The Case To Indict Trump
There are possibilities, and they are growing stronger, that t-RUMP could be charged “with obstructing an official proceeding or defrauding the United States on the basis of election fraud claims that he knew were false.” This came from the Guardian. J6 is molding a case for Attorney General Merrick Garland, if only he would decide to get off that garland covered Christmas tree of 2020, to use the legal doctrine of “willful blindness” against #45.
t-RUMP has been regurgitating the same old sputum that the election was stolen from him; there were dead people voting; votes were stuffed in suitcases and thrown away; and the list goes on. The NITWIT from Queens wouldn’t wrap his tiny, little, infected brain around the fact that in spite of his losses, down-ballot Trump Nazi Party candidates won seats. Either the Creature from the Mar-A-Lago Lagoon is so psychotically delusional and incompetent or just plain old damn stupid and unfit to do anything. The guy needs to be locked away for the rest of his life.
He was told over and over again that he did not win the election and his election lies were “bullshit.”
We heard during the public J6 hearing from Little Miss Prissy Trump, also known as Ivanka, that she did not believe her father’s persistent lie that he actually won the election “big” and by “YUUGE” margins because of her respect for BillyBob Barr’s legal opinions. Yet, Little Miss Prissy went on her father’s Daddy Needs Love and Big Lie tour raising Cain over his illegitimate losses in front of crowds of COVID infected zombies. She faked her innocence before the J6 committee.
According to Kluwer Patent Blog, the question is “whether enhanced damages are nonetheless a possibility where an infringer purposefully avoids knowledge of patent infringement.”
In the case of t-RUMP’s “willful blindness” in regards to his stolen election allegations, would there be precedence when using the same argument used in a purposeful avoidance of patent infringement case? “The Supreme Court did make clear, however, that enhanced damages awards are only available in “egregious cases” of misconduct that involve more than “typical” infringement.” No doubt, the stealing of an election through fake electors, and an insurrection would qualify “egregious.” “Further, the Court made clear that enhanced damages were “designed as a ‘punitive’ or ‘vindictive’ sanction for egregious infringement behavior,” and reserved for behavior that was “willful, wanton, malicious, bad-faith, deliberate, consciously wrongful, flagrant, or—indeed—characteristic of a pirate.”
Hey!! We could easily equate t-RUMP’s actions as those of a pirate. “Willful, deliberate, consciously wrongful and flagrant” all apply to #45’s actions leading up to J6.
“Typically, claims for enhanced damages are based on allegations of willful misconduct—so much so that, although the words “willful” and “willfulness” do not appear in § 284, plaintiffs and courts often refer to claims for enhanced damages as “willful infringement claims.” “In practice, the determination of a claim for enhanced damages is a two step process: (1) the jury determines whether the infringement is “willful (or, indeed, wanton, malicious, in bad-faith, deliberate, consciously wrongful, flagrant, or characteristic of a pirate), as alleged by the plaintiff and, if so, (2) the judge determines whether the behavior is sufficiently egregious to warrant enhanced damages…”
Does this sound like t-RUMP could be legally charged with the crimes mentioned above?
“The Federal Circuit has made clear that “[k]nowledge of the patent alleged to be willfully infringed” is a prerequisite for enhanced damages. But “‘willful misconduct’ [does] not mean that a court may award enhanced damages simply because the evidence shows that the infringer knew about the patent and nothing more.” In a previous Supreme Court case, their decision was “interpreted as requiring—at a minimum—knowledge of infringement (of the patent). And “[i]t is circumstance that transforms simple knowledge into such egregious behavior” that warrants punishment.”
It is clear that in t-RUMP’s case, there is plenty of “circumstance”. “The doctrine of willful blindness allows a finding of willful blindness to substitute for a finding of actual knowledge in criminal or civil proceedings.” “…the Supreme Court has allowed willful blindness to replace actual knowledge that the acts induced constituted patent infringement.”
In t-RUMP’s case, it isn’t patent infringement, but crimes against the government. “In the eyes of the Supreme Court, acting with willful blindness is “just as culpable as . . . actual knowledge” because the actor “can almost be said to have actually known the critical facts.” #45 was told of the actually known (by Bill Barr and others) critical facts that the election wasn’t stolen from him. His false claims persistently used to stir up hate and anger against the U.S government, our legal election system, our elections, our Constitution, our freedoms, and even against Joe Biden for claiming he stole it away from him through “dirty tricks” performed at election sites could be seen as “willful blindness.”
