|
Post by Socal Fan on Jun 1, 2024 19:42:30 GMT -5
a DA who ran on the platform of indicting Trump It is the job of a DA to indict anyone he believes commits a crime. In fact, that is a DA's only function. Note that neither the DA nor the judge has the power to convict anybody. That is the function of the jury. That is how the American justice system works. Are you criticizing the DA for living up to his campaign promises? Trump made exactly the same campaign promise which was to lock up Hillary. Not only was Hillary not locked up, Trump never even indicted or convicted her. The DA fulfilled his campaign promise. Trump didn't.
|
|
|
Post by The Real Outhouse on Jun 1, 2024 19:48:44 GMT -5
Nobody even knows what the crime is. If anyone claims not to know what the crimes are that the CONVICTED FELON committed (and was found GUILTY of) it's that they make a choice to remain ignorant. Allow me to deliver you from your ignorance. Below are quoted materials from the Wikipedia article about this case. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecution_of_Donald_Trump_in_New_YorkIndictment and charges The April 4, 2023 indictment document The Manhattan grand jury voted to indict Trump on March 30, 2023.[84] The indictment was filed with the New York Supreme Court (the ordinary trial court for felonies in the state of New York and not the final court of appeal for the state) the same day.[85] The charges were under seal until published when Trump was arraigned.[86][87] The indictment charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, in violation of New York Penal Law §175.10.[88][89] Each count is related to a specific business document, each having a date ranging from February 14 through December 5, 2017:[90] 11 for invoices from Michael Cohen 9 for general ledger entries for Donald J. Trump 9 for checks from Donald J. Trump 3 for general ledger entries for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust 2 for checks from the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust The allegedly falsified documents are related to Trump's payment to Stormy Daniels as hush money. The payments were listed in the business records as a legal expense payable to Michael Cohen, whereas the indictment alleges that they were actually to reimburse Cohen for the earlier, allegedly illicit, payment to Daniels.[91][92] Falsifying business records in the first degree is a felony under New York state law that requires that the "intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof". Note: The final statement "an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof" refers to (also quoted from the same article) "the intent to commit other crimes: violation of federal campaign finance limits, unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and tax fraud.
unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election
Futhermore, the text you copied and attributed to CNN, and for which you did not provide a link nor the author's name, was not found on CNN and IMO is not representative of the prevailing view of CNN. Your text was copied from an online "off topic" discussion forum hosted by "WSO", where the source was also not identified. Nice try but FAIL. In other words, it's FAKE NEWS, which is the historical case for much of the "content" you choose to share here. www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/off-topic/trump-nyc-case-outlined-as-a-political-hit-job-by-a-senior-legal-analyst-for-cnnBetter luck next time. Suggestion: next time you quote text, provide a link to the source. It's the proper thing to do, unless your intent is to obscure the facts.
|
|
|
Post by The Real Outhouse on Jun 1, 2024 19:54:49 GMT -5
Anyone who votes for a CONVICTED FELON is too stupid (and does not deserve) to live in a democracy. Anyone who believes that a conviction under DA and judge that were both big Democrat donors, and a DA who ran on the platform of indicting Trump, was anything remotely resembling a fair trial, is too ignorant to live in a democracy. It was the JURY who convicted him. Did you forget that the IT IS THE JURY WHO DECIDES.
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Jun 1, 2024 20:00:46 GMT -5
I am considering donating to President Trump's Campaign! You should. Although I think Trump's legal defense fund needs your money much more desperately.
|
|
|
Post by The Real Outhouse on Jun 1, 2024 20:10:57 GMT -5
I am considering donating to President Trump's Campaign! You should. Although I think Trump's legal defense fund needs your money much more desperately. Campaign, legal defense fund... no difference... msims' two bucks will put a dent in it.
|
|
|
Post by The Real Outhouse on Jun 1, 2024 20:14:24 GMT -5
Who here believes that Todd Blanche will get a nickel from Trump?
|
|
|
Post by colt46 on Jun 1, 2024 20:15:58 GMT -5
SoCal fan , I know you will vote for Biden ,you think what ever he does is ok , you love ❤️ Bidens open borders, his war on oil , forcing Americans to buy EV CARS, PAY OFF STUDENT LOANS, EVEN WHEN THE SUPREME COURT SAID HD DID NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO ! That republicans are the only ones that are guilty!
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Jun 1, 2024 20:24:23 GMT -5
you love ❤️ Bidens open borders Don't be silly. Our borders have been secure since Trump built his wall. And he even got the Mexicans to pay for it.
