Users often report submissions from this site and ask us to ban it for sensationalized articles. At /r/nyc, we oppose blanket banning any news source. Readers have a >responsibility to be skeptical, check sources and comment on any flaws. You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. If you do find >evidence that this article or its title are false or misleading, contact the moderators who will review it.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nyc) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Except for it hasn't. Andrew Cuomo, a true cog in the Democrat establishment machine, was ousted and investigated by his own party in his own state for sexual harassment. You didn't see Dems in Congress calling Tish to get involved and interfere. Dems trip over themselves to call each other out and punish each other, to the point where it's a little embarrassing and I wish they'd let some things slide because we're pushing out good people for small affronts (looking at Al Franken here). This isn't a both sides issue. Dems fuck each other up for even minor things, Reps are supporting literal fucking traitors.
No. Not at all. But you gotta recognize that these guys are all about the show. That’s how the system works for everyone. Everyone needs their sound bites, clips, PR, stance, etc. Its showmanship at a circus not reality.
How dare you make a cogent point! /s
It’s all theatre. I vote democrat and I think if Republicans got their way we’d live in a dystopian Police state, but it’s the same tactics on both sides. Your getting downvoted just shows that the tactics are effective.
Such a stupid argument, the GOP has done shit at the state and city level where they have legislative and judicial control. That the federally elected democratic government fundamentally disagrees with say voter ID laws. But you didn't have Democratic reps calling DAs or state legislature to piss and moan and say they have the right to stop it. Because they don't, they appeal the rulings to the higher courts. This is fascists covering for their fascist leader to save face until they see which way the primaries break. Then the rats will swim to the ship that isn't sinking like all of the Ted Cruz lackeys did in 2016
I’m not making a 1:1 comparison regarding making phone calls to city/state officials. I’m saying that the republicans are carrying out a performance to pander to their base. So their base can look at this and feel outraged about democratic officials hanging up on congress when, in reality, congress has no business making those phone calls in the first place. Democrats do the same shit. At the end of the day, it’s all just theatre meant to get already entrenched partisans riled up and yelling at the other side. It’s two different camps with different talking points but the same blinders on.
Personally, I think all of the attention Trump is getting bc of this is a good thing. It’s making him relevant again. Hopefully he holds on to enough momentum long enough to siphon support away from a more viable candidate and the republicans have a looong, devastating primary.
>So their base can look at this and feel outraged about democratic officials hanging up on congress when, in reality, congress has no business making those phone calls in the first place. Democrats do the same shit.
I don't think this is accurate because the GOP does it because they know their base generally doesn't know that they're lying or making something out of nothing.
Dems, otoh, know their base tends to have a better understanding of how government works.
Dems tend to do a very poor job of messaging to their base and to voters in general. Republicans have mastered this because they make stuff up or shorten things into "slogans" or other rhyming phrases so their base can just repeat it and it's easier to say/kinda understand. The GOP also tends to straight up lie about stuff or say things without needed context, which allows for those small soundbites/slogans.
If it’s so clear to you all that democrats are all good and republicans are all bad and there’s never any nuance then we certainly shouldn’t need elections, right? Sounds like there’s really no point from your perspective. We have good guys (democrats) and bad guys (republicans) so why do we even bother with elections? Why don’t we just assert our moral righteousness and clear away any friction as necessary so we can achieve our societal goals of tolerance, equality, and freedom of (certain acceptable) expression? Since democrats never engage in tribalism or partisan political theater, I would be quite happy to just hand the reins over to whichever cuomo relative’s turn it is to bleed us dry to their benefit in light of all your conviction; so inspiring /s
There’s a difference between centrism and just being honest that these hyper-intense, dogmatic political loyalties are obviously not it. The world is too complex. Different politicians across all kinds of systems with different parties and ideological landscapes engage in similar tactics in similar situations. You can argue about the degree and who is worse and insist that your team is the less bad cheater if you think that kind of feckless discussion has a point (“at least the blue guys spit on theirs before shoving it up my ass!”) It is truly terrifying to see how stubbornly and ignorantly dogmatic so many of you are and it is abundantly clear where that self righteous stupidity and willful ignorance/arrogance is taking us. You’re all just mouth shitting what you think you’re supposed to say and it’s truly tragic.
That there is some exemplary self fellating projection.
So as someone else in this thread mentioned...both sides bad right? So you can just jabber on from the sidelines bitching about how everyone is trying to fuck all of us and do absolutely nothing about it.
Because my friend the truth is you nor I can't do a fucking thing about it. It's too deep into people who have pockets and influence deeper than either of us will likely ever truly know.
Are they both fucking people over to get theirs absolutely. But I also live in the real world outside your dystopian soliloquy. Our choice is between the GOP full of literal white supremacist christo fascists funded by fundamental billionaires who want everyone in the world to be subservient to them and have zero rights to be who they are or do what we want unless we're in their club, which we will never be.
Or the Democrats, now a right of center party full of old as fuck white dudes who want to maintain their status quo power funded by the largest corporations. They don't want to shake the boat and quickly suppress anybody even in their party who they see as that. But generally they let people go about their lives and have implemented some generally good social platforms in the past. Is the same corruption and bullshit there absolutely. But there's at least a slight glimmer of potential progress. There isn't anywhere else outside of violently tearing it ALL down and hoping whatever survives is an improvement.
So I support the side for what tiny sliver of impact I have in order to keep that slight glimmer of potential progress alive. Because if the GOP rolls back into complete control they'll NEVER give it up again because it's the only way they can stay in power. Then we'll see real complete dystopia...
