-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
Even more moderate Illinois Republicans who don’t support the former president said they were “troubled” by the case that resulted in a conviction on 34 felony counts in New York.
Summary and audio linked here.
Chicago’s political leadership is floating a pension buyout program as evidence it is seriously addressing the city’s thirty-six-billion-dollar unfunded pension liability, but Mark Glennon, founder of the Illinois policy research organization Wirepoints, said that the proposal moves debt from one column to another rather than reducing it, and that the broader fiscal picture facing the city continues to deteriorate across every measurable dimension. Audio here.
Expect no retraction or apology. This what they do.
The state’s existing buyout program for its own pensions is the precedent for Chicago, which should be a warning: Look out for similar exaggerated claims and shoddy analysis.
Full interview and summary linked here.
SIGN UP HERE FOR OUR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
“Show me the man and I’ll find the crime.” Laventeri Beria.
This isn’t Stalin. Give me a break. This is a shady tactic getting nailed in court.
You understand that Trump is the very first person in the history of the United States to have been charged this way, with long expired misdemeanors transformed into felony conspiracies to affect the outcome of an election? Does that matter to you at all?
Does it matter than Hillary Clinton’s campaign was fined by the FED, but not prosecuted, for illegally claiming the Steele Dossier was a ‘legal expense’ instead of a campaign expense? Because it not a crime?
Of course not, because you have a bad case of TDS. Fact don’t matter to you. Ya goof!
Here’s the hillary campaign doing the same thing!
No, Trump is not the first. John Edwards was charged for the same thing. Hung jury.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-senator-and-presidential-candidate-john-edwards-charged-alleged-role-scheme-violate
No, no, no. Edwards was charged directly, in an upfront manner, with violating federal campaign laws (apparently, based on your summary). Here, a presumption was made that such a violation occurred, but that presumption was false. No such violation was even pled or argued. The judge and prosecution made no effort even to explain what the elements of such a charge might be. Trump’s request to have testimony on that issue was denied. Trump was convicted on state charges for which the statute of limitations had run out. The prosecution needed that second, federal crime to extend the statute.
Sounds like you are making hairsplitting legal argument on the merits. Are you a lawyer?
I guess you haven’t read his bio.
I just did.
1. He is not a campaign finance lawyer
2. Hairsplitting is still hairsplitting.
3. There are actual practicing campaign finance lawyers with different opinions. What do they say?
4. It’s still not Stalinism. It’s a judicial system with citizen juries and judges and DAs with differing opinions.
Here’s a good concise summary of just some of the wrongs in this prosecution, by no less than CNN’s legal analyst. Maybe Stalinism is hyperbole, but this kind of abuse of the legal system is extraordinarily wrong and dangerous. Americans of both parties already didn’t trust the coming election. Now, for many, the case is already made that the election is rigged. This either gets fixed or civil strife will ensue.https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1796577680919511048.We have forfeited our right to condemn tyranny in other nations.
Hair splitting? Presuming a crime that was never even charged or argued is hair splitting? It’s a Fifth Amendment violation. And yes, I am, though it shouldn’t take a lawyer to see that.
No, hairsplitting is differentiating a paperwork violation in criminal charges from the underlying act that caused it all. Or whatever the legal mumbo jumbo is.
Going through shady financial dealing to deceive the voters is still going through shady dealing to deceive the voters.
Al Capone was convicted for tax evasion.
Legal mumbo jumbo? Guess you are not a lawyer either.
Some due process you believe in, as if politicians don’t routinely do shady dealing to deceive voters.
The link here destroys your own argument in the first sentence. A federal grand jury indicted Edwards on six counts. A federal grand jury, not an elected district attorney in the state of NY (or any other state). Why the need for a convoluted two-tier charge? Because NY has no jurisdiction to prosecute violations of federal campaign finance laws.
Here is a good non-partisan view of how it could have gone either way. From what I have seen, it comes down to the jury, and either way has legal justification.
https://www.vox.com/politics/353111/trump-trial-verdict-criticisms-wrongly-convicted
A NYC jury in a district that voted Biden+80!
Let’s try Biden for Treason (for colluding with the cartels to admit 10,000,000 illegal immigrants) in the Western District of Texas, an area that voted Trump+87.
Do you think Biden would get a fair trial in west Texas on a charge of Treason?
Set aside your TDS for a couple of seconds and your hatred of Trump, and think about it from the other side.
Excellent point
1. Vox is non-partisan? LMAO
2. Why do you deliberately keep missing the point that the case should never have been brought in a NYC court? Without a “novel” legal theory, they had no jurisdiction. The feds did have jurisdiction, but declined to bring a case.
3. It could have gone either way? Deflection, because it assumes the case was valid in NY. And irrelevant, because we both know it is untrue.
I am not a Trump fan. But do you guys have no sense of the damage you are doing in your quest to vanquish the Orange Man demon?
DOWNVOTED
“This is a shady tactic getting nailed in court.” The point is to not use the court system to over-charge anybody for whatever law was broken. The Manhattan DA’s approach to the case reminded me that those who identify with progressives don’t like rich people. That type of aversion does not belong in a court of law. You have to look at sentencing differences between guilt on felony charges vs misdemeanor to see why some consider the tactics similar to Stalinism. DA’s and prosecutors who spend their time on what they are supposed to be doing steer clear of witch… Read more »