It will be interesting to see your shocked face when he’s indicted, probably multiple times.
It will be interesting to see your shocked face when he’s indicted, probably multiple times.Guys he’s not going to be charged. He will get a stern speaking to and he will give zero fucks about it.
Wake me up when Justice Department gets some balls.
Unless he makes a deal somehowIt will be interesting to see your shocked face when he’s indicted, probably multiple times.
We shall see….It will be interesting to see your shocked face when he’s indicted, probably multiple times.
It will be interesting to see your shocked face when he’s indicted, probably multiple times.
Unless he makes a deal somehow
There will absolutely be EP and classification issues raised that have never been decided. There is largely no precedent on those issues, at least in terms of who the possible defendant is. And that means they'll absolutely be escalated to SCOTUS at some point during the proceedings. You may think they're based on invalid theories on their face (and they likely are) but that means nothing in the current judicial climate. They will have implications on both process/timeline, and potentially decisions/judgements.
Those are just 2 areas. I'm sure there will be more.
Every time, EVERY TIME I hear the media talk about the many crimes Donald Trump has committed the media always uses those words "if" or "possible" or "might have" or "may have" or "could have", but never have we heard the media use the words HE DEFINITELY DID THIS, WE HAVE SOLID PROOF, CASE CLOSED. No matter what the accusation or crime committed, those nasty words IF, POSSIBLY, MIGHT HAVE, COULD HAVE, and all of those other nasty words always get in the way.
Hell... it smells like a crime, it looks and acts like a crime, and if anyone other than Donald Trump were involved It damn well WOULD BE A CRIME.... yet never quite enough of a crime to nail Donald Trump.
And now, the word is that Donald Trump ordered boxes of classified documents to be moved AFTER the FBI subpoena them. And the news media is comparing this to Richard Nixon's smoking gun, but still again we hear those nasty words IF, MAYBE, COULD HAVE, POSSIBLY, etc etc.
Anyone else, ANYONE ELSE would be indicted, arrested, tried AND convicted. ANYONE ELSE..... But not Donald Trump. Oh no... Never Donald Trump.
We don't have a smoking gun here, we have a F-ing box of smoking assault weapons. And... we also still have those nasty words IF, MIGHT HAVE, COULD HAVE, POSSIBLY, MAYBE, etc etc.
Wake me when its over.... I'm getting quite extensively bored.
Oh, and the Jan 6th committee is holding another hearing tomorrow, Thursday, But WHY????? What "IS" the point? Really? We know Adolf Hitler killed the Jews, so what more do we need as proof, fingerprints off the six million dead Jews???
What is it that protects Donald Trump so ????
Magic? Satan? Pure evil? The money???
I honestly don't see any. Trump can claim that he psychically declassified the documents and Biden will just say that he psychically reclassified them, and Trump is still stuck having refused to hand over classified documents.There will absolutely be EP and classification issues raised that have never been decided. There is largely no precedent on those issues, at least in terms of who the possible defendant is. And that means they'll absolutely be escalated to SCOTUS at some point during the proceedings. You may think they're based on invalid theories on their face (and they likely are) but that means nothing in the current judicial climate. They will have implications on both process/timeline, and potentially decisions/judgements.
Those are just 2 areas. I'm sure there will be more.
And also irrelevant to the likely statutes Trump will be charged under.I honestly don't see any. Trump can claim that he psychically declassified the documents and Biden will just say that he psychically reclassified them, and Trump is still stuck having refused to hand over classified documents.
The laws around classified documents are pretty straight forward.
I honestly don't see any. Trump can claim that he psychically declassified the documents and Biden will just say that he psychically reclassified them, and Trump is still stuck having refused to hand over classified documents.
The laws around classified documents are pretty straight forward.
In the US a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. A lot people seem to have forgotten this and replaced it with "internet guilt", based on an internet conviction. It leads to a lot of tooth gnashing and outrage, but little else. Your post here is a perfect example. You know Trump is guilty, you know he's a criminal, you know he should be jailed, and you're upset that it hasn't happened. The one thought that you've never considered is that he's not guilty until he's convicted.Every time, EVERY TIME I hear the media talk about the many crimes Donald Trump has committed the media always uses those words "if" or "possible" or "might have" or "may have" or "could have", but never have we heard the media use the words HE DEFINITELY DID THIS, WE HAVE SOLID PROOF, CASE CLOSED. No matter what the accusation or crime committed, those nasty words IF, POSSIBLY, MIGHT HAVE, COULD HAVE, and all of those other nasty words always get in the way.
