Gaetzgate: Gaetz under investigation for being a pedo

#827
#827
evillawyer said:
I feel like we've been down this road before
Click to expand...

you mean like where the original alleged crime/action didn't occur but you still nab someone on a process crime?

yes, we've been down that road; far too often

(NOTE: before anyone freaks out I'm not claiming the original accusation against Gaetz aren't true; just that charges of such have yet to materialize)
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider, Sandman 423, Orangeslice13 and 2 others
#828
#828
evillawyer said:
I feel like we've been down this road before
Click to expand...
Are you referring to “ I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#829
#829
volinbham said:
you mean like where the original alleged crime/action didn't occur but you still nab someone on a process crime?

yes, we've been down that road; far too often

(NOTE: before anyone freaks out I'm not claiming the original accusation against Gaetz aren't true; just that charges of such have yet to materialize)
Click to expand...
The dopey liberals here actually believe conservatives will support him even if he is guilty. 🙄
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and StarRaider
#832
#832
Carl Pickens said:
You’re more FOS than a Xmas turkey and delusional as well
Click to expand...
Probably half of the “conservatives” here still think Chauvin is innocent. Saying they wouldn’t support him if he’s guilty isn’t saying much when half will never admit he’s guilty.
 
#833
#833
RockyTop85 said:
Probably half of the “conservatives” here still think Chauvin is innocent. Saying they wouldn’t support him if he’s guilty isn’t saying much when half will never admit he’s guilty.
Click to expand...
I guess all of the liberals still think George Floyd was a healthy guy that could pass a drug test when he died. Was Chauvin guilty? Yes.... of murder? Maybe.... manslaughter? Probably
 
#836
#836
Carl Pickens said:
Proving your point by thinking Chauvin is guilty? You’re brilliant
Click to expand...

Jury: he’s a murderer.
You: i don’t know if he was a murderer.

I realize juries are fallable, but it’s the agreed upon process and you won’t acknowledge the reality of the result.

This is one of two fundamental features of the Republican Party and “conservatives” right now: if we don’t like it, it isn’t real.
 
#837
#837
RockyTop85 said:
Jury: he’s a murderer.
You: i don’t know if he was a murderer.

I realize juries are fallable, but it’s the agreed upon process and you won’t acknowledge the reality of the result.

This is one of two fundamental features of the Republican Party and “conservatives” right now: if we don’t like it, it isn’t real.
Click to expand...
Personally speaking I don’t know as I wasn’t on the jury to hear all of the facts of the case..... so maybe he is a murder...... my personal opinion is he didn’t intend to kill him ..... which is why I brought up manslaughter
 
#839
#839
Carl Pickens said:
Personally speaking I don’t know as I wasn’t on the jury to hear all of the facts of the case..... so maybe he is a murder...... my personal opinion is he didn’t intend to kill him ..... which is why I brought up manslaughter
Click to expand...

You said that already. It still proves my point.

The agreed upon process for determining whether he’s a murderer, since before the founding, has been for him to receive a trial.

He got one. He was convicted. He’s a murderer.

By substituting your own judgment and questioning the validity of the outcome, you’re essentially saying that process is no longer sufficient.

I could respect that, if it was universal and there was some thought directed towards improving the process. I could respect it if it was based on anything substantially out of the ordinary that went on with his trial.

It’s mostly not either of those things. In fact, most of the complaints about this particular trial are so frivolous that they evince an outsized faith in the jury trial process.

But Trumpkins need a reason to question the outcome to preserve their perceived validity of their political identity because they stupidly made Chauvin an avatar for “conservatives” in their dipshit culture war.

It’s the same reason they can’t accept the validity of the Mueller appointment or the initiation of either impeachment. Same reason they couldn’t accept the outcome of the Roger Stone trial. It’s the same reason they can’t accept the results of the election. It’s the same reason they need to pretend that January 6 wasn’t violent.

“If we don’t like it, we don’t accept it. If we don’t accept it, it isn’t real.” That’s the new modus operandi of the Republican Party, or at least the people who associate affiliation with the party as a core part of their personal identity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic, USAFgolferVol and samanderson
#849
#849
hog88 said:
If not guilty, slander and claim coverup.
Click to expand...

They won't charge/prosecute if they don't have an air tight case. Feds win rate is like 99.8% - they either indict and dunk or they don't even pick up the ball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RockyTop85
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top