2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: macsak on May 30, 2024, 01:17:21 PM
-
what a joke...
-
Wow. The only thing separating us from a communist country is no public executions.
Regardless of how you feel about Trump, anyone who should try to use logic can see the weaponization.
I think he's a strong leader. He never once backed down and played ball with them. Because if he did, then there would be no repeated BS charges.
I would like to see how this plays out. Appeal?
-
The Dems overplayed their hand. If polling shows Trump getting a bump after the verdict, he'll win. If his numbers drop, the GOP have a chance to put another candidate in his place if they can meet the states' deadlines.
The reason for the polling changes are unimportant. What's important is whether or not he's still viable to win in November.
I imagine the appeals will have to be lightning quick or wait until after the election. Otherwise, he's wasting valuable campaign time in court again.
The verdicts were predetermined, given the bias of the judge and jury (NYC votes 80%+ "D").
Too bad they don't have a test for TDS to screen them out of the jury pool.
-
no bail
trump is out free
appeal is going to be filed asap
sentencing is by the biased judge a few days before the R natl convention
guess what the sentencing will be unless the appeal process is approved?
my feeling is that donations and polling will go up for the Don...
Wow. The only thing separating us from a communist country is no public executions.
Regardless of how you feel about Trump, anyone who should try to use logic can see the weaponization.
I think he's a strong leader. He never once backed down and played ball with them. Because if he did, then there would be no repeated BS charges.
I would like to see how this plays out. Appeal?
-
They crashed the donation site
-
Appeals will delay till December.
-
Can someone confirm or correct the below:
Trump's guilty of B, because he's also guilty of breaking A.
But he has never been to court or had a hearing for breaking A.
-
correct
not proven in a court of law...
Can someone confirm or correct the below:
Trump's guilty of B, because he's also guilty of breaking A.
But he has never been to court or had a hearing for breaking A.
-
interesting that TDS geraldo didn't like the trial nor the result...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THumeaWPSqE
-
About time. Hope he is convicted of more. Should nominate nicky....
-
Can someone confirm or correct the below:
Trump's guilty of B, because he's also guilty of breaking A.
But he has never been to court or had a hearing for breaking A.
Not sure that’s strictly true. As I understand it, the situation was “he’s guilty of A; by itself, A is a misdemeanor. If A is done with the intent of furthering another crime (crime B), A is a felony.” I don’t think there needs to be a conviction on crime B for the felony charge to attach, just the intent.
-
Someone shut the window. The commies are getting in.
-
Someone shut the window. The commies are getting in.
I tried that, but they started swimming up through the sewer.
-
“Say comrade… nice constitutional republic you got there!”
(https://www.syfy.com/sites/syfy/files/2019/10/ghoulies-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000.jpg)
-
Regardless of how you feel about Trump, anyone who should try to use logic can see the weaponization.
Agreed, I don't think he should be president but even terrible people should not be charged with crimes in this manner. If you throw out your integrity fighting a bad person you have no grounds to stand on.
-
Looking forward to Obama's murder trial
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki
-
https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/billionaire-ceo-real-estate-investor-impact-trump-verdict-nobody-wants-do-business-nyc
Prominent business executives have warned that more New York enterprises and their leaders may fall victim to "no rule of law" in the wake of Donald Trump’s guilty verdict.
"If they can do this to a business person like Donald Trump, they could do it to anybody in New York and a lot of businesses. A lot of people are concerned that there is no rule of law," billionaire CEO John Catsimatidis said Friday on "Mornings with Maria."
"If they can do this to Donald Trump, a former president, regardless of how you feel about the politics, if they can do this to a former president, what can they do to Grant Cardone? What can they do to any other businessman?," the Cardone Capital founder also chimed in Friday on "Varney & Co."
"The city was shocked. The country was shocked. The world was shocked, and it was just mind-boggling. People texted me that they just got home and their wives were crying. We have to bring back the rule of law," Catsimatidis added in reaction.
-
What they're also doing is making sure that no "outsider" with money runs ever again. Why give up your awesome lifestyle for this, unless you truly love our country. And even if they do manage to win, they have to play ball with the status quo. From day 1, they knew Trump wasn't going to do this, but instead do what's best for the country.
Only 1 thing is separating us from communist type run countries, which is public executions by LEO's.
