Indictment Monday?

[Anonymous]

When was the last time the GOP compromised on anything? Serious question.

Now do Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

When was the last time the GOP compromised on anything? Serious question.

Now do Democrats.

Just about Every piece of legislation that’s been pasted in my lifetime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When was the last time the GOP compromised on anything? Serious question.

Now do Democrats.

Just about Every piece of legislation that’s been pasted in my lifetime.

*passed

[Anonymous]

Is he going to be tried as an adult?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.


I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.


Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.


The problem is that a decent percentage of the country (I'd guess 20%) have so thoroughly identified themselves with Trump that they're totally unable to separate him being held accountable for his crimes with a direct attack on them personally. Look at how they talk about it " they are not after Trump as much as they are after all of us" "if they can come for Trump, they will come for you." You can't reason with that.


I find that part fascinating. Like how does a politician end up being so intertwined with your own identity that you simply cannot accept any negative information about that politician, because it feels like accepting negative information about yourself? Have we had other politicians or famous people in this country (besides cult leaders) who have been able to do this to people? I know it’s not everyone who voted for and supports Trump. Plenty wil say they don’t like the guy but they still vote for him. But that percentage that sees this as an attack on them, the kind that say “we are MAGA”… just fascinating.

Plenty of insecure people who "need" to identify with someone. Either that or P.T. Barnum had it right that a sucker is born every minute (or second). It's only fascinating if you haven't been around a lot of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When he’s found not guilty, then what? Will you accept it or will it be because "the jury was filled with MAGA people"?

If a jury finds him not guilty, we (the non-crazies) will accept it...because that's how law and order works. We believe that every person is equal under the law and if the accused goes through the legal process, including a jury trial, and is found not-guilty, we certainly won't be storming the courthouse, DA's office, or state capitol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When he’s found not guilty, then what? Will you accept it or will it be because "the jury was filled with MAGA people"?

If a jury finds him not guilty, we (the non-crazies) will accept it...because that's how law and order works. We believe that every person is equal under the law and if the accused goes through the legal process, including a jury trial, and is found not-guilty, we certainly won't be storming the courthouse, DA's office, or state capitol.

+1

They just cannot fathom how far they fallen over the last 6 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When he’s found not guilty, then what? Will you accept it or will it be because "the jury was filled with MAGA people"?

If a jury finds him not guilty, we (the non-crazies) will accept it...because that's how law and order works. We believe that every person is equal under the law and if the accused goes through the legal process, including a jury trial, and is found not-guilty, we certainly won't be storming the courthouse, DA's office, or state capitol.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is he going to be tried as an adult?

LOL!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does this not mean red state juries will start indicting democrats and blue state juries won't start indicting more republicans? What's preventing a red state from going after Hunter now, for example?

This should do wonders for the two parties they need to compromise in order to run the country while we are barreling towards a default in our debt in a matter of months.

When was the last time the GOP compromised on anything? Serious question.

Gay marriage

What compromise? The Sup Ct told them they had to allow it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How did they get to 34 crimes?

CNN is reporting that Trump "faces more than 30 counts related to business fraud." No more details as of yet. The idea that Trump committed business fraud should not surprise anybody. Recall that in January the Trump org. was fined $1.6 mill for tax fraud and his CFO is currently in jail for tax fraud.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64257735

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is he going to be tried as an adult?

😂 belly laugh over this comment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does this not mean red state juries will start indicting democrats and blue state juries won't start indicting more republicans? What's preventing a red state from going after Hunter now, for example?

This should do wonders for the two parties they need to compromise in order to run the country while we are barreling towards a default in our debt in a matter of months.

Are you joking?

Joking about what? NYC is 86% registered Democrat, so how could any Republican expect a fair and unbiased trial there? What's going to stop the Republicans from now trying to idict members of the other party in counties that are 85% registered Republican? And around and around the charades will go.

Wait you are making the argument that politicians who commit crimes in jurisdictions where they belong to the minority party should get away with those crimes because they are a minority?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.

I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.

Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.

The problem is that a decent percentage of the country (I'd guess 20%) have so thoroughly identified themselves with Trump that they're totally unable to separate him being held accountable for his crimes with a direct attack on them personally. Look at how they talk about it " they are not after Trump as much as they are after all of us" "if they can come for Trump, they will come for you." You can't reason with that.

I find that part fascinating. Like how does a politician end up being so intertwined with your own identity that you simply cannot accept any negative information about that politician, because it feels like accepting negative information about yourself? Have we had other politicians or famous people in this country (besides cult leaders) who have been able to do this to people? I know it’s not everyone who voted for and supports Trump. Plenty wil say they don’t like the guy but they still vote for him. But that percentage that sees this as an attack on them, the kind that say “we are MAGA”… just fascinating.

I mean, you had the answer right here....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does this not mean red state juries will start indicting democrats and blue state juries won't start indicting more republicans? What's preventing a red state from going after Hunter now, for example?

This should do wonders for the two parties they need to compromise in order to run the country while we are barreling towards a default in our debt in a matter of months.

Are you joking?

Joking about what? NYC is 86% registered Democrat, so how could any Republican expect a fair and unbiased trial there? What's going to stop the Republicans from now trying to idict members of the other party in counties that are 85% registered Republican? And around and around the charades will go.

Wait you are making the argument that politicians who commit crimes in jurisdictions where they belong to the minority party should get away with those crimes because they are a minority?

+1
It really shows their mindset because that's what they would do. They would treat a court case as an opportunity to be vindictive and retaliate, so that's what they see others as thinking they would do. Instead of being normal people who follow the law, wherever that leads them, they see an opportunity to grandstand and pander to politics. It's a roadmap of their thinking. It's preposterous.