Tiger337 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 10 hours ago, ewsieg said: This goes back to what I said to Sue, while you're right he has scammed people his entire life, do you believe our government should be able to railroad someone because they either haven't tried to convict them in the past or haven't been able to convict them? I think he should have been punished severely for his financial crimes a long time ago. If they had did done this 20 years ago it would have been better. I don't feel bad for him at all. He's getting what he deserves. I think they didn't try to convict him in the past or succumbed to his delay tactics, but they are more motivated now due to politics. I understand that the timing makes it look bad to some people, but I am confident that his crimes are real and his presidential ambitions do not give him immunity. They should start nailing some other big fraudsters now BEFORE they think about running for President. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted March 21 Author Share Posted March 21 14 hours ago, ewsieg said: Your not wrong Chuck, but again, we're talking 1/2 billion dollar fine over something that was politically motivated. And calling Deutsce Bank a victim here, haha. Again, I do find it funny because I despise Trump, but it was an over the top settlement for this specific case. (Mind you I'd be perfectly all right with him being hung if he's found guilty of insurrection). You really did not read the post, did you, haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 When I am on a road by myself and driving 15 MPH over the speed limit, and a cop sitting in a ditch sees me and gives me a ticket... is he targeting me? What about other people on other roads? There's no victim. Nobody got hurt. If I am parked out front of a store, in the "fire lane", and I get a ticket, but there's no fire.... there's no victim. Nobody got hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) On Earth 2.0, where Michael Bloomberg's 2020 campaign resulted in him winning the Democratic nomination and Presidency against Donald Trump, does one believe that his finances would have been scrutinized a lot more than they were prior to running? For better or worse, when someone makes the decision to run for office, particularly POTUS, their lives are scrutinized in ways that they weren't before. This was true of all of Trump's predecessors, and it is true of his successor (see the impeachment inquiry he's currently being subjected to) Edited March 21 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 The easiest comp to how a normal person would be treated compared to Trump viz "railroaded" is the difference between how you get treated for stockpiling nuclear secrets in the toilet of your shabby roadside motel that happens to be a locus of Russian and Chinese espionage, if you are regular person. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted March 21 Author Share Posted March 21 11 hours ago, pfife said: yep maga calls c-span on the independent line all the time and also say democrat party Oh man, those are some of my my favorite calls: "I am a registered Democrat, I voted for Biden and for Obama twice and for Clinton twice and for Carter twice and for Johnson and for Kennedy and for Stevenson twice and for Truman and for FDR four times, but I can't take the utter corruption and the lies anymore so I'm voting for Trump, I'm not leaving the party, the party left me." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted March 21 Author Share Posted March 21 4 hours ago, oblong said: Like the dudes who say they aren't racist but why can rappers use the N word but we can't? (And they refer to any music by a black person as 'that rap music') They're just about the only people still calling it "rap", and frequently as part of a rhyming phrase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 2 minutes ago, oblong said: When I am on a road by myself and driving 15 MPH over the speed limit, and a cop sitting in a ditch sees me and gives me a ticket... is he targeting me? What about other people on other roads? There's no victim. Nobody got hurt. If I am parked out front of a store, in the "fire lane", and I get a ticket, but there's no fire.... there's no victim. Nobody got hurt. When you're on a road by yourself driving 15 mph over the speed limit and no cop sees you, but years later someone shows up because they decided to check every traffic cam and look specifically for you and found you driving 15mph over the speed limit, yes you're still guilty, but you were also targeted. And again, what is a penalty for parking in the fire lane? Is it twice the value of the car you parked in that fire lane? 400 million is 'ill-gotten' gains, laughable. Again, 232 million dollar loan and there is no evidence that he ended up with a better interest rate as a result as Deutsche Bank said they questioned/pushed back, and negotiated an interest rate that both agreed too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted March 21 Author Share Posted March 21 yeah, who does that judge think he is, settling on a number so high that it might deter others from doing the same thing? 