What is happening now at the Proud Boys trial we will witness again and again.

[fightforfreedom]

A Proud Boy who pled guilty is now testifying and telling all.

When Garland, Smith, Willis, indict people. Some of them will plead guilty and tell all. They will do this to get lighter sentences. Some of the coup plotters may be not talking now. But when you get indicted and see the evidence against you, the possible years you are facing in prison. That has a way of changing your mind about not talking.

[dem4decades]

1. Let me know when Roger Stone goes to jail, until then ho hum.

[we can do it]

2. Snore

[calimary]

30. Boy is THAT one overdue.

[EYESORE 9001]

3. The earlier you squeal, the better deal you'll get

Under the spreading chestnut tree
I sold you and you sold me

[scarletlib]

4. Not to mention attorney fees for a defense in federal crimes.

[boyedav1969]

37. No doubt

I've seen $7500 retainers or higher for simple charges that they knew they were going to plead out. For a trial, you're starting in the low 5 figures, and considerably more if it goes more than a day or two.

[rubbersole]

42. Could be as much as $25K just to get in the door of an attorney who does federal court cases.

Those guys won't even go to trial if they stand a chance of losing. Federal Court is where the big boys play. Nobody wants to be a defendant there. Even rich people.

[gab13by13]

5. The pyramid strategy was a bust

No Proud Boys or Oath Keepers flipped on Trump because Trump kept his hands clean, used Mark Meadows as a middle man and they used burner phones.

2 years, 1,000 people prosecuted and they can’t tie Trump to the Willard Hotel.

Should have started with Meadows 2 years ago, the J6 committee got a lot of info from Meadows before someone threatened him and he clammed up. It should have been DOJ subpoenaing Meadows and not the J6 committee. Jack Smith has a lot of catching up to do.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

6. Of course you have inside information to state such as if it is fact

You don't, but that doesn't stop you.

[jaxexpat]

9. One may disagree without being disagreeable,.

Some, however, apparently disagree.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

15. Post I replied to was illogical which I highlighted of necessity. Further, it was not the first time

[fightforfreedom]

22. Illogical is an understatement.

[Silent3]

46. What is particularly logical about assuming a positive view of the DoJ's approach...

…requires no inside knowledge, and only dissenters must meet this deliberately impossible standard of proof?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

47. You make the binary fallacy and neglect public info

But regardless, I am net positive, on balance, because of public info, namely the seriousness and care of each of Garland's public steps.

Other than that I DO NOT KNOW.

Further, you fall into the all-or-nothing thinking trap that one is either all negative or all positive because 1) you term it an impossible standard, which it is, and 2) that the only way to be positive or negative is to have inside knowledge.

[Silent3]

50. You miss that saying the binary fallacy is yours. I'm describing it, not proposing it. n/t

[fightforfreedom]

11. Oh no not again! Did you dream all this?

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. Try to keep up

With some very minor exceptions (PB given WH tour, call to OK from WH aide) No one has ever claimed there was a direct link between the PB’s, OK’s and Trump.

The layer of the “pyramid” you seem to have ignored is the one containing Roger Stone, Ali Alexander and Alex Jones. They all had direct contact with PB’s and OK’s, and with the Trump campaign and WH staffers, including those planning the J6 rally. Jones and Alexander were directly involved in bringing insurrectionists to the East door of the Capitol, under the guise that Trump would be giving a speech there. Stone was in the War room at the Willard on January 5, but high tailed it out of town when things heated up on the 6th.

Stone, Alexander and Jones all testified to the J6 committee. Alexander testified to the DOJ’s grand jury last year.

Alexander in particular is a slimy little weasel who would turn on his own mother if he was facing prison time.

We shall see where the next brick in the pyramid lies…

[fightforfreedom]

21. Some people believe you build a house from the roof down.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

23. That's a great metaphor! . . . nt

[gab13by13]

25. Some people believe

You can wait 2 years to investigate criminals and not lose evidence.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

28. And you are making fables that people HAVE waited 2 years to investigate criminals

Otherwise you would have phrased post 25 differently.

[getagrip_already]

41. Fables? Not so much...

There was no serious investigations of those above the foot soldiers until Smith came on board. It very much appears he had to start from scratch.

So saying people (doj people along with garland) waiting 2 years is not a fable.

The fable is that they have been aggressively building a case against tfg and his upper eschalons for 2 years. They simply were not.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

43. You know this by inside info? Otherwise again you spin a fable

There was no serious investigations of those above the foot soldiers until Smith came on board.

This is not a fact knowable except by inside info. Hence we can be sure it is your fable.

It very much appears he had to start from scratch.

Wrong. Read reports of court filings within a two/three weeks of the appointment and you, well, we hope even you can see that you stated something wrong; that is not a fact. Doing so is not a lie, but it is part of the fable you spin. To your credit you qualify the statement with "appears". However facts around the time make the statement false. You have been deceived by appearances.

So saying people (doj people along with garland) waiting 2 years is not a fable.

False. Serious people do not think Garland did nothing for 2 years.

The fable is that they have been aggressively building a case against tfg and his upper eschalons for 2 years. They simply were not.

Even if this statement of yours were to be fact not fable it is unknowable except by inside info.

You write speculation as if it were fact. That makes you a fabulist.

[getagrip_already]

44. Those with access to inside info have said so...

And since neither of us have direct inside info, I will defer to those that likely do.

I get the urge to trust on faith that things are rosy. It just isn't shaking out that way.

The election season is underway. It is almost too late to indict. Almost. A trial likely won't even begin before next November given the parties involved.

