I traditionally have a thread heading to the election, here we go.
Get out the popcorn for this one.
Quote
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to formally announce next week he is running for president in 2024, NBC News reported Thursday, citing two sources familiar with the matter.
The governor's official entry into the Republican primary field will put him head-to-head with former President Donald Trump, the party's current frontrunner for the nomination. Trump has already spent months treating DeSantis as his primary campaign rival, thrashing him with torrents of criticism over his gubernatorial record, his political skills and his personality.
0He's already been in Michigan but our GOP in Michigan won't be spending any money. It's broke. The DeVos and Meijjer families won't be donating.
And today Catherine Rampell has an opinion piece that describes why Trump DID commit a civil fraud and why we must prosecute. She articulates it much more thoroughly than I. There is a reason that bank fraud laws were created in the first place and why he must be prosecuted.
Opinion _ Two myths about Donald Trump's New York civil fraud trial - The Washington Post.html
Alot of flaws to the rationale that is using to make her opinion.
But, if I have to first try to explain that the state isn't prosecuting and that this is a civil suit, I don't know that I'm up to delving into the rest.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Beerman said:
Alot of flaws to the rationale that is using to make her opinion.
But, if I have to first try to explain that the state isn't prosecuting and that this is a civil suit, I don't know that I'm up to delving into the rest.
The point is that the states SHOULD be prosecuting Trump for his illegal efforts to subvert their election results. For some reason, Trump isn't being prosecuted for breaking those laws. Maybe there's some double standard at play for wealthy men who are in politics.
The point is that the states SHOULD be prosecuting Trump for his illegal efforts to subvert their election results. For some reason, Trump isn't being prosecuted for breaking those laws. Maybe there's some double standard at play for wealthy men who are in politics.
I would think if the states had a solid case at against Trump they surely would go after him rather than put him above the law. That's just me thinking out loud, or perhaps spewing out right ring rhetoric.
The point is that the states SHOULD be prosecuting Trump for his illegal efforts to subvert their election results. For some reason, Trump isn't being prosecuted for breaking those laws. Maybe there's some double standard at play for wealthy men who are in politics.
As a result of her fraud investigation I into Trump, Leticia James made referrals to the US Attys Office, the IRS, and the Manhatten DA's office (the same one who is prosecuting the hush money case).
"For some reason", no criminal charges filed by any of them.
Alot of flaws to the rationale that is using to make her opinion.
But, if I have to first try to explain that the state isn't prosecuting and that this is a civil suit, I don't know that I'm up to delving into the rest.
The state isn't prosecuting? Letitia James is the AG of NY state. Please explain Rampall's lack if logic here. Should we just reverse the law because of your twisted logic that it shouldn't exist in the first place?
The state isn't prosecuting? Letitia James is the AG of NY state. Please explain Rampall's lack if logic here. Should we just reverse the law because of your twisted logic that it shouldn't exist in the first place?
Beerman is playing semantic games (“prosecutor" vs. "complainant”) in the hope that you won't actually think about what trump did.
Thestate isn't prosecuting? Letitia James is the AG of NY state.
No, the state isn't prosecuting.
subee said:
Please explain Rampall's lack if logic here.
In short, her arguments are based on the false presumption that the banks handed out loans based only on Trump's valuations and that they didn't do any due diligence or risk assessment of their own.
subee said:
Should we just reverse the law because of your twisted logic that it shouldn't exist in the first place?
Whether the law should exist or not is a moot point. He hasn't been charged with breaking any laws.
When a person uses that term, and along with other comments, it makes me doubt that person has any understanding of the case.
Everyone should have a understanding of what he did, and what the AG, and the judge did.
Most Trump-haters don't care. As has been said here, he's had it coming to him anyway.
What you don't understand is that the citizens of New York have an interest in limiting dishonest behavior by people doing business in New York.
What he did: falsified his financial statements to lenders and the taxpayers of New York in order to enrich himself.
What the AG did: made a strategic decision to sue under a statute that does not require any injured party other than the people of New York.
What the judge did: assessed the evidence of dishonesty and the defendant's explanations and decided who made more sense. He then calculated how much money was involved in the dishonest deals, how much he would have gotten if his statements had been honest and ordered trump to pay the difference to the citizens of New York.
Trump's sleazy business practices came home to bite him, finally. A libertarian nightmare.
Like many Trump-haters, it's not that I don't care about the truth, it's that I just can't keep up. I don't have the energy which is why you don't hear me commenting a whole lot on the individual civil and/or criminal cases against him because I know how people are going to split hairs about what I say. That's fair, if I'm going to comment, I perhaps should know the insides about what I'm talking about. Which often I don't which is why "I stand corrected..." or "I back away from......" is something I often say. LOL
Rather than deep dive, I do try to keep up with some of the highlights.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Beerman said:
As a result of her fraud investigation I into Trump, Leticia James made referrals to the US Attys Office, the IRS, and the Manhatten DA's office (the same one who is prosecuting the hush money case).
"For some reason", no criminal charges filed by any of them.
Double standard at play, I'm sure.
OK
I'm talking about Trump's efforts to change vote totals in states like Michigan, Georgia and Arizona. What you mention is evidence that Biden hasn't weaponized the DOJ against Trump.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz has claimed Democrats are "flooding millions of dollars" into the state in a bid to unseat him in November.
The Republican said his opponent, House Democrat Colin Allred, has outraised his 2018 rival Beto O'Rourke by a ratio of "three to one."...
...Referring to the 2018 contest, he said, "It was a three-point race. I won by 2.6 percent. So, [Senate Majority Leader] Chuck Schumer, his deal is he floods millions into Texas, he gains three points, and that's how they win.
Beerman, BSN
4,428 Posts
Alot of flaws to the rationale that is using to make her opinion.
But, if I have to first try to explain that the state isn't prosecuting and that this is a civil suit, I don't know that I'm up to delving into the rest.