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 3 minutes ago, ewsieg said: When you're on a road by yourself driving 15 mph over the speed limit and no cop sees you, but years later someone shows up because they decided to check every traffic cam and look specifically for you and found you driving 15mph over the speed limit, yes you're still guilty, but you were also targeted. And again, what is a penalty for parking in the fire lane? Is it twice the value of the car you parked in that fire lane? 400 million is 'ill-gotten' gains, laughable. Again, 232 million dollar loan and there is no evidence that he ended up with a better interest rate as a result as Deutsche Bank said they questioned/pushed back, and negotiated an interest rate that both agreed too. Trump is the one who told the Judge he had that much money. When they try to provide a penalty to get him to stop doing the bad things they need to match the punishment to the pain threshold of the perp. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) Just now, romad1 said: Trump is the one who told the Judge he had that much money. When they try to provide a penalty to get him to stop doing the bad things they need to match the punishment to the pain threshold of the perp. I owe you a coke Chasfh Edited March 21 by romad1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted March 21 Author Share Posted March 21 2 minutes ago, romad1 said: I owe you a coke Chasfh Powder or rock is fine by me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) I keep going back to the fact that everyone who ends up running for POTUS amps up the scrutiny on themselves because they are drawing attention to themselves in a way that they weren't in their previous roles (either in lower level roles in government or, in Trump's case, as a private businessman). There's a reason campaigns hire opposition researchers... to find shady **** in their opponents past. Trump is not unique in this regard, and I have no idea why the volume or type of shadiness in his past, or the fact that it violates the law in this particular case, requires us to treat him by a different standard. Edited March 21 by mtutiger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 34 minutes ago, ewsieg said: When you're on a road by yourself driving 15 mph over the speed limit and no cop sees you, but years later someone shows up because they decided to check every traffic cam and look specifically for you and found you driving 15mph over the speed limit, yes you're still guilty, but you were also targeted. And again, what is a penalty for parking in the fire lane? Is it twice the value of the car you parked in that fire lane? 400 million is 'ill-gotten' gains, laughable. Again, 232 million dollar loan and there is no evidence that he ended up with a better interest rate as a result as Deutsche Bank said they questioned/pushed back, and negotiated an interest rate that both agreed too. But you aren't defending him.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 19 minutes ago, mtutiger said: I keep going back to the fact that everyone who ends up running for POTUS amps up the scrutiny on themselves because they are drawing attention to themselves in a way that they weren't in their previous roles (either in lower level roles in government or, in Trump's case, as a private businessman). There's a reason campaigns hire opposition researchers... to find shady **** in their opponents past. Trump is not unique in this regard, and I have no idea why the volume or type of shadiness in his past, or the fact that it violates the law in this particular case, requires us to treat him by a different standard. The Clintons and MacDougals give their regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 6 minutes ago, oblong said: But you aren't defending him.... I'm not, he was guilty and he should be punished, I've said that multiple times. Just admit he's guilty of something no one else would have charged with and the penalty for that specific crime was exorbitant. I get it 'couldn't have happened to a nicer guy', so i'm not expecting sympathy, nor am I giving him any. As Romad pointed out though, i'd much prefer if undecided folks, in the little news they take in, were getting news on the documents case, j6, or his GA case (and not the side show with Willis), and not this which I fear could make undecided voters apothetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 4 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I get it 'couldn't have happened to a nicer guy', so i'm not expecting sympathy, nor am I giving him any. As Romad pointed out though, i'd much prefer if undecided folks, in the little news they take in, were getting news on the documents case, j6, or his GA case (and not the side show with Willis), and not this which I fear could make undecided voters apothetic. Unless there is a conviction in any of the criminal cases, I don't expect they will matter much regardless of the existence of this case. To the extent this one matters, it goes to more practical implications of dealing with the fallout while trying to mount of a national campaign (which will require a significant amount of $$$) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) 1 hour ago, mtutiger said: I keep going back to the fact that everyone who ends up running for POTUS amps up the scrutiny on themselves because they are drawing attention to themselves in a way that they weren't in their previous roles (either in lower level roles in government or, in Trump's case, as a private businessman). There's a reason campaigns hire opposition researchers... to find shady **** in their opponents past. Trump is not unique in this regard, and I have no idea why the volume or type of shadiness in