-
Apparently the Trump justice department was okay with it and kept the same policy.
Apparently you missed the news about the DOJ and FBI obtaining illegal FISA warrants to spy on Trump.
Not exactly a "Trump DOJ". huh?
How far would Trump have gotten firing the people investigating him for Russian collusion?
The Swamp ran the DOJ, not Trump. Comey admitted as much after he left. "Had I known then what I know now, we would have never asked for those warrants." He was referring to the facts surrounding Carter Page and the fake dossier.
-
Apparently the Trump justice department was okay with it and kept the same policy.
Things that never happened for $500 Alex.
-
FISA
Apparently you missed the news about the DOJ and FBI obtaining illegal FIAS warrants to spy on Trump.
Not exactly a "Trump DOJ". huh?
How far would Trump have gotten firing the people investigating him for Russian collusion?
The Swamp ran the DOJ, not Trump. Comey admitted as much after he left. "Had I known then what I know now, we would have never asked for those warrants." He was referring to the facts surrounding Carter Page and the fake dossier.
-
I refuse to click on fake news links for more details about this, which is why I ask it here.
What's this I was hearing that there need not be a unanimous (12 jurors) vote guilty for each of the 34 counts. SOmething about if 4 vote guilty for count 1, then 4 for count 2, then 4 for count 3, that equals 12. Which then counts as guilty for all 34 counts.
I never paid too much attention to this trial, as what I knew prior to it was all BS anyways. But now that it's a talking point, I would like to get my facts straight. Example: My TDS father was celebrating this. We have discussions and he gets all his info from the fake news.
-
Apparently you missed the news about the DOJ and FBI obtaining illegal FISA warrants to spy on Trump.
Not exactly a "Trump DOJ". huh?
How far would Trump have gotten firing the people investigating him for Russian collusion?
The Swamp ran the DOJ, not Trump. Comey admitted as much after he left. "Had I known then what I know now, we would have never asked for those warrants." He was referring to the facts surrounding Carter Page and the fake dossier.
Didn't they call him paranoid for thinking that the DOJ/Gov was spying on him? Oh wait...
-
no
the prosecution said there are three possible crimes for each count
has to be unanimous for each separate count
but the judge's instruction said the jury did not have to be unanimous one on of the three crimes, just had to be 12 for any of the three crimes...
I refuse to click on fake news links for more details about this, which is why I ask it here.
What's this I was hearing that there need not be a unanimous (12 jurors) vote guilty for each of the 34 counts. SOmething about if 4 vote guilty for count 1, then 4 for count 2, then 4 for count 3, that equals 12. Which then counts as guilty for all 34 counts.
I never paid too much attention to this trial, as what I knew prior to it was all BS anyways. But now that it's a talking point, I would like to get my facts straight. Example: My TDS father was celebrating this. We have discussions and he gets all his info from the fake news.
-
Jury Instructions
-
mahalo
Jury Instructions
-
THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT
FALSIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS RECORDS
VIOLATION OF TAX LAWS
these are the prosecution's theories of "unlawful means"
the judge instructed the jury that they had to find trump guilty of only one of these three theories on each count, NOT that he violated all three theories...
-
THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT
FALSIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS RECORDS
VIOLATION OF TAX LAWS
these are the prosecution's theories of "unlawful means"
the judge instructed the jury that they had to find trump guilty of only one of these three theories on each count, NOT that he violated all three theories...
And 4 of 12 for each of the 3 in caps? Flapps doc was 55 pages and I don't have the time right now to read 55 pages.
-
no, 4 of each was an example
he said you have to decide if they committed one or more of the three
and then you should vote guilty
And 4 of 12 for each of the 3 in caps? Flapps doc was 55 pages and I don't have the time right now to read 55 pages.
-
no, 4 of each was an example
he said you have to decide if they committed one or more of the three
and then you should vote guilty
Thanks.
This tactic that they used looks like what anti 2a lawyers are using to show history and tradition. Basically, throw everything at the wall and see what sticks.
-
watched a video that had a short explanation of the appeals process in NY
there are 2 levels of appeals court in NY
the first level is automatic for both the verdict and sentencing
they can uphold ruling, overrule, or send to the higher level
either side can appeal the first level ruling to the higher level
and the higher level ruling can be appealed to the USSC...
