OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Bandwagon]

Apparently he can't pardon himself.
The charge was a state offence and not federal.
Someone can be swarn in as President while incarcerated.

Yeah, but it'd be funny as f**k.

 

[strider]

.......and the first sentence in that post isn't said in isolation of the second sentence, which qualifies the first, and which you left out there.......



..

Ok, fair enough .... but as per the article its generally not a case of pleb vs non-pleb, its generally a case of being a repeat offender that decides if you get jail

I dont disagree that the rich pricks get off argument is true .... but i think that is sooooo far from the case here .... sure he is rich, but theres more rich merkins funding his prosecution - so thats pretty much out the window. There is enormous momentum to bring him down. He is probably lower than a pleb in a court situation atm.

For the record, i think they won't give him jail time, but he will cop a massively larger than normal fine (hmmmm, sounds familiar). ..... i think to send him to jail for something pretty much no one in the same position would go to jail for, would be knowingly sending the country into chaos. .... i think these cases are primarily all about building a narrative. The word "felon" in the media will be the new "safe and effective".

That said, it could be that it suits people to send the country into chaos this year. I wouldnt say anything is impossible.

 

[Bandwagon]

Ok, fair enough .... but as per the article its generally not a case of pleb vs non-pleb, its generally a case of being a repeat offender that decides if you get jail

I dont disagree that the rich pricks get off argument is true .... but i think that is sooooo far from the case here .... sure he is rich, but theres more rich merkins funding his prosecution - so thats pretty much out the window. There is enormous momentum to bring him down. He is probably lower than a pleb in a court situation atm.

The prosecution is funded by the state here, like any prosecution. It's a criminal case, not a civil one.

Is there powerful folks in the state that would like to "bring him down" as you say, I'd say for sure. Equally though I'd say there are plenty of powerful folk defending him.

For the record, i think they won't give him jail time, but he will cop a massively larger than normal fine (hmmmm, sounds familiar). ..... i think to send him to jail for something pretty much no one in the same position would go to jail for, would be knowingly sending the country into chaos. .... i think these cases are primarily all about building a narrative. The word "felon" in the media will be the new "safe and effective".

That said, it could be that it suits people to send the country into chaos this year. I wouldnt say anything is impossible.

It could also be that he is a criminal and should be in jail, but won't be because yeah, chaos might well ensue.

I mean there's this whole Trump's a victim narrative and all, but one look at his history tells you he's not exactly a stand up guy, he's shafted plenty of merkins and caused plenty of others to lose money they well could not afford. He's a lowlife. He's not on his own mind, but he's still a lowlife.

 

[Gronk]

The difference between a custodial sentence and a suspended sentence is based on an interview process with Probation. It involves an assessment of the offender and the compiling of a Pre Sentence Report (PSR).

An offence analysis. - A summary of the facts of the offence. - Your developed understanding of how and why you allowed yourself to offend. - An assessment of how you feel about what you have done. - Your understanding of the impact on victims. Any relevant information that you want included such as the work you have already completed and changes you have made to address your behaviour.

In summary, contrition and restitution - being remorseful and showing a willingness to make good - goes a long way for the offender to be given a more favourable PSR (lenient sentence).

Being a first offender in a white collar crime, should be a no brainer. Say you are sorry.

Going around slandering the court and the jurors is a double edged sword. You might gain in political donations, but maybe you might also end up with an unfavourable sentence. Of course Trump might see that as an advantage. Let’s face it, he was almost daring the judge to jail him for contempt.

=========================

I have seen many comments from people who have drunk the MAGA cool aid. Claims of a Biden weaponization of the judiciary AND then claims that the case was somehow rigged, that the jury was tampered with. Trump claims and people parrot his claims that he was unfairly gagged, that HE wasn’t allowed to testify and finally that they were prevented from calling their witnesses. None of which are true. Yet people buy it.

LINK

A common position with MAGA people is what I heard on radio this morning. A young girl parroted the Trump claims and then was asked if she believed that Trump had an affair with a porn star, paid her with sneaky money to kill the story to give him a political advantage. She said that she had no opinion of what happened and that Trump is fundamentally a good man. Cognitive dissonance.

They key takeaway from this period of politics, is that elections are only fair if his party wins, courts are independent only when the cards fall in his favour and polls are partisan unless they show him leading. Sadly his “supporters” all believe this.

