Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (284293)	4/26/2024 12:47:45 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362321

>> Surely there are at least one or two crimes amid all the charges against Trump. This is the entire, outrageous attitude of the prosecutors in each of these cases. Surely. "There must be at least one or two crimes. We can come up with something. After all, he is orange." This is the classic, "Show me the man and I'll find you the crime" nonsense that has persisted against Trump since the day he took the escalator. We're not talking about "all this." We're talking about whether it's even theoretically possible in your mind that prosecutors, who are paid to prosecute crimes when they come to their attention, might be even remotely invested in the crime part. You say not, that it's 100% witch hunt. Theoretically possible doesn't constitute grounds for indicting a man under charges that do not even EXIST on the books, or charges that have NEVER been applied in this manner, or upgrading a charge from a misdemeanor to a felony -- not by operation of law, but my actually CORRUPTING the law solely to make a charge become a felony. It is absurd. This would never be allowed in anything but a kangaroo court. And you know that. What really makes it outrageous is the fact that each and every case they've brought -- from the bogus rape case to Jack Smith -- has been engineered in precisely the same ways: time is of the essence because what they're really after is keeping him from campaigning. And if there is a way to manipulate the charges to make them look worse than they are, go with it, and damn the evidence. This man is by any definition "squeaky clean". Every last one of these cases is a political prosecution with no legitimate grounds whatsoever. If you could find a crime, at least one, then we have a conversation about it, but you cannot come up with a single crime that any other person would have been charged with in similar circumstances. Even Jack Smith's case is now falling apart on the evidence as the redactions are peeled away.