When someone points to the likely crimes committed by the biden family or hillary clinton or whatever. Don't get confused, no one is saying Trump shouldn't be investigated and/or indicted. They are pointing out the hypocrisy of the left and two tier justice system that exists in this countryFLBear5630 said:You make a great point. I am sick of the "but he or she did it" tactic in discussing these acts.Rawhide said:Trump has had a half century as a real estate developer. Lyin' Biden has had a half century of using political clout to peddle influence to lobbyists and foreign countries.LateSteak69 said:Trump did the same thing with China and Jared. maybe they can swap notes.Rawhide said:I'm less concerned with someone's value of their own property vs. the multiple shell companies set up by the bidens to hide payments from foreign countries/companies.FLBear5630 said:Trump's in Westchester County was valued at 80 million to get a 21 million dollar tax benefit, then had it valued a 200 and 291 million depending on his need. Here is the article.Rawhide said:Looking at what the county appraisal district has valued my property at, is corrupt.FLBear5630 said:Corruption is horrible, when it is working against you. Take a look at the Tax Credits and the valuations of some of his properties. That was sound Government...TWD 1974 said:Giving Trump credit for corruption awareness is like crediting Bonnie and Clyde for bank security.Oldbear83 said:More like I agree Trump's ego did him damage, but he did more to bring awareness of the Swamp than any President since Ike. And some of the cabinet picks failed because the GOP-controlled Congress had the spine of a marshmallow.ATL Bear said:This must be that humility OldBear was talking about.Oldbear83 said:Cool story, bro.sombear said:Oldbear83 said:
Doc Holliday: "Everyone is a uniparty loyalist except those two."
Gotta disagree. Haley and Scott have promise.
Question is, if someone not Trump but GOP wins the White House, can they resist the full court press from the Swamp?
Make the wrong VP choice, or a weak Attorney General, or a wobbly FBI Director, and you might as well have elected Romney.
Trump cleaned out his own appointees more than he cleaned out the swamp. Don't mistake campaign rhetoric for action or success. Trump made the swamp worse and is about to drown in the swamp.
Claimed value of sleepy NY estate could come to haunt Trump | AP News
Big difference there partner.
But please, show us where Trump created multiple shell companies so that money from China to Jared would be hidden and difficult to trace and spread among sisters/brothers/grand children.
Face it dude, you're guy is up to his nose in corruption. The cracks in the biden crime family network of selling out America for cash is starting to show and you're besides yourself.
But please, go on, keep trying to deflect with "but Trump this".... I'm not even voting for the guy in the primary.
Biden should be investigated
Hunter should be indicted
Hillary should be investigated and/or indicted
Trump should be indicted.
Whether or not there is negligence in investigating or prosecuting the others, IT DOES NOT GIVE THE REST A PASS!
He's Going to Jail
52,250 Views |
548 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by FLBear5630
Only part of it is on Trump. The fact that the FBI concluded she broke the law "but didn't mean to", shows us that she should've been indicted in 2016. That's not on Trump. That's an example of how crooked democrats are.FLBear5630 said:Hilary is on Trump. He ran on the "Lock Her Up" and then did nothing...Waco1947 said:
Biden should be investigated He is being investigated
Hunter should be indicted It's in the court system now, but let us wait until the grand jury indicts
Hillary should be investigated and/or indicted Has been investigated but no one sought indictments
Trump should be indicted. 99 already
Whether or not there is negligence in investigating or prosecuting the others, IT DOES NOT GIVE THE REST A PASS!
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
There is a reason why Dems are sticking with Biden rather than dumping him for Newsom.......Osodecentx said:to your last point, 74% of Democrats think Biden is too old to be effective. What if Biden backs out and Newsom gets nomination? A young candidate would be running against a candidate who has been indicted 18 (19?) times in 4 jurisdictions.Quote:Quote:Quote:
The man is 80 years old. He could die in his sleep without any help from "foul play."
Biden could drop dead at any minute. It's not an unrealistic concern. What helps him is he has the best healthcare of anyone in the world monitoring him.
What I find odd is Trump is the same generation, eats more **** than the Hamburglar and has a family history of dementia. And now his freedom is at risk.
Is there a reason he's avoiding debates? Hiding in the basement.
To paraphrase a British Prime Minister speaking in parliament from many years ago, those who expect to lose the election always challenge whose who expect to win the election to a debate and those who expect to win the election decline.
I suspect he doesn't see the benefit, and he may be right. He doesn't have to do anything at this point to suck the oxygen away from other Republican candidates.