And despite what armchair enthusiasts are claiming, Smith probably isn't close to an indictment.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

45. I don't know

I'm pretty sure Garland is very aware of the clock and will have communicated the importance of this to Smith when he appointed him.

I don't know, but why am I sure? Because of Garland's sense of timing on things, most notably his appointment of Smith within days of tRump announcing, and tRump announcing within days of the close of the midterm elections.

Appointments like that do not get projected, nominated, interviewed, and negotiated within "days" or two/three weeks. Garland was cognizant of the 60 day clock (however vague/informal it may have been) before the elections and had to have the Smith appointment virtually in his suit pocket, ready for tRump if he were to announce (and he did).

Nov 8, 2022: midterms
Nov 15, 2022: the rump announces
Nov 18, 2022: Garland announces Jack Smith

I never had faith in a rosy outcome, rather more a "good" outcome. As the clock ticks, my faith wavers slightly more. Even so, I wouldn't dare make a prediction on when Smith indicts, other than "between now and 60 days before Nov 5, 2024".

[dem4decades]

48. Garland was not pursuing a robust investigation was he?

[Lucky Luciano]

7. great

[AllaN01Bear]

8. untill i see the slobfather in prison orange . in chains . going to the ultramax.

fleeing the country( russia is out as putin hates all americans ) or croaks . i aint going to say nothing about these trials. my main focus is on him with consequences and i see none . 3 years and i see none . when he dies , i am going to do a victory dance.

[IronLionZion]

10. I hope so

we've all been wanting that for so long

[gab13by13]

12. Facts don't lie, time matters

It has taken E. Jean Carroll 3 1/2 years to get Trump to a civil trial. Fact.

If DOJ had indicted individual one we may have had a Trump trial scheduled before the 2024 election.

If Jack Smith indicts Trump today, when would a Trump trial happen? 2025? 2026? Democrats better keep the presidency in 2024 and 2028.

[gab13by13]

19. If you are going to call me a liar

Can you specify what I am lying about so I can defend myself. Time matters, fact, the FBI seized Scott Perry’s phone last August, it hasn’t been accessed yet, he is fighting it in the courts, it may take 6 more months to gain access. Meanwhile, Perry is on a committee investigating the FBI. Perry was a key player in the fake elector scheme.

[fightforfreedom]

26. I and other members have pointed out your mistakes to you many times.

You don't listen and keep repeating the same mistakes. I don't think you are a liar. I think you make mistakes and fail to recognize them even when you are shown evidence you are wrong.

You said Meadows was threatened. You just made that up.

You said the pyramid strategy was a bust. There is no evidence of that.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

27. You are not a liar. Occasionally you are a fabulist

... but the main part of the meaning of "fabulist", not the liar part. Not in everything, for example not in post 19, not in post 12, but in post 5.

[gab13by13]

33. I stand by post 5 as the pyramid strategy

Applies to Donald Trump.

The pyramid strategy may work to indict Stone, Flynn, and others at the Willard Hotel but I stand by saying that Trump used Mark Meadows to keep his hands clean. Meadows is the key to indicting Trump and no one has explained to me yet why the J6 committee took the lead in subpoenaing Meadows. Why wasn’t DOJ out front, in the lead?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

40. It has neither failed nor succeeded. It is operational. You wrote a fable. . . . nt

[fightforfreedom]

31. I am going to protect my posts from misinformation.

I did not call you a liar. I think you are at times misinformed, ignore facts sometimes, and make mistakes that you repeat over and over again.

[Fiendish Thingy]

17. Facts don't lie, but sometimes they whisper

And if you’re not paying close enough attention, you miss the point, or leave out important details,

[calimary]

32. That's a good way to put it.

“Facts don’t lie, but sometimes they whisper.”

[BlackSkimmer]

14. So you seem to think...

But the lower end of these plotters will behave much differently than the big wigs. No comparison.

[fightforfreedom]

18. Some people do not talk, some people do, it's universal.

Lower level people, higher level people, mid level people. it doesn't matter. Some people talk to stay out of prison or to get a lighter sentence.

Some of the so called lower level people you are talking about are facing seditious conspiracy charges. Twenty years in prison. Some are talking, some are not. Some have pled not guilty, some have pled guilty.

[twodogsbarking]

20. Death threats by former associates up next.

[Easterncedar]

24. Can we discuss instead of argue?

I appreciate folks who initiate posts, and don’t want them to be discouraged. (Thanks, Fightforfreedom.). I think the sarcasm and nastiness is a useful tool for those who don’t wish this community well.

[Bev54]

34. When it is a constant discourse coming from one, it becomes tiresome to answer

the same misconceptions in almost every post and the poster gains no introspection no matter how much people try.

[Easterncedar]

36. Yeah. I've had friends give up on DU because of it.

[fightforfreedom]

38. Thank you.

Constant is the correct word.

[Martin68]

29. True. It's one reason the process takes time, but it's worth it to get the guys at the top.

We all know the guy at the very top is Tonald Dump.

[fightforfreedom]

35. I have always believed Meadows is someone who would talk if facing prison time.

Let's see what happens if he is indicted and is facing serious prison time. I think he will sing like a canary.

[jalan48]

39. Some believe everyone is equal under the law while others (including myself) believe

those with wealth and power enjoy special privileges and never face the consequences for their behavior (Nixon and Reagan). It's comforting to think the rich and powerful will be held accountable but I'm skeptical.

[JCMach1]

49. Meanwhile Trump is running around like it didn't happen...

It was a coup attempt. In any other country in the world he is already executed, or in deep maximum security, or fled into exile.

Something terribly wrong going on here.