Are Republican's claims valid that Trump's indictment is 'political'?

[The Duke]

Law professors said that the Trump prosecution is total bullshit.

So yes, the Trump prosecution is "Banana Republic Law" .

All we need to be like the Philippines is to have Trump shot at the NY airport like Marcos.

Don't give the retards any ideas. That would be a very bad thing to happen. What I see happening after all the dust settles, is the US

being on a path to theocracy.

 

[john doe 101]

The courts are not where this issue will be fought.

And believe me, it will be fought. Hard. With weapons if necessary.

Stalinism will NOT be tolerated in this country.

Your kind will do NOTHING. LOL Stalinism. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

 

[scruffy]

Your kind will do NOTHING. LOL Stalinism. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

This dumbass leftard ^^^ is going to wake up one morning hating the world.

More than he already does.

 

[Rumpole]

Of course it is political. There is absolutely no possibility it isn't political.

Here we have a corrupt judge doing the bidding of George Soros and the rest of the globalists trying to destroy this country from within and you think it ISN'T political?

No. Your view is that of a cynic, and I"m not a cynic.

Cynicism begets nihilism and that is a very dark place.

 

[Rumpole]

When was the last time anyone WAS EVER indicted based on information retrieved by raiding their lawyer?

Trump's indictment is not merely based on data garnered from the raid on Cohen's office, home and hotel room, it was based largely on Cohen's 23 or so testimonies given to a NY grand jury, among the testimony of others close to Trump.

For that matter, NAME ONE HUMAN BEING in the entire WRITTEN HISTORY OF LAW that has has their FUCKING LAWYER'S OFFICE RAIDED BY THE MOTHER FUCKING GOVERNMENT.

My word, you're fairly miffed, did you stop and think about it? Anyway, I can think of two, off hand:

1. Victoria Toensing and Joseph diGenova, two lawyers (associated with Giuliani) who were involved in efforts to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden in Ukraine, had their home and office raided by the FBI in May 2021. The raid was part of an investigation into whether the lawyers had illegally lobbied the Trump administration on behalf of Ukrainian officials.
2. Rudy Giuliani, the former personal lawyer for former President Donald Trump, had his home and office raided by the FBI in April 2021. The raid was part of an investigation into Giuliani's activities in Ukraine, including whether he illegally lobbied the Trump administration on behalf of Ukrainian officials.

Name the man, name the lawyer.

Name the crime, name the probable cause.

Hell... Show me the probable cause affidavit to raid Cohen....

to the best of my knowledge, the probable cause affidavit to raid Michael Cohen's office in 2018 has not been publicly released. The search warrant was granted by a federal judge after prosecutors provided evidence and argued that they had probable cause to believe that Cohen's office contained records and documents related to his business dealings and personal finances, including potential campaign finance violations. The raid was conducted by the FBI as part of an ongoing investigation into Cohen's activities.

Even the fuckin bolsheviks didn't do that.

Well, not sure what you mean, but they didn't have federal magistrates signing off on search warrants.

Of course, you are alluding to the Stalin-esque quote, 'show me the man, and I'll show you the crime' (though it was Lavrentiy Beria, head of Joseph Stalin's secret police who actually uttered the quote, but it could just as easily be Stalin's). This type of thinking is common amongst cynics and nihilists and the hard right (and some on the hard left, as well).

Okay, The argument that Trump's indictment (or Cohen's raid and/or indictment/conviction) is political and similar to the Stalinist quote "Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime" is flawed for several reasons. First of all, our justice system is based on the principle of due process. This means that anyone who is accused of a crime has the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. An indictment is simply a formal accusation that a crime has been committed and that there is enough evidence to proceed with a trial.

The idea that Trump's indictment is political overlooks the fact that the investigation into his conduct began long before he became a political figure. It was carried out by career prosecutors and law enforcement officials who are committed to upholding the law and pursuing justice, regardless of political considerations.

Moreover, the Stalinist quote is problematic because it describes a situation in which a government targets individuals for persecution based on their political views, without regard for due process. In Stalin's Russia, he was the prosecutor, judge, and jury. If someone did not do as he dictated, they could be shot. However, in our justice system, Trump's guilt or innocence will be decided by a jury of his peers, all of whom cannot be said to have Stalinist leanings. The jury will be made up of ordinary citizens who are chosen to hear the evidence and determine whether or not Trump is guilty of the crimes he has been accused of.

Does this mean that every indictment, every 'raid' or search warrant is perfect, that all politicians are squeaky clean eagle scouts? Not at all, I'm just indicating in a general principe sense. We don't' have the actual facts of Cohen's raid, though I do remember some things about it.

