i am assuming you are talking about Letitia James here, not Fani Willis, as I can find no evidence that Fani Willis, the DA from Georgia, ever campaigned on "getting Trump." https://www.poynter.org/fact-checki...~:text=Kerwin Swint, a political scientist,No. Again, I am assuming you are talking about Letitia James in New York. I do find her campaign promises to get Trump inappropriate. Evidence of a crime is the only thing that should lead a prosecutor toward indictment, not personal grudges or vendettas. The gag order in the New York case only relates to courtroom staff. Trump holds a press conference right outside the courtroom doors every time he goes to trial there and says whatever he wants about Letitia James. He's hardly been constrained. Prosecutors lose cases occasionally, especially trial lawyers. They get lost on appeal sometimes. Doesn't mean that every single case the prosecutor tries is unjust, illegitimate or fraudulent in some way. Our judicial system allows for every defendant to have a fair trial and also an ability to appeal the decisions. This case is the least of Trump's concerns and frankly it is the least of mine as well. The one thing that you didn't mention in any of your defense of Trump is that he is innocent of the charges against him. That's notable.
[QU you are entitled to believe whatever you want but decisions made on this level of our judicial system are in place to decide who is write and wrong constitutionally so their decision becomes law and part of future precedent. so you are welcome to continue to believe anything you like, however correctness in this case lies in the decisions passed down from the courts, up to and including the SC.
I have to accept the results of the investigation. I can still question certain associations and, of even more concern to me, financial ties to Russian banks knowing that there is no such thing as a bank in Russia that isn't backed by the Kremlin. I can do both at the same time. I have no proof of my suspicions other than his sons publically bragging about it and it being an open aired "secret" until Trump wanted to run for President, but I most certainly do not dwell upon it because there are so many other more important issue with Trump, like the documents case in Florida or the Election interference cases in DC and Georgia.
No. I don't have time for things like that. Things like that would mean I'd have to spend as much time on this site as you do every day. Plus, unless I am mistaken I think that is the first time I've ever offered to see what the courts decide and compare notes later. My willingness stems from the lack of argument from Trump's defense in the documents case related to his mental telepathic ability to declassify. As I recall you and JMG made that argument regularly, even dug up a SC case to illustrate how right you both thought you were. Turns out the entire argument is completely irrelevant and no one, absolutely no one has made that argument since.
You know you're point here is well taken because the whole "walls are closing in" argument has been grossly over used by the media. That said, I wonder at what point you will truly think the walls have closed in on poor Donald? I know you don't believe it will ever come to that but tell me, at what point would the walls genuinely be closing in? Conviction? Jail Time? His closest allies flipping on him?
good. that story was false. he neither owed Russia via deutche bank, nor was there ever a server linked to a Russian bank. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/...evidence-that-trump-owes-money-to-russia.html again, this was all a media driven hysteria from the hillary campaign. I welcome you to read all about how it happened in an article from a new York times Pulitzer prize winning writer in the Columbia journalism review. https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-1.php this is not written by Glenn Beck or Fox news. that is a Pulitzer winnint NYT investigative reporter. that's what happened. the Russia stuff was a lie. hillary thought Russian connections were damaging herr campaign and saw it s way to tar trump. "Hillary Clinton entered the race, and it was she, not Trump, who began her campaign facing scrutiny over Russia ties. Weeks earlier, the Times had collaborated with the conservative author of a best-selling book to explore various Clinton-Russia links, including a lucrative speech in Moscow by Bill Clinton, Russia-related donations to the Clinton family foundation, and Russia-friendly initiatives by the Obama administration while Hillary was secretary of state. The Times itself said it had an “exclusive agreement” with the author to “pursue the story lines found in the book” through “its own reporting.” An internal Clinton campaign poll, shared within the campaign the day of Trump’s announcement, showed that the Russia entanglements exposed in the book and the Times were the most worrisome “Clinton negative message" ... Clinton and her campaign would secretly sponsor and publicly promote an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that there was a secret alliance between Trump and Russia" this is difficult to believe, beccasue to accept that as a reality, you have to accept that the media was lying every single day for years. this will make you lose faith in mainstream media. so be it. they are liars. the trump/russia think was not real. it never was. given that this has been said every day and it has never come to pass, doesnt that lead you distrust the media? don't you see that they will interpret everything as walls closing in? when they have a legal analyst come on and say trump is definitely finished its the beginning of the end, do you believe it every time? why not think about why he says something so wrong so many times in the exact same way? probably never. why should the walls every close on him? none of what he did was bad. he fucked a whore and paid her. fine. he wanted the election revisted. so what? every dmocrat has done that basically every time. he disagrees on values of assets for loans, everyone does. when I first applied for a credit card as a kid I inflated my income so I would get it. they took a risk and now years later the credit card company made a fuckload of money off me. no victim. he can declassify documents so that's also not a big deal. the media hates trump they make up shit. when you learn to accept that, all of this makes way more sense. trump is an obnoxious blowhard, not Dr evil. and he doesn't know dick about russia and has about as much connection with them as you do. but because poorly educated whites love trump because they are stupid, it because socially incentivized in the media class to not just hate him, but to overtly and loudly despise him as evil and fascist. that's stupid. and I didn't vote for him either. but then he was a fine president. no new wars, cheap oil, low inflation. that's all I want. so don't let the media force you hate trump. dont let them tell you is satan. he isnt. we are not in a good vs evil novel. he is just an obnsious new yorker, i have met many. they are not satan.
Every Single One of these cases will get tossed on appeal and the prosecution in each case knows it! This is grandstanding and the very definition of "election interference"
well it depends on which charge. clearly he paid stormy, and he wrote it down as whatever kinda expense. I don't think it should be prosecuted because there is no victim and its all a political witch hunt, which is a disgrace and people who care about democracy should speak out about it. the classified documents, he clearly did take those documents, but the were printed and existed solely for the purpose of being taken to the white house and given to him, and he can declassify anything he wants, and this is somethingBiden and pence and everyone does. the part about him leaking consequential secrets is made up. to stay he "stole" them is silly, they were printed out purely to be given to him. and you cant "steal" copies of things in the traditional sense. they can jusyt print another copy. its not stolen and gone. so that case is stupid and purely motivated by hate of trump and imagined rewards of getting him. but they wont. trump was clearly within his rights to discuss and plan trying to find the votes he thouht he got, so that case is bullshit as well. the rape case was made my DA who extended the statute of limitations just to get trump, and his accuser didn't even know what year it was. that's also a bullshit case. if the accuse cant name the year, defendant has no hope for alibi, case is horseshit. defendant must be given a chance to present alibi. and yes he is also guilty of inflating real estate values. not a real crime in my opinion. its a civil issue between the lender and borrower.
this is correct. all cases will eventually end up in appeals courts or the supreme court and be dismissed or diminished to nothing.
remember @Winston1 , all those years everyday we were told Mueller has him, its jail for sure. adam schiff lying about the smoking gun he wasn't allowed to mention. the media loving it. and in the end not one single American was convicted of any russia conspiracy crime. not one. some idiot got tax stuff, which they could get me on as well I always lie on my taxes.