“Willful blindness has two requirements: “(1) [t]he defendant must subjectively believe that there is a high probability that a fact exists and (2) the defendant must take deliberate actions to avoid learning of that fact.” “And “[u]nder this formulation, a willfully blind defendant is one who takes deliberate actions to avoid confirming a high probability of wrongdoing,” as opposed to one “who merely knows of a substantial and unjustified risk of such wrongdoing.”
#45 seems to fit the requirements. He believed that he won the election because people like John Eastman, Mark Meadows, Junior Trump, Rudy “Ghouliani”, Sidney Powell, Ginni Thomas, and others kept telling him that he was the rightful winner of the 2020 election. He took willful action to avoid learning the facts and blocked out the facts and the truth. There were Trump Nazi allies, such as Mo Brooks who told tRUMP to rescind the election. These people were pushing t-RUMP to commit treason on their behalf and for their own political gain. They were all complicit accomplices in the NITWIT from Queens actions to commit treason.
While on the other hand, there were individuals, such as Bill Barr, who kept telling Duh’Fuhrer Trump that he did NOT win the election. Kellyanne Conway claimed that she told her boss that he lost the election. Paul Ryan and Rep. Dan Crenshaw were another. In addition, there were over 60 lawsuits against election officials to make their case that there was election fraud and election tampering. Each one of these lawsuits ended up losing, too. t-RUMP’s claim of ballots stuffed in suitcases and tossed in the rivers were also proven false. There was no evidence of this. “Ghouliani” insisted that a black suitcase under an election counting desk was where ballots for Trump were stuffed in order to be tossed away. But that was a lie, as well. That box was a lock box in order to protect ballots that had to be counted the next day, since the hand counting process took days to complete.
The big question now is Merrick Garland just a strand of Christmas garland, or has he a pair of Christmas balls? It appears there is a strong case against 45 in the courts. Let it be made.
In an article posted on RawStory by Matthew Chapman, he makes the case that 45 committed treason when he failed to use security forces to protect the Capital and the Capital police trying to defend it. On MSNBC, former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner detailed his opinion that 45 committed treason.
Kirschner said, "This was a plan, a scheme.” "This was not a riot or a crowd that got over enthusiastic and sort of spun out of control, and I can't wait to see more information in the coming public hearings about the meeting in the Oval Office between Trump, Flynn, Giuliani and Powell. I'm quite sure the J6 committee has some information about that. They are going to present. Last night we sort of got the impression that there were no adults in the room at the time, no lovers of democracy in there to try to keep that — that conspiracy, you know, contained, and we heard, that you know, some people did rush in and when we heard these folks were meeting in the Oval of course, but about an hour after that meeting we got the tweet. The plan had been hatched, and Donald Trump was implementing it. Come to D.C. on January 6th. It will be wild."
"The other word ... that you heard yesterday was war," said Kirschner. "Why does that become important? Well, where is that word prominently featured in the big ugly blue book of federal laws, the United States Code, the crime of treason, and every time I heard war, my mind went back to treason which is a very short and simple statute. Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, like the president, levies war against the United States, is guilty of treason."
“The real indication of a crime, Kirschner argued, is Trump's lack of response to what was going on.”
Does “willful blindness” apply here? According to General Mike Milley, Pence had to call up additional security forces after his wannabe crime boss failed to do so. He said that there needed to forces called to there Capital, even though Pence didn’t have the authority to do so. Trump was furious because he did not want Pence looking like he was now in charge and that Duh’Fuhrer Trump was no longer capable of fulfilling his presidential duties, especially during a time of the insurrection and those in the halls of Congress were fearing for their lives.
You can watch Glenn Kirschner here.
The Veteran House Counsel says it is time to investigate where Trump should be indicted for the Insurrection.
Now for “You Can’t Make This Stuff Up!”
We have Margie Taylor Greene Slime at it again. She once again demonstrated that she has a very difficult time mastering the art of the English language when speaking before an audience.
Last Wednesday, when the House was debating a vote on the “Protection Our Kids Act,” which was a gun reform plan, she said, “due-process rights that are being so fragrantly and horrifically violated.” By the way, the package for gun reform did pass the House and then it went to the Senate.
Greene Slime meant to say flagrantly, but instead said FRAGRANTLY. She must have been smelling her own foul stench wafting out of her body, which she so believes is fragrant.