OK, throw Trump in jail in 2022
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by arkon on Aug 5, 2023 12:34:15 GMT -5
That's horseshit. It doesn't, it shouldn't matter who a defendant is. Equal protection under the law means everybody gets treated the same and NOBODY gets special treatment...including former presidents. Guilt beyond a REASONABLE doubt. For everybody. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, even if it is wrong. Nobody is saying he shouldn't get equal treatment. Right now he is not. Several Democrats have similar activities and the DOJ has turned a blind eye to them. And again, all they are saying is that if you are going to drag a former president into this kind of charge you need to make damn sure your case is solid. Y'all need to learn to interpret things just a bit better. Final analysis, it doesn't matter how strong a case the prosecution presents, it still won't change the minds of those who will not accept that Donald Trump has committed ANY crimes.
|
|
It isn't enough to love Ohio State. You also have to hate m******n
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by canefan on Aug 5, 2023 13:05:05 GMT -5
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, even if it is wrong. Nobody is saying he shouldn't get equal treatment. Right now he is not. Several Democrats have similar activities and the DOJ has turned a blind eye to them. And again, all they are saying is that if you are going to drag a former president into this kind of charge you need to make damn sure your case is solid. Y'all need to learn to interpret things just a bit better. Why is a former president entitled to such treatment and not the rest of us? Well, first of all, we are only talking about the decision to charge him. Once the charge is in place he gets exactly the same standard as anyone. But when making that decision there are some things to consider. Like it or not, the first is that he is a former president of the country. Why? Because one, a trial of a former president does diminish us in the eyes of the world and weakens our position with the rest of the world. I have no doubt you disagree with that, and that's fine. We can agree to disagree. Second, we don't know everything that the president does. Neither does the prosecutor. There may be things that we and he is not privy to that would explain actions that look peculiar. That is why he should have a higher standard in making the decision to bring charges. In Trumps case, if they put the country through this, which you also know is going to further divide the country, and Trump wins, I'd say Jack Smiths career is essentially over.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by canefan on Aug 5, 2023 13:08:39 GMT -5
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, even if it is wrong. Nobody is saying he shouldn't get equal treatment. Right now he is not. Several Democrats have similar activities and the DOJ has turned a blind eye to them. And again, all they are saying is that if you are going to drag a former president into this kind of charge you need to make damn sure your case is solid. Y'all need to learn to interpret things just a bit better. Final analysis, it doesn't matter how strong a case the prosecution presents, it still won't change the minds of those who will not accept that Donald Trump has committed ANY crimes. And there is your bias showing again. In court he will be held to the same standard. But, as I noted before, if he loses you can bet this will go all the way to the SCOTUS. And unlike you and the other lefties here, I still have faith that the Justices will follow the letter of the law in making their decision. BTW, my position wouldn't change if it was Biden, Clinton or Obama. Each deserves that extra certainty before making a decision to charge. And each one, if convicted in their trial, would go all the way to the SCOTUS no matter what, because they are former presidents of the United States.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Aug 5, 2023 13:14:37 GMT -5
Why is a former president entitled to such treatment and not the rest of us? Well, first of all, we are only talking about the decision to charge him. Once the charge is in place he gets exactly the same standard as anyone. But when making that decision there are some things to consider. Like it or not, the first is that he is a former president of the country. Why? Because one, a trial of a former president does diminish us in the eyes of the world and weakens our position with the rest of the world. I have no doubt you disagree with that, and that's fine. We can agree to disagree. Second, we don't know everything that the president does. Neither does the prosecutor. There may be things that we and he is not privy to that would explain actions that look peculiar. That is why he should have a higher standard in making the decision to bring charges. In Trumps case, if they put the country through this, which you also know is going to further divide the country, and Trump wins, I'd say Jack Smiths career is essentially over. 1. Can you explain why you think the notion of prosecuting a former POTUS somehow diminishes us? 2. If there are things 'we don't know', then that exculpatory evidence should logically see the inside of the courtroom. If it doesn't, then we can presume there isn't any such evidence. 3. I doubt anyone but Mr. Smith and his family and friends give a rip about his or any prosecutor's career if they are bad at their job.
