• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Crime pays agian. 27,000 wiped out but he wore a suit during the crime......

Under a plea agreement signed by Wasendorf on September 6 but not made public until this week, an earlier indictment accusing him of 31 counts of false statements to regulators will be dropped. Unlike many criminal plea agreements, Wasendorf is under no obligation to cooperate with prosecutors.
Basically, those who are allegedly representing the average citizen's interests, have conspired to keep the deal under wraps until just a couple days prior to sentencing. Essentially, purposely leaving little time for public disapproval. Also note that most of what little time is made available is over the weekend, when they know full well that most people will not be paying attention to the news for stuff like this. Not illegal, but certainly shady.
 
Basically, those who are allegedly representing the average citizen's interests, have conspired to keep the deal under wraps until just a couple days prior to sentencing. Essentially, purposely leaving little time for public disapproval. Also note that most of what little time is made available is over the weekend, when they know full well that most people will not be paying attention to the news for stuff like this. Not illegal, but certainly shady.

You know......

It COULD be an indicator that the evidence wasn't solid enough to guarantee that a jury would find him guilty (although I'd be surprised if that was the case considering all a jury would have to do is hear the charge in this day and age and immediately assume him guilty). You are aware that prosecutors love to get a win, whatever the cost.
 
You know......

It COULD be an indicator that the evidence wasn't solid enough to guarantee that a jury would find him guilty (although I'd be surprised if that was the case considering all a jury would have to do is hear the charge in this day and age and immediately assume him guilty). You are aware that prosecutors love to get a win, whatever the cost.
Possible, but...

...an easy win notches on the belt just as well as any other win. All most people will see and/or remember is the win.
 
Possible, but...

...an easy win notches on the belt just as well as any other win. All most people will see and/or remember is the win.

pretty much the same thing I was saying.
 
"steal a little and they throw you in Jail, steal a lot and they make you king" (Robert Zimmerman, Infidels Album, 1980s)
 
If I have learned one thing in all my years it is that you can't know the fairness of any verdict if you weren't there. The news often gets it wrong or reports with bias.
 
Back
Top Bottom