All_Pro_Bills

Biden also drained the SPR and Saudi Arabia has rebuffed US interests while transitioned to an ally of China on his watch. Along with this, OPEC+ is consistently ignoring US interests. To this point its indisputable that this administration's energy policy is a failure. And things are going to get much worse.

That's going to be another hoot. At this point the Democratic leadership is so crooked they automatically assume everybody operates and thinks like them and is out running some hustle or con. Its projection at its finest.

Unfortunately better qualified students are going to suffer because of admission standards and practices favoring less qualified candidates for whatever reason they want to give. But all this is going to be self-correcting over time. Action and reaction along with consequences. Because schools like Ivy League universities are only destroying their brand by lowering the admission standards for specific demographics because as the quality of students is diluted so will the value of the credentials they market to students wanting to attend their institution. Don't be surprised when there's moaning and groaning about the need to lower expectations of student performance. A "C" score today will be considered an "A" grade in the immediate future. With exclusivity, excellence, and merit removed from their brand it becomes just another commodity. And once realizing the prestige applied to an Ivy league degree no longer exists why would parents and students want to pay premium tuition costs for mediocrity?

The thing is, attempting to influence an election is what its all about. Because all candidates and their campaigns by the nature of the political process, operate with the purpose of influencing the outcome of the election. Either things they do, or do not do. This is how it works. Otherwise, an NDA is not illegal. And making payments per the NDA terms and conditions is not illegal and no campaign money was involved.. And not revealing the terms and conditions or contents of the NDA is not illegal. Revealing it would defeat the purpose of the agreement. And there are rights to privacy affording citizens like the 4th Amendment. As for testimony on delaying payments. Is there some directive in writing? Or is the delay documented as part of the NDA agreement? Because generally, "he said that he said" 2nd or 3rd hand type testimony can pass muster in grand jury actions where prosecutors charges are typically approved by the grand jury but in criminal court legally regarded as hearsay. If Bragg wants to find somebody looking to influence an election, then he should look in the mirror. But we all already know that's the game here. Or maybe arrest the 51 former intelligence community members that influenced the 2020 election when they lied about the origins of the Hunter Biden laptop being Russian disinformation when they (and the FBI) knew the truth that it was authentic. Nobody's doing time for that one.

Good luck proving that. The problem for the DA is the payment had nothing to do with the campaign. It was of a personal nature, wasn't campaign money, and would have been made absent the election regardless. Such as not wanting his wife to know which is common in these situations.

What's the "crime" in the indictment cited as being covered up? I don't see it. The DA's case is pure fantasy.

But there needs to be a prerequisite conviction for the predicate offense or the State would need to have jurisdiction to prosecute such an offense. Neither appears true to this point. The State must reveal what is the criminal conviction is being covered up? Otherwise, the falsifying business records to cover up another crime conviction has no merit because there is no other crime to cover up. What am I missing?

Each count of the indictment states (bolding is mine & generic date): THE GRAND JURY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, by this indictment, accuses the defendant of the crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE , in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows: The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about <date>, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, etc.. I guess the key question is what other crime?

And exactly when does AG Garland either start or appoint a special counsel for that investigation of President Biden & family? Like when Hell freezes over?

But while there are good intentions at work here for "better treatment" its characterized by "equity" as "privilege". Just in the opposite direction as the historical preferential treatment/privilege argument social justice types rally against when it comes to whites. It all seems like revenge.

The alternative is potential for voter fraud and I'd suggest that either side is more than willing to look the other way if it means victory. That leaves a need for some agreement that meets the requirements for voter authentication and guaranteeing every citizen's right to cast a ballot while removing the biases inherent in the political process. But given the current polarized environment that is proving difficult absent some extreme prodding from citizen groups interested in the process of fairness and democratic principals. Sadly, reading my own words leaves me feeling like a delusional idealist longing for reasonable thinking given the current climate.

Only if you consider some form of voter identification which is consistent with identity verification methods used in every day personal transactions to be difficult. Yet a majority of Americans polled representing Democrats, Republicans, and Independents believe this is reasonable yet resistance among a loud minority of leaders and citizens block efforts. Because its.... (wait for it...) Racist! The excuse of the times we live in for everything that can't be defended by logic and reason.

"Virtue signalling" is something the left has perfected. Wearing a $35K dress to protest against wealth. Flying a private jet to a climate change conference to demand a halt to fossil fuel usage, accuse others of dangerous speech while threatening them unless they stop, censoring ideas as disinformation while spreading disinformation.

It will all depend on the actual indictment which we should see today. What I struggle with is identifying the victim of this felony? Its not campaign donors who had their donations funneled to a payment to Daniels. If it was a campaign funding violation the Feds would have jumped all over it. And they didn't. Its not Daniels. Its not the State of New York. The wording I've heard is "falsifying business records". But what does that mean? It wasn't falsifying a tax return or regulatory filing or any legal filing. The first argument we'll hear from Trump's legal team is the charges are baseless and not a violation of any explicit existing law or regulation. In short, an imaginary law created by the prosecutors to charge an imaginary crime. Something like intentionally mis-classifying a payment on business records with the intent of hiding the payment to enhance the chances of winning an election. We'll see how that goes.

