the good guys" while letting Rs do just whatever. The realistic way it would play out is Dems pretend nothing is wrong, make a show of "peaceful transfer of power" after the election, and do the shocked pikachu when it's bad. Do pay attention to modern history.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I keep seeing hypotheticals like this

Either a president is completely free to do whatever he wants or he is constrained by rules. This is not hypothetical.

[-] chocosoldier@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I meant the hypothetical in which Trump's "immunity" defense is upheld, libs love to powerfantasy about what Biden could do with this sort of "immunity" but history tells us that when Dems can choose whether or not to be restrained, they choose restraint, even if it means the GOP gets to hurt everyone.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah, the quote wasn't actually a literal suggestion, it was pointing out the absurdity in a way that a conservative could understand it without having to make it directly about them.

All politicians are at the same time self serving and for sale to some extent or they'd never successfully get into politics.

But one side gets off on punishing people from the other side, and the gays, the poor, and the minorities. I generally put those guys down as the bad guys when I'm checking off boxes.

That orange jack wagon parading around how he's going full dictator for a day to punish everyone. It's one thing to be a sell out, to back a position for the favor of the people that donate the most to your cause, it's another to try to come to power by proudly claiming all the people you want to hurt.

The people backing him campaigning that way, they are not good people.

this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
409 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19246 readers
2458 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS