Not finding evidence is now a reason to get fired?

[Man With A Plan]

Your post is full of blah, blah, blah accusations but you have offered no links to data and facts that prove your words.

In addition, you say that James fraudulently charged Trump with fraud? She won her case!

Attorney General James Wins Landmark Victory in Case ...​

Trump did win his appeals case but only as far as what he had to pay. The Fraud itself was upheld!

The appeals court decision

• Date of ruling: On August 21, 2025, a five-judge panel in New York's mid-level appeals court issued a split decision on Trump's appeal.
• Monetary penalty voided: The court threw out the massive financial penalty, with a majority calling it "excessive" and a violation of the Eighth Amendment.
• Fraud finding upheld: The panel largely upheld the underlying finding that Trump and his company had committed fraud.

You do realize that her case has been absolutely gutted...right, Lucky? By a New York appeals courts that was made up of more liberals than conservatives? That the judge's rulings have been excoriated by those same appeals court judges? James isn't getting that money from Trump...the conviction itself is on appeal as well and will also most likely be overturned. The fact that James "won" that case is more of an indictment of the New York judicial system than it is Trump! The fact that James actually DID commit mortgage fraud several times is just the cherry on top!

 

[Seymour Flops]

Eric Seibert, the acting U.S. Attorney for the state of Virginia and a "Republican", was fired because he failed to find evidence that incriminates AG for New York, Letitia James.



It seems that now, the requirement to be at Trump's side is to fulfill his wishes and find evidence (though there may be none and are innocent) of those that he considers enemies.

Are we now losing our Justice system, to be replaced with a king that decides all of our fates, depending on whether we support him or not?

Is proof of guilt not important now?

If finding evidence is your job, then of course you would be fired for not finding it.

His replacement will find it.

Can you imagine how quickly Merrick Garland or any DOJ prosecutor would have been fired if they told their boss that there was no reason to prosecute Trump or any of the other lawfare victims.

Why do Dems hate it so much when it happens to one of them?

 

[Luckyone]

If finding evidence is your job, then of course you would be fired for not finding it.

His replacement will find it.

Sure, he will make it up or be fired. That is Trump's order!

Can you imagine how quickly Merrick Garland or any DOJ prosecutor would have been fired if they told their boss that there was no reason to prosecute Trump or any of the other lawfare victims.

Heck, there is so much evidence against Trump that not finding it would be gross incompetence. Heck, Trump has already been found guilty 5 previous times, and one of those times it was a felony!

Why do Dems hate it so much when it happens to one of them?

Injustice has a way of being hated by all. Heck, just look at the millions of excuses that Trump supporters always come up with for his behavior:

 

[Seymour Flops]

Sure, he will make it up or be fired. That is Trump's order!

Show me ANY evidence of a Trump-backed prosecutor making up evidence.

Heck, there is so much evidence against Trump that not finding it would be gross incompetence. Heck, Trump has already been found guilty 5 previous times, and one of those times it was a felony!

I think you are confused about your numbers there.

Injustice has a way of being hated by all. Heck, just look at the millions of excuses that Trump supporters always come up with for his behavior:

View attachment 1168189

Yet, he was somehow able to win the highest office in the land by a strong popular majority and a landslide electoral majority.

Have you considered the possiblilty that you are just wrong?

 

[Luckyone]

Show me ANY evidence of a Trump-backed prosecutor making up evidence.

I think you are confused about your numbers there.

Yet, he was somehow able to win the highest office in the land by a strong popular majority and a landslide electoral majority.

Have you considered the possiblilty that you are just wrong?

 

[Seymour Flops]

View attachment 1168199

Yeah.

That's your evidence.

 

[Concerned American]

That is plain stupid and simply vengeful

Plain stupid and vengeful has been the democrat MO since they foisted TWO scam impeachments on the nation and unleashed the DOJ lawfare and the NY inJustice dept. on Trump. LOL, typical democrat garbage---blame the opposition for doing what the democrats have already done, IOW projection.

 

[Concerned American]

View attachment 1168199

Name calling is the best you have? LMAO

 

[Luckyone]

Yeah.

That's your evidence.

You being an ass is evidence in your favor?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Itis hard find that what tis NOT there.

Bush managed to get people to do it.

Remember the WMDs?

 

[Godboy]

This is not about Seibert but about Trump. Seibert (a Republican) said that he was unable to find PROOF that Letitia James was guilty of what Trump was saying she was guilty of. and he got fired BECAUSE he did not find proof.

You call that liberal politics? I call that Dictator politics!

They found the proof MONTHS ago. She lied on numerous applications.

 

[Slade3200]

That, or he was just playing liberal politics.

He’s a Republican who is in power, why would he risk his position to play liberal politics? Do you any evidence that he was?

 

[Meister]

He’s a Republican who is in power, why would he risk his position to play liberal politics? Do you any evidence that he was?

Have you ever heard of a RINO?
Other than the fact that there was enough evidence to have it decided in the courts?

 

[Marener]

Other than the fact that there was enough evidence to have it decided in the courts?

There was enough evidence to get it past a grand jury, but that doesn’t mean it has any chance at getting past a jury trial.

 

[Meister]

There was enough evidence to get it past a grand jury, but that doesn’t mean it has any chance at getting past a jury trial.

Or, maybe it does.

 

[Marener]

Or, maybe it does.

An experienced team of prosecutors looked at it and decided it didn’t.

Do you think they’re going to get a conviction?

 

[Meister]

An experienced team of prosecutors looked at it and decided it didn’t.

Do you think they’re going to get a conviction?

"An experienced team of prosecutors looked at it and decided it didn’t."
I bet there is a team of experienced prosecutors that would find there was enough evidence.

I don't know one way or the other, and neither do you.
Let the courts decide.

Your bias just overrides any common sense. Incredible.

 

[Marener]

I bet there is a team of experienced prosecutors that would find there was enough evidence

You think? The person who decided to bring the case to court is not an experienced prosecutor. She’s a loyalist, one of Trump’s former personal attorneys.

I don’t think you guys care much about common sense anymore. Anyone with common sense has a lot of doubt about the substance of the case and has a lot of doubt about the governments ability to get a conviction.

 

[Meister]

You think? The person who decided to bring the case to court is not an experienced prosecutor. She’s a loyalist, one of Trump’s former personal attorneys.

I don’t think you guys care much about common sense anymore. Anyone with common sense has a lot of doubt about the substance of the case and has a lot of doubt about the governments ability to get a conviction.

So that excludes her?

Okay....I guess.

 

[Marener]

So that excludes her?

Okay....I guess.

She’s definitely not an experienced prosecutor and I don’t think anyone sees her as unbiased. I mean, it’s pretty clear that getting the nomination to the position is contingent on her willingness to take the case no matter what.

Of course, you don’t seem to have a problem with this, but it’s pretty sad this is what Trump is doing to this country.