No One Is Above the Law, Part 1, Letitia James Edition

[Yagoda]

Because the news article I read came from John Solomon, a brilliant investigative journalist, I wont link it in order to avoid the Greek Chorus of "MAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGAAAAAAAA", instead, Ill go right to the source.

 

https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2025-04/FHFALetitiaJamesReferralLetter_0.pdf

 

Letitia has got her hand caught in the cookie jar. These cases are slam dunk for the government, ask Marilyn Mosby.

 

Pro Tip: Be clean before you accuse others of being dirty.

 

Anticipated Comments:

De Minimus

Lawfare by Trump

MAGA (see above)

 

Of course, dont forget the comments about yours truly, the Kingdom of Cambodia, MAGAnuts, Trump in general, and my personal favourite: the Emojinauts, whose wires will be humming when one of them spots this.

 

The letter above contains mere accusations. She has not been charged. But she will be.

 

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

You can go to this page below from FEB 2024 where I was taking the heat for presenting the case that that the Ms. James case against Mr. Trump was a real dud.

So Ms. James will get little sympathy at least from me. As the Brits would say 'Own Goal'.

https://aseannow.com/topic/1320175-judge-orders-trump-and-companies-to-pay-nearly-355-million-in-civil-fraud-trial/page/22/

.

[placeholder]

19 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Because the news article I read came from John Solomon, a brilliant investigative journalist, I wont link it in order to avoid the Greek Chorus of "MAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGAAAAAAAA", instead, Ill go right to the source.

 

https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2025-04/FHFALetitiaJamesReferralLetter_0.pdf

 

Letitia has got her hand caught in the cookie jar. These cases are slam dunk for the government, ask Marilyn Mosby.

 

Pro Tip: Be clean before you accuse others of being dirty.

 

Anticipated Comments:

De Minimus

Lawfare by Trump

MAGA (see above)

 

Of course, dont forget the comments about yours truly, the Kingdom of Cambodia, MAGAnuts, Trump in general, and my personal favourite: the Emojinauts, whose wires will be humming when one of them spots this.

 

The letter above contains mere accusations. She has not been charged. But she will be.

 

 

 

So what is your point? How does this prove that Laetitia James' prosecution against Trump was defective? Are you saying that if James hadn't authorized a prosecution against Trump, this suggested investigation wouldn't have happened?

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

You can go to this page below from FEB 2024 where I was taking the heat for presenting the case that that the Ms. James case against Mr. Trump was a real dud.

So Ms. James will get little sympathy at least from me. As the Brits would say 'Own Goal'.

https://aseannow.com/topic/1320175-judge-orders-trump-and-companies-to-pay-nearly-355-million-in-civil-fraud-trial/page/22/

.

To repeat: How does this prove that Laetitia James' prosecution against Trump was defective? How is this an own goal? Would it be one if she hadn't authorized the prosecution of Trump?

[frank83628]

23 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Because the news article I read came from John Solomon, a brilliant investigative journalist, I wont link it in order to avoid the Greek Chorus of "MAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGAAAAAAAA", instead, Ill go right to the source.

 

https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2025-04/FHFALetitiaJamesReferralLetter_0.pdf

 

Letitia has got her hand caught in the cookie jar. These cases are slam dunk for the government, ask Marilyn Mosby.

 

Pro Tip: Be clean before you accuse others of being dirty.

 

Anticipated Comments:

De Minimus

Lawfare by Trump

MAGA (see above)

 

Of course, dont forget the comments about yours truly, the Kingdom of Cambodia, MAGAnuts, Trump in general, and my personal favourite: the Emojinauts, whose wires will be humming when one of them spots this.

 

The letter above contains mere accusations. She has not been charged. But she will be.

 

 

 

i hope all those that attacked Trump using lawfare get what they deserve, however the Republicans are no where near as vicious and underhanded as the Democrats and I dont think much will come of it due to this. Unfortunately 

[placeholder]

35 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Because the news article I read came from John Solomon, a brilliant investigative journalist, I wont link it in order to avoid the Greek Chorus of "MAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGAAAAAAAA", instead, Ill go right to the source.

