• jonne@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    28 days ago

    The hush money one is the first one to actually go to trial, so it’s mostly that. The documents case is basically suppressed until they can somehow get rid of this judge, and the other 2 cases are also being held up in places.

    The hush money case isn’t likely to put him in prison though, I don’t think there’s any precedent of a politician going to prison for that. And of course there’s going to be appeals that can easily push it until past November.

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      28 days ago

      There’s plenty of precedent for locking people up when the steal classified documents. It doesn’t matter if they’re a politician.

    • DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      28 days ago

      It’s my understanding that there’s a pretty ironclad contract between the government and a cleared individual. This is really just a matter of enforcement, and it’s hard to see how this isn’t one of the most brazen and extensive cases of mishandling classified material. Better people have gone to prison for a lot less, so I say again: no justice.

      • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        27 days ago

        I have known of people getting dishonorable discharges for simply looking at classified information they were not supposed to, careers over due to misunderstanding or picking a document up after an accident.

        If someone other than Trump had all these documents they would be gone from the earth. We would never hear from them again as the FBI went through their life to figure out who else was involved and how they got away with boxes of these documents.

        • DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          27 days ago

          Literally just ready an article this morning that a Navy seaman got 18 years in prison for leaking information after being socially engineered by a foreign agent.

          • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            27 days ago

            I was in for ten years, and a battle buddy of mine was telling me about a soldier in his platoon who got the other than honorable discharge over classified stuff.

            Here is what happened: car accident on post, stuff is all over the intersection. The guy is an E5, already deployed once, is by all means upper crust for a career. One of the people in the accident was the G2. The E5 sees there are classified documents. Calls it in, but decides to help out and scoops them all up into a neat little pile and secures them in his vehicle. He then sits in his vehicle so they are secure.

            This is entirely against what he should have done as there was no risk the documents would have blown away. The only reason he didn’t get prison time was due to having an ArCom for Valor. But he is gone and his army career was over at that point for mishandling - simply mishandling - classified documents.

            Trump has fucking pallets of them, and “oh gosh, what do we do? UwU it’s sooo tricky!!”

              • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                27 days ago

                I think the big thing was him being alone in the car with all of it.

                I don’t know what to do in that situation to be honest, but it’s probably a “secure the scene and make sure no one goes in or out” type of deal.

    • NoSuchAgency
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      28 days ago

      And it is going to get overturned on appeal. It was an obvious political trial with a judge that donated to Biden, his daughter was bringing in millions because of the trial and the prosecutor ran for office pledging to take down Trump. That’s why Trumps bringing in record donations from small donors now.

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        28 days ago

        And I’m sure you’re equally as concerned about the conflict of interest from a judge that Trump appointed overseeing one of his trials, right? Surely you are of the opinion that Cannon should have recused herself at the very beginning, right?

      • Absolute dumbass commentary. The jury decided the case, not the judge. Trump literally had no defense to the allegations other than bald denials. The evidence that he did the crimes was written in paper and undeniable.

        • NoSuchAgency
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          You’re just buying everything the MSM is selling, hook line & sinker. They wouldn’t let Trump have much of a defense. They wouldn’t even let an expert witness testify for the defense. And sure, the jury decides the case based on the instructions given by the judge and this is the only time a judge has ever given instructions like the ones in this case. You really don’t know much about the justice system if you believe that the judge in a case doesn’t play a major role in how a case is decided.

            • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              27 days ago

              Yeah, but you didn’t read this particular article posted on a random website by a guy who said he totally knows, and that makes him more qualified than all of us here.

            • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              27 days ago

              Superpatrioteagle50caljesus dot com only has the best news.

              Tune in tomorrow for how we explain how NASA spies on your poop!

            • NoSuchAgency
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              27 days ago

              I read the instructions, so I guess the judge in this case

              • barsquid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                27 days ago

                No, that’s not correct. You are receiving delusional propaganda about disallowing expert witnesses from somewhere. Where is that from?

                Bradley Smith was definitely allowed to testify as an expert, but the defense declined to call him. Here, since you like pretending to have read things direct from the court. He was not allowed to show up and instruct the jury, which is the same as decided in the prior cited cases in NY and OH.

                Where is your delusional propaganda from? The things you are claiming are lies that Donald has been tweeting. So perhaps your delusions are coming direct from the source: a lifelong con man and fraud who committed election interference in 2016.

      • Seleni@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        28 days ago

        Don’t a lot of people run for office on a platform of arresting and convicting people who commit crimes, though? Or am I missing something?

        • NoSuchAgency
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          Yeah, that won’t happen, they’ve got such a stranglehold on surveillance in this country, it would never get off the ground and things are just going to get worse. Most younger people and some older people to either keep their face buried into their phones on Facebook or Tiktok propaganda machines or they just buy into everything the MSM tells them so until we fix that stuff there’s really no hope of things getting better

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      The Supreme Court may well just decide that Trump has absolute immunity, depending on what their pay masters tell them to do.