US Politics Thread 2021-24 - Page 367

Buddahaid · 03-30-23, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

You still going to be laughing when he beats the rap again?

Why not, it's not as if he's lost pretty much every legal action in recent history?

This is just the first of several on the way with the E. Jean Carroll civil rape and defamation trial set to begin April 15. EDIT: April 25.

Oh, and here's another they reporting on Jacob Chansley.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65132475

August · 03-31-23, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Why not, it's not as if he's lost pretty much every legal action in recent history?

This is just the first of several on the way with the E. Jean Carroll civil rape and defamation trial set to begin April 15. EDIT: April 25.

Oh, and here's another they reporting on Jacob Chansley.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65132475

We'll see. The New York case is widely considered to be very weak and it's pretty obvious it has primarily a political motivation. I'm betting that it will fail as will that civil case and any others they manage to bring forth.

Buddahaid · 03-31-23, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

We'll see. The New York case is widely considered to be very weak and it's pretty obvious it has primarily a political motivation. I'm betting that it will fail as will that civil case and any others they manage to bring forth.

Politically motivated is an excuse forwarded in an attempt to swing opinion over legal obligations on suits filed in civil actions against Trump. Let it roll and get it over with. This one also includes Trump Org. 250 million NY tax evasion trial set for Oct 3.

The more criminal investigations in Georgia and DC are justified whether due to political motivation, or not. It's Trump's own actions that have forced these issues to escalate, while he plays victim for sympathy, and further grift.

August · 03-31-23, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Politically motivated is an excuse forwarded in an attempt to swing opinion over legal obligations on suits filed in civil actions against Trump. Let it roll and get it over with. This one also includes Trump Org. 250 million NY tax evasion trial set for Oct 3.

The more criminal investigations in Georgia and DC are justified whether due to political motivation, or not. It's Trump's own actions that have forced these issues to escalate, while he plays victim for sympathy, and further grift.

Politically motivated as in DA Bragg openly campaigned on going after Trump and has put together a case that stretches the law beyond recognition and is obviously tailored to doing just that, getting Trump.

Whatever, it's obvious the machine is out to destroy the man and they will never stop. They obviously don't really care what it takes, or what precedents are set in order to achieve their goal. They have exposed themselves doing it and I hope to live to see it used against them.

Now as I have said a few times i'd rather see the GoP put up a younger man or woman anyways so maybe if the Dems are finally successful it will open a path for a Conservative who isn't an obnoxious loudmouth New Yorker.

I don't expect they'll be treated any better than Trump was, a lot depends on their ability to put together a team that can take control of the letter agencies and coming up with a way to neutralize the Dem Media attack machine.

Torvald Von Mansee · 03-31-23, 05:30 AM

What kind of world do we live in where crime is criminalized?!?!?

Torvald Von Mansee · 03-31-23, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

You still going to be laughing when he beats the rap again?

I think I shall go for a long, relaxing drive in a white Ford Bronco with a cardboard cutout of innocent person O.J. Simpson!!

Dowly · 03-31-23, 06:49 AM

First of, the grand jury, who decides whether to indict or not, consists of regular citizens. They make the decision, not Bragg.

Second, this sets the precedent that a former POTUS can be indicted. Why is that bad?

Rockstar · 03-31-23, 07:37 AM

6 YEARS of accusations. Indictments do not prove guilt they are a ‘formal’ accusation. The Boondoggle continues.

Still taking bets.

mapuc · 03-31-23, 07:57 AM

Just have to say this - Eye of the beholder -

I see it as an interesting thing that two people can get different stuff out of an article.

A person who's pro-Trump will see this article as a negative or positive
A person who's anti-Trump will see this article as a positive or negative.

Markus

Cybermat47 · 03-31-23, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly

Second, this sets the precedent that a former POTUS can be indicted. Why is that bad?

Because owning the libs is far more important than holding government officials to the same legal standard as the American people.

What are you, a commie?

Skybird · 03-31-23, 01:30 PM

Trump must be brought to justice, I have no doubt about that. But not for the charges now being tried, but for the events in Georgia, and later at the Capitol on January 6. The indictment in New York now is all too obviously politically motivated, and quite irrelevant on the merits. Interested political circles are abusing the judicial system, which has the nerve to formally enable this process. Formally, it may be legal - whether it is really wise and should be done is quite another matter. And it can backfire badly against the initiating Democrat party.

