The (many) indictments of Donald Trump

reagan started us on our merry decline into the debt we now have.

Maybe a better starting point wound be to compare some other numbers. These three graphs all have something in common; can you figure out what it is. The better question would be is the commonality a matter of correlation or causation? Common sense would say if you take money our of your own economy and put it in another economy that your economy will suffer. It's hard to have consumers (at least without debt) if you remove workers from the money cycle. Also a nation's wealth depends highly on the nation's ability to produce and manufacture. A service based economy will only circulate accumulated wealth with losses in every transaction; it takes producing goods or growing crops to generate wealth. I'd argue the debt has more to do with economics than presidents but that government certainly has the ability to screw everything up.

china-trade-balance-deficit-2023-03-31-macrotrends.png
FT_23.01.30_DebtLimit_1.jpg
Total_US_household_debt_and_its_composition_over_time.png
 
The defense is typically not allowed to present an argument or present evidence or even be present. The prosecution is free to present or withhold whatever evidence and witnesses they choose.

But like you said, it’s not a trial. The Defense can do those things during trial. What’s a more fair alternative in your opinion?
 
Question of the day.

Nancy’s grasp of our legal system is…..



Prove innocence? Sounds very Stalinesque

Isn't it the requirement under our system that the prosecutor must prove guilt? Apparently the dems don't believe in innocent until proven guilty for anyone outside their flock.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
This is so dumb. Bail reform doesn't mean you don't get prosecuted. Like many of these small time crooks, Trump will be charged and remain free until his trial date.

 
First they came for Trump. And EL didn’t care. Because she wasn’t Trump and she hated him.

It’s disheartening to see people who are so called legal professionals so excited about this because they hate the Orange Buffoon. Nothing stays the same in this country and you’re pointing a weapon (sorry if that’s triggering) at Trump that could be pointed at you in 5 years.

Again, a grand jury indited him not Bragg. Bragg simply laid out the evidence of violation(s) of the law.

Don't we want politicians to be held accountable when the evidence presents itself and a jury sees merit?

Now trump will get what he wants - a platform to complain about how unfair life is while begging for donations.

I don't get it, you folks bitch about the politicians getting away with crimes (see hillary clinton and the "lock her up" screeches") and then fall all over yourselves clutching your pearls when your flavor actually gets held accountable.
 
Please.

I was entering 6th grade when Nashville de-segregated. I saw the white flight. I saw private schools popping up everywhere. I heard good people say and do the wrong things. It was certainly a time of change. Some did, some just dug in. I have nothing but respect for the people who allowed themselves to actually grow and willingly opened their eyes to things they couldn't see before.
That’s freaking hilarious. The man makes racist comments constantly, things that you would cry about if Trump said the exact same thing. We know your morals only apply to Reps. All bets are off with Dems.
 
I'm arguing that there had been times of slight fluctuations. Reagan is the first to have a double digit rate of increase during a time of supposed "prosperity". He's the first to claim a roaring economic success, while using a double digit rate of increase in deficit spending. (Smoke and mirrors.....voodoo economics.....Reaganomics....)
The perceived success certainly didn't go unnoticed by future politicians.

What president did Reagan follow, and what damage had been done to the economy? Some of you forget that repairs aren't cheap.
 
Again, a grand jury indited him not Bragg. Bragg simply laid out the evidence of violation(s) of the law.

Don't we want politicians to be held accountable when the evidence presents itself and a jury sees merit?

Now trump will get what he wants - a platform to complain about how unfair life is while begging for donations.

I don't get it, you folks bitch about the politicians getting away with crimes (see hillary clinton and the "lock her up" screeches") and then fall all over yourselves clutching your pearls when your flavor actually gets held accountable.
Are you really that naive that you don't understand how the GJ process works? It's a one sided spin against the person the prosecutor wants to indict and in a place like NYC where 9/10 people vote democratic, you think was somehow impartial?
 
I'm going to say that this is a case of creative interpretation of the law to gain an indictment and no he didn't break the law.


I did not ask you if you agree he did, or did not break the law. I am asking whether both can be true: the prosecution is motivated by politics AND Trump committed the crimes.
 
Please.

I was entering 6th grade when Nashville de-segregated. I saw the white flight. I saw private schools popping up everywhere. I heard good people say and do the wrong things. It was certainly a time of change. Some did, some just dug in. I have nothing but respect for the people who allowed themselves to actually grow and willingly opened their eyes to things they couldn't see before.

So that’s where you got your white guilt.
 

VN Store



Back
Top