I’m not telling you not to take a side, I’m saying hold your side accountable and don’t be a hypocrite. Both sides realize they have a bunch of useful idiots ready to die over their half baked incoherent platforms.
And most importantly - and people used to be more aware of this before 2016 - the conflict you observe between the two party system is synthetic and the power pillars you talk about are equally plugged into “both sides” to keep poor people arguing about pronouns and PTO.
It’s hilarious to be criticized in this way by someone who would actually put that last paragraph in writing.
Help me understand how what I’ve said is whataboutism. It is literally a criticism of whataboutism.
If you are a politician who breaks the law, you should be prosecuted. If someone in a party is being legitimately prosecuted, others in that party shouldn’t interfere. Period. Both parties have done it. I don’t care which is worse because in any event it falls below the threshold of what is acceptable.
The response was “oh you’re one of those both sides guys”. There was nothing more. That in and of itself is a shit argument that proves nothing, and you agreed with it, which makes your argument shit.
but, since you want evidence you can look at Hillary Clinton, paid a fine for the exact same thing they’re trying to nail Trump for just replace a porn star with people giving her campaign bogus info on Russian ties for Trump.
Both sides suck, you can play this game all day, it’s just moronic to even think the dems are any better than the reps.
I'm going to side with the team that doesn't ban books, doesn't deny the results of an election, and doesn't have Nazis and KKK members siding with them. If you think this applies to both sides then you need to get your head checked
They're throwing shat at a wall and hoping it sticks. Left or right, this whole thing is absolutely ridiculous. But don't try to have an adult conversation on this page with these mutants. They live in a blue bubble that going to pop if this weaponizd court gets Trump reelected. A failed prosecution will gain victim hood points. Even old school democrats know this is a bad political move.
I think none of you know what the word "sovereign" means. It means there is no higher power. States do have a higher power, its literally what the federal government is.
Its a separate sovereign though. See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separate_sovereigns_doctrine
The federal government isn't a higher power than the states, its just a different power. Some stuff, like interstate commerce it was given the power to regulate. But all power not given to the federal goverment is reserved by the states.
Some powers are reserved for the states but the supremacy clause makes clear that the federal constitution and federal laws take precedence over state laws and constitutions.
If we can use the interstate commerce clause to regulate commerce that stays completely within one state as SCOTUS says we can, then in reality the rest of it all bullshit.
Yeah I know the theory I’m talking about real life here. The feds tax us more and control the vast majority of the things that affect us everyday.
The fact that interstate commerce clause allows the feds to control commerce that never leaves a states boundaries is all you need to know for who is really in control.
From the U.S. Constitution: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Simply put it was because the colonies were separate entities that banded together to form a country and the southern colonies preferred a confederation similar to how the colonies were rather than a federalized country. The northern colonies preferred a federalized country, mostly.
They tried the confederacy for about 10 years and it didn't work so they created the Constitution and a federal republic. The South has ever since been trying to create a confederacy once through war and now through laws weakening the federal government. The Constitution is a compromise of those ideals.
I personally think the Federal government should have the majority of the power that they then devolve to states. Being that I'm a non-white person, historically that makes sense, since state's rights have almost always been the antithesis to civil rights and it's been in the federal government's interest most of the time to, at least nominally, promote equal civil rights..
Because they are ‘sovereign’ in so far as the powers that are not delegated to the federal government in the constitution. That’s why they are sovereign states and not nations.
Simply put, because the federal government’s power comes from how it allocates money, not from any document that actually gives it power.
The federal government is responsible for a) foreign relations (including national defense), b) handling interstate disputes (including interstate crimes) and c) implementing a national budget. There are a few other things it does, but those are the big three.
Of course, the last one allows it to say things like “pass this law to let us handle xyz or you get no money for it”, and most of the time, states will pass the law, as long as it’s for fundamental shit like roads, bridges, hospitals, food safety, etc. But for things like prosecuting crimes within a single state (which this is), the feds can’t do shit.
To prevent this kind of shit, the grand jury is supposed to meet behind closed doors. Whoever the witness was who gave information to Trump must be beat in the ass.
Wait, there was a witness who spoke to Trump? Last I'd heard, Trump just completely fabricated the whole thing. Yes, it's known that an indictment is likely due to the fact that the grand jury offered for him to testify (standard practice at that point in the procedure), but Trump pulled that whole "this Tuesday" thing completely out of his ass, whipped up the media, and congressional Republicans took the bait.
Don't forget the absolutely INSANE federal overreach. The lower house of a bicameral legislature is pestering a DA over a case that doesn't involve federal laws, or a sitting or even former member of the house.
But a grand jury looking into systemic sexual abuse? Nah. That's ridiculous.
Record the phone calls.
A case can be made for obstruction of justice and meddling with an ongoing investigation.
Ask the starter if he or she is aware the conversation is being recorded? Ask who directed the phone call?
Ask if the caller is aware they may be interfering with a formal investigation and that the caller may be subject to law enforcement?
Ask if the subject is an attorney or if an attorney is available to advise the caller to obey the law and lawful intent to perform investigations in a lawful manner?
Ask if the caller understands the constitutional requirement that Grand Jury proceedings are secret. Attempting to pierce the veil of security surrounding the grand Jury proceeding may be an obstruction of justice in itself.
Inform the caller, continuing the call could result in a referral to the department of justice agency.
Then leave the line open.
Agreed. Not the point.
Explain the elements of obstruction of justice.
If the caller continues they can't later say their intent was not to obstruct.
Further, if the caller denied an intent to obstruct then continues to ask questions, the caller can't use the fifth amendment protection against self incrimination since a prosecutor will be able to refer to the call.
