Why Bragg's case is bogus

[homersapien 11,467]

17 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

I agree. You would have to be willfullly blind not to see the DOJ is actively working against Trump. (1) They literally said that Biden was guilty of mishandling classified documents, but they weren't going to charge him "because the jury would likely not convict" because he is elderly.  Yeah, they always let people go based on that. And then (2) his political opponent for the same crime. You can't make this stuff up. They aren't even trying to hide it any more. It's part of the intimidation factor for others who want to oppose them. It will be interesting to see if (3)Judge Cannon throws it out based on selective prosecution.  That issue is now on her docket. 

There are several "falsehoods" and/or distortions in that post:

(1) No cases of inadvertent or deliberate possession have been prosecuted when possessor voluntarily returned said documents. (Including Pence.)

(2) Biden was not charged with possessing classified documents. (And neither would have Trump had he promptly returned them.)

(3) Yeah, it will be.  But I'm betting she won't that far, as her favoritism toward Trump - her patron - is already under close scrutiny.

[homersapien 11,467]

2 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

This thread will make one's head hurt. FOX is the worst! FTLOG. We all remember the lies of Russia, Russia, Russia. COVID lies for $500 anyone? Should we broach the Hunter Biden lies? To point out FOX as some outlier of daily lies or dishonesty is laughable and the words of a simpleton. 

 

Specifically, what were the "lies" of Russia, Russia, Russia?

 

[AUFAN78 3,926]

45 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Fox, NBC, CNN All Hit With High-Profile Lawsuits

Topline: When Karen McDougal, the former Playboy model who said she had an affair with Donald Trump before he became president, sued Fox News for defamation Thursday, she became only the latest public figure this year to file a high-profile lawsuit against big media companies.

Here are McDougal’s and other claims against media outlets across the world:

• McDougal, who claimed to have an affair with Trump, alleges that Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson intentionally defamed her on his show by claiming she extorted Trump and is seeking unspecified punitive damages from the network⁠ (Carlson is not named as a defendant).
• George Zimmerman, the highly controversial figure who shot and killed Trayvon Martin (a 17-year-old African American) in 2012, filed a $100 million suit against Martin’s family for malicious prosecution, defamation and conspiracy Wednesday⁠, and against HarperCollins, the publisher of a book by the Martin family’s lawyer.
• Republican representative Devin Nunes sued CNN for $435 million Monday claiming the network defamed Nunes when it reported he traveled to Vienna and met with Viktor Shokin, the former top Ukrainian prosecutor that Joe Biden helped oust in 2016; Nunes says the story is untrue, while CNN claims it reportedly asked him to comment before publishing.
• Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sued the Daily Mail’s parent company in October for the misuse of private information, copyright infringement and for breaking a U.K. data law, with Harry issuing a sharply worded statement about the media’s treatment of Meghan that referenced his mother, the late Princess Diana (who died while being chased by paparazzi); Harry also filed separate claims the same month against the Sun and Daily Mirror tabloids for allegedly hacking his phone. 
• When Nicholas Sandmann was thrust into the national spotlight after a January viral video appeared to show him facing off with a Native American drummer, his family brought defamation lawsuits against the Washington Post in February for $250 million in damages, CNN for for $275 million in damages and NBCUniversal for another $275 million in damages⁠—and while his suit against the Post was initially dismissed, in October a federal judge revived part of it, and advanced the CNN and NBC cases in separate decisions.
• Other claims this year: On December 4 motivational speaker Tony Robbins filed a libel suit in Ireland against Buzzfeed for reporting on his alleged sexual misconduct (which he denies).

============================================

So what's your point?  Are you claiming these are equivalent to what Fox pleaded guilty to???

 

 

The point is clear, media lies are often prosecuted, and rightfully so. You asked for examples and I provided a handful for your parsing. Enjoy.

[homersapien 11,467]

4 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

The point is clear, media lies are often prosecuted, and rightfully so. You asked for examples and I provided a handful for your parsing. En njoy.

I certainly never have, and would not think of, disputing that.

Now, what was your point again?

Edited May 8 by homersapien

[AUFAN78 3,926]

17 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Specifically, what were the "lies" of Russia, Russia, Russia?

 

Russian collusion, Crossfire Hurricane, the Steel Dossier. All garbage. 

After four years, we finally have the full 316-page report from Justice Department special counsel John Durham, and it’s a damning indictment of some of our country’s leading institutions. 

Durham said the FBI should have never launched an investigation into alleged Russian collusion with Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, given the slim evidence. 

urham slammed the FBI’s investigation – dubbed Crossfire Hurricane – into the Trump campaign for its “serious lack of analytic rigor” and a “cavalier attitude” for accuracy. 

“...We conclude that the Department and the FBI failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law in connection with certain events and activities described in this report,” Durham wrote.

For its part, the FBI does not dispute the report’s findings, but says it has already taken action and added safeguards in its investigations.

Durham also called out the role of the (now-discredited) Steele dossier, the opposition research gathered for the Hillary Clinton campaign that was in turn given to the FBI. Durham said the dossier was “unvetted and unverified,” yet was used as justification for surveillance. 

“Indeed, based on the evidence gathered in multiple exhaustive and costly federal investigations of these matters, including the instant investigation, neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation," the report stated.

As Durham details, the FBI fumbled the “collusion” investigation. But mainstream media outlets also deserve blame for breathlessly going along with the Trump-Russia allegations. 

[AUFAN78 3,926]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I certainly never have, and would not think of, disputing that.

Now, what was your point again?

4:45 cocktails?

[homersapien 11,467]

1 minute ago, AUFAN78 said:

4:45 cocktails?

Yeah, that's what I figured.  It was a mindless post with no point.

