Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Is the Judicial Branch now a Political Branch

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by ajoseph, May 1, 2024.

  1. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    6,665
    2,489
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    With all of these alleged contradictions in fact, we should settle the dispute the American way — let’s have a trial on the merits. Right?
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,647
    2,011
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    The charges are well known and are made public in the indictment. Do you seriously not know that? He is charged with 34 counts of first degree falsifying business records.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 2
  3. ETGator1

    ETGator1 GC Hall of Fame

    15,752
    1,731
    708
    Apr 3, 2007
    false charges and witch hunt - all indictments are bs.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. ETGator1

    ETGator1 GC Hall of Fame

    15,752
    1,731
    708
    Apr 3, 2007
    why? you admitted we do not have fair justice system.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,647
    2,011
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Given that you apparently didn't even know that they had been announced, it seems like all indictments are causing you cognitive dissonance, which you are very desperately trying to avoid. Because how could you not even know what the charges were, but still be convinced that you could declare whether they were true or not?
     
    • Like x 1
    • Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Optimistic x 1
    • Come On Man x 1
  6. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    6,665
    2,489
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    It’s flawed,but it’s the only one we have. But I’d add: (a) the jury system allows a representative collection of people to sit and listen to the evidence, consider the evidence, debate the evidence, vote in the evidence, and determine whether the prosecution has met its high burden of proof. While you and I disagree about Trump’s legal and moral compass, let a pool of jurors sit and do their job — let them decide whether this is a “witch hunt,” or whether Trump broke laws. That’s our system.

    Think of it this way, I will never convince you that Trump has wronged America or NY or Georgia. You’ll never convince me this is a witch hunt. But neither of us really know the full breadth of both side’s story.

    Let a jury hear both sides zealously present their case. And let the jury decide the issue.

    Or, of course, everyone can just call each other names.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. ETGator1

    ETGator1 GC Hall of Fame

    15,752
    1,731
    708
    Apr 3, 2007
    I know this is what is taught, and you are serious, but this is laughable.

    There is no way a conservative can have a fair jury in Washington DC, New York, Atlanta and other democrat controlled hot beds.

    Trump's NY jury will convict regardless of the trial evidence. The fix is in. Why? Not one conservative on the jury, none. If that's what you call a fair representation, I'll make you a good deal on the solid gold watch I'm wearing.

    Not only is it judge shopping, it's also the venue location which produces the right jurors leaning to convict conservatives.

    The other side of the coin is you can't convict liberals in these locations either. Hence, the two-sided justice system. The special counsel over the Russiagate Hoax won his trial to convict, but the jury refused to convict regardless of the evidence. It's called jury nullification.

    Bottom line, we could both agree on a fair trial with impartial locations and jurors. Unfortunately, these places are non-existent in areas in strong control by the left or the right.

    Alvin Bragg knows his conviction of Trump will eventually overturned. He doesn't care. He wants a felony conviction so bad that he has fabricated charges and evidence to sell to a jury he knows he can manipulate. The irony is the public at large knows this is going on. Their intention is to put Trump back in the White House regardless of the lawfare used by Biden.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,143
    13,182
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    So the only way Trump gets a fair trial is if the judge, prosecutors, court staff, jurors, and janitor at the court house are all maga. Gotcha :rolleyes:
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. gatorjo

    gatorjo GC Hall of Fame

    1,700
    315
    213
    Feb 24, 2024
    Long post, bro. Lot of heartache to read about. It's definitely not fair. You're a victim.

    I've been working on my empathy though; I'm feeling your pain. I want to help. So........

    You should move. Move to somewhere where it's fair. Where you won't be a victim.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    6,665
    2,489
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    It’s just factually wrong to say that Bragg has judge-shopped or forum shopped. He filed his case in the Court where it had to be filed, and the case was then randomly and blindly assigned to the Judge that oversees the case. Same is true down here in the Documents case, where Trump somehow was assigned the single pro-Trump district court judge in the Southern District, in the single place in South Florida where the entire jury pool leans hard right.

    Also, I’m not sure where you got your information that there’s not a single conservative on the jury panel. That’s just not true. If you have something to show me otherwise, I’d love to see it.

    I think it’s easy to make comments like any NY jury will convict. However, I think you’d have a different opinion if you ever served on a jury. My experience in trying cases is that the vast majority of the time, the jury, as a whole, is serious about their job, and hears and considers evidence (as a collective body — meaning, while some evidence might not be retained by one juror, when they are deliberating, the collective panel brings to light all evidence).

    Clearly, I agree that the jury system is flawed and imperfect. I generally don’t like juries as much as bench trials or arbitrations because I find juries to be less predictable. But

    But you’ve made the claims that all of the charges, in every venue and every court, against Trump, are without merit or factual predicates. I think we can agree that there’s a large segment of the Country that thinks the charges and claims are grounded in an abundance of facts. And so I ask this in all seriousness, when you have two sides (the vast majority of both sides who haven’t take the time to actually read the charges or complaints or listened to any testimony or read any documents), who see the cases on polar opposite ends of the spectrum, how do we find out whose right f there is no forum to decide? And, if you take a moment for objectivity, IF Trump is actually guilty, wouldn’t you want him punished? And IF Trump is truly innocent wouldn’t you want to see that vindication, as well?!?! What better way is there to be proven right (or wrong)?!?!

    Note, on a far lesser scale of importance, I also disagree with you that “Bragg is knows his conviction of a Trump will be overturned.” Bragg would not have brought the case if he thought he’d lose at trial or on appeal. He doesn’t want to have criminal conduct excused by either a jury or appeal, precisely because of the negative implications that has in future deterrence.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  11. ETGator1

    ETGator1 GC Hall of Fame

    15,752
    1,731
    708
    Apr 3, 2007
    Insert neutral and you'd be right for a welcome change. The fix:

    Point 1 - Alvin Bragg ran on getting Trump.

    Point 2 - Matthew Colangelo, lead prosecutor, moved from #3 in Biden's DOJ to direct the attack on Trump 3 months before Trump was charged.

    Point 3 - Judge Merchan is a Biden $ donor.

    Point 4 - The jury had slim pickings to find those who would only admit they will listen to the evidence before deciding. If reverse jury nullification is a thing, that's what we have had since the jury was seated.

    There is no way to divorce Joe Biden from this farce of an attack trial which is being used to keep Trump off the campaign trail, a direct threat to democracy by Biden as he is attempting to silence Trump because he can't beat him at the ballot box this year.

    The long-term consequence should not please the left, the right, you, or me as it is an historic attack on Biden's political opponent which if successful will leave a weakened presidency/executive, a volcanic event outside of the constitution.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  12. gatorjo

    gatorjo GC Hall of Fame

    1,700
    315
    213
    Feb 24, 2024
    Welp, I'm convinced. You're a victim. It's not fair.

    And Trump is also a victim. He'd never do anything illegal or unkind. Like try to coerce a foreign country into announcing a fake investigation into Biden. Or committing a conspiracy to overturn an election. He'd never do that because he's rilly rilly honest. It's not fair.

    Also;













    LOCK HIM UP !!
    :) :)
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Dislike Dislike x 1