It seems that whoever the GOP nominates will be running against a guy who is, for lack of a better term, corrupt. There a lot of smoke in the form of money circling the Biden clan, and I fear that there's a good bit of fire in the form of corruption and probably obstruction as well. It is depressing to think what will happen if the GOP can't nominate someone other than Trump, or if Biden should become incapacitated or die before his time in office ends.
whiterock said:There is a reason why Dems are sticking with Biden rather than dumping him for Newsom.......Osodecentx said:to your last point, 74% of Democrats think Biden is too old to be effective. What if Biden backs out and Newsom gets nomination? A young candidate would be running against a candidate who has been indicted 18 (19?) times in 4 jurisdictions.Quote:Quote:Quote:
The man is 80 years old. He could die in his sleep without any help from "foul play."
Biden could drop dead at any minute. It's not an unrealistic concern. What helps him is he has the best healthcare of anyone in the world monitoring him.
What I find odd is Trump is the same generation, eats more **** than the Hamburglar and has a family history of dementia. And now his freedom is at risk.
Is there a reason he's avoiding debates? Hiding in the basement.
To paraphrase a British Prime Minister speaking in parliament from many years ago, those who expect to lose the election always challenge whose who expect to win the election to a debate and those who expect to win the election decline.
I suspect he doesn't see the benefit, and he may be right. He doesn't have to do anything at this point to suck the oxygen away from other Republican candidates.
It seems that whoever the GOP nominates will be running against a guy who is, for lack of a better term, corrupt. There a lot of smoke in the form of money circling the Biden clan, and I fear that there's a good bit of fire in the form of corruption and probably obstruction as well. It is depressing to think what will happen if the GOP can't nominate someone other than Trump, or if Biden should become incapacitated or die before his time in office ends.
I believe Biden will not be the nominee
From WSJ Thursday:
Put it this way: The party that nominates someone other than these two will win the decisive votes of independents, and the election. The Republicans look locked into their forget-the-independents choice. I don't think the Democrats are.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-party-vs-the-evil-party-election-president-race-voters-alternative-candidate-biden-286ced48?mod=opinion_featst_pos1
If he's alive, they'll keep the coalition together, because of the "Bird in the Hand" principle. They can see high probability pathways to getting BIden re-elected. With Newsom, it's more subjective. Sure, he looks good on paper. But so did RDS. Look how that's turned out.Osodecentx said:whiterock said:There is a reason why Dems are sticking with Biden rather than dumping him for Newsom.......Osodecentx said:to your last point, 74% of Democrats think Biden is too old to be effective. What if Biden backs out and Newsom gets nomination? A young candidate would be running against a candidate who has been indicted 18 (19?) times in 4 jurisdictions.Quote:Quote:Quote:
The man is 80 years old. He could die in his sleep without any help from "foul play."
Biden could drop dead at any minute. It's not an unrealistic concern. What helps him is he has the best healthcare of anyone in the world monitoring him.
What I find odd is Trump is the same generation, eats more **** than the Hamburglar and has a family history of dementia. And now his freedom is at risk.
Is there a reason he's avoiding debates? Hiding in the basement.
To paraphrase a British Prime Minister speaking in parliament from many years ago, those who expect to lose the election always challenge whose who expect to win the election to a debate and those who expect to win the election decline.
I suspect he doesn't see the benefit, and he may be right. He doesn't have to do anything at this point to suck the oxygen away from other Republican candidates.
It seems that whoever the GOP nominates will be running against a guy who is, for lack of a better term, corrupt. There a lot of smoke in the form of money circling the Biden clan, and I fear that there's a good bit of fire in the form of corruption and probably obstruction as well. It is depressing to think what will happen if the GOP can't nominate someone other than Trump, or if Biden should become incapacitated or die before his time in office ends.
I believe Biden will not be the nominee
Stepping up from statewide to national is very, VERY hard. No guarantee Newsom can do it. Biden, on the other hand, has done it three times.......
Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
More and more believe it.whiterock said:If he's alive, they'll keep the coalition together, because of the "Bird in the Hand" principle. They can see high probability pathways to getting BIden re-elected. With Newsom, it's more subjective. Sure, he looks good on paper. But so did RDS. Look how that's turned out.Osodecentx said:whiterock said:There is a reason why Dems are sticking with Biden rather than dumping him for Newsom.......Osodecentx said:to your last point, 74% of Democrats think Biden is too old to be effective. What if Biden backs out and Newsom gets nomination? A young candidate would be running against a candidate who has been indicted 18 (19?) times in 4 jurisdictions.Quote:Quote:Quote:
The man is 80 years old. He could die in his sleep without any help from "foul play."
Biden could drop dead at any minute. It's not an unrealistic concern. What helps him is he has the best healthcare of anyone in the world monitoring him.
What I find odd is Trump is the same generation, eats more **** than the Hamburglar and has a family history of dementia. And now his freedom is at risk.
Is there a reason he's avoiding debates? Hiding in the basement.
To paraphrase a British Prime Minister speaking in parliament from many years ago, those who expect to lose the election always challenge whose who expect to win the election to a debate and those who expect to win the election decline.
I suspect he doesn't see the benefit, and he may be right. He doesn't have to do anything at this point to suck the oxygen away from other Republican candidates.
It seems that whoever the GOP nominates will be running against a guy who is, for lack of a better term, corrupt. There a lot of smoke in the form of money circling the Biden clan, and I fear that there's a good bit of fire in the form of corruption and probably obstruction as well. It is depressing to think what will happen if the GOP can't nominate someone other than Trump, or if Biden should become incapacitated or die before his time in office ends.
I believe Biden will not be the nominee
Stepping up from statewide to national is very, VERY hard. No guarantee Newsom can do it. Biden, on the other hand, has done it three times.......
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-party-vs-the-evil-party-election-president-race-voters-alternative-candidate-biden-286ced48?mod=opinion_featst_pos1
Put it this way: The party that nominates someone other than these two will win the decisive votes of independents, and the election. The Republicans look locked into their forget-the-independents choice. I don't think the Democrats are.
Maybe because there was no evidence like BenghaziFLBear5630 said:Hilary is on Trump. He ran on the "Lock Her Up" and then did nothing...Waco1947 said:
Biden should be investigated He is being investigated
Hunter should be indicted It's in the court system now, but let us wait until the grand jury indicts
Hillary should be investigated and/or indicted Has been investigated but no one sought indictments
Trump should be indicted. 99 already
Whether or not there is negligence in investigating or prosecuting the others, IT DOES NOT GIVE THE REST A PASS!
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
The J6 case is well supported by precedent. Don't know about the Georgia one.Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
Tell you what, I will answer your question if you can first name me an instance in which the statutes at issue (other than the documents case) have been used to prosecute such conduct. And I will make this easy for you - I won't restrict it to prosecuting former presidents of the United States for election interference. I will broaden it to conduct of a similar nature. Let's see if you can prove this isn't an unprecedented use of the statutes at issueHuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
I will hang up and listen.
Please point out the precedent.Sam Lowry said:The J6 case is well supported by precedent. Don't know about the Georgia one.Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
Principally the Haas/Hammerschmidt line of cases. You can find more detail on it here and here.Mothra said:Please point out the precedent.Sam Lowry said:The J6 case is well supported by precedent. Don't know about the Georgia one.Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
Insanity.
I ask everyone to read those cases. None of them hold what DA Willis says they do.
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) August 31, 2023
False representation to the Court makes DA Willis guilty of the same conduct she accuses the defendants.
It's a violation of Ga. Code Ann. § 16-10-20.1 (false statement to Court) https://t.co/OB9a0XrGIO pic.twitter.com/XYIt8dBkQC
Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
A "party" has not gone after trump but judicial system based on trump's actions and words.
That's a red herring. Parties have gone after actual presidents - that's more than "parallel." Starting with Nixon, every Pres except Obama had a special/independent counsel investigate them, and even for Obama, the GOP wanted it done relative to the gun runner scandal. GOP is after Biden now. There is nothing new about what is happening to Trump.Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
I've said all along, I'm not convinced the election crap is crime. But, the theories are no more flimsy than what most prior special/independent counsel have investigated (supported by the opposing party). And, I must say, the more I read about Trump's election challenges, the worse it looks. I'm still not ready to change my mind, it is really ugly.
And the documents/obstruction is a perfectly legitimate charge, and I think he's convicted absent jury nullification.
Again, the only difference is Trump's idiotic and reckless conduct.
He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Everything Trump is accused of doing has been done by myriad Democrats and in many cases in a much worse fashion. The Rubicon crossed was filing bogus charges against a political opponent to interfere with an election and undermine democracy. That bell cannot be un-rung.sombear said:That's a red herring. Parties have gone after actual presidents - that's more than "parallel." Starting with Nixon, every Pres except Obama had a special/independent counsel investigate them, and even for Obama, the GOP wanted it done relative to the gun runner scandal. GOP is after Biden now. There is nothing new about what is happening to Trump.Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
I've said all along, I'm not convinced the election crap is crime. But, the theories are no more flimsy than what most prior special/independent counsel have investigated (supported by the opposing party). And, I must say, the more I read about Trump's election challenges, the worse it looks. I'm still not ready to change my mind, it is really ugly.
