But it’s not really a crime.


Back in the day, the right wing glitterati went all “rule of law” on John Edwards.

Now, hair on fire about indictments for similar conduct.

I thought elephants had long memories. Maybe just a myth.

20 thoughts on “But it’s not really a crime.

  1. “Yes, he’s going to go to jail and he should be indicted. He knew what he was doing was wrong. He was diverting campaign money. He was complicit in making sure that he hid his affair. He lied to us about it and he is going to end up serving jail time for this. Whether or not he knew it was wrong and against the law, which I believe he did know it was against the law, he is going to jail because you are charged with knowing the laws that apply to you. That applied and he broke the law.“

    The link from the post.

    So there it is. Straight from FOX and the Hannity show.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I guess we will find out tomorrow what the charges are. I suspect tax evasion to be some of them. Writing off “legal expenses” with phony invoices is a problem for local, state and federal income taxes.

        Diverting campaign funds for that is also a problem.

        Liked by 1 person

          1. “…his own accounting…”.

            He signed off on phony invoices and was in on the scam that his lawyer went to prison for, but Trump was “immune” due to his DOJ covering for him.

            I’d say he is in more trouble than many think.

            Al Capone was put away on tax evasion, not bootlegging, extortion and murder.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Well, if they get him, it better be clear and serious, If they try to kneecap him on something trivial. you can expect GOP prosecutors across the country to engage in retaliatory lawfare.

            And there are A LOT of vulnerable Democrats.


          3. So it is fine with you for a businessman like Trump to cheat, break the law and evade taxes so long as it is not too big.

            What businesses would not cheat if he gets away with this?

            A shoplifter boosts a few thousand dollar worth of goods and fences them. He will get prison time.

            The average person will then see this as just another case of the elites getting away with crimes. Isn’t that what Trump was supposed to end? Rule of Law is dependent upon equal application, rich or poor.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. I would expect Trump to be treated no differently than anyone else of similar wealth and complexity of their finances.

            Trump is a partner(or at least was in 2015) in over 500 businesses. Complexity like that results in errors and omissions.

            In theory, Trump is responsible for every transaction, but no one man could review all that paperwork, even if he weren’t at the same time running for President.

            So, if some wrong characterizations are found, before convicting Trump, I would expect proof that he knew of them and intended them to happen.


          5. He lied to protect Trump, who then dumped him.

            I suspect he told the truth in his trial under oath.

            There apparently are other corroborating witnesses which is partly, along with additional evidence, why Bragg decided to proceed.

            As prosecutors often remind us, when you are dealing with criminals, you are not going to get choirboys as witnesses.

            Liked by 1 person

          6. Why doo you continue to question the legal ability of the DA? Is it because he isn’t YOUR chosen prosecutor? OR some other hidden reason?

            Keep attacking a District Attorney who is following the law, regardless of the accused, and one realizes that to you the rule of law only applies when YOU want it to.

            This quote from Mona Charen’s opinion piece in The Bulwark this morning hits the nail on the head.

            “So while Bragg may have done something imprudent, he has followed the law in every way. From one point of view, he has vindicated an important principle—that no one is above the law. Republicans, by contrast, have demonstrated reckless contempt for rules, order, and justice in service to their deranged master.”


      2. The point is when it was John Edwards, the right wing glitterati was calling for his head. With Trump, it is “you can’t do that”.

        I love how you hypocrites on the right IGNORE completely the gist of the post to start defending Trump.


          1. …”yet was not prosecuted.”

            You are factually challenged. He WAS prosecuted.

            And seeing as I am the one who posted the story, you do not get to define MY point. Which is the right wing talking heads screamed for prosecution of Edwards and are screamiing AGIANAT prosecution of Trump.


  2. John Edward’s funneled abt $1 million of “campaign contributions” to his pregnant mistress. Hardly similar but Edward’s was acqitted of one charge and the rest were dropped. Seeing as how Trump’s case is much weaker, I expect the same. Perhaps even a malicious prosecution lawsuit as well.


    1. …” as how Trump’s case is much weaker”

      So when you wrote this comment, you had seen the indictment and your law degree informs you of your opinion? Got it. You are just so much smarter than the average District Attorney.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s