If I recall correctly, the circumstances surrounding the police raid of Michael Cohen's office, home, and hotel room in April 2018 were related to an investigation into his personal and professional dealings. Of course, we know that Cohen was the longtime personal lawyer and fixer for former President Donald Trump, and he was under investigation by the FBI as part of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The FBI had obtained a warrant for the raid from a federal judge in New York, based on evidence that Cohen had committed multiple crimes, including bank fraud, wire fraud, and campaign finance violations. The search warrant authorized the seizure of records related to Cohen's business dealings, including documents related to payments he had made to women (Daniels and McDougal) who alleged they had affairs with Trump before the 2016 election. The FBI also seized electronic devices and other materials from Cohen's office and home.

The raid was controversial because it involved a high-profile figure who was closely associated with the President of the United States. Some supporters of President Trump criticized the raid as politically motivated and argued that it was an abuse of government power. However, others argued that the raid was justified and necessary to uncover potential criminal activity and ensure that justice was served.

Ultimately, Cohen pleaded guilty to several charges, including campaign finance violations related to the payments he made to the women alleging affairs with Trump, and he was sentenced to three years in prison. The raid was upheld by the courts, which found that there was probable cause to believe that Cohen had committed a crime and that the search warrant was properly issued based on that evidence.

So, the police raid on Michael Cohen's office, home, and hotel room was based on a warrant obtained by the FBI as part of an investigation into his personal and professional dealings. The warrant was upheld by the courts, and Cohen ultimately pleaded guilty to several charges. That's all I know.

In conclusion regarding Trump, the argument that Trump's indictment is political and similar to the Stalinist quote is flawed. The indictment is based on specific allegations of criminal conduct and is being pursued in accordance with the rule of law and due process. Trump's guilt or innocence will be decided by a jury of his peers, who will hear the evidence and make their decision based on the facts of the case. You simply cannot characterize American jurisprudence to that of the Stalin era. Oh, you can criticize the hell out of it, but your characterization, in my view, is a bridge too far, in overall terms, not referring to isolated cases which might enrage reasonable individuals.

 

[Rumpole]

The courts are not where this issue will be fought.

No, Trump will have is day in court, or two, or three, maybe four.

And believe me, it will be fought. Hard. With weapons if necessary.

Find thee a chill pill, you appear to be having a conniption.

Stalinism will NOT be tolerated in this country.

Hysterics on parade. Wonderful!

 

[Rumpole]

This dumbass leftard ^^^ is going to wake up one morning hating the world.

More than he already does.

You have not presented a coherent counter argument. Rants are not arguments.

 

[Rumpole]

I don't recall Hillary ever being indicted--although it probably would have been a slam dunk. Try again moron.

Not really. They tried for years to pin something on her. They found nada, as in nada damn thing.

 

[Rumpole]

Totally and absolutely agree with you. Will you change your tune once you find out that this is indeed the case? Will you then realize what TDS is?

TDS is a right wing trope designed to curb critical thinking and kill the conversation. Any time you have an alleged data point that only one side of the political spectrum can agree on, you have a pseudo data point. (fancy talk for 'fake news') In fact, what TDS really is is a thought-terminating cliché.

 

[Rumpole]

Turley and Dershowitz legal opinions vs _______?________, dumbass.

Andrew Weissman, Lawrence Tribe, Barbara McQuade, Neil Katyal, Chuck Rosenberg, to name a few.

 

[Rumpole]

And as stupid as you are, you don't understand where this ends.........Trump is the start, mass graves and murder is the end game of you fascists....

Hysterics on parade.

Get thee to a chill pill dispenser, I do believe you are having a conniption.

 

[Lastamender]

View attachment 771407

Was she ever arrested?

 

[Lastamender]

Pelosi says you have to prove your innocence. That is why you get a trial. See anything wrong there?

 

[Rumpole]

I don't even think they really expect anything beyond a fine. They're hoping to damage him in the election, bottom line. If he announced he was retiring from politics tomorrow, this whole thing would evaporate.

That is a viewpoint consistent with cynicism, which I reject. Cynicism leads to nihilism which leads to a very dark place.

They might do a plea bargain just to save face, but the unending, irrational democrat hate machine would switch to someone else in a hurry.

Trump has committed too many crimes to be gotten away with. We can't have presidents committing so many crimes. He must be held accountable. You're just miffed because he is a Republican. Republicans in the White House really need to stop committing so many crimes, as they have been since Nixon. They are bad for America.

 

[Rumpole]

Biden and Garland are violating their oaths of office.

They are not faithfully executing the laws.

Please provide evidence of these claims. Thank you.

 

[Concerned American]

Not really. They tried for years to pin something on her. They found nada, as in nada damn thing.