|
|
OK, throw Trump in jail in 2022
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by arkon on Aug 5, 2023 13:51:49 GMT -5
Final analysis, it doesn't matter how strong a case the prosecution presents, it still won't change the minds of those who will not accept that Donald Trump has committed ANY crimes. And there is your bias showing again. In court he will be held to the same standard. But, as I noted before, if he loses you can bet this will go all the way to the SCOTUS. And unlike you and the other lefties here, I still have faith that the Justices will follow the letter of the law in making their decision. BTW, my position wouldn't change if it was Biden, Clinton or Obama. Each deserves that extra certainty before making a decision to charge. And each one, if convicted in their trial, would go all the way to the SCOTUS no matter what, because they are former presidents of the United States. And what degree of evidence/proof would be required for you to finally admit his guilt?
|
|
It isn't enough to love Ohio State. You also have to hate m******n
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Aug 5, 2023 17:31:47 GMT -5
And there is your bias showing again. In court he will be held to the same standard. But, as I noted before, if he loses you can bet this will go all the way to the SCOTUS. And unlike you and the other lefties here, I still have faith that the Justices will follow the letter of the law in making their decision. BTW, my position wouldn't change if it was Biden, Clinton or Obama. Each deserves that extra certainty before making a decision to charge. And each one, if convicted in their trial, would go all the way to the SCOTUS no matter what, because they are former presidents of the United States. And what degree of evidence/proof would be required for you to finally admit his guilt? He’s told you. He won’t buy it until SCOTUS says so. Which will never happen, unless he theoretically loses the election, in which case…he’ll go ahead and just be fine with the outcome. If he wins the election, he will pardon himself and SCOTUS will never weigh in…unless it is on the question of whether a president can pardon himself.
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
OK, throw Trump in jail in 2022
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by arkon on Aug 5, 2023 20:02:06 GMT -5
And what degree of evidence/proof would be required for you to finally admit his guilt? He’s told you. He won’t buy it until SCOTUS says so. Which will never happen, unless he theoretically loses the election, in which case…he’ll go ahead and just be fine with the outcome. If he wins the election, he will pardon himself and SCOTUS will never weigh in…unless it is on the question of whether a president can pardon himself. He'll be just fine with the outcome? If Trump loses? I don't see that happening.
|
|
It isn't enough to love Ohio State. You also have to hate m******n
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Aug 5, 2023 20:10:24 GMT -5
He’s told you. He won’t buy it until SCOTUS says so. Which will never happen, unless he theoretically loses the election, in which case…he’ll go ahead and just be fine with the outcome. If he wins the election, he will pardon himself and SCOTUS will never weigh in…unless it is on the question of whether a president can pardon himself. He'll be just fine with the outcome? If Trump loses? I don't see that happening. In terms of the SCOTUS determination. He’s already told you a conviction by a jury won’t matter….he’s going to wait for SCOTUS to weigh in. If and when SCOTUS ever weighs in…it’ll be after the 2024 election. So here are the possible outcomes… 1. Trump is acquitted. Cane is happy. 2. Trump is convicted. Cane won’t accept that until it is appealed to SCOTUS for their opinion. That won’t possibly occur before the 2024 election. Cane is happy. Which then leads us to… 2(a). If Trump loses the 2024 election, Cane doesn’t give a shit what SCOTUS says because Trump, at that point, will be finished and none of this really matters beyond the tying of loose ends. So he can claim he still believes in the rule of law. 2(b). If Trump wins the 2024 election, he will almost assuredly pardon himself, rendering his conviction moot, unless SCOTUS is asked to weigh in on the question of whether a president can pardon himself. Cane will be happy. Effectively, by Cane punting this to SCOTUS before he will “accept” the outcome allows him to still claim this is all political until the politics part is done.
