For once, I agree with this Al Sharpton.

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nutxo
The bail should have been set equal to what he stole.

Because that is Constitutional also.


How quickly we toss away the Constitution for vengeance or security.

Well, the Constitution has been suspended during times of War and what these Wall Street and Banking Criminals have wrought on the U.S. is pretty close to an act of war.

lol. Please, greed isn't war and John Q. Public deserves just as much blame.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nutxo
The bail should have been set equal to what he stole.

Because that is Constitutional also.


How quickly we toss away the Constitution for vengeance or security.

Well, the Constitution has been suspended during times of War and what these Wall Street and Banking Criminals have wrought on the U.S. is pretty close to an act of war.

lol. Please, greed isn't war and John Q. Public deserves just as much blame.

OK, at the end of the day, I'll grind my teeth and agree with you and whoozyer on the principle and importance of haebus corpus, as well as the fact that there's plenty of blame to go around, but doesn't money skew justice and create different social classes which in turn undermine the concept of a stable and just society?

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
If you were a mugger or stick up artist

This guy stole billions.

He's being treateed more harshly than the average petty criminal awaiting trial would be treated.

Stealing billions is not a petty crime.

Did he steal billions? AFAIK, the $50 billion number that has been reported is the amount that was "lost" by investors, including money that they invested and lost and fictitious gains that he reported. The money he stole from investors was given to earlier investors - that's how you keep a ponzi scheme going. I haven't heard anything about how much he actually profited from the scheme.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nutxo
The bail should have been set equal to what he stole.

Because that is Constitutional also.


How quickly we toss away the Constitution for vengeance or security.

Well, the Constitution has been suspended during times of War and what these Wall Street and Banking Criminals have wrought on the U.S. is pretty close to an act of war.

The stuff people post in P&N :laugh: Priceless.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nutxo
The bail should have been set equal to what he stole.

Because that is Constitutional also.


How quickly we toss away the Constitution for vengeance or security.

Well, the Constitution has been suspended during times of War and what these Wall Street and Banking Criminals have wrought on the U.S. is pretty close to an act of war.

The stuff people post in P&N :laugh: Priceless.

I am sure Ian Thiermann is sharing the laugh with you too:

"After losing his entire life's savings to disgraced fund manager Bernard Madoff, 90-year-old Ian Thiermann abandoned retirement and now works the aisles of a grocery store to make ends meet.

Handing out fliers hawking avocados and pork ribs at a supermarket in Ben Lomond, California, Thiermann is one of many facing dramatic lifestyle changes after losing their savings in Madoff's suspected $50 billion Ponzi scheme.

Thiermann wasn't even aware he had invested with Madoff until December 15, when a friend who managed his investments called him on the telephone. "He said, 'I've lost everything and you have lost everything.'" For Thiermann, that meant $750,000."

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
If you were a mugger or stick up artist

This guy stole billions.

He's being treateed more harshly than the average petty criminal awaiting trial would be treated.

Stealing billions is not a petty crime.

Neither is rape or murder but most of the time those people are eligible for bail as well. The comparison that Sharpton is trying to make is that if you or I (normal Joe Sixpak types) did what Maddoff did we'd be sitting in a cell. "Ohhh... look at the rich guy and his special treatment." There is nothing special about the way he's being treated. He lives in a penthouse. If he lived in a double-wide he'd be there instead. Whose house should he be in for his house arrest?

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Siddhartha
I rather not have my taxes go towards having this guy in jail.

I would rather they did as people deserve equal treatment, not just the treatment they can afford. Besides, having him loose is a risk to the public as he can still do PLENTY of more damage to people's finances and the greater economy.

He's not loose. He's under house arrest. Get a grip. He can't do anything more.

Bail is a constitutional right, people. It applies to everyone. He hasn't been to trial yet, he hasn't been convicted of anything. I'm not defending the guy. I hope he dies in prison with a prolapsed rectum and lots of cold sores.

But seriously, get a grip. Why is it that some of you have such a hard time with this?

Actually, he can. He has already been shown to be mailing off valuables to family members. He is in a position to try and hide as many funds and evidence as possible by a mere phone call or visitor. When something of this scale happens, you need the extra scrutiny. Bail is a constitutional right, but an astronomical bail amount for one person is nothing in comparison to the wall st types. He got a slap on the wrist as far as bail goes. No, he hasn't been to trial yet, but smaller scale money-laundering thieves would be treated much harsher in the run-up to their own trails.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nutxo
The bail should have been set equal to what he stole.

Because that is Constitutional also.


How quickly we toss away the Constitution for vengeance or security.

Well, the Constitution has been suspended during times of War and what these Wall Street and Banking Criminals have wrought on the U.S. is pretty close to an act of war.

The stuff people post in P&N :laugh: Priceless.

I am sure Ian Thiermann is sharing the laugh with you too:

"After losing his entire life's savings to disgraced fund manager Bernard Madoff, 90-year-old Ian Thiermann abandoned retirement and now works the aisles of a grocery store to make ends meet.

Handing out fliers hawking avocados and pork ribs at a supermarket in Ben Lomond, California, Thiermann is one of many facing dramatic lifestyle changes after losing their savings in Madoff's suspected $50 billion Ponzi scheme.

Thiermann wasn't even aware he had invested with Madoff until December 15, when a friend who managed his investments called him on the telephone. "He said, 'I've lost everything and you have lost everything.'" For Thiermann, that meant $750,000."

I'm sure Ian Thiermann would not laugh, because he lost all of his money. But he would probably agree that you're a lunatic for calling it an act of war. Ian seems smart like that.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: tvarad

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nutxo
The bail should have been set equal to what he stole.

Because that is Constitutional also.


How quickly we toss away the Constitution for vengeance or security.

Well, the Constitution has been suspended during times of War and what these Wall Street and Banking Criminals have wrought on the U.S. is pretty close to an act of war.

The stuff people post in P&N :laugh: Priceless.

I am sure Ian Thiermann is sharing the laugh with you too:

"After losing his entire life's savings to disgraced fund manager Bernard Madoff, 90-year-old Ian Thiermann abandoned retirement and now works the aisles of a grocery store to make ends meet.

Handing out fliers hawking avocados and pork ribs at a supermarket in Ben Lomond, California, Thiermann is one of many facing dramatic lifestyle changes after losing their savings in Madoff's suspected $50 billion Ponzi scheme.

Thiermann wasn't even aware he had invested with Madoff until December 15, when a friend who managed his investments called him on the telephone. "He said, 'I've lost everything and you have lost everything.'" For Thiermann, that meant $750,000."

I'm sure Ian Thiermann would not laugh, because he lost all of his money. But he would probably agree that you're a lunatic for calling it an act of war. Ian seems smart like that.

From Merriam-Webster:

rhetorical
One entry found.

Main Entry:
rhe·tor·i·cal Listen to the pronunciation of rhetorical
Pronunciation:
\ri-'to?r-i-k?l, -'tär-\
Variant(s):
also rhe·tor·ic Listen to the pronunciation of rhetoric \ri-'to?r-ik, -'tär-\
Function:
adjective
Date:
15th century

1 a: of, relating to, or concerned with rhetoric b: employed for rhetorical effect ; especially : asked merely for effect with no answer expected <a rhetorical question>