-
I wonder if this type of finding someone guilty procedure is common? As in the 1 of 3 or the intent of committing crime B that was never proven in court.
I mean, CRS Firearms was found guilty of selling a machine gun because his "intent" was that the key card can make a gun into a machine gun. Never mind that the AFT failed 3 times to get said keycard to work. Which means, he could draw on a piece of paper and with that logic, that paper is a machine gun. But yet the Anarchist Cookbook is protected by the 1st amendment. You know, that book they sell on Amazon that teaches u how to make explosives and stuff.
-
i watched a video about this in the past 2 days, but i've watched so many videos i can't remember what they said or which one it was on...
no focus...
I wonder if this type of finding someone guilty procedure is common? As in the 1 of 3 or the intent of committing crime B that was never proven in court.
I mean, CRS Firearms was found guilty of selling a machine gun because his "intent" was that the key card can make a gun into a machine gun. Never mind that the AFT failed 3 times to get said keycard to work. Which means, he could draw on a piece of paper and with that logic, that paper is a machine gun. But yet the Anarchist Cookbook is protected by the 1st amendment. You know, that book they sell on Amazon that teaches u how to make explosives and stuff.
-
i watched a video about this in the past 2 days, but i've watched so many videos i can't remember what they said or which one it was on...
no focus...
Forgot to add in "or did they change the law so they can get a guilty verdict".
-
i remember it was a NY thing
but i cannot recall if it was the 3 theories thing or the misdemeanor to felony thing...
Forgot to add in "or did they change the law so they can get a guilty verdict".
-
$51 million raised in less than a day
-
lul
$51 million raised in less than a day
-
i remember it was a NY thing
but i cannot recall if it was the 3 theories thing or the misdemeanor to felony thing...
I believe it’s both.
Falsifying business records (crime A) in NY is a misdemeanor, unless you do it with the intent to further another crime (crime B), in which case it’s a felony.
The People in this case offered three possible crime Bs: crime B1, crime B2, and crime B3.
For any given count, to reach a guilty felony verdict, all 12 jurors have to agree that 1) the defendant committed crime A, and that the defendant did so with the intent to further any one of crimes B1, B2, or B3. They don’t all have to agree on WHICH crime B the defendant intended to further, just that he intended to further one of them.
As I understand it, 11 jurors could say “he committed crime A with the intent to further crime B1,” and one juror could say “he committed crime A to further crime B2” and get a felony guilty verdict.
If 11 say he committed crime A in order to further crime B1, and one juror says he committed crime A but NOT with intent to further any of the crime Bs, the best they could do is a misdemeanor conviction.
Based on what I read in the jury instructions, that’s a bit of a simplification but generally accurate.
-
I believe it’s both.
Falsifying business records (crime A) in NY is a misdemeanor, unless you do it with the intent to further another crime (crime B), in which case it’s a felony.
The People in this case offered three possible crime Bs: crime B1, crime B2, and crime B3.
For any given count, to reach a guilty felony verdict, all 12 jurors have to agree that 1) the defendant committed crime A, and that the defendant did so with the intent to further any one of crimes B1, B2, or B3. They don’t all have to agree on WHICH crime B the defendant intended to further, just that he intended to further one of them.
As I understand it, 11 jurors could say “he committed crime A with the intent to further crime B1,” and one juror could say “he committed crime A to further crime B2” and get a felony guilty verdict.
If 11 say he committed crime A in order to further crime B1, and one juror says he committed crime A but NOT with intent to further any of the crime Bs, the best they could do is a misdemeanor conviction.
Based on what I read in the jury instructions, that’s a bit of a simplification but generally accurate.
Thats a bit of a stretch
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ4zUAsz6DN69Raurx5jVIlTahhoZIi3zRyBg&s)
-
Thats a bit of a stretch
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ4zUAsz6DN69Raurx5jVIlTahhoZIi3zRyBg&s)
Just saying what I think the law in New York is. Not making any value judgement.
-
Just saying what I think the law in New York is. Not making any value judgement.