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 1, 2024 20:30:00 GMT -5
you love ❤️ Bidens open borders Don't be silly. Our borders have been secure since Trump built his wall. And he even got the Mexicans to pay for it. Border wall pays for itself many times over. He'll fiinish it when he wins in November. Hopefully not enough dems to block the funding this time around. Meanwhile, Dementia Joe's effectively open border policy is letting millions of illegals in...polls show that Americans don't like that too much. lol
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 1, 2024 20:37:29 GMT -5
SoCal fan , I know you will vote for Biden ,you think what ever he does is ok , you love ❤️ Bidens open borders, his war on oil , forcing Americans to buy EV CARS, PAY OFF STUDENT LOANS, EVEN WHEN THE SUPREME COURT SAID HD DID NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO ! That republicans are the only ones that are guilty! Biden is AWESOME!!!! I just love his high prices, high crime, wide open border, endless proxy wars, and advanced dementia with Horror Show Harris waiting in the wings (mind of a five year old). Who needs Trumps peace and prosperity again. Yuck, phooey. Wise up, Colty! ROFL
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Jun 1, 2024 20:38:08 GMT -5
DA and judge that were both big Democrat donors How much did DA and judge donate to Democrats? Hard to find, usually no more public than the law requires, if that; I'm disinclined to google for more than a minute just to prove it, but feel free. Certainly big Democrat donors donated to the DA, if indirectly. "Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has raised over $800,000 since indicting former President Donald Trump over the payments that his 2016 presidential campaign made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels ahead of the election." - Newsweek, definitely not right-wing For a DA to campaign on indicting a particular person is wildly wrong. They can campaign on vigorous enforcement or compassionate enforcement or some other general policy positions, but to campaign on targeting any individual person or case subverts the justice system, because they may be acting on a campaign promise rather than the merits of the case (which might otherwise have an investigation leading to the conclusion that something smells, but achieving fair proof beyond a reasonable doubt of crime is a stretch). And the judge's daughter definitely has connections with and has worked for organizations that campaign for Democrats in general, and once for VP Harris's 2020 campaign. Given that the judge's family profits from anti-Trump controversy, one can certainly argue conflict of interest. One can very reasonably wonder if these people are letting politics or ideology or revenge get ahead of objective justice. Both NY state and city are with rare exception stacked to the left (although doubtless the far smaller number of upstate people are more conservative). Be very clear: these cases are far less about the law than about preventing Trump from being re-elected, which aside from the 14th Amendment argument (which should be decided by Congress, probably) is NOT for the justice system to decide. The only Constitutional requirements for President are spelled out, and lack of a conviction is purposely not one of them, perhaps because of the understanding that justice is not incorruptible, and the vote should take precedence. Heck, a number of the "MSM" talk show hosts and some Democrat activists definitely want revenge, on the order of Trump dying broke in jail. That's just plain psycho. Haters should be shunned and de-platformed, they've brought it on themselves. The entire premise is faulty. Election law violation in a federal election is by FEC and DOJ agreement exclusively under federal jurisdiction. So using that (without federal conviction on that point - indeed, the DOJ declined to prosecute) to escalate otherwise trivial (and not well proven) business records irregularities into state felonies is contrived in the extreme.
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 1, 2024 20:43:04 GMT -5
How much did DA and judge donate to Democrats? Hard to find, usually no more public than the law requires, if that; I'm disinclined to google for more than a minute just to prove it, but feel free. Certainly big Democrat donors donated to the DA, if indirectly. "Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has raised over $800,000 since indicting former President Donald Trump over the payments that his 2016 presidential campaign made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels ahead of the election." - Newsweek, definitely not right-wing For a DA to campaign on indicting a particular person is wildly wrong. They can campaign on vigorous enforcement or compassionate enforcement or some other general policy positions, but to campaign on targeting any individual person or case subverts the justice system, because they may be acting on a campaign promise rather than the merits of the case (which might otherwise have an investigation leading to the conclusion that something smells, but achieving fair proof beyond a reasonable doubt of crime is a stretch). And the judge's daughter definitely has connections with and has worked for organizations that campaign for Democrats in general, and once for VP Harris's 2020 campaign. Given that the judge's family profits from anti-Trump controversy, one can certainly argue conflict of interest. One can very reasonably wonder if these people are letting politics or ideology or revenge get ahead of objective justice. Both NY state and city are with rare exception stacked to the left (although doubtless the far smaller number of upstate people are more conservative). Be very clear: these cases are far less about the law than about preventing Trump from being re-elected, which aside from the 14th Amendment argument (which should be decided by Congress, probably) is NOT for the justice system to decide. The only Constitutional requirements for President are spelled out, and lack of a conviction is purposely not one of them, perhaps because of the understanding that justice is not incorruptible, and the vote should take precedence. Heck, a number of the "MSM" talk show hosts and some Democrat activists definitely want revenge, on the order of Trump dying broke in jail. That's just plain psycho. Haters should be shunned and de-platformed, they've brought it on themselves. The entire premise is faulty. Election law violation in a federal election is by FEC and DOJ agreement exclusively under federal jurisdiction. So using that (without federal conviction on that point - indeed, the DOJ declined to prosecute) to escalate otherwise trivial (and not well proven) business records irregularities into state felonies is contrived in the extreme. This coming from a CNN legal analyst, and CNN hates Trump. CNN Senior Legal Analyst describes how the Trump conviction was a political hit job - full article
"The judge donated money... in plain violation of a rule prohibiting New York judges from making political donations—to a pro-Biden, anti-Trump political operation."
