News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by norwalkbear on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:26PM (#35381687)
America looks like and probably is a banana republic to the world at large right now.

It's no accident the us dollar is about to be dropped as the reserve currency.

No one is going to charge Obama, Bush,or Clinton with crimes and we all know it. That's what makes this all ridiculous

Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by stanleydrew on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:36PM (#35381765)
To make this claim you have to argue that the indictment is illegitimate. And I suppose there are a lot of people who will make that claim.

Presumably the reason Obama, Bush and Clinton won't be charged with crimes is that there isn't enough evidence that they committed any crimes for a prosecutor to seek an indictment.

Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by peyton on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:40PM (#35381797)
Why? Prosecutors have discretion. Doesn’t mean the indictment is illegitimate.
Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by stanleydrew on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:51PM (#35381881)
Agreed. We haven't seen the indictment yet, so it's not really possible to opine on its legitimacy. A lot of people are jumping to conclusions without evidence.
Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by leereeves on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:48PM (#35381848)
The NY Times called the case an "untested legal theory" and said "it is not easy to point to a direct precedent for the case Mr. Bragg appears to be contemplating".

IMO any case made against a DA's political opponents should rest on solid ground, not untested legal theories.

It's disturbing that so many people are willing to throw away the legal system in order to prosecute someone they don't like.

Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by tablespoon on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:57PM (#35381928)
> The NY Times called the case an "untested legal theory" and said "it is not easy to point to a direct precedent for the case Mr. Bragg appears to be contemplating".

> IMO any case made against a DA's political opponents should rest on solid ground, not untested legal theories.

Exactly. It's an even bigger violation of the principle that "the law should apply to political leaders" to abuse the law in order to prosecute one.

I'm no fan of Trump, but any case against him should be strong, not something so weird that an acrobat would have trouble jumping through all the hoops. Unfortunately, Trump broke America, including his opponents, and now they're out for blood and are willing to go as low or even lower than him to get it.

Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by norwalkbear on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:49PM (#35381860)
Bullshit, even top democrats are angry at Braggs over this.
Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by stanleydrew on Thursday March 30, 2023 @10:54PM (#35381899)
It seems like you're pretty upset about this, so maybe not the best time to discuss. But anyway my only point is that whoever is angry at Bragg about this must feel that the indictment is illegitimate, that's all.
[dead]
Re:Grand Jury Votes to Indict Donald Trump by dang on Friday March 31, 2023 @12:29AM (#35382579)
Hey - can you please not break the site guidelines like this? We ban accounts that do that, regardless of their politics. If you'd be willing to review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html you'll see that we don't have much choice about this.

Edit: it turns out you've been doing this a ton, unfortunately. I don't want to ban you for this in the current thread because people will just assume it was for partisan reasons, which it isn't. But if you don't start using HN in the intended spirit, we're going to end up having to.