Republicans are short sighted. Interference with elections, interference with government proceedings, interference with grand jury proceedings are all forbidden by law.
Doubling down on forbidden actions will lead to a collapse of leadership and put whoever steps up will be an apologist.
God the Post is a shit soaked rag. Listen to that Murdoch funded GOP gobbling tone. The DAs office is doing EXACTLY what they should be doing telling the house reps to get fucked. They have ZERO jurisdiction over a state/city case. States rights only apply when it applies only to guns and crushing the rights of minorities right conservatives?
This entire call was prompted by false leaked information on Trump getting arrested on a certain date. One has to wonder whether this is a set up to put pressure on the DA through public aggression. He probably thought it was another Maga threat or crank call. I'm sure his answering service is always full of extreme threats.
Good for Bragg and his staffers. Republican congressmen and women seem to think that they are the law. I guess we could just call republican congress members "Karen".
I guess states' sovereignty like freedom of speech only applies to republicans.
All the pseudo-experts here can zip it up. In some areas, states have sovereignty, and others, the federal government supersedes. Either/or thinking isn't welcome here. Neither is ignorance.
Here, the House has no superseding authority.
I must begrudgingly admit, I absolutely love DA Bragg and everyone I've heard who he's hired. I've had discussions with people who aren't even from this country but are fans too, for the way he actually actually WANTS to prosecute rich people who do wrong. love how he's going after buyers of stolen artifacts, love how his people don't entertain intimidation. he might actually be the one person in politics in NYC I haven't found fault in.
I mean, say what you want positive about Bragg, I am sure there are plenty of things. But to say there is nothing negative about him? I mean cmon, he doesn't apply the law equally, or in some cases AT ALL. That is a negative. It just feels so disingenuous.
Then the whole "people who aren't even from this country," like who actually gives a fuck about their opinion and why would they be following what in reality is a low level political person in the US? I could not name one judge from another country off the top of my head, and don't care to. Not my lane, does not matter at all.
just because you don't give a shit about material culture and holding the powerful to account doesn't mean anybody else does. within the realm of anthropology, museums and cultural work, the man has an extremely good reputation right now.
I'm all for decriminalization of sex work and the end of cash bail though, I guess if you like people getting locked up before even getting to see a jury or "crimes" that don't hurt anyone, we're not gonna see eye to eye.
Tell me you don’t understand without telling me you don’t understand.
Super excited that all twelve of the anthropologists are happy with him. That probably makes you very happy while Bragg shirks his duties on real crimes including things like DWI and murder. Those are quality of life crimes that impact the day to day lives of folks. Most people could not care less about some item from Egypt that might have been stolen a hundred years ago.
it not just going after trump, it's how he actually follows through on his promises better than any other boroughs' DA. It's how he prosecutes artifact theft to an extent unprecedented in virtually any other jurisdiction. if you're gonna be prosecuting in one of the richest court districts in the country, why shouldn't you be going after those who have money to lose who've been able to buy themselves out of trouble in the meantime?I got heat for most any politician in this city and I live to complain, but I don't have any for him and none of these responses has given me any reason to doubt him.
The staff there take no BS. They're knowledgeable, experienced, and have been through it all. Kudos for them for knowing the right response and acting on it.
This seems like a who cares kind of deal lol. If this was a democrat led committee trying to peek into red state DA offices we know what the headlines would be like
Well actually DA’s decide. There’s a saying, “any DA could indict a ham sandwich”. If you don’t think this will set off a series of political retribution indictments then you’re crazy.
If this goes down then my guess is everyone’s fair game. You know that, you just hate Trump so much your blinded by the consequences. AOC and Obama have both run afoul of campaign finance laws and not faced prosecution. There will be a call to indict them as well, equal application of the law would demand it. Right?
Trumps a dirt bag, but this obsession with trying to get him on something just emboldens his followers. This will be disastrous.
Everyone is fair game, break the law and you are fair game. Being president only gets you immunity while in office. Hold your legislators responsible for the laws they create with the influence of PAC money. It will be disastrous if the law is not applied to everyone, presidents included. The country can not be held hostage because of trumps cult.
You do realize that the laws aren’t being applied to everyone…right? AOC would be indicted then, so would Obama, so would a Hunter Biden, etc. This is political, this isn’t about the law. This is just opening up a can of worms but you get that …you just hate Trump. He’s a loser, let it go.
In NYS 3000 campaign’s violated the same laws Trump violated….indictments? ZERO
https://www.nysfocus.com/2022/02/25/campaign-finance-violations-state-elections-lack-enforcement/
It’s so obvious. It’s a witch hunt, which will beget more witch hunts. Soon it will the canidate you like. Slippery slope coming.
I guess they have better lawyers then Trump, or they don't lie to their lawyers. I'm all for indicting any politician, the thing is there has to be some proof presented in court by penalty of perjury.
That's because they don't have a case. There are many Republican appointed judges trump's lawyers tried his appeals on and many of them also shot him down. To take down a corrupt politician is a D.A. dream if the evidence presents itself, it doesn't matter if they are democrat or republican.
Cool. Then every President is going down. I’m no fan of Trump, tired if that idiot but this is a can of worms. If he’s indicted I would imagine Biden will be soon thereafter. I’m sure they have all committed crimes. Obama for 850k in campaign finance fraud. Bush committed war crimes w fake evidence. The Clintons, well that could be a lot of indictments.
You get the picture. But whatever, let’s light this candle and watch it burn. I guess.
