Trump charged

[jason_c]

100% correct. This is what these people do becasue it is unforunately legal. Why is it legal? Because they can shape the legislation to make it legal. It is a sorry state of affairs and I believe that pretty much EVERYBODY does it. So the systems needs to be changed but it's not going to be changed by trying to pin it on one person and while others go to Washington PRECISELY to get a share of that gravy train. Yes, Hunter Biden's income dried up after 2016 becasue he could no longer sell the illusion of access. Go figure. What do you thik Jeb Bush is doing these days? Or how much money did Kushner and Ivanka make SINCE 2016? As I said, it's all pretty depressing.... However, this does not show that Joe Biden has broken the law because his son is running around with his pants around his ankles.



Yes and no. All of the above is correct but trump was not charged for the hush money payments, he was charged for falsifying business records in order to facilitate the hush-money payments. This is also a correction to my comment above.



See my comment on paragraph one.

Svensson, I'm going to assume you simply misspoke here. Hunter could no longer sell 'the illusion of access' after 2016? Hunter's illegitimate daughter has an 'illusion of access' to Joe Biden. However, Hunter definitely did have access to Joe. This, I think, is not in any doubt.

[String]

So when do you think he should be ‘raked over the legal coals’?
If Mr Trump doesn’t want to be prosecuted he shouldn’t break the law.
"Justice delayed is justice denied"

[jason_c]

So when do you think he should be ‘raked over the legal coals’?
If Mr Trump doesn’t want to be prosecuted he shouldn’t break the law.
"Justice delayed is justice denied"

He should not be raked over the legal coals full stop. And yes, this implies an almost blasphemous argument that certain people are above the law. When it comes to political opponents they ought to be off limits when it comes to anything that smacks of political/legal persecution. Just as I would be against prosecuting, say, Gavin Newsom if there was a Republican President. It's all a bit banana republic. If in doubt it's best not to jail your most likely opponent at the next Presidential election.

[String]

No one is above the law.

[Svensson]

Svensson, I'm going to assume you simply misspoke here. Hunter could no longer sell 'the illusion of access' after 2016? Hunter's illegitimate daughter has an 'illusion of access' to Joe Biden. However, Hunter definitely did have access to Joe. This, I think, is not in any doubt.

Not misspoken at all. I am referencing Devon Archer here, James Comer's own witness:

https://www.axios.com/2023/07/31/devon-archer-testify-hunter-biden

Yes, Hunter did have acces to his father but the suggesting that this acces was for sale to others was, according to Archer, an illusion.

[Svensson]

I should have also pointed out the suspicious nature of the timing of these charges. It's almost certainly no coincidence that they come just six months or so before the primary campaign kicks off. All these charges just in time to fill the media cycle during election year. More evidence the authorities are not playing with a straight bat in regards to the prosecution of Donald Trump.

Of course just because I cannot produce a memo from the Whitehouse to the DoJ and various DA's calling for Trump to be raked over the legal coals during election year posters on here will call it all an unfounded conspiracy theory.

Let's be honest, the timing does not matter for this lame argument to be made regardless.

If the charges had been brought a year ago, it would have been to influence the midterms. had the charges been brought in a year's time, the accusation would have been "he has been charged to influence the elections". As it happens, the charges have been brought now, but the trials will be during the election year.

It does not matter when the charges are brought, this exact same accusation against the DoJ/Speial Counsel would be made anyways.

I would like to go a step further. DoJ should just ignore the fact that htere is an election. The judges should set the trials when they see fitr and not when an electikn is taking place. Otherwise, I can evade a trila simply by running for office.

It's another example of a 2-tier justice system. One rule for Joe Average, another rule for rich politicians. I'm sick of it.

And the trial should be televised. So that Donald Trump can't lie about it afterwards.

[Ms Diddles]

And the trial should be televised. So that Donald Trump can't lie about it afterwards.

Oh! That wouldn't stop him!

It was when he lied about the size of the crowd at his inauguration compared to Obama's that I realised how utterly delusional he was.

[jason_c]

Let's be honest, the timing does not matter for this lame argument to be made regardless.

If the charges had been brought a year ago, it would have been to influence the midterms. had the charges been brought in a year's time, the accusation would have been "he has been charged to influence the elections". As it happens, the charges have been brought now, but the trials will be during the election year.

It does not matter when the charges are brought, this exact same accusation against the DoJ/Speial Counsel would be made anyways.

I would like to go a step further. DoJ should just ignore the fact that htere is an election. The judges should set the trials when they see fitr and not when an electikn is taking place. Otherwise, I can evade a trila simply by running for office.

It's another example of a 2-tier justice system. One rule for Joe Average, another rule for rich politicians. I'm sick of it.

And the trial should be televised. So that Donald Trump can't lie about it afterwards.

Agree that the trial(s) should be televised. The most important trials in modern American history deserve the sunlight of live television. We can't have the US Republic totter in the shadows.

[Pcdunn]

https://www.cnn.com/

Wimpy Trump suggested that the Supreme Court intercede in his legal battles. He really has no idea how things work.

[Fiver]

He should not be raked over the legal coals full stop. And yes, this implies an almost blasphemous argument that certain people are above the law. When it comes to political opponents they ought to be off limits when it comes to anything that smacks of political/legal persecution.

