Our Trumpy governor has surrendered whatever honor, integrity, and patriotism he may once have had in his quest to get on the 2024 Republican ticket. Reacting to the first of many indictments of Donald Trump, he had this to say . . .
“It is beyond belief that District Attorney Alvin Bragg has indicted a former President and current presidential candidate for pure political gain. Arresting a presidential candidate on a manufactured basis should not happen in America. The left’s continued attempts to weaponize our judicial system erode people’s faith in the American justice system and it needs to stop.”
In one word, this is a disgrace. And it is disqualifying for higher office. We have had enough of lying liars in high places.
This is not a “manufactured basis.” Trump’s own Justice Department prosecuted Michael Cohen and put him in jail around these same facts. In those proceedings the Trump DOJ said that Cohen was acting on the instructions of “Individual 1” – the un-indicted co-conspirator. That person was Donald Trump. Now he is indicted. And so it goes.
“The left” had nothing to do with New York prosecutors doing their jobs. It is this kind of dishonest bullshit that erodes faith in the American justice system. Duh!
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
“And it is disqualifying for higher office.”
By the LAW, it isn’t. Which seems odd to me, because in most states, a felony conviction results in the loss of voting rights, ability to serve on a jury or as a notary, or to hold public office. Perhaps it only matters in the minds of the voters.
Youngkin’s statement is just his way of setting himself up with MAGA voters should he decide to seek the GOP nomination. I would not be surprised, if in the quiet private moments of his life, he did a little victory dance in the dark. IF it comes down that GOP voters have decided they have had enough of the drama.
LikeLike
RE: “In one word, this is a disgrace. And it is disqualifying for higher office. We have had enough of lying liars in high places.”
If you take the position that Gov. Younkin is not allowed to have or express an opinion on the Trump indictment, then I suppose it could be called a disgrace that he does so. But then, the position that opinions are not allowed is itself a disgraceful one.
It is hard to see how either justice or the national interest will be served by prosecuting Donald Trump. Even if Michael Cohen’s campaign finance conviction in the Stormy Daniels matter is just, Trump’s role in it probably wasn’t criminal.
It is not actually a crime to instruct a lawyer in one’s employ to break the law. It is the lawyer’s crime if he does it. It only becomes the client’s crime, too, when both the lawyer and the client are fully aware of the illegality and both have the same intention to break the law.
LikeLike
Youngkin’s statement is not just an opinion. His statement that the indictment is politically motivated and is based on a “manufactured basis” is an outright LIE. The basis is real and it was enough to send Michael Cohen to prison. Trump got a bye because he was President. Now he is not.
But, of course opinions and LIES are allowed. But, expressing them carries consequences.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “His statement that the indictment is politically motivated and is based on a ‘manufactured basis’ is an outright LIE.”
No, it isn’t. You just don’t like it. Everything you don’t like is untrue in some way.
LikeLike
“No, it isn’t. You just don’t like it. Everything you don’t like is untrue in some way”
Yes, it is.
Of course that is a LIE. The evidence the Grand Jury saw was NOT “manufactured.” If you want to claim that it is and that therefore the prosecutors are corrupt, prove it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “The evidence the Grand Jury saw was NOT ‘manufactured.'”
Maybe not, but the grand jury procedure is “manufactured” by definition. So, Youngkin’s opinion may well be justified. He told no lie, but you are not telling the truth.
LikeLike
“Maybe not, but the grand jury procedure is “manufactured” by definition.”
Your Dr. Semantics schtick is usually a fail, but this one takes the cake. Patently ridiculous defense of this liar whose motivation could not be more obvious – pandering to Trump and his MAGA cult.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not semantics. Logic. As in, “It makes no logical sense for you to keep repeating falsehoods.”
LikeLike
Logic? Why is it only YOUR logic matters, you sanctimonious ass?
YOU are not a lawyer, legal expert or even a decent “sea lawyer”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Everything you don’t like is untrue in some way.”
Talking to yourself again, Mr. Roberts?
What exactly is the political motivation of the Manhattan DA?
And the only manufacturing that went on was the alleged criminal fraud perpetrated by Mr. Trump.
You don’t get a 30+ count indictment out of thin air. Read the piece by Kim Wehle I posted this morning for context. (The third thing to consider.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Read the piece by Kim Wehle I posted this morning for context.”
I read it. Can’t think of a useful way to comment on it other than to suggest that Ms. Wehle should be disbarred, which isn’t very useful.
I think that YOU don’t understand “innocent until proven guilty.” This causes you to make many mistakes.
LikeLike
“Can’t think of a useful way to comment on it other than to suggest that Ms. Wehle should be disbarred, which isn’t very useful.”
Justify it. Or are you just PISSED because she made valid points to consider in this instance that don’t comport to your ass-kissing worship of DJT?
LikeLike
“ It is hard to see how either justice or the national interest will be served by prosecuting Donald Trump.”
Do you think he is above the law?