SAUDI ARABIA TO CUT OIL OUTPUT BY 500,000 BARRELS/DAY FROM MAY KUWAIT TO CUT OIL PRODUCTION BY 128,000 BARRELS/DAY UAE TO REDUCE OIL PRODUCTION BY 144,000 BARRELS/DAY FROM MAY KAZAKHSTAN TO CUT 78K B/D TO OPEC+ OUTPUT CUT IRAQ TO CUT 211,000 B/D OF OIL OUTPUT FROM MAY ALGERIA TO CUT 48K B/D OF OIL OUTPUT FROM MAY TO END 2023 OMAN TO CONTRIBUTE 40K B/D TO OPEC+ PRODUCTION CUT

I'm wondering when we'll hear about the arrest of the person that leaked the indictment information to The Times. Its a class E felony by NYS law punishable by imprisonment. I'm certain the DA will pursue this leaker as everybody keeps repeating and telling us that "nobody is above the law". Ha, ha.

Bragg's thing is a stated belief in what he calls "criminalizing poverty" but such an approach ignores the rights and harm done to the victim of crimes. For an intelligent man this is incredibly stupid.

We all know that anyone from any place on the social and political spectrum blowing the whistle on the establishment gets fired and the crooks ride off free and clear. You're blind to that because you see every issue and event through the eyes of the government.

It's not about me. And you're missing the point entirely. There's a subjective application of the law based on your status. If you think you'd be treated equally by the system, as say Hillary Clinton, you're a fool.

The problem is your lack of objectivity and awareness of the realities of how "the system" operates. I could cite other people that have crossed the line but time after time ride off into the sunset free and clear. While nobody is above the law there are certainly people that operate outside of the law. The problem isn't Trump's penchant for breaking the law or the people that support him. The problem is you're either a member of the establishment protected political class or you're an outsider. I'm going to make an assumption that nobody posting here is part of that protected class. You're not a member, I'm not a member, and Trump is not a member. If you're a member you can do things like Trump is accused of and not have to break a sweat worrying that anyone is going to come after you. Nobody will. As a non-member of the protected class you're either obedient to the system like lots of characters in the media, business, and social causes or you express discontent and disobedience to the power of the political class. That makes you an enemy of the state and open to potential consequences for expressing your displeasure with their activities and positions. Like it or not, agree or disagree, this is how it works.

Respect to woman? That's funny. The Democrats and their social justice crowd can't even define what a woman is and think men menstruate. I've asked, show me one biological man that bleeds from "his" privates every 28 days but nobody as of yet has found the guy. I'm not saying you buy into that insanity, but you got to admit it's crazy and delusional thinking. How can you trust the judgment of people running things if they believe crap like that?

Well if you choose to ignore the obvious that's your business. But targeting a specific individual and morphing a federal misdemeanor offense, which the DOJ decides has no merit, into some vague felony charge the State of NY most likely has no legal standing to prosecute sounds a bit fishy. Of course we'll have to wait to hear the specific on the charges. Or just last week, the IRS showing up at the door of an investigative reporter during his testimony to Congress on the weaponization of government and social media resources to suppress opposition voices sounds a bit of a coincidence. Don't they typically send a litter first Is Lois Lerner's Obama enemies task force back in business? Today Nancy Pelosi showing a complete lack of respect for how the justice system works and the rights of the accused said it best, "Donald Trump Has A 'Right To Prove His Innocence". So apparently a senior member of the Democratic leadership in Congress believes we are no longer operating under the Constitutional protections of innocent until proven guilty where the State is required to prove guilt and not the accused who must prove their innocence? Sure sounds like that's the thinking.

Or consider officials that weaponize the justice system against their political opposition as enemies of the people and a threat to democracy? How difficult is that?

What's worse? Useful idiots brainwashed into denying Hillary exposed confidential and secret documents to our enemies or believing a 7 year fantasy that the opposition is conspiring with a foreign power?

I see it like this. We don't know the exact charges until they are unsealed. But the libs declaring victory now is like kicking a field goal on the first drive of the game and counting the game as a win. There's a lot of time left on the clock. My gut says everybody including Bragg knows these charges are on shaky legal ground, transforming a Federal misdemeanor charge to a felony State charge, statute of limitations issues, the legal standing of the State to pursue Federal charges, the integrity of the witness, and on and on. But none of that matters. The Democrats aren't stupid, they know all this too. They know the charges are flimsy and will most certainly be dismissed at some court level. But not in Manhattan district court where they can pick a friendly judge who can deny most of the defenses motions, and an almost all Democratic jury. They find Trump guilty, the case is appealed and overturned at the next level. But they get their conviction in the lower court and will use that conviction as proof of guilt, even though the defendant was ultimately acquitted. Ultimately they don't care if he's guilty or not. What they want is the voters to think he's guilty. That's how I see it playing out.