I think New York law is whatever the corrupt justice system over there says it is
-
mostly correct, but not "generally accurate"
the bolded line is incorrect
if 1 person says no to B1 B2 and B3, trump would be innocent on that one count
the statute of limitations has already expired on the misdemeanors, so he couldn't be found guilty of the misdemeanor
that's one of the reasons it took so long for this case to come up, they needed to have the handpicked DA and handpicked judge to make it work
I believe it’s both.
Falsifying business records (crime A) in NY is a misdemeanor, unless you do it with the intent to further another crime (crime B), in which case it’s a felony.
The People in this case offered three possible crime Bs: crime B1, crime B2, and crime B3.
For any given count, to reach a guilty felony verdict, all 12 jurors have to agree that 1) the defendant committed crime A, and that the defendant did so with the intent to further any one of crimes B1, B2, or B3. They don’t all have to agree on WHICH crime B the defendant intended to further, just that he intended to further one of them.
As I understand it, 11 jurors could say “he committed crime A with the intent to further crime B1,” and one juror could say “he committed crime A to further crime B2” and get a felony guilty verdict.
If 11 say he committed crime A in order to further crime B1, and one juror says he committed crime A but NOT with intent to further any of the crime Bs, the best they could do is a misdemeanor conviction.
Based on what I read in the jury instructions, that’s a bit of a simplification but generally accurate.
-
mostly correct, but not "generally accurate"
the bolded line is incorrect
if 1 person says no to B1 B2 and B3, trump would be innocent on that one count
the statute of limitations has already expired on the misdemeanors, so he couldn't be found guilty of the misdemeanor
that's one of the reasons it took so long for this case to come up, they needed to have the handpicked DA and handpicked judge to make it work
Good point about the statute of limitations. I’d forgotten about that.
-
so you were wrong?
Good point about the statute of limitations. I’d forgotten about that.
-
Witch hunt. Plain and simple.
Again, for the umpteenth time.......Obi-Wan to Darth Vader:
"If you strike me down, I will become more powerful than you can ever imagine......"
-
so you were wrong?
Yes, I was wrong. I had forgotten about the statute of limitations in this case, which takes the misdemeanor charge off the table.
Are you implying I don’t admit when I’m wrong?
-
please show me where i was implying you don't admit you are wrong...
Yes, I was wrong. I had forgotten about the statute of limitations in this case, which takes the misdemeanor charge off the table.
Are you implying I don’t admit when I’m wrong?
-
please show me where i was implying you don't admit you are wrong...
I didn’t know if you were implying I don’t admit when I’m wrong. Hence the question.
“Please show me where I said you’re implying I don’t admit when I’m wrong.” :crazy:
-
Whatever their plan was, it's not working.
Raised almost 50 mil in 24 hours and would probably done way more if Stripe hadn't shut down his account again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1_90XVvFmA
-
More money for Trump to pay all his legal fees and his own companies. Polling says he lost overall support with his conviction.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-verdict-makes-significant-number-republicans-less-likely-support-him-poll
Republicans need to pick another candidate. Nicky would destroy biden in the election.
-
sure, jan...
More money for Trump to pay all his legal fees and his own companies. Polling says he lost overall support with his conviction.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-verdict-makes-significant-number-republicans-less-likely-support-him-poll
Republicans need to pick another candidate. Nicky would destroy biden in the election.
-
wrong...
Misdemeanor conviction was not possible because it was charged as a felony. If all 12 said he falsified records and believed it was not to further a crime the jury would be hung and the case could be tried again with a different jury.
In this case a jury consisting of 12 of his peers agreed that Trump is guilty according to the facts.
-
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-lawyer-spars-host-ex-biden-doj-official-tapped-new-york-hush-money-case
-
Republicans need to dump the extremist views and get back to working in the best interest of all the citizens. Currently nothing gets done. Even when given their demands, they refuse to pass legislation for political reasons.
What extremist views?
Are you talking about defunding the police? How about DEI? Gender-affirming care in prisons and the military? Banning all semi-auto firearms? Waving Palestinian flags on the House floor? Yelling "Hands up! Don't shoot!" during Senate and House sessions? Nominating candidates to the judiciary who refuse to define what a woman is?
i'm curious. Seems like the extremists are the ones on the other side.
-
What extremist views?
