The Argument the left uses on the trial
(ghostarchive.org)
Comments (12)
sorted by:
Anytime a leftist uses “debunked” they are knowingly lying. They’re trying to set the “argument” into a framework that they can debate, or at least lie enough about to seem correct.
it's worse. they legitimately think that some smarter person who knows best has determined an item to be false after careful consideration in honestly weighing the facts.
they don't think for themselves.
A little from column A, a little from column B.
Case in point, right away. 1 or 2 cases per year in a country of 300+ million definitely already qualifies as "obscure". But even that comparison only works "on the most basic level" by looking at all charges in the same general category rather than looking only for contextually similar charges. That's a categorization just barely less useless than saying "Hitler and Merkel are both German ex-chancellors. So Germany regularly elects people like Hitler."
Just nitpicking numbers:
The office's domain is not the whole country, and not every citizen has business records to report.
Your point still stands because there can be tons of individual expenses that businesses have to organize and categorize for reporting to the IRS, state, and stakeholders.
Fair point, I had got a little gung ho with the napkin math.
I'm not the only one though, I double checked the "dozens" were all from the New York office and not actually weaseled from a nationwide list. Found their presumed source and it's 28 cases.
Which is including a large number of cases where prison corrections officers falsifying reports after inmates were assaulted weirdly comes under "falsifying business records". Lots of cases where it's a ancillary charge alongside class B felonies like insurance fraud or grand larceny. Less than 5 actually comparable cases where falsifying is the only charge, usually in connection with bribery.
"without evidence" means there's conclusive evidence and they know it, but the person didn't stop in the middle of their speech and list out a bunch of cites that any reporter could find in 5 minutes of search.
The funniest part about this is the whole justification for the prosecution is that trumps business record fraud allowed him to commit a more serious crime. But that "crime" seems to be literally winning the election. As if all politicians are legally required to admit martial affairs before running for office. That would be the day!
The final waking up is learning that the left and the right are on the same team.
Politics is theatre.
What's the time stamp for that?