And the documents/obstruction is a perfectly legitimate charge, and I think he's convicted absent jury nullification.
Again, the only difference is Trump's idiotic and reckless conduct.
Please detail exactly what other Dems have done similarly - who what when.Harrison Bergeron said:Everything Trump is accused of doing has been done by myriad Democrats and in many cases in a much worse fashion. The Rubicon crossed was filing bogus charges against a political opponent to interfere with an election and undermine democracy. That bell cannot be un-rung.sombear said:That's a red herring. Parties have gone after actual presidents - that's more than "parallel." Starting with Nixon, every Pres except Obama had a special/independent counsel investigate them, and even for Obama, the GOP wanted it done relative to the gun runner scandal. GOP is after Biden now. There is nothing new about what is happening to Trump.Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
I've said all along, I'm not convinced the election crap is crime. But, the theories are no more flimsy than what most prior special/independent counsel have investigated (supported by the opposing party). And, I must say, the more I read about Trump's election challenges, the worse it looks. I'm still not ready to change my mind, it is really ugly.
And the documents/obstruction is a perfectly legitimate charge, and I think he's convicted absent jury nullification.
Again, the only difference is Trump's idiotic and reckless conduct.
Going after sitting presidents is better?
Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
ATL Bear said:
The Georgia prosecutor is a political hack and is loving this attention. Nevertheless, she has inadvertently opened up election discovery that no one wants. The Dominion accusations were wrong. The ugly sausage making of the vote could get dragged into the open, and no one D or R in Georgia wants that.
Hope you are correct .
judicial system doesnt go after anyone. Judiciary listens an applies existing law to facts presented about a greivance.Waco1947 said:
A "party" has not gone after trump but judicial system based on trump's actions and words.
Somebody has to bring the greivance and that might be considered by some "the other party"
Carry on..
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”
Jon Stewart
Jon Stewart
and he didntFLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”
Jon Stewart
Jon Stewart
He didn't force that…FLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
Force isn't verbal demand.
Verbal demand from your CEO? Pence stood tall by not bucklingDoc Holliday said:He didn't force that…FLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
Force isn't verbal demand.
4th and Inches said:and he didntFLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
No, he used a national intimidation campaign. He used his position as. His boss to put pressure on him. So what Trump and his MAGA supporters did and said was right and legal?
Doc Holliday said:He didn't force that…FLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
Force isn't verbal demand.
He used his position and followers and did nothing while the Capital was stormed with Pence inside. He smiles and in an interview said the demonstrators were mad. The guy you want to be President again.
Watching a really good historical show on Netflix. Hitlers: Circle of Evil, you should watch it. Very good.
I want Rand Paul to be POTUS, but he's not running unfortunately.FLBear5630 said:Doc Holliday said:He didn't force that…FLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
Force isn't verbal demand.
He used his position and followers and did nothing while the Capital was stormed with Pence inside. He smiles and in an interview said the demonstrators were mad. The guy you want to be President again.
Watching a really good historical show on Netflix. Hitlers: Circle of Evil, you should watch it. Very good.
Trump is the best bet to actually be POTUS because of polling. That's not an endorsement of Trump, it's just pointing out the reality of the situation.
Trump told people to be peaceful prior to them trespassing.
Hitler was a socialist leftoid psychopath. Nazi society normalized hatred of Jews just like the modern left with their monopoly on media and academia is normalizing the hatred of anyone opposed to their politics.
Doc Holliday said:I want Rand Paul to be POTUS, but he's not running unfortunately.FLBear5630 said:Doc Holliday said:He didn't force that…FLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
Force isn't verbal demand.
He used his position and followers and did nothing while the Capital was stormed with Pence inside. He smiles and in an interview said the demonstrators were mad. The guy you want to be President again.
Watching a really good historical show on Netflix. Hitlers: Circle of Evil, you should watch it. Very good.
Trump is the best bet to actually be POTUS because of polling. That's not an endorsement of Trump, it's just pointing out the reality of the situation.
Trump told people to be peaceful prior to them trespassing.
Hitler was a socialist leftoid psychopath. Nazi society normalized hatred of Jews just like the modern left with their monopoly on media and academia is normalizing the hatred of anyone opposed to their politics.
Watch the show, it is not about Hitler. It is about what is around him and the tactics used, based on lessons learned from failed attempts. It is about how they overthrew a democracy and who executed it. Not Hitler, he was the front man. It is very good.