Are you talking about defunding the police? How about DEI? Gender-affirming care in prisons and the military? Banning all semi-auto firearms? Waving Palestinian flags on the House floor? Yelling "Hands up! Don't shoot!" during Senate and House sessions? Nominating candidates to the judiciary who refuse to define what a woman is?
i'm curious. Seems like the extremists are the ones on the other side.
rhater was thinking about the Democrat's extremist, racist views.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/06/democratic-party-racist-history-mona-charen/
Al Gore’s reframing of the relevant history is the story of the Democratic party in microcosm. The party’s history is pockmarked with racism and terror. The Democrats were the party of slavery, black codes, Jim Crow, and that miserable terrorist excrescence, the Ku Klux Klan. Republicans were the party of Lincoln, Reconstruction, anti-lynching laws, and the civil rights acts of 1875, 1957, 1960, and 1964. Were all Republicans models of rectitude on racial matters? Hardly. Were they a heck of a lot better than the Democrats? Without question.
As recently as 2010, the Senate’s president pro tempore was former Ku Klux Klan Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd (D., W.Va.). Rather than acknowledge their sorry history, modern Democrats have rewritten it.
The Democrats have been sedulously rewriting history for decades.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-democratic-partys-sordid-past-on-race-roosevelt-wilson-klan-e59b190d
In “The Democrats and Anti-Semitism” (Wonder Land, Nov. 2), Daniel Henninger examines the rupture in the Democratic Party that has pit pro-Israel liberals against an ascendant progressive wing that accuses Israel of ethnic cleansing and genocide. He provides a brief history lesson on the Nazis and the Holocaust that began 90 years ago and implies that members of the party under Franklin D. Roosevelt then would be appalled by today’s anti-Semitic views.
But let’s not give the Democratic Party of the 1930s a pass on anti-Semitism. Jonah Goldberg’s 2008 book “Liberal Fascism” is a useful primer for understanding the thin line that separates fascists from the far left.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uMhlUOfJ2CU/XvsZ7Z1tgZI/AAAAAAAAPAk/dXkFun_2XwkA0qOOK-2axbEdRA0ZzSjIQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1924%2BDemocrat%2Bconvention.png)
(http://polination.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/you-can-thank-the-democratic-party-for-the-kkk.jpg#KKK%20Democrats%202750x2125)
-
well, not all polling says that
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Eq3O_uBTk0
More money for Trump to pay all his legal fees and his own companies. Polling says he lost overall support with his conviction.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-verdict-makes-significant-number-republicans-less-likely-support-him-poll
Republicans need to pick another candidate. Nicky would destroy biden in the election.
-
To say this is a witch hunt is to say that you don't believe in the Constitution, our laws or our system of justice. Do you really hate the system on which our country was formed?
I believe in the United States Constitution. I believe in the laws of Justice in our country.
That's why I said this is a witch hunt.
-
To say this is a witch hunt is to say that you don't believe in the Constitution, our laws or our system of justice. Do you really hate the system on which our country was formed?
Is it your belief everyone in government jobs follow State and federal Constitutions and Statutes all the time without corruption, bias, mistakes, or incompetence?
It's possible to believe in the principles of our government and simultaneously distrust those presently running it.
-
https://x.com/LeadingReport/status/1797360221918024083/photo/1
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GPGBmGdWsAIcZEr?format=jpg&name=large)
-
To say this is a witch hunt is to say that you don't believe in the Constitution, our laws or our system of justice. Do you really hate the system on which our country was formed?
Someone doesn't know what a "witch hunt" is. But instead trying to circumvent the issue by stating something else.
The question is do you believe in the constitution and our laws or our system of justice is blind/fair? This is rhetorical, as I know your answer.
-
Both sides should dump the extremist waccos. Both sides getting more and more of them.
-
Both sides should dump the extremist waccos. Both sides getting more and more of them.
"In my opinion, not based on any logic or factual data..." FIFY
-
Both sides should dump the extremist waccos. Both sides getting more and more of them.
That's a general, ambiguous opinion.
Can you elaborate on who the waccos [sic] are on both sides? Names of well-known wackos would be appreciated.
-
Examples of wackos were made for democrats, but the Palestinian supporters, socialists, communists, dudes in girl sports etc. Gop got the anti abortionist, anti gay marriages, pro russia folks. Trumpers that ignore laws.