Alvin Bragg boasted on the campaign trail in an overwhelmingly Democrat county, “It is a fact that I have sued Trump over 100 times.”
"Most importantly, the DA’s charges against Trump push the outer boundaries of the law and due process."
"The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever."
The DA inflated misdemeanors past the statute of limitations and "electroshocked them back to life" by alleging the falsification of business records was committed 'with intent to commit another crime.'
"Inexcusably, the DA refused to specify what those unlawful means actually were — and the judge declined to force them to pony up — until right before closing arguments. So much for the constitutional obligation to provide notice to the defendant of the accusations against him in advance of trial."
"In these key respects, the charges against Trump aren’t just unusual. They’re bespoke, seemingly crafted individually for the former president and nobody else."
"The Manhattan DA’s employees reportedly have called this the “Zombie Case” because of various legal infirmities, including its bizarre charging mechanism. But it’s better characterized as the Frankenstein Case, cobbled together with ill-fitting parts into an ugly, awkward, but more-or-less functioning contraption that just might ultimately turn on its creator."
|
|
Rightwing Conspiracy Theorist
Guest
|
Post by Rightwing Conspiracy Theorist on Jun 1, 2024 20:47:30 GMT -5
Don't be silly. Our borders have been secure since Trump built his wall. And he even got the Mexicans to pay for it. Border wall pays for itself many times over. He'll fiinish it when he wins in November. Hopefully not enough dems to block the funding this time around. Meanwhile, Dementia Joe's effectively open border policy is letting millions of illegals in...polls show that Americans don't like that too much. lol It's really no surprise to watch the glee coming from those infected with TDS. It's completely understandable to hate someone who puts out the number of mean tweets that Trump does. But what IS really surprising is the lack of posts that brag about how Liberal rule has benefited anyone in the US. We've seen nothing but higher inflation, a major migrant crisis, more wars and complete turmoil since 2020. Trump is no prince, but the USA was much better off under his policies than those we are getting now. It would be great if those with TDS could provide a list of policies that have benefited the average joe since the Obama Biden administration has taken over. America is way worse off in every way possible since the last election.
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Jun 1, 2024 20:49:09 GMT -5
a DA who ran on the platform of indicting Trump It is the job of a DA to indict anyone he believes commits a crime. In fact, that is a DA's only function. Note that neither the DA nor the judge has the power to convict anybody. That is the function of the jury. That is how the American justice system works. Are you criticizing the DA for living up to his campaign promises? Trump made exactly the same campaign promise which was to lock up Hillary. Not only was Hillary not locked up, Trump never even indicted or convicted her. The DA fulfilled his campaign promise. Trump didn't. I'm criticizing the DA for ever having made such an illegitimate campaign promise. He can promise to go after criminals or have general policies, but he's got no business naming who he alleges to be a criminal in a campaign. Trump was wrong too, but it's well known that he shoots his mouth off to his own detriment, which to a large degree is a prerogative (even if an unwise one!) of candidates or holders of strictly political office. Presidents should also distance themselves from the details of any specific potential or actual case, although many of both parties have failed to honor that premise; but Attorneys-General, DA's, and judges should be squeaky clean and ethically beyond the appearance of impropriety, or be fired. As to Hillary, Comey couldn't pretend she was clean, but declined to frame servergate as a crime. He should have kept investigating QUIETLY until after the election, and then announced what he would do. Instead, he pretended to balance the mistake of talking about it prematurely with the other mistake of just letting her off. After Trump was elected, going after Hillary just wouldn't have been worth it politically. Not to mention that being too inconvenient to Hillary is a health risk.
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Jun 1, 2024 21:09:02 GMT -5
How much did DA and judge donate to Democrats? Hard to find, usually no more public than the law requires, if that; I'm disinclined to google for more than a minute just to prove it, but feel free. All I am asking for is the evidence to support your assertion. If you are disinclined to provide such evidence, then you should retract your assertion. There is no point in me arguing with you if you are unwilling or unable to support your assertions.
|
|