Gee, how ironic, I know of another guy that has been hounded for the last seven years for the same thing with the same results. Hmmmm.

 

[2aguy]

That is a viewpoint consistent with cynicism, which I reject. Cynicism leads to nihilism which leads to a very dark place.


Trump has committed too many crimes to be gotten away with. We can't have presidents committing so many crimes. He must be held accountable. You're just miffed because he is a Republican. Republicans in the White House really need to stop committing so many crimes, as they have been since Nixon. They are bad for America.

View attachment 771771

What crimes, you doofus.....?

Compared to clinton or obama?

 

[Mac1958]

I suggest that such claims by Republicans, itself, is political. It certainly gives Republicans, many of whom, privately, have expressed their dislike of Trump, while publically either being indifferent or approving of him, the claims of 'political' give Republicans a political advantage if they succeed in convincing a large swath of the electorate that the claim is true.

But is it true? Let's take a deep dive (and please, those with short attention spans are not invited).

The recent indictment of former President Donald Trump on over 30 counts of crimes has brought to light once again the problematic claim of Republicans that this is a political move. This claim conveniently ignores the numerous examples of hypocrisy in their own actions, such as their investigations into Hunter Biden and current President Joe Biden, both of whom have not been indicted for any crimes in which there is one salient and glaring fact: Rep. Comer's investigation, when assigned to the task, his committee was investigating Jared Kushner, which he stalled in favor of investigating Hunter Biden (but the target of the investigation, as admitted by Comer, is Joe Biden), and to date, their 'memo' does not actually prove any illegal activity by the 'Biden family', a characterization which, though intended to imply, does not include include Joe Biden

Moreover, this claim also overlooks the fact that Trump's own family members, including Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, have benefited from their connections to foreign officials, which could potentially constitute conflicts of interest and unethical behavior.

Let us first examine the claims made by Republicans that Trump's indictment is politically motivated. While it is true that politics can play a role in legal proceedings, it is important to note that the evidence presented against Trump is extensive and has been gathered over several years by multiple investigators. It is also worth mentioning that the indictments were issued by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, which is not a partisan entity and has a long history of impartiality.

Contrast this with the Republican-led investigations into Hunter Biden, who is not, nor has he ever been, a public official. These investigations seem to have been motivated purely by political gain and have not resulted in any criminal charges being brought against Biden. It is also worth noting that Joe Biden himself has not been indicted for any crimes, despite the intense scrutiny he has faced from Republicans.

However, the hypocrisy of the Republicans does not end there. Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law, held a senior advisory position in the White House and reportedly received $2 billion from Mohammed Bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. This payment was allegedly made in exchange for soft treatment by the Trump White House, and Bin Salman himself is suspected of involvement in the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Similarly, Ivanka Trump also held a senior advisory position in the White House and received accelerated trademarks worth millions from China. These trademarks allowed her to sell products to the tune of millions in profits while her father was negotiating with China on a trade deal.

It is difficult to argue that these actions by Kushner and Ivanka Trump do not constitute conflicts of interest and potentially unethical behavior. Yet, Republicans have largely ignored these examples of possible corruption within their own party.

In conclusion, the Republican claim that Trump's indictment is politically motivated is problematic and ignores the extensive evidence gathered against him. Moreover, it highlights the hypocrisy of their investigations into Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, who have not been indicted for any crimes given that no evidence has ever been forthcoming (though plenty of implication and innuendo), while ignoring the potential conflicts of interest and unethical behavior of their own party members, such as Kushner and Ivanka Trump. It is important for us to hold all public officials, regardless of party affiliation, accountable for their actions and to demand transparency and integrity in our political system.

Assuming there will be other indictments and other charges (not a good assumption), this is a BAD one to come out of the gate first.

And if there are no other indictments, it will look even WORSE.

Trump's superpower is putting intelligent adults in impossible situations with his behaviors.

 

[Independentthinker]

TDS is a right wing trope designed to curb critical thinking and kill the conversation. Any time you have an alleged data point that only one side of the political spectrum can agree on, you have a pseudo data point. (fancy talk for 'fake news') In fact, what TDS really is is a thought-terminating cliché.

TDS is when you find a person you hate and launch numerous investigations into them, abusing your power in the process, just so you can get the person you hate with something, anything. Our founding fathers would be turning over in their graves. This is clear abuse of the justice system for purely partisan political gain.

 

[scruffy]

Trump's indictment is not merely based on data garnered from the raid on Cohen's office, home and hotel room, it was based largely on Cohen's 23 or so testimonies given to a NY grand jury, among the testimony of others close to Trump.

