413 private links
Ronnie Long’s story is a tragic tale of injustice and prosecutorial misconduct. In 1976, he was convicted of a crime he did not commit in Concord, North Carolina, and spent 44 years in prison.
Fortunately, Long was recently released after a review of his case. While the city will be paying a hefty settlement, it will not bring back the years in which he was wrongfully deprived of his freedom. This story is a frightening example of prosecutorial misconduct that often goes unnoticed.
Curmudgeon
10 hours ago
The bank in question testified at the trial for the defence. They stated they did their own assessment and agreed terms with Trump. The loan was paid back in full in accordance with the agreement. //
Blue State Deplorable
9 hours ago edited
This prosecution is patently ridiculous. First, there are no damages - the bank was made whole with interest. Second, the bank is not some unequal partner that was taken advantage of. This is their business and they have professionals that advise them accordingly. Third, and as Kevin O’Leary points out, this is a negotiation that happens every day in every city in America. It’s how commercial real estate development is often financed. Anyone who thinks Trump is guilty of something here is galactically stupid. //
Ready2Squeeze Romeg
9 hours ago
At least here in NY, valuations for purposes of taxes are always much lower than what the property is worth on the market. That is done intentionally as it fools a lot of people into thinking that they are getting a 'deal' on their tax assessment - when in fact everyone else's property is similarly 'under valued'.
But don't worry - the government just makes it up on the tax rate ...
In a victory for the Justice Department and against commonsense, a federal appeals court ruled on Friday that merely being in the Capitol was enough to merit conviction for “disorderly” or “disruptive” conduct.
A three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that they were participants if people were aware of what was happening around them. //
“Even passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly,” Henderson added, citing Supreme Court precedent that held sit-ins or protests that block traffic can be disorderly.
Compare and contrast this novel concept of "disorderly conduct" with the free pass given to all George Floyd Memorial Riot and Looting Festival participants. //
The Court [SCOTUS] has consistently over that time rejected the expansive application of statutory language by DOJ in the area of “obstruction of justice.” It has narrowly construed language such that an “ordinary person” would realize when his or her conduct crossed the line into criminal “obstructive” behavior. If Congress wants broader application, Congress needs to speak clearly by using expressly broader language.
What the DC Circuit has done is nothing other than legitimize a political vendetta. If we are ever fortunate enough to get another workable GOP majority in the House and Senate, the judges who validated this abuse must be held to account. Impeachment, even if failing to remove them from office, would at least deter other judges from acting like sock puppets to the Department of Justice. //
Cy
6 hours ago
Pro-Hamas can storm the capitol. Pro-Americans cannot set foot in it.
Liberals can shout down conservatives on campus, conservatives on campus aren't even allowed to breathe.
Leftist can burn down buildings and cities, conservatives can't pray outside an abortion clinic.
Someday the pendulum will swing the other way and I intend to take full advantage of it. //
emptypockets
4 hours ago edited
So accepting an invitation from a uniformed police officer to enter "the people's house" still makes one guilty of disorderly conduct if one's politics is of the wrong persuasion.
Yet some of the officers wearing the same uniform admitted they caused the riot by firing rubber bullets and pepper spray into a peaceful crowd.
One presumes [yes, wrongly but bear with me] that police officers KNOW and understand the laws they are sworn to enforce. so...wouldn't them inviting people in --against the law---be entrapment?
On anything related to "justice" in the District of Corruption, there is no perversion of law which would really surprise me. Disgust is a whole other critter, though.
We have become a nation of Madame Defarges — eagerly knitting names of those to be subject to arbitrary justice. //
The whole idea was already ridiculous when Democrats started trying to use the 14th Amendment to target Trump. Now, this issue has descended further into the realm of the absurd as they seek to disqualify as many Republicans from the ballot as possible.
The AG claims Team Trump exaggerated the value of real estate to secure favorable loans and insurance rates. That’s it. Lenders rely upon their own appraisals. Sophisticated businesses decided to loan him money, all of which he repaid. And the banks are not complaining. This is the Trump defense. Yet, so far, James is winning. //
The AG disregards that there is no victim such as a wronged investor or lender who wound up holding the bag on an undervalued piece of real estate. The state contends that none of this matters; that exaggerating, fibbing, or lying is wrong, and that the Trumps must be destroyed. Apparently, no expenditure of tax dollars is too much for the state to invest to punish these wrongs. The relief sought is the revocation of business licenses throughout the state of New York and fines as high as $250 million. Because it is unusual for a prosecutor to bring a civil case without a victim or cognizable harm, the AG’s motivations have been questioned, especially during her unprecedented daily press conferences. //
Each of these Trump cases brings an odd claim, one that has never been brought against others in the past, or a charge that is not being pursued today against others who have mishandled documents or challenged elections, for instance. //
If the court of appeals reverses Judge Engoron’s decisions, the irreparable harm to the Trump family will have already been done, though. And, for many, that is the goal. //
Much of the damage will have already occurred regardless of future vindication. These are the hallmarks of lawfare. If your goal is to harm your opposition or enemy, a trial win is welcome, but a trial loss also inflicts noticeable pain and offers plenty of consolation.
As a lawfare plaintiff, you win some and lose some — but you can make all of them hurt.