Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by 19Crib, Mar 23, 2023.
We're talking about one particular aspect. Don't move the goalposts around.
What did he do, kill your puppy or something? I'm no fan of Biden, but you don't see me on here every day, day after day after day calling for the man's head on a spike. And once he's no longer POTUS, I likely won't talk about him at all, unless he is genuinely relevant to a conversation's topic.
then yes. I believe that about anyone who supports Donald Trump.
I also believe it about people who think the earth is flat.
Lady Justice wears a blindfold. Alvin Bragg wears binoculars and he only looks at Trump. This is a political prosecution. Everyone knows if Trump's last name were Biden there is zero change this goes anywhere. Trying to claim this wasn't a witch hunt is very dishonest. At least admit reality and that you agree with it, likely due to the double standard you have displayed in this thread where you claim everyone must wait to determine if this witch hunt is a witch hunt (when the DA said he was going to go on a witch hunt against Trump if he got elected). Yet, you've said repeatedly that you know Trump is guilty. There's a two tiered system of justice in Bragg's domain and you have been supporting it wholeheartedly while accusing others of bias.
But if it is a felony, it is not past the statute. If fraud is involved, then there is no limit to the statute.
Even if that were true, "knowing" someone else broke the law is a not a crime either. They need to prove intent that Trump directed it for this to go anywhere other than a slap on the wrist. Additionally, I do not believe Trump knows whether or not the Daniels NDA payments were not "legal" expenses or some other category of bookkeeping record. He's a moron. He paid Cohen to make these things go away and to insulate himself from any of it. That was Cohen's job. He was Trump's fixer. He took the risk on behalf of Trump.
Why do you suppose it's being said that Bragg's case is shot?
There are laws in place in which the statute is suspended. For example, bankruptcy will suspend the statute for certain financial crimes. Some of the pandemic relief also suspended statute of limitations for most crimes.
Not really, it can also be a state charge. YOu know, Federalism.
I don't know if his case is shot. I think the last witness, the one Trump wanted to testify, put money in the works, but it is not shot. This is normal for a lot of cases, especially circumstantial murder cases.
Perhaps it "can" be, but in this instance it is not, as the law I referenced to you proves.
He never had a case to begin with. He was relying on misdirection to try to get a grand jury to move forward. This entire process is a disgusting disgrace to our country. The fact that so many people are on board with this blatantly obvious political prosecution is pathetic.
Let's evaluate Bragg's case and Trump's assessment of guilt as it relates to similar cases when it comes to assessing his "innocence." Charges for campaign finance violations extremely rare. But, we have a very similar case when John Edwards paid his mistress out of campaign funds to make her go away. The DoJ charged Edwards because he made it a campaign expense.
Bragg is now seeking to indict Trump because he DIDN'T classify his hush fund money as a campaign expense.
Let's repeat that for the blantant hypocrisy. John Edwards was prosecuted because his hush fund came out of campaign funds by the federal government. Bragg is seeking to prosecute Trump because his team didn't pay it out of campaign funds. And, he's using the same FEDERAL law the DoJ used to prosecute Edwards to make his state charge a felony.
It's a classic catch 22 scenario. This is why the DoJ looked at this and declined to press charges. Meanwhile, liberals are seeking to turn us into a Banana Republic where prosecutors attempt to arrest politicians when they announce their campaigns to try to remove them from the board. They should look forward to Texas combing through Robert Francis O'Rourke's campaign expense filings and seeking to arrest him on trash charges using federal law when he announces his upcoming candidacy. This is the precedent they're setting. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Everyone it seems but the rabid anti-Trumps. Even the more sane Democrats see it as another political witch hunt.
Just because one is running for President does not make this exclusively a federal crime.
None of the legal experts I know who don't have a horse in this race don't think so. The ones on Fox, Newsmaxx, conservative tabloid news, and others have said yes and they are not "everyone." Again, just because it is going to be next week before they rule may not mean the case is on the rocks. DA Bragg is a very methodical prosecutor. He received testimony that put a quirk in the works. But that may mean testimony to circumvent that direct testimony for the grand jury to consider. Of course, the question is who. Or additional evidence may be considered in the grand jury to circumvent that testimoney. And again, we won't know what that additional evidence is until the records are unsealed at the time of arraignment if that happens.