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by burninbush on Aug 5, 2023 21:14:17 GMT -5
He'll be just fine with the outcome? If Trump loses? I don't see that happening. In terms of the SCOTUS determination. He’s already told you a conviction by a jury won’t matter….he’s going to wait for SCOTUS to weigh in. If and when SCOTUS ever weighs in…it’ll be after the 2024 election. So here are the possible outcomes… 1. Trump is acquitted. Cane is happy. 2. Trump is convicted. Cane won’t accept that until it is appealed to SCOTUS for their opinion. That won’t possibly occur before the 2024 election. Cane is happy. Which then leads us to… 2(a). If Trump loses the 2024 election, Cane doesn’t give a shit what SCOTUS says because Trump, at that point, will be finished and none of this really matters beyond the tying of loose ends. So he can claim he still believes in the rule of law. 2(b). If Trump wins the 2024 election, he will almost assuredly pardon himself, rendering his conviction moot, unless SCOTUS is asked to weigh in on the question of whether a president can pardon himself. Cane will be happy. Effectively, by Cane punting this to SCOTUS before he will “accept” the outcome allows him to still claim this is all political until the politics part is done. I imagine he's planning on a Nixon-style VP pardon. His version of a get out of jail maneuver.
|
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Aug 5, 2023 22:09:48 GMT -5
In terms of the SCOTUS determination. He’s already told you a conviction by a jury won’t matter….he’s going to wait for SCOTUS to weigh in. If and when SCOTUS ever weighs in…it’ll be after the 2024 election. So here are the possible outcomes… 1. Trump is acquitted. Cane is happy. 2. Trump is convicted. Cane won’t accept that until it is appealed to SCOTUS for their opinion. That won’t possibly occur before the 2024 election. Cane is happy. Which then leads us to… 2(a). If Trump loses the 2024 election, Cane doesn’t give a shit what SCOTUS says because Trump, at that point, will be finished and none of this really matters beyond the tying of loose ends. So he can claim he still believes in the rule of law. 2(b). If Trump wins the 2024 election, he will almost assuredly pardon himself, rendering his conviction moot, unless SCOTUS is asked to weigh in on the question of whether a president can pardon himself. Cane will be happy. Effectively, by Cane punting this to SCOTUS before he will “accept” the outcome allows him to still claim this is all political until the politics part is done. I imagine he's planning on a Nixon-style VP pardon. His version of a get out of jail maneuver. I doubt he would have any desire to abdicate the presidency.
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by canefan on Aug 5, 2023 22:24:57 GMT -5
Well, first of all, we are only talking about the decision to charge him. Once the charge is in place he gets exactly the same standard as anyone. But when making that decision there are some things to consider. Like it or not, the first is that he is a former president of the country. Why? Because one, a trial of a former president does diminish us in the eyes of the world and weakens our position with the rest of the world. I have no doubt you disagree with that, and that's fine. We can agree to disagree. Second, we don't know everything that the president does. Neither does the prosecutor. There may be things that we and he is not privy to that would explain actions that look peculiar. That is why he should have a higher standard in making the decision to bring charges. In Trumps case, if they put the country through this, which you also know is going to further divide the country, and Trump wins, I'd say Jack Smiths career is essentially over. 1. Can you explain why you think the notion of prosecuting a former POTUS somehow diminishes us? Yep. It looks and smells like political prosecution to keep Trump out of office. Makes us look like a Banana Republic 2. If there are things 'we don't know', then that exculpatory evidence should logically see the inside of the courtroom. If it doesn't, then we can presume there isn't any such evidence. What if it's classified? 3. I doubt anyone but Mr. Smith and his family and friends give a rip about his or any prosecutor's career if they are bad at their job. He's the one making the decision.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by canefan on Aug 6, 2023 7:24:01 GMT -5