his past, or the fact that it violates the law in this particular case, requires us to treat him by a different standard. Right, there are a lot different ways to formulate the basic concept, but the standard goes up for the guy who wants to be in charge. It always has, it always will, and it is the completely correct social requirement/outcome. And to be absolutely fair it's why the Dems were completely wrong (speaking purely strategically in the long term) to have supported Clinton once he had perjured himself, and that decision haunts them to this day in holding Trump accountable. Edited March 21 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbomb13 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) This will literally push zero moderates/independents to vote for Trump. The only people that will be upset about this is the cult that will always vote for him anyway. Edited March 21 by Tigerbomb13 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 31 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I'm not, he was guilty and he should be punished, I've said that multiple times. Just admit he's guilty of something no one else would have charged with and the penalty for that specific crime was exorbitant. I get it 'couldn't have happened to a nicer guy', so i'm not expecting sympathy, nor am I giving him any. As Romad pointed out though, i'd much prefer if undecided folks, in the little news they take in, were getting news on the documents case, j6, or his GA case (and not the side show with Willis), and not this which I fear could make undecided voters apothetic. People that commit those kinds of crimes are always wealthy and connected. That is why they don't get punished and that's not right. They should be punished more often. Why are you so sure that the penalty was exorbitant? Isn't he being asked to pay back what he gained from his criminal behavior? As for the politics, if Biden or Obama had committed those crimes, the Republicans would have been all over them. You know that 100%. Politics is nasty and Trump is an easy target, because he thinks laws do not pertain to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 11 minutes ago, Tigerbomb13 said: This will literally push zero moderates/independents to vote for Trump. The only people that will be upset about this is the cult that will always vote for him anyway. There are people who might be looking for justification to vote for him but this is the weakest sauce. Proven criminal is punished for being a criminal. How dare they!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 35 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Right, there are a lot different ways to formulate the basic concept, but the standard goes up for the guy who wants to be in charge. It always has, it always will, and it is the completely correct social requirement/outcome. And to be absolutely fair it's why the Dems were completely wrong (speaking purely strategically in the long term) to have supported Clinton once he had perjured himself, and that decision haunts them to this day in holding Trump accountable. Even during this current administration, we are living through an impeachment inquiry that (for a variety of reasons) wouldn't be a twinkle in anyone's eye had Biden not chosen to run for office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 catching up on some of the clips of Lev Parnas yesterday...... he raised his right hand before he said that stuff. People saying the opposite haven't. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 5 hours ago, ewsieg said: C'mon, i'm asking you to look at this specific thing he was found guilty ... 232 million in loans, which he paid back... The $400 mill is not for ONE thing. It's not for the Deutsche loan and ONLY that loan. He has a 20+ year history of lying about the value of his holdings ("they ain't worth nuthin') in order to **** states out of tax money. Which ****s New York State taxpayers and others. And a 20+ year history of lying about the value of his holdings ("worth BILLIONS" including his "name" which he values at 5+ Billion, har-dee-har-har) in order to illegally obtain loans, securitized by his over-leveraged, illegally overvalued properties. He should have been in prison 10+ years ago for White Collar Crime. Are you next going to try to convince us that Embezzlement is perfectly fine too? Because what Trump did was ILLEGAL... and he didn't do it ONCE, he did it EVERY SINGLE TIME, on EVERY LOAN application, EVERY loan he received, EVERY tax filing he made. Just because Deutsche is used as the prime example does NOT mean that he hasn't engaged in a pattern of illegal activity. OH!!! That's called RICO. Racketeering. A pattern of illegal activity. And judges are ALLOWED to write extraordinary penalties for the crime, for a pattern of criminal behavior, and as a warning for that behavior. It's called "punitive damages". And Trump owes a ****load more than $454 mill for his criminal behavior the past 40+ years. And he should have been in prison already the past 10+ years, with 10 more to go. That scumbag MF'er. IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 3 hours ago, chasfh said: yeah, who does that judge think he is, settling on a number so high that it might deter others from doing the same thing? Omigosh...!!! Don't they call that... "Punitive Damages"? And isn't that... Actually... "LEGAL" (not illegal) to do?!?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.