So you condemned Donald Trump and his followers for chanting "Lock Her Up!"? Or do only Republican candidates get to be above the law?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

He should not be raked over the legal coals full stop. And yes, this implies an almost blasphemous argument that certain people are above the law. When it comes to political opponents they ought to be off limits when it comes to anything that smacks of political/legal persecution. Just as I would be against prosecuting, say, Gavin Newsom if there was a Republican President. It's all a bit banana republic. If in doubt it's best not to jail your most likely opponent at the next Presidential election.

Hi Jason,

The idea that those in/with power are above the law is exactly how a Banana Republic operates. Do you believe that if Trump was re-elected, the 'impeach Biden' calls would stop? The MAGA favourite 'lock them up' chants? Trumps platform for 2016 was heavily invested in threats to 'lock up' Hillary Clinton, it's a favoured crowd pleaser and key tactic of his.

From the outside, it appears to me that if America wants to move away from hateful partisanship, Trump has no place in politics. Of course, large parts of America don't want to move away, but if the preferred candidate has been prosecuted, it's no less than what that candidate and his followers want to be able to do themselves.

Politics has always been a shady occupation, but the current conduct, the language, the personal attacks, it's a new low for a democratic nation. Trump is undoubtedly to blame for much of it, but the self serving cowards in the Republican Party who value their own career over the constitution they have vowed to uphold, who dare not speak out, are really to blame. They facilitated this madness for the chance to get in power and it's now bigger than they are. Trumps not an elected official of any sort, but he still pulls the strings. That's your Banana Republic.

[String]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/04/donald-trump-courtroom-jurors-truth-indictment

[jason_c]

Hi Jason,

The idea that those in/with power are above the law is exactly how a Banana Republic operates. Do you believe that if Trump was re-elected, the 'impeach Biden' calls would stop? The MAGA favourite 'lock them up' chants? Trumps platform for 2016 was heavily invested in threats to 'lock up' Hillary Clinton, it's a favoured crowd pleaser and key tactic of his.

From the outside, it appears to me that if America wants to move away from hateful partisanship, Trump has no place in politics. Of course, large parts of America don't want to move away, but if the preferred candidate has been prosecuted, it's no less than what that candidate and his followers want to be able to do themselves.

Politics has always been a shady occupation, but the current conduct, the language, the personal attacks, it's a new low for a democratic nation. Trump is undoubtedly to blame for much of it, but the self serving cowards in the Republican Party who value their own career over the constitution they have vowed to uphold, who dare not speak out, are really to blame. They facilitated this madness for the chance to get in power and it's now bigger than they are. Trumps not an elected official of any sort, but he still pulls the strings. That's your Banana Republic.

Trump and his crowd chanting 'lock her up' is a long way from actually locking Hillary up. I view the chant as a political rally equivalent of meme, or sh**posting. Impeachment is largely a political measure voted on by Congress. It's a tool of last resort by one of the three branches of government. I understand the danger of someone being above the law. However, we are talking about very limited instances here of people being above the law. I just think as a rule it's more dangerous to lock someone up on dubious charges when that person is the main opposition force to the party or individual in power. Btw I notice Imran Khan has today been sentenced to three years in prison. Bolsonaro has been barred from running for public office in Brazil. Nigel Farage is having his bank accounts closed and all sorts of rights infringed. The tendency for elites to go after populists by both fair means and foul is noteworthy.

I take on board what you say about Trump having no place in US politics. However, I would say the consequences will be worse if Trump is taken out of the game by legal persecution. I would make one tentative prediction which I hope is not viewed as a threat; all bets are off when it comes to the reaction of Trump supporters if he spends a single day behind bars on what they see as dubious charges.

[Fiver]

Trump and his crowd chanting 'lock her up' is a long way from actually locking Hillary up. I view the chant as a political rally equivalent of meme, or sh**posting.

It was a call for Hillary to be locked up without benefit of trial. A call to replace justice and the rule of law with the whims of the mob.

TI just think as a rule it's more dangerous to lock someone up on dubious charges when that person is the main opposition force to the party or individual in power.

None of the charges are dubious.

However, I would say the consequences will be worse if Trump is taken out of the game by legal persecution. I would make one tentative prediction which I hope is not viewed as a threat; all bets are off when it comes to the reaction of Trump supporters if he spends a single day behind bars on what they see as dubious charges.

It's not persecution, it's prosecution. Most of the Trumpanistas willing to treason for Trump have already been arrested over the January 5 riot. I'm sure our legal system can handle it if a few more are stupid enough to throw away their futures for an autocrat who doesn't care about them.

[Svensson]

Trump and his crowd chanting 'lock her up' is a long way from actually locking Hillary up. I view the chant as a political rally equivalent of meme, or sh**posting. Impeachment is largely a political measure voted on by Congress. It's a tool of last resort by one of the three branches of government. I understand the danger of someone being above the law. However, we are talking about very limited instances here of people being above the law. I just think as a rule it's more dangerous to lock someone up on dubious charges when that person is the main opposition force to the party or individual in power. Btw I notice Imran Khan has today been sentenced to three years in prison. Bolsonaro has been barred from running for public office in Brazil. Nigel Farage is having his bank accounts closed and all sorts of rights infringed. The tendency for elites to go after populists by both fair means and foul is noteworthy.

I take on board what you say about Trump having no place in US politics. However, I would say the consequences will be worse if Trump is taken out of the game by legal persecution. I would make one tentative prediction which I hope is not viewed as a threat; all bets are off when it comes to the reaction of Trump supporters if he spends a single day behind bars on what they see as dubious charges.

I think all of this stands and falĺs with your presumption of Jack Smith having filed "dubious charges". What if they are not dubious? Then what will you do?