The Frankish Reich Posted May 7 Posted May 7 5 minutes ago, B-Man said: *Please use your routine "belittle the author" childishness. Since you couldn't tie Prof. Reynolds shoes. Glenn Reynolds is an actual law prof. He obviously is more interested in his blogging career now. But he is a serious person. And he's right: the "over criminalization" thing is a problem. So like he says, go ahead and try to correct what you think is selective prosecution through the political/electoral system. If we believe Trump, that is where Reynolds is wrong. Trump believes that these prosecutions make him more popular and more likely to be elected. So much for this comment: 7 minutes ago, B-Man said: We used to rely on the political process to discipline this sort of overreach, but with politics polarized as they are today, it’s not likely to work.
Pokebball Posted May 7 Posted May 7 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: Glenn Reynolds is an actual law prof. He obviously is more interested in his blogging career now. But he is a serious person. And he's right: the "over criminalization" thing is a problem. So like he says, go ahead and try to correct what you think is selective prosecution through the political/electoral system. If we believe Trump, that is where Reynolds is wrong. Trump believes that these prosecutions make him more popular and more likely to be elected. So much for this comment: I believe Biden is above the law 1
ChiGoose Posted May 7 Posted May 7 6 minutes ago, B-Man said: Democrats use the legal system to target the right — yet give the left a pass By Glenn H. Reynolds “For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law.” This philosophy, announced by Brazilian President Getulio Vargas in the 1940s, is no longer just the favored approach of Latin American strongmen. It has become the openly practiced strategy of today’s Democratic machine. Laws that hamper Democrats are ignored. Laws that might be used to hurt Republicans are enforced to — and often well past — the limits of the law. One need look no farther than the absurd circus-clown show trial (one pundit prefers the term “goat rodeo”) in which the state of New York has gone so far in trying to turn Donald Trump’s (alleged) personal peccadilloes into business crimes that Gov. Hochul had to go out of her way to reassure other businessmen that this was a one-off, and that only Trump would be prosecuted under this novel approach to the law. As law professor Jonathan Turley noted in these pages, the New York statute in question has never been used this way before: “Even The New York Times agreed that it could not find a single case in history where this statute was used against an individual or a company that did not commit a criminal offense, go bankrupt, or leave financial victims.” Nothing says “rule of law” like custom-made forms of liability designed for a single hated defendant. {snip} (multiple other examples given) Yet the Supreme Court has made clear that officials have to be evenhanded in their treatment of protests, and can’t discriminate based on whether or not they like the viewpoint, something California federal judge Cormac J. Carney recently noted regarding selective prosecution of right-wing protesters vs. Antifa. But for all the talk about “rule of law,” they’re doing just that in all sorts of cases, all over the country. That needs to stop. For the longer term, we need to do something about policing prosecutors’ discretion to prosecute, and not to. Over a decade ago, before the madness of the Trump years, I wrote about this in the Columbia Law Review, in a piece titled “Ham Sandwich Nation: Due Process When Everything Is a Crime.” As New York Judge Sol Wachtler once said, any competent prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, which appears to be what Trump prosecutor Alvin Bragg has done. We used to rely on the political process to discipline this sort of overreach, but with politics polarized as they are today, it’s not likely to work. https://nypost.com/2024/05/06/opinion/dems-use-the-legal-system-to-target-the-right-yet-give-the-left-a-pass/ *Please use your routine "belittle the author" childishness. Since you couldn't tie Prof. Reynolds shoes. . Over 13,000 people were arrested in the 2020 George Floyd protests. More than 2,500 protestors have been arrested or detained on campuses across the country. The Manhattan DA's Office charged 437 cases of First-Degree Falsifying Business Records over a 10 year period. (On average of just under once per week for a decade) Previous instances of prosecutions of covert payments to benefit a political campaign include (helpful table starting on page 9 here) Richard Brega Clarence Norman John Dote Richard Luthmann
The Frankish Reich Posted May 7 Posted May 7 Husband of the Year is also Father of the Year. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-attend-fundraiser-day-barrons-graduation-1897759
Pokebball Posted May 8 Posted May 8 Jack Smith doing this is bad. Jack Smith lying to the judge about doing it is absolutely unbelievable. He better be held accountable. 1 1
BillsFanNC Posted May 8 Author Posted May 8 Clown Kangaroo court. OMG. He shook his head and looked down! 1
Irv Posted May 8 Posted May 8 (edited) The case is nothing more than a pathetic attempt at smear campaign. The only thing it's doing is making Trump stronger. Thank you, Democrats! What a mess. Edited May 8 by Irv 1
Tommy Callahan Posted May 8 Posted May 8 6 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Its starting to look like the only goal of this lawfare was her stories for the cycle. The actual case is weak as it comes. 2
The Frankish Reich Posted May 8 Posted May 8 Just now, B-Man said: What Americans see. . Umm, isn't that kind of on Trump? I mean, if I'm ever on trial for falsifying financial records, I can assure you that a porn star (and I generally refuse to use that term - I will call her what she is, a sex worker; no one is a "star" if only porn addicts know their name) will not be involved in any way.
Recommended Posts