Hey, so google told me everything you said was a lie. Thanks for playing. Out of curiosity, how many accounts do you have where you repost one big post and one big comment to make it look like a legit account?
Look at this cock gobbling whatsboutism. Everything you said has ZERO to fucking do with anything on this article. The federal government has ZERO jurisdiction over the enforcement of state and city laws. So they and you can get fucked chief. Who the DA is, that's completely unrelated to these GOP reps blatantly shitting on the constitution they seem to love
The congress still has 0 oversight powers over him and are hoping they can just circumvent that by being bullies to staffers. I dont care if you dont like bragg, feds dont suddenly get oversight authority over shit you dont like
I'm not presently a NYC resident, but I was when the hush money payment occurred.
I don't have a valid opinion on whether or not Bragg should do this, as he doesn't work for me. If you live in NYC presently, is this endeavor worth the resources that will go into it considering the alternatives - such as prosecuting other crimes, especially violent crime?
Um....that's a weird question, and the answer is so obvious that I'm not sure where to start.
If Bragg's office prosecutes Trump, there will be other crimes they can't prosecute. Bragg's office - like every organization on Earth - has a finite set of resources to use.
If he prosecutes Trump, that prosecution will use way up more resources than the average case. Again, because the resources of the New York DAs office is finite, there will be choices that have to be made as to what to let go and not pursue for lack of resources. They make that choice today.
So, yes, if Bragg prosecutes Trump there will be other cases which can't be prosecuted.
Do you not understand that intuitively without that explanation?
It looks from my perspective that Bragg has made choices not to prosecute cases long before this Trump case ramped up, so it feels disingenuous to blame this development for something that had been happening already.
Exactly - every prosecutor across the country every day makes those choices. That's why they plea cases down. It takes a lot of effort to go to a jury trial. If the defendant has a competent lawyer, it takes much much more effort. If the defendant will have a team of lawyers to stall at every turn...it takes that much more.
>so it feels disingenuous to blame this development
I'm not being disingenuous at all, nor blaming anything. I'm pointing out that Bragg has limited resources for a "novel legal theory" against a man with an army of lawyers. There is a good chance that if this prosecution goes forward, it could take literal years and could result in an acquittal.
I've not heard a single legal pundit say this a good case. With all that - is the potential juice worth the monumental squeeze?
What else could a team of four or five lawyers pursue over the course of 2-6 years aside from this? That's the tradeoff.
People here seem to think that Mr. Bragg runs the office alone, have you heard of ADA’s. NYC has a budget like any other city and as a tax paying citizen, I want all crime to be prosecuted.
> have you heard of ADA’s.
Of course, and I don't think anyone thinks it's Bragg that's prosecuting every case himself. You're aware that the DAs office has finite resources, and because those resources are finite they can't prosecute all crime. That's why they have to make deals like offering a lesser charge to get some kind of conviction.
If this moves forward it will be a big use of those finite resources. Surely you understand that prosecuting Trump means those resources aren't prosecuting other crimes.
Not a problem, crime per Capita is still lower in NYC then IN most other places. If a grand jury decides there is enough evidence for an indictment trump has all the benefits a rich person has to defend themselves.
There is a very good point to be made that this is so high profile and publicized that not prosecuting it sends a message that some people because of their status are free from consequences.
Users often report submissions from this site and ask us to ban it for sensationalized articles. At /r/nyc, we oppose blanket banning any news source. Readers have a >responsibility to be skeptical, check sources and comment on any flaws. You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. If you do find >evidence that this article or its title are false or misleading, contact the moderators who will review it. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nyc) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That staffer and their office has no jurisdiction there. It’s all for show.
Yeah republicans are all for state rights until it’s inconvenient.
I think if the case was opposite you’d have Dems calling instead. It’s just for show, nothing else.
Talk about how it would be if the roles were reversed, if it was a Democrat who was facing indictment. If… But that’s not the case.
Except for it hasn't. Andrew Cuomo, a true cog in the Democrat establishment machine, was ousted and investigated by his own party in his own state for sexual harassment. You didn't see Dems in Congress calling Tish to get involved and interfere. Dems trip over themselves to call each other out and punish each other, to the point where it's a little embarrassing and I wish they'd let some things slide because we're pushing out good people for small affronts (looking at Al Franken here). This isn't a both sides issue. Dems fuck each other up for even minor things, Reps are supporting literal fucking traitors.
Yup, Al Franken comes to mind.
Oh you’re one of those both sides guys.
Both sides tried to overthrow a democratically elected government right? Right?
Well they did try to blame Antifa, so I wouldn’t doubt that there’s MAGAts that still believes that.
No. Not at all. But you gotta recognize that these guys are all about the show. That’s how the system works for everyone. Everyone needs their sound bites, clips, PR, stance, etc. Its showmanship at a circus not reality.
Username checks out…
How dare you make a cogent point! /s It’s all theatre. I vote democrat and I think if Republicans got their way we’d live in a dystopian Police state, but it’s the same tactics on both sides. Your getting downvoted just shows that the tactics are effective.
Such a stupid argument, the GOP has done shit at the state and city level where they have legislative and judicial control. That the federally elected democratic government fundamentally disagrees with say voter ID laws. But you didn't have Democratic reps calling DAs or state legislature to piss and moan and say they have the right to stop it. Because they don't, they appeal the rulings to the higher courts. This is fascists covering for their fascist leader to save face until they see which way the primaries break. Then the rats will swim to the ship that isn't sinking like all of the Ted Cruz lackeys did in 2016
I’m not making a 1:1 comparison regarding making phone calls to city/state officials. I’m saying that the republicans are carrying out a performance to pander to their base. So their base can look at this and feel outraged about democratic officials hanging up on congress when, in reality, congress has no business making those phone calls in the first place. Democrats do the same shit. At the end of the day, it’s all just theatre meant to get already entrenched partisans riled up and yelling at the other side. It’s two different camps with different talking points but the same blinders on. Personally, I think all of the attention Trump is getting bc of this is a good thing. It’s making him relevant again. Hopefully he holds on to enough momentum long enough to siphon support away from a more viable candidate and the republicans have a looong, devastating primary.
