Will Georgia indict? May find out tonight! Update: Posted Jan 9 finally indicted Aug 14.

[fskimospy]

I ask again ... obstruction of Justice?

Georgia Republicans Take Emergency Action on Trump Indictment​

Republican state Senator Colton Moore called on the state's GOP governor to convene a special session to investigate the lead prosecutor.

Fact Check: Could Georgia Shut Down Fani Willis' Trump Investigation?​

Donald Trump's indictment could be "shut down tomorrow" by Georgia's state legislature, one conservative commentator has claimed.

You can't really have core legislative functions be obstruction of justice so no.

All that aside there's nothing the GA legislature is going to do to stop this - they might try some futile messaging gestures but that's the end of it.

 

[Jaskalas]

I find it funny how people today think doxxing people is such an incredible violation when for most of our lives every town literally had a giant book that would tell you everyone's name, address, and phone number.

In this case, it's taking the personal info of the Judge, Jury, Prosecutor, and telling people where they live. You know, in case you want to visit and stalk and otherwise harm them AND their family.
It's not being done for peaceful purposes. There's nothing innocent about their intent.

 

[skyking]

These claims were made "tweeting to the base". That is not where the rubber meets the road.
If they really had something going, it would be done behind the scenes for as long as possible.

 

[fskimospy]

In this case, it's taking the personal info of the Judge, Jury, Prosecutor, and telling people where they live. You know, in case you want to visit and stalk and otherwise harm them AND their family.
It's not being done for peaceful purposes. There's nothing innocent about their intent.

I agree completely - the purpose here is to hurt them and to intimidate future jurors who might vote to convict Trump or whatever.

I just find the modern concern about doxxing to be sort of amusing given the existence of phone books.

 

[Jaskalas]

I agree completely - the purpose here is to hurt them and to intimidate future jurors who might vote to convict Trump or whatever.

I just find the modern concern about doxxing to be sort of amusing given the existence of phone books.

Phone books were just names and phone numbers, right?
Not addresses?

 

[dank69]

Phone books were just names and phone numbers, right?
Not addresses?

I think they also had addresses.

 

[fskimospy]

Phone books were just names and phone numbers, right?
Not addresses?

I'm not sure if they're all the same but mine had addresses.

 

[brycejones]

Phone books were just names and phone numbers, right?
Not addresses?

They had addresses

 

[Jaskalas]

I'm not sure if they're all the same but mine had addresses.

Interesting. Society certainly was different "back in the day".
I really don't like the idea of participants of the legal system being easily ID'd, located, and targeted.
Especially in today's environment, that WILL be exploited to harm people AND corrupt our justice system.

Heck, even just knowing that Trump is the defendant skews the Jury. Republicans don't think he'll get a fair trial in DC, but could you imagine one in a deeply red city? The reverse is true, he would never be found guilty of anything. In a similar vein, I think much of the evidence for the Georgia trial comes straight from his own legal team. They did not make an effort to conceal their own actions, because they could not imagine any of their actions as being illegal.

 

[uclaLabrat]

No place for an "intellectual conservative" in Trumplican world. He's looking for a new home.
And always completely wrong about the Middle East.

Because "intellectual conservative" was a mythical beast as early as the 80s and a complete oxymoron by the mid-90s. Conservative policy (where they bother to articulate one) is easily debunked on a superficial level.

Those holdouts still waving the flag are intellectually dishonest clowns still trying to maintain the grift. Theyve been pushed aside by those who realized you dont even need to keep up pretenses, and that tiger is never going back in the cage.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm not sure if they're all the same but mine had addresses.

When I was a kid I remember at lest some having addresses. That did stop at sometime I am going to guess in the early 80s.
Might have been businesses only, not sure I do remember having addresses in there.

 

[dank69]

When I was a kid I remember at lest some having addresses. That did stop at sometime I am going to guess in the early 80s.
Might have been businesses only, not sure I do remember having addresses in there.

for reference:

 

[ksheets]

Ours always had addresses, but you could OPT out of them. Can you OPT out of someone posting your info online? that's where I would make the distinction.