 

[T-Boon]

I would like to see the right go after Hilary and Bill Clinton in a similar way and of course also go for Binden.
It will likely become the norm now that the presidential candidate will face allegations in court. The left are a real bunch of bitches over Trump. I can't even recall what was actually bad about him apart from his stupid tweeting.

 

[hindy111]

I would like to see the right go after Hilary and Bill Clinton in a similar way and of course also go for Binden.
It will likely become the norm now that the presidential candidate will face allegations in court. The left are a real bunch of bitches over Trump. I can't even recall what was actually bad about him apart from his stupid tweeting.

BIDENS GOTTA GO

 

[T-Boon]

BIDENS GOTTA GO

GOTS. TO. GEW.

 

[Bandwagon]

I would like to see the right go after Hilary and Bill Clinton in a similar way and of course also go for Binden.
It will likely become the norm now that the presidential candidate will face allegations in court. The left are a real bunch of bitches over Trump. I can't even recall what was actually bad about him apart from his stupid tweeting.

Mate, they've been going after Biden non stop, unfortunately they've had to settle for Hunters Dick Pics.

 

[T-Boon]

Mate, they've been going after Biden non stop, unfortunately they've had to settle for Hunters Dick Pics.

We’ll just make stuff up. They need to triple their efforts.

 

[Gherkin]

Hopefully all this drama doesn’t derail Trump’s golf career. I really thought this was the year he’d win a club championship at a course he didn’t own

 

[hineyrulz]

BIDENS GOTTA GO

He goes all the time, in his nappies.

 

[Bandwagon]

He goes all the time, in his nappies.

Nah, that's Trump, Biden's the I don't remember where I was yesterday guy so let me tell you about corn-pop

 

[strider]

 

[strider]

No felons here .... sounds kinda similar

 

[strider]

And of course its even better when you have some friends to do the dirty work for you and dont even have to pay the hush money and misappropriate it in the first place in order to help win an election

 

[Gronk]

No felons here .... sounds kinda similar

At a cursory glance it does. But the reality is that it’s not.

=========

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy spoke to reporters yesterday and was asked whether GOP lawmakers have concerns about whether Trump might have “falsified business records to cover for hush money payments to cover up this alleged affair with an adult film actress.” The California Republican responded:

“Look, the thing I think about, it was interesting, someone briefed me on the use of money in a situation like this before. You probably covered this. Remember when the DNC and Hillary Clinton paid the law firm a million dollars and said that it was for something else, and we found out later it wasn’t. It was all about the Russian inclusion, it wasn’t for the legal part. So they went through, and they got investigated. A million dollars they spent, and you know what, at the end of the day, they didn’t get arrested. They got fined.”

It was at that point that the House speaker emphasized his “equal justice” talking point, effectively making the case that if Clinton wasn’t arrested for her campaign finance controversy, then Trump shouldn’t be arrested for his.

But just as Biggs didn’t fully appreciate the details of his Clinton-related comparison, McCarthy’s pitch didn’t quite work either, for reasons he should’ve understood.

It’s true that Clinton’s 2016 campaign agreed to a civil penalty of $8,000 in the recent past stemming from an FEC investigation into how campaign money for Christopher Steele’s dossier was reported. But as a Washington Post report explained soon after, “This analogy isn’t terribly strong, given, first, that the campaign and the Democratic National Committee faced punishment for the reporting and, second, that it centered on the mechanics of properly reporting campaign spending to the FEC.”

In other words, McCarthy described Trump’s hush money scandal as being “a situation like” the investigation into Clinton’s campaign finance filings, but the closer one looked, the less sense this made.

But let’s also not brush past the disconnect between the question and the speaker’s answer. A reporter asked McCarthy about possible concerns that Trump allegedly “falsified business records to cover for hush money payments to cover up this alleged affair with an adult film actress.” The very first thought the California Republican had was to focus on Hillary Clinton.

The King of Whataboutism strikes again.

LINK

 

[strider]

At a cursory glance it does. But the reality is that it’s not.

=========

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy spoke to reporters yesterday and was asked whether GOP lawmakers have concerns about whether Trump might have “falsified business records to cover for hush money payments to cover up this alleged affair with an adult film actress.” The California Republican responded:


It was at that point that the House speaker emphasized his “equal justice” talking point, effectively making the case that if Clinton wasn’t arrested for her campaign finance controversy, then Trump shouldn’t be arrested for his.

