It must not be forgotten that Trump, and his father before him, did a lot of their business in New York and have a history there, much of it unpalatable. It would not therefore be surprising if there was a greater appetite to see Trump bought to book there than, say, in Miami, or indeed in Washington. That's not politics though. That's a local reputation amplified by national exposure, which would be just the same if he positioned himself as a Democrat.

Maybe the indictment won't be proved. If so it would hand Trump a major propaganda victory. So if this is politically motivated it seems an unwise decision to go ahead if indeed it is "risky".

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

My “outrage” only flows towards things I both perceive as a threat and which any words from me might make a difference. Trump being a prime example.

Whataboutism gives no one the right to do what they like. It’s just a diversionary tactic used to try to avoid focussing on something the poster doesn’t’ want to face.

I have perfect vision. With my glasses! And I have an appointment with Specsavers this week!

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

It's pretty difficult not to hear the constant chuntering of the disillusioned right on these pages. It's a daily flood of prejudice and backward thinking.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Probably a moot point. The theory is that politics and the legal system are totally separate institutions, with no crossover or influence.
Certainly in the US and UK it happens all the time. Who decides the current policing policy, such as " breaking County Lines dealerships", "war on Knife crime" ? Actually the direction comes from Government, especially approaching General Election time.
Who decided against prosecuting Harry Webb or ? or Jimmy Savile?

Actually, plenty of decisions regarding prosecution (or not) and their timings are influenced from outside the legal system.

I disengage, I turn the page.

From the man who wants to take us back into Europe.

A man who denies that the EU wants to be a one government super state when the primary figurehead representing those wishing a return unashamedly states that his ultimate goal is a world government.

A man who would rather whine about the 'Right Wing' than catch rapists.

A man who thinks it's OK to prosecute former Presidents to undermine the democratic process, when he regularly asserts that the law and democratic process are beyond reproach.

A man who denies the inevitable replacement of the Northern European British in Britain when the population has been reduced by 25% in one lifetime and 6% in the last 10 years alone.

I'd like to raise a toast to backward thinking.

Sure, governments determine priorities and strategies, whilst the individual decision-making is done locally. Perhaps you could post your reasoning on the grooming gangs thread too? It resonates there as well.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.