I don't agree with his application of Stein's Law, but we are going to find out here in about 6 months.Osodecentx said:More and more believe it.whiterock said:If he's alive, they'll keep the coalition together, because of the "Bird in the Hand" principle. They can see high probability pathways to getting BIden re-elected. With Newsom, it's more subjective. Sure, he looks good on paper. But so did RDS. Look how that's turned out.Osodecentx said:whiterock said:There is a reason why Dems are sticking with Biden rather than dumping him for Newsom.......Osodecentx said:to your last point, 74% of Democrats think Biden is too old to be effective. What if Biden backs out and Newsom gets nomination? A young candidate would be running against a candidate who has been indicted 18 (19?) times in 4 jurisdictions.Quote:Quote:Quote:
The man is 80 years old. He could die in his sleep without any help from "foul play."
Biden could drop dead at any minute. It's not an unrealistic concern. What helps him is he has the best healthcare of anyone in the world monitoring him.
What I find odd is Trump is the same generation, eats more **** than the Hamburglar and has a family history of dementia. And now his freedom is at risk.
Is there a reason he's avoiding debates? Hiding in the basement.
To paraphrase a British Prime Minister speaking in parliament from many years ago, those who expect to lose the election always challenge whose who expect to win the election to a debate and those who expect to win the election decline.
I suspect he doesn't see the benefit, and he may be right. He doesn't have to do anything at this point to suck the oxygen away from other Republican candidates.
It seems that whoever the GOP nominates will be running against a guy who is, for lack of a better term, corrupt. There a lot of smoke in the form of money circling the Biden clan, and I fear that there's a good bit of fire in the form of corruption and probably obstruction as well. It is depressing to think what will happen if the GOP can't nominate someone other than Trump, or if Biden should become incapacitated or die before his time in office ends.
I believe Biden will not be the nominee
Stepping up from statewide to national is very, VERY hard. No guarantee Newsom can do it. Biden, on the other hand, has done it three times.......
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-party-vs-the-evil-party-election-president-race-voters-alternative-candidate-biden-286ced48?mod=opinion_featst_pos1
Put it this way: The party that nominates someone other than these two will win the decisive votes of independents, and the election. The Republicans look locked into their forget-the-independents choice. I don't think the Democrats are.
Things that cannot go on forever can go on for much longer than they should, and typically do. Call it "Whiterock's Corollary to Stein's Law"
if your boss told you to rob a bank but you didnt is it still bank robbery?FLBear5630 said:4th and Inches said:and he didntFLBear5630 said:Trump told Pence not to accept and substitute different electors than the State submitted, that is different than convincing a duly appointed one to change their vote.Harrison Bergeron said:He had alternate electors.FLBear5630 said:Gore asked for recounts, he didn't ask for new electors!Harrison Bergeron said:Al Gore Jr. in 2000.HuMcK said:Mothra said:While I partly agree with you, this is the first time that a party has gone after a former president and the likely presidential nominee for one of the major parties before an election. And even though I agree with you on Trump being despicable, let's not pretend that all of these prosecutors, save and except the documents charge, are using statutes very creatively and in a way they've never been used to find that Trump committed a crime.sombear said:Political prosecutions have been happening forever. Too many governors, senators, congressmen, and others to count. Both parties also have tried to go after Presidents and Presidential candidates. Nothing is new about any of this. If anything is new, it's that Trump is just a despicable human being who also happens to be stupid in many ways and thinks he is above the law.Mothra said:That is because until now, political prosecutions in this country were not a thing. But now that your party has opened Pandora's Box and has started to behave like we are a banana republic, I suspect we are going to start seeing Republican DA's and U.S. attorneys start doing the exact same thing.Waco1947 said:
Giving a pass is immaterial. Many have sought indictments in the judicial courts with Trump and the Bidens but no one has sought them for Hillary and that is not a pass it is just how the system works. Write your congress person and get them to investigate Hillary.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for...
All of the above is indeed unprecedented. Name me a parallel, and I am willing to reconsider my position.
Good luck!
A necessary predicate to finding your desired parallel would be for you to point out an example where a losing Presidential candidate concocted a conspiracy to use forged documents and send false slates of electors to try and keep himself in office, thereby disenfranchising tens of millions of legitimate voters. The prosecution is novel because the criminal acts were novel, not really all that complicated.
So...we're waiting.
The Democrats called for electors to violate their "oath" in 2016. Should they be arrested for attempting to disenfranchise millions?
Trump could sue in Court, demand recounts and even ask officials to find more votes (giving him the benefit of the doubt, it is just how he talks). What he can't do, is force the VP to change the electors during certification.
No, he used a national intimidation campaign. He used his position as. His boss to put pressure on him. So what Trump and his MAGA supporters did and said was right and legal?
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”
Jon Stewart
Jon Stewart