Trump and 18 allies charged in Georgia election meddling

[neurosis]

Apparently telling people to watch a television channel is illegal and freedom of speech is gone now.

If you tell someone to go to 7-11 to buy a book of matches, not illegal.

If you conspire with someone to burn a building down and tell them to get the matches at 7-11, can be considered illegal.

[beej]

If you tell someone to go to 7-11 to buy a book of matches, not illegal.

If you conspire with someone to burn a building down and tell them to get the matches at 7-11, can be considered illegal.

what if nobody buys the matches? Is it still illegal?

[RobertELee]

If you tell someone to go to 7-11 to buy a book of matches, not illegal.

If you conspire with someone to burn a building down and tell them to get the matches at 7-11, can be considered illegal.

That's a reach.

[neurosis]

That's a reach.

It's not a reach. It's a fact.

Why do you think they used RICO charges

[neurosis]

what if nobody buys the matches? Is it still illegal?

I don't have a law degree, but if you told someone who you were conspiring to commit arson with to go get the matches, then you would still be culpable? 

[RobertELee]

It's not a reach. It's a fact.

Why do you think they used RICO charges

Because it's the only thing they could find that was so ambiguous that 'might' stick. Literally made for RACKETEERING, which last I checked, this isn't in the definition of racketeering.

[neurosis]

Because it's the only thing they could find that was so ambiguous that 'might' stick. Literally made for RACKETEERING, which last I checked, this isn't in the definition of racketeering.

It was so they could charge everyone involved, even if only with minor involvement, under that conspiracy umbrella.  If I understand this right, the smallest involvement could get you the same sentence as those at the top.  The hopes is to get one of these people to roll over on Trump in exchange for a lighter sentence. 

My question, is who is going to be first? 

Maybe a pollworthy topic?   

[neurosis]

That was a horrible explanation.  lol.  It's past my bed time.

[__]

That was a horrible explanation.  lol.  It's past my bed time.

yeah, you Bidened it 

[RobertELee]

It was so they could charge everyone involved, even if only with minor involvement, under that conspiracy umbrella.  If I understand this right, the smallest involvement could get you the same sentence as those at the top.  The hopes is to get one of these people to roll over on Trump in exchange for a lighter sentence. 

My question, is who is going to be first? 

Maybe a pollworthy topic?   

No no no... it's because Orangemanbad... plain and simple.

[mkd]

Seems for a Rico prosecution you'd need a crime.
 Questioning how the 2020 election was actually stolen doesn't sound like a crime in anything but a banana Republic

[beej]

Seems for a Rico prosecution you'd need a crime.
 Questioning how the 2020 election was actually stolen doesn't sound like a crime in anything but a banana Republic

No you just need a dozen willing jurors. Then you win the appeal at the appellate level, but by that point you've already lost.

[beej]

None of this is about landing him in jail. I think they'd love that but that's not the goal.

They have possession of the ball, and they are trying to run out the clock. That is all.

[Jim at Gentex]

No you just need a dozen willing jurors uesful idiots.

Reality fiss.

[CNCAppsJames]

No you just need a dozen willing jurors Smitheads. Then you win the appeal at the appellate level, but by that point you've already lost.

Reality fiss. And if the election results are any indication, there's 80,999,088 more of them to choose from.