 

 

 

 

As for John Solomon being a "brilliant investigative journalist;"

The Hill’s review of John Solomon’s columns on Ukraine

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/483600-the-hills-review-of-john-solomons-columns-on-ukraine/

[BangkokReady]

19 minutes ago, placeholder said:

To repeat: How does this prove that Laetitia James' prosecution against Trump was defective? How is this an own goal? Would it be one if she hadn't authorized the prosecution of Trump?

 

It's more about the fact that there is a lot of corruption in America (probably in most governments around the world) but it gets ignored because everyone is doing it.  So politician A doesn't highlight the corruption of politician B because politician A is up to the same things.

 

What happened with Trump is that people used "lawfare" against him and he ended up being in court for things that most politicians do.  Now he is turning the tables and exposing a lot of corruption.

 

Note that Trump didn't do this the first time he was in office, even though he obviously could have done.

[jerrymahoney]

24 minutes ago, placeholder said:

To repeat: How does this prove that Laetitia James' prosecution against Trump was defective? How is this an own goal? Would it be one if she hadn't authorized the prosecution of Trump?

That the case was a dud has nothing to do with anything in OP. It was always a dud.

 

And while there may never be any legal action against Ms. James in the OP, Ms. James may be in for a whole lot of adverse publicity of her own doing.

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

That the case was a dud has nothing to do with anything in OP. It was always a dud.

 

And while there may never be any legal action against Ms. James in the OP, Ms. James may be in for a whole lot of adverse publicity of her own doing.

Well, so far the case has held up to judicial scrutiny. And your reply to Yagoda didn't exactly challenge his interpretation of the situation.

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

 

 

Note that Trump didn't do this the first time he was in office, even though he obviously could have done.

You've got to be kidding. The only reason Trump didn't go after his enemies via the justice dept was that he chose AGs who couldn't bring themselves to sink that low. For his second term he's solved that problem.

[jerrymahoney]

It was a bench trial -- no jury. And while the 'no victims' argument may hacve swayed Engoron, the appeals courts might have looked at it differently.

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

It was a bench trial -- no jury. And while the 'no victims' argument may hacve swayed Engoron, the appeals courts might have looked at it differently.

Guilty: Trump becomes first former US president convicted of felony crimes

 Donald Trump became the first former American president to be convicted of felony crimes Thursday as a New York jury found him guilty of all 34 charges in a scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election through a hush money payment to a porn actor who said the two had sex.

Trump sat stone-faced while the verdict was read as cheering from the street below could be heard in the hallway on the courthouse’s 15th floor where the decision was revealed after more than nine hours of deliberations.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-trial-deliberations-jury-testimony-verdict-85558c6d08efb434d05b694364470aa0

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

It was a bench trial -- no jury. And while the 'no victims' argument may hacve swayed Engoron, the appeals courts might have looked at it differently.

 

[jerrymahoney]

Wrong case.

[Yagoda]

35 minutes ago, placeholder said:

As for John Solomon being a "brilliant investigative journalist;"

The Hill’s review of John Solomon’s columns on Ukraine

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/483600-the-hills-review-of-john-solomons-columns-on-ukraine/

Well I saw that one coming. So predictable.

[Yagoda]

28 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, so far the case has held up to judicial scrutiny

What? You have the Appellate Decision?

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Well I saw that one coming. So predictable.

I bet when someone says  two plus two equals 4, you say the same thing.

Predictable because it's true.

[jerrymahoney]

Ms. James will be up for re-election as NY State attorney general in a state-wide election in NOV 2026.

[Yagoda]

22 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Guilty: Trump becomes first former US president convicted of felony crimes

 Donald Trump became the first former American president to be convicted of felony crimes Thursday as a New York jury found him guilty of all 34 charges in a scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election through a hush money payment to a porn actor who said the two had sex.