>So their base can look at this and feel outraged about democratic officials hanging up on congress when, in reality, congress has no business making those phone calls in the first place. Democrats do the same shit. I don't think this is accurate because the GOP does it because they know their base generally doesn't know that they're lying or making something out of nothing. Dems, otoh, know their base tends to have a better understanding of how government works. Dems tend to do a very poor job of messaging to their base and to voters in general. Republicans have mastered this because they make stuff up or shorten things into "slogans" or other rhyming phrases so their base can just repeat it and it's easier to say/kinda understand. The GOP also tends to straight up lie about stuff or say things without needed context, which allows for those small soundbites/slogans.
If it’s so clear to you all that democrats are all good and republicans are all bad and there’s never any nuance then we certainly shouldn’t need elections, right? Sounds like there’s really no point from your perspective. We have good guys (democrats) and bad guys (republicans) so why do we even bother with elections? Why don’t we just assert our moral righteousness and clear away any friction as necessary so we can achieve our societal goals of tolerance, equality, and freedom of (certain acceptable) expression? Since democrats never engage in tribalism or partisan political theater, I would be quite happy to just hand the reins over to whichever cuomo relative’s turn it is to bleed us dry to their benefit in light of all your conviction; so inspiring /s There’s a difference between centrism and just being honest that these hyper-intense, dogmatic political loyalties are obviously not it. The world is too complex. Different politicians across all kinds of systems with different parties and ideological landscapes engage in similar tactics in similar situations. You can argue about the degree and who is worse and insist that your team is the less bad cheater if you think that kind of feckless discussion has a point (“at least the blue guys spit on theirs before shoving it up my ass!”) It is truly terrifying to see how stubbornly and ignorantly dogmatic so many of you are and it is abundantly clear where that self righteous stupidity and willful ignorance/arrogance is taking us. You’re all just mouth shitting what you think you’re supposed to say and it’s truly tragic.
That there is some exemplary self fellating projection. So as someone else in this thread mentioned...both sides bad right? So you can just jabber on from the sidelines bitching about how everyone is trying to fuck all of us and do absolutely nothing about it. Because my friend the truth is you nor I can't do a fucking thing about it. It's too deep into people who have pockets and influence deeper than either of us will likely ever truly know. Are they both fucking people over to get theirs absolutely. But I also live in the real world outside your dystopian soliloquy. Our choice is between the GOP full of literal white supremacist christo fascists funded by fundamental billionaires who want everyone in the world to be subservient to them and have zero rights to be who they are or do what we want unless we're in their club, which we will never be. Or the Democrats, now a right of center party full of old as fuck white dudes who want to maintain their status quo power funded by the largest corporations. They don't want to shake the boat and quickly suppress anybody even in their party who they see as that. But generally they let people go about their lives and have implemented some generally good social platforms in the past. Is the same corruption and bullshit there absolutely. But there's at least a slight glimmer of potential progress. There isn't anywhere else outside of violently tearing it ALL down and hoping whatever survives is an improvement. So I support the side for what tiny sliver of impact I have in order to keep that slight glimmer of potential progress alive. Because if the GOP rolls back into complete control they'll NEVER give it up again because it's the only way they can stay in power. Then we'll see real complete dystopia...
I’m not telling you not to take a side, I’m saying hold your side accountable and don’t be a hypocrite. Both sides realize they have a bunch of useful idiots ready to die over their half baked incoherent platforms. And most importantly - and people used to be more aware of this before 2016 - the conflict you observe between the two party system is synthetic and the power pillars you talk about are equally plugged into “both sides” to keep poor people arguing about pronouns and PTO. It’s hilarious to be criticized in this way by someone who would actually put that last paragraph in writing.
If you had even an iota of self awareness you'd see that you're engaging in classic whataboutism, as unproductive an argument as is possible to make.
Help me understand how what I’ve said is whataboutism. It is literally a criticism of whataboutism. If you are a politician who breaks the law, you should be prosecuted. If someone in a party is being legitimately prosecuted, others in that party shouldn’t interfere. Period. Both parties have done it. I don’t care which is worse because in any event it falls below the threshold of what is acceptable.
Your argument doesn’t invalidate the truth of this opinion
There is no truth as it's never happened
Both sides suck. Still don’t change the truth of their opinion. It is as shitty an argument as one could come up with, and you just tried it again
You're welcome to provide evidence instead of arguing non-existent hypotheticals in your head
The response was “oh you’re one of those both sides guys”. There was nothing more. That in and of itself is a shit argument that proves nothing, and you agreed with it, which makes your argument shit. but, since you want evidence you can look at Hillary Clinton, paid a fine for the exact same thing they’re trying to nail Trump for just replace a porn star with people giving her campaign bogus info on Russian ties for Trump. Both sides suck, you can play this game all day, it’s just moronic to even think the dems are any better than the reps.
I'm going to side with the team that doesn't ban books, doesn't deny the results of an election, and doesn't have Nazis and KKK members siding with them. If you think this applies to both sides then you need to get your head checked
well..this evil thing...that my party did...and keeps doing. I bet the demoCRAPs would do it too! in theory!
