Trump indicted over hush money payments in Stormy Daniels probe

This is a rabbit hole..

@cabse5 pls answer @yardmeat post I quoted above. Tks..

 

Exactly. Just like antifa running on calling themselves anti-fascist (and democrats love them for being anti-fascists), but they're all fascists. And just like when they claim January 6th was an insurrection when their gaggle of "anti-fascists" took over government agencies and sat outside of those agencies armed, only allowing "anti-fascists" into their autonomous zones. It's as believable as the NBPP calling themselves anti-racist.

 

yep, that is what it seemed like to me too, thanks for confirming

 

The left often times does that. I agree. Though I wish they wouldn’t.

 

k

 

It is , at least in a real universe, if one uses deceptive ways and illegal motives to skirt the laws, charges will be brought against the individual. Hence, the operative word is "charges" , then the individual can use what ever "normal and legal" means to combat the charges to prove they are false.
Have others been accused of wrong doings and been convicted? Yes!. Have others been accused and found innocent to know or find out later they are not innocent? Yes!
Try letting the legal system run its course and see if the charges are proven.
But with the opening statement of living or being in a real universe, those who refuse to let the legal system do it duty, it is a difficult situation to try to understand.
With all that said.....headlines from a news organization.
"
Trump faces more than 30 counts related to business fraud"

 

Unfortunately, you can be falsely accused of a crime and go bankrupt trying to defend yourself. Not that Trump doesn't have deep pockets, but a bs indictment like the one Bragg delivered (per his campaign promise) just wastes his and the taxpayer's money. Are you ok with that, if this turns out to be a dud?

 

How much time and money was WASTED on a Nothingburger like Benghazi?
Pot meet kettle...

 

The real problem, if you want to examine it is....those that do have the financial means to work through the legal system do not fall upon the hardship those that cannot afford the type of representation.
Nowhere did I say it was justifiable. The legal system is skewed to punish those that do not have the means to represent themselves.
If the system runs its course and the perpetrator is found guilty they should be punished to the full extent of the law, regardless of their economic/political/influential status.
If they are found innocent, then use the system to regain what you may.
Are you alright with the entire justice system?

 

You're slipping. You forgot your trademark --

 

I would only recommend that the winner takes all; meaning if the defendant wins the State has to reimburse that person for all expenses, plus compensation for emotional harm. Afterall, the legal system can fine someone to recoup some of the costs.

 

Nice to know that is the understanding of how it should all work out for every US citizen.
But, there are so many recorded instances where many are found "guilty" and sent to prison for years and then found innocent.
If it were to work how you propose then all of those people need to be compensated greatly for how they were treated.
Is it your stance that should happen to "all" or just a chosen few.
Where is the revenue for this compensation taken from and how would it be collected?
This is a little off subject but something to be discussed in the real legal system.
Is there a limited amount of delays that the person being charged can use?

 

Citizens United ----needs to be re-litigated and examined.

 

I'll stand by my point. It would make DAs more accountable, for the cases they try. It's known that DAs will prosecute even an innocent person if it's to their political advantage to do so.

 

I know EXACTLY what it means

Donald Trump.

 

Those who are celebrating a win for team left haven't yet realized that they could too, become a victim of a corrupt justice system.

 

Being found "not guilty" is not the same as being innocent.

 

You still have to prove "corrupt justice system". The indictment of Donald Trump proves nothing.
1. You still don't know what he was indicted over.
2. There is the possibility (although you refuse to acknowledge it) that Trump is guilty.

 

Still has nothing to do with the grand jury

 

When you've gotten away with corruption for a long time you start to believe you're really the "Untouchables".


The phrase " plausible deniability" should be trademarked by the Bidens.

 

You can't make this **** up!

On his truth-so-called account tRaitor tRump complained:

"These Thugs and Radical Left Monsters have just INDICATED the 45th President of the United States of America ... "



As my old uncle used to say; "it's one thing to have people think you're stupid, but don't help them out by opening your mouth.

 

There is strong circumstantial evidence that Joe Biden is compromised by his son's business dealings with China. Is he guilty? I don't know, but it warrants a full (and impartial) investigation. Where is the democrats on this?

 

Did I say otherwise? What's your point, relative to mine?

 

I disagree with the premise. There is NO "circumstantial" evidence that JOE Biden is compromised in any way.

Hunter? Maybe, investigate away.

 

There's an actual case with actual evidence that's actually on topic.