(But thanks for reminding me of the time. )

Edited May 8 by homersapien

[AUFAN78 3,926]

Just now, homersapien said:

Yeah, that's what I figured.  It was a mindless post with no point.

No homey, it is you already forgot the point made. 

[homersapien 11,467]

Just now, AUFAN78 said:

No homey, it is you already forgot the point made. 

You and I both know there was no point other than trying to imply Fox is no different than everyone else - regardless of scale and substance - which is patently absurd.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You and I both know there was no point other than trying to imply Fox is no different than everyone else - regardless of scale and substance - which is patently absurd.

It amazes me how quickly the contents of a single thread escape you. 

[homersapien 11,467]

14 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Russian collusion, Crossfire Hurricane, the Steel Dossier. All garbage. 

After four years, we finally have the full 316-page report from Justice Department special counsel John Durham, and it’s a damning indictment of some of our country’s leading institutions. 

Durham said the FBI should have never launched an investigation into alleged Russian collusion with Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, given the slim evidence. 

urham slammed the FBI’s investigation – dubbed Crossfire Hurricane – into the Trump campaign for its “serious lack of analytic rigor” and a “cavalier attitude” for accuracy. 

“...We conclude that the Department and the FBI failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law in connection with certain events and activities described in this report,” Durham wrote.

For its part, the FBI does not dispute the report’s findings, but says it has already taken action and added safeguards in its investigations.

Durham also called out the role of the (now-discredited) Steele dossier, the opposition research gathered for the Hillary Clinton campaign that was in turn given to the FBI. Durham said the dossier was “unvetted and unverified,” yet was used as justification for surveillance. 

“Indeed, based on the evidence gathered in multiple exhaustive and costly federal investigations of these matters, including the instant investigation, neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation," the report stated.

As Durham details, the FBI fumbled the “collusion” investigation. But mainstream media outlets also deserve blame for breathlessly going along with the Trump-Russia allegations. 

No, those weren't "lies", those were cited as possible evidence/proof  and/or suspicions that sparked the investigation.

Who claimed actual knowledge they were authentic?

You just want to apply the word "lie" to the whole affair as if it were totally bogus.  Never mind what the investigation actually uncovered - Russia did help Trump, they did talk to the Trump campaign, Trump did commit obstruction.  

And I predict we haven't heard the last of the Trump/Russia relationship, which extends beyond the 2016 campaign.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

18 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, those weren't "lies", those were cited as possible evidence/proof  and/or suspicions that sparked the investigation.

Who claimed actual knowledge they were authentic?

You just want to apply the word "lie" to the whole affair as if it were totally bogus.  Never mind what the investigation actually uncovered - Russia did help Trump, they did talk to the Trump campaign, Trump did commit obstruction.  

And I predict we haven't heard the last of the Trump/Russia relationship, which extends beyond the 2016 campaign.

They were deceitful lies. 

[homersapien 11,467]

18 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

They were deceitful lies. 

By whom?

[AUFAN78 3,926]

13 minutes ago, homersapien said:

By whom?

Those who used them for political purposes.

[homersapien 11,467]

12 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Those who used them for political purposes.

Can you be more specific, as in naming them?

[AUFAN78 3,926]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Can you be more specific, as in naming them?

That would require a book. I'm not interested in writing a book. The 316 page Durham Report will suffice. I provided quotes for your convenience. Read them.

Edited May 9 by AUFAN78

[1716AU 731]

I hate to break your hearts, but Stormy Daniels sunk him today.

Put a fork in him.  He is done.

[1716AU 731]

I must say, Trump is lucky they didn't ask for a search warrant and take him in a room to take picture of his penis.

When your whole defense is that she is making it up, you might want to prove her credibility.

Unfortunately, the Prosecution has the Jury eating out of its hand right now. No matter what, they have lost the jury.

[aubaseball 2,661]

6 hours ago, 1716AU said:

I hate to break your hearts, but Stormy Daniels sunk him today.

Put a fork in him.  He is done.

I did not have sexual relations with that woman.   What is your definition of is is? 

[Cardin Drake 1,857]

The only testimony Daniels gave that was relevant to the case on trial. 

Daniels conceded she never spoke to Trump about her hush money and has no personal involvement in the repayment scheme that the former president is charged over. Trump nodded his head affirmatively as she remarked on her lack of knowledge about his role in the hush money deal. 

“I’m just here to answer questions about me,” Daniels told Necheles.

Her testimony is however, good grounds for appeal of the case.  No normal judge would have allowed this prejudicial testimony in at all.  The judge then had the chutzpah to say the defense didn't object enough. 

[JMWATS 107]

14 hours ago, 1716AU said:

I hate to break your hearts, but Stormy Daniels sunk him today.

Put a fork in him.  He is done.

She was so believable LoL.  Like after making 200 plus porn movies and being banged in every conceivable position she stated she felt lightheaded and the room spun during her encounter with Trump. 

Edited May 10 by JMWATS

[I_M4_AU 8,020]

Her testimony does not have any relevance to the charges brought by the prosecution for financial fraud and if Trump was aware of it.

Its a platform for Stormy to spout off on Trump in public.

Edited May 10 by I_M4_AU

[Cardin Drake 1,857]

 

[JMWATS 107]

Talking heads on CNN seem to think the NY trial ends in a not guilty.

if it does an emboldened Trump’s path to the presidency will be clearer and free of courtroom trials.  

Could it be the Democrat’s plan to take out Trump via criminal charges has failed? 

[Cardin Drake 1,857]

I've never understood the prosecution's theory of the case.  Even if everything Cohen said is true, where is the crime?  The defense shredded Cohen's credibility yesterday for sure, but I will be very surprised if this jury doesn't convict anyway.  The prosecution has  been planning on the opposite of jury nullification all along. 

Edited May 17 by Cardin Drake