Trump / Musk (other than DOGE)

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 12K
  • Views: 632K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
You know, you're learning a decent amount of law from me. You could learn more, and get more respect on the board, if you would ask questions instead of making stupid and ignorant assertions based on nothing. I'm happy to answer questions posed in good faith. It gets tiresome rebutting bullshit.

If Trump gives Elon access to a specific building in writing and beforehand, and the building isn't controlled by an independent agency, then yes the people in the building are wrong to resist. If one or both of those conditions are not satisfied, then Elon is wrong.
Click to expand...
Why do you believe it has to be in writing and which building specifically are you referring to as independent, which presumably would be outside of the executive branches authority, and requiring access in writing?

More importantly, why do you believe that these claims are so objectively true that you can say it's obvious that Doge or Elon broke the law?
 
ZenMode said:
@sringwal

I do think the anger directed at Elon is misplaced. He cannot do anything but make suggestions to Trump. He has no authority to enact change. It has to come from the president.

I also believe that the anger toward Elon is at least partially because Democrats, for nearly a decade, have been completely unable to bring down Trump, which includes murdering him, so they've moved on to a new target, hoping to get some traction.
Click to expand...
The only people who have tried to murder Trump were Republicans*.

*of the two known assassination attempts, it is possible the USSS has foiled other attempts that did not advance to the point of Trump being in the zone of danger.
 
ZenMode said:
Do you believe it was Republicans / conservatives that tried to kill him?
Click to expand...
I dont believe it was anyone on any political spectrum. That kind of thing is related to mental illness not political ideology. Acting otherwise on a discussion message board is completely unacceptable.
 
ZenMode said:
Why do you believe it has to be in writing and which building specifically are you referring to as independent, which presumably would be outside of the executive branches authority, and requiring access in writing?
Click to expand...
1. USIP is the most recent one. They are also targeting the FTC, IIRC.
2. It has to be memorialized for it to be an act of the president. It's why Trump can't declassify documents with his mind. I suppose there could be other ways of memorializing it, though I don't know the law in this area. Could the Trump take official action by audio recording? Maybe. But in writing is obviously the most common method, by far. Military command would be different.
 
ZenMode said:
Exactly. Shooting cand of Bud Light also isn't threatening the lives of transgender people. :rolleyes:

" At least four of the Tesla Terrorists are trans btw."
Weighing Options Are You Sure GIF
Click to expand...
While plenty of people shoot cans on their own property without it being a threat to individuals or groups, the PUBLICATION of that particular act was what transitioned the relatively normal act into a threat to an individual and a protected group. Had someone acted to take the next step against a protected group, it would have been entirely reasonable to place a portion of the responsibility on Kid Rock.
 
wmheel1287 said:
I dont believe it was anyone on any political spectrum. That kind of thing is related to mental illness not political ideology. Acting otherwise on a discussion message board is completely unacceptable.
Click to expand...
If anything, the guy who fired a shot and the guy lining up a shot had/have a substantial right wing history.

Zen is representative of a social malignancy that was birth into the modern era by the John Birch society and blasted with rocket fuel by the internet.
 
superrific said:
It doesn't. But the analogy addresses the issue of intent. You can't infer intent in a court of law merely from actions that could be easily explained in other ways. In order for a terrorism charge to stick, for instance, the jury would have to rule out "defendant was just angry" as a motivation, and on the evidence so far established, that would be impossible. As an attorney, you should know this -- but then again, there are a lot of things you don't know that you should.

This is why, for instance, the police often arrest people on minor crimes and then amend the indictment later. IIRC, the Boston Marathon bomber was initially detained on some minor charge, because that could be easily proven. Then, after investigating and finding actual evidence of intent, they charged with terrorism.

Some actions are res ipsa loquitur. Both bin Laden and McVeigh were clearly engaged in terrorism. There's no other way to describe those actions. Incidentally, because 9/11 was a transnational plot, the mens rea requirement would be lower and thus the required showing on intent is relaxed. But with McVeigh, the government had to prove a certain intent. IIRC, McVeigh either admitted to having that intent or didn't fight the point, but it would have been easily established of funding and anyway, because an anti-government activist blowing up a federal building speaks for itself.

But firebombing a Tesla dealership isn't remotely that. Hell, the government would have to prove that the defendants intended to cause property damage, which might not be possible. You'd have to rule out, "I was drunk and I was trying to throw this flaming bottle away from all the cars." This is why, often, crimes like this would be charged for a count requiring only a recklessness mens rea because that's obviously established. So before you can get these guys on terrorism, you'd have to be able to get them on malicious property destruction. It's so far away from a terrorism charge that even suggesting it should constitute prosecutorial misconduct.
Click to expand...
Bondi is gathering facts regarding funding and coordination of these acts which might ultimately lead to domestic terrorism charges.
 
Ramrouser said:
Bondi is gathering facts regarding funding and coordination of these acts which might ultimately lead to domestic terrorism charges.
Click to expand...
No, what they are looking for is any excuse to declare a national emergency and consolidate power, Reichstag-style. They've been unable to provoke anything but a few Tesla fires, so that's what they are trying to run with. It's a pathetic attempt, but the whole administration is pathetic. Fucking idiots couldn't take the garbage to the curb if you spotted them the garage door.

There will not be any domestic terrorism convictions. Of that I am sure.
 
“Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s boyfriend has a wild idea for dealing with vandals targeting Tesla dealerships.

Speaking on a broadcast Thursday, the reporter for Trump-loving Real America’s Voice suggested the vehicle manufacturer may need “Kyle Rittenhouse-style” armed guards at its outlets.

“Maybe it’s time to go full-on Kyle Rittenhouse-style security and start having armed security guards in front of a dealership,” Brian Glenn said. “If I was in charge of a dealership, that’s exactly what I would do because they are absolutely destroying a brand.” …”

www.thedailybeast.com

MTG’s Reporter Beau Suggests Bonkers Plan to Protect Tesla

As billionaire car manufacturer Elon Musk wields his chainsaw at federal agencies, protesters have wreaked havoc at Tesla dealerships around the country.
www.thedailybeast.com www.thedailybeast.com
 
Lando said:
The people they hate now hate them back. Trolling the libs has worked spectacularly, but they don't seem to be enjoying their victory.
Click to expand...
Which is to be expected as they're the original snowflakes. Their view of themselves is apparently that they should be free to bully and harass and intimidate anyone they want, and say literally anything they want about any individual or group or race or gender, but there also should be no consequences for their behavior and actions and no one should be allowed to hate or criticize or give them a taste of their own medicine. They can go after Bud Light and take video clips of themselves shooting Bud Light cans, but how dare someone go after Tesla and do the same! They can call gays and transgenders and feminists and immigrants and others all sorts of nasty things, but let someone call them a slur or say anything they find offensive and they and Fox News get the vapors and lose their minds. In other words, they practice a huge double standard.
 
DOJ Designates Posting Photos Of Balding Elon Musk As Domestic Terrorism —
theonion.com

DOJ Designates Posting Photos Of Balding Elon Musk As Domestic Terrorism

WASHINGTON—Warning that the charge carried a five-year mandatory minimum sentence, the U.S. Department of Justice declared Friday that the distribution of images featuring a balding Elon Musk constituted an act of domestic terrorism. “For the benefit of all Americans, anyone who posts or reposts...
theonion.com theonion.com

1742763538695.png
1742763732200.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top