-
Examples of wackos were made for democrats, but the Palestinian supporters, socialists, communists, dudes in girl sports etc. Gop got the anti abortionist, anti gay marriages, pro russia folks. Trumpers that ignore laws.
Is it your opinion that being anti-abortion in order to save innocent babies makes you an extremist whacko?
Is it your opinion that not supporting gay marriage when civil unions are just as good makes you an extremist whacko?
Is it your opinion that people who support Trump and also choose to ignore whatever laws you're referring to are extremist whackos?
-
Examples of wackos were made for democrats, but the Palestinian supporters, socialists, communists, dudes in girl sports etc. Gop got the anti abortionist, anti gay marriages, pro russia folks. Trumpers that ignore laws.
Trumpers that ignore laws...U mean laws that are changed to find a crime later.
-
Trumpers that ignore laws...U mean laws that are changed to find a crime later.
Even if you ignore the felony aspect he paid her off using illigal means. That's breaking the law. The secret docs is a no brainer he's guilty.
-
Even if you ignore the felony aspect he paid her off using illigal means. That's breaking the law. The secret docs is a no brainer he's guilty.
This sentence sums up what I posted about in this thread.
-
Even if you ignore the felony aspect he paid her off using illigal means.
That sentence makes no sense.
-
what about hillary's emails?
what about biden secret docs?
Even if you ignore the felony aspect he paid her off using illigal means. That's breaking the law. The secret docs is a no brainer he's guilty.
-
even if they were "illigal" means, the statute of limitations on those charges already expired...
Even if you ignore the felony aspect he paid her off using illigal means. That's breaking the law. The secret docs is a no brainer he's guilty.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/how-the-supreme-court-could-upend-the-other-criminal-cases-against-trump-210712541.html
-
Someone doesn't know what a "witch hunt" is. But instead trying to circumvent the issue by stating something else.
The question is do you believe in the constitution and our laws or our system of justice is blind/fair? This is rhetorical, as I know your answer.
Notice how he turns things around and insinuates that stating "witch hunt" equals hatred for the US Constitution and US Laws.
He is a true, genuine troll.
-
Notice how he turns things around and insinuates that stating "witch hunt" equals hatred for the US Constitution and US Laws.
He is a true, genuine troll.
This is a tactic one uses when they're either wrong or have no clue how to reply cause they parrot stuff they heard.
Campaign by Will Ferrell does this, but on a more funny size. Basically, if he doesn't know how to reply, make stuff up and say "Support the troops" at the end to get people to agree, but they don't realize they're agreeing to it all.
Xhe has been using this tactic for some time now.
-
"putting out a fire with oxygen..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8T9xTcQDQs
-
If you are anti-abortion, why do you abandon the needs and safety of children after birth?
If civil unions are just as good as marriage then you should be promoting replacement of marriage with civil unions for all people.
If you choose ignore laws you are a criminal and anti-government, anti-American.
See, what did I tell you guys about this. Campaign style "support the troops". I'll repeat, xhe makes a statement that sounds like you have to agree with it. Each statement above has it's errors, like how xhe normally does.
-
It makes perfect sense. Trump is guilty of election fraud because he misrepresented his candidacy to the American people. Similar to lying on a job application. Nothing new since he seems to have a really difficult time telling the truth.
Makes sense to those who don't use logic.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKIhNgbJC8E
-
If you are anti-abortion, why do you abandon the needs and safety of children after birth?
Who is 'you?' I raised 2 children. Two parent home. never abandoned their needs and safety before or after birth. is it your belief i have a duty to care for anyone i think should have the right to live? How does that work for suicidal people that someone takes to the ER? Is that person now responsible for the person because they prevented their death?
If civil unions are just as good as marriage then you should be promoting replacement of marriage with civil unions for all people.
Illogical. Marriage has the traditional purpose of joining a man and woman in order to start a family by having children and raising them. The only real argument for gay marriage is one of legal standing the way spouses are afforded -- probate, survivorship, medical decisions, etc.. Appropriating marriage for that purpose is unnecessary and disrespectful of tradition.
If you choose ignore laws you are a criminal and anti-government, anti-American.
So, if someone arrives in the US from another country, they are allowed to ignore our laws (i.e. literally not Americans)?
