Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

So you basically 100% agree with what I just said, then?

Or you were basically 100% agreeing with what I initially said, but you just chose to agree with me in a way that sounded like you were completely disagreeing with me? Ok then.

Did you hit your head or put on your Anastasis hat this morning?

  • Haha 4
Posted
3 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I think the more stupid argument is claiming you have to be charged for a crime to have occurred. But please tell everyone else how they are stupid

yeah, that was more stupid

but that doesn't make the other argument any less idiotic just because I said something even dumber 😉

Posted
49 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The guy is saying it's not a crime if it doesn't go to trial.  Please tell me you don't agree.

I do agree, with you.   The original premise was that Trump was some kind of court wizard, which is patently untrue.

That evolved or devolved into whether he gets away with crimes, and with respect to uncharged crimes that is certainly true.  We shall see about the charged ones.

Posted
1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Well, tax evasion, fraud, and rape to name three.  Just because he has not been charged does not mean the crimes weren't committed.

Tax evasion was LABORIOUSLY laid out in a massive New York Times article. That alone should have spurred action by someone. I still don’t get why it didn’t. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Or you were basically 100% agreeing with what I initially said, but you just chose to agree with me in a way that sounded like you were completely disagreeing with me? Ok then.

Did you hit your head or put on your Anastasis hat this morning?

I literally can't find the thing I said in that block of text that you're disagreeing with.

Posted

Jesus Christ.  @wildcat09 said, and I quote:

Quote

He’s actually been getting away with crimes his entire life.

He didn't imply that Trump had ever beaten the rap in criminal court.  He was clearly saying that Trump has committed many crimes over the years and has never gotten punished for them.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

I literally can't find the thing I said in that block of text that you're disagreeing with.

Yeah, I missed the "Not" part of "not just his goal" in your ealrier post. I erad it as "THat's not what Trump wants, it's what the GOP wants." I was like WTF?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Not one you asshats can post the "Stripes" .gif?

"Have you ever been convicted of a felony?"

"Convicted?  No, not convicted."  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Posted
2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Tax evasion was LABORIOUSLY laid out in a massive New York Times article. That alone should have spurred action by someone. I still don’t get why it didn’t. 

The one time I dealt with Federal law enforcement I was gobsmacked that they ration their efforts because essentially there is more crime than they can prosecute given their resources.   We had evidence of a crime committed by an employee giftwrapped in a nice little bow.  I remember being in a meeting with our outside counsel and Southern District Attorney and they basically turned us down cold.  "This is Miami, I don't have time for anything under $10million dollars."  She went on to say that the case was clear but difficult to convey to a jury and that it would take too much of their time for too small of a result"   She suggested trying to get the FBI interested in ecommerce aspect of the case.

tl/dr

  • Crime it up In Miami/Southern District
  • Keep it under $10mil
  • Make it too complex for a jury to understand easily
  • Profit

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Yeah, I missed the "Not" part of "not just his goal" in your ealrier post. I erad it as "THat's not what Trump wants, it's what the GOP wants." I was like WTF?

Given the sloppiness in my posts thus far this morning, highly understandable.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Tax evasion was LABORIOUSLY laid out in a massive New York Times article. That alone should have spurred action by someone. I still don’t get why it didn’t. 

That particular tax evasion happened more than 20 years ago and limitations had expired.

Another example of NY County DA and USAO SD NY laying off the sack of shit.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Jesus Christ.  @wildcat09 said, and I quote:

He didn't imply that Trump had ever beaten the rap in criminal court.  He was clearly saying that Trump has committed many crimes over the years and has never gotten punished for them.

Yeah, but it's not the same thing. Evading charges, and beating them after indictment, are entirely different animals.

Especially when the indictment comes from the federal government, notoriously conservative in what charges they levy, to keep that 99% conviction rate.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, locodos said:

The one time I dealt with Federal law enforcement I was gobsmacked that they ration their efforts because essentially there is more crime than they can prosecute given their resources.   We had evidence of a crime committed by an employee giftwrapped in a nice little bow.  I remember being in a meeting with our outside counsel and Southern District Attorney and they basically turned us down cold.  "This is Miami, I don't have time for anything under $10million dollars."  She went on to say that the case was clear but difficult to convey to a jury and that it would take too much of their time for too small of a result"   She suggested trying to get the FBI interested in ecommerce aspect of the case.

tl/dr

  • Crime it up In Miami/Southern District
  • Keep it under $10mil
  • Make it too complex for a jury to understand easily
  • Profit

 

I'm curious why you went to SD Fla instead of Dade County?  Did you ever go to Dade County?

