Damn It's a 30 count indictment

So only conservative DAs should indict conservatives...otherwise, everyone will start screaming "witch hunt!!!!!"?

The hypothesis that this prosecution was triggered by Trump's avowed candidacy, not any real existence of guilt, is refuted by the simple fact that Democrats/liberals desperately want Trump to run, split the ticket, fracture the RepubliQ, and hand the 2024 election to them on a silver platter.

In fact, if the Democrats are focusing strictly on 2024, AND somehow make the justice system dance on their puppet strings, bwa ha ha ha haaaaa, this is a terrible strategic move. And I think they know this. I also think they feel obligated to pursue it.

You're kind of talking out of both sides of your mouth when you say this case is weak; yet, you know very little about it. I say, let it play out. If Trump skates, that'll shoot the "martyrdom" story dead, and would at least suggest that justice prevails (whether or not he actually committed an actionable crime). If he gets tossed in the clink, that's tens of thousands of TV hours where he will NOT appear, which will help cleanse the air of toxic fumes.

Who cares?    If their isnt enough evidence to convict then he will be found innocent.     I can give you a line item list of political hacks and motivations behind the current Hunter Biden investigation.   But I dont care about that either for the same reason.  The people chasing after him dont get to render verdict.    

Our justice system doesnt scare me, Tom.  Why does it scare you and everyone else in the "lock her up crowd"?

The issue is whether or not bragg has jurisdiction, have the statute of limitations expired, can he prosecute a federal case, is it politically motivated or is selective prosecution?

So before this case can go to trial these questions must be resolved.

 Everyone with a brain knows what this shit show is all about - and it ain't about justice. MAGA!

In NEW YORK it is a crime to create false books & records. And when you do that to cover up another crime, it's a felony.

And Bragg has jurisdiction in NEW YORK, doesn't he? What do you say, tom?

The false records charge is a misdemeanor & the statute of limitations has expired, so bragg is stretching it to a federal felony, where he doesn't have jurisdiction.  The statute on this is 5 years & if it is determined the crime was was 2016, the statute of limitations is 5 years & again it has expired.  He may try to use 2018 in which case the statute hasn't expired, but it may be determined that it is a federal case. 

And then we have bragg's lack of interest in sending  criminals to jail

Bragg issued a controversial “Day One” memo after taking office saying he would no longer seek prison sentences in many crimes, would downgrade felony charges in cases including armed robberies and drug dealing, and drop some misdemeanors

He has declined to prosecute 35 percent more felony cases this year than in 2019, with 1,119 so far in 2022 compared to 828 three years ago

Bragg was accused of giving a sweetheart plea deal in August to Justin Washington, accused of raping a teen-age relative, only for Washington to be arrested on new sex-crime charges the next month.

Bragg did come down hard on bodega worker Jose Alba, who killed a crazed customer attacking him in his Harlem store. After a public outcry, Bragg dropped the murder charge against him

😂 Tom thinks prosecutors don't check the SOL before bringing charges. Also, it's 34 individual counts not one count.  Counselor Tom, I'd suggest you wait to see the actual charges before you try to construct a defense to them.

Stupid Tommie-poo won't be able to suck Trump off twice a day and be his attorney, too. He'll have to choose.

What kind of person defends and apolgizes for that asshole??

Thanks for educating us that juries determine verdicts. I've heard that before...somewhere. Here's another little well-known secret..meritless court cases are presented by DA's of both political persuasions sometimes. Sometimes some judges throw cases out or allow progression to a trial, and sometimes all these collective decisions by DA's and judges are influenced by their political leanings. That's not the way it's supposed to be, but it's real. Do you deny that fact? Let's face  that as a reality, fair enough?

And regarding the Trump post election suit onslaught, I  agree with you ( miracles appear even in this strange place). The facts are the facts and the court outcomes regarding this issue are what they were/ are. I've addressed that  many times back when this forum was inundated with reciprocal squawking about the 2020 election and Trump's post election actions. 

I'm very unafraid of a just system despite your implication; I'm concerned that our system isn't always and routinely just, though. Are you convinced that it's consistently square and plumb? The founders knew it wouldn't always be.

What really worries me is negative EV at the blackjack tables next week if you want to know the truth..or that I'll find hair or worse in the food I paid too much for somewhere. Those are big sources of concern. I'm not supposed to be here anyway ( by my own procalamation a while back; I just needed to address the Bragg stuff..couldn't stand  to leave it alone..a few posts of weakness participating here..now I'm out *l*).

Carry on.

I didn't say a damned word regarding conservative DA's indicting only conservatives...don't accuse me of that ( if you did), Margaret. Further, I said nothing regarding the hypothesis that this case was triggered by Trump's announced candidacy, either ; lay that accusation at somebody else's feet ( I'm fully aware that it's out there, admittedly).. Further, Beatrice...my admission that we don't know what the specific charges are or even a scintilla of the sum total evidence makes it pretty clear that I indeed don't know the significant facts about this case..neither you nor the general public knows, either. I'm concerned about the strength of this case on the surface from what is publicly available, though. And I was only talking out of the right side of my mouth..I didn't stutter. Maybe you misinterpreted..it's an alien language / syntax to you I know..but that's cool.

I do ( albeit somewhat painstakingly) agree with a couple of your points.

1). D's want Trump to run

2) Let the facts / evidence play out in this case

Did I miss your personal opinion regarding the strength of this case from what we know currently? I might have missed it as one or both of us may have been off on some elliptical pigtrail somewhere.

Have fun, Gertrude..I'm out.