We have a verdict -- Guilty on ALL counts
- Thread starter UncleMark
- Start date
- Status
I'm not sure about that. Ness wasn't an elected official. Elected officials who run on getting a man, not going after a crime, are crossing a line, I think.
Your reference to Trump's past history cuts against prosecuting him in this instance, not in favor of it. NY prosecutors left him alone for decades since that was just how things were done in the Big Apple. But now, it appears to prevent him from running or being elected again, NY goes after him? That's a bad precedent.
Trump wasn't worth sacrificing public faith by in the justice system for. And no one was hurt by him booking the Stormy Daniels payment as a legal fee vs. a payoff to a prostitute to prevent embarrassment.
Apparently, I was wrong and it was a campaign promise to go after Trump.
I’m not defending jack. I’m on record saying the case shouldn’t have been brought. That’s separate from his guilt or innocence and it didn’t surprise me that he was guilty.
Evan’s Scholars. Like I said. Giving other hardworking kids a chance to go to college.
Both the Smith cases are very easy to understand. Read the indictments. They’re not at all hard to understand, even by those of us that aren’t lawyers.
I'm not a 24/7 watcher and auditor of nationwide DA campaign efforts or the rules typically followed in enforcing the contours of DA campaigns. So I'm not an expert.
That said, even your linked summary doesn't establish the wrongful bias you are alleging.
If Bragg were opposed to Trump based only on his criminal activities and corruption, and campaigned accordingly, your citation doesn't make his efforts improper. You are rejecting the notion that Trump's obvious and ongoing corruption (as opposed to his political role) was driving Bragg's words. I think that's your conclusion and it's not a given the way you suggest. But even if Bragg pushed the envelope or went too far, it's a rough world, Trump is sui generis, and there has been a pervasive sense that Trump absolutely holds himself above the law. A DA's willingness to speak truth to power and to hold the corrupt accountable seems highly relevant to his job.
Last edited:
Bragg might if he finds out you're a Republican.
Why would ever dignify anything written by deranged Jack Smith by reading it? The guy who’s cases get overturned 9-0 at SCOTUS?
He’s clearly deranged and has no respect for the law. Don’t offer any quarter to that joker.
Trump wasn’t legally allowed to possess his classified documents after leaving office either. This issue is the same for both, but there are a ton of differences which I’ve explained and won’t bother to do again.
UFC is Trump's safespace. He got a rude shock at the Charlotte Nascar event on Memorial day when the boos were just as audible as the cheers. On top of that he pulled his phony stunt where he waves at the crowd and pretends they are cheering at him while he does...
His "fans" in New York
Ness was just an analogy.
Like I said below, Trump is sui generis and his incredible actions lead to atypical results.
Past prosecutors not going after Trump is likely what Briggs and others have been responding to. It's the notion that crime and corruption by the powerful can't be touched but the rest of the commoners have to face the man in unequal and unfair ways.
As far as precedent or public faith, I would hardly be surprised if somebody like Bragg was concerned with what you describe: reinforcing the power of precedence and defending public faith in the justice system.
Ultimately, your concern is a call for the voters of NY/NYC and for whatever judicial regulators play a role there.
---
Edited because I keep misspelling the DA.
I think it would be safe assumption that Colangelo has a hard on for burying Trump. He was with the AG's office for many years and helped prosecute the trump foundation and he and Bragg were apparently friendly. He was the lead prosecutor in the New York Attorney General’s 2018 case against the Trump administration’s unsuccessful attempt to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. Basically, where there is a trump case in NYC at the state level, he's been there. And he's paid a lot of money in his role.
It starts to unravel when you start saying this was a Biden thing. I'll grant you that Colangelo wanted yet another piece of Trump Ass. After that, not sure. It makes far more sense to me that Bragg and Colangelo, who knew each other, had a discussion and Bragg said "we are going after Trump, are you in"? Why wouldn't Bragg do that--Colangelo had hammered Trump for many years on other matters.
The guy with a baby arm holding an apple brought up a good point on ethical rules for a prosecutor. In theory, there maybe an issue there but how does one pursue a successful grievance or challenge to the jury verdict when he got a guilty verdict? Impossible.
You could read them to inform yourself.
Incidentally your post reads as if you are deranged.
We would all be in trouble if he campaigned on getting the Water Coolerites. Also, if you represent me, please put me on the stand. I’d love to reread some of my posts in court. I’ll have the Judge and jury buying Bitcoin 😁. Probably round up a few new members to the Dream Team, as well.Bragg might if he finds out you're a Republican.