Georgia, Capitol Hill: these two are the acts he should stand trial for. I see him guilty in both cases.

Catfish · 03-31-23, 01:37 PM

^ I agree this cannot be the main accusation, but legally this one is still binding under civil law. Any less rich man would also be accused if such tax dodging would come out.
You assume that most rich people will not be accused of bribing and hiding the price and you are right, but still remains a criminal act. If you are for justice or "law and order" this is legitimate.
The more important trials will follow anyway.

Skybird · 03-31-23, 03:30 PM

^ I thought the only issue was that the way the hush money was accounted for and reaccounted for (which in itself is legitimate under U.S. law, though objectionable in my sense of the law) could be seen as illegal campaign financing?

Possible I am not up to date, I do not follow this too closely, it does not interest me that much.

les green01 · 03-31-23, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

^ I thought the only issue was that the way the hush money was accounted for and reaccounted for (which in itself is legitimate under U.S. law, though objectionable in my sense of the law) could be seen as illegal campaign financing?

Possible I am not up to date, I do not follow this too closely, it does not interest me that much.

what i been reading Sky going be like 30+ charges but what it amounts to is a witch hunt which i think going backfire against the dems and it should but trump keeps shooting off his mouth i think the man was born with his foot in his mouth i don't think he going get a lot of protesters and all that backing him after he left the fools from jan 6 with their bums hanging out

Buddahaid · 03-31-23, 08:27 PM

Public disclosure of the indictment has been authorized. Maybe Tuesday.
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/4769/180Yn9.png

03-31-23, 05:30 AM	#5495
Torvald Von Mansee Sea Lord Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: CA4528 Posts: 1,673 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	What kind of world do we live in where crime is criminalized?!?!? __________________ "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you" - Leon Trotsky

03-31-23, 06:49 AM	#5497
Dowly Lucky Jack Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 25,005 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	First of, the grand jury, who decides whether to indict or not, consists of regular citizens. They make the decision, not Bragg. Second, this sets the precedent that a former POTUS can be indicted. Why is that bad? Last edited by Dowly; 03-31-23 at 07:06 AM.

03-31-23, 07:37 AM	#5498
Rockstar Rear Admiral Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 11,834 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	6 YEARS of accusations. Indictments do not prove guilt they are a ‘formal’ accusation. The Boondoggle continues. Still taking bets. __________________ Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 03-31-23 at 02:35 PM.

03-31-23, 07:57 AM	#5499
mapuc Fleet Admiral Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 17,877 Downloads: 37 Uploads: 0	Just have to say this - Eye of the beholder - I see it as an interesting thing that two people can get different stuff out of an article. A person who's pro-Trump will see this article as a negative or positive A person who's anti-Trump will see this article as a positive or negative. Markus __________________ My little lovely female cat

03-31-23, 01:30 PM	#5501
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,492 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	Trump must be brought to justice, I have no doubt about that. But not for the charges now being tried, but for the events in Georgia, and later at the Capitol on January 6. The indictment in New York now is all too obviously politically motivated, and quite irrelevant on the merits. Interested political circles are abusing the judicial system, which has the nerve to formally enable this process. Formally, it may be legal - whether it is really wise and should be done is quite another matter. And it can backfire badly against the initiating Democrat party. Georgia, Capitol Hill: these two are the acts he should stand trial for. I see him guilty in both cases. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-31-23, 01:37 PM	#5502
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 16,897 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	^ I agree this cannot be the main accusation, but legally this one is still binding under civil law. Any less rich man would also be accused if such tax dodging would come out. You assume that most rich people will not be accused of bribing and hiding the price and you are right, but still remains a criminal act. If you are for justice or "law and order" this is legitimate. The more important trials will follow anyway. __________________ >^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.

03-31-23, 03:30 PM	#5503
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,492 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	^ I thought the only issue was that the way the hush money was accounted for and reaccounted for (which in itself is legitimate under U.S. law, though objectionable in my sense of the law) could be seen as illegal campaign financing? Possible I am not up to date, I do not follow this too closely, it does not interest me that much. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-31-23, 08:27 PM	#5505
Buddahaid Shark above Space Chicken Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 8,557 Downloads: 160 Uploads: 0	Public disclosure of the indictment has been authorized. Maybe Tuesday. https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/4769/180Yn9.png __________________ "However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light." Stanley Kubrick "Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming." David Bowie