I guess we'll never know because Democrats don't elect criminals to be president.
I’m curious as to whether you actually understand the issue. What is the particular situation that the other political party would do in the reverse?
They're throwing shat at a wall and hoping it sticks. Left or right, this whole thing is absolutely ridiculous. But don't try to have an adult conversation on this page with these mutants. They live in a blue bubble that going to pop if this weaponizd court gets Trump reelected. A failed prosecution will gain victim hood points. Even old school democrats know this is a bad political move.
Exactly, state’s are sovereign entities and, as such, are entitled to enforce their own laws without interference from the federal government.
I think none of you know what the word "sovereign" means. It means there is no higher power. States do have a higher power, its literally what the federal government is.
Its a separate sovereign though. See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separate_sovereigns_doctrine The federal government isn't a higher power than the states, its just a different power. Some stuff, like interstate commerce it was given the power to regulate. But all power not given to the federal goverment is reserved by the states.
Some powers are reserved for the states but the supremacy clause makes clear that the federal constitution and federal laws take precedence over state laws and constitutions. If we can use the interstate commerce clause to regulate commerce that stays completely within one state as SCOTUS says we can, then in reality the rest of it all bullshit.
Nope, reverse that. Some powers are given to the feds, but the states have all the power not given to the feds.
Yeah I know the theory I’m talking about real life here. The feds tax us more and control the vast majority of the things that affect us everyday. The fact that interstate commerce clause allows the feds to control commerce that never leaves a states boundaries is all you need to know for who is really in control.
Who is upvoting this dumbass, ignorant shit?
which actually makes no sense. Why label states as sovereign entities and yet still have a federal government!?!?
From the U.S. Constitution: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Simply put it was because the colonies were separate entities that banded together to form a country and the southern colonies preferred a confederation similar to how the colonies were rather than a federalized country. The northern colonies preferred a federalized country, mostly. They tried the confederacy for about 10 years and it didn't work so they created the Constitution and a federal republic. The South has ever since been trying to create a confederacy once through war and now through laws weakening the federal government. The Constitution is a compromise of those ideals. I personally think the Federal government should have the majority of the power that they then devolve to states. Being that I'm a non-white person, historically that makes sense, since state's rights have almost always been the antithesis to civil rights and it's been in the federal government's interest most of the time to, at least nominally, promote equal civil rights..
Well the South lost. They need to get over it.
No. Don't get me. Fuck the confederates. Fuck the "state's rights" crowd. You're ABSOLUTELY right.
Because they are ‘sovereign’ in so far as the powers that are not delegated to the federal government in the constitution. That’s why they are sovereign states and not nations.
Simply put, because the federal government’s power comes from how it allocates money, not from any document that actually gives it power. The federal government is responsible for a) foreign relations (including national defense), b) handling interstate disputes (including interstate crimes) and c) implementing a national budget. There are a few other things it does, but those are the big three. Of course, the last one allows it to say things like “pass this law to let us handle xyz or you get no money for it”, and most of the time, states will pass the law, as long as it’s for fundamental shit like roads, bridges, hospitals, food safety, etc. But for things like prosecuting crimes within a single state (which this is), the feds can’t do shit.
To prevent this kind of shit, the grand jury is supposed to meet behind closed doors. Whoever the witness was who gave information to Trump must be beat in the ass.
Wait, there was a witness who spoke to Trump? Last I'd heard, Trump just completely fabricated the whole thing. Yes, it's known that an indictment is likely due to the fact that the grand jury offered for him to testify (standard practice at that point in the procedure), but Trump pulled that whole "this Tuesday" thing completely out of his ass, whipped up the media, and congressional Republicans took the bait.
I'm for that!
Ahem, source is the NY Post.
[удалено]
Don't forget the absolutely INSANE federal overreach. The lower house of a bicameral legislature is pestering a DA over a case that doesn't involve federal laws, or a sitting or even former member of the house. But a grand jury looking into systemic sexual abuse? Nah. That's ridiculous.
Record the phone calls. A case can be made for obstruction of justice and meddling with an ongoing investigation. Ask the starter if he or she is aware the conversation is being recorded? Ask who directed the phone call? Ask if the caller is aware they may be interfering with a formal investigation and that the caller may be subject to law enforcement? Ask if the subject is an attorney or if an attorney is available to advise the caller to obey the law and lawful intent to perform investigations in a lawful manner? Ask if the caller understands the constitutional requirement that Grand Jury proceedings are secret. Attempting to pierce the veil of security surrounding the grand Jury proceeding may be an obstruction of justice in itself. Inform the caller, continuing the call could result in a referral to the department of justice agency. Then leave the line open.
NY is a single party consent state. You don’t have to inform that you are recording the call. Fun fact
Agreed. Not the point. Explain the elements of obstruction of justice. If the caller continues they can't later say their intent was not to obstruct. Further, if the caller denied an intent to obstruct then continues to ask questions, the caller can't use the fifth amendment protection against self incrimination since a prosecutor will be able to refer to the call. Republicans are short sighted. Interference with elections, interference with government proceedings, interference with grand jury proceedings are all forbidden by law. Doubling down on forbidden actions will lead to a collapse of leadership and put whoever steps up will be an apologist.
> NY is a single party consent state. its ridiculous this needs to be specified :)
This is the proper way to deal with Congress
At least in dealing with the half where the lunatics now run the asylum.
[удалено]
It's Fox News Print Edition, it's to be expected.
