US Politics: Bike tricks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kieppie said:
:rolleyes:
Pointless stat if you take into account the majority of those are plea deals.
Go look at how many actually went to trial instead.

A jury focusing on the rule of law will benefit Trump in this frivolous bookkeeping case.
Click to expand...
The 90% figure is trials not plea deals. Accounting is the least subjective field but you keep thinking that you can talk your way out of it. Lol. Send him to a rubber stamping trial jury - great strategy
 
quovadis said:
The 90% figure is trials not plea deals. Accounting is the least subjective field but you keep thinking that you can talk your way out of it. Lol. Send him to a rubber stamping trial jury - great strategy
Click to expand...
You can't take their conviction rate for felonies into account if they aren't the jury pool that did the indictment.
Only single digit cases ever go to trial in Staten Island, hence my comment about the plea deals.

The borough is home to a large number civil servants, police and fire fighters so typically they aren't very sympathetic to those charged with serious crimes.
Sadly this case isn't such a case.

Being "sympathetic" is irrelevant in weak cases such as this.
 
The_Right_Honourable_Brit said:
Legislators are there to introduce, debate, and vote on legislation. Not to use bullhorns and stage a media event.

There are plenty of other venues for that and plenty of media organizations happy to amplify it.

Creating a "protest environment" inside a legislative chamber and expecting that to be the new norm is a great way to have the legislature turn into a regularly scheduled clown show, with appearances from the left, the right, and the just plain kooky.
Click to expand...

Look how you ignored my other post on this
 
quovadis said:
www.propublica.org

Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From Major GOP Donor

Island-hopping on a superyacht. Private jet rides around the world. The undisclosed gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the Supreme Court. “It’s incomprehensible to me that someone would do this,” says one former judge.
www.propublica.org www.propublica.org
Click to expand...

Ok, and what? Until you have actual evidence (not hints, proper evidence) that Thomas somehow discussed cases with this donor, this investigation is a nothing burger.

The Supreme Court is left almost entirely to police itself.

There are few restrictions on what gifts justices can accept. That’s in contrast to the other branches of government. Members of Congress are generally prohibited from taking gifts worth $50 or more and would need pre-approval from an ethics committee to take many of the trips Thomas has accepted from Crow.
Click to expand...
 
The_Right_Honourable_Brit said:
Ok, and what? Until you have actual evidence (not hints, proper evidence) that Thomas somehow discussed cases with this donor, this investigation is a nothing burger.
Click to expand...

No, it is not a nothingburger. The conflict of interest is glaringly obvious. Any judge at any other level besides the absolutely immune from prosecution US Supreme Court would have been impeached by now.
 
cerebus said:
No, it is not a nothingburger. The conflict of interest is glaringly obvious. Any judge at any other level besides the absolutely immune from prosecution US Supreme Court would have been impeached by now.
Click to expand...
Where's the conflict of interest? Even ProPublica couldn't find it despite combing through the court records:

Crow and his firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it, though the court periodically hears major cases that directly impact the real estate industry. The details of his discussions with Thomas over the years remain unknown, and it is unclear if Crow has had any influence on the justice’s views.
Click to expand...
 
quovadis said:
Lol. You really have no clue about this.
A felony isn’t serious?
Enough now.
Click to expand...
It appears you have even less of a clue of the underlying issues.
An no, this inventive use of a felony is not serious except for some very deluded people.
 
Kieppie said:
It appears you have even less of a clue of the underlying issues.
An no, this inventive use of a felony is not serious except for some very deluded people.
Click to expand...
Lol. Are they felony charges or not? In light of financial scams of late is creative book keeping something average Joe will simply ignore especially if the book keeping relates to a pattern of impropriety?
 
The_Right_Honourable_Brit said:
Where's the conflict of interest? Even ProPublica couldn't find it despite combing through the court records:
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm sure major GOP donors showering supreme court justices with gifts and holidays for 20 years is totally above board and conflict-free. If there is no conflict and no issue, why didn't he declare them in his financial disclosures? I note that directly above the quote you cited above it says this:

A code of conduct for federal judges below the Supreme Court requires them to avoid even the “appearance of impropriety.” Members of the high court, Chief Justice John Roberts has written, “consult” that code for guidance.
Click to expand...

Even in the quote you cited in this post, the conflict is right there in the text, you just didn't choose to bold it:

Crow and his firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it, though the court periodically hears major cases that directly impact the real estate industry.
Click to expand...

Supreme Court decisions on the real estate industry are a direct concern of real estate tycoons, wouldn't you agree?
 
cerebus said:
Yeah I'm sure major GOP donors showering supreme court justices with gifts and holidays for 20 years is totally above board and conflict-free. If there is no conflict and no issue, why didn't he declare them in his financial disclosures? I note that directly above the quote you cited above it says this:



Even in the quote you cited in this post, the conflict is right there in the text, you just didn't choose to bold it:



Supreme Court decisions on the real estate industry are a direct concern of real estate tycoons, wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...
Imagine if this was Kagan and Soros - the hypocrisy on display here is unbelievable.
 
quovadis said:
Lol. Are they felony charges or not?
Click to expand...
Just because they claim felony doesn't mean it actually is.

quovadis said:
In light of financial scams of late is creative book keeping something average Joe will simply ignore especially if the book keeping relates to a pattern of impropriety?
Click to expand...
Should ask Hillary's team they purposely misfiled their campaign finances and received a fine.
This case with Trump they still to even prove it was purposefully done.

Come off it, this case is a joke and everyone except ideologues knows it.
Even leftist publications says as much

slate.com

Donald Trump Probably Should Not Have Been Charged With (This) Felony

It is said that if you go after the king, you should not miss.
slate.com slate.com
 
quovadis said:
Imagine if this was Kagan and Soros - the hypocrisy on display here is unbelievable.
Click to expand...
The difference is that Soros does this openly and with a clearly stated agenda funneling millions to further this.

The hypocrisy would be to try and equate this with Clarence, whos a frequent target of leftists making up bunk stories.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X