The feds really ought not be anyone's first stop for "reporting crimes" unless it's a very federal crime.

Posted
Just now, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

It is like they are really trying to get the fuck slapped out of them.  What a fucking joke.  Is this enough to hold them in contempt?

Hardly.  

The judge is just going to pick a day, probably Thursday, and say tough shit on both lawyers being present.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 minute ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Good.

Also, they didn't say anything about Wednesday, so it will probably be Wednesday.

A protective order is really no big deal, just a procedural thing.  They can be modified later if they truly prove to be unworkable for some specific reason, which would place the burden on Trumpco to articulate some specific reason, which might be fun.

Posted
9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That particular tax evasion happened more than 20 years ago and limitations had expired.

Another example of NY County DA and USAO SD NY laying off the sack of shit.

Can I get a tl;dr version of why some things have statute of limitations and some don’t?  Or why some are longer than others?  

Posted
Just now, Biff Tannen said:

Can I get a tl;dr version of why some things have statute of limitations and some don’t?  Or why some are longer than others?  

It's not "Statute", okay?  It's "Statue"  !!!

Also, August 15th is first day of school.  So works fine for me for first day of Trump's death trial.  Kids will be in school so I can easily take up a serious heroin/mezcal addiction and be awake in time for bus drop-off.  

Posted
1 minute ago, YGIFS said:

It's not "Statute", okay?  It's "Statue"  !!!

Also, August 15th is first day of school.  So works fine for me for first day of Trump's death trial.  Kids will be in school so I can easily take up a serious heroin/mezcal addiction and be awake in time for bus drop-off.  

I knew this was coming 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

Can I get a tl;dr version of why some things have statute of limitations and some don’t?  Or why some are longer than others?  

Just about everything has a statute of limitations.  The general, sort of average s/l is five years.

More serious crimes tend to have longer statutes, both because the investigation may take longer and to avoid criminals escaping prosecution.

Notably, rapey crimes and child sexual abuse crimes have been having their statutes of limitation extended, from a more typical five years to 20 or none.  NY extended their rape s/l to 20 years and also, for one year, let people like E. Jean Carroll, bring civil suits in cases where limitations had already expired.

Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Just about everything has a statute of limitations.  The general, sort of average s/l is five years.

More serious crimes tend to have longer statutes, both because the investigation may take longer and to avoid criminals escaping prosecution.

Notably, rapey crimes and child sexual abuse crimes have been having their statutes of limitation extended, from a more typical five years to 20 or none.  NY extended their rape s/l to 20 years and also, for one year, let people like E. Jean Carroll, bring civil suits in cases where limitations had already expired.

No SOL on murder, at least not in Texas.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm curious why you went to SD Fla instead of Dade County?  Did you ever go to Dade County?

The feds really ought not be anyone's first stop for "reporting crimes" unless it's a very federal crime.

Oh we went to everybody, started off with the city, then county.  There was an internet aspect to the case and all the local authorities kept pointing us up the ladder.  They were all like "Yeah this is an issue, but we just don't have the resources for that sort of thing."    IIRC the employee stole about $4mil. of inventory/service and sold them on ebay and other online venues.  The only reason they eventually were charged is that one E level exec wanted a scalp and didn't care what it cost.  Hence retaining outside counsel to help shop the case to law enforcement.

 

Posted

The statutes of limitations for crimes that wealthy people or members of Congress/state legislatures might get caught committing tend to be shorter than for crimes for which poor and minorities are disproportionately arrested. One guess as to why.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The statutes of limitations for crimes that wealthy people or members of Congress/state legislatures might get caught committing tend to be shorter than for crimes for which poor and minorities are disproportionately arrested. One guess as to why.

This is what I was getting at. It’s fucking horseshit. If anything, white collar crime should never have an expiration.  That shit is so much more evil. 