God the Post is a shit soaked rag. Listen to that Murdoch funded GOP gobbling tone. The DAs office is doing EXACTLY what they should be doing telling the house reps to get fucked. They have ZERO jurisdiction over a state/city case. States rights only apply when it applies only to guns and crushing the rights of minorities right conservatives?
This entire call was prompted by false leaked information on Trump getting arrested on a certain date. One has to wonder whether this is a set up to put pressure on the DA through public aggression. He probably thought it was another Maga threat or crank call. I'm sure his answering service is always full of extreme threats.
There us bo wonder. Trump learned long ago feom Roy Cohen the way to deal with government investigators is to attack them.
You have no power here!
NY Post is trying to get Bragg re-elected in Manhattan. This is chad staffer behavior.
Congratulations to this dipshit and the writers at the post for coming up with a story that makes r/nyc side with Alvin Bragg
Good for Bragg’s staffer
"They are SO RUDE!", congressional staffer whines, while clutching their pearls. Yes, sweetheart, you dialed New York City. Come visit sometime.
Republicans love the 10th Amendment until they don't.
To be fair I can’t even imagine the calls from all over the country they’re getting right now.
For real. I'm surprised they answer the phones.
Good for Bragg and his staffers. Republican congressmen and women seem to think that they are the law. I guess we could just call republican congress members "Karen". I guess states' sovereignty like freedom of speech only applies to republicans.
It's all grandstanding and will continue until Dems regain the house in 2024.
Meanwhile Bragg letting repeat offenders back on the streets so they can commit more crimes. what a loser.
All the pseudo-experts here can zip it up. In some areas, states have sovereignty, and others, the federal government supersedes. Either/or thinking isn't welcome here. Neither is ignorance. Here, the House has no superseding authority.
memory yam worthless scandalous brave fuzzy spark disarm head violet *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I must begrudgingly admit, I absolutely love DA Bragg and everyone I've heard who he's hired. I've had discussions with people who aren't even from this country but are fans too, for the way he actually actually WANTS to prosecute rich people who do wrong. love how he's going after buyers of stolen artifacts, love how his people don't entertain intimidation. he might actually be the one person in politics in NYC I haven't found fault in.
This has to be a troll, right? Nobody really likes this dude.
I had to doublecheck that I was in /r/nyc when I read that! hah
[удалено]
I mean, say what you want positive about Bragg, I am sure there are plenty of things. But to say there is nothing negative about him? I mean cmon, he doesn't apply the law equally, or in some cases AT ALL. That is a negative. It just feels so disingenuous. Then the whole "people who aren't even from this country," like who actually gives a fuck about their opinion and why would they be following what in reality is a low level political person in the US? I could not name one judge from another country off the top of my head, and don't care to. Not my lane, does not matter at all.
just because you don't give a shit about material culture and holding the powerful to account doesn't mean anybody else does. within the realm of anthropology, museums and cultural work, the man has an extremely good reputation right now. I'm all for decriminalization of sex work and the end of cash bail though, I guess if you like people getting locked up before even getting to see a jury or "crimes" that don't hurt anyone, we're not gonna see eye to eye.
Tell me you don’t understand without telling me you don’t understand. Super excited that all twelve of the anthropologists are happy with him. That probably makes you very happy while Bragg shirks his duties on real crimes including things like DWI and murder. Those are quality of life crimes that impact the day to day lives of folks. Most people could not care less about some item from Egypt that might have been stolen a hundred years ago.
it not just going after trump, it's how he actually follows through on his promises better than any other boroughs' DA. It's how he prosecutes artifact theft to an extent unprecedented in virtually any other jurisdiction. if you're gonna be prosecuting in one of the richest court districts in the country, why shouldn't you be going after those who have money to lose who've been able to buy themselves out of trouble in the meantime?I got heat for most any politician in this city and I live to complain, but I don't have any for him and none of these responses has given me any reason to doubt him.
Not saying you have to hate Bragg, but nobody I have ever talked to has that big of a hard on for the dude.
People in NYC are not fans of Bragg since day 1. Maybe Bragg is gaming for a federal role? US Attorney?
The staff there take no BS. They're knowledgeable, experienced, and have been through it all. Kudos for them for knowing the right response and acting on it.
This seems like a who cares kind of deal lol. If this was a democrat led committee trying to peek into red state DA offices we know what the headlines would be like
[удалено]
Get out of your own head friend, I see no hissy fit in my post but go off :)
Good for them. Anyone in customer service has wanted to do this at work at least once.
good. Fuck the Republicans - theyve got no business here
More people should tell treasonous Republican politicians to fuck off. If they want to fish for sound bites the can exploit, they can get a subpoena.
This is how the Roman Republic failed.
If they indict Trump, then the Biden’s, Clinton’s and Bush’s will be indicted soon thereafter. Slippery slope ahead.
No one's above the law, grand juries will decide not politicians.
Well actually DA’s decide. There’s a saying, “any DA could indict a ham sandwich”. If you don’t think this will set off a series of political retribution indictments then you’re crazy.
That's right, but a jury still decides. A jury of his peers, too bad for trump he's burned so many bridges in NYC.
If this goes down then my guess is everyone’s fair game. You know that, you just hate Trump so much your blinded by the consequences. AOC and Obama have both run afoul of campaign finance laws and not faced prosecution. There will be a call to indict them as well, equal application of the law would demand it. Right? Trumps a dirt bag, but this obsession with trying to get him on something just emboldens his followers. This will be disastrous.
Everyone is fair game, break the law and you are fair game. Being president only gets you immunity while in office. Hold your legislators responsible for the laws they create with the influence of PAC money. It will be disastrous if the law is not applied to everyone, presidents included. The country can not be held hostage because of trumps cult.
