|
|
Post by indy on Mar 30, 2023 22:26:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Mar 30, 2023 22:30:28 GMT
The same people who were screeching "THE LAW IS THE LAW!" over Hillary Clinton will be screeching "WITCH HUNT!" over Trump. To those MAGAts I say...  |
|
jackd
Assistant Professor
Posts: 813
|
Post by jackd on Mar 30, 2023 22:43:34 GMT
I hope this induces the Georgia DA to act. She has the significant case. I've always thought this one was a little like a tricky tack penalty in sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by indy on Mar 31, 2023 2:06:24 GMT
Scuttlebutt going around is that it is 34 counts of business-related fraud.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Mar 31, 2023 5:32:44 GMT
Scuttlebutt going around is that it is 34 counts of business-related fraud. If that's correct it probably means Weiselberg talked. A few months at Rykers might have convinced him that Trump isn't worth it. |
|
|
|
Post by indy on Mar 31, 2023 11:15:01 GMT
Scuttlebutt going around is that it is 34 counts of business-related fraud. If that's correct it probably means Weiselberg talked. A few months at Rykers might have convinced him that Trump isn't worth it. It's hard to tell what is going on. Reportedly Weiselberg switched from Trump paid lawyers to his own a few days ago. It could be the the investigation turned up new evidence for other crimes that implicated Weiselberg and the prospect of facing another trial with potential for a more prolonged Rykers sentence got him to flip.
If this 34 count indictment is correct, it doesn't seem to me that it can all be related to the pay-off of Stormy but maybe?
I'm guessing whatever it is, it is likely a strong case though.
|
|
|
|
Post by indy on Mar 31, 2023 11:23:48 GMT
I hope this induces the Georgia DA to act. She has the significant case. I've always thought this one was a little like a tricky tack penalty in sports. Well, from what I've seen (which is admittedly not that much), the GA thing looks like a case with a lot more wiggle room in terms of the vagueness of the relevant laws as well as the fact that things like audio evidence are open to being cast into various interpretations by skilled attorneys. At the moment, it looks like a pretty high risk prosecution to me but I'm certainly open to the prospect there is much more to it.
This kind of case, on the other hand, usually has a pretty good record of the transactions all neatly written down, as well as a lot of people who can testify as to what they were told to do and by whom. A bit easier to keep the jury from adding their own biases and interpretation to the evidence they are presented. But with people you can never really know of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by indy on Mar 31, 2023 11:54:57 GMT
This lends some credence to the Weiselberg may have flipped angle...
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Mar 31, 2023 14:51:15 GMT
If this ends up being mostly a business fraud prosecution, I suspect Bragg was more than happy to let Trump's defenders screech on and on and on about Stormy Daniels. It sounds like it may have been a smokescreen. Now when Gym Jordan again tries to defend Trump, Bragg will tell him to piss off. If Gym subpoenas him he'll still tell him to piss off, take it to court, and present the evidence that Gym isn't serious since he demanded testimony and evidence from an ongoing criminal prosecution with no idea what it was about. Bragg may have protected the investigation from House Republican interference.
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Mar 31, 2023 14:53:42 GMT
And now we know why Trump declared his run so early. He's trying to play the executive privilege card just over the fact that he's running for office. It will play well with his MAGAt base and the fascist Republicans, which is now most of them, will amplify the fake outrage. |
|
AnBr
Associate Professor
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by AnBr on Mar 31, 2023 15:05:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Mar 31, 2023 16:16:45 GMT
Truth!
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Mar 31, 2023 16:31:31 GMT
I just turned off the tv. The cable news channels are filling up time asking people if it would have been better if the Georgia case or the DOJ indicted first. And about how "unprecedented" this all is. Ridiculous speculation and it leads people to think there is something wrong with the whole process. There is nothing wrong. If all these cases were prosecuted by various DOJ departments or offices then maybe some kind of coordination is possible. But these cases are in three different jurisdictions by three different agencies. They have no organizational relationships and are free to operate independently.
