There is nothing illegal about the the transaction of the land purchase and sale of Longtan industrial park.
Thank you for your statement of pure speculation. It’s very helpful.[/quote]
It is not a speculation. Old pony said it himself with his own words. 司法不能背離合理期待
judiciary cannot go against expectations.
Quote of the day.
Thank you for your statement of pure speculation. It’s very helpful.[/quote]
It is not a speculation. Old pony said it himself with his own words. 司法不能背離合理期待
judiciary cannot go against expectations.
Quote of the day.[/quote]
Bad translation of the day.
“Judiciary cannot go against REASONABLE expectations.” That word makes a big difference.
And yes, it IS speculation. Where and when did he say that? Well, I did your homework for you (a burden you always unfairly put on the reader of your posts) and found that quote was in response to the judiciary finding Chen NOT GUILTY on one of the charges against him ( news.ltn.com.tw/news/focus/paper/441917 ). So how does that quote constitute, as you originally claimed, Ma “direct(ing) his supreme court judges to issue a guilty verdict”?
Again, you play your silly word games filled with half-truths, quotes taken out of context, or just plain false claims. It’s conspiracy and it’s not amusing.
I asked you earlier to give me clear examples of his illegal use of power that have supporting evidence. You still haven’t given any concrete examples. You can’t just hope he goes into a prison cell because you don’t like his administration. You need proof of ILLEGAL activity.[/quote]
Ma’s use of the special investigators to try and get Wang Jinping would be a prime example.
[quote=“Dirt”]http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2013/03/27/2003558093
This is what I found on Jeffrey Koo. Looks like prosecuters lied to get him to return to Taiwan, but it’s inadmissible.[/quote]
It was the cornerstone of the state’s case. Oh and Koo also later said he lied. Hasn’t resulted in a new trial though.
Inadmissible. You card.
[quote]
chinapost.com.tw/taiwan-busi … -finds.htm
Ah, here we go. However, Chen was a public servant, Koo was a private citizen.[/quote]
You asked about selectice treatment. Koo bribes and lies and is not tried
[quote]
According to this article, violations of the Anti-Corruption Act carries a minimum sentence of 10 years. I’m fairly sure Chen violated that act. It hasn’t been 10 years.[\quote]
Few people in Taiwan do a full sentence.
[quote]
I think Lin Yi-shih would be a better argument for you. Although, Chen was convicted on many more counts. So, yeah, I would agree they “threw the book” at Chen. All current and future ROC presidents should be forewarned.[/quote][/quote]
I have mentioned Lin at least a dozen times. But Chen only has one other major charge. The prosecutors went fishing during his investigation. It was unseemly to watch. You think they couldn’t have found more on Lin if they wanted?
I asked you earlier to give me clear examples of his illegal use of power that have supporting evidence. You still haven’t given any concrete examples. You can’t just hope he goes into a prison cell because you don’t like his administration. You need proof of ILLEGAL activity.[/quote]
Ma’s use of the special investigators to try and get Wang Jinping would be a prime example.[/quote]
And to provide him with inside information which he could use as Chairman to destroy Wang.
I asked you earlier to give me clear examples of his illegal use of power that have supporting evidence. You still haven’t given any concrete examples. You can’t just hope he goes into a prison cell because you don’t like his administration. You need proof of ILLEGAL activity.[/quote]
Ma’s use of the special investigators to try and get Wang Jinping would be a prime example.[/quote]
And to provide him with inside information which he could use as Chairman to destroy Wang.[/quote]
That’s a criminal offense no?
he will try for a fallguy, I think - oh no, he already did.
Ma and LTH were both Chairmen and leaders of the KMT. The KMT, even in the democratic/post-White Terror era, has chosen to retain and continue to profit off of assets stolen from the Taiwanese people. And yet there is no prosecution of either them, or the KMT as an organization. This is not a case of penalizing current KMT leaders for the theft committed by CKS and others; this is a case where the current KMT knowing full well that their predecessors stole millions have chosen to keep the stolen assets and continue to profit off them . . . . for some 20 years. And Ma and LTH were the highest leaders in the land; their loyalty should have been to the state and not to the party.
Until the KMT returns their stolen wealth, and the KMT leadership faces trial for keeping it so long, I can’t see how Taiwan has “rule of law” when it comes to prosecuting political corruption. Let’s call a spade a spade. Taiwan has a system where the ruling political party (the KMT) has and continues to be able to use the state to selectively prosecute and persecute their political enemies, while simultaneously shielding themselves from prosecution for similar matters. Chen deserves his sentence. Ma and LTH, do not deserve immunity however; they should get their day in court and the KMT’s stolen wealth should be returned to the Taiwanese people.
I asked you earlier to give me clear examples of his illegal use of power that have supporting evidence. You still haven’t given any concrete examples. You can’t just hope he goes into a prison cell because you don’t like his administration. You need proof of ILLEGAL activity.[/quote]
Ma’s use of the special investigators to try and get Wang Jinping would be a prime example.[/quote]
All articles I read about this said that Ma’s only involvement was that the prosecutor presented a report to Ma of information they gathered before the probe was completed. In all of the articles I’ve read about the Wang case, I see virtually nothing implying that Ma himself was involved in the wiretapping or even the instigation of the investigation. What was his crime? What evidence is there that he committed such crime?
This article (from the heavily green-leaning Taipei Times) gives the same summary that I’ve read over and over: taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/ … 2003578065
[quote]In late August and early September, Huang allegedly informed President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) that SID prosecutors had overheard conversations implicating Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) in improper lobbying.
They alleged Wang sought to prevent Taiwan High Prosecutors’ Office prosecutor Lin Shiow-tao (林秀濤) from seeking an appeal in a breach of a trust case against Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘).
