Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
|
Not sure what you mean by "political." A DA's job is to prosecute people who commit crimes. Trump did things that were a crime under New York laws, and he was prosecuted. (You just said the trial itself was fair.) That refutes that claim that he was only prosecuted because of who he was. If you can't see that, I can't help you.
I'm not impressed by Andrew Cuomo's view on anything much, and am disappointed in you for thinking I might be. Why don't you tell me what Jon Herdman says about the Canadian women's team's use of drones?
Quote:
|
And like it or not, my assessment, not your apologist’s justification, is the consensus.
|
Everyone -- everyone -- understands that Trump wants to be above the law. The red/blue divide in this country is whether he should be. So when you tell me the "consensus" is what Republicans think, it makes me think you should get out more. Seriously, no one thinks Trump hasn't been criming. But about half the country, a little less actually, but two-thirds of the Supreme Court, think he should get away with it.
Quote:
|
On the eastern seaboard (and we’re what counts), nobody treats that conviction as real.
|
That's cute. Try that line on someone it might work on.
Quote:
|
Similarly, nobody treats Cannon’s dismissal as real. That too was a nakedly political move. Bragg and Cannon should both be fired from their positions for lack of ethics. Then they can open a firm together.
|
I personally take a different view of what Cannon was up to. I think she was ducking holding any kind of trial until after the election.
Serious question -- given that Bragg got the conviction, what is the ethical problem with his decision to charge? If he were a Pennsylvania lawyer, what Pennsylvania ethical rule says he shouldn't have brought the charges?
