3
whiterabbitfollower 3 points ago +4 / -1

The thing is this, though... I know plenty of normies who don't dispute that there is sex trafficking. The fact that they are seeing this movie isn't going to sway them away from the rest of their beliefs.

1
whiterabbitfollower 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm terrified of the bridges and overpasses in this country. All of them.

1
whiterabbitfollower 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think that literally every normie that I know at least knows about that Tom Cruise deepfake... it' been pretty mainstream knowledge for at least the last 5 years because of that.

5
whiterabbitfollower 5 points ago +5 / -0

I'm still wondering how they can possibly find an impartial jury for a fair trial. Which is a 6th amendment right.

3
whiterabbitfollower 3 points ago +3 / -0

Trump was arrested. An arrest follows an indictment in every case. They just decided that it wasn't necessary to fingerprint, mug shot, perp walk. New York state law says that every non-violent felony offender is released on their own recognizance unless they're a flight risk. Which, Trump obviously isn't because he has a 24/7 secret service detail. It was always going to happen that he was released after the arraignment, until the next court date. That's what happens after every arraignment where there's no bail set. There is no arraignment without an arrest.

2
whiterabbitfollower 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, I don't understand how anyone sees this as a win. Leo has been involved in this case since 2018, and is only testifying because of his connection with the guy. The only one fucked in this case is the rapper.

3
whiterabbitfollower 3 points ago +3 / -0

Leo has been involved in this case for a long time. This guy donated a bunch of money to Leo's foundation, and helped fund "The Wolf of Wall Street". In 2018 the justice dept took like $60 million back from the production company. Since then he's been in cooperation with the government about it.

2
whiterabbitfollower 2 points ago +2 / -0

I wonder if they could get a mistrial due to not being able to get an impartial jury in NY. It would violate the 6th amendment to not have an impartial jury.

6
whiterabbitfollower 6 points ago +6 / -0

Praying for your wife, you, and your family. It definitely could be something like a severe anxiety attack, or even dehydration coupled with anxiety.

1
whiterabbitfollower 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes- everyone who is indicted is automatically arrested. The arrest happens before the arraignment. He's not a flight risk- he has a secret service detail. I don't think that they would literally say that they think that the secret service would let him run.

2
whiterabbitfollower 2 points ago +2 / -0

So sorry to hear that he's still missing! Keeping your family in my prayers.

1
whiterabbitfollower 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't think that this is their gotcha moment. I think that the precedent was set so that the other prosecutors who didn't want to be first to indict a president, don't have that issue anymore. I'm afraid that it might be a first play by the J6 crew (or the GA crew)- for something trivial and some BS misdemeanor that they're trying to turn into a felony by claiming that campaign funds were used. I think that we might be in for a bumpy ride, but it will ultimately blow up in their faces.

1
whiterabbitfollower 1 point ago +1 / -0

He shouldn't have to post bail. NY state law says that any nonviolent felony offender is released on their own recognizance unless they're a flight risk. It should happen that- he's arrested, the judge reads the charges during the arraignment, he pleads not guilty, he's released until his next court date.

2
whiterabbitfollower 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm sorry, just saw this (had to work all day). They should have issued a golden/silver alert (for a missing adult with a mental disability- I think it's a silver alert in California). It basically functions the same as an amber alert. It would notify everyone in the area with emergency notifications enabled, and give the authorities access to any flight information, etc. It's generally issued if all local resources are exhausted in the case of someone under 65 who is cognitively or developmentally impaired- unless it's an immediate emergency, then it's issued right away.

3
whiterabbitfollower 3 points ago +3 / -0

If he really did go to LAX to fly out- the police would be able to find that out. You can't fly without an ID, and security is pretty tight in airports. If he's mentally a child, and the police are involved, that information would be available to them.

1
whiterabbitfollower 1 point ago +1 / -0

There was also that draft of an indictment that was released that showed that a grand jury planned to indict Nixon with a couple of counts of obstruction, conspiracy, and bribery. He just resigned first and then was pardoned. That would have been the precedent back in 1974.

1
whiterabbitfollower 1 point ago +1 / -0

An arrest always follows an indictment. There is currently a warrant out for his arrest. They say that he's supposed to turn himself in on Tuesday. There may not be a "perp walk", but an arrest is a definite. That's not the same thing as being "locked up" though. NY law says that any nonviolent felony offender is released on their own recognizance (unless they're a flight risk). So, what happens now is that he'll be arrested, he'll have an arraignment hearing in front of the judge where the judge will read all of the charges out loud. Then he'll enter a formal plea (not guilty), then he'll be released until his next court date. And- if he does get convicted, and gets jail time? His secret service agents would apparently be in there with him to protect him.

2
whiterabbitfollower 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well, no. Not "politicians". No president has been indicted before- but plenty of mayors have been indicted and convicted. Plenty of governors too; something like 4 of the past 10 governors in Illinois have gone to prison. And vice presidents- VP Aaron Burr was indicted on two counts of murder while he was still in office. And then Nixon's VP was arrested and plead no contest to tax evasion, and then resigned to avoid prison time.

4
whiterabbitfollower 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah- just verified what I'd read. He has secret service, there's speculation that they would protect him in jail if they ever put him in jail, and there's speculation that they wouldn't let local law enforcement cuff him- that they'd insist on being the ones who walked him in.

2
whiterabbitfollower 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't think so? At least he hadn't before the raid- I know there was some talk of if he'd had private security that they would have stopped the FBI.

view more: Next ›