 

[MrSquished]

I remember the phone book with address days, but to think that doxxing now, decades later, with the technology we have now, is the same thing. Well, you have to be a fucking idiot to say that. Technology and communication change things, to not even consider that is pure idiocy.

Yes with phone books one could get an address, but it was a very limited audience they could push that to to garner outrage and then actual harm. They'd pretty much have to do it themselves or hire someone or sort it via very limited mediums.


Now they can just put it on the Internet, and have millions of cultists or fundies fully aware and angry, everywhere geographically. Now that opens a whole other can of worms, because the info is so widespread so fast due to the Internet and social media, it makes a phone book address access back then look like child's play.

To not have the sense to have these basic thoughts about the differences between then and now is frightening.

 

[Vic]

Phone books were just names and phone numbers, right?
Not addresses?

They also had addresses in most cases. You had to ask the phone company not to list them.

 

[hal2kilo]

Phone books were just names and phone numbers, right?
Not addresses?

There were addresses.

 

[pcgeek11]

What’s weird though is that Trump’s own son publicly confessed to colluding with the Russians. Was he lying?

Link?

 

[fskimospy]

Link?

https://www.npr.org/2017/07/11/536670194/donald-trump-jr-s-emails-about-meeting-with-russian-lawyer-annotated#:~:text=Carlos%20Barria%2FReuters-,Donald%20Trump%20Jr.,your%20father.%22%20Trump%20Jr.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Link?

He did, there was something about receiving info from a Russian leading up to 2016 and him plus the former President have said (pre-2016) that they did big business with Russia.

 

[hal2kilo]

Because "intellectual conservative" was a mythical beast as early as the 80s and a complete oxymoron by the mid-90s. Conservative policy (where they bother to articulate one) is easily debunked on a superficial level.

Those holdouts still waving the flag are intellectually dishonest clowns still trying to maintain the grift. Theyve been pushed aside by those who realized you dont even need to keep up pretenses, and that tiger is never going back in the cage.

Thus the quotes.

 

[Paratus]

He did, there was something about receiving info from a Russian leading up to 2016 and him plus the former President have said (pre-2016) that they did big business with Russia.

@pcgeek11

If you care here’s a link to what fanatical meat was talking about.

Eric Trump said Trump golf courses got $100 million in funding from Russia

"We've got some guys that really, really love golf, and they're really invested in our programs."

www.businessinsider.com

 

[pcgeek11]

https://www.npr.org/2017/07/11/536670194/donald-trump-jr-s-emails-about-meeting-with-russian-lawyer-annotated#:~:text=Carlos%20Barria%2FReuters-,Donald%20Trump%20Jr.,your%20father.%22%20Trump%20Jr.

"Donald Trump Jr. tweeted images of emails regarding his 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer on Tuesday. An intermediary said he could connect Trump Jr. with people who had information "that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] ... and would be very useful to your father." Trump Jr. agreed to the meeting, which former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Trump son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner also attended in June 2016. They met with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya, who Trump Jr. said ultimately did not provide the promised material on Clinton."

Sounds like opposition research, much like the Steel Dossier.

 

[fskimospy]

Sounds like opposition research, much like the Steel Dossier.

Nope - that would be an illegal foreign contribution to the Trump campaign.

Regardless, you have Trump Jr. confessing to having the Russian government reach out to him to offer assistance and him enthusiastically accepting.

Russian collusion. Period.

 

[pcgeek11]

Nope - that would be an illegal foreign contribution to the Trump campaign.

Regardless, you have Trump Jr. confessing to having the Russian government reach out to him to offer assistance and him enthusiastically accepting.

Russian collusion. Period.

Well then lock him up.

In your link they didn't supply anything. Kind of like Adam Schiff and the fake phone call from a Russian claiming to have information on Trump...

Report: Schiff Engaged With Russian Prank Callers - Roll Call

Audio of Russian radio comedians prank-calling Rep. Adam Schiff shows the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee asking for details about naked photos of President Donald Trump they were offering. The audio from last year was posted by U.K. outlet The Daily Mail. The audio’s...

rollcall.com

 

[iRONic]

Phone books were just names and phone numbers, right?
Not addresses?

WTF?!?!

Every phone abook I’ve ever seen in my 63 years on this rock in America had names, numbers, and addresses!!