And there is your bias showing again. In court he will be held to the same standard. But, as I noted before, if he loses you can bet this will go all the way to the SCOTUS. And unlike you and the other lefties here, I still have faith that the Justices will follow the letter of the law in making their decision. BTW, my position wouldn't change if it was Biden, Clinton or Obama. Each deserves that extra certainty before making a decision to charge. And each one, if convicted in their trial, would go all the way to the SCOTUS no matter what, because they are former presidents of the United States. And what degree of evidence/proof would be required for you to finally admit his guilt? You guys really are a trip. Read your response again. You insist that I just accept that he is guilty, you are certain he is guilty. Doesn't matter what the legal experts say. You want him to be guilty so he is. Remember, in the US you are innocent until proven guilty. I don't have any idea what kind of evidence it will take to prove that he actually knew for a fact that he lost and didn't actually believe he won and the election was stolen. That's why I say it will have to go through the chain. Anyone not driven by their liberal bias is going to at least admit to themselves that any trial for Trump in DC has zero chance of being fair. So going through the appeals up to the SCOTUS is where we will see the legitimate legal arguments.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Aug 6, 2023 8:20:23 GMT -5
And what degree of evidence/proof would be required for you to finally admit his guilt? You guys really are a trip. Read your response again. You insist that I just accept that he is guilty, you are certain he is guilty. Doesn't matter what the legal experts say. You want him to be guilty so he is. Remember, in the US you are innocent until proven guilty. I don't have any idea what kind of evidence it will take to prove that he actually knew for a fact that he lost and didn't actually believe he won and the election was stolen. That's why I say it will have to go through the chain. Anyone not driven by their liberal bias is going to at least admit to themselves that any trial for Trump in DC has zero chance of being fair. So going through the appeals up to the SCOTUS is where we will see the legitimate legal arguments. SCOTUS does not rule on the findings of fact by a jury, nor does it overturn verdicts. It can only rule on the process of the case and whether or not the law was followed. It can invalidate the trial and/or some aspect of a ruling by the court, but it cannot find Trump not guilty if the jury found him guilty.
|
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Aug 6, 2023 8:29:26 GMT -5
You guys really are a trip. Read your response again. You insist that I just accept that he is guilty, you are certain he is guilty. Doesn't matter what the legal experts say. You want him to be guilty so he is. Remember, in the US you are innocent until proven guilty. I don't have any idea what kind of evidence it will take to prove that he actually knew for a fact that he lost and didn't actually believe he won and the election was stolen. That's why I say it will have to go through the chain. Anyone not driven by their liberal bias is going to at least admit to themselves that any trial for Trump in DC has zero chance of being fair. So going through the appeals up to the SCOTUS is where we will see the legitimate legal arguments. SCOTUS does not rule on the findings of fact by a jury, nor does it overturn verdicts. It can only rule on the process of the case and whether or not the law was followed. It can invalidate the trial and/or some aspect of a ruling by the court, but it cannot find Trump not guilty if the jury found him guilty. Alas, here he is telling you that until SCOTUS passes judgment…nothing is legit or settled.
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Make America Great Again !!!
Supreme Being-like Member
|
Post by Panama pfRedd on Aug 6, 2023 8:45:46 GMT -5
And what degree of evidence/proof would be required for you to finally admit his guilt? You guys really are a trip. Read your response again. You insist that I just accept that he is guilty, you are certain he is guilty. Doesn't matter what the legal experts say. You want him to be guilty so he is. Remember, in the US you are innocent until proven guilty. I don't have any idea what kind of evidence it will take to prove that he actually knew for a fact that he lost and didn't actually believe he won and the election was stolen. That's why I say it will have to go through the chain. Anyone not driven by their liberal bias is going to at least admit to themselves that any trial for Trump in DC has zero chance of being fair. So going through the appeals up to the SCOTUS is where we will see the legitimate legal arguments. Their desperation to get Trump blinds them to anything else. Never underestimate how many people like our twins think they have it all figured and cannot possibly be wrong.
|
|
................................ ................................ = Panama pfRedd - 2021 Regular Season Champion = ............................... ................................
|