  • Like 1
Posted
57 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

No, no, TwiceHorn has the right idea.

He's never gotten indicted on criminal charges and gotten away with it.

Yes, it's a crime either way. Obviously.

But "getting away with it" because you were never charged, and "getting away with it" because you beat the rap, are entirely different things.

There's a lot of y'all who are acting like they're the same thing: "Because he has never been charged with his crimes before, he will get away with it now that he has been charged" is such a stupid argument.

Come On Wtf GIF

  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I didn't say they were.  Nor did he.

So the sentiment is, "Trump is going to get away with it again, even though this time is clearly different from every time before since he's actually indicted?"

Maybe it's just me, but that somehow makes even less sense.

I mean... neither "it's the same" nor "he always gets away with it even though he has never been indicted before when the government has a 99% conviction rate" make sense to me.

How do either of those make sense?

Posted
5 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

So the sentiment is, "Trump is going to get away with it again, even though this time is clearly different from every time before since he's actually indicted?"

Maybe it's just me, but that somehow makes even less sense.

I mean... neither "it's the same" nor "he always gets away with it even though he has never been indicted before when the government has a 99% conviction rate" make sense to me.

How do either of those make sense?

Go home, you're drunk.

Posted
32 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is what I was getting at. It’s fucking horseshit. If anything, white collar crime should never have an expiration.  That shit is so much more evil. 

F3D1F936-C352-4948-A03D-221F8C817E1E.gif.cfdf63e4ce6ef473a71e939be58d3b84.gif

Oh look, Jean Valjean!

 

 

 

 

j/k. agree

  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

fucking christ, let's concentrate our negative energy away from each other, some motherfucker just threw his cap in the air, let's goooo

internet what GIF

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Goredho said:


For anyone who benefits as a member of "mainstream society" and who isn't a right-wing nutjob (i.e. pretty much anyone on this thread) Trump is a walking institutional demoralizer.  You look at him, what he's done, that none of it seems to matter, that he could be President again -- that shakes your faith you in your political system, your government, your judiciary, your sources of broader information and a good chunk of your fellow citizens.

I can't blame anyone for being cynical about this process.  We all expected there to be guardrails in place to protect against someone like Trump taking the reins of power in this country.  Little did we know, we just had brittle norms upheld by tradition and the conscience of past politicians.

THIS

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

The more I think about it, the more I believe Trump's strategy(??) is to eventually be thrown in jail pretrial.  This will feed his narrative that he is being treated "so unfairly" and that the judge is crooked and an Anti-trumper.  He will keep pushing the envelope and the judge will give him as much leash as possible, but eventually the judge will have her hand forced and she will have to react.  Then the howling from Trump and the right will kick into overdrive and Fox/NewsMax will eat it up and 30-45% of the country will believe it.   This will introduce a component of chaos into the election which Trump hopes will change the game.   It is idiotic, but kinda smart considering the 96% chance he is convicted if he just follows the rules.  

7 hours ago, The Dog said:

 Trump does not want to go to jail for any length of time. 

His defense strategy is to delay everything until after the election so that if he wins he can pardon himself. In fact, the entire reason he's running is to avoid jail. 

That's it.

If he gets thrown in jail, he'll look weak to a lot of the BMDs and even to the moderates/not-quite-MAGA-but-still-(R) types.

Plus, if he gets thrown in jail, he'll lose control of his ability to go out to rallies and give speeches, do social media on his terms, etc., and given how much of a control freak he is, this would freak him the fuck out.  He has a need to be in full control.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

I mean, why do they call him "Waltine"?  He's not a rectangular wall, his face is round, his body is round...shouldn't they call him "Roundtine"?   

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

 

Cannon taking instructions from Fox News is, shit what do you call it? Not a good sign? The other one.

Getting much harder to make the argument that these decisions are the result of naïveté, inexperience, and or incompetence 

Unless your standard is she must issue a formal communication stating “I really want Trump to beat this rap and I’m going to do everything within my power to see he succeeds” I think it’s safe to conclude she is in the bag for him

 

eta and just to clarify for me, she is talking about trying to throw out the case that is not before her correct?

Edited by Sawbonz
  • Rage+1 1


×
×
  • Create New...