Oh, come on, give your performance outrage a break. Climb down from the soapbox. This is not a "new legal reality." What an asinine thing to say. This was a dumb tweet by a politician. Nancy Pelosi has nothing to do with this situation. Yes, she said something incorrect and dumb her tweet. Who the hell cares? You don't seem to comment on the daily barrage of hurtful, hateful, damaging, and harmful crap your side spews. Just the other day, your lord and savior (and now indicted, or as he said, indicated, ex-occupant of the White House) posted a picture of him with a baseball bat looking over a picture of Biggs and threatened bloodshed if the legal system takes the action to which it is allowed to take. Not a peep from you. Gee, wonder why? Nah, we know why. Go find some other irrelevance over which you can get your panties in a twist. This is not one of them.
It was not a dumb tweet, it was an accurate summary of the situation but hey, you ‘got’ Trump, so it’s all good
The level of performative outrage over ‘my side’s’ crap is quite sufficient without my comments none of the things you hate about ‘my side’ has gone unnoticed by the eagle eyed freedom and truth loving posters here on BS the collective panties of the posters here are so twisted that they’re been ripped to shreds a long time ago
too late I’m fully caffeinated this morning what are you implying calling Trump ‘my boyfriend’? when it come to law, whatever he gets seems secondary, the whole legality of the whole process is more important
Could you elaborate? It seems to me that he's gotten extraordinarily kind treatment from a justice system that's terrified of the consequences of arresting a career criminal, because of that criminal's popularity. That's not how it's supposed to work.
agree, popularity should not be an impediment for lawful prosecution but neither should political animosity be a spur for prosecution
In shithole countries leaders crime before they get elected, while they are in power and after they are out of power and they never get prosecuted
The fact that felons can be charged with felonies is not a new legal reality. It's the way it should be. It's true that white collar crimes by wealthy people frequently go uninvestigated and unpunished. That's why Trump and his family were able to get away with previous crimes (e.g. the "All-County Building Supply and Maintenance" tax fraud scheme). It's also possible that the Trumps, like Paul Manafort, would have been able to get away with their crime indefinitely if they hadn't gone into politics. But it's the previous impunity that's the problem there - not the fact that Trump squandered it by deciding to make his crimes more publicly notable.
Ah of course how convenient So you fail to say anything about Trumps incitement of violence, but then rush to the forum about a tweet from nancy. This is your table stakes problem
I actually somewhat agree with you ---- not the hyperbolic part. But the person who writes her Tweets should be reprimanded for phrasing the burden of proof wrong.
That is nonsense. Nancy Pelosi has nothing to do with the situation. Now, if the prosecutor had something like, I would call it out for you. Also, it is the OPPOSITE of an 'accurate summary of the situation.' I feel sorry for you. I did not 'get' anything. HE allegedly committed multiple felonies. HE has to answer for those multiple felonies. This is the first of many alleged criminal activities for which he may have to answer. Pretty simple how this system works. As for the actual charges, we will see when the indictment is unsealed. I will not comment on them until I have a chance to actually read the indictment. I don't "hate" your side. Again, I don't hate anyone (well, almost noone). I am ONLY speaking of your performance outrage, which you just double downed on with your asinine comment, "it was an accurate summary of the situation." Have a nice weekend, @marek.
Precisely. That was my point. It was a stupid and inaccurate thing to say. While she has nothing to do with the situation, she is an "authoritative" voice.
Yep. And I absolutely agree with you that the idea that TFG is being treated unfairly by the legal system is patently ridiculous. Any normal person would have already been indicted in two states and by the feds at this point. FFS, Bragg had people in his office resign because he wanted more work done on the case before moving forward.
I don't think there's any doubt about it, is there? They'd have been fine if they hadn't made it that obvious.
A novel legal concept of appealing before your trial This case is starting off about how I expected. pic.twitter.com/lINa1s728o— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) March 31, 2023
Of course, THIS has never been charged before, since no ex-President has ever paid off a porn star and then lied about it, covered it up and had his lawyer go to jail for precisely the same fact scenario. Also, we do not know what the charges are, but I can safely assume that some involve falsifying business records and conspiracy to falsify business records. THOSE are pretty routine white collar crimes.