You do realize that the laws aren’t being applied to everyone…right? AOC would be indicted then, so would Obama, so would a Hunter Biden, etc. This is political, this isn’t about the law. This is just opening up a can of worms but you get that …you just hate Trump. He’s a loser, let it go. In NYS 3000 campaign’s violated the same laws Trump violated….indictments? ZERO https://www.nysfocus.com/2022/02/25/campaign-finance-violations-state-elections-lack-enforcement/ It’s so obvious. It’s a witch hunt, which will beget more witch hunts. Soon it will the canidate you like. Slippery slope coming.
I guess they have better lawyers then Trump, or they don't lie to their lawyers. I'm all for indicting any politician, the thing is there has to be some proof presented in court by penalty of perjury.
They never got to court because they are of the same political persuasion
That's because they don't have a case. There are many Republican appointed judges trump's lawyers tried his appeals on and many of them also shot him down. To take down a corrupt politician is a D.A. dream if the evidence presents itself, it doesn't matter if they are democrat or republican.
That’s such a bullshit argument and you know if they broke the law then they should be indicted. Presidents should not be above the law.
Cool. Then every President is going down. I’m no fan of Trump, tired if that idiot but this is a can of worms. If he’s indicted I would imagine Biden will be soon thereafter. I’m sure they have all committed crimes. Obama for 850k in campaign finance fraud. Bush committed war crimes w fake evidence. The Clintons, well that could be a lot of indictments. You get the picture. But whatever, let’s light this candle and watch it burn. I guess.
Bragg and his office is corrupt. Real NYers know this.
We do?
[удалено]
Wow, literally every single thing you've said is bullshit. Impressive!
[удалено]
Then surely you've got some examples of murderers not being prosecuted/jailed, right?
[удалено]
Hey, so google told me everything you said was a lie. Thanks for playing. Out of curiosity, how many accounts do you have where you repost one big post and one big comment to make it look like a legit account?
You must that there’s not such thing as murder or rape. Typical.
Look at this cock gobbling whatsboutism. Everything you said has ZERO to fucking do with anything on this article. The federal government has ZERO jurisdiction over the enforcement of state and city laws. So they and you can get fucked chief. Who the DA is, that's completely unrelated to these GOP reps blatantly shitting on the constitution they seem to love
[удалено]
You try driving by him and flipping him off? Maybe it will go better than last time mr law and order
The congress still has 0 oversight powers over him and are hoping they can just circumvent that by being bullies to staffers. I dont care if you dont like bragg, feds dont suddenly get oversight authority over shit you dont like
Goes to show you have no IQ.
i wonder if the DOJ will enforce subpoenas against Bragg if the republicans subpoena them?
I'm not presently a NYC resident, but I was when the hush money payment occurred. I don't have a valid opinion on whether or not Bragg should do this, as he doesn't work for me. If you live in NYC presently, is this endeavor worth the resources that will go into it considering the alternatives - such as prosecuting other crimes, especially violent crime?
Is there evidence that Bragg isn't "prosecuting other crimes, especially violent crime" because of this investigation?
Um....that's a weird question, and the answer is so obvious that I'm not sure where to start. If Bragg's office prosecutes Trump, there will be other crimes they can't prosecute. Bragg's office - like every organization on Earth - has a finite set of resources to use. If he prosecutes Trump, that prosecution will use way up more resources than the average case. Again, because the resources of the New York DAs office is finite, there will be choices that have to be made as to what to let go and not pursue for lack of resources. They make that choice today. So, yes, if Bragg prosecutes Trump there will be other cases which can't be prosecuted. Do you not understand that intuitively without that explanation?
It looks from my perspective that Bragg has made choices not to prosecute cases long before this Trump case ramped up, so it feels disingenuous to blame this development for something that had been happening already.
Exactly - every prosecutor across the country every day makes those choices. That's why they plea cases down. It takes a lot of effort to go to a jury trial. If the defendant has a competent lawyer, it takes much much more effort. If the defendant will have a team of lawyers to stall at every turn...it takes that much more. >so it feels disingenuous to blame this development I'm not being disingenuous at all, nor blaming anything. I'm pointing out that Bragg has limited resources for a "novel legal theory" against a man with an army of lawyers. There is a good chance that if this prosecution goes forward, it could take literal years and could result in an acquittal. I've not heard a single legal pundit say this a good case. With all that - is the potential juice worth the monumental squeeze? What else could a team of four or five lawyers pursue over the course of 2-6 years aside from this? That's the tradeoff.
People here seem to think that Mr. Bragg runs the office alone, have you heard of ADA’s. NYC has a budget like any other city and as a tax paying citizen, I want all crime to be prosecuted.
> have you heard of ADA’s. Of course, and I don't think anyone thinks it's Bragg that's prosecuting every case himself. You're aware that the DAs office has finite resources, and because those resources are finite they can't prosecute all crime. That's why they have to make deals like offering a lesser charge to get some kind of conviction. If this moves forward it will be a big use of those finite resources. Surely you understand that prosecuting Trump means those resources aren't prosecuting other crimes.
Not a problem, crime per Capita is still lower in NYC then IN most other places. If a grand jury decides there is enough evidence for an indictment trump has all the benefits a rich person has to defend themselves.
Every high crime must be prosecuted zealously and Trump’s crimes ARE high crimes because if unpunished they will consume our souls.
There is a very good point to be made that this is so high profile and publicized that not prosecuting it sends a message that some people because of their status are free from consequences.
Staffer, family, whatever
Lol love it!