But just as Biggs didn’t fully appreciate the details of his Clinton-related comparison, McCarthy’s pitch didn’t quite work either, for reasons he should’ve understood.

It’s true that Clinton’s 2016 campaign agreed to a civil penalty of $8,000 in the recent past stemming from an FEC investigation into how campaign money for Christopher Steele’s dossier was reported. But as a Washington Post report explained soon after, “This analogy isn’t terribly strong, given, first, that the campaign and the Democratic National Committee faced punishment for the reporting and, second, that it centered on the mechanics of properly reporting campaign spending to the FEC.”

In other words, McCarthy described Trump’s hush money scandal as being “a situation like” the investigation into Clinton’s campaign finance filings, but the closer one looked, the less sense this made.

But let’s also not brush past the disconnect between the question and the speaker’s answer. A reporter asked McCarthy about possible concerns that Trump allegedly “falsified business records to cover for hush money payments to cover up this alleged affair with an adult film actress.” The very first thought the California Republican had was to focus on Hillary Clinton.

The King of Whataboutism strikes again.

LINK

Oh dear .... well yeah, there is alot of absolute waffle there and a great deflection, but the only relevant bit is ...

“This analogy isn’t terribly strong, given, first, that the campaign and the Democratic National Committee faced punishment for the reporting and, second, that it centered on the mechanics of properly reporting campaign spending to the FEC.”

So the Washington Post wrote it was only the DNC and Clinton had nothing to do with it - yeah ok .... gotta give the washington post props for looking out for their friends.

But cool, lets pretend it was only the DNC .... why wasnt anyone from the DNC charged with a felony? ... just a fine

And secondly, centred on the mechanics of reporting blah blah blah - whatever - they hid it and falsified records........ no one said its exactly the same, but it certainly lives on the same block.

 

[King-Gutho94]

What dope of a country sets up there political constitution that the only ones that can contest should be in a nursing home are in line to run the country.

It's almost getting like the Vatican where the president has to be nearly 80 years old to get a start.

 

[hindy111]

The issue with America isn't who is running it but capitalism. As much as it works for a while it eventually breaks. It is like a snowball. Families with money pass it on to the next generation. They give them more support, better education which leads to better jobs and opportunities and at the end of it all huge inheritances. As the cycle continues the gap widens.
And to those who have busted their gut and sold the American dream to see that taken away obviously are restless and have had enough. Australia has always been about 20yrs behind and we are starting to see it now. A child born to a wealthy family starts it's life with huge advantages no matter what bullshit " Equal opportunities " they get sold.
Unfortunately some good, honest and hard working individuals will have to work twice as hard to just manage an ok lifestyle then others who will get fed with a silver spoon.
And as religion weakens which many think is a good thing it's actually quite scary becuase this is one thing that gave many people struggling HOPE. You take that away and what's left? This is when you will start to see some wild shit happen. Crimes,drugs use will increase. People with nothing to lose have nothing to fear.

Eventually all control will.be lost and people will turn. May not happen in our lifetime but it's inevitable. See rules have been made to be broken. At some point people will just say f**k you and over throw the Authorities. And let's face it the rules have been made by the wealthy to keep the poor in line.

 

[Gronk]

Oh dear .... well yeah, there is alot of absolute waffle there and a great deflection, but the only relevant bit is ...


So the Washington Post wrote it was only the DNC and Clinton had nothing to do with it - yeah ok .... gotta give the washington post props for looking out for their friends.

But cool, lets pretend it was only the DNC .... why wasnt anyone from the DNC charged with a felony? ... just a fine

And secondly, centred on the mechanics of reporting blah blah blah - whatever - they hid it and falsified records........ no one said its exactly the same, but it certainly lives on the same block.

Well all you have done here is said that you don’t accept how others have interpreted the situation, and that you prefer to keep the sceptical baloon in the air.

Fine, however what you can’t deny is that the republicans hold congressional power (have the majority in the house) and have done nothing about this supposed crime. So please explain this.

I suspect that the answer is in the detail, but detail is not what suits the whataboutguys.

No, the answer also is not boohoo the system is against us.