Ok, so let’s take a look at all the factual and contextual flaws in Mr. Nocera’s argument.
“It was never used in a crime.” This is completely irrelevant. The law prohibits drug addicts from owning purchasing or owning guns. The law does not say anything about whether or not they were used in a crime. BTW, this is a gun restriction law fav…
Ok, so let’s take a look at all the factual and contextual flaws in Mr. Nocera’s argument.
“It was never used in a crime.” This is completely irrelevant. The law prohibits drug addicts from owning purchasing or owning guns. The law does not say anything about whether or not they were used in a crime. BTW, this is a gun restriction law favored by DEMOCRATS. I have to admit, I favor it, too. But Mr. Nocera introduces a red herring. The matter at law is this: was the defendant a drug addict at the time he filled out the application. By Hunter Biden’s own admission, he was a drug addict when he filled out the FEDERAL form. And he lied on a FEDERAL form.
“He is not taking drugs anymore.” Again, completely irrelevant. What matters is what he wrote at the time. Imagine this. Judge: Sir, did you hold up the liquor store on that night? Defendant: Your honor, I’m innocent because I’m not robbing liquor stores at this time.
No, it is not the case that both prosecutions are based on weak charges. Hunter Biden is a drug addict who violated gun laws. Mr. Trump was charged for an accounting decision made by his accounting firm. There is no correspondence, no equivalence.
“Bragg and his team were prosecuting Trump simply because that’s what they do.” Really? Bragg campaigned for the job promising to put Trump in jail. That is a violation of jurist ethics. NO! Except in NY and GA, lawyers do not campaign on a platform of putting a PARTICULAR person in jail.
And this is the worst lie by Mr. Nocera. “Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney (sic) – who has NO CONNECTION TO THE FEDERAL JUSTICE DEPARTMENT (my emphasis). One of the prosecuting attorneys was Matthew Colangelo. Before the Trump trial, Colangelo was the third highest ranking figure in Biden’s Department of Justice. Imagine that! The third highest ranking member of the Biden DOJ resigns his position to become an assistant prosecutor for a local district attorney. Oh, no, absolutely no collusion there.
Michael Milken? Michael Milken was a fraudster who cost millions of Americans billions of dollars. Mr. Trump has never manipulated stocks or bonds. And during his presidency, the economy flourished. Where is there any equivalency?
Mr. Nocera tacitly admits that this case never should have gone to trial. “Plenty of prosecutors have won plenty of convictions in cases that shouldn’t have been brought in the first place.” Mr. Nocera, by his own argument, admits that this was a case that should not have been brought to trial. Indeed, federal prosecutors declined to take the case. And initially, Mr. Bragg declined the case.
We could go on and on about this flawed piece. But what it comes down to is this. Mr. Trump is no ordinary, obscure defendant. He is a former President of the United States of America. He also is likely, without weaponization of the courts by Democrats, to be the next President of the United States of America. This entire charade is designed to interfere with a national election. Everyone knows it. Some are in favor of the charade. Many are not. Mr. Nocera should be honest. And Bari et. al., must be very careful about the line between reporting and deception.
I love you all, and I thank you for this platform.
Ok, so let’s take a look at all the factual and contextual flaws in Mr. Nocera’s argument.
“It was never used in a crime.” This is completely irrelevant. The law prohibits drug addicts from owning purchasing or owning guns. The law does not say anything about whether or not they were used in a crime. BTW, this is a gun restriction law favored by DEMOCRATS. I have to admit, I favor it, too. But Mr. Nocera introduces a red herring. The matter at law is this: was the defendant a drug addict at the time he filled out the application. By Hunter Biden’s own admission, he was a drug addict when he filled out the FEDERAL form. And he lied on a FEDERAL form.
“He is not taking drugs anymore.” Again, completely irrelevant. What matters is what he wrote at the time. Imagine this. Judge: Sir, did you hold up the liquor store on that night? Defendant: Your honor, I’m innocent because I’m not robbing liquor stores at this time.
No, it is not the case that both prosecutions are based on weak charges. Hunter Biden is a drug addict who violated gun laws. Mr. Trump was charged for an accounting decision made by his accounting firm. There is no correspondence, no equivalence.
“Bragg and his team were prosecuting Trump simply because that’s what they do.” Really? Bragg campaigned for the job promising to put Trump in jail. That is a violation of jurist ethics. NO! Except in NY and GA, lawyers do not campaign on a platform of putting a PARTICULAR person in jail.
And this is the worst lie by Mr. Nocera. “Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney (sic) – who has NO CONNECTION TO THE FEDERAL JUSTICE DEPARTMENT (my emphasis). One of the prosecuting attorneys was Matthew Colangelo. Before the Trump trial, Colangelo was the third highest ranking figure in Biden’s Department of Justice. Imagine that! The third highest ranking member of the Biden DOJ resigns his position to become an assistant prosecutor for a local district attorney. Oh, no, absolutely no collusion there.
Michael Milken? Michael Milken was a fraudster who cost millions of Americans billions of dollars. Mr. Trump has never manipulated stocks or bonds. And during his presidency, the economy flourished. Where is there any equivalency?
Mr. Nocera tacitly admits that this case never should have gone to trial. “Plenty of prosecutors have won plenty of convictions in cases that shouldn’t have been brought in the first place.” Mr. Nocera, by his own argument, admits that this was a case that should not have been brought to trial. Indeed, federal prosecutors declined to take the case. And initially, Mr. Bragg declined the case.
We could go on and on about this flawed piece. But what it comes down to is this. Mr. Trump is no ordinary, obscure defendant. He is a former President of the United States of America. He also is likely, without weaponization of the courts by Democrats, to be the next President of the United States of America. This entire charade is designed to interfere with a national election. Everyone knows it. Some are in favor of the charade. Many are not. Mr. Nocera should be honest. And Bari et. al., must be very careful about the line between reporting and deception.
I love you all, and I thank you for this platform.