It wasn't the talking heads in fox. It was real estate developers and market watchers on various business media that did.Actually, Hunter's gun charges are rarely ever prosecuted. They tend to be grouped into a larger bundle of charges and negotiated away during the plea deal period.
As for Trump: Why do you think this is a rare event, that someone is charged and convicted for fraud? Overstating the value of properties to secure a loan is illegal. And what Trump did is NOT something most developers do, no matter how much the talking heads on Fox tell you. Now, I would say that the banks are culpable to an extent here, they did not do their own due diligence into this, considering Trump's reputation. But, the reality is that Trump got better terms and money that might have gone to other more worthy businesses.
And...where did Biden's lawyers say he couldn't stand a trial? It didn't happen. Thanks for playing.
The DA did.Did he campaign specifically on charging Trump with those offenses?
No.
What he basically said was that he would hold Trump accountable. It is important to remember that the previous DA had evidence and allegations from other trials (hello Michael Cohn) and testimony before the senate.
If you want to talk about the rule of law being equal, you are right, Trump was not treated as another defendant. He was given preferential treatment. He was able to travel and talk shit about the judge like no other defendant would ever try. He was figuratively handled with kid gloves.
And while the right wants to paint what happened to Trump as unprecedented or a witch hunt, its more like the US has never had a president who blatantly broke the law before, in and out of office. If you can find that Biden, Obama or Clinton did similar things, I'd say throw the book at them. And I'm sure the FBI or DOJ would have done so. But...alas, there just isn't any credible evidence of wrong doing.
Was it wrong when j Edgar hoover said he was going after al capone ? If capone ran for office would that have made it a political hit job ?The DA did.
She has clearly stated her motives are political numerous times.
Name who was charged for lying on a gun application who has committed no other crimes - I dare you to. The Supreme Court said that those laws are unconstitutional and Florida doesn't even have a penalty for Hunters 'crime'. Furthermore red states never prosecute this 'crime'It wasn't the talking heads in fox. It was real estate developers and market watchers on various business media that did.
Who else has been charged like this? Name them please.
Asking you for proof is "problems following the conversation"?Val, you really are having problems following the conversation again. I wish you the best as you try to navigate this.
Of course not.Was it wrong when j Edgar hoover said he was going after al capone ? If capone ran for office would that have made it a political hit job ?
I don't think that's true.The Supreme Court said that those laws are unconstitutional
How about this guy: https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2018/aug/10/manafort-lied-on-loan-forms-witnesses-s/?printIt wasn't the talking heads in fox. It was real estate developers and market watchers on various business media that did.
Who else has been charged like this? Name them please.
I don't think that's true.
I think there have been some lower court rulings and it hasn't made its way to the Supremes yet.
Right.Loading…
www.politico.com
Sadly, I don't have access to the legal databases like NexusLexus. I'm sure there could be lawyers who do. And, just because it isn't in the media doesn't mean it doesn't happen. But, when you consider the scale of the fraud, and the person doing the fraud, it makes sense it would be covered in the paper.It wasn't the talking heads in fox. It was real estate developers and market watchers on various business media that did.
Who else has been charged like this? Name them please.
So, you're proof is where you get James endorsing Harris? One where she doesn't even mention Trump by name.The DA did.
She has clearly stated her motives are political numerous times.
Presumably, though, even without us having Lexus-Nexus, a reporter will have backed up the "this case is the only example of its type somewhere" with something other than a quote from a Trump surrogate.Sadly, I don't have access to the legal databases like NexusLexus. I'm sure there could be lawyers who do. And, just because it isn't in the media doesn't mean it doesn't happen. But, when you consider the scale of the fraud, and the person doing the fraud, it makes sense it would be covered in the paper.
But of course it does!But, I guess the question for you is this: Just because it might not be a widely prosecuted crime (partly because it might not be reported), doesn't mean an organization should get away with shady deals.
Yes.So, you're proof is where you get James endorsing Harris? One where she doesn't even mention Trump by name.![]()
I'll follow this thread. When they're available, please put details here.
What have the Repugs done so far?????? How about nominating a criminal who incited a riot to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after losing but being unable to admit it, so he lied that it was stolen. He also tried to have Georgia fabricate 12000 votes for him on a phone call. Those 2 things alone make him an enemy of democracy, but they still nominated him. That's what they've done.What has the repugs done so far? They haven't kicked a sitting president who's also the nominee to the curb because he turns out to be obsolete...exposed...they were ready to bet on Biden until the public found out.. now as if nothing r3ally happened...democrats doing undemocratic things is such an irony..m
Sounds legit....your candidate needs notes for the debate against a felon....What have the Repugs done so far?????? How about nominating a criminal who incited a riot to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after losing but being unable to admit it, so he lied that it was stolen. He also tried to have Georgia fabricate 12000 votes for him on a phone call. Those 2 things alone make him an enemy of democracy, but they still nominated him. That's what they've done.
This is one if the funniest things you've said. Not in the good way by the way. I will clarify that now to save me have to explain it to you later.Asking you for proof is "problems following the conversation"?
I like that one - just a shameless ink cloud of avoidance by you.
Sure.This is one if the funniest things you've said. Not in the good way by the way. I will clarify that now to save me have to explain it to you later.