Last edited:
By the way, it's odd to me that folks lining up for Trump would get worked up about Bragg when Trump's campaign promises, behaviors, and statements are so extreme and out of control.
I think the counter can be said of your position. The misd was time barred and how an accounting disclosure was captured isn’t obvious to anyone. Politics should not influence prosecutorial discretion as set forth in the citation. When you are campaigning on getting a political opponent it’s hard to say with a straight face that this was apolitical.
To be clear, for sure when I said that Bragg's statements could be read as "anti-corruption" instead of "political", I wasn't saying that's the only fair interpretation. I do think at a minimum, though, that there's what I would call an easy legal argument in support of my generous read of the cite you shared.
Because Bragg is not someone I give a shit about. I live in Illinois. His bullshit in NYC should not effect me. Except when he convicts former presidents on nonsense. **** that fatty. Don’t trust fat people and I never will.
The Trump University case was a 2013 case. The NYC fraud cases began in 2019 with early consideration of moving forward in 2018. The criminal investigation and 3 grand juries were 2020. Don't forget, it was Trump that filed suit against James in 2021, and the indicment wasn't brought until 2022
That check, though, doesn't exist, as we all know. The people of NYC wanted Trump's head on a pike, and they elected a man to do just that--to find something to charge him with. That's not how the justice system is supposed to work.
Sui generis isn't how the law is supposed to work, either. But that is exactly what all this "he's a threat to democracy" and "he's a fascist" rhetoric has been about--justifying using extraordinary, norm-breaking methods to beat him by hook or by crook. In my mind, he wasn't worth it and the damage is done. I think this marks a sea change in how politics will be practiced from here on out.
One can criticize Bragg's conduct without "lining up for Trump."
Only the Beatles should be sui generis
i think you hit the nail on the head. @Mark Milton and @BradStevens to answer yours as well. i think if you have a progressive activist da who comes in and says that i think the system is bullshit and if elected i'm not going to charge a category of crimes. or the converse if elected i'm going to seek jail time for anyone who commits a dwi. no more suspended sentences or whatever. jail. that's all fine. when you name names before you have all of the evidence in a campaign then it's a problem and it's political and not what is contemplated in the role of a prosecutor
and that barca class from 2009 - 2012
Heard, and that's probably the reasoned discussion to be had, but we are where we are. I don't like the "the other side made me do it stuff" at all, but I think it's rational to be mindful of the unprecedented challenges to the historical order that Trump has brought upon us. I think the minimization that people place on the Trump threat is problematic; as is the insistence that Trump fear (for lack of a better phrase) is irrational. But that's the debate and I understand that is indeed close to the core of the dissonance.
For sure.
I think that some are doing just that is generally relevant, but probably irrelevant to our back and forth.
Oh shit. what a gaffe on my part!! 100000% The greatest team to exist in any sport. Equisite. You could take the best players in the world outside of Barca for those years, train them for a year, and have them play Barca 10 times and Barca would win 7-8 games and have 60% possession
**** off joker. You are not a serious persons if you believe Trump is the larger threat to our “historical order”.
You’re just a clown with a vocabulary that is half as good as you think it is
No brother @Thyrsis is a solid poster. We need more like him to offset the blank spaces
The '27 Yankees, '85 Bears, and '93 Hoosiers (I'll fight over this--****ing Henderson injury) would like a word.
Can't disagree on the specific years you cited but Mr Longstaff and I were thinking of a grouping of years-- the Barca 4-5'year run
@BradStevens delete your post. Comparing the fridge and Jim McMahon and some rando from hickory huck Indiana in college to artists like xavi iniesta fab and Messi in their prime? Do better. BE BETTER
Well, if we're including 5 year runs, the Indianapolis Neck Beards' dominance of the Disc Golf Association is probably the gold standard.
@larsIU
Walter Payton, Calbert Cheaney, Babe Ruth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Messi
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
You willingly put bumper stickers on your car? My perception of you has just taken quite a hit.
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
Yes because if Trump had returned the documents when asked then they would have left him alone just like Biden and Pence.
Doesn't mean that Biden and Pence didn't screw up but they cooperated with returning them.
The idea that you can pardon yourself in any jurisdiction is the antithesis of "No one is above the law".
No he’s not. No one that sees Trump as a larger threat than Biden’s can hide being his posts being “mostly opinion” just like the rest of ours. No need to attribute any significance to him.
- Status