His companies were convicted on 17 counts of tax fraud, so we are not dealing with people who are strangers to criminal behavior.
Justice is absolutely necessary for leaders as they set the tone for trust in the law. Trump ran on holding elites accountable by draining the swamp and supporting the average working class.
The national interest is served by making sure our elected leaders are held to account that the average citizen would most certainly be also.
The fact that he has declared his candidacy for president makes it even more important to indict and try him. Otherwise any other person in legal trouble could declare candidacy for any office and scream political persecution.
Whether or not he is found guilty, the trial is important. For him, if he is innocent, for the country if he cleared or convicted.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“If you take the position that Gov. Younkin is not allowed to have or express an opinion on the Trump indictment, ”
Sure he is. He is also allowed to be called out for it. It may not be legally disqualifying for higher office. It could be a question to be considered in the minds of the voters.
…”Trump’s role in it probably wasn’t criminal.”
If that were true, there there would have been no indictment.
“It only becomes the client’s crime, too, when both the lawyer and the client are fully aware of the illegality and both have the same intention to break the law.”
Which appears to be the case here.
But until the indictment is unsealed, we are all just speculating.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “If that were true, there there would have been no indictment.”
Not really. Do you know what a ham sandwich is?
RE: “Which appears to be the case here.”
Appearances and reality are not the same. Proving mens rea for a conspiracy theory is a big challenge.
LikeLike
“Appearances and reality are not the same.”
What part of SPECUALTING are you ignoring? I have been clear that until we see the indictment, we are only guessing.
You, of course, just KNOW that it a nothing burger (or ham sandwich).
And Mr. Bragg is smart enough to not bring conspiracy charges UNLESS he can prove them. So if there is a conspiracy charge in the indictment, I feel confident that the DA has the evidence and witness testimony to prove it.
LikeLike
RE: “What part of SPECUALTING are you ignoring?”
None. Your speculations are illogical.
RE: “You, of course, just KNOW that it a nothing burger (or ham sandwich).”
I haven’t said so. “Ham sandwich” doesn’t mean the case is a nothing burger. It means, as in the famous cliche, that an indictment by itself is meaningless.
RE: “I feel confident that the DA has the evidence and witness testimony to prove it.”
That and a dollar can buy you a cup of coffee.
LikeLike
“Your speculations are illogical.”
And yours isn’t? Screw you!
The DA doesn’t take the action, unprecedented as it is, unless he is confident that he can secure a conviction.
And you can take your coffee and give yourself an enema with it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “The DA doesn’t take the action, unprecedented as it is, unless he is confident that he can secure a conviction.”
So what? Does that mean we should assume the defendant is guilty?
LikeLike
Should we assume that the DA is motivated by politics? That is what you and your side is doing.
I did not say ANYTHING about guilt or innocence. I did say that the DA is smarter than you give him credit for. He knows his job MUCH better than you ever could.
LikeLike
“Does that mean we should assume the defendant is guilty?”
No, you do not have to assume that, but you do not get to LIE and say the indictment is on a “manufactured basis” or that it was “politically motivated.”
The only assumption a fair minded person would make is that there is “probable cause” behind the actions of the DA and the Grand Jury. And that assumption is doubly valid in such a high profile case.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A fair minded person would admit that the DA and grand jury may be flawed. An opinionated fair minded person might characterize the flaws. That doesn’t make the opinion a lie.
In fact, it is irresponsible of you to call Younkin a liar in this instance, since you obviously can’t prove he is lying.
LikeLike
“A fair minded person would admit that the DA and grand jury may be flawed.”
So would a racist.
LikeLike
There is a pretty high bar to reach in indicating Trump on these types of very weak charges and Bragg is relying on a jury to buy any testimony from Cohen as the star and only true witness besides a hooker? Really? This is purely hands down a political stunt by the deranged Trump haters. Youngkin is correct in his assessment. The left couldn’t do any better in putting Trump back in the white house again now. Dopes…
LikeLike
Also, a case study in projection…
LikeLike
“Dopes…”
Your the ones that put the ass in office.
…”indicating Trump”…
I find it interesting that you have the same typo that Trump himself had in one of his late night tweets. (indicating vice indicting.).
And your comment shows how little attention you are paying. It is NOT just Cohen and Stormy’s testimony. Documents, corroborating evidence and testimony form others are also involved.
Keep your wishing up.
LikeLike
“Indicated” If I played auto correct police with you I would never get any sleep. Is that all you can babble about? Laughably lame.
Numerous scholars of law including Bill Barr, who is no friend of Trump, have said this is a pathetically weak case no matter the supposed evidence. No , it’s all politically intended to affect the 2024 election. Democrats are famous for playing dirty tricks like this.
LikeLike
I simply pointed out that you ad Mr. Trump have the EXACT same mistakes in your respective posts.
Bill Barr also stated that the Mueller Report didn’t have in it what it actually had in it. He is no fan of Trump, but he sure did a good job of covering up for his large orange-haired ass.
LikeLike