The conversations were collected from wiretaps that were part of an unrelated investigation involving Ker.[/quote]
So the prosecutor’s office was running an ongoing investigation on Ker, overheard a conversation in which Wang was engaging in questionable behavior, and then reported it to Ma. How is Ma guilty of any crime in that series of events?
Now Ma then went on to use that questionably-obtained information in a questionable manner. He used it to try to push Wang out. Since the information was gained through improper means, it wasn’t proper to make it public and try to leverage it into a way to push Wang out of the party, but as far as I know, those actions while perhaps morally lacking, aren’t ILLEGAL. This is an example of Ma being a poor politician, not a criminal.
Thank you for your statement of pure speculation. It’s very helpful.[/quote]
It is not a speculation. Old pony said it himself with his own words. 司法不能背離合理期待
judiciary cannot go against expectations.
Quote of the day.[/quote]
Bad translation of the day.
“Judiciary cannot go against REASONABLE expectations.” That word makes a big difference…[/quote]
It makes no difference. Expectations are expectations. They are not evidence.
How come horsey did not go to jail?
His accountant did.
Last September saw horsey interfere with the legal system in ways which should earn him a decade on Green Island.[/quote]
When Ma’s term is over in about 2 years. Try him. Be prepared to provide evidence.[/quote]
Evidence? Wow. O’Pony said it himself, “judiciary cannot go against REASONABLE expectations.” :roflmao:
Thank you for your statement of pure speculation. It’s very helpful.[/quote]
It is not a speculation. Old pony said it himself with his own words. 司法不能背離合理期待
judiciary cannot go against expectations.
Quote of the day.[/quote]
Bad translation of the day.
“Judiciary cannot go against REASONABLE expectations.” That word makes a big difference…[/quote]
It makes no difference. Expectations are expectations. They are not evidence.[/quote]
But reasonable expectations are based on evidence.
Whatever…I have no desire to get into a semantics argument with you. The primary point is that that quote doesn’t at all constitute President Ma “directing his supreme court judges to issue a guilty verdict.” The quote was a response to a not guilty verdict. You persist in distorting the truth.
No. Expectations are not. Evidence is evidence. Expectations are expectations.
Except for O’pony and his fans, for whom evidence is based on expectations.
Here’s the quote in full:
Rough translation: “Of course the judiciary should be independent, but it cannot be isolated from society and must not deviate from the reasonable expectations of the people. The judiciary must safeguard the interests of good people. That is the bare minimum of justice.”
It’s clear that he is not suggesting that the courts should decide cases on public opinion and not evidence. He is only stating that the “reasonable expectations” of the people is that the law be upheld.
Again…you’re really doing a good job of dodging the point. He PUBLICLY said this AFTER the NOT GUILTY verdict came down for one of the charges. The statement, in no way, could be construed to be Ma “directing his supreme court judges to issue a guilty verdict.”
[quote=“Taiwanguy”]Here’s the quote in full:
Rough translation: “Of course the judiciary should be independent, but it cannot be isolated from society and must not deviate from the reasonable expectations of the people. The judiciary must safeguard the interests of good people. That is the bare minimum of justice.”
It’s clear that he is not suggesting that the courts should decide cases on public opinion and not evidence. He is only stating that the “reasonable expectations” of the people is that the law be upheld.[/quote]
Look at the bold part. What he is directly saying is that if the people based on the KMT spin wants a kangaroo court run, then this is run.
How come horsey did not go to jail?
His accountant did.
Last September saw horsey interfere with the legal system in ways which should earn him a decade on Green Island.[/quote]
When Ma’s term is over in about 2 years. Try him. Be prepared to provide evidence.[/quote]
They can dig up some dirt!
How come horsey did not go to jail?
His accountant did.
Last September saw horsey interfere with the legal system in ways which should earn him a decade on Green Island.[/quote]
When Ma’s term is over in about 2 years. Try him. Be prepared to provide evidence.[/quote]
They can dig up some dirt![/quote]
If it worked on Chen, it can work on horsey too.
[quote=“Mr He”][quote=“Taiwanguy”]Here’s the quote in full:
Rough translation: “Of course the judiciary should be independent, but it cannot be isolated from society and must not deviate from the reasonable expectations of the people. The judiciary must safeguard the interests of good people. That is the bare minimum of justice.”
It’s clear that he is not suggesting that the courts should decide cases on public opinion and not evidence. He is only stating that the “reasonable expectations” of the people is that the law be upheld.[/quote]
Look at the bold part. What he is directly saying is that if the people based on the KMT spin wants a kangaroo court run, then this is run.[/quote]
Yes, look at the bold part IN CONTEXT. He is not talking about a specific case. He is not talking about how the courts decide cases. He is speaking about the principle of judicial independence and how the people have a “reasonable expectation” that the judiciary will “safeguard the interests of good people.” I guarantee that if you gave this complete quote to anyone without telling them who it is, they would glance at it and say “yep, that seems reasonable.” You are trying to make it into something it’s not…a declaration that the courts should decide cases based on public opinion.
How come horsey did not go to jail?
His accountant did.
Last September saw horsey interfere with the legal system in ways which should earn him a decade on Green Island.[/quote]
When Ma’s term is over in about 2 years. Try him. Be prepared to provide evidence.[/quote]
They can dig up some dirt![/quote]
If it worked on Chen, it can work on horsey too.[/quote]
If there is dirt to be dug up and they succeed in digging it up, you won’t be hearing any complaining from me. I wish the Chen supporters would say the same. Dirt was dug up on their guy (the corruption was RAMPANT throughout his entire family) and they call conspiracy.
Ma is inherently hypocrite … it’s his character … saying one thing, next, doing the other, he’s good at dodging. As most polticians are probably, but he’s the ultimate.