The (many) indictments of Donald Trump

[clarksvol00]

Didn’t know you needed preferred pronouns.

I prefer to know who "they" are, Smart Guy. Just tell me who you're talking about.

 

[clarksvol00]

The electorate is acting as a jury, unfortunately. This is what happens when the ruling administration goes after it's political opposition.

I think a jury will be acting as a jury.

 

[volgr]

I think a jury will be acting as a jury.

A jury will be acting as a jury, eventually, but in this unique case the public will be acting as the jury.

 

[bamawriter]

The electorate is acting as a jury, unfortunately. This is what happens when the ruling administration goes after it's political opposition.

Does it not occur to you that these indictments are designed to galvanize Trump's base? The Democrats spent a ton of money last year to get Trump's handpicked candidates nominated. Do you really have such a blindspot that you can't see the endgame here?

 

[bamawriter]

A jury will be acting as a jury, eventually, but in this unique case the public will be acting as the jury.

With your argument, I assume you're okay with the state charges in GA going ahead since Trump cannot pardon himself for those.

 

[volfanhill]

Does it not occur to you that these indictments are designed to galvanize Trump's base? The Democrats spent a ton of money last year to get Trump's handpicked candidates nominated. Do you really have such a blindspot that you can't see the endgame here?

The Democrats want nothing more then go against Trump. The only way Biden wins is to go against Trump and the only way Trump wins is to go against Hillary

 

[volgr]

With your argument, I assume you're okay with the state charges in GA going ahead since Trump cannot pardon himself foe those.

What is the issue with waiting a few more months for all of his cases? No one can answer that simple question. What is so important to hold these trials during an election that trumps either the appearance of or actual election inteference?

 

[volgr]

The Democrats want nothing more then go against Trump. The only way Biden wins is to go against Trump and the only way Trump wins is to go against Hillary

Then there should be no issue with postponing trials until after Trump is easily defeated.

 

[bamawriter]

What is the issue with waiting a few more months for all of his cases? No one can answer that simple question. What is so important to hold these trials during an election that trumps either the appearance of or actual election inteference?

I answered this already:

It would be pretty stupid to pause a prosecution for the sole purpose of seeing if the defendant earns the right to pardon himself.

But further, if the prosecution should grant some deference to avoiding the appearance of election interference, then what is there to prevent the defendent from announcing his run for congress, governor, mayor, alderman, clerk, etc the day after his loss?

 

[luthervol]

Remember back after obama won and people questioned whether he met the qualifications? The answer was that it didn't matter, the people had spoken. Seems like if Trump should win and they failed to be timely and convict him by then, then all the lawsuits should go away for the same reason. If none of the DAs could get it together soon enough to get to trial before the election, too bad.

I would agree to that if Trump would agree to proceed as quickly as posible and to never request any type of delay.

 

[clarksvol00]

What is the issue with waiting a few more months for all of his cases? No one can answer that simple question. What is so important to hold these trials during an election that trumps either the appearance of or actual election inteference?

Why should someone aspiring to a political office be immune from prosecution until the election is over?

 

[Septic]

What is the issue with waiting a few more months for all of his cases? No one can answer that simple question. What is so important to hold these trials during an election that trumps either the appearance of or actual election inteference?

Asked and answered.

Why do you keep asking?

A few months? Trump asked to put it off to 2026.

An innocent man would want to be cleared, especially if he had proof.

Justice shouldn't wait until it's convenient for the accused.

 

[RockyTop85]

Why should someone aspiring to a political office be immune from prosecution until the election is over?

Because the people who wanted the vice President to override the voters now want the voters to decide.

 

[luthervol]

A jury will be acting as a jury, eventually, but in this unique case the public will be acting as the jury.

Seems like Trump would wish to expedite the proceedings.

 

[Franklin Pierce]

Poll: 60% of Voters Say Joe Biden Had Role in Indicting Donald Trump​

A strong majority of voters believe President Joe Biden played a role in indicting former President Donald Trump, a recent McLaughlin & Associates poll found.

The poll asked respondents, “And how much of a role would you say President Joe Biden has played in the indictments of former President Donald Trump?”

Poll: 60% of Voters Say Joe Biden Had Role in Indicting Donald Trump

A strong majority of voters believe President Joe Biden played a role in indicting former President Donald Trump.

www.breitbart.com

 

[luthervol]

Poll: 60% of Voters Say Joe Biden Had Role in Indicting Donald Trump​

View attachment 573981
A strong majority of voters believe President Joe Biden played a role in indicting former President Donald Trump, a recent McLaughlin & Associates poll found.

The poll asked respondents, “And how much of a role would you say President Joe Biden has played in the indictments of former President Donald Trump?”

Poll: 60% of Voters Say Joe Biden Had Role in Indicting Donald Trump

A strong majority of voters believe President Joe Biden played a role in indicting former President Donald Trump.

www.breitbart.com

So 61% said he played no role or a very minor role?

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

YOUR opinion

Fact

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

No. You're focusing too much on the word "collusion," and Mueller did not call anything a lie.

Robert Mueller's report did not address "collusion," because that is not a legal term. The Mueller probe concerned whether or not the evidence was sufficient enough to charge any member of the Trump campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. Mueller determined that it was not.

However, Mueller later added that, "The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed."

Mueller refutes Trump’s ‘no collusion, no obstruction’ line

‘We focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.’

www.politico.eu

You are exaggerating the extent to which Mueller's report exonerated Trump.

He wasn’t charged because there was no evidence. There was no collusion. No Russian coup. Your side said it happened and it didn’t. Get over it.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

So 61% said he played no role or a very minor role?

Even if it was a minor role it shows how pathetic he is as a president.

 

[kiddiedoc]

Even if it was a minor role it shows how pathetic he is as a president.

In what free world is it OK for a President to play ANY role in bringing charges against his political adversary?

 

[clarksvol00]

In what free world is it OK for a President to play ANY role in bringing charges against his political adversary?

You have proof of this?

 

[luthervol]

Even if it was a minor role it shows how pathetic he is as a president.

What? A president shouldn't be concerned about someone who attempts to steal an election?

Did Trump play a role in all of the false accusations?

 

[volfanhill]

In what free world is it OK for a President to play ANY role in bringing charges against his political adversary?

I agree. Anyone proven to do so isn't qualified to ever hold office

‘Where are all of the arrests?’: Trump demands Barr lock up his foes

The day-long run of tweets and retweets marked the most frantic stretch of Trump’s public activity since he left Walter Reed.

www.politico.com

 

[clarksvol00]

In what free world is it OK for a President to play ANY role in bringing charges against his political adversary?

In what free world is it OK to not prosecute someone for a potential crime because they have political aspirations?

 

[RockyTop85]

You have proof of this?

When there is proof, it’s not as big of a deal. Only when the polls show that people believe it, does it become a scandal. See: 2019 Trump impeachment thread.