The report, which said the special counsel’s office stood “fully behind” the merits of the prosecution, amounted to an extraordinary rebuke of the president-elect.
I believe it. But also… Yeah? Obviously some low-level prosecutors can be sloppy but did we really expect Jack Smith to shoot from the hip and indict without thinking he’ll win in what could/should have been the biggest case of his life?
Do you think it will take 4 years to indict Luigi because it will be the biggest case of the prosecutor’s life? Oh wait, they already indicted him, arrested him, and are now building a case. It won’t even be 4 years before a trial.
In a just world, Trump would have been jailed on Jan 7th LIKE EVERYONE ELSE CAUGHT RED HANDED HAVING JUST COMMITTED A CRIME.
It shouldn’t have taken 4 years, no, but there’s a lot of false equivalence in everything else you said. Different crimes, different things that have to be proven (including intent), different witnesses to be interviewed to build that case, etc.
Yes, there are different things that need to be proven for different crimes- All of which are done after arrest for every other poor or middle class person arrested.
I had an employee with an ex girlfriend who would call the police to report him for missed child support payments. He would be arrested, thrown in jail over the weekend until Monday morning when the county clerk would be back in office and tell the judge, “Mr. X has been paying his child support, you can release him.”
That’s a pretty shitty thing, but the solution is not to extend the shittiness elsewhere, especially since a miss here would vindicate Trump that much more in the eyes of his supporters
So Trump and only Trump gets off because we wouldn’t want shitness extended? Wtf?
And a miss would mean nothing just as the fraud and rape convictions meant nothing to them.
In my opinion, Trump in prison without makeup and hair stylists would have had a huge affect on many of his followers who see him as an untouchable strong man. It would have destroyed the illusion he portrays.
If there’s a problem being applied unequally, you don’t spread it. You fix the problem.
He wasn’t convicted of rape. A jury found that, more likely than not, he sexually assaulted E Jean Carroll in her defamation lawsuit. The same jury found that, more likely than not, he did not rape her but the judge later clarified that those actions constituted rape. All of it was part of a civil lawsuit, where the standard is a preponderance of evidence (basically, that “more likely than not” phrase I used). Criminal trials are brought on differently and need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a much more difficult burden.
The standard has always been to arrest criminals. It’s never been a problem. Only Trump got a pass.
The judge said rape. The issue wasn’t how hard it is to prosecute criminal vs civil. You started 2 separate arguments.
One was he couldn’t be arrested because that’s not how it is done. That is false. Arresting first is the standard.
The second was that how he was perceived would be a political problem. To which his rape and other fraud convictions are proof it didn’t matter to his followers. The standards to get a guilty verdict in civil cases aren’t relevant.
You don’t get guilty verdicts in civil cases, as you said. You don’t get convictions. Those are very specific things with very specific meanings, and they do not happen in the civil system
And I mean he was also sentenced for 34 different felonies 4 days ago and it amounted to the judge just saying “off you go, you rascal” and sending him on his way scott-free. Why would another conviction be any different?
Because that would have happened in the timeline where Trump lost the 2024 election. He didn’t, hence Smith resigning. I don’t like it either, but there’s your answer
I believe it. But also… Yeah? Obviously some low-level prosecutors can be sloppy but did we really expect Jack Smith to shoot from the hip and indict without thinking he’ll win in what could/should have been the biggest case of his life?
Do you think it will take 4 years to indict Luigi because it will be the biggest case of the prosecutor’s life? Oh wait, they already indicted him, arrested him, and are now building a case. It won’t even be 4 years before a trial.
In a just world, Trump would have been jailed on Jan 7th LIKE EVERYONE ELSE CAUGHT RED HANDED HAVING JUST COMMITTED A CRIME.
It shouldn’t have taken 4 years, no, but there’s a lot of false equivalence in everything else you said. Different crimes, different things that have to be proven (including intent), different witnesses to be interviewed to build that case, etc.
Yes, there are different things that need to be proven for different crimes- All of which are done after arrest for every other poor or middle class person arrested.
I had an employee with an ex girlfriend who would call the police to report him for missed child support payments. He would be arrested, thrown in jail over the weekend until Monday morning when the county clerk would be back in office and tell the judge, “Mr. X has been paying his child support, you can release him.”
That’s the legal system for the poor.
That’s a pretty shitty thing, but the solution is not to extend the shittiness elsewhere, especially since a miss here would vindicate Trump that much more in the eyes of his supporters
So Trump and only Trump gets off because we wouldn’t want shitness extended? Wtf?
And a miss would mean nothing just as the fraud and rape convictions meant nothing to them.
In my opinion, Trump in prison without makeup and hair stylists would have had a huge affect on many of his followers who see him as an untouchable strong man. It would have destroyed the illusion he portrays.
If there’s a problem being applied unequally, you don’t spread it. You fix the problem.
He wasn’t convicted of rape. A jury found that, more likely than not, he sexually assaulted E Jean Carroll in her defamation lawsuit. The same jury found that, more likely than not, he did not rape her but the judge later clarified that those actions constituted rape. All of it was part of a civil lawsuit, where the standard is a preponderance of evidence (basically, that “more likely than not” phrase I used). Criminal trials are brought on differently and need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a much more difficult burden.
The standard has always been to arrest criminals. It’s never been a problem. Only Trump got a pass.
The judge said rape. The issue wasn’t how hard it is to prosecute criminal vs civil. You started 2 separate arguments.
One was he couldn’t be arrested because that’s not how it is done. That is false. Arresting first is the standard.
The second was that how he was perceived would be a political problem. To which his rape and other fraud convictions are proof it didn’t matter to his followers. The standards to get a guilty verdict in civil cases aren’t relevant.
https://www.npr.org/2022/12/06/1140756394/former-president-donald-trumps-company-found-guilty-criminal-tax-fraud
You don’t get guilty verdicts in civil cases, as you said. You don’t get convictions. Those are very specific things with very specific meanings, and they do not happen in the civil system
And I mean he was also sentenced for 34 different felonies 4 days ago and it amounted to the judge just saying “off you go, you rascal” and sending him on his way scott-free. Why would another conviction be any different?
Because that would have happened in the timeline where Trump lost the 2024 election. He didn’t, hence Smith resigning. I don’t like it either, but there’s your answer
Definitely is the biggest case of his life. Sadly, he’ll be remembered by it.