| >it was not handled in a way that gives most Democrats faith that it was a fair ruling. You don't have faith it would have been handled the same but you have faith that a Democrat would have had these charges against them? Just for comparison... Hillary committed misdemeanors that LITERALLY was money crimes to influence an election. The exact same "crimes" that Trump had turned into felonies (without actual evidence of the crimes). The problem we are in today is that these cases (4 of them) are obviously, blatantly and undeniably political and everyone knows that if Trump wasn't running for reelection or if Trump wasn't a Republican? These charges wouldn't be brought. > it wasn't tested because exactly. It wasn't tested. A draft grand jury indictment isn't an indictment. > you aware of any former presidents where a prosecutor concluded that criminal charges were warranted Are you aware of any prosecutors that were illegally appointed and paid for? because if you want to talk details, stuff like that is important as well. Florida wasn't appointed properly. And, lets be honest... a lot of the "proof" is suspect. IE: The J6 committee that hid and deleted evidence from Republicans or the Jean trial where character evidence wasn't allowed showing that she's crazy. (Oh... statute of limitations be damned as well for a he said-she said civil trial). The end of the story the main problem is you can complain that SCOTUS would do differently if it was another party... but you can't do that and ignore the fact that these cases are getting to the SCOTUS because the lower courts are treating Trump differently because of party and politics. Weaponization of the "Justice System". > Last thought - the classified documents case is one where Trump has gotten extreme leniency compared to what an ordinary defendant would get Really? I find it extremly lenient to not charge a Senator for keeping classified documents unsecured in his garage. I find it lenient for another Senator to not get charged for storing classified info on an illegal server then deleting the evidence that was under subpoena. Yet somehow... it's lenient that a POTUS who's working with the "archive" gets raided without warning and a photo op happens? then the prosecutor admits to doctoring evidence? Trump is being treated leniently? We have a different definition of lenient, I think :) |