ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
The judge is very clearly. Which is ok but usually places like NYS and Delaware are smart enough to prioritize their own reputation of impartiality over business rulings
He was a taxi driver, then a litigator for 11 years, then a judge. I don't see anything in his resume about holding political office or working for a political party (source).
He was a taxi driver, then a litigator for 11 years, then a judge. I don't see anything in his resume about holding political office or working for a political party (source).
Did you see the smirks and the smiles on video?
He was a taxi driver, then a litigator for 11 years, then a judge. I don't see anything in his resume about holding political office or working for a political party (source).
A taxi driver. LOL
That explains a lot.
He was a taxi driver, then a litigator for 11 years, then a judge. I don't see anything in his resume about holding political office or working for a political party (source).
LOL, wait, what?
Care to enlighten us?
The daily self ownage by the Trumpers in this thread is.... delicious.
An attorney making a campaign promise to prosecute lawbreakers in their district if elected Attorney General? That's crazy. Perhaps she wasn't aware she's only allowed to say that about Democrats.
Trump campaigned he would throw Hillary in jail if he won. Yet here we are in 2024 with Trump claiming political prosecution against him. How funny.
The judge smiled and smirked before bestowing the obscenely exaggerated penalty to trump (again to be clear: trump was guilty, but of something every **** ing one does in NY and elsewhere, and that actually didn't even damage anyone in this case as in most cases. Something we routinely don't consider particularly severe).
If you throw the book at any businessman you can find something. Because following all the rules to the letter is impossible when other people don't, and get away with it routinely.
Most rules are written on purpose in absurd ways, never to be enforced except when you want to punish someone.
Everyone knows it. They "forget" when it's about someone they dislike.
Just remember it when Florida throws the book at someone you like
Which was Trump's (or rather, his lawyer's) choice, no? Or was that the other trial? I lose track, hard to keep up with all Trump's legal woes.
Not 100% sure but this was a civil case with no jury because it was about some strange civil law rules where you can be prosecuted even if the alleged victim testifies in your favour (which is already insane, a civil case shouldn't exist without a plaintiff seeking redress)
An attorney making a campaign promise to prosecute lawbreakers in their district if elected Attorney General? That's crazy. Perhaps she wasn't aware she's only allowed to say that about Democrats.
Trump campaigned he would throw Hillary in jail if he won. Yet here we are in 2024 with Trump claiming political prosecution against him. How funny.
He did and it was bad optics, and disgraceful.
Then he became POTUS AND HE ****ING DIDN'T PROSECUTE HER.
He did and it was bad optics, and disgraceful.
Then he became POTUS AND HE ****ING DIDN'T PROSECUTE HER.
Trump attempted to coerce a foreign president to investigate his domestic political presidential opponent. And just like every other behavior Trump projects onto others, he once again is the only one actually committing the offense he claims is being done to him.
The judge smiled and smirked before bestowing the obscenely exaggerated penalty to trump (again to be clear: trump was guilty, but of something every **** ing one does in NY and elsewhere, and that actually didn't even damage anyone in this case as in most cases. Something we routinely don't consider particularly severe).
If you throw the book at any businessman you can find something. Because following all the rules to the letter is impossible when other people don't, and get away with it routin
the people i "like" aren't committing crimes to my knowledge. and if they are they should be prosecuted in a court of law for those crimes.
Trump already was caught running a fraudulent university and a fraudulent foundation. if you are going to "throw the book" at someone, you should absolutely pick the biggest target not a random smaller one. it loses all sense of meaning if you throw the book at small company xyz that know one has ever heard of.
Smirk!
the people i "like" aren't committing crimes to my knowledge. and if they are they should be prosecuted in a court of law for those crimes.
Trump already was caught running a fraudulent university and a fraudulent foundation. if you are going to "throw the book" at someone, you should absolutely pick the biggest target not a random smaller one. it loses all sense of meaning if you throw the book at small company xyz that know one has ever heard of.
Yeah the University and foundation had victims .