Hell... it smells like a crime, it looks and acts like a crime, and if anyone other than Donald Trump were involved It damn well WOULD BE A CRIME.... yet never quite enough of a crime to nail Donald Trump.
And now, the word is that Donald Trump ordered boxes of classified documents to be moved AFTER the FBI subpoena them. And the news media is comparing this to Richard Nixon's smoking gun, but still again we hear those nasty words IF, MAYBE, COULD HAVE, POSSIBLY, etc etc.
Anyone else, ANYONE ELSE would be indicted, arrested, tried AND convicted. ANYONE ELSE..... But not Donald Trump. Oh no... Never Donald Trump.
We don't have a smoking gun here, we have a F-ing box of smoking assault weapons. And... we also still have those nasty words IF, MIGHT HAVE, COULD HAVE, POSSIBLY, MAYBE, etc etc.
Wake me when its over.... I'm getting quite extensively bored.
Oh, and the Jan 6th committee is holding another hearing tomorrow, Thursday, But WHY????? What "IS" the point? Really? We know Adolf Hitler killed the Jews, so what more do we need as proof, fingerprints off the six million dead Jews???
What is it that protects Donald Trump so ????
Magic? Satan? Pure evil? The money???
In the US a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. A lot people seem to have forgotten this and replaced it with "internet guilt", based on an internet conviction. It leads to a lot of tooth gnashing and outrage, but little else. Your post here is a perfect example. You know Trump is guilty, you know he's a criminal, you know he should be jailed, and you're upset that it hasn't happened. The one thought that you've never considered is that he's not guilty until he's convicted.
In the US a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. A lot people seem to have forgotten this and replaced it with "internet guilt", based on an internet conviction. It leads to a lot of tooth gnashing and outrage, but little else. Your post here is a perfect example. You know Trump is guilty, you know he's a criminal, you know he should be jailed, and you're upset that it hasn't happened. The one thought that you've never considered is that he's not guilty until he's convicted.
I think the most likely reason is he doesn't have an answer but also doesn't want to admit we are right.Why do you avoid @fskimospy every single time he calls you out on this?
You know, A person can be guilty as fuck (like Trump) and still not be convicted.. Look at O.J. Or are you going to sit there and say he did not commit a crime because he wasn't found guilty in a court of law? Our legal system has a lot of fallacies because of how easy it is to circumvent. Specially if you have money.In the US a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. A lot people seem to have forgotten this and replaced it with "internet guilt", based on an internet conviction. It leads to a lot of tooth gnashing and outrage, but little else. Your post here is a perfect example. You know Trump is guilty, you know he's a criminal, you know he should be jailed, and you're upset that it hasn't happened. The one thought that you've never considered is that he's not guilty until he's convicted.
It's interesting how people who presumably had no problem simultaneously holding the ideas of:You know, A person can be guilty a fuck (like Trump) and still not be convicted.. Look at O.J. Or are you going to sit there and say he did not commit a crime because he wasn't found guilty in a court of law? Our legal system has a lot of fallacies because of how easy it is to circumvent. Specially if you have money.
The fact that you keep trying to hide Trump's crimes and lack of innocence behind "not guilty until proven in a court of law" shows that you don't have an ounce of integrity. Because a man with integrity wouldn't be sitting here defending a guy who continuously lies over and over, changed his story from one day to the next.. Only a fool would think he wasn't guilty.. as a honest man wouldn't have to change his story, not even once. The story would stay the same no matter what day it is. Yet, you seem to be immune to the bullshit Trump feeds you..
You seem to be confused about what that statement means. It does not mean he is literally innocent. It means that the government must treat him as if he is innocent until they can prove otherwise to a court. It is intended to make sure that everyone is treated equally by our justice system. It does not mean I, or anyone not officially representing a US government, must treat him as innocent. For example it is perfectly legal for me to fire someone for being accused of a crime without them being convicted.In the US a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. A lot people seem to have forgotten this and replaced it with "internet guilt", based on an internet conviction.
It's interesting how people who presumably had no problem simultaneously holding the ideas of:
1) OJ hasn't been convicted of murder
2) OJ is a murderer
Somehow have difficulty holding the ideas of:
1) Trump hasn't been convicted of a crime
2) Trump is guilty of one or more crimes
Anyone with common sense knows OJ did it. He gets to walk because that's how our system works, but no serious person thinks he didn't kill those two people. Even if Trump ends up walking completely any serious person knows he is guilty in this documents case.
I'm not sure if the primary issue here is whether or not Biden is pointing his magical telepathic classification mind rays at the right target.I'm confused with the repeated Biden can reclassify. Like he never said he was clairvoyant and can reclassify something he can't identify.