My word, you're fairly miffed, did you stop and think about it? Anyway, I can think of two, off hand:

1. Victoria Toensing and Joseph diGenova, two lawyers (associated with Giuliani) who were involved in efforts to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden in Ukraine, had their home and office raided by the FBI in May 2021. The raid was part of an investigation into whether the lawyers had illegally lobbied the Trump administration on behalf of Ukrainian officials.
2. Rudy Giuliani, the former personal lawyer for former President Donald Trump, had his home and office raided by the FBI in April 2021. The raid was part of an investigation into Giuliani's activities in Ukraine, including whether he illegally lobbied the Trump administration on behalf of Ukrainian officials.

to the best of my knowledge, the probable cause affidavit to raid Michael Cohen's office in 2018 has not been publicly released. The search warrant was granted by a federal judge after prosecutors provided evidence and argued that they had probable cause to believe that Cohen's office contained records and documents related to his business dealings and personal finances, including potential campaign finance violations. The raid was conducted by the FBI as part of an ongoing investigation into Cohen's activities.

Well, not sure what you mean, but they didn't have federal magistrates signing off on search warrants.

Of course, you are alluding to the Stalin-esque quote, 'show me the man, and I'll show you the crime' (though it was Lavrentiy Beria, head of Joseph Stalin's secret police who actually uttered the quote, but it could just as easily be Stalin's). This type of thinking is common amongst cynics and nihilists and the hard right (and some on the hard left, as well).

Okay, The argument that Trump's indictment (or Cohen's raid and/or indictment/conviction) is political and similar to the Stalinist quote "Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime" is flawed for several reasons. First of all, our justice system is based on the principle of due process. This means that anyone who is accused of a crime has the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. An indictment is simply a formal accusation that a crime has been committed and that there is enough evidence to proceed with a trial.

The idea that Trump's indictment is political overlooks the fact that the investigation into his conduct began long before he became a political figure. It was carried out by career prosecutors and law enforcement officials who are committed to upholding the law and pursuing justice, regardless of political considerations.

Moreover, the Stalinist quote is problematic because it describes a situation in which a government targets individuals for persecution based on their political views, without regard for due process. In Stalin's Russia, he was the prosecutor, judge, and jury. If someone did not do as he dictated, they could be shot. However, in our justice system, Trump's guilt or innocence will be decided by a jury of his peers, all of whom cannot be said to have Stalinist leanings. The jury will be made up of ordinary citizens who are chosen to hear the evidence and determine whether or not Trump is guilty of the crimes he has been accused of.

Does this mean that every indictment, every 'raid' or search warrant is perfect, that all politicians are squeaky clean eagle scouts? Not at all, I'm just indicating in a general principe sense. We don't' have the actual facts of Cohen's raid, though I do remember some things about it.

If I recall correctly, the circumstances surrounding the police raid of Michael Cohen's office, home, and hotel room in April 2018 were related to an investigation into his personal and professional dealings. Of course, we know that Cohen was the longtime personal lawyer and fixer for former President Donald Trump, and he was under investigation by the FBI as part of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The FBI had obtained a warrant for the raid from a federal judge in New York, based on evidence that Cohen had committed multiple crimes, including bank fraud, wire fraud, and campaign finance violations. The search warrant authorized the seizure of records related to Cohen's business dealings, including documents related to payments he had made to women (Daniels and McDougal) who alleged they had affairs with Trump before the 2016 election. The FBI also seized electronic devices and other materials from Cohen's office and home.

The raid was controversial because it involved a high-profile figure who was closely associated with the President of the United States. Some supporters of President Trump criticized the raid as politically motivated and argued that it was an abuse of government power. However, others argued that the raid was justified and necessary to uncover potential criminal activity and ensure that justice was served.

Ultimately, Cohen pleaded guilty to several charges, including campaign finance violations related to the payments he made to the women alleging affairs with Trump, and he was sentenced to three years in prison. The raid was upheld by the courts, which found that there was probable cause to believe that Cohen had committed a crime and that the search warrant was properly issued based on that evidence.

So, the police raid on Michael Cohen's office, home, and hotel room was based on a warrant obtained by the FBI as part of an investigation into his personal and professional dealings. The warrant was upheld by the courts, and Cohen ultimately pleaded guilty to several charges. That's all I know.

In conclusion regarding Trump, the argument that Trump's indictment is political and similar to the Stalinist quote is flawed. The indictment is based on specific allegations of criminal conduct and is being pursued in accordance with the rule of law and due process. Trump's guilt or innocence will be decided by a jury of his peers, who will hear the evidence and make their decision based on the facts of the case. You simply cannot characterize American jurisprudence to that of the Stalin era. Oh, you can criticize the hell out of it, but your characterization, in my view, is a bridge too far, in overall terms, not referring to isolated cases which might enrage reasonable individuals.

Way tl;dr