Trump sat stone-faced while the verdict was read as cheering from the street below could be heard in the hallway on the courthouse’s 15th floor where the decision was revealed after more than nine hours of deliberations.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-trial-deliberations-jury-testimony-verdict-85558c6d08efb434d05b694364470aa0

I cant wait for the reversal. That should clear a bunch of you out, like the election did LOL

[placeholder]

Just now, Yagoda said:

What? You have the Appellate Decision?

Native speakers of English know what "so far" means.

[BangkokReady]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

You've got to be kidding. The only reason Trump didn't go after his enemies via the justice dept was that he chose AGs who couldn't bring themselves to sink that low. For his second term he's solved that problem.

 

No.  It's tit for tat.  That's why you didn't see any of this in his first term.

[candide]

7 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

No.  It's tit for tat.  That's why you didn't see any of this in his first term.

Too bad Hillary did not try to overturn the 2016 election, did not call anyone to find her 11 700 votes. Oh, and that Obama did not refuse to give back Presidential records and did not hide them! 

[SunnyinBangrak]

"Prosecutors specifically pointed to a previous Truth Social post by Mr Trump in angry all capital letters: “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-threatens-biden-democrats-criminal-cases-b2401423.html

 

Mwahahahaha democrats facing consequences and boy are the msm consumers triggered by karma. Loving the show.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

"Prosecutors specifically pointed to a previous Truth Social post by Mr Trump in angry all capital letters: “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-threatens-biden-democrats-criminal-cases-b2401423.html

 

Mwahahahaha democrats facing consequences and boy are the msm consumers triggered by karma. Loving the show.

The president of the United States is openly using the Justice Department to exact revenge. Not only that he's also waging war on the Constitution. The Constitution grants those facing actual  or possible criminal prosecution the right to counsel. Trump is punishing those who act in accordance with that right.

[jerrymahoney]

Jack Smith was able to get a Federal Grand jury in Washington DC to indict former President Trump on criminal charges.

As the jurisdiction for almost all the 'revenge crimes' will be in Washington DC, it might not be so easy for the current DoJ to get similar grand jury indictments against Trump's erstwhile opponents in the overly Democratic venue.

[SunnyinBangrak]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

The president of the United States is openly using the Justice Department to exact revenge. Not only that he's also waging war on the Constitution. The Constitution grants those facing actual  or possible criminal prosecution the right to counsel. Trump is punishing those who act in accordance with that right.

From my prior link.

 

“Crooked Joe pushed this litigation hard to get it done. This is a new low in Presidential Politics. To the Democrats, I say, ‘be careful what you wish for’.”

 

Amen Sir! Giving more fun than taking?🤣

[illisdean]

A favorable development and classic case of FAFO.

 

 

[BLMFem]

6 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Well I saw that one coming. So predictable.

OK. And?

[Yagoda]

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

The president of the United States is openly using the Justice Department to exact revenge.

AS opposed to Joe Biden and the Dems doing it surreptitiously

 

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

The Constitution grants those facing actual  or possible criminal prosecution the right to counsel. Trump is punishing those who act in accordance with that right.

OH, hes the one seeking disbarment of lawyers for thought crime? What does Letitia James fraud have to do with the right to counsel btw?

[Dan O]

7 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

 

It's more about the fact that there is a lot of corruption in America (probably in most governments around the world) but it gets ignored because everyone is doing it.  So politician A doesn't highlight the corruption of politician B because politician A is up to the same things.

 

What happened with Trump is that people used "lawfare" against him and he ended up being in court for things that most politicians do.  Now he is turning the tables and exposing a lot of corruption.

 

Note that Trump didn't do this the first time he was in office, even though he obviously could have done.

Bringing charges against someone that has broken the law is not lawfare. 

 

Now what Trump is doing is definitely considreed lawfare as he's attacking everyone that had any role in investigating him for his activities and instructing the doj to investigate and prosecute them just for doing their job. Pulling security clearance and penalizing lawfirms that may have had staff work on cases. That is lawfare, clearly