https://www.nytimes.com/live/2...den-plea-tax-charges

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/ne...ea-deal-court-judge/


The issue is does the deal provide immunity for all other crimes or just tax crimes.

I think the judge will accept it, and it will be narrowed in scope to specific types of charges and a time period.

What this confirms is that there are other investigations concerning other types of potential crimes.

The Defense was trying to leverage this plea to end those investigations.

Politicians = criminals!

Trump appointed judge.

Talk about politics involved?

The report I read was that once it became clear that this left him open for further charges, the defense canned it and Biden pled not guilty.

The reporting I am hearing is the plea is going to be accepted on the narrow scope from above.

Yes, the Judge in making sure the plea was being entered into knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily being entered.

The parties came to an agreement as to scope, but the Judge has refused to accept the deal on the gun charge over her concerns the provision of the GCA is unconstitutional. Thanks S. Ct.

Apparently his lawyer and he thought the plea would give him immunity for other charges going forward. When the judge said no, they withdraw the guilty plea and will apparently go to trial. That’s according to the evening News tonight. That means his deal on the felony gun charge is back in play….

I am getting an AL Capone vibe off this -- without a plea deal, little joe is facing the full force of law on the tax charges - while I am certain his daddy would pardon him, i think this is a game changer.

personally, I feel this is a somewhat dishonest approach, as there was a plea deal (regardless of the legality) and the judge f'ed it up

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Apparently his lawyer and he thought the plea would give him immunity for other charges going forward. When the judge said no, they withdraw the guilty plea and will apparently go to trial. That’s according to the evening News tonight. That means his deal on the felony gun charge is back in play….

No and Yes. Yes, he pled not guilty. No, both sides have accepted the plea only covers activity from a set date. The Judge has requested briefings on the constitutionality of the gun charge plea, and her ability to accept a plea on that charge not before her (not indicted it appears).

https://www.politico.com/news/...s-plea-deal-00108301

What I find troubling is plea deals for practically no punishment for crimes that the average American would go to prison for are de rigueur for 'celebrities' or political figures. Justice and the law should be applied equally to all.

Does that include the prosecution of Republican lawbreakers too? Or are they above the law, in your mind?

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Does that include the prosecution of Republican lawbreakers too? Or are they above the law, in your mind?

....the average American would go to prison for are de rigueur for 'celebrities' or political figures. Justice and the law should be applied equally to all.

Do you see some sort of exclusion on my part here?

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Does that include the prosecution of Republican lawbreakers too? Or are they above the law, in your mind?

Nope. Politicians should be mostly held to the same standards as us hoi polloi.

I guarantee if you or I did what Trump did, we would be serving time at some federal facility. That’s not the question form the right, though.

The question is why are they going after Trump and not any of the others who have been caught doing the same things, not as egregiously?

Be a the situations are not factually or legally similar which has been exploring you.

You just refuse to accept the explanation.

See HRC.

Oh, I accept the explanation.

I don’t agree with it.

HRC would have gone to Leavenworth if she had not been HRC but had been some field grade military officer, much less enlisted. If she had been a high ranking civilian employee of the state department, the same.

Did or did not Biden get caught with security classified documents in his house?

Yes, Trump is incrementally worse… he’s bragging about it. He’s stating it’s ok.

But if you or I had one of those papers at home and it was found… prison.

Prosecutorial discretion is used a lot to justify treating different people differently.

Heck, as a middle aged white guy, I probably get more warnings than a 19 year old white guy. Is it right? Does it happen? You tell me.

First, Edwards went to the hurt. That means there was a law that required fact finding by a jury. The jury resolved those facts in his favor. President Trump can face a hurt too.

Second, no President has tried to conspire to remain in power assuming President Strunk is so indicted as is being reported.

Third, no ex president has ever lied on a subpoena, refused to surrender documents, directed the destruction of evidence (despite your claims the investigation by DOJ found HRC cooperated fully sane as President Biden) , and then showed those documents to celebrities.

No, you do not accept Comey’s summation of the HRC investigation. The DOJ determined as a matter of law that the statutes had not been violated and a conviction would not survive on appeal if obtained. Now, I have not read the caselaw he summarized to know if he was lying. I accept he is not. There is nothing to suggest he was, but wishful thinking.

As far as warnings, it depends on the facts and severity.

No president ever lied on a subpoena?

William Jefferson Clinton.

He got caught.

He even was impeached over it.

Again, loss of law license? Most folks get substantially more punishment than that for perjury.

Anyone who thinks the good old boy network is not still in full force is delusional. People of power help or hurt as they see fit. It is human nature and has been in play since humans were hunting with sticks and rocks and it will continue long into the future. What I do not understand is why everyone thinks it so unusual or restricted to one party or the other. It is going on everywhere from local government, churches, organizations, corporations etc. It not restricted to USA every country in the world does it.

It is not fair or just, but it is normal, and we will never get rid of it so just sit back eat some popcorn and watch the show!

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
No president ever lied on a subpoena?

William Jefferson Clinton.

He got caught.

He even was impeached over it.

Again, loss of law license? Most folks get substantially more punishment than that for perjury.

He did not lie on a subpoena for documents. He lied under oath. He also tried to get others to lie.

He should have been removed by the Senate and prosecuted. He did not take too secret documents and refuse to give the back.

Isn’t a subpoena essentially a demand for a statement? Ie testimony?

You just admitted that people get treated differently for political reasons.

Now, I’m all for Trump facing the music for his misdeeds. I’m fine with him being the first… but Biden should be in the cell next to him after they convict him for illicit possession of secret documents. If Biden serves a shorter sentence due to circumstances, hey that’s fine, but both did the same chargeable offense.

No a subpoena is a demand to appear. A subpoena duces tecum, which is what we are taking about here, is a demand to produce tangible things.

I am not going to let President Clinton getting by with his shenanigans influence my opinion of holding President Trump accountable. President Clinton also cut a deal with Starr. Both were impeached in the House and acquitted in the Senate. I also believe there was a deal for President Trump to resin and be pardoned like President Nixon. That is my speculation.

I believe both should have been removed in the Senate and prosecuted. I do believe President Trump’s sledged crimes are more severe than perjury. The penal code agrees as President Trump is facing higher felony charges than what prejudge is.

President Clinton is not HRC nor Edwards.

No he’s not.

I’m not disagreeing with Trump going to court.

I’m stating your acceptance of prosecutorial discretion is what is allowing Trump to get by with a certain subset of the population in claiming it’s all a conspiracy.

I know of one guy in Leavenworth for security violations of private e-mail on a secure (nuclear) server. That is essentially the same crime as HRC. I don’t care that Powell got away with it. He shouldn’t have either.

HRC is a Yale lawyer. Self proclaimative the smartest woman in the world… and yet the justification for letting her off was she didn’t know better- no bad intent.

I’d give that at least Trump can’t use that one- he was chanting lock her up over it.