President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
The judge is very clearly. Which is ok but usually places like NYS and Delaware are smart enough to prioritize their own reputation of impartiality over business rulings
He was a taxi driver, then a litigator for 11 years, then a judge. I don't see anything in his resume about holding political office or working for a political party (source).
He was a taxi driver, then a litigator for 11 years, then a judge. I don't see anything in his resume about holding political office or working for a political party (source).
Did you see the smirks and the smiles on video?
The Attorney General that campaigned on the fact she would get Trump
He was a taxi driver, then a litigator for 11 years, then a judge. I don't see anything in his resume about holding political office or working for a political party (source).
LOL, wait, what?
Care to enlighten us?
you mean running on a "Lock him up" campaign makes you corrupt?
stop trying to show us how unsmart you are
An attorney making a campaign promise to prosecute lawbreakers in their district if elected Attorney General? That's crazy. Perhaps she wasn't aware she's only allowed to say that about Democrats.
Trump campaigned he would throw Hillary in jail if he won. Yet here we are in 2024 with Trump claiming political prosecution against him. How funny.
Which was Trump's (or rather, his lawyer's) choice, no? Or was that the other trial? I lose track, hard to keep up with all Trump's legal woes.
The judge smiled and smirked before bestowing the obscenely exaggerated penalty to trump (again to be clear: trump was guilty, but of something every **** ing one does in NY and elsewhere, and that actually didn't even damage anyone in this case as in most cases. Something we routinely don't consider particularly severe).
If you throw the book at any businessman you can find something. Because following all the rules to the letter is impossible when other people don't, and get away with it routinely.
Most rules are written on purpose in absurd ways, never to be enforced except when you want to punish someone.
Everyone knows it. They "forget" when it's about someone they dislike.
Just remember it when Florida throws the book at someone you like
Which was Trump's (or rather, his lawyer's) choice, no? Or was that the other trial? I lose track, hard to keep up with all Trump's legal woes.
Not 100% sure but this was a civil case with no jury because it was about some strange civil law rules where you can be prosecuted even if the alleged victim testifies in your favour (which is already insane, a civil case shouldn't exist without a plaintiff seeking redress)
you mean running on a "Lock him up" campaign makes you corrupt?
stop trying to show us how unsmart you are
Yeah a case with no victims or complainants or damages and fines him 355 million
No political agenda here
95 million when the defendant asked for far less
An attorney making a campaign promise to prosecute lawbreakers in their district if elected Attorney General? That's crazy. Perhaps she wasn't aware she's only allowed to say that about Democrats.
Trump campaigned he would throw Hillary in jail if he won. Yet here we are in 2024 with Trump claiming political prosecution against him. How funny.
He did and it was bad optics, and disgraceful.
Then he became POTUS AND HE ****ING DIDN'T PROSECUTE HER.
He did and it was bad optics, and disgraceful.
Then he became POTUS AND HE ****ING DIDN'T PROSECUTE HER.
Or, and hear me out on this, there was no prosecution cuz there wasn’t a crime to prosecute
He did and it was bad optics, and disgraceful.
Then he became POTUS AND HE ****ING DIDN'T PROSECUTE HER.
Presidents don't get to choose whom to prosecute.
Yeah a case with no victims or complainants or damages and fines him 355 million
No political agenda here
95 million when the defendant asked for far less
Well, the defendant would probably be asking for zero. Did you mean plaintiff?
Defendant?
The plaintiff got about what she asked for in actual damages. The rest was punitive damages.
He did and it was bad optics, and disgraceful.
Then he became POTUS AND HE ****ING DIDN'T PROSECUTE HER.
Trump attempted to coerce a foreign president to investigate his domestic political presidential opponent. And just like every other behavior Trump projects onto others, he once again is the only one actually committing the offense he claims is being done to him.
The judge smiled and smirked before bestowing the obscenely exaggerated penalty to trump (again to be clear: trump was guilty, but of something every **** ing one does in NY and elsewhere, and that actually didn't even damage anyone in this case as in most cases. Something we routinely don't consider particularly severe).If you throw the book at any businessman you can find som
the people i "like" aren't committing crimes to my knowledge. and if they are they should be prosecuted in a court of law for those crimes.
Trump already was caught running a fraudulent university and a fraudulent foundation. if you are going to "throw the book" at someone, you should absolutely pick the biggest target not a random smaller one. it loses all sense of meaning if you throw the book at small company xyz that know one has ever heard of.
the people i "like" aren't committing crimes to my knowledge. and if they are they should be prosecuted in a court of law for those crimes.Trump already was caught running a fraudulent university and a fraudulent foundation. if you are going to "throw the book" at someone, you should absolutely pick the biggest target not a random smaller one. it loses all sense of meaning if y
Yeah the University and foundation had victims .