And yes, it is unprecedented. It is also unprecedented for a real estate developer and tv celebrity to be elected to the presidency. It also unprecedented that this person's behavior has led to two impeachments. It is also unprecedented that a person who lost the electoral college claim that he didn't really lose at all. Ain't nothing about Trump that is in line with any of our experiences of the past, not even Nixon, not even Reagan's folks arranging Iran Contra and keeping hostages in Iran until his inauguration.
Putting my soap box away and turning off the tv except for watching Mandolorian and Succession this weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by indy on Mar 31, 2023 16:44:01 GMT
Well, as many others are pointing out, John Edwards was indicted and tried for similar acts as a presidential candidate so really how 'unprecedented' is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Mar 31, 2023 16:55:59 GMT
Josh Marshall with a moment of sanity for an MSNBC panel. He couldn't be more right. We can't let Donald Trump set the narrative. He is being investigated by multiple branches of America's criminal justice system and each will independently decide if/when to indict and prosecute.
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Mar 31, 2023 19:59:15 GMT
Trump immediately attacks the judge because of course he does. If they aren't transparent sycophants who don't belong on the bench, like Aileen "Loose" Cannon, Trump hates them. Too bad for him that it sounds like the judge who has his case is no bullshit, by the book, and personally very detailed oriented. This is exactly the kind of judge he hates most.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Mar 31, 2023 20:00:32 GMT
Brings back memories of Trump denigrating the "Mexican judge" who presided over the what was it? Fake university case?
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Mar 31, 2023 20:43:33 GMT
Ron Filipkowski tells it like it is. The judge will likely place strong bond conditions on Trump, much like any other defendent would get. All he has to do is keep his mouth shut so he doesn’t violate those probable conditions of bond including no threats or incitement towards anybody involved in the case. That’s it.
As Ron says, “He’s used to civil court and civil cases where you can skirt the rules and get away with shit. In criminal court they don’t play that. And I hope they don’t play it for him. And so as soon as he violates he’s going to be hauled into court on a bond revocation motion. And if your bond is revoked you do not get out until your trial, which could be quite a while.” If this is a no nonsense judge, Trump will be playing with his freedom.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Mar 31, 2023 21:07:45 GMT
I've wondered why Trump didn't move out of the country the day he left the White House. There are places for rich folks to stay to avoid extradition. Now it's too late.
Of course he isn't as rich as he wants everyone to believe. Maybe he's not rich at all, is in fact close to broke. That's why he's held onto the post 1/6 grift?
|
|
|
|
Post by indy on Mar 31, 2023 21:38:15 GMT
Well, it's not like this is his first crime. He has been committing them for a long time and he has been getting away with them. Coupled with his narcissistic disorder and the fact that he is a former president and I'm pretty sure he just thinks he is immune. And why wouldn't he? I mean, zoom out a little and you see he is right and people like him just aren't prosecuted. If they are and convicted, it usually amounts to little more than a slap on the wrist and that's likely to be the case here too, his sentence will be light.
Why does he need to run from that?
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 4, 2023 17:13:09 GMT
Interesting take on Trump destroying his own defense on the almost sure to be prosecuted classified document case.
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 4, 2023 19:48:52 GMT
34 counts of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree. Not one mention of Stormy Daniels either by her real name or stage name. Perhaps it's buried someplace else in greater detail but this sure seems like prosecuting Trump for fraudulent business practices.
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 4, 2023 20:03:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 4, 2023 20:21:13 GMT
Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone says Trump. Who among us hasn't falsified business records 34 times to hide the fact that we got a little nookie on the side? Who hasn't threatened to unleash a mob to get retribution for being criminally charged for doing what anyone would under the same circumstances? It's a witch hunt! It's an attempt to bleed me dry with lawyers fees!
|
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 4, 2023 20:27:05 GMT
Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone says Trump. Who among us hasn't falsified business records 34 times to hide the fact that we got a little nookie on the side? Who hasn't threatened to unleash a mob to get retribution for being criminally charged for doing what anyone would under the same circumstances? It's a witch hunt! It's an attempt to bleed me dry with lawyers fees!  |
|
