@Teri_Kanefield@Mary625 Well, shucks. I genuinely believed all the money in the bank belonged to me; and that was going to be my defense in the bank robbery trial.
No need for word police. Most of the GOP won't even admit there's anything to investigate. So, whatever words we use, they're bound to be more accurate. ✌🏻😊
A self proclaimed Progressive griefing and haranguing one of the most reliable sources of news and politics on this hell app over the way she speaks and uses language.
You cosplay socialists are getting started early this election season aintcha
@Teri_Kanefield There is a word, #Integrity . https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/integrity . All the meanings of the word are related, and inform each other. Having different truths for different purposes is not how you do #integrity. #Integrity is supposed to be vital in someone you pick to represent you. Someone you entrust with a precious thing like the future of your country.
@Teri_Kanefield I think he’ll put his political needs first. As a conviction for #SeditiousConspiracy to incite an #Insurrection would make him ineligible to hold office, he will try to delay the trial by any and all means possible so he can get elected and make it go away. He does not want to go to prison.
@Teri_Kanefield Wouldn't the lawyers he already has just represent him? I'll admit that I thankfully have zero experience with needing a defense lawyer, much less when facing multiple cases, so maybe there's some rules around using the same lawyer in multiple cases I don't know about?
@Teri_Kanefield I agree completely and I think I would go farther: he's acting like he thinks he will lose on at least some of the charges, so he's betting everything on becoming president, pardoning himself and firing the prosecutors, and if that makes his legal prospects worse, so be it.
@Teri_Kanefield I guess the frustration is that he seems to get the benefit of the doubt at all steps. Delays seem like they occur whenever he has trouble finding representation or representation changes. What you say is plain for all to see; he has drastically conflicting needs. Judges certainly follow the news of the country they live in and can see this as well and yet nothing comes to resolution.
@Teri_Kanefield@jaybird81 I keep having to point out that while it seems that Trump is getting special favors, he’s actually not. Except for the not being remanded to jail without bail part. Poor defendants don’t get the opportunity to live their lives while the justice system continues to crunch away. If we want criminal defendants to have rights, it has to apply to ALL defendants, even Trump. And really, while Trump thinks he can bully people to get what he wants, he’s not getting what he wants here.
@cadenza@Teri_Kanefield The treatment of Trump is probably what it should be but the regulars are probably often treated below how they should be. The frustration is accumulated with Trump; he has likely avoided serious consequences in the past because of his bullying and ability to cause pain in the legal system. There is now a will to endure that pain but it seems like he benefits from the shear volume of alleged criminality. The scheduling of these cases and interaction between them
@cadenza@Teri_Kanefield creates complications that would not be there with just a single prosecution. Is he actually benefiting from facing multiple criminal prosecutions? Of course not! One would never want want multiple indictments hanging over them but with the political timescale overlaid it does oddly seem to work in his favor to have more prosecutions than less... for now at least.
@Teri_Kanefield@cadenza I had not. Thanks for the link. The last few years (as unusual and frightening as they have been at times) have been a fascinating learning opportunity. The ability to work from home and listen in to several court proceedings has been quite interesting! If you ever need a FAQ for engineering I may he able to return the favor :)
Politicians, on the other hand, should get almost no benefit of doubt. If a politician puts him/her self into situations where they can be plausibly accused of violating laws or even norms, they should not get elected.
If, by a preponderance of the evidence, they aid, abet or participate in an insurrection, then they're straight up prevented from running. We need a mechanism for making such a finding. Nobody thought we'd need such a thing when 14th was written.
I’ve pointed out before that I am a juror who said, ‘Yup, they are guilty. That’s almost surely so. It’s not, however, PROVEN beyond what I ME MYSELF consider a REASONABLE doubt. I vote they go free (to do it again).’ ‘It’ was armed robbery.
It’s a tough system for many -- maybe most -- people to accept. They’d rather live in a more tyrannical one.
@Teri_Kanefield All our thoughts on the competence of of DT’s lawyers center around the defense at an actual trial. But what if it doesn’t matter? ie, even with 3rd-rung lawyers, if DT is successful in getting the trial(s) delayed to after the election - and say, DT or another Republican becomes POTUS - it might not matter what caliber of lawyer he attracts.
@Teri_Kanefield Yes, I am assuming a finding of guilt will matter - all the more if it’s also associated with jail time; not an unreasonable assumption, I hope (who cares what his hardcore MAGA supporters think? NOTHING will convince them to change their mind).
Frankly, the way you’re framing it: why even bother bringing charges or having a trial?
@Teri_Kanefield Will read the FAQs. However, just to clarify a couple of things:
I wasn’t suggesting a guilty verdict is key to determining the election result (Biden beat Trump in 2020 without any court assist).
All I’m saying is that even with third-rate lawyers, DT can, and most likely will, use the timing of the election to his advantage in terms of delaying any trial. And depending on how the election shakes out, it might be all he needs to do.
Add comment