Comments by "" (@charlesvan13) on "Trump lashes out at day 4 of trial: ‘Man, is he angry!’" video.

@promethiac2641 No. This is much different. This means that the incumbent president will use the DOJ and ties to local courts to have his political opposition prosecuted. Like Latin American and Africa ex-presidents will be prosecuted when leaving office.
6
I have a hunch that the Roberts SCOTUS is going to issue a "presidential immunity" ruling that is just strong enough to nip this in the bud. They're watching the unhinged Democrats ruin the credibility of the US justice system.
1
No. It's not about anything. The FEC concluded in 2018 that this was not a campaign expense. The entire evidence is 2 attorney retainer checks Trump paid Cohen.
1
@triarb5790 The fact that there is no crime, makes it not criminal. The FEC looked at this in 2018 and concluded that it wasn't a campaign expense. Alvin Bragg is a fool, and is being used by the Democrats to sacrifice his career to harm the Trump campaign.
1
@TrumpSetUp16FakeElectors Trump didn't do anything. Trump didn't even make the hush money payment, that was Cohen, the felon perjurer who is the prosecution's witness.
1
@43supermm Trump never told his DOJ to prosecute Hillary Clinton. This is purely a Biden and Democrat precedent that is set. But tit for tat is fair.
1
@donnymaga8732 "just prove why you are innocent, " Did you even graduate from high school? In the U.S. system all defendants are "innocent until proven guilty". The prosecution has to prove he is guilty. You're either not American, or you're a traitor. In the "guilty until proven innocent" systems, eg. Napoleonic Code, anyone can get railroaded. The court just keeps the charges vague so the defendant can't defend themself.
1
@jameswheeler349 If this case were about the law, it never would have gone to trial. The indictment doesn't even state the crime that Trump is supposed to have hidden with his business records.
1
@joycebyrne9175 I think Trump isn't going to follow it. It's just blatant that this trial is not legitimate. This is the next step in an out of control Stalinist political party. In Russiagate the CIA, FBI and Democrats capture the media and destroyed all journalistic norms. Now they've moved to politicizing the courts. Cook up politically motivated vague charges, don't allow the defendant to introduce exonerating evidence, and stack the jury.
1
@bobwoods1302 Well...Biden polls at 40% and Putin at 70%. But both are prosecuting their political opponents. And Putin does give protesters 20 year sentences like the Biden regime.
1
@bobwoods1302 Biden instructed Garland to indict Trump. Then Garland appointed Jack Smith to go after Trump, even illegally appointing him without Senate confirmation. Fani Willis, and her employees, visited the White House, their financial records show. This is all coordinated. If you want to virtue signal over the Russians, why are you adopting their politics?
1
@jeremytine Then why don't you pansies just do it already. Try sending an ex-president with secret service protection to Riker's Island.
1
That's a lie. Trump never threatened anyone. The judges daughter has been raising money for Democrat campaigns off of this case.
1
@TreeDancingCloud That's a lie. Gag orders are normally to protect the right of the defendant to an impartial jury. This is the opposite. It's to silence the defendant so the judge and prosecution can lie and appoint a biased jury.
1
@TreeDancingCloud You guys are the absolute worst. "law breakers"? In the American system you are innocent until proven guilty. There is no law breaker. I'm stating the constitutional law. I know that's not the reality here. This is a kangaroo court.
1