If you are trying to get a child to the ER while speeding and ignoring traffic laws, that makes you anti-government and anti-American? I never knew that. Next time i'll let my daughter die rather than be called those horrible names.
-
https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-never-trump-voters-say-backing-gop-nominee-conviction
The Free Press spoke with several voters from across the country whose opinions were significantly impacted by the guilty verdict in the New York trial against former President Trump.
Shaun Maguire, a Los Angeles-based venture capitalist and a former Hillary Clinton campaign donor, declared on social media that he donated $300,000 to the Trump campaign within an hour of the verdict, and wrote in an essay that "the double standards and lawfare that Trump has faced" "boiled my blood."
He told The Free Press, "We were told that Donald Trump would be the end of democracy, but it turns out that lawfare tactics have been escalated by the Democrats and not by the Republicans. And so it’s from that backdrop that I believe the Republican Party is less of a danger to democracy than the Democratic Party right now."
(https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/694860/rtx341qy.jpg)
-
https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-never-trump-voters-say-backing-gop-nominee-conviction
The Free Press spoke with several voters from across the country whose opinions were significantly impacted by the guilty verdict in the New York trial against former President Trump.
Shaun Maguire, a Los Angeles-based venture capitalist and a former Hillary Clinton campaign donor, declared on social media that he donated $300,000 to the Trump campaign within an hour of the verdict, and wrote in an essay that "the double standards and lawfare that Trump has faced" "boiled my blood."
He told The Free Press, "We were told that Donald Trump would be the end of democracy, but it turns out that lawfare tactics have been escalated by the Democrats and not by the Republicans. And so it’s from that backdrop that I believe the Republican Party is less of a danger to democracy than the Democratic Party right now."
The backlash pending a conviction was predicted well in advance. The only question was the depth and breadth of it.
Based on early reports, it's turning into a clash between voters and the Swamp.
The Swamp crossed the line and the voters are waking up to the evil they represent.
-
but but but but jaco and rhater say that to question the conviction is to hate america...
The backlash pending a conviction was predicted well in advance. The only question was the depth and breadth of it.
Based on early reports, it's turning into a clash between voters and the Swamp.
The Swamp crossed the line and the voters are waking up to the evil they represent.
-
but but but but jaco and rhater say that to question the conviction is to hate america...
They have difficulty understanding the distinction between "The United States of America" and "The US Government."
-
what about hillary's emails?
what about biden secret docs?
Investigate and charge anyone who breaks the law.
-
even if they were "illigal" means, the statute of limitations on those charges already expired...
So if you commit a crime and they don't catch you in time, it was never a bad thing? What a low bar you hold your future leaders to.
-
please show me where i said it was never a bad thing...
So if you commit a crime and they don't catch you in time, it was never a bad thing? What a low bar you hold your future leaders to.
-
So if you commit a crime and they don't catch you in time, it was never a bad thing? What a low bar you hold your future leaders to.
Tell me you don't know much about the legal system and how evidence works without saying you don't know much about the legal system and how evidence works.
-
So if you commit a crime and they don't catch you in time, it was never a bad thing? What a low bar you hold your future leaders to.
Do you even know the purpose behind the statute of limitations concept?
Also, do you not accept the allegations that we have a two-tiered justice system?
-
Again we see a sleeping giant has been awakened.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/c4Ia2bQymBE?feature=share
-
Again we see a sleeping giant has been awakened.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/c4Ia2bQymBE?feature=share
The other half of America can still think for themselves. Thank goodness for that.
-
The other half of America can still think for themselves. Thank goodness for that.
Too bad this half doesn't have control of the media to make sure information is fair and accurate.
-
Trump has a history of falsifying business records. It was bound to catch up to him eventually. His mistake in this instance was falsifying business records to commit election fraud. Given the recent rape cases and civil fraud cases he lost, he is displaying a pattern of criminal behavior that harms millions of people. Definitely he is a threat to the people of this country.
I don't actually doubt that he falsified business records but it is a misdemeanor and the statute of limitations has long since expired. Doing gymnastics to connect a federal crime to a state crime and then a covid regulation to extend the statute just so he can be charged right during election season is a bad use of the justice system even if technically possible.
Clinton and Obama also got fined for very similar campaign finance violations BTW. Should republicans have pushed to charge them during election season?