You have no idea what that word means or implies. You were the one who said it is a federal crime, not considering a state crime. I simply countered that argument with the "running for president" narrative that conservatives like to use.
It is not a campaign expense. Period. It can't be. It is an illegal expense in which he paid money to have sex in a quid pro quo relationship.
That being said, what he did was tried to make it a legitimate expense and paid it out of his campaign fund as a legitimate legal expense that may have been claimed on the campaign finance form reported to the state.
John Edwards was prosecuted twice for the same. His appeal allowed for a retrial. The first time he was found guilty. The second time he was acquitted. Even though that was a federal charge, the state of North Carolina at that time may not have had the laws in place to charge him or other factors that are in play. So far, you have very little info on the exact nature of the case involving both John Edwards and the grand jury. And Wikipedia only gives you the synopsis of the whole thing, not the details. And the second trial was in a North Carolina state district court where he was acquitted.
So what's this about just being federal then?
What I said was the additive charge to make it a felony is a federal charge and I cited the law for you to prove to you that your opinion that a state law would apply was incorrect. If Bragg was using a state offense it wouldn't be predicted on the initial charge. You're making up an argument that I have not seen made by anyone with knowledge of the situation or the grand jury proceedings. Why don't you cite your source.
No, the funds in question was simply hush money to keep her from going public about their alleged affair. The payment was for her signature on an NDA after she threatened to go public during his campaign. Please review the basic facts of the case. This is getting ridiculous.
That being said, I'm ignoring the rest of your post until you exhibit basic knowledge of the situation.
I find that kind of pandering to be dishonest, and UNAMERICAN. Maybe that's why his approval ratings are in the tank at 38%. Americans have more in common than not, and when someone judges their patriotism as Biden has, it gets in their grill. Not many find Biden to be honest. What happened to "Honest Joe"?
p.s. cue the whataboutism Trump brigade
Of course you know I'm married to a Biden supporter. Whereas I don't agree with her choice, I understand and respect her choice. She didn't agree with my support for Trump, but evidently she respects my right to support someone she doesn't. If she had the mindset of some that we see here, she would be divorcing me. They would probably demand that she did.
Polling aggregates — which are typically much more accurate than individual polls — have him at 43% [source] but I know cherry-picking to find what matches an agenda is easier. We tried to warn y’all in 2020 and I am glad y’all are still treating polling like it’s a Bible when ignoring the inconvenient bits.
As for whataboutism — you realize this is a thread about trump created by a pro-trumper and you are complaining about Biden. The irony!
As to the OP — as we are all patriotic Americans including the magapatriots, we should allow charges to go through the appropriate systems.
If a crime is found we should all support them securing a conviction, correct?
Not really because the way the state law reads, it is any crime, state or federal, that can make it a state felony. Stop listening to Dan Borgenino. He has absolutely no idea what the hell he is talking about. If you ever looked at his purple file, his permanent record, and that was made public, I can assure you two things: he was not as good as he said he was and he was caught in that prostitution scandal in Brazil and was forced to retire.
If you want the source, here it is. Penal code 175.05 and 175.10. Notice what 175.10 says about the conditions of being a felony under NY state law: "Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree occurs when you violate any of the four subsections of the lesser misdemeanor offense and an Assistant District Attorney can prove beyond a reasonable doubt additional elements." Additional elements may include any law that the DA can prove beyond a reasonable doubt in which the intent was to commit additional crimes. The person does not have to be prosecuted for the additional elements to be realized, but the intent of the fact. Thus, any potential federal crime that the DA believes trump violated and can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt can be used to make this into a state felony without trying the defendant for that crime. Or in other words, "Simply, if you delete, alter or make a false entry in the business records of an enterprise and you do so with the intent to defraud, you have run afoul of the misdemeanor crime. If when you do so, you also have the intent to further or conceal another criminal offense, then you have committed the felony crime."
Separate names with a comma.