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.
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
You really think Trump followers voted for Trump when he was found guilty of fraud only because it wasn’t a criminal case?
Using your excuse, New York v. Trump should not have happened because there was a chance Trump would have been found innocent and that would have given the election to Trump.
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
Which is why I linked to his 2022 criminal conviction.
You said
They’re not relevant because you don’t get “guilty” verdicts in civil cases. Nuances matter and you’ve been getting them all wrong
You really think Trump followers voted for Trump when he was found guilty of fraud only because it wasn’t a criminal case?
Using your excuse, New York v. Trump should not have happened because there was a chance Trump would have been found innocent and that would have given the election to Trump.
Really?