LogFAQs > #970823557

Ozmose posted...

The facts I'm looking at are the ones that will actually stick in court. You're bringing up stuff like espionage, but there's not a damn bit of evidence of that that would hold up in court. If that's what they want to chase to charge him with, they'll fail yet again.

That you're willing to write off the more severe charges Trump could be facing indicates you do give a shit one way over the other. You're dismissive of the greater charges, yet open to the lesser.

You say the charges won't hold up, but may I remind you that this situation is far different than the failed impeachments under a Republican-run Senate. Those impeachments were not criminal indictments. They were constitutional processes.

The warrant which the FBI utilized when searching Mar-A-Lago could only be obtained with probable cause that Trump had violated the law. The evidence gathered goes toward proving their case. I bring up espionage because at least one of the laws cited on the warrant was drafted under the 1917 Espionage Act.

There's a long way to go for this to work it's way through the courts. Claiming the charges won't hold up is jumping the gun by a lot. Much of this is unprecedented. We just had two insurrectionists convicted of seditious conspiracy. Anything is possible, and much is left to be seen.