Criminal Charges Against Trump / Trump Indicted / Hush Money Part II

[Stacyhs]

Is it though?

A Democrat DOJ or AG poses no deterrent for Republicans to crime, because they know they can delay consequences indefinitely whilst Fundraising on the fact that they are being investigated.

I hope Smith tears Trump such a big one that he will regret ever getting into politics.

I don't agree with your first paragraph; who do you think appointed Jack Smith as special counsel? But I do agree with your last sentence 100%.

 

[eerok]

The penalty should include never discussing the crime or case with anyone, nor commenting on the judge or jury, on penalty of contempt. Trump can't control his yap these days, so he will just put himself in the slammer longer. Where he will keep yapping, just making it worse.

I have to admit that this is an outcome I'd buy popcorn for.

 

[quadraginta]

It was a Motel 6, and they didn't leave the light on for you.

If it's a Motel 6 they probably didn't even have working lights.

 

[Darat]

If it's a Motel 6 they probably didn't even have working lights.

Are they the ones that give a per hour rate when you ask how much?

 

[quadraginta]

Are they the ones that give a per hour rate when you ask how much?

"What?!! You need the room for a whole hour?"

("I suppose you want one with the bedbugs sheets changed, too.")

 

[dudalb]

That's a good thing.

That is what worries me. That in fighting the Right, the Left becomes just as bad in being willing to throw law and democracy out the window in order to "win".

 

[dudalb]

Are they the ones that give a per hour rate when you ask how much?

AKA 'Hot Sheets Motel" or 'No Tell Motel".

 

[Stacyhs]

Are they the ones that give a per hour rate when you ask how much?

Try black lighting the blankets/spreads at most hotels/motels.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That is what worries me. That in fighting the Right, the Left becomes just as bad in being willing to throw law and democracy out the window in order to "win".

Huh?

She said it was good Garland wasn't like Starr, Barr or Durham.

How does that fit with your reply?

 

[Orphia Nay]

I thought I was following Jack Smith on Twitter, but he came across as almost DemAnon, so I'm not sure it was the right account. Can anyone help me out?

Eta: nevermind, I remember now it was a parody account and I didn't follow it.

 

[Aridas]

That is what worries me. That in fighting the Right, the Left becomes just as bad in being willing to throw law and democracy out the window in order to "win".

An understandable worry... it's just that when it's used to justify inaction when action would otherwise be warranted, that's a problem. Carroll's lawsuit is one thing and yeah, you'd have more to work with if everything was only that bad. Unfortunately, in reality, what's triggering you seems to pretty well end up being the concerns that arise from things like that we have serious breaches of national security and what has long been, quite frankly, open and shut cases that are far beyond any actually reasonable doubt and very real likelihood of further breaches of national security specifically because of the delay. That's on top of the old principle that justice delayed too long is justice denied.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Trump's lawyers are basically saying the hush-money case is political.

NEW YORK (AP) — Within hours of his historic arraignment this spring, Donald Trump fixed his ire on the judge, complaining that he’s “a Trump-hating judge” with a family full of “Trump haters.”

On Friday, the former president’s lawyers doubled down on that criticism, demanding Judge Juan Manuel Merchan step aside from his New York City criminal case because of what they say is anti-Trump bias and a conflict of interest arising from his daughter’s work for some of Trump’s Democratic rivals.

Trump’s lawyers allege that Merchan, a respected jurist in Manhattan’s criminal court, tipped the scales in two other Trump-related cases by involving himself in plea negotiations for Trump’s longtime finance chief and requiring him to testify against Trump’s company in exchange for a five-month jail sentence.

Trump’s lawyers, Susan Necheles and Todd Blanche, also asked Merchan to explain three political donations totaling $35 that were made to Democratic causes in his name during the 2020 election cycle.

https://apnews.com/article/d0e54b546043e0497b5c04e78b505d6a

$35 seems trivial. This is when all the i's have to be painstakingly dotted and the t's crossed perfectly.

 

[Norman Alexander]

That is what worries me. That in fighting the Right, the Left becomes just as bad in being willing to throw law and democracy out the window in order to "win".

The rabid Right are betting that the Left is not prepared to be that bad, thus allowing them to get away with it.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Trump's lawyers are basically saying the hush-money case is political.

https://apnews.com/article/d0e54b546043e0497b5c04e78b505d6a

$35 seems [is] trivial. This is when all the i's have to be painstakingly dotted and the t's crossed perfectly.

This from the guy that put $25K into the coffers on a certain AG's reelection who later dropped a case against Trump.

Florida AG asked Trump for donation before nixing fraud case

The new disclosure from Attorney General Pam Bondi’s spokesman to The Associated Press on Monday provides additional details around the unusual circumstances of Trump’s $25,000 donation to Bondi.

The money came from a Trump family foundation in apparent violation of rules surrounding political activities by charities. A political group backing Bondi’s re-election, called And Justice for All, reported receiving the check Sept. 17, 2013 — four days after Bondi’s office publicly announced she was considering joining a New York state probe of Trump University’s activities, according to a 2013 report in the Orlando Sentinel.

After the check came in, Bondi’s office nixed suing Trump, citing insufficient grounds to proceed.

Gee, if you were to slip some money into my campaign coffers I might be able to take care of this matter.

 

[gnome]

The rabid Right are betting that the Left is not prepared to be that bad, thus allowing them to get away with it.

If so then it's definitely on the Left to find an effective response that ISN'T dismantling rule of law and democracy. Or else we're just helping it be done.

The idea "we have to be willing to be that bad" sounds like fighting an arsonist trying to burn your house down by burning the rest of it down so that it wasn't the arsonist that did it. That oughta teach the arsonist a darn good lesson there.

 

[Aridas]

If so then it's definitely on the Left to find an effective response that ISN'T dismantling rule of law and democracy. Or else we're just helping it be done.

The idea "we have to be willing to be that bad" sounds like fighting an arsonist trying to burn your house down by burning the rest of it down so that it wasn't the arsonist that did it. That oughta teach the arsonist a darn good lesson there.

To poke at this general tangent a little indirectly, I think that this person happened to address some of the larger principles at hand reasonably well.

How I've Told My Conservative Neighbors that a Love of Justice Should Make One Lean Liberal

Going a bit further than that link, though, it's certainly true that the fruit of injustice will tend to be injustice - by encouraging the oppressors to keep doing it, by normalizing it, and by making karma-like backlash all the more attractive and perpetuating the injustice even if the group power balances change. Fears of the oppressed going too far tend to be overblown and easy for the oppressors to exploit to impede justice from happening, though, while simultaneously increasing the appeal of karma-like backlash out of frustration.

"The Left" vs "The Right" polarizes things a bit wrongly here, though, much as I too think that Norman Alexander's argument is a bit off. It's fairly certainly true, as far as it goes, but I don't think that it's particularly close to a full picture. Even touching on roughly the same line, the "rabid Right" are likely also betting that they have enough influence/control over the very right-wing dominated Justice System to get away with all kinds of shenanigans, by one means or other, regardless of what those who value justice might wish, regardless of their politics otherwise. Hence, it's not truly right versus left in the first place or a matter of whether those who oppose the rabid Right are willing to sink to their level. It's more a matter of actually being able to uphold justice properly and impartially in the first place.

 

[Norman Alexander]

If so then it's definitely on the Left to find an effective response that ISN'T dismantling rule of law and democracy. Or else we're just helping it be done.

Yep. And since any "regular" methods that have relied on honour and decency and a bunch of gentlemens' rules have failed already, it's time to use those heavy-duty rules that are in place that can be deployed, e.g. arrests for criminal activities in business, mishandling of government property and secrets, and insurrection against the state. And have justice brought down swiftly and firmly on the main perpetrators, then lock them up, and ignore any howls of indignant protest.

The idea "we have to be willing to be that bad" sounds like fighting an arsonist trying to burn your house down by burning the rest of it down so that it wasn't the arsonist that did it. That oughta teach the arsonist a darn good lesson there.

Except these arsonists keep trying to throw more gasoline on the inferno, daring you to try and shoot them in cold blood to stop them. That's what they want - the loudmouth useful idiots like EmptyG and Gaetz and Jordan to be prosecuted so they can bitch about it bitterly for years. After all, that's what Trump has been doing since Nov 2019, riding the complaint train for all it's worth.

 

[autumn1971]

If so then it's definitely on the Left to find an effective response that ISN'T dismantling rule of law and democracy. Or else we're just helping it be done.

The idea "we have to be willing to be that bad" sounds like fighting an arsonist trying to burn your house down by burning the rest of it down so that it wasn't the arsonist that did it. That oughta teach the arsonist a darn good lesson there.

How many houses do I need to have burned down before I’m justified in taking the necessary steps when the arsonist again approaches my house with a can of gasoline?

Honest question; at what point is the GOP able to be dealt with as a terrorist organization? Or at least one that has openly committed acts of war against the United States?

Where’s the line of “well, that’s just too much treason”?

 

[shemp]

How many houses do I need to have burned down before I’m justified in taking the necessary steps when the arsonist again approaches my house with a can of gasoline?

Honest question; at what point is the GOP able to be dealt with as a terrorist organization? Or at least one that has openly committed acts of war against the United States?

Where’s the line of “well, that’s just too much treason”?

It's already been passed.

 

[gnome]

Fears of the oppressed going too far tend to be overblown and easy for the oppressors to exploit to impede justice from happening, though, while simultaneously increasing the appeal of karma-like backlash out of frustration.

I agree that these concerns should not invite paralysis. What I hope is that being mindful